PDA

View Full Version : How good would they have been?



Hawkeye15
08-24-2008, 06:02 PM
If Injuries hadn't happened, to Grant Hill or Penny Hardaway, how good could these guys have been? There are some other guys too

bogdanrom
08-24-2008, 06:07 PM
Both of them would probably be top 5 at their respected position.

SeoulBeatz
08-24-2008, 06:08 PM
i agree, Grant Hill would have been one of the greatest of all time.

penny would have been a perrennial all star as well, i feel for them.

masalex1205
08-24-2008, 06:19 PM
Jason Williams would have been solid if he hadn't gotten hurt

Hawkeye15
08-24-2008, 06:21 PM
Jason Williams would have been solid if he hadn't gotten hurt

what I meant was players that had a shot at top 50 players ever, not guys who would have been better than okay

Lakersfan2483
08-24-2008, 06:48 PM
Penny Hardaway would have been a top 50 player of all-time, he had skills, great court vision, could score on anyone, pass better than most, he had his own unique style. He should have been a hall of famer.

Grant Hill had game, he was a point/forward, he avg. 25, 7, 7 a game in his prime. A great player who could perform in the clutch and made others better. He could have been a top player as well.

madiaz3
08-24-2008, 06:49 PM
what I meant was players that had a shot at top 50 players ever, not guys who would have been better than okay

I think Jason Williams had that shot from what I heard.

PhxGiant
08-24-2008, 07:04 PM
Grant Hill could have been top 10 or top 5 of all time, one of the first point forwards. I think one season he lead his team in points, assists, rebounds, and steals.

lakers4sho
08-24-2008, 07:08 PM
Probably top 5 at their respective positions.

bigmac8675
08-24-2008, 07:12 PM
Yea Greant would have been in the top 5 at his position and Penny would be right on the cusp of the top 5 at his position. Both were stellar back before injuries.
Dude, I still have the Pistons Grant Hill plastic cup from McDonalds!

Killebrewcrew3
08-24-2008, 07:15 PM
I think Jason Williams had that shot from what I heard.

But he never played long enough to know. You cant really go by personal predictions.

SensandRaps
08-24-2008, 07:25 PM
Grant Hill would be a top 10 small forward

SwaggaIke
08-24-2008, 07:48 PM
Grant would have been an all time great. Possible top 15 player of all time.

ARMIN12NBA
08-24-2008, 07:56 PM
Probably top 5 at their respective positions.

Agreed.

How about Lenny Bias or Jay Williams? Len Bias would've been one of the great players of his era as well as help the Celtics win a few more titles and prolong McHale and Birds careers. Jay Williams would've been a top point guard in this league and the Rockets would've probably wished they took him over Yao.

SwaggaIke
08-24-2008, 08:02 PM
I don't know about Jay Williams. But Len Bias would have been great. Len Bias + Reggie Lewis = Murder. They definitely would have cut into the Bulls Dynasty.

agnine
08-25-2008, 02:30 PM
Both would have put together the type of career that everyone envisions for LeBron. So would Larry Johnson.

sixers247
08-25-2008, 02:35 PM
Grant Hill was a beast. He was putting up numbers on a yearly basis that every ooo's and ahhhh's out when Lebron does it now.

JordansBulls
08-25-2008, 03:06 PM
Both Penny and Grant were great players and would be guys who could probably lead teams to the finals as the focal point of the team.

Industry
08-25-2008, 03:11 PM
Ron Harper......and there will always be a question mark about Bobby Hurley

_Sn1P3r_
08-25-2008, 03:14 PM
Didn't Grant Hill get more voted than MJ once for an allstar game? I also think both players could've been top 5 at their positions.

Mile High Champ
08-25-2008, 03:32 PM
Agreed.

How about Lenny Bias or Jay Williams? Len Bias would've been one of the great players of his era as well as help the Celtics win a few more titles and prolong McHale and Birds careers. Jay Williams would've been a top point guard in this league and the Rockets would've probably wished they took him over Yao.

Len Bias?? all your going on is college. He never played in the NBA for even a minute. You cant just say he would of been one of the best of his era. He did not prove anything at all..

JWalk126
08-25-2008, 03:40 PM
I honestly have no idea

SwaggaIke
08-25-2008, 03:44 PM
Len Bias?? all your going on is college. He never played in the NBA for even a minute. You cant just say he would of been one of the best of his era. He did not prove anything at all..

