Doc will meet with grant hill

4ms222 · Post #1 » by **4ms222** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 5:00 am

here is the link

http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/07/04/gran ... oc-rivers/

Scalamental · Post #2 » by **Scalamental** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 5:15 am

That's good to hear. If there's anyone in the NBA that would play somewhere for the chance to win it rather than a chance to make a lot of money, it's Grant Hill.

Post #3 » by **Darth Celtic** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 5:49 am

wallace, hill. Sign and trade for pg/sg. good.

cold5 · Post #4 » by **cold5** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 6:04 am

Grant would be a good addition but would he stay healthy without the miracle-working Suns medical staff?

Post #5 » by **TMU** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 6:20 am

Grant Hill hasn't had much problem with the Suns. I don't think it's a major concern. His movement without the ball and his ability to score off the bench will serve useful to the Celtics roster.

MaxwellSmart · Post #6 » by **MaxwellSmart** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 7:17 am

the thing I found hard to believe was: a 36 yr old player of his caliber has NEVER won a playoff series?

Yeah, go ahead and sign with NY or Phoenix if you want to keep your record going.

Kefa461 · Post #7 » by **Kefa461** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 11:35 am

I would hope Hill before he retires would give us the shot to get a ring....he won't get it in NY nor in Phoenix.

8-)

cfan79 · Post #8 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 11:40 am

I hope we don't sign him because I think we can do better. Of course he's better then what we had last season, but a monkey with diarrhea would be better then what we had.

Post #9 » by **sunshinekids99** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 11:43 am

cfan79 wrote:I hope we don't sign him because I think we can do better. Of course he's better then what we had last season, but a monkey with diarrhea would be better then what we had.

Ok who is a better option than Grant Hill?

cfan79 · Post #10 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 11:55 am

sunshinekids99 wrote:
cfan79 wrote:I hope we don't sign him because I think we can do better. Of course he's better then what we had last season, but a monkey with diarrhea would be better then what we had.

Ok who is a better option than Grant Hill?

I'd rather have any of these guys.

Hakim Warrick
Rodney Carney
Matt Barnes
Shawn Marion
Anthony Parker

Psychoceltic · Post #11 » by **Psychoceltic** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 12:05 pm

I don't think he should be signed unless he gets a breast job.

Kefa461 · Post #12 » by **Kefa461** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 12:42 pm

The part I liked in the article was....."Rivers believes that Hill could be a key veteran to help the Celtics get past Cleveland and Orlando and reach the NBA Finals again next season. Hill, whose teams never have won a playoff series, is intrigued by the possibility".

Now if Doc has a bit of insider info we don't have about the Sheed on goings it might help.

8-)

NashtyNas · Post #13 » by **NashtyNas** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 1:48 pm

cfan79 wrote:
sunshinekids99 wrote:
cfan79 wrote:I hope we don't sign him because I think we can do better. Of course he's better then what we had last season, but a monkey with diarrhea would be better then what we had.

Ok who is a better option than Grant Hill?

I'd rather have any of these guys.

Hakim Warrick
Rodney Carney
Matt Barnes
Shawn Marion
Anthony Parker

Half those guys don't play the same position. Hill > Barnes & Carney. He is also better than Parker, even though I love them both. Warrick sucks, and he plays PF not SF. Only guy I would want over him from that list is Marion, and for the price Marion would demand, I still take Hill any day of the week for the LLE. So, Hill > anyone else you can get out there at that price for the SF position right now.

cfan79 · Post #14 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 1:58 pm

sd1306 wrote:
Half those guys don't play the same position. Hill > Barnes & Carney. He is also better than Parker, even though I love them both. Warrick sucks, and he plays PF not SF. Only guy I would want over him from that list is Marion, and for the price Marion would demand, I still take Hill any day of the week for the LLE. So, Hill > anyone else you can get out there at that price for the SF position right now.

What the heck are you talking about? Grant Hill is a small forward, you've watched him play with your eyes open right?

Hakim Warrick - small forward/power forward
Rodney Carney - small Forward
Matt Barnes - small forward
Shawn Marion - small Forward/power forward
Anthony Parker - small forward/shooting guard

LakersSquad · Post #15 » by **LakersSquad** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:20 pm

that would be a good pick up for the bench. If yall can get sheed as well I would put yall as the east favorites (if healthy)

LakersSquad · Post #16 » by **LakersSquad** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:23 pm

that would be a good pick up for the bench. If yall can get sheed as well I would put yall as the east favorites (if healthy)

Post #17 » by **Hilltop** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:25 pm

Hill would be a bargain at whatever price he'd ask for (which is probably not a lot at all). Even at his age he's still very athletic, he's versatile, and his production is still pretty good. He'd still be a starting caliber player for several teams in the league. He's far from washed up.

cfan79 · Post #18 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:32 pm

He makes more sense for Orlando since he lives there and he owes them something. The guy collected a paycheck for very little work and cost them Ben Wallace. Plus he could actually start on that team.

Zin5 · Post #19 » by **Zin5** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:36 pm

cfan79 wrote:
sunshinekids99 wrote:
cfan79 wrote:I hope we don't sign him because I think we can do better. Of course he's better then what we had last season, but a monkey with diarrhea would be better then what we had.

Ok who is a better option than Grant Hill?

I'd rather have any of these guys.

Hakim Warrick
Rodney Carney
Matt Barnes
Shawn Marion
Anthony Parker

Warrick doesn't play a lick of defense, is more of a PF, and would cost more than Hill.
Carney isn't terrible, but I'd like someone more experienced and could cost more than Hill.
Barnes is the only debatable one, because he'd have a similar pricetag and does a lot on D.
Marion, obviously he's better, but it'd cost the full MLE.
Parker's out of the question now that Toronto can't sign and trade him.

EDIT: Also, anyone who I mentioned would cost more than Hill: We lose a chance at your sig lovefest in Sheed.

cfan79 · Post #20 » by **cfan79** » Sun Jul 5, 2009 2:53 pm

Zin5 wrote: Warrick doesn't play a lick of defense, is more of a PF, and would cost more than Hill.
Carney isn't terrible, but I'd like someone more experienced and could cost more than Hill.
Barnes is the only debatable one, because he'd have a similar pricetag and does a lot on D.
Marion, obviously he's better, but it'd cost the full MLE.
Parker's out of the question now that Toronto can't sign and trade him.

EDIT: Also, anyone who I mentioned would cost more than Hill: We lose a chance at your sig lovefest in Sheed.

You might be right about the $, but what the heck we only might have a 3-4 year window. The teams that win are usually the ones that spend big money.