PDA

View Full Version : Hillís value underscores gamble for Spurs in Kawhi Leonard trade



billbradley
08-04-2011, 11:50 AM
Hillís value underscores gamble for Spurs in Kawhi Leonard trade
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2011/08/04/hills-value-underscores-gamble-for-spurs-in-kawhi-leonard-trade/
Tim Griffin


SI.comís Point Forward blog is counting down the top 100 players in the NBA during a course of daily reports over the past several days.

No current Spurshave been ranked in numbers 70 through 100 that have been revealed so far. I would expect the Spurs will have three players in the final rankings ó Tony Parker, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili.

But one Spurs player from last seasonís roster has been listed so far. And George Hillís ranking at No. 73 highlights the importance of the Spursí biggest off-season acquisitions.

After three seasons with the Spurs, Hill was swapped to Indiana in a draft-day trade for a package of young players highlighted by No. 1 draft pick Kawhi Leonard.

Hillís two-way value is the major reason that SI.com has him ranked as highly as was. He was one of the most efficient players in the league and the Spursí best defensive weapon in the backcourt.

He will get his big chance to become a key contributor and perhaps even a starter for the Pacers.

The players the Spurs received in his trade ó Davis Bertans, Erazem Lorbek and Leonard ó are throwbacks to the way the Spurs used to play defense during their championship seasons. Their development will be critical in San Antonioís hopes of duplicating last seasonís regular-season success and improving on the disappointment of the early exit in the playoffs.

Hill already has been ranked as a more valuable commodity than Indiana center Roy Hibbert, according to SI.com. Heís also ahead of others like Tony Allen, Raymond Felton, Brandon Roy, O.J. Mayo, Ty Lawson, Mike Conley and Jrue Holiday who have already been placed behind him. Hill is listed only one place behind 2010 No. 1 draft pick John Wall at No. 72 and two behind aging but productive Denver point guard Andre Miller at No. 71.

Hillís ability once earned him the moniker as ďGregg Popovichís favorite player.Ē But after the disappointment of the playoffs last season, the Spurs clearly need to go in a different direction.

The players they received in the Hill trade will help in the transformation.

But the Spurs are taking a chance. And Hillís value as one of the top guards in the NBA emphasizes that.

Iím curious if Spurs Nation believes that Hillís ranking on SI.comís list is accurate.

And do they believe that trading him for a collection of talented but unproven players like the Spurs received is a big gamble?

Kid Minneapolis
08-04-2011, 12:02 PM
One thing I never understood was why Pop so easily gave up "his favorite player"?

Kegboy
08-04-2011, 12:11 PM
One thing I never understood was why Pop so easily gave up "his favorite player"?

I don't think it was easy, we've supposedly been bugging them about Hill forever. The main thing people need to remember is SA is tapped out financially, and they probably felt they wouldn't be able to keep Hill after his rookie contract expired. We were the team most likely to give the most for Hill because of his local ties, and when Leonard dropped to us they relented.

Of course, as the article points out, the Spurs implosion last season played a large part as well. They needed to change things up while Duncan still has some run left in him. And as much as they might like Hill, he's not someone you can build your franchise around.

CableKC
08-04-2011, 12:58 PM
But GH didn't score 48 points against some ProAm Players in some random game that no one cares about....

JBones19
08-04-2011, 01:16 PM
That list by Zach Lowe had Roy at #87 and D.C. just outside of the top 100 and Hill at #73.

http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/08/02/top-100-nba-players-pt-ii-nos-81-90/?sct=nba_t11_a2

PR07
08-04-2011, 01:41 PM
The players the Spurs received in his trade ó Davis Bertans, Erazem Lorbek and Leonard ó are throwbacks to the way the Spurs used to play defense during their championship seasons.

I'm confused by this, wouldn't you think Lorbek would be a poor defender?

Kegboy
08-04-2011, 02:03 PM
I'm confused by this, wouldn't you think Lorbek would be a poor defender?

Well, he did play for Izzo for a year, so he's at least been exposed to hard defense.

MillerTime
08-04-2011, 02:09 PM
I think there might have also been an issue where the Spurs felt that they wouldnt be able to re-sign Hill after his contract it up

McKeyFan
08-04-2011, 03:13 PM
I don't think it was easy, we've supposedly been bugging them about Hill forever. The main thing people need to remember is SA is tapped out financially, and they probably felt they wouldn't be able to keep Hill after his rookie contract expired. We were the team most likely to give the most for Hill because of his local ties, and when Leonard dropped to us they relented.

