Grant Hill at his best vs Lerbon James, I take Hill anyday. I believe Hill would of been the best SF in the league and possibly the best player in the league if he had never got injuried . Especially after the Jordan era. I think his career would of took off and he would of helped a team get a Championship.
Grant Hill, no doubt in my mind. You see everything LeBron does, and you go nuts. Hill could do it all, yet he was more fundamentally sound and also a much better defensive player. Grant Hill could have went down as one of the greatest players of all-time.
I will take Lebron James over Grant Hill. Grant Hill was a very good player, and could do everything offensively. Lebron James is much better at taking over a game offensively than Grant Hill was though. He can take over and dominate another team with his scoring better than Grant Hill, and can be much more authoritative than Grant Hill was about doing it. Lebron was also a bette athlete than Grant Hill was, and has a much higher ceiling than Grant Hill had. He can run faster, jump higher, and is stronger. He can get to the rim better than Hill could. As I said though, his ability to take over a game offensively, better than Grant Hill could is my main reason for taking Lebron over Grant Hill in his prime.
Right now, I'm going to say Grant Hill. Some people might look at this thread and laugh, but the prime Grant Hill was something special. He was one of the first "Next MJ's" early in his career. He was a triple double threat every night, with great court vision for a SF, and also a great rebounder for his size. I may be wrong on this, but I think he was the last person to average 20 points, 9 rebounds, and 7 assists in a season. As CB32 said, he was a much better defender than Lebron is now. Just imagine what Hill's career would have been like if it wasn't for the injuries.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Lebron was also a bette athlete than Grant Hill was,</div>I don't agree with that at all. There is not one part of Lebrons game that is better then Grant Hills.
Lebron James can jump higher than Grant Hill could, can run faster than Hill could, and can take over a game offensively better than Grant Hill could. His size and strength allow him to be better on the drive than Grant Hill was, and allow him to shift at the rim for a dunk, or change of direction layup better than Grant Hill could. Being able to take over a game like Lebron can, compared to what Grant Hill used to do, is a huge reason for me to pick Lebron over Hill. Lebron James is also just as good of a passer as Grant Hill, makes reads just as well, and makes even better passes. His passes are much more crisp and clean, and get to where they need to go just as well as Grant Hill's passes did, maybe even better.
I'll go with Lebron. You just can't make up for the fact that Lebron's scoring was FAR better than Hill's, and the rebounding+passing are pretty dead even between the two (Lebron's a slightly better passer, hill's a slightly better rebounder). Hill was a good defender, but no amount of defense can make up for a ten point deficit in the scoring category when all else is equal. Hill was never the guy who deserved the MVP, whereas Lebron was. Revisionist history tends to overrate injured/deceased players a tad I've noticed (Hill, Bias, Lewis, Walton), due to what they could have been.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dagameplayer @ May 28 2007, 10:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't agree with that at all. There is not one part of Lebrons game that is better then Grant Hills.</div>Lebron is easily a better scorer and at least an even passer.
When I look at Grant Hill, he was a 4-year player at Duke. His fundamentals and defense are obviously going to be stronger. It's going to take LeBron a little while to catch up with what Hill had mastered in college. I'd take LeBron James. Much more physicly imposing player at 6'8" 240 than Grant Hill was at a lean 225. LeBron's a better scorer, just as good a passer, more athletic, quicker. Grant Hill was a great player, but LeBron to me is more special, like a Grant Hill 2.0
Just clarifying, in case I misunderstood... is this asking Grant Hill at his best vs. LeBron James NOW, or Grant Hill at his best vs. LeBron when he's at his peak (we have not seen that yet). If it's prime Hill vs. James now, then I stand by what I said. But if this is prime Hill vs. LeBron when he's at his peak, then I'd go with LeBron.
I would take LeBron. LeBron IS a better athlete, IMO a better passer(again, I think hes a PG by heart), not as good defender, but hes a better shooter. People forget Grant Hill wasnt a great shooter, he was more of a post-up, create shot type of player. LeBron is just as good rebounder and has a killer instinct and major leadership skills. People, I knew who Grant Hill was before I knew who Michael Jordan was. Im a very huge fan of Grant Hill and what he used to do back in the day. LeBron James is better now, than Hill was then. Its not just the fans who hype LeBron up, its the people who have seen the Grant Hills and realize..wow, this 22 yr old guy from highschool is probbaly better than prime superstars we've seen...Thats why LeBron is so hyped..cause its probably true.
