How good does Grant Hill's 1997 peak season compare to alltime SF peaks

[migya]

Grant Hill's peak season by metrics is 1997. How does it compare alltime in one year peaks among SFs?

80gm,
39.3mins, 21.4pts, 49.6fg%, 9reb, 7.3ast, 1.8stl, 0.6blk, 3.2tos,
Per 100 - 13reb, 10.5ast, 2.6stl, 0.9blk, 30.9pts, 114OR, 100DR
25.5PER, 55.6ts%, 8.7ows, 5.9dws, 14.6ws, .223ws/48, 8.2bpm, 8.0vorp

Certainly one of the most all-around seasons.

If Hill's prime lasted 12 seasons, double what it did, are the same level as his six Detroit seasons, would he be top 5 SF?

[AEnigma]

Prime Grant Hill played fifteen postseason games total and never exited the first round, and he only ever finished above tenth in points per game once, so we probably should rate his peak/prime below Kawhi, Durant, Pippen, Erving, McGinnis, Barry, Baylor, Havlicek, Cunningham, Chet Walker, King, Marques Johnson, English, Worthy, Wilkins, Dantley, Aguirre, Mullin, Artest, Pierce, Carmelo, Butler, Paul George, Tatum, Cliff Hagan, Paul Arizin, Connie Hawkins, Roger Brown…

Just not enough of a winner!

Olympic level gymnastics to celebrate Grant Hill while dismissing Garnett for not going far enough in the postseason, but what else is new.

[Colbinii]

Hill had no shot at being a Top 5 SF all-time with LeBron, Bird, Durant, Erving, Havlicek, Pippen, Kawhi and Barry considering Havlicek and Pippen are not far-off offensively yet defensively there is a massive gap. Kawhi at his peak and every prime season is considerably better than Hill while Barry is more of a wildcard as a much better scorer.

[Owly]

Hill had no shot at being a Top 5 SF all-time with LeBron, Bird, Durant, Erving, Havlicek, Pippen, Kawhi and Barry considering Havlicek and Pippen are not far-off offensively yet defensively there is a massive gap. Kawhi at his peak and every prime season is considerably better than Hill while Barry is more of a wildcard as a much better scorer.

Unclear whether you are talking peak, per the OP question or career.

Limited tools available but '97 or 2000 for Hill he peaks at either .133 OWS/48 or .140; Havlicek, in '70 or '74 at between .091 and .092. For the very slightly higher Hondo season (and doing this off total season OWS so prior rounding might have made a difference with the margin so small) of '74 we have OBPM (and it's the best one we have numbers for, though we don't have his full career) and it's 1.7. Hill's two strongest years cited were both 5.4.

These are box only, maybe one loves Hondo's off ball game, think he's a better shooter, scales better. Tools are limited etc. Still, there's pretty substantial box gap there.

Re: Barry - scorer
Where he rate in this regard would seem to depend on year. He mashes the early ABA on small samples (falling back to more normal goodness in later ABA years). He's good in his early NBA career, when he's less of a playmaker. When I'd guess more people think his peak (NBA return, esp often the title year and vaunted MVP "snub") is he's only a little above average efficiency (then below and staying below after '76). It comes in concert with playmaking to add value but with Barry in a given year you don't get health and efficiency and playmaking, so for peak purposes it depends what year one is talking matters as to the value of scoring specifically.

[parsnips33]

Am I missing something? When did KG get brought into it?

[magicman1978]

Better peaks would include LeBron, Bird, Pippen, Dr. J, Kawhi, KD, Baylor and I'm probably forgetting someone there - but he definitely wouldn't be top 5 peaks for me.

If he had a 12-year prime, I would put him over Pippen and Kawhi as they both had/have pretty short primes comparatively. So he may move up a bit - but still would be behind LeBron, Bird, Dr J, KD, and Baylor.

