Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
kids out of this city play their entire school careers playing with no white kids, and against few. it seems to me they carry the bias that white kids, and black suburban kids, are soft. in a way they're right. Detroit kids are tougher (not more skilled, rougher harder meaner), although the suburban kids can play to that level, they are playing tougher since they're on a court with city kids- the city kids are playing ball the way they play all the time. they walk onto courts knowing as much.
I also feel Grant Hill is soft, he can play, but when he was the Pistons' savior he was not tough- need a big shot? don't count on it-2 free throws to ice a game? Hill will miss one.
My sense is the toughness is mostly an economic/lack of hope thing- who knows.
Jalen did say he was wrong about Laetner and Duke, so the overall thing could have been ignored by Hill-
But if Hill was to respond, I sort of think he did okay. First, as to trash talking, the number one "win" is "scoreboard" and Grant called that.
As to what Grant defended, the Fab Five guys called out Duke not by citing player racial stats over a decade, but by questioning Hill's family and heart. How does he respond to that by saying Jalen has a good point?
And understand, I am a Rose fan, and I dislike Hill, but I think you perhaps call on him to do more than he could be expected to do- the man was defending himself.
Coach K's choices? Fuck I don't know- I agree with Jalen, but I'm not sure that Grant had the ability to defend his background while calling out K (assuming grant feels the same way I do (and the way you do)).
edit: rereading you said his thing was understandable, so maybe you were making a point beyond his statement
|
I think you miss my point completely. Yes, it is understandable that Hill is defensive. Yes, Jalen's criticism was misdirected (and to be certain, it was misdirected as a kid when he probably thought the Grant Hill's of the world thought they were better than him because they came from good families and ended up at Duke). But Hill either ignored or is incapable of understanding the basis for the overall criticism of Krzyzewski's program and approach to recruiting.
That's my point. I understand why he felt defensive and good on him for defending himself and his teammates. But he neglected to address the aspects of Duke's program that lead to Jalen's midirected criticism. And I think he did it on purpose.
TM
