PDA

View Full Version : GHill/Hendo comparisons



DukeCO2009
02-10-2009, 05:40 PM
Was just watching the 1992 game at the Nose Dome on ESPN Classic. Patrick and Vitale kept saying that although Grant was probably the most talented person on the court, he often removed himself from the action and played too passively. Hmm...where have I heard that before?

IMO, 91/92 Hill and 07/08 Henderson were very, very similar players. Both had the same issues to solve: suspect outside shooting, below average free throw shooting, and the tendency to avoid playing as aggressively enough to fully make use of their talents. You'll have to forgive my spotty recollection of Hill's first two years (I was 4/5 years old--cut me some slack :)), but Henderson certainly appears be in the process of making the same kind of junior year leap that Grant did. Comparing anyone to Grant is high praise, but I think one could make the case that Henderson is worthy. Thoughts from those with better memories of Grant's first two seasons?

slower
02-10-2009, 05:50 PM
Was just watching the 1992 game at the Nose Dome on ESPN Classic. Patrick and Vitale kept saying that although Grant was probably the most talented person on the court, he often removed himself from the action and played too passively. Hmm...where have I heard that before?

IMO, 91/92 Hill and 07/08 Henderson were very, very similar players. Both had the same issues to solve: suspect outside shooting, below average free throw shooting, and the tendency to avoid playing as aggressively enough to fully make use of their talents. You'll have to forgive my spotty recollection of Hill's first two years (I was 4/5 years old--cut me some slack :)), but Henderson certainly appears be in the process of making the same kind of junior year leap that Grant did. Comparing anyone to Grant is high praise, but I think one could make the case that Henderson is worthy. Thoughts from those with better memories of Grant's first two seasons?

but I seem to recall that Grant had a better handle than Gerald, even from the start.

Jumbo
02-10-2009, 05:51 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.

dukelifer
02-10-2009, 06:38 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.

They both have first names that start with G and last names that start with H.

They both have fathers who were professional athletes.

Both fathers were born in January.

Both fathers have different first names than their sons- Gerald Sr. is actually Jerome.

They both jump really high and dunk effortlessly.

Other than that- they are pretty different players.

dukediv2013
02-10-2009, 06:59 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.


I disagree with most of your assessment of defensive ability. I was watching the game against UNC from last year and Henderson is a GREAT defender. Not only is he quick enough to stick with his man, but his athletic abilities allow him to block more shots than anyone his size, defend bigger players (Even Hanstravel), and rebound at another level than anyone at 6'4. G is as good if not better at defense than Grant Hill. (No disrespect)

chrisheery
02-10-2009, 07:03 PM
but I seem to recall that Grant had a better handle than Gerald, even from the start.

and he was 6'8"!!

roywhite
02-10-2009, 07:12 PM
I was going to make a point about GH and GH at least being comparable, but I reviewed Grant Hill's accomplishments, so I won't go there. Up till this season, Grant had career averages of 20 pts, 7 rebs, and 5 asst per game. He was either 1st or 2nd team All-Pro 4 different times in addition to being Rookie of the Year, multi-time All-Star, Gold Medal Winner, and of course 2-time NCAA Champ!

But I do think Gerald has a significant upside, which IMO could include being a starter in the NBA and possibly an All-Star.

I also think Gerald is the best dunker I've seen at Duke, and that includes some very good ones. He gets up very high and has excellent body control and awareness so he can catch the ball if it's anywhere close and make adjustments in the air.

DUKIE V(A)
02-10-2009, 07:17 PM
I think people are forgetting just how great Grant Hill was...The season before his ankle injury he averaged 25.8 PPG, 6.6 Boards, and 5.2 Assists a game in THE LEAGUE. He was an amazing defender and had silly hops at
6'8". By the way, Grant is a career 48.5% FG and over a 76% FT shooter in the NBA (the numbers are 53.8 and 69.8 at Duke for his career). Was he a pure shooter? No. Was he a good shooter? Absolutely.

Henderson is awesome...but me thinks G-Money is (at minimum) a lock First Teamer on the All-Time Duke team.

yancem
02-10-2009, 07:27 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.

