|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jim99187
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jan 2014
Posts: 22138
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | Wildchild027 wrote: | | DoubleClutch wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | Have to sell high on Hill IMO. He's not what the Lakers are looking for in terms of big men. They want a rim protector and he certainly does not do that. |
Nets receive: Stephenson and J Hill
Hornets receive: Lopez
Lakers receive: Biyombo, Cory Jefferson, Hornets 1st
Hornets aren't willing to give up a first just to dump Stephenson, but if they get a big man like Lopez back I'm guessing they would.
Nets get Hill to replace Lopez and Stephenson lets them move Joe Johnson if they can find a taker. It's a good package for Lopez.
Lakers get another first that could be lotto and a couple young athletic bigs. |
So the Hornets are going to play Jefferson and Lopez together. They already have spacing issues. |
Lopez is actually more of a high post mid range shooter. |
that defense tough |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jim99187
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jan 2014
Posts: 22138
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | Hill has value next to a true rim protector. He is hitting the jumper and crashes the boards, so he has offensive value, and his defense would be covered by a true defensive big (he already looks better next to Davis). To the right contender (for the title or simply for a better playoff push), he may have value. Miami is a team that jumps out at me. Mcroberts and a first (with a minimum contract to make the salary work) for hill and a second? |
Mcroberts is signed till 2017/2018 so 3 more yrs after this.
dont want it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RusselDoeee01
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 1072
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thejet24 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | I commend Hill for being productive and consistent (two things he has had problems before). He clearly worked on his game and has worked on the off-the-court stuff that has hampered him.
That being said, even on poor teams, guys will put up numbers. 13/9 is great and all, but he is not a great defender and certainly not a defensive anchor. However, every team can use a hybrid big man off the bench or a guy who can put up numbers. I don't see him as a long-term answer to the Lakers center position. So why not get an asset for him? |
Everyone wants to talk about Hill not being a dominat defensive force in the middle...WHO IS IN TODAY'S GAME!?
A big who can hit the mid-range shot to stretch the floor, gets boards and just came out saying he's been working on adding 3pt range...ideal in today's up and down game.
Unless it lands Rondo or someone of that caliber, you hold on to Hill. |
Couldn't agree more. There really isn't a DOMINANT big in the NBA anymore. The last showings of a big actually dominating and taking over a game was probably Bynum. He certainly was the most offensively gifted bigman in a long time who played with his back to the basket.. Nowadays the best big in the league is Davis who more is a slasher and catch and go kind of guy.
Without Hill, we have Sacre... Yes, that even hurts to think about |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
watchME
Star Player
Joined: 06 May 2011
Posts: 3384
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i would trade hill for stephenson + pick in a heart beat.
PG.mudiay - clarkson
SG.stephenson - young
SF.kobe - wesley
PF.randle - kelly
C.marc - sacre
with the right coach that team could be incredible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pippen Aint Easy wrote: | | thejet24 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | I commend Hill for being productive and consistent (two things he has had problems before). He clearly worked on his game and has worked on the off-the-court stuff that has hampered him.
That being said, even on poor teams, guys will put up numbers. 13/9 is great and all, but he is not a great defender and certainly not a defensive anchor. However, every team can use a hybrid big man off the bench or a guy who can put up numbers. I don't see him as a long-term answer to the Lakers center position. So why not get an asset for him? |
Everyone wants to talk about Hill not being a dominat defensive force in the middle...WHO IS IN TODAY'S GAME!?
A big who can hit the mid-range shot to stretch the floor, gets boards and just came out saying he's been working on adding 3pt range...ideal in today's up and down game.
Unless it lands Rondo or someone of that caliber, you hold on to Hill. |
Couldn't agree more. There really isn't a DOMINANT big in the NBA anymore. The last showings of a big actually dominating and taking over a game was probably Bynum. He certainly was the most offensively gifted bigman in a long time who played with his back to the basket.. Nowadays the best big in the league is Davis who more is a slasher and catch and go kind of guy.
Without Hill, we have Sacre... Yes, that even hurts to think about |
So in that case wouldn't it be a good idea to get one of those guys who can protect the rim?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Pippen Aint Easy wrote: | | thejet24 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | I commend Hill for being productive and consistent (two things he has had problems before). He clearly worked on his game and has worked on the off-the-court stuff that has hampered him.
