Prime Grant Hill vs. current Carmelo Anthony

[StateOfMind12]

Who do you guys think was the better player? I feel like making a good comparison out there since someone made a terrible comparison with current Durant and Prime Tmac and we all obviously know Durant was clearly better than prime Tmac so here is a comparison that is actually somewhat close.

Who do you guys think was the better player?

[Velocirap31]

I've never seen prime Grant Hill to be honest. No idea.

[LABean]

Would take Grant Hill easily.

[pauk]

Prime Grant Hill... just a MUCH better all-round/overall player... seen him live at this best, he was kindof like a mix between Lebron-Pippen-Penny....

[tmacman]

Who do you guys think was the better player? I feel like making a good comparison out there since someone made a terrible comparison with current Durant and Prime Tmac and we all obviously know Durant was clearly better than prime Tmac so here is a comparison that is actually somewhat close.

Who do you guys think was the better player?
So angry this one

:roll:

[blablabla]

melo

[Sarcastic]

Prime Grant Hill... just a MUCH better all-round/overall player... seen him live at this best, he was kindof like a mix between Lebron-Pippen-Penny....

He was a better passer. That's about it. Rebounding is even, and scoring is pretty heavily in Melo's favor.

[InfiniteBaskets]

He was a better passer. That's about it. Rebounding is even, and scoring is pretty heavily in Melo's favor.

I think Grant Hill is a more versatile player though, and that counts for something. Melo is more one dimensional. You know what you get with Melo, you know exactly what to use him for. If you ask him to do something else, problems are going to occur ala D'Antoni.

I don't remember how much hype Grant Hill got in his prime but when he shared ROY honors with J.Kidd, people had him labeled as the next big thing. I'd equate prime Hill to a more soft-spoken LeBron, without the once in a generation athleticism and ego.

[LBJMVP]

Prime Grant Hill > Carmelo Anthony
Prime T-Mac > Kevin Durant

[Dbrog]

Prime Grant Hill...dude was throwing up trip dubs (or close to) like they were nothing + good defense.

[Sarcastic]

I think Grant Hill is a more versatile player though, and that counts for something. Melo is more one dimensional. You know what you get with Melo, you know exactly what to use him for. If you ask him to do something else, problems are going to occur ala D'Antoni.

I don't remember how much hype Grant Hill got in his prime but when he shared ROY honors with J.Kidd, people had him labeled as the next big thing. I'd equate prime Hill to a more soft-spoken LeBron, without the once in a generation athleticism and ego.

I think people have forgotten how good Carmelo has been in his career. He went to a 17 win Nuggets team and took them to the playoffs every year of his career. A lot of people think he should have been the ROY over Lebron in their rookie years as well.

[jbryan1984]

Prime Grant Hill no question. Grant Hill at one time, was arguably the face of the NBA. And Melo, I would have to really think about even considering him a top 10 player today.

[Sarcastic]

Prime Grant Hill no question. Grant Hill at one time, was arguably the face of the NBA. And Melo, I would have to really think about even considering him a top 10 player today.

He never became the face. He was one of many "next Jordans" that the league had. His prime was the late 1990s, when Jordan was still playing. Unfortunately for him, he got hurt early in the 2000s, and never filled "his" shoes.

Let's not forget playoffs either. Melo took his team to the WCF by the age of 24. Hill was getting swept almost every year when he was young.

[midatlantic09]

Grant Hill, easily. Melo is overrated.

[Rake2204]

He never became the face. He was one of many "next Jordans" that the league had. His prime was the late 1990s, when Jordan was still playing. Unfortunately for him, he got hurt early in the 2000s, and never filled "his" shoes.
I think it's fair to say Grant Hill was one of the faces of the NBA from 1994 until his injury in 2000. He arrived with a bang and may have led the league in All-Star votes as a rookie. He was popular and he was seemingly a great guy, appearing on endless amounts of commercials and magazine covers. None of that has to do with his skill, mind you, I'm just saying, the NBA definitely tried to make him the face (or at least one of the faces) fans would see when the topic of NBA basketball popped up.

In terms of skill and who I'd prefer, I'd select Grant Hill. I feel to say Grant Hill "only" had an advantage over Carmelo Anthony in the passing department would be similar to saying Hakeem Olajuwon only had the advantage over Dikembe Mutombo in the scoring department. There might be some truth to such a statement, but passing is not a small aspect to claim superiority upon. Hill's passing, in combination with his other skills, are what placed him above so many other players at the time.

I also just noticed the discussion pits a prime Grant Hill against current Carmelo Anthony. I feel this skews things even further in Hill's advantage. Just on play styles alone, in terms of how each player operates on the floor, I'd select Hill. On the flip side, even statistically, I'll take a guy who averages 20, 10, and 7 on 46% shooting over a guy who averages 22, 6, and 4 on 42% shooting.

In terms of intangibles, I feel Grant Hill was able to fit in with any team. He was similar to Jason Kidd in this regard. All-Around players tend to be able to step in and make something great happen somewhere at all times. I'm not sure I've always had a feeling Anthony was that malleable. There were never any distractions or issues with Hill. He was a guy people knew would always be there, putting in work, no matter what, without creating any issues - directly or indirectly.

[airchibundo507]

do you think those are Melo's yearly numbers or something? he has been injured the entire season.

[Rake2204]

do you think those are Melo's yearly numbers or something? he has been injured the entire season.
Fair point to make. I thought the initial comparison was between prime Hill and prime Anthony and I was still going to select Grant. I just went back at the last second and plugged in Carmelo's current '12 stats in place of his prime stats once I realized it was in comparison to current Melo. His '11 stats (26, 7, and 3 on 46% shooting) do not affect my opinion.

I think a player who is a dynamite scorer but just as much of a threat passing (Hill) is far more dangerous, effective, and beneficial to his team than a player whose primary goal is to gun quite effectively.

[LamarOdom]

He was a better passer. That's about it. Rebounding is even, and scoring is pretty heavily in Melo's favor.

Grant Hill averaged 9.8 rebounds in his second season, has Melo even averaged 7?

Offensivly Melo was much better but all round I would pick Hill.

[Dave3]

So angry this one

:roll:
He says "we all obviously know" despite the majority voting otherwise.

Delusion.

[InfiniteBaskets]

do you think those are Melo's yearly numbers or something? he has been injured the entire season.

Well OP did say Prime Grant Hill vs. Current Melo.

[Owl]

I think people have forgotten how good Carmelo has been in his career. He went to a 17 win Nuggets team and took them to the playoffs every year of his career. A lot of people think he should have been the ROY over Lebron in their rookie years as well.
Except he didn't ever play with that 17 win team.
The 3-8 (by minutes played) on the 02-03 team was
Junior Harrington
Donnell Harvey
Rodney White
Vincent Yarbrough
Nikoloz Tskitishvili
Ryan Bowen

Carmelo (in place of Juwon Howard as "star" and player of most minutes)
had
Andre Miller
Nene (retained having 2nd most minutes last year)
Voshon Lenard
Marcus Camby (playing 72 games rather than 29)
Earl Boykins
Jon Barry
Chris Andersen (slightly improved)

The notion that Melo was the primary reason for that teams improvement is ludicrous. They went from having 2 players who were fit and rotation worthy to 8.

Grant Hill. He was a proto LeBron. Not as good, not as strong but the same type of player. Waaay better than Carmelo.

[Rake2204]

Except he didn't ever play with that 17 win team.
The 3-8 (by minutes played) on the 02-03 team was
Junior Harrington
Donnell Harvey
Rodney White
Vincent Yarbrough
Nikoloz Tskitishvili
Ryan Bowen

Carmelo (in place of Juwon Howard as "star" and player of most minutes)
had
Andre Miller
Nene (retained having 2nd most minutes last year)
Voshon Lenard
Marcus Camby (playing 72 games rather than 29)
Earl Boykins
Jon Barry
Chris Andersen (slightly improved)

The notion that Melo was the primary reason for that teams improvement is ludicrous. They went from having 2 players who were fit and rotation worthy to 8.

Grant Hill. He was a proto LeBron. Not as good, not as strong but the same type of player. Waaay better than Carmelo.
I am in full agreement with your statements. I've been wrong about a lot of teams in my time, but my friend and I saw Denver's ascent coming from a mile away. We used to talk about it all the time and people would get all twisty faced when we mentioned what we thought about their future.

I guess it didn't exactly take a rocket scientist to recognize Juwan Howard's $20 million/year salary coming off the books in conjunction with their guaranteed top five pick in a loaded draft. Then again, we had bigger plans for Nikoloz. Still, we were mostly right.

[Sarcastic]

Take Carmelo off Denver in his rookie year, and that's about a 30 win team.

[get these NETS]

melo


hill was great all around player and more suited to be a secondary star...he just didn't have it in him to be what he was promoted as...a top tier alpha male player


not just my opinion, he never won a playoff series.....until a few years back with the suns( as a secondary player....)


put melo in a situation to be that alpha male player...and he flourishes....he's a great scorer....does other things competently for his position

[get these NETS]

the lebron comparison is WAY off......

lebron has justified ALL the hype about him....and lived up to every expectation that people had about him entering the league

all nba, all defense..led team of ymca players to the nba finals


grant hill was pippen with better offensive arsenal......which is pretty good....but he was more hype than game before the injury

[Living Being]

Melo is a more unstoppable scorer, but Grant Hill is the best overall...plus he's a better "glue" for a team than Melo.