Did you ever watch Len play or are you just talking? His tangible skills were phenomenal. He had everything you could ask for in a player. GREAT mid range game, GREAT athlete, GREAT size and a supremely muscular build. He had all the makings of a damn good NBA player.

pwest6
08-25-2008, 06:19 PM
Did you ever watch Len play or are you just talking? His tangible skills were phenomenal. He had everything you could ask for in a player. GREAT mid range game, GREAT athlete, GREAT size and a supremely muscular build. He had all the makings of a damn good NBA player.

So did Kwame Brown

Hawkeye15
08-25-2008, 06:33 PM
Both would have put together the type of career that everyone envisions for LeBron. So would Larry Johnson.

disagree on Johnson. THose other guys were huge for their position, and had supreme athletic ability. Johnson would never have been a top 10 PF, no matter what

Hawkeye15
08-25-2008, 06:34 PM
Did you ever watch Len play or are you just talking? His tangible skills were phenomenal. He had everything you could ask for in a player. GREAT mid range game, GREAT athlete, GREAT size and a supremely muscular build. He had all the makings of a damn good NBA player.

He was very talented. He would have fit in perfectly with Boston too. Sad story

Hawkeye15
08-25-2008, 06:36 PM
Ron Harper......and there will always be a question mark about Bobby Hurley

usually the highest level players start fast, so Hurley, while I think would have been a serviceable point guard, never had the chance to be a star. Ron Harper was pretty sweet back in the day. Behind MJ and Drexler, I thought he was the best SG out there. But he did recover from his injuries, he played like 3-4 seasons of 19 ppg and then began to decline.

mrblisterdundee
08-25-2008, 06:41 PM
Sam Bowie might not have sucked quite as bad. The Blazers might have never been regarded as making the worst draft choice ever; maybe just the second or third worst.

Beno7500
08-25-2008, 07:21 PM
They would be the same.

bogdanrom
08-25-2008, 09:01 PM
They would be the same.

What?!? I hope you're just kidding.

mariotubes
08-25-2008, 09:15 PM
what I meant was players that had a shot at top 50 players ever, not guys who would have been better than okay

then say u meant that

ARMIN12NBA
08-26-2008, 12:11 AM
Len Bias?? all your going on is college. He never played in the NBA for even a minute. You cant just say he would of been one of the best of his era. He did not prove anything at all..

Well, he died 2 days after the draft. There is no way I or anyone could've ever seen him play in the NBA so, yes, I am going on college and he was great. He was a better shooter than MJ was at that same time. He had great post skills and was a terrific dunker. If you saw him play in college then you would agree that he would've been amazing. Many analysts believe he would've been great. He wasn't going on a bad team that he'd have to carry. He would've played on the defending champion Celtics and would've had great coaching and leadership in Bird and McHale to bring him along.

SAVAGE CLAW
08-26-2008, 12:25 AM
Its more than Probable that T-Mac would have known the second round of the playoffs.

And its also probable that Tim Duncan , Kobe and Shaq had not so many rings.

Grant Hill was Hughe!!!.

Im not so sold on Hardaway, i think Magic made a Hughe mistake trading webber for him.

theuuord
08-26-2008, 12:35 AM
Shawn Kemp.

SAVAGE CLAW
08-26-2008, 12:35 AM
The list of people that had great looks but didnt go that far, or be as great as they could have been because of either Injuries, or Drugs,Depression,Overweight, or Courtside trouble is long.

There you have from the top of my minds just some names:

Bernard King,Larry Johnson, Dratzen Petrovic, Kenny Anderson,Len Bias,Reggie Lewis,Alonzo Mourning,Chris Washburn,Ray Ray,Hardaway,Stanley Roberts,Harold Miner,William Bedford,Vin Baker,Orlando Wooldrige,Brad Daugherty,Oliver Miller,Richard Dumas,Ralph Sampson,Walter Berry,Bobby Hurley,Benoit Benjamin,Ron Harper,Darius Miles,Roy Tarpley,Jamaal Mashburn,Sam Elliott,Big Country Reeves, Michael Dickerson, Chris Jackson,Reggie Williams,Bobby Phils,Jr Rider,Terrell Brandon,Raul Lopez,Sam Bowie, Shawn Kemp.....

