PDA

View Full Version : How do you guys see Granger's potential?



THE DAGGER
08-16-2007, 08:13 PM
I'm a Lakers fan. I'm not here to talk about "JO to LA" (at least not in this thread). But, I just wanted to get an understanding on how you all see Danny Granger's potential. And I would also like to share my own opinion on his potential as well.

I know your front office is high on him. From reading some of the posts here, I can see that most of you fans are high on him as well. With good reason, I really like him as a player too.

But, I think you guys are going to expect more from him than he can give you.

I definitely see him as the second best player on your team behind JO. But, I think there's a difference between being the second best player and being the second best scoring option.

I get the feeling you guys see him as both.

As far as I know, before you made the trade with the Warriors, Granger was the 3rd or 4th scoring option behind JO, Jackson, and Harrington.

He was thrust into being the 2nd scoring option after the trade. And even then, with free rein to score, he had trouble with the role.

His talents don't really lie in scoring. His talents actually lie in everything but.

Don't get me wrong, he can score if needed. He shoots really good percentages from the field, the 3, and the line. But, I don't think he's comfortable being relied upon to score.

If you keep the team as is and expect Granger to be your perimeter scorer and JO to be your post scorer, you might be in for a rude awakening.

And if you do actually trade JO, and put even more of the scoring load on Granger, it could be a recipe for disaster.

To me, Granger can be an all-star caliber player. But, in particular, an all-star caliber "complementary" player.

To put it in perspective, he grew up idolizing Scottie Pippen and patterned his game after him. He even wears #33 in his honor. That's the type of player Granger is.

And I know you're going to just think I'm a Lakers homer after I say this. But, honestly, who better to pair Granger, a "Pippen" type player, than with Kobe, a "Jordan" type player?

Even if it's not Kobe, Granger is better suited playing next to a perimeter scorer while he concentrates more so on defense and filling up the stat sheet in other areas.

Your guys' main priority should be to find that perimeter scorer while Granger is in his prime. But, until you guys do that, you'll be wasting his talents.

Kegboy
08-16-2007, 08:21 PM
Damn Hicks, when are you ever gonna add the "p" word to the language filter?

Danny's :censored: is off the charts. You talk about his scoring, but he has the talent to be a 20ppg player if he wanted to. But, and I'm going to get boo'd mightily for this, I see him as a Derrick McKey type who never plays up to his :censored:.

Hicks
08-16-2007, 08:35 PM
This season should tell us a lot about his offensive potential. If he doesn't jump his PPG up this year into 18+ppg, I don't think he ever will.

BlueNGold
08-16-2007, 09:01 PM
I don't think people are overrating Granger on offense. Generally, people know he's not Kobe Bryant or Lebron James. However, he will be more efficient and consistent than Jack or Harrington.

I suspect his ceiling will be around 20ppg at best....which is very good IMO. He scored 7-8ppg his first year, 13-14ppg his second year. ...so 20ppg seems reasonable in a few years....but it will take a lot of work.

In any event, I'm not sure why a Laker fan would care. He ain't heading west.

Bball
08-16-2007, 09:08 PM
I know your front office is high

I wondered about that myself at times.

-Bball

GrangerRanger
08-16-2007, 09:15 PM
I expect 16 ppg this year, nothing more, nothing less. I see him getting more mintutes under JOB but c'mon guys..he's got a new coach. It's going to take some time to adjust to this new role. He was thrust into the position of being the number two option on a team mid way through his second season, and flourished (sorta). This year he will be thrusted into that situation again, but with a different coach, style, and different approach. I expect him to lose his starting job early in this season (because if your not doing good, JOB will just sit your :censored:) and after a few good practices, Danny gonna get back in their and establish a new career high. ;)

Edit: Oh and btw..I used to be a Laker fan (a big one, mind you) but I was never like the ones that visit these forums. What was it? OMG! Lakers gonna get Jermaine, let's go check the Roster (which was probably the first time any of you had seen it) and see who else we can get. Digger, who on your "awesome" roster could you trade for Danny?

eldubious
08-16-2007, 09:18 PM
IMO, Granger is similar to Caron Butler, his intangibles are more effective than his scoring. I don't see him being an all-star though, he's a highly valuable complimentary player.

jcouts
08-16-2007, 09:54 PM
The only way I see Danny making it to All Star level is if he starts generating a lot of easy offense from defense. All of the Pippen comparisons won't be worth anything unless Danny defends as well as Pippen did. Danny is a solid defender, but not a standout, All Defensive Team defender yet. He certain could become that type of defender, but he could also just as easily become a solid post defender who defends well, but doesn't necessarily generate a lot of easy baskets with solid defense. I think that will be the difference between him being a 16, 8 and 4 guy or a 20, 8 and 5 guy.

