PDA

View Full Version : Danny Granger



DaSMASH
12-04-2007, 10:43 PM
Well the Pacers are 19 games into the season.

One of the questions that I have is......

Will Danny Granger EVER step up to the plate?

This being Dannys third year he is still the most inconsistant player on this team. This should be his breakout season. All I'm seeing though is one good game usually followed by two bad. He is consistantly inconsistant.

Tonight against Phoenix he was barely visable on the court, and I know it wasn't Grant Hills defense that was shutting Danny down...it was Danny shutting Danny down. Logic should dictate that when your not scoring the ball your defending and boarding....Danny was doing neither.

His stat line was 6 points on 2 for 11 from the field...0 of 5 fom the 3 point line. 7 rebounds ....all this with the fourth most minutes on the squad tonight (28). Grant Hill went for 16 and Grants backup, Raja Bell went for 17. This is how Grangers game has been since his rookie year...just when you think he's got it....he does everything in his power to make you shake your head dumbfounded.

I sincerely believe that the Pacers should include him in any kind of a blockbuster trade that they can come up with, only because his contract will be coming up soon, as will Diogu's. Danny is as good as he's going to get, and I do nt s him EVER growing a mean streak, one that a 6 foot 9 or 10 forward should have.

Move him and get something valuable back, especially while the other teams in the league think that he's an up and coming talent.

King Tuts Tomb
12-04-2007, 10:47 PM
Yikes, kind of harsh. I don't think Danny is anywhere near his ceiling yet so I'm not ready to trade him. If he doesn't make any more strides by year 5 then I'll get on him, but right now he's where I expect him to be.

Aw Heck
12-04-2007, 10:50 PM
Yikes, kind of harsh. I don't think Danny is anywhere near his ceiling yet so I'm not ready to trade him. If he doesn't make any more strides by year 5 then I'll get on him, but right now he's where I expect him to be.
Agreed. I'll admit, he was pretty bad tonight. And he has been struggling mightily lately. But I think he's just going through a rough stretch. Remember, he was playing pretty well to start the year.

Things can change pretty fast. I remember some people were unhappy with Tinsley a couple weeks ago.

We have to remember that he's still a 3rd year player. I think he still has room to grow as a player. We just have to give him the chance to become more consistent.

dohman
12-04-2007, 10:56 PM
I posted this into the game thread and I will post it here as well




Jo played a great game but I still stand by my theory. Danny is not the same player with JO in the lineup. Before JO came back danny was cutting to the hoop, driving it to the basket and drawing fouls. He is not doing this with JO in the lineup. I think part of it is because JO is in the post and looking for the ball. When JO posts up he doesnt move around which makes it harder to drive. Danny needs to learn to play with JO in the lineup. He cannot just spot up at the three point line.

I want to see a few more games before I start preaching this but it is my theory.

I also have to take into consideration Marion is a great defender and might of just got into his head

andreialta
12-04-2007, 11:03 PM
that was a good shot from a player who is struggling

BlueNGold
12-04-2007, 11:11 PM
Well the Pacers are 19 games into the season.

One of the questions that I have is......

Will Danny Granger EVER step up to the plate?

This being Dannys third year he is still the most inconsistant player on this team. This should be his breakout season. All I'm seeing though is one good game usually followed by two bad. He is consistantly inconsistant.

Tonight against Phoenix he was barely visable on the court, and I know it wasn't Grant Hills defense that was shutting Danny down...it was Danny shutting Danny down. Logic should dictate that when your not scoring the ball your defending and boarding....Danny was doing neither.

His stat line was 6 points on 2 for 11 from the field...0 of 5 fom the 3 point line. 7 rebounds ....all this with the fourth most minutes on the squad tonight (28). Grant Hill went for 16 and Grants backup, Raja Bell went for 17. This is how Grangers game has been since his rookie year...just when you think he's got it....he does everything in his power to make you shake your head dumbfounded.

I sincerely believe that the Pacers should include him in any kind of a blockbuster trade that they can come up with, only because his contract will be coming up soon, as will Diogu's. Danny is as good as he's going to get, and I do nt s him EVER growing a mean streak, one that a 6 foot 9 or 10 forward should have.

Move him and get something valuable back, especially while the other teams in the league think that he's an up and coming talent.

It's really hard not to break some PD rules here...:censored:

Granger is nowhere near his prime and is already averaging over 18ppg. He had 5 of 6 games at the end of November where he exceeded 20ppg while only having to guard Josh Howard, Lebron James and Carmello Anthony. That stretch was probably the best of his career and just ended last week.

