Reply With Quote
I voted yes, but IMO it's too early to tell. However, I am loving it how he is panning out and playing aggressive and well.
Is George Hill the "Chosen Son of San Antonio"?
This position/ le has been left vacant since the departure of Antonio Daniels summer of 2002.
I say yes. I've been waiting for a sign. Not even Parker got three straight 20 point games at this stage in his career. Back in 2002 I wanted to give this le to Parker, but as the season progressed I felt he actually leapfrogged this position and firmly established himself as "THE Spurs point guard".
Just for reference, I define Chosen Son of San Antonio as the youngest, most good-looking, most up and comingest Spur, with a game that can't be labeled as "herky jerky, helter skelter" etc, basically, they have to flat out ball.
For all of you homer nutsuckers, this isn't a poll asking if he's better than Parker. Please read this post over again if you think that.
So here it is. Is he the Chosen One?
Last edited by Cant_Be_Faded; 11-25-2008 at 11:37 PM. Reason: dumbasses
I voted yes, but IMO it's too early to tell. However, I am loving it how he is panning out and playing aggressive and well.
Ummm...
Tp 4evah!!!!!
I would have saved this poll until feb or march, but the vicissitudes of the nba combined with sheer balling ability to prod me into starting the poll.
Try to shake off your spoiled spursfan tendencies, and say it out loud. A rookie, we drafted late in the first round, that the majority of us (including me i admit it) scoffed to no end, has scored three straight 20 point games in an effort to keep our time afloat and hold down the fort.
This is unprecedented. Duncan accomplished this, but he's a special case, he's the greatest player of all basketball times.
Do you mean the le should remain vacant or you have a better candidate.Ummm...
This thread will fail unless you yeah's and nahbrah's alike give your input.
what makes this poll the official spurstalk poll?
Ummm refer to mr. chug's post.
Last edited by Reck; 11-25-2008 at 11:39 PM.
The fact that I am the first spurstalk fan in its existence to coin the term Chosen Son of San Antonio.
BTW if you stupid assholes turn this into a Hill vs Parker thread I will put you on my list. This is not about that. It's about a le, which I described in the first post, and nothing more.
oh.
well i liked hill from the start.
so yeah, i think he's the next 'chosen son of san antonio'.
'son' reminds me of that annoying hornets fan during the playoffs..
Kinda specific. Is there even another candidate?
They have to meet all specifications to a T. If they don't, then the le remains vacant, as it has been for the past 6 seasons.
It's a player that makes you insanely excited for the future, but isn't so blatantly good that he'll be a Spur cornerstone for years to come.
Parker was so good he leapfrogged the position. Beno was a total joke and abortion. If you think there are no other candidates, vote so.
I voted yes, but I think the question is skewed to invoke that answer.
What you're basically asking is 'is George Hill the best prospect since Tony Parker', which doesn't leave a wide range of compe ion.
The only real proven rook the Spurs have plucked from the draft since Tony was Beno, who looked impressive in stints, but was obviously unimpressive as a Spur.
Barbosa, Howard, Scola, Splitter....all these possible prospects have unfortunately never logged a minute for us. Mahinmi is still waiting to prove he can survive the NBA level.
Then you get into the long list of tryouts and DLeaguers. I think it's pretty safe to say that the Spurs didn't miss any gems in Linton Johnson, Alex Garcia, Darius Washington, or even...dare I say....James Gist!
Keeping Matt Barnes around might have been a swell move, but I don't run the damn thing.
Brent Barry was a likely candidate coming in, but was never young nor up-and-coming, and never lived up to the hype. Hedo Turkoglu was a good piece that just didn't fit the puzzle. While just getting his first big shot in the League, Roger Mason Jr. already established himself with the Wizards last year, and isn't necessarily a whipper-snapper by any means, either.
So yeah, since no other recent rookie has been able to come in and put up 20-20-20 games for the Spurs in their first 15 games...I'll admit that George Hill looks like a pretty solid damn pickup by this FO.
But I'd like to see at least one season's average before I really cast my vote.
Even Beno is able to put together a good three game stretch.
Well, if he's not wearing a Spur, anyway.
I don't think you can label him something like that just yet. While the very involved Spurs fans (such as most people here) have latched onto him, I can't say that the city itself is behind him in similar fashion. I think the average fan has to be more head over heels for this guy before you christen him with such a le.
From the preview before the 2008 playoffs.
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/sas_phx_rd1_08.html
Tony Parker’s success in the playoffs at such a young age has put him in elite company. With 1,547 career playoff points before the age of 25, Parker trails only Kobe Bryant on the all-time list for most playoff points for a player under 25.
Parker turned 25 during the 2007 playoffs on 5/17 and has scored 229 playoff points since his 25th birthday to give him a total of 1,776. (2157 now)
He is also second all-time in postseason wins for a player under 25 with 56 playoff victories and is tied with Bryant in assists at 407.
Oh and Tony is the youngest player (21 years 22 days) to have two games in a row with 20+ points in NBA finals.
I am a big fan of George Hill, but come on. He had great games against Utah (without Williams, Boozer & Korver) and Memphis... And Denver in garbage time.
3 good games, 1 month of NBA compe ion VS 545 season games + 117 playoffs games + 3 NBA Finals + 8 years.
