148 replies to this topic

[timetodienow1234567]

He's played well with Harden. But some of that is that Harden has been injured and has allowed Lin to excel. When he's back to full strength I'm not sure how they will coexist.

[RudyT1995]

I wouldn't consider Jeremy Lin a star either, at this point in his career. Perhaps never.

I personally like Jeremy Lin more than George Hill, I had Hill on my FBL team last year and suffered through a lot of his bad games. His shooting percentage is not ideal, either.

 

I don't recall calling Lin a star.  I was replying to JG who said that a real PG upgrade would have to be a star player.  I was trying to say that we don't need a star to upgrade the position.  We can upgrade by finding a better fit.  A player like George Hill, who isn't necessarily a better overall player than Lin, would be an upgrade because he is a better fit.  As JG said, Hill is sort of a taller version of Bev.  He's a good shooter, is good playing off the ball, a pretty good defender.  And he can defend both guard positions.  He's not that great at creating offense, so he's not perfect.  But otherwise he's pretty close.

[rocketrick]

I don't recall calling Lin a star.  I was replying to JG who said that a real PG upgrade would have to be a star player.  I was trying to say that we don't need a star to upgrade the position.  We can upgrade by finding a better fit.  A player like George Hill, who isn't necessarily a better overall player than Lin, would be an upgrade because he is a better fit.  As JG said, Hill is sort of a taller version of Bev.  He's a good shooter, is good playing off the ball, a pretty good defender.  And he can defend both guard positions.  He's not that great at creating offense, so he's not perfect.  But otherwise he's pretty close.

RudyT1995, I am in agreement with you that neither Jeremy Lin or George Hill is considered to be a star at this point in their careers.

George Hill's contract is through the 2016-17 season at $8 million per. At least Lin's contract, for better or worse, expires at the end of next season. That makes him more valuable cap wise.

But more importantly to me, I just don't value George Hill as a consistent point guard that is as good with the pick and roll, etc. as Jeremy Lin and no, I am not a LOF.

I liked Hill in the San Antonio system but he was used primarily as a SG there playing often alongside Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili.

Edited by rocketrick, 27 November 2013 - 11:35 PM.

[RudyT1995]

I liked Hill in the San Antonio system but he was used primarily as a SG there playing often alongside Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili.

 

That's how he's used in Indiana too.  Lance Stephenson and Paul George do most of the playmaking.  That's how a player like him would be used here too, with Harden and Parsons doing most of the playmaking.

[Mason Khamvilay]

The more playmakers the better, as long as everyone's sharing the ball making quick decisions

[rocketrick]

That's how he's used in Indiana too.  Lance Stephenson and Paul George do most of the playmaking.  That's how a player like him would be used here too, with Harden and Parsons doing most of the playmaking.

That sounds positive to me.

What is your take on George Hill's contract, 4 years including this season at $8 million per?

[RudyT1995]

That sounds positive to me.

What is your take on George Hill's contract, 4 years including this season at $8 million per?

 

I just want to clarify.  I never said that we should trade for George Hill.  As far as I know, there's no way that the Pacers would even trade him.

 

The point that I was trying to make was that we shouldn't trade away Lin unless we could address an area of need, and I identified a starting PG that fits better as an area of need.  George Hill was just an example of a player with the size, length, and the kind of game that would be a good fit and be an upgrade without pushing into "star player" territory.  I kept saying that a player like Hill would be an upgrade.  Never said that he himself should be our target.

 

That kind of renders any questions about Hill's contract pointless.  But since you asked, I think that Hill's contract is fair for what he does.  If you look around the league, $8 mil is about the going rate for a player of his size, age, and skill set.  

 

Since this started as a discussion about Lin, if we look at LIn's contract vs Hill's, the cap hit is dead even this year and next.  And after that, if his team needed to clear cap space, Hill's contract is very tradeable.  

[thejohnnygold]

This is all getting complicated.  I don't think we need an upgrade because our guys are fine.  Hill would work--until you realize that Bev offers similar production (with slightly less defense) for 1/8th his price.  Salary cap matters.

 

Regarding Lin--it amazes me how often talk of him seems to be so player-centric and less team-oriented.  Lin is fine next to Harden.  The Rockets are better with him spending time away from Harden--that's all I meant.  Bev can be good for us the same way Chalmers is good for Miami or Hill is good for Indiana.  It's about fit and I think our guys fit fine.  Since you already acknowledged Hill is probably off the table who do you think we should target, RudyT?

 

Parsons is best playing off the ball--if we were to rely on him to create offense for us the way Harden or Lin does night in and night out it would get ugly fast.  Maybe in a year or two, but he's not there yet.  We need a guy who can create shots for himself and others even when the defense clamps down.  I would actually rank Beverley ahead of Parsons right now in that regard.

[Mason Khamvilay]

Lets not compare rookie contracts to non rookie contracts, I hate that.

[RudyT1995]

This is all getting complicated.  I don't think we need an upgrade because our guys are fine.  Hill would work--until you realize that Bev offers similar production (with slightly less defense) for 1/8th his price.  Salary cap matters.