[Xiao Yao You]

Grant was a special player. Anthony is just a high scoring small forward.

[Floppy]

melo


hill was great all around player and more suited to be a secondary star...he just didn't have it in him to be what he was promoted as...a top tier alpha male player


not just my opinion, he never won a playoff series.....until a few years back with the suns( as a secondary player....)


put melo in a situation to be that alpha male player...and he flourishes....he's a great scorer....does other things competently for his position
:biggums:

Oh I get it.

Nice guy = soft

[Lebron23]

Melo has the better NBA Career while Hill was the better overall player.

[Jotaro Durant]

Melo has the better NBA Career while Hill was the better overall player.
this and its only going to get better for carmelo.

[magic chiongson]

prime grant hill could do everything. give him lerbon's body and he'd be goat level by now

[Duncan21formvp]

Prime Grant Hill... just a MUCH better all-round/overall player... seen him live at this best, he was kindof like a mix between Lebron-Pippen-Penny....
Prime Hill no contest.

[Lebron23]

Prime Hill no contest.


He never won a playoffs series in Detroit.

[Rake2204]

He never won a playoffs series in Detroit.
I don't find that particularly relevant in this discussion. To reiterate, this is a discussion of Prime Grant Hill versus Current Carmelo Anthony. Comparing career arcs becomes an entirely different ballgame.

For the record, I'm not a huge fan of passing judgment on a player's entire game based on their team's success. At some point, it's up to the team being good. Sometimes teams won't succeed no matter how insanely awesome a single player may be (see Jordan scoring the most points in single playoff game history and still losing). Folks may see Detroit won 54 games in '97, but I always found that more amazing than expected. After Hill, their next in line was an old Joe Dumars, Lindsey Hunter, older Otis Thorpe, and Terry Mills. It's tough to expect playoff success when that's the lineup one is working with.

But again, I don't find that pertains to this discussion. If a person is someone who likes to judge individual ability heavily based off of playoff success, I suppose we'd have to wait and see what Current Carmelo does this year with a team that could be arguably more talented than any squad Hill ran with in Detroit. Key word is "arguably", for I am not trying to make any certain claims in that regard.

[plUto or bUst]

Carmelo is a system player who only thrives in an iso offense centered around him. Take him away from that and he'll pout and not play defense - just generally be ineffective.

Prime Grant Hill would thrive in any system. Much more versatile, could score, pass, rebound, play defense. Just a better all around player.

[kurple]

this and its only going to get better for carmelo.
or worse, at it has done this season

[jbryan1984]

Too many young ISHers only know of post injury Grant Hill.

[Xiao Yao You]

Too many young IShers buy into the Carmelo hype.

[WillC]

I find it incredible that some people think Carmelo Anthony is currently better than an in-his-prime Grant Hill.

Maybe the kids on this forum don't realise how good Grant Hill was.

Teams averaged less points in the 1990s due to the tougher defenses and the fact that defenders were allowed to hand check. Now, it is easier for players to score more freely.

Despite the tougher conditions, over a 5-year period between 1996 and 2000, Grant Hill averaged 21.9ppg, 8.1rpg, 6.5apg, 1.6spg and 0.6bpg on .476 FG%.

He was basically LeBron before LeBron.

Meanwhile, Carmelo Anthony should be compared to someone like Glenn Robinson - their style of play are much more comparable.

[GreatHILL]

prime grant hill was a triple double machine

[Nashty]

Prime Hill would be 2nd or 3rd best player in the league right now.

[get these NETS]

I don't find that particularly relevant in this discussion. To reiterate, this is a discussion of Prime Grant Hill versus Current Carmelo Anthony. Comparing career arcs becomes an entirely different ballgame.

For the record, I'm not a huge fan of passing judgment on a player's entire game based on their team's success. At some point, it's up to the team being good. Sometimes teams won't succeed no matter how insanely awesome a single player may be (see Jordan scoring the most points in single playoff game history and still losing). Folks may see Detroit won 54 games in '97, but I always found that more amazing than expected. After Hill, their next in line was an old Joe Dumars, Lindsey Hunter, older Otis Thorpe, and Terry Mills. It's tough to expect playoff success when that's the lineup one is working with.

But again, I don't find that pertains to this discussion. If a person is someone who likes to judge individual ability heavily based off of playoff success, I suppose we'd have to wait and see what Current Carmelo does this year with a team that could be arguably more talented than any squad Hill ran with in Detroit. Key word is "arguably", for I am not trying to make any certain claims in that regard.



as the top scorer/player for his team....hill accomplished jack shit in the playoffs


as the top scorer/player for his team..melo has accomplished more



any way you slice it, this is true

[get these NETS]

:biggums:

Oh I get it.

Nice guy = soft

nah...simplistic way of looking at it

duncan is a "nice guy"....nba couldn't have created a better player in terms of being just a regular dude..but duncan is a killer when the pressure is on...

[Bigsmoke]

Prime Hill would be 2nd or 3rd best player in the league right now.

he wasnt 2nd or 3rd best ever in his career so why would he be now?

[Teanett]

Prime Grant Hill no question. Grant Hill at one time, was arguably the face of the NBA.

bullshit.
he was good but never as good/popular as jordan, pippen, shaq, kobe, kg, duncan, iverson, carter

[ralph_i_el]

I didn't see prime Grant Hill so it's hard to say

[Nashty]

he wasnt 2nd or 3rd best ever in his career so why would he be now?

Because he could score, pass, rebound and play defense, his prime numbers were 22/8/7 on 48% shooting.

[StateOfMind12]

he wasnt 2nd or 3rd best ever in his career so why would he be now?
Because when Grant Hill was in his prime, there was Jordan, Malone, Shaq, Hakeem, etc. If anyone thinks that era was weaker than what the era is right now is kidding themselves. This is actually a very weak era and year for dominant/elite players.

We could change the thread title from to Prime Hill vs. Prime Melo but I think most people would still take Hill but this is what this thread is for.

[WillC]

bullshit.
he was good but never as good/popular as jordan, pippen, shaq, kobe, kg, duncan, iverson, carter

Oh.

I guess that's why he was the leading vote-getter in the All-Star Game then.

:facepalm

[fubu05]

or worse, at it has done this season

This could not be more wrong... who the eff looks back at a players career and remembers the *REGULAR SEASON*.. and not just their whole regular season but *ONE* -.-

If the Knicks somehow pull off some miracle run or some shit like that... you really think his career has been negatively cause he's struggled through ONE regular season -.- smh.

But yeah, Prime Grant Hill was a BEAST. Def better than any of Melo's years, but career wise Melo will probably end up the better player.

[knickswin]

it's kind of an unnatural comparison. melo should be compared to guys like bernard king and dominique wilkins. melo is a bit more of a point forward than those guys, but you can't compare him to guys like lebron, hill, pippen, and penny hardaway who could be de facto point guards.

[Teanett]

Oh.

I guess that's why he was the leading vote-getter in the All-Star Game then.

:facepalm

eh. white middle-class america voted for him- do you really believe he was more popular than michael jordan in 1996?

[WillC]

he was good but never as good/popular as jordan, pippen, shaq, kobe, kg, duncan, iverson, carter

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you? :facepalm

Here is Grant Hill's ranking in All-Star Game votes in various seasons:

1995 = 1st (in his rookie season)
1996 = 1st (ahead of Jordan...and everyone else for that matter)
1997 = 3rd
1998 = 2nd
1999 = 5th

[L.Kizzle]

he wasnt 2nd or 3rd best ever in his career so why would he be now?
Cause there is no Shaq, Hakem or Jordan now, that's why?

[Teanett]

You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you? :facepalm

Here is Grant Hill's ranking in All-Star Game votes in various seasons:

1995 = 1st (in his rookie season)
1996 = 1st (ahead of Jordan...and everyone else for that matter)
1997 = 3rd
1998 = 2nd
1999 = 5th

again, fukkface, DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE GRANT HILL WAS MORE POPULAR THAN MICHAEL JORDAN IN 1996???

[WillC]

again, fukkface, DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE GRANT HILL WAS MORE POPULAR THAN MICHAEL JORDAN IN 1996???

That's not the point.

You said Grant Hill was "never as popular" as players including Garnett and Duncan.

Absolute nonsense.

I just proved that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

[Teanett]

That's not the point.

You said Grant Hill was "never as popular" as players including Garnett and Duncan.

Absolute nonsense.

I just proved that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

just replying to the notion that hill was the face of the nba.
he sure wasnt during jordan's time, he wasnt during the 1st laker 3peat and he wasnt in 2004 when garnett won mvp.
so when was he the face of the nba? complete nonsense.

[WillC]

just replying to the notion that hill was the face of the nba.
he sure wasnt during jordan's time, he wasnt during the 1st laker 3peat and he wasnt in 2004 when garnett won mvp.
so when was he the face of the nba? complete nonsense.

Along with Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill was the most popular player in the NBA during Jordan's hiatus. That doesn't mean either player was the best; that title belonged to Olajuwon, Robinson or Shaq, depending on the day in question.

But Hill was certainly one of the faces of the NBA. He was the golden boy of the League.

I'm guessing you were too young to remember, right?

http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m561/Will23C1982/Slam%20Magazine/17.jpg

http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m561/Will23C1982/Slam%20Magazine/7.jpg

[veilside23]

is this a joke ??? oh its real.. Even if a regular grant hill before the injury.. He was the better player.. I wonder would a prime grant hill would have done.

