<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ May 28 2007, 08:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>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.</div>I didnt mean he had a post up game, but much like the older players, he would back down his opponent rather than start at the 3-point line. Everytime ive seen his older games, hes usually gonna post up against his opponent about a foot or 2 in from the 3 point line and create from there. But he wasnt a 3 point shooter at all...
[quote name='valo35' post='366896' date='May 28 2007, 10:29 PM']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.[/quote]Grant was an overrated rebounder. When his scoring responsbilities got as large as T-Mac or Kobe's, he dipped right around where they are/were. His defensive assignments also tended to play closer to basket than Kobe or T-Mac's. But he was a better rebounder, but not by a huge margin.Both playmaking and rebounding Grant was slightly better, but never really dominant in each category. He was never a truly dominant player like T-Mac is/was and Kobe is. When you said that, I took it as you thought Grant was a better player. Again, Grant stat filled and had his hand dipped in every category, but Kobe and T-Mac are/were more dominant and can simply take over and win games like Grant couldn't. Grant, in only 1/3 of his time in Detroit got team more wins than Kobe did last year (and he had far more help than Kobe), and T-Mac has gotten team to 52 wins twice since arriving with the Rockets and in playoffs has been better than Grant (along with having just as much success). I am not buying that Kobe and T-Mac can't push team through season like Grant could. Yes, it wasn't what he does now or quite what Grant had to do, but from 02-04 he was the main playmaker for the team, which goes against your arguement that they didn't have to be the main playmakers for their teams. Kobe was the playmaker of the 3 peat Lakers and was the playmaker this past season. Ask any Lakers fan who watched most of their games and they will attest to this. Lamar also missed a good chunk of games in which Kobe had to be sole playmaker with absolutely no one else to make plays for themselves or others. At least Grant had the likes of Joe Dumars to help with that load. Yao was hurt for 30 games this year yet T-Mac led team to a 21-10 record without him. In the only 2 seasons Grant's team won more than 42 games, he had Dumars to help out to score and pass, Otis Thorpe as main guy for rebounding, and Allan Houston/Lindsay Hunter to score (then Stackhouse in Grant's last season as a Piston). In 02-03 T-Mac was leading scorer, passer, and for half the season, rebounder. T-Mac can carry a team better than Grant could IMO, and has been able to since 02-03. Kobe had to a LOT with LA in the 3 peat years. I brought it up to show that he has proven he can win. When Shaq fouled out in Finals he took over. When Shaq was injured in 02-03 he carried team. When Shaq had to sit in final minutes of games due to being a liability at the line, Kobe would be the one to come up clutch. Kobe has had to carry his team moreso than Grant ever dreamed of. In only 1 of his 6 seasons as main guy, he got team to 50 wins. Kobe has had only 2 seasons of being healthy and being the man, and got just as far in playoffs as Grant ever did (and the 45 wins were moreso than 4 of Grant's 6 seasons). He didn't have to deal with his 2nd option getting hurt like Kobe has with Odom, he had a better team than Kobe, and was in a M-U-C-H easier conference. He never had to score 35PPG just to get a 7 seed. If Kobe didn't have that 40PPG month this past March, which included the 4 game streak of 50pt games, they wouldn't have made the playoffs. Grant may have his hand in more categories, but the kind of historic things the Lakers have needed from Kobe to win is way moreso than the Pistons needed from Hill.
