Is Grant Hill Hall of Fame bound?

[Smoke117]

The reason that Grant is similar to Dr. J is the fact that they were legit number one Batman options. Something Pip NEVER was. G Hill was way more willing to put a team on his back that Pip ever was scoring wise. Doc and Hill were freakish athletes and very smooth with that. Grant just didn't get to do it as long as Doc due to the injuries. Grant also had the point forward capabilities of Scottie Pippen as well, something Doc didn't have. Thus Grant combined the two in one. The only thing Pip had in common with Doc was the fact they were freakish athletes. Over than that, Pip and Doc didn't have much in common. Doc was a true Batman, while Pip was a true Robin. G Hill was considered a Batman, but probably not quite on the level of Doc. Cause Grant got hurt when he should have been really getting into his prime. And he had point forward skills of Pip along with.

The reasons I pointed out are why Hill did redefine the SF spot. Pip did too however. Pip combined Dr. J type athletic ability or with point forward skills. But Pip was never a Batman or true number one option. Grant Hill added that scoring takeover ability that Pip didn't exhibit consistently enough. Therefore, Hill did redefine the SF spot. And now Bron is taking what Hill did to sick levels. Bottom line is Doc and Hill were Batman while Pip was always a Robin.

Pippen was Batman enough to lead his team to 55 (while missing those 10 games they went 4-6) wins and 7 games in the 2nd round (which they should have won if not for a bullshit call) vs the eventual team who lost in the finals in 7 games. He did a hell of a lot more as the "batman" than Hill ever did in ONE season. And no, sorry, Hill never had Pippen's ability as a PG. He was just frankly allowed to do whatever he pleased in Doug Collins offense. As I said in my post, you replace Hill with Pippen and Pippen would average around 9apg given that much freedom.

[bizil]

Pippen was Batman enough to lead his team to 55 (while missing those 10 games they went 4-6) wins and 7 games in the 2nd round (which they should have won if not for a bullshit call) vs the eventual team who lost in the finals in 7 games. He did a hell of a lot more as the "batman" than Hill ever did in ONE season. And no, sorry, Hill never had Pippen's ability as a PG. He was just frankly allowed to do whatever he pleased in Doug Collins offense. As I said in my post, you replace Hill with Pippen and Pippen would average around 9apg given that much freedom.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda don't mean nothing. Sure Pip got the Bulls to 55 wins. But that team needed more scoring to reach that next level. Pip only average like a point more than he did WITH Mike! lol That simply doesn't cut it. The standard in Chicago was RINGS and not simply making the playoffs. They just came off a damn three peat. He had a tremendous coach in Phil Jackson and great system in the triangle. And the Bulls were a tremendous defensive team. I think a peak Hill would have got that Bulls team farther than Pip would have. Cause Hill would have stepped up his scoring more. That Bulls team simply needed more scoring punch. Replace MJ with Pip on that team. The Bulls would have made the Finals and even win another title. It wouldn't have came down to that bad call by the ref in the Knicks series.

For u to say Pip was more of a Batman than Hill ever was that season is frankly delusional. Hill's best seasons trumps Pip's best seasons. For u to say Pip clearly would have averaged 9 assists in place of Hill is a bold statement. When both guys were actually very comparable as passers. I would say Hill was the better passer. And Hill DIDN'T have the luxury to pass to the greatest player of all time! LOL Put Hill in place of Pippen on those Bulls teams and I feel they would have been even more dominant!

[Smoke117]

Shoulda, coulda, woulda don't mean nothing. Sure Pip got the Bulls to 55 wins. But that team needed more scoring to reach that next level. Pip only average like a point more than he did WITH Mike! lol That simply doesn't cut it. The standard in Chicago was RINGS and not simply making the playoffs. They just came off a damn three peat. He had a tremendous coach in Phil Jackson and great system in the triangle. And the Bulls were a tremendous defensive team. I think a peak Hill would have got that Bulls team farther than Pip would have. Cause Hill would have stepped up his scoring more. That Bulls team simply needed more scoring punch. Replace MJ with Pip on that team. The Bulls would have made the Finals and even win another title. It wouldn't have came down to that bad call by the ref in the Knicks series.

