I was trying to look back to find a thread this maybe able to go on, but couldn't find one. So sorry if there was one. I am very excited with Roy's numbers so far this season. Honestly, when he was averaging 25 points a game, I was a bit worried. I really fell in love with Roy being that Grant Hill type player, rebounding and assists and scoring when his team needs him. I would be extremely happy if Roy is averaging 20-22 points a game, 6 assists and 5 rebounds. To me it's more of a complete game. I know it's not as "flashy" as a Carter or T-mac scoring type, but look what "scoring titles" and "showtime dunks" get you?
As opposed to all the titles Grant Hill won? Hill, prior to injuries, was a great player. So was McGrady. And Carter has been pretty tremendous too. All of them had very well-rounded games...if you look at their prime seasons, McGrady and Carter were also getting assists and rebounds. The three players never won titles because they didn't have good enough teams around them.
You got a point with Hill, but I was a big fan of players like Magic, Hill and Kidd. Players that could likely score 30 a game if they wanted (okay maybe not Kidd), but choose to involve the other players on their teams to make them better. I've never seen Carter or T-mac play in that way. And even though, statistically they looked like they had a nice "well rounded game", when I watched them, they just didn't make others look better around them. <--- Remember only my opinion.
actually hill averaged like 25, 8, and 8... so actually he did score a lot. He was the Lebron James of that era when he came into the league. As for B-Roy, why wouldn't you want him to score a lot? hes the most talented scorer on the team, and can still get the boards and assists if he wants. The name of the game is SCORING.
Frankly you must not have watched them play all that much then. Both players have been capable assist men, able to drive and dish and break down a defense with their dribble. Granted I think both players have always been a bit more score-first than Roy or Hill, but you can't discredit what they were able to do in their primes.
McGrady was often accused of being "passive" because he spent large portions of the game passing to teammates rather than scoring. I think McGrady, despite being a volume scorer, was the antithesis of selfish. His only offensive flaw, IMO, was at times falling in love with the outside shot even when it wasn't falling...but I think part of that was trying to protect his back from further injuries. Prior to his first major back injury, he was arguably the best in the league at attacking the rim. I think Carter gets a bum rap too. Early on in his career, I think it was fair to criticize him for lack of play-making for teammates. But I think over time he began setting teammates up more and more. In New Jersey, he was definitely a good and willing passer.
Grant Hill played on faster teams and he never averaged 25/8/8 - his best year was his 6th and he averaged 25.8/5.2/6.6 with a PER of 24.5 which was only slightly better than Roy's PER last year.
I'm not discrediting them at all. They are seat fillers and NBA darlings in their prime. What a-typical fan wouldn't love watching a player score 50 in a game? The reason why Jordan was such a Goldmine for the NBA, was he was able to score in bundles, plus be that "game changer" that made his team mates better. Regardless, and only my opinion, I personally would rather see a facilitator that doesn't look to score first than some bloke that makes others around him better. And for the people that think I didn't watch their games because they said Carter and T-mac were getting their team mates involved, I must agree to disagree then. Because I never saw that and watched them a lot. Never once did I feel a "Carter or T-mac" made their team mates better. I saw it in Kidd, Magic, Roy and LJ
