PDA

View Full Version : George Hill... from a Spurs fan.



tiMVP
07-11-2011, 03:09 AM
Howdy,

Spurs fan here coming over to give you some insight on George Hill. I've been meaning to do this for awhile now but got caught up with life. Oh well, better late than never. I'm sure some of you guys know some about George's game being he grew up right down the street but I'm also sure his game has transformed since being in the NBA.


Here in San Antonio the Spurs are very close to the community and George was no different, Everyone here is sad to see him go not only because he was a great player but also a great person to have in our city. Saying that, I am glad he is going back home to the Pacers, not only for his sake, but also because I have always liked the Pacers and they have always been my favorite team out east.


Now to talk some about his game.

1. What is his true position?
I can imagine that this has been a popular topic since draft day and also since we argued about this almost every day as a Spurs fan. Yes, George Hill is a combo guard, but be dubious of his PG skills. Make no mistake that George's natural position is definitely the 2 and he is a lot more comfortable when playing there. He isn't a great facilitator, doesn't have great court vision and has trouble running an effective P&R. Saying that, the game isn't going to crumble if you enter him in at that position, if you know what I mean. He has the ability to make it up in different ways, just expect the ball movement and pace of the game to decrease with him at the helm.


2. His biggest Strengths
Since college and coming into the league as a rookie, George has improved drastically in his 3 pt shot. He is a threat everywhere on the court with his 3 ball and is absolutely deadly from the corners (remember this). Last season george shot the 3 ball around a 30% clip from the wings and key and close to 50% in the corners.

George is also a great defender, his long arms make him great defending the passing lanes and contesting shots. He moves well laterally and is very athletic. At times I felt the Spurs leaned on him too much in regard to his defense (guarding others out of position) but with your roster I don't really see that happening which will let him defend his natural positions more.

He can definitely score the rock. One of George's biggest problems in a Spurs uniform was his lack of assertiveness. Coach Popovich continually had to grill George and remind him that he was one of the best scorers on the court but when that message was taken to heart George could take over a game offensively. He is a great shooter (mid range and 3 pt) as touched on earlier, great at getting to the rim, and great at getting to the line and finishing.

Another big strength that gained him huge respect from Spurs fans was his ability to perform in the playoffs. To Spurs fans, that is all that matters. George has been one of the best playoff performers for the Spurs since he's entered the league which is huge because it doesn't always work out that way. He was one of the biggest reasons we were able to beat Dallas in the first round 2 years ago. I also think that will help a lot with your young roster.

He also takes no shi* from anyone! Not even Kobe. :o
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c506253ef0147e11d2534970b-600wi

3. Weaknesses
As I said before George tends to shy away at times or needs to be reminded that he is in fact an NBA player. Coach Popovich was always on him to play more aggressive and confidently because that's when he is at his best. Being on a veteran team could have had an effect on that and now him being the "veteran" on a younger team could indeed change that whole problem. He does have an active mind though and you could tell that if he doesn't play well, it does take a pretty big toll on him and his confidence.

Defensively George is pretty solid but there is also a couple problems that arise with him. He is a tweener so at time guarding bigger stronger 2s has been a problem. Like I said earlier, I feel the Spurs had him guarding out of position too much which didn't help this and with your current roster of athletic 3s, I don't see that being the case here. George does have a problem guarding the P&R though, he isn't the best at fighting through screens and definitely needs to work on this part of his game.

Road Play- As a Spurs fan this was the most frustrating part of George's game. One night he would have 18 pts on 8-10 shooting playing the Lakers at home and the next game he would be 1-10 shooting at Detroit. For whatever reason it was, George had serious problems playing on the road with the Silver and Black. Here are Georges stats from last season comparing his Home and Road #'s. As you can see, it's a pretty big drop off for a guy who averaged close to 30mpg for us.

Home: 14.3 PPG, 53% FG, 50% 3FG
Road: 8.8 PPG, 41% FG, 27% 3FG

Hopefully his road woes disappear with his new surroundings.


On the flip side, I hope Kawhi Leonard works out for us :laugh: Our front office must have seen something to target the kid and I'm not going to go against there judgement.



Hopefully this helps a little to some of you guys who haven't seen George play a whole lot. If you guys would like to know anything else regarding him don't hesitate to ask (#s and all). Hopefully we can have many good basketball discussions going forward here, which seems to be a pretty active board.

Good luck next season (if there is one :( ) and Go Spurs Go!

Bye George :cry:

timvp.

Peck
07-11-2011, 03:23 AM
Thank you for taking the time to give us a report. It is always good to get a first hand report on a player.

