Reply With Quote
why would he be put in the d-league?
In his interview last night after hitting the game-winner against the Lakers Hill credited Tony Parker for teaching him the floater. What a classy guy. I was heartbroken when the trade was announced. I have a feeling he might be back one day. Instead of stashing him in the D-league, they stashed him as a starting point guard in the NBA to accelerate his development, while getting KaWOW Leonard. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
why would he be put in the d-league?
Parker+Booner for Hill+Hibbert. Do it RC!
As much as I'd love to get Hibbert....
Giving away Parker for the opportunity to pay Hill and Hibbert a combined $100 million? Yeah, no.
Dumb.
Assuming the trade were possible, I would have to think hard about it. Having Hibbert would be great. But not having a starting-quality point guard would hurt the spurs. Hill is alright at PG, but he's no superstar. I was never that high on him to begin with. Duncan at PF and Hibbert at C with Splitter and Diaw as backups would be the most imposing frontcourt in the NBA by a wide margin. But that's a glut of bigs at the expense of having any real point guard.
Tempting though it is, I'd say no.
Hill has already proven the whole 'hes a SG not a PG' contingency on ST wrong.
Parker is on the other side of 30 now, he iisnt gonna blow by defenders forever. Hill and Hibbert on the other hand are young, proven players...if Indiana offered that (they never would) itd be pretty dumb of the Spurs not to bite.
That trade is laughable and would immediately take San Antonio out of contention. Hill and Hibbert may be younger than Parker, but San Antonio needs to win now. Would a foundation of Hill and a max deal Hibbert really be something you want to build on? Sounds like a nightmare to me.
The idea of trading one of San Antonio's all-timers who is still at his peak for a Western contender for a tweener who hasn't improved since his time here and an overpaid big who's about reached his ceiling is insane.
oh my godz thiz iz a signz thatz he wantz to comezbak !!!!
Hill proved that by putting up the worst stats of his career after being handed the starting PG gig? Interesting.
For the record, I think Hill is capable of playing point guard ... but he's best suited as a third guard who can eat minutes at both guard spots.
True. Those of us that said George Hill could never lead a sub .500 team in assists for 15 games were WAY off.
This thread should be called "George Hill a Spur Always?" And the answer would be yes. His floater against the Lakers proved that.
For all the Parker vs Hill debates fans had, there was no question that he fit perfectly as the combo guard off the bench with the Spurs. I would have liked to have seen his development in that role continue for a few more years, especially now with Green emerging and De Colo on board.
Not for the money though, obviously.
Hill owes his career to the Spurs, who picked him way earlier than he was projected to go and then teaching him fundamentals. Good for him for beating the Lakers.
No ing way.
Trades trades trades, that's all this forum is lately, it's so redundant and downright laughable reading all these ridiculous propositions when the team is 12-3 and in my humble opinion knocking at the door of a championship year in and year out.
Big part of why the Spurs started the 2010-11 season on fire.
George Hill sucks. He's a starter because Indiana has no stars and no where else to turn.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