BlueNGold
08-16-2007, 09:57 PM
I think Granger's value is particularly difficult to judge right now because of the changes to his role last year. He was asked to develop a perimeter game after playing more in the interior. I think he will be asked to play more in the interior in his 3rd year and we will see his comfort level begin to rise. I expect 16-17ppg this year and a stronger more consistent player. More shot blocking, rebounds, etc.

BTW, I think Granger would be very happy to lead and even be the leading scorer. Whether that's the best use of his skills is another matter. In any event, he is very confident of himself, but he also has class and shows respect to others. That is, he does not walk around with a chip on his shoulder and act like an a$$. He is a quality player and person.

Rajah Brown
08-16-2007, 11:00 PM
I'm w/ eldubious. He should be a very good role player who can be a
2nd option, but on a very good team, would be better as a 3rd option.
I don't think he's got the natural ball skills or elite athleticism to ever
be much more than that at the SF position.

I actually think Williams has at least a similar ceiling and maybe even
a bit higher one than DG. But wether he'll have the intangible qualities
DG has that are necessary to eventually get to that point is an open
question.

bellisimo
08-17-2007, 07:36 AM
actually i feel as if Granger has the talent to become really good stat stuffer...including upping his ppg avg....but for some reason i feel like he doesn't want to be the go-to guy or be the one that is the focal point of the offense...

Speed
08-17-2007, 07:44 AM
If he was the number one option he would put up 20+ easily. He's a team first guy working to be a complete player, so his numbers aren't and may never be the end all be all of judging his game. He needs to assert himself with less of a conscience, not his nature I don't think because he allows the game to come to him, maybe too much.

This should be a year where he starts to put it all together, but the way this team is structured its going to be hard for him to have numbers. If it was him and JO and a bunch of role players then you may see it, but he won't get the shot opportunities so I would be happy with efficiency from him.

I wish he had a streak of arrogance. I don't mean be a jerk, but a respectful arrogance, which again I don't know if his make up allows that. So as long as he guards the other 3s effectively and continues to give great effort I consider him an extremely good player, although the number may never be allstar caliber.

If JO does get moved for young players only, a Bynum or Nene but not a Jefferson, all bets are off and it becomes his team from a leadership standpoint. I don't think he can be a franchise guy, but I think in the very best case he could become a 1b on a very good team.

Rarely does a humble guy like Granger ever put up crazy numbers and many times that is seen as a disappointment by a casual fan, I don't think that at all. He seems to want to play basket ball the right way and that doesn't include getting his all the time, which is lost on many.

I can see the Mckey comparison just by the demeanor and build, but McKey was an completely reluctant offensive player because he realized if you play team ball you can maybe get a lay up or really good shot. To a point where it was detrimental at times cuz he wouldn't shoot.
Danny is low key, but not the savvy and clever lock down defender McKey was and not the unwilling offensive player so much its a fault.

So I would say on this team as is 16 pts, 6 rebs , 3 assists. If he was on a team where he was the main guy 21 pts, 6, and 4.

purdue101
08-17-2007, 08:18 AM
i see him hitting a level similar to where josh howard is right now. a very good player at both ends of the court, a borderline all star, but not quite a number one option on a team.

i think it's fair to say that he'll average 18 pts, 7 boards, & 3 assists within a year or two. he'll also become an above average defender.

BobbyMac
08-17-2007, 09:04 AM
I expect Granger's numbers to match Odom next year and he will surpass him after that.

bosk
08-17-2007, 09:43 AM
i see him hitting a level similar to where josh howard is right now. a very good player at both ends of the court, a borderline all star, but not quite a number one option on a team.

I also see the Josh Howard comparison. I think either could be a first option on a poor team, but are best suited to be the glue guy on an elite team.

purdue101
08-17-2007, 10:20 AM
I expect Granger's numbers to match Odom next year and he will surpass him after that.

i don't think danny will ever average double digit boards. doubt he can get his assists up past 4 a game either.

he'll be a better scorer and wing defender than odom though.

DisplacedKnick
08-17-2007, 11:39 AM
I see 18-8-4, good defender/borderline all-star as his top end.

