PDA

View Full Version : Is Danny Granger overrated?



WetBob
01-05-2009, 03:57 PM
At the risk of alienating myself from members of this board, which I have come to really enjoy lurking on for some time and now that my Colts have once again shattered my hopes and dreams, I plan on contributing much more, but I feel like this is a question that needs to be asked.

There is no question that right now Danny is the best player on the team, it remains to be seen whether that will continue to be the case with the hopefully imminent return of Mike Dunleavy, but it just seems to me like there are too many people here who think that he is a great NBA player because he has been scoring consistently this season. In my opinion, Danny is not a great player. He's good, but no where near the level that some posters here seem to believe.

What does he do really well? He's a fantastic spot up shooter. He's a decent shooter off of one dribble. He's shown the ability to block shots from the help side. Beyond that? I don't see it. He's an extremely sub-par ball handler, a worse passer, but more than anything, what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough. Now, I'm sure I will be lambasted for that comment, and maybe it's just. People will point to the Celtics' game and the broken teeth issue and what not. But does that really make him tough? Sure he plays hard, its great seeing the best player on your team diving on the floor for loose balls late in a blowout game, but to me that was one instance. More an anomaly then the rule. At Memphis, he leaves the game with what is called a concussion and doesn't return. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all? Against the Knicks he takes a knock and acts like someone shot him in the leg. Now, credit should be given where credit is due, and he finished the game, shot the free throws and hung in there. But, Danny is our best player!! He's our leader. He needs to lead by example. Suck it up, don't show weakness. Lead the team.

Perhaps I'm being overly critical, as I'm sure I will be told numerous times, but we are at a point in the season where we can't afford to be so soft. We need to get tougher!! It is a good thing we were able to close out the games in New York and against the Kings because if we hadn't I fear we may have gone 0-for January. Our schedule this month is brutal. We have 15 more games to go in January, if we win 4 or 5 of those I will be pleasantly surprised. Obviously getting Mike back will help, but unless we show more toughness then we did the first 2 months, it isn't going to make enough of a difference.

In my personal opinion, that toughness needs to improve immensely, and it starts with Danny Granger.

Coop
01-05-2009, 04:02 PM
:laugh::laugh:

I can't wait to see the responses here.

Edit: Decided to put my .02 in

All 3 of those “weaknesses” you referenced make no sense whatsoever. Sure, he’s not Tinsley with the ball in his hands, but he’s a SF. He doesn’t need to be a superb ball-handler to be great at his position. As it is, he’s good enough with the ball that he is able to penetrate and get to the line better than 90% of other players in the NBA.

Your comment about his passing is even more far-fetched and makes me wonder if you’ve been watching ANY games this year. Outside of the first month of the season, Danny has been averaging over 4 assists per game. That’s an above average number for SF’s in the league. If that is his biggest weakness, then there is no doubt that he is a special player.
<O:p
</O:p
A lack of toughness? Really? What about the Boston game DOES NOT prove that he’s a tough player? What are the odds that you would get your teeth busted out and return to the court just a few minutes later? What are the odds that you would do that even with the game in hand? That’s what I thought. A concussion is a completely different matter. You don’t play around with head injuries. Just because a guy goes out of a game for a concussion does not mean he isn’t “tough”. Playing with a concussion can have much more severe consequences than playing through pain most of the time. Obviously, your comment about a concussion being like a headache just shows that you have no idea what a concussion actually is and feels like.<O:p
</O:p

I could go on and keep breaking down some of your ridiculous claims but I think it's already pretty obvious to everyone how far-fetched some of them are.

Spirit
01-05-2009, 04:09 PM
Danny actually has been trying to improve his passing of late, and his handles aren't great ubt I haven't seen him lose the ball that much. He's actually pretty tough, and I don't think you know the severity of a concussion. I don't think I saw the hit in new york, so I can't really comment on that. Bottom line, I think Danny is finally showing he can be a franchise player, the way he has played this season.

OakMoses
01-05-2009, 04:15 PM
No.

pacergod2
01-05-2009, 04:17 PM
How about I call Bob Sanders soft. He gets injured all the time and leaves his team out to dry because the defense sucks without him.

Or

Bob Sanders plays so hard and tough all the time that his injuries are warranted with the way he plays.

And a concussion is not something to dismiss. I have had three from playing over the years. I didn't know my name for an hour after the one. And another one I threw the ball into the bleachers thinking that third base was actually first base. I know I shouldn't have been playing immediately after a concussion. The next day you are fine, but the immediate affects from a blow to the head can be severe and its always best to take the utmost precaution with head injuries. It isn't about tough with that... its about not being stupid.

Robertmto
01-05-2009, 04:23 PM
YES, and IMHO, wildly

Hicks
01-05-2009, 04:24 PM
Danny Granger is a very good player. Right now. He still has a chance of being a great player by next year.

Right now I see a guy who is a pretty good shooter from 3 and from mid range, who can shoot off the dribble in traffic, who can drive and get fouled, who hits almost 90% of his free throws, and now a days can also find people for a few assists a game. He can also rebound well and block shots and grab a steal a game. His FG%s are solid. He's a good (not great) defender (who can have lapses). He's doing all of this and averaging 25ppg with the opponent's defense trained almost completely on him every night because Dunleavy isn't playing. That's a very good player.

If he can continue to develop his handles in the summer time, he could become a great player if he rises above mediocrity in that area.

I would say he's neither over or underrated at this point.