Yes, he's been off a couple games now but every other player on this team has had stretches of bad play this year. It's simply ludicrous to say he needs traded. Not a good character guy who will only get better. The guy will put butts in seats at Conseco fieldhouse and that's exactly what this franchise needs.

BTW, it's naive to imply that just because Granger is a "good boy", he doesn't have any fire. The guy is confident and punks and hoods don't have a monopoly on competitiveness. You'd probably say the same thing about Timmy Duncan...:rolleyes:

granger33
12-04-2007, 11:23 PM
cmon guys. some people here are pethetic.

plays 1 or 2 bad games and u want him out.

His our future.

dohman
12-04-2007, 11:33 PM
cmon guys. some people here are pethetic.

plays 1 or 2 bad games and u want him out.

His our future.

straight and to the point.

Rajah Brown
12-04-2007, 11:38 PM
Not sure I'd go that far. But I've never thought Granger's ceiling
was as high as some seem to. As for trading him, sure, if a deal
(wether seperately, or part of a package) presents itself that
brings back a player or players/assets the Pacers need to
balance out the talent on the roster, I've no problem with it.

Trader Joe
12-04-2007, 11:44 PM
This being Dannys third year he is still the most inconsistant player on this team. This should be his breakout season. All I'm seeing though is one good game usually followed by two bad. He is consistantly inconsistant.



I stopped right here because this comment is just WRONG. YOu have nothing to back it up. Not one thing. This is the first time this season that Granger has been poor two nights in a row. This is not the usual for him this season. Just a completely off base statement.

BlueNGold
12-04-2007, 11:48 PM
Not sure I'd go that far. But I've never thought Granger's ceiling
was as high as some seem to. As for trading him, sure, if a deal
(wether seperately, or part of a package) presents itself that
brings back a player or players/assets the Pacers need to
balance out the talent on the roster, I've no problem with it.

I agree his ceiling is limited. He will never be an elite player in the league. Elite being top 5 or 10. I would not be surprised, however, to see him crack top 20. Considering he is already over 18ppg, he is very likely to exceed a 20ppg scoring average before he reaches his prime in 4 years, that's really good enough to keep on the team particularly with a likely clean police record going forward.

odeez
12-04-2007, 11:53 PM
Isn't he still leading the team in scoring? The only thing I see him being guilty of is not being aggressive enough all the time. Standing around behind the three point line is not where he belongs. Much better when he is going to the rim or catch for the three in transition. No way do you trade this guy, only his third year averaging something like 19 a game. Granger is a keeper!

Trader Joe
12-04-2007, 11:54 PM
Granger is going to be at least as good as Josh Howard and that is fine with me.

avoidingtheclowns
12-05-2007, 12:15 AM
Well the Pacers are 19 games into the season.

One of the questions that I have is......

Will Danny Granger EVER step up to the plate?

This being Dannys third year he is still the most inconsistant player on this team. This should be his breakout season. All I'm seeing though is one good game usually followed by two bad. He is consistantly inconsistant.

Tonight against Phoenix he was barely visable on the court, and I know it wasn't Grant Hills defense that was shutting Danny down...it was Danny shutting Danny down. Logic should dictate that when your not scoring the ball your defending and boarding....Danny was doing neither.

His stat line was 6 points on 2 for 11 from the field...0 of 5 fom the 3 point line. 7 rebounds ....all this with the fourth most minutes on the squad tonight (28). Grant Hill went for 16 and Grants backup, Raja Bell went for 17. This is how Grangers game has been since his rookie year...just when you think he's got it....he does everything in his power to make you shake your head dumbfounded.

I sincerely believe that the Pacers should include him in any kind of a blockbuster trade that they can come up with, only because his contract will be coming up soon, as will Diogu's. Danny is as good as he's going to get, and I do nt s him EVER growing a mean streak, one that a 6 foot 9 or 10 forward should have.

Move him and get something valuable back, especially while the other teams in the league think that he's an up and coming talent.

so this is how we're going to get the #1 from boston and draft oden. yeeehaw!

Hicks
12-05-2007, 12:22 AM
I think Danny will be just fine once Oden comes back and he can play off the big fella in the paint.

