PDA

View Full Version : george hill available for brandon rush



billbradley
06-25-2010, 04:00 PM
i don't know if this is new thread worthy, but as i mentioned in another wells commented on a deal involving rush for george hill. he basically says the spurs were for it but bird wasn't ready to give up on rush. i think he wanted see what he had on draft day and based on the picks rush is out the door. wells has a starks moment with, "they would have did dat deal."

starts at 4:50 on the mike wells portion of dakich show

http://www.1070thefan.com/dakich/podcast.aspx

BornReady
06-25-2010, 04:02 PM
hmm it is a little depressing to give up on rush so soon especially because we know what he can potentially be capable of. guys think he'd break out of his passive mentality on the spurs? or perhaps become a pure defensive specialist.

interesting...

Gamble1
06-25-2010, 04:02 PM
I didn't think they would do a straight up deal like that.

tadscout
06-25-2010, 04:03 PM
:pray: we still do...

Then get a coach that teaches team ball movement/ pick and rolls and screens.... having the 3 guys that can create shots would be nice aling with the post presence of Hibbert.

Unclebuck
06-25-2010, 04:04 PM
I don't see George Hill as the playmaker we need. I like him as a player a lot. But more as a third guard

flox
06-25-2010, 04:05 PM
i don't know if this is new thread worthy, but as i mentioned in another wells commented on a deal involving rush for george hill. he basically says the spurs were for it but bird wasn't ready to give up on rush. i think he wanted see what he had on draft day and based on the picks rush is out the door. wells has a starks moment with, "they would have did dat deal."

starts at 4:50 on the mike wells portion of dakich show

http://www.1070thefan.com/dakich/podcast.aspx

Thank you so much for finding it!


I wish I could give you like 10 billion thanks

Magic P
06-25-2010, 04:06 PM
Do it Bird. Give them Ford while you're at it.

graphic-er
06-25-2010, 04:06 PM
Lets go! Make it happen!

Gamble1
06-25-2010, 04:09 PM
I don't see George Hill as the playmaker we need. I like him as a player a lot. But more as a third guard
I totally agree with you there UB. IMO, its still a upgrade over Ford/Watson. I also think if Hill doesn't work out as a starter then he is easier to trade than Rush.

Personally I would like Maynor over him if we are just looking for a average pg with some upside.

Trader Joe
06-25-2010, 04:10 PM
Hill is at least a talent upgrade over Brandon I think. You gotta make this deal if you're the Pacers.

billbradley
06-25-2010, 04:12 PM
i like rush, but i think he's just getting closer and closer to ron mercer land. moves and looks like a great player, but doesn't finish. he and his brother might share the same heart.

and no matter what i think of hill as a PG, do i think that rush will ever be a better overall player than hill? i don't think so.

OakMoses
06-25-2010, 04:12 PM
Wells is an idiot.

There are currently 6 wing players and 7 bigs on our roster, yet he talks about stupid things like Granger playing C.

Yes, our roster is unbalanced, but when you consider the fact that Granger will play some PF (like it or not) it's far more unbalanced with bigs than wing players.

I'll be sad to see Rush go, but I'm resigned to the fact that we'll probably have to move him for a PG.

tadscout
06-25-2010, 04:14 PM
I totally agree with you there UB. IMO, its still a upgrade over Ford/Watson. I also think if Hill doesn't work out as a starter then he is easier to trade than Rush.

Personally I would like Maynor over him if we are just looking for a average pg with some upside.

I agree... absolutely better than what we have now.

I rather have a better play maker PG... but what young playmaking PG is available?

Anyway with the way are team is structured I think Hill is a better fit than Rush now... and if we do finder a better PG, then we have a great back up PG...

ESutt7
06-25-2010, 04:17 PM
I may be the only one, but I kinda like the 3 man wing lineup of Rush, Granger, and George. Great size, length, and mobility. I do like George Hill though, and I'd be for getting him. He's definitely a combo guard, but it'd be GREAT if he could be a full time PG because I love the size and athleticism he'd bring there. I'd love to have him vs. Rose, Rondo, Westbrook etc.

I do think Rush is going to be our one trade chip that we'll be willing to move, just wonder what other possible "true PGs" will be out there. Because you know that JOB will want to play a PG/Hill/George/Granger/Hibbert more than a Hill/George/Granger/Hansbrough/Hibbert lineup. Personally I prefer the latter. Tremendous length/athleticism on the perimeter. And it'd be nice to have another guy that WANTS to be here in Hill.

tadscout
06-25-2010, 04:17 PM
Wells is an idiot.


I agree he is an idiot... and thankful he doesn't make any basketball decisions... but however he does seem to have sources. (now like all media can't fully believe them, but hey can at least give you some hope:-p)

Indra
06-25-2010, 04:18 PM
Do you guys think that Hill is a better player/fit with this team than Collison? If both were on the table, who would you rather have?

BornReady
06-25-2010, 04:21 PM
I'm kind of torn
I guess I'm not as quick as some fellow posters to turn on Rush- I'm still intrigued by his defensive prowess and potential
I know for sure I'd be irritated if Rush starts doing what we expected to do here in SA
At the same time, even though George Hill wasn't on the top of my list (and I admit, I don't know too much about him) that it would be nice to have a competent pg.

