So Do You Guys Finally Realize Jordan Hill Sucks?

OooSplendiforous · Post #1 » by **OooSplendiforous** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:02 pm

Not being a troll or anything. We have a thread on the Knick board of a couple of our posters wanting Hill back and I thought it was insane.

When he played for us this is what I saw:

Bad hands

Cant Catch an entry pass

Low basketball IQ

Often seems lost

Predictable, weak post game

Struggles to hold onto rebounds

Good shooter, can run the floor

Overall a bad prospect. Have you guys seen any improvement? Or is he still the same Miki Moore clone...but worse.

Post #2 » by **Optimism Prime** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:20 pm

Least biased thread title I've seen in a while.

moofs · Post #3 » by **moofs** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:25 pm

I think you were just trying to describe either Stromile Swift or Tyrus Thomas. Hill is loads better than either of those two.

Post #4 » by **Optimism Prime** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:35 pm

But to give you some statistical backing, Hill played better for us than he did you.

His TS% went from .479 to .567.
His PER went from 14.0 to 15.7--where 15 is the league average.
His RB% went from 13.8 to 17.6. Some of that, I'm sure, can be applied to the fact that Lee is a much better rebounder than anyone we had, so he was competing for rebounds against that.
His AST% went from 4.5 to 5.6; not huge improvement, but also not necessary.
His BLK% went down slightly from 2.7 to 2.3.
His ORTG and DRTG both improved greatly here: 102/109, to 115/107.
His WS (O/D/T) increased from .1/.2/.3 to .6/.4/1.

Is he the future of our franchise? By no means. Is he a part of the rotation that'll help give us depth and move forward into the eventual post-Yao era? Probably. Is he a serviceable big that we're happy to have? Soitenly.

Post #5 » by **Mr. E** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:01 pm

Optimism Prime wrote:Least biased thread title I've seen in a while.

Yeah, where do you really go after a title like that?

Post #6 » by **Optimism Prime** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:04 pm

Mr. E wrote:
Optimism Prime wrote:Least biased thread title I've seen in a while.

Yeah, where do you really go after a title like that?

Exactly. I mean, I provided advanced stats saying that he's a better player, but I'm fully expecting a rebuttal of "But he sucks!"

You can't argue with logic like that....

Post #7 » by **Mr. E** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:07 pm

Optimism Prime wrote:
Mr. E wrote:
Optimism Prime wrote:Least biased thread title I've seen in a while.

Yeah, where do you really go after a title like that?

Exactly. I mean, I provided advanced stats saying that he's a better player, but I'm fully expecting a rebuttal of "But he sucks!"

You can't argue with logic like that....

I really did like your reply. Unlike the Knicks - who for some reason would not play him - we actually got to see Hill get a chance last season. I agree with your overall assessment of what kind of player he could be for this team.

Looking forward to seeing what the guy can do this season.

I'm sorry...what I meant to say was "you're a stupidhead and you have cooties!"

Post #8 » by **TMU** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:08 pm

The OP clearly has an agenda, but I'll leave this thread open. O. Prime has provided some great analysis and its worthy of discussion.

I think those numbers delineate the difference in coaching/scouting between the Rockets and the Knicks.

Post #9 » by **Optimism Prime** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:21 pm

Mr. E wrote:I really did like your reply. Unlike the Knicks - who for some reason would not play him - we actually got to see Hill get a chance last season. I agree with your overall assessment of what kind of player he could be for this team.

Looking forward to seeing what the guy can do this season.

I'm sorry...what I meant to say was "you're a stupidhead and you have cooties!"

I think that's the big difference here. We got to see him; Knicks fans for some unknown reason didn't. Yet Morey was still impressed enough with his numbers to bring him aboard. Was he a crucial part of the trade? No, but--and Kam, please don't kill me for saying this--he DOES slightly offset the loss of Landry.

I feel like Morey getting a player in a trade should be a good indicator of worth.

He doesn't go after deadweight... well, except Andersen.

T-Mac United wrote:The OP clearly has an agenda, but I'll leave this thread open. O. Prime has provided some great analysis and its worthy of discussion.

I think those numbers delineate the difference in coaching/scouting between the Rockets and the Knicks.

It's why you keep me around.

Tomas_11 · Post #10 » by **Tomas_11** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:24 pm

T-Mac United wrote:The OP clearly has an agenda, but I'll leave this thread open. O. Prime has provided some great analysis and its worthy of discussion.