[WillC]

By the way, for all the other youngsters like Teanett who never saw Grant Hill in his prime, here's a little homework for you. Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhd5SWS8u4Y

[Sarcastic]

A lot of revisionist history being told here.

Grant Hill was extremely popular because the NBA was searching the "next" player to fill Jordan's shoes when he retired. That's why he was the leading vote getter as a rookie in the All Star game. The NBA hype machine was in full effect.

However a lot of people felt he had underachieved for his first few years, as he never really established himself as "the man" for his team. At the beginning Joe Dumars was still in control, and the next few years he battled with Allan Houston for the title. People always questioned his scoring, and his drive to lead, as he was reluctant to take over games. It wasn't until 2000 when he scored like 26 ppg that people started to look at him as a leader. Then he got hurt, and we never got to see the Grant Hill that would lead his team.

On top of that, he was a poor shooter from the outside, especially from three point range. His mid range game was good, but no where near Carmelo Anthony's.

If you think he could everything, as some people are saying, go look up his 3 point percentages.

[airchibundo507]

you pick Carmelo over Hill as a franchise player for a contending team

Hill would be best utilized as a complementary Pippen type

[WillC]

A lot of revisionist history being told here.

Grant Hill was extremely popular because the NBA was searching the "next" player to fill Jordan's shoes when he retired. That's why he was the leading vote getter as a rookie in the All Star game. The NBA hype machine was in full effect.

However a lot of people felt he had underachieved for his first few years, as he never really established himself as "the man" for his team. At the beginning Joe Dumars was still in control, and the next few years he battled with Allan Houston for the title. People always questioned his scoring, and his drive to lead, as he was reluctant to take over games. It wasn't until 2000 when he scored like 26 ppg that people started to look at him as a leader. Then he got hurt, and we never got to see the Grant Hill that would lead his team.

On top of that, he was a poor shooter from the outside, especially from three point range. His mid range game was good, but no where near Carmelo Anthony's.

If you think he could everything, as some people are saying, go look up his 3 point percentages.

Grant Hill was a far superior slasher compared to Melo. And of course Hill was far less selfish; he was one of the best passing forwards of the last 20 years, in fact.

Meanwhile, Hill's team was shockingly bad. They had some of the worst starters in the league. Oliver Miller, Lindsey Hunter, Mark West, Grant Long. Good luck with that.

[Solid Snake]

Oh.

I guess that's why he was the leading vote-getter in the All-Star Game then.

:facepalm


This is a poor barometer for popularity when comparing between different positions. Think about the choices there were for East at Small Forward. There's certain players who gets less votes in a given position just because another player's fans will vote for them. In other words, some of Jordan's votes were taken away since some voters would've voted for their own player at SG. Whereas with SF that year, Grant Hill was THE default choice to make. Which is why he was the first player EVER to get over a million votes.

[Whoah10115]

You talk about revisionist history. Grant Hill was a near unanimous pick as a top 5 player in the league. Penny Hardaway had near the same sort of love before getting hurt.




Grant Hill was like Pippen, without the defense (which he somehow acquired in Phoenix) and with the scoring mentality.




Pippen was not a complimentary player, but maybe his style was. Grant Hill was not a complimentary player. With respect to Anthony, Grant Hill is the one you take. He was the best rebounding SF in the league too. The team's first playmaker, and a scorer. A lot like what Lebron did in Cleveland, but without some of the late-game point padding.

[Sarcastic]

Grant Hill was a far superior slasher compared to Melo. And of course Hill was far less selfish; he was one of the best passing forwards of the last 20 years, in fact.

Meanwhile, Hill's team was shockingly bad. They had some of the worst starters in the league. Oliver Miller, Lindsey Hunter, Mark West, Grant Long. Good luck with that.

Carmelo Anthony has never been on a team that was below .500. Grant Hill was on a 37 win team at age 25, that had Stackhouse, Joe Dumars, Theo Ratliff, and Lindsey Hunter.

[hitmanyr2k]

you pick Carmelo over Hill as a franchise player for a contending team

Hill would be best utilized as a complementary Pippen type


The only way I'd even consider choosing Melo over Hill or Pippen is if my team already has a good point guard. From what I've seen of NY's pg situation this year (aside from Lin's short run) I wouldn't even think twice taking Hill or Pippen over Carmelo. It's an instant upgrade...better point play, better defense, etc.

[Sarcastic]

The only way I'd even consider choosing Melo over Hill or Pippen is if my team already has a good point guard. From what I've seen of NY's pg situation this year (aside from Lin's short run) I wouldn't even think twice taking Hill or Pippen over Carmelo. It's an instant upgrade...better point play, better defense, etc.

Ok fine. Grant Hill is a better point guard than Carmelo Anthony. I can agree with that.

[NugzHeat3]

Carmelo Anthony has never been on a team that was below .500. Grant Hill was on a 37 win team at age 25, that had Stackhouse, Joe Dumars, Theo Ratliff, and Lindsey Hunter.
Those guys were traded for one another. He didn't have all of them at the same time. Stackhouse went from Philly because he wasn't a good fit next to AI and Philly wanted a defensive presence so Ratliff was a good choice.

You also mentioned Allan Houston was battling for "The Man" title with Hill which is an utter joke since it never happened. Hill was the unquestionable man on the team in his second year.

And besides, even if that's true (and it's not), what about 1997 when Hill led them to 54 wins? Who was he battling with at that time?

[Sarcastic]

Those guys were traded for one another. He didn't have all of them at the same time. Stackhouse went from Philly because he wasn't a good fit next to AI and Philly wanted a defensive presence so Ratliff was a good choice.

You also mentioned Allan Houston was battling for "The Man" title with Hill which is an utter joke since it never happened. Hill was the unquestionable man on the team in his second year.

And besides, even if that's true (and it's not), what about 1997 when Hill led them to 54 wins? Who was he battling with at that time?

Joe Dumars last good season.

[Rake2204]

as the top scorer/player for his team....hill accomplished jack shit in the playoffs


as the top scorer/player for his team..melo has accomplished more



any way you slice it, this is true
Again, I'm not sure Anthony's past accomplishments have much to do with a comparison of current Melo and prime Hill. I'd say Hill's lack of playoff success had less to do with his supposed lack of skill and more to do with his team.


Joe Dumars last good season.
Hey, I'm not an expert so I'm not going to try to pass my word as the utter truth, but I'll say I've been watching the Pistons since the pre-Hill era. They have been my team forever. And again, that doesn't mean I know it all, but from watching seemingly every one of their games humanly possible from that era, I can say Grant Hill was the man for the Pistons from the moment he was drafted. He was never battling anyone, let alone Joe Dumars in 1997. Joe D is my 2nd favorite player of all-time, but he was a great complimentary piece from '95 forward. He was the steady guy who was still a borderline all-star, but there's no way anyone would have mistaken Joe D as "The Man" in Detroit at any point of the Grant Hill era. That's not to undermine Dumars though. I don't mean Dumars stopped leading, stopped playing, stopped being what made him great. He still did all of that, it's just his package wasn't on the same level as Hill's at that point.

Further, Allan Houston sprung about. He was also never considered The Man in Detroit. It was a little crazy to see his scoring blow up in '96, but it was never a situation where people thought Grant Hill was somehow taking a back seat to AH. I'm not entirely sure who you're referring to when you mention a lot of folks who believe he underachieved his first few years. He met all expectations and exceeded them. I remember his weak point early on being his jumper, but that quickly came along through his second and third season.

I do recall some folks referring to him as "soft" as you mentioned. However, I've never been a big believer in those notions. The labels always seem to follow nice guys, as if it's a foregone conclusion. Because they don't scowl, because they seem affable, they're soft and don't have the killer instinct. David Robinson got the same treatment. As such, naysayers weren't sure he could be relied upon. I believe such a notion was unfounded, but I acknowledge folks believed it. Here's a clip touching on it a little, from a game where he led Detroit back from the dead, scoring 8 of their final 10 in the final two minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2DEd8uQrE8


Grant Hill was on a 37 win team at age 25, that had Stackhouse, Joe Dumars, Theo Ratliff, and Lindsey Hunter.
Again, I mean this with respect, but it feels like you're attempting to draw conclusions on Hill based on basketballreference.com rather than what you actually observed (due to your assumption that Hill played on a team with both Stack and Ratliff at the same time). I use that website a lot for reference as well, but sometimes it can fall short of providing the whole story.

[NugzHeat3]

Joe Dumars last good season.
Really?

Joe Dumars taking 11 shots a game, doing 14.7 ppg on 44% shooting is supposedly "rivaling" Grant Hill for the title of being the man?

Laughable.

Hill was by far the best player on the team, it's number option and their entire offense went through him. He was the primary set up guy and the leading scorer much like LeBron with the Cavs for example. He was the man and treated and such.

Ironic for someone bringing up revisionist history.

[knickswin]

again, to me it is a silly comparison. you're comparing a scoring, post-up three to a point forward. obviously grant hill is a better distributor and ball handler. obviously melo is better at scoring in the half court.

I really like Grant Hill. Very fun to watch and his game was very smooth.

when it's all said and done, melo's more likely to have the better resume. it's really just life being unfair because hill had his prime robbed from him. unfortunately, hill doesn't have a great playoff run on which to hang his hat. his statement moments were when he was at Duke.

[Owl]

A lot of revisionist history being told here.

