Gauging Danny Granger's trade value

So the hate spewed forth in my last FanPost, when I suggested blowing this team up and shipping off Danny Granger for what amounted to Darren Collison, Marcus Thornton, a pick and cap space. Most people abhorred the idea of getting so little back for Granger. Strangely, these were typically the same people who are generally upset with Larry Bird's "rebuilding" plan, and would like it to, well, um...start happening.

Anyway, so maybe I was wrong in my assessment that Collison, Thornton, a pick and cap space would be fair for Granger. What are some other possibilities? I'll start with the ones we've already heard about, then add a few of my own.


1. Al Jefferson and Ramon Sessions for Danny Granger, Solomon Jones and Brandon Rush.

We've heard Big Al's name come up in some rumors involving the Pacers, and of course we heard about a pre-draft trade that would've probably involved Granger-for-Jefferson in some way. In my version, the Pacers address both their PG and starting PF needs, so the trade makes a little more sense than just a Jefferson for Granger straight up deal. I still don't like it. Granger's a better fit for the offense than Jefferson ever will be, and even assuming the Pacers will change schemes as soon as next season, another year of huge numbers for Granger couldn't hurt his eventual trade value. Not to mention, Jefferson's at his absolute lowest value point, having just had surgery. I like Sessions a lot though. It's confusing why we didn't make a push for him last summer, but oh well. He's not as good a defender as the guy we ended up with (Earl Watson), but is younger and a better drive-an dish type, and would've fit in well in our offense.


2. Devin Harris and Derrick Favors for Granger.

This was supposedly discussed on draft day, though Bird unequivocally said it wasn't happening, and that no on one on the Nets was worth Granger. From a rebuilding perspective I don't hate this trade, in that it gives the Pacers the #3 pick and about $40 million of shaved cap over the next five years. That said, talent-for-talent, this is quite a lopsided one. I feel like PGs like Harris are a dime-a-dozen, while Granger's more versatile and unique, and scoring talents like him don't come around very often. If the Nets landed LeBron and wanted to play Granger at the 2 or 4, they could have some incentive to get this deal done, but in my opinion they'd have to sweeten it somehow.


Okay, those are variations of the rumored deals we've heard about involving Granger, so we have some idea of his value on the open market. Now here's some we've talked about on this forum, and a couple I've just come up with.

3. Granger for Eric Gordon and two future first rounders (one via Minnesota).

This was a pipedream scenario brought to us by some guys at SBN's Clipper fan sight. At the time, the trade was this year's #8 pick and next year's Minnesota pick, but I have no real interest in Al Farouq Aminu. I think the trade is fair, it shaves cap and nets three assets, one of whom is an Indiana high school legend. It's not perfect (EJ may never be anything but a 16ppg type, non-All-Star), but it's as fair, in my opinion, as we've seen.

4. Caron Butler and Rodrique Beaubois for Granger, OR Eric Dampier and a future #1 for Granger.

The appeal here would obviously be salary cap related. Dallas wants an upgrade on the wing, and Butler looks a lot worse when he's not paired with Gil Arenas and Antawn Jamison. Granger is quite better and more versatile. But Butler as a long-term starter for the Pacers isn't too unattractive either, as he comes off the books next summer and would clear all of Granger's cap commitment and provide about 75% of the on-court value. Not a bad deal, if we're serious about rebuilding via free agency or deadline trades. What's more, Butler would likely be willing to take an extension that started at 7-figures following the new CBA, as long as it were long-term, so he could prove a very cost-effective option. Meanwhile, Beaubois is considered PG heir-apparent in Dallas for when Jason Kidd hangs 'em up, and that could happen any year now. If they like him that well, and the hype is real (though I admit I don't know much about him), the Pacers could start him right away for a year, and when his extension comes up next season they'd know what he was worth.

Dampier has a non-guaranteed contract, which means he represents $13 million in real money, cuttable before his cap hit. This would be a depressing scenario, because it would unceremoniously bring an end to the Granger era, like it never even happened. I'm not sure the Pacers are that financially desperate yet. Throw in Beaubois and take back Dahntay Jones, and it could be more intriguing, as pretty much all of the Pacers veteran long-term deals will be off the books heading into next summer.

5. Jeff Green, Nenad Krstic, Eric Maynor and a future #1 for Granger.

If you liked the Collison trade, you'll probably like this one. It features similar returns with some tweaks. In the Collison trade it's Collison/Thornton with all the upside, in this one it's Maynor/Green. In the Collison trade it's Peja creating cap space, with this one it's Krstic, who comes off the books for less money, but we wouldn't have to give up any of our pieces to get him like we would in the Peja deal). The draft pick for OKC will probably be slightly worse. But only slightly. I'd say Collison is a much better PG prospect than Maynor is, but Green is a much better wing prospect than Thornton is. All in all, it's the same concept, and one I endorse. It shaves cap, gets younger and addresses multiple needs.

6. Marvin Williams, Al Horford and Jeff Teague for Granger.

Okay, so this one may seem a little far-fetched. But you'll notice, Horford isn't necessarily certain he'll be a part of the Hawks' long-term plans. WIth the Hawks looking to move Williams, Mike Bibby or Josh Smith, Williams might make the most sense from competitive and financial standpoints. The Hawks have explored offering Shaq a two-year deal, meaning Horford or Smith will be the odd man out, and both are PFs. Depending on which one the Hawks want to keep (and Smith will be harder to trade), Horford could potentially wind up on the block, as unrealistic as that sounds. If the Hawks could make a Williams-to-Granger upgrade at SF and keep Smith at PF, the starting lineup would be significantly better next year, even without Horford. Obviously, Teague's no starting-caliber PG yet, but Williams is pretty much worth 75% of Granger, production-wise (kind of like Jeff Green or Caron Butler), and he's paid 75% of what Granger is too. Horford would make this trade all worth it.


So what do you think? Am I under/over valuing Granger? What trades would you do? Are any worth it? Would these all be steps backward?

Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Indy Cornrows

You must be a member of Indy Cornrows to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Indy Cornrows. You should read them.

Join Indy Cornrows

You must be a member of Indy Cornrows to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Indy Cornrows. You should read them.




Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.