Reply With Quote
Dear God some of y'all are re ed. By all means keep Hill--why is this concept of having a Parker/Hill threat in the backcourt so impossible for some of y'all to wrap your minds around?
Trade Hill
Keep Hill
Dear God some of y'all are re ed. By all means keep Hill--why is this concept of having a Parker/Hill threat in the backcourt so impossible for some of y'all to wrap your minds around?
Because apparently, teams that play a small pg and sg just do not win.
depends. i'm not yet confident of a hill/parker backcourt. hill should only be used as trade bait to get a player that immediately improves the spurs like an all star caliber SF/PF. would be kind of re ed to trade hill for young assets, when he already is a young asset.
So your telling me that the team is basically the same with hill on the court as they are with manu on the court. I guess hill is basically as good as manu. Thanks for letting me know, we should be a lock for the finals now.
Just a thought, could it be that statistics are overrated and deceiving. Hopefully now you have come to that realization.
Last edited by Nathan89; 07-29-2010 at 07:59 PM.
We might have to package him up with bonner. Whatabummer
The only way the Spurs trade Hill is if they really want to dump RJ's contract.
We should be able to get someone really good for that. A very nice starter and maybe a garbage player like hairston.
dump rjs contract, get rid of parker, duncans contract expires next season same with ginoboli...dump bonner contract
spurs back under cap...lets get 2-3 Allstarts to join this team
Hill will not be traded... Pop and co love the guy; he is being crafted to be in the Spurs system for a long while... Parker on the other hand will probably get traded in the next couple of seasons...
Who's the girl on the 1st pic?
I wish I knew...
Have no clue who that girl is but it looks like that is the back of R.C. Buford's head.
This! I don't understand how people overlook these things. Who in their right mind would want to trade away Hill for a player that is making the same money and will most definitely not be as good a player?
Package him up with bonner,dice, or rj.
Maybe Dice, but RJ or Bonner? Just so I can better understand your logic, would you mind making me a list teams you think are lining up to bring on Bonner @ 4yrs/$16M, or RJ @ 4yrs/$40M...even with Hill being included?
Rj is a longshot. Hill with dice and bonner are definitely possible. Is 4yrs/16m official? Whatever the contract is for bonner if the spurs(the best organization in the nba) will give him the contract then I think someone will take it.
Are you even listening to yourself, man?
Are you even listening to yourself, man?to this-->
I'm not talking, I am typing. If you disagree with something please point it out and why you disagree. I guarantee some team will take a bonner+hill or dice+hill package trade. If not we can find another nice young cheap piece. I do not think that good player on a rookie contract.
Alright, then -- let's clarify: you're saying other FOs are salivating over our scrubs and willing to give up an exceptional player because the Spurs are the best organization in the league? You don't give other FOs much credit in the brain department?
If anyone needs to be traded, it is Parker as he would yield the best return. If he is re-signed, it will even make more sense to trade Parker as the other team would not need to worry about losing him in the FA market
Can you guarantee That any of those teams can give us back equal/greater value than we already have with Hill? Plus, Hill's a combo guard anyway, and a natural 2 guard at that...why are you under the impression that we should even think of getting rid of him if Parker resigns.
If you find some team that wants to trade us an all-star for Hill/Bonner or Hill/Dice then I'll accept your desire to get rid of him. But you don't give away a player who earns slightly more than $1M/year and has shown that he is more than capable of starting for us. That is a piece for both now and the future...why do you want to give that away.
Take a look at your poll results before you keep trying to justify trading him.
To be honest I am not very impressed with most of the other FOs. The ideal team to send bonner+hill to would be a non-playoff team because bonner performs his best in the reg.season.
If we trade parker we will probably get significantly less in return. I would not be against a parker trade if the right deal was proposed. I think it is easier to trade hill and still get equal value but at a different position.
As for the sentence in bold.
I cant guarantee it but I do believe we could get at least equal value. What I was trying to stress was that bonner was not a deal breaker for every team.
Can you guarantee That any of those teams can give us back equal/greater value than we already have with Hill? Plus, Hill's a combo guard anyway, and a natural 2 guard at that...why are you under the impression that we should even think of getting rid of him if Parker resigns.
If you find some team that wants to trade us an all-star for Hill/Bonner or Hill/Dice then I'll accept your desire to get rid of him. But you don't give away a player who earns slightly more than $1M/year and has shown that he is more than capable of starting for us. That is a piece for both now and the future...why do you want to give that away.
Take a look at your poll results before you keep trying to justify trading him.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