Grant Hill was extremely popular because the NBA was searching the "next" player to fill Jordan's shoes when he retired. That's why he was the leading vote getter as a rookie in the All Star game. The NBA hype machine was in full effect.

However a lot of people felt he had underachieved for his first few years, as he never really established himself as "the man" for his team. At the beginning Joe Dumars was still in control, and the next few years he battled with Allan Houston for the title. People always questioned his scoring, and his drive to lead, as he was reluctant to take over games. It wasn't until 2000 when he scored like 26 ppg that people started to look at him as a leader. Then he got hurt, and we never got to see the Grant Hill that would lead his team.

On top of that, he was a poor shooter from the outside, especially from three point range. His mid range game was good, but no where near Carmelo Anthony's.

If you think he could everything, as some people are saying, go look up his 3 point percentages.
Utter nonsense. Nobody felt he underachieved, he was always the man on his team. Dumars was always a veteran leader as was to be expected given he'd won a title with the franchise. He never battled Houston for that title and the idea that that happened "for the next few years" AFTER Hill's first year shows that your just making stuff up off the top of your head. A google search could have reminded you that Houston left in 1996 2 years after Hill was drafted and only one year after that first year in which Dumars was "still in control".

Hill's numbers did slip a little after the arrival of Jerry Stackhouse because they were both slashers whose range didn't extend to the 3 point line.

But as WillC pointed out he was one of the most popular players in the league and he was also one of the very best.

In what sense was Carmelo better, Hill has an all-NBA First Team appearance (Melo doesn't), Hill was 4 times 2nd team All-NBA (Melo has been once). Hill's statistics are better (by PER, Win Shares whatever) and he played better defense.

The only thing Carmelo did more was score, but not a lot more than Hill and a little less efficiently (even factoring in Melo's ability to get to the line).

[Lebron23]

You talk about revisionist history. Grant Hill was a near unanimous pick as a top 5 player in the league. Penny Hardaway had near the same sort of love before getting hurt.




Grant Hill was like Pippen, without the defense (which he somehow acquired in Phoenix) and with the scoring mentality.




Pippen was not a complimentary player, but maybe his style was. Grant Hill was not a complimentary player. With respect to Anthony, Grant Hill is the one you take. He was the best rebounding SF in the league too. The team's first playmaker, and a scorer. A lot like what Lebron did in Cleveland, but without some of the late-game point padding.


In fairness to LeBron I think he is a superior playoffs performer than Hill. Even Mcgrady was a better regular season and playoffs performer than the 6'8" SF from Duke.

[WillC]

Utter nonsense. Nobody felt he underachieved, he was always the man on his team. Dumars was always a veteran leader as was to be expected given he'd won a title with the franchise. He never battled Houston for that title and the idea that that happened "for the next few years" AFTER Hill's first year shows that your just making stuff up off the top of your head. A google search could have reminded you that Houston left in 1996 2 years after Hill was drafted and only one year after that first year in which Dumars was "still in control".

Hill's numbers did slip a little after the arrival of Jerry Stackhouse because they were both slashers whose range didn't extend to the 3 point line.

But as WillC pointed out he was one of the most popular players in the league and he was also one of the very best.

In what sense was Carmelo better, Hill has an all-NBA First Team appearance (Melo doesn't), Hill was 4 times 2nd team All-NBA (Melo has been once). Hill's statistics are better (by PER, Win Shares whatever) and he played better defense.

The only thing Carmelo did more was score, but not a lot more than Hill and a little less efficiently (even factoring in Melo's ability to get to the line).

Game. Set. Match.

:applause:

[Whoah10115]

In fairness to LeBron I think he is a superior playoffs performer than Hill. Even Mcgrady was a better regular season and playoffs performer than the 6'8" SF from Duke.



Lebron also had a good team. They weren't built to win anything, but they were good and in an Eastern Conference without much depth. And, with that said, I'll concede that Lebron reached a higher peak than Hill. But again, Lebron isn't the one in question.



McGrady was great but I don't see him having been a better player than Hill, in any capacity. His teams sucked but he was too lazy to get where he needed. The one season that would stand up is obviously the 02-03 one.

[knickswin]

In fairness to LeBron I think he is a superior playoffs performer than Hill. Even Mcgrady was a better regular season and playoffs performer than the 6'8" SF from Duke.

Hill has never really done anything in the playoffs. I don't think he's ever scored 30 points. I'm not sure he's ever had a particularly good game. Never got out of the first round until he got to Phoenix. Lebron's playoff resume destroys Hill's. Melo's is better too, and it's not like Melo's is all that outstanding.

[Lebron23]

Hill has never really done anything in the playoffs. I don't think he's ever scored 30 points. I'm not sure he's ever had a particularly good game. Never got out of the first round until he got to Phoenix. Lebron's playoff resume destroys Hill's. Melo's is better too, and it's not like Melo's is all that outstanding.


He's a little bit overrated in this forum. Hill is a good guy that why he was always rank higher than Rice and Hardaway in the NBA All time lists.

[Lebron23]

Lebron also had a good team. They weren't built to win anything, but they were good and in an Eastern Conference without much depth. And, with that said, I'll concede that Lebron reached a higher peak than Hill. But again, Lebron isn't the one in question.



McGrady was great but I don't see him having been a better player than Hill, in any capacity. His teams sucked but he was too lazy to get where he needed. The one season that would stand up is obviously the 02-03 one.


Mcgrady and his weak ass Magic nearly defeated a very good 2003 Pistons team in the playoffs, but Detroit showed why they were the better overall team from game 5-7. Mcgrady elevated his game into the playoffs while Hill's overall productions went down.

[knickswin]

The only thing Carmelo did more was score, but not a lot more than Hill and a little less efficiently (even factoring in Melo's ability to get to the line).

Melo is a much better scorer than Hill ever was. come on. it's not close, and there's no comparison. melo goes into god mode sometimes and there's nothing anyone can do about it. he's had playoff series where he's averaged 30 points.

I like Grant Hill too. I understand that if we're comparing skill sets, there's a lot to like about Grant Hill as a player. but melo is easily, easily, easily the better scorer.

this reminds me of when all the kg versus dirk threads came up and a lot of people said that based on their averages they're close as scorers. not really true. dirk is a guy liable to absolutely explode in a playoff series and kg was never like that.

[returnofthemack]

grant hills prime was spent hurt. so we are comparing hurt hill to melo. well when you look at it that way its a tie. both players wouldnt win you a ring as the man so there.

[Cermet]

Grant Hill never reached is his prime. When he was supposed to reach his prime he was injured. But still I think Grant Hill would be better since he was averaging like almost a triple double in his second year, so in his prime he would be monster stat machine

[Rake2204]

grant hills prime was spent hurt. so we are comparing hurt hill to melo. well when you look at it that way its a tie. both players wouldnt win you a ring as the man so there.
For the sake of this discussion, I believe people are referring to Grant Hill's prime as the best years of his career, which occurred in the mid to late 90's.

[knickswin]

Grant Hill never reached is his prime. When he was supposed to reach his prime he was injured. But still I think Grant Hill would be better since he was averaging like almost a triple double in his second year, so in his prime he would be monster stat machine

yep. the thing is, there's nothing to compare. grant hill never really did anything. he never had the team to do it, and he spend most of his better years injured.

[Sarcastic]

Really?

Joe Dumars taking 11 shots a game, doing 14.7 ppg on 44% shooting is supposedly "rivaling" Grant Hill for the title of being the man?

Laughable.

Hill was by far the best player on the team, it's number option and their entire offense went through him. He was the primary set up guy and the leading scorer much like LeBron with the Cavs for example. He was the man and treated and such.

Ironic for someone bringing up revisionist history.

You do know Joe Dumars was an All Star in 1997, right?

[NugzHeat3]

You do know Joe Dumars was an All Star in 1997, right?
Yes, I'm aware he was an All-Star for the same reason Jameer Nelson was one. Multiple injuries (Ewing and Zo).

[Owl]

Melo is a much better scorer than Hill ever was. come on. it's not close, and there's no comparison. melo goes into god mode sometimes and there's nothing anyone can do about it. he's had playoff series where he's averaged 30 points.

I like Grant Hill too. I understand that if we're comparing skill sets, there's a lot to like about Grant Hill as a player. but melo is easily, easily, easily the better scorer.

this reminds me of when all the kg versus dirk threads came up and a lot of people said that based on their averages they're close as scorers. not really true. dirk is a guy liable to absolutely explode in a playoff series and kg was never like that.
What happens in this "god mode" does he get above 50% from the field for that one game.

Melo can score in a variety of ways, and some people enjoy how he does it. He gets called a/ the best pure scorer. No idea what that means unless its the variety of ways he scores or that he doesn't dunk that much or he's the best at focusing purely on scoring. Well honestly I don't know what it means.

But he's shooting just over 45% for his career and "current" Carmelo is shooting .423 awful for a forward. His main gift is getting to the line. He's very good at it an he converts at an 80% rate. But he's also developed a repuation as a ball stopper who needs the ball in his hands and his scoring efficiency (when accounting for FTs) is good but not great.

But we're saying Grant in his prime and in his prime he had a year scoring 25.8 points and would have had more if he'd had a real point guard, a more stable coaching situation and a better fit at sg than Jerry Stackhouse (gunner who needed the ball, and a slasher who didn't complement Hill's style at all). Grant's fg% is signifcantly superior because of dazzling crossover and first step and an ability to get to (above) the rim and finish.