[Snakebites]

As a Piston fan who grew up in the 90s I'm higher on him than I think most people are. He's still outside of my top 5 in terms of single season peaks.

I think there's no argument for his peak over Lebron, KD, Bird, Kawhi or Dr J. AndI think at a bare minimum you also have to put Pippen over him too. 1996-97 was a pretty underrated carry job on the part of Hil- the Pistons had a top tier offense despite no other all star caliber players (before internet smart-alecks come in to point out that Dumars made the All Star team that year- take a look at Dumars' stats in that season)- I think he was pretty squarely superior anything Pippen put out there on offense, but one does have to acknowkledge the defensive gap between the two and put Pippen there as well.

Barry is a tricky guy to compare him to and I think the gap between he and Hondo offensively is enough for a case to be made there as well. With Baylor there are valid questions about his efficiency (even compared to other star players of his era) that I'm not sold on him here even though I'm sure that's the conventional wisdom.

So even for me in a single season the highest spot you can defend is 7th.

[Colbinii]

As a Piston fan who grew up in the 90s I'm higher on him than I think most people are. He's still outside of my top 5 in terms of single season peaks.

I think there's no argument for his peak over Lebron, KD, Bird, Kawhi or Dr J. AndI think at a bare minimum you also have to put Pippen over him too. 1996-97 was a pretty underrated carry job on the part of Hil- the Pistons had a top tier offense despite no other all star caliber players (before internet smart-alecks come in to point out that Dumars made the All Star team that year- take a look at Dumars' stats in that season)- I think he was pretty squarely superior anything Pippen put out there on offense, but one does have to acknowkledge the defensive gap between the two and put Pippen there as well.

Barry is a tricky guy to compare him to and I think the gap between he and Hondo offensively is enough for a case to be made there as well. With Baylor there are valid questions about his efficiency (even compared to other star players of his era) that I'm not sold on him here even though I'm sure that's the conventional wisdom.

So even for me in a single season the highest spot you can defend is 7th.

One thing to note about Hill, he was getting more efficient right before his injury. In 2000, Hill produced a 141.2 TS+ as he was finishing at rim well [close to 70%] and also was starting to develop a 3P shot [which he later developed to a low volume].

Those 1998-2000 Pistons were terrible outside of Hill though.

Regarding Dumars--goes to show how weak the NBA was in 1997 where Dumars, at 14/4 on good efficiency, can make an all-star team.

[Snakebites]

As a Piston fan who grew up in the 90s I'm higher on him than I think most people are. He's still outside of my top 5 in terms of single season peaks.

I think there's no argument for his peak over Lebron, KD, Bird, Kawhi or Dr J. AndI think at a bare minimum you also have to put Pippen over him too. 1996-97 was a pretty underrated carry job on the part of Hil- the Pistons had a top tier offense despite no other all star caliber players (before internet smart-alecks come in to point out that Dumars made the All Star team that year- take a look at Dumars' stats in that season)- I think he was pretty squarely superior anything Pippen put out there on offense, but one does have to acknowkledge the defensive gap between the two and put Pippen there as well.

Barry is a tricky guy to compare him to and I think the gap between he and Hondo offensively is enough for a case to be made there as well. With Baylor there are valid questions about his efficiency (even compared to other star players of his era) that I'm not sold on him here even though I'm sure that's the conventional wisdom.

So even for me in a single season the highest spot you can defend is 7th.

One thing to note about Hill, he was getting more efficient right before his injury. In 2000, Hill produced a 141.2 TS+ as he was finishing at rim well [close to 70%] and also was starting to develop a 3P shot [which he later developed to a low volume].

Those 1998-2000 Pistons were terrible outside of Hill though.

Regarding Dumars--goes to show how weak the NBA was in 1997 where Dumars, at 14/4 on good efficiency, can make an all-star team.

It’s important to note that he was an injury replacement who was selected because the Pistons had one of the best records out the league pre-All Star break.

And Hill was the absolute driver behind that.