Jonathan
01-05-2009, 04:25 PM
Danny is not overrated at all. My only knock on him is this: He might not be a great teammate.

ajbry
01-05-2009, 04:28 PM
Danny Granger is a very good player. Right now. He still has a chance of being a great player by next year.

Right now I see a guy who is a pretty good shooter from 3 and from mid range, who can shoot off the dribble in traffic, who can drive and get fouled, who hits almost 90% of his free throws, and now a days can also find people for a few assists a game. He can also rebound well and block shots and grab a steal a game. His FG%s are solid. He's a good (not great) defender (who can have lapses). That's a very good player.

If he can continue to develop his handles in the summer time, he could become a great player if he rises above mediocrity in that area.

I would say he's neither over or underrated at this point.

Pretty comprehensive and unbiased summation of his game right there...

However, I do think he's overrated by the masses who don't really see him play on a regular basis as they assume he's excellent defensively. The truth is that while he's certainly competent on that end, he hasn't proven to be a game-changer on D and has some pretty evident lapses that cost his team crucial points. Granger is a pretty good defender but relative to the other swingmen defenders he's nothing special... yet.

Coop
01-05-2009, 04:29 PM
YES, and IMHO, wildly

How? Curious as to what a fan of another team thinks.


Danny is not overrated at all. My only knock on him is this: He might not be a great teammate.

What makes you believe that?

Sollozzo
01-05-2009, 04:29 PM
My only knock on him is this: He might not be a great teammate.

Care to elaborate?

Since86
01-05-2009, 04:33 PM
How? Curious as to what a fan of another team thinks.

I really wish you wouldn't have done that.....

Coop
01-05-2009, 04:35 PM
I really wish you wouldn't have done that.....

Did I miss something? He's a Wiz fan right?

Since86
01-05-2009, 04:38 PM
Yes, and everytime the Pacers lose a close game he's in the post game thread talking about how "unclutch" he is and saying how Danny couldn't carry Caron's jockstrap etc.

Basically saying he dislikes Danny because of the treatment he gets on this board. Who has the audacity to praise a Pacer player, on a Pacer's fan site? Seriously, people.

RaptorsFan
01-05-2009, 04:39 PM
I know i wont win many friends here, but i see Granger as a really good 3rd option or a decent 2nd option on a true contender, his game has too many holes in it atm to think he will be a superstar someday, he is lucky to be on a team lacking scoring so badly that he is the main man imo.

Coop
01-05-2009, 04:39 PM
Ah, I got ya. I guess I've never paid close enough attention to notice it.

Unclebuck
01-05-2009, 05:01 PM
Well first, I don't know how highly he's actually rated. he is the leading scorer and best player on a team that is 12-21 - so I doubt he's actually rated all that highly. I will say his scoring figures are a bit inflated - he's not the 4th or 5th best scorer in the NBA. Pacers style of play and Pacers lack of a second scorer have inflated Danny's numbers.

He's a pretty good player though. Never would have thought he could score like this

Sollozzo
01-05-2009, 05:04 PM
Basically saying he dislikes Danny because of the treatment he gets on this board. Who has the audacity to praise a Pacer player, on a Pacer's fan site? Seriously, people.


But that would require a person to actually use logic/common sense. Those qualities aren't displayed in the scenario you're referring to.

xtacy
01-05-2009, 05:06 PM
NO

Trader Joe
01-05-2009, 05:12 PM
No, he's not overrated. I think most people in the NBA have a healthy respect for what Danny is capable of, but they also have a good understanding of his deficiencies.

BRushWithDeath
01-05-2009, 05:18 PM
Around the league absolutely not. Around PacersDigest he absolutely is.

Sollozzo
01-05-2009, 05:19 PM
I've only heard one poster on here moan that he's overrated. Most in the national media give Granger props for his scoring, but it's not like anyone is comparing him to Lebron or Kobe.

I get that same sentiment from everyone here at PD. Most understand what Danny is: someone who is a helluva scorer on a bad team.

If we're overly excited about him, sue us. After all the crap we've gone through over the past 4 years it's wonderful to have an exciting player like Danny who appears to have his head screwed on right.

duke dynamite
01-05-2009, 05:22 PM
I think he is underrated. That is because the team he is playing on.

Jonathan
01-05-2009, 05:23 PM
Care to elaborate?

Danny gets frustrated with his fellow teammates easily. I know it is not his job to be Mr. Rah Rah or a team prankster, but I do not know if other Pacer's players like playing with him.

Sollozzo
01-05-2009, 05:24 PM
Danny gets frustrated with his fellow teammates easily. I know it is not his job to be Mr. Rah Rah or a team prankster, but I do not know if other Pacer's players like playing with him.

I'd be frustrated too if I played at the level Danny's played at all season while losing most of the games.

pacerfreak
01-05-2009, 05:24 PM
NO. Danny is recieving the the right amount of attention....well maybe not STAR treatment from the refs just yet:hmm:

Since86
01-05-2009, 05:29 PM
I think he is underrated. That is because the team he is playing on.

If he was putting up similiar numbers on a lot better team, then I would agree with you. But right now he's a very good scorer on a bad team.

It's nice he's in the same category as players like LeBron, Kobe, DWade, etc. but he's only in their category on a stat sheet.

He's a second fiddle guy, not a main man.

Putnam
01-05-2009, 05:31 PM
Yes, Danny is overrated.

And you know what? The fault of that is with the talkers and not with Danny. Sports commentators are often full of baloney. They talk a hundred words a minute and never think about whether their words will still be true tomorrow. Some fans, too, overrate Granger. Other underrate him. Most comparisons are unwise, because there are too many variables and too few cons6tants to make those comparisons meaningful. As Since86 points out in the preceding post, Danny would be a different player if he played on a different team.


