RealGM

I have come to the conclusion that we should be starting George Hill and using DC at backup. I'm all for trading DC in the off season so maybe we should just keep him starting until the end of the season and then move him? But I think we can go further in the playoffs with Georoge.

Collison is our 5th greatest point guard ever.

George Hill would be an upgrade defensively. Offensively, none of the two is going to look like a good PG since our system is not built for our PGs to shine. So, if he can cut on his turnovers a bit I'd have no problem with it.

This was my argument back when Hill was affecting Paul George's playing time. Then when Vogel subbed for Darren he brought in AJ, this had a chain effect on PG. Finally, just when you thought PG would reenter, here comes Dahntey for Granger.

I'd basically love to see a few games against top competition with an 8-man rotation, just to see what it looks like. 10-men rotations are unheard of with good teams.

I've always maintained and I still do, we need to shy away from small weak backcourts.

As long as he gets his minutes and can finish games, I'm cool with his backup role for this season.
If only Vogel wouldn't protect DC as his own child and would cut his minutes when he plays bad (again).
His preset substitutions, especially George for George, sometimes make absolutely no sense.

Further, George Hill starting would also mean Collison and Barbosa playing and defending much time together. Don't think that is a good idea. They can not create for others like Hill can and they flat out both suck on defense.

You know, just as a note, I'm a Raptor fan. I am an admirer of your coach (who I think demands toughness) but i simply don't understand why George Hill is on your bench. I actually came to your board to see what you thought of the matter. Low and behold, this thread appears.

He's bigger, he's more talented offensively and defensively, he's smarter, stronger and a better shooter.

I don't get it. Look, Collison isn't bad. He's in the "Mike Conleyespque" level without the strong d. He does run the offense and he isn;t a chucker. But think how much more space Granger and George would get with a point who could actually be a strength of the team? Besides, Hibbert needs less shots, not more. He's an efficient power big with limited mobility. He would be better served being a much lesser cog in your offense. I know, he was an allstar this year--but sometimes the sacrifice for the greater good outweighs what seems better in the short term.

Hill needs to play 38 minutes. Collison and Barbosa would work fine off the bench in a more limited capacity. Collison is more a defer guy and Barbosa will take as many shots as you give him. Their lack of size wouldn't be much of a problem off the bench defensively because most players in at that time tend to be undersized anyway. In any case, it's offense that is needed off the bench and those two could penetrate enough to allow your somewhat stone-handed bnech bigs enough space to finish. It might also help Collison to look for his own more, and push him to be more productive.

I agree that you need to tighten your rotation for the playoffs. Dahntay Jones, in particular, has cost you at least 2 close games I saw recently with his terrible offensive decisions and lack of finish. For now, the long rotation works in your favor because it will lessen the chance of injury and give the coach a nice idea of the strengths and weaknesses. I don't like the long bench for all the marbles though, and we'll see what happens as a result.

Good luck to your team in the playoffs, I will be rooting for you againts the team that shall not be named.

As the saying goes it's not who starts, it's who finishes. We're starting to see Hill finishing games now and that's slot easier for Vogel to justify when Collison is the guy coming out. There are nights when Collison plays well enough to stay on the floor. Others when it's great to have George Hill as an option. George hill is going to getbhis minutes. I'm ok with the way it is now. When next season comes I just hope we've up graded the position.

The better question, could George Hill be enough of an up grade at the point to em eliminate the need to acquire a better player at this position?

George may be the better player, but that doesn't mean starting him creates the best rotation. besides there is the chemistry issues to think about. it is possible that making such a change in the regular season would hurt DC's confidence. we need him to play better not worse. in any event, I expect to see Hill get heavy minutes in the playoffs.

there used to be a good article in the RealGM archives on Red Auerbach and the famous Boston sixth man. Red won a ton of championships bringing one of his best players off the bench. Frank Ramsey, Tommy Heinsohn, and John Havlecek were all sixth men. Red never said it until long after he retired but these players were all better than the starter they came in for at the 6 minute mark. Red thought he gained an advantage by making his team better at the first substitution when the other team was making a substitution that made it worse and that the other team never caught up.

youreachiteach wrote:
Hill needs to play 38 minutes.