[Heej]

Makes you wonder how they would've been if Isiah stayed healthy and let this guy take over. Hell, could say the same thing about the Bird Celtics or even Magic by the time Shaq came over. Really cements how much of an outlier the 90s were as far as weakness and all time greats fading out of nowhere goes.

Would be like if the first half of the 2010s just didn't have Duncan, Garnett, or Kobe due to them getting some kind of weird career ending injuries during their late primes.

[Cavsfansince84]

Prime/peak Grant Hill seemed like much more an outlier among sf's 10 years ago. Since then we've seen too many others come along which sort of left him behind. Not even counting players like Harden and Luka who are putting up better numbers at the guard position.

[migya]

For carry jobs Hill is up there, especially for SFs. As a playmaker he is also among the best at his position. He didn't score a ton but he was constantly facing multiple defenders as the Pistons had little talent. Though he didn't have a good outside shot he'd be better nowadays.

[dygaction]

Better peaks would include LeBron, Bird, Pippen, Dr. J, Kawhi, KD, Baylor and I'm probably forgetting someone there - but he definitely wouldn't be top 5 peaks for me.

If he had a 12-year prime, I would put him over Pippen and Kawhi as they both had/have pretty short primes comparatively. So he may move up a bit - but still would be behind LeBron, Bird, Dr J, KD, and Baylor.

Peak TMac definitely and I don't see why not this year's Tatum either

[dygaction]

Prime Grant Hill played fifteen postseason games total and never exited the first round, and he only ever finished above tenth in points per game once, so we probably should rate his peak/prime below Kawhi, Durant, Pippen, Erving, McGinnis, Barry, Baylor, Havlicek, Cunningham, Chet Walker, King, Marques Johnson, English, Worthy, Wilkins, Dantley, Aguirre, Mullin, Artest, Pierce, Carmelo, Butler, Paul George, Tatum, Cliff Hagan, Paul Arizin, Connie Hawkins, Roger Brown…

Just not enough of a winner!

Olympic level gymnastics to celebrate Grant Hill while dismissing Garnett for not going far enough in the postseason, but what else is new.

The KG comparison really comes out of no where and whenever that happens, there are lots of "and 1" in this forum... Don't you feel dragging KG into a Hill discussion lower his standard? It's not like OP wants to raise Hill ahead of KG either.
With that, Grant Hill lost first-round 4 yrs in a row since his second season, KG lost first-round 4 yrs (7 actually) in a row since his second season. Both of them averaged under 20ppg over that period (19.6 Hill vs 18.3 KG).
Back to SF, McGrady was the one really derailed by injury. He lost 1st round 7 times in his prime averaging 28.5ppg with excellent playmaking and good defense.

[HeartBreakKid]

Not top ten.

[migya]

Prime Grant Hill played fifteen postseason games total and never exited the first round, and he only ever finished above tenth in points per game once, so we probably should rate his peak/prime below Kawhi, Durant, Pippen, Erving, McGinnis, Barry, Baylor, Havlicek, Cunningham, Chet Walker, King, Marques Johnson, English, Worthy, Wilkins, Dantley, Aguirre, Mullin, Artest, Pierce, Carmelo, Butler, Paul George, Tatum, Cliff Hagan, Paul Arizin, Connie Hawkins, Roger Brown…

Just not enough of a winner!

Olympic level gymnastics to celebrate Grant Hill while dismissing Garnett for not going far enough in the postseason, but what else is new.

The KG comparison really comes out of no where and whenever that happens, there are lots of "and 1" in this forum... Don't you feel dragging KG into a Hill discussion lower his standard? It's not like OP wants to raise Hill ahead of KG either.
With that, Grant Hill lost first-round 4 yrs in a row since his second season, KG lost first-round 4 yrs (7 actually) in a row since his second season. Both of them averaged under 20ppg over that period (19.6 Hill vs 18.3 KG).
Back to SF, McGrady was the one really derailed by injury. He lost 1st round 7 times in his prime averaging 28.5ppg with excellent playmaking and good defense.

