Let's criticize Granger everyone! It is fun!
by dbcb on Apr 19, 2011 11:04 PM EDT
Email
Print21.5 ppg- first on team
3.5 apg- second on team
4 rbg
1 turnover pg
50% fg, 40% 3fg
PER of 22.4
He is scoring at the same rate, with a higher shooting percentage, and his turnovers are down big time. All against Deng, an awesome defender and against the best defense in the league.
Why are we blaming and criticizing him right now? Why aren't we praising him for stepping up his game from the regular season?
We know he has faults: you can't give him the ball at the end of the game at the top of the key and say "score." We realize that. But maybe we should be asking why we keep putting him in that position. Why not move him around more, try running him off screens, put him in the post... anything.Maybe we should be yelling at the coach to try something else.
You can recognize faults without blaming and calling for a player to be traded, especially when he is the best player on our team by a long shot and is playing pretty dang well. Our starting 4 is shooting under 40% and averaging only 5 rebounds a game yet I don't see post after post complaining he sucks and isn't starting quality?
145 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you.
I agree that he gets way more shit than he deserves. Without him we don’t make the playoffs, nor do we compete in any of these playoff games. We do not run proper plays in clutch situations in my mind, too much isolation. Reggie didn’t shoot the ball from isolations, he came off screens and popped right away. Let’s see some of that with Granger.
by infinityzero.systemerror on Apr 20, 2011 12:30 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Agree w/everything you say here
he’s not going to fill it up in isolation, and that’s not his fault it’s who he is. But… either Collison, George or Hibbert need to grow into that end of game scorer or we need to find someone who can
Granger
I don’t like the fact that he’s selfish and he doesn’t play defense. And he’s not the best player “by a long shot”. He’s just the guy that takes the most shots…including lots of bad ones. I’d argue to say our best players are Hansbrough and Collison…probably Collison more than Hansbrough because Collison is the one that sets everything up.
There's not much evidence that Hansbrough is good...yet
He’s looked only marginally better than Josh McRoberts in this series. Granger has looked like an NBA-caliber jump-shooter who probably doesn’t pass enough or play outstanding defense. Surprise! That’s what he is. But saying he’s not our best player is a little naive, I think. You can’t base your evaluation of a player on one playoff series either. Granger has been consistently our best player for a long time, while Hansbrough and Collison have had 50% of a good playoff series and a lot of streakiness throughout the regular season.
Not saying I dont’ think they could be our best players eventually, but they’re not at the moment. Not even close.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
Lets see Granger go toe to toe with the best...
Hansbrough goes toe toe to with the best PF in the league and he’s never scared. He never shys away from the challenge on both ends of the court. He has out played Carlos Boozer, Amare Stoudamire, Kevin Garnett…and a bunch of others this year. Sure he’s had off days but it’s never due to lack of effort. That’s more than I can say for Granger
Ok
And you sir have very limited basketball knowledge…
Hansbrough got OWNED by Garnett this year
Stoudemire and Boozer are piss-poor defenders, explaining his going off on them. I’m one of Hansbrough’s biggest champions, but he’s not there yet, regardless of how hard he tries.
As for Collison, if you have a problem with a guy who doesn’t play good defense, you’re not yet allowed to like Collison. He has a long way to go in that department. For all the optimistic talk about Collison, his numbers this season were almost identical to TJ Ford’s first year here. He has the potential to improve, but right now he’s not there.
It’s awesome how much room this team has to improve, but if Hansbrough and Collison were really good enough to make Granger a third banana, we’d be talking championship and we certainly wouldn’t be an 8 seed.
J.O.B.
Does anyone remember that horrible coach who wouldn’t play Tyler and PG… and had DC on the bench at the end of games? Half the year was lost for our 3 young players.
I wanted him out as much as the next guy, but that's a crutch
You want it both ways: saying those young guys are the best players on the team but then making excuses for the young guys saying that they’re not better because JOB didn’t play them.
I agree they’d be better off if JOB had played them, but he didn’t and they’re not. Regardless, they’re not good enough to be better than Granger in this series.
BTW, Hansbrough got better under Vogel. Collison didn’t. I’m confident he can get better, but I watched this team the whole season and I’m shocked Collison played as well as he did in the series considering how lackluster his season was.
One more thing, Hansbrough wasn’t a reliable option last game — he shot 2-12 and missed a ton of open shots. It’s ok that he wasn’t feeling it but he just can’t get his own shot consistently yet.
How was DC lack luster?
If that the case then everyone was lack luster. He was 2nd on the team in scoring and 1st in assist. If Danny was the “best player” you’re only basing that on points…that would make DC 2nd best right?
THIS
everyone was lack luster
You nailed it!
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
dammit Nukem!
I was gonna say the exact same thing.
EXACTLY!
NO ONE on this team had a really good season. Everyone had flashes, but no one but Granger really showed the ability to score or contribute consistently.
During the month of March
AFTER Vogel took over:
Collison averaged 12.7 ppg, 4.7 apg, 2.4 TOpg.
In February, Collison’s worst month: 12.4 ppg, 5.9, 2.7
The only significant difference were his percentages (ATROCIOUS in Februrary, much, much better in March). I think that could speak to Vogel reigning him in some, making him work on his shot selection. But overall, he was just as turnover prone under Vogel, and averaged about half as many steals (1.5 in Feb to 0.8 in March), which may speak to a defensive philosophy switch under coach Frank.
Anyway, my point is Collison wasn’t giving anyone any reason to play more than the 29mpg he was getting in February, let alone at the end of games.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
agree with everything
Harper's on Miller, McKey, gets in to Miller for the win and...
Hail to the Orange.
Hail to the Blue.
Hail Alma Mater,
Ever so true.
We love no other,
So let our motto be
Victory, Illinois, Varsity.
Chief Illiniwek lives
by wonillionaire on Apr 20, 2011 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Huh?
That makes zero sense. Just because you perceive that Tyler “goes toe to toe with the best” and “isn’t scared” does not mean that he is actually better than them, or anywhere near as good! You use a lot of flowery language but don’t back up anything with stats, facts or empirical evidence. What’s the point? This seems like a pretty one-sided argument. I like Tyler, but you’re delusional if you think he’s one of the best PFs in the league at this point in his career.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I'm saying he competes
Obviously he’s not one of the best but he consistently keeps the best player on their toes. Do you disagree?
I don't know? Who cares if they outscore and outrebound him?
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
With development, I still think he's David West
But I’m not sure if David West is good enough to start at PF on a title team with Roy Hibbert at center. Tyler needs to work on defense and his offense around the basket. I still think the best thing we could have done (at least talent wise) is sign an offensive post presence and have Tyler as a 3rd big man.
Doesn't rebound quite as well, but yeah, that's pretty much the best-case scenario comparison I made when we drafted him
And at times this year we saw that coming to fruition. But like you said, it makes me uncomfortable to have so many one-dimensional players around the basket. It’s not like we can shift Tyler over to 3 and bring in a rebounding/shotblocking PF in for 12 minutes per game. Nor can we slide him in at 5. I’d actually be really happy with sticking him back on the bench, but there are no better free agent options out there, and we played ourseleves out of a good draft pick (not to mention the draft sucks this year, and watching these playoffs has been totally worth it), so I guess he’s the starter unless you trade him.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I know you're not a huge fan
but I would have loved to sign Zach Randolph, prayed he behaved and moved Tyler to the bench. Z-Bo can score on the block, give any team fits and is a better rebounder than anyone we have. With him #1, Granger #2 Hibbert/Collison/George #3 that would look to me like a 50+ win team.