This is easy to me and I can't believe so many people picked the other player....LeBron is the easy choice to me.When LeBron is playing at the level he was last year and late part of this season, he is the much more dominant scorer than Hill was, better playmaker, and IMO just the more dominant guy who can really lead his team somewhere with his skills. Grant was much better defensively, and a slightly better rebounder (mostly due to he played down low and had less pressure on him offensively than LeBron early in his career).People talk about Grant like some mythical creature who had the most talent in NBA history or something. He had a lot of talent, but it never really translated into the hype he got.
But it never did. At his peak he was around a 25/7/5 guy, and there are quite afew SG/SF then and now that I'd take over him at his peak.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (austingriz @ May 28 2007, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I would take LeBron. LeBron IS a better athlete, IMO a better passer(again, I think hes a PG by heart), not as good defender, but hes a better shooter. People forget Grant Hill wasnt a great shooter, he was more of a post-up, create shot type of player. LeBron is just as good rebounder and has a killer instinct and major leadership skills. People, I knew who Grant Hill was before I knew who Michael Jordan was. Im a very huge fan of Grant Hill and what he used to do back in the day. LeBron James is better now, than Hill was then. Its not just the fans who hype LeBron up, its the people who have seen the Grant Hills and realize..wow, this 22 yr old guy from highschool is probbaly better than prime superstars we've seen...Thats why LeBron is so hyped..cause its probably true.</div>I must disagree here, Grant Hill was not the type of guy to post up to get his points. He was a finesse guy, that attacked off the dribble, and used his very good mid range shot to set up everything else for him. The best part of his game was that on the drive he could easily find someone open, stop for he mid-range floater or jumper, or keep on going straight to the rim. That was always Grant Hill's game in Detroit.I will disagree with one thing that I read, and that is that Grant Hills talent never translated into the hype he got. It was hard for him to do what he had to do, acting as the primary ball-handler and playmaker for his team, play as the best rebounder on the team, and also play as the best scorer for the Pistons. He had little to no help with this Pistons team in any category, he had to do everything, much as Michael Jordan had to do early in his career for the Bulls. Grant Hill proved he was able to do all of this, and do it all very well. The only small forward's I have seen, that I would take over Grant Hill was Lebron James, and probably Scottie Pippen.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The only small forward's I have seen, that I would take over Grant Hill was Lebron James, and probably Scottie Pippen.</div>*cough*larry bird*cough*EDIT: I didn't see the "that I have seen" part
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kobebryant_24OWNEDME @ May 28 2007, 08:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>*cough*larry bird*cough*EDIT: I didn't see the "that I have seen" part</div>My bad, I should have specified that, I was more talking about people that played around the same time as Hill, or came in after him, since Nitro said there are quite a few SF/SG's then anad now that I would take over Grant Hill. Obviously I would take Larry Bird over Grant Hill also.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ May 28 2007, 08:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I will disagree with one thing that I read, and that is that Grant Hills talent never translated into the hype he got. It was hard for him to do what he had to do, acting as the primary ball-handler and playmaker for his team, play as the best rebounder on the team, and also play as the best scorer for the Pistons. He had little to no help with this Pistons team in any category, he had to do everything, much as Michael Jordan had to do early in his career for the Bulls. Grant Hill proved he was able to do all of this, and do it all very well. The only small forward's I have seen, that I would take over Grant Hill was Lebron James, and probably Scottie Pippen.</div>He was being called the 'next MJ' and'better than MJ' when he was on the rise. Grant never really translated into that player.I said SG/SF. During or since Grant's stint, give me MJ, Pippen, LeBron, T-Mac '01-'05, Kobe, and Wade over Hill (and there are a few that I am forgetting). He was one of the first to be heavily compared to MJ.
