Grant Hill or Paul George

[Shade8780]

I didnt get to see Hill play but I heard he was very good and Ive seen his stats. PG has arguably been a top 3 player in the league this year though. Who's better?

[Lebron23]

Give me Grant Hill. But PG right now have the better team success than GH.

[plowking]

Penny Hardaway was another player in the similar mold as these two, and he was better than both.

[Alan Ogg]

Prime Grant Hill

21.5 ppg, 9 reb, 7 ast, 2 stl

[AintNoSunshine]

Even worse comparison than your other thread. Grant Hill was better.

[crunk-juice]

Prime Grant Hill

21.5 ppg, 9 reb, 7 ast, 2 stl


Pre-prime Paul George

24 ppg, 6 reb, 3.6 ast, 2 stl



not exactly sure who you were making a case for :confusedshrug:

[Shade8780]

Scary af that George is only 23 and is playing at this level.

[Alan Ogg]

Pre-prime Paul George

24 ppg, 6 reb, 3.6 ast, 2 stl



not exactly sure who you were making a case for :confusedshrug:

I'm picking Grant Hill. Not sure he even reached his peak. Before getting injured he put up

26 ppg, 6.5 reb, 5 ast, 1.5 stl

[poido123]

Grant Hill was a force man.

What Lebron was projected to be now, was what Grant Hill was supposed to be.

He could shoot, pass, rebound and do it all.

Before he got injured, he was on par with current Lebron minus the accolades.

Here's a few videos for guys who didn't see him much, first video is the best IMO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEeYFH-qlvk

http://cdn.tss.uproxx.com/TSS/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Boots-Guy.jpg



So if you think that Lebron is better than George(you should), then Hill was better in his prime.

[pauk]

Prime Grant Hill, he was essentially being the Lebron before Lebron before he got injured.

[East_Stone_Ya]

it's Grant Hill and btw it's a bad comparison

[crunk-juice]

I'm picking Grant Hill. Not sure he even reached his peak. Before getting injured he put up

26 ppg, 6.5 reb, 5 ast, 1.5 stl



see that's the thing, it depends on what Hill we are supposed to be considering.

I would never argue the George projects better than Hill projected. he was on his way to maybe being one of the best to play the game. Hill's years in Detroit were special.

[plowking]

Hill didn't reach his peak? Rubbish. He was 28 when he got injured. The majority of perimeter players have already had their best season by then. He wasn't getting much better either way.

Not to mention he wasn't great on the defensive side of the ball. Penny Hardaway could do everything Hill could do, and better. He was better offensively, a better passer, slightly worse rebounder, and a far better defender.

[crunk-juice]

Hill didn't reach his peak? Rubbish. He was 28 when he got injured. The majority of perimeter players have already had their best season by then. He wasn't getting much better either way.

Not to mention he wasn't great on the defensive side of the ball. Penny Hardaway could do everything Hill could do, and better. He was better offensively, a better passer, slightly worse rebounder, and a far better defender.


'slightly' worse rebounder? come on now.

[poido123]

Hill didn't reach his peak? Rubbish. He was 28 when he got injured. The majority of perimeter players have already had their best season by then. He wasn't getting much better either way.

Not to mention he wasn't great on the defensive side of the ball. Penny Hardaway could do everything Hill could do, and better. He was better offensively, a better passer, slightly worse rebounder, and a far better defender.

Hill was near on lebron's level now. I'm not kidding.

This thread should be Grant Hill v Lebron James as they were much more similar players.

Hill didn't have Shaq to distract opposing defenses like Penny did. Hill was a better player

You're wrong again about a player comparison, just like you were with Bosh v Rodman :facepalm

[fandarko]

Hill was near on lebron's level now. I'm not kidding.

This thread should be Grant Hill v Lebron James as they were much more similar players.

Hill didn't have Shaq to distract opposing defenses like Penny did. Hill was a better player

You're wrong again about a player comparison, just like you were with Bosh v Rodman :facepalm

Yeah, he was, but there's still a difference.
Hill was amazing, but he wasn't the defender Lebron is and he didn't have a three-point shot.
These are two important issues.

Penny Hardaway wasn't a point-forward like them two, but a pure point guard who could play 2 and 3 due to his size.

[poido123]

Yeah, he was, but there's still a difference.
Hill was amazing, but he wasn't the defender Lebron is and he didn't have a three-point shot.
These are two important issues.

Penny Hardaway wasn't a point-forward like them two, but a pure point guard who could play 2 and 3 due to his size.

I can go with that. Lebron is a better defender but not by lightyears...

I would say Hill was far more dynamic offensively than Lebron

[AintNoSunshine]

I can go with that. Lebron is a better defender but not by lightyears...

I would say Hill was far more dynamic offensively than Lebron

Aren't you leaving the forum? You don't want everyone to remember you as a moron do you?

[New World Order]

LeBron had the better man-to-man and help defender than Hill by a good margin. Another thing is when Hill had to be "the man" more and score upwards of 25ppg, his rebounding/assist stats fell some (still very nice). I don't think Hill could average 30 over a season. LeBron has already done that - twice.

[poido123]

Aren't you leaving the forum? You don't want everyone to remember you as a moron do you?

There's a retirement thread in the main forum. Instead of asking me something that has already been clarified, why not go read it? Pretty sure I said I'm staying here because I realise how many Heat fans hated me, and how much better that made me feel so I decided to stay :rockon:

[poido123]

LeBron had the better man-to-man and help defender than Hill by a good margin. Another thing is when Hill had to be "the man" more and score upwards of 25ppg, his rebounding/assist stats fell some (still very nice). I don't think Hill could average 30 over a season. LeBron has already done that - twice.

I can go with you on the defense point. But you think Hill was not capable to average over 30? I posted some vids up on an earlier page, see how more dynamic and explosive Hill was than Lebron on offense. I can see Hill averaging 30.

[Jailblazers7]

Hill was a GREAT player but the "he was on Lebron's level" stuff is just non-sense. That is not a disrespect to Hill at all but simply an acknowledgment of the fact that only 6-8 players have ever been at or around Lebron's level at their peak in NBA history.

