It's been said. Trade bait. I doubt he can be developed into a star at this stage. If he wants to prove us wrong, he's got the beginning of next season (whenever that happens) possibly to do it.
With Cleveland out of contention for the foreseeable future, the Spurs could go after Varejao. His contract is long and he's a bit overpaid, but he is a legit starting big and the Spurs would instantly get better defensively. Cleveland would get Hill and Bonner and pocket the savings from Dyess while getting there only long term contract off the books. Bonner/Hill/Dyess for Varejao/Graham(unguaranteed) looks like it would work.
I like the idea of Dice plus sweetener for Varejao. If they'd take Bonner, that would be great. If not, Dice/Blair for Varejao works as well.
Now that they got the 1st and he 4th pick in this draft, i don't think they're going to let Andy go. Gilbert is willing to spend money to make the Cavs better and rebuild fast. Andy is the only guy in the team capable to play C. If they trade Andy, they have no C.
That's why you include Bonner in the deal...
DONE, anything to get that guy outta here I am all with
Seriously
I think our best parter if we want a big is Minny. They have too many bigs and are desperate for a SG. Even though Hill is a combo guard, they really could use him.
And if we have to get a backup PG, we could get one from the Cavs easily. They have Davis/Sessions/Gibson and they're going to get Kyrie in the draft.
I agree. Minny probably wants to get rid of some players like Flynn (rubio's coming), Webster and some bigs (he has too many of them). Probably the dice asset could work very well with them as well as Jefferson (they are still years away from elite teams, and they need experience and good behavior's guys : and Jefferson could find an ideal situation for his game).
Seriously
I think our best parter if we want a big is Minny. They have too many bigs and are desperate for a SG. Even though Hill is a combo guard, they really could use him.
And if we have to get a backup PG, we could get one from the Cavs easily. They have Davis/Sessions/Gibson and they're going to get Kyrie in the draft.
one possible trade : pekovic+flynn+webster for dice and RJ
The only problem is that they have too many SF's as well. And i don't think they want Jefferson's lazy ass, unless they see him as a veteran to guide the young boys in Minny, something i seriously doubt.
They are playing Beasley as a SF, they have Webster, they have Wes Johnson and they have Hayward. Plus, if they don't trade the 2nd pick, i think they are going to draft Williams (basically a tweener SF/PF like Beasley) and they will play him as a SF because Love is the starting PF.
They are loaded with SFs and bigs. Basically what the Spurs are looking for. Not to mention that if Rubio comes, they are probably going to trade Flynn as well.
IMO, Minny is our best partner. They have some nice role players that could be very usefull in SA.
Too early to tell with the next CBA still undecided... But if it's anything like the curent CBA, those thinking Hill can be kept for MLE money are daydreaming. Some teams out there will gladly pay more than that for him. If the Spurs can't move one of RJ or Bonner contracts to make room for a compe ive salary offer, he'll be trade bait on a package as benefactor said.
He's a good player to have on the roster at a bargain price. We don't know what the MLE will be next year, if there will even be one. But the MLE this year was about $5.75M. I like Hill, but not for anything approaching the current MLE money.
That full MLE figure is about what Kyle Lowrey gets paid for the next several seasons. Mike Miller, slightly less. OJ Mayo's extension starts about there. Phoenix extended Jared Dudley for 4.2M per year. Unless Hill becomes more consistent, I don't think anyone is offering him nearly $6M per year. He's not a great PG, and he's not a great shooting guard.
Somewhere around $3.5M, plus raises - sign him. Much more than that, and he's overpaid. That hasn't worked out too well for the Spurs over the years.
One more example... Kelenna Azabuike (before the injury) got about $3M per year. Nobody lined up to give him the (current at that time) MLE. Hill isn't more of a hot commodity that 'Buike was that season. There will be teams that want him. But there won't be teams competing to give him the full MLE. Especially not next season, with the new CBA.
Last edited by GSH; 05-24-2011 at 12:39 AM.
Hill isn't worth anywhere near MLE money. Under the current system, Hill would be a restricted free agent next summer. If he brings in an offer sheet for MLE money, you let him walk.
The Spurs have gotten great bang for the buck from Hill over his first three seasons. With one year left on his rookie deal, he could be useful in a trade package to improve the team up front.
Good post.
(Mayo hasn't received an extension. Like Hill, he just finished the third year of his rookie contract.)