I just went with Small Forwards, because he really only played the 3 in his prime, so I saw no reason to compare him to shooting guards. I would easily take Grant Hill over Mcgrady with the Magic, and Kobe Bryant these days. He proved to be able to carry his team as the main man, just as well as Mcgrady and Kobe have, while having to worry about being the best scorer, rebounder, perimeter defender, and playmaker on the team all at the same time. Mcgrady and Kobe have only had to be the scorer's of their teams when they are the main man. They didn't have to worry about being the best rebounder and playmakers on the team, and still haven't been able to carry their teams to 50 win seasons.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ May 28 2007, 09:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I just went with Small Forwards, because he really only played the 3 in his prime, so I saw no reason to compare him to shooting guards. I would easily take Grant Hill over Mcgrady with the Magic, and Kobe Bryant these days. He proved to be able to carry his team as the main man, just as well as Mcgrady and Kobe have, while having to worry about being the best scorer, rebounder, perimeter defender, and playmaker on the team all at the same time. Mcgrady and Kobe have only had to be the scorer's of their teams when they are the main man. They didn't have to worry about being the best rebounder and playmakers on the team, and still haven't been able to carry their teams to 50 win seasons.</div>From a pure skill standpoint, both T-Mac of Orlando and Kobe now are better than Grant was. Grant was only expected one season to do the kind of scoring T-Mac and Kobe do, and when he did raise his points, his rebounds dipped below 7RPG and assists to 5APG. T-Mac in his prime in orlando was a 32/7/5 guy, and simply more skilled and far more dominant of a scorer than Grant was. Bottom line is T-Mac was, and still is IMO, the more dominant and standout player than Hill. I can't believe you even thought of saying Grant was better than Kobe is now....Kobe and T-Mac BOTH had to be the best playmakers and perimeter defenders on their team. Grant never got team past 1st round, and only once in his 6 year Detroit career did he get team to 50 wins. Kobe has had only 3 years of being the man in LA (the part he played in the 3 peat more than makes up for no 50 win seasons yet), and while I said Orlando T-Mac (who played only 4 seasons in Orlando), T-Mac has gotten Rockets over 50 wins twice.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ May 28 2007, 10:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>From a pure skill standpoint, both T-Mac of Orlando and Kobe now are better than Grant was. When Grant Hill raised his points to near the level Kobe and T-Mac, his rebounds dipped below 7RPG and assists to 5APG. T-Mac in his prime in orlando was a 32/7/5 guy, and simply more skilled and far more dominant of a scorer than Grant was. Bottom line is T-Mac was, and still is IMO, the more dominant and standout player than Hill. I can't believe you even thought of saying Grant was better than Kobe is now....</div>From a pure skill stand point, I will agree that they are better scorers than Grant Hill was and Kobe is a better defensive player than Grant Hill was. However, Grant Hill is a better passer than both of them are/was, and is a better rebounder than both of them are/was. As far as who I would take on my team, sure both can take over a game with their scoring, but Grant Hill can push his team through a season better and control every part of the game better than what Kobe and Mcgrady could. He was also a better defensive player than Tracy Mcgrady, slid his feet better, and was able to read what was going on better than Mcgrady proved in Orlando. I don't know what your reading, but I never said that Grant is a better player than Kobe, I just said I would take him in his prime for a team over Kobe Bryant because of his ability to control more of the game than Kobe can.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Kobe and T-Mac BOTH had to be the best playmakers and perimeter defenders on their team.</div>Tracy Mcgrady didn't have near the playmaking duties in Orlando as what he has in Houston. He was mainly just a scorer in Orlando, and while he did do some playmaking, it was not near what he does now nor was it near what Grant Hill did in Detroit. Kobe has not been the primary playmaker on his team, as that has been Lamar Odom's job the past couple of years. He has been the facilitator of that teams offense. Kobe was just mainly the scorer of the team, much like when Jordan was the scorer and Pippen worried about the playmaking and facilitating of the offense. Nor has Kobe had to worry about going inside and mixing it up on the glass near as much as what Grant Hill had to do. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Grant never got team past 1st round, and only once in his 6 year Detroit career did he get team to 50 wins. Kobe has had only 3 years of being the man in LA (the part he played in the 3 peat more than makes up for no 50 win seasons yet), and while I said Orlando T-Mac (who played only 4 seasons in Orlando), T-Mac has gotten Rockets over 50 wins twice.</div>Tracy Mcgrady has gotten them over 50 wins twice, but that was with a better team than Grant Hill had. He had someone down low to help even out and balance the court, he did not have to worry about being the best rebounder on the team. Kobe Bryant had Shaq in his prime on his team, I am not going to give him that for being able to carry a team better than Grant Hill. When Kobe has been by himself, he hasn't gotten them to one 50 win season. In Grant Hill's first three years in the league, he got his team to being a 50 win team, while having to control alot more of the game than Kobe Bryant has had to control and carrying a much heavier burden than Kobe Bryant has had to carry.