For u to say Pip was more of a Batman than Hill ever was that season is frankly delusional. Hill's best seasons trumps Pip's best seasons. For u to say Pip clearly would have averaged 9 assists in place of Hill is a bold statement. When both guys were actually very comparable as passers. I would say Hill was the better passer. And Hill DIDN'T have the luxury to pass to the greatest player of all time! LOL Put Hill in place of Pippen on those Bulls teams and I feel they would have been even more dominant!

Phil Jackson didn't want Pippen to start taking 20 shots are taking anything. Why do you think the 94 Bulls are better defensively than the 93 Bulls even though they lost Jordan? Because they concentrated more on that and Scottie especially became more of an actual ANCHOR real before it was more of a three headed dragon with: Jordan, Pippen, Grant. Pippen absolutely dominated defensively in 94. He didn't need to score 25+ppg to be a super star. God defense is so underrated. You act like he COULDN'T have averaged more points when it was just the fact that he just didn't shoot that much. He only took 17.8 shots in 94. It's not that he couldn't score more it's just that, that's not what they wanted him to do. Antoine Walker should be an example enough that ppg doesn't mean shit. That guy basically took as many shots as it took him to score his points. He took about 19 shots to average 20 points. Pippen just didn't shoot the ball that much. That hardly means he couldn't have. Besides before that 2000 season, Hill had never once averaged more points than Pippen did in 94 or 95.

[bizil]

Phil Jackson didn't want Pippen to start taking 20 shots are taking anything. Why do you think the 94 Bulls are better defensively than the 93 Bulls even though they lost Jordan? Because they concentrated more on that and Scottie especially became more of an actual ANCHOR real before it was more of a three headed dragon with: Jordan, Pippen, Grant. Pippen absolutely dominated defensively in 94. He didn't need to score 25+ppg to be a super star. God defense is so underrated.

See now u are putting words in my mouth. I never said D was underrated. Or that Pip wasn't a superstar. Because Pip was indeed a superstar. But John Stockton was also a superstar as well. Bob Cousy was a superstar. Rodman was a superstar. Bill Russell was a superstar. Jason Kidd was a superstar. I NEVER SAID PIP WASN'T A SUPERSTAR!

Jackson didn't want Pip doing than cause THAT'S NOT IN PIP'S NATURE! It's different when the number one priority is u. Pip had the luxury of MJ being there to make life easier, which is fine. Cause many teams had multiple HOFers on them. But when it's time for YOU to be the number one option and the legend or legends are gone, how are u gonna perform? Phil wouldn't have told MJ the same thing. Because MJ was the ultimate Batman AND the ultimate all around game all in one. MJ would put up 20 shots or 25 shots if that's what it took. But MJ was very effcient and can get 30 a night taking under 20 shots a night. BUT NO WAY IN HELL WOULD PHIL EVER TELL MJ NOT TO TAKE 20 SHOTS! He told Pip that cause he knew Pip's mentality that's why!

[Smoke117]

See now u are putting words in my mouth. I never said D was underrated. Or that Pip wasn't a superstar. Because Pip was indeed a superstar. But John Stockton was also a superstar as well. Bob Cousy was a superstar. Rodman was a superstar. Bill Russell was a superstar. Jason Kidd was a superstar. I NEVER SAID PIP WASN'T A SUPERSTAR!

Jackson didn't want Pip doing than cause THAT'S NOT IN PIP'S NATURE! It's different when the number one priority is u. Pip had the luxury of MJ being there to make life easier, which is fine. Cause many teams had multiple HOFers on them. But when it's time for YOU to be the number one option and the legend or legends are gone, how are u gonna perform? Phil wouldn't have told MJ the same thing. Because MJ was the ultimate Batman AND the ultimate all around game all in one. MJ would put up 20 shots or 25 shots if that's what it took. But MJ was very effcient and can get 30 a night taking under 20 shots a night. BUT NO WAY IN HELL WOULD PHIL EVER TELL MJ NOT TO TAKE 20 SHOTS! He told Pip that cause he knew Pip's mentality that's why!

