its official hill signs with philly - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Tank · 03-03-2003, 07:07 PM

76ers Sign Former Sixer and Free Agent Tyrone Hill; Waive Kenny Satterfield

PHILADELPHIA, PA - March 3, 2003 - Philadelphia 76ers General Manager Billy King announced today that the Sixers have signed free agent forward Tyrone Hill and waived guard Kenny Satterfield. Hill was placed on waivers by Cleveland on Thursday, Feb. 27, 2003. Per team policy, terms of the contract were not released.

The 34-year-old Hill is making his second stop in Philadelphia. He was originally acquired by the Sixers on March 11, 1999, in a four-player deal with Milwaukee. He played the remainder of the 1998-99 season with Philadelphia as well as the 1999-2000 and 2000-01 seasons, helping the Sixers to the 2001 NBA Finals. As a Sixer, Hill averaged 10.4 points, 8.9 rebounds and 30.9 minutes in 165 games (146 starts). He was traded by Philadelphia to Cleveland on August 3, 2001, with Jumaine Jones for Matt Harpring, Cedric Henderson and Robert Traylor.

Playing in his 13th NBA season, Hill was averaging 6.3 points, 8.3 rebounds and 26.7 minutes per game in 32 games (25 starts) for the Cavs this season. This season, he grabbed a season-high 17 rebounds versus the Lakers on Nov. 5, 2002, setting a Gund Arena record for defensive rebounds in a quarter with nine in the first period. He also had a season-high 17 points at the Clippers on Oct. 30 as part of a double-double. In 2001-02, Hill played in just 26 games, missing the first 50 games due to back spasms.

Hill was originally drafted by Golden State with the 11th pick of the 1990 NBA Draft. In his NBA career, he has played in 772 games (592 starts), averaging 9.6 points, 8.7 rebounds and 28.3 minutes per game. The Xavier ’90 product enjoyed his best year as a professional in 1994-95 when he averaged a career-best 13.8 points and 10.9 rebounds in 70 games during his first stop in Cleveland and was selected to the 1995 All-Star game that year. Hill played with Golden State from 1990-1993 when he was traded to the Cavs on July 15, 1993. He then spent from 1993-1997 with Cleveland before being sent to Milwaukee on Sept. 25, 1997, as part of a three-way deal with Seattle.

Satterfield, 6-foot-2, 170 pounds, averaged 0.6 points, 0.8 assists and 4.9 minutes per game in 16 contests with the Sixers. The third-year guard was claimed off waivers by the 76ers on Dec. 23, 2002 and has career averages of 3.5 points, 1.7 assists and 13.1 minutes per game in 38 NBA contests. Satterfield was selected after his sophomore season at the University of Cincinnati by the Dallas Mavericks in the second round (54th overall pick) of the 2001 NBA Draft. His rights were later traded to Denver for a future second-round draft choice or future considerations on Sept

LRB · 03-03-2003, 07:54 PM

Well at least the Fakers didn't get him.

ames7 · 03-03-2003, 08:11 PM

Stein comments:

You read right. Hill elected to rejoin the Sixers rather than sign with the Mavericks, giving Dallas another punch to stomach in the wake of Thursday's fall-from-ahead loss at home to Sacramento. Hill apparently wouldn't join the Mavericks for less than $3.9 million for the rest of the season, which is what's left of Dallas' mid-level cap exception. Owner Mark Cuban, as seen with the Brian Grant deal, vetoed that proposal on the premise that Hill -- despite being a wily power forward who rebounds -- couldn't help the Mavs enough to justify the expense.

The solace these days for Dallas is that the standings still make pleasant reading. So long as the Mavs maintain the league's best record, and so long as the Kings also win the Pacific Division, Dallas can get to the conference finals without having to play Sacramento, San Antonio or the L.A. Lakers. So long as nothing else major changes.

If current form holds, Dallas would get Phoenix, Houston or Golden State in Round 1 and the Minnesota/Portland winner in Round 2. The burly Blazers would worry the Mavericks most from that group, but those are all teams Dallas should beat. Even without a new power forward.
***
I don't know, does it seem to anyone else that we weren't rallying too hard to get him? I don't really see this as as big of a blow as the media is playing it as. I know we need rebounding help, but it's not like Hill was the only option.