The relatively small advantage Melo has here (scoring) is hugely overshadowed by Hill's advantages elsewhere.


You do know Joe Dumars was an All Star in 1997, right?
And you do know that coaches pick all-star reserves and that was a "career achievements"/classy guy vote rather than an indication that Dumars was one of the top 24 players in the league.

But if you want to boost Dumars as a player fine. He was a classy guy, a very good defender and a very important player on a couple of title teams. But that was Hill's team.

[WillC]

Melo is a much better scorer than Hill ever was. come on. it's not close, and there's no comparison. melo goes into god mode sometimes and there's nothing anyone can do about it. he's had playoff series where he's averaged 30 points.

'God mode'? How old are you? :facepalm

Too young to have watched Grant Hill in his prime, clearly.

[knickswin]

'God mode'? How old are you? :facepalm

Too young to have watched Grant Hill in his prime, clearly.

I mean that Melo has had many games in the playoffs where he's scored 30+ points. he's had several 40+ point games too. he's also had several regular season games where he's gone for 50 points.

I LIKE GRANT HILL AND NEVER SAID THAT MELO WAS THE BETTER PLAYER

but Melo is EASILY the better scorer.

[knicksman]

Grant hill never made a team contender while melo has done it twice so ill take melo

[hitmanyr2k]

Grant hill never made a team contender while melo has done it twice so ill take melo

Carmelo has been out of the first round once in his entire career. How has he made a team a true contender twice?

[knicksman]

The only way I'd even consider choosing Melo over Hill or Pippen is if my team already has a good point guard. From what I've seen of NY's pg situation this year (aside from Lin's short run) I wouldn't even think twice taking Hill or Pippen over Carmelo. It's an instant upgrade...better point play, better defense, etc.

but scorers wins in this league not pgs. Its not like new york isnt performing well with melo right now.

[knicksman]

Carmelo has been out of the first round once in his entire career. How has he made a team a true contender twice?

i consider the 09-10 denver as contenders if not for karl being out. They were the 2nd best team in the west at that time.

[knicksman]

I find it incredible that some people think Carmelo Anthony is currently better than an in-his-prime Grant Hill.

Maybe the kids on this forum don't realise how good Grant Hill was.

Teams averaged less points in the 1990s due to the tougher defenses and the fact that defenders were allowed to hand check. Now, it is easier for players to score more freely.

Despite the tougher conditions, over a 5-year period between 1996 and 2000, Grant Hill averaged 21.9ppg, 8.1rpg, 6.5apg, 1.6spg and 0.6bpg on .476 FG%.

He was basically LeBron before LeBron.

Meanwhile, Carmelo Anthony should be compared to someone like Glenn Robinson - their style of play are much more comparable.

because it is harder to score than to be an all around player. Thats why grant hill has never been a number 1 option. To judge whos better, you ask yourself whether he can be a number 1 option and melo can be while hill cant. Theres a reason why melo can easily play defense if he wants to which is a strength of hill but he cant just be a scoring machine like melo no matter how hard he tries. Its about which skills are harder to learn not how many skills you have. Its about the quality of the skills not the quantity. Grant has alot of skills but melo has the quality. In fact I would chose ray allen and paul pierce over him. Theres a reason why he was an underachiever coz he doesnt possess the most important skill that paul pierce/allen/melo had.

[97 bulls]

but scorers wins in this league not pgs. Its not like new york isnt performing well with melo right now.
How many times has a scoring champ won a championship in the same season?

[Sarcastic]

How many times has a scoring champ won a championship in the same season?

How many teams that were led by a point guard, or point forward have won a title?

[97 bulls]

How many teams that were led by a point guard, or point forward have won a title?
Every champion has a floor general. Only two players have won the scoring title and championship in the same season.

[knicksman]

How many times has a scoring champ won a championship in the same season?

not really scoring champ but usually they are in the top 5 scorers in the league. Whereas you can find pgs like rondo, lin in the 2nd round. In fact nash and stockton are late round picks and you cant win with them without scorers on their side.

[97 bulls]

because it is harder to score than to be an all around player. Thats why grant hill has never been a number 1 option. To judge whos better, you ask yourself whether he can be a number 1 option and melo can be while hill cant. Theres a reason why melo can easily play defense if he wants to which is a strength of hill but he cant just be a scoring machine like melo no matter how hard he tries. Its about which skills are harder to learn not how many skills you have. Its about the quality of the skills not the quantity. Grant has alot of skills but melo has the quality. In fact I would chose ray allen and paul pierce over him. Theres a reason why he was an underachiever coz he doesnt possess the most important skill that paul pierce/allen/melo had.
Lol have you been watching your own team? The knicks have plenty of offensive firepower. It their defense that let's them down. And the fact is that every player in the NBA can score. But not all can score, rebound, defend, pass, and run an offense.

[hitmanyr2k]

but scorers wins in this league not pgs. Its not like new york isnt performing well with melo right now.

Cmon :oldlol: Carmelo has been a scorer his whole career and honestly he hasn't done jack except go out in the first round every year. And it's not like he hasn't been surrounded by good players for just about his entire time in the NBA. And the year the Nuggets did damage and finally got past the first round it wasn't Carmelo who was the catalyst. They got their floor general in Chauncey Billups to lead and direct that team. Like I said before, if you have a good PG already then I'd possibly take Carmelo. If you don't have a decent PG a player like Pippen or Hill is a no-brainer.

[nbacardDOTnet]

Grant Hill, easily. Melo is overrated.


http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/z%20Crazy%20Stat%20n%20Record/Carmelo%20Anthony/CarmeloAnthony-gervin.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/Whos%20Who/Carmelo%20Anthony/a088b2d9.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/z%20Crazy%20Stat%20n%20Record/Carmelo%20Anthony/091127denvervsnewyork.gif

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/0%20Players/Lebron%20James/0%20cant%20stop/8cbb5817.gif :lebronamazed:

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/z%20Crazy%20Stat%20n%20Record/Carmelo%20Anthony/-Fixedavi_000422333.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/VS/z%20Crazy%20Stat%20n%20Record/Carmelo%20Anthony/20120203atCeltics-Melo.jpg

thoughts ?

[Sarcastic]

Every champion has a floor general. Only two players have won the scoring title and championship in the same season.

Carmelo has never won a scoring title.

[97 bulls]

Carmelo has never won a scoring title.
But his point was that great scorers win championships. That's not true.

[knicksman]

Lol have you been watching your own team? The knicks have plenty of offensive firepower. It their defense that let's them down. And the fact is that every player in the NBA can score. But not all can score, rebound, defend, pass, and run an offense.

ha i guess, everybody can just be a 30 ppg scorer if they want. Theres a reason why grant hill only scored 25 ppg once in his career and couldnt do it again coz its that hard. And no we dont have firepower right now coz amare hasnt fully recovered yet. Hes playing passive to avoid reinjuring his back throughout the season. Maybe right now that we have jr and lin but we didnt have them at the start of the season. Everybody knows we are lacking in bench and weak backcourt at the start of the season.

And everybody can easily be an all around player like igoudala than to be a 30 ppg scorer in this league. Thats why grant hill choses to be an all around player than to be a scorer coz its easier and what makes you overrated. Ray allen and paul pierce are more impactful than him. Almost every pg in this league can average 7 apg and its just selfishness on his part to be a facilitator just so he can have good stats. Let the pgs who are better than him run the offense. Almost every center and pfs too can average 9 rbg. Its a team game so let your teammates have roles rather than be a one man team. Having all around stats are just for selfish statpadders who want to look good by having good stats. Melo plays to win while hill plays to statpad and thats the reason why hes a career loser.

[knicksman]

Cmon :oldlol: Carmelo has been a scorer his whole career and honestly he hasn't done jack except go out in the first round every year. And it's not like he hasn't been surrounded by good players for just about his entire time in the NBA. And the year the Nuggets did damage and finally got past the first round it wasn't Carmelo who was the catalyst. They got their floor general in Chauncey Billups to lead and direct that team. Like I said before, if you have a good PG already then I'd possibly take Carmelo. If you don't have a decent PG a player like Pippen or Hill is a no-brainer.


lets not act like those lebrons cavs arent first round exits too in the west.

[knicksman]

But his point was that great scorers win championships. That's not true.


isnt jordan, shaq, kobe, allen/pierce scorers?

[Sarcastic]

But his point was that great scorers win championships. That's not true.

Elite wing scorers are much more successful than point guards. Jordan, Kobe, Wade, and I would argue that Nowitzki was a wing scorer too. He is definitely not an elite post power forward in the mold of Duncan.

[Sarcastic]

lets not act like those lebrons cavs arent first round exits too in the west.

At least Carmelo's Nuggets won a game from the Spurs in 2007. The Cavs that year got swept by the same Spurs.

[97 bulls]

isnt jordan, shaq, kobe, allen/pierce scorers?
Yes. But its not a given that because your a great scorer, your gonna win a championship

[hitmanyr2k]

lets not act like those lebrons cavs arent first round exits too in the west.

Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. All I know is the Nuggets were a first round exit every year and while Carmelo was a talented scorer his shooting performances in the playoffs was BRUTAL more often than not. And when he was shooting terribly he was worthless because it's not like he was going to be a playmaker for his teammates or play defense or anything. The Nuggets were known as a talented, bone-headed, low IQ team until Chauncey arrived and gave that team some much needed leadership and direction.