I have been wondering about his ability to take the ball to the rim, any insight on that?

ilive4sports
07-11-2011, 03:28 AM
Thanks for posting this. I was unaware of the differences at home vs on the road. Hopefully as he is another year older this improves.

mattie
07-11-2011, 03:47 AM
Thanks for dropping in! At least from our perspective, a lot of us thought the trade was one that should work out for both teams. Is that how all you felt?

pacer4ever
07-11-2011, 04:32 AM
Thanks for dropping in! At least from our perspective, a lot of us thought the trade was one that should work out for both teams. Is that how all you felt?

wait aren't you the one who said the Pacers stole Hill and gave up nothing for him while i was the one who said it was good for both teams?:rolleyes:

Speed
07-11-2011, 08:06 AM
I didn't realize the extent of his timid nature, maybe that changes with a different group. Also, I no idea the home/away disparity. I'm surprised at how clearly he's more a 2 guard.

I am still hoping/thinking he can provide excellent defense against opposing Point Guards. I'm going over some games from last year and I didn't realize how poor DCs defensive recognition is at times. If George Hill can provide relief in this area, if DC doesn't consistently improve in this, GH can have a huge impact on this team in that way. In fact, GH might finish games instead of DC, if DC doesn't start to improve on defense, imho.

Although, I did notice the getting through pick issue with GH, mentioned in the OP. Spurs, though, would often straight switch on these at the end of games, so I don't know if that was by design for strategy or from GHs limitations.

I'm eager to find out, though.

Hicks
07-11-2011, 08:16 AM
Ironically, Hill would have been a great PG option for Jim and his offense.

Speed
07-11-2011, 08:55 AM
One other thing, about George Hill bogging down an offense when playing the point. With the Point Guards that have been Pacers the last few years, I wonder if we'd even notice.

Unclebuck
07-11-2011, 10:28 AM
I always say you never truly know a player until you see him every game (or most every game) so I'm sure there will be a few surprises for us when we start watching George as a Pacers player.

I agree with everything tiMVP posted - although I did think he ran the pick and roll pretty well, but then if you have Parker and Manu as comparisons every game, maybe George would pale in any comparison

But I expect George to seem like a somewhat different player for us, just because we don't have Duncan, Parker and Manu - we don't even have 1 player like those guys who have all won multiple championships. We also don't have Pop as our coach. So I expect George to be more aggressive as a Pacer

The thing I always liked about George whenever I watched him play was his toughness. Sure he has some weaknesses, but toughness is extremely important

Pacerized
07-11-2011, 10:45 AM
Thanks for posting and giving us the insight on Hill.
I'm interested in knowing. how do you or other Spurs fans feel about the trade?

imawhat
07-11-2011, 11:04 AM
Thanks for the report. Everything you've said is exactly what I've been saying about him, but it helps to have people who watch every game of his share their thoughts.

He's very much like a current Pacer, Darren Collison, in his strengths and weaknesses. I view him as a slightly better version of Darren.

He'll definitely be used differently here than he was in San Antonio; at least I hope so. There's still a lot to learn about his game because his role for the Spurs was so simple. He's very effective in the corners, but I think the Spurs had him in the corners way too much and it limited his overall effectiveness. He spent almost all of his time there, and I think San Antonio's offense moved/looked better when George was on the bench. I also think he spent too much time guarding bigger positions, even small forwards, but that's because he may have been the best option between him, Tony and Manu, who spent quite a bit of time together on the court. He looks equally solid on average point guards and shooting guards.


I have been wondering about his ability to take the ball to the rim, any insight on thatI know you want tiMVP's answer, but George is pretty good when he does it. He has no problem getting to the rim, and has the ability to finish strong and make tough shots, though he misses some of the easier ones sometimes. He can lay it in, but he also has a teardrop that I'm assuming he picked up from Parker.

Still, I hope he drives a lot more than he did for the Spurs. I think it will open up his mid-range game (which looks like it could be very good...even one of his top strengths if used effectively) and his outside game. Hopefully tiMVP can provide some insight here.

imawhat
07-11-2011, 11:17 AM
One other thing, about George Hill bogging down an offense when playing the point. With the Point Guards that have been Pacers the last few years, I wonder if we'd even notice.

I'll notice because having a point guard with vision and the ability to get easy shots for a team full of players that can't create their own shot is still our biggest weakness. I think both Collison and Hill deserve a lot of playing time, but one of them becomes expendable if we get a real point guard here.

I'm not counting on it, but it would be perfect if Lance got his act together and could play with these guys. I can't think of a better combo than Lance/Hill; they complement each other so much it's ridiculous. Lance can drive to the middle and knows exactly when to make the kickout pass. He'd get Hill so many open 3s that our offense would become really efficient. And on defense, having Hill on the court allows Lance to slide over to guard SGs which helps cover up his lateral quickness.