SAVAGE CLAW
08-26-2008, 12:36 AM
And cant help to be amazed at how good was Chris Mullin even if he was an Alcoholic!!!!, How could he have been if he didnt drink????

dre1990
08-26-2008, 12:42 AM
Grant hill would be considered top 5 all time. penny would have been considered top 15, top 5 at the gaurd

SwaggaIke
08-26-2008, 12:49 AM
Well, he died 2 days after the draft. There is no way I or anyone could've ever seen him play in the NBA so, yes, I am going on college and he was great. He was a better shooter than MJ was at that same time. He had great post skills and was a terrific dunker. If you saw him play in college then you would agree that he would've been amazing. Many analysts believe he would've been great. He wasn't going on a bad team that he'd have to carry. He would've played on the defending champion Celtics and would've had great coaching and leadership in Bird and McHale to bring him along.

I completely agree. He would have been Bird's successor. Had Bias lived he would have also prolonged Bird's career. Him and McHale wouldn't have had to shoulder such a load in the mid to late 80s on into the early 90s. Bird could have lasted well into 95.

Tha Truth
08-26-2008, 12:53 AM
Grant will was suppose to be the next Jordan.

Of course the injuries did not allow him to reach his potential.

GregOden#1
08-26-2008, 01:01 AM
Whoever is saying Hill would be top 5, top 10, top 15, or even top 30 are smoking something fierce. He was 28 when he got injured, Kobe wasn't top 20 when he was 28 and he had 3 championships.

BadnewzNiners
08-26-2008, 01:05 AM
lived in Detroit when they had grant hill, he was amazing. def was like Marion as was rebounds vision of a point guard and his shot was clutch and he's an awesome person as well. I was truly hurt when he went down. He is my favorite player of all time. he led the league in triple doubles. could argued he would of been best SF all-time. would of earned some def player of the year awards and some mvp's as well as some scoring titles.

DopieB
08-26-2008, 01:09 AM
Well, he died 2 days after the draft. There is no way I or anyone could've ever seen him play in the NBA so, yes, I am going on college and he was great. He was a better shooter than MJ was at that same time. He had great post skills and was a terrific dunker. If you saw him play in college then you would agree that he would've been amazing. Many analysts believe he would've been great. He wasn't going on a bad team that he'd have to carry. He would've played on the defending champion Celtics and would've had great coaching and leadership in Bird and McHale to bring him along.
He would have been a superstar, and if lewis was there it would have been a great 1-2 punch

barreleffact
08-26-2008, 01:11 AM
So did Kwame Brown

kwame brown shouldnt even be considered in the same league as any of these players. bias played in college and brown didnt. plus bias would have come out in 85 but something happened where his parents or something wanted him to stay one more year for reasons i dont remember. but anyway, brown was fully based off potential. bias actually was proven in college and was compared to jordan multiple times but actually could have been an equal. he was taller and just as athletic with a better shot at the time. im glad he couldnt stop jordans legacy but im sad at the cost. h/e i still dont feel sorry for him because its his fault, if im not mistaken

BadnewzNiners
08-26-2008, 01:17 AM
Whoever is saying Hill would be top 5, top 10, top 15, or even top 30 are smoking something fierce. He was 28 when he got injured, Kobe wasn't top 20 when he was 28 and he had 3 championships.

name a SF with more tools than him? kobe hadn't proved anything at that time except that he was good with shaq on his team he played bad D and couldn't pass worth a damn. Grant lead his team in almost every category, top of the league in scoring, averaged around 2 blocks and 2 steals per game led league in triple doubles. He took MJ to 7 games with no one else on his team and doesn't he have a gold medal.

scrumptiousduck
08-26-2008, 01:29 AM
i think guys like vince carter or steve francis jermaine Oniel should be up here all never lived up to potential and had injuries hold them back all couldve been top 50

Ph1lly Diehard
08-26-2008, 01:33 AM
i think guys like vince carter or steve francis jermaine Oniel should be up here all never lived up to potential and had injuries hold them back all couldve been top 50

No they shouldn't. All of them have showed what they are cappable of when healthy, and all were allstars other the Francis. Jermaine is the only one that we could maybe say "what if", but Steve just isn't that good, and Vince is Vince, a great player.

barreleffact
08-26-2008, 01:35 AM
im still wondering about jay williams. i think he couldve been as good as anyone

BRADfromOZ
08-26-2008, 01:45 AM
IMO both would have been all time greats. Point Guards would compared to Magic and Penny and Small Forwards to Larry Bird and Grant Hill.