[quote name='Nitro1118' post='366940' date='May 28 2007, 11:13 PM']Grant was an overrated rebounder. When his scoring responsbilities got as large as T-Mac or Kobe's, he dipped right around where they are/were. His defensive assignments also tended to play closer to basket than Kobe or T-Mac's. But he was a better rebounder, but not by a huge margin.[/quote]You can say his rebounding was overrated, but that's not true at all. He was able to get inside and mix it up with alot of big people in the East at that time. Alonzo Mourning, Patick Ewing, Dennis Rodman, alot of big guys to go against. He still managed to do that for his team, while also leading in playmaking duties, and scoring. Neither of the other to had to do that for an entire season, nor have they lead their teams as well when trying to do that. And when Mcgrady was the main playmaker and scorer of his team, he never had the results that Grant Hill had with the Pistons as the scorer, rebounder and playmaker. He only got the Magic to 44 wins at the highest in four seasons, led them to a 21 win season one time, and that was in a much worse conference than what Grant Hill was leading his team in. He was really only the playmaker while Odom was out, they didn't do to well then. They was winning at the beginning of the season with Odom as the playmaker, and they was winning with Kobe as the scorer towards the end of the season, but when Kobe had to be the scorer and plamaker the Lakers were faultering this season. It doesn't prove at all that he is able to carry his team when he has to be both. Darrell Armstrong helped out Mcgrady with the playmaking, just as much as what Dumars helped out Grant Hill with the playmaking in Detroit. Plus in the fist 20 some odd games of that 02-03 season, Grant Hill played and helped him alot with the playmaking duties and rebounding. Then Grant Hill went out, and it wasn't to long after that we traded for Drew Gooden, who took over as the main rebounder. So really there was only a stretch of about 20 games where Mcgrady had to be the main one to do everything all by himself Scorer, rebounder, and playmaker like Grant Hill had to do for many seasons all by himself. And considering we had a loosing record up up until the Drew Gooden trade, obviously he wasn't able to carry the load as much being the guy to have to carry the Scoring, Rebounding and playmaking duties. So no I don't think he can carry a team through a season as well as what Grant Hill was able to do.The season after that where he was carrying the team, and the main scorer/playmaker, we had a 21 win season, including a 19 game loosing streak at the beginning of the season before Mcgrady had all of his injuries that season. How do you get that he had a better team than Kobe did? He had to carry the loads scoring, rebounding, and playmaking. Where as Kobe played on a team where he did not have to worry about all of the playmaking duties like Hill had to, nor did he have to go inside to grab rebounds like Hill had to. All he had to do was score, and Hill had to do that also throughout the season. As for the tougher conference, the East at that time was just as tough as what the West is these days. The teams they had to face were just as deep from top to bottom, if not deeper, and the teams were better. They had to be in a conference with the Bulls, Knicks, Heat, Pacers, Hornets, Hawks, and Magic who during those times could all jump out for 50 wins. During the year his team won 54 games, only 6 other teams in that conference finished with below 42 wins, and no one in his division finished with below 30 wins. Meanwhile 5 other teams finished with 54 or more wins. So he played in a tough conference, don't know where you pulled that from. Your right, he didn't score 35 points per game to grab a 7 seed, but Kobe never had to do everything for his team like Tracy Mcgrady had to do, playing as the main rebounder, facilitator and scorer.
[quote name='valo35' post='366999' date='May 29 2007, 12:23 AM']You can say his rebounding was overrated, but that's not true at all. He was able to get inside and mix it up with alot of big people in the East at that time. Alonzo Mourning, Patick Ewing, Dennis Rodman, alot of big guys to go against. He still managed to do that for his team, while also leading in playmaking duties, and scoring. Neither of the other to had to do that for an entire season, nor have they lead their teams as well when trying to do that.[/quote]T-Mac had led team in rebounding before in Orlando, and was always the first or 2nd leading rebounder on the Magic in first 3 seasons. From 02-04 he was the main playmaker, and all of his seasons he was expected to score about 8PPG more than Grant ever really had to do. He also didn't have the help Grant Hill did. If T-Mac even had just Allan Houston for either 01/02 or 02/03, he would have been out of the 2nd round, something Grant never accomplished in his 6 seasons. He never had the kind of scorer next to him to succeed (Mike Miller was an absolute choke in the '02 playoffs and was traded next season, and in 02/03 had no reliable 2nd option as evident in game 2 of '03 playoffs).You know as well as I do T-Mac doesn't deserve the blame for the Magic that season. The team was abysmal and Doc Rivers performed one of the worst coaching jobs ever during the 19 game losing streak. First of all, at the beginning of the season Kobe wasn't doing much scoring, he