Also, Hill is very good in transition. Him and Lance together in transition will work. Add Paul George to the mix, who's amazing at running to the rim (though we'd never know since he was rarely rewarded for it last season), and suddenly we have our first fast break team since Mark Jackson was here.

OakMoses
07-11-2011, 11:21 AM
This post provides an interesting contrast with the general national media interpretation of Hill's game and their projections towards how he will play for the Pacers. Most guys seem to think that Hill was "shackled" to a certain extent in San Antonio's offense, and that he will, to an extent, break out in Indiana's less structured system. There's probably some truth to that, but tiMVP seems to be saying that Hill's shackles may have been self imposed as much as they were Popavich imposed.

I agree with Buck in that we will probably see a different George Hill now that he's not playing with HoF type players every night. We've heard from several different assessments that he's a fairly cerebral player, so I'm sure that in his mind taking shots away from Hibbert, Granger, George, etc. is a lot different and less harmful to the team than taking shots away from guys like Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker. Hill is most likely our second best player right now. Hopefully he realizes that offensively.

Hicks, I've also been thinking the same thing about him being a great PG for O'Brien's offense.

I think that Vogel and his atmosphere of unconditional positive regard will probably be good for Hill. Pop is notoriously hard on players; Vogel is just the opposite. I think that will help Hill to assert himself a bit more. Hill was a huge scorer in college. Hopefully we can see him re-gain some of that swagger.

OakMoses
07-11-2011, 11:23 AM
I'm not counting on it, but it would be perfect if Lance got his act together and could play with these guys. I can't think of a better combo than Lance/Hill; they complement each other so much it's ridiculous. Lance can drive to the middle and knows exactly when to make the kickout pass. He'd get Hill so many open 3s that our offense would become really efficient. And on defense, having Hill on the court allows Lance to slide over to guard SGs which helps cover up his lateral quickness.


I've been thinking the same thing. People like to say that 2 combo guards does not make a PG, but with good coaching and complementary skill sets I don't know why not.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 12:03 PM
I view him as a slightly better version of Darren.

I view him as a slightly worse version but with defense.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 12:07 PM
Hill is most likely our second best player right now.

Woah.

Speed
07-11-2011, 12:33 PM
I'll notice because having a point guard with vision and the ability to get easy shots for a team full of players that can't create their own shot is still our biggest weakness. I think both Collison and Hill deserve a lot of playing time, but one of them becomes expendable if we get a real point guard here.

I'm not counting on it, but it would be perfect if Lance got his act together and could play with these guys. I can't think of a better combo than Lance/Hill; they complement each other so much it's ridiculous. Lance can drive to the middle and knows exactly when to make the kickout pass. He'd get Hill so many open 3s that our offense would become really efficient. And on defense, having Hill on the court allows Lance to slide over to guard SGs which helps cover up his lateral quickness.

Also, Hill is very good in transition. Him and Lance together in transition will work. Add Paul George to the mix, who's amazing at running to the rim (though we'd never know since he was rarely rewarded for it last season), and suddenly we have our first fast break team since Mark Jackson was here.

QFT!

I hate it because I think of how many ways it can get screwed up, but how incredible the Born Ready/Indiana George combo could be.

McKeyFan
07-11-2011, 12:51 PM
I'm not counting on it, but it would be perfect if Lance got his act together and could play with these guys. I can't think of a better combo than Lance/Hill; they complement each other so much it's ridiculous. Lance can drive to the middle and knows exactly when to make the kickout pass.

I'm with you. I remember those posts where you showed frame by frame how Lance made perfect kickout passes.


He's very much like a current Pacer, Darren Collison, in his strengths and weaknesses. I view him as a slightly better version of Darren.

Huh?

Darren is a terrible defender. Hill an excellent one.

Perhaps you were thinking just offensively.

pacers74
07-11-2011, 01:12 PM
I also have been hoping Hill and Lance can share the court together. Either one can bring the ball up the court and if Lance keeps working on his game he should be the better passer of the two. On defense Hill will guard the better guard. That should cover up Lances weakness on defense. They could make a perfect backup duo.
Lets just hope Lance keeps working on his game now that Clark is banned form working with him.

Hicks
07-11-2011, 01:30 PM
I view him as a slightly worse version but with defense.

... which would make him, overall, more than slightly better.

Hicks
07-11-2011, 01:35 PM
By the way, I watched some of Hill's game on Synergy yesterday. One thing I noticed is that he can be pretty darn effective when he gets multiple screens to run around off of the ball.

The most common setup I saw was when Hill would dribble the ball up the court, the other guard would curl up to the top of the key, Hill would feed him, and then the other 3 players on the court would stay relatively still for a moment, and they acted as three different spots where Hill could lose his man via the screens they would set.