I wouldn't have minded too much
I just would rather break the bank on a younger player later if it meant building a championship contender. I don’t think Randolph would have gotten us over that 44-45 win hump. But hell, I’d be fine with that win total for a few years.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
We already know Granger isn't ever going to be cutthroat type player
such as Reggie Miller or Kobe Bryant or Kevin Garnett, etc. But the fact that you don’t consider him the best basketball player on the team is still baffling to me. Do we need a player like that? Yes. But that doesn’t men Danny can’t still be a feature player on a winning team
"My game’s like the Pythagorean Theorem. It ain’t got no answer." - Shaq
Follow me on Twitter @JWM_IndySports
by bleedinblueandgold on Apr 21, 2011 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Hansbrough has not shown the consistency to even be considered our best player.
He pretty much gets shut down if his jump shot isn’t falling. He is a poor rebounder and hasn’t shown a particularly strong ability to pass out. Granger stills scores even if his shot isn’t all that great, generally speaking, and I think he really improved his passing this season. Danny really isn’t that bad on defense, certainly you’d like more effort at times, but it’s not like he doesn’t play it. If we’re talking about defense, then Darren Collison was far worse than DG all season.
by infinityzero.systemerror on Apr 20, 2011 7:00 AM EDT up reply actions
See this is what irritates me.
Collison has played GREAT this series. But he has STRUGGLED all year, especially defensively. He was, and this isn’t even exaggerating, HORRIBLE on defense most of the year. All you had to do is be here when the games were going on.
And then you go and mention Hansborough. Who struggles defensively as well despite the effort. Vogel even mentioned his weak side help “needed work”.
Yet there you are, criticizing Granger for his defense and say Collison and Hans are our best players. And I am not even going to touch the selfish thing and taking lots of shots… Hans puts up his shots in hurry and doesn’t really rack up the assists.
The double standard towards Granger is just ridiculous.
And I am not saying Granger is some sort of God. Hell, I have been in game threads absolutely pissed about how he was playing. But RIGHT NOW, int his last two games, he isn’t playing like that. He is playing some damn good basketball and people still keep hating on him while praising others who aren’t playing as well.
Collison
For a guy who struggled all year, he’s still 2nd on the team in scoring. Much of his struggles early on were do to J.OB. He has had to make so many adjustments playing for 4 different coaches in his 1st 2 years.
I'll paraphrase so others can understand...
“dbcb called me out and said Collison didn’t play good defense this year (fact), so I’m gonna rebuddle by saying his scoring was 2nd to Granger and its all Jim O’Brien’s fault”
Brilliant input.
Christ people. dbcb isn’t saying Granger is the savior and the team is worthless without him. He’s just saying Granger has played well through the first 2 games and has clearly taken his game up a notch since the regular season ended. Does the team deserve SOME criticism for blowing a 10 point lead in game 1? Probably. Does Granger deserve 100% of the criticism for that and then some more on top of it for being “selfish” and playing “piss poor defense?” Absolutely not.
"I really don’t want to offend you, Bob, but I don’t read your column, I really don’t," - Peyton Manning
I'd be inclined to agree with you...
If Collison’s numbers had picked up after Vogel took over. They didn’t. I’m excited to see him work on his game this summer, but he has a ways to go.
A little surprised at the Granger hate too
I got it during parts of the regular season when it was sort of understood that we wouldn’t make the playoffs (or if we did, we wouldn’t be competitive) and the blowup idea was popular. I still think trading him this off-season might be a fine plan, if we can get back a good player or picks. But he’s made it abundantly clear this playoff series that he is the sole reason we are competitive on offense. There is literally no one else who can consistently score and is wiling to consistently take difficult shots.
Collison is not a great shooter, and now his ankle is hurt.
George doesn’t seem to know how to play offense at all, and has zero confidence in that department.
Hansbrough is a bit of a black hole, who will be great or horrible, depending on the day.
Hibbert is inconsistent and predictable.
Rush and Dunleavy don’t see enough floor time (and I’m completely FINE with this).
For anyone willing to point the finger at Granger’s perceived selfishness for all of our team’s problems, grab a guy off that list and show me evidence that he has been a better offensive option this playoff series, or for any consistent stretch ever. Yeah. Thought not.
The truth is Granger isn’t an ideal #1. He’s also made that clear this series. But he IS OUR #!!!!! We can’t do anything about that, so we just have to get over it and wait until the team can start acquiring some more pieces in hopes that someone else takes over the reigns.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I'm not surprised at all by the Granger hate
Granger is a nice player and he is our #1 scoring option, right now. Those are the facts, and not in dispute, but I feel he should be harshly criticized for his decision making/shot selection/defense so far in the playoffs. He has not stepped up his game much for the playoffs in my opinion. Looks like some ol same ol to me. He still chucks up/settles for ill advised jumpers at innopportune times, when he has room to get into the lane and improve the teams odds of making a better play. It’s just as lazy as it is selfish. He still has trouble maintaining assignments on defense. I would never call a player of his stature lazy, but he does seem to disappear at times, especially on defense. So not much has changed right? Our offense loses momentum everytime the ball gets into his hands, especially when he’s not hitting. The long range jumper is a low percentage shot but unfortunately, DG doesn’t seem to understand percentages, which is shocking, considering he was an engineering major. Our offense stagnates when he is isolating on the perimeter, and the Pacers would be much better served by playing the percentages and running normal offensive sets, getting the ball to the open man, since we don’t have an NBA killer on this team. Forcing the ball to Granger in crucial situations is absolutely a bad idea, and negates all the positives he brings to the team. It slows the game down, takes other players out of the flow of the game, brings down field goal percentages, and lessens opportunities to get to the free throw line, which bails out the other team in the long run. In short, one step forward, two steps back. Either utilize DG’s skill set differently or trade him for a more balanced and aggressive player. If we don’t do one of those things, we will never escape mediocrity.
Didn't you read the post?
He has not stepped up his game much for the playoffs
Read it again. He definitely has stepped his game up. You’re being selective with the bad shots you’re remembering. They don’t ruin an entire body of work.
Furthermore, didn’t you read the comments? It seems like nearly everyone on here who is part of the “stop dissing Granger” argument agrees that DG is not a great leader, or ideal #1 option…he just IS the closest thing we have to a leader or #1 option. It’s not like we’re going to suddenly pull him from late game situations and rely on someone else who hasn’t done anything all year. This is a 37-win team, and people are acting like we were really good, and what we were doing in the regular season was working, and Granger is swooping in and screwing it up. We’re not good. It’s not all DG’s fault. He can score, and no one else really can (except for Tyler, though it’s hard to predict when his one offensive weapon, the open 15-20 footer, is going to work). If we get swept and DG continues to do what he’s been doing, should we be surprised? I mean, we barely even qualified for a playoff spot. This perception that because the Bulls are playing badly against us and a few of our guys seem to be hustling more (ignoring the fact that we’ve been badly outrebounded and can’t figure out how to rotate on defense during this series) DG is somehow lazy or selfish is baffling. He’s no more or less lazy and/or selfish than he’s always been. No, check that, he’s LESS lazy and selfish than he’s been all season, according to the stats.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I have only seen about 25 or so games...