assumed the playmaker role instead. Secondly, Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm, and the others were also hurt throughout the season. From the moment Lamar went down Kobe became the playmaker for the team. Lamar was never right the rest of the season, so Kobe assumed both roles. Even with only 42 wins, that was still more than 60% of Grant's time in Detroit (I didn't count the lockout season) and was with less help than Grant had in his 46/54 win season. Kobe has had only 2 years of being healthy and being the man on the Lakers, while Grant had 6 and more help in a weaker conference. T-Mac was scoring 11PPG more than Grant did when he was leading the team in rebounding and assists...and he had to as the team needed that kind of scoring moreso than passing or rebounding. T-Mac gave you the 7RPG and 5APG, not far off what Grant did, but gave you a league leading 32PPG. Unlike Grant, when team was in slump, he could win games purely with scoring (which is what he did after they lost 3 in a row before getting Gooden....T-Mac went for 52pts in 3 quarters in Gooden's first game in Orlando, then 46/13/10 the following game). BIG difference between 21PPG and 35PPG....BIG difference. Throughout the 4 seasons Grant Hill got to the playoffs, he had Allan Houston, Jerry Stackhouse, Lindsay Hunter, Joe Dumar, Terry Mills and Otis Thorpe that could at least score some points and hit shots. Kobe has had to deal with injuries to his 2nd option, and the rest of the players are either below average or NBDL level (excluding Luke Walton and Chris Mihm, who has played only 59 games in past 2 seasons). The top 5 teams in the West of today were all better than 4 of the 5 top teams of the 1996-1997 East. They were actually much better....SA/Dallas/Phoenix/Utah/Houston are all much better than NYK/Miami/Atlanta/Detroit of that season. Warriors, Nuggets, and both LA teams were also tough, especially the Warriors.This doesn't mean a thing. Grant may have had a hand in each area of the game moreso than T-Mac or Kobe, but he was never dominate in any single area of the game. That is a big thing I consider when ranking and comparing players. When Grant did try to become more assertive as a scorer, his other numbers dropped to right around where T-Mac and Kobe give you each season. In a nutshell, give me the 32/6/6 type guys in T-Mac/Kobe over the 21/8/7 guy in Grant Hill. He has never had the oppertunity to do that, but the way Kobe has carried the Lakers, even if it is mainly with just scoring, is absolutely unbelievable and a feat only a few select players in the past 20 years could have done...Hill not being one of them since he could never score like Kobe can.
I don't even understand how you can take Grant hill over kobe. Now let me remind you of the laker TalentC- Bynum- Started of good, fizzed out. His post moves became redundant.PF- Odom- He had a great season but injuries killed himSF- Walton- His beginning of the season was a fluke. Matador defender. PG- Smush- One of the worst defenders at the 1 in the nba.Our rotation, Sasha vujacic, only thing he does well is hustle. His a euro who can't shoot. Evans, selfish player who just might be the most inconsistent player in the league. Cook, one trick phony. Turiaf, undersized but plays his heart our. Great shotblocker. Kwame brown, inept offensively, improved off the ball defense but injuries killed him. Farmar, hit the rookie wall but finished of well.The lakers Simply don't have talent. When Grant hill didn't have talent he didn't win. Kobe with less talent in a harder conference won more games. This season he single handedly saved the lakers from the lottery. That alone trumps what grant hill has done.Odom missed 24 gamesWalton missed 20 gamesBrown missed 41 gamesRad missed 27 gamesNow tell me how the lakers won 42 games with all those injuries? Two words. Kobe bryant.Also tell me, in the last 3 seasons have the lakers won less then 40 games when kobe has played more than 70 games?Did the pistons during grant hil''s reign win less than 40 games with hill played 70 games?If your talking about winning Bryant does it better. If you talk about individual player, There's no contest.
Also, that's nonsense to say lakers didn't win with kobe as the primary scorer and faciliator. Kobe led the lakers in scoring during theit 26-13 run whilst being a scorer and facilitator. Phil dumped Odom as the main playmaker earlier on because it simply didn't work. It started with the mephis game and kept on going on.Lakers are better in terms of winning with bryant scoring. But interms of team player they are better when he is a playmaker/scorer.
Also, lakers were 13-9 without odom. That's amazing considering the teams they played and the talent left on the team.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>*cough*larry bird*cough*EDIT: I didn't see the "that I have seen" part</div>No No your right I forgot to put him there then again I look at him more as a Pf but yeah he did play sf as well so I add him to that list as well.
Grant Hill. I respect the mind's power over the body. And I hate it when players go to the pros straight from HS. Breeds the crop of narcissistic uneducated ballhogs in the league. Though, LeBron is a special case (usually), he could have used the improvement in college. His shooting technique is atrocious. If Grant Hill stayed healthy, we would be calling James the next Grant Hill.