Of course, as the article points out, the Spurs implosion last season played a large part as well. They needed to change things up while Duncan still has some run left in him. And as much as they might like Hill, he's not someone you can build your franchise around.

First paragraph makes sense. The second one, not as much. Wouldn't they want an impact now player if they are trying to help Duncan in his last year or two?

McKeyFan
08-04-2011, 03:14 PM
Personally, I continue to be surprised that San Antonio made this trade. Glad they did, but surprised.

King Tuts Tomb
08-04-2011, 07:14 PM
One thing I never understood was why Pop so easily gave up "his favorite player"?

I don't remember exactly where I saw it, but after the trade I remember Popovich said it was the hardest deal he's had to make while working for the Spurs.

Constellations
08-04-2011, 07:33 PM
I don't remember exactly where I saw it, but after the trade I remember Popovich said it was the hardest deal he's had to make while working for the Spurs.


Though the Spurs are intrigued by Leonard, who at 6-foot-7 gives the Spurs added size at a position where they were small, Buford made clear the night was bittersweet.

ďThis might have been one of the most difficult nights in Spurs history, as long as weíve been here,Ē Buford said. ďTo lose a player like George Hill, who has meant so much to our team, to our culture, to our locker room Ö itís one of the most difficult decisions weíve had to make.Ē


Read more: http://www.48minutesofhell.com/how-gregg-popovich-could-trade-his-favorite-player#ixzz1U6ayaipv


I believe this may be it.

ballism
08-04-2011, 08:14 PM
I'm sure they were sorry to let him go.
But between resigning Hill or getting a decent big man next summer, big man is clearly the bigger need for San Antonio. They have a ton of backup guards. And while none of them is as good as Hill, Gary Neal isn't bad at all, and a few others are ok-ish.
On the other hand, McDyess is old. Blair and Bonner don't fit well with aging Duncan. And Splitter isn't enough.

They should have way over midlevel cap next year. Omer Asik will be there and he's a great fit. Chris Kaman will be there. Heck, Garnett will be there, how about one last united run by two former arch enemies?

Not to mention, Leonard should at least be a Corey Brewer type player right away. And they wanted Brewer badly last year but got outbid by Dallas.

It made a lot of sense for Spurs if the goal is to max out the last few chances with Duncan.

cdash
08-04-2011, 08:33 PM
I'm not upset with this trade at all. I'm just pissed we won't get to see him in a Pacer uniform until the 2012-2013 season.

pacer4ever
08-04-2011, 09:44 PM
I'm confused by this, wouldn't you think Lorbek would be a poor defender?

The writer is just counting on Leonard for elite defense IMO he just wrote it that way. He is the only NBA ready defender.

PacerPenguins
08-04-2011, 09:48 PM
I'm not upset with this trade at all. I'm just pissed we won't get to see him in a Pacer uniform until the 2012-2013 season.

yea i bummed

MTM
08-05-2011, 04:18 PM
Personally, I continue to be surprised that San Antonio made this trade. Glad they did, but surprised.

Me too. The basic rule of "winning in a trade" is to get the best player out of the deal, and it seems improbable that any of these 3 guys we gave up will be one of the top 72 ranked players in the league anytime soon, or in any case, turn into a better player than Hill. Maybe if Leonard develops into a good player during his second contract in the league, we can revisit the argument. But for now and the foreseeable future, this feels like a "win" for us. And the likelihood that Leonard is more Marquis Daniels than he is Shawn Marion seems very high. I'd certainly rather have Hill than Marquis Daniels.

Naptown_Seth
08-06-2011, 04:17 PM
I'm not upset with this trade at all. I'm just pissed we won't get to see him in a Pacer uniform until the 2012-2013 season.
And can we even buy an official Hill Pacers uni at this point?

I'd be more frustrated if I hadn't already given up hope on next season. Acceptance is part of my recovery.

Scot Pollard
08-07-2011, 10:40 PM
I think Hill will be damn good in our system and will be us a good team.

He's a nice piece to our puzzle as far as closing out games and winning.

A Hill/Stephenson guard lineup off the bench will be insane.

Please get the season going!

We definitely won this trade. The Spurs always get praise because they deserve it for winning all these years. So everything thinks they're right.

Kawhi Leonard isn't going to be anything great.