Typically, Hill would always first run along the two strong-side pickers (the two on his side of the floor, that is) and curl down towards the baseline, and then he'd take what the defense gave him.

If George thought he could get open by it, he'd reverse course and curl back out to towards the corner or the wing, and the ball handler would find him for an open jumper from either 3 or midrange, which he does a decent job of hitting.

Otherwise, he could also just keep creating space between he and his man by continuing on underneath the basket, where the 3rd picker would give him one last bit of breathing room, where he would then be fed the ball for the same kind of shot.

George would use the fact that he could go either way to keep his man wondering, which made it easier for him to juke himself open one way or another.

I certainly hope we run a similar play for him here periodically.

It reminded me how Reggie and Rip have run around like that. They were better, but he's good at it.

tiMVP
07-11-2011, 01:48 PM
I have been wondering about his ability to take the ball to the rim, any insight on that?

As imawhat touched on earlier in the thread, George has great ability to get to the rim and finish there. His long arms make it hard for defenders to contest his shot at times and he has definitely taken a page out of tony parkers book with the "floater" in the lane.

He is also deadly in the open court. His speed from baseline to baseline is very quick.

tiMVP
07-11-2011, 01:59 PM
Thanks for posting and giving us the insight on Hill.
I'm interested in knowing. how do you or other Spurs fans feel about the trade?

Spurs fans are staying pretty reserve so far regarding the trade. I'm not sure if you guys really understand how big of a piece he was in our system the last 2 years. He has been our 4th best player (behind the big 3) and it isn't even close, so it is definitely hard and to an extent shocking to see him go.

Saying that, It's hard to go against what the Spurs FO does and everyone is pretty much giving them the benefit of the doubt regarding this trade.

With the emergence of Gary Neal in a Spurs uniform and rookie James Anderson from Oklahoma State sitting in the fold (who the Spurs are extremely high on) it seemed the George was the only piece with good value that was expendable. Coach Pop has termed George Hill his "favorite player" since he joined the Spurs 3 years ago and has recently said it was one of the hardest things he has ever done in his tenure here.

Another reason for the move is his contract issue, with George becoming a FA next off-season, I am not quite sure the Spurs were ready to fork over 6-7 mil/season to keep him which I believe will be his going rate (depending on the new CBA).

With all that in mind the Spurs are getting a player in Kawhi Leonard who definitely fills a need and gap at the 3 since all we have is that abomination of a player Richard Jefferson at that position.

tiMVP
07-11-2011, 02:06 PM
He'll definitely be used differently here than he was in San Antonio; at least I hope so. There's still a lot to learn about his game because his role for the Spurs was so simple. He's very effective in the corners, but I think the Spurs had him in the corners way too much and it limited his overall effectiveness. He spent almost all of his time there, and I think San Antonio's offense moved/looked better when George was on the bench. I also think he spent too much time guarding bigger positions, even small forwards, but that's because he may have been the best option between him, Tony and Manu, who spent quite a bit of time together on the court. He looks equally solid on average point guards and shooting guards.


I wouldn't read too much into him spending most of his time in the corners. The whole Spurs offense is predicated on the High P&R with either Tony or Manu penetrating off the screen and kicks the ball out for an open 3. Whoever is not Tony or Manu pretty much sits in the corner and waits for an open 3 ball (see Bruce Bowen).. So simple, yet so effective.

George definitely had his opportunities to run the offense when Tony and Manu were on the bench or missing the game entirely and with how the Spurs run there offense, he simply isn't a great fit at PG in this particular system. He definitely played his best ball playing off of Tony at the 2 position.

mattie
07-11-2011, 02:16 PM
wait aren't you the one who said the Pacers stole Hill and gave up nothing for him while i was the one who said it was good for both teams?:rolleyes:

Once again to ever think the 15th pick is equal to an established player like Hill is absolutely ludicrous. Of course I think it'll work out for both teams. I don't think the Spurs had the money to sign Hill, so going for a draft pick is a good move for them.

Edit- and I'm pretty confident you're probably one of those from the "trade granger for OJ Mayo/Hill sucks" group anyway. Not really going to look up your negative thoughts on the trade.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 02:19 PM
... which would make him, overall, more than slightly better.

Overall, sure, maybe.

But our offense likely isn't going to run any better if you substitute Hill in for Collison. JMO. As frustrating as Collison can be, Hill might be even more inconsistent.