You can't compare them now. Maybe in 2 or 3 years... with George having 1 or 2 les.
Question's too vague.
Thread le asks for the "Son", yet I'm confused by your reference to "THE Spurs point guard". In that case...NO, it's Tony.
If he has to fall into your qualifying characteristics as "youngest, most good-looking, up and comingest Spur" (very gay checklist so far BTW-but whatever)...still Tony.
I knew Antonio as a drinking buddy when he was here in SATX and I guess you're asking for a ladies man?
Are you serious? That's not what San Antonio's about so I don't know WHAT the you're asking.
WHO'S FACE OF THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS? No one would dispute that.
As a judge would rule upon an objection to your cross-examination: "Rephrase your question counselor"
Well half the guys you mentioned we never actually played. And Barry was like 13 years too old. LJ3, Alex Garcia, and Darius never actually got enough burn and never proved themselves to be over the hump. It's not about a prospect, it's about that young up and comer that gets you excited about your teams future, but isn't so over the top good that its a given he'll be a starter for the next 10 years.I voted yes, but I think the question is skewed to invoke that answer.
What you're basically asking is 'is George Hill the best prospect since Tony Parker', which doesn't leave a wide range of compe ion.
The only real proven rook the Spurs have plucked from the draft since Tony was Beno, who looked impressive in stints, but was obviously unimpressive as a Spur.
Barbosa, Howard, Scola, Splitter....all these possible prospects have unfortunately never logged a minute for us. Mahinmi is still waiting to prove he can survive the NBA level.
Then you get into the long list of tryouts and DLeaguers. I think it's pretty safe to say that the Spurs didn't miss any gems in Linton Johnson, Alex Garcia, Darius Washington, or even...dare I say....James Gist!
Keeping Matt Barnes around might have been a swell move, but I don't run the damn thing.
Brent Barry was a likely candidate coming in, but was never young nor up-and-coming, and never lived up to the hype. Hedo Turkoglu was a good piece that just didn't fit the puzzle. While just getting his first big shot in the League, Roger Mason Jr. already established himself with the Wizards last year, and isn't necessarily a whipper-snapper by any means, either.
So yeah, since no other recent rookie has been able to come in and put up 20-20-20 games for the Spurs in their first 15 games...I'll admit that George Hill looks like a pretty solid damn pickup by this FO.
But I'd like to see at least one season's average before I really cast my vote.
Even Beno is able to put together a good three game stretch.
Well, if he's not wearing a Spur, anyway.
The fact that you think the question is skewed to get that answer only means that you agree that he's the best candidate for the le we've had in a long time.
Last edited by Cant_Be_Faded; 11-26-2008 at 12:44 AM.
Jesus christ you are such a ing stupid asshole. I see you have a little french flag next to your name. I guess that means you can't read ing english.
I said Parker was so blatantly good that he was not qualified for this le because it was blatant he was the Spurs point guard now and for the oncoming future.Question's too vague.
Thread le asks for the "Son", yet I'm confused by your reference to "THE Spurs point guard". In that case...NO, it's Tony.
If he has to fall into your qualifying characteristics as "youngest, most good-looking, up and comingest Spur" (very gay checklist so far BTW-but whatever)...still Tony.
I knew Antonio as a drinking buddy when he was here in SATX and I guess you're asking for a ladies man?
Are you serious? That's not what San Antonio's about so I don't know WHAT the you're asking.
WHO'S FACE OF THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS? No one would dispute that.
As a judge would rule upon an objection to your cross-examination: "Rephrase your question counselor"
The le is for a player that is not so over the top good that he'll always be a starter, but when he comes into the game he gets you revved up, and he's still young and a flat out baller. Antonio Daniels was the best athlete on the team at one point, he was young, and came off the bench to spark us. Like Ginobili, but with more of a classic nba style, as opposed to Ginobili's freak on wheels style.
I see that in Hill.
Thank you.
I do....
And I did...
So....boo-yah?
I can't completely disagree with you buddy, but only time will tell. Historically, some young players get in a groove and can't play around the adjustments made around HIS ROLE. Meaning, I can truly see Tony coming back and lighting up the league (eventually)>the Spurs playing at an elite level>GHill's minutes dwindling to about 16 a game>having a few off nights>and losing his confidence for quite some time.
There have been a myriad of players who have shone brightly for a period when the ball is in their hands for many minutes and most posessions. Too many to mention. It's rare however, when a player can completely change roles and continue to play consistently. Some get better, some alot worse. Better? Enter Manu Ginobili (Turkoglu/Finley) and David Robinson (Tim Duncan) played 2nd fiddle on purpose for the betterment of the team and it WORKED. They played within their roles, but not everyone can do that. Envy...one of the 7 deadly sins and it happens to most of us. Don't tell me he won't be a little jealous once Tony comes back and puts the rook back on the bench. Can GH step up and still shock the defense the way he does now with the same confidence?
We have ring #5 riding on such things...
I bet you loved it when the Spurs drafted him.
You guys gotta cut CBF some slack.
I voted yes but what I really mean is yes for now. I reserve the right to change my vote
at any time in the future. I have yet to see Ian, Gist, or Splitter play in a Spurs uniform.
And who knows what future stars may come.
So............. yes for now.
Last edited by homer; 11-26-2008 at 04:59 AM. Reason: spelling
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