[poido123]

Hill was a GREAT player but the "he was on Lebron's level" stuff is just non-sense. That is not a disrespect to Hill at all but simply an acknowledgment of the fact that only 6-8 players have ever been at or around Lebron's level at their peak in NBA history.

Hill might of been there, had his career not been derailed by injury. So yes, quite easily he could of been in the 6-8 discussion, many were calling him the next Jordan back then.

Show me where Lebron is better than Hill offensively. Hill is far more dynamic and creative offensively. Better finisher, better body control(no crab steps), better shooter and more explosive.

Defensively, Lebron is more versatile and better man defender.

[New World Order]

I can go with you on the defense point. But you think Hill was not capable to average over 30? I posted some vids up on an earlier page, see how more dynamic and explosive Hill was than Lebron on offense. I can see Hill averaging 30.

Hill only came "close" if you average his 1999-00 season of 25.8ppg and even then, it's not really close (if he was at 28-29 or whatever, fine, we can round up). Grant was basically a low 20ppg scorer with quasi-triple-double averages. At his statistical best, Hill was not a huge scorer and more like an ultimate all-around guy. Not having a good 3-point shot hurt Hill because his quickness was legendary. He worked on his mid-range game to gain more respect. Everybody feared his crossovers and quick first step. If Hill had a good 3-point shot, people would have had to check him even further back and open things up for his drive and passing. Sadly, he never really had that. I don't view Hill as being more "explosive" than LBJ. Hill scored less at his peak and on lower percentages to boot.

[IGOTGAME]

Hill might of been there, had his career not been derailed by injury. So yes, quite easily he could of been in the 6-8 discussion, many were calling him the next Jordan back then.

Show me where Lebron is better than Hill offensively. Hill is far more dynamic and creative offensively. Better finisher, better body control(no crab steps), better shooter and more explosive.

Defensively, Lebron is more versatile and better man defender.

this is just getting silly. Everyone knows I'm not the biggest Lebron fan but he was head and shoulders better than Grant ever was.

[poido123]

this is just getting silly. Everyone knows I'm not the biggest Lebron fan but he was head and shoulders better than Grant ever was.

That's cool.

And I'll be in the minority on this opinion...

Head and shoulders no. That is incorrect. It's close when comparing Hill's peak.

[poido123]

Hill only came "close" if you average his 1999-00 season of 25.8ppg and even then, it's not really close (if he was at 28-29 or whatever, fine, we can round up). Grant was basically a low 20ppg scorer with quasi-triple-double averages. At his statistical best, Hill was not a huge scorer and more like an ultimate all-around guy. Not having a good 3-point shot hurt Hill because his quickness was legendary. He worked on his mid-range game to gain more respect. Everybody feared his crossovers and quick first step. If Hill had a good 3-point shot, people would have had to check him even further back and open things up for his drive and passing. Sadly, he never really had that. I don't view Hill as being more "explosive" than LBJ. Hill scored less at his peak and on lower percentages to boot.

Had Hill really even reached his statistical peak? With better supporting cast like Lebron has, is it far fetched to think he could replicate the same stats?

Hill had more variety and was more dynamic, explosive(was also lighter which helped) on offense. Not saying Lebron couldn't score more(largely due to being big and fast, not footwork and fundamentals), just Hill had more ways to beat you and more ways to score.

[Mass Debator]

Grant Hill pretty easily as far as right now goes, but I don't think PG can reach Hill's level in an offense stand point. Grant Hill was such a capable ball handler it was terrifying to the opposition. I'll go as far as he was clearly a less athletic version of Lebron but more skilled with his footwork and ball handling acumen. Quicker than Bron but wasn't nearly as strong and as fast. By the way he shoots free throws, you can tell he clearly has put in work with great coaches and was disciplined at an early age. Very high IQ player. The only slight knock on him was his iffy jump shot from deeper range, but he's shown that he was a capable three point shooter during his run with the Suns.

And his comparison to Lebron? He wasn't as special when it came to being a physical specimen, but I feel like he was more determined. Lebron just outclasses him and everyone at his position in strength and overall size which makes him even harder to guard. I like to watch Hill more though.

And regarding Penny? Let me say that Grant Hill and Penny Hardaway are essentially Lebron and D-Wade in a smaller/slimmer frame. Hill and Penny just relied more on skills and were more polished. Hill would've benefited too from having Shaq and IMO is slightly greater than Penny overall. At the end of the day though, Lebron and Wade > Hill and Penny for the fact that they are more athletic. I can't stress enough how I think Penny and Wade resemble each other. The way they spin off the dribble to their step back and acrobatic layups...the way they utilize big men and even posterize the other team's big men...All 4 are great to watch.

[poido123]

Grant Hill pretty easily as far as right now goes, but I don't think PG can reach Hill's level in an offense stand point. Grant Hill was such a capable ball handler it was terrifying to the opposition. I'll go as far as he was clearly a less athletic version of Lebron but more skilled with his footwork and ball handling acumen. Quicker than Bron but wasn't nearly as strong and as fast. By the way he shoots free throws, you can tell he clearly has put in work with great coaches and was disciplined at an early age. Very high IQ player. The only slight knock on him was his iffy jump shot from deeper range, but he's shown that he was a capable three point shooter during his run with the Suns.

And his comparison to Lebron? He wasn't as special when it came to being a physical specimen, but I feel like he was more determined. Lebron just outclasses him and everyone at his position in strength and overall size which makes him even harder to guard. I like to watch Hill more though.

And regarding Penny? Let me say that Grant Hill and Penny Hardaway are essentially Lebron and D-Wade in a smaller/slimmer frame. Hill and Penny just relied more on skills and were more polished. Hill would've benefited too from having Shaq and IMO is slightly greater than Penny overall. At the end of the day though, Lebron and Wade > Hill and Penny for the fact that they are more athletic. I can't stress enough how I think Penny and Wade resemble each other. The way they spin off the dribble to their step back and acrobatic layups...the way they utilize big men and even posterize the other team's big men...All 4 are great to watch.


Great post :applause:

[Nick Young]

Grant Hill was like Lebron who relied on skill to score instead of strength, traveling and gifted freethrows like Lebron does.

[VIntageNOvel]

Grant Hill was a force man.