AIMelo=KillaDUO
08-26-2008, 01:52 AM
Grant woulda been great. It's always sad to see players with so much potential, having there careers cut short, or limited due to injuries :(

Bishnoff
08-26-2008, 02:24 AM
I'd put Amare in this category too. If you have a look at how he played the PF position before double micro-fracture surgery compared to now you’d know that he has totally changed his game in order to achieve the same numbers. Before surgery, he could rely purely on his speed and athleticism (which rivalled the best SF’s at the time) to power past opponents for either a dunk or a trip to the free-throw line (led the league in free-throw attempts). He was a much more opposing defender due to his lateral quickness; something he doesn’t possess nowadays to the same degree.

During his year off, he developed an excellent mid range jumper and has improved his free-throw percentage considerably – both of which have made up for the drop in dunks and easy baskets in the paint. I only imagine of what he would be like today if he hadn’t required surgery; power, speed, athleticism and finesse – the total package.

SwaggaIke
08-26-2008, 02:28 AM
Surgery was the best thing that could have ever happened to Amare.

Hellcrooner
08-26-2008, 02:46 AM
Grant hill reminds me a lot of the bernard kings case, all the skills in teh world, all the time in the world to become best sf ever and a tragic injury that has them a lot of years totally screwed, but at last they are able to make a good seaosn or two to retire on a good note.

DerekRE_3
08-26-2008, 02:49 AM
What about Jonathon Bender? 7 foot SF with athleticism and he could shoot pretty well. If his knees hadn't gone to hell he could have been a special player.

The same could be said about Lionel Simmons. He averaged 18 ppg his rookie year, but his knees gave out on him.

LAcowBOMBER
08-26-2008, 03:09 AM
Grant hill would be considered top 5 all time. penny would have been considered top 15, top 5 at the gaurd

Really? Think about what you are saying. Top 5 all-time. That's ridiculous. I mean Lebron is a better player, Kobe is better and that is just current players that are better than him without question really

LakerzDQ
08-26-2008, 09:47 AM
grant hill would've become like a 30/8/7 player, and one of the best SF's ever. I can compare him to Lebron stat-wise.

Knicks845
08-26-2008, 10:11 AM
Penny Hardaway would have been a top 50 player of all-time, he had skills, great court vision, could score on anyone, pass better than most, he had his own unique style. He should have been a hall of famer.

Grant Hill had game, he was a point/forward, he avg. 25, 7, 7 a game in his prime. A great player who could perform in the clutch and made others better. He could have been a top player as well.

Where'd he average 25,7,7? NBA or College?

BigSteve
08-26-2008, 12:46 PM
I think I'll always be a little mad that Grant Hill had the injuries he did. He was one of the most complete players I have ever seen. He could have gone out and tried to put up insane stats, but he was a team player and did everything he could to always have his teammates involved. I probably watched every game that he played while he was in Detroit. Its a shame this happened to him. I don't think it is a stretch at all to say he would have been a top 5 SF. Not sure if he would have made it into the top 10 of all time, but he would have been in the top 20 for sure.

Penny Hardaway was the first player I ever tried to pattern my game after. I had seen him in college when he was younger and ran around and told everyone that would listen that he was going to be the second coming when he got drafted. He was another guy who was a complete player. He did everything well. In my opinion he would have been top 50 for sure when he retired.

Chronz
08-26-2008, 12:57 PM
Yep they were good, but not Kobe good, not Tmac / Vince in their primes good.

Hawkeye15
08-26-2008, 01:13 PM
Yep they were good, but not Kobe good, not Tmac / Vince in their primes good.

I think Grant Hill was better than either before he went down. Way better. As for Penny, he would have been better than VC, around the same as TMac though. But he was a PG, remember

Chronz
08-26-2008, 01:18 PM
Well injuries took away the prime of all these players but based on how they played then yea Grant Hill was better than Vince, Penny is alittle overrated IMO but yea as a PG he was great and pretty close to Vince at his peak.