Shack80
12-05-2007, 12:58 AM
What would be wrong if Danny is just a good player? Everyone acts like if he is not the next Pippen he is worthless. I am pretty happy with the player he has become, if he improves then super. Right now he is a good player. Maybe he never becomes the superstar the Pacers never seem to find, so what, he is a piece to build on.

AesopRockOn
12-05-2007, 01:00 AM
I love it when this dude starts a thread because every reply is a tempered rebuttal. He has to reply so many times to so little avail. Except now, it's Danny Granger rather than Jermaine. Ah, comic relief.

Continue as you were.

Anthem
12-05-2007, 01:20 AM
I sincerely believe that the Pacers should include him in any kind of a blockbuster trade that they can come up with, only because his contract will be coming up soon, as will Diogu's. Danny is as good as he's going to get, and I do nt s him EVER growing a mean streak, one that a 6 foot 9 or 10 forward should have.

Move him and get something valuable back, especially while the other teams in the league think that he's an up and coming talent.
A good idea. Maybe we could trade him for Gerald Wallace. :flirt:



NOTE: For folks new to the digest, this is a joke.

D-BONE
12-05-2007, 08:08 AM
The assertions seem somewhat hyperbolic, but I'll listen to any trade offers. I wouldn't rule out a trade of anybody as long as it helped the team out.

OakMoses
12-05-2007, 10:52 AM
Jo played a great game but I still stand by my theory. Danny is not the same player with JO in the lineup. Before JO came back danny was cutting to the hoop, driving it to the basket and drawing fouls. He is not doing this with JO in the lineup. I think part of it is because JO is in the post and looking for the ball. When JO posts up he doesnt move around which makes it harder to drive. Danny needs to learn to play with JO in the lineup. He cannot just spot up at the three point line.

I want to see a few more games before I start preaching this but it is my theory.


I've been wondering the exact same thing. If you look at the stats that somebody posted the other day, Danny's stats are not nearly as good when JO plays. I'm also going to watch this closely over the next few games. I think it might be more of a mental shift on Danny's part. When JO is gone, I think he knows he has to act like the #1 option on offense. He plays aggressive because he knows he needs to score for the team to win. With JO out there, Danny defers to him because that's what he's been doing for the first 2 years of his career. I don't think this is JO's fault, it's more a case of Danny being willing to take a back seat when he shouldn't. Hopefully this is something that J'Ob will address.

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 11:49 AM
that was a good shot from a player who is struggling


Just what I said.....he's on one and off two....INCONSISTANT for 3 years...does not mean that he will never get it.....also doesn't mean he ever will get it.

Is it worth the $$$ that your going to have to pay to keep him?

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 11:51 AM
Isn't he still leading the team in scoring? The only thing I see him being guilty of is not being aggressive enough all the time. Standing around behind the three point line is not where he belongs. Much better when he is going to the rim or catch for the three in transition. No way do you trade this guy, only his third year averaging something like 19 a game. Granger is a keeper!

Leading the team in scoring does not translate into LEADER on the Floor, or GO TO guy in the clutch. For all the pomp and circumstance that Danny got and still gets from time to time...He needs to find a niche and give the team the same amount of production EVERY night, no matter who is on the floor for the Pacers.

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 11:53 AM
so this is how we're going to get the #1 from boston and draft oden. yeeehaw!


Get over yourself funny boy.....I'm serious...Granger has not improved or matured the way he should up to this point. He still shakes his head to much after a mistake....which if you look at his stats, is right up there.

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 11:55 AM
What would be wrong if Danny is just a good player? Everyone acts like if he is not the next Pippen he is worthless. I am pretty happy with the player he has become, if he improves then super. Right now he is a good player. Maybe he never becomes the superstar the Pacers never seem to find, so what, he is a piece to build on.

You won't be saying this when contract time comes around and Danny points to his useless stats that are not winning us games. Yet he wants market value for those personal stats.

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 11:56 AM
I love it when this dude starts a thread because every reply is a tempered rebuttal. He has to reply so many times to so little avail. Except now, it's Danny Granger rather than Jermaine. Ah, comic relief.

Continue as you were.


I love it when your posts contain drivel....which is a tempered rebuttal to little avail....

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 11:57 AM
Granger is going to be at least as good as Josh Howard and that is fine with me.


What time machine are you operating from?

When Danny goes cold, he settles for jumpers. He never drives to the basket because....lets face it...hes afraid.

Aw Heck
12-05-2007, 12:10 PM
What time machine are you operating from?