"The Night Watch" by Rembrandt is a very good painting. I think it is too dark, but my opinion doesn't affect the fact that it is an acknowledged masterpiece. Danny is a very good player. He is as good as his stats indicate that he is. He is exactly as good as he looks, night in and night out. The fact that some people overpraise him and others over-criticize him doesn't affect what he is. He's good.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/SHD/S520%7EThe-Night-Watch-1642-Posters.jpg

pacerDU
01-05-2009, 05:35 PM
I respect your opinion WetBob, but I can't really figure out where you get the idea Granger lacks toughness. I actually think the opposite is true.

Mentioned on here have been numerous occasions where he has displayed his "toughness". I can't really recall any times where I've thought he was being soft either. Maybe it's his style that has you feeling this way? He has a very smooth playing-style and very fluid movements. He doesn't throw it down on people and is definitely a finesse-style player. I don't think that qualifies as a lack of toughness.

Jonathan: not a great teammate? I'd have to line up behind the others here to ask - could you elaborate? He always seems to celebrate with his teammates after great plays (not always involving him) and he often defers *too* much to his teammates, especially at the end of games. His assist numbers are good too.

I always get annoyed when a player is over-hyped and I often need solid proof that a player is the real deal, before I truly respect their game. However I've seen enough from Granger to believe the hype. I don't think anyone's saying he's the second coming, but I think I agree with Hicks here: he's neither underrated nor overrated.

Just a small side-note; on NBA TV during halftime (I can't remember which game), the hosts said they think Danny Granger might be the most underrated player in the league. You hear a lot about him in Indy, but not much outside. I remember David West, I think it was, saying they prepare for him like they would Tracy McGrady.

Edit: sorry Jonathon, you already explained why you feel he's not a good teammate - I missed it. Is Kevin Garnett not a good teammate either because he sure as hell gets frustrated with the other players sometimes.

Trader Joe
01-05-2009, 05:37 PM
Danny gets frustrated with his fellow teammates easily. I know it is not his job to be Mr. Rah Rah or a team prankster, but I do not know if other Pacer's players like playing with him.

I kind of agree with this, but at the same time Danny is the first guy to congratulate someone when they make a good play. It's nice to have someone who holds people accountable, but also let's them know when they are playing well.

croz24
01-05-2009, 05:39 PM
great players actually improve their team...yes, danny granger is overrated by the vast majority of pacers fans. danny granger is the perfect #3 option.

GO!!!!!
01-05-2009, 05:41 PM
As a player NO, not tough enough / Thug Enough Maybe, but that’s his Up Bringing, don't think you will find a more placid dude on the court and I respect that, he asks for a lot from his teammates and thats like most people in the workplace, I can't stand my lazy colleuge that leaves earlier then me and has a longer lunch breaks...
<O:p
I have no quails with the way he plays and as far as the Good Player on a bad team compare this list and who would you rather<O:p></O:p>
<O:p
Even Paul Peirce would struggle with this team and he did for years with a rubbish Boston Teams..

<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 322.5pt; mso-cellspacing: .7pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; mso-padding-alt: 3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width=430 border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" colSpan=5>
High Scorers On Loss Leaders

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 1"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Name<O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>PPG<O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Year<O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>G<O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>W-L<O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 2"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Johnston, Phi <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>22.3 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'52-53 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>70 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>12-57 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 3"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Brand (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=91), Chi <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>20.1 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'00-01 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>74 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>15-67 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 4"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Carter, Phi <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>20.0 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'72-73 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>81 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>9-73 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 5"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Kojis, SD <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.7 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'68-69 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>69 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>15-67 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 6"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Mercer (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=546), Chi <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.7 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'00-01 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>61 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>15-67 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 7"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Jackson (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=372), Dal <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.2 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'93-94 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>82 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>13-69 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 8; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Mashburn (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=516), Dal <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.2 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'93-94 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>79 <O:p></O:p>

</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>13-69 <O:p></O:p>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<O:p
*Max 15 wins, min. 55 games played<O:p></O:p>
<O:p
Just got this from the daily dime when comparing Durant and the Thunder..<O:p</O:p

Coop
01-05-2009, 05:45 PM
great players actually improve their team...yes, danny granger is overrated by the vast majority of pacers fans. danny granger is the perfect #3 option.


If Granger wasn't playing, we'd have 5 wins at most. He definitely makes this team better.

#3 option? How many #3 guys are even capable of putting up 25 a game bad team or not? Maybe Ray Allen (2-3 years ago), but the Celtics are crazy talented.

MrSparko
01-05-2009, 05:52 PM
great players actually improve their team...yes, danny granger is overrated by the vast majority of pacers fans. danny granger is the perfect #3 option.

List teams with 3rd options better than him.

Also how many teams have 2nd options better than him? I bet not more than half. So if at worse he is an upper-level robin or a poor batman then that sounds pretty good to me.

PaceBalls
01-05-2009, 05:56 PM
One thing about Danny that I've noticed is that he seems seriously pissed off all the time. I don't think I've ever seen that guy smile on the court. Even back in his rookie year when I was lucky enough to go to a few games close to the Pacer bench he would glare.. even scowl at the crowd during the timeouts. At first I thought he was mad at a fan or something but I think that's just his natural game face. He is a very serious player.

Robertmto
01-05-2009, 05:59 PM
Yes, and everytime the Pacers lose a close game he's in the post game thread talking about how "unclutch" he is and saying how Danny couldn't carry Caron's jockstrap etc.