I agree with your assessments about their respective skills but the original poster was comparing their attitude/demeanor and I think that Hill is a good comparison for Henderson. They were both very athletically gifted and possessed unlimited potential coming out of high school and while they both made solid contributions their first 2 years, it always felt that we were only seeing glimpses of what they were capable of doing with a basketball. In their respective junior years they both finally started/starting to understand their talent levels and played/playing up to their potential. I think that is a real similarity.

I have also always thought that there was a real similarity to the aesthetics of their movements. Take skills out of the equation and simply watch their movements. When they cut to the basket, elevate for on a pull up j or go up to block a shot, if you squint just a little, I'm not sure you could tell which one is which (4 inches of height not withstanding).

Jumbo
02-10-2009, 07:36 PM
I disagree with most of your assessment of defensive ability. I was watching the game against UNC from last year and Henderson is a GREAT defender. Not only is he quick enough to stick with his man, but his athletic abilities allow him to block more shots than anyone his size, defend bigger players (Even Hanstravel), and rebound at another level than anyone at 6'4. G is as good if not better at defense than Grant Hill. (No disrespect)

I'm sorry, but G is many things. A great defender is not one of them. If he were a "great" defender he would draw the top opposing player every night (like Grant did). He doesn't. He doesn't even draw the top opposing wing -- Scheyer does. Again, G's best defensive skills are largely in help D -- jumping in the passing lanes, rotating over to block a shot, weakside rebounding. This stands out more to the untrained eye because they are "spectacular" in nature. But his fundamental D still leaves much room for improvement, particularly on the ball. Grant Hill did everything G could do, and locked down his man. Night and day.

greybeard
02-10-2009, 07:40 PM
Gerald's game reminds me more of David Thompson's. Did I ever mention that before? ;)

Johnboy
02-10-2009, 07:49 PM
They both have first names that start with G and last names that start with H.
They both have fathers who were professional athletes.
Both fathers were born in January.
Both fathers have different first names than their sons- Gerald Sr. is actually Jerome.
They both jump really high and dunk effortlessly.
Other than that- they are pretty different players.

Gerald has a secretary (http://www.snopes.com/history/american/lincoln-kennedy.asp) named "Hill" and Grant had a secretary named "Henderson" . . .Both had successors named Johnson ?

MChambers
02-10-2009, 08:24 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.

The main similarities are that they are absolutely spectacular in the air and have fathers who were pro athletes.

Otherwise, they are quite different. And Grant had a pretty good sophomore year. One can certainly argue he was the best player in the Final Four that year.

MChambers
02-10-2009, 08:26 PM
I disagree with most of your assessment of defensive ability. I was watching the game against UNC from last year and Henderson is a GREAT defender. Not only is he quick enough to stick with his man, but his athletic abilities allow him to block more shots than anyone his size, defend bigger players (Even Hanstravel), and rebound at another level than anyone at 6'4. G is as good if not better at defense than Grant Hill. (No disrespect)

It's not even close. Grant by a mile. The Suns still use him on opposing point guards in a crisis.

Bay Area Duke Fan
02-10-2009, 08:35 PM
Grant Hill was one of the great Duke basketball players. He was an important part of 4 teams, two of which were national champs and one of which (the 1994 team that he carried) lost in the final game. His jersey was retired. There's no need to talk about his NBA career here.

Gerald has yet to prove that he's a star for an entire season. He's good and may become very good. But I doubt that he'll be talked about in the future as one of the great players in Duke basketball history. Maybe he'll make an All-ACC team this year or next.

Coballs
02-10-2009, 08:37 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.

I was at Duke for Grant's junior and senior years. IMO, Jumbo's breakdown is pretty much on the money. With regards to Grant's outside shooting, I don't remember him as a poor outside shooter. He simply didn't shoot very much from outside during his first 3 years (quite possibly because he wasn't a great shooter, or possibly because that's not what those teams needed from him). In his first 3 seasons at Duke, he attempted a total of only 17 3-point shots: Fresh 1-2 Soph 0-1 Jr 4-14. Finally, in his Senior season, he started to extend his game and shot 39-100 from behind the arc.
Defensively, he was one of Duke's all time greats. He won the Iba award in 1993. Does anyone remember the play when he single-handedly broke up a 3-on-1 (or was it a 4-on-1?) UNC fast break at Cameron.

