Grant Hill - Hall of Fame?

[superdave]

This article was on NBA.com last week. It looks ahead to players eligible for the Hall next year, with Grant Hill among them.

http://www.nba.com/article/2017/09/09/jason-kidd-and-grant-hill-highlight-possible-nominees-2018-hall-fame?cid=EMA_NBA_daily&uniqueID=4511405922

The class is headlined by Jason Kidd who is likely a shoe-in. After that there's Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway, Rudy Tomjonovich and Chris Webber who are holdovers from previous years and newly eligible Hill, Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace and Marcus Camby.

The point of the article is that Hill is likely to get in, but will he get in on his first try? And if he does, is it because he's a good guy and well-liked by voters, whereas his stats and career arc is not all that different from KJ, CWebb, etc who did not get in on the first try.

We shall see. I could see year 2 or 3 being likely.

Here's Hill's career stats via Basketball Reference - along with their cool win shares comps at the bottom. They have Hill as similar to Chris Mullin and having an 89.1% chance of getting in.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hillgr01.html

[JasonEvans]

It is not at all crazy to say that at age 27, in the middle of his prime, Grant Hill was on course to be one of the top 50 players in the history of the game. His combination of size and skill was truly rare (think Lebron, but with a little less bulk and not as good an outside shot because the game was not yet all about the 3 point line). At that point, the notion that he would not be an automatic first-ballot hall of famer was laughable.

And then the injuries...

Still, he compiled some nice stats after the injuries sapped him of much of his explosion and athleticism and he played a really, really long time (a testament to his skill). I guess I can see why there might be some debate about whether to include him in year one or not, but if I had a vote, he would get it for sure.

-Jason "the fact that he is a sterling citizen and one of the all-time great ambassadors of the game matters here" Evans

[Troublemaker]

Why shouldn't you get extra points for being a likable guy? It's a team sport and chemistry matters, no?

With that said, I think he should be close to a lock just based on his pre-injury accomplishments. Grant was a 7-time All-Star, 1st team NBA once (so a top 5 player that season), and 2nd team NBA (a top 10 player) an additional four times. That plus his college accomplishments make him a first-ballot HOFer to me.

[Trey21]

He'll get in. Maybe not the first go round, but that's kinda of fair considering how his tragic career turned out. I was really happy that T-Mac got in this past go around, but I was a little surprised that he got in that quick. Those former Orlando teammates have a lot in common in terms of career trajectory and ultimately unfulfilled potential. Think T-Mac overall had a higher peak, but Grant had an outstanding career at Duke and for a brief moment was one of the most famous and talented players in the NBA. Basically from his rookie year in 1995 until 2000 he at least averaged 20/5/5.Those first six years alone would probably be enough to get him in, but considering he put in some great years in with Suns I think he'll get in a little earlier.

7 time All Star
1 All Nba First Team
4 All Nba Second Team
Co NBA Rookie of the Year
2 NCAA Champion

Also his game is really proto-typical to how modern basketball is now played. He played a lot like LeBron. He'll get in. His peak and career was definitely better than Mitch Richmond in my eyes. No disrespect to Richmond.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Even Heels fans reluctantly acknowledge he is a good dude and got a raw deal on injuries.

I would be overjoyed to see him go in.

[superdave]

Webber is a good comparison because he had some injury issues too, but had a very high peak as a player. He averaged 55 games per season over his career.

1st team all-NBA once, 2nd team 3X, 3rd team once. Five all-star appearances. Just missed averaging 20/10 for his career, which is big. His peak was in 2001 when he averaged 27/11 and pushed Shaq in the Western Finals...and lost.

Basketball Reference only gives Webber a 14.6% chance of making the Hall. I guess longevity really helps Hill, who played 200 more games the Webber.

[NSDukeFan]

Webber is a good comparison because he had some injury issues too, but had a very high peak as a player. He averaged 55 games per season over his career.

1st team all-NBA once, 2nd team 3X, 3rd team once. Five all-star appearances. Just missed averaging 20/10 for his career, which is big. His peak was in 2001 when he averaged 27/11 and pushed Shaq in the Western Finals...and lost.