Sorry, for some reason I was thinking the MLE to be closer to $4M, not $6M... I can see Hill fetching $5M (you know, pretending the CBA stays the same). We are a bit down on the kid after a few seasons, but some other teams might not necessarily agree. He's young, and he's a serviceable player.
Head case, emo twitter warrior. Cannot be counted on.
Trade bait.
I think we can get a 1st round pick for him or move up to the late teen or early 20's for just him and our pick in this weak draft to get a more needed small forward(Chris Singleton). Still young, and can play but inconsistent. I do like that packaging him with a big maybe Darko, or Varejao. As a post mentioned above the T-wolves have some nice pieces, that could help us(Darko,Webster,Flynn,Ridnour)
A little less than MLE for the starting year with around 10% ulative increase per annum. A little over 30M/6yrs total contract with the first three years guaranteed, team option on the fourth and fifth, 25-50% guaranteed on the sixth year.
Glad I'm not the only person who is annoyed by his tweets. I've always been a fan of George Hill, but his tweets are getting to the point of where I want to unfollow him.
How quickly people forget how great Hill was as was as a starter last season and how he produced when given a starting gig. I think his role on the team has flip flopped so many times in the past two seasons he's had a hard time getting his confidence and rhythym and as a result we saw the passive player who looked unsure of himself in the playoffs. When he's playing with confidence its a totally different story. He can be downright ferocious defensively, and very good in all aspects of offense including fast break.
I'm not sure what his role on the team will be moving forward, but its clear with Parker and Gary Neal the spurs are very small at the 1 & 2 and either need to get Anderson into the rotation or find a way to move one or two of these 3 (Parker, Hill or Neal).
If I had my way, I would much prefer the spurs keep Hill and trade Parker and use Neal as a "sweetener" (in either that deal or another one), because not only is his value going to be at an all time high, but he's bound to have the dreaded "sop re slump" next year. The spurs should be able to land a solid player in trade using Neal as bait after that terrific year he had.
Last edited by TJastal; 05-24-2011 at 08:38 AM.
Sideshow Bob doesn't help the spurs much, and anyway Splitter is already his equal defensively and will be much better in pick and roll situations, which is what the spurs will be running on offense the majority of the time. He looked great when James was a cavalier, because Lebron knew the limited spots on the floor where he liked to get the ball, which was mostly dump off passes on the baselines. If the spurs are going to invest in another 7 footer, they should really go for someone who can be an offensive threat.
And also the spurs need rim protection in a big way. Even if that player has other deficiencies. That is why I was a Mahinmi supporter. He knew the system, was paid peanuts, and could have provided some quality minutes to help shore up this deficiency.
Regarding Varajao, I think his & Tiago's games are just too similar IMO, and only 1 of them is necessary. They both are excellent positional defenders and will try to draw charges. But neither one offers a ton of rim protection. And since the spurs get little to no rim protection from Bonner, Blair, or Jefferson the problem is exacerbated tenfold.
After watching the mavs/thunder game last night, even an aging Shawn Marion's length on Durant and his athleticism around the rim helped alot to keep the thunder off balance in the paint (along with Chandler's help). They didn't overwhelm or anything, but it was more than enough help in the paint for Dallas to essentially get by defensively and then proceed to beat the thunder to death with their much more potent offensive arsenal. Spurs could have followed this model too if the right players had been kept (and/or traded for).
So obviously its clear that some rim protection is a must in this league. Which requires at least 1 (if not 2) athletic, tall players. You can't just start a 6'5" lead anchor at center and have a 6'8" ginger pushover coming in as his replacement and expect to beat quality teams.
A fact which appears to have escaped a certain "4 rings, got" coach.
Last edited by TJastal; 05-24-2011 at 09:11 AM.
hopefully nothing, I've had it with Hill
Can Hill improve his defense on a regular basis (not just the home games)?
Yes?
Keep him. 2.5 M/3 years max.
No?
Trade.
That should be the mantra for the rest of the team as well, defense.
You're right... Conley got extended. And he's north of the current MLE. Don't know who I was remembering, and I'm too lazy to go look at all the other teams.
Bottom line, I'd love to see Hill stay with the team. But not as much as I'd hate to see them over-pay for him. Ultimately, that was what doomed Malik Rose's career in San Antonio. Hill is that same sort of utility player - not exactly right for either of the positions he gets asked to play. He can be very good with the right matchup, but look pretty bad in other situations. (Sound anything like Malik?) We, as fans, appreciate those kinds of players, and we remember the good games more than the bad. But the game is also a business, and those limitations have got to lower their market value.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
