What's new
By:

George Hill coming to Utah

gregbroncs said:
I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "led". It's the second time you've argued that incorrectly. Teague was a part of a team that did some things, he was not the leader, he was not the main reason they did some things. He was a part of something that went well.
Click to expand...

Who was Atl's primary ball handler? Who set up the offense? Millsap? Korver? Horford?
 
fishonjazz said:
I think he agrees with this. I think he is saying that the reason the jazz like hill more is cause he be cheaper.
Click to expand...


Ding, ding, ding.

That is my issue. I don't hate the trade. I like the trade. Hill is a very good player. I've stated all along that the Jazz need a starting PG, a starting wing and a backup big.

Hill fits that need. He can start at PG and do a really good job.

I like the trade.

What I don't like is knowing we could have gotten a younger, better player...and we didn't, especially when the main reason seems to be money.

Once again the Millers have gone the cheap route.
 
Well, I think I screamed my point loud and clear:

I like George Hill a lot. I don't like that Utah passed up a younger, better player because of money.
 
green said:
Ding, ding, ding.

That is my issue. I don't hate the trade. I like the trade. Hill is a very good player. I've stated all along that the Jazz need a starting PG, a starting wing and a backup big.

Hill fits that need. He can start at PG and do a really good job.

I like the trade.

What I don't like is knowing we could have gotten a younger, better player...and we didn't, especially when the main reason seems to be money.

Once again the Millers have gone the cheap route.
Click to expand...

seriously dude, give it a break. Hill is so obviously a better fit here and doesn't disrupt long term plans. Teague isn't anywhere near good enough to build around and pay big money to. This trade offers a huge upgrade at PG, a transtion into Exum being the PG starter, a natural fit into our defensive identity as well as an excellent shooter, good on the break and a high quality dude to fit into the chemistry. Without breaking the bank to allow for the big contracts we'll be looking at soon.

All i see is win win win. As in a 50 win season. Stop your bitching
 
green said:
Was it in your condescending believe-me-cause-i-said-so post? If so, yeah, I didn't read that. Worthless. Your delivery sucked.
Click to expand...

It actually wasn't even in a post directed at you! You should've read that post though, it was good, and true. But hey, you still think Kevin Love is better than Favors, so I don't think I'll convince you that Hill is better for this team than Teague.

Anyways, if I remember right, the year Hill led the Pacers (when everybody else was hurt) his per36 was 20/6/5 on 47% shooting with excellent defense. Something like 16/5/4 in 30 minutes a game. He increased his usage and efficiency, it was really impressive.
 
it's only the likes of [MENTION=228]green[/MENTION] that think they see something in Teague that Snyder doesn't. As in Quin Snyder, Teague's former coach. Give me a freaking break. If Quin wanted Teague instead of Hill, he could have had him. He didn't. That means something to people with brain cells.
 
There is some crazy stat that Hill was a 47/43 shooter when Ellis was on the bench.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
 
NAOS said:
it's only the likes of [MENTION=228]green[/MENTION] that think they see something in Teague that Snyder doesn't. As in Quin Snyder, Teague's former coach. Give me a freaking break.
Click to expand...

99% of this board thinks they're smarter than our front office/coaching staff, it's kinda cute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top