MyFavMartin
06-25-2010, 04:24 PM
Why not keep Rush and our young talent and address the PG position through other means (ie FA or trading a veteran)?

odeez
06-25-2010, 04:25 PM
Nice, they mentioned Pacers Digest on 1070... along with Hicks, UB, and some of the other members. Nice job guys, I hope you enjoyed yourself there! I think we got a great pick!

ESutt7
06-25-2010, 04:27 PM
Do you guys think that Hill is a better player/fit with this team than Collison? If both were on the table, who would you rather have?

I think either could "fit." Collison is a lightning fast, but undersized PG. From the things I've read he really improved offensively during the season, but gets abused on D. He weighs about the same as TJ Ford for a frame of reference. My concern with him is his ability to stay healthy (even though he hasn't yet had injuries) long term due to his size. Undersized PGs just make me nervous.

Hill is more of a combo guard than a PG, even SA fans will tell you that. More of a "scorer" than a "creator" if you will. But I think he could competently run the PG spot. The upside is his length and athleticism. I think he'd be a tremendous defender on 1s and 2s (SA has even used him on players like Kobe with success). So defensively I think we'd be better off with Hill.

If George and Granger can create their own looks, I think we'd be better with Hill because he could at least get the ball to them, and we could drastically improve our D. If George and Granger struggle to score efficiently creating their own looks, then I think Collison is the better fit, at least offensively. But in general, scoring hasn't been a major issue. Our defense has. So I'd prefer George Hill I think.

billbradley
06-25-2010, 04:28 PM
i guess after 2 years i think i see a difference between what is and what may be with these two.

hill is a major contributor on a playoff team and may be a main facilitator on a contender.

rush is a player who is inconsistent and sometimes lost on a losing team and may be a rotation guy for a contender.

Psyren
06-25-2010, 04:31 PM
Can't say I'm all that thrilled at the idea of Hill, but he's a better point guard than anyone we have now.

I'd still wait and see if we can explore the Collison trade again. Only downside is taking back Okafor's contract.

indygeezer
06-25-2010, 04:33 PM
Is this supposed to be a new trade possibility or a left-over from yesterday?

Gamble1
06-25-2010, 04:36 PM
I think either could "fit." Collison is a lightning fast, but undersized PG. From the things I've read he really improved offensively during the season, but gets abused on D. He weighs about the same as TJ Ford for a frame of reference. My concern with him is his ability to stay healthy (even though he hasn't yet had injuries) long term due to his size. Undersized PGs just make me nervous.

Hill is more of a combo guard than a PG, even SA fans will tell you that. More of a "scorer" than a "creator" if you will. But I think he could competently run the PG spot. The upside is his length and athleticism. I think he'd be a tremendous defender on 1s and 2s (SA has even used him on players like Kobe with success). So defensively I think we'd be better off with Hill.

If George and Granger can create their own looks, I think we'd be better with Hill because he could at least get the ball to them, and we could drastically improve our D. If George and Granger struggle to score efficiently creating their own looks, then I think Collison is the better fit, at least offensively. But in general, scoring hasn't been a major issue. Our defense has. So I'd prefer George Hill I think.
Thats the problem ESutt, Granger and George have a hard time creating their own looks. I would prefer Collision if we could get him without a huge contract attached. Maybe Posey for Rush and expirings would be enough.

tadscout
06-25-2010, 04:38 PM
I think either could "fit." Collison is a lightning fast, but undersized PG. From the things I've read he really improved offensively during the season, but gets abused on D. He weighs about the same as TJ Ford for a frame of reference. My concern with him is his ability to stay healthy (even though he hasn't yet had injuries) long term due to his size. Undersized PGs just make me nervous.

Hill is more of a combo guard than a PG, even SA fans will tell you that. More of a "scorer" than a "creator" if you will. But I think he could competently run the PG spot. The upside is his length and athleticism. I think he'd be a tremendous defender on 1s and 2s (SA has even used him on players like Kobe with success). So defensively I think we'd be better off with Hill.

If George and Granger can create their own looks, I think we'd be better with Hill because he could at least get the ball to them, and we could drastically improve our D. If George and Granger struggle to score efficiently creating their own looks, then I think Collison is the better fit, at least offensively. But in general, scoring hasn't been a major issue. Our defense has. So I'd prefer George Hill I think.

Also we could really utilize Hibbert's passing skills with Hill/George/Granger slashing to the basket...

*I say we fire JoB and hire one of Pop's or Sloan's assistants! :-p

Naptown_Seth
06-25-2010, 04:38 PM
If you trade Rush then you do it with Aldrich in that OKC deal, then you take a PG and whatever position. Tons of talent fell to that range. This would also have the same effect it does for NO, you cut back on salary by moving down from the pay that Rush and #10 would command to what you pay for the lower OKC picks.

Of course I'd ask for a bit more than they did for Mo Pete and #11, at the very least cash.

Shade
06-25-2010, 04:38 PM
Do this yesterday!!!

