PDA

View Full Version : Pippen vs. Granger



redwillow
07-30-2006, 03:44 PM
Lets see what the rookie stats of both players have to say about it.

Granger:
G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
78 17 22.6 .462 .323 .777 1.7 3.2 4.9 1.2 .74 .79 1.03 2.7 7.5
Pippen:
G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
79 0 20.9 .463 .174 .576 1.5 2.3 3.8 2.1 1.15 .66 1.66 2.7 7.9
Pippen's Soph. season:
73 56 33.1 .476 .273 .668 1.9 4.2 6.1 3.5 1.90 .84 2.73 3.6 14.4

Stats were found at NBA.com

It seems Danny is worthy of the comparison based on stats. I would like to see Danny's sophmore stat line before I would say for sure though.

SoupIsGood
07-30-2006, 03:48 PM
I think Danny will put up a similar sophomore stat line next year. I don't think he'll blossom into being one of the greatest small forwards of all-time, though. (like pippen)

Jay Ohh
07-30-2006, 03:58 PM
Danny will probably put up around 10-15 points and 4-6 rebounds if he starts next year.

ESutt7
07-30-2006, 04:14 PM
That's cool how close the numbers are. I expect Danny to get around 15 pts., 7 boards.

BlueNGold
07-30-2006, 05:07 PM
Pretty interesting, but who knows how he will develop? I expect 12-14ppg and 7-8 boards this coming season. No way to guess what happens later.

Destined4Greatness
07-30-2006, 05:12 PM
Just remember Pippen would have been the franchise player on just about any other team in his day. If Granger some how does blossom into that much of a talent. Get him a supporting cast.

I mean seriously if he had been born 10 years earlier or later he would not be known as a sidekick.

Anthem
07-30-2006, 05:33 PM
Pippen was a great complementary player. But that's all he was. He was never the same without MJ.

If you want Danny to become Pippen, then we need to figure out how to get an MJ.

SoupIsGood
07-30-2006, 05:47 PM
Pippen was a great complementary player. But that's all he was. He was never the same without MJ.



No way, he had his best season as a pro without MJ - putting up 22-9-6-3-1. That does not sound like a complementary player.

LG33
07-30-2006, 05:55 PM
Here's a short piece (written by Ron Jumper?) about Pippen and Michael, a subject i'd rather not ever discuss again...MJ is overrated, Pippen is underrated...let's leave it at that...

http://www.sportsoverload.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?stnum=1152488265

I think Granger has great potential...I just hope he is able to live up to that potential before Jermaine gets too old

Sollozzo
07-30-2006, 06:13 PM
Pippen was a great complementary player. But that's all he was. He was never the same without MJ.

If you want Danny to become Pippen, then we need to figure out how to get an MJ.


:bs2:

Like Soup said, Pip's best season was in 1993-1994 when MJ was out the entire season. He led the Bulls to game 7 in the semis against the Knicks(who went to the finals that year). He led the Bulls to a 55-27 record that year without Jordan. Not bad for someone who you're calling a "great complementary player."

Pip averaged 22 pts, over 8 bds, over 5 dimes, and almost 3 steals that year, hence why he is commonly referred to as one of the greatest all around players in history.

I think you're judging Pippen by his Houston and Portland years, which by then, he was an old player on the downslope of his career.

In his prime, he was a consistant top 10 (if not better) player.

BoomBaby31
07-30-2006, 06:23 PM
Pippen was a great complementary player. But that's all he was. He was never the same without MJ.

If you want Danny to become Pippen, then we need to figure out how to get an MJ.

I think it is the other way around, MJ was never the same without Pippen. Look at the stats when Pippen was out during MJ's carreer. Pippen was just as big as factor as MJ was during the Bulls days.

davstarp10
07-30-2006, 06:38 PM
Sophmore slump.... dont expect too much from the young man... too much hype might hurt his development.... comparing him to Pippen? its just numbers, Pip did so much more than his numbers.... If Granger puts up similar numbers to last year now everyone in the league knows who he is, I wouldnt be too upset.... the comparison can only be a good sign though... have I just contradicted myself?