I dont think either of them were at Tmac's Orlando years though, its a shame they never played a playoff game together. To me the fact that Tmac was so great at such a young age is the biggest determining factor

Hawkeye15
08-26-2008, 01:26 PM
Really? Think about what you are saying. Top 5 all-time. That's ridiculous. I mean Lebron is a better player, Kobe is better and that is just current players that are better than him without question really

From 96-98', Hill was a top 2-3 player easy. In fact, Hill from those years, I would take over Kobe. He did everything, and was a great defender. And don't bring up Kobe being first team all defense. I have always said, i think that is an insult to the team in general.

Hawkeye15
08-26-2008, 01:27 PM
Well injuries took away the prime of all these players but based on how they played then yea Grant Hill was better than Vince, Penny is alittle overrated IMO but yea as a PG he was great and pretty close to Vince at his peak.

I dont think either of them were at Tmac's Orlando years though, its a shame they never played a playoff game together. To me the fact that Tmac was so great at such a young age is the biggest determining factor

TMac was a better scorer, Hill was better at literally everything else. I take Hill before injury over TMac anyday

Chronz
08-26-2008, 03:14 PM
What about Jonathon Bender? 7 foot SF with athleticism and he could shoot pretty well. If his knees hadn't gone to hell he could have been a special player.

The same could be said about Lionel Simmons. He averaged 18 ppg his rookie year, but his knees gave out on him.

Yea I know a guy who loves the Pacers and to this day he talks about what Bender couldve been.

Chronz
08-26-2008, 03:28 PM
TMac was a better scorer, Hill was better at literally everything else. I take Hill before injury over TMac anyday

Hill and Tmac are very similar in terms of passing ability, but even if he wasnt, Tmac is still the better offensive player so I dont see why it would matter if hes better at everything else if it doesnt negate Tmac's main superiority. Tmac before his back problems played at a level Hill never reached. Hes a better rebounder for sure but their rebounding rates arent too far off. Tmac at his best was too gifted offensively, he carried burdens so huge that lesser players wouldve led the league in turnovers, Hill included. Just a great decision maker and ball-handler.

Also Tmac raised his game substantially in every postseason certainly much higher than Hill ever did.

bogdanrom
08-26-2008, 06:04 PM
Hill and Tmac are very similar in terms of passing ability, but even if he wasnt, Tmac is still the better offensive player so I dont see why it would matter if hes better at everything else if it doesnt negate Tmac's main superiority. Tmac before his back problems played at a level Hill never reached. Hes a better rebounder for sure but their rebounding rates arent too far off. Tmac at his best was too gifted offensively, he carried burdens so huge that lesser players wouldve led the league in turnovers, Hill included. Just a great decision maker and ball-handler.

Also Tmac raised his game substantially in every postseason certainly much higher than Hill ever did.

After looking closer at their stats, I think Hill would have had a better career. Mcgrady was definitely a better offensive threat, but Hill beat in almost everything. Hill was a better rebounder, passer, defender, and more efficient( career FG of 48%, and in his best season he averaged 50%FG). And Hill wasn't awful on the offsenvise end( Career PPG Hill- 19.3, Mcgrady-22.4). Hill would have probably become a 30-31PPG, 9RPG, 8RPG, 2SPG, 1SPG. In Mcgrady defense he has some injury trouble but not even close to Hill's.

GregOden#1
08-26-2008, 06:11 PM
After looking closer at their stats, I think Hill would have had a better career. Mcgrady was definitely a better offensive threat, but Hill beat in almost everything. Hill was a better rebounder, passer, defender, and more efficient( career FG of 48%, and in his best season he averaged 50%FG). And Hill wasn't awful on the offsenvise end( Career PPG Hill- 19.3, Mcgrady-22.4). Hill would have probably become a 30-31PPG, 9RPG, 8RPG, 2SPG, 1SPG. In Mcgrady defense he has some injury trouble but not even close to Hill's.

He was 28, the guy was in his prime. Saying Hill would average Oscar Robertson stats when he never even got close to that level is beyond ridiculous.

bogdanrom
08-26-2008, 06:19 PM
He was 28, the guy was in his prime. Saying Hill would average Oscar Robertson stats when he never even got close to that level is beyond ridiculous.