We can still trade an expiring for a veteran point and be three deep at almost every position.

tadscout
06-25-2010, 04:39 PM
Thats the problem ESutt, Granger and George have a hard time creating their own looks.

Ummm beg your pardon?:hmm:

imawhat
06-25-2010, 04:40 PM
Was Wells watching the draft yesterday when the Spurs picked James Anderson?

Bball
06-25-2010, 04:47 PM
Well... If we could see Rush with a different coach where we ran some plays for him to get some shots off of screens then my opinion might change... and with a coach that valued defense and didn't expect him to just go gunning for 3's too....

But since apparently that's not in the cards... I guess I'm for the trade because with this coach Rush doesn't offer much (or enough). But I will always wonder who does and who will except for 'stretch forwards' shooting 3's... if that is all you expect out of your PF/C

pacers74
06-25-2010, 04:48 PM
The deal is probably dead with San Antonio's first round pick of James Anderson. If we wanted to do this deal Bird needed to pull the trigger when it was on the table.
If San Antonio made that trade they probably would not have drafted Anderson.

Trader Joe
06-25-2010, 04:49 PM
If you trade Rush then you do it with Aldrich in that OKC deal, then you take a PG and whatever position. Tons of talent fell to that range. This would also have the same effect it does for NO, you cut back on salary by moving down from the pay that Rush and #10 would command to what you pay for the lower OKC picks.

Of course I'd ask for a bit more than they did for Mo Pete and #11, at the very least cash.

You don't do that if you want George...which apparently Obie's been having dreams about this guy since he saw him for the first time all of a month ago...

tadscout
06-25-2010, 04:55 PM
You don't do that if you want George...which apparently Obie's been having dreams about this guy since he saw him for the first time all of a month ago...

Folks JoB has maybe 5% say in the draft and that may be generous... :rolleyes:

Bird said they started scouting him in college... so our organization had done much more homework on him than you misrepresent.

QuickRelease
06-25-2010, 05:03 PM
hmm it is a little depressing to give up on rush so soon especially because we know what he can potentially be capable of. guys think he'd break out of his passive mentality on the spurs? or perhaps become a pure defensive specialist.

interesting...I don't think that every time a player gets moved it's because the franchise has given up on them. You have to give something to get something, and Brandon is the most expendable between he and Hibbert. I'd hate to see him go as much as anyone, but if it nets us the PG of the future, you have to look at it.

pacers74
06-25-2010, 05:18 PM
Wells is on JMV and just said he would not be surprised if the pacers don't go back and try to get Hill from the Spurs.

oz_pacer
06-25-2010, 05:22 PM
if thats all it takes to get george hill pull the trigger do it

ESutt7
06-25-2010, 05:23 PM
I think Rush would be a nice fit for the Spurs. They don't have a lot on the wings as of now...Manu and RJ, James Anderson, maybe Mason, Hill if you count him as a wing. And I think Pop could be good for Rush. I wouldn't be upset if we made the pick, and I'd be really happy if we got them to add Blair to it...but they'd really have to address their back up PG issue. I think we have just the guy for them...

Day-V
06-25-2010, 05:50 PM
DO IT BIRD!


I'm all for this deal. But then again, I went to school with him an watched him play. So I'm biased. But, he HAS proven that he can play on the big stage and win ballgames against good teams.


I guess I'm George Hill's graphic-er.

Merz
06-25-2010, 08:22 PM
If you trade Rush then you do it with Aldrich in that OKC deal, then you take a PG and whatever position. Tons of talent fell to that range. This would also have the same effect it does for NO, you cut back on salary by moving down from the pay that Rush and #10 would command to what you pay for the lower OKC picks.

Of course I'd ask for a bit more than they did for Mo Pete and #11, at the very least cash.

Wait a minute...are you suggesting that they should have traded Rush and the 10th pick for the 21st and 26th?? I agree with the majority of things you post...but that idea is pretty bad IMO. I would've been very, very upset with that deal. Even including the cash that you would ask for.

pacergod2
06-25-2010, 08:25 PM
The hometown ridiculousness I am getting right now is atrocious.

Hill is a solid ball player. Don't get me wrong, but he isn't a pass-first type of PG with shooting range that everybody is clamoring for. Why are we insisting on trading Rush when we should focus our attention on trading Murphy. Murphy is our biggest trade asset not named Granger, Hibbert, and probably George right now. If it takes adding Rush to Murphy to get a solid PG then you do it. But to trade Rush for Hill is a lateral move and doesn't really do a whole lot. Hill is not the answer at PG either. Period. He isn't. Sorry Indianapolis residents, but the hometown boy is not as golden as you want him to be. Rush is a very good basketball player and so is Hill. Let's make a deal where it isn't just lateral mediocrity. Thanks.

Justin Tyme
06-25-2010, 09:02 PM
I'd be really happy if we got them to add Blair to it


Collison, Lawson, Maynor, and Hill, none of them, for Rush works salarywise! The other team, other than OKC, has to add a filler to make a Rush trade work. Blair would work, but SA isn't going to give Hill & Blair for Rush.