I'm not sure ANY player needs to play 38 minutes. 30-34 would be just about right. However, I think you'll see that most of the forum probably agrees with you. Right now, we really like what George Hill brings to the roster. He has a bit more of a steady hand, and the true ability to create for others. I'm not sure that this is the offensive system for Darren Collison to be the most productive player he can be.

youreachiteach wrote:a better shooter.

GH is not a better shoooter. It is mostly a wash between the two, actually. DC is a slightly better FT shooter (.852 vs .808) and GH is a slightly better 3 pt shooter (.385 vs .369). Both of them are good shooters and can space the floor and play off the ball excellently.

Very good post, though

youreachiteach wrote:Good luck to your team in the playoffs, I will be rooting for you againts the team that shall not be named.

Thanks a lot

I do believe that Hill is fine coming off the bench. As someone else put it, it's not about who starts, it's about who finishes. It's a condensed season and our balance is our biggest strength.

Hill is actually a better shooter. Going by TS% and how he can shoot off the dribble much better with a faster release outside, he is better.

Miller4ever wrote:Hill is actually a better shooter. Going by TS% and how he can shoot off the dribble much better with a faster release outside, he is better.

By TS% he is indeed slightly better. Anyway, both are good to great shooters, anyway

I still think Hill should be coming off the bench. That way he is a 1st or 2nd option on the court most of the time.
If he starts he becomes much less of a primary scoring option.

Steve Nash should be our starting point guard.
Next year will do.

Deron Williams should be our starting point guard.

I think maybe he should but not because Hill is better on some sort of absolute scale but because DC is at his best in an up tempo open floor game and that's harder to play with Hibbert and West on the floor. I can see Hill running a set play, half court game with Hibbert and West and DC flying with Lou and Tyler. I don't think the wings matter as they can all run and they can all stretch the floor.

We just do not have a strong passer right now at that position.

Nash with Hill backing up to give him a nice break and bolster the D would be great.

D Williams is a pipe dream. It would cost us just too much, gut the team.

Rondo maybe if something could be worked out for Granger in a three way...

But Nash needs to move and is one of the best passers of all time.
And he can be had.

Guys just need to more or less go to the bucket and put their hands up - and the ball almost magically appears in their hands for an easy score.

That's a far cry from "why bother to run the break or post up hard?"
Either is usually, at this point, a wasted effort.

Nash? Williams? Either would do!

Wizop wrote:I think maybe he should but not because Hill is better on some sort of absolute scale but because DC is at his best in an up tempo open floor game and that's harder to play with Hibbert and West on the floor. I can see Hill running a set play, half court game with Hibbert and West and DC flying with Lou and Tyler. I don't think the wings matter as they can all run and they can all stretch the floor.

I agree with this

Thanks Nun for bringing us back on point.

Can Hill work better than DC in a half court game?
It's hard to say. I can't really.
Colison is, I think, the better passer. Not by a lot and neither frankly is very good.

It is just disheartening to see the biggest guy in the league so frequently well posted...but then instead of the ball flashing to his hands we see a guard - wishing he could somehow work that ball to him.

I've seen that a lot this year.

Damn, sorry to stray again.

I feel that EITHER guy may just be able to get it. I could see Roy adopting one for the summer and taking 700 passes a day over who ever or what ever thay can construct until may b- when the D flashes out- the delivery could still be made.

I know a guy who's got that down real real well - and he needs a new team. One that would be strong if only...

Last year I said if we could get Nene or West (and someone to play some D on the point) we'd compete for a home court spot in the playoff.

We did and we are.

I'm tellin you now...

Roy wil get a little better,
Paul George will get better.
David west has another good year in him at least (This is big).
Tyler, Hill, and the Blur enjoy winning and will continue to find a way to help the team.
Next Year could Be Danny's Best all-around.
Our new pair of back up bigs are keepers.
We lack nothing but some experience and much better passing.

If we land Steve FREAKIN Nash as a freebie..?

We will contend for a title next year.

And there is not a current team that I'd bet much on to beat us.