When Danny goes cold, he settles for jumpers. He never drives to the basket because....lets face it...hes afraid.
Yeah, during that Seattle game he never attacked the basket. His shot wasn't falling and he only went to the free throw line FIFTEEN times. Yeah, what a wimp.

Jeez, the guy is a little over a month into his 3rd season and you're expecting him to be a LEADER? I don't think that's ever been expected of him as a Pacer. He's always been one of the younger players on the team. If you think this team lacks leadership, then you should be pointing your finger at JO and Tinsley, not Granger.

Yes, he's having trouble with consistency...on the offensive end. He's not the only player to do so. It's DECEMBER. If he's still playing with inconsistency by February, I'd say we might want to be concerned. And besides, it's not like his contract runs out by the end of the year. We'll still have another season after this one to evaluate him and trade him, if needed.

SoupIsGood
12-05-2007, 12:27 PM
:disturbed

Speed
12-05-2007, 01:49 PM
Smash, smash, smash..... Happy Holidays buddy.

Naptown_Seth
12-05-2007, 02:29 PM
Danny just makes tons of mistakes still. He's a slow but steady learner who apparently hasn't quite taken the full step forward in awareness/confidence that I thought he had earlier in the year.

Here's a tangible example of the subtle mistakes he makes that hurt the bottom line:

In-bounds is Hill, DG on him. The pass is in to the high post and as Hill steps in and toward the post (ala give and go over the top) Danny steps UNDER the play, well before Hill has had to choose which side he will go. This let Hill go over the top, get the return pass on a short step-back and hit the open jumper as Danny made a flailing close out on him with little hope of getting there.

Stuff like this looks on the surface like effort on his part (it is) and just good play by the other player (also true), but it's also a case where Danny simply makes the game harder on himself.

In the parlance of Vince Vaughn, Danny's got these big bear claws but he doesn't know how to use them yet. ;)

His fits and starts are to me obviously moments when he locks into a comfort zone, something familiar, and then when he slips into areas he doesn't recognize.


The comparison between he and Shawne is remarkably similar to last season. Shawne has the instincts and confidence for the game, though he also makes youthful errors. Danny doesn't appear to come to things nearly as naturally but does have a good ability to learn over time.


BTW, I've been sick which is why I didn't get to the thread I'm going to start which will specifically praise Danny and David for addressing flaws in their game this season.

Danny is not THE man right now, and is often part of the problem. But he's also a big part of things that go right and still has tons of untapped upside that he shows no signs of failing to reach, at least not yet. Plateau is not a word I think of when I see Danny (or Shawne) play.

JayRedd
12-05-2007, 03:09 PM
In the parlance of Vince Vaughn, Danny's got these big bear claws but he doesn't know how to use them yet. ;)

It's not even so much me as it's Roenick...He's good.

owk4S0GGDbU

Naptown_Seth
12-05-2007, 03:16 PM
F'n brilliant.

Best thing about that was I played the hell outta that version of NHL and the boys would all sit around in similar fashion for this and Madden.

Best way we ever played Genesis Madden? 2 on 2, one guy was offense, the other was defense. One team switched at the half, the other at quarters, so you got all 4 combos of pairings during the game. It's actually a lot of fun as the "defense" sitting there rooting for your offense. Way more fun than a couple of guys both on offense at the same time.

BTW, with my reference should I now refer to Danny as
:bunny:

JayRedd
12-05-2007, 03:29 PM
Me and my boy were incredible at NHL 94. We'd play on the same team as the Chicago Blackhawks, and then we'd pull our goalie and play against the computer with six men on the ice. We could beat every team except Detroit and like one other, and we'd shut out the horrible teams like Ottawa. Without a goalie.

Roenick wasn't quite as good as Tecmo Bo, but he's on the short list of contenders for best video game athlete of all time. Vince Vaughn speaks the truth.

Speed
12-05-2007, 03:59 PM
Me and my boy were incredible at NHL 94. We'd play on the same team as the Chicago Blackhawks, and then we'd pull our goalie and play against the computer with six men on the ice. We could beat every team except Detroit and like one other, and we'd shut out the horrible teams like Ottawa. Without a goalie.

Roenick wasn't quite as good as Tecmo Bo, but he's on the short list of contenders for best video game athlete of all time. Vince Vaughn speaks the truth.


Tecmo Bo, could almost not be tackled. He would have multiple 50 yars plus touchdowns every game, simply awesome. You couldn't stop him NOR could you hope to contain him.

