PDA

View Full Version : Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.



Anthem
10-09-2005, 09:43 PM
All right, now that people have seen a little bit of Granger, let's talk this through some more.

Earlier this week, I said that if you really think Granger is going to be good enough to start, why would you start him over Ron? Why not start him over Jax?

I'd think Jackson would be more qualified to come off the bench at the swingman spots than Ron, since he can play shooting guard and I don't like the idea of Ron spending much time at the 4. So why not have a 3-man swingman rotation of Ron/Granger with Jax off the bench? Between them, those guys should eat up all the available minutes.

Now, I honestly think we'd be better off (for this year anyway) with Jax and Ron starting, with Granger backing both of them up. But I think it could be worth considering to think of Granger as a 2. He's the same size as Jax, and it sounds like he can do the necessary things: slash, shoot, rebound, defend. What's not to like?

Pacers#1Fan
10-09-2005, 09:45 PM
From what I saw at the FamJam I think he could play the 2, 3, and 4.

Frank Slade
10-09-2005, 09:47 PM
From what I saw at the FamJam I think he could play the 2, 3, and 4.


Yeah well the line on him coming out of College was he could play positions 1-4.. So it certainly is not out of the question.

Lord Helmet
10-09-2005, 09:56 PM
I think that would make much more sense, Anthem.

With this idea we wouldn't have to worry about the opposing team's leading scorer getting off to a hot start, because Ron won't be on the bench.

But, I think the only question is if Granger is truly ready to start, and if he is, try it.

Unclebuck
10-09-2005, 09:58 PM
I can't answer until I see him in a couple of games

Brian
10-09-2005, 10:06 PM
I can't answer until I see him in a couple of games


Exactly...I wouldnt even go on preseason games,Im gonna wait till I see him in a few season games.

BlueNGold
10-09-2005, 10:07 PM
All right, now that people have seen a little bit of Granger, let's talk this through some more.

Earlier this week, I said that if you really think Granger is going to be good enough to start, why would you start him over Ron? Why not start him over Jax?

I'd think Jackson would be more qualified to come off the bench at the swingman spots than Ron, since he can play shooting guard and I don't like the idea of Ron spending much time at the 4. So why not have a 3-man swingman rotation of Ron/Granger with Jax off the bench? Between them, those guys should eat up all the available minutes.

Now, I honestly think we'd be better off (for this year anyway) with Jax and Ron starting, with Granger backing both of them up. But I think it could be worth considering to think of Granger as a 2. He's the same size as Jax, and it sounds like he can do the necessary things: slash, shoot, rebound, defend. What's not to like?

I like it....but as I think you are saying, one concern would be that he is a rookie.....but he is a rookie who looks like a starter now. I was stunned by his presence on the floor and the quality and breadth of his skills. I know this may be premature, but I think he will develop into a much better player than Jax....and Jax is no slouch.

If Granger can sufficiently guard the 2, I would play him there with Ron at the 3....particularly when Jax is having a poor game and complaining to officials. Granger looks a litte larger than Jax, so I am not sure how he would handle the quick 2 guards. He looks like a good post defender, but I am not sure about his quickness.

317Kim
10-09-2005, 10:15 PM
Yeah I'm probably going to wait until the actual season starts but make observations during preseason.

PacerMan
10-09-2005, 10:26 PM
What is this teams biggest weakness? Rebounding would be my answer though outside shooting is certainly a question.
That guy was a HORSE on the glass in college and blocked a lot of clutch shots. I want his butt up front. Let Jax and Freddie WELL man the 2.

BlueNGold
10-09-2005, 10:34 PM
What is this teams biggest weakness? Rebounding would be my answer though outside shooting is certainly a question.
That guy was a HORSE on the glass in college and blocked a lot of clutch shots. I want his butt up front. Let Jax and Freddie WELL man the 2.

Another good point. Only problem is...where do we put Ron. He does not belong on the bench. He is too short to play PF, IMO.

Anthem
10-09-2005, 11:29 PM
What is this teams biggest weakness? Rebounding would be my answer though outside shooting is certainly a question.

I agree with that, but I disagree with your proposed answer.