I can't understand some of these trade scenarios that are just thrown out there with no prior thought if it's workable.

billbradley
06-25-2010, 09:07 PM
I can't understand some of these trade scenarios that are just thrown out there with no prior thought if it's workable.

if you listen to the interview there was a trade scenario larry declined. the players mentioned are just the main pieces. i assume the spurs would throw in a malik hairston type filler, maybe a future second from us.

SycamoreKen
06-25-2010, 09:34 PM
How does that trade make sense from the Spurs side unless the pics were getting swaped as well?

billbradley
06-25-2010, 09:37 PM
How does that trade make sense from the Spurs side unless the pics were getting swaped as well?

all wells says is the spurs like rush and would have done a deal for hill that larry declined. i speculated the spurs getting a second from the pacers to make a point, not to say that it was the deal.

SycamoreKen
06-25-2010, 09:40 PM
I could see Rush starting and allowing Manu to come off the bench. I can also see them picking up someone like Watson to back up Parker if they made that move. People down here are ready to move Parker for a big though. Murph's name has been floated on the radio, but that is just chatter.

ESutt7
06-25-2010, 09:43 PM
Collison, Lawson, Maynor, and Hill, none of them, for Rush works salarywise! The other team, other than OKC, has to add a filler to make a Rush trade work. Blair would work, but SA isn't going to give Hill & Blair for Rush.

I can't understand some of these trade scenarios that are just thrown out there with no prior thought if it's workable.

I threw that out because it would work salary wise, and because he's the only other young guy I'd want from them. I'm well aware that deal isn't realistic. Just saying, yeah Rush for Hill straight up doesn't work. Not sure if you were referring to me or others when you mentioned throwing out deals that don't work.

PacersPride
06-25-2010, 10:18 PM
really think we should be cautious before giving up on Rush. yes the pacers need a pg. but trading Rush for a pg will not make us a championship caliber team. were young, and if miami or chicago signs two max players to go with wade or their core, no one in the East will have a chance.

lets not just throw George to the wolves and start him day one. this kid may be a real gem but he is still a rookie and 2-3 years away from showing the entire package. trading youth for youth may get us a point gaurd but were not gonna win the finals just yet.

keep rush unless a great deal comes along, and instead move the expirings after the free agent bonanza.

the combo of Granger, Rush, George is a great nucleus. we got Hans and Hibbert in the frontcourt. moving the expirings should be Birds focus, and it may need to happen around the trade deadline in order to maximize value.

pickup a young vet at pg, and pf and have another solid lotto pick next year and this team could then start to make some noise. getting a new coach would be icing on the cake.

i disagree with Pacer fans who want to trade Rush b/c we now have George in here. better off dealing these expirings.

the team is still 2-3 years away anyhow, unless Bird can get some veteran leadership in here. hell, i would be okay with us being average until the deadline, then making a deal for a vet pg and/or pf and sneaking into the playoffs and making some noise.

i think Dun and Fosters value will be maximized by waiting to see how they perform this season following rehibilatation.

Ford and Murphy are our two best expiring trade chips. if that cant net us a point gaurd or power forward by the deadline, then Bird possibly does need to be replaced.

Go Pacers!!

Day-V
06-25-2010, 10:21 PM
I could see Rush starting and allowing Manu to come off the bench. I can also see them picking up someone like Watson to back up Parker if they made that move. People down here are ready to move Parker for a big though. Murph's name has been floated on the radio, but that is just chatter.

Do people down there prefer Hill over Parker at this point?

PacersPride
06-25-2010, 10:24 PM
The hometown ridiculousness I am getting right now is atrocious.

Hill is a solid ball player. Don't get me wrong, but he isn't a pass-first type of PG with shooting range that everybody is clamoring for. Why are we insisting on trading Rush when we should focus our attention on trading Murphy. Murphy is our biggest trade asset not named Granger, Hibbert, and probably George right now. If it takes adding Rush to Murphy to get a solid PG then you do it. But to trade Rush for Hill is a lateral move and doesn't really do a whole lot. Hill is not the answer at PG either. Period. He isn't. Sorry Indianapolis residents, but the hometown boy is not as golden as you want him to be. Rush is a very good basketball player and so is Hill. Let's make a deal where it isn't just lateral mediocrity. Thanks.

EXACTLY! 100% agree. unless more moves were to follow, were still 2 years away at best from competing for a championship. keep the young players and trade the expirings.. ie. Murph and Ford.

graphic-er
06-25-2010, 10:39 PM
really think we should be cautious before giving up on Rush. yes the pacers need a pg. but trading Rush for a pg will not make us a championship caliber team. were young, and if miami or chicago signs two max players to go with wade or their core, no one in the East will have a chance.

lets not just throw George to the wolves and start him day one. this kid may be a real gem but he is still a rookie and 2-3 years away from showing the entire package. trading youth for youth may get us a point gaurd but were not gonna win the finals just yet.

keep rush unless a great deal comes along, and instead move the expirings after the free agent bonanza.

the combo of Granger, Rush, George is a great nucleus. we got Hans and Hibbert in the frontcourt. moving the expirings should be Birds focus, and it may need to happen around the trade deadline in order to maximize value.

pickup a young vet at pg, and pf and have another solid lotto pick next year and this team could then start to make some noise. getting a new coach would be icing on the cake.

i disagree with Pacer fans who want to trade Rush b/c we now have George in here. better off dealing these expirings.

the team is still 2-3 years away anyhow, unless Bird can get some veteran leadership in here. hell, i would be okay with us being average until the deadline, then making a deal for a vet pg and/or pf and sneaking into the playoffs and making some noise.

i think Dun and Fosters value will be maximized by waiting to see how they perform this season following rehibilatation.