…the last few seasons. And aside from Feb. and early March, I don’t think I’ve ever viewed Danny as Lazy. He’s not strong physically. He’s not very fast athletically. I saw two of his games in college and didn’t think he’d be much more than a solid utility guy off the bench. But, he’s been able to turn his confidence and versatility into reliable scoring. Maybe not great scoring, and it certainly declines when the presure is on. That presure may be mental or it may just be the fact that teams defend opponents best players harder late and Danny just doesn’t have the speed or strength to turn that into consistent late game trips to the stripe.
My only real quam with Danny when his effor is there, which it has been all series, is his tunnel vision. Aside from Danny and Collison being effective attacking in iso (and I emphasize effective…not dominant, great or ever very good) all of our great play in this series has been ball movement, active defense, and wave after wave of slightly varying skill sets. I really don’t think the Bulls have played terribly in this series. I think that they’ve won most of the year in a similar way to the 61 win Pacers (Artest, JO, ect). They’ve played with playoff effort all season. They may not make it out of the east. I bet they beat the Hawks (or Orlando if they aren’t knocking down 15 3’s a game along with Howard’s 30/15). But, they may not make it out of the east. Still, alot of teams would struggle with the Pacers we’ve seen. It’s hard to get a bead on these guys and lock them down for 48 minutes.
Danny, Collison, AJ, Hansbrough…all these guys seem to get the ball and almost know whether they are going to force a shot or look for the right play before they make a move or read the defense. I think that’s what’s been frustrating. We’ve done surprisingly well with Danny and Collison knocking down shots off the dribble, but our best play has been moving the ball (like most teams that lack a Kobe/MJ type…even Lebron is best when others are involved). Watching these guys do some good things during the course of a game, but then end up proving to be who they are late I think has really broken the spirit of some fans.
peac.e
I'd say Danny is strong enough.
At least for a small forward. He even played some PF when JOB was still here.
I think his biggest problem is his ball handling ability. Danny has trouble keeping possession in critical situations while dribbling because he’s not good at isos. He never will be, probably. He’s just not that kind of a player.
Until the Pacers acquire a player who can be that guy, if ever, nothing is likely to change unless we go to a different type of play. The isolation play — which every team seems to live or die by these days — just isn’t our game.
by Manfred James on Apr 22, 2011 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Goes both ways
Granger has played two pretty good games. But I don’t think there’s been too much undeserved criticism either. He stunk it up at the end of game one both offensively and defensively (three missed shots, foul on Noah and left Deng wide open for three), and he left Deng wide open for a three to kill us at the end of game two.
So far watching him he’s proved he’s our best player, a great shooter and diverse scorer. He also proved he has poor court vision, doesn’t hustle on defense and when the pressure is on at the end of games makes poor decisions. Without him we lose, but we are losing with him. I think we’re sick of hearing how he’s the face of the franchise and untouchable. He’s our best player I’d say by a fair margin, but he’s not a franchise player and he peaked at the age of 25, while our other young players have room to grow.
Pretty much my thoughts right there.
I like Danny alot, but if he’s our best player, and we won 37 games and can’t close in the 4th…maybe we need a better option. Does that mean we have to trade him? Not necessarily. But, it might be the best way to try and get a better player.
I think he’s played pretty well. He doesn’t seem to quite have a feel for those late game situations (understatement) and he’s not great at anything besides maybe 3pt shot.
Still, I’m happy with the way he closed out the season and fairly satisfied with his play in this series. I also don’t know that I’d say he peaked at 25. We had litteraly nothing going on that season. He scored more, AND shot at a higher rate (and seemed better on defense too), but that was only two season ago. His play hasn’t completely nose dived. He could easily match that season again, or at least pick up his play and stats a notch or two and maintain that for years to come.
I’m still a big fan of shopping him this summer. If you win 37 games you don’t say your best and highest paid player is untouchable unless you’re happy with 37 wins.
peac.e
rec'd
"I really don’t want to offend you, Bob, but I don’t read your column, I really don’t," - Peyton Manning
I concur...
We already know what his strengths and weaknesses are. Therefore the coaches should put him in a position to maximize his strengths and minimizes his weaknesses. Not to say that he shouldn’t put in the work needed to strengthen his weak areas.
Opportunity is missed by most people because it comes dressed in overalls and looks like work.
-Thomas Edison
Granger criticism
Compare Granger with the criticism LeBron had to take for not winning Championships….all i’m complaining about is him not playing hard. As a teams #1 option you are going to take the bulk of the criticism when your team continually folds down the stretch. How many close game have the Pacers blown this year? How many times has another teams wing play dominated us in the 4th qtr. I’m forced to look no further than Granger. He gets paid the big bucks to handle this. If not then give him a pay cut and we’ll leave him alone.
agreed
as a top payed player and team captain/supposed leader, he is near automatically entitled to the critism, and moreso due to his lack of effort/selfishness (poor shot selection). But he is our best player, our record isn’t all that great and the blame can be spread around to many of the players. Bottom line, he needs to step up, especially with collision hurt (whether or not he plays). If his shot isn’t falling he needs to be putting extra effort on the defensive side and passing tthe ball to keep our offense flowing and helping us on the boards.
If his shot isn't falling...
He is shooting freaking 50% from the field. WTF are you talking about??
Bad shots
A few bad shots in the 4th qtr is enough to spoil an entire games worth of effort. Danny did it in both games…
by Real Talk on Apr 20, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
thanks
ppl need to learn to read. I said “if” and anyone who watched the games knows that dg had no business having the ball at the end of regulation.
Who do you want shooting the ball then??
seriously, who on the Pacers do you want to have the ball at the end of the game?
DC
Every time. i’d be satisfied with whatever decision he makes because if he doesn’t see a shot for himself, he’ll find a teammate. with Danny its all or nothing….usually nothing.
Have you only been watching this team for the last 4 weeks or something?
His shot selection and reliability was HORRID for 80% of the year!
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I see what he's saying
I understand that yeah, DC didn’t have a consistent year. But I have to admit, I feel more comfortable with him having the ball than granger in a clutch spot. I feel like DC plays with more poise, and more often comes up with a productive play in a high pressure spots. Granger succumbs to his limitations a lot, and you can tell his shots at the end of games are kind of a hope-this-goes-in. Hibbert does the same thing.
Playoffs often display who has “it” on a team cause it presents pressure moments that don’t exist in the regular season. I think, and hope, that what we saw from Collison in the first two games is the cream rising to the top, so to speak.. him understanding what that next level is through this experience and playing there at a consistent basis. When that happens, and if it’s happening now, Granger’s gotta be ready to relinquish the reigns. DG has shot well in these two games and I’ve liked how he’s played, but he doesn’t have the ability to control the game like Collison appears to be able to. In sum, yeah Granger is playing pretty well, but you can’t ignore the inherent potential of the playoff, as conpared to the regular seqson, as a time for players to differentiate themselves, which I think is starting to happen.
by BenD on Apr 21, 2011 7:54 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think DC had the oppurtunity a few times this year.