JayRedd
07-30-2006, 07:05 PM
When you look at prospects in any sport, it's always good to look at their style of play and use player comparisons to come up the possibilities for the guy's:

1) Absolute Ceiling (player he has a less than 5% chance to equal)
2) Expected (probable player his career will resemble)
3) Worst Case (what happens if he's a bust)

Right now, I'd put Danny at:

Ceiling: Scottie Pippen
Expected: Kendall Gill
Worst Case: Adrian Griffin

My guess is he ends up being better than Kendall Gill, though, and of course, no where near Pippen. But I think he can be a Top 5 SF in the NBA by the time he reaches his prime. And I think Granger, Josh Howard and Luol Deng are the three young SFs in this League that can still be considered to have a "Pippen-esque" ceiling, based on raw talent and their "do everything" style of play.

When it's all said and done, I think he'll end up right there around Michael Cooper territory.

Destined4Greatness
07-30-2006, 07:24 PM
Pippen was a great complementary player. But that's all he was. He was never the same without MJ.

If you want Danny to become Pippen, then we need to figure out how to get an MJ.

The dude was one of the top 50 players in History IIRC. Plus as many have stated his best stats were when MJ was out an entire season. His problem was he didn't have a real sidekick that year. If he had they could have won it all I feel.

Ron who?
07-30-2006, 07:34 PM
The dude was one of the top 50 players in History IIRC. Plus as many have stated his best stats were when MJ was out an entire season. His problem was he didn't have a real sidekick that year. If he had they could have won it all I feel.

yeah theres no such thing as a championship one man team... when Jordan left Pippen had nobody to help out... it was just pippen nobody else.. I'm not comparing Pippen to MJ but I am saying that Granger being Pippen is asking for too much if he does end up being pippen i think trading JO would be a must in order to get him a supporting cast

BlueNGold
07-30-2006, 07:45 PM
Everyone has a different opinion on this because it is so subjective.

My take is that Pippen was a little better than Paul Pierce. Much better defense, not quite as potent on offense. Great physical specimen. Very talented. Maybe top 50 of all time, so he was a great player.

...but I know this. MJ would have won championships with any other top player you paired him with. Unless you watched MJ for hundreds of games, you are no judge. MJ is the best player I have ever seen, including King James and DWade...at least for now. He controlled games like no other player I have seen. Pippen isn't even close to that level and would be a virtual unknown if he had not been MJ's sidekick. Great player, yes...but sidekick when compared to the great one.

pizza guy
07-30-2006, 08:12 PM
Everyone has a different opinion on this because it is so subjective.

My take is that Pippen was a little better than Paul Pierce. Much better defense, not quite as potent on offense. Great physical specimen. Very talented. Maybe top 50 of all time, so he was a great player.

...but I know this. MJ would have won championships with any other top player you paired him with. Unless you watched MJ for hundreds of games, you are no judge. MJ is the best player I have ever seen, including King James and DWade...at least for now. He controlled games like no other player I have seen. Pippen isn't even close to that level and would be a virtual unknown if he had not been MJ's sidekick. Great player, yes...but sidekick when compared to the great one.

:bs2:

Pippen was a lot more than MJ's sidekick. Just like it was "Shaq and Kobe," it was "Michael and Scottie." No, Pip wasn't Michael, but no one was. Pip could've been a franchise player by himself, though. Like any great team, you can't have just one superstar, you have to have two it seems. The Bulls had Michael and Scottie, then a bunch of guys that knew their roles.

To say Scottie would be a 'virtual unknown' is plain wrong. To say Scottie wouldn't have been the same without Michael is obvious. But, Michael wouldn't have been the same without Scottie either.

----

As for Granger: To compare him to Scottie is setting the bar pretty high. If that's what we get, he's more than just "The Gift." This will be his second season, so, it's hard to imagine he'll be given the "Next Scottie Pippen" tag yet. Although, if he starts all year, I think the league will have to recognize him as a force.

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 08:20 PM
In all honestly MJ wasn't bad in DC - In his last year (40 years old mind you) he averaged 20 points, 6 boards and 4 assists. VERY good all around numbers. The year befoe that he averaged 23 points, 6 boards and 5 assists. Can Kobe, Wade, Melo, Arenas, JO, Granger, Al, Jamison, Butler, Peja, Maggete, Iverson, CP3, Hinrich, T Mac, Marion, Dirk, Diaw, Nash etc etc etc do that today??