Putting a guy up front that's shorter and lighter than any of the guys he plays against isn't going to win us the rebound battle. What WILL help is putting big guys up front, and then getting 5 rebounds a game from our shooting guard.

sixthman
10-09-2005, 11:52 PM
I don't know where Danny is going to play, but I'd wager it will be somewhere. The kid is smart, unselfish, and one hell of a ball player already. No doubt about it.

pizza guy
10-10-2005, 12:03 AM
My guess is Granger will come out and play at whatever position he catches the ball at. Let's say he gets it at midcourt, he'll make a nice pass or slash to the hoop. How about in the corner? He'll hit a shot. Down low? He'll take it to 'em and make a good power move.

The kid is a ball player, not neccessarily a 2 or a 3. Just a natural basketball player.

Frank Slade
10-10-2005, 12:31 AM
I agree with that, but I disagree with your proposed answer.

Putting a guy up front that's shorter and lighter than any of the guys he plays against isn't going to win us the rebound battle. What WILL help is putting big guys up front, and then getting 5 rebounds a game from our shooting guard.

Granger can rebound . lets not discount his height he is not 6'6 or 6'7 he is actually closer to 6'9 6'8 1\2 actually with shoes. However certainly not the most imposing figure he can get up ,, and rebounding is never about height or size ...it's all about positioning and desire

Kegboy
10-10-2005, 12:42 AM
I think you need to look at the psych factor here, too. We know Ron has always enjoyed playing with the scrubs, and he's coming in a bit humbled by last year. Jack may not be as accommodating, and with babysitter Mike not around, Rick may not want to rock the boat.

Frank Slade
10-10-2005, 12:53 AM
Agreed.. on that one.. putting it nicely , yes Jax would be less accomodating for sure as opposed to Artest.. and I will leave it at that....

Anthem
10-10-2005, 01:23 AM
Well, I don't think either of them should come off the bench. Let Granger, he's the rookie.

I'm thinking more in terms of "who is our long-term answer at shooting guard."

Naptown Seth
10-10-2005, 01:35 AM
Right now you have to start Jackson and Artest. However I like the prospect of Granger at SG more so than at PF because it's always better to be oversized than undersized in the NBA. If Granger is legit, then I could see him starting at SG, but no earlier than 2006-2007. And thats a long ways away, Ron and/or Jackson could be gone by then,

Unclebuck
10-10-2005, 09:11 AM
Here is what I posted back in September

Rick rarely says something that he does not intend to. When he says they might bring one of their better players off the bench, he obviously has thought about this as a possibility.

The only logical choice is Jackson. Rick tried last season several times to bring Jax off the bench and I think he will experiment with that in the preseason. Jax is capable of bringing instant offense off the bench and if Rick worries whether Ron, J.O and Jax can learn to share the ball, then I could easily see Jax come off the bench.

Who would start at shooting guard? I don't know. Fred, Saras, who knows. But don't be shocked if Artest starts at shooting guard and Granger starts at small forward. I'm not predicting that, but I could envision that as a possibility. Remember last season how JJ started when I thought it was clear Fred and Jax were both better players.

ChicagoJ
10-10-2005, 12:06 PM
6'8"/ 230 lbs.

Prototype SF.

I don't like the idea of playing Granger at the "2" any more than I like the idea of playing Granger at the "4".

Granted, I've got to see him play...

DisplacedKnick
10-10-2005, 12:09 PM
I can't answer until I see him in a couple of games

Same here - and in his case I didn't even see him play in college - how many times was New Mexico (or is it NM State?) on National TV?

I've been mentally thinking of Saras as the 1/2 backup up to now, Granger just backing up the 3.

However, your biggest positional dropoff is at PF. I'm beginning to think more along starting Granger at 3 and having Ron backup the 3/4.

There's a bunch of flexibility and a lot of different ways you can go:

- start Foster at C and move JO to the 5 and Artest to the 4 when he goes out
- use Harrison to back Foster up
- use Granger at the 2 and 3
- use Artest at the 3 and 4
- use SJax at the 2 and 3
- use Saras at the 1 and 2

Makes my head spin.

Suaveness
10-10-2005, 12:11 PM
It would be nice to have either Ron or Jackson coming off of the bench. Either would definitely give some scoring to a bench that just isn't going to give that right now.