Lord Ash
02-10-2009, 09:30 PM
Hm... I think most of the comparisons are made because of...

1) Them both being super smooth when moving towards the basket.

2) Both have a smooth release on their shot.

3) Both carry themselves in a rather composed fashion and usually seem to generally be calm and un-emotional.

4) They both have incredible, effortless ups.

5) Both have dads of some athletic fame.

and

6) In a vague way they look vaguely alike, with some similar facial hair at times and a few other similar features.

dukelifer
02-10-2009, 09:43 PM
They both have first names that start with G and last names that start with H.

They both have fathers who were professional athletes.

Both fathers were born in January.

Both fathers have different first names than their sons- Gerald Sr. is actually Jerome.

They both jump really high and dunk effortlessly.

Other than that- they are pretty different players.

Upon further analysis I learned that G's real name is Jerome. Grant and G are less alike than I originally thought.

throatybeard
02-10-2009, 10:14 PM
6F) [Recruit/current player] reminds me of [previous Duke player, usu. of same race and somatype, but not necessarily game].

Lord Ash
02-10-2009, 10:29 PM
6F) [Recruit/current player] reminds me of [previous Duke player, usu. of same race and somatype, but not necessarily game].

*laugh* Not quite sure that 6F applies here, as there seem to be SOME similarities between their games, no? Hey; some smart folks have even made the comparison (including, I think, Jay Bilas?)

dukemsu
02-10-2009, 10:45 PM
I really do not see that many similarities other than their style, and that is a big similarity. Both play(ed) with a gliding, bouncing style that could lull a defender to sleep and then go by them, almost like a turbo boost in a video game. Not the best comparison, but I think you know what I mean.

Grant was one of the elite individual defenders in the last 20 years (by contrast, I think Shane was a better team defender). I don't think that is an understatement. G is making strides but is not a guy you can point to a 6'6" slasher and say "Turn him off, please". I agree with Jumbo that G is a superior jump shooter. That fadeaway is a thing of beauty, though I am getting a bit nervous that it is taking away from his basket attacks.

I can see the comparison, but two very different players. G is a unique player and I see streaks of Grant's "Get behind me" senior year leadership in him at an earlier age.

dukemsu

jipops
02-10-2009, 11:05 PM
I don't see. I've never seen it. They are too very different kind of players.

From the day Hill set foot on campus, it was clear that he was an extremely versatile all-around player whose greatest weakness might have been scoring. Henderson, by contrast, was a scorer who has needed to add other aspects to his game. If you compare the two in each category, there aren't many similarities:

-Ball-Handling: Hill was a superior ball handler, capable of going left and right with equal ease. This is why he actually ran the point at Duke when Hurley was out and after Hurley left. G is right hand dominant and doesn't have the same skills off the bounce.

-Court Vision: Hill was an excellent passer immediately, and that skill only grew as he got older. Henderson has grown a great deal since he was a freshman, but even in that regard, his vision is average at best.

-Shooting: Henderson actually has the better looking outside stroke. This was always the weakest part of Grant's game.

-Size: Grant is 6'8". Gerald is 6'4". Big difference.

-Athleticism: Both have/had incredible hops and explosive speed. Hill was quicker laterally. Henderson is stronger.

-Rebounding: Both were good for their size, though Hill was better.

-Defense: Not close. Hill could lock down anyone at virtually any position. Henderson is most valuable as a help defender -- Scheyer actually guards the other team's best wing player.

Overall, Grant Hill was a much, much better player than G. And G is pretty darn good.

Jumbo is spot on once again on this one. I've said very similar things in past posts on this subject but not nearly as eloquently. Other than athleticism there really is almost no similarity between the two. I think because we get caught up in the visions of a Duke player making some miraculous athletic play, there is some tendency to make a Grant Hill comparison. If Maggette had been around for another year this very same subject probably would have been brought up and his game is further away from Grant's than Henderson's.

Grant had this insane ability to completely take over a game without scoring a ton of points (atleast by his senior year). As a freshman he was already initiating offensive plays and as Jumbo stated, he locked down anybody at any position. There is a reason why Grant played in 3 national title games.