:whoknows:

Honestly, I doubt these players will do that nowadays, let alone in 10-15 years

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 08:43 PM
In all honestly MJ wasn't bad in DC - In his last year (40 years old mind you) he averaged 20 points, 6 boards and 4 assists. VERY good all around numbers. The year befoe that he averaged 23 points, 6 boards and 5 assists. Can Kobe, Wade, Melo, Arenas, JO, Granger, Al, Jamison, Butler, Peja, Maggete, Iverson, CP3, Hinrich, T Mac, Marion, Dirk, Diaw, Nash etc etc etc do that today??

:whoknows:

Honestly, I doubt these players will do that nowadays, let alone in 10-15 years

Jordan had no problem with his game his last year, his problem was his attitude

I actually attended the Pacers-Wiards game when Jalen got exected for talking **** to Jordan, and Im not positive but I think JOrdan went off for 40 that night. A truly amaing thing to see in person. My one and only time seeing JOrdan live. And boy was it a treat.

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 08:45 PM
Jordan had no problem with his game his last year, his problem was his attitude

I actually attended the Pacers-Wiards game when Jalen got exected for talking **** to Jordan, and Im not positive but I think JOrdan went off for 40 that night. A truly amaing thing to see in person. My one and only time seeing JOrdan live. And boy was it a treat.

I believe that was the game in early January when he played the entire game, including overtime.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 08:47 PM
I believe that was the game in early January when he played the entire game, including overtime.

Yeah, that was it. I do remember it went into OT cause I was talking a lot of trash to the two ladies behind me.

That was when I first started posting here, I didnt know it at the time but BigMac was a couple of rows in front of me.

redwillow
07-30-2006, 09:06 PM
Jordan had no problem with his game his last year, his problem was his attitude.

Dind't he have some pretty bad knee issues aswell?

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 09:21 PM
Classic game. Just behind the Mavs vs. Wiz game from later that year.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 09:21 PM
Dind't he have some pretty bad knee issues aswell?

I dont remember his health being an issue, but it may have been.

I just remember his attitude because I expected him to get a job in the front office and as we all know that didnt work out.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 09:22 PM
Classic game. Just behind the Mavs vs. Wiz game from later that year.

I dont remember that game, but I may have seen that one on the TV.

But you are correct, that game was a classic.

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 09:23 PM
I believe it went to double OT. And Juan Dixon was the biggest reason (besides MJ) we almost won. God I miss his play.

JayRedd
07-30-2006, 09:39 PM
I believe it went to double OT. And Juan Dixon was the biggest reason (besides MJ) we almost won. God I miss his play.

If we're thinking of the same game, my favorite play Mike made that day was when he pinned someone's layup against the glass double-handed.

Juan Dixon shot something ridiculous like 80% on 15 shots that day too.

I wouldn't mind getting him to play for us next year. He's the deadeye perimeter threat we could use off the bench. Cheap too.

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 09:42 PM
If we're thinking of the same game, my favorite play Mike made that day was when he pinned someone's layup against the glass double-handed.

Juan Dixon shot something ridiculous like 80% on 15 shots that day too.

I wouldn't mind getting him to play for us next year. He's the deadeye perimeter threat we could use off the bench. Cheap too.

thats the game - when MJ hit that shot at the buzzer to send it to the 2nd OT. I believe Juan sent it to OT.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 09:51 PM
I believe it went to double OT. And Juan Dixon was the biggest reason (besides MJ) we almost won. God I miss his play.

Was Blake on that team as well?

Man you are making me miss basketball more and more with this thread.

I was wearing my Tinsley jersey that game, what a great game.

And yeah, I always enjoyed Juan from his Marrland days, but that game his play was beyond amazing.

Where is he now?

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 10:01 PM
Was Blake on that team as well?

Man you are making me miss basketball more and more with this thread.

I was wearing my Tinsley jersey that game, what a great game.

And yeah, I always enjoyed Juan from his Marrland days, but that game his play was beyond amazing.

Where is he now?

