What's new
By:

George Hill coming to Utah

Teague wanted a max extension. We could have given it to him. He wouldn't have been a FA, buddies.
 
And what the **** does an elbow to face have to do with Hill's toe. Teague was healthy all year. Hill wasn't.

To argue that Hill was better last fall was foolish. To do it now is just dumb.
 
green said:
Teague wanted a max extension. We could have given it to him. He wouldn't have been a FA, buddies.
Click to expand...

I don't know if Teague's 3pt shooting is good enough for our team though. Teague is also VERY ball dominant. He needs the ball in his hands to get those assists. That's his game. Quin wants to put the ball in Hayward's hand. Hill is definitely a better fit.
 
green said:
And what the **** does an elbow to face have to do with Hill's toe. Teague was healthy all year. Hill wasn't.

To argue that Hill was better last fall was foolish. To do it now is just dumb.
Click to expand...

Hill was better than Teague when healthy. Hill if re-signed will be better than Teague next season. Hill was better for us in the first round of playoffs against the Clippers than Teague would have been. It would have made 0 difference if we had Teague against GS.

Hill was a better choice for our team over Teague.
 
Spaniard said:
I tend to agree with PG_AB. Wasn't a huge fan of the trade, felt like they were doing what they promised not to do and started skipping steps. Not sure it hurts the franchise too much though unless there was someone available last year at 12 that we're going to wish we had. I don't see that at this point.
Click to expand...

I think they felt like they needed to do something to increase the chance of Hayward staying.


I get why they had to do it.
 
PG_AB said:
All for naught, SENSATIONALIZE IT ALL YOU WANT. The proof is in the pudding. We haven't even gotten to the part where he tries to price gouge them yet, and as a franchise, they asked for that... He provided great moments against bottom-feeders like the Knicks and Lakers.

It was a terrible trade. Time will only further prove that to be true.


Was the trading up for Trey Burke a terrible trade too? or u in full denial/territorial mode?

I called the Trey Burke pick out, in great detail, MONTHS in advance too.. While lames like [MENTION=848]dalamon[/MENTION] called him the savior and god and grotesque things of that nature. I said this guy has a step-back J and not much else.

I even said I'd stop rooting for the team if they picked burke, and I planned to but I said since they drafted Rudy i'm gonna stick around. None of this is sensationalized either..

There were people calling for Burke from the 1st page of the 2013 draftees thread --- I thoroughly debunked many of his 'strengths and weaknesses' beyond a shadow of a doubt.. and then what happened? Burke proved pretty much every word of it true.


How many ****ing idiots went out of their way to try and trash DENNIS SCHRODER, who I said is definitely better, to make their point about Burke??? ha? DENIAL is heavy here. You lose a battle like that, you retreat to higher ground and try again. I'll ****ing beat you every which way tho. My point has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt -- DENY DENY DENY tho. It's a terrific compliment, thank you all. You proved my point, not me.
Click to expand...

I was VERY high on Schroeder, but even I thought Trey Burke was a great pick at the time.



Who would have thought his college's hot 3pt wouldn't translate to the NBA? Had he been able to hit anywhere near his college percentage he would have been a solid starter in the NBA.


He also did not improve AT ALL, which was a big surprise to me given his character and age.
 
ONE LOVE said:
I don't know if Teague's 3pt shooting is good enough for our team though. Teague is also VERY ball dominant. He needs the ball in his hands to get those assists. That's his game. Quin wants to put the ball in Hayward's hand. Hill is definitely a better fit.
Click to expand...

First, we need ball dominance. We don't take the ball to the hoop enough. Teague would be perfect for us and our offense. He'd attack the rim more, draw more fouls, and free up Hayward, Johnson, Ingles, Hood, etc for open three point looks. And, he'd be great in the pick and roll with Favors and Gobert.

Also, as far as three point shooting goes, Hill is 1.2 out of 3.3 per game in threes. 1 for 2.4 per game. .36% vs .38%. Pretty negligible if you ask me. Plus, Teague is younger and fits in with this team long term better.
 
green said:
First, we need ball dominance. We don't take the ball to the hoop enough. Teague would be perfect for us and our offense. He'd attack the rim more, draw more fouls, and free up Hayward, Johnson, Ingles, Hood, etc for open three point looks. And, he'd be great in the pick and roll with Favors and Gobert.

Also, as far as three point shooting goes, Hill is 1.2 out of 3.3 per game in threes. 1 for 2.4 per game. .36% vs .38%. Pretty negligible if you ask me. Plus, Teague is younger and fits in with this team long term better.
Click to expand...

I dunno, I think he's a traditional PG who doesn't quite fit in Quin's system.


How about defensively though? That's our identity. Hill is longer and is a better defender.
 
Ron Mexico said:
Hill was better than Teague when healthy. Hill if re-signed will be better than Teague next season. Hill was better for us in the first round of playoffs against the Clippers than Teague would have been. It would have made 0 difference if we had Teague against GS.

Hill was a better choice for our team over Teague.
Click to expand...

Hill played 49 games.
Teague played 82.

That right there has no counter argument. If you don't think Teague for almost twice as many games would have made Utah better...then the conversations over.