No, he told him that because he knew that's not what was going to help the team. Okay, so your team just lost the best player in the league and if not the best player in the league, arguably the best scorer in the league, a guy who was averaging 30ppg on great efficiency for your team...and replaced him with Pete Myers. Is Scottie Pippen going out there and shooting 20-25 shots no matter how good he is going to replace that? Especially when he has no...well Scottie Pippen as his 2nd option? I don't know how old you are or how much you watched the 94 Bulls play, but they actually utilized the triangle offense in it's most purest form and played some of the best team ball I've EVER seen. This is why I hate people (and i'm not talking about you, you're obviously smarter than that) that just look at ppg and go wow that guys good. One season Antoine Walker averaged 23.4ppg...yet needed 21.2 shots to do that...lol...if Pippen had taken 21.2 shots in 94 he probably would have averaged somewhere around 26pts. Yet because he Walker actually averaged more points than him for an entire season does that make him a better scorer? OF COURSE NOT, because the clown was just chucking away. You have to understand that Scottie had to expend as much energy on the defensive end as he did on the offensive end (especially in 95...which was when they used to say that he looked too tired to finish teams off offensively because of how HARD HE PLAYED DEFENSIVELY...tell me ONE OTHER SUPERSTAR YOU EVER HEARD THEM SAY THAT ABOUT?) without Michael being there. The reason why Michael can't be better defensively than Scottie is because he NEVER was close to as dominant as Pippen was in 94 and especially 95 and just plain couldn't legitimately anchor a defense like Pippen did in 94 and 95 as a perimeter player.

Hell Phil Jackson and Michael Jordan have said themselves that Scottie Pippen could go out there and there and score 30 points every game, that he was that talented. Over glorifying teammates and someone you coached? Probably somewhat? But it's been stated before that Phil pretty much said that he never really wanted Scottie to take more than 15-17 shots a game because he wanted him to set up his teammates and do other things and not be preoccupied with scoring the ball.

[L.Kizzle]

shouldn't be


never got out of first round as the man

So is Baron Davis a HoF'er? He's been out the first round many of times ...

[Lebron23]

He probably will, but this is why I just do not like how people get into the hall. I dont think he really doesn't deserves to be in. He had a nice college career and a good 5-6 years in the NBA, but to me that shouldn't be enough to get in. Had he not been injured, he would have been a lock in the hall. I dont even think Chis Mullin should be in. I wish the Hall was more exclusive. But based on how players are inducted, Hill certainly has a good chance.

This is the basketball hall of fame. By the way the NBA needs to have their own hall of fame ceremonies.

[bizil]

This is the basketball hall of fame. By the way the NBA needs to have their own hall of fame ceremonies.

Yes indeed! The L needs its own Hall of Fame. Baseball and football don't have this problem at all. If the NBA had its own HOF, guys like Walton for example shouldn't be in. Even though Bill was a HOF type talent, he simply wasn't good long enough. For guys like a Dominique or Reggie Miller not to be a first ballot HOFer is a travesty. The NBA needs to go ahead and have its own Hall.

[Meticode]

they will bullshit his way in... similar to Yao, something like, nicest player offcourt.

I don't feel they will need to bullshit his way in. He had a great college career and was a NBA star until his injury, after that he was a solid NBA player.

[Meticode]

If Grant Hill makes it, then so should Vince Carter.

Did Vince Carter win two college titles?

[L.Kizzle]

Yes indeed! The L needs its own Hall of Fame. Baseball and football don't have this problem at all. If the NBA had its own HOF, guys like Walton for example shouldn't be in. Even though Bill was a HOF type talent, he simply wasn't good long enough. For guys like a Dominique or Reggie Miller not to be a first ballot HOFer is a travesty. The NBA needs to go ahead and have its own Hall.

You know why they don't have this problem, cause America is the only place those sports really get played at.

It's sort of like wrestling, there is only a WWE Hall of Fame I believe, no (Wrestling) Hall. So if Vince doesn't like you, well, tough luck.