Our offensive execution was a problem in the playoffs. Our defense was pretty darn good.

tiMVP
07-11-2011, 02:21 PM
This post provides an interesting contrast with the general national media interpretation of Hill's game and their projections towards how he will play for the Pacers. Most guys seem to think that Hill was "shackled" to a certain extent in San Antonio's offense, and that he will, to an extent, break out in Indiana's less structured system. There's probably some truth to that, but tiMVP seems to be saying that Hill's shackles may have been self imposed as much as they were Popavich imposed.


I definitely don't think George was "shackled" in any way when being in a Spurs uniform. I think him playing behind Tony and Manu was probably the best thing to ever happen to a kid because I'm not sure he could of handled any more responsibilities then he already had.

I can tell you this.. George definitely works better in an uptempo offense compared to a half-court offense. What people don't seem to realize is the Spurs have definitely been transforming there offense to more of an up-tempo style (and I don't think that been a coincidence).

The Spurs were #14 in the NBA last season in "pace" (# of possessions per 48/minutes) at 94.3 possessions. The Pacers ranked #5 in the NBA at 97.4 possessions which definitely leads me to believe he could be effective there.

joew8302
07-11-2011, 02:22 PM
Hey timvp, I was a former member of spurstalk and you guys run a fun board over there. I hope things with you and Kori are well. Thanks for the report.

OakMoses
07-11-2011, 02:46 PM
Woah.

Who is then?

Eleazar
07-11-2011, 03:57 PM
Who is then?

Well this past season if you take out the coach variable it was probably TJ Ford.

Going forward though I would say it is a close race between Collison and Hibbert.



From the description the OP gave it sounds like his opinion of Hill is more or less a smaller Rush who has some nice ball handling skills.

pacer4ever
07-11-2011, 04:04 PM
Well this past season if you take out the coach variable it was probably TJ Ford.

Going forward though I would say it is a close race between Collison and Hibbert.



From the description the OP gave it sounds like his opinion of Hill is more or less a smaller Rush who has some nice ball handling skills.

:bs:
:eek:

Constellations
07-11-2011, 04:06 PM
Who is then?

Hibbert

Eleazar
07-11-2011, 04:21 PM
:bs:
:eek:

I figured that comment would be controversial.

Constellations
07-11-2011, 04:23 PM
I figured that comment would be controversial.

And not true.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 04:23 PM
Who is then?

Where are people getting this Hill-mania? Hill is a decent player; he's not our 2nd best player. People are way over-shooting the expectations of this guy. He played within one of the best coached and long-standing structures in the league with all kinds of great veteran presence around him --- most of which is lacking here. He's in for a huge change, and likely not for the better as this young team and coaching staff works kinks out. Look at our organization, it's undergoing transition from top-to-bottom as we speak. We're not the Spurs.

I'm telling you, this board is so eager for *any* personnel transition that we'll make George Hill sound like the coming of Tracy MacGrady. A reality check is in order... people are just building yourselves up for a huge let-down. You can't look at the few YouTube clips out there of his highlights or him getting in Kobe's face and think that he plays like that *all the time*. He doesn't.

This is what I see when I observe everyone going bananas over George Hill after watching his YouTube highlights and looking at his stats --- Dahntay Jones. This would be like us giving up DJones in a trade after his first season here and the other team going bananas about the signing. Both players averaged 10-11 points, both players are inconsistent offensive players and good defensive players, both players get juiced up for the playoffs, both players have moments of hotness in which you love them, and then they disappear, both players get 2-2.5 assists per game, both players get 2.5-3 rebounds per game. Jones did that in 25 minutes per game, and Hill did it in 31 minutes per game.

That's reality. They are fine roleplayers, and even capable of some spot starter minutes, but that's it! I saw someone predict All-Star for Hill this next year!

Hill is going to be a fine addition to this team, a wonderful option off the bench, or even a situational option as a starter, but let's keep grounded here, sheesh.

mattie
07-11-2011, 04:28 PM
Where are people getting this Hill-mania? Hill is a decent player; he's not our 2nd best player. People are way over-shooting the expectations of this guy. He played within one of the best coached and long-standing structures in the league with all kinds of great veteran presence around him --- most of which is lacking here. He's in for a huge change, and likely not for the better as this young team and coaching staff works kinks out. Look at our organization, it's undergoing transition from top-to-bottom as we speak. We're not the Spurs.

I'm telling you, this board is so eager for *any* personnel transition that we'll make George Hill sound like the coming of Tracy MacGrady. A reality check is in order... people are just building yourselves up for a huge let-down. You can't look at the few YouTube clips out there of his highlights or him getting in Kobe's face and think that he plays like that *all the time*. He doesn't.