Hill: 17 points, 4 assists, 3 rebounds, 2 turnovers, 40% from three, 19 PER, .599 TS%, 2.2 VORP
Teague: 15 points, 8 assists, 4 rebounds, 2 turnovers, 36% from three, 19 PER, .574 TS%, 2.6 VORP

Hill played on a much better team. Hill accounted for 25-29 points per game. Teague accounted for 31-39 points per game.

Come on now. To argue Hill was better for Utah this year, with him only playing 49 games...is just dumb. You're digging in.
 
ONE LOVE said:
I dunno, I think he's a traditional PG who doesn't quite fit in Quin's system.


How about defensively though? That's our identity. Hill is longer and is a better defender.
Click to expand...

49 games vs 82. It's a no brainer. Who cares about your defense when you don't play.

Hill's DBPM: -0.3. Teague's: 1.9

Teague is a better defender. Don't buy into the jazzfanz myths.

Hill steal %: 1.7. Teague: 1.9.

Hill DWS: 1.9. Teague: 2.4.

Hlll steals: 1.0. Teague: 1.2

Teague is a better defender than Hill. He is younger. He is healthier. He is a better ball distributor. There was no good reason to pick Hill over Teague.

And the Jazz paid for it with their decision when they decided to go cheap.
 
White Chocolate said:
You all should put this troll on ignore. You'll save yourself a lot of time not arguing with an idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...


Show me where I'm wrong. Or, do you think 49 games is better than 82? Do you think lower defensive ratings is better than higher? Do you think older is better than younger?

Or, are you just a dumbass?

Thought so.
 
green said:
49 games vs 82. It's a no brainer. Who cares about your defense when you don't play.

Hill's DBPM: -0.3. Teague's: 1.9

Teague is a better defender. Don't buy into the jazzfanz myths.

Hill steal %: 1.7. Teague: 1.9.

Hill DWS: 1.9. Teague: 2.4.

Hlll steals: 1.0. Teague: 1.2

Teague is a better defender than Hill. He is younger. He is healthier. He is a better ball distributor. There was no good reason to pick Hill over Teague.

And the Jazz paid for it with their decision when they decided to go cheap.
Click to expand...

I don't get how going for Hill over Teague is 'cheap'?
 
[MENTION=228]green[/MENTION], hindsight is a wonderful thing Who would have thought Hill would be hit with so many injuries at the time the trade occurred?
 
green said:
Show me where I'm wrong. Or, do you think 49 games is better than 82? Do you think lower defensive ratings is better than higher? Do you think older is better than younger?

Or, are you just a dumbass?

Thought so.
Click to expand...

I was talking about PG_ABitch but thanks for calling me a dumbass anyways.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
 
ONE LOVE said:
I don't get how going for Hill over Teague is 'cheap'?
Click to expand...

Teague wanted a max extension from whatever team he went to. I think Utah was hoping Hill would come in, be good, and then resign for cheap in December. When Hill was getting chatter of a max deal, that plan blew up in their faces. Then Hill went down with injury an a suspect trade turned into an awful trade.

Like I said earlier, you could have traded for Teague and extended him. You get Teague for all 82 games, a better defender, a better scorer, an almost equivalent three point shooter (and whose to say Teague's % isn't better on a better team).

Hill sat out for 33 games. I think we were slightly under .500 in those games. If we go .622 in those games (our regular season win %), that is about 4 extra wins. That ties us for third place in the west.

Suddenly, we don't get GS until the WCF's.

The Jazz gave that up, in hopes that they could re-sign Hill cheaper than Teague.
 
ONE LOVE said:
[MENTION=228]green[/MENTION], hindsight is a wonderful thing Who would have thought Hill would be hit with so many injuries at the time the trade occurred?
Click to expand...


My point is this:

It was a bad trade even if Hill stays healthy. BUT, because he was hurt, it becomes an AWFUL trade.
 
green said:
Teague wanted a max extension from whatever team he went to. I think Utah was hoping Hill would come in, be good, and then resign for cheap in December. When Hill was getting chatter of a max deal, that plan blew up in their faces. Then Hill went down with injury an a suspect trade turned into an awful trade.

Like I said earlier, you could have traded for Teague and extended him. You get Teague for all 82 games, a better defender, a better scorer, an almost equivalent three point shooter (and whose to say Teague's % isn't better on a better team).

Hill sat out for 33 games. I think we were slightly under .500 in those games. If we go .622 in those games (our regular season win %), that is about 4 extra wins. That ties us for third place in the west.

Suddenly, we don't get GS until the WCF's.

The Jazz gave that up, in hopes that they could re-sign Hill cheaper than Teague.
Click to expand...

Look, I know Teague. I had him this whole year on my fantasy team and I eventually won the whole thing with him as my 5th-6th best player. He was a significant contributor to my team. I followed him all season and I feel like I know him better than most here.


Yes, he had a pretty good season. Nothing spectacular, but a solid season. His main contribution to my team was his assists. He wasn't a big 3pt shooter, not consistent. His scoring is also not consistent. His midrange isn't something to brag about. He occasionally drive and dish, but for some reason he was very hesitant to do that. He was certainly ball dominant.


All and all, a solid player, but just not a player I feel Quin or DL would think is a good fit for our team. He holds the ball too much for our system (just ask Paul George, who I don't think appreciate it all that much). He also was a very so so defender.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top