I think those numbers delineate the difference in coaching/scouting between the Rockets and the Knicks.

Yes, because we all aspire to be like Darryl Morey someday

Post #11 » by **Optimism Prime** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:36 pm

Just posted my thoughts on the Knicks board... we'll see how it goes.

I think we can all agree that since Les told Morey to spend what he needed to this summer that all "Hey, Rockets, let's clear up some cap space for you by taking (Player X) off your hands, here's a 2nd rounder" trades should be laughed at, correct?*

(*I don't see the Andersen trade as about cap space, but about roster space; we needed to ship someone, and he's about the least-useful player we had.)

moofs · Post #12 » by **moofs** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:49 pm

Optimism Prime wrote:It's why you keep me around.

Oh no, that's because you have xkcd in your avatar.

Optimism Prime wrote:(*I don't see the Andersen trade as about cap space, but about roster space; we needed to ship someone, and he's about the least-useful player we had.)

I think it was about flexibility in general. We saved about 3m, cleared up a spot, and got a [rather un-useful] draft pick.

Optimism Prime wrote:Is he the future of our franchise? By no means. Is he a part of the rotation that'll help give us depth and move forward into the eventual post-Yao era? Probably. Is he a serviceable big that we're happy to have? Soitenly.

Yep. I currently see his cap / expected production as being a slightly-above average big.

I guess it should be noted that the OP seems to have a thing for Iverson. Take that as you will.

wadero · Post #13 » by **wadero** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:10 pm

He plays better than TMAC currently does!!!!

rocketsballin · Post #14 » by **rocketsballin** » Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:11 pm

hill is the closest thing we have to a big black guy (6'11 250lbs+), how we gonna get rid of him now?

College Boy · Post #15 » by **College Boy** » Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:01 am

No, Yao is the closest thing we have to a big black guy..... except without the blackness.

Aaron Brooks · Post #16 » by **Aaron Brooks** » Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:05 am

roxfashoballin wrote:hill is the closest thing we have to a big black guy (6'11 250lbs+), how we gonna get rid of him now?

OooSplendiforous · Post #17 » by **OooSplendiforous** » Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:13 am

Your GM relies too heavily on his advanced statistics. Theres a place for it in every sport, but not to the degree that he takes it. People like Hollinger (i believe) try to make stats out of almost everything, and thats just not accurate.

If statistics is your top method of analyzing how good a player is/will become then youre going to end up picking guys like Kwame Brown #1 overall.

Why is it certain players dominate in college but their games don't translate over to the NBA?

What about the mental aspect of basketball? Something Jordan Hill obviously doesn't posess...his bball IQ is horrific, and aparently so was his work ethic (according to one of the knick beat writers).

If statistics or physical aspects tells the whole story then why wasn't a guy like Gerald Green sucessful in the league?

Statistics have a place, but Morey and some of the posters on Real GM rely way too heavily on it to determine how "good" a player is.

Before these advanced statistics, scouts and GM's picked out talent from what they saw with their eyes, not from what they figured out from a formula.

From what I see, Hill doesn't have it. And if Donnie thought he did, he wouldn't have traded him to you guys.

Aaron Brooks · Post #18 » by **Aaron Brooks** » Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:27 am

OooSplendiforous wrote:Your GM relies too heavily on his advanced statistics. Theres a place for it in every sport, but not to the degree that he takes it. People like Hollinger (i believe) try to make stats out of almost everything, and thats just not accurate.

If statistics is your top method of analyzing how good a player is/will become then youre going to end up picking guys like Kwame Brown #1 overall.

Why is it certain players dominate in college but their games don't translate over to the NBA?

What about the mental aspect of basketball? Something Jordan Hill obviously doesn't posess...his bball IQ is horrific, and aparently so was his work ethic (according to one of the knick beat writers).

If statistics or physical aspects tells the whole story then why wasn't a guy like Gerald Green sucessful in the league?

Statistics have a place, but Morey and some of the posters on Real GM rely way too heavily on it to determine how "good" a player is.

Before these advanced statistics, scouts and GM's picked out talent from what they saw with their eyes, not from what they figured out from a formula.

From what I see, Hill doesn't have it. And if Donnie thought he did, he wouldn't have traded him to you guys.

