Roy, Hill, or Penny?

Close between Hill and Penny, but I gotta go with Penny

 

Grant Hill was not the next MJ and I can't stand when people say that. That's not to say he wouldn't have been great because he was already on his way.

That being said, he has nothing on penny hardaway. penny was magic with with incredible athleticism. a six seven point guard who could dunk on your entire team. grant hill was a really good small forward but I don't think he was truly great at anything.

 

His numbers are better than Pennys. Grant Hill could dunk on you just the same. he posterized just about everyone back then. And i think when people say the next MJ, it's bc they did say that about him back then...they said it about everyone though because they were desperate for the next MJ. Don't think it was a comparison of talent, but as in the next big thing for the league. Not being MJ himself. Hill basically put up LBJ #'s minus 6-9pts because he didn't shoot nearly as much as LBJ. The knock on him was that he wasn't aggressive, yet when he finally started to shoot more and score over 25ppg, he did it shooting near 50%

I'd Rank since the mid 90s:
1.Grant Hill

2.T-Mac
2b.Penny







3.Roy

 

i looked at the stats after that post, and i didn't realize how good grant's season was before he got hurt, he took his scoring avg way up.

at the same time i may have overrated some of the things that penny did but penny and shaq were a nice combo and it would have been interesting to see him be the lead superstar on the team.

i don't know if i completely buy into the stories about penny and shaq not getting along, shaq was going to LA no matter what HE WANTED TO MAKE MOVIES, so i would say penny was more serious about winning. shaq surely had no problem making his issues with kobe public

 

Grant Hill.... Grant Hill was literally Lebron lite. He would have been one of the best SFs of all time.

 

i agree, but grant hill is also like lebron where he didn't take over games as far as scoring was concerned. that's why i'm arguing penny but the penny argument is more based on potential. i can't deny that grant had the better start to his career, however i know it was with shaq but penny was in the finals

 

If the implication that Grant Hill was just as good as LeBron, but didn't score as much simply because he wasn't as selfish, it's a very flawed argument.

Grant Hill's best year (age 27)
25.8 ppg on 19.2 shots, 6.6 rebounds, 5.2 assists.
Led his team to a 42-40 record that year. Never went out of first round with Pistons.

LeBron's career averages (came straight from high school, where most guys are very inefficient first few years)
27.6 ppg on 20.3 shots, 7.2 rebounds, 6.9 assists

Keep in mind that Grant Hill only had this one scoring outlier year and that his assist totals dropped off (not coincidentally) that year.

He was never as good for even one year as LeBron has been pretty much every year of his career.

I think it's absurd when people throw up "Top 10 of all time" when they bring up Grant Hill. LeBron isn't even top 10 of all time and he's a superior player.