That being said, even on poor teams, guys will put up numbers. 13/9 is great and all, but he is not a great defender and certainly not a defensive anchor. However, every team can use a hybrid big man off the bench or a guy who can put up numbers. I don't see him as a long-term answer to the Lakers center position. So why not get an asset for him? |
Everyone wants to talk about Hill not being a dominat defensive force in the middle...WHO IS IN TODAY'S GAME!?
A big who can hit the mid-range shot to stretch the floor, gets boards and just came out saying he's been working on adding 3pt range...ideal in today's up and down game.
Unless it lands Rondo or someone of that caliber, you hold on to Hill. |
Couldn't agree more. There really isn't a DOMINANT big in the NBA anymore. The last showings of a big actually dominating and taking over a game was probably Bynum. He certainly was the most offensively gifted bigman in a long time who played with his back to the basket.. Nowadays the best big in the league is Davis who more is a slasher and catch and go kind of guy.
Without Hill, we have Sacre... Yes, that even hurts to think about |
So in that case wouldn't it be a good idea to get one of those guys who can protect the rim? |
Nahh. Since almost no one has a billion dollars, why would I want a billion dollars?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lakers_Jester
Star Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2012
Posts: 5366
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pippen Aint Easy wrote: | | thejet24 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | I commend Hill for being productive and consistent (two things he has had problems before). He clearly worked on his game and has worked on the off-the-court stuff that has hampered him.
That being said, even on poor teams, guys will put up numbers. 13/9 is great and all, but he is not a great defender and certainly not a defensive anchor. However, every team can use a hybrid big man off the bench or a guy who can put up numbers. I don't see him as a long-term answer to the Lakers center position. So why not get an asset for him? |
Everyone wants to talk about Hill not being a dominat defensive force in the middle...WHO IS IN TODAY'S GAME!?
A big who can hit the mid-range shot to stretch the floor, gets boards and just came out saying he's been working on adding 3pt range...ideal in today's up and down game.
Unless it lands Rondo or someone of that caliber, you hold on to Hill. |
Couldn't agree more. There really isn't a DOMINANT big in the NBA anymore. The last showings of a big actually dominating and taking over a game was probably Bynum. He certainly was the most offensively gifted bigman in a long time who played with his back to the basket.. Nowadays the best big in the league is Davis who more is a slasher and catch and go kind of guy.
Without Hill, we have Sacre... Yes, that even hurts to think about |
Hibbert, marc gasol, gobert, robin lopez, noah, deandre jordan, howard, ibaka, adams, davis, cousins, sanders, drummond, valanciunas, vucevic, gortat, asik, mason plumlee...all viable defensive centers. Not dominant defensive centers (not all of them at least) but viable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RusselDoeee01
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 1072
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Pippen Aint Easy wrote: | | thejet24 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | I commend Hill for being productive and consistent (two things he has had problems before). He clearly worked on his game and has worked on the off-the-court stuff that has hampered him.
That being said, even on poor teams, guys will put up numbers. 13/9 is great and all, but he is not a great defender and certainly not a defensive anchor. However, every team can use a hybrid big man off the bench or a guy who can put up numbers. I don't see him as a long-term answer to the Lakers center position. So why not get an asset for him? |
Everyone wants to talk about Hill not being a dominat defensive force in the middle...WHO IS IN TODAY'S GAME!?
A big who can hit the mid-range shot to stretch the floor, gets boards and just came out saying he's been working on adding 3pt range...ideal in today's up and down game.
Unless it lands Rondo or someone of that caliber, you hold on to Hill. |
Couldn't agree more. There really isn't a DOMINANT big in the NBA anymore. The last showings of a big actually dominating and taking over a game was probably Bynum. He certainly was the most offensively gifted bigman in a long time who played with his back to the basket.. Nowadays the best big in the league is Davis who more is a slasher and catch and go kind of guy.
Without Hill, we have Sacre... Yes, that even hurts to think about |
So in that case wouldn't it be a good idea to get one of those guys who can protect the rim? |
Im not saying its not good to have a rim protector but although Hill doesn't provide Davis like rim protection, not many players in the league do. And if they do, its pretty much all they can do. Ed Davis for example is a great rim protector, but other then that is pretty limited on the offensive end. Hill is not great at any one thing, but rather is at least good at many things and in todays NBA that is rare for a big man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
