Author Topic: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?  (Read 5684 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« on: June 15, 2009, 04:34:12 PM »

Offline Drucci

  • Global Moderator
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7223
  • Tommy Points: 439
By reading all the free agency ideas and desires expressed by the fans on CB, it seems obvious that the majority of us want to sign Grant Hill as the wing backup for Pierce.

I agree with this idea because we all know Hill's qualities : a veteran player, with a good shooting touch, still some driving abilities, good free-throw shooter, decent rebounder, nice passer, etc. That's why he would be a perfect fit for our bench : he would be a consistent bench player who would allow Pierce to get some rest during the regular season, and who could contribute in a big way in the playoffs. Plus, Grant is a great person and he would accept his backup role and a small contract with no problem.

That's why I think he should be our first candidate on the wing backups list. Still there is a major problem that I have not seen mentioned (or very few times) and I think Danny should consider it cautiously if he wants to sign Hill : the guy will turn 37 years old next year and we all know how fragile his health is. I know that he just set a personal record by playing in 82 games this season for the first time in his career, and it says a lot about Hill's health throughout his career.

You can argue that he just had the best season of his career health wise, meaning that he will be in great shape next season. But what many people tend to forget is that the medical staff in Phoenix is probably the best in the league. I've heard that they use some new technologies and acupuncture to heal their players and to keep them in shape. Anyway, I don't know much about their methods but the results are here : this staff is doing "miracles" by keeping "old" guys like Nash, Hill or Shaq (who was almost considering retirement because of his health before getting traded to Phoenix) in great shape.

So here is my question : would you sign Hill for, let's say, $1 million when there is a huge risk that he could get injured for the most part of the season or at the worst period of the year (for the playoffs)? It could cost a lot to our chances of winning the title because we will have to spend every dollar and roster spot wisely, there is very little margin for error.

Hopefully a backup role would prevent Hill from getting injured but we never know and we must consider the worst scenarios, since Hill is very fragile.

Would you prefer Grant Hill and the health risks he represents, or a player less talented but younger and less injury prone, and seeking for a bigger contract (Jamario Moon for example)? Here is the "dilemma" that I've been thinking about for quite some time, and I don't really have an answer. All your opinions and arguments are welcome, as usual!

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #1 on: June 15, 2009, 05:03:11 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
I think it all depends on the options.  Would I prefer James Posey?  Yes.  However, if it's between Hill and more young, unproven talent, I'd take Hill.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2009, 05:05:05 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
I kinda think Hill is a perfect fit for the team. And after seeing him play 82 games this year and KG get hurt I'm not sure how I would evaluate injury risk these days

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2009, 05:07:44 PM »

Offline Cman

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13074
  • Tommy Points: 121
I think it all depends on the options.  Would I prefer James Posey?  Yes.  However, if it's between Hill and more young, unproven talent, I'd take Hill.


I tend to agree.  I would take Hill over Bill Walker as PP's backup, for example.  But I would prefer someone younger, like Matt Barnes, or Hedo.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2009, 05:49:06 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 53335
  • Tommy Points: 2578
I think it all depends on the options.  Would I prefer James Posey?  Yes.  However, if it's between Hill and more young, unproven talent, I'd take Hill.

Yup -- Hill is the best option on the market.

If there was someone with comparable ability, and better age/injury history for comparable pay, then I'd rather that guy ... but that player doesn't exist.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2009, 06:03:03 PM »

Offline Cman

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13074
  • Tommy Points: 121
Plus, Grant is a great person and he would accept his backup role and a small contract with no problem.

No GM in his right mind would turn down the opportunity to sign Hill to the vet min.  But my guess is that Hill will have other options.  How "small" will his contract be?  I wouldn't be surprised to see a team offer him something like $3M/yr for 3 years (for example, Hill would be a cheap replacement for Wally coming off the Cavs bench).  I think people her at CB are assuming that Hill will come cheap because of his small current contract.  But I question that assumption.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2009, 06:06:25 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34122
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Hill is a great fit.


He doesn't need alot of minutes to be effective.

He has PG skills as a bigger player which works well with House as a backup PG. 


He gives the Celtics one more guy that can hit the stars with great passes in the right spots.


And, he is another good leader to have on the bench to teach the 2nd year players.


Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2009, 06:14:27 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
I'd take a risk on Hill but as others have said we might not be able to get him.  I wouldn't be worried so much about injuries if he were playing ~20 minutes a night.

It's unlikely, but I'd also hope that Doc would play Walker and maybe Giddens or Pruitt (if they're still here) more next year so they can develop into serviceable backups so we aren't totally up the creek if Hill (or whichever backup SF we sign) gets injured.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2009, 06:14:36 PM »

Offline cornbreadsmart

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1706
  • Tommy Points: 106
i can't believe nobody mentioned "classy" yet. ha. i'm pretty bummed if hill is the best we can do.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2009, 06:16:32 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34122
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
i can't believe nobody mentioned "classy" yet. ha. i'm pretty bummed if hill is the best we can do.

Name one other FA swingman out there the Celtics could get for the LLE or vet min that would be as good?


Barnes?  Celtics already have a better version of him in Scali.



Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2009, 06:22:42 PM »

Offline cornbreadsmart

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1706
  • Tommy Points: 106
i'm not to keen on salaries. it's not that i'm saying he stinks but meaning if this is the most help we get, the best new player added to the roster i'm not excited. i think if healthy hill probably would be better than barnes. i just WISH we could do better.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2009, 06:24:16 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34122
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
i'm not to keen on salaries. it's not that i'm saying he stinks but meaning if this is the most help we get, the best new player added to the roster i'm not excited. i think if healthy hill probably would be better than barnes. i just WISH we could do better.


Well, I think most expect the Celtics to add a Wallace or Mcdyse along with Hill.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2009, 06:24:42 PM »

Offline cornbreadsmart

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1706
  • Tommy Points: 106
i'm still mourning last night. think it's sad how red is getting pushed to 2nd nationally. big fat lie.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2009, 06:27:23 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34122
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
i'm still mourning last night. think it's sad how red is getting pushed to 2nd nationally. big fat lie.


Everyone on ESPN were so ready to push Phil.



Except John Thompson.  He said he didn't care.  Red was the greatest coach he had ever been around.

Re: Is Grant Hill worth the risk?
« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2009, 06:31:54 PM »

Offline ManUp

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8511
  • Tommy Points: 285
  • Rondo doesn't believe in easy buckets...
For the Vet minimum he isn't a risk at all.