1st of all it was YOUR GM that drafted Hill, I also believe our GM said Hill was ranked 6th in terms of talent, but the Rockets had him 13th on their draft board. Morey is a huge stat guy but stats aren't the only thing that they base their decisions on, Chase Budinger said the Rockets did a really thorough background check on him before they drafted him.

College Boy · Post #19 » by **College Boy** » Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:30 am

OooSplendiforous wrote:Your GM relies too heavily on his advanced statistics. Theres a place for it in every sport, but not to the degree that he takes it. People like Hollinger (i believe) try to make stats out of almost everything, and thats just not accurate.

If statistics is your top method of analyzing how good a player is/will become then youre going to end up picking guys like Kwame Brown #1 overall.

Why is it certain players dominate in college but their games don't translate over to the NBA?

What about the mental aspect of basketball? Something Jordan Hill obviously doesn't posess...his bball IQ is horrific, and aparently so was his work ethic (according to one of the knick beat writers).

If statistics or physical aspects tells the whole story then why wasn't a guy like Gerald Green sucessful in the league?

Statistics have a place, but Morey and some of the posters on Real GM rely way too heavily on it to determine how "good" a player is.

Before these advanced statistics, scouts and GM's picked out talent from what they saw with their eyes, not from what they figured out from a formula.

From what I see, Hill doesn't have it. And if Donnie thought he did, he wouldn't have traded him to you guys.

You know what, I would completely agree with this post if it weren't for the high success rate of Morey's moves. I see that you're not a fan of statistics, but the statistics show that his method works and works very well. The only other GM that has made moves as good as Morey's during his stint as GM is Kevin Pritchard. Besides, we didn't spend a #8 pick on Hill, Walsh did. We actually picked him up as a throw-in. So you come back and re-post this when we pick a Kwame Brown.

Post #20 » by **TMACFORMVP** » Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:46 am

Look, no one said statistics are the beginning and end of the story, but you have to admit it plays some factor in determining a players skill-set. Our GM that "heavily relies on statistics," has also brought us late round gems in Aaron Brooks (late first), Carl Landry (early 2nd), Chase Budinger (mid second), etc. I agree with you in that statistics as the only factor in deciding a player is wrong, but to say Morey is an example of that shows how much you know, or lack thereof when talking about the Rockets.

And how would you really know what Jordan Hill is capable of? I mean, D'Antoni has clearly showed favoritism as a coach (frankly, he was exposed last season). Look at Darko's production in Minnesota compared to New York, look at Nate Robinson playing critical minutes in crucial playoff games and contributing on BOTH ends of the floor with Boston. Jordan Hill, as a 22 year old rookie played only 10 minutes per game with the Knicks. You can determine the conclusion that he "sucks," is "one of the biggest busts of all time," from that?

With the Rockets, he played nearly the same amount of games, got moderately more minutes, and it showed in his production. 6/5 on 53% in just 16 minutes is very good production (14/11 per36 minutes). He's expected to take a bigger role on this season, and he can be a guy that will continue to improve his game - something he wasn't allowed to do in New York (I'd almost bet if he was a rook doing 6/5 in 16 minutes as a Knick - you'd be loving him).

And you know what I LOVE? The contradiction in your post. You come on to this board, and say, "From what I see, Hill doesn't have it. And if Donnie thought he did, he wouldn't have traded him to you guys." So that's essentially implying that Walsh was smart in doing this, and got the better of Morey. Then wouldn't Walsh, as this guy "who saw talent with their eyes and not the stats," have picked anyone else besides Hill? I mean, not even Jennings, but how bout Lawson, Holiday, Beaubois? Was it Walsh's plan all along to pick Hill with his lottery pick, package that with two more future firsts for an expiring contract to get Randolph and Felton (already had enough max for Amar'e)?

Look at how easily teams like Chicago shed salary, New York clearly paid the biggest price. I think you came over to this board with a disillusioned view of trying to make you feel better about the trade for the Knicks. I think it was something they had to do (though, the addition of ANOTHER pick was a bit excessive) to have a chance at LeBron but the plan unfortunately didn't work out.

Even if Jordan Hill doesn't pan out, we'll still likely be able to swap picks next season, and have the Knicks 2012 1st round pick as well - and considering Morey's success rate with first round picks, I'd take that trade for McGrady ANY day. If Hill becomes anything reasonable (which there is no reason to believe he will not), then that's just gravy.