PDA

View Full Version : If you had to pick one...



flakcatcher
10-16-2006, 11:00 PM
Just for fun: Danger Granger or JO? Completely hypothetically speaking. One or the other -- who and why?

I say Granger because he's got an attitude this teams needs. A good guy who plays with an enormous chip on his shoulder. J.O., in my opinion, doesn't have the same fire.

Can somebody make this a public poll, please?

Jermaniac
10-16-2006, 11:05 PM
Jermaine because he is better.

Evan_The_Dude
10-16-2006, 11:06 PM
Granger only because he's younger.

rexnom
10-16-2006, 11:12 PM
I love Granger...but...JO is already an all-star starter and a 20-10 guy. That's what we're hoping Granger turns into. Guys, don't blame people that aren't the problem. Jermaine has never been the problem.

btowncolt
10-16-2006, 11:15 PM
Ack! Private poll!

Los Angeles
10-16-2006, 11:25 PM
You're joking right?

Choose between our only bona-fide star and a promising sophomore that isn't even guaranteed to start?

It's like choosing between Kobe and Smush Parker.

EDIT: except Smush started nearly every game last year, unlike Granger.

flakcatcher
10-16-2006, 11:28 PM
You're joking right?

Choose between our only bona-fide star and a promising sophomore that isn't even guaranteed to start?

It's like choosing between Kobe and Smush Parker.

EDIT: except Smush started nearly every game last year, unlike Granger.

EXACTLY why it's fun. Although I'll humbly submit that Granger is way more promising that Smush Parker ever was.

Frank Slade
10-16-2006, 11:41 PM
Ack! Private poll!

:mob:

Slick Pinkham
10-16-2006, 11:44 PM
JO by a mile.

Los Angeles
10-16-2006, 11:45 PM
EXACTLY why it's fun. Although I'll humbly submit that Granger is way more promising that Smush Parker ever was.

Good point. :)

So I guess my rant means I vote for JO.

Destined4Greatness
10-16-2006, 11:47 PM
I love Granger...but...JO is already an all-star starter and a 20-10 guy. That's what we're hoping Granger turns into. Guys, don't blame people that aren't the problem. Jermaine has never been the problem.

Yeah but just because you are not a problem doesn't mean you are part of the solution. And IIRC Injuries and inconsistent starting lineups have been a major problem.

I choose Granger, Younger, and really he showed up consistently for the playoffs last year. JO showed up for what 5 or 6 total quarters. Nah. Granger. Younger, and not a crippling contract. Not to mention hes not a limping injury.

Jermaniac
10-16-2006, 11:52 PM
He started 4 games and had 8 ppg and 5 rpg, he was also criticized by your boy Stephen for playing bad defense on Vince Carter.

Consistent in the playoffs last year. Yes. Consistent.

While Jermaine had 21 and 7.

Ohh okay I see what you are talking about. Consistent in the playoffs.

Alpolloloco
10-17-2006, 03:39 AM
Granger easily. JO is a washed up player who will decline the coming years, watch my words!

And the offense is also stalling with JO in it, we need ball movement so Sarunas can really create some offense and shine.

Maybe it's time we begin to say goodbye to JO while he still has some value!

317Kim
10-17-2006, 05:51 AM
Jermaine.

He's proven and we've seen what he can do, but I still heart Danny.

able
10-17-2006, 07:07 AM
lemme see, hard question.... do i choose a perennial all star at 28 and entering his prime or do i go with the unproven "upside" of a rook that can still not further develop and even if he does, is not a big man, but a sf

is that really a question?

Pacerized
10-17-2006, 08:36 AM
Just asking this question shows how much our fans over value Granger. I still question if Granger can cut it as a starter, and he's being compared to an all star.
Seriously, I doubt if Granger is ever the player J.O. is now.

RWB
10-17-2006, 08:44 AM
Seriously, I doubt if Granger is ever the player J.O. is now.

Not to be a wise guy, but let's hope not. JO hasn't exactly been real impressive of late for a supposed franchise player.

BlueNGold
10-17-2006, 09:05 AM
Not to be a wise guy, but let's hope not. JO hasn't exactly been real impressive of late for a supposed franchise player.

JO has been a good player, but he is just an average franchise player and not currently headed to the hall of fame. He has had the benefit of playing on a team with a deep bench and with better players like Reggie and Ron Artest over the years. This has kept us in the playoffs more than JO.

Now, JO is obviously better than Granger right now...but he should be given his experience and paycheck. He is overpaid and makes 20 times what Granger makes. Granger is younger and clearly the better buy and would be the first player I would pick from the Pacers...considering all factors.

#31
10-17-2006, 01:03 PM
I say Granger because he's got an attitude this teams needs. A good guy who plays with an enormous chip on his shoulder. J.O., in my opinion, doesn't have the same fire.



word!

JayRedd
10-17-2006, 01:18 PM
This is pretty much asking "Should I stay home and sleep with my smoking hot fiancee who lets me drive her Mercedes or should I break up with her to go with my buddy to the PlayBoy Mansion and hope I can convince one of those Bunnies to come home with me."

I love Granger. Kid will probably be pretty good. But why would you gamble on something that proably won't happen (Danny becoming All NBA) when you already have something that's a lot better than what most people have?

JO may not be the best player in this League, and he is of course overpaid, but he's entering his athletic prime and has a pretty damn good pedigree behind him. And if you think our big problems are the flaws in JOs game, we're still a lot better off than 2/3 the other teams in this league.

RWB
10-17-2006, 01:45 PM
JO may not be the best player in this League, and he is of course overpaid, but he's entering his athletic prime and has a pretty damn good pedigree behind him.