A very nice 2nd option for a team but if he's your go-to guy night-in, night-out you have a team weakness that needs to be addressed. He COULD be your primary perimeter option if you had a top-tier post player.

FlavaDave
08-17-2007, 01:26 PM
I think we can comfortably say he will land somewhere between Shane Battier and Scottie Pippen.

jeffg-body
08-17-2007, 02:12 PM
I see Granger as a guy who does everything very well, but he's not overly great in anything. He's the perfect complimentary player, but not the #1 guy. He could be a great fit to a JO team if JO continues to develop his leadership skills, which it soulds like he is doing. On another note, Shawn Williams is very similar in that mold, but a little more explosive as a slasher. In the end, he may turn out to be the better player.:stewie:

D-BONE
08-17-2007, 02:27 PM
Yes, DG has most upside as a complimentary guy in the Pippen mold. As a consistent scoring option he'll be much more successful as a 2nd or 3rd option.

Of course, the problem with that here is that he's on a team that has nothing but other 2nd and 3rd option type players offensively. In fact, I'd go so far to say that I think JO's ideal role on a team would also be the way many describe DG's except it would be more in the paint obviously. A 2nd scoring option who would really make his mark in the paint with shotblocking and rebounding.

BoomBaby31
08-18-2007, 03:10 PM
I'm a Lakers fan. I'm not here to talk about "JO to LA" (at least not in this thread). But, I just wanted to get an understanding on how you all see Danny Granger's potential. And I would also like to share my own opinion on his potential as well.

I know your front office is high on him. From reading some of the posts here, I can see that most of you fans are high on him as well. With good reason, I really like him as a player too.

But, I think you guys are going to expect more from him than he can give you.

I definitely see him as the second best player on your team behind JO. But, I think there's a difference between being the second best player and being the second best scoring option.

I get the feeling you guys see him as both.

As far as I know, before you made the trade with the Warriors, Granger was the 3rd or 4th scoring option behind JO, Jackson, and Harrington.

He was thrust into being the 2nd scoring option after the trade. And even then, with free rein to score, he had trouble with the role.

His talents don't really lie in scoring. His talents actually lie in everything but.

Don't get me wrong, he can score if needed. He shoots really good percentages from the field, the 3, and the line. But, I don't think he's comfortable being relied upon to score.

If you keep the team as is and expect Granger to be your perimeter scorer and JO to be your post scorer, you might be in for a rude awakening.

And if you do actually trade JO, and put even more of the scoring load on Granger, it could be a recipe for disaster.

To me, Granger can be an all-star caliber player. But, in particular, an all-star caliber "complementary" player.

To put it in perspective, he grew up idolizing Scottie Pippen and patterned his game after him. He even wears #33 in his honor. That's the type of player Granger is.

And I know you're going to just think I'm a Lakers homer after I say this. But, honestly, who better to pair Granger, a "Pippen" type player, than with Kobe, a "Jordan" type player?

Even if it's not Kobe, Granger is better suited playing next to a perimeter scorer while he concentrates more so on defense and filling up the stat sheet in other areas.

Your guys' main priority should be to find that perimeter scorer while Granger is in his prime. But, until you guys do that, you'll be wasting his talents.

On this forum, Granger could stand next to a Floating Jesus and two hand fulls of people would pick Granger. That is how much they love this kid.

Naptown_Seth
08-19-2007, 01:10 PM
Still on track to be Pippen-like. He's improved the 3, he was able to get away from camping the arc last season, he's clearly showing signs of learning the game, adopting and adapting rather than just getting by on pure skill.

He's nowhere near done developing his awareness IMO. In fact most Granger supporters hated how I critiqued his game last season, though I have no doubts still that my points were accurate.

See for that side they think that any negative translates to "I don't like him and he's a bust". Nothing could be further from the truth. I just am not going to gloss over the real issues in a rush to put him on the pedistal before he's reached the top.

He'll get there, but it will clearly be a progressive thing, not instant. This year look for him to find his dribble game and to really improve his defense thanks to JOB/Harter.

This kid gets lost a lot in games and I think it's due explicitly to OVERTHINKING when he hits things he hasn't learned yet. He tries to figure it out rather than reacting. Sucks now, but the upside is that he WILL LEARN because that's his process, that's what he has been suffering through. Once he knows what to do he clearly has the ability to make good on it.

