George Hill is a PG

[baseline bum]

After all these years people are still arguing with rascal?

LOL... back when the Spurs were winning les with the strongest frontcourt in the league rascal ed about the team not running and not being fun to watch like the Spurs of the 80s. Now that they run and put up points he complains about not having bigs. I would say he's not a Spurs fan, but then again there are plenty of fans like him who think the team is a failure for only having 4 rings instead of 7 or 8.

[FkLA]

No question that Manu plays his best basketball when he is the primary ball handler, which he is when Hill is on the court alongside him. Fact is Manu can't hold up for a whole season as it is and would without a doubt wear down a of a lot quicker if he was asked to take on those responsibilities and play like that game in and game out during the regular season.

On the other hand, Parker has the ability to win this team games virtually by himself even if Manu is having an off night or missing time due to injuries (which seem pretty likely from here on out) Something George doesn't have the ability to do because he is a far inferior player at the end of the day.

George was a fine backup PG to Tony, sure, because he really wasn't even running point when Manu was in the game alongside him but he is definitely not a starting PG in this league and turning over the reigns and making him play a position he doesn't even play would have been a disaster here. Especially with a team like the Spurs who rely so much on point guard play.

You know what lets play along and say Hill is a SG not a PG, and can only be respectable as PG when playing alongside Manu...

Make your last stand these last two years by pairing a Hill-Manu backcourt that has shown that the team doesnt miss a beat when compared to a Parker-Manu backcourt. Add in to the equation the frontline help trading Parker couldve provided. Then once those two years are up and Manu retires move Hill to his "natural" position.

Youre telling me you wouldnt have taken that over having a Parker-Manu backcourt and the current weak frontcourt+giving away your 4th best player in Hill for a 19 yr old rookie who will likely need time to develope and have a real impact?? Any Spurs fan without homer blinds can see which is the better option. Unless youre ready for rebuilding the former is by far the better choice.

[DesignatedT]

Earl Watson.

1. I wasn't implying that Manu would play more minutes although that would more then likely happen as well if the Spurs wanted to keep winning games.

2. Manu would absolutely wear down having to handle all the offensive responsibilities with virtually no time allowed playing off the ball. Getting rid of Parker would pretty much be putting pressure on Manu to win us every game. For example if Manu had a bad game = loss since the only other star power that we had would be gone. If Manu were to go down with an injury as well (very unlikely he plays 80 games ever again) that would spell big trouble for the Spurs.

I would love to see how effective the Hill/Neal 1-2 combo was together this season on the court actually. Just to see. My guess would be not very impressive

[baseline bum]

You know what lets play along and say Hill is a SG not a PG, and can only be respectable as PG when playing alongside Manu...

Make your last stand these last two years by pairing a Hill-Manu backcourt that has shown that the team doesnt miss a beat when compared to a Parker-Manu backcourt. Add in to the equation the frontline help trading Parker couldve provided. Then once those two years are up and Manu retires move Hill to his "natural" position.

Youre telling me you wouldnt take that over having a Parker-Manu backcourt and the current weak frontcourt+giving away your 4th best player in Hill for a 19 yr old rookie who will likely need time to develope and have a real impact?? Any Spurs fan without homer blinds can see which is the better option.

LOL, get the out of here... the frontline help you wanted to trade for was Omri Casspi, a complete bust in Jason Thompson, and Klay Thompson.

[DesignatedT]

Add in to the equation the frontline help trading Parker couldve provided. Then once those two years are up and Manu retires move Hill to his "natural" position.

Youre telling me you wouldnt have taken that over having a Parker-Manu backcourt and the current weak frontcourt+giving away your 4th best player in Hill for a 19 yr old rookie who will likely need time to develope and have a real impact?? Any Spurs fan without homer blinds can see which is the better option. Unless youre ready for rebuilding the former is by far the better choice.

1. What frontline help could we have got for Parker?

2. I highly doubt the Spurs start the season with the same frontline rotation/players as last season. Free Agency has yet to begin and RC definitely didn't seem like they were done making moves.

3. Yes, That is exactly what I am telling you, I would not trade away an All-Star/Former finals MVP to start George Hill who isn't even a true PG and 10x less the player as Tony.


How some forget how good Tony really is. If you think George Hill is the player Tony is or will ever be then you are delusional.

Do I think the Hill for Leonard swap was a good deal? I'm not sure, that is yet to be determined but I definitely understand the reasoning behind it and definitely don't think getting rid of Tony would have been a better deal.

[TJastal]

You know what lets play along and say Hill is a SG not a PG, and can only be respectable as PG when playing alongside Manu...