What Lebron was projected to be now, was what Grant Hill was supposed to be.

He could shoot, pass, rebound and do it all.

Before he got injured, he was on par with current Lebron minus the accolades.

Here's a few videos for guys who didn't see him much, first video is the best IMO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEeYFH-qlvk

http://cdn.tss.uproxx.com/TSS/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Boots-Guy.jpg



So if you think that Lebron is better than George(you should), then Hill was better in his prime.

true, uninjured grant hill = lebron now

grant hill, CP, and bynum are the player that sadly we wont ever see how good they are without injury

[K Xerxes]

Grant Hill is basically like a super LeBron-lite, if that makes sense. He was the all round player LeBron is, but a worse defender and not as effective in scoring (20-25ppg instead of 25-30)

Great great great player. This comparison is stupid, George isn't anywhere near that now. He was also never on this LeBron's level (or for the past 5 years). Peak Lebron is just completely unique.

[Dro]

I'm taking Grant Hill..His ball handling is better than PG's and his overall ability to take over a game, although PG is getting close in that regard....

[plowking]

Hill might of been there, had his career not been derailed by injury. So yes, quite easily he could of been in the 6-8 discussion, many were calling him the next Jordan back then.

Show me where Lebron is better than Hill offensively. Hill is far more dynamic and creative offensively. Better finisher, better body control(no crab steps), better shooter and more explosive.

Defensively, Lebron is more versatile and better man defender.

Again with the general statements.:oldlol:

That's all you got bro. No. He isn't more creative offensively, hence why Lebron is far more efficient and a larger scorer. Hes not a better finisher than Lebron, who in fact might be the best ever. Better body control? Based on what? Better shooter? Nope, not close. Hill wasn't a better shooter in his later days when he couldn't rely on his athleticism, let alone back then.
More explosive? :oldlol: Okay. Idiot.

The fact you think Hill was close to Bron as a player. :oldlol:
Replicating the same stats with a similar cast? Lets see him get 66 wins with the shitty Cleveland teams Bron had.


Hill was near on lebron's level now. I'm not kidding.

This thread should be Grant Hill v Lebron James as they were much more similar players.

Hill didn't have Shaq to distract opposing defenses like Penny did. Hill was a better player

You're wrong again about a player comparison, just like you were with Bosh v Rodman

:oldlol:

More dumb shit from you.

Yeah, Penny really struggled without Shaq.
Shaq missed 30 games in the 96 season, and Orlando went on to win 60 games. That's the major low post presence gone missing, and Penny gets them to 60 wins. That's a team of Horace Grant, Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson with some no name center replacing Shaq that I can't remember getting 60 wins.

Penny is closer to Lebron than Hill will ever be. Hill wasn't close to sniffing Lebron's stats or impact on the court, either side of the ball.
Its why Penny was the one getting all NBA first team nods over Hill.

[poido123]

Again with the general statements.:oldlol:

That's all you got bro. No. He isn't more creative offensively, hence why Lebron is far more efficient and a larger scorer. Hes not a better finisher than Lebron, who in fact might be the best ever. Better body control? Based on what? Better shooter? Nope, not close. Hill wasn't a better shooter in his later days when he couldn't rely on his athleticism, let alone back then.
More explosive? :oldlol: Okay. Idiot.

The fact you think Hill was close to Bron as a player. :oldlol:
Replicating the same stats with a similar cast? Lets see him get 66 wins with the shitty Cleveland teams Bron had.



:oldlol:

More dumb shit from you.

Yeah, Penny really struggled without Shaq.
Shaq missed 30 games in the 96 season, and Orlando went on to win 60 games. That's the major low post presence gone missing, and Penny gets them to 60 wins. That's a team of Horace Grant, Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson with some no name center replacing Shaq that I can't remember getting 60 wins.

Penny is closer to Lebron than Hill will ever be. Hill wasn't close to sniffing Lebron's stats or impact on the court, either side of the ball.
Its why Penny was the one getting all NBA first team nods over Hill.


You are becoming too much of Lebron homer for me to even bother with a discussion with you. You literally argue everything in favour of Lebron, no matter who is up against him :facepalm:

How good do you think Grant Hill's supporting casts were back then? Nothing better than what Lebron had in Cleveland, Hill like Lebron would carry his team into the playoffs, don't get ahead of yourself. Detroit had Allan Houston in his first 2 years before he became a solid player, an older Joe Dumars past his best, Lindsey Hunter? Not much at all, where's Hill's amazing supporting cast? No different to Lebron's Cleveland years.

Hill was better than Penny, not just me saying that go google search some forums and you will see who is favoured. Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson weren't bad, Horace Grant was still in his prime in 96.

LOL at your comment that Lebron is a bigger scorer and more efficient, therefore he is a more dynamic scorer :facepalm That right there shows me how clouded and dumb you can be.

[Hoopz2332]

Hill was somewhat like lebron but then again he wasn't. The same way Igoudala is somewhat similar to lebron but obviously isn't. lebron is/was much better offensive player than Hill and obviously a better defensive one.

[SamuraiSWISH]

If you replaced prime Hill for George on the current Pacers, I believe they get better. Possibly exceptionally, too.

Hill was a great ball handler, very intelligent, could run an offense and distribute as a true LeBron-esque Point Forward. It would make a very good contending Pacers team, potentially great.

Put Granger at SF to space the floor with his long range shooting ability. And YIKES. Grant Hill's humble, friendly, team leadership abilities would cool down the knuckle headed nature of Stevenson, Granger, etc. That team would be killer.

G - G. Hill
G - L. Stevenson
F - D. Granger
F - D. West
C - R. Hibbert

That's championship material, IMO. In terms of individual level? I feel like P. George is kind of overrated defensively. So I definitely feel Hill is the superior offensive talent, while not being as far behind defensively as we are usually lead to believe.

So yes, prime Hill circa '94 - 2000 was absolutely the better player then the best we've seen of P. George through not even half of the 2014 season. Stop quickly overhyping players ISH. Let them become superstars organically. Prove it through consistency, and big performances in the playoffs ... when things matter.

