Reply With Quote
Watch your hand Becky!
I wouldn't trade Kawhi back for three George Hills though.IUPUI.
Fkla was right about George Hill.
Now a Hill-Rique swap? Sign me up tbh.
Watch your hand Becky!
It's an old pic from during the RRT when the Spurs played @ Indy.
Rique up to no good per par. Coaches, teammate's wives, etc.Watch your hand Becky!
Sounds like you're describing Manu. Why would that bother you?
If you gotta compare George Hill with a 37 year old in his last legs, then there's your answer...
Oh yeah, me neither.I wouldn't trade Kawhi back for three George Hills though.
Now a Hill-Rique swap? Sign me up tbh.
But I remember a minority of posters saying Hill > Parker in 2010.
I love this photo. Classic.
He is having a nice patch, but that has been something he has always done throughout his career. I did like him as a Spur, but to me, he is more of a high level combo backup rather than a starter. I would easily take him back in that role with the Spurs.
His pick and roll defense has always been bad and despite his ridiculous length he isn't really a disruptor defensively, not easy at PG though. I always felt he wasn't aggressive enough on offense as well, probably because he can't always get to the spots he needs to because of his ty ballhandling.
One thing about him though, since being in Indiana, he has been ridiculously clutch - I swear he has had like 5 game winners on layups created on his own
He is having a nice patch, but that has been something he has always done throughout his career. I did like him as a Spur, but to me, he is more of a high level combo backup rather than a starter. I would easily take him back in that role with the Spurs.
His pick and roll defense has always been bad and despite his ridiculous length he isn't really a disruptor defensively, not easy at PG though. I always felt he wasn't aggressive enough on offense as well, probably because he can't always get to the spots he needs to because of his ty ballhandling.
One thing about him though, since being in Indiana, he has been ridiculously clutch - I swear he has had like 5 game winners on layups created on his own
Maybe you and I remember different players named George Hill. The guy I remember had a decent wingspan for a 6'3" pg but had trouble getting Gatorade out of the cooler at the practice gym. Not exactly incredible length. He had a very good set of handles for a shooting guard but was only mediocre as a passer. Played tenacious defense against most pg and SG but some brawnier SG could back him down and shoot over him. At times could disrupt the offense by stopping ball movement. My real nock on the guy is that he is a NBA SG trapped in the body of a pg.
6'2 with a 6'9 wingspan should have been pretty disruptive on opposing PG's, many of which are 6'0.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/George-Hill-5067/
His ballhandling IMO was very, very average for a PG and ok for a SG and yeah, he was a limited passer. His defense was pretty damn good in isolation, but he used to get hung up on PnR, maybe because of his broad shoulders.A solid athlete with a ridiculous 6-9 wingspan,
Hill was always a pure scorer and shines best when he's the number 1/2 option. It's no surprise he's flourishing this year without George, Stephenson, Hibbert, and even West being prioritized over him in the offense. Paul George and him will make a nice 1-2 punch. Be interesting to see if Indiana can build a complementary team around them.
he's very good tbh. Complete player.
I was a Hill fan back then especially that '09 or '10 series against Mavs, he was the mvp of that series IIRC. But the problem with him was road games. Too mentally weak on the road. We all saw it when the Pacers would go to the heat's home floor. He'd just shrink.
I like him a lot. He would be great to rotate in for added defensive purposes with either Parker or Ginobilli along side of him. We could go small with Green and Leonard. Could be a nasty perimeter D. As long as he does not handle too much.
But alas, we are stuck with a Championship lineup at the moment. I like the attempy at the tandem Lowry/Hill threads. It was deftly accomplished... In an extraordinarily blatant manner.
He's one of the biggest reasons we beat the Mavs in '10. At the same time he's probably the biggest reason we lost back in '10 to the Suns. Letting Nash waltz into the lane for layups in game 1 did wonders for the Suns confidence. That underscores the main issue I had with him. He wasn't consistent enough.
pretty much this
George stays close to Spurs organization, he brought us Kawhi, he is a spurs success, I'm happy he is doing good in Indiana recently
Shame he broke his leg
The idea was to trade Parker and get assets to shore up the team. Would of hurt the spurs in the short run but who knows what we could have gotten. Of course getting kawhi probably is better than anyone the spurs could get from a hypothetical trade.Oh yeah, me neither.
But I remember a minority of posters saying Hill > Parker in 2010.
Back to the op...spurs system is only good for shooters. So when a guy like Neal leaves it's not surprising he struggles. The other thing is the spurs will cover up defensive mistakes from the perimeter player. Again lol Neal.
Hill on the other hand was a combo guard playing with Parker and Manu....two ball dominant players. He was limited playing for the spurs unless he wanted a 6 man role or we traded Parker. Not surprising he grew into a decent player when given the alpha role on a team.
28pts, 6ast, 3rebs tonight
When's he a FA again?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