Make your last stand these last two years by pairing a Hill-Manu backcourt that has shown that the team doesnt miss a beat when compared to a Parker-Manu backcourt. Add in to the equation the frontline help trading Parker couldve provided. Then once those two years are up and Manu retires move Hill to his "natural" position.

Youre telling me you wouldnt have taken that over having a Parker-Manu backcourt and the current weak frontcourt+giving away your 4th best player in Hill for a 19 yr old rookie who will likely need time to develope and have a real impact?? Any Spurs fan without homer blinds can see which is the better option. Unless youre ready for rebuilding the former is by far the better choice.

+1

Spurs could have had this as a starting lineup this year but they blew it already.

Hill
Manu
Singleton (pick acquired via Parker trade)
Splitter (or trade acquisition big)
Duncan

As a spurs fan watching Popovich year after year make blunder after blunder it really starts to get old.

[DesignatedT]

+1

Spurs could have had this as a starting lineup this year but they blew it already. :

Hill
Manu
Singleton
FA acquisition big (for Parker)
Duncan

As a spurs fan watching Popovich year after year make blunder after blunder it really starts to get old.

God you're a dip .

[TJastal]

God you're a dip .

Maybe if you took Parker's nuts off your chin and actually did some thinking, you might see how its actually possible for the spurs to survive without him.

[FkLA]

LOL, get the out of here... the frontline help you wanted to trade for was Omri Casspi, a complete bust in Jason Thompson, and Klay Thompson.

Link?

I said trading Parker before the draft was not necessary, especially considering how horrible this class was and how horrible some of the proposed trades were.

Its probably not very realistic anymore considering what he showed this season and how in love Buss' son is with him, but Ive wanted Bynum since early 2010 and everyone here laughed at the suggestion. His length and size couldve helped out greatly. That's the type of player I wanted for Parker, an established player that couldve helped out right now.

[FkLA]

1. What frontline help could we have got for Parker?

2. I highly doubt the Spurs start the season with the same frontline rotation/players as last season. Free Agency has yet to begin and RC definitely didn't seem like they were done making moves.

3. Yes, That is exactly what I am telling you, I would not trade away an All-Star/Former finals MVP to start George Hill who isn't even a true PG and 10x less the player as Tony.


How some forget how good Tony really is. If you think George Hill is the player Tony is or will ever be then you are delusional.

Do I think the Hill for Leonard swap was a good deal? I'm not sure, that is yet to be determined but I definitely understand the reasoning behind it and definitely don't think getting rid of Tony would have been a better deal.

Why do yall s alway go back to Parker being better individually than Hill? I dont think me or TJ have ever said Hill is better. All we've been saying, which is clearly supported by facts, is that the Spurs as team do just fine with a Hill-Manu backcourt. There is no significant dropoff in the team's play compared to a Parker-Manu backcourt, even if Parker is the better player.

And I cant see into the future so I dont know what kind of frontcourt help the Spurs couldve gotten for Parker. All I know is that its very likely they couldve gotten a more established player, as opposed to a 19 yr old rookie that needs time to develope and be a significant part of this team. Time this aging Spurs core does not have.

[TJastal]

Why do yall s alway go back to Parker being better individually than Hill? I dont think me or TJ have ever said Hill is better. All we've been saying, which is clearly supported by facts, is that the Spurs as team do just fine with a Hill-Manu backcourt. There is no significant dropoff in the team's play compared to a Parker-Manu backcourt, even if Parker is the better player.

And I cant see into the future so I dont know what kind of frontcourt help the Spurs couldve gotten for Parker. All I know is that its very likely they couldve gotten a more established player, as opposed to a 19 yr old rookie that needs time to develope and be a significant part of this team. Time this aging Spurs core does not have.

+1

I can vouch here that I never said Hill is the more talented player of the two. But the talent gap is close (Parker is not 10X better as some TP nutsuckers claim) and its a VERIFIABLE FACT that the spurs as a team have played better basketball with Hill in the starting lineup. Plus Hill has been far more durable than Parker since he's been on the team and also doesn't have a myriad of personal issues casting dark shadows over his life. He also doesn't have commitments to other countries to play summer baskeball.

Combine all of that with the fact Hill will be making peanuts compared to Parker for the next two years and I thought it would be a no-brainer for Pop to take a flyer on Hill for the last couple seasons in Duncan & Ginobili's careers. Apparently not, however.

[FkLA]

Youre like the 20th person Ive had to repeat that to tbh...

Every single one of you always goes back to Parker being better than Hill individually, when that is clearly not my/TJ's/Hill advocate's point.