[knicksman]

this is like poor mans version lebron vs poor mans kobe/jordan. Poor mans kobe is on the same level as lebron so thats all i need to know how overrated lebron is.:lol

[plowking]

Hill was better than Penny, not just me saying that go google search some forums and you will see who is favoured. Dennis Scott and Nick Anderson weren't bad, Horace Grant was still in his prime in 96.

LOL at your comment that Lebron is a bigger scorer and more efficient, therefore he is a more dynamic scorer :facepalm That right there shows me how clouded and dumb you can be.

This dude using yahoo answers as his back up. :oldlol:

You haven't got a clue as to the type of players Scott or Anderson were. :oldlol: If I was to show you a picture of both right now you probably would have to take a guess as to which one is which. Lucky for you, you have your and yahoo to help you out.

No, Hardaway was a better player than Hill. Hence why he was chosen over him on first teams, and not to mention with similar talent teams, he faired much better, even with his main offensive weapon being taken out of the line up and having to adapt to a different style of ball. He was just that much better at running the offense.

[50_40_90_]

Not having three point range does hurt Grant Hill's argument overall.

People talk about how he only averaged around 20-25 a game.

If he had a decent beyond the arc shot, his scoring average would have probably gained a few more points to around 27ish.

Paul George is still only 23 years old. It would be nice to bump this thread in five years time when he's had a few prime seasons under his belt.

[poido123]

This dude using yahoo answers as his back up. :oldlol:

You haven't got a clue as to the type of players Scott or Anderson were. :oldlol: If I was to show you a picture of both right now you probably would have to take a guess as to which one is which. Lucky for you, you have your and yahoo to help you out.

No, Hardaway was a better player than Hill. Hence why he was chosen over him on first teams, and not to mention with similar talent teams, he faired much better, even with his main offensive weapon being taken out of the line up and having to adapt to a different style of ball. He was just that much better at running the offense.


All you're doing is assuming Plowqueen like you always do. That and sucking on Lebron's wanger. I looked up other forums to see who was better since you go around saying stuff like 'Penny is better than Hill' so I went and saw for myself what the majority of people were saying...

Sorry man, most people went with Hill over Penny, deal with it. You're wrong yet again :oldlol:

Here's a few forums I found that rated Hill over Penny;

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77084

First page on Inside hoops looks pretty resounding :lol

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=164893

Here's Real GM

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=769926



So you see Plowking, it's not just me with this opinion. It seems to be the majority. Now what say you?

What shit are you gonna throw at me this time? That I don't know anything about basketball and all i know is plain and boring things? :rolleyes: You have a go at me for using google and doing the research, but then you will turn around and say I have no knowledge? I would think someone who practices reading and looking on the internet is in fact knowledgeable.

I don't give two fcks whether you think I saw Anderson or Scott play and for me to convince you otherwise would only seem futile. How can I prove it.

You go around telling everyone how wrong they are, yet just about every forum that I investigated, suggests that you are in fact wrong.

http://gifs.gifbin.com/022013/reverse-1367338010_jimmy_butler__deal_with_it.gif

[plowking]

You're using other peoples opinion to make your own. Not anything you watched or read about the two players. lol...

Hill gets the majority of his hype to this day on being called the next Jordan coming into the league, etc. Not to mention putting up stats on a lousy team for the most part of his career.
At the end of the day, Penny was a more multi faceted scorer who could step out and hit the shot, was a better post player despite being smaller, and a better defender. Not to mention he was a better passer and playmaker due to his penetration ability. He pretty much did everything better apart from rebound the ball.

[poido123]

You're using other peoples opinion to make your own. Not anything you watched or read about the two players. lol...

Hill gets the majority of his hype to this day on being called the next Jordan coming into the league, etc. Not to mention putting up stats on a lousy team for the most part of his career.
At the end of the day, Penny was a more multi faceted scorer who could step out and hit the shot, was a better post player despite being smaller, and a better defender. Not to mention he was a better passer and playmaker due to his penetration ability. He pretty much did everything better apart from rebound the ball.


But you don't listen to my opinion, so I satisfy the other which is everyone else?

Do yourself a favour and read what other people say about the comparison. Then you will learn why so many people disagree with you. I have watched them play, I can tell you that Penny was made to look a lot better than he is, with having Shaq around. Having all that space to work with can make anyone look good. Grant Hill didn't have that luxury. Hill was a Lebron clone with slightly worse defense, so you would be contradicting yourself by saying Penny was way better, since you claim Lebron to be GOAT :rolleyes:

LOL at the bolded. How is that any different to the way I analyse different players? You had a go at me about how simplified and unknowledgeable my posts are, yet what is that shit? :oldlol:

[hawkfan]

Grant Hill in his prime and it is not even close.

That said Paul George is a great player and he should eventually become a consistent, dominant player at his position.

[cos88]

george hill for me

[hawkfan]

Paul George is still only 23 years old. It would be nice to bump this thread in five years time when he's had a few prime seasons under his belt.

In five years time, this would be a fair comparison.

Right now, no way.

[plowking]

But you don't listen to my opinion, so I satisfy the other which is everyone else?

Do yourself a favour and read what other people say about the comparison. Then you will learn why so many people disagree with you. I have watched them play, I can tell you that Penny was made to look a lot better than he is, with having Shaq around. Having all that space to work with can make anyone look good. Grant Hill didn't have that luxury. Hill was a Lebron clone with slightly worse defense, so you would be contradicting yourself by saying Penny was way better, since you claim Lebron to be GOAT :rolleyes:

LOL at the bolded. How is that any different to the way I analyse different players? You had a go at me about how simplified and unknowledgeable my posts are, yet what is that shit? :oldlol:


Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about as usual. You throw out generalities and shit everyone on here says to sound as if you know what you're talking about. The fact is, you don't.

Penny didn't need Shaq. He wasn't made to look better, in fact, he flourished without Shaq. In a 22 game span in the first half of the year where Shaq sat out in their 60 win season, Penny averaged 26 points and 7 assists on 62% TS%. But yeah, it was Shaq's spacing that helped. :oldlol: Guess that's why he came 3rd that season in MVP voting behind Jordan and Malone. Because he needed Shaq and all. :oldlol:
Your general BS statements that don't really say shit get you caught out. You fall into the same category as that andgar poster. Looks like you're saying a lot, but you really aren't saying shit.

