At their peak - Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway, and Scottie Pippen

[StateOfMind12]

Rank these 3 players peak from best to worst between Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway, and Scottie Pippen.

I suspect the peak years of the three are...1997 for Hill, 1996 for Penny, and 1994 for Pippen.

[scm5]

Pippen.

He put up nearly identical numbers to Hill but played much better overall D.

Penny to me, isn't really in the comparison. Lesser numbers, D wasn't as good.

[pauk]

1. Grant Hill (come on now, he was on his way to maybe be the Lebron before Lebron, i remember Jordan comparing his game to him in 1999 where grant averaged 26-7-5 and saying he passed the torch to him and so on, he was only getting better, then the injury happened)

2. Scottie Pippen

3. Penny Hardaway


But i was more of a Penny fan, one of the smoothest/fluid games i ever seen and playing PG at 6'7 made it even sexier...

When i think about it all these players were pretty damn similar, athletic point-forwards that could do everything...

[dyna]

1) Hill
2) Pippen
3) Hardaway

[Cali Syndicate]

Pippen.

He put up nearly identical numbers to Hill but played much better overall D.

Penny to me, isn't really in the comparison. Lesser numbers, D wasn't as good.

Penny was the better most polished scorer of the three though. Had he played his natural position and the team relied more on his scoring instead of his facilitating, his numbers would be marginally better IMO.

[scm5]

1. Grant Hill (come on now, he was on his way to maybe be the Lebron before Lebron, i remember Jordan comparing his game to him in 1999 where grant averaged 26-7-5 and saying he passed the torch to him and so on, he was only getting better, then the injury happened)

2. Scottie Pippen

3. Penny Hardaway


But i was more of a Penny fan, one of the smoothest/fluid games i ever seen and playing PG at 6'7 made it even sexier...

When i think about it all these players were pretty damn similar, athletic point-forwards that could do everything...

Hill:

21/9/7 on 50% shooting 1.8spg .6bpg in 97'
26/7/5 on 49% shooting 1.6spg .6bpg in 00'

Pippen:

21/8/7 on 51% shooting 1.9spg 1.1bpg in 92'.
22/9/6 on 49% shooting and 2.9spg 1.1bpg in 97'

Those were their two best years for each players, in my opinion... and they are all very close. I would give the nod to Pippen because of his dominance on the defensive end of the floor.

[tmacattack33]

Pippen.

He put up nearly identical numbers to Hill but played much better overall D.

Penny to me, isn't really in the comparison. Lesser numbers, D wasn't as good.

Apparently efficiency doesn't matter to you in terms of numbers. Penny's FG% and TS% were threw the roof.
They were second only to MJ (yup, better than Wade, C. Paul, Deron...and of course the less efficient guys like T-mac, Carter, etc). The only people to meet that level since are Lebron and Durant.

He also had more assists per game than Grant Hill, yet one less turnover per game. Regardless, he was clearly a better passer than Hill was.

Defensively, Hill wasn't that great...he's actually been a better defender during his Phoenix resurrection than his prime days.

In 1996, Penny was 3rd in MVP voting behind MJ and Malone. And he deserved it.

Penny > Hill

[pauk]

Penny was the better most polished scorer of the three though. Had he played his natural position and the team relied more on his scoring instead of his facilitating, his numbers would be marginally better IMO.

Indeed, if you didnt look at the stats and only saw one game of these three players you would think Penny was a superstar (one of the top 3 players in the NBA or something)... he was much more aesthetically pleasing to watch, beautiful game, beautiful jumpshot, beautiful dribbling, beautiful scoring arsenal, could rebound and had amazing vision/passing skills (better than Grant/Pippen), flashy but efficient.... and remember his post game? People forget....

I say it again, Penny to me had the most beautiful game... silky smooth... everything was FINESSE...

[scm5]

Apparently efficiency doesn't matter to you in terms of numbers. Penny's FG% and TS% were threw the roof.
They were second only to MJ (yup, better than Wade, C. Paul, Deron...and of course the less efficient guys like T-mac, Carter, etc). The only people to meet that level since are Lebron and Durant.

He also had more assists per game than Grant Hill, yet one less turnover per game. Regardless, he was clearly a better passer than Hill was.

Defensively, Hill wasn't that great...he's actually been a better defender during his Phoenix resurrection than his prime days.

In 1996, Penny was 3rd in MVP voting behind MJ and Malone. And he deserved it.

Penny > Hill

I posted up Hill's numbers above... here are Penny's two peak seasons:

22/4/7 on 51% FG% 2.0spg .6bpg in 96'
21/4/7 on 51% FG% 1.7spg .3bpg in 95'

In terms of scoring, Penny was the more natural scorer and scored more efficiently, but he wasn't as good as Hill.

Hill was like a mini-Lebron while Penny was like a mini-Wade.

[Myth]

1. Pippen
2. Hill
3. Penny

Hill would have likely had a better peak than Pippen if it weren't for injuries. Pippen's D is what kept him above hill on my list.

[scm5]

Indeed, if you didnt look at the stats and only saw one game of these three players you would think Penny was a superstar (one of the top 3 players in the NBA or something)... he was much more aesthetically pleasing to watch, beautiful game, beautiful jumpshot, beautiful dribbling, beautiful scoring arsenal, could rebound and had amazing vision/passing skills (better than Grant/Pippen), flashy but efficient.... and remember his post game? People forget....

I say it again, Penny to me had the most beautiful game... silky smooth... everything was FINESSE...

I agree, it isn't all about numbers. Their numbers are actually kinda close, but Hill just did more throughout the game. It's about defense as well, and while Hill and Penny were more or less on the same level defensively, Pippen was on another level.

Pippen's defense, plus putting up numbers that are arguably greater than Hill and Penny's is ridiculous.

[scm5]

1. Pippen
2. Hill
3. Penny

Hill would have likely had a better peak than Pippen if it weren't for injuries. Pippen's D is what kept him above hill on my list.

The thing is, we're just talking about peaks. Peak play, Pippen was better. Hill was more consistently good, and put up better numbers than Pippen overall, when he was healthy. Enough to cover the gap defensively.

[tmacattack33]

I posted up Hill's numbers above... here are Penny's two peak seasons:

22/4/7 on 51% FG% 2.0spg .6bpg in 96'
21/4/7 on 51% FG% 1.7spg .3bpg in 95'

In terms of scoring, Penny was the more natural scorer and scored more efficiently, but he wasn't as good as Hill.

Hill was like a mini-Lebron while Penny was like a mini-Wade.

Wade's passing is closer to Hill's. Lebron and Penny's vision and passing are closer. (Penny was also a much better shooter than Wade, so that comparison is off). Lebron himself said that he'd compare himself to Penny and Magic.

As for the stats...

96 Penny: 21.7 pts on .605 TS%, 4.3 reb, 7.1 assists, 2.8 turnovers

99 Hill: 25.8 pts, .565 TS%, 6.6 reb, 5.4 assists, 3.2 turnovers


Basically an even stat line. And to me, from watching the games, Penny was a better scorer and on another level in terms of passing.




Biggest argument on Penny's behalf...was what he did without Shaq for 30 games in 1996. This was also what helped him come 3rd in MVP voting:

In the first part of the season (a 22 game span) without Shaq in 1996: Penny stats: 26.3 ppg, .622 TS% (there is no other way to describe this than purely amazing), 6.8 assists/3.2 turnovers, 5.3 reb

[Clippersfan86]

Penny clearly doesn't fit in with how short his prime is. Hill+Pippen are evenly matched and debatable. VERY similar players. Hill was better score, Pippen better defender IMO.

[Whoah10115]

Had he played his natural position and the team relied more on his scoring instead of his facilitating, his numbers would be marginally better IMO.



This is not true. Penny Hardaway was 6'7 in high school, and played PG in high school.


Penny was a PG, in the mold of Magic Johnson, if anyone could be. Even without injuries, his stats were down when he moved to SG, including his points.



I understand they're all shorter, but Rose (who I think is a PG), Curry, and especially Westbrook are PG's, so I can't see how Hardaway's natural position is SG..not when we're talking about his actual game and not his height.

[tmacattack33]

Also if you want to talk stats, let's talk about the real season.

Penny: 22.0 pts, .568 TS%, 4.5 reb, 6.6 assists, 3.1 TO (over 41 games)

Grant Hill: 20.9 pts, .514 TS%, 7.1 reb, 5.8 assists, 3.0 TO (over 13 games)

Hill only played playoff 13 games in Detroit, and that's a small sample size, so what we are mostly looking at here is Penny's numbers. Which are great playoff numbers (better TS% than even Lebron).

[tmacattack33]

Pippen's playoff stats in the 90's on the Bulls for comparison

19.2 pts, .521 TS%, 7.9 reb, 5.5 assists, 3.0 TO (over 136 games)

[Myth]

The thing is, we're just talking about peaks. Peak play, Pippen was better. Hill was more consistently good, and put up better numbers than Pippen overall, when he was healthy. Enough to cover the gap defensively.

I'm not sure what you are saying, because you say 2 things that contradict each other: "Peak play, Pippen was better" and "[Hill did] enough to cover the gap defensively."

But I was well aware that this is just talking about peaks. I believe Pippen's peak was better than Hill's. I only mentioned Hill's injuries, because I think that Hill would have had an even better peak in his career if it weren't for injuries.

[StateOfMind12]

Penny clearly doesn't fit in with how short his prime is. Hill+Pippen are evenly matched and debatable. VERY similar players. Hill was better score, Pippen better defender IMO.
We're talking peak though, not prime, so when they were all at their best. I think you could argue Penny was better. He was pretty dominant in 1996 and he stepped up big time when Shaq went out that season. He was 3rd in MVP that season because of how big time he was.

[Clippersfan86]

We're talking peak though, not prime, so when they were all at their best. I think you could argue Penny was better. He was pretty dominant in 1996 and he stepped up big time when Shaq went out that season. He was 3rd in MVP that season because of how big time he was.

Again Penny's best season doesn't match the other two's. Hill had the best single season of the bunch and one of the best in NBA history giving just declining Jordan and Malone a run for their money for MVP.

[StateOfMind12]

Again Penny's best season doesn't match the other two's. Hill had the best single season of the bunch and one of the best in NBA history giving just declining Jordan and Malone a run for their money for MVP.
This is based on what though?

Penny's peak was just as good as Hill's, if not better. Hill was never as good of a playoff performer as Penny and Penny and Hill were both 3rd in MVP voting at one point. What exactly separates Hill from Penny?

You can't just pass your opinion as a fact without even backing it up.

[Clippersfan86]

This is based on what though?

Penny's peak was just as good as Hill's, if not better. Hill was never as good of a playoff performer as Penny and Hill was never voted as high in the MVP rankings like Penny was in 1996.

You can't just pass your opinion as a fact without even backing it up.

Grant Hill's MVP runner up season... was 99 right?

25.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, 1.5 spg on 56.5 TS%. Not to mention Hill's always been a respectable/good defender, although not as good as he has been the last 5-6 years. Penny on the other hand was a mediocre defender who could be classified as average at best.

Penny was an awesome and unique talent but he can't touch prime Hill. As for Pippen his numbers may not be quite as good as peak Hill BUT he's a top 3 perimeter defender of all time and has a case for the top spot in that regard, that alone puts him above Penny IMO.

Penny is one of those players that have become insanely overhyped long after they are gone. I watched him and he was very very gifted and good. That being said his prime was extremely short lived and outside of getting carried by young Shaq didn't do much to impress me. People act like he's Lebron but forget that he only had what 4 seasons as a top caliber player, then vanished? By comparison Tmac and Vince Carter who people act like were a flash in the pan had at leasy 7-8 seasons at the highest level at their position.

[tmacattack33]

Again Penny's best season doesn't match the other two's. Hill had the best single season of the bunch and one of the best in NBA history giving just declining Jordan and Malone a run for their money for MVP.


Penny's year and level of play in 1996 is something that Grant Hill never matched.

Penny was ahead of Malone in voting in 1996 by the way.

And I hope you didn't just try to say 1996 had a low level of top tier players, because those were some of the NBA's Golden Years. That was a great year for MJ, David Robinson (2nd in MVP voting), Pippen himself, Hakeem Olajuwon, and Karl Malone. It was an amazing time for the league.

[Clippersfan86]

Penny's year and level of play in 1996 is something that Grant Hill never matched.

Penny was ahead of Malone in voting in 1996 by the way.

And I hope you didn't just try to say 1996 had a low level of top tier players, because those were some of the NBA's Golden Years. That was a great year for MJ, David Robinson (2nd in MVP voting), Pippen himself, Hakeem Olajuwon, and Karl Malone :facepalm.

Hill in 99>>>Penny in 96.

[StateOfMind12]

Grant Hill's MVP runner up season... was 99 right?
No, Hill's highest MVP ranked year was 1997 where he was 3rd just like Penny was in 1996.

Hill wasn't even top 5 in MVP voting in 1999, don't know what you're talking about here.


That being said his prime was extremely short lived and outside of getting carried by young Shaq didn't do much to impress me. People act like he's Lebron but forget that he only had what 4 seasons as a top caliber player, then vanished?
We're talking peak here, best season and at their absolute best, who cares how long it lasted?

Plus, a large reason why Penny was 3rd in MVP voting was because of how much he stepped up when Shaq was out. The Penny needs Shaq argument is invalid.


By comparison Tmac and Vince Carter who people act like were a flash in the pan had at leasy 7-8 seasons at the highest level at their position.
Yes, Penny was pretty much McGrady before McGrady, more efficient, lesser volume, but similar overall.

[Clippersfan86]

No, Hill's highest MVP ranked year was 1997 where he was 3rd just like Penny was in 1996.

Hill wasn't even top 5 in MVP voting in 1999, don't know what you're talking about here.


We're talking peak here, best season and at their absolute best, who cares how long it lasted?

Plus, a large reason why Penny was 3rd in MVP voting was because of how much he stepped up when Shaq was out. The Penny needs Shaq argument is invalid.


Yes, Penny was pretty much McGrady before McGrady, more efficient, lesser volume, but similar overall.

I put a question mark because I wasn't sure which year it was. I personally think 99 was his best year though and that's why I used it. Worse APG but 4+ ppg more and better defense. Nobody seems to be factoring how much better of a defender Hill was than Penny BTW.

[StateOfMind12]

I put a question mark because I wasn't sure which year it was. I personally think 99 was his best year though and that's why I used it. Worse APG but 4+ ppg more and better defense. Nobody seems to be factoring how much better of a defender Hill was than Penny BTW.
Hill wasn't really that good of a defender until recently as he aged. He wasn't that good of a defender in his Pistons days. He was still better than Penny, no doubt, but he wasn't some all-defensive caliber player.

[Clippersfan86]

BTW Penny was the better playoff performer no doubt although he choked in 99. I shouldn't make it sound like it's not debatable but when defense+efficiency is factored in I prefer Hill strongly over Penny.

[Clippersfan86]

Hill wasn't really that good of a defender until recently as he aged. He wasn't that good of a defender in his Pistons days. He was still better than Penny, no doubt, but he wasn't some all-defensive caliber player.

I already said that :D . Not a "fantastic" or elite perimeter defender like later in his career but at least "good" or "above average" defensively in younger years, better than Penny defensively.

[tpols]

99 was probably the weakest year in the nba in the past 30-40 years.

[Miller for 3]

99 was probably the weakest year in the nba in the past 30-40 years.

:no: 2011-2012 waves hello

[Whoah10115]

Grant Hill's MVP runner up season... was 99 right?

25.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, 1.5 spg on 56.5 TS%. Not to mention Hill's always been a respectable/good defender, although not as good as he has been the last 5-6 years. Penny on the other hand was a mediocre defender who could be classified as average at best.

Penny was an awesome and unique talent but he can't touch prime Hill. As for Pippen his numbers may not be quite as good as peak Hill BUT he's a top 3 perimeter defender of all time and has a case for the top spot in that regard, that alone puts him above Penny IMO.

Penny is one of those players that have become insanely overhyped long after they are gone. I watched him and he was very very gifted and good. That being said his prime was extremely short lived and outside of getting carried by young Shaq didn't do much to impress me. People act like he's Lebron but forget that he only had what 4 seasons as a top caliber player, then vanished? By comparison Tmac and Vince Carter who people act like were a flash in the pan had at leasy 7-8 seasons at the highest level at their position.



This is incorrect. Hardaway was clearly a better defender than Grant Hill. Grant Hill was no more than decent back then, and Penny was very much a good defender. You have that one backwards.


Hardaway is one of those players where revisionist history has taken over. The lack of credit for his defense is an example. Penny Hardaway was considered the best PG in the NBA, and Stockton was still in his prime. Hardaway reaching his prime would have been better than any PG in the league today. The guy scored 22 a game and his stats don't do him justice. He didn't dominate the ball to rack up 7APG. Like early Magic, the assists don't bear out the reality of his playmaking and his vision. He was a great passer, but his vision was where he stood out.


Hardaway was 1st Team All-NBA in his 3rd season (3rd in MVP voting), but also the year prior, in only his 2nd season. He beat out Gary Payton, just as he would the next year, when Payton was DPOTY and led his team to the 2nd best record in the league behind the 72win Bulls.


Penny Hardaway was incredible.

[StateOfMind12]

BTW Penny was the better playoff performer no doubt although he choked in 99. I shouldn't make it sound like it's not debatable but when defense+efficiency is factored in I prefer Hill strongly over Penny.
He actually didn't play that bad. He had two really bad games and two really good games in the series. It kind of just balanced out. Honestly, when you look at playoff series averages, you have to look at game by game instead of just total averages to get a better view.

But, Penny's peak was in 1996, not 1999 so it's kind of moot. It would be like saying Tmac sucked in the playoffs because he sucked in the 2007 playoffs but Tmac was past his prime and was a pretty good playoff performer for the most part.

[tmacattack33]

I put a question mark because I wasn't sure which year it was. I personally think 99 was his best year though and that's why I used it. Worse APG but 4+ ppg more and better defense. Nobody seems to be factoring how much better of a defender Hill was than Penny BTW.

Because I don't think it was that big of a difference. I was a young fan then, and since then I've seen a few full games of theirs in youtube and stuff, so i am no expert here but Penny was an above average defender and Hill was an above average defender to good defender. Not a huge difference.

I don't know, i'd take Penny overall for his offensive prowess. Hill is very close though, with his better D and rebounding giving him a very good argument.

[Clippersfan86]

Because I don't think it was that big of a difference. I was a young fan then, and since then I've seen a few full games of theirs in youtube and stuff, so i am no expert here but Penny was an above average defender and Hill was an above average defender to good defender. Not a huge difference.

I don't know, i'd take Penny overall for his offensive prowess. Hill is very close though, with his better D and rebounding giving him a very good argument.

Not huge but worth noting man. LOL at Woah saying Penny was clearly the better defender and calling me the revisionist. At no point in either players career was Penny the better defender. Maybe only slightly worse but not equal or better.

[Whoah10115]

Not huge but worth noting man. LOL at Woah saying Penny was clearly the better defender and calling me the revisionist. At no point in either players career was Penny the better defender. Maybe only slightly worse but not equal or better.



Penny was the better defender. Hill was not a particularly good defender back then. He even jokes about it now. Hill was simply a player on defense. He was never above average until he got to Phoenix.



Penny came into the league above average. He played good defense in the post and had great feet on the perimeter. He fought thru screens, had great lateral movement, and stayed in front of his man. He also used his wingspan very well and got a lot of steals, man to man.


No, you're wrong here. Penny Hardaway was a better defender than a no-more than average Grant Hill.

[Clippersfan86]

Penny was the better defender. Hill was not a particularly good defender back then. He even jokes about it now. Hill was simply a player on defense. He was never above average until he got to Phoenix.



Penny came into the league above average. He played good defense in the post and had great feet on the perimeter. He fought thru screens, had great lateral movement, and stayed in front of his man. He also used his wingspan very well and got a lot of steals, man to man.


No, you're wrong here. Penny Hardaway was a better defender than a no-more than average Grant Hill.

Hill was not an all NBA defender early in his career but he was an above average defender, Penny wasn't. I never once said Penny was a poor defender I said he was average or slightly above average where as Hill was better.

[Whoah10115]

Hill was not an all NBA defender early in his career but he was an above average defender, Penny wasn't. I never once said Penny was a poor defender I said he was average or slightly above average where as Hill was better.


But it's not accurate. What's more, that was not the general opinion. The general opinion was that Hill was not aggressive enough and needed to become a better defender, because he had the tools to be good.


Penny was considered a very strong man-to-man defender on the perimeter, able to guard in the post, get steals, and had great shot-blocking instincts, maximizing his athleticism.

[Clippersfan86]

But it's not accurate. What's more, that was not the general opinion. The general opinion was that Hill was not aggressive enough and needed to become a better defender, because he had the tools to be good.


Penny was considered a very strong man-to-man defender on the perimeter, able to guard in the post, get steals, and had great shot-blocking instincts, maximizing his athleticism.

Again we may perceive it different and remember it differently but I disagree. I give Grant Hill the defensive and efficiency edge as well as the scoring edge.

[Whoah10115]

Again we may perceive it different and remember it differently but I disagree. I give Grant Hill the defensive and efficiency edge as well as the scoring edge.



I think Hill had the potential to be better than Pippen, because of the scoring ability. He had the sickest handles. He could have become the 2nd best SF ever (tho Lebron would come along).


But thinking about it now (I hadn't before), I think Penny was probably better. He didn't fall off. Those injuries killed him quick. Like Hill, he came back in Phoenix, but he was never again elite. I think he could have become the 2nd best PG ever.

[Clippersfan86]

I think Hill had the potential to be better than Pippen, because of the scoring ability. He had the sickest handles. He could have become the 2nd best SF ever (tho Lebron would come along).


But thinking about it now (I hadn't before), I think Penny was probably better. He didn't fall off. Those injuries killed him quick. Like Hill, he came back in Phoenix, but he was never again elite. I think he could have become the 2nd best PG ever.

:eek:

[Whoah10115]

:eek:



I know. I think Chris Paul is certainly gearing down that track, and I think Penny would have primed out better...a lot to say. I didn't predict it back then, but I knew he was special. Now, with some time passed, I think I can analyze. I think so.

[tmacattack33]

:eek:

I don't think that's a huge leap to make.

If you look at his assist numbers (7 per game), maybe it does look like one, but Penny was a better passer than the 7 assists per game show.

And I'm guessing the journalists back then recognized that, as he made All-NBA First Team both of his prime years...over Gary Payton in 1995 and over both Stockton and Payton in 1996.

[KOBE143]

1. Scottie Pippen - far the the better defender among the three and slightly better offensively
2. Penny Hardaway - top 5 player in the late 90s, consider to be the next Jordan.. Cant believe Shaq cant win a chip with this player..
3. Grant Hill - almost equal to Penny but always failed to advance in the first round.. He's the Tmac of the 90s.. :lol

[Smoke117]

1. Grant Hill (come on now, he was on his way to maybe be the Lebron before Lebron, i remember Jordan comparing his game to him in 1999 where grant averaged 26-7-5 and saying he passed the torch to him and so on, he was only getting better, then the injury happened)

2. Scottie Pippen

3. Penny Hardaway


But i was more of a Penny fan, one of the smoothest/fluid games i ever seen and playing PG at 6'7 made it even sexier...

When i think about it all these players were pretty damn similar, athletic point-forwards that could do everything...

How does that even make sense? That year his scoring went up, his rebounding and assists were at their lowest since his rookie year. Besides Grant Hill on Pistons under Doug Collins had free reign to do whatever the hell he wanted. Through 96-98 that is why his assist are at their highest...he basically had the ball in his hands all the time and could do whatever he wanted, but that is nonsense that he was a Lebron before Lebron when other parts of his game were diminishing as he started scoring more. That 2000 season was also the worse he had ever been defensively. Lebron has only gotten better defensively, so that comparison is just a bunch of nonsense. It's true with a lot players frankly...when they start scoring more other parts of their game suffer....and other parts of Hills game suffered. Frankly I think people are wrong about him defensively at least as far as 96-98 he was a good defensive player, not Scottie Pippen good obviously, but I'd put him in that good range.

[LA Lakers]

Grew up watching these cats play. In order: Pip, Penny, Hill. Pip def the best. Penny had the most hype going forward with all the Sprite and shoe commercials and it was warranted. Guys footwork and ability to get difficult shots off was something to watch. Always felt Hill to be a little overrated. Magic with Shaq and Penny was scary. But Pip easily the most dominant between the 3.

[Dragonyeuw]

1. Scottie Pippen - far the the better defender among the three and slightly better offensively
2. Penny Hardaway - top 5 player in the late 90s, consider to be the next Jordan.. Cant believe Shaq cant win a chip with this player..
3. Grant Hill - almost equal to Penny but always failed to advance in the first round.. He's the Tmac of the 90s.. :lol

1. Pippen wasn't better offensively than either, despite the similar peak scoring numbers. Penny out of the three probably had the best pure scoring skills and, had he played out his prime as a shooting guard without the injuries, easily had 27-30 ppg potential if he focused more on scoring and less on playing a facilitator role.

2. Penny's knees were more or less shot by late 90s, he peaked in mid 90s. 96 Penny was the best we ever saw from him.

[JohnnySic]

I'd rank Hill first if he had the longevity; as it is, its Pippen, then Hill, with Penny a more distant third.

[ncrizzle]

Penny had a better peak. And if he wasnt riddled with the injury bug for most of his career he would be considered the better player of the 3. Pippen destroys both on defense, but lets remember that MJ was double teamed through scotties whole career. MJ even stated in some interview that Penny was the hardest person in the league to guard.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Peak Penny was definitely better than peak Pippen. Hill is arguably over Pippen as well, but has a weaker case. Penny's top end, though he didn't have need to display it much, was very high.

[PJR]

At their invidual peaks, I'd take Penny. I still remember Penny's back to back 40 spots against the Heat in the playoffs.

[L.Kizzle]

Why Pippen, McGrady would be a better comparison with the other 2.

[Duncan21formvp]

Well all 3 guys finished top 3 in MVP voting one season so it really comes down to who you rwould rather have overall.

[Cali Syndicate]

Why Pippen, McGrady would be a better comparison with the other 2.

I also feel Penny and McGrady were similar in how they played.

But Hill is more like Lebron IMO. Main difference is Hill had a better midrange game and Lebron the better 3 point shooter.

[Dragonyeuw]

At their invidual peaks, I'd take Penny. I still remember Penny's back to back 40 spots against the Heat in the playoffs.
Funny enough this thread prompted me to check out the highlights of those games. He really was the whole package on offense.

[plowking]

Grant Hill's MVP runner up season... was 99 right?

25.8 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 5.2 apg, 1.5 spg on 56.5 TS%. Not to mention Hill's always been a respectable/good defender, although not as good as he has been the last 5-6 years. Penny on the other hand was a mediocre defender who could be classified as average at best.

Penny was an awesome and unique talent but he can't touch prime Hill. As for Pippen his numbers may not be quite as good as peak Hill BUT he's a top 3 perimeter defender of all time and has a case for the top spot in that regard, that alone puts him above Penny IMO.

Penny is one of those players that have become insanely overhyped long after they are gone. I watched him and he was very very gifted and good. That being said his prime was extremely short lived and outside of getting carried by young Shaq didn't do much to impress me. People act like he's Lebron but forget that he only had what 4 seasons as a top caliber player, then vanished? By comparison Tmac and Vince Carter who people act like were a flash in the pan had at leasy 7-8 seasons at the highest level at their position.

LOL at can't touch Hill, and Penny getting carried by Shaq.

In the 95-96 season where Shaq missed the 22 first games of the season, Penny led them to 17-5. That is better than Wade or Kobe ever did with Shaq sitting.
Penny was far better defensively than Hill and simply didn't put up the stats he could offensively because he played smart and in a system where he wasn't given free reign to do what he liked.

Penny was the better player no question. He was leading his team to the playoffs, and impacted the game far more. And the Shaq excuse is thrown out the window, since we've seen how he performs without him. And yes, Penny was better than Pippen too.

Even next season they were 38-21 in the 59 games Penny played; this being the 96-97 season where Shaq joined the Lakers. When Penny didn't play they were 7-16 in the remaining games. Shows how much impact he had.

You really don't have a clue as to what you're writing, and I'm not sure if you've seen more then 2 or 3 games from either Hill or Hardaway back in their Pistons and Magic days.

[Round Mound]

1-Pippen
2-Hill
3-Penny

[D.J.]

Pippen's and Hill's statlines are almost identical, but Pippen was the far superior defender. That puts him above Hill. Hardaway was a better defender than Hill and had better court vision, but his advantage on D isn't enough to put him above Hill. What I liked most about Penny is he didn't hold onto the ball like LeBron in Cleveland did. Penny had great court vision and was able to create mismatches because of his height. If an opposing team put their SG on him, Penny very easily hit Nick Anderson or Dennis Scott for an open 3.

Pip at #1 is clear as day. #2 isn't as clear cut because Hill and Penny are close, but Hill does have the slight advantage. So...Pip #1, Hill #2, and Penny #3.

[plowking]

Its hilarious to see all these pro Hill responses over Penny, yet you wouldn't really be able to name anything that Hill is better at than Penny.

Shooter? Penny.
Post Player? Penny.
Playmaker? Penny.
Defender? Penny.
Drive Penetration? Penny.
Passer? Penny.
More efficient? Penny.

How is Hill better again?

[Eat Like A Bosh]

As of right now, obviously Scottie tops them both. But a prime Grant Hill was like a LeBron.
Peaks. Pippen's versatility is enough to put him over Penny
1. Hill
2. Pippen
3. Penny

[tmacattack33]

Why Pippen, McGrady would be a better comparison with the other 2.

Yeah i don't really get the comparison either, i guess the OP just threw Pippen in there since he was a similar versatile wing player who played at the same time they did.

[StateOfMind12]

Yeah i don't really get the comparison either, i guess the OP just threw Pippen in there since he was a similar versatile wing player who played at the same time they did.
I threw Pippen's name out there because I'm in a voting panel for peaks on another site and Pippen's peak was considered better than both. I don't agree with it but I wanted to see how many others did agree with it.

[97 bulls]

I threw Pippen's name out there because I'm in a voting panel for peaks on another site and Pippen's peak was considered better than both. I don't agree with it but I wanted to see how many others did agree with it.
Thats because Pippen is the best out of the three. He brings the most to the table. But to be honest, all three or four counting McGrady are on the same level

[97 bulls]

Why Pippen, McGrady would be a better comparison with the other 2.
Why wouldnt Pip be in a discussion between these player?

[plowking]

Thats because Pippen is the best out of the three. He brings the most to the table. But to be honest, all three or four counting McGrady are on the same level

Pip was somehow better than Penny despite Penny making the All NBA 1st teams twice in his first 3 years, and only healthy ones really?

Penny was the only real first option out of the three.

I'll say it again when comparing Hill and Penny strictly. Out of the two, what was Hill better at?

Shooter? Penny.
Post Player? Penny.
Playmaker? Penny.
Defender? Penny.
Drive Penetration? Penny.
Passer? Penny.
More efficient? Penny.

Hill has no case over Penny in their primes.
When you look above, the same thing applies for Penny vs Pippen outside of defense. Everything else Penny had him pinned too.

[97 bulls]

Pip was somehow better than Penny despite Penny making the All NBA 1st teams twice in his first 3 years, and only healthy ones really?

Penny was the only real first option out of the three.

I'll say it again when comparing Hill and Penny strictly. Out of the two, what was Hill better at?

Shooter? Penny.
Post Player? Penny.
Playmaker? Penny.
Defender? Penny.
Drive Penetration? Penny.
Passer? Penny.
More efficient? Penny.

Hill has no case over Penny in their primes.
When you look above, the same thing applies for Penny vs Pippen outside of defense. Everything else Penny had him pinned too.
I don't think Penny was better at passing. Or even running an offense. He was a SG/SF playing PG just like the others.

[plowking]

I don't think Penny was better at passing. Or even running an offense. He was a SG/SF playing PG just like the others.

You don't think Penny was better at passing? :oldlol:
Pippen never showed the creativity or court vision Penny had.

Running an offense? That's so obscure and hard to prove, but Penny's track record speaks for itself. He adjusted without Shaq there, and when Shaq was there he lead them to a 17-5 record while Shaq sat out injured the first 22 games of the 95-96 season.

[bizil]

When u are talking MJ, Bron, Hill, Pippen, Drexler, Penny, Kobe, and T-Mac, u are talking guys in that 6'6 to 6'9 range that are freakish athletes, very good-great defenders, very good-great scorers, very good-great passers, and very good-great rebounders. U literally get the TOTAL PACKAGE which is something that makes them unique even amongst Bird and Magic. Not saying all of those guys are better than Bird and Magic, but these guys defensively and athletic ability wise gives them literally no weaknesses.

When it comes to the three guys mentioned for this post, I think Penny was the most polished and best scorer. U gotta realize Penny played his best years with the Diesel and running PG, so his scoring capabilities (like Magic) were apparent when the game was on the line or when it was time to takeover. U can't just look at his stats, even though Penny was an excellent scoring PG.

Defense wise,it clearly goes to Pippen. Rebounding wise, I would roll with Hill. Passing wise, I would take Penny. Peak value wise, I'm gonna take Hill. All at their best, I'm taking G Hill. He was a triple double threat who could get 26 a night and provide very good defense, even back then. After that I would take Penny and then Pippen.

[plowking]

When u are talking MJ, Bron, Hill, Pippen, Drexler, Penny, Kobe, and T-Mac, u are talking guys in that 6'6 to 6'9 range that are freakish athletes, very good-great defenders, very good-great scorers, very good-great passers, and very good-great rebounders. U literally get the TOTAL PACKAGE which is something that makes them unique even amongst Bird and Magic. Not saying all of those guys are better than Bird and Magic, but these guys defensively and athletic ability wise gives them literally no weaknesses.

When it comes to the three guys mentioned for this post, I think Penny was the most polished and best scorer. U gotta realize Penny played his best years with the Diesel and running PG, so his scoring capabilities (like Magic) were apparent when the game was on the line or when it was time to takeover. U can't just look at his stats, even though Penny was an excellent scoring PG.

Defense wise,it clearly goes to Pippen. Rebounding wise, I would roll with Hill. Passing wise, I would take Penny. Peak value wise, I'm gonna take Hill. All at their best, I'm taking G Hill. He was a triple double threat who could get 26 a night and provide very good defense, even back then. After that I would take Penny and then Pippen.

Hill never played with a great rebounder in his life. Look at all those teams he played on. The two seasons he averaged 9rpg, he was the leading rebounder. In one of those seasons T-Mac was the second best rebounder on the team... :confusedshrug:

Penny was playing with Horace Grant and Shaq. Two fantastic rebounders. I don't think there is some great difference in their rebounding abilities. They were both pulling down similar offensive rebounding numbers in their primes.

[97 bulls]

You don't think Penny was better at passing? :oldlol:
Pippen never showed the creativity or court vision Penny had.

Running an offense? That's so obscure and hard to prove, but Penny's track record speaks for itself. He adjusted without Shaq there, and when Shaq was there he lead them to a 17-5 record while Shaq sat out injured the first 22 games of the 95-96 season.
Court vision is such nonsense. How do you make that determination? Especially with players at this level? Assists? Flashy passes? T0s?

And im not implying Hardaway wasnt great at running a team. I just think Pippen was better.

[plowking]

Court vision is such nonsense. How do you make that determination? Especially with players at this level? Assists? Flashy passes? T0s?

And im not implying Hardaway wasnt great at running a team. I just think Pippen was better.

What made Pippen better at running a team?
Court vision? I'm basing that on flashy passes and splitting those impossible gaps. Pippen was much more of a bread and butter passer. He racked up assists in the triangle offense, but never did anything extraordinary. Penny had some passes that reminded you of Magic on the fast break, and Bird in the half court.

[bizil]

Hill never played with a great rebounder in his life. Look at all those teams he played on. The two seasons he averaged 9rpg, he was the leading rebounder. In one of those seasons T-Mac was the second best rebounder on the team... :confusedshrug:

Penny was playing with Horace Grant and Shaq. Two fantastic rebounders. I don't think there is some great difference in their rebounding abilities. They were both pulling down similar offensive rebounding numbers in their primes.

I think all of three guys were great rebounders for their size. But if I had to pick, I would take Hill. Gotta remember Hill and Pippen were both in that 225 pound range while Penny was more slender and most likely 10-15 pounds lighter. Hill and Pippen also defended PF's and had more experience banging with bigger players head on than Penny did. But all three were great rebounders for their sizes and I agree with u!:cheers:

[bizil]

I think Hill and Pippen are great passers no doubt. But Penny I feel was closer to that Bird, Magic, Bron level of epic passing. In terms of seeing the play before it happens and threading the needle type of shit. I'm not saying Pippen or Hill weren't capable of that, but they werent quite on the level of Penny in that regard. When u have players so close in terms of assist output or intelligence, it comes down to little things like that to determine a Penny, Magic, Bron, or Bird over other great 6-6 to 6'9 passers like Hill, Pippen, Mac, MJ,Kobe, or Drexler.

[97 bulls]

What made Pippen better at running a team?
Court vision? I'm basing that on flashy passes and splitting those impossible gaps. Pippen was much more of a bread and butter passer. He racked up assists in the triangle offense, but never did anything extraordinary. Penny had some passes that reminded you of Magic on the fast break, and Bird in the half court.
Pippen could make flashy passes.

Pippen was better at running a tram based on the Six championships, the top ratings in offense four times out of the eight he ran the Bulls offense.

And let's not forget that Pippen dominated Hardaway in 96 ECF.

[97 bulls]

I think all of three guys were great rebounders for their size. But if I had to pick, I would take Hill. Gotta remember Hill and Pippen were both in that 225 pound range while Penny was more slender and most likely 10-15 pounds lighter. Hill and Pippen also defended PF's and had more experience banging with bigger players head on than Penny did. But all three were great rebounders for their sizes and I agree with u!:cheers:
How many boards would Hill pull if he had played with Shaq and Grant or Rodman?

[bizil]

How many boards would Hill pull if he had played with Shaq and Grant or Rodman?

It is what it is. If I had to pick, I would pick Hill as the best rebounder. I stated all three were great rebounders for their size and position. I wouldn't complain at all if someone thought Pippen or Penny was the premier rebounder.

[tmacattack33]

Court vision is such nonsense. How do you make that determination? Especially with players at this level? Assists? Flashy passes? T0s?

And im not implying Hardaway wasnt great at running a team. I just think Pippen was better.

How is court vision non-sense, lol?

Someone like Andrew Bynum does not have it too much of it, and it costs his team buckets. Teams can double team him and much of the time he can't find the open man.

And someone like Rajon Rondo has it, and it allows him to make get his teammates open baskets.



And you make the determination by watching the games. Bynum can make the most simple pass to a clearly wide open teammate...that's all i've really seen him do so far. He's young so hopefully he can better though.

Rondo can find people open who don't even know themselves that they are open. Elite passers like him make it seem like they can see the future. It's like they watched the play on a DVR before it actually happened and knew before hand where all the defenders were going to be and in which direction they would be moving in.

It all happens really fast and is very instinctive, and so its a skill which you can't really learn or develop too much.

[plowking]

Pippen could make flashy passes.

Pippen was better at running a tram based on the Six championships, the top ratings in offense four times out of the eight he ran the Bulls offense.

And let's not forget that Pippen dominated Hardaway in 96 ECF.