Basically saying he dislikes Danny because of the treatment he gets on this board. Who has the audacity to praise a Pacer player, on a Pacer's fan site? Seriously, people.

thats not true at all, i didn't even bring up the Tough Juice thing, sum1 else did. And i wasn't the only one who believed Butler was better either.

But yes, i think he is overrated because he can't win big games consistently, he scores a decent amount of points in "garbage time" (scores maybe 6 or 7 straight when team is down 15 in 4th) and because he disappears in the 4th quarter 80% of games.

Would i welcome him to the Wizards? OF COURSE!

Would I want him as a first, or even second option? NO

Coop
01-05-2009, 06:09 PM
But yes, i think he is overrated because he can't win big games consistently, he scores a decent amount of points in "garbage time" (scores maybe 6 or 7 straight when team is down 15 in 4th) and because he disappears in the 4th quarter 80% of games.



1. You won't win a lot of games if you don't have a strong supporting cast. The number of losses can't be blamed on Granger.

2. We are typically right there every game during the fourth. We just haven't been able to close out. So the down 15 in the 4th comment doesnt apply very often.

3. Completely untrue. I'm tired of reading this "disappearing in the 4th" comment that seems to be used all the time by his doubters. After about 2 minutes of research, I found that Danny is the 4th leading scorer in the league in the 4th quarter. Courtesy of 82games.com

http://www.82games.com/0809/QTR4S11.HTM

MiaDragon
01-05-2009, 06:14 PM
Danny is not overrated at all. My only knock on him is this: He might not be a great teammate.

Based on.... ?

Trader Joe
01-05-2009, 06:15 PM
Yeah, I've never understood the "disappears in the 4th" comment. I figured Danny was up there. After I a little more research I discovered Granger's highest average points per quarter is the 4th.

He averages 6.4 points in the 1st, 5.9 in the 2nd, 5.4 in the 3rd, and 7.2 in the 4th.

Robertmto
01-05-2009, 06:20 PM
Yeah, I've never understood the "disappears in the 4th" comment. I figured Danny was up there. After I a little more research I discovered Granger's highest average points per quarter is the 4th.

He averages 6.4 points in the 1st, 5.9 in the 2nd, 5.4 in the 3rd, and 7.2 in the 4th.

he also takes ALOT more shots in the 4th than any other quarter, especially alot more (missed) 3s

Coop
01-05-2009, 06:22 PM
So now he doesn't disappear, but he shoots too much? Who would you rather take those shots?

I'm a bit confused.

Anthem
01-05-2009, 06:22 PM
At the risk of alienating myself from members of this board, which I have come to really enjoy lurking on for some time and now that my Colts have once again shattered my hopes and dreams, I plan on contributing much more, but I feel like this is a question that needs to be asked.

There is no question that right now Danny is the best player on the team, it remains to be seen whether that will continue to be the case with the hopefully imminent return of Mike Dunleavy, but it just seems to me like there are too many people here who think that he is a great NBA player because he has been scoring consistently this season. In my opinion, Danny is not a great player. He's good, but no where near the level that some posters here seem to believe.

What does he do really well? He's a fantastic spot up shooter. He's a decent shooter off of one dribble. He's shown the ability to block shots from the help side. Beyond that? I don't see it. He's an extremely sub-par ball handler, a worse passer, but more than anything, what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough. Now, I'm sure I will be lambasted for that comment, and maybe it's just. People will point to the Celtics' game and the broken teeth issue and what not. But does that really make him tough? Sure he plays hard, its great seeing the best player on your team diving on the floor for loose balls late in a blowout game, but to me that was one instance. More an anomaly then the rule. At Memphis, he leaves the game with what is called a concussion and doesn't return. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all? Against the Knicks he takes a knock and acts like someone shot him in the leg. Now, credit should be given where credit is due, and he finished the game, shot the free throws and hung in there. But, Danny is our best player!! He's our leader. He needs to lead by example. Suck it up, don't show weakness. Lead the team.

Perhaps I'm being overly critical, as I'm sure I will be told numerous times, but we are at a point in the season where we can't afford to be so soft. We need to get tougher!! It is a good thing we were able to close out the games in New York and against the Kings because if we hadn't I fear we may have gone 0-for January. Our schedule this month is brutal. We have 15 more games to go in January, if we win 4 or 5 of those I will be pleasantly surprised. Obviously getting Mike back will help, but unless we show more toughness then we did the first 2 months, it isn't going to make enough of a difference.

In my personal opinion, that toughness needs to improve immensely, and it starts with Danny Granger.
Where's that "stir the pot" smiley when you need one? :laugh:

At first I thought you were serious, but when I read the "concussion is another name for a headache" I started laughing. This is so good... I want to frame this post.

Roaming Gnome, I salute you!

EDIT: :stirthepo

Hicks
01-05-2009, 06:24 PM
The Pacers very rarely have garbage time in the 4th. I don't know where you're getting that he scores in garbage time.

Robertmto
01-05-2009, 06:26 PM
So now he doesn't disappear, but he shoots too much? Who would you rather take those shots?

I'm a bit confused.

he does disappear, or maybe it just seems liek that because he misses most of the shots (even if he does score more)

BlueNGold
01-05-2009, 06:26 PM
I think it depends on who's rating him...and that's all over the board.