Ford and Murphy are our two best expiring trade chips. if that cant net us a point gaurd or power forward by the deadline, then Bird possibly does need to be replaced.

Go Pacers!!

I really hate this mentality of we should just suck it up for a couple of years and not try to get incrementally better because we wont' even be in contention for a championship for another 3-4 years. If we just followed your advice, we'd never be in contention. Teams dont' go from suck to contenders in one offseason, they get incrementally better. (unless your Boston).

PacersPride
06-25-2010, 11:06 PM
I really hate this mentality of we should just suck it up for a couple of years and not try to get incrementally better because we wont' even be in contention for a championship for another 3-4 years. If we just followed your advice, we'd never be in contention. Teams dont' go from suck to contenders in one offseason, they get incrementally better. (unless your Boston).

wait a minute.. where did i say we "should" suck for a couple of seasons.. i think you took what i said out of context. i want to see the pacers win now. but in regard to the topic question, trading rush for hill, i think its as the other poster states simply a lateral move. i want to be clear.. i want to win now but trading a young player in rush for a pg WILL NOT get us to the finals, and possibly not even into the playoffs.

yes we need to win now.. but you have to think long term at the same time. alas.. trading youth for youth is not the best option we have, its an option but not the best.

whereas, dealing the expirings.. specifically Murph and Ford is the best option. moreover, does anyone really believe Hill is the answer to our prayers at the pg position for the next 10 years?? i dont.

so in essense what im saying is.. if we can get talent in here to win now lets do it. and the best way to go about it is trading expirings. and the best time to trade the expirings is most likely at the deadline (Dun and Fosters value will be maxed then as well). ideally we make a deal that brings in a pg and/or pf and we make a run at the playoffs.

this accomplishes two things.. first we get the pg and/or pf we need going forward, and secondly we still have a decent pick in next years draft. also, we still have cap space to fill the other position we will need. hell, some of these teams might deal a very good player away to us for a draft pick only, and with the cap space available that gives us the cap flexibility to make one of those kind of deals.

I want to see the pacers compete as much as the next guy, but as i stated, its still a year away, so why start giving up young players now, when we should be focusing on trading the expirings?? thats the point i was trying to convey.

fyi.. in an odd way i dont want us to be exceptionally great anyways cause im afraid JOB would only get an extension further out of that kind of turnaround.

Patience is what im stressing, at least for one more season, unless a mega deal comes along thats too good to pass up.. and thats not likely. the best thing a rebuilding team can do is keep the youth potential they have. our asset we need to maximize is the expirings.

plain and simple.

Young
06-25-2010, 11:14 PM
I don't think Rush is or will be considered a "bust". He is a very talented player and he has shown he can play in the league. His game and mindset is just different.

People talk about his talent and oh how he could/should dominate games. It doesn't matter. He doesn't have that mindset and few players do. There is nothing wrong with that.

There isn't much of a place for Rush in Indiana as of now. Not with Danny and now Paul George and if the Pacers are as high on Lance Stephenson as some have said I have to believe that Rush will be traded.

I really think that Brandon would be a great fit for the Spurs. He is a good defender and would get much better in San Antonio. He also is a good spot up shooter. The Spur's coaching staff would bring out the absolute best in Brandon.

If the Pacers can swap Brandon Rush for George Hill that is likely to be the best deal out there for their point guard needs. Hill is as good of a point guard prospects as any of the others being discussed and he is on a rookie contract.

I hope that if Bird was offered George Hill for Brandon Rush that he would have taken it by now. If he really was and he did turn it down I hope he wakes up and accepts the offer unless there is something about George Hill that we are all missing.

D-BONE
06-25-2010, 11:22 PM
Okay, what's it gonna take to get Felton? S & T with Ford? Will they insist on Rush? That was the deal originally Ford and Rush for RF, Henderson and Nazr or something?

What I'm trying to say here is Felton is probably at best an average-ish PG, but he's more of a PG than George Hill. I like Hill, but, given he's not a PG, I don't buy that he's definitively better than Rush long term the same way that I don't buy Maynor would have been worth giving up Rush.

True, Hill is a more accomplished offensive player now. However, all things being equal in terms of the players surrounding them, I actually think Rush might still end up being the more impact guy with his athleticism, D and team deferral potential. Think MAYBE an even better version of McKey.

Hill for Rush is far from a no brainer. I think we need to be careful there. Hell, I'd rather have a S & T-ed Parker although I don't know exactly what it'd cost us personnel-wisel.

PacersPride
06-25-2010, 11:35 PM
I don't think Rush is or will be considered a "bust". He is a very talented player and he has shown he can play in the league. His game and mindset is just different.