It's the usual from the little Garnett fan boys who have been mocking my threads for some time.

[AEnigma]

Prime Grant Hill played fifteen postseason games total and never exited the first round, and he only ever finished above tenth in points per game once, so we probably should rate his peak/prime below Kawhi, Durant, Pippen, Erving, McGinnis, Barry, Baylor, Havlicek, Cunningham, Chet Walker, King, Marques Johnson, English, Worthy, Wilkins, Dantley, Aguirre, Mullin, Artest, Pierce, Carmelo, Butler, Paul George, Tatum, Cliff Hagan, Paul Arizin, Connie Hawkins, Roger Brown…

Just not enough of a winner!

Olympic level gymnastics to celebrate Grant Hill while dismissing Garnett for not going far enough in the postseason, but what else is new.

The KG comparison really comes out of no where and whenever that happens, there are lots of "and 1" in this forum... Don't you feel dragging KG into a Hill discussion lower his standard? It's not like OP wants to raise Hill ahead of KG either.
With that, Grant Hill lost first-round 4 yrs in a row since his second season, KG lost first-round 4 yrs (7 actually) in a row since his second season. Both of them averaged under 20ppg over that period (19.6 Hill vs 18.3 KG).
Back to SF, McGrady was the one really derailed by injury. He lost 1st round 7 times in his prime averaging 28.5ppg with excellent playmaking and good defense.

It's the usual from the little Garnett fan boys who have been mocking my threads for some time.

It is not about Garnett, is is about the laughable inconsistency.

You devoutly cite Win Shares and BPM as a means of arguing Barkley over Kobe, while dismissing Kobe’s superior success because you think he had better teams. You use cumulative longevity to argue Stockton over Steph. But when people bring up how Garnett tops Malone in a lot of those metrics, averaged or cumulative, suddenly it is a massive issue that Garnett did not play as much in the postseason, and actually longevity only matters to a point.

So we come to Grant Hill, who does not have a season in the top 250 combined win shares (again, your own metric of choice), nor does he have any playoff success, yet nevertheless you are trying to sell him as this all-time peak.

As always, the only real commonality is “was this guy a star in the 1990s.” If you do not want that to be mocked, might be worth evolving your analysis past raw decade nostalgia and random basketball-reference summaries when convenient.

[DNice68]

Good to see people are finally not overrating Grant Hill!

[migya]

The KG comparison really comes out of no where and whenever that happens, there are lots of "and 1" in this forum... Don't you feel dragging KG into a Hill discussion lower his standard? It's not like OP wants to raise Hill ahead of KG either.
With that, Grant Hill lost first-round 4 yrs in a row since his second season, KG lost first-round 4 yrs (7 actually) in a row since his second season. Both of them averaged under 20ppg over that period (19.6 Hill vs 18.3 KG).
Back to SF, McGrady was the one really derailed by injury. He lost 1st round 7 times in his prime averaging 28.5ppg with excellent playmaking and good defense.

It's the usual from the little Garnett fan boys who have been mocking my threads for some time.

It is not about Garnett, is is about the laughable inconsistency.

You devoutly cite Win Shares and BPM as a means of arguing Barkley over Kobe, while dismissing Kobe’s superior success because you think he had better teams. You use cumulative longevity to argue Stockton over Steph. But when people bring up how Garnett tops Malone in a lot of those metrics, averaged or cumulative, suddenly it is a massive issue that Garnett did not play as much in the postseason, and actually longevity only matters to a point.

So we come to Grant Hill, who does not have a season in the top 250 combined win shares (again, your own metric of choice), nor does he have any playoff success, yet nevertheless you are trying to sell him as this all-time peak.

As always, the only real commonality is “was this guy a star in the 1990s.” If you do not want that to be mocked, might be worth evolving your analysis past raw decade nostalgia and random basketball-reference summaries when convenient.