This is January and Danny is 5th in the league in scoring after many people said he would never be much of an offensive player. I find that pretty impressive considering his strength was supposedly defense. Now that his offense has gotten harder to criticize, people criticize his defense. No, he is not as good as the top echelon talent in the NBA such as DWade, Lebron, Kobe, etc...but I don't think anyone reasonably believes that. He fits in the second tier somewhere with players like Joe Johnson, Brandon Roy, Caron Butler, etc. Not a bad group of players.

Considering scorers like Joe Johnson, Kevin Durant, Caron Butler, Brandon Roy and Carmello Anthony trail him significantly in some cases on the offensive side of the ledger...I find him just about fairly rated by most commentators.

Of course King James overshadows him, but James overshadows everyone. I don't think there is another SF in the East that is significantly better than Granger, if at all.

Edit: BTW, if you haven't been watching, his toughness is much better this year. If he gets burned now or is particularly focused, he is getting to the rim and being fouled quite a bit. Often converting the shot. He is so much better at that this year.

Edit: Yes, he can be shut down if defenders surround him because his handle is not great. It is his weakness. However, he has improved that area and I do believe other supposed all-star SF's are not particularly strong at that skill.

Coop
01-05-2009, 06:30 PM
he does disappear, or maybe it just seems liek that because he misses most of the shots (even if he does score more)

Did you even click on the link I provided? He shoots 45.3% in the 4th quarter. His overall shooting percentage is 44.5%. His 3pt percentages are down in the fourth, but overall, his shooting is better. It seems like you're grabbing for straws right now trying to use anything you can to discredit him.

Edit: Made a mistake. His overall shooting percentage is actually exactly the same at 45.3%. I got the 44.5 from 07-08. So his shooting percentage stays the same overall, but actually improves inside the 3 point line.

trey
01-05-2009, 06:32 PM
I honestly believe Danny Granger is just some improved ball handling skills away from being a superstar. If he could just handle that ball better, he'd be putting up 30+ a game cuz people really wouldn't be able to guard him. He is deadly from every spot on the court. His passing is getting better as well. And this is coming from someone who has only missed maybe 3 or 4 Pacers games this year.

Sollozzo
01-05-2009, 06:43 PM
he does disappear, or maybe it just seems liek that because he misses most of the shots (even if he does score more)

First you say that the he disappears in the 4th quarter, which is then proven wrong by Indy who points out that he averages more in the 4th then any other quarter. Then you respond by saying that it's "garbage time." That of course is false, as anyone who has followed the Pacers this year would understand that the majority of their games have been close in the 4th quarter. It's certainly not "garbage time." Then you say that he misses most of his shots in the 4th, which is again proven wrong by Heartland who points out that his shooting percentage is the same in the 4th as his overall average.

You have no argument. You've tripped over yourself so many times in this thread that it's downright comical to watch. Every "argument" you've had for Granger disappearing has been proven wrong by someone else. We don't lose games because Danny disappears in the 4th, we instead lose them because we aren't that good of a team.

Michael Jordan averaged 37 points in 86-87, but the Bulls went 40-42. Yes, I realize that Danny isn't anything close to Air, but Jordan that year was in the same place that Danny's in now. He was scoring a ton of points, but his team sucked and he couldn't lead him to a winning record. That didn't mean that MJ was necessarily disappearing at the end of games though.

Naptown_Seth
01-05-2009, 07:02 PM
3. Completely untrue. I'm tired of reading this "disappearing in the 4th" comment that seems to be used all the time by his doubters. After about 2 minutes of research, I found that Danny is the 4th leading scorer in the league in the 4th quarter. Courtesy of 82games.com

http://www.82games.com/0809/QTR4S11.HTM
For the win!


Sheesh, if you watch the games how in the world could you knock Danny at this point? What does he do well? Maybe the correct question is what does he do poorly, and that's one thing - handles/passing.

Danny now has a killer set of drive and score moves to the rim, including a variety of finger rolls and reverse lay-ups, he's got a very pure pull-up 3 shot, he's been insanely prolific with his shot blocking including out-of-nowhere run downs on guys, he's getting to the line like a madman (I mean 10+ FTAs is becoming common)...

Considering that his TOs seem to be dropping and that his passing seems to be slightly improving, I don't see how he could be overrated. He's playing AS caliber ball and that's the most praise I hear him get. No one is saying MVP or as good as Lebron or anything.

The dude is CRUSHING what Reggie was doing in his first few seasons. Time to get a grip on that, this is what greatness looks like in it's first few seasons.

Naturally he will have to continue playing at this level to earn that kind of all-time great status. The comparison to Pippen is valid, but ONLY for the first 4 years. After 4 years Pip wasn't going to the HOF or a top 50 player, and neither was Reggie. But after 4 years this is what they looked like in action.

8 more years of this kind of play, some AS games, some big playoff moments and this kind of talk will all seem obvious. All I'm saying is that this is what it looks like at the start and it's not dumb to notice it. Frankly I think the smart thing to do is appreciate it now in it's prime.


but more than anything, what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough.Danny's teeth called...

(edit - oh yeah, you dismissed that as an anomaly...Remember in Jaws when the shark clamps down on Quint and he starts screaming and garbling up blood, just another way of saying "I've got a tummy ache")

Hicks
01-05-2009, 08:06 PM
The idea that anyone thinks Danny isn't tough is laughable. I'm sorry. He has proven his toughness more than once.

Trader Joe
01-05-2009, 08:07 PM
The idea that anyone thinks Danny isn't tough is laughable. I'm sorry. He has proven his toughness more than once.
God no kidding.

pianoman
01-05-2009, 08:12 PM
At the risk of alienating myself from members of this board, which I have come to really enjoy lurking on for some time and now that my Colts have once again shattered my hopes and dreams, I plan on contributing much more, but I feel like this is a question that needs to be asked.