 

Regarding Lin--it amazes me how often talk of him seems to be so player-centric and less team-oriented.  Lin is fine next to Harden.  The Rockets are better with him spending time away from Harden--that's all I meant.  Bev can be good for us the same way Chalmers is good for Miami or Hill is good for Indiana.  It's about fit and I think our guys fit fine.  Since you already acknowledged Hill is probably off the table who do you think we should target, RudyT?

 

Parsons is best playing off the ball--if we were to rely on him to create offense for us the way Harden or Lin does night in and night out it would get ugly fast.  Maybe in a year or two, but he's not there yet.  We need a guy who can create shots for himself and others even when the defense clamps down.  I would actually rank Beverley ahead of Parsons right now in that regard.

 

If you read the first post I wrote on this topic, I said that we shouldn't trade Lin because we cannot get the kind of player that we need in return.  I don't want to trade him, I think he's done well enough with Harden for us not to trade him.  The only reason to trade him is for a "fit" upgrade if one is available, but none is, therefore we should not trade him.

 

As for Bev vs Hill, I never said that a player like Hill should be Bev's replacement.  I said that a player like Hill should be Lin's replacement if we trade him.  Obviously Bev is a great fit for Harden, but just as obviously, he can't play 48 minutes a night.  In fact, he has shown so far that he is most effective/ disruptive, in controlled minutes.  So, what would be better in that situation than having two players like Bev who can each play 25-30 minutes a night and have the new guy be someone who is taller and longer than Bev with a little more offensive game.  

[thejohnnygold]

If I read it?  That's a little dismissive--thanks for that.  Sorry if I made a mistake, but like I said...this thread got complicated by the time I came back to it.  The bottom line is I disagree with your train of thought that having two players in Beverley's mold is better than having a guy like Lin (scorer/playmaker) or Brooks (the same).  It seems we both agree that keeping Lin is good so there's that.

 

Sorry for the salary cap mention, 2016--but it's a relevant thing here.  It's not a comparison--it's just the situation.  When considering upgrades I don't see how that can't be part of the conversation--especially when we've already got so much money tied up in so few positions.

[RudyT1995]

If I read it?  That's a little dismissive--thanks for that.  Sorry if I made a mistake, but like I said...this thread got complicated by the time I came back to it.  

 

Well, it was starting to sound like maybe you hadn't read the first post I wrote on the subject, which, as you said was starting to get complicated.  I was trying not to be presumptuous.  I wasn't trying to be dismissive.   

[Mason Khamvilay]

I know this is going to sound hypocritical coming from someone who openly finds Lin detractors hilarious, but conversations just aren't any fun when people start feeling the need to get defensive, so everyone please try not to get defensive and don't make others feel the need to defend themselves. This goes for the moderators too so I'm not singling anyone out here, just think of it as friendly advice from someone who enjoys seeing fun conversations!

Edited by 2016Champions, 28 November 2013 - 06:02 AM.

[thejohnnygold]

Lets not compare rookie contracts to non rookie contracts, I hate that.

 

...and you think posts like this help?  Okie Dokie.  Thanks for refereeing. 

 

RudyT, it's cool.  My response probably did lose track of what you had said.  My bad.

[timetodienow1234567]

I like Hill and think he's roughly in the same class as Lin. That's why they're paid the same. I think I'd rather have Lin since he's more familiar with our system and has more potential. With Paul George getting better and better, I don't think Indy would want Lin. Maybe if Hibbert goes down we could get Granger/Hill for Asik/Lin/etc.., but it's not likely to happen, so let's drop it.

[rocketrick]

I like Lin's contract better as it expires the end of next season and with George Hill he is under contract for 2 additional seasons at $8 million per.

 

I don't know if it's possible, but I wouldn't mind seeing the Rockets re-sign Lin longer term and try and restructure his contract at the same time.

 

However, Lin may just want to test free agency Summer 2015 as he may want the same thing as Asik, a chance to be a starter, while he is still young and in good health.

Edited by rocketrick, 28 November 2013 - 06:14 PM.

[Mason Khamvilay]

...and you think posts like this help?  Okie Dokie.  Thanks for refereeing. 

 

RudyT, it's cool.  My response probably did lose track of what you had said.  My bad.

No let's seriously discuss this. How much do you think Beverley will get re-signed for? I think it will be around $6m per year. You should be comparing Beverley's next contact to Lin's, not his rookie contact.

[Cooper]

Beverley is a mid level exception guy.

[Mason Khamvilay]

Beverley is a mid level exception guy.

He's getting a bit of hype around the league as an elite defender so I see him going for a little more than the mid level. He even got a vote for DPoY in the official ESPN predictions, David Thorpe voted for him.

Edited by 2016Champions, 29 November 2013 - 01:06 AM.

[RollingWave]

Spoiler

(Filter: Guards, over 10 games , average 25min + a game, and usage of over 20% aka onball guys that's played most of the season.)