During that time(don't know exactly when) but somewhere in his prime is when he got injured. And a couple of year before that he averaged 22PPG, 9 RPG, and 7 APG.

BRADfromOZ
08-26-2008, 06:35 PM
Where'd he average 25,7,7? NBA or College?
Detroit 99-00 25.8ppg 6.6rpg 5.2apg
Career 19.3ppg 6.8rpg 5.0apg

Chronz
08-27-2008, 04:19 AM
After looking closer at their stats, I think Hill would have had a better career. Mcgrady was definitely a better offensive threat, but Hill beat in almost everything. Hill was a better rebounder, passer, defender, and more efficient( career FG of 48%, and in his best season he averaged 50%FG). And Hill wasn't awful on the offsenvise end( Career PPG Hill- 19.3, Mcgrady-22.4). Hill would have probably become a 30-31PPG, 9RPG, 8RPG, 2SPG, 1SPG. In Mcgrady defense he has some injury trouble but not even close to Hill's.
First of all when comparing a players prime stages dont look at career averages. Secondly I never said Hill was awful offensively, in fact he was pretty great, lastly he wasnt more efficient than Tmac at his peak, he had a higher fg% but he didnt shoot 3's at all and was more turnover prone, thats why Tmac had the higher offensive rating and TS%. And I dont see why you would rank Hill as the better passer, Tmac is one of the greatest decision makers with his passing.

Also I doubt Hill wouldve approached those numbers, his best rebounding days were behind him but it all depends on the pace and minutes played so I dont put much stock into per game averages.

Chronz
08-27-2008, 04:27 AM
During that time(don't know exactly when) but somewhere in his prime is when he got injured. And a couple of year before that he averaged 22PPG, 9 RPG, and 7 APG.

He basically averaged 20 10 and 7 his 2nd year at age 23, but people get too caught up in how pretty the triple double threat looks, its why people have continued to overrate Jason Kidd despite his obvious decline. Even Kidd himself thought he was having one of his finest seasons because he averaged alot of rebounds when honestly what they contribute offensively is far more important. Anyways that was his 3rd year, by age 27 his rebound rate fell to 10.2 which wasnt far off of Tmac 9.5 rate in his best season.

Hill couldnt touch McGrady offensively (When I say this I mean their playmaking and overall scoring ability), his rebounding edge doesnt give him enough separation for me to label him the better player.

Chronz
08-27-2008, 04:28 AM
Detroit 99-00 25.8ppg 6.6rpg 5.2apg
Career 19.3ppg 6.8rpg 5.0apg

So basically never

bogdanrom
08-27-2008, 01:52 PM
First of all when comparing a players prime stages dont look at career averages. Secondly I never said Hill was awful offensively, in fact he was pretty great, lastly he wasnt more efficient than Tmac at his peak, he had a higher fg% but he didnt shoot 3's at all and was more turnover prone, thats why Tmac had the higher offensive rating and TS%. And I dont see why you would rank Hill as the better passer, Tmac is one of the greatest decision makers with his passing.

Also I doubt Hill wouldve approached those numbers, his best rebounding days were behind him but it all depends on the pace and minutes played so I dont put much stock into per game averages.

The thing is that he didn't have a chance to show what he can really do because he was always injured. I'm not saying he would have been much better than TMac but I think he would have been a little better than him. We will never know though.

BowDown32
08-27-2008, 02:14 PM
Grant Hill was nasty. He was so much fun to watch, he could do it all. Penny on the other hand was good, but I don't think he would still be as good as Grant Hill.
I'm glad to see him back, cuz he can still help a team after the 27 surgeries or however many he had. I don't think Penny can help anybody.

Tom81
08-27-2008, 03:39 PM
i agree, Grant Hill would have been one of the greatest of all time.

penny would have been a perrennial all star as well, i feel for them.

agreed

Chronz
08-27-2008, 03:50 PM
The thing is that he didn't have a chance to show what he can really do because he was always injured. I'm not saying he would have been much better than TMac but I think he would have been a little better than him. We will never know though.

Yes he did, he had several healthy seasons and his talents were on full display, by 25 players are almost fully developed by 28 they are in their prime, and his prime was great just not as great as Tmac was at age 22.

If anyone was robbed of their prime it was Tmac.