This is what I see when I observe everyone going bananas over George Hill after watching his YouTube highlights and looking at his stats --- Dahntay Jones. This would be like us giving up DJones in a trade after his first season here and the other team going bananas about the signing. Both players averaged 10-11 points, both players are inconsistent offensive players and good defensive players, both players get juiced up for the playoffs, both players have moments of hotness in which you love them, and then they disappear, both players get 2-2.5 assists per game, both players get 2.5-3 rebounds per game. Jones did that in 25 minutes per game, and Hill did it in 31 minutes per game.

That's reality. They are fine roleplayers, and even capable of some spot starter minutes, but that's it!

Hill is going to be a fine addition to this team, a wonderful option off the bench, or even a situational option as a starter, but let's keep grounded here, sheesh.

People aren't going bananas. They just recognize that currently this team doesn't have very many solid players. In fact there are probably 3 consistent players on the Pacers right now. Granger, Foster Hill (if Jeff is resigned). It's not a stretch to say right now, Hill is our second best player. That doesn't come from some sort of exaggerated expectations of who he is. It comes from a realistic view of our roster. And that is Paul George is still way too raw, Hibbert and Collison are widely inconsistent, Tyler and Josh are both deathly afraid of rebounding, and I could go on.

Unclebuck
07-11-2011, 04:28 PM
Where are people getting this Hill-mania? Hill is a decent player; he's not our 2nd best player. People are way over-shooting the expectations of this guy. He played within one of the best coached and long-standing structures in the league with all kinds of great veteran presence around him --- most of which is lacking here. He's in for a huge change, and likely not for the better as this young team and coaching staff works kinks out. Look at our organization, it's undergoing transition from top-to-bottom as we speak. We're not the Spurs.

I'm telling you, this board is so eager for *any* personnel transition that we'll make George Hill sound like the coming of Tracy MacGrady. A reality check is in order... people are just building yourselves up for a huge let-down. You can't look at the few YouTube clips out there of his highlights or him getting in Kobe's face and think that he plays like that *all the time*. He doesn't.

This is what I see when I observe everyone going bananas over George Hill after watching his YouTube highlights and looking at his stats --- Dahntay Jones. This would be like us giving up DJones in a trade after his first season here and the other team going bananas about the signing. Both players averaged 10-11 points, both players are inconsistent offensive players and good defensive players, both players get juiced up for the playoffs, both players have moments of hotness in which you love them, and then they disappear, both players get 2-2.5 assists per game, both players get 2.5-3 rebounds per game. Jones did that in 25 minutes per game, and Hill did it in 31 minutes per game.

That's reality. They are fine roleplayers, and even capable of some spot starter minutes, but that's it!

Hill is going to be a fine addition to this team, a wonderful option off the bench, or even a situational option as a starter, but let's keep grounded here, sheesh.



I think for a lot of who thinks maybe Hill could be our second best player, at least until Paul George gets a little better, it has more to do with us thinking that right now after Granger we don't have anyone who is worthy of being our team's second best player.

It says more about the other players on our team that it says about George Hill.

But who knows what will happen next season. I hope George Hill is our 5th or 6th best player, that will mean the Pacers are having a good season.

As to your point about George Hill looking better because he was with the Spurs - you might be 100% correct about that, but it could also go the opposite way, he might be better if more is expected of him as will likely happen here. We just don't know

pacer4ever
07-11-2011, 04:29 PM
I figured that comment would be controversial.

If JOB was holding him back lets see how he does next year.(the guy isnt very good IMO better than Price? probably but thats not saying much.) But come on now TJ Ford at his best isn't our 2nd best player.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 04:34 PM
Last year was Hansbrough's first true season. Last year was Paul George's first true season. Hibbert has shown considerable improvement every year in his short career. Collison had a setback under JOB, but improved under Vogel and is still very young. Marginal improvement in any of those guys easily paces them far ahead of Hill for the coveted "2nd Best Pacer Award".

OakMoses
07-11-2011, 04:55 PM
Spurs fans are staying pretty reserve so far regarding the trade. I'm not sure if you guys really understand how big of a piece he was in our system the last 2 years. He has been our 4th best player (behind the big 3) and it isn't even close, so it is definitely hard and to an extent shocking to see him go.

Coach Pop has termed George Hill his "favorite player" since he joined the Spurs 3 years ago and has recently said it was one of the hardest things he has ever done in his tenure here.



This bears repeating in the George Hill is our 2nd best player discussion.


I think for a lot of who thinks maybe Hill could be our second best player, at least until Paul George gets a little better, it has more to do with us thinking that right now after Granger we don't have anyone who is worthy of being our team's second best player.

It says more about the other players on our team that it says about George Hill.

But who knows what will happen next season. I hope George Hill is our 5th or 6th best player, that will mean the Pacers are having a good season.

As to your point about George Hill looking better because he was with the Spurs - you might be 100% correct about that, but it could also go the opposite way, he might be better if more is expected of him as will likely happen here. We just don't know

Buck, as usual, makes an excellent point. Saying George Hill is our second best player says far more about our other players than about Hill.