I believe we ran an iso at the top and let him drive into the lane to no success. Now DG hasn’t had much success here either, but I feel a great deal of this can be related to running isolation. I don’t think this is an ideal play for the end of the game, mismatches withheld. I feel that we could run much better plays that we could get the ball to our shooters in rhythm. Wouldn’t mind putting Granger in the post and trying to get something from that. Really, I’d settle for most anything other than a iso.
by infinityzero.systemerror on Apr 21, 2011 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I would take DC on a pick and roll
Over DG in the post any day of the week. Granger should only be coming off screens in these spots. I agree though, no isos cause the Pacers don’t have a player with the strength and speed to get off a shot on a consistent basis (except Lance…..)
The problem with the pick and roll, in my mind,
Would be the impression I have gotten that it’s been a bit ineffective.
by infinityzero.systemerror on Apr 21, 2011 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Our big men don't have the hands or the hops...
…to really get that first step at the basket and flash. I’m afraid the ball handler would almost always take the shot b/c Roy and Tyler’s back would probably still be truned when the ballhandler has to make that read on the defense to take the shot or dish to the “roller”.
peac.e
Luke is right.
DC has taken some horrible shots this season and I only saw about 20, maybe 25 regular season games.
peac.e
Agreed, if...
He had no business taking those shots, but I sure as hell didn’t want Tyler taking them with all the shots he was missing (wide open). I didn’t want George to even have the ball, the way he looked so lost on offense. We saw what happened when Hibbert got it down low with the game on the line (bad call or not, he didn’t get himself in good scoring position). I don’t WANT DG taking those shots, but hell, who else is going to?
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
welll considering what u said nukem..
personally if not DG than I would take Rush or Duns maybe a hot Price w hans shootin that bad hibbs dc etc.
by Justin Arnold on Apr 20, 2011 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Rush is 40% from 3 on the year and Duns can knock it down(Denver)...
We shouldnt be using DG like DRose instead recognize our strength is our depth and use that
by Justin Arnold on Apr 20, 2011 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions
You don’t think Granger has played hard this series?
Has Dunleavy (who makes basically the same amount Granger does) played up to your standards this series?
You think Luol Deng has dominated us in the 4th qtr this series?
"I really don’t want to offend you, Bob, but I don’t read your column, I really don’t," - Peyton Manning
he made 10 million
You act as if he got a max contract. If I remember right, he took a pay cut to stay here.
He should have left
The Knicks wouldve been a perfect fit…He could jack up all the 3’s he wants and not have to play a lick of D.
Huh?
How’d he take a pay cut? I guess you could make a pretty strong arguement that he signed his extension in the heat of what I remember as an All-star season….so I guess so, but there’s no proof he turned down a larger deal to stay. Still, he’s not overpaid…yet. If he level’s off at what he gave us this year, I think he’ll be overpaid over the next 3 seasons.
peac.e
Cutter, he put up better numbers than Joe Johnson
Danny could’ve gotten more money than he did easily.
So he's just a good guy then I guess.
Joe Johnson has put up better career numbers and better single season numbers (in his best years) than Danny has. But, like I said, you can make a pretty good arguement that he shoulda hit the open market if he was looking to maximize his $$$.
Still, I think we gave him a very, VERY fair deal. Personally, I woulda taken the $2mil. or so extra tax we would have paid to structure the deal so that he got about the same money, but that the lowest years were either 2011/12, or 2012/13 so we could maximize our cap space when we would clearly have some…but, that’s kinda nit-picky.
Dollar for Dollar, I’d rather have Danny and his contract than Joe Johnson and his…but JJ’s a better player. Not sure of the revelevance, but just sayin’.
peac.e
Bottom Line
Granger is who he is….The team didn’t come close to making the playoffs last year. In comes Collison and wala….the Pacers make the playoffs. That has to say a lot. PG came on strong toward the end of the year, but clearly it’s Collison who makes this team go. Luol Deng isn’t the issue. We have Paul George getting torched by Rose and Granger doesn’t step up to the challenge. Any other top quality wing wouldn’t stand for a rookie having to guard the other teams best player. PG and Granger both play the same position. There is no excuse for Granger not stepping up to guard Rose! I can’t respect that. Dunleavy is an outside shooter, thats it. He’s not the leader of this team and he’s not even a starter. Don’t use his limitations to justify Granger’s short comings. Granger needs to take Rose’s out of his mouth and grow a pair of his own!
You don't make sense.
Our record is 5 games better than it was last year. 5 games. I agree, Collison has been a very welcome addition here and has had a positive impact. However, when he went down in Game 2, TJ Ford and AJ Price were able to hold it together and even have a bit of a lead in the 4th qtr (don’t get it twisted, Darren Collison is the best PG on our team).
The reason George is guarding rose is because of his length and overall athleticism (Vogel’s decision). Yes, they theoretically play the same position, but they are not the same player. You think Granger should be guarding Rose? Take that up with Vogel.
How many times has another teams wing play dominated us in the 4th qtr.
Luol Deng isn’t the issue.
Seems a little contradicting to me…
I’m not using Dunleavy’s ‘limitations’ to justify Granger’s ‘short comings.’ At one point this season Dunleavy was a starter. I’m simply pointing out that you cannot criticize Granger’s performance and use his salary as an excuse when Dunleavy makes just as much.
Yes, Granger is the leader of this team. But, the fact that we are down 2-0 in the series absolutely cannot be solely put on his shoulders.
"I really don’t want to offend you, Bob, but I don’t read your column, I really don’t," - Peyton Manning
you are clueless and a waste of time
So now our best offensive player has to turn around and chase around the opposing teams point guard as well?
George is much more athletic than Granger is. Do you even watch basketball? I noticed you werent around during the regular season…
When DC got hurt...
The Pacers were up 9 and totally in control of the game. When DC got hurt they immediately surrendered the lead. I understand why George is guarding Rose but I just don’t understand why Granger isn’t steeping up, especially when Rose is killing like he is. Granger voluntarily takes over on offense…he should be able to do the same defensively. at least that’s what competitors do…
Again, you don't make sense
I would love nothing more than for you to provide some insight as to how Granger isn’t “steeping up,”
We immediately surrenered the lead because AJ Price came in and started passing to the wrong team. Have you watched more than 5 minutes of the playoffs?
Do you want Granger go 1-on-1 with Rose? Lets do that. Forget playing 5-on-5, we’ll just play 1-on-1 the rest of the way out.
"I really don’t want to offend you, Bob, but I don’t read your column, I really don’t," - Peyton Manning
I don't think Granger has much to do with...
…AJ Price turning the ball over as soon as he gets into the halfcourt set multiple times in a row. I’m the first to admit that Collison’s COMPETENT play was the reason the Pacers were ahead by so much. His ball control, ability to hit jumpers and surprisingly solid defense made a huge difference. But how is it Granger’s fault when all of that went away? That’s like saying that if Noah got injured it would be Rose’s fault if the interior defense and rebounding suffered!
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
Granger is only part of the problem...
I think people suffer from Lebron-Kobe-DWade-Durant-etc-etc-itis.
He looks like, and at times plays like these guys, and even averaged 25 pts a game over a season. Personally, I’ll take it!!!
Sure, it would be great if he was at this caliber, but obviously he isn’t. That’s too bad, but it is what it is. He remains one of the better players in the league, and plenty of teams would love to have him on theirs. Be glad you have a near all-star caliber player on your team. There are plenty of teams who don’t.
