PistonsPowered posted an argument for why the Detroit Pistons should retire Grant Hill’s number. I would like to offer some counterpoint. The article uses individual success and Hill’s unique talent as the argument for retiring his jersey. Furthermore, he accurately states that Hill “is the best small forward in Detroit Pistons’ history.” He then defends Hill’s lack of playoff success, “the Chicago Bulls were in the process of their second three-peat during Hill’s rapid ascent to stardom.” Then he states Bob Lanier and Dave Bing as former Pistons with little team success that had their jerseys retired. In those last two points, he both defends Hill’s lack of post-season success and excuses it.
Argument #1 Individual Success
To begin with, Grant Hill is undeniably a great talent. This article in no way disputes that Hill’s time with Detroit was significant. In Hill’s time in Detroit, he averaged 21.6 ppg, 7.9 RPG, and 6.3 APG. Over the six-year span he played in five All-Star games. It would have undoubtedly been six, but the 1999 lockout-shortened season featured no All-Star game. During his first season, he shared the Rookie of the Year Award with Jason Kidd. From the 96’ season through the 2000 season he made the All-NBA Second Team four times and the First Team once in the 97’ season. Hill appears all over the Pistons regular-season record book. His individual accolades are parallel with his superstar status.
I must cede to this argument. Statistically, Grant Hill was as good as any other player in Piston’s history. The numbers that he put up are comparable to Isiah Thomas, Bob Lanier, and Dave Bing. His numbers are outstanding and Hill’s award shelf must be breaking. Although his time in Detroit was short (six seasons) he put a stamp on Piston history and became a superstar in the league.
Argument #2 Unique Talent
This argument may seem to be the same, however, in the ’90s the point forward was unique and the all-around player was not as common as it is now. The superstar was typically associated with putting up huge scoring numbers. Michael Jordan led and inspired a generation of high-scorers and unique one-on-one players. Grant Hill stood out among that generation with his size and athleticism combined with his ball-handling, court vision, rebounding, and of course, scoring. So, yes, Grant Hill was unique. The player of the era most like him, arguably, was Penny Hardaway (whose success was cut short even quicker than Hill’s). Hill had an inch and 20 pounds on Penny. So, they had comparable body types. Penny’s first four seasons included 19.7 ppg, 4.6 RPG, and 6.7 APG. This stat line is quite similar to Hill’s numbers (21.6 ppg, 7.9 RPG, and 6.3 APG); the biggest difference being rebounds. Hardaway, however, played with a few strong rebounders, Shaquille O’Neal and Horace Grant. The best rebounder Hill played with was arguably Jerome Williams. No hate towards Junk Yard Dog, he just was not the same caliber player as either Shaq or Horace Grant. Speaking of Shaquille O’Neal, Hill was not even the most unique player of his generation. That era produced the likes Shaq, Kobe, Iverson, Vince Carter, and Tim Duncan. This comparison could be apples and oranges. You like apples and you like oranges. You could say Grant Hill is an orange and Kobe and Shaq are apples. The big difference is that the apples have rings.
I do not know if uniqueness qualifies you for jersey retirement, but it may. I do not particularly like this argument; however, the facts support it. How it connects to having a jersey retired for the Pistons eludes me. Yes, Grant Hill played for the Pistons and yes, he was a unique player. If the Pistons did not have a championship culture I would say that this would be enough. My personal disagreement does not change that Grant Hill was a unique talent. Any YouTube search of his time in Detroit would confirm that. His unique talent may have been enough before the Bad Boys, but after those titles, a great player is all style and no substance.
Defense #1 Bull’s Prominence
During Grant Hill’s time in Detroit, the Jordan led Bulls dominated the NBA. I could understand this as a defense, however, the Bulls never kept Detroit from advancing in the playoffs. In fact, Hill never advanced past the first round as a Piston. If we lower the baseline of success for a Pistons legend to advancing past the first one once, Hill failed. Hill’s playoff statistics (19.6 ppg, 6.9 RPG, 5.6 APG over 15 games) are still solid. The Pistons posted a 4-12 record over that span. Hill missed the last game against Miami in 2000 and that series was marred by his injury. Hill attempted to play through the pain in his last games in a Piston uniform. This, of course, led to some controversy over how the Pistons training and medical staff dealt with his injury and of course his departure. I do not intend to delve into the nature and connection of those two events here, but I will say it certainly draws some parallels to Kawhi Leonard and his departure from San Antonio. It would be nearly identical if you imagine the Spurs never made it past the first round of the playoffs.
