RealGM

After the 2011 draft party at Conseco fieldhouse, there were people within the organization planted around the exits. I guess it was their job to ask people what they thought about the trade. I might have been one of the few to give an answer they weren't expecting.

I guess they thought all Hoosiers were giddy, but I was unsure. Although it was shocking to see us take K.Leonard, over the next half hour I thought about it, and concluded that Granger, George, and Leonard could form a brutal gauntlet of wings. Then out of right field they announced the trade.

Wonder how Hill feels about his reduced role on an inferior team? SA actually had begun to tinker with the idea of him as TParker's heir-apparent. Remember, all the TParker trade chatter before the draft.

Basically, I want to know if his mindset is right.

When Eric Godon was traded he was visibly upset, and we felt his pain. But when George Hill was traded, he showed the same type of pain, only we ignored that. He said that he was shocked, and that he and Blair were suppose to be the future in San Antonio. It is best to look at a players initial reaction, no matter how they spin it later on.

I just feel like George has aspirations of actually running a team, and he knows his role here requires less of his input. Right now he is trying to fit in, but we have to understand, he came from a better situation that asked a lot out of him.

It's time to let him be the player he can be. Otherwise Larry did the young man a disservice by bringing him here, and we would have been better off with Leonard.

Its very possible that you're right. A lot of it is just new players needing adjustment, but George Hill wasn't brought in the way David West was. West is playing a similar role with Darren Collison, a game he's more familiar with. George Hill is without Parker, Manu, and Duncan to cover for him, and so his adjustment period ill be longer. The lack of confidence in his shooting could tell the whole story.

Can't tell if serious.

Honestly, I could care less how he feels about the trade. If he's truly unhappy over less playing time while collecting a 2 million dollar paycheck, he needs to grow up. I don't recall him saying anything about it so I'm just responding to your take on the situation. I fail to sympathize with athletes who make millions of dollars to play a game for a living. I'm not sure why you do but I guess that's your prerogative. Life isn't fair and in this case, him being unhappy would be frivolous. The team did what they were supposed to do by adding depth and it's his job to do what they tell him to do. If you can't roll out of bed with a smile on your face because of lack of playing time while making millions to play basketball for a living, you have mental problems.

I can assure you Frizzledizzle not one player is seeking your sympathy.

Since George Hill is a human, he has the right decide how he feels. Your theory is flawed.

You misinterpreted the just of my post, which is, if we're not going to use GHill effectively, then we should've kept Leonard. One example is when a player like Calderon is going off, let George guard him.

I can see having a harsh stance against players that force their way out, but in this situation you've got it wrong.

That's good good because they'll never get it. At least not if it's because they're unhappy about their salary, city they play in, playing time etc. If something important actually happened in their life like they were getting a divorce or a family member died, that's different.

You're right, he does have the right to feel whatever way he wants. And I have the right to feel it's pathetic that a millionaire would be unhappy about lack of playing time. I think most people who work in the real world would feel that way too. Dude, I had a spinal cord injury, got cheated on after 3 years and fired all in a short time period. I've somehow managed to find happiness in my life so yeah... it's pretty pathetic in my perspective if someone is going to throw a pity party over playing time. Big f'n deal man, there are bigger tragedies in the world.

I think I understood your post just fine. You basically said the team shouldn't have traded for him if they were going to give him a lesser role. Not sure how it's the franchises responsibility to make sure he has an equal role that he had on the Spurs. The goal is to stack the team with talent and that's what they did. Maybe if he played better he'd get more playing time. Hopefully that will change as he learns the system but you're essentially calling out the team for lack of playing time after two games. It takes time to learn the system and gel with players. The coaches are putting the players on the floor that they feel give them the best chance to win. Last time I checked, they're 2-0.

I don't have the situation wrong because there is no situation. As I've said, if lack of playing time warrants being unhappy than the guy needs to grow up. Maybe he should talk to Brian Shaw and get a better perspective on life. Not only was he tossed out like trash by the franchise he spent 11 years with but his parents and sister died in a car crash.

And again, I'm not even sure the guy is unhappy. I'm just saying if your view of the situation is accurate, oh well, he needs to get over it. You gave your view and I gave my view. Sorry if I'm not willing to join in on the pity party you are offering him. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because the Pacers literally owe him nothing other than the 2 million dollar paycheck they are giving him this season. Seems plenty fair in my opinion...

For the record, I don't view it as a harsh stance. The working people such as myself make far less and are treated far worse. Tons of bosses could care less how you feel. So not only does the guy have God given talent and make millions but he should also be pampered by his employers? I guess I just don't understand feeling sorry for the guy. He has had a smaller role and played fewer minutes so far. Okay... sorry? I'm dumbfounded.

You're stuck on the $2 million he is owed, and he is concerned with his next contract. The man was in line to take over for TP on the Spurs, and now he is stuck behind a bunch of youngsters. If I was a player about to cash in, I'd be absolutely pissed.

Again you're missing the point. When we acquired him we already had a log-jam at the wing, and we had a starting pg. I am suggesting that if we're not going to make room for him, then we should've kept Leonard. How is that a pity party frizzle.

Where were these comments two weeks ago when everybody was throwing Gordon a pity party?

In general, I think even people at the tops of their games shouldn't be satisfied with where they are because they can still get better. That's just a sports principle. Money should be a side effect of skill, and it often is not, so I would prefer it if we keep that out of the argument.

If a you got transferred to a crappier place for work with the same pay but less authority and respect and didn't like it, a homeless guy would probably tell you to get over it. That argument is also moot here.