Yea Blake, Stack, Oak, and Laettner were all on that team.

Dixon is playing for the Blazers now. And Blake was just traded from the Blazers to the Bucks.

JayRedd
07-30-2006, 10:04 PM
thats the game - when MJ hit that shot at the buzzer to send it to the 2nd OT. I believe Juan sent it to OT.

Great, great game. 2nd best I remember from his Wiz days.

First has to be the 51 he dropped on Charlotte the next game after he was held to a career low 6 points by the mightly Pacers.

I remember how much flak he received because it was still early in the season and everyone was criticizing him saying he never should have come back and he was tarnishing his legacy.

So he was like "You gonna talk about my legacy? You know what Fifty ****-ing One, *****es."

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 10:09 PM
My fav was him puttin 45 on N.O. 2 weeks before turning 40.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 10:11 PM
Yea Blake, Stack, Oak, and Laettner were all on that team.

Dixon is playing for the Blazers now. And Blake was just traded from the Blazers to the Bucks.

The way Soup roots for DH and the way UB rooted for Artest, that's the way I was with Blake. I loved him from the first time I saw him play at UM.

I lost track after he was traded to the Jailblazers, didnt even realize he was traded to the Bucks.

JayRedd
07-30-2006, 10:14 PM
I lost track after he was traded to the Jailblazers, didnt even realize he was traded to the Bucks.

Happened today.

He played well in Portland and should have a long career in this league. Doubt he'll ever be a starter, but he's the type of game manager any coach would want to have off the bench. Can hit the open jumper with consistency still too.

But that Maryland/Indiana Final may have been the worst one I've ever watched.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 10:16 PM
:laugh:

I always forget UM played IU for that championship.

I agree with what you said about Blake, although I think he and Eddie Gill should be the starting backcourt for the Pacers next year

Of course that would make to much sense, no way would Donnie Do Nothing do something that made that much sense

Robertmto
07-30-2006, 10:18 PM
Blake started most of the year with the Blazers.

rel
07-30-2006, 10:33 PM
wow...you guys really got off topic :)

i thought this was a thread for Granger...not Steve Blake/MJ

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 10:45 PM
Well if it helps any, the closest I have come to getting attached to a player the same way I was to Blake would be the way I feel about Granger now.


Wow, that was not worded properly at all, but you all get my point.

Kid Minneapolis
07-30-2006, 11:41 PM
You people who are putting Pippen up there with MJ are high on crack. No one ever doubted that Pippen was a fine player, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that MJ is the #1 player of all-time, while Pippen was questionably added to the all-time top 50 (and I wouldn't keep him on that list for long, if he's even still on it). You cant take seasonal stats of who was missing who and make complete judgements on that, there's way too many other factors involved to say "Oh, Pippen did better with MJ than MJ did without Pippen." I think Pippen's game evolved to the point it did *because* he played alongside Jordan for so long. Would Pippen had been so good in any other situation? I don't think so, and you'll be hardpressed to prove me wrong.

SycamoreKen
07-31-2006, 12:52 AM
I think Granger could take him at least 8 out of ten times if they suited up today, but 10 years ago Pippen would have wiped the court with G. But then again Granger was 13.

Peck
07-31-2006, 01:23 AM
I know we should try & compare him to Pippen but I just cannot get over to me how much Danny reminds me of a very young Karl Malone.

Not the bulked up Karl that was as large as a tank but the lean Malone who came into the NBA. Danny just seems to me to have a Warrior spirit about him that makes me think this guy is going to make his living inside battling the big's for boards & blocks.

Scottie was more of an antalope type player who was athletic & fast.

BTW, I had the misfortune of watching Jordan play every single game in Indiana from 1985 till whenever it was he last retired & I can say this. While I hated the help he got from the refs. (& yes he had plenty of help) & while his blow hard know nothing jock sniffing fans would send me into a white hot rage I will admit this.

I've never seen anybody better & not even close. Not Bryant, not James, not Wade & not even Shaq.

M.J. was in a world of his own. I will never call him the best player of all-time because I just don't see how we can compare him & Wilt Chamberlin (for God's sake the man grabbed 50 rebounds vs. Bill Russel & the Celtics) but I will rank them both as # 1 of all-time.