People talk about his talent and oh how he could/should dominate games. It doesn't matter. He doesn't have that mindset and few players do. There is nothing wrong with that.

There isn't much of a place for Rush in Indiana as of now. Not with Danny and now Paul George and if the Pacers are as high on Lance Stephenson as some have said I have to believe that Rush will be traded.

I really think that Brandon would be a great fit for the Spurs. He is a good defender and would get much better in San Antonio. He also is a good spot up shooter. The Spur's coaching staff would bring out the absolute best in Brandon.

If the Pacers can swap Brandon Rush for George Hill that is likely to be the best deal out there for their point guard needs. Hill is as good of a point guard prospects as any of the others being discussed and he is on a rookie contract.

I hope that if Bird was offered George Hill for Brandon Rush that he would have taken it by now. If he really was and he did turn it down I hope he wakes up and accepts the offer unless there is something about George Hill that we are all missing.

im not totally against a Rush for Hill trade. but if it was offered today i would be somewhat hesitant. the draft just ended and the FA bonanza is about to begin. would rather us be patient, see how everything shakes out, and then revaluate our options at that point with the expiring contracts.

ive always said, Rush has too many high expectations from pacer fans. imagine if he were drated during the pacer glory days to be Millers replacement. say around when Miller was 34 or so, that would have given Rush 5 years to be an impact player off the bench. so by the time Rush was 27 or so he would be ready to contribute. its just now we need him to be a STUD and thats not his game.

he is a good defensive player, with some offensive abilities that needs to mature. im not sold on him being a great player but im not sold on him being a bust either.

would rather us be patient and re-evalute once the FA bonanza is clear, then see if Murph or Ford can net us a young point gaurd to be this teams leader.

point gaurd is also a position i do not want to see us settle on. point gaurd ive always felt is like the QB is in football, its important to get the right one, because he is often the leader of your team. lets see if we can move these expirings first and then determine if rush needs to be included.

PacersPride
06-25-2010, 11:42 PM
Okay, what's it gonna take to get Felton? S & T with Ford? Will they insist on Rush? That was the deal originally Ford and Rush for RF, Henderson and Nazr or something?

What I'm trying to say here is Felton is probably at best an average-ish PG, but he's more of a PG than George Hill. I like Hill, but, given he's not a PG, I don't buy that he's definitively better than Rush long term the same way that I don't buy Maynor would have been worth giving up Rush.

True, Hill is a more accomplished offensive player now. However, all things being equal in terms of the players surrounding them, I actually think Rush might still end up being the more impact guy with his athleticism, D and team deferral potential. Think MAYBE an even better version of McKey.

Hill for Rush is far from a no brainer. I think we need to be careful there. Hell, I'd rather have a S & T-ed Parker although I don't know exactly what it'd cost us personnel-wisel.

like this idea bettter as well. would rather take a chance giving away ford than rush. Ford is very expendable, if it nets us a player like Felton, i would be okay with it. as long as we do not sign felton to like a 6 year deal.

more like 4 yrs at around 6-7 million. he could be a player to hold down the position until we draft a pg or acquire another player through trade/FA. also, that type of contract is movable for a player like felton and he would be a good backup if a better point gaurd was available.

better option than giving up rush at this point in time anyways.

pizza guy
06-25-2010, 11:42 PM
really think we should be cautious before giving up on Rush. yes the pacers need a pg. but trading Rush for a pg will not make us a championship caliber team. were young, and if miami or chicago signs two max players to go with wade or their core, no one in the East will have a chance.

lets not just throw George to the wolves and start him day one. this kid may be a real gem but he is still a rookie and 2-3 years away from showing the entire package. trading youth for youth may get us a point gaurd but were not gonna win the finals just yet.

keep rush unless a great deal comes along, and instead move the expirings after the free agent bonanza.

the combo of Granger, Rush, George is a great nucleus. we got Hans and Hibbert in the frontcourt. moving the expirings should be Birds focus, and it may need to happen around the trade deadline in order to maximize value.

pickup a young vet at pg, and pf and have another solid lotto pick next year and this team could then start to make some noise. getting a new coach would be icing on the cake.

i disagree with Pacer fans who want to trade Rush b/c we now have George in here. better off dealing these expirings.

the team is still 2-3 years away anyhow, unless Bird can get some veteran leadership in here. hell, i would be okay with us being average until the deadline, then making a deal for a vet pg and/or pf and sneaking into the playoffs and making some noise.

i think Dun and Fosters value will be maximized by waiting to see how they perform this season following rehibilatation.

Ford and Murphy are our two best expiring trade chips. if that cant net us a point gaurd or power forward by the deadline, then Bird possibly does need to be replaced.

Go Pacers!!

I'd rather see the expiring players traded before the season starts for our super pg of the future, but, you might be right that their value will be greatest at the deadline and we could probably squeeze into the playoffs if we land the right deal.

If we don't get it done before the season starts, I'll be a little disappointed, but not devastated because I think making a deal is probably Bird's first priority with all the expiring contracts we've got.

Here's another question, though. Who's coming up for free agency after next season that we could target after those expirings clear our books? Just something else to think about.