As for the Lebron reference which I don't even care for, Penny was actually the one that plays more like Lebron. Penny's passing and vision is closer or equal to that of Lebron where as Hill isn't on that level.
I don't need to read peoples opinions on the matter. I'm talking about two of my favorite players ever here, who I've seen countless amounts of. At one point I did think Hill was better, mainly because as a kid you put numbers together and see who can accumulate more while playing. But Penny was just flat out better if you actually saw them play.

And Hill was not a Lebron clone with slightly worse defense. Hill himself will tell you he wasn't a good defender. He was regularly called out for it back in the day due to being too passive on that side of the ball. Penny was regarded as a good defender, who was exceptionally good at using his length and feet in the paint. Not to mention he got out in the passing lanes. Jordan, your lover boy even praised him for his efforts on that side of the ball.

Prime for prime, Penny was better. He was better in the post, better shooter, better playmaker, better scorer, more efficient, better perimeter defender and an excellent post defender. There really isn't much that Hill was better at. Hill doesn't have a season as good as Penny's 96 season. That is a fact. Not to mention, once you start talking about the playoffs, its a wrap in Penny's favor.

[poido123]

Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about as usual. You throw out generalities and shit everyone on here says to sound as if you know what you're talking about. The fact is, you don't.

Penny didn't need Shaq. He wasn't made to look better, in fact, he flourished without Shaq. In a 22 game span in the first half of the year where Shaq sat out in their 60 win season, Penny averaged 26 points and 7 assists on 62% TS%. But yeah, it was Shaq's spacing that helped. :oldlol: Guess that's why he came 3rd that season in MVP voting behind Jordan and Malone. Because he needed Shaq and all. :oldlol:
Your general BS statements that don't really say shit get you caught out. You fall into the same category as that andgar poster. Looks like you're saying a lot, but you really aren't saying shit.

As for the Lebron reference which I don't even care for, Penny was actually the one that plays more like Lebron. Penny's passing and vision is closer or equal to that of Lebron where as Hill isn't on that level.
I don't need to read peoples opinions on the matter. I'm talking about two of my favorite players ever here, who I've seen countless amounts of. At one point I did think Hill was better, mainly because as a kid you put numbers together and see who can accumulate more while playing. But Penny was just flat out better if you actually saw them play.

And Hill was not a Lebron clone with slightly worse defense. Hill himself will tell you he wasn't a good defender. He was regularly called out for it back in the day due to being too passive on that side of the ball. Penny was regarded as a good defender, who was exceptionally good at using his length and feet in the paint. Not to mention he got out in the passing lanes. Jordan, your lover boy even praised him for his efforts on that side of the ball.

Prime for prime, Penny was better. He was better in the post, better shooter, better playmaker, better scorer, more efficient, better perimeter defender and an excellent post defender. There really isn't much that Hill was better at. Hill doesn't have a season as good as Penny's 96 season. That is a fact. Not to mention, once you start talking about the playoffs, its a wrap in Penny's favor.


What kind of logic suggests that a player would flourish without Shaq? Who would say that :oldlol: No different to saying that Lebron would flourish if he was without Bosh and Wade, which he obviously didn't. Having star teammates will always help with taking the defense's attention away, especially Shaq who regularly commanded double teams.

Penny in 1996 had inferior numbers to Hill in reg season? Hill was more dominant in just about every category.

The '96 playoffs Penny played like 5 games and so did Hill? Penny's points average was high, but Hill had him beat in the rest of the categories. What kind of sample size is that anyway? 5 playoff games each? :lol But you make this big claim of how great Penny was in 96 :oldlol:

Penny was a better shooter, the rest is debatable, Hill better passer, better finisher, less flashy but more effective. And yes, you do have to take into account the fact that Penny played alongside Shaq, while Hill played in a rather mediocre team with opposing defenses focused in on him.


Yeah ok Plowqueen, you're one of the minority who says that Penny is more like Bron than Hill. But because you say it, it's right?

You don't believe in everyone elses opinions, yet it's the majority that are right 9 times out of 10 you dipshit :oldlol:

[Overdrive]

[...]gets the majority of his hype to this day on being called the next Jordan coming into the league, etc. Not to mention putting up stats on a lousy team for the most part of his career.


Doesn't that sound familiar? In 2000 it was rumored that Hill might join the Spurs. His injury ended them and the rebuilding Magic took the gamble. Imagine Hill winning rings his career would be viewed similar to Lebron, who wouldn't win MVPs over prime Duncan, prime Shaq and Jordan maybe over Malone and AI.

[plowking]

Doesn't that sound familiar? In 2000 it was rumored that Hill might join the Spurs. His injury ended them and the rebuilding Magic took the gamble. Imagine Hill winning rings his career would be viewed similar to Lebron, who wouldn't win MVPs over prime Duncan, prime Shaq and Jordan maybe over Malone and AI.

False, Lebron is more than likely guaranteed 3 MVP's either way. He got 2 of them while being on 66 win teams. The other on a 60+ win team.

Somehow AI, Duncan and Malone won over a prime Shaq, yet Lebron wouldn't despite being a better player. :oldlol:
Some logic went into that thought obviously. :oldlol:



What kind of logic suggests that a player would flourish without Shaq? Who would say that No different to saying that Lebron would flourish if he was without Bosh and Wade, which he obviously didn't. Having star teammates will always help with taking the defense's attention away, especially Shaq who regularly commanded double teams.

The fact is, he did. 26/7 on 62% TS%. And he was winning, hence why he got the MVP talk. Lebron did play well without Wade and Bosh, hence why he was winning MVP's. Now hes just a better player, hence why hes still winning MVP's.


Penny in 1996 had inferior numbers to Hill in reg season? Hill was more dominant in just about every category.


Hill wasn't close to as good as Penny in 95-96, hence why he wasn't selected to the first team, and Penny was.


The '96 playoffs Penny played like 5 games and so did Hill? Penny's points average was high, but Hill had him beat in the rest of the categories. What kind of sample size is that anyway? 5 playoff games each? But you make this big claim of how great Penny was in 96

The 96 playoffs are the playoffs of the 95-96 season. The last number represents the overall season. And I wasn't talking about a particular season, I was talking in general. Penny was considered the better playoff performer at the time.