One could argue that the Piston's lack of talent prevented Hill from leading the Pistons to eternal playoff glory: the second round. During Hill’s time in Detroit, Joe Dumars finished his time as a Piston. Dumars averaged 14 ppg and 4.1 APG during that time. More importantly, Dumars provided a veteran presence, a mentorship to Hill, and spread the floor for the point forward. Dumars also had young stars Allan Houston and Jerry Stackhouse nipping at his heels for minutes. Of course, Houston left for New York. There was speculation that it had something to do with a personal conflict with Hill, but that is neither here nor there. I would not suggest that other players having a problem sharing the spotlight with Hill should prevent the Pistons from retiring his number. If so, Adrian Dantley would have kept Isiah’s number out of the rafters. Stackhouse, a high-scorer, later helped a Piston’s team (2002) reach a level Hill never did, the second round. Of course, that team was led by Ben Wallace, but more on that later.
This defense does not track. Hill could never lead the Pistons to the second round let alone a matchup with the Bulls. Hill was unable to lead the Pistons to any memorable success. That’s why you should YouTube Grant Hill highlights and not Detroit Piston highlights from that era. For the other eras with retired jerseys, you can simply YouTube Bad Boys or Going to Work Pistons. Dave Bing and Bob Lanier played in an era before YouTube and before Isiah Thomas, Bill Laimbeer, and company changed the narrative of success in Detroit. The Grant Hill era had no discernible identity. In retrospect, it provides a good example of how to build an unsuccessful team in Detroit; Step 1: Acquire a superstar that puts up huge numbers and electrifying highlights. Step 2: Make the playoffs sometimes and never make it past the first round.
Defense #2 Other Great Players without Team Success
Dave Bing and Bob Lanier have had their numbers retired by the Pistons and neither won an NBA championship. Both had great individual success. Bing averaged 22.6 ppg, 6.0 APG, and 3.6 RPG over a nine-year span in Detroit. Lanier averaged 22.7 ppg, 11.8 RPG, and 3.3 APG over a nine-and-a-half-year span in Detroit. Both comparable to Grant Hill. Lanier has a slight advantage over both Hill and Bing; he made it to the promised land of the second round of the playoffs. The even more important advantage that Lanier has is that he did not choose to leave the organization. Bing requested a trade and Hill left via free agency. I could delve into Bing and Lanier’s involvement in the community, but they did much of that after the Pistons retired their numbers. Besides, Hill is a standup guy. I have no quarrels with his off-court behavior.
This defense does not hold up to any pressure. If Hill played in Detroit before the Bad Boys there would not be any argument to keep his jersey out of the rafters…however, he played in Detroit after. All the individual success, unique talent, and a myriad of excuses does not excuse the lack of team success. Hill may have set records for Rookie All-Star voting, he may have been a player ahead of his time, he may have been in commercials and had critical acclaim, but none of this makes him a Piston’s great. Piston’s greatness comes from championships. That is why Grant Hill’s greatest legacy has none to do with his play in Detroit.
The best argument for retiring Grant Hill’s number is the sign and trade move he helped facilitate. The best thing Grant Hill ever did for the Pistons was leave in such a way that gave the Pistons Ben Wallace. Wallace represents everything right about Detroit basketball: hard work, defensive intensity, and winning basketball. Hill had all the style a basketball fan could ask for, but Ben Wallace had all the substance a Pistons fan could ever need. Wallace’s highlight reels may not feature the same jaw-dropping plays as Hill’s, but post-season success is what matters. In fact, while highlight reels are fun, Tayshaun Prince’s block in Game 2 of the 2004 Eastern Conference finals is more significant than any play Grant Hill made in a Pistons uniform.
Grant Hill had immense talent and put up monstrous numbers. His place in Piston’s history combined with his lack of playoff success should bar him from jersey retirement. Unfortunately, no logical argument (either mine or the one from PistonsPowered) will decide whether Hill’s number gets retired or not. It will come down to whether the organization thinks they can get twelve more people into Little Caesar’s Arena on a Friday night and if Grant Hill even wants the honor. In a podcast with Adrian Wojnarowski, Hill said something to the effect that he had the opportunity to return to Detroit as a player during the Going to Work era and decided not to. He had a chance to come back and help us win another title during that era, but he decided he could not come back because he could not be the same player that he was during his first stint in Detroit. He missed the point. The Pistons did not need a unique superstar, they needed a winner.
References
Comments