Just because you hate it when players go straight from high school to the pro's does not mean that Grant Hill was better in his prime that Lebron James right now. Lebron James is a much better scorer than what Grant Hill was, even with his atrocious jump shot. Lebron can take over over games with his scoring, in a manner that Grant Hill couldn't do even when he was with the Pistons. Then you add to that Lebron James is just as good of a passer as what Grant Hill was, can see the floor better, and makes some of the most crisp and clean passes we have seen since Magic Johnson was in this league. He can take over the game with his passing just as Grant Hill was able to do, while being able to take over a game with his scoring unlike Grant Hill was ever able to do.
Grant Hill was injured during his prime. We saw a glimpse of a possible future for Grant right before he got injured. He put up pretty good numbers. LeBron may be more physically gifted, but he is not a smarter player than Grant was. But then I think most players today are stupid.
Grant Hill was maxed out on his potential, and pretty much in his prime at the end of his time in Detroit. Considering he had went to four years of college, and then played six in Detroit, Grant Hill was not going to improve that much more from where he was. As for smarts, Grant Hill went to four years of college, and still wasn't that much smarter of a basketball player than Lebron James is. Hell, this year as a veteran, and having been around the league for many years he was not much smarter than Lebron James is. Lebron has a very good understanding of the game of basketball for his age, makes great reads on the court, and really is one of the smarter players out there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Jun 9 2007, 12:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Grant Hill was maxed out on his potential, and pretty much in his prime at the end of his time in Detroit. Considering he had went to four years of college, and then played six in Detroit, Grant Hill was not going to improve that much more from where he was. As for smarts, Grant Hill went to four years of college, and still wasn't that much smarter of a basketball player than Lebron James is. Hell, this year as a veteran, and having been around the league for many years he was not much smarter than Lebron James is. Lebron has a very good understanding of the game of basketball for his age, makes great reads on the court, and really is one of the smarter players out there.</div>That's where I disagree. Grant Hill mastered the mid-range jumpshot. I think his decision making then was much better than James's is now. LeBron's skills lie with his great physical gifts right now. But he can't even hit open jumpers. He's a streaky player. I'm not saying Hill ever had a shot of having a better future than LeBron. But it's ludicrous to say the LeBron now plays smarter than Grant Hill right before his prime. How could you say Grant Hill was maxed out in potential? He didn't even develop a 3-point shot yet. Grant Hill was a better defender (though not a more capable one), just as good a passer, and was more adept at the mid-range shot. James, right now, relies solely on his athleticism to score, similar to the pre-Championships Jordan, but Jordan had a far more consistent mid-range jumper. My other criticism of James on the offensive end, besides a consistent mid-range shot, is him not being able to move without the ball well. Granted, he there aren't any other playmakers on the Cavs, but he has to make the defense work. Frustrate them a bit. Run through screens. The "holding the ball at the top of the key for 14 seconds" is getting old. With players now, it's all about dribbling out the clock, pulling up for a three, or dunking the ball. Not much in-between games. And that's just as important.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Let Em Hear This @ Jun 9 2007, 10:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That's where I disagree. Grant Hill mastered the mid-range jumpshot. I think his decision making then was much better than James's is now. LeBron's skills lie with his great physical gifts right now. But he can't even hit open jumpers. He's a streaky player. I'm not saying Hill ever had a shot of having a better future than LeBron. But it's ludicrous to say the LeBron now plays smarter than Grant Hill right before his prime. How could you say Grant Hill was maxed out in potential? He didn't even develop a 3-point shot yet. Grant Hill was a better defender (though not a more capable one), just as good a passer, and was more adept at the mid-range shot. James, right now, relies solely on his athleticism to score, similar to the pre-Championships Jordan, but Jordan had a far more consistent mid-range jumper. My other criticism of James on the offensive end, besides a consistent mid-range shot, is him not being able to move without the ball well. Granted, he there aren't any other playmakers on the Cavs, but he has to make the defense work. Frustrate them a bit. Run through screens. The "holding the ball at the top of the key for 14 seconds" is getting old. With players now, it's all about dribbling out the clock, pulling up for a three, or dunking the ball. Not much in-between games. And that's just as important.</div>but this thread isn't about whether you like Lebron's style, it's about whether or not Lebron right now is better than prime hill. And you have not yet made an argument either way.