Also, from the games I saw last year, Fred plays so much better when he starts. Granted, so do most people. But he seems a bit more confident of sorts. Something to maybe look into.

But I do like the idea of Granger starting.

Hicks
10-10-2005, 12:29 PM
6'8"/ 230 lbs.

Prototype SF.

I don't like the idea of playing Granger at the "2" any more than I like the idea of playing Granger at the "4".

Granted, I've got to see him play...

Same here. I feel like we got a more aggressive Tayshaun Prince tossed in our laps, and I want him playing SF.

Unclebuck
10-10-2005, 12:46 PM
I think almost everyone would rather Granger play exclusively the small forward position. But if he is as good as we are hearing he needs to play more than the 10 minutes that will be available behind Artest.

So that raises the question how do you get them both on the floor at the same time. I really expect Ron and Granger to be playing the forward positions. In other words one will be the small forward and one the power forward. Who plays what, I don't care, take your pick.

Spicoli
10-10-2005, 12:51 PM
I think almost everyone would rather Granger play exclusively the small forward position. But if he is as good as we are hearing he needs to play more than the 10 minutes that will be available behind Artest.

So that raises the question how do you get them both on the floor at the same time. I really expect Ron and Granger to be playing the forward positions. In other words one will be the small forward and one the power forward. Who plays what, I don't care, take your pick.

I really want to see DG in a few preseason games first, but.....

I'll admit I'm excited at the potential of this line-up under the right circumstances.

Tinsley
Jackson
Granger
Artest
O'Neal

Intriguing.....

ChicagoJ
10-10-2005, 01:47 PM
We draft Harrison, and I retire my "JO is our team's center" schtick.

Now a whole bunch of you want to play him at "center."

:banghead:

SoupIsGood
10-10-2005, 05:31 PM
So, then, who can play SG better, Danny or Ron?

If Danny really is that good, we should just give him the backup 3/2 minutes this season, and maybe dip quite a bit into Jackson's minutes.

Kegboy
10-10-2005, 06:41 PM
We draft Harrison, and I retire my "JO is our team's center" schtick.

Now a whole bunch of you want to play him at "center."

:banghead:

:laugh:

We could always talk about trading all 15 guys if you prefer.

SoupIsGood
10-10-2005, 06:47 PM
:goponies:

badger77
10-10-2005, 08:27 PM
My guess is Granger will come out and play at whatever position he catches the ball at. Let's say he gets it at midcourt, he'll make a nice pass or slash to the hoop. How about in the corner? He'll hit a shot. Down low? He'll take it to 'em and make a good power move.

The kid is a ball player, not neccessarily a 2 or a 3. Just a natural basketball player.

I think you’ve captured Danny’s game quite nicely here. One thing you failed to mention, if he gets the ball near the top of the key and the defender sags at all, he’ll pull up and bury it. If the defender is tight, he’ll pass or blow by him, like you say. Danny has deceptive quickness. It doesn’t look like much, but it takes a guard to keep up. Much of Danny's game is about getting his defender out of their natural position.

PCC87
10-10-2005, 10:10 PM
If Danny can play the way he did at FanJam in the regular season, then Rick has a difficult decision upon him.And its who to start....

PCC87
10-10-2005, 10:15 PM
I can hear it now:

and starting at "whatever position he catches the ball at", 6'8" out of New Mexico Sate Dannnnnnnnnnnnnyyyyyyy Granger!


Its just New Mexico not New Mexico State

PacerMan
10-11-2005, 01:03 PM
I agree with that, but I disagree with your proposed answer.

Putting a guy up front that's shorter and lighter than any of the guys he plays against isn't going to win us the rebound battle. What WILL help is putting big guys up front, and then getting 5 rebounds a game from our shooting guard.

Looks like prototypical 3 size to me.
Rick doesn't send our guards to glass, he has them getting back to defend.
Not going to help us if he can't stay with real 2's and gets torched all season.

PacerMan
10-11-2005, 01:05 PM
I really want to see DG in a few preseason games first, but.....

I'll admit I'm excited at the potential of this line-up under the right circumstances.

Tinsley
Jackson
Granger
Artest
O'Neal

Intriguing.....

Agreed, and approaching Isiah Thomas's idea of interchangable positions.