There is no question that right now Danny is the best player on the team, it remains to be seen whether that will continue to be the case with the hopefully imminent return of Mike Dunleavy, but it just seems to me like there are too many people here who think that he is a great NBA player because he has been scoring consistently this season. In my opinion, Danny is not a great player. He's good, but no where near the level that some posters here seem to believe.

What does he do really well? He's a fantastic spot up shooter. He's a decent shooter off of one dribble. He's shown the ability to block shots from the help side. Beyond that? I don't see it. He's an extremely sub-par ball handler, a worse passer, but more than anything, what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough. Now, I'm sure I will be lambasted for that comment, and maybe it's just. People will point to the Celtics' game and the broken teeth issue and what not. But does that really make him tough? Sure he plays hard, its great seeing the best player on your team diving on the floor for loose balls late in a blowout game, but to me that was one instance. More an anomaly then the rule. At Memphis, he leaves the game with what is called a concussion and doesn't return. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all? Against the Knicks he takes a knock and acts like someone shot him in the leg. Now, credit should be given where credit is due, and he finished the game, shot the free throws and hung in there. But, Danny is our best player!! He's our leader. He needs to lead by example. Suck it up, don't show weakness. Lead the team.

Perhaps I'm being overly critical, as I'm sure I will be told numerous times, but we are at a point in the season where we can't afford to be so soft. We need to get tougher!! It is a good thing we were able to close out the games in New York and against the Kings because if we hadn't I fear we may have gone 0-for January. Our schedule this month is brutal. We have 15 more games to go in January, if we win 4 or 5 of those I will be pleasantly surprised. Obviously getting Mike back will help, but unless we show more toughness then we did the first 2 months, it isn't going to make enough of a difference.

In my personal opinion, that toughness needs to improve immensely, and it starts with Danny Granger.

It seems to me like you are trying to compare him to lebron.

Trader Joe
01-05-2009, 08:12 PM
he also takes ALOT more shots in the 4th than any other quarter, especially alot more (missed) 3s

Dude, he shoots 45% from the field in the 4th pretty much right on with his average. I don't know what you're trying to get at (other than just being a troll), but your argument here is laughable. He attempts roughly one shot more in the 4th than in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. Is that your definition of A LOT? That sounds really questionable to me. Personally, I just think you're trolling and taking out your frustration about the Wiz season on us.

Sollozzo
01-05-2009, 08:23 PM
Personally, I just think you're trolling and taking out your frustration about the Wiz season on us.


Ding Ding Ding

Since86
01-06-2009, 02:05 PM
I think this is a perfect example of taking an argument to the woodshed and completely tearing it apart.

I would trade anyone on the Pacers team for a player like Jamison, and the Pacers are still in a better position than the Wiz, even though our best player isn't even a second tier guy in your opinion. Something doesn't come up to snuff on that argument either.

Quis
01-06-2009, 02:35 PM
Granger's just as efficient as any of the other top scorers in the league, so I'm not buying that he's not elite offensively, or at least close to it. There's a fine line between being a blatant chucker (Arenas, Stephen Jackson, etc.) and being a classy, efficient scorer (Bird, Reggie, etc.). Granger is closer to the later than the former.

Infinite MAN_force
01-06-2009, 02:42 PM
As a player NO, not tough enough / Thug Enough Maybe, but that’s his Up Bringing, don't think you will find a more placid dude on the court and I respect that, he asks for a lot from his teammates and thats like most people in the workplace, I can't stand my lazy colleuge that leaves earlier then me and has a longer lunch breaks...
<O:p
I have no quails with the way he plays and as far as the Good Player on a bad team compare this list and who would you rather<O:p></O:p>
<O:p
Even Paul Peirce would struggle with this team and he did for years with a rubbish Boston Teams..

<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 322.5pt; mso-cellspacing: .7pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; mso-padding-alt: 3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt 3.75pt" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width=430 border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" colSpan=5>
High Scorers On Loss Leaders



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 1"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Name<O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>PPG<O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Year<O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>G<O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>W-L<O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 2"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Johnston, Phi <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>22.3 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'52-53 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>70 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>12-57 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 3"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Brand (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=91), Chi <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>20.1 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'00-01 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>74 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>15-67 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 4"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Carter, Phi <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>20.0 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'72-73 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>81 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>9-73 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 5"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Kojis, SD <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.7 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'68-69 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>69 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>15-67 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 6"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Mercer (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=546), Chi <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.7 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'00-01 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>61 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>15-67 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 7"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Jackson (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=372), Dal <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.2 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'93-94 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>82 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>13-69 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 8; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>Mashburn (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=516), Dal <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>19.2 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>'93-94 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>79 <O:p></O:p>



</TD><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-RIGHT: 3.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; PADDING-LEFT: 3.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 3.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 3.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" vAlign=top>13-69 <O:p></O:p>



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<O:p
*Max 15 wins, min. 55 games played<O:p></O:p>
<O:p
Just got this from the daily dime when comparing Durant and the Thunder..<O:p</O:p

and none of those are even close to 25 points a game.

Im sorry, this top scorer on a bad team thing is just garbage. The pacers don't even have a legit second scorer, the opposing defense is completily keyed in on granger, and yet... last 10 games?

28 ppg on 46% FGP 42% from three. Averaging 10 trips to the line per game (converting 86%) (hes getting to the line more than kobe, lebron, and wade in the same 10 game stretch). 4.3 assists. 5.4 rebounds.