In fact the thought that people put Bryant in Jordans caliber makes me laugh. He's a great player, don't get me wrong, but there was nobody like Mike.

Naptown_Seth
07-31-2006, 02:06 AM
I understand what you are saying Peck, but I don't think Danny really plays the post that well, including jumpers from the post. But obviously he is much more 3/4 than the 2/3 that Pippen was. He's going to board more, block more, assist less and probably score around the same, at the very least for the first 3 seasons.

Then we will see if he can continue on up to Pippen's ceiling. The main point of the comparison is to remind people that what guys become is not what they always were. People did not see Pippen after year 1 and assume he would become what he did. He took steps and people noted his progress at the time. I remember strongly thinking that he was becoming better, it was more than just getting more PT, he was earning his way into stardom in steps.


You can't assume Danny will get there, but you can see that its very possible based on what he looks like and has done so far. Some people expect Chris Paul the first year for future stars, but then again sometimes a guy does that and then becomes Mark Jackson...great in Indy, top assist guy but also fell off after his rookie year and had to rebuild his career almost after the superstar beginning.

Chuck Person really jumps to mind when thinking of fast starts that didn't become the actual best player of his class over the long haul.

denyfizle
07-31-2006, 02:39 AM
Pippen ruled in NBA LIVE 95!!! Until Granger rules in any basketball video game, I won't make the comparison... hehehe

AesopRockOn
07-31-2006, 04:35 AM
Pippen was good because of Jordan
Jordan was and forever will be the best forever (redundant)
I think all things considered, Rodman is overall better than Pippen
But Rodman is kind of like Artest and Scottie is like Granger, at least that is what this thread is supposed to be about
I'm so high right now

BlueNGold
07-31-2006, 06:02 AM
You people who are putting Pippen up there with MJ are high on crack. No one ever doubted that Pippen was a fine player, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that MJ is the #1 player of all-time, while Pippen was questionably added to the all-time top 50 (and I wouldn't keep him on that list for long, if he's even still on it). You cant take seasonal stats of who was missing who and make complete judgements on that, there's way too many other factors involved to say "Oh, Pippen did better with MJ than MJ did without Pippen." I think Pippen's game evolved to the point it did *because* he played alongside Jordan for so long. Would Pippen had been so good in any other situation? I don't think so, and you'll be hardpressed to prove me wrong.

Finally, someone who appears to have actually seen MJ play.

Eindar
07-31-2006, 06:06 AM
I think, in an alternate reality where Pippen got drafted by someone other than the Bulls, he'd be slightly better than Paul Pierce. A very good player, a borderline HoF guy.

As to the Granger comparison, it's only accurate in that they appear to be built the same. However, Pippen was much quicker laterally, and had MUCH quicker hands. Granger seems to be a little more solid, a bit better timing on his jumps for blocks, and a bit better shooter, at this age. See, I'm trying not to talk about stuff that can be readily improved, like shooting percentages. Their game is similar, but different, and I think there's gotta be a better comparison for Danny than Pippen. Looking at a couple sites, I think Laphonso Ellis would be a more accurate comparison, but hopefully Danny ends up being a little bit better than Ellis.

Tim
07-31-2006, 08:14 AM
Pippen was a great complementary player. But that's all he was. He was never the same without MJ.

If you want Danny to become Pippen, then we need to figure out how to get an MJ.


Exactly! Too bad the only MJ in the league right now is Kobe, Wade and LeBron.

I am sorry to say this but deep down I think Granger is going to blosson only to end up with the Lakers, Heat or Cavs. Thoses teams will overspend to get him, Donnie will not.

Haggard
07-31-2006, 08:27 AM
I don't think Granger will be as good as Pippen, but prove me wrong Danny.