[Sarcastic]

Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. All I know is the Nuggets were a first round exit every year and while Carmelo was a talented scorer his shooting performances in the playoffs was BRUTAL more often than not. And when he was shooting terribly he was worthless because it's not like he was going to be a playmaker for his teammates or play defense or anything. The Nuggets were known as a talented, bone-headed, low IQ team until Chauncey arrived and gave that team some much needed leadership and direction.

Carmelo was losing in the playoffs to eventual champions like the Spurs and Lakers half the time. Grant Hill was losing to Atlanta with Christian Laettner.

[knicksman]

Yes. But its not a given that because your a great scorer, your gonna win a championship

of course you need to surround them with complimentary players. But they are the most impactful players in this league and pgs are just complimentary pieces. Pgs are nothing without scorers. Just look at deron, calderon. Those are championship caliber pgs if they are paired with championship caliber scorers but theyre nothing without these scorers. Thats why magic wants to be drafted by the lakers coz they have kareem. Coz lakers wont be winning rings with him. Thats why kareem had 6 rings to magics 5.

[knicksman]

Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. All I know is the Nuggets were a first round exit every year and while Carmelo was a talented scorer his shooting performances in the playoffs was BRUTAL more often than not. And when he was shooting terribly he was worthless because it's not like he was going to be a playmaker for his teammates or play defense or anything. The Nuggets were known as a talented, bone-headed, low IQ team until Chauncey arrived and gave that team some much needed leadership and direction.

of course his facing championship defense throughout his career while lebron is facing below .500 teams. Just look at his finals performance against san antonio. Lets not pretend like lebrons shooting performance isnt the same as melo.

[hitmanyr2k]

At least Carmelo's Nuggets won a game from the Spurs in 2007. The Cavs that year got swept by the same Spurs.

The Cavs got swept because, similar to Carmelo, Lebron's shooting was horrendous. It's not like the Cavs and Nuggets weren't competitive against the Spurs that year. A lot of those games came down to the final minute. If Lebron or Melo play at least average they probably pull some of those games out.

[97 bulls]

Elite wing scorers are much more successful than point guards. Jordan, Kobe, Wade, and I would argue that Nowitzki was a wing scorer too. He is definitely not an elite post power forward in the mold of Duncan.
Its tough to argue this point cuz I'm more of a team guy. I could roll out point guards that have won championships but all players have had a tremendous amount of support when they've won.

Id tend to agree that anothony has played on better teams than hill. And that the big casm in his game is defense. That goes for amare too. The knicks should be battling for the best record in basketball.

[L.Kizzle]

Carmelo was losing in the playoffs to eventual champions like the Spurs and Lakers half the time. Grant Hill was losing to Atlanta with Christian Laettner.
and Mutombo and Steve Smith and Mookie Blaylock. They won 56 games.

[Sarcastic]

Its tough to argue this point cuz I'm more of a team guy. I could roll out point guards that have won championships but all players have had a tremendous amount of support when they've won.

Every team has a point guard. My comment was that teams with point guards or point forwards as the leader of the team, do extremely poor championship wise. The last point guard to lead his team to a title was Isiah Thomas.




Id tend to agree that anothony has played on better teams than hill. And that the big casm in his game is defense. That goes for amare too. The knicks should be battling for the best record in basketball.

Grant Hill wasn't some elite defender. He and Carmelo are very equal in that regards. The Pistons led by Grant Hill were a joke compared to their Bad Boy days. It's one of the reasons that the city never embraced him, and there was always a rift with he and Joe Dumars.

And the Knicks would be battling for best record if they didn't have D'Antoni for the first 44 games. They are 13-4 in the last 17, and have beaten some really good team. They are ranked 5th in Hollinger's ranking right now.

[knicksman]

Its tough to argue this point cuz I'm more of a team guy. I could roll out point guards that have won championships but all players have had a tremendous amount of support when they've won.

Id tend to agree that anothony has played on better teams than hill. And that the big casm in his game is defense. That goes for amare too. The knicks should be battling for the best record in basketball.

Just because youre a scorer, you cant be a team player. you need talent and teamwork to win championships not just talent alone and not just teamwork alone. Jordan started winning by becoming a team player. Im sure he wont be winning chips if he continued his statpadding ways by playing point forward that hill does. Just like robertson who has never won as a man playing point forward.

[knicksman]

Every team has a point guard. My comment was that teams with point guards or point forwards as the leader of the team, do extremely poor championship wise. The last point guard to lead his team to a title was Isiah Thomas.







And Isiah was lucky to have a team to be the first in playing that thuggery defense. Im sure every team can do it, its just not all players are dirty like those pistons teams. Once every team is doing what theyre doing, I havent seen a pg lead team winning it all.

And hill won 42 in his prime. And thats just equal to melos rookie year. That shows how empty his stats are. Hes like tmac whos another point forward whose impact cant be felt.

[97 bulls]

Every team has a point guard. My comment was that teams with point guards or point forwards as the leader of the team, do extremely poor championship wise. The last point guard to lead his team to a title was Isiah Thomas.




Grant Hill wasn't some elite defender. He and Carmelo are very equal in that regards. The Pistons led by Grant Hill were a joke compared to their Bad Boy days. It's one of the reasons that the city never embraced him, and there was always a rift with he and Joe Dumars.

And the Knicks would be battling for best record if they didn't have D'Antoni for the first 44 games. They are 13-4 in the last 17, and have beaten some really good team. They are ranked 5th in Hollinger's ranking right now.
Truth be told, jordan, shaq, and brynt don't help your argument cuz they were all 2 way and versitl players. Anthony to me is much more similar to gervin, or wilkins. And we saw how their careers played out.

[Sarcastic]

Truth be told, jordan, shaq, and brynt don't help your argument cuz they were all 2 way and versitl players. Anthony to me is much more similar to gervin, or wilkins. And we saw how their careers played out.

Melo is more like Pierce to me, and we have seen how his career has turned out.

[donald_trump]

its hilarious how some posters parade around here like they know all the answers to questions, when i bet only 5-10% of this board saw grant hill play in detroit.

hill was my favorite player growing up, outside of earl monroe, and i can tell you that he most definitely was/is not better than carmelo anthony.

hill put up great stats, had a very pretty game, and was a hard worker, though he didnt impact the game to similar do it all players in his own era. scottie pippen and anfernee hardaway were far and away more impactful and better players.

carmelo on the other hand can flat out score. the most important thing in a basketball game. hes a better rebounder too. he grabs more offensive rebounds, which i believe is the best indicator.

[fubu05]

Truth be told, jordan, shaq, and brynt don't help your argument cuz they were all 2 way and versitl players. Anthony to me is much more similar to gervin, or wilkins. And we saw how their careers played out.

I will disagree. I'd say he's like them only as far as that he's a "Scoring SF" but in terms of style of play, they're completely different. These were guys that were pretty athletic and relied on a lot of that to get their buckets. Melo is an extremely skilled player, relying more on his footwork, post play, and mid-range game to get his points.

Guess what I'm trying to say is, with age, Melo will go the Kobe/Paul Pierce route because of how skilled he is and how little he relies on athleticism.

[Sarcastic]

its hilarious how some posters parade around here like they know all the answers to questions, when i bet only 5-10% of this board saw grant hill play in detroit.

hill was my favorite player growing up, outside of earl monroe, and i can tell you that he most definitely was/is not better than carmelo anthony.

hill put up great stats, had a very pretty game, and was a hard worker, though he didnt impact the game to similar do it all players in his own era. scottie pippen and anfernee hardaway were far and away more impactful and better players.

carmelo on the other hand can flat out score. the most important thing in a basketball game. hes a better rebounder too. he grabs more offensive rebounds, which i believe is the best indicator.

I think Grant Hill was put in a very tough situation going to Detroit. He had to follow up the Bad Boy days, and he wasn't prepared for what was needed of him. They needed a strong leader to transform the team, and he was never that. He was a soft spoken guy, and he was always ridiculed in Detroit for not being tough enough for the city. I think it was the major reason he left for Orlando. I think he would have been much better in a glitzier city like LA.

[Teanett]

This is a poor barometer for popularity when comparing between different positions. Think about the choices there were for East at Small Forward. There's certain players who gets less votes in a given position just because another player's fans will vote for them. In other words, some of Jordan's votes were taken away since some voters would've voted for their own player at SG. Whereas with SF that year, Grant Hill was THE default choice to make. Which is why he was the first player EVER to get over a million votes.

also a very good point.
jordan's votes where going to penny (the new thing), shaq's were going to ewing or other big man.
at forward, there was really only hill or pippen, the next one was big dog.

[Owl]

its hilarious how some posters parade around here like they know all the answers to questions, when i bet only 5-10% of this board saw grant hill play in detroit.

hill was my favorite player growing up, outside of earl monroe, and i can tell you that he most definitely was/is not better than carmelo anthony.

hill put up great stats, had a very pretty game, and was a hard worker, though he didnt impact the game to similar do it all players in his own era. scottie pippen and anfernee hardaway were far and away more impactful and better players.

carmelo on the other hand can flat out score. the most important thing in a basketball game. hes a better rebounder too. he grabs more offensive rebounds, which i believe is the best indicator.
It's hilarious how many people don't know how to use capital letters around here. Scoring doesn't take place in vaccum it uses up possessions Carmelo isn't that efficient (good efficiency not great, less efficient than Hill) and he's considered somewhat of a ball stopper.