Basketball Reference only gives Webber a 14.6% chance of making the Hall. I guess longevity really helps Hill, who played 200 more games the Webber.
Without looking further into it, it seems odd that Richmond is in and Webber is not and doesn't have a great shot. That guy had a fantastic peak. When he was getting all-NBA honours, power forward was a super stacked position. Richmond was also very good and probably one of the top 5 shooting guards in the league for awhile, but that was a much weaker position, after Jordan.
I hope and expect Grant to be a Hall of Famer. I believe it's a basketball Hall of Fame, and not just NBA, so Grant 's amazing college career should also help. It might also help that he was considered a great teammate throughout his career and as Jason said, he seems to be one of the really good guys.

[JasonEvans]

I guess longevity really helps Hill, who played 200 more games the Webber.

Grant was still a double-digit scorer in the NBA at age 39... that's absurd.

[RPS]

He'll get in. Maybe not the first go round, but that's kinda of fair considering how his tragic career turned out. I was really happy that T-Mac got in this past go around, but I was a little surprised that he got in that quick. Those former Orlando teammates have a lot in common in terms of career trajectory and ultimately unfulfilled potential. Think T-Mac overall had a higher peak...I will be thrilled if/when he gets in. I'm surprised anyone thinks T-Mac had a higher peak though, outstanding as he was.

[jipops]

I would think the lack of playoff success would factor in as much or more than the injuries. Grant had a difficult time getting out of the first round.

But as mentioned, right before he was injured he was a spectacular all around player throwing in 25 a night while drawing the toughest defensive assignment.

[jipops]

I will be thrilled if/when he gets in. I'm surprised anyone thinks T-Mac had a higher peak though, outstanding as he was.

I think a very good argument could be made for T-Mac having a higher peak. For one, he was a much better perimeter shooter than Grant. Tracy, at 6-9, also had the ability to put it on the floor like a guard and may have actually had a little bit more bounce than Grant. I'm not saying those few things automatically made him the better player. But I could see how they could give T-Mac an edge.

[devilsince1977]

As was mentioned, it is the Basketball Hall of Fame, not the NBA Hall of Fame. Grant should be a 1st year inductee. His college career puts him over the top in my bias opinion. Christian should already be in for his College career. He would be if Timberlake hadn't dove under his foot.

[Duke79UNLV77]

It is not at all crazy to say that at age 27, in the middle of his prime, Grant Hill was on course to be one of the top 50 players in the history of the game.

Indeed, it would be crazy not to say that he was on course to be one of the top 50 players of all time. Over his 1st 6 years, he had a combination of points, rebounds, and assists that only LeBron, Larry Bird, and Oscar Robertson have matched over a 6 year period. Let that sink in. LeBron, Bird, and the Big O, and over a 6-year period, not just a year or 2. Plus, Grant was an outstanding defensive player. He never regained that level, but he did make another all-star game and play effectively to age 39.

Even with the injuries, his career numbers show a 89% HOF probability rating on basketballreference.com. Plus, pro sports HOFs typically give some allowance for great players whose careers were limited some by injuries. One can argue whether he'll have to wait a year or 2, but there's really no reasonable argument as to whether he should get in the HOF. When judging HOF credentials, some hold him to a different standard of comparing him to what he could have been without the injuries, as opposed to other players in the HOF. As someone else noted, college also is considered for the Basketball HOF.

Coincidentally, NBA TV currently is airing a 1999 game in which Grant scored 46.

[johnb]

In discussing the Webber comparison, don't forget his college all America status and two final fours. Oh, wait, you can forget them since they were vacated after he accepted 6 figure "loans" from a professional gambler and then lied about it to federal investigators. And he then couldn't associate with UM athletics for a decade.

Webber was a great player, and also an intelligent young man whose earliest hoops error was in turning down Coach K. (Hurley/hill/hill/laettner/webber has a nice ring to it, and it's unlikely a Michigan booster would have given money to a duke guy). I also found him likable and with a fun sense of humor. I'm sure he wasn't the disappointing, bad guy that might be the Golden State memory, and it's not entirely fair to penalize a man for youthful indiscretions.

But it's the Basketball Hall of Fame, and Webber helped trigger a major scandal. He and Hill may have had vaguely similar trajectories, and both are unusually bright and articulate, but it's no surprise that Webber might not skate through.