MavsFanFinley · 03-03-2003, 09:02 PM

<< I don't really see this as as big of a blow as the media is playing it as. >>

I don't either.

The media might be making a big deal out of it cause of our summer actions/or lack of last year.

We couldn't sign Lewis or Redd. And we chose not to resign Wang.

We never, either by choice or hands tied, signed that rebounder we said we were going after. And just recently, for money reasons supposedly, we didn't pull the trigger on a trade that would have brought us a rebounder in Grant.

I put Hill up there with the Redd interest. We wanted to add them, but we were not going to use the full exception on getting them. The difference in that, is we should have offered Redd the whole thing, but didn't. With Hill, this late in the season, I can understand the Mavs not offering him the rest of it.

But for the media, they only see another player passing on the Mavs for whatever reason.

Rhylan · 03-03-2003, 10:42 PM

My understanding is that the $3.9mil would be prorated for the remainder of the season.. but the hit is in that the full figure is added to salary cap numbers, and Luxury Tax arithmetic anyway. At any rate, Cuban's purse-strings are tighter now than when we sucked.

Murphy3 · 03-03-2003, 10:55 PM

the redd thing..well, that was just poor judgement by nellie/cuban.
i'm sure they regret it now..how couldn't they?

they should look at it as a chance to add a player that could be a significant part of the core now and for years to come..for a cheap price
but, unfortunately, cuban and nellie either made a bad basketball decision or cuban made a money decision.

either way you look at it, the mavs missed out on a golden opportunity

Bookit · 03-03-2003, 11:14 PM

<< the redd thing..well, that was just poor judgement by nellie/cuban.
i'm sure they regret it now..how couldn't they?

they should look at it as a chance to add a player that could be a significant part of the core now and for years to come..for a cheap price
but, unfortunately, cuban and nellie either made a bad basketball decision or cuban made a money decision.

either way you look at it, the mavs missed out on a golden opportunity >>

No kidding. Sometimes Cuban outsmarts himself. He tries to get too cute. This time it cost him bigtime. Redd would have been a great player and even better trade bait.

mavs_afroman · 03-04-2003, 04:50 AM

Sometimes I wonder if our willingness to make big trades hurts when it comes to signing free agents? I wonder if players feel like they would be signing with an organization that is not dedicated to them and would quickly trade them for something better? I think most teams in the NBA are like that but we've shown it in the last 2 or 3 years.

Usually Lurkin · 03-04-2003, 08:43 AM

maybe fat towels and sony playstations really aren't as important to players as money and playing time.

MFFL · 03-04-2003, 09:59 AM

<< maybe fat towels and sony playstations really aren't as important to players as money and playing time. >>

Ding, ding, ding! You have won a prize!

Now the bonus question is - name one major free agent that the Mavs have signed since Cuban took over.

Dooby · 03-04-2003, 10:11 AM

What is a "major" free agent?

By some standards, no team has signed a "major" free agent since Cuban bought the Mavs. I think this team has made bad choices on who to pursue. I don't think there is a general bias against the way Cuban does business. Was Joe Smith a "major" free agent? Was Hill a "major" free agent? Truth is there hasn't been "major" free agent movement beyond players earning the mid-level exception in the past 2-3 years. And we have been active in using that mid-level exception each year, although our decisions on how to use that mid-level exception have been suspect.

Usually Lurkin · 03-04-2003, 10:24 AM

<< What is a "major" free agent? >>

How about the free agent that was the mavericks first choice?
How about free agents that the mavs pursued?

What are the Mavericks recruitment records in just these two categories since Cuban took over?

Bookit · 03-04-2003, 10:30 AM

The one thing that Cuban does very well is he keeps the guys who are already here. I commend him for that. Finley, Raef, Dirk, Bradley, and Najera have all stayed. Buckner left but I really missed all of that and can't remember why. And Raja has done well in replacing him. Booth left but he was a short timer anyway. And it seems to have worked out for the best.