G is an excellent player and lately he's been displaying some very impressive mid-range skills. His stroke is smoother than Grant's was. But he's simply not close to mastering parts of the game that Grant had nailed down.

Lord Ash
02-10-2009, 11:20 PM
I think that when some folks have made the comparison that it hasn't necessarily been as deep or in as many ways as some folks have mentioned; I think it is enough to say "Hey, when I watch this player play it reminds me of this other player." There are a few similarities... I think this is enough for folks to fairly make the comparison. I have no heard anyone say that Grant and Gerald are a lot a like or anything, just some comparisons:)

IMHO, they are somewhat similar, but only in a few surface ways. For Gerald to, in an overall sense, match Grant is obviously impossible.

roywhite
02-10-2009, 11:32 PM
I think that when some folks have made the comparison that it hasn't necessarily been as deep or in as many ways as some folks have mentioned; I think it is enough to say "Hey, when I watch this player play it reminds me of this other player." There are a few similarities... I think this is enough for folks to fairly make the comparison. I have no heard anyone say that Grant and Gerald are a lot a like or anything, just some comparisons:)

IMHO, they are somewhat similar, but only in a few surface ways. For Gerald to, in an overall sense, match Grant is obviously impossible.


It's a positive to have a current player compared to an all-time Duke great. I haven't heard other current players come up in this context.

Actually, watching the 1984 ACC semifinal win over UNC on ESPN Classic yesterday, I noticed some similarities between Kyle and Mark Alarie, who does not have his jersey retired, but was a 2000 pt scorer. They are about the same size (Alarie a little heavier) and both smart, versatile players who could work inside and outside. Kyle is probably a better passer and able to defend on the perimeter a little better; Alarie was very good at posting up and shot a high %.

throatybeard
02-10-2009, 11:38 PM
It's a positive to have a current player compared to an all-time Duke great. I haven't heard other current players come up in this context.

I don't see how it's positive or negative when the comparison has been demonstrated to be completely spurious.

dukediv2013
02-11-2009, 12:19 AM
I'm sorry, but G is many things. A great defender is not one of them. If he were a "great" defender he would draw the top opposing player every night (like Grant did). He doesn't. He doesn't even draw the top opposing wing -- Scheyer does. Again, G's best defensive skills are largely in help D -- jumping in the passing lanes, rotating over to block a shot, weakside rebounding. This stands out more to the untrained eye because they are "spectacular" in nature. But his fundamental D still leaves much room for improvement, particularly on the ball. Grant Hill did everything G could do, and locked down his man. Night and day.

Jumbo, you seem to like numbers. Let’s look at the stats of the players that Henderson has primarily guarded in the last 7 games.

Asbury, MIA- 12 points on 5-8 shooting
Rivers, CLEM- 11 points on 4-12 shooting
VIRGINIA- Multiple Players combined for 6 points on 2-16 shooting
Aminu, WFU- 15 points on 5-14 shooting with 5 free throws
MARYLAND- Multiple Players combined for 9 points on 3-18 shooting
NC STATE- Multiple Players combined for 10 points on 5-16 shooting
Wright, GU- 3 points on 1-6 shooting

That is a combined 66 points on 25-90. That averages to 9.4 ppg at 27% FG against Henderson in 7 games. Not too shabby, huh? I guess that would go unseen by the untrained eye as well though.

Kedsy
02-11-2009, 12:26 AM
I disagree with most of your assessment of defensive ability. I was watching the game against UNC from last year and Henderson is a GREAT defender. Not only is he quick enough to stick with his man, but his athletic abilities allow him to block more shots than anyone his size, defend bigger players (Even Hanstravel), and rebound at another level than anyone at 6'4. G is as good if not better at defense than Grant Hill. (No disrespect)

G may be a great defender, but IMO he's not nearly as great a defender as Grant was. As good as G is, it's not even close.

FireOgilvie
02-11-2009, 12:36 AM
Jumbo, you seem to like numbers. Let’s look at the stats of the players that Henderson has primarily guarded in the last 7 games.