Penny was a better shooter, the rest is debatable, Hill better passer, better finisher, less flashy but more effective. And yes, you do have to take into account the fact that Penny played alongside Shaq, while Hill played in a rather mediocre team with opposing defenses focused in on him.

Hill was not the better passer. Not a chance. Better finisher? What is this based on? Penny was a better player around the ring, and better on the break. How in the world are you going to call Hill a better finisher when Penny was the one shooting in the 50's percentage wise while taking more 3's. He was a beast in the post and around the ring.



Yeah ok Plowqueen, you're one of the minority who says that Penny is more like Bron than Hill. But because you say it, it's right?


Lame. You're getting murdered in this discussion. You can't bring a single piece of evidence to the table apart from generalities and name calling. You can't tell me anything about their games I don't already know. You can't tell me any specifics at the time that I don't already know. Know why? Because you don't know any of it.
You probably can't even remember the talk about Penny after the 95 playoff series against the Bulls.

[poido123]

False, Lebron is more than likely guaranteed 3 MVP's either way. He got 2 of them while being on 66 win teams. The other on a 60+ win team.

Somehow AI, Duncan and Malone won over a prime Shaq, yet Lebron wouldn't despite being a better player. :oldlol:
Some logic went into that thought obviously. :oldlol:




The fact is, he did. 26/7 on 62% TS%. And he was winning, hence why he got the MVP talk. Lebron did play well without Wade and Bosh, hence why he was winning MVP's. Now hes just a better player, hence why hes still winning MVP's.



Hill wasn't close to as good as Penny in 95-96, hence why he wasn't selected to the first team, and Penny was.



The 96 playoffs are the playoffs of the 95-96 season. The last number represents the overall season. And I wasn't talking about a particular season, I was talking in general. Penny was considered the better playoff performer at the time.



Hill was not the better passer. Not a chance. Better finisher? What is this based on? Penny was a better player around the ring, and better on the break. How in the world are you going to call Hill a better finisher when Penny was the one shooting in the 50's percentage wise while taking more 3's. He was a beast in the post and around the ring.




Lame. You're getting murdered in this discussion. You can't bring a single piece of evidence to the table apart from generalities and name calling. You can't tell me anything about their games I don't already know. You can't tell me any specifics at the time that I don't already know. Know why? Because you don't know any of it.
You probably can't even remember the talk about Penny after the 95 playoff series against the Bulls.


What have you told me that I don't already know? Except of course your opinion that your trying to state as facts :oldlol:

That Penny 'flourished' without Shaq in your opinion, but then you fail to acknowledge that he had the benefit of Shaq, which we all know that he regularly commanded double teams.

What facts have you brought up in this? That you 'believe' that Penny is better based on 1x 1st team selection when Hill didn't? Those sportwriters and analysts, the same ones who vote MVP's and we all know how accurate MVP's have been over the years :rolleyes:

You fail to mention that Grant Hill was on the NBA first team the very next year, while Penny was All NBA 3rd team. How convenient :lol The accuracy of those awards are not even worth mentioning, but of course you want to throw them around like they are sooo important :oldlol:

I didn't bring up evidence? Well there you go, have a look at that last paragraph :oldlol: I pointed out some stat facts in my last post, don't make up shit Plow.

Keeping in mind you have a bias towards heat, any player who's played for the Heat, you overrate the fck out of. Penny played his last season in Miami around the time you started becoming a fan of the Heat in 07.

[plowking]

What have you told me that I don't already know? Except of course your opinion that your trying to state as facts :oldlol:

That Penny 'flourished' in your opinion, but then you fail to acknowledge that he had the benefit of Shaq, which we all know that he regularly commanded double teams.

What facts have you brought up in this? That you 'believe' that Penny is better based on 1x 1st team selection when Hill didn't? Those sportwriters and analysts, the same ones who vote MVP's and we all know how accurate MVP's have been over the years :rolleyes:

You fail to mention that Grant Hill was on the NBA first team the very next year, while Penny was All NBA 3rd team. How convenient :lol The accuracy of those awards are not even worth mentioning, but of course you want to throw them around like they are sooo important :oldlol:

I didn't bring up evidence? Well there you go, have a look at that last paragraph :oldlol: I pointed out some stat facts in my last post, don't make up shit Plow.

Keeping in mind you have a bias towards heat, any player who's played for the Heat, you overrate the fck out of. Penny played his last season in Miami around the time you started becoming a fan of the Heat in 07.

Some more lame shit from you.

You didn't even know that Shaq was injured for a large chunk of the 95-96 season. You claim Penny benefited because of Shaq, yet he put up even better scoring numbers, on even better efficiency, and didn't lose anything when it came to the team getting wins. That's called putting the team on your back, and clearly not being made by any player.
I've shown you numbers, times, specifics. All you can do is say "Shaq is big, he made it easy".
If anything Shaq benefited from Penny. His dribble penetration set up Shaq for so many easy rolls, and simple finishes in the paint. He wasn't the post presence he was in LA, and actually got a lot of easy buckets from dishes in the paint and curl around passes, mainly from Penny on pick and rolls.

Just be honest, you wouldn't be able to pick Nick Anderson out if I put 5 pictures in front of you of a whole bunch of different Orlando players. You really are like andgar.
You'll write all this shit like "He was a good this, good that, not bad at this"... Then someone tells you otherwise who you actually semi get along with on here, and you'll change your attitude to the tune of "well yeah, but I meant it like this"...
It shows through enough in your Hill being a decent defender comments, or slightly worse than Lebron as you like to say. :oldlol:
He isn't close to holding a candle to Lebron's team defense, nor man to man. And hes not the defender Penny was, that's for sure. Go read some articles on Hill's defense and the comments that were made.
Keep sticking to your guns, despite being way off and wrong. :oldlol:

[Overdrive]

False, Lebron is more than likely guaranteed 3 MVP's either way. He got 2 of them while being on 66 win teams. The other on a 60+ win team.