Last year was Hansbrough's first true season. Last year was Paul George's first true season. Hibbert has shown considerable improvement every year in his short career. Collison had a setback under JOB, but improved under Vogel and is still very young. Marginal improvement in any of those guys easily paces them far ahead of Hill for the coveted "2nd Best Pacer Award".

You're doing a lot of projecting here, and I don't think you can make any sort of convincing argument this way. I'm not saying that George Hill will be the 2nd best Pacer next season or any season going forward. What I'm saying is that, based on the body of work we've seen in the NBA so far, George Hill is the 2nd best player on our team. Hill is an above average player on both ends of the floor. He might be the only player on our team you can say that about. Granger is when he wants to be, but most nights he's average, at best, on defense.

If you want to play the projection game, I don't really think that any of the guys you mention will ever be "far ahead" of Hill with the exception of Paul George. Hibbert and Hansbrough and Collison could get to that point, but all three players have some pretty obvious weaknesses that will stick with them throughout their careers and significantly limit their effectiveness.

By the way, I think your D. Jones argument is completely bogus. Over the past 3 seasons George Hill has played 5694 minutes and averaged 9.9 ppg on a team that averaged 55 wins per season. Over the 8 seasons of his NBA career, D. Jones has played 7553 minutes, averaged 6.1 ppg, and been on a winning team 4 out of 8 seasons. D. Jones is an atrocious offensive player. Even when he's playing well and making shots, his offensive play makes me cringe. I don't think anybody says that about Hill.

Kraft
07-11-2011, 05:00 PM
More should embrace George Hill for what he is -- a fine, fine combo guard off the bench. If he supplants Darren Collison, I think the team has a major problem.

Hill as a PG for 12 minutes a night and 12-24 more as a shooting guard is ideal. Hill playing much more PG than that worries me.

If people don't think Collison is enough as a starting PG, the answer isn't George Hill. The answer is finding a PG that is the answer ... whoever that may be.

I feel similarly about Hansbrough. An excellent first big off the bench. Tenacious, offensively capable, a big burst of energy. Not a starter.

A bench of Hill, Hansbrough, another wing, Dahntay Jones and Jeff Foster (or a similar replacement if need be) is one giant pain in the back side for opposing teams.

mattie
07-11-2011, 05:04 PM
More should embrace George Hill for what he is -- a fine, fine combo guard off the bench. If he supplants Darren Collison, I think the team has a major problem.

Hill as a PG for 12 minutes a night and 12-24 more as a shooting guard is ideal. Hill playing much more PG than that worries me.

If people don't think Collison is enough as a starting PG, the answer isn't George Hill. The answer is finding a PG that is the answer ... whoever that may be.

I feel similarly about Hansbrough. An excellent first big off the bench. Tenacious, offensively capable, a big burst of energy. Not a starter.

A bench of Hill, Hansbrough, another wing, Dahntay Jones and Jeff Foster (or a similar replacement if need be) is one giant pain in the back side for opposing teams.

It certainly appears like the Pacers are putting together one helluva bench. We just need our starting talent to realize their abilities on a consistent basis. And obviously a star PF we are waiting to sign in the next few years.

Speed
07-11-2011, 05:26 PM
I think George Hill was loved in San Antonio the same way we like Jeff Foster, sort of. He's a role player who plays hard and you don't have high expectations of so when he's good, you really appreciate it.

Not downgrading George here, just saying, he was on a team of 'stars' and played a really important role. He was their 4th best all around player, but the gap between 3 and 4 was really big.

George was drafted late in the first round so expectations were low and he really panned out.

Its kind of the anti DC, the expectations were too high for him, imo, so he's not valued, liked or whatever as much. If the Pacers drafted him in the 20s, he'd be a fan favorite by becoming the starting point guard in year two.

All about expectations, imo.

Realize I think he's a key rotation player for years here, so again, I'm not down on him, at all. Give me a hardnose, athletic defender, whos good on offense everyday of the week.

Infinite MAN_force
07-11-2011, 06:04 PM
I'm starting to feel like people have blown Collison's little sophomore slump way out of proportion. The Hill acquisition should be a nice motivator, I expect he makes a big jump entering his third season.

Just a hunch. He's a better player than he gets credit for around here.

Hicks
07-11-2011, 06:10 PM
I'm starting to feel like people have blown Collison's little sophomore slump way out of proportion. The Hill acquisition should be a nice motivator, I expect he makes a big jump entering his third season.

Just a hunch. He's a better player than he gets credit for around here.

DC has sure taken a lot of hits on this board. I still think he's decent and could be better than he's sometimes performed, too.