Asbury, MIA- 12 points on 5-8 shooting
Rivers, CLEM- 11 points on 4-12 shooting
VIRGINIA- Multiple Players combined for 6 points on 2-16 shooting
Aminu, WFU- 15 points on 5-14 shooting with 5 free throws
MARYLAND- Multiple Players combined for 9 points on 3-18 shooting
NC STATE- Multiple Players combined for 10 points on 5-16 shooting
Wright, GU- 3 points on 1-6 shooting

That is a combined 66 points on 25-90. That averages to 9.4 ppg at 27% FG against Henderson in 7 games. Not too shabby, huh? I guess that would go unseen by the untrained eye as well though.


I agree with Jumbo. Gerald is a good defender, but not great. His strength lies in his help defense, which is very solid. As far as on-the-ball goes, Scheyer is better. Also, your stats really don't show much about his actual defense.

Edouble
02-11-2009, 01:27 AM
I also think Gerald is the best dunker I've seen at Duke, and that includes some very good ones.

He's very good, but there's no way he's as good as Magette. I also don't see how he's any better than Dahntay. Maybe if he destroys a 7 footer (sans push-ups) I can put him in the same league.

I think G is very much like Kobe in shot form, movement, mannerism, sharp facial features, and athletic ability. I don't think he's much like Grant Hill at all. The closest thing we've had to Hill since Hill was probably Dunleavy.

Mudge
02-11-2009, 02:12 AM
Speaking of Grant Hill-- did anyone see the Grant Hill impersonation that 5'10" Dominic James did in tonight's Marquette/Villanova game-- this guy went up for an alley-oop where the ball was thrown behind him, towards the back corner of the backboard, and had to reach back and get it and bring it back in, and put it down with one hand, the way Hill did in the NCAA final back in 1991 against Kansas-- but James is 5'10", not 6'8", like Hill.

It was Spud Webb-amazing like to see this guy THAT high off the floor doing that in a game... James has got to have one of the best vertical leap heights in the college game right now-- he was sooo far off the floor it looked fake (like the LeBron James fullcourt shot commercial).

Jumbo
02-11-2009, 02:13 AM
Jumbo, you seem to like numbers. Let’s look at the stats of the players that Henderson has primarily guarded in the last 7 games.

Asbury, MIA- 12 points on 5-8 shooting
Rivers, CLEM- 11 points on 4-12 shooting
VIRGINIA- Multiple Players combined for 6 points on 2-16 shooting
Aminu, WFU- 15 points on 5-14 shooting with 5 free throws
MARYLAND- Multiple Players combined for 9 points on 3-18 shooting
NC STATE- Multiple Players combined for 10 points on 5-16 shooting
Wright, GU- 3 points on 1-6 shooting

That is a combined 66 points on 25-90. That averages to 9.4 ppg at 27% FG against Henderson in 7 games. Not too shabby, huh? I guess that would go unseen by the untrained eye as well though.

You really want to argue? Fine, let's argue.
A) Why would Duke put Scheyer on the opposing team's best wing if Henderson was a lock-down defender?
B) Those are some selective stats right there. Also, you have some of the matchups wrong. (For instance, Henderson's primary assignment against GU was not Wright).
C) If Henderson was guarding "multiple players," other Duke defenders were also guarding said "multiple players."
D) It is extremely difficult to quantify defense in stats.

Did you even see Grant Hill play, btw?

jma4life
02-11-2009, 02:23 AM
Scottie Pippen often guarded the other team's best player. Doesn't mean Jordan was not a fantastic defender.

That said, I agree with the point that Henderson is not an incredible man to man defender. But the sheer fact that Scheyer is better does not imply that G is not pretty good. Unless you think that Scheyer is not that great a defender in which case Henderson being worse than a not great defender implies Henderson is not great.

By the way, Bilas actually did compare Henderson to Hill at the last game. But he did it on a more superficial level, as some have referenced. Both are very athletic and smooth. He certainly was not comparing their style of play.

Lord Ash
02-11-2009, 07:21 AM
I don't see how it's positive or negative when the comparison has been demonstrated to be completely spurious.

Tell that to Jay Bilas.

As for the Jones/Maggette comparison,s I do think that Gerald elevates more effortlessly than either of them. He might not be as ferocious, but I think he gets up more smoothly. In fact, I think he is the smoothest elevator I have ever seen at Duke.