But the last part, why on earth would one (smaller) part of rebounding be the "best indicator" of rebounding ability. Despite a short prime (cut short by injuries) Grant Hill had 3 years where he grabbed 14% or more of all available rebounds. Carmelo's highest single year is 11.8% presently his career rebound percentage is below 10%.

[Teanett]

Along with Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill was the most popular player in the NBA during Jordan's hiatus. That doesn't mean either player was the best; that title belonged to Olajuwon, Robinson or Shaq, depending on the day in question.

But Hill was certainly one of the faces of the NBA. He was the golden boy of the League.

I'm guessing you were too young to remember, right?

http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m561/Will23C1982/Slam%20Magazine/17.jpg

http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m561/Will23C1982/Slam%20Magazine/7.jpg

absolutely not.
hill and penny were hyped to be the "next" jordan during jordan's leave. but the truth is, even though tv was bombarded with "grant hill drinks sprite" and "lil penny" adds, *even then* michael jordan was still the most popular athlete in the world.
a couple of slam covers means nothing. i think mateen cleaves made it on the cover once... :facepalm

you fukker!

[ShaqAttack3234]

Grant Hill never reached is his prime. When he was supposed to reach his prime he was injured. But still I think Grant Hill would be better since he was averaging like almost a triple double in his second year, so in his prime he would be monster stat machine

You're acting like Grant was in his early 20's when he was injured. He was 27 turning 28 and had completed 6 seasons. I don't know if he reached his peak, but he was probably in part of his prime. You could argue that 2000 was the start with the improvement he made on his jump shot that year, but you could also argue that he never had a better season than his 3rd one(1997) despite playing 3 healthy seasons after that.

You mention Hill's second year stats as a reason why he would have been "a monster stat machine" in his "prime", but I'm not understanding the logic here. Not that becoming a better player necessarily means it will show up in the numbers, but his numbers didn't steadily increase after his 2nd or 3rd season, they actually went down.


Every champion has a floor general. Only two players have won the scoring title and championship in the same season.

Floor general is a vague description, but as I point out later in this post, very few point guards have been the best player on a championship team. That's just like me saying every team that wins a title has multiple scorers.

And 4 players have actually won a scoring title and championship in the same season(Mikan, Kareem, Jordan, Shaq), 3 of them in the shot clock era. But many other teams will have guys top 2, 3 or 5 in scoring.


Lol have you been watching your own team? The knicks have plenty of offensive firepower. It their defense that let's them down. And the fact is that every player in the NBA can score. But not all can score, rebound, defend, pass, and run an offense.

Have you watched the Knicks? Offense has been a much bigger problem, while the defense has been surprisingly good. Even earlier when the offense was a mess, the defense was a surprise, the Knicks broadcasters were regularly mentioning that the defensive improvements were being overshadowed by the offensive struggles.

On paper, the Knicks do have a good amount of offensive talent, but with injuries, players underachieving as well as a lack of chemistry and execution for much of the season, offense has been the problem.

And not every NBA player can score, that's an exaggeration and not even close to accurate, there are players who can't score on every NBA team, sometimes guys who contribute as valuable role players on successful teams, but aren't offensive threats.


Every team has a point guard. My comment was that teams with point guards or point forwards as the leader of the team, do extremely poor championship wise. The last point guard to lead his team to a title was Isiah Thomas.

Yeah, and those Detroit teams with Isiah as the best player weren't led by Isiah in the way that Jordan, Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kobe, Kareem ect. led their teams. Detroit's offense didn't really on one or 2 stars carrying them, they went would milk the hot hand whether it was Isiah, Dumars, Aguirre, James Edwards or Vinnie Johnson carrying them that night. Isiah would also regularly move off the ball and have Dumars handle some of the point guard duos. Plus, Isiah's greatest strength was offense and those Piston team's greatest strengths were defense and rebounding, despite a strong offense.

Nothing against Isiah, but it was definitely different than the way those other superstars led their teams. They were more similar to a better version of the '04 Pistons than the other teams mentioned.

Prior to that, Magic did lead the Lakers to titles in '87 and '88 as the clear best player, he was arguably the best on the '85 team as well, though Kareem also has a strong argument, though Magic is also a top 10 player and an exception. But prior to that, 2 championship teams were led by Kareem('80, '82), 1 was led by Moses('83) and 3 others were led by Bird('81, '84, '86).

And many championship teams haven't even really had point guards, mainly Phil Jackson's teams, none of them really had them. First 3peat Bulls had John Paxson(a spot up shooter) starting at guard with Jordan, and second 3peat had 2 natural shooting guards(Ron Harper along with Jordan), though those teams had Pippen as a "point forward" '00 Lakers also had Bryant and Ron Harper, while the '01, '02, '09 and '10 teams started Bryant alongside a combo guard and shoot-first player in Derek Fisher, with Kobe as their primary facilitator, but very few would consider him a point guard.

And those account for 11 of the last 22 championships. Half of them with essentially no real point guard.

Then there's the '11 Mavs where their point guard was at best, their 4th best player behind Dirk, Terry and Chandler. The '08 Celtics whose point guard was a distant 4th best player on the team and Rondo was nowhere near the all-star player he is today with nowhere near the same responsibility. '07 Spurs did feature Parker in a prominent role and as arguably their 2nd or 3rd best player.

'06 Heat had Jason Williams as one of several key role players along with Mourning, Walker, Haslem and Posey. I certainly would consider him the most important out of those role players and obviously nowhere near as important as Wade or Shaq. '05 Spurs had Parker as a distant 3rd best player. '04 Pistons had Billups who despite the finals MVP, was not the most important player. You could argue he was anywhere from 2-4, after Big Ben, but Rip was more consistent throughout the playoffs and Sheed helped take them to the next level defensively.

'03 Spurs had Parker who was young and inconsistent, and averaged 3.5 apg during the playoffs with much of the offense running through Duncan in the post. '99 Spurs had Avery Johnson, a legit PG, but a distant 3rd best player, and certainly closer to the other role players(Elliott, Elie) than Duncan/Robinson. '94 and '95 Rockets offenses revolved around Dream in the post, and Drexler was also key to the '95 team. Point guards weren't top 3 on either team, and much of Kenny Smith's importance in those offenses was as a shooter.

Seems pretty strange that despite all of this evidence I often hear the importance of point guards hyped up, with quite a few calling it the most important position on the court.

I like Phil Jackson's theory on why star point guards haven't often led teams to titles, which is that they're probably too ball-dominant in many cases.


I will disagree. I'd say he's like them only as far as that he's a "Scoring SF" but in terms of style of play, they're completely different. These were guys that were pretty athletic and relied on a lot of that to get their buckets. Melo is an extremely skilled player, relying more on his footwork, post play, and mid-range game to get his points

I think that many would be surprised at how much Nique used his jumper, post, game, mid-range game and floaters to score considering the highlights.

Haven't seen as much of Gervin as well, but he didn't strike me as a guy who relied more than usual on athleticism, either. Seemed to post up and shoot quite a few 15 footers.

Neither struggled as far as longevity either. Nique was actually unusual in that regard with 10 straight 25+ ppg seasons, including arguably his best season at unusual age(33) when he averaged 30 ppg.

Gervin was also still averaging 26 ppg at 31/32 years old, though he retired at a pretty young age(34).

[donald_trump]

It's hilarious how many people don't know how to use capital letters around here. Scoring doesn't take place in vaccum it uses up possessions Carmelo isn't that efficient (good efficiency not great, less efficient than Hill) and he's considered somewhat of a ball stopper.

But the last part, why on earth would one (smaller) part of rebounding be the "best indicator" of rebounding ability. Despite a short prime (cut short by injuries) Grant Hill had 3 years where he grabbed 14% or more of all available rebounds. Carmelo's highest single year is 11.8% presently his career rebound percentage is below 10%.

defensive rebounding all depends on the matchups you're given on the defensive end.
offensive boards are the best indication. its all about grit, determination and who wants it more.

[Owl]

defensive rebounding all depends on the matchups you're given on the defensive end.
offensive boards are the best indication. its all about grit, determination and who wants it more.
Defensive rebounding depends on matchups but those same matchups (one teams potential defensive rebound is another teams potential offensive rebound) have no effect on who gets offensive rebounds?

About who wants it more between whom? The defensive rebounder and the offensive rebounder? Seriously that makes no sense in the context of your argument.

Carmelo has more offensive rebounds because he plays closer to the basket on offense, whilst Hill was a slasher who would likely be away from the post.

Hill consistently outrebounded Melo and it wasn't even close.

If you think offensive rebounds are more valuable thats fine, if you think offensive rebounds require more effort thats fine. But to claim that offensive rebounds are a better indicator of rebounding ability makes no sense.

[Lebron23]

Gh has become one of the most overrated players in this forum.

[bizil]

I would take G Hill. One of the premier all around SF's of all time AND u get alpha dog scoring. But Melo is a beast and a better pure alpha dog type guy. But usually for me, it doesn't get better than guys like Bird, Barry, Hondo, Bron, and Hill at SF. Because they are great all around players AND great scorers all in one. But after that guys like Doc, Nique, Melo, Durant, Bernard King, English, etc. are so dominant at what they do that they can supercede MANY better all around type players. But in this case, give me G Hill over Melo.

