George Hill has great court vision and knows the game well but AB is just something special. I don't think we wanna trade away a special talent.
Too soon to tell on Hill. I don't think he can create his own offense if he's the focal point of a team. Brooks can because of his sheer speed and outside shooting. Hill might be a better complimentary piece than Brooks because he can play D and is bigger to begin with. If Yao is close to 100% and commands double teams, I'd still rather have Brooks if he keeps shooting as well as he did this year.
I prefer Hill. Brooks shines because we don't really have many options for offense. Hill can easily be a 20+pts player with efficiency and defense and size on our team. Believe it or not, Duncan/Ginobili/Parker/Jeffereson/Hill can all average 20+pts if any of them is here.
I totally believe that Hill is overly inflated. Put Hill on this Rockets team and see if he would be playing as "seemingly" well. His numbers and performance are only as good as Ginoble, Duncan and Parker. This is the Trevor Ariza syndrome. All of sudden he is on national tv and in the playoffs and is playing well for a stretch. This is not an indication of how well he will always play if the situation were different.
If you think Hills numbers are inflated wait till AB starts playing with Yao and ? next year. His points will drop like a stone. oh, and that Trevor Ariza got a Triple double the last game.
He played a big part in the spurs late season push. He is more eficient than brooks, but that could be due to having timmay and manu.
Yeah, someone made a point about how he would be the better role player, but Brooks would be the better scoring option. And I'm thinking, with Adelman's offensive scheme (which seems to be the "everyone is a threat" offense), Brooks would fit in better. Hill would fit better if we were still rolling with Tmac and Yao.
Hill is a good solid rotation player... nothing more. Valuable for any team. He's not near the playmaker AB is. you can 1-4 flat with AB pretty damn well but you could never do that with Hill. Hill's value comes in the fact that he knows his role, does it well, and can occasionally step up. Spurs probably wouldn't trade Hill for AB becuase he works well with what they have, but we shouldn't think about that trade either.
No way. First of all, Brooks gets my vote out of loyalty. Second of all, I think this kind of thing happened last year ... everyone in the league started making a big deal over this guy who helped LA get the title ... then we got him and realized he's nothing special. Before I buy into Hill, or anyone else, I want to see them do more than get lucky in the playoffs. They need to prove they can do it night in, and night out in the regular season. Let's face it ... if you can't get to the playoffs ... you can't win the title.
Ariza is making like 6 mil a year right? I don't think we're overpaying, that's "solid role player" money. I think what happened with Ariza is he has an awesome first few weeks of the season and then never really lived up to that the rest of the season.
Although I do agree. He did great once Martin got here. Comparing Ariza to Hill is unfair. You wouldn't bring Hill here and place him at SG and ask him to start shooting.
I was more impressed by Roddy Beaubois. George Hill's points were mostly set up by his teammates. Roddy Beaubois's dribble penetration was unguardable. This kid can really score around the basket. He could be the Tony Parker with three point range for the Mavs.
Plays defense and can pass the ball... sounds like Lowry to me. The thing I like about Brooks right now is that I feel like Brooks is a legit 3rd option. And the thing that convinces me this is true is the 1st round of the playoffs last season against Portland. We've seen what he can do with legit talent on the team.
More like 2nd option to me. When they shut down Yao, then they will do pick n roll with Brooks. Martin is like a 3rd option and more comfortable having someone create open looks for him.