I actually like the Kobe comparison, but again, in a limited way... namely I think they have similar shooting styles and they are both pretty good at the midrange jumpshot. But as with the Grant comparisons, Gerald is not on the same planet, overall, as Bryant.

jv001
02-11-2009, 08:36 AM
Biggest comparison is that both their first names begins with the letter G. While Gerald is one of my favorite players to play at Duke, he's not the player Grant Hill was. Now if Gerald hangs around for another year then we can make a better comparison. Grant Hill is either the best to play at Duke or the 2nd best to play at Duke. Christian is either 1 or 2. Gerald is finally playing like we all expected him to. Grant played at a high level from day one. As for Gerald's defense, it has improved and he does play it well. But his best ability is coming off his man to defend at the goal(hops man). While Gerald is a very good player, he is not Grant Hill. Go Duke!

Wander
02-11-2009, 09:28 AM
You really want to argue? Fine, let's argue.
A) Why would Duke put Scheyer on the opposing team's best wing if Henderson was a lock-down defender?

Is this true? I seem to remember Henderson guarding Rivers, Vasquez, and Aminu for very significant stretches (while Scheyer was still in the game). Common knowledge is that he'll guard Green as well tonight, though we'll see. Could be remembering those match-ups incorrectly though.

gw67
02-11-2009, 09:34 AM
I agree with Jumbo's assessment. Grant was one of the greatest players in Duke history. Henderson has yet to make All ACC 3rd team although I expect him to be 1st or 2nd team this year. Grant was also one of the best defensive players in Duke history (at 6-8 he was able to guard a large range of players). He also carried the Devils on his back during his senior year.

gw67

roywhite
02-11-2009, 09:41 AM
I agree with Jumbo's assessment. Grant was one of the greatest players in Duke history. Henderson has yet to make All ACC 3rd team although I expect him to be 1st or 2nd team this year. Grant was also one of the best defensive players in Duke history (at 6-8 he was able to guard a large range of players). He also carried the Devils on his back during his senior year.

gw67

Just for the record, at a similar point in Grant's career (well into his junior season) he had not yet been named All ACC 1st team. He was named 2nd team All ACC in 1992, and then 1st team for 1993 and 1994.

Seems to me that Henderson is on pace to be 1st Team All ACC this year, but that's not a sure thing yet.

davekay1971
02-11-2009, 09:47 AM
Mostly echoing what Jumbo said. I love G, and I think he has, at times, been by far the best player on the court in the last few games. I hope he continues to tear it up the rest of the way and hope he comes back next year.

But he's just not the same type of player Grant was. I think of G as more of a classic scoring wing - great drive moves, nice mid and long range jumper, amazing finisher, and a solid wing defender. He's more the Jordan style of player, though, of course, to compare Hendo to His Airness would be unfair: Hendo would make a much better team owner, doesn't have a gambling addiction, would make a better husband for some lucky girl, and is an all around better human being.

Grant, I felt, drew more comparison to Magic. He wasn't the point guard Magic was, but he was pretty damned good running the offense. He was a better defender than Magic was, by a long shot. They both could play 5 positions, and both were a threat for a triple double every time they took the court. I honestly believe that, if it weren't for injuries, Grant would have drawn comparisons with Magic by the end of his career.

JBDuke
02-11-2009, 09:49 AM
I think that the most common and accurate comparison between G and Grant is that they're both highly athletic players who showed the potential to dominate on the court at the college level early in their collegiate careers, but took until later in those careers to develop that dominance. Grant really came into his own late in '92 and then in '93. G seems to have made his move in the last month to five weeks. If G continues to play at this high level, the comparison will prove accurate.

Beyond that, Jumbo (and others) are correct to point out that their games are quite different, and G has not shown jersey-retiring, NBA All-Pro level of skills that Grant had in his arsenal. And if you think G is anything close to Grant as a defender, you didn't watch Grant defend, you haven't watched G defend, or you don't know much about defense. The only Duke defenders I'd immediately put in Grant's class are Billy King and Shane.

Fish80
02-11-2009, 09:50 AM
No question, Grant is one of the all time greats! His all around game is the best I've ever seen.

IMHO Grant and Gerald are not so much similar ball players as they are similar athletes. They're on another level of athleticism. Their motion reminds me of big cats, smooth and pure. A joy to behold.