Again, Pippen progressed, he wasn't an instant guy. And he was paired with Jordan. Danny's had a tougher road so far and still improved his game at a decent rate. It's coming....it's just not there yet.

18-7-5 with 1-1 on defense and a 38% 3pt shot. I can see that by year 4.


And I prefer to pair him with Gordon or Mayo...oh, and some guy named JO.



Shawne - more of an inside defender/rebounder, better shot on offense, less ball handling than Danny. I don't think he'll be the all-around guy that Danny will, but he will be a guy that can impact a game nearly as much given the opportunity. But that's less certain. It's been one season and then a very unimpressive summer league for him.

JayRedd
08-19-2007, 02:53 PM
Again, Pippen progressed, he wasn't an instant guy. And he was paired with Jordan.

FWIW...I think there was also quite a direct correlation between those two. Danny doesn't, nor ever likely will play with anyone that pushes him towards greatness as MJ did Scottie. Especially in respect to having someone help instill him with confidence.



Danny's had a tougher road so far and still improved his game at a decent rate. It's coming....it's just not there yet.

I still have faith he'll be a great player. I just think the Pippen ceiling most likely needs to be lowered. HOF expectations just seem somewhat of a stretch at this point. But regardless of semantics, we still have a really strong starting SF for the next decade if we keep him around.

Rajah Brown
08-19-2007, 04:22 PM
Jay-

Your final few words may end up being the $64,000 question. I'm not
quite as high on DG as some, but nonetheless, I recognize that he's
the Pacers' #2 asset at this point. If for whatever reasons, J.O.
ends up sticking around longer term, at some point, in an attempt
to balance the roster and infuse the backcourt with a legit, high
impact talent, strong consideration to moving DG to make that
happen will have to and should be considered.

Los Angeles
08-19-2007, 04:35 PM
Ultimately, I expect more from every player than they can give. When it comes to young players (guys still playing on rookie contracts) I expect a LOT more from them than they can ever give.

Part of the fun of following a team is waiting with baited breath for a young player to become a star.

Granger has that kind of upside. He can reach coach selected all-star status as long as he and Coach OB really find ways to exploit his talents.

Sometimes players seem to get worse when they work more on their difficiencies than they do on their strengths. I think Danny may have done that this past year, and what I considered to be his strengths seemed to falter a bit.

The fact that he was not coached well, especially on the defensive end, did not help his situation.

I have no problem with expecting excellence from our young guys, even when they are not excellent players. I can only hope that their expectations are even higher than mine, and that they are doing everything in their power to meet those expectations.

Naptown_Seth
08-20-2007, 01:53 PM
FWIW...I think there was also quite a direct correlation between those two. Danny doesn't, nor ever likely will play with anyone that pushes him towards greatness as MJ did Scottie. Especially in respect to having someone help instill him with confidence.


I still have faith he'll be a great player. I just think the Pippen ceiling most likely needs to be lowered. HOF expectations just seem somewhat of a stretch at this point. But regardless of semantics, we still have a really strong starting SF for the next decade if we keep him around.
Good point on being pushed, though I suspect he's a bit more mature than Pippen that way (ahem, "I won't go in if I don't get to take the final shot").

The HOF thing is overrated with Pippen I think. So part of this I guess is that I don't think Pippen was some lofty goal that is unreachable. Bring the Pippen icon back down to the actual Pippen and it becomes within Danny's reach. To me it's more like "can DG become an all-star".

On that count I will admit that it's still pretty iffy. But he's already proven that he can start even when he probably wasn't ready to in terms of learning a complete game. Next rung up from starter is high quality starter and then all-star. If he's not there in 3 years then it probably won't happen, but for now I'll be stunned if he doesn't continue to progress fairly quickly (in relative NBA terms, like 4-5 PPG improve or 2-3 rpg/apg improve, which to me is a lot).


The fact that he was not coached well, especially on the defensive end, did not help his situation.I agree. Rick had this defensive rep but he's an offensive coach who likes safe, deliberate, efficient offense. That keeps the scoring down and helps the defense get set up, but after that it's not his area as much. He had guys like Ben and Ron who made the defense better, but having someone like Person as the defensive coach seemed to be a mistake IMO. Love Chuck, but this team floundered in defensive awareness last season.

Closing out guys ahead of time, covering space before it can be exploited, forcing a team to choose the option that your teammates are waiting on, those things can make weaker defenders look okay. That's awareness, not physical ability. This team did a lot of reacting and ball chasing last year, rather than controlling the space.