It's not JOs fault because I think he represents the Pacers well, but 18million toward the team's cap is hard to swallow.

Roy Munson
10-17-2006, 01:55 PM
Granger because JO is one of the most overrated players in the NBA.

JayRedd
10-17-2006, 02:00 PM
It's not JOs fault because I think he represents the Pacers well, but 18million toward the team's cap is hard to swallow.

I hear ya...but if you look around the whole league there's maybe 10 guys who aren't on rookie deals that aren't overpaid.

So, would you rather give JO $18 when he should be making $14 or overpay someone like Kurt Thomas with $8 per then hafta turn around and overpay Nene with $10 per then hafta turn around....

I hate JO's cap number as much as anyone, but if you're going to overpay, it may as well be a few extra million for one bonafide All Star big man, then overpaying $2 million here and $3 million there for the role players you need to make for not having any true #1 guy.

So in our optimal front court: we overpay JO, we get great value for Al, and we pretty much have Danny for free for two more seasons. That's a better situation than most franchises are in.

I really don't think now is the time to "sell low" on Jermaine. Unless he gets severely injured, he'll still have lots of trade value after this year if we want to re-evaluate our future then and possibly move on. Until then, it's the JO Era.

ajbry
10-17-2006, 03:05 PM
Jermaine by far. I can't believe Granger is winning this poll.

FrenchConnection
10-17-2006, 03:10 PM
Granger because JO is one of the most overrated players in the NBA.

Yes, Jermaine is overrated and overpaid, but he is still a much better player than Danny.

Hicks
10-17-2006, 04:00 PM
I think less of JO every season (at least for the last few), so between that and my hopes for Danny I'd probably pick him, though right now that looks/sounds stupid.

SycamoreKen
10-17-2006, 04:03 PM
JO. Very good bigs are harder to find than good wing players.

BlueNGold
10-17-2006, 04:11 PM
Granger....is my favorite player.

JO is more productive right now, but Granger gives me hope for a brighter day in Pacerland. Talent is only part of the equation IMO.

The Hustler
10-17-2006, 04:53 PM
I love granger .. i think he has a shot at being an allstar ... but J.O is an allstar ... so its sold to me!

bulldog
10-17-2006, 04:58 PM
This is pretty much asking "Should I stay home with my smoking hot fiancee who will never let me go all the way, certainly isn't getting any prettier, and charges $18 million per year, or should I break up with her to go with my buddy to the PlayBoy Mansion and hope I can convince one of those Bunnies to come home with me."

Fixed.
JO is good, but overrated.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-17-2006, 05:46 PM
No question...JO7

JayRedd
10-17-2006, 05:46 PM
Fixed.
JO is good, but overrated.

And Danny Granger, while my favorite Pacer and someone I have huge hopes for, is a nobody.

JayRedd
10-17-2006, 05:47 PM
I think less of JO every season (at least for the last few), so between that and my hopes for Danny I'd probably pick him, though right now that looks/sounds stupid.

you can add and "/is" to that "looks/sounds" part.

Destined4Greatness
10-17-2006, 06:08 PM
The Franchise player for a team can't make over a quarter million a year, complain about his position when he actually does play, and on top of that only play half the games a year. Not to mention be associated with Marijuana or punching some fat moron that posed zero threat to you.

JO is a franchise player in Name and Pay only. Not reality. We have seen and been disappointed by what JO can do, its time to see what Granger can do.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-17-2006, 06:41 PM
The Franchise player for a team can't make over a quarter million a year, complain about his position when he actually does play, and on top of that only play half the games a year. Not to mention be associated with Marijuana or punching some fat moron that posed zero threat to you.

JO is a franchise player in Name and Pay only. Not reality. We have seen and been disappointed by what JO can do, its time to see what Granger can do.

Oh my God....:shakehead

Hicks
10-17-2006, 07:03 PM
you can add and "/is" to that "looks/sounds" part.

Classy.

And polite!

:cheers:

BlueNGold
10-17-2006, 07:05 PM
The Franchise player for a team can't make over a quarter million a year, complain about his position when he actually does play, and on top of that only play half the games a year. Not to mention be associated with Marijuana or punching some fat moron that posed zero threat to you.

JO is a franchise player in Name and Pay only. Not reality. We have seen and been disappointed by what JO can do, its time to see what Granger can do.

I am utterly biased for Granger, but he has much to prove. He still has some hesitation which will hamper his progress. If he shakes that he will improve. He is visibly stronger than last season, so I expect great things. He has the natural skills and fundamentals to be better than JO. He also has that edge that could make him a star. If he is real, he should make significant progress this year.

Ron who?
10-17-2006, 07:27 PM
Jermaine is already a star... we're HOPING that Danny can become a star.. so definitely Jermaine

JayRedd
10-17-2006, 09:29 PM
Classy.

And polite!

:cheers:

My bad Hicks,

It really wasn't intended as a pot shot at you.

Just using what you wrote to re-iterate what a poor idea I think it would be for us to get rid of JO at this time. Not that you're stupid.

I know the thread is "If you had to pick one..." but the main issue for me is that there's no way Donnie/Larry could even conceivably consider trading JO given what's happened the last few years.

When you're in the situation we're in, I just don't think you can trade your best player. Danny's my favorite player on our team, but as much as I'd hate it, he's marginally tradable (possibly in a deal with Jax to get something of value) whereas Jermaine just isn't right now. That's just not a message you can send your fan base when they're staggaring against the ropes like we are.

I guess my real answer to "If you had to pick one..." would have to be "Both."