Reply With Quote
Done deal...Now go to Minny, Hill.
Done deal...Now go to Minny, Hill.
George Hill is not going to Minnesota over the Spurs. Poor spainard goes from Minn to Utah.
Lowry to Minny would be interesting. They really need some shooters though
Hill makes sense. People need to get over money/term and think outside box.
If Re , who's superior shooter, but 3 years older and inferior defender, goes for $16-18M, then even with cap leveling off and space drying up, why wouldn't Green command in that range in '18? And considering the $20M discount he gave Spurs in '15, wouldn't he be out for every last cent this time?
If so, as much as I like Green, I'd rather Hill, who's a better off the dribble version of Green, albeit at a different position. Still, he'd immediately be Spurs' best guard since '14 Parker and can play with any in bent or future guards on both sides of ball, which is particularly important with Murray.
As an aside, everywhere Teodosic was rumored going (Nets, Bulls, Jazz), they've filled holes. Wonder if he eventually fall into MLE range and if Spurs would have interest if Hill goes elsewhere.
I'd rather the Spurs stick with the status-quo than tying themselves up with Hill. But that's just me.
Hayward not tied up with Hill?
He'll be great for those 50 games he plays for the year.
So who's getting jettisoned for Hill's injury prone ass?
Parker's contract ideally but we all know that won't happen because as much as they are in a "win-now" mode, they're still being held back by the past with this ty contract. So sayonara Green and hopefully LMA because of Parker.
If the Spurs actually moved Parker instead of Green (who I've been hard on admittedly but would prefer over TP) then the Hill thing would be easier to swallow. We all know that's not happening though.
At Spurs fans. Don't do anything, just wait for unicorn . . .
Got to spend at least 90% of cap anyway, so would you rather, in '18, 31 year old Green for $16-18M per for 3-4 years (who might be 3 years deep in a shooting decline by then) or 31 year old Hill for say $20M per for 3 years (who's played best ball of his career in recent years)?
Also, Spurs can lessen Hill's cap hit by adding partially guaranteed 4th season or player option, which at that point if he's significantly declined and/or they need cap space, they can re-negotiate, like they did Jefferson and will do Gasol.
ugh.
i'm a fan too.
Why do people keep projecting Green to get a huge pay raise? What on Earth has he done to warrant that? I don't hate Hill. But the team needs to get back to the movement/quick-post game they had back in their last le run. I'm not sure that Hill's the guy that can help take them there.
All-D second team!!!
i thought okc got rubio for a sec
sucks the jazz got him... i hope other teams like hill more than the spurs.
I'd take Hill back if it meant shipping Parker's ass outta here. If the Spurs were able to keep Danny Green & get GH3, that would be a uva defensive starting unit.
Lol, still dreaming about the Parker trade that won't ever happen
I can't get past the part when you said Danny's going to get 16 to 18 mil a year.
Got to spend at least 90% of cap anyway, so would you rather, in '18, 31 year old Green for $16-18M per for 3-4 years (who might be 3 years deep in a shooting decline by then) or 31 year old Hill for say $20M per for 3 years (who's played best ball of his career in recent years)?
Also, Spurs can lessen Hill's cap hit by adding partially guaranteed 4th season or player option, which at that point if he's significantly declined and/or they need cap space, they can re-negotiate, like they did Jefferson and will do Gasol.
No one is paying a 31 year old Green 18 million a season
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