DaSMASH
12-05-2007, 04:28 PM
Yeah, during that Seattle game he never attacked the basket. His shot wasn't falling and he only went to the free throw line FIFTEEN times. Yeah, what a wimp.

Jeez, the guy is a little over a month into his 3rd season and you're expecting him to be a LEADER? I don't think that's ever been expected of him as a Pacer. He's always been one of the younger players on the team. If you think this team lacks leadership, then you should be pointing your finger at JO and Tinsley, not Granger.

Yes, he's having trouble with consistency...on the offensive end. He's not the only player to do so. It's DECEMBER. If he's still playing with inconsistency by February, I'd say we might want to be concerned. And besides, it's not like his contract runs out by the end of the year. We'll still have another season after this one to evaluate him and trade him, if needed.

Bottom line is that, Yees, he went to the line 15 times and yet the Pacers STILL lost the game.....just like last night...You've got to be accountable EVERY night when your a pro.....just not every once in a while.

Danny has learned some things, yet still makes the same rookie mistakes...watch him shake his head when he makes a mistake...He knows, but he doesn't know how to get around it.

Anthem
12-05-2007, 04:37 PM
I like where this thread has gone.

Although I WAS hoping somebody would get the Wallace joke. Ahh well.

Coop
12-05-2007, 04:48 PM
Bottom line is that, Yees, he went to the line 15 times and yet the Pacers STILL lost the game.....just like last night...You've got to be accountable EVERY night when your a pro.....just not every once in a while.

Danny has learned some things, yet still makes the same rookie mistakes...watch him shake his head when he makes a mistake...He knows, but he doesn't know how to get around it.


:deadhorse

We know where you stand and most of the board disagrees so just get over it and quit trying to change everyones opinion. This thread FTL...

Since86
12-05-2007, 04:55 PM
Bottom line is that, Yees, he went to the line 15 times and yet the Pacers STILL lost the game.....just like last night...You've got to be accountable EVERY night when your a pro.....just not every once in a while.

Danny has learned some things, yet still makes the same rookie mistakes...watch him shake his head when he makes a mistake...He knows, but he doesn't know how to get around it.

You're absolutely right. He's too mistake prone for a 3yr player. I don't know why he starts, and should be traded for a bag of cool ranch doritos, or even chilli cheese corn chips, if they could get a large Mt. Dew out of it as well I'd be sitting on cloud nine.

Dude, come back to reality. Next time you make a mistake I hope your boss doesn't look to get rid of you, because you should be held accountable every single day as well.

He's averaging 17.5 pts 6.1 rbs, and shooting all while shooting at a higher percentage than JO and Tinsley.

Oh, and for a player that's scared to take the ball to the basket, he also leads the team in FTA per game.

Drewtone
12-05-2007, 05:17 PM
Me and my boy were incredible at NHL 94. We'd play on the same team as the Chicago Blackhawks, and then we'd pull our goalie and play against the computer with six men on the ice. We could beat every team except Detroit and like one other, and we'd shut out the horrible teams like Ottawa. Without a goalie.

Roenick wasn't quite as good as Tecmo Bo, but he's on the short list of contenders for best video game athlete of all time. Vince Vaughn speaks the truth.

Dude, that whole Blackhawks team was epic that year on the game. Roenick, Larmer and Michel Goulet on the front line (Goulet was ancient, but EA put him in prime form), with Steve Smith and Chelios on defense. Are you freaking kidding me?

I switched from the Kings, who were great the year before on the last fighting version. Vince Vaughn was absolutely correct on all points.

JayRedd
12-05-2007, 05:53 PM
Dude, that whole Blackhawks team was epic that year on the game. Roenick, Larmer and Michel Goulet on the front line (Goulet was ancient, but EA put him in prime form), with Steve Smith and Chelios on defense. Are you freaking kidding me?

I switched from the Kings, who were great the year before on the last fighting version. Vince Vaughn was absolutely correct on all points.

They were truly unreal.

My man would always want to play with Detroit cause of Yzerman and Federov, but I wouldn't stand for it. Top to bottom, Chicago's lines were just phenomonal.

Goulet and Larmer would always each get get like five goals per game on laser one-timers from Roenick or Chelios, who was arguably the best defenseman in the game. And Smith and Roenick were the best checkers in the game. They just ran over everyone.

Meanwhile, you forgot to mention Ed "Stonewall" Belfour, who was borderline un-deekable.