Somehow AI, Duncan and Malone won over a prime Shaq, yet Lebron wouldn't despite being a better player. :oldlol:
Some logic went into that thought obviously. :oldlol:

Let's interchange Hill and Lebron and act like Lebron's suspect footwork and regular ballfumbling wouldn't get exposed under the old rules.
Lebron wouldn't get to 66 wins in the east from 95 to 98 as he'd share the Division with the Bulls and Pacers who were the two top contenders in the east something Lebron never had during his MVP years.

99 is up for grabs. 00 is Shaq's, Lebron has no influence on that playing in the east, still having to face the Pacers in his Division thus not getting to 66 Ws. Iverson's was a storyline MVP and the best Player in the league with the best stats couldn't win against him. Lebron's MVPs stem from stats, why should he win then? After 01 paralleling Lebron's current career path he'd join another team, unpredictable which.

You act like Lebron's career would still be exactly the same if he was drafted in 94.

[miles berg]

Penny Hardaway was another player in the similar mold as these two, and he was better than both.

Lol he wasn't close to as good as Hill.

[poido123]

Some more lame shit from you.

You didn't even know that Shaq was injured for a large chunk of the 95-96 season. You claim Penny benefited because of Shaq, yet he put up even better scoring numbers, on even better efficiency, and didn't lose anything when it came to the team getting wins. That's called putting the team on your back, and clearly not being made by any player.
I've shown you numbers, times, specifics. All you can do is say "Shaq is big, he made it easy".
If anything Shaq benefited from Penny. His dribble penetration set up Shaq for so many easy rolls, and simple finishes in the paint. He wasn't the post presence he was in LA, and actually got a lot of easy buckets from dishes in the paint and curl around passes, mainly from Penny on pick and rolls.

Just be honest, you wouldn't be able to pick Nick Anderson out if I put 5 pictures in front of you of a whole bunch of different Orlando players. You really are like andgar.
You'll write all this shit like "He was a good this, good that, not bad at this"... Then someone tells you otherwise who you actually semi get along with on here, and you'll change your attitude to the tune of "well yeah, but I meant it like this"...
It shows through enough in your Hill being a decent defender comments, or slightly worse than Lebron as you like to say. :oldlol:
He isn't close to holding a candle to Lebron's team defense, nor man to man. And hes not the defender Penny was, that's for sure. Go read some articles on Hill's defense and the comments that were made.
Keep sticking to your guns, despite being way off and wrong. :oldlol:



Care to answer the 1st all NBA team selection the next year point I made, or conveniently ignore that part :oldlol:

I'll conveniently ignore everything you said, while you go on and refute the fact that more people rate Hill as a better player. But somehow your opinion matters more than most? :rolleyes:

Shaq posted up and got his. No way Penny is responsible for Shaq's scoring, on a few plays? sure. But Shaq didn't need Penny's help then, he would still average what he did without Penny's assists. Shaq still played 2/3 of the season, lets not act like he was out for most of it. Cherry picking statements as per usual...

There you go overrating Lebron again, just can't help yourself :oldlol: Great man to man and team defender? Great team defender, above average man to man, poor off the ball defender. Can often lose his man off the ball, plays the passing lanes well though and run down blocks.

Andgar has taken you to pieces on Jordan threads and discussion. You got your ass handed to you and you're still bitter over it :rant :oldlol:

[Lebron23]

Let's interchange Hill and Lebron and act like Lebron's suspect footwork and regular ballfumbling wouldn't get exposed under the old rules.
Lebron wouldn't get to 66 wins in the east from 95 to 98 as he'd share the Division with the Bulls and Pacers who were the two top contenders in the east something Lebron never had during his MVP years.

99 is up for grabs. 00 is Shaq's, Lebron has no influence on that playing in the east, still having to face the Pacers in his Division thus not getting to 66 Ws. Iverson's was a storyline MVP and the best Player in the league with the best stats couldn't win against him. Lebron's MVPs stem from stats, why should he win then? After 01 paralleling Lebron's current career path he'd join another team, unpredictable which.

You act like Lebron's career would still be exactly the same if he was drafted in 94.

I think you need to STFU. Grant Hill was a 2nd round virgin when he played for the Pistons. He couldn't even beat the Dikembe Mutombo Led Atlanta Hawks. LBJ in Cleveland beat much better teams in the post season.

[Doranku]

I think you need to STFU. Grant Hill was a 2nd round virgin when he played for the Pistons. He couldn't even beat the Dikembe Mutombo Led Atlanta Hawks. LBJ in Cleveland beat much better teams in the post season.
:oldlol: He only beat one 50 win team in Cleveland. f*ck outta here with that.

[poido123]

I think you need to STFU. Grant Hill was a 2nd round virgin when he played for the Pistons. He couldn't even beat the Dikembe Mutombo Led Atlanta Hawks. LBJ in Cleveland beat much better teams in the post season.


Sad that you're a fan of the player before the team. Run along now Lebron stan.

[plowking]

Let's interchange Hill and Lebron and act like Lebron's suspect footwork and regular ballfumbling wouldn't get exposed under the old rules.
Lebron wouldn't get to 66 wins in the east from 95 to 98 as he'd share the Division with the Bulls and Pacers who were the two top contenders in the east something Lebron never had during his MVP years.

99 is up for grabs. 00 is Shaq's, Lebron has no influence on that playing in the east, still having to face the Pacers in his Division thus not getting to 66 Ws. Iverson's was a storyline MVP and the best Player in the league with the best stats couldn't win against him. Lebron's MVPs stem from stats, why should he win then? After 01 paralleling Lebron's current career path he'd join another team, unpredictable which.

You act like Lebron's career would still be exactly the same if he was drafted in 94.

Cool speculations and what ifs. Call me when you want to talk about stuff that's actually happened.

[Lebron23]

:oldlol: He only beat one 50 win team in Cleveland. f*ck outta here with that.
who cares?? The east was pathetic before the Celtics formed their own big three., but The wizards team with hughes, arenas, jamison, and the nets team with carter, Kidd, and Jamison >>> Dikembe Mutombo and steve Smith's Hawks.

Prime Grant Hill was an average playoffs performer.

[plowking]

Grant Hill, 15 games in the playoffs total as a member of the Pistons, and couldn't get to the second round until age 37. lol...