Firstly you and yours are the ones with the inconsistencies:

Malone played over a quarter of his playoff games after the age of 35, past real prime, not favoring him at all. Malone's peak isn't easy to identify, as he was great at the start of the 90sc as well. Garnett just doesn't have a very long prime, particularly compared to Malone.

Garnett's playoff peak is either 04 or 08, 08 having bit better metrics but 04 better averages. Either is not as good as Malone's 92 playoffs.


Malone 92 PS -
16gm, 43.0mins, 29.1pts, 52.1fg%, 10.6ftm, 80.5ft%, 11.3reb, 2.6ast, 1.4stl, 1.2blk, 2.9tos,
124OR, 109DR, 25.0PE4, 61.8ts%, 2.3ows, 0.9dws, 3.2ws, .220ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.5vorp


Garnett 04 PS - 18gm, 43.5mins, 24.3pts, 45.2fg%, 5.4ftm, 77.6ft%, 14.6reb, 5.1ast, 1.3stl, 2.3blk, 4.2tos,
100OR, 95DR, 25.0PER, 51.3ts%, 1.4ows, 1.3dws, 2.7ws, .163ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.7vorp

08 PS - 26gm, 38.0mins, 20.4pts, 49.5fg%, 3.6ftm, 81.0ft%, 10.5reb, 3.3ast, 1.3stl, 1.1blk, 2.1tos,
112OR, 99, 23.0PER, 54.2ts%, 2.1ows, 2.0dws, 4.1ws, .199ws/48, 6.6bpm, 2.1vorp


Malone's peak is considerably better than Garnett's in the playoffs.

Using Malone's 98 is still higher - 20gm, 26.3pts, 39.8mins, 47.1fg%, 6.5ftm, 78.8ft%, 10.9reb, 3.4ast, 1.1stl, 1.0blk, 3.0tos,
105OR, 96DR, 24.2PER, 53.4ts%, 1.3ows, 1.7dws, 3.0ws, .184ws/48, 7.1bpm, 1.8vorp

Neither 04 or 08 are KG's best scoring years in your metrics. Of course that might speak to the weakness in this type of analysis, but regardless, if you actually want to use these stats, the best scoring postseasons in the given metrics are 99-03. As it is, the two chosen "off-years"(by the stats you really like for some reason) are comparable enough, and off course the averages actually favor KG despite the playoff sample mostly being post-prime KG vs Prime Malone.

Don't get what you mean by nether 04 or 08 aren't the best for metrics and 99-03 are? Garnett was out in the first round every year until 04 and his metrics are at their best in either 04 or 08.

Your friend didn't respond to that because he was exposed.


I won't waste much of my time and I'll respond to this pathetic low poking once.

As above, Malone peaks higher and had better longevity than Garnett.

Kobe did have much better teams than Barkley. Pretty ludicrous to think that Barkley not winning in his eight years in Philly is his fault, much like it isn't darling Garnett's fault for not winning in Minnesota. Kobe had top 10 player alltime Shaq for three of his rings.

Stockton has better metrics than Curry over much longer, just takes looking at them.

This thread was to compare a forgotten player Grant Hill to some of the best at his position. You're the one creating any prejudice view by accusing me. You are another little boy pulling for his current era over previous ones, even if many see how fake it has become.

[magicman1978]

Better peaks would include LeBron, Bird, Pippen, Dr. J, Kawhi, KD, Baylor and I'm probably forgetting someone there - but he definitely wouldn't be top 5 peaks for me.

If he had a 12-year prime, I would put him over Pippen and Kawhi as they both had/have pretty short primes comparatively. So he may move up a bit - but still would be behind LeBron, Bird, Dr J, KD, and Baylor.

Peak TMac definitely and I don't see why not this year's Tatum either

TMac was a SG in the season that he peaked higher. I don't watch Tatum enough, but the season isn't over and the production based stats favor Hill.