It’s fine to wish he were better than he is, but this team is a serious work-in-progress if you haven’t noticed.
Bottom line is this team lacks leadership. If Collison and Hansbrough, or whoever you think might be able to carry the load, they would have by now. Granger just happens to have the most leadership and responsibility right now. Obviously he’s not a very good leader… but he’s still the best the team has. Hopefully for his sake he doesn’t let it get to him. He’s not the first player this has happened to, and many of them could never fit in to a system as they should. The list is long.
The playoffs is the time to step up, and Collison has shown flashes. These other guys will have 2 more games to show more. If not, then Granger by default will need to be taking the shots. It’s just how it is! You don’t like it, blame mgmt.
Points don't mean leadership
Sometimes the guy scoring the most points can be disruptive if he’s forcing bad shots. Good leadership is recognizing how and when to include teammates….that would exclude Danny from the “leadership” category. The only leader the Pacers have is DC. He continually gets other involved as well as scoring points of his own. We need more of DC’s team play and less of Danny’s selfish 1 on 1 forced jump shots. The team looks great when DC is finding open guys. Danny’s at his best when DC is passing him the ball for an open shot. Same for Hans, Roy and PG. DC is the only shot creator on this team.
Yet...
You want Danny to score 30 a game? How’s that work?
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
DC is almost there... hopefully
DC has that potential I agree. I look back to game one though… how could he roll to 15 points in the first half… and 2 in the second? I like that he still had 4 assists, but if a leader is rolling offensively, especially with a go-to guy MIA… shouldn’t he keep putting it in the hole? DC is arguably still very shaky as a reliable leader.
Now is the time for somebody to step up. We’ll see if DC is that guy.
I don't think it's even arguable that he's not shaky
Like I said above, TJ Ford had a better 1st season here than DC did. A “star” point guard needs to do better than 13 and 5 per game and he didn’t show that this year.
both have asterisks
I agree with you, but they both come with asterisks.
TJ’s has to say: *Shooting guard in point guards body. One fall away from being paralized for life. Questionable as an asset.
DC’s has to say *Pretty much has proven he sucks, but has shown potential to be very good. A stable coaching situation may be what he needs to flourish.
You have to ride out what got you here, and DC is that guy… for better or for worse. Next year is the true test. He’s the immediate future whether you like it or not.
DC is damn good
to come into a very unstable team with the pg situation as the question mark….and take the team to the playoffs??? That pretty damn good for a 2nd year player.
You're either confused or you're really good at twisting reality
DC didn’t so much “take” the Pacers to the playoffs as he did, along with every other player, “narrowly miss the lottery” thanks to the ineptitude of the Bucks and Bobcats. I don’t know that Ford or Earl Watson at the point would have been any worse. Or Jarret Jack for that matter.
The real turning point? How about firing the coach who publicly humiliated his starting center, couldn’t stick to a rotation and had no interest in coaching (or even aknowledging the existence of) defense. I’d say that had a lot more to do with us miraculously making the playoffs than some watershed revelation-year by Collison.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
well... that gets an asterisk too
One guy can’t take a team to the playoffs. There were MANY factors for this team being in the playoffs…. Vogel, Hansbrough, Hibbert, Dunleavy, Goon-squad….
Don’t get me wrong… I still think it was a great move by Bird…. but DC isn’t that good yet. You cannot play really well one minute and then horrible the next. That equates into average, which he is right now.
Let’s call it like it is.
My point exactly...
This team lacks a star…DG’s been in the league 7 years…obviously he’s not that guy. DC is in his 2nd season and this is already his 4th coach. Once he gets comfortable in a system which gives him control, he’ll be a much better player than Granger.
For a guy who does nothin else but score??
If you’re taking 20+ shots, why can’t I expect 30 points? If Danny took 15 “good shots” per game meaning he came off a screen, set his feet for a kick out pass, or had a good drive to the basket…he would shoot a much better percentage and average well over 20 pts. But instead he only averages about 5 good shots per game and about 10-12 bad ones.
Again, he's shooting 50% in the playoffs
The Pacers CANNOT be a playoff contender if Granger continues to have to be the closer. They just can’t. But you’re not offering up any logic (and still haven’t learned how to use the reply button). Granger takes 17 shots per game in the playoffs, hits half of them and has put up near-23 points per game. That’s efficient. He still doesn’t get to the line enough, and never will, but what are you expecting? You can’t indict a guy for taking a few bad shots at crucial times when the other options were basically unable (or unwilling) to even get a shot for themselves!
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
Exactly
If Granger doesn’t take those shots last game, it’s AJ Price bricking or George being tentative,
I think the playoff atmosphere has been the toughest on PG on the offensive end. Remember, just about everyone on this team is either a veteran or played in the Final Four, which is a similar atmosphere. George played at Fresno St. and has never really gotten a taste of big time basketball like this until now.
Eventually, I think PG takes over the closer role but that’s a couple years down the road. Until he does, it’s either Granger or someone needs to do some major growing.
I like to think of Granger as our transition star
He’ll be good enough of a scorer until our kids really grow up. While I don’t think PG is ever an offensive stud/closer, I do think that player is out there somewhere. Granger’s still young enough to carry us until we find him, or he (depending on who he is) develops from the core we’ve already got.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
Good way to put it
Assuming the team does get that “first option” I do think Granger will still have the opportunity to be a formidable presence offensively and defensively. I actually think he could be a better player with somebody else to shoulder the offensive load. I’ve seen him first-hand shut down other teams first options (despite all the criticism he gets defensively), so don’t dismiss him just yet.
Agree partially, though...
…I think it would be only fair to mention that Granger also might end up being a large part of a trade that brings us that guy. Maybe not as a straight player for player deal, but as the key piece to acquire picks that we use to draft or trade for THAT guy.
But, in the mean time, yes, he’ll provide us with…well…exactly what he has so far probably.
peac.e
Yeah
I’m cool with that too. I just think it might have to wait till he’s a little closer to that magic “expiring contract” range, or else someone’s going to be overpaying for him. In the mean time I’ll take what I’m getting out of him and hope someone else steps up.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
id like to see Granger have a full year
with a coach that doesn’t say "jack threes’
He showed some promise efficiency wise under Vogel.
RE: For a guy who does nothin else but score
Well said! I couldn’t agree more.
I am going to say this one more time
I am not talking about the regular season with this post. Granger had some really bad months this year (and some really good ones) and deserved a lot of the crap people on this site gave him. All of it? No, peoples rational for Grange not being a true #1 is trade him for peanuts which makes absolutely no sense because I guess having a 20+ ppg player is bad, but that is besides the point.
Why I made this post is because in the two games so far in the playoffs, we are right there with the #1 seed, having lost two close games. And Granger has been playing pretty damn well… yet when you get on here everyone is complaining and saying how much he sucks and pointing out all the things he sucks at.
Its irritating. He isn’t the reason we lost those games. He is playing better than everyone (maybe not DC but thats debatable) else on our team, yet is getting no praise for it. Instead we praise Hansborough and act like he’s god (despite the fact he sucked in game 2 and can’t rebound). We praise George (even then he is giving us nothing on the offensive end). We praise Rush for hitting a couple 3’s. We praise Vogel for getting us ready to play (its the playoffs everyone is ready to play. Plus he deserves a lot fo the blame for the end of game play calling). And then we turn around and ignore 20ppg on 50% shooting and say Danny sucks and doesn’t try.