I just hope Cuban is learning from his mistakes....and most likely he is. The Reggie Lewis thing was a debacle. Michael Redd should be a Maverick right now. Redd's deal would have been easy if Cuban would have paid him what he is worth and stopped worrying about the luxury tax. Keon Clark should also be a Mav. Bad move on Cuban for this one. He is exactly what Dallas needs. To make matters worse, Keon signs with Sacramento. Popeye is injury prone. I hope Cuban looks closely at a player's health history before signing them.

Dooby · 03-04-2003, 10:52 AM

<<

<< What is a "major" free agent? >>

How about the free agent that was the mavericks first choice?
How about free agents that the mavs pursued?

What are the Mavericks recruitment records in just these two categories since Cuban took over? >>

Well it was abysmal before Cuban took over; and it is a little better now. Wasn't Eisley the Mavs' first choice? One of our problems is that we aimed too high with Rashard Lewis. We could have gotten (I believe) Harpring, Donyell Marshall or Keon Clark. However, for whatever reason, we didn't pursue them at all. Redd is another matter, Cuban chose not to go above market value, and unfortunately it appears that Redd's value was substantially greater.

I don't think players are not coming to Dallas because of Cuban, adn I don't think that is what you are saying. I do think there is something to be said that players are not flocking to Dallas to play for Cuban, which is what I think you are really saying.

But I think the more important issue is the directionless lack of strategy that the Mavs employed in the offseason.

Rhylan · 03-04-2003, 10:55 AM

<< Michael Redd should be a Maverick right now. Redd's deal would have been easy if Cuban would have paid him what he is worth and stopped worrying about the luxury tax. Keon Clark should also be a Mav. >>

We only have one exception, Bookit! It would have had to either be Kee-smoke or Redd, not both. But, your point is taken.

Bookit · 03-04-2003, 11:00 AM

<<

<< Michael Redd should be a Maverick right now. Redd's deal would have been easy if Cuban would have paid him what he is worth and stopped worrying about the luxury tax. Keon Clark should also be a Mav. >>

We only have one exception, Bookit! It would have had to either be Kee-smoke or Redd, not both. But, your point is taken. >>

Kee-smoke should have been the first priority. Cuban seemed disorganized last off season.

Dooby · 03-04-2003, 11:08 AM

<< Cuban seemed disorganized last off season. >>

I think the fault is equally Cuban and Nellie's

dude1394 · 03-04-2003, 11:24 AM

Hmmm... I don't know he seems to manaage somehow to get the team better every year. Don't ask me how, luck I guess with all of the horrible mistakes he's making... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

Usually Lurkin · 03-04-2003, 11:55 AM

Dooby, I'm not really trying to make a point, just trying to fill in the story.

I do remember a big hubbub when Cubes took over about how free agents would love to come here because they get to sit in comfortable chairs and use the weight room when they visit.
So far it looks like those amenities are not great enough to compensate for sharing court time with stars, and/or Cuban's tightening wallet.

This past summer did not hold a lot of desirable free-agents for the Mavs, it seems. They figured a long shot was worth the wait because they didn't think holes in the mavs were that glaring. Losing free agents because of misevaluation of needs is different than losing free agents after a pursuit.

To say Redd is playing above what was his market value in the summer is to say he is playing better than everyone expected him to. The odds were against that happening. By definition. Can't fault them for playing the odds, though they may now regret not making the bet. We have lost more than one free agent chase now because of Cuban's unwillingness to spend. Didn't he make a promise or something at one point that we wouldn't lose a championship because of that?

Would Redd or Clark in Dallas mean a championship in Dallas?

Bookit, good point about keeping those that we've tried to keep. They've done a good job with that. Booth is the only getaway I can remember, maybe Wang, but neither of those are players we'd make a play for now, so no real loss.