Coach
07-31-2006, 08:51 AM
The knock on Pippen was the fact that he was not clutch. Everbody wants to talk about the year that Jordan sat out and Pip's stats, but think about how many "pressure is on game winners" Pippen hit that year (or any year). When it got to crunch time Pippen had a tendency to wilt at the end when he was "the man". It should tell everybody something when Jackson had Kukoc(sp?) take that last shot in the infamous "sit down" game of Scotties.

loborick
07-31-2006, 11:35 AM
When you look at prospects in any sport, it's always good to look at their style of play and use player comparisons to come up the possibilities for the guy's:

1) Absolute Ceiling (player he has a less than 5% chance to equal)
2) Expected (probable player his career will resemble)
3) Worst Case (what happens if he's a bust)

Right now, I'd put Danny at:

Ceiling: Scottie Pippen
Expected: Kendall Gill
Worst Case: Adrian Griffin

My guess is he ends up being better than Kendall Gill, though, and of course, no where near Pippen. But I think he can be a Top 5 SF in the NBA by the time he reaches his prime. And I think Granger, Josh Howard and Luol Deng are the three young SFs in this League that can still be considered to have a "Pippen-esque" ceiling, based on raw talent and their "do everything" style of play.

When it's all said and done, I think he'll end up right there around Michael Cooper territory.

Interesting comparison with Coop, especially since they both played for New Mexico. But IMO Coop was more of a defensive specialist in the NBA (I believe he won DPOY one year), while Danny's game will be more rounded. Danny plays great defense (probably not as well as Coop, though), and he is a better offensive player. I believe Danny will break through on offense this year. He wasn't a guy in college who would drop in 40, but he was a consistent 18-24 point scorer who made the players around him better. I see him doing the same this season with the Pacers. Because of everything he does, he makes a team better just being on the floor. I hestitate to compare him to anyone. Hopefully, he will just be known as Granger, not Pippen-like or anyone else-like.

grace
07-31-2006, 11:42 AM
Thoses teams will overspend to get him, Donnie will not.

Will Larry?

Sollozzo
07-31-2006, 11:51 AM
I know we should try & compare him to Pippen but I just cannot get over to me how much Danny reminds me of a very young Karl Malone.

Not the bulked up Karl that was as large as a tank but the lean Malone who came into the NBA. Danny just seems to me to have a Warrior spirit about him that makes me think this guy is going to make his living inside battling the big's for boards & blocks.

Scottie was more of an antalope type player who was athletic & fast.

BTW, I had the misfortune of watching Jordan play every single game in Indiana from 1985 till whenever it was he last retired & I can say this. While I hated the help he got from the refs. (& yes he had plenty of help) & while his blow hard know nothing jock sniffing fans would send me into a white hot rage I will admit this.

I've never seen anybody better & not even close. Not Bryant, not James, not Wade & not even Shaq.

M.J. was in a world of his own. I will never call him the best player of all-time because I just don't see how we can compare him & Wilt Chamberlin (for God's sake the man grabbed 50 rebounds vs. Bill Russel & the Celtics) but I will rank them both as # 1 of all-time.

In fact the thought that people put Bryant in Jordans caliber makes me laugh. He's a great player, don't get me wrong, but there was nobody like Mike.


I don't think it is fair to say that Wade, Bryant, and James aren't on the same level as Jordan is, because these guys are all still in their 20's. Jordan's career is long completed. You watched him in his prime. These guys still haven't even entered their prime yet, I don't think it is fair to compare them to a retired player and say they won't be as great

I don't care about Shaq, because I think it is impossible to compare a dominant post player to a guard like MJ.

Wade dominanted the NBA finals as a 24 year old. Bryant has 3 titles and averaged 35 points this season (the first since MJ to do so, by the way). Lebron James is 21 freaking years old and he averaged 31 points, 7 rebounds, and 6 assists. Those are unbelivable accomplishments for players so young. To comapre guys who just completed their 3rd year of play to a retired player who has achieved everything is foolish.

Jordan endured his share of defeats when he was a young guy. He had to learn to lose to the Pistons and the Celtics before he could be a champion.

I'll say this, no one will ever have the impact on the league market wise like MJ did. The media attention, the shoes, the commercials. Everything. That's not to say these guys can't be as good as basketball players as him.

Leisure Suit Larry
07-31-2006, 12:06 PM
This comparison is just a tab premature.