--pizza

Young
06-25-2010, 11:46 PM
PacersPride,

I can't say I disagree with much of anything that you said. I just don't know that there is a much better option at point guard besides George Hill.

I think the Pacers could get Raymond Felton in a sign and trade but he is wanting big money. He turned down like 7 million a year from the Bobcats last summer/fall correct? If you read the Bobcat's message board they seem to like him but only for 5-6 million per year. I don't thik he is the long term answer or that much of an upgrade over TJ Ford.

You could get him or guys like Ramon Sessions or Randy Foye. I think those types are solid but not worth it for the Pacers to get. I'd rather just try and get Jack back.

Hill isn't in the Steve Nash catagorey of point guards but I highly doubt the Pacers are able to get that type of point guard at least this summer or during the season.

You mention Murphy and Ford as pieces to trade for a point guard but I think that their value gets overratted. Their value is highest at the trade deadline and if you look at what expirings got the Cavs (Antwan Jamison althoug they had their choice between him and Troy) it's probably best not to expect much in return on a trade of either of them. I suppose their valueable if you want to add someone overpaid like Elton Brando or Emeka Okafor.

pizza guy
06-25-2010, 11:53 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=FreeAgents-10-11

Free Agents for 2010 and 2011

Obviously, 'Melo leads the '11 class, probably followed by Yao. AK47 is in there. J-Rich. And everyone's favorite: Zach Randolph. There's a handful of good players in there, obviously not like this year's FAs, but good pieces to build a team. Big Baby Davis is in there as well.

Just information to chew on, I'm not really suggesting anyone in particular.

--pizza

Kamiyohk
06-25-2010, 11:58 PM
just give Rush one more year ok?

D-BONE
06-25-2010, 11:59 PM
PacersPride,

I can't say I disagree with much of anything that you said. I just don't know that there is a much better option at point guard besides George Hill.

I think the Pacers could get Raymond Felton in a sign and trade but he is wanting big money. He turned down like 7 million a year from the Bobcats last summer/fall correct? If you read the Bobcat's message board they seem to like him but only for 5-6 million per year. I don't thik he is the long term answer or that much of an upgrade over TJ Ford.

You could get him or guys like Ramon Sessions or Randy Foye. I think those types are solid but not worth it for the Pacers to get. I'd rather just try and get Jack back.

Hill isn't in the Steve Nash catagorey of point guards but I highly doubt the Pacers are able to get that type of point guard at least this summer or during the season.

You mention Murphy and Ford as pieces to trade for a point guard but I think that their value gets overratted. Their value is highest at the trade deadline and if you look at what expirings got the Cavs (Antwan Jamison althoug they had their choice between him and Troy) it's probably best not to expect much in return on a trade of either of them. I suppose their valueable if you want to add someone overpaid like Elton Brando or Emeka Okafor.

Well, personally I'd love to get Jack back, but he was inked for big bucks, no? That's why we didn't keep him I thought. Plus, most would say he's not a "long-term" solution for us. I'm not sure some of these young "stud" PGs that have been rumored would be either, but they are on better contracts I suppose.

Anyway, I would have to disagree that Felton wouldn't be much of an upgrade over Rush. As I've said elsewhere, he seems like an average-ish NBA point, but that's far better than anything around here for the last three or four years. Particularly given he's got a lot more traditional PG qualities than Ford. At least I regard him (Ford) as effectively an undersized SCORING guard without deep range who plays half-*** D.

Kamiyohk
06-26-2010, 12:00 AM
Sign felton and move TJ is good idea
Rush Granger start, Jones,George backup, Stephenson learning the game on the bench

PacersPride
06-26-2010, 12:03 AM
I'd rather see the expiring players traded before the season starts for our super pg of the future, but, you might be right that their value will be greatest at the deadline and we could probably squeeze into the playoffs if we land the right deal.

If we don't get it done before the season starts, I'll be a little disappointed, but not devastated because I think making a deal is probably Bird's first priority with all the expiring contracts we've got.

Here's another question, though. Who's coming up for free agency after next season that we could target after those expirings clear our books? Just something else to think about.

--pizza

i dont think there is really anyone there that would be someone who would help our team out right away. and Durant or Melo are not coming here. maybe parker if the spurs released him but i doubt eva longoria would be thrilled about coming to indy.

so yes dealing the expirings before the season starts is the way to go if you ask me.. moving rush right now seems a little hasty unless it was a no brainer.

Bird should focus on moving Murph and Ford, then Dun and foster at the deadline.. pretty simple really.

if Dun and Foster are not moved, we have cap space and could see us getting a player simply for a pick.. some team wanting to lessen their cap and we could take it on b/c we would be under.

for example, if NO's wanted to get rid of a contract like they do right now and we had the room we would be like,, okay we will take on Okafors 4 years 10 million, but you gotta give us Collison, and we then give them compensation in the form of a draft pick.

having cap space is a positive it seems after seeing Miami basically give the 18th pick away.

ideally tho, move Murph and Ford, then deal Dun and Foster at the deadline.

at least we have options as fans these days.. the last few years were brutal.

quinnthology
06-26-2010, 12:04 AM
The idea of the Spurs trading Hill in any form, not to mention for someone as terrible as Rush, goes against everything I've ever about Hill with the Spurs. He's the reason Tony Parker is being semi-shopped. George Hill is going to remain a Spur, period. And the thought of Brandon Rush straight up for him is an insult to the Spurs management and Hill. This is what you call a misinformed trade rumor from Wells.

