Reply With Quote
I think that Pop is just a bit of a perfectionist. I don't blame him considering his military background. If someone can't do the job when it is needed, you need to find someone who will or has the ability to do so.
Hill is a rookie who is trying to learn a new position, PG, which is the toughest position on the court. Not too surprising that Pop limits his minutes to situations where his limitations at that position-rookie inexperience, inability to finish at the rim, transition from SG to PG-don't overshadow his raw talents.
Unlike most of the backup guards TimVP listed, Pop has been willing at times to put Hill in to finish the game because of his defensive skills. I was amazed that he had enough confidence to put Hill against Nash, a deadly shooter, FT shooter, and MVP playmaker in the 4th the other night.
Clearly Pop was screwing around since he kept TD on the bench most of the 4th, but you wouldn't have seen NVE or Kerr or even Vaughn out there in that situation. I think POp sometimes goes into his mad scientist routine about the roster too much, but he obviously has something in his devious mind when he juggles the lineups so much and so weirdly. Mere mortals and most players simply can't figure his purpose out.
I think that Pop is just a bit of a perfectionist. I don't blame him considering his military background. If someone can't do the job when it is needed, you need to find someone who will or has the ability to do so.
I really am rooting for Hill though. I like point guards who can dunk. Makes me feel les short.
After sleeping on this and thinking about it a little more, I think I am going to lean towards Pop feeling more comfortable going to his vets over him not wanting to develop Hill properly. Hill has made great strides both as a rookie and transitioning to the point, but there is always the question of how he will hold up to the pressure of the playoffs running the point as a rookie...especially as one still learning the finer points of the position.
I think Pop will use Hill in the playoffs, but in the same role as he played against the Suns. Hopefully it changes some on the offensive end and Pop will also take advantage of some of his playmaking ability instead of just sitting him in the corner.
Last edited by benefactor; 03-10-2009 at 08:45 AM.
Pop is just being his usual crazy self.
For those using the rookie excuse, can we get some history input on what rookie point guards and/or backup point guards have been used successfully in the playoffs? Other positions?
For example who did Pat Riley use in his 5?
How about in Phil Jackson in his 4-1 assownings over *military tough* Pop?
Manu GNob, rookie 2003 Championship.
*I know he wasn't a point guard, just saying rookies can contribute to les.
Manu was not exactly the average inexperienced rookie.
Is "coaching backups PGs" an actual skill set that teams look for when hiring coaches? Who, exactly, is the best backup PG coacher in the NBA? Who is the best backup PG in the league?
Perhaps the reason some of these PGs perform well in other environments is because they require extended floor time to perform at that level....and as long as you're a backup PG, by definition, you will not get extended minutes. Guys that have been mentioned repeatedly in this thread (Beno, Jason Hart, Kerr, Stoudamire...) have had more success outside of San Antonio because they have/had a larger role in their other stops, and in most situations were starters on those teams. Beno (or any of these other guys) was never going to have the floor time or the freedom to excel here. It's also no coincidence that most of these guys who excel elsewhere, excel in environments where they don't have to worry about inconsequential things like winning basketball games.
I don't think it's a matter of just "coaching backup point gaurds," though. If anything, Pop is the one putting them in the position to fail.
I think one of the causes for this is also one of the Spurs strongest values: Tony Parker. Every time Parker takes the floor and takes over a game, this reaffirms to Pop that tough love makes great players. Pop is as responsible for making Tony an elite point guard as anybody, and I think he's tried taking that same approach with Speedy, and Beno, and now Hill.
The problem with this strategy is that Tony was the only player given the playing time to afford him this opportunity. Parker was thrust into the starting lineup early and since that point, has generally always known where his playing time was going to come, even when Pop was barking down his throat. That comfort, combined with incredible practice and talent by Tony, allowed him to blossom as we've all seen.
Now to the flip side of that equation...Look at guys like Udrih and Hill. They carry very much the same expectation, and I think Pop believes this is to their benefit. However, it's a vastly different situation if you're only getting 15 minutes to get a rhythm and show your best, and if those minutes could disappear at the drop of a dime to some veteran who knows how to run an offense.
That's a lot more pressure to succeed, with a much smaller sample rate and a lot slimmer margin for error. Whereas Parker got the chance to feel his way out and become a great player, many other point guards just get to see the bench, then the door. Pop either has to give these guys the time of the floor to figure out what to do, or handle them differently than he did Parker.
I agree with timvp that the only way Hill is going to get any better is if you let him learn from his mistakes. This is the time of his career to do so, and if we lose another gem in the rough because Pop is afraid to give him minutes, then it will one of the few times I've ever questioned the coach's judgment.
How is he putting them in a position to fail? They are backups! All the PG has to do is go out there and not turn the ball over, run the offense, play sound defense...and do this for about 15 minutes a night.
Look, I want to see Hill on the floor more, but I'd much rather have a guy like Mason out there MORE if he meets the backup PG criteria. You can argue that Hill deserves more minutes, but who do you give fewer minutes to in exchange?
A very good point.
There are few players in the NBA who can go in a game at some point as reserves and get hot right away. Most players, especially young/rookies, need time to get in the flow. It's not the same thing to get in the game for 2/3 mins each quarter and to get a whole quarter to play. So far Hill hasn't shown he can spell Parker for short stretches and bring instant production even on the defensive end IMO, though most might disagree with the second notion. What he has shown is promise and that he can be counted on in specific situations.