Look, im not a stat person, nor am I trying to say granger is a superstar just yet, but seriously, numbers don't lie, thats why they are numbers. help me out here seth...

Despite this, people will continue to call him a pretty good "third" option. :censored:

Dr. Goldfoot
01-06-2009, 03:19 PM
There are plenty of players who have become high scorers for a couple of seasons due to being the only option on bad teams. I'm not sure where Danny may eventually fall on that list but until this team turns it around.....the shoe fits. Tony Campbell, Kelly Tripucka, Dennis Scott & LaPhonso Ellis all come to mind as players who scored alot of points in these type of situations then disappeared when they moved on to better teams.

Speed
01-06-2009, 03:40 PM
Toughness=your front teeth knocked out and missed 2 minutes.

Anthem
01-06-2009, 04:28 PM
Wow, I'm a moron.

I was trying to figure out why so many people were taking this post seriously when Gnome was clearly joking, then I realized that it was some dude named WetBob. I went back and looked at the original post, and I apparently saw the avatar but didn't look at the name.

So apparently the dude's not joking. My mistake, let the open season commence.

I still think the "concussion is basically a bad headache" line is awesome.

count55
01-06-2009, 04:31 PM
I still think the "concussion is basically a bad headache" line is awesome.

Yes...it's reflective of someone who either (a) has never had one themselves, or (b) has never sufficiently recovered from the one they had.

duke dynamite
01-06-2009, 04:33 PM
The idea that anyone thinks Danny isn't tough is laughable. I'm sorry. He has proven his toughness more than once.

http://i36.tinypic.com/sq135j.jpg

Since86
01-06-2009, 04:42 PM
At Memphis, he leaves the game with what is called a concussion and doesn't return. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all?

Wow, thanks Anthem, I didn't see this before.

First off, you clearly have no knowledge about brain injuries nor athletic training. In the very first athletic training course I took, we covered concussions and they made it very clear, you do NOT mess around with them.

If there is even a hint that a player has one, your professional advice must be that they sit out until further tests can be ran, or symptoms subside for atleast THREE DAYS.

Do you know that if a person suffers a concussion while recovering from a previous one, that they have a 50% chance of death or irreversible brain damage? That's why the NFL is taking such a hardline stance now with them. Not only that, but once you have one, you're more likely to get more in the future.

Concussions are a VERY VERY serious medical condition, that you don't mess around with. Even if you have a Grade 1, you're most likely going to be out several days.

Dr. Awesome
01-06-2009, 05:42 PM
At the risk of alienating myself from members of this board, which I have come to really enjoy lurking on for some time and now that my Colts have once again shattered my hopes and dreams, I plan on contributing much more, but I feel like this is a question that needs to be asked.

There is no question that right now Danny is the best player on the team, it remains to be seen whether that will continue to be the case with the hopefully imminent return of Mike Dunleavy, but it just seems to me like there are too many people here who think that he is a great NBA player because he has been scoring consistently this season. In my opinion, Danny is not a great player. He's good, but no where near the level that some posters here seem to believe.

What does he do really well? He's a fantastic spot up shooter. He's a decent shooter off of one dribble. He's shown the ability to block shots from the help side. Beyond that? I don't see it. He's an extremely sub-par ball handler, a worse passer, but more than anything, what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough. Now, I'm sure I will be lambasted for that comment, and maybe it's just. People will point to the Celtics' game and the broken teeth issue and what not. But does that really make him tough? Sure he plays hard, its great seeing the best player on your team diving on the floor for loose balls late in a blowout game, but to me that was one instance. More an anomaly then the rule. At Memphis, he leaves the game with what is called a concussion and doesn't return. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all? Against the Knicks he takes a knock and acts like someone shot him in the leg. Now, credit should be given where credit is due, and he finished the game, shot the free throws and hung in there. But, Danny is our best player!! He's our leader. He needs to lead by example. Suck it up, don't show weakness. Lead the team.

Perhaps I'm being overly critical, as I'm sure I will be told numerous times, but we are at a point in the season where we can't afford to be so soft. We need to get tougher!! It is a good thing we were able to close out the games in New York and against the Kings because if we hadn't I fear we may have gone 0-for January. Our schedule this month is brutal. We have 15 more games to go in January, if we win 4 or 5 of those I will be pleasantly surprised. Obviously getting Mike back will help, but unless we show more toughness then we did the first 2 months, it isn't going to make enough of a difference.

In my personal opinion, that toughness needs to improve immensely, and it starts with Danny Granger.

Man, that has to be one of the worst arguments I've ever seen. I have no problem if you think Danny Granger is overrated, thats your opinion and your entitled to it.

However, if your going to say something like that, at least make points that back what your saying. Every point you made has the evidence to prove you wrong. This line is the worst: "...a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache." Seriously? I can't believe anyone would even say that haha. Thats worthy of a :eek: and maybe a :hmm:. A concussion can be very serious if not taken care of. If he were to go back out, for one, he'd be really woozy and dizzy, but if he were to go back out and something else hit him in the head, maybe an elbow or something, it could have been career ending. It would take another serious blow, but there can be permanent damage in certain situations. I think others have already stated that, I didn't really go through and read every other post, but everything you said has the evidence to prove you wrong. It would sort of be like me saying "Jordan wasn't the best because he could never win it all." Obviously thats an extreme example, but still.

docpaul
01-06-2009, 05:54 PM
Have we really run out of all other Pacer conversation topics? :)

He's tough as nails, and has performed exceptionally well given the circumstances. He runs hot and cold, as most players do, but he's just heading towards the prime of his career.