Lord Ash
02-11-2009, 10:05 AM
Ohhh, I like the "big cats" reference; very apt.

I was thinking more about Geralds ups; I think there are two things that make them so remarkable and set him apart from almost any other leaper in Duke history. First is his leg strength, which allows him to elevate without seeming to coil his entire body up to unleash... instead, he is able to keep his body doing whatever it was it was doing while his legs do all the elevating. The second thing is his body control once in the air; I can't recall anyone having as much two armed body control while in the air. One arm, sure, but Gerald seems almost alone in his ability to use both arms well and even his torso while in the air.

cruxer
02-11-2009, 10:27 AM
It's easy to forget how great a defender Grant was at Duke. His senior year, he willed his not incredibly talented team to the final game! Anybody remember the Elite 8 game when he absolutely shut down the best scorer in the NCAA, Glen Robinson? I'm with Jumbo, G, though a good defender, would not have drawn that defensive assignment. I'll always be convinced that we'd have 4 championships if he didn't finally run out of gas against Arkansas (and Thurman doesn't hit that ridiculous 3...).

That said, G shows all signs of still learning the game and having a tremendous upside. He looks like the best pro on the current Duke team, assuming he continues his improvement.

-c

dukediv2013
02-11-2009, 10:35 AM
You really want to argue? Fine, let's argue.
A) Why would Duke put Scheyer on the opposing team's best wing if Henderson was a lock-down defender?
B) Those are some selective stats right there. Also, you have some of the matchups wrong. (For instance, Henderson's primary assignment against GU was not Wright).
C) If Henderson was guarding "multiple players," other Duke defenders were also guarding said "multiple players."
D) It is extremely difficult to quantify defense in stats.

Did you even see Grant Hill play, btw?

I am not trying to start an argument, but you obviously are so I will answer your questions.

a) Duke does not always put Henderson on the opposing team's best wing because he is more physical than Scheyer and is able to guard a bigger guy. Would Scheyer be able to guard a guy that weighs 40-50 lbs more? No. That is why G plays against the opposing team's "3" or SF.

b) Most of my matchups were correct as I went back and looked at who G guarded primarily during each of those games. He may not have been guarding Wright during the whole game, but from the tip, he was guarding Wright.

c) I agree that most people on the team were guarding other players, but during the games where I stated "multiple players," there was no consistency in the person that G guarded as those teams subbed out for their "3" a lot.

d) I agree with your statement that it is hard to define defensive stats, but from just looking at FG %, G has been able to lock down many of the opponents "3" position players.

Yes. I did see Grant Hill play. He is my 2nd favorite Duke player ever behind Jason Williams. Unfortunately, I had to watch videos of him play as I was only 4 or 5 when he won NC's with Duke. I just think that you are not giving G enough credit on the defensive end. He is a great defender.

SupaDave
02-11-2009, 11:07 AM
What's really ironic about this discussion to me is that Gerald reminds me more of Luol Deng actually. Could be just their length since I really didn't get to see as much of Lu as I have of Gerald so it could be a stretch...

Diddy
02-11-2009, 11:42 AM
Grant was special. He would have been mentioned as one of the all time greats if he hadn't been derailed by injury. He was that good. He was relatively polished when he arrived, played good D, and was a great athlete. His improvement came from weight room work, competing every day against other quality players, and just maturing.

G needed a lot more work, and that is normal. His time and effort on his conditioning and skills is evident. Hendo is a good to great player who can still get a lot better. If he keeps working on his J, his handle, and his D he can be a hall of fame player. He might even end up having a better pro career than GHill, but that is because of GHills injuries.

Grant should have been one of the all time greats. Hendo could be another Ray Allen or similiar player.

Hendo is a special athlete with great potential who is starting to realize that potential.

Hill was special-special. Laetner and Hurley, as great as they were, did it mainly on effort, smarts, and determination. Hill was just great. He lacked Laetner and Hurley's extreme levels of balls to the wall determination and killer instinct, but he had ample supplies of both to go along with otherworldly physical gifts which the other two lacked.