BlueNGold
12-07-2007, 10:02 PM
Man, Granger's having a terrible game. 24 points on 5-6 from 3pt range after just 3 quarters. Maybe he gets his all time high tonight.

I say he's pretty good and getting better...

GrangerRanger
12-07-2007, 10:31 PM
He's having a good season, decent game tonight.

On another hand, with a cheap rookie contract you can't really make a blockbuster trade with him.

BlueNGold
12-07-2007, 11:38 PM
He's having a good season, decent game tonight.

On another hand, with a cheap rookie contract you can't really make a blockbuster trade with him.

His contract is no hinderance to a trade...it probably is helpful. Package him up with one of our fat contracts (ie. Murphy) and you can get a fair trade easily.

But I seriously doubt the Pacers will trade Granger simply because he is a rare marketable commodity. IOW, you can put him on TV and sell the franchise without a high likelihood of looking foolish and having to peel mud off your face.

Yes, this is a business and he is the product and the packaging does matter.

Young
12-07-2007, 11:51 PM
Danny has a lot of talent.

Good player.

He is still young. I think his mistakes are little things (that yes do have an impact on the outcome of a game) however it's not things that won't be fixed with more experience.

He will get better. More consistant. He is a good player and once we get settled in as a team and everyone is comfortable with their roles everyone will play more consistant.

Danny is one of the last players you trade at this point in time.

wintermute
12-07-2007, 11:59 PM
danny is a 3rd year player. inconsistency is part of the package. that said, he's improved greatly this year.

maybe he won't turn into a star (though it looks like he might), but at minimum he's a very solid starter. he's valuable to the team, one way or another.



BTW, I've been sick which is why I didn't get to the thread I'm going to start which will specifically praise Danny and David for addressing flaws in their game this season.


good one. danny has progressed, sure, but that's sort of expected of him. david though, wow he's improved dramatically. dare i say contract year? :p


Although I WAS hoping somebody would get the Wallace joke. Ahh well.

if you must know, i did get the reference. didn't know your ego needed stroking though :D

anyway the joke doesn't quite fit unless danny is a throw-in in the trade

Anthem
12-08-2007, 01:54 AM
if you must know, i did get the reference. didn't know your ego needed stroking though :D

anyway the joke doesn't quite fit unless danny is a throw-in in the trade
:laugh: You guys know me too well.

rexnom
12-08-2007, 06:31 AM
Just got the Wallace reference...man is that an old-school, obscure PD reference.

Unclebuck
12-08-2007, 09:43 AM
His defense tonight with 15 deflections was outstanding

Anthem
12-08-2007, 10:01 AM
Just got the Wallace reference...man is that an old-school, obscure PD reference.
Before that point, I always believed DaSmash when he said he had a source. That was when I realized I'd never have to take his trade talk seriously again.

So it was kind of a watershed moment for me.

Speed
12-08-2007, 10:24 AM
Before that point, I always believed DaSmash when he said he had a source. That was when I realized I'd never have to take his trade talk seriously again.

So it was kind of a watershed moment for me.

I hate to pile on, well not really hate to, but I didn't find the reference you are refering to??? However, it must be the Gerald Wallace being traded to the Pacers then cut, episode? :)

I wouldn't even had tucked in my memory banks if it wasn't for the whole, I know more than all of you, you're just peons because of my sources, attitude.

Anthem
12-08-2007, 10:58 AM
I hate to pile on, well not really hate to, but I didn't find the reference you are refering to??? However, it must be the Gerald Wallace being traded to the Pacers then cut, episode? :)

I wouldn't even had tucked in my memory banks if it wasn't for the whole, I know more than all of you, you're just peons because of my sources, attitude.
Yeah, an old classic.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?t=30791

Money quote is on page 2:


Gerald Wallace on another note would be released by the Pacers in a cap saving move and glut of small forwards, so if Wallace chose to do so could resign with the Bobcats...He won't.

:laugh: Always good for a laugh.

Major Cold
04-18-2008, 03:01 PM
This is funny now...

ajbry
04-18-2008, 03:05 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/080416

Bill Simmons' annual MVP rankings... Danny is #33 (coincidence)?

Avert your eyes from #30, BTW.

Speed
04-18-2008, 03:24 PM
Well the Pacers are 19 games into the season....

Danny is as good as he's going to get....

Move him and get something valuable back, especially while the other teams in the league think that he's an up and coming talent.

Just to summarize.

I miss you Smash. He's been one of my favorites since the mid 90s, back on the Rats board.