[bizil]

No, he told him that because he knew that's not what was going to help the team. Okay, so your team just lost the best player in the league and if not the best player in the league, arguably the best scorer in the league, a guy who was averaging 30ppg on great efficiency for your team...and replaced him with Pete Myers. Is Scottie Pippen going out there and shooting 20-25 shots no matter how good he is going to replace that? Especially when he has no...well Scottie Pippen as his 2nd option? I don't know how old you are or how much you watched the 94 Bulls play, but they actually utilized the triangle offense in it's most purest form and played some of the best team ball I've EVER seen. This is why I hate people (and i'm not talking about you, you're obviously smarter than that) that just look at ppg and go wow that guys good. One season Antoine Walker averaged 23.4ppg...yet needed 21.2 shots to do that...lol...if Pippen had taken 21.2 shots in 94 he probably would have averaged somewhere around 26pts. Yet because he Walker actually averaged more points than him for an entire season does that make him a better scorer? OF COURSE NOT, because the clown was just chucking away. You have to understand that Scottie had to expend as much energy on the defensive end as he did on the offensive end (especially in 95...which was when they used to say that he looked too tired to finish teams off offensively because of how HARD HE PLAYED DEFENSIVELY...tell me ONE OTHER SUPERSTAR YOU EVER HEARD THEM SAY THAT ABOUT?) without Michael being there. The reason why Michael can't be better defensively than Scottie is because he NEVER was close to as dominant as Pippen was in 94 and especially 95 and just plain couldn't legitimately anchor a defense like Pippen did in 94 and 95 as a perimeter player.

Hell Phil Jackson and Michael Jordan have said themselves that Scottie Pippen could go out there and there and score 30 points every game, that he was that talented. Over glorifying teammates and someone you coached? Probably somewhat? But it's been stated before that Phil pretty much said that he never really wanted Scottie to take more than 15-17 shots a game because he wanted him to set up his teammates and do other things and not be preoccupied with scoring the ball.

The main difference Pip had on MJ was the size to defend some PF's. Or a big ass PG like Magic at 6'9. I will give u that. But in terms of guarding PG, SG, and most SF's, MJ was just as good as Pip. And the bottom line is that Bulls team that Pip led needed more scoring on it. Let's say a Mitch Richmond got on the Bulls somehow in MJ's absence. Pip would have been cool averaging 22 cause Mitch would have chipped in maybe 22 points minimum. Then the Bulls still have a shot to make the Finals. The Bulls just needed some more punch that's all I'm saying. And to think this whole back and forth started JUST because I said G Hill had elements of Dr.J and Pip in his game all in one. The observation I made is not out of the realm of possibility at all. Especially when u say shades of Doc and Pip in G Hill's game.

[bizil]

You know why they don't have this problem, cause America is the only place those sports really get played at.

It's sort of like wrestling, there is only a WWE Hall of Fame I believe, no (Wrestling) Hall. So if Vince doesn't like you, well, tough luck.

Exactly right! Bball is unique cause of the big three sports, it's by far the most global. And the Naismith HOF tries to cater to international, college, and NBA. The NBA is the greatest bball league EVER! It shouldn't have to be dumbed down to accomodate other levels of bball.

U bring a great point about the WWE HOF! It's a total joke. To not have inducted the late great Randy Savage while he was alive reeked of something weird. Not having Savage in the Hall is like leaving out a Magic or Bird. Hogan was the MJ of wrestling. Which meant Savage HAD to be like the Magic or Bird.

[Cali Syndicate]

Exactly right! Bball is unique cause of the big three sports, it's by far the most global. And the Naismith HOF tries to cater to international, college, and NBA. The NBA is the greatest bball league EVER! It shouldn't have to be dumbed down to accomodate other levels of bball.

U bring a great point about the WWE HOF! It's a total joke. To not have inducted the late great Randy Savage while he was alive reeked of something weird. Not having Savage in the Hall is like leaving out a Magic or Bird. Hogan was the MJ of wrestling. Which meant Savage HAD to be like the Magic or Bird.

What about this guy?

[bizil]

What about this guy?

Hell ya Warrior too!