Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 30 of 30

Thread: No, we aren't better without George Hill...

  1. #26
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    42
    Posts
    25,501

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: No, we aren't better without George Hill...

    Quote Originally Posted by A.B.Hollywood View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    but we are better with more Paul George.

    I think these last couple games are showing us what Paul can do when empowered and given more opportunities and George Hill is the primary man who eats into that within our current rotation.

    So while no, I am not advocating less George Hill necessarily but I am advocating more Paul George. Likely this is at the expense of Collison but then again he also is having a nice stretch here as well.

    So how do we better make this happen? Good question. And also what a good problem to have.

    #1stworldpacerproblems
    I don't get it....why would GH or DC be the Players to lose minutes at the expense of PG?

    Wouldn't it make more sense to take away minutes from Lance or even Inferno if more minutes need to be given to PG?
    Last edited by CableKC; 02-07-2012 at 03:46 AM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  2. #27

    Default Re: No, we aren't better without George Hill...

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think that idea is coming from some of us watching Paul get beat by much stronger players. LeBron absolutely destroyed Paul George earlier this season. Paul just wasn't strong enough.
    There was a few times Paul was on him that game, but for the most part Danny was guarding him and getting killed.

    I don't doubt Paul got beat some too. That was probably his first time guarding Lebron, so that's to be expected. He's still the best option we have on him though IMO.

  3. #28
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,891

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: No, we aren't better without George Hill...

    Quote Originally Posted by CJ Jones View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There was a few times Paul was on him that game, but for the most part Danny was guarding him and getting killed.

    I don't doubt Paul got beat some too. That was probably his first time guarding Lebron, so that's to be expected. He's still the best option we have on him though IMO.
    there is no good option to guard LeBron. Especially now with his post up game. Sure, Paul is tall, but thats not really a problem for LeBron. LeBron would just post him up all game long and bully him with his strength. Danny is better against the bigger guys. Yeah, LeBron lit us up. LeBron lights every team up, he's just a freak of nature.

    IF we put PG on LeBron, who is guarding Wade? Danny isn't fast enough. DC and Hill would get abused by him. PG needs to keep tabs on Wade and let Danny slow down LeBron as much as possible. LeBron is enough of a headache to guard himself, but adding in a dynamic guy like Wade, you can't create more mismatches that necessary.

  4. #29

    Default Re: No, we aren't better without George Hill...

    Don't get me wrong, it's definitely an asset having both on defense. My point was that there's really no proof that Danny matches up with certain players better than Paul. Seems like some people are using this as an excuse for keeping them together when we're not even sure if it's true.

  5. #30
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,891

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: No, we aren't better without George Hill...

    Quote Originally Posted by CJ Jones View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Don't get me wrong, it's definitely an asset having both on defense. My point was that there's really no proof that Danny matches up with certain players better than Paul. Seems like some people are using this as an excuse for keeping them together when we're not even sure if it's true.
    I think the proof is Vogel having Danny guard LeBron (when Wade was out too) and Josh Smith while Paul guards 2's.

Similar Threads

  1. George Hill not happy at all about the trade
    By bphil in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 06-28-2011, 11:37 AM
  2. george hill available for brandon rush
    By billbradley in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 06-26-2010, 12:43 AM
  3. Eddie George to star in play
    By Basketball Fan in forum Indianapolis Colts
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-14-2010, 07:29 PM
  4. San Antonio Spurs sticking with guard George Hill in starting lineup [ESPN]
    By RoboHicks in forum NBA Headlines (RSS Feeds)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-18-2010, 09:00 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •