Grant Hill or Paul George

[VIntageNOvel]

Grant Hill was a force man.

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

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

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

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

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

http://cdn.tss.uproxx.com/TSS/wp-con.../Boots-Guy.jpg



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

true, uninjured grant hill = lebron now

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

[K Xerxes]

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

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

[Dro]

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

[plowking]

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

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

Defensively, Lebron is more versatile and better man defender.

Again with the general statements.

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

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

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

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

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

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

More dumb shit from you.

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

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

[poido123]

Again with the general statements.

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

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





More dumb shit from you.

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Hoopz2332]

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

[SamuraiSWISH]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[knicksman]

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

[plowking]

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

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

This dude using yahoo answers as his back up.

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

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

[50_40_90_]

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

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

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

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

[poido123]

This dude using yahoo answers as his back up.

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

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

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

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

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

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

First page on Inside hoops looks pretty resounding

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

Here's Real GM

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



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

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

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

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

[plowking]

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

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

[poido123]

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

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

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

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

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

[hawkfan]

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

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

[cos88]

george hill for me