If you're saying it's up to George Hill to start feeling better, you have a case, but the way you say it makes it sound like you're mad at rich athletes, which must make being a sports fan a massive everyday struggle. Boneman said nothing of a pity party, he's just concerned for a player. Do you think that's so wrong?

I doubt that it was ever Leonard or Hill. I'm sure the trade was in place before the pick and Leonard was their choice not ours. as far as I'm concerned the issue is simply whether we're ready to fight for a home court playoff spot this year and it looks like we are. if we're in win now mode, the veteran is the right choice. if we saw three more years of 500 at best ahead of us, you keep the pick. early returns suggest we're in win now mode. West and Amundson have been terrific and we know what Hill can do when he gets comfortable. one might even suggest that getting Hill might have factored into West's decision as it showed a commitment to the moment. I'm not second guessing any of this year's moves.

Long term I don't see HIll's situation that different here than it was in San Antonio. The same opportunity to own the pg spot exists here. Its not like Collison has distinguised himself to this point as a franchise pg. I think in some respects Hill is a victum of the lock out. No time to really compete with Collison for the starting pg position further complicated by the Pacers desire to see Lance Stephenson during the preseason at the point. Hilll saw almost no time at the position holding his greatest upside.

I can understand why he would be a little disappointed with the way things are currently. Its his contract year and a much larger potential pay day is there for a starting pg than a third combo guard. The fact that his shot is totally awol right now is just making it worse. He has the reputation for be a solid professional. I expect he'll get past his initial disappointments and struggles before too long. Hope so anyway, we need more than he's providing right now.

I doubt that it was ever Leonard or Hill. I'm sure the trade was in place before the pick and Leonard was their choice not ours.

Much like Granger, Leonard slipped on draft night. But you're probably right, when he started dropping, the Spurs knew they could have Indy's picks and a prospect for Hill.

I was about to say I'm happy for George Hill(which I am) and give him all the credit in the world while the Pacers were up by 9. But you got your wish that he got more playing time and in the final half of the 4th quarter, he almost blew it all by himself. He took like 5 selfish, awful shots and made a couple more bad plays. I was really happy for him prior and kinda feel bad for him after but you got your wish and you're lucky this game is going to overtime based on your wish. He was the worse than Dahntay Jones in the final 7 minutes of the 4th quarter. He can thank West making a clutch bucket and Kyrie missing clutch shots/free throws for saving him from the Pacers losing because he pretty much threw the game away by himself

Another bad shot by Hill after West gives them the lead. erm...

I like Hill...He did have a horrible 4th and overtime. He threw up clownish/circus shots for no reason and almost blew the game. I was screamin for DC to come back in, and soon as he did we put it to bed. I love Hill but he's not better than DC. He's not the floor general DC is. And speakin of DC im getting kinda tired of fellow pacer folks putting him down...on what merrit? His defense, man on man, leaves some to be desired. But he is clearly our best pg, and one of the best young pg's in the league. He makes good decisions more oft than not. He plays hard. He plays with a burst of speed. He gets to the rim. He's got a good J. He makes great passes. He's easily our best pg since Jackson. People need to stop over-exaggerating his flaws and give him props for everything great he does. Bottom line. People are too quick to hate, instead of giving props. Stephenson has potential, but right now, he's not even close to DC in any aspect. Hill is good, but he's playing sub-par right now. He had 15 pts tonight, but had more bad plays than DC has had all year. Name me one time in the first 3 games and the 2 preseason that DC has taken ridiculous shots like Hill did tonight....he doesnt...hes solid...hes our pg unless an upgrade comes along. I honestly think when we find our offense, we are 3rd or 4th best team in the east. Homerism? maybe. But celtics are old. ny is not that great and cant play D to save their life. Orlando just isnt that good period. Dwight is everything there. As far as team goes, we can be the 3rd seed if we play to potential.

Interesting what different people see during a game.

During the fourth quarter what I was noticing was Hill stayed in while Collison sat. I think the reason was Collison couldn't handle Irving and Hill could. Hill forced tough shots. Collison couldn't keep Irving away from the basket. That's a big part of why we went so hard after Hill. The Pacers need someone to go to when Collison is over matched defensively. Hill fits that bill.

While there were some poor shots taken at the end of the game there was also 4 steals and a blocked shot. During the second quarter when no one else in the second unit could hit a shot Hill kept us in the game with some pretty nice aggressive scoring. I thought last night showed the parts of Hill's game that make him such an excellent fit for the Pacers.

"It's partially my fault because I'm not getting him involved enough in the offense, and I made some adjustments by calling his number a little more and he produced." Frank Vogel on George Hill's slow start.

I think Vogel's next obstacle is to let Hill play on the ball more, as in more pg and less sg.

M4E made a good point about West, in that the day he signed here, his role was defined. On the other hand, George has been on this roster since the draft, and now the coach admits to leaving him out of the game plan. I believe him because that is exactly how it looked and why I brought up the topic.

Hill's acquisition lacked transparency from the beginning. At first many people thought it meant the end of the line for DC, then we offered JCraw a deal after scouring high and low for a conventional 2. Just a lot of mixed signals really. Glad the coach addressed the situation honestly in the Indy Star.

Hill will come right for you guys. He was a good 6th man in SA and he's got the skillset to backup either Collison or George for the 30 mins (combined) they're out of the game. He's just getting used to a new team and system.

I guess I was right back in December.

Nobody likes a gloater.

feels strange to read these posts from a few months ago when Hill was struggling to adjust to a new team. I'm so used to reading Windy's posts knocking Collison that I'd forgotten how recently the grass was greener on the other side. lets hope DC has the maturity not to sulk and to do his best with the second unit. playing with Barbosa should be great for DC.