[ChumpDumper]

Amazing coincidence how that happened when Hill was running point, huh?

lol running point

[ChumpDumper]

Maybe if you took Parker's nuts off your chin and actually did some thinking, you might see how its actually possible for the spurs to survive without him.

Will the Spurs survive without Hill?

Yes or no.

[baseline bum]

Link?

I said trading Parker before the draft was not necessary, especially considering how horrible this class was and how horrible some of the proposed trades were.

Its probably not very realistic anymore considering what he showed this season and how in love Buss' son is with him, but Ive wanted Bynum since early 2010 and everyone here laughed at the suggestion. His length and size couldve helped out greatly. That's the type of player I wanted for Parker, an established player that couldve helped out right now.

I dont think it'd be just a draft pick, I doubt those teams have the cap space to absorb TP's contract like that. There would have to be other players included...I would take Casspi, Thompson, and their pick tbh. Would prefer Bynum though.

I take back saying you wanted Klay Thompson, though that was who all the rumors at the time said the Spurs were trading up to draft. Biyombo and Motiejunas are very long term prospects and the Morris twins aren't very good, so where is this big frontcourt help you wanted to land with that trade?

[TJastal]

With the way the hawks are fielding offers for Josh Smith combined with their search for a point guard, Parker would have been the perfect fit over there. Parker for Smith works straight up and I bet you Sund would have been all over it. Then assuming the spurs could also use one of their extra SG's to trade up in the draft (Neal or Anderson) and BANG, there's Singleton. Lineup:

Hill / FA / Joseph
Manu / Green
Singleton / Jefferson
Smith / Blair
Duncan / Splitter

That's a lineup with enough firepower and defense to get past the mavs and to the nba finals next year.

[ChumpDumper]

Hill isn't on the team anymore.

You never saw Singleton play.

BANG.

[TJastal]

Hill isn't on the team anymore.

You never saw Singleton play.

BANG.

I know it bugs you to no end that I point out all the FO ups.

[ChumpDumper]

I know it bugs you to no end that I point out all the FO ups.

On the contrary, I rather enjoy seeing you rant about players you have never seen play basketball.

[baseline bum]

With the way the hawks are fielding offers for Josh Smith combined with their search for a point guard, Parker would have been the perfect fit over there. Parker for Smith works straight up and I bet you Sund would have been all over it. Then assuming the spurs could also use one of their extra SG's to trade up in the draft (Neal or Anderson) and BANG, there's Singleton. Lineup:

Hill / FA / Joseph
Manu / Green
Singleton / Jefferson
Smith / Blair
Duncan / Splitter

That's a lineup with enough firepower and defense to get past the mavs and to the nba finals next year.

They wanted to salary dump Smith; not trade him for someone owed even more money.

[TJastal]

They wanted to salary dump Smith; not trade him for someone owed even more money.

They're also shopping for a starting point guard. Not too difficult to connect the dots here.

[baseline bum]

They're also shopping for a starting point guard. Not too difficult to connect the dots here.

They're paying $8 million to Hinrich and then adding $13.5 million for Parker? You can't be serious. All they wanted to do was dump Smith's contract to give them some breathing room after signing Joe Johnson, Marvin Williams, and Zaza Pachulia to ridiculous deals.

[ChumpDumper]

They're paying $8 million to Hinrich and then adding $13.5 million for Parker? You can't be serious.

Oh, he's very serious.

But more stupid.

[FkLA]

I take back saying you wanted Klay Thompson, though that was who all the rumors at the time said the Spurs were trading up to draft. Biyombo and Motiejunas are very long term prospects and the Morris twins aren't very good, so where is this big frontcourt help you wanted to land with that trade?

Jason Thompson is better than both Bonner & Blair. A Duncan-Thompson frontline with Splitter backing up both had the potential to be significantly better imho, although that wouldve also been dependent on Pop finally burying Bonner at the end of the bench. Casspi is a better shooter than RJ, he would be a better fit since thats basically what RJ's role has been reduced to. The 7th pick couldve been shopped around. There was no all-star per se but the frontline was still getting an upgrade. That was my thought process at the time.

I wouldve preferred an established player like Bynum though, as I stated in that same post. And later stated in that same thread that trading Parker before the draft was not completely necessary. I was not against waiting for the right deal.

lol running point

Playing as a PG, masquerading as PG, call it what you want...but whats the Spurs record been with Hill starting?

[ChumpDumper]

Playing as a PG, masquerading as PG, call it what you want...but whats the Spurs record been with Hill starting?

I don't know, but doesn't matter.

Hill isn't on the team anymore.