Pacers2012
06-26-2010, 12:06 AM
Lets be honest. The pacers aren't doing anything this next year. If they make the playoffs great but, not likely to happen. We will be in the same situation in 2011 trying to replace Murphy,Foster, Dunleavy, and Ford. Now is the time to find a guard. Earl Watson is more then likely gone this summer which gives us 1 guard left. George Hill is the best option for us. Just think of him as a Rondo that can shoot. If we could get him and add some 2 solid FAs next summer then indy is back in the playoffs. I'm not sure if I want to give up Rush just yet tho. I think we should keep him until his rookie contract runs out. The pacers have a long 2 years of move making ahead of them. Lets hope and see if they are committed to winning like Bird said before the draft.

graphic-er
06-26-2010, 12:08 AM
Why over pay for Felton? He has reach his ceiling.

Hill on the other looks like he is on the verge of having a break out season from the point. He started alot of games last year due to Parker being injured, and he did a pretty good job. He has the prototype body of these new era point guards, 6-3, strong, and quick with long wingspan. He stated that next year he really wants to start running the offense more in lieu of the spurs not resigning Parker in the future. He is committed to the position and I think he only gets better at it.

PacersPride
06-26-2010, 12:18 AM
PacersPride,

I can't say I disagree with much of anything that you said. I just don't know that there is a much better option at point guard besides George Hill.

I think the Pacers could get Raymond Felton in a sign and trade but he is wanting big money. He turned down like 7 million a year from the Bobcats last summer/fall correct? If you read the Bobcat's message board they seem to like him but only for 5-6 million per year. I don't thik he is the long term answer or that much of an upgrade over TJ Ford.

You could get him or guys like Ramon Sessions or Randy Foye. I think those types are solid but not worth it for the Pacers to get. I'd rather just try and get Jack back.

Hill isn't in the Steve Nash catagorey of point guards but I highly doubt the Pacers are able to get that type of point guard at least this summer or during the season.

You mention Murphy and Ford as pieces to trade for a point guard but I think that their value gets overratted. Their value is highest at the trade deadline and if you look at what expirings got the Cavs (Antwan Jamison althoug they had their choice between him and Troy) it's probably best not to expect much in return on a trade of either of them. I suppose their valueable if you want to add someone overpaid like Elton Brando or Emeka Okafor.

i agree.. murph and ford are not gonna bring back a deron williams. right now an upgrade would suffice.

we are set at the SG, and SF position. were kinda pretty much set at C as well cause I really like Hibbert. PF we need an upgrade in the form of a vet because I like Hans but i dont think he is ready to be a 82 game starter.

acquiring a player "like" felton not per se Felton but someone who gives us a capable starting level pg is a reasonable request for Murph/Ford in return.

my point being, next years draft were gonna be looking at 2 positions, PF and PG. so we need someone like a felton for 2-3 years until we can land the pg of the future per se.

i think there are gonna be options for us with these expirings, and were not ready to jump to the finals yet anyways.

We need a veteran PF who can work well with Hibber for the next 4-5 seasons and let Hansbrough be a stud off the bench.

we need a PG who is pass first, shoot second,, opposite of TJ. and we draft a PG next offseason.

if those expirings cannot net us a pass first starter type quality PG and a vet PF who is nearing the end of his prime then Bird might need to be replaced.

however, one trade i would just love to see is Collison, Okafor for Murphy & Foster or Ford. if NO's has to add Posey so be it.

Okafor would be an excellent additon even with the salary for the next 4 years and obviously Collison would be the pg everyone on here would love to see in a pacers uniform.

it also would move two of our four expirings and then leave the other two, letting them expire or explore other options.

NO's gets two replacements for Okafor, and a ton of cap space. that deal seems to really work for all involved.

PacersPride
06-26-2010, 12:24 AM
The idea of the Spurs trading Hill in any form, not to mention for someone as terrible as Rush, goes against everything I've ever about Hill with the Spurs. He's the reason Tony Parker is being semi-shopped. George Hill is going to remain a Spur, period. And the thought of Brandon Rush straight up for him is an insult to the Spurs management and Hill. This is what you call a misinformed trade rumor from Wells.

no idea Hill was the second coming of Magic Johnson.. Hill is a good player no doubt, but having Tim Duncan on the roster helps alot of players look better. my only concern if we made any move for hill would be is he a true PG? seems as tho to be more of a combo gaurd a little bit.

still prefer trading our expirings for a deal involving Collison/Okafor

eldubious
06-26-2010, 12:43 AM
Did anyone forget Rush was almost traded to the Bobcats, I don't believe Bird is reluctant to trade him as it is he wants to get the max for him. Although, I believe the Collison deal is more likely with the way NO is trying to shed salary and that Collison believes he'll be traded.

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/67453/20100625/collison_isnt_sure_if_hornets_will_deal_him/