[ClutchOver9000]

I would take G Hill. One of the premier all around SF's of all time AND u get alpha dog scoring. But Melo is a beast and a better pure alpha dog type guy. But usually for me, it doesn't get better than guys like Bird, Barry, Hondo, Bron, and Hill at SF. Because they are great all around players AND great scorers all in one. But after that guys like Doc, Nique, Melo, Durant, Bernard King, English, etc. are so dominant at what they do that they can supercede MANY better all around type players. But in this case, give me G Hill over Melo.

lolwut? :biggums:

[bizil]

lolwut? :biggums:

Get outta here with that ashy lip Dave C shit! If u got a problem with my post speak your mind and cut out that funny shit.

[97 bulls]

I would take G Hill. One of the premier all around SF's of all time AND u get alpha dog scoring. But Melo is a beast and a better pure alpha dog type guy. But usually for me, it doesn't get better than guys like Bird, Barry, Hondo, Bron, and Hill at SF. Because they are great all around players AND great scorers all in one. But after that guys like Doc, Nique, Melo, Durant, Bernard King, English, etc. are so dominant at what they do that they can supercede MANY better all around type players. But in this case, give me G Hill over Melo.
Not one mention of Pippen. Sad

[bizil]

Not one mention of Pippen. Sad

I had a fine thick honey and got sidetracked. I didn't have time to list every player. Damn u Pippen guys are sensitive! lol

But on a side note, Bird, Hondo, Bron, and Barry were GREAT SCORERS AND GREAT ALL AROUND PLAYERS ALL IN ONE AT THE SF! Pippen was a great all around player and a VERY GOOD SCORER AT BEST! G Hill in my opinion was more along the lines of a Bron type than a Pippen type. So come to think of it, Pippen didn't belong in the group I was talking about. But I give Pip credit for being as complete skillset wise as any SF ever. And for redefining the point forward or small forward spots. But he wasn't a GREAT SCORER!

And before u get even more sensitive, I feel Pip is indeed a top 6-7 GOAT SF. I was just stating that I feel guys like Bird, Bron, Barry, and Hondo are on another level because they were great scorers AND great all around players. But I do feel certain guys like Nique, Doc, Durant, Melo, and King are so dominant and special at scoring that I would rather have them over several guys who are better all around players. Better all around DOESN'T mean the BETTER PLAYER in all cases. If u can make a defense collapse and alter the way a team plays defense like a Nique or Dr.J, that's a major, major feat.

[97 bulls]

I had a fine thick honey and got sidetracked. I didn't have time to list every player. Damn u Pippen guys are sensitive! lol

But on a side note, Bird, Hondo, Bron, and Barry were GREAT SCORERS AND GREAT ALL AROUND PLAYERS ALL IN ONE AT THE SF! Pippen was a great all around player and a VERY GOOD SCORER AT BEST! G Hill in my opinion was more along the lines of a Bron type than a Pippen type. So come to think of it, Pippen didn't belong in the group I was talking about. But I give Pip credit for being as complete skillset wise as any SF ever. And for redefining the point forward or small forward spots. But he wasn't a GREAT SCORER!

And before u get even more sensitive, I feel Pip is indeed a top 6-7 GOAT SF. I was just stating that I feel guys like Bird, Bron, Barry, and Hondo are on another level because they were great scorers AND great all around players. But I do feel certain guys like Nique, Doc, Durant, Melo, and King are so dominant and special at scoring that I would rather have them over several guys who are better all around players. Better all around DOESN'T mean the BETTER PLAYER in all cases. If u can make a defense collapse and alter the way a team plays defense like a Nique or Dr.J, that's a major, major feat.
Man you had me at fine thick honey. Nothing more needed to be said. But I was teasing you

[bizil]

Man you had me at fine thick honey. Nothing more needed to be said. But I was teasing you

No offense taken at all. Just healthy debate and I didn't really clarify my remarks earlier like I wanted to. I know u are a big Pip fan and always got his back.

[Reggie43]

Prime Grant Hill was obviously better than current Melo and even prime for prime I would still take Grant. Hill's defense, playmaking, efficiency and leadership is what seperates them for me

[miggyme1]

Prime Grant Hill was obviously better than current Melo and even prime for prime I would still take Grant. Hill's defense, playmaking, efficiency and leadership is what seperates them for me

Damn i hear You but over melo?i mean it might be decades before we see another player like melo.prime grant hill was special but i feel he had reached his ceiling far as potential.he was gonne be a 25/5/7 guy but not win any rings.melo.prime grant hill cant guard prime melo.so im taking melo and im winning everytime.

[Reggie43]

Damn i hear You but over melo?i mean it might be decades before we see another player like melo.prime grant hill was special but i feel he had reached his ceiling far as potential.he was gonne be a 25/5/7 guy but not win any rings.melo.prime grant hill cant guard prime melo.so im taking melo and im winning everytime.

Nobody is winning any rings with the teammates pre-injury Hill had. As for Hill not being able to guard Melo I think its safe to assume that Melo would have the same problems guarding Hill

[Sarcastic]

Hill's defense is getting severely overrated. He was only slightly above average, just like Melo is. If he were better on defense, then Detroit probably would have been more accepting of him.

[ZenMaster]

Hill's defense is getting severely overrated. He was only slightly above average, just like Melo is. If he were better on defense, then Detroit probably would have been more accepting of him.

From the start of Melo's career up until now he has not been an above average defender, he's been poor.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Hill's defense is getting severely overrated. He was only slightly above average, just like Melo is. If he were better on defense, then Detroit probably would have been more accepting of him.

Yeah, I don't remember the talk of him being a great defender when he was in Detroit, actually I recall some criticizing his defense, though I don't think it was ever bad, just not great or elite. I also remember him being called soft, I think that was why he tried to play through the ankle injury in 2000, which ultimately, ended his prime unfortunately.

I don't think everything being said about Hill is fair, I do think he had the ability to be a go to scorer(particularly in 2000), but even earlier. Maybe it wasn't ideal for his mentality, in that sense I'd agree that he was better suited to being the second option, same with a guy like Drexler even.

He was definitely a better rebounder than Melo, Hill has very few peers as far as rebounding SF. Bird was better, and probably Marion, but the list is very short, Pippen was at least his equal, but beyond them, I'd have to think really hard to come up with other names. I'll throw Gerald Wallace in there.

His Piston teams did suck, too. How he led a cast of 33 year old Joe Dumars, Lindsey Hunter, 34 year old Otis Thorpe, Terry Mills, young Theo Ratliff and Aaaron McKie and Grant long to 54 wins is beyond me.

As NugzHeat mentioned, he was their offense as their one go to scorer and their playmaker creating everything like a point guard.

The 2000 team went 2-6 without him, really 2-7 including a game he played just 16 minutes in, and they were 40-34 with him(really 40-33). They had Stackhouse, Lindsey Hunter, Christian Laettner, Jerome Williams, Terry Mills and Michael Curry, plus they were the 9th worst defensive team.

Stackhouse was a legit scorer at 24 ppg, but not a guy I'm convinced really helped a team much, Hunter was a pretty solid point, but nothing more, and Laettner was a respectable NBA player, but aside from Stackhouse, every starter would be classified as below average and to add to it, the team sucked defensively.

So not much he could really do with that team. His team's were easily worse than Melo's. Melo showed more as a playoff performer and the potential to be the "man", but he also had much more talent around him. His '09 Nuggets were arguably the most talented team in the league. The West was ridiculous tough when Melo played there, but the East didn't get really bad until after Hill's injury.

But Melo is also clearly the better scorer. Hill's 2000 season was as impressive of a scoring year statistically as Melo's, but regardless of numbers, Melo is a flat out better scorer.

While I have to defend Hill, some do overrate him. He was a clear step below Lebron, and anyone who says otherwise is clouded by nostalgia, and his playoff career gets overlooked far more than McGrady's, despite T-Mac having a much better playoff career.

Imagine if McGrady went scoreless in the 4th quarter of the deciding game 5, which he was leading like Hill did in '97, and I believe that he was scoreless in the 4th during another game in that series.

I've also never agreed with those who put Hill on another tier than Penny, a lot of that has to do with Hill's rebounding making his all around statline look more impressive, but Penny was a better offensive player, and he showed a lot more as far as being clutch and a big game performer.

Hill was also a long way from being the next Jordan despite the hype. In fact, I'd take prime Pippen over him.

The question is difficult for me. Melo is my favorite current player along with Howard, but Hill was more all around and more consistent than Melo without the effort questions. But I have more faith in Melo as "the man" in big games, and is anyone playing better than Melo the past few weeks?

And anyone who says Melo isn't an all around player hasn't watched him much. He's not Lebron, Pippen or Hill in that regard, but he's been an underrated passer, one of the best rebounding SF and as people are noticing now, he can defend.

[DCL]

whenever hill scored 40, they usually won the game. and it's not like hill's team was all that great. he scored productive points, the buckets that kept the team in the game.

melo scores a lot too, but throughout his career, his points are kinda, to an extent, "All-Me-Gotta-Get-Mine" points.

hill was never criticized as being a "black hole." but melo carries that label occasionally.

[Sarcastic]

From the start of Melo's career up until now he has not been an above average defender, he's been poor.

He's not a liability on defense, and he is a great rebounder for a small forward.

Is Melo a great defender? No. Is he an adequate defender? Yes.

[ZenMaster]

He's not a liability on defense, and he is a great rebounder for a small forward.

Is Melo a great defender? No. Is he an adequate defender? Yes.

He's been a lazy defender most of his career, for the last 10-20? games he's been adequate.