I like G. Heck, I love G. I think he is our best player this year, and maybe the best since JJ. G does more things better than JJ, but JJ's scoring and shooting were special. But Hill was our best player. He didn't have the best career, or the best numbers. His best playing days occured after Duke, and that is really saying something when you look at his career.

But if you took all of Duke's players under K, and put them at their prime level of health and skill, and everyone on earth would take G-Hill first. After that, there are valid arguments for several players as to who is No. 2. But if you were building a team, you would take G-Hill first. There are players I personally liked more, who I felt had better Duke careers. But, purely on Basketball skills and abilities, G-Hill has no peers. None. If you take all of Duke's special players, and Hendo would be in that group, Hill would be special out of that group. You don't get many of them today, and those you do get don't stay in college for very long.

Lord Ash
02-11-2009, 11:53 AM
Grant was a once in a lifetime talent; forget the idiot "Big Dog," Grant was HUGE, and if his career in the NBA would likely have been an all-timer if not for injuries.

Having said that; if I start my own Duke team, I start with Shane. Just saying.

:)

(What a choice to make, right?)

SupaDave
02-11-2009, 12:23 PM
Grant was special. He would have been mentioned as one of the all time greats if he hadn't been derailed by injury. He was that good. He was relatively polished when he arrived, played good D, and was a great athlete. His improvement came from weight room work, competing every day against other quality players, and just maturing.

G needed a lot more work, and that is normal. His time and effort on his conditioning and skills is evident. Hendo is a good to great player who can still get a lot better. If he keeps working on his J, his handle, and his D he can be a hall of fame player. He might even end up having a better pro career than GHill, but that is because of GHills injuries.

Grant should have been one of the all time greats. Hendo could be another Ray Allen or similiar player.

Hendo is a special athlete with great potential who is starting to realize that potential.

Hill was special-special. Laetner and Hurley, as great as they were, did it mainly on effort, smarts, and determination. Hill was just great. He lacked Laetner and Hurley's extreme levels of balls to the wall determination and killer instinct, but he had ample supplies of both to go along with otherworldly physical gifts which the other two lacked.

I like G. Heck, I love G. I think he is our best player this year, and maybe the best since JJ. G does more things better than JJ, but JJ's scoring and shooting were special. But Hill was our best player. He didn't have the best career, or the best numbers. His best playing days occured after Duke, and that is really saying something when you look at his career.

But if you took all of Duke's players under K, and put them at their prime level of health and skill, and everyone on earth would take G-Hill first. After that, there are valid arguments for several players as to who is No. 2. But if you were building a team, you would take G-Hill first. There are players I personally liked more, who I felt had better Duke careers. But, purely on Basketball skills and abilities, G-Hill has no peers. None. If you take all of Duke's special players, and Hendo would be in that group, Hill would be special out of that group. You don't get many of them today, and those you do get don't stay in college for very long.

Clarification - Grant IS one of the all-time Duke greats. AND his NBA career isn't so shabby now that he's on his 'second' career. You talk as if the man has retired. Pretty much the only other person with a similar career in the entire NBA is Alonzo Mourning. He's STILL winning awards! I think Grant will make the Hall of Fame off of simply being a statesmen for the game of basketball for SO long...

Ummm... I think there are MANY of this board who would think that Hurley and Laettner (two t's please) were 'special-special'. Laettner OWNED the NCAA tourney with records that will probably NEVER be topped. You don't get some of that just b/c of hustle and smarts. They are called SKILLS. Ya know? For Hurley - It's that whole NCAA assists leader thing - yeah - that's still standing too.

You do realize that G came the year JJ left? A comparison to JJ is just ridiculous - unless you want to talk about conditioning and the improvement of ball-handling skills.

And while I believe Grant to be awesome. If given my choice of healthy Duke player to start with - I'm taking Jason Williams whom I believe to be on G's level for a number of reasons. I might even take Dawkins before Grant but Grant is definitely in my top 5 however I disagree that he has no peers.

Vincetaylor
02-13-2009, 01:33 AM
I love Gerald's game, but there is absolutely no comparison. Coach K would probably tell you Grant is his most talented player ever. He won 2 NCAA championships, went to 3, and was an NBA all star. If he hadn't had so many injury problems, he could have been one of the NBA's all time best. He could take over a game on both sides of the court.