JayRedd
07-31-2006, 12:57 PM
Interesting comparison with Coop, especially since they both played for New Mexico. But IMO Coop was more of a defensive specialist in the NBA (I believe he won DPOY one year), while Danny's game will be more rounded. Danny plays great defense (probably not as well as Coop, though), and he is a better offensive player. I believe Danny will break through on offense this year. He wasn't a guy in college who would drop in 40, but he was a consistent 18-24 point scorer who made the players around him better. I see him doing the same this season with the Pacers. Because of everything he does, he makes a team better just being on the floor. I hestitate to compare him to anyone. Hopefully, he will just be known as Granger, not Pippen-like or anyone else-like.

I think Danny will be a defensive stopper. Not a specialist, Bruce Bowen-type, but I think his defensive ability will eventually be on par with Raja Bell from last year or at a Richard Jefferson-level.

I agree that Coop was known as a specialist, so this may not be the best comparison. But it was the first that came to mine, and I do think that Cooper had plenty of offensive ability as well. Granted, I was pretty young at the time, but from what I've seen since on old film, he was very capable at both ends of the floor. Danny will surely score more I believe, but he's also not going to be competing with Kareem, Big Game James, Magic and the others (Byron, McAdoo, etc.) for shots. Basically, Danny will be asked to be a leader on both ends (which will probably hurt his stats and his defensive prowess, somewhat) whereas anything Coop gave the Showtime Lakers on offense was a bonus.

On our team, I think Coop would average the 15-18 per game that I believe Danny will be putting up over the next few seasons.

Check out his offensive stats per 40 on basketball-reference.
www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/coopemi01.html (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/coopemi01.html)

He could fill it up when they needed him to, and he shot about 50% for his career. But he never got the minutes to give him the averages I expect out of Granger. Probably because they had some dude named James Worthy.

That said, I just thought of a much better comparison: Reggie Lewis. Guy was special. And athletically similar and could do all the things Danny does. I think Reggie has the slight edge in scoring, while Danny is a better rebounder. Let's hope he doesn't die though.

www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lewisre01.html (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lewisre01.html)

JayRedd
07-31-2006, 12:58 PM
I think all things considered, Rodman is overall better than Pippen


I'm so high right now

Obviously

Leisure Suit Larry
07-31-2006, 01:07 PM
Well according to that basketball-reference.com site, we should be comparing Granger to Kenny Walker, not Scottie Pippen.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grangda01.html

JayRedd
07-31-2006, 01:11 PM
Well according to that basketball-reference.com site, we should be comparing Granger to Kenny Walker, not Scottie Pippen.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grangda01.html

Saw that...Let's hope not

I think SkyWalker is closer to Flight than The Gift. They should both win a dunk contest anyway.

Tim
07-31-2006, 04:00 PM
Will Larry?


What does that matter if Donnie is here. Donnie has drawn a line in the sand as far as spending goes.

JayRedd
07-31-2006, 04:43 PM
What does that matter if Donnie is here. Donnie has drawn a line in the sand as far as spending goes.

Pretty sure it's the Simons drawing that line. It is their money and all. Why would Donnie care how much they're laying out?

Anthem
07-31-2006, 06:03 PM
This comparison is just a tab premature.
No kidding.

indytoad
07-31-2006, 06:26 PM
No kidding.

Wow, can't believe Anthem didn't have anything to say about the use of the word "tab" there.

IndyToad
And that monkey

Naptown_Seth
07-31-2006, 07:53 PM
As to the Granger comparison, it's only accurate in that they appear to be built the same. However, Pippen was much quicker laterally, and had MUCH quicker hands. Granger seems to be a little more solid, a bit better timing on his jumps for blocks, and a bit better shooter, at this age. See, I'm trying not to talk about stuff that can be readily improved, like shooting percentages. Their game is similar, but different, and I think there's gotta be a better comparison for Danny than Pippen. Looking at a couple sites, I think Laphonso Ellis would be a more accurate comparison, but hopefully Danny ends up being a little bit better than Ellis.
The Pippen stuff comes up not just from the build and the SF position, but also because of the defensive awareness. Ellis was not the defender that Pippen was or Granger appears to be.

Like I said, I see Danny as the "inside" version of Pippen - more rebounds and blocks, less assists and steals. But the general impact on the game remains the same....for now. Danny must continue to grow as Pippen continued to grow (in skill I mean).

