What's new
By:
Filters

Tony Jones: Hill and Gobert didn’t always see eye-to-eye

Crocodile Dante said:
hill must have been the one to convince Hayward to leave that *******
Click to expand...

Hayward was gone a long time ago. I have as much evidence that the only reason he talked to the Heat and did that whole song-and-dance was to create the appearance he didn't already have his mind made up, and in the process get to hold free agency hostage as a power play.
 
Stoked said:
Get real. Picking up Hill was an amazing move. Unfortunate injuries and apparently player personality conflict sank that move. But it was absolutely a good move.

You try way to hard.
Click to expand...

When did I ever say it was a bad move?

I try too hard? Youre out here creating your own narrative..
 
There are a few things that soured with Hill but looking at the whole of it, he was a very good acquisition. Despite his limited appearance, I think he was a huge part of our success and has helped propel our growth forward. He was a perfect fit for what we had last year and it’s unfortunate we never really saw that squad healthy.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Hayward was gone a long time ago. I have as much evidence that the only reason he talked to the Heat and did that whole song-and-dance was to create the appearance he didn't already have his mind made up, and in the process get to hold free agency hostage as a power play.
Click to expand...

When people around the Hayward situation mention issues that are done with that happened several years ago you can be fairly certain the guy knew he was leaving. I'm not sure having a few dust ups between the team leader and one of his best friends on the team helped.

Hill was good for us... I'm not turning on him... competitive dudes see things differently sometimes and all of us would have been thinking about our next contract too.
 
Hill was playing for his next contract. It's one of the reasons he was conservative with sitting out. He was traded here, remember, he didn't choose to come to Utah. Sometimes guys don't care that much. Hill also signed with Sacramento for less than the Jazz offered him to extend him last year.
 
Not sure why everyone is turning on the guy. He was solid for us. Had we not traded for Rubio I bet we would re-sign him with or without Hayward.

I don't always see eye to eye with my friends and definitely don't always see eye to eye with my wife... it's fine.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
I don't believe this part to be true. I think this is more an afterthought now that Hill is gone.

I think the FO went sour on Hill for a couple of reasons: One, because I think they discussed his willingness to re-sign before they made the trade, and then felt betrayed after they offered him a **** ton of money and he declined.

Two, I think they were annoyed with him not trying to play through his injuries in the playoffs. Don't know for sure about this, but that's my hunch.

To be fair to Hill, I think he knew Haywood likely wasn't coming back, so I think it's understandable why he didn't sign the extension. In the end, he hurt himself financially and ended up on a bad team, so that ought to satisfy fans who are bitter. Depending on how the next 3 years go, he may have done the Jazz a big favor as well.
Click to expand...
This.
1. There was talk about an extension right after the trade, then after his hot start, we began to hear he wanted a max deal. I believe it was rumored Utah offered 3 years at ~$20m.

2. Definitely remember an article questioning Hill's decision not to play through his injuries.

3. He may thought it unlikely Hayward would return. Wasn't he supposedly good friends with Gordon before coming to Utah? Of course "friend" is a loose term in Hayward's dictionary given how he treated Ingles on his way out of Salt Lake.

4. Just couldn't wait for him in free agency. Part of the pitch to Hayward was having a very good PG in place to get him the ball. Rubio would have been an even better PG to pair with Hayward than Hill since he isn't a scorer, would have taken the pressure off Gordon to be a ball handler and would have gotten Hayward some easy looks.

5. Might be partially true re: Hill/Gobert. IIRC, it was Exum, Mack and Neto who were lobbing in to Gobert, not Hill.

Sorry for the TL/DR response.
My conclusion: Glad Hill didn't re-sign. TBH, I don't fault him for shutting it down. He knew he wasn't go to re-sign with Utah, so he needed to be healthy for free agency. He never looked like the great defender everyone thought he was; maybe that was age, maybe his toe. In Rubio, we now have a PG who is extremely happy to be in Utah. I think he becomes the PG Utah needs: 12-14 pts while looking for others first.
 
Zombie said:
I'm glad we picked him up, without him we don't make the playoffs at all last year. That said, I'm glad he's gone because now we've got Ricky.

I hadn't realized we had basically turned into the Browns of the NBA with regard to the PG position until one of the Lakers announcers brought up the fact we've gone through 8 starting PGs in 8 years. Hopefully this is the last year of that trend.
Click to expand...

And we've used 5 first rounders, including THREE lottery picks trying to find a solution. I think Jazz have found the answer in Rubio. Seems like he's been in the league forever, but he's still young. I think he still has some upside now that he will have stability and a coach who is going to work closely with him.
 