His lack of court vision can be (very) frustrating, by only big gripe was that I was expecting to see an above-average defensive PG out of him, and most of the time that's just not what I got.

If nothing else, though, I expect him to become a better and more consistent scorer, and while that's nails on the chalk board to PG purists, I still see that as a potentially quite valuable asset to have.

ilive4sports
07-11-2011, 06:16 PM
I don't know if he is our second best player, but I certainly think he is our second best scorer.

A.B.Hollywood
07-11-2011, 06:23 PM
Just curious...

but how would many here (and specifically our new Spurs friend if he feels so inclined to chime in) welcome the down the road comparison to Joe Dumars?

Again, not saying this is what GH3 is now but as an undersized two (they are the same height and weight) who plays both positions but obviously is more of a SG than anything else, who is known for his lock down defense, clutch performances in the playoffs and knack for not backing down on anyone. Just try and tell me that doesn't remind you of Joe Dumars.

It sure as hell does for me.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 09:06 PM
You're doing a lot of projecting here, and I don't think you can make any sort of convincing argument this way. I'm not saying that George Hill will be the 2nd best Pacer next season or any season going forward. What I'm saying is that, based on the body of work we've seen in the NBA so far, George Hill is the 2nd best player on our team. Hill is an above average player on both ends of the floor. He might be the only player on our team you can say that about. Granger is when he wants to be, but most nights he's average, at best, on defense.

If you want to play the projection game, I don't really think that any of the guys you mention will ever be "far ahead" of Hill with the exception of Paul George. Hibbert and Hansbrough and Collison could get to that point, but all three players have some pretty obvious weaknesses that will stick with them throughout their careers and significantly limit their effectiveness.

By the way, I think your D. Jones argument is completely bogus. Over the past 3 seasons George Hill has played 5694 minutes and averaged 9.9 ppg on a team that averaged 55 wins per season. Over the 8 seasons of his NBA career, D. Jones has played 7553 minutes, averaged 6.1 ppg, and been on a winning team 4 out of 8 seasons. D. Jones is an atrocious offensive player. Even when he's playing well and making shots, his offensive play makes me cringe. I don't think anybody says that about Hill.

Missed the point. I'm not doing an apples-to-apples comparison on their games. I'm asking you to view them in the same impact on the team --- as a roleplayer. My point is, it's the same as a team acquiring Jones, viewing all of Jones Youtube highlights (he has some, believe it or not), viewing his stats, viewing his "backup" status, and their entire fan forum goes all a-twitter about him being ready to bust out and take the NBA by storm and earn himself an All-Star berth and he's their 2nd best player. It's a silly notion.

I also don't agree, based on his "body of work" that's our 2nd best player. I think he's a damned fine addition to the team, but I just flat-out disagree with your assessment.

OakMoses
07-11-2011, 11:37 PM
Missed the point. I'm not doing an apples-to-apples comparison on their games. I'm asking you to view them in the same impact on the team --- as a roleplayer. My point is, it's the same as a team acquiring Jones, viewing all of Jones Youtube highlights (he has some, believe it or not), viewing his stats, viewing his "backup" status, and their entire fan forum goes all a-twitter about him being ready to bust out and take the NBA by storm and earn himself an All-Star berth and he's their 2nd best player. It's a silly notion.

I also don't agree, based on his "body of work" that's our 2nd best player. I think he's a damned fine addition to the team, but I just flat-out disagree with your assessment.

Fair enough. I don't think Hill is going to turn into an all-star or anything (though I think he's got a better chance than DC or Tyler). I just think that he had a solid season as a major contributor on a really good team, and since I wouldn't use a stronger adjective than solid to describe any Pacer's season last year, I'm going to opt for the player on the better team.

I'm still interested to know who you say are second best player is right now. I don't want to argue. Just curious.

The funny thing is that I don't think we really disagree on much where Hill is concerned. I think he's a solid but not spectacular acquisition. Because of his defensive abilities and his demonstrated performance playing very high level basketball, I prefer him over most of the guys on our roster. However, I don't think the margin is all that wide and I can certainly see how you could make a case for other players.

Kid Minneapolis
07-11-2011, 11:44 PM
I stated a few posts ago that I'd put my money on anyone that rhymes with Collison, Hansbrough, Paul George, or Hibbert. One of those guys is gonna hit. I know you think I'm doing a lot of projecting, but --- they're young guys still improving... all of whom are arguably equally or more important to this team *right now* than George Hill, and they still have room to improve this next season, especially now that our coaching situation is straightening itself out.

It's not to diminish George Hill, I'm just looking at him for what he is. He's a great addition to this team, I'm gonna love his big plays when he comes up with them in his role.