But nah, clearly better than Penny who led his team to 60 wins with the absence of Shaq for pretty much half the season. Not to mention was a major factor in the only team that knocked out the Jordan Bull's in the playoffs.

[Lebron23]

Grant Hill, 15 games in the playoffs total as a member of the Pistons, and couldn't get to the second round until age 37. lol...

But nah, clearly better than Penny who led his team to 60 wins with the absence of Shaq for pretty much half the season. Not to mention was a major factor in the only team that knocked out the Jordan Bull's in the playoffs.
This

Hill was not even a better playoffs performer than Prime T-Mac.

[Overdrive]

Cool speculations and what ifs. Call me when you want to talk about stuff that's actually happened.

You argued Lebron would've won 3 MVPs back then. You've got to prove that.

[poido123]

Cool speculations and what ifs. Call me when you want to talk about stuff that's actually happened.


A majority of people rate Grant Hill as a better player than Penny Hardaway. You can bark all you like on a forum, it aint gonna change that :oldlol:

The problem with you is Plowking, your 'facts' are often opinion, most people don't agree with you on your opinion, but you want to go around tellin everybody they are wrong?

Like this thing about Penny v Hill, you have conveniently left out facts that don't support your argument, but then accuse me of coming up with generalisations? I mean, I don't know about you, but I'd rather generalise and be right, than speculate a whole heap of stuff, leave out the facts, believe that your opinion is all that matters, I mean WTF are you smoking?

:biggums:

That's some ignorant, know-it-all BS right there :oldlol:

[plowking]

You argued Lebron would've won 3 MVPs back then. You've got to prove that.

How can I? You've just told me in your fantasy world that he wouldn't win as much and he has no hope. I guess I just can't. You've just got all the bases covered you clever kid.

[poido123]

Grant Hill, 15 games in the playoffs total as a member of the Pistons, and couldn't get to the second round until age 37. lol...

But nah, clearly better than Penny who led his team to 60 wins with the absence of Shaq for pretty much half the season. Not to mention was a major factor in the only team that knocked out the Jordan Bull's in the playoffs.


Quality of opponents, lack of quality team he was leading.

You want to point that out, but did Hill have Shaq? Hill with Shaq would be devasting in the playoffs, moreso than Penny was with Shaq.

You fck me off with your leaving out of facts. That Bulls team that year was a shadow of their normal self. Jordan came back in March with only a few months to get his feet under him after a long layoff. Don't pretend like that doesn't matter in your biased BS argument.

I remember an Anderson quote saying that MJ just wasn't MJ in that series...I can look it up if you don't believe me.

[poido123]

How can I? You've just told me in your fantasy world that he wouldn't win as much and he has no hope. I guess I just can't. You've just got all the bases covered you clever kid.


Plowking you got to admit when your wrong dude. You keep arguing, when the majority of people rate Hill higher, yet your having a go at me for being out of touch :oldlol:

[Lebron23]

Malone and Barkley won an MVP over Jordan in 1993 and 1997. And Lebron in 2008-09-2009-10 > Barkley and Malone.

[plowking]

Plowking you got to admit when your wrong dude. You keep arguing, when the majority of people rate Hill higher, yet your having a go at me for being out of touch :oldlol:

I'm not arguing with you, I'm teaching you.

You still haven't even refuted any of my points, where as I'm cleaning you up. All you keep saying is 'Shaq this, Shaq that, space this, space that'.
You still haven't explained to me how Penny got better in the absence of Shaq, and how he was able to lead his team to a great record despite the best player being injured. He couldn't possibly do that without Shaq. The very life force he feeds off of. :oldlol:

I'll wait. And most likely continue to wait, since you never really watched either play, did you? :oldlol:

[Trollsmasher]

I'm not arguing with you, I'm teaching you.

You still haven't even refuted any of my points, where as I'm cleaning you up. All you keep saying is 'Shaq this, Shaq that, space this, space that'.
You still haven't explained to me how Penny got better in the absence of Shaq, and how he was able to lead his team to a great record despite the best player being injured. He couldn't possibly do that without Shaq. The very life force he feeds off of. :oldlol:

I'll wait. And most likely continue to wait, since you never really watched either play, did you? :oldlol:
But he read about them on realgm tho'. That's like Chewbacca defense.

[poido123]

I'm not arguing with you, I'm teaching you.

You still haven't even refuted any of my points, where as I'm cleaning you up. All you keep saying is 'Shaq this, Shaq that, space this, space that'.
You still haven't explained to me how Penny got better in the absence of Shaq, and how he was able to lead his team to a great record despite the best player being injured. He couldn't possibly do that without Shaq. The very life force he feeds off of. :oldlol:

I'll wait. And most likely continue to wait, since you never really watched either play, did you? :oldlol:

I'll play your game this time.

I'll give credit, Penny played great basketball for the first few weeks of that season, won NBA player of the month during that stretch of play.

But is that a whole body of work to go by and say without question that Penny would always perform better if Shaq was out?

Does 20 odd games really give an accurate indicator that Penny played better whenever Shaq was injured? That's absurd.

What's to say that Shaq was out the whole year and the rest of the season after those games Penny started to struggle? Too many what ifs, and I though whatifs are what bothered you :confusedshrug:

But I want an answer to the All NBA 1st team thing you point out, but fail to mention the next year where Penny was left off the first team and Hill was right there :oldlol:

[poido123]

But he read about them on realgm tho'. That's like Chewbacca defense.

You belong in the junkpile of ISH posters.

I don't bother with what a braindead, Lebron obsessed stan would think.

[Overdrive]

I'm not arguing with you, I'm teaching you.

You still haven't even refuted any of my points, where as I'm cleaning you up. All you keep saying is 'Shaq this, Shaq that, space this, space that'.
You still haven't explained to me how Penny got better in the absence of Shaq, and how he was able to lead his team to a great record despite the best player being injured. He couldn't possibly do that without Shaq. The very life force he feeds off of. :oldlol:

I'll wait. And most likely continue to wait, since you never really watched either play, did you? :oldlol:

IIRC Penny didn't make it out of the first round without Shaq seither. Not a knock on him though I think they've been both about equal with different strengthes but equal hype.

[Purch]

Penny Hardaway was another player in the similar mold as these two, and he was better than both.
bull.