My memory of the Buckner thing was that they felt Buckner and Griff were redundant, so didn't make an offer to Buckner.

dude1394 · 03-04-2003, 01:17 PM

If we think of the improving ability to get free agents here as ONLY the "getting" of someone for cheap (below market value) then we will forever be dissapointed. However there is no doubt that if cubes were NOT here, there wouldn't be any free agents or draft picks either probably wanting to play here.

madape · 03-04-2003, 01:19 PM

What is Mark Stein's facination with the Brian Grant deal? He broke the bogus story, and now continutes to talk about it. The only reason it ever even made it into national attention is because of this guy. Cuban has all but denied anything more than a casual phone call. I haven't heard anything from Nelson about it. So why does Stein insist that it was so close to being done? Now he's starting a rumor that Cuban nixed the deal for financial reasons, and that Nelson is pissed. I don't claim to have the inside track on this issue, but that sounds like horseshit to me. In all likelihood, Miami was just one of the dozens of calls Cuban and Nellie made before the deadline. They do it every year. Many of them are intended only to confuse and counfound others contemplating draft day deals. In fact, I have heard that the reason behind talks with Miami was to prevent Eddie Jones from going to Minnesota.

Now I've always liked Mark Stein. He's been a responsible journalist in the past. But over the past month, the only stories he's broken are absolute fabrications, gross manipulations of truth and unsubstantiated conjecture.

First, he "breaks" the story on Ron Artest beating up James Posey at an all-star party. Of course he didn't bother to try to verify anything before he printed it. Then, even though his face is covered with egg, he reports that the Mavericks are about to trade for Zydrunas Ilgauskas, which of course was never an issue except in Steins inflated head. Next he blows the Grant deal way out of proportion. And now he's feeding us this line of crap. Maybe the NY Post is hiring, because that's about the quality of "inside information" we are getting from Stein these days.

Hey Marc. You freaking idiot. Maybe the Mavs didn't want Grant because his sorry, overpaid ass really wouldn't help the team. Did you ever think of that? Sorry to offend you, but maybe the Mavericks are a little bit better than you at scouting and running an NBA franchise. They are in first place after all. And maybe Grant isn't as good as you think, or hope, he is. No one else in the league thinks so. Get over it already.

jayC · 03-04-2003, 03:21 PM

Yo! Rotation problems had to have been the problem. 3.9 million is too much money for Hill anyway. We can always nag PJ Brown, Elden Campbell, Howard, Odom, Maggette, etc.

Dooby · 03-04-2003, 03:42 PM

Considering we were only going to have to him less than $400K for less than 2 months work, I don't see what your point is JayC. No one offered him a deal that went into next year. The guys you mentioned are all under contract. I think you are confused.

Rhylan · 03-04-2003, 03:50 PM

preach on, ape.

Stein got on ESPN and realized that he looks like a little chubby momma's boy that got beat up on the playground, compared to all those TV guys with their dashing good looks. So he overcompensates by trying to be the insider. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

jayC · 03-04-2003, 05:48 PM

Dooby
Stein said that hill wanted to be signed beyond this year. And its a prorated 4.5 million dollar exception. Hill will take us to the promise land not! The guy played well in the east but not in the west when over half the players in the league are in the top ten. Don't see where he helps us. Why sign a guy when he isn't going to take you over the top. He is 35 pretty easy to rebound all the time when your team can't hit the broad side of a barn.

If he wasn't going to slow down Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Webber and Shaq and Malone who cares? He plays against kenyon martin okay PF not a very good offensive player. Jermaine Oneal close to the others out west but not there at all. That is the complete rundown of great front court players in the east its pretty sorry. So don't jump through a hoop just because he played for nelson.

He wanted to be signed next year also. So you want to risk a title and next years exception on Tyrone Hill, I don't.The fact of the matter his boys are out in Philedelphia and not in Dallas that's the bottom line.

You must be bitter all the time.

Dooby · 03-04-2003, 06:05 PM

Well, he wasn't signed for next year. That is a fact. If he wanted to be, fine; but neither Philly or Dallas offered it to him. What db.com and the DMN said was that Hill wanted ther remainder of Dallas' exception this year, which is only $3.9M or somesuch-prorated over the remainder of the season and that is a little more than 1/4 of that, or around $1M.

Regardless, it was the opportunity to make this team better, with little to no downside. And the opportunity was not taken. No one expected him to take out Webber, Duncan or Shaq, but it would be nice to have somebody that could put a body on Vlade or Keon Clark. I am not upset about it. I am just saying that what you stated is wrong-ergo, you are confused.