Granger is not "a bit better" on his blocking ability, he appears much better, and is clearly a stronger rebounder as well.

I think too much is being placed on the offensive comparison which is why people are looking for other matches. Granger is a guy that can score off the dribble and shoot the 3, but he's not the ball handler that Pippen was obviously. So people look for a more inside type of scorer. But Granger has better handles than that, even if he's not Pippen.


Ellis didn't have the outside game and couldn't hand out assists at all. Plus Ellis peaked his first couple of seasons basically. The only season to match those was 96-97 when he took advantage of the final season of the shorter 3pt line to bump his 3P% really high (by his standards) and increase his scoring. Danny just had what would have been Ellis' BEST 3pt season from the longer distance, and did it in less minutes that Ellis got (2700+ his first 2 seasons).

Ellis had 1 season where he shot over 30 attempts from the longer line and was able to hit on 30% of those (01-02), and by then he had become a stationary outside player who was falling back on the shot at the end of his career - his rebounding, PPG, and assists dropped to nothing that year and the next, his final one.


Danny is a player that is likely to pull down 8 rebounds a night AND shoot 100+ attempts from 3 at a 35% rate (or better). That's not Ellis or Pierce, especially when you bring in the defensive side of things. Karl Malone, even young, thin Karl, didn't have the 3 ball at all. K. Gill never had the 3 ball outside of the shortened line years (94-96) and was not the rebounder Granger is already. Granger is already better than Griffin just on numbers.


Again, guys like Ellis, Malone, Pierce, etc all had minutes right away, Gill was just a little less than them in year 1 but jumped to huge minutes year 2. Pippen is the guy that like Granger started with fewer minutes and became a great player.

loborick
07-31-2006, 10:46 PM
I think Danny will be a defensive stopper. Not a specialist, Bruce Bowen-type, but I think his defensive ability will eventually be on par with Raja Bell from last year or at a Richard Jefferson-level.

I agree that Coop was known as a specialist, so this may not be the best comparison. But it was the first that came to mine, and I do think that Cooper had plenty of offensive ability as well. Granted, I was pretty young at the time, but from what I've seen since on old film, he was very capable at both ends of the floor. Danny will surely score more I believe, but he's also not going to be competing with Kareem, Big Game James, Magic and the others (Byron, McAdoo, etc.) for shots. Basically, Danny will be asked to be a leader on both ends (which will probably hurt his stats and his defensive prowess, somewhat) whereas anything Coop gave the Showtime Lakers on offense was a bonus.

On our team, I think Coop would average the 15-18 per game that I believe Danny will be putting up over the next few seasons.

Check out his offensive stats per 40 on basketball-reference.
www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/coopemi01.html (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/coopemi01.html)

He could fill it up when they needed him to, and he shot about 50% for his career. But he never got the minutes to give him the averages I expect out of Granger. Probably because they had some dude named James Worthy.

That said, I just thought of a much better comparison: Reggie Lewis. Guy was special. And athletically similar and could do all the things Danny does. I think Reggie has the slight edge in scoring, while Danny is a better rebounder. Let's hope he doesn't die though.

www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lewisre01.html (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lewisre01.html)

I meant to mention in my post that Coop was a pretty good offensive player in college. He averaged 15.1 as a junior and 16.1 as a senior at UNM.

I also meant to that Danny is a very good defensive player, but not as good as Coop.

Naptown_Seth
08-01-2006, 01:06 AM
Cooper played more outside on both ends. Higher steals than blocks, higher assists than rebounds, but in the park of the discussion for sure.

How about Orlando Woolridge? Perhaps a shade better actually. Or maybe Larry Nance from that same draft year?

The Nance comparison is pretty decent to me, better blocker than steals guy, 8ish rebounds, 2-3 assists, solid defensive player, 16-19 ppg depending on the team. But Nance lacks the 3ball.


I'll tell you what, trying to find a good match in all aspects of Danny's game is tough. Unless he falls apart he really does look like a brilliant pick.

Anthem
08-01-2006, 01:14 AM
Wow, can't believe Anthem didn't have anything to say about the use of the word "tab" there.
I'm trying to make nice with my good buddy Leisure Suit Larry.