Dominated? He shot 35% outside of one good game. Penny averaged 26ppg that series and had a 38 point game where he shot 75% from the field.

This is why no one takes your opinions seriously on the board. You blatantly make shit up. Of course Pippen won six championships. I guess he's better at running a team than Nash as well since his rings say so. He played with the best player ever in his prime.

[97 bulls]

How is court vision non-sense, lol?

Someone like Andrew Bynum does not have it too much of it, and it costs his team buckets. Teams can double team him and much of the time he can't find the open man.

And someone like Rajon Rondo has it, and it allows him to make get his teammates open baskets.



And you make the determination by watching the games. Bynum can make the most simple pass to a clearly wide open teammate...that's all i've really seen him do so far. He's young so hopefully he can better though.

Rondo can find people open who don't even know themselves that they are open. Elite passers like him make it seem like they can see the future. It's like they watched the play on a DVR before it actually happened and knew before hand where all the defenders were going to be and in which direction they would be moving in.

It all happens really fast and is very instinctive, and so its a skill which you can't really learn or develop too much.
If you'll reread my post. I qualified my statement by stating at this level. The difference is minimal if any. Unless you can point out times that Pippen missed open players for easy buckets.

[bizil]

How is court vision non-sense, lol?

Someone like Andrew Bynum does not have it too much of it, and it costs his team buckets. Teams can double team him and much of the time he can't find the open man.

And someone like Rajon Rondo has it, and it allows him to make get his teammates open baskets.



And you make the determination by watching the games. Bynum can make the most simple pass to a clearly wide open teammate...that's all i've really seen him do so far. He's young so hopefully he can better though.

Rondo can find people open who don't even know themselves that they are open. Elite passers like him make it seem like they can see the future. It's like they watched the play on a DVR before it actually happened and knew before hand where all the defenders were going to be and in which direction they would be moving in.

It all happens really fast and is very instinctive, and so its a skill which you can't really learn or develop too much.

U are exactly right and summed up how an epic passer like Rondo sees the game. A flashy pass is often times done because many times its UNEXPECTED. It just happens to look so awesome that it is a piece of art. When Magic was doing a no look pass, he was ACTUALLY fooling the defense. When Bird did his shit in the halfcourt and throwing dimes over his head, it was unexpected. U have guys who are great passers who make the correct pass and are very intelligent and prolific at that. But then u have guys who make the UNEXPECTED PASS in addition to that, which puts them on another level. Penny was guy who was epic at the UNEXPECTED PASS just like Bron is today. However both happen to be great athletes, and great scorers, so many coaches would prefer to play them with another PG or small combo guard to open them up for other elements.

[DatAsh]

What made Pippen better at running a team?
Court vision? I'm basing that on flashy passes and splitting those impossible gaps. Pippen was much more of a bread and butter passer. He racked up assists in the triangle offense, but never did anything extraordinary. Penny had some passes that reminded you of Magic on the fast break, and Bird in the half court.

I'd agree that Penny was overall the better passer, and better at running a team, and probably a better scorer on top of that, but the defensive gap between he Pippen is enough to make up for it in my opinion. I'm going with

Pippen
Penny
Hill

in that order

[97 bulls]

Dominated? He shot 35% outside of one good game. Penny averaged 26ppg that series and had a 38 point game where he shot 75% from the field.

This is why no one takes your opinions seriously on the board. You blatantly make shit up. Of course Pippen won six championships. I guess he's better at running a team than Nash as well since his rings say so. He played with the best player ever in his prime.
What did Hardaway shoot outside of his one good game? And dont dont forget those game weren't close. Alot of Hardaways points were scored when the game had already been decided. And that one good game Hardaway had, most of his points came in the first half. The Bulls defense spearheaded by Pippens defense on Hardaway force Orlando to cough up a 20 point lead. Hardaway was shut down in the second half of that game by Pip.

[DatAsh]

Pippen could make flashy passes.

Pippen was better at running a tram based on the Six championships, the top ratings in offense four times out of the eight he ran the Bulls offense.

And let's not forget that Pippen dominated Hardaway in 96 ECF.

Come on now, you and I both know that the bolded is pretty disingenuous.

[97 bulls]

Come on now, you and I both know that the bolded is pretty disingenuous.
How? The best way to determine a players efficiency at running a teams offense is how efficient that teams offense is.

[DatAsh]

How? The best way to determine a players efficiency at running a teams offense is how efficient that teams offense is.

I'm sure having Michael Jordan on his team had nothing to do with that all time great offense.

[97 bulls]

I'm sure having Michael Jordan on his team had nothing to do with that all time great offense.
Sure it did. So did Rodman, and Kukoc, and Kerr, and armstrong, and Grant etc. But Pippen RAN the team. The question was who did the better Job. Hardaway wasn't exactly working with chopped liver. Shaq, Anderson, Grant, and Scott?

[The Mamba]

Hill and Penny never reached their peak due to injury, though.

[Dragonyeuw]

Hill and Penny never reached their peak due to injury, though.

Grant was 28 and 7 years in when the ankle injury came. For all purposes he was maybe a year into his peak. Penny's last really great year was 96, at 25 with 3 seasons under his belt. Which, when you think about it is pretty crazy because Penny after 3 seasons played with the poise of a 7 year veteran.

People talk about how we were robbed of seeing prime Grant and Penny; at least with Hill we got 7 good years out of him. We could see where his career was headed. We were TRULY robbed in Penny's case, we never got to see him at 28, healthy and at his skills/athleticism/mental peak. Even in 3 seasons, at the best we saw of him he was at least on the level of Hill and I believe had injuries not derailed both, Hardaway would have proven himself the more dominant player. Yeah Hill had the triple doubles and all that, but I think Penny could do more with less. As stated before, look at the Magic's record without Shaq and a healthy Penny, they barely skipped a beat.