Catchall said:
Hill was playing for his next contract. It's one of the reasons he was conservative with sitting out. He was traded here, remember, he didn't choose to come to Utah. Sometimes guys don't care that much. Hill also signed with Sacramento for less than the Jazz offered him to extend him last year.
Click to expand...

He didn't sign here because the Jazz got Rubio. The idea that Hill sat around forever then signed far below what he was offered here to play on the ****ing Sacramento ****ing Kings is laughable.
 
Tony isn't specific at all in that article. He could simply be saying Hill didn't find Gobert on the lob a lot or something. What is actually being claimed here?
 
LifeOnaPlate said:
Tony isn't specific at all in that article. He could simply be saying Hill didn't find Gobert on the lob a lot or something. What is actually being claimed here?
Click to expand...

That Hill was a huge supporter of Le Pen and Gobert took great issue with this. Boris (the player, not the poster) had to smooth things over all season.
 
I like Rubio, but I'd rather have a healthy George Hill. Considering the fact that he has so much trouble staying healthy, and we were going to pay him all-star money, I think it could be a blessing in disguise that he turned us down.

Hard to say one way or another, until we see how the next few years play out for both players. I do think he would have re-signed if Haywood was committed though, so I'm just gonna blame everything on that guy.
 
*shrug, Hill was best matched with Hayward. Rubio appears to have some chemistry with Gobert, so the fit have now is best for our best player.

I hope Hill heals and has a good year.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
I like Rubio, but I'd rather have a healthy George Hill. Considering the fact that he has so much trouble staying healthy, and we were going to pay him all-star money, I think it could be a blessing in disguise that he turned us down.

Hard to say one way or another, until we see how the next few years play out for both players. I do think he would have re-signed if Haywood was committed though, so I'm just gonna blame everything on that guy.
Click to expand...

But at what price? Hayward at $30m+ and Hill at $20M? I think having those two plus Gobert at $25M means any depth is gone after this season. Jazz can afford the luxury tax one season, but they aren't going to be repeat offenders. Even Cleveland has made trades to cut their tax bill.

And that's where the Jazz' draft mistakes really come back to bite them. You have to have good, young players on rookie contracts as either rising stars or decent backups. Hopefully Mitchell and Bradley reverse the course that has had Lindsey essentially wasting a pick on an expiring (Hill), drafting Lyles, taking a developmental player who hasn't contributed much, and wasting two picks on a PG now out of the league.

Mitchell and Gobert may be this generation's Stockton/Malone, but the rest of DL's draft history stinks as bad as the Jazz' in the 90's, which was pretty much the reason Utah never won a title. Couldn't attract decent free agents, mostly made trades for aging vets, and drafted bust after bust.
 
LifeOnaPlate said:
Tony isn't specific at all in that article. He could simply be saying Hill didn't find Gobert on the lob a lot or something. What is actually being claimed here?
Click to expand...

It's not about on-court chemistry or lack of vision. He wrote: "It will be interesting to see if he and Rubio get along better on and off the floor.". So yeah, I think is safe to say Rudy and Hill didn't get along.

Not saying that doesn't happen in other teams. On the contrary. But maybe is one of the reasons the Jazz pulled the trigger on the Rubio trade rather that waiting on Hill. There were concerns about the injuries, money, age, bad chemistry with Rudy, etc. Or it could be as simple as Hill not wanting to play here anymore (despite positive stuff that was said in public by the Jazz or Hill's camp...could 've been smokescreen).

I think Hill was good for us when healthy. He also helped us to win our first playoff series. But it seems many doubts were were raised as the season went along.
 
Jack Strop said:
And we've used 5 first rounders, including THREE lottery picks trying to find a solution. I think Jazz have found the answer in Rubio. Seems like he's been in the league forever, but he's still young. I think he still has some upside now that he will have stability and a coach who is going to work closely with him.
Click to expand...


I totally respect this position.

But my gut really tells me Rubio is not the pg who can lead the Jazz out of the West.
He will be exposed. Especially if he is sharing lots of court time with the twin towers.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Also, I think we've all seen the frustration in Rudy when players have failed to get him the ball at the basket. I don't believe that was just a Hill thing. Rudy has improved his hands a great deal though, so I think the other players trust him more now to catch the ball.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that Rod Hood was one intended recipient of Gobert's post-game message. Rudy was aiming at more than Hill... if, in fact, he was aiming at Hill. Yall seem to be making some serious conclusions from one passing line of this article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top