It's unfair to say that about DG in the playoffs so far
he’s taken a few bad shots, but without him we’re not in position to lose those games late because no one else is ready to step up like that.
exactly
You have to have a couple guys (or more) that have the ability to step up. Unfortunately Indiana doesn’t have them yet. I think our starting 5 (outside of Tyler) all have passive personalities, so it’s a tough situation. Granger tries, but it’s hard to be somebody they’re not. He’s got a fairly passive personality.
Somebody needs to grow some aggressiveness…. some will to win…. get some hunger….
Right now I don’t see that person. Tyler, Dahntay, Foster, and AJ seem to be the only players who really care about winning out there, but they aren’t the goto guys!! DG, DC, RH, and PG are all trying, but it might take a small miracle to pull out a win this series.
It seems every single Bull player has that hunger, that drive, that passion in their eyes. That’s why they’ve pulled out those wins.
"You have to have a couple guys (or more) that have the ability to step up..."
…or one Derrek Rose.
Just kidding. Even though I think he’s been about 90% of why they are beating us, Korver and Deng have both made big shots late.
peac.e
DANNY AND COLLISON
It seems like an argument on who’s the better player and or better leader for the Pacers. It’s not important; they both have their strong points and their weaknesses. I believe the focus should not be on what Danny and Darren do better than each other than on how they can both play to their strengths and work on their weakness to become better Pacers. Its playoff time and we are down 0-2 with Collison most likely out. I personally enjoyed watching the Pacers this season and can only hope they can figure out how to beat the Bulls so I can continue watching this team. The way I look at it is we are very young talented and that equal great years to come. Danny,DC,Hans,PG,and Hibbert, and a deep bench we are not too far away from making some serious noise in the NBA.
"Danny,DC,Hans,PG,and Hibbert, and a deep bench we are not too far away from making some serious noise in the NBA."
I’d say either one dominant big man and one more very good perimeter player (PG and DC could become that)….OR…. another very good big man (better than Hibbert and Tyler) and a dominant wing player.
Otherwise, we’ll be lucky to win 45+ games even with some marginal, respectible improvement from our youngsters.
But, it’s a start. I’ve been phenominally impressed with the play of our team in this series. I can chalk the 4th quarter breakdowns to inexperience and a lack of a true closer and be completely happy with that fact for now. Our play in this game has even given me the comfort in knowing that I think we no longer need to assume that we’ll never be able to attract quality free agents at a competative price. I know some want to go to big city/bright lights…but, most just want to play on a team that can win. And I think we’ve got solid players up and down the roster, cap space and all our own picks. Good stuff. With or without Danny, barring some really dumb moves or terrible luck, we are on the way up.
peac.e
Like????
Please don’t tell me you think Fairead will put us over the top? Not unless we can play 6 guys on the court. Otherwise we just have tons of incomplete players…kinda like now.
peac.e
a lot of times players develope into superstars like Kobe going like I think the 16th pick...
A young guy like Tristan thompson while not a bruiser could be good pick for his potential in the low post and with rebounding, a Kenneth Faried would bring guarnteed rebounding and toughness but thats probably a little high at 15 unless we thought we could get him late 1st and trade down with chi for there two late first rounders. Im sure the scouts and Larry will make an informed decision and draft someone good/great. And if we dont find him this draft maybe next draft or next years FA, but i can tell you hes not in this years FA and I dont wanna be like Philly and over pay an Elton Brand about to go on the backend of his career. Also, if PG cant or wont develop into the go to create your own shot guy than we need to make a trade for a guy like Mayo and take a chance. One last thing, again we shop DG though hes played great we might not have that contender while hes still relevant, and if we find the right package ie. multiple high draft picks and or YOUNG high upside talent. Otherwise ride with him cause we could be worse off.
by Justin Arnold on Apr 21, 2011 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions
and resign Foster Damnit hes played wonderful IMO....
by Justin Arnold on Apr 21, 2011 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I'd love for Foster to come back....
…But Foster is a guy that you have to win games now…maybe in 2012…maybe even 2013…but back and hip issues at his age (though he’s been great this year)…are very scary. We gotta make sure we don’t spend a ton of money staying in the 40 win range. 2 years at maybe $4mil. total…and that’s if we don’t spend any more money on big men other than maybe a little more than that proposed Foster money on Josh. If it comes down to giving Josh $4mil. per for 3+years and $3mil. per to Foster for 3+…I’m going with the young guy with upside. Though I’d really like for him to hit the weight room this summer. Even harder.
peac.e
I'd love Tristen Thompson.
He’s kind of lanky/goofy and not really all that fast, but his arms are soooo long that he can play like a near 7 footer and is a better athlete than Hibbs. He’s not a super quick leaper, but with good timing he can really get up. Alas…he’ll be gone at 15 almost guarantee. But, there’s 5 or 6 guys who COULD fall that I’d like.
Faried I like, on a sentimental level. I actually watched 4 of his games this year. He put up good stats in 3 of them, but he didn’t look very impresive to me. I know we wouldn’t be drafting him for offense, but he has no touch around the rim. Despite his huge rebounding numbers, he actually doesn’t even have great hands grabbing boards. Not terrible, but most of what I saw was just a matter of playing bad teams (even Louisville, just missed alot of shots). To make matters worse, he’s like 6’9" 230lbs. He looks cut, but I saw him get pushed all over the paint by marginal players. He needs tons of work on his lower body strength…and that might end up minimizing his hops…who knows. I’d take him for sure in the mid-20s though. In this draft he’s a solid bet. I’d put him at the same, “wish he was just a little more….” as JuJuan Johnson.
peac.e
EVERYONE stepped there game up in the playoffs and its been great so far...
yeah id have love to won but we still can and the way they bounced back after game 1 really show some great tgings to be excited bout. JMAC needs to stick with dunking, TO s need minimized . We really need DC back but make the adjustments and continue playing hard the wins will come and ill be happy. Oh yeah the refs call fouls if they sneeze on Rose and phantom O foul calls are awfuly suspect, but thats the NBA unfortunately. Go Pacers!!
As far as DG. Im sure anyone thats not stupid would agree that if we get the right package , then we trade DG otherwise ride with what weve got. Wish DG was MJ but hes been very good.
I feel like there's a MAJOR disconnect here
Granger’s our best player. That much is true. But people are comparing OUR best player to the Rose’s/Howard’s/Durant’s/LBJ’s of the world. They clearly aren’t in the same class, hence our record the last few years. Is that on Danny? Partly yes, partly no. Calling Danny lazy is sheer idiocy in my opinion, people act like in the offseasons he’s chilling on the couch with a bag of Fritos. When you have a singular player that’s the best on the team, you WANT him to take the last shot, you want HIM to WANT the ball in crunch time.
It’s not Danny’s fault there’s not more consistent talent with closing ability around him. I’ll trade anyone on the roster, because our roster simply isn’t good enough. But I’m trading any of them simply because they aren’t “good enough.” Think any trade Danny leaves in he’s not going to be the best player? You’re wrong.
