Reply With Quote
he always sucked at handling the ball, but the pacers playcall has been borderline disgusting, only one play in the whole game. No excuse for that showing though.
1 point in a Conference Finals game is pathetic....
he always sucked at handling the ball, but the pacers playcall has been borderline disgusting, only one play in the whole game. No excuse for that showing though.
Hill's never finished well in the playoffs. He might start off decent but that coon just flames out and becomes Matt Bonner lite.
Hill is a SG and he could be a very serviceable one, he should not play PG that's about it imho
Hill simply sucks on the road... always has. But 1 point? That is ing pathetic.
the main thing is, Hill is excellent at guarding pgs, which are the hardest players to guard these days in most teams (namely Miami and Okc are exceptions along with some others), he also plays pg because he is not good in catch and shoot situations. So, how to make him work? one way, play him at pg and have a shooter, but that leaves the problem of ballhandling. The other way it is to play him at sg and have a real pg, but then the team's shooting struggles. The best fit i see him is as a complement to a selfish chucker, like Kobe or Monta.
He'll have a better game 6. As I said earlier, he's always played poorly on the road.
That's just his personality. That's why Pop coddled his ass so much.
LMAO at this thread and spurfans in it, after spurfans were convinced he was a "Kobe killer" and an all-star talent... while he was with the Spurs. Now that hes gone, he is average, overrated, sucks, choker, etc...
I think Vogel is a good coach and the Pacers are good team. But I can't help but think Pop and the Spurs' system would ultimately get more out of Hill's talent. To say that he could have one day been an All-star as the Spurs starting PG, isn't that farfetched.
lol Roddy B
Remember det time Spur fan wanted to trade away Parker and keep Hill?
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