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Let Em Hear This @ Jun 9 2007, 12:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That's where I disagree. Grant Hill mastered the mid-range jumpshot. I think his decision making then was much better than James's is now. LeBron's skills lie with his great physical gifts right now. But he can't even hit open jumpers. He's a streaky player. I'm not saying Hill ever had a shot of having a better future than LeBron. But it's ludicrous to say the LeBron now plays smarter than Grant Hill right before his prime. How could you say Grant Hill was maxed out in potential? He didn't even develop a 3-point shot yet. Grant Hill was a better defender (though not a more capable one), just as good a passer, and was more adept at the mid-range shot. James, right now, relies solely on his athleticism to score, similar to the pre-Championships Jordan, but Jordan had a far more consistent mid-range jumper. My other criticism of James on the offensive end, besides a consistent mid-range shot, is him not being able to move without the ball well. Granted, he there aren't any other playmakers on the Cavs, but he has to make the defense work. Frustrate them a bit. Run through screens. The "holding the ball at the top of the key for 14 seconds" is getting old. With players now, it's all about dribbling out the clock, pulling up for a three, or dunking the ball. Not much in-between games. And that's just as important.</div>Grant Hill was never going to develop a 3-point shot, if he had, he would have developed it by now. Usually when players are injured, are when they develop their long range shooting better, and Grant Hill never developed that long range shooting even up until this season. He was never going to get much better at shooting than what he is now. Besides being more adept at the mid range shot, there really isn't much he is better at than Lebron James. As a one on one defender, he was a bit better, but Grant Hill really didn't shut anyone down as a defender. He just made people work harder, much the same way Lebron James does. As for smarts, I didn't say he was smarter at this time than Grant Hill was, I said he was almost as smart. He know's how to read and where to pass to just as well as what Grant Hill was able to, Lebron James is just as good at reading passing lanes and being able to fill them. Besides a mid range game, there isn't anything you have really said as to why he was better then, as what Lebron is now. Lebron James has proven he can carry a team on his back, farther than what Grant Hill was able to, with less offensive options on his team than Grant Hill had. The thing that makes him better, is once again how he can take over a game with his offense and impose his will on the game far better than Grant Hill was able to.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kobebryant_24OWNEDME @ Jun 9 2007, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>but this thread isn't about whether you like Lebron's style, it's about whether or not Lebron right now is better than prime hill. And you have not yet made an argument either way.</div>Who the hell are you to decide and/or restrict posting my thoughts??? Jackasses like you keep me away from message boards. Where do I state I don't like his style? I said I have criticisms of his play. How can a player so physically gifted NOT play well without the ball? He just stands there. Would a frickin list be easier for you to understand?Things Hill is better than James thanlaying without the ball-all-around defensively (though, neither spectacular)-consistent mid-range jumpshot (by a gigantic margin)I consider passing equal. LeBron has a slight edge in rebounding, 3-pt shot, and getting to the rim.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Let Em Hear This @ Jun 10 2007, 03:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Who the hell are you to decide and/or restrict posting my thoughts??? Jackasses like you keep me away from message boards. Where do I state I don't like his style? I said I have criticisms of his play. How can a player so physically gifted NOT play well without the ball? He just stands there. Would a frickin list be easier for you to understand?Things Hill is better than James thanlaying without the ball-all-around defensively (though, neither spectacular)-consistent mid-range jumpshot (by a gigantic margin)I consider passing equal. LeBron has a slight edge in rebounding, 3-pt shot, and getting to the rim.</div>Hill played better without the ball because he had actual PG's to handle the ball, and the defense also never focused on him like they do with LeBron. LeBron has a lot more pressure on him than Hill ever had.Agree defensively.It doesn't matter if he had a more consistent mid range jumper as since his 2nd season, Bron has scored more on better FG % from the field and from 3. Bron has always been a more dominant scorer than Hill, and a player who is much more suited to carry a team throughout regular season than Hill. I feel that Bron is a better playmaker than Hill, and the fact that in Hill's only season that he carried a large scoring load, his APG dipped to 5.2. Bron is simply a better player than Hill was, if not for anything else but he is more dominant. He is a better leader and his skills are much more suited to carrying a team than Hill.
