Hawks considering trading Josh Smith

[Blackjack]

I think he can get better than that at the two. I think he definitely needs to improve his footwork, and that will go a long ways towards allowing him to penetrate more easily and also make him a better defender. I think his mid-range is already pretty good. I don't think he's going to have the basketball smarts of a Ginobili, but then few players do.
TBH, I personally only see next season as the last shot at number 5 in the TD era, after that Hill is either going to develop into an incredibly good talent, and we might be able to keep him (or not), or simply be a solid but not over the top SG, which would be enough for a non-championship caliber team (you never know what the future brings, but I expect at least a few seasons of average play unless we get really lucky) and replacing a fairly aged Manu.

I understand that I don't have a crystal ball, and that you might have a different opinion of what the future could bring, and that's obviously fine by me.

There's that old saying: opinions are like assholes ... well, at least yours are. I think that's how it goes.

No, but seriously, I don't have any problem with your view or opinion of Hill. It's reasoned, well-thought and there's no irrational hate or spite coming from it. We just differ (and I'd worry for you and your family if you agreed with me every time ).

When I look at Hill, I see a player that had never legitimately played the point-guard position until the '08 Summer League. When most were rushing to call him a bum or a bust, I was trying to preach patience because I understood what the guy was going through. I realized just how much the mind gets in the way when you're uncertain and trying to do the right thing instead of play.

So watching him his rookie year, I thought it was pretty easy to see the progression as the season went along and he received more opportunities. He began to become accustomed to the huge leap in athleticism and compe ion coming from IUPUI and his game started to translate more -- he was starting to finish at the rim in traffic and find his stroke. He started to just looked like he belonged much more. But his play-making was non-existent for the most part and his approach was to take care of the ball -- eliminate turnovers -- and just make the obvious plays.

Going into his sop re year, it was easy to see that his offseason was almost solely used to improve his offensive game. It was clearly apparent it had become his focus and was part of the reason for the defensive slippage, IMO. But his his play and decision-making were much improved -- even if the results didn't always show -- as he was seeing the play more and attempting to make the play more instead of always taking the better-safe-than-sorry approach -- it was really noticeable when he played the likes of the Clippers and Wolves (two terrible defensive teams that Tony's always feasted on) and he exploited their inep ude. Some like to say: "Look at the compe ion!" but I believe cream rises and the good ones take advantage. The mere fact that he was able to rack up the assists or make some of the reads and plays he did against those teams -- and not solely those teams -- showed me a significant growth that should only continue as he enters his third year.

I really believe he'll learn this offense much the same way Tony has and become a solid point with the Spurs for years to come. The only problem I have with some of those that dismiss the notion, is that they fail to acknowledge that this is a player far from being a finished product and that comparing him to Parker -- the fourth or fifth best player in franchise history -- is just asinine; and I also find it a little strange that someone like Hill could never play the point but someone like Parker could be a Top-5 point-guard in the league. There is middle ground, I guess is what I'm trying to say, and we never seem to see much of it here if there's ever talk between Manu and Tony or Tony and George.

Again, it almost becomes a blood feud for some where they have to take a side. It's just not enough to realize some player's play and position conflicts by nature at times or just inevitably. There's just always got to be something sinister at play.

Well, I personally don't think Temple will be ready for the playoffs next season, so I rather have better insurance with some sort of a more solid backup PG (maybe a vet), and actually build a solid rotation at both SG and PG instead of the interchangeable pieces we had last season. But that's just my preference.

Going forward, sure, I think Temple has as good a chance as anybody to grow into a pretty solid PG (maybe not a TP like PG, but a solid PG).

I'm fine with their point-guard depth for next year if they keep Tony. I mean, Hill's the best backup point-guard they've had in forever. That's just being honest. They could definitely use a Martell Webster or Ariza in their starting lineup and they really need to hope that their youth and (cross fingers) Splitter come through, but the point-guard position isn't one of my worries -- and I was speaking long-term with Temple and how a 6-5 or bigger guy that could share play-making responsibilities would be ideal with Hill. I wasn't suggesting Hill would be the 2, only that he wouldn't be the sole playmaker in the backcourt.

I disagree on this. I think it's incredibly hard to come by proven, fairly solid big guys. I think the Spurs would think about it looking not only at the possibility of getting #5 with TD, but also past that, where Bosh may not make them a championship contender, but it would allow the team to remain compe ive for a little bit longer after TD retires, perhaps being able to build a new fairly solid frontcourt if Splitter pans out and Blair keeps on improving.
As far as the upcoming season, you look at your foes today and frontcourt size is a huge factor. I personally wouldn't pass on Bosh if he would be available, even though I don't really think he wants to play for a small market. Now, I would do it for a top tier like Bosh. Smith is not top tier, IMO.

I actually find part of me nodding in congruence. I don't know, man ... I don't know. Almost every fiber of my being leads me to believe that the Spurs are approaching this last season as their last stand -- one last drive-for-five and let the chips fall where they may -- but it's that same line of thinking that leads me to believe they won't make a Parker trade unless they feel it puts them closer to No. 5 in what could very likely be their last opportunity.

You just don't come across these chances often and I just can't see Pop and the Spurs sending Parker on his way for a lateral move or one that leaves them worse off. Even if they're not championship-caliber with Parker and the expected team for next year -- at least not quite if all goes well -- they're still close enough to where you've got to believe they'd have to give themselves a shot. That's just something --even if it's the right move -- you can never really live with if you don't give the guys one last shot after all of the blood, sweat and tears that have been shed.

Basketball is a business and there's an inherent cynicism attached to all things professional athletics, but this team and organization seems and feels like one of those unique and rare examples. There's a certain amount of loyalty, camaraderie and family that separates them from most. I just honestly believe their intentions were always to give it one last shot -- but things and cir stances change.

I guess there's always a certain amount of romanticism for dynastic teams or those with sustained excellence and it's not always rooted in the facts.

It is a business, after all. Unfortunately we're too often reminded of it.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Trading Parker for Smith?? You only do this IF Parker has already notified the FO he will not sign an extension and IF there is no better offer on the table. Trying to justify this trade with basketball arguments will always come short, as clearly Parker >> Smith and Parker >> Hill. Smith can't play the 3 and Hill can't play the 1.