Reply With Quote
Way too early to answer that question. Have to wait for the new rules of the new CBA.
Simple question:
Next season will be Hill's last year in his rookie contract. If we keep him, how much money do you guys think we should offer ? And for how long ?
Way too early to answer that question. Have to wait for the new rules of the new CBA.
duncan and ginos contract expires, so i think hill either gets paid arond MLE or his bolting
Depends on the new CBA, but he'll probably get the MLE, if the MLE even exists still.
He's not a backup PG. Too short to be a shooting guard. Average defender. I like Hill, but he's not a required MUST for this team, going forward. In fact, he seems to be more a Popovich luxury. I say use him as trade bait.
Trade bait.
Trade bait! Not showing up every game...too inconsistent.
Last edited by BOHOLANO#21; 05-23-2011 at 10:23 PM.
trade him for jr smith
smith is better then him
yes I know jr smith is a fa but denver would then be able to trade hill
and not let jr walk for NOTHING
Nobody shows up every game. He would be a good trade piece, but might be better to keep him.
Jr Smith. Yeah, we need a brainless chucker with a BB IQ of 1. Oh but he can dunk...
You really have no idea how the system works, do you?
JR Smith
Hill's limitations have already been called out repeatedly. The only good reason to keep him would be if you think he is going to develop the talent/athleticism to try to be a Derrick Rose type of player...and it's pretty obvious at this point, that is not going to happen.
He doesn't have the vision to be a star point, and he doesn't have the talent to be a star shooting guard. He's a good player sometimes, but the consistency just isn't there.
But instead of trading him, the Spurs will probably just continue to wait for him to come around, just like they will wait for Bonner's and Jefferson's shots to start falling.
I'm a big fan of your posts, but this one leaves me confused.
If I follow your reasoning, the Spurs should trade Hill because he's not likely to develop into a star. If that's right, it begs two questions:
1. If what you say about George is true, won't you just get another non-star back in return?
2. How many teams have a star-level player as the third guard on the team?
As little as you can pay him. He is passive, a SG version of RJ.
Amen.
It's unclear as to what Hill will eventually become, but it's very clear what he is NOT. He's not a backup PG and he's a short shooting guard. Because he's still young, he has not developed the mental toughness needed to play as well on the road as he does as home. THe Spurs must decide how long they want to wait on him. At some point, it's going to be a 'crap or get off the pot" kind of decision to be made.
Use his postion and money to get either a real PG or a PF/C......
Nice guy with some skills, but I'd trade him.
If you're just looking to trade back up PG for backup PG, then my pick would be Devin Harris. The biggest problem with Harris is his contract though. He's being paid as a starter, and while he's good, he's not $8 mil a year good imo.
But he'd be a great backup to Parker.
I'd pair his contract with McDyess' expiring for a big.
Now that's entirely realistic and sensible.
I made those statements mostly in reference to Hill's limitations. Like people have said..he's undersized. His defense is overrated. He's a bad finisher in traffic, and not a great shooter unless he is streaking on the corner three. And while he's had some big moments (Dallas in '10 comes to mind), he hasn't really developed into a must-have kind of player. A good role player, perhaps, but there are lots of good role-players in the league.
To me, it seemed like the Spurs have been waiting for Hill to develop into another Parker or Ginobili-level diamond in the rough. If he could become a star-caliber player, it becomes a lot easier to overlook certain limitations, and I'd imagine the team would eventually transition into his hands.
Obviously, that's probably settings expectations awfully high for any low draft pick, but imo it's also become apparent that Hill won't live up to them. Who knows, maybe the kid still has a breakout left in him?
That being considered, I do like his game and like having him on the team, but ultimately, I think he could be expendable if you could get a comparable player in return who has a particular strength (defense, shooting, passing), instead of a player who has a decent skillset, but is not great at any one particular thing.
Got it.
I don't know if the Spurs expected him to develop into a star, but plenty of people around here did. I don't see him as untouchable and have no problem using him in a package to improve the team. I'm just not with those that want to get rid of him just because he's not gonna be a star. He's a decent player especially in terms of salary v. production. With one year left on a cheap rookie contract, this may be this best opportunity to trade him.
MLE type salary seems fair.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