I don't even think he's getting nearly the same tough love as Parker did, Pop's just trying things right now because Hill will probably not get any extended minutes in this year's playoffs. It's not about killing his confidence at all, it's about seeing what he's made of. Besides if he continues to develop he will be seeing significant minutes at the 2 spot in the future, not just as a backup PG. It's a fair argument that getting him force-fed minutes right now while he's still struggling, might destroy his confidence more than benching him and giving him time to get it together, because he'll be an important player for the Spurs for years to come, but not necessarily during this year's playoffs.I believe this way Pop takes a little pressure off of him.
Having said this, I fully expect him to regain his backup PG spot after Manu comes back, but it's a long shot to expect him to be consistent or an X-factor in the playoffs. One bad series destroyed everything Beno had as mental toughness. I'm not saying Hill is the same, quite the contrary, but it's not necessarily good to force feed him minutes while he's struggling.
If you've got Ime Udoka out on the floor, then you've got time to find on the wing for George Hill. Same goes for playing Finley 28 mpg. And the more rest Tony can manage, the better.
I'll admit that I like Mason getting touches and shots, but there are ways to do that without playing him out of position. And without stifling the development of one of our more promising players. I wanna win now, too, but Spurs Basketball goes way beyond just this season.
If you don't want people to play out of position, why would you advocate playing Hill in place of Finley, Udoka, or anyone not named Tony Parker for that matter? If he's a PG, then that's where he should get his minutes and he should get them by being better than Tony Parker. If he's not a PG, this thread is meaningless since it's about coaching PGs. If he's a combo guard, then call him that...but then so is Roger Mason who I'd rather have on the floor over Hill.
How about Sam Cassell?
How about Sam Cassell again in 2008?For those using the rookie excuse, can we get some history input on what rookie point guards and/or backup point guards have been used successfully in the playoffs? Other positions?
For example who did Pat Riley use in his 5?
How about in Phil Jackson in his 4-1 assownings over *military tough* Pop?
I believe that statistic between Pop and Phil is misleading. Because the Lakers were not good between 2005-2007 and the Spurs were at their best. If the Lakers would have played the Spurs during those seasons in the playoffs...Spurs would have clearly won and that record would have been closer.
If he was better than Tony Parker, he'd be the starter. Nobody is expecting that.
What I'm advocating is letting him play at his natural position, which allows everyone else to stick to theirs. When Pop switches Mason to point, that forces guys like Udoka or Finley to step into the two, where they can easily be torched by the faster shooting guards.
If you are able to confidently insert Hill, Mason can stay at his two spot, and Finley/Bowen/Udoka can do what they're gonna do at the three. Since the ball-handling responsibilities are often distributed among the guards anyway (especially when you have handlers like Manu or Mason), I don't even mind seeing him on the floor with Tony, as they can switch off playing the point.
The point still remains that Hill isn't going to get better without playing.
Hill MUST be able to play the PG position, if they want him to play that position behind Tony. Hill isn't actually that bad of a PG, but I don't see why Pop plays Mason ahead of him. I think Hill will actually have an important role in the playoffs because of his defense. His offense will come around eventually, but Pop needs to let Hill have the ball in his hands and run the offense. This Mason isn't working. He can't drive, he has bad handles, and turns the ball over on occasion.
Come on Pop, let the rookie make his mistakes and learn from them. It's the only way he's going to get better.
Tony never got DNP's. If he wasn't hurt, he was given his opportunity every game.
GHill has already played quite a bit this season as the backup Point, as much as can be expected when you are backing up one of the best PGs in the NBA. But we are now past the "learning" segment of the season........it is time to get ready for the playoffs.
Pop will be shortening the rotation and figuring out each player's niche. GHill's niche for the playoffs is going to be primarily as a defensive stopper. GHill has great potential at the point, but right now he is too sloppy with the ball at times - one handed passes, weak post entries, etc., and with defensive pressure turned up in the playoffs, he may be turnover prone, which you can't risk. This is where Mason's experience wins out.
On the other hand, when GHill is at the point, he runs the offense and we get more ball movement. When Mason is at the point, he seems to be looking to score first, which is not always bad, but sometimes he forces it. Also, playing GHill on the wing some will hopefully help get him out of his offensive funk, because sometimes when GHill is at the point, he is too passive, rarely looking for his own shot, especially as far as using his athleticism to get into the paint.
This switch of Mason to the 1 and GHill to the 2 could be good to help round out the skills of both players. But primarily it comes down to a trust factor: right now Pop trusts Mason more than Hill. Remember, Pop didn't trust Parker for a long time either.
LOL, the Spurs won 2 in 3 seasons while Beno was here and 1 in 3 seasons while he's gone. So you might want to rethink that argument (which is funny anyway, it's not like these guys were superstars).
great analysis Solid D
And what gem in the rough back up point guards have the Spurs lost because as some in this thread percieve that Pop can't coach them?
Beno?
Very true. He was never pulled from a game for making mistakes, and Manu's mistakes were tolerated with an exasperated look and a wisecrack.
Grat post. Roger Mason was set to be the backup point guard, trust me George Hill won't go down because of his superior defense and his young, athletic legs. I think what Pop is trying to do is make him a 2 guard in the rotation for now. Let's face it, when manu come back, would he like a 2nd string of Pg - Mason, Sg - Udoka, Sf - Bowen, Pf - Thomas, C - Gooden or a lineup of Pg - Mason, Sg - Hill, Sf - Bowen, Pf - Thomas, C - Gooden. I think that Pop would like the latter because of the versatility that hill brings to the backcourt. I think Pop would start to develop Hill's point skills in the summer when he will surely be on the Spurs' summer league roster. I am worried about Hill too, but i have faith in Pop that he'll also have faith in Hill. He's a very promising young rookie.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
