Dwyer: George Hill is ‘Overrated’
It may be temporary, and due to injury, but George Hill is a starting NBA point guard much earlier than anticipated. Not bad for another of the Spurs’ “where did he come from” draft picks.
Because he has improved so much from last season to this one, a lot of expectations have been placed on the IUPUI product by fans. But not everyone has been impressed, as you can read in Kelly Dwyer’s Behind the Box Score from yesterday’s game:
George Hill continues to be overrated, but he played … like George Hill. 17 points on 16 shots, four assists.
Now, Dwyer doesn’t elaborate as this is but a minor point he is making, but for what it’s worth I argue that his statement is a matter of perspective and it brings up a valid talking point: where do you rate George Hill?
I’m not sure who Dwyer believes is overrating Hill, but if he reads through any comments sections you can find a few over-enthused Spurs fans. Like this poor lost soul, who in my last Grizzlies-Spurs preview advocated trading Tony Parker to make room for Hill:
I don’t know what the author is talking about. Please list Hill’s record as a starter. It speaks for itself. Also get a clue about scoring, TP is better at finishing (maybe because he is quicker), but Tony can’t shoot FTs or a 3-pointer. Tony shoots 27% behind the arc, and Hill is in the upper 30s. Tony also turns the ball over more and Jefferson isn’t nearly as effective with TP running the show. Don’t even get me started on the defense.
Or this gem from one of the good folks at Spurstalk.com:
George Hill is looking like a really nice player at this point. another gem by our front office (we knew this before, but it’s becoming crystal clear right now).
i’m starting to wonder if a line-up of Hill, Manu, and RJ is better than if you substituted Parker in for Hill. Hill is obviously the better defender and shooter at this point. he might even be the better passer. i always knew how one-dimensional Parker was, but it’s pretty apparent when you compare him to Hill.
Okay, perhaps some of these posts have more to do with these people’s disdain for Parker than their evaluations of Hill, but there are those among us (Spurs fans) who are talking in terms of Hill being the next Parker or Ginobili find. In short, an All-Star.
If you asked me at the beginning of the season I would have listed Antonio Daniels as a comparable player for Hill. An athletic combo guard who can be a valuable role player due to his defense, shooting and finishing ability but ultimately limited by his lack of creativity with the ball.
With the improvement he has made in such a short time I think Hill is redefining what we view as his ceiling as we speak.
For a late first rounder who was projected to go in the second, I would say he has been a steal. And I think most Spurs fans are over passing up Mario Chalmers for Hill. But since we are talking trade deadline this week, and our objectives remain more in the present than the future, I would ask-how valuable is Hill and is he untouchable?
Pingback: George Hill and the Clippers Game | 48 Minutes of Hell()