Sheesh, lets move on.

focused444
01-06-2009, 05:57 PM
the ONLY way i could consider Danny Granger overrated is...the fact that i believe he can still get better as a player..once he gets a " killer instinct" and begins to finish hard around the rim... then he truly can be rated.


Granger is not done developing..

Roaming Gnome
01-06-2009, 06:29 PM
Wow, I'm a moron.

I was trying to figure out why so many people were taking this post seriously when Gnome was clearly joking, then I realized that it was some dude named WetBob. I went back and looked at the original post, and I apparently saw the avatar but didn't look at the name.

So apparently the dude's not joking. My mistake, let the open season commence.

I still think the "concussion is basically a bad headache" line is awesome.

I don't think I could type something like that and keep a strait face...

Anyway, I thought you were speaking of me for this classic line that sums up my thoughts on the original post..., "Opinions are like assh*les, everybody has one."

As for the "over-rated" thing... What's the rating? Who's doing the rating? Are we talking for DG's potential to be an East All-Star?

The only place I know that he is rated is in NBA 2K9. Recently, his overall player rating was increased to 92 overall placing him in tie with Carmelo Anthony and Paul Pierce for the 2nd best SF in the NBA... according to 2K Sports. In that case, Danny is indeed... "over-rated".

As for the other cases, Danny is a great player and I'm just going to sit back and enjoy his development. We might be growing a star and it may be the only enjoyment of watching this team outside of watching the young guys develop and the team grow together.

Naptown_Seth
01-06-2009, 06:37 PM
There are plenty of players who have become high scorers for a couple of seasons due to being the only option on bad teams. I'm not sure where Danny may eventually fall on that list but until this team turns it around.....the shoe fits. Tony Campbell, Kelly Tripucka, Dennis Scott & LaPhonso Ellis all come to mind as players who scored alot of points in these type of situations then disappeared when they moved on to better teams.
Dennis Scott scored big for a BAD team? No, he scored big when he had Shaq, Penny and Nick Anderson out there with him. And his big 3PT season came with the shorter arc to boot.

Tripucka and Ellis were solid players, though Ellis had that one season of 20+ for a bad Nuggets team mostly due to them getting Jax from the Pacers for 50 games. Plus they had Dale Ellis still ripping from deep. And even still he didn't get over 20 per game despite their very high pace factor.

Tripucka had strong seasons for the Pistons when they were winning 46 games a couple of years in a row. KT just got old and broken down.

And as has been said, the flaw with "good on bad team" and the "well someone has to get those stats and score those points" is EFFICIENCY. Iverson, IMO, was a guy who looked greater than he was due to being given all the offensive chances. He's typically shot the ball very poorly and made up for it with FTAs.

So certainly every team will have a leading scorer, but usually if the team is bad it means the leading scorer is having to do more work with less team. If the guy is truly mediocre then he's not going to be up to the challenge of scoring big while maintaining a quality FG%.

We aren't just sitting on 25 ppg to announce Danny as great. It's the shooting PCT, his ability to get to the line, and his defensive effort that get him the credit he gets.

Last night he hit that one 3 with a guy swiping right through his shot mid-air. That's typical of his play. The weakness of the other options has brought the focus down on him, yet his scoring and effectiveness have only gone up (or stayed the same at worst).


Of the NBA players taking at least 14 shots per game (43 NBA players), Granger's 1.37 points per shot is 5th in the NBA. And look at the company that puts him in.

Amare 1.56
D Harris 1.51
Bosh 1.45
James 1.44
Granger 1.37
Roy 1.35
Duncan 1.33

If you drop down to 13 FGAs you can pick up Paul and Yao both with a 1.48. Still leaves Danny as a top 10 EFFICIENT VOLUME scorer.

And of guys shooting from the outside a lot where FG% tends to drop and fouls are harder to come by Danny again ranks really high. The top 50 3PA guys go down to 3.8 per game, Danny is taking 6.7. His 1.37 PPS here ranks him 6th. Totally different group of AS caliber players except for Granger and Lebron.

Posey 1.48
James 1.44
Billups 1.44
K Martin 1.43
R Allen 1.39
Granger 1.37

He's also 12th in 2P% among this same list of top 3PA shooters (ie pure shooters who are even more deadly as they get inside the arc).

He's also 7th in PPS among the top 20 PPG scorers in the NBA (Dwight Howard joins this list plus guys previously mentioned).

His weakness is TOs, but of the top 20 he's one of the few that's not a true PG or combo-guard (Nash, Wade). His TO/STL and TO/AST are poor in comparison to those passing/quick hands players, but one of the guys on that list that mostly closely matches Danny's TO/STL and TO/AST ratios is Carmelo Anthony. Another close match is Paul Pierce.


His stats, ie his tangible, measurable results, state that he is playing at the level that other AS caliber players play at. When you see James or Pierce do whatever it is they do, they end up accumulating the same types of numbers Granger is. I don't care if he flopped like a turtle and the ball magically went in 50% of the time, results are who you are.

Danny is making the most of his chances and is scoring at an elite player level.


Good players on bad teams like Durant or Rudy Gay aren't doing that. Frankly there aren't many guys in the top scorers list that haven't proven themselves already on good teams (like Butler, Vince, Jamison, Gordon), and Butler/Jamison are both shooting a significantly lower PCT than Danny despite having at least each other to rely on.


BE AMAZED STAT - Granger is getting 7.0 FTAs per game, Kobe gets 7.3!

naptownmenace
01-06-2009, 