We all know Danny isn’t perfect, Danny knows he isn’t perfect. Take him off this team and watch how bad we are, what with Hansbrough jacking up common 2/12 nights, Roy getting his massive frame pushed off the block into a 13 foot fadeaway, DC getting blown by by any PG known to man leading Hibbert to try and rotate (too late) and pick up yet another foul. Name a consistent offensive weapon on this team other than Danny……I’m still waiting.
You don’t just luck into Rose’s and Lebron’s and Kobe’s people. I’m serious, put Varajao on this team this summer along with a guy like a Jamal Crawford or OJ Mayo and watch how much better we are.
I don't know what to do. At all.
Replace O.J. Mayo with Marcus Thornton.
And I would agree strongly.
by infinityzero.systemerror on Apr 21, 2011 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sold on Thornton
Just simply because I haven’t seen enough of him. I he creating for himself or is he running off screens like Danny SHOULD be doing (news flash: That’s not on Danny) catching and shooting. We’ve got a ton of work off the ball and get open guys, we need an ISO closer, Crawford and Mayo are absolutely that.
Trying The Lance Stephenson Experiment and trying to bring in Mayo shows me Bird understands this. Bird’s building this team very well, able to adapt to a multitude of defenses thrown at it. This summer he’ll complete it and we’ll be making noise. Not contending noise, but “holy hell look at this well rounded complete young team noise.” I truly, truly feel Varejao is a major missing piece.
I don't know what to do. At all.
I forgot about Andy V. He would be a great option, but I just hope he doesnt take his talents to south beach..
by Justin Arnold on Apr 21, 2011 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree about Varejao
He can go PF or C and is a rebounding/charge taking machine, exactly what the Pacers need. If there is any way to pry him from Cleveland, Pacers have to try. I bet there will be a lot of teams trying to get him is he’s available though, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Cavs hold onto him thinking him and Hickson could be a formidable front court.
Thorton is one of the best young scorers in the league
He could easily average 20 if he played for us…plus he’ll hustle. Id rather have him than Granger any day. seriously. DC, PG and Thornton! Unselfish hustle!
Thornton is the real deal
He’s outstanding taking it off the dribble. Check here, especially around the 2-minute mark.
And here he is single-handedly dismantling the Warriors this year.
His knocks are that he isn’t a great defender. But he can spot up shoot with the best of them, and get his own shot if need be. Plus there’s automatic chemistry with Collison (they both started together when CP3 was out). As for his defense, well, he’s got quick hands (about 1.5 spg as a starter for the Kings this year, I think) and PG would off-set him nicely. Between the two of them, they’re the perfect SG.
Mayo, meanwhile, has never shown me anything. He’s regressed since his first year. This playoff series vs. San Antonio he’s looked worse than ever. I don’t get the fascination. He was clearly overrated in high school.
Crawford? Not my type. He’s basically Thornton but older and will cost more. I’d be fine with signing Thornton to a deal in the $7 mil per year range, but I don’t want the same guy, but with no remaining potential, for $3-$4 mil a year more. No thanks.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
What happened with Thornton in NOLA?
I mean, is he just too ball dominant to co-exist with CP3? How do did they give up on that guy? Just crazy to me. I’d love to see him in blue and gold….
I don't know
I don’t really follow NOR that closely. Coaching change, maybe? Perhaps he didn’t fit in with what Monty Williams wanted, although I figured that what he did at the end of last season was enough to earn him some PT (he was the team’s leading scorer from February on out, averaging 19 a game and shooting 45%+ from the floor).
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
So way we go after Thornton
Who I really do think is a legit target, what do you seem him as? Starting 2? Backup 2 behind PG (with PG finiding a starting niche with the starters as a defensive wing stopper) and Thornton being the classic Vinnie Johnson instant offense type?
My wishlist goes as follows, w/o taking into account what it’d take to get them;
1: Varaejao
2: Any scoring penetrating 2, read: Mayo/Crawford?Thornton/Jason Richardson’s corpse
I absolutely think those are available and I cannot overestimate how much Varaejao improves our interior rotation.
I don't know what to do. At all.
What I would do...
Is keep PG at the starting 2 but rotate Thornton into the lineup in the following situations:
A. We want to go small and quick with Granger at the 4 and PG at the 3 (very rare)
B. As a 2 with either PG or DG going to the bench, whoever needs the break
He could see 25-30 mpg that way.
Ideally we could find a viable 1/2 hybrid. Brandon Knight would be nice, but we won’t be able to draft him. That’s the only situation where I see Jamal Crawford being a better fit than Thornton because he’s a slightly better ball handler and can run an offense. Fact of the matter is we need a backup point, a guy who can create his own shot and an upgrade at backup center (by the way, I don’t know if Varejao is really a good enough defender for what we need, but he can rebound…I’d prefer Dalembert, or maybe even Chuck Hayes before him, assuming they’re both significantly cheaper than the $6ish mil Varejao makes, plus we wouldn’t have to trade to get them). So Thornton only addresses one of those needs, but he’s the most cost-effective option I see out there that addresses any of them. It’s got me thinking that maybe trying to acquire Monta Ellis in a trade, since he can play both backcourt spots, wouldn’t be such a bad idea after all. PG’s defensive ability has made me a lot more confident that having such an undersized, defensively-challenged starting backcourt group wouldn’t be so horrible.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
on varaejao
he still has about 5 years at over 7 million per left on his contract. he’s already 28 and basically a hustle guy. idk, though, might be all we can get, i’ll agree about your #2 point.
I realize Andy V's not cheap
But that’s not bad cash for a pretty consistent double double guy that gives solid interior defense that can slide to the 5. I love me some Foster but he doesn’t have much time left, a lineup like DC/PG (FA?)/Danny/Vareajo/Roy with PG sliding to Danny’s backup minutes, Andy sliding to Roy’s backup 5 spot, Hans first big off the bench at the 4. It solidifies our frontcourt big time.
Then a combo type guard off the bench like a Crawford or Mayo to get minutes at the 1 and 2 dictating matchup. Crawford’s a FA, so I’d rather NOT chase him since it’s dumping straight money. I’m also not concerned about the 2 spot with PG’s hopeful development. But who says no first, Posey(‘s expiring contract) + 1st or maybe Rush for Andy? Think it makes sense for both sides especially with Cleveland hamstrung with Baron Davis’s deal. I really have no clue how open they are to trading Varajeo, but it makes sense that they’d be open to it. And I’d really really like it.
I don't know what to do. At all.
I think you do luck into those players...
finishing 9th and picking 1st is luck…unless you subscribe to the David Stern Draft fixing conspiracy (which I don’t…not much anyway). Even if you subscribe to finishing last and securing the worst record and then getting the 1st pick in the Lebron draft is luck if you believe in the draft fixing…Stern has no incentive to prop up the Cavs. And the Lakers were lucky enough to draft Kobe when HS players were eligible, but KG had yet to do enough to stem the stigma and no one was picking non-bigmen in the top 10 out of High School.
Danny is our best player. I’m not trading him for a mere top 10 pick and cap space…not in this draft (top 2…that’s a different story). I agree, any trade where we move Danny, he’ll be the most proven, probably the best player involved. If I move Danny it’s because he’s like a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10, but we got a couple 5 or 6s on that scale at his position and though I firmly believe you can only do so much with depth when you have a max of 5 players on the court at the same time…moving a good, likeable player who has proven he can’t carry a mediocore team, for pieces that may help a mediocore team shake that status is wise. Your post was hard to really understand what you are suggesting. My theory is that Danny can be shopped quietly. We probably need to start with attempting to move him for a superstar and back down from our side (even if we have no shot of making the deal) so that when the rumors hit the media that Danny is being offered for an expiring contract a top 5 pick and a protected future 1st (or young, raw player), we can deny them if the deal falls through and maybe Danny can man up and keep playing the kind of respectible ball that he’s been giving us if the deal falls through.
I would settle for no less than 2012 cap space, a top 6-8 pick in this draft and a future 1st. And even that would be hard to swallow…now, you start offering more than that, and I’m probably pulling the trigger.
peac.e
Also...Mayo??? CRAWFORD?!?!?!?
Perhaps. Mayo more than Crawford if given a shot, could maybe get back to being the player that he should be. At 6’4" with handles, muscles, intensity (once upon a time), a decent stroke and at least average court vision…he should be a solid combo guard. A guy who could come of the bench for George and/or Collison and help our team. However, right now, I’m not so sure he’s going to be much better than Stephenson (in the long run) given the minutes and he’s going to cost about 8 times as much as Lance.
Crawford could help in the same capacity, but with more proven skills as a backup PG/combo guard. Probably better 3pt shooting too. But, if you watched this team the last few games and think either of those guys are going to add 5-10 wins and a significant punch in the post season…you’re crazy. We’re much better off with cheaper solutions that won’t take away minutes from George and Collison and keeping our options open for a better upgrade.
peac.e
Sign Thornton, Trade Granger
Sign Thornton, Trade Granger for a 4 man, and we’d still a lot of cap space to sign a high level talent.
Your hilarious
You say Danny sucks at defense and doesn’t try….
But you want Thorton, who Monty Williams benched because he wouldn’t play defense.
At least your consistently inconsistent.
by dbcb on Apr 21, 2011 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The only way I'd want to trade Granger is if we could get Josh Smith AND get a more than servicable starting 2 (not Thornton)
I like Thornton but I agree he’s not good enough defensively to start with Collison in the backcourt. If we could clear some cap space for next year and make a run at Eric Gordon (thanks to Sterling’s notorious cheapess) that’s something I would consider trading Granger and maybe Hans if we needed to. Maybe a lineup like this:
DC
Gordon
George
Smith
Hibbert
Thornton
Dalembert
AJ or Lance
Dahntay/Rush
Big man (maybe Lorbek?)
That looks like a dangerous team with some rooks sprinkled in.
by bigdawg9292 on Apr 22, 2011 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps...
…certainly better than what we have now. I’m not sure what’s going on with J.Smith though. Maybe it’s the trade rumors, maybe it’s the fact that he’s no longer the best big man on the team, but for some reason he seems to have lost some of his tenacity at both ends of the floor. Either way, I’d be 50/50 on trading Granger for Smith straight up…and besides. We’d absolutely have to have another partner involved. Someone would have to be giving Atlanta picks and taking Granger. Why would you want Joe Johnson AND Granger? I mean I guess they could try to do sort of an Orlando thing when they had Howard, Hedo and Lewis working some sort of mod-triangle offense with more 3pt shooting and less iso. But, Horford isn’t quite Howard and even though Granger is almost as tall as Lewis, I don’t think you’re going to find many coaches willing to try Granger at the 4. So, you’d probably have to solve that problem for them if they are going to pay Danny more than Smith along with Joe’s max deal.
Not sure if you’re just repeating what I’ve posted in the past, but I think Dalembert, for the right price is a great idea if Foster can’t be had for $4-5mil. for 2 years. Thronton, I think is an ok option…but, I worry that he’s just a product of a bad team.
peac.e
If all the guys who didn't come out this year come out next year....
Plus, all the talent that is coming to college this year comes out. It will be stupidly deep and I would love to have multiple picks.
by infinityzero.systemerror on Apr 22, 2011 1:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Id be up for trading this years pick for someones potentially similar next year.....
We have a lot of flex and plenty of options its agreat time to be a Pacer
by Justin Arnold on Apr 22, 2011 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Length and versatility - can't teach
I think one thing that people forget is how long and versatile Granger is. You can’t teach that, and it’s incredibly valuable. It’s one of the reasons he has been delegated the first option, because he has the tools to do it. Having a guy who can play and guard multiple positions and be able to put up 25 on any given night… you really have to understand how valuable that is…. even if he’s not what you’d want as a top tier “first option”.
I think Granger’s numbers have dipped in the past couple seasons because he’s trying to expand his arsenal… such as dribbling/driving more. He’s sacrificing what he’s comfortable doing to be a bigger asset down the road. He’s obviously struggled, but he’s still committed to improving. I commend that, and believe he’ll find his “niche” in the next couple of years. I think he’ll be right back up in the 23-24 points a game, be a defensive stopper, and be an all-star. Just watch.
I don't know
That’s a tall order these days in the Eastern Conference. Here’s your guaranteed All-Stars for next year (barring injuries): Deron Williams, D-Wade, LBJ, Amare, Dwight Howard, Rondo, Rose and Carmelo. I’d say guys like Noah, Bosh, and any or all of the remaining “Big 3” in Boston could also make it. That’s pretty stiff competition. I don’t know if Granger will ever make an All-Star appearance again. That doesn’t confront me. I don’t care if we have any All-Stars. I don’t think being an All-Star should make a difference to Danny. But I do hope you’re right about his ability to continue improving.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
A lot's changed since then, my friend
And Granger would probably score 30 a game if he had LBJ drawing double teams and dishing beautiful dimes to him wide open for three.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I know, and I know it took a ton of lobbying from LBJ and friends to get him in
But still, just goes to show how frivolous the ASG can be. All due respect to Kevin Love, but he get in over Lamarcus Aldridge. That’s just sad.
KEEP COACH FRANK
all-star "caliber"
Agreed, I’m not too concerned about all-star teams. I should’ve said all-nba, referring more to first-team, second-team, third team material. I think that particular “system” is flawed too, but it’s better than all-star selection.
My point is, he should get to the point where he is considered one of the best at this position, instead of an overrated scorer who shouldn’t be a first option for a team. Obviously his current role doesn’t seem to be a very good fit, but he’s still incredibly athletic and talented. Hopefully Pacer mgmt can figure out how to best utilize him. He seems to have the drive and work ethic to thrive once he finds his niche.
maybe it takes a trade
Honestly, Granger may even be best as a third option. It would be very interesting to see him in that role. It’s hard for me to say what kind of player he’d be, but at a minimum he’d probably be a much better defensive presence. His 3-point shooting would also be very dangerous. Other than that I don’t know! It’s an interesting situation that might take a trade to make things work for both sides.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Create-a-Caption: Jeff Pendergraph scares his Pacers teammates
- James Harden is a cake now
- Mike Miller loses shoe, plays two possessions without it, Pacers don’t score (VIDEO)
- Larry Bird calls his Indiana Pacers ‘soft’ following the team’s physical Game 5 loss to Miami
- Dexter Pittman’s elbow to Lance Stephenson’s throat is just one of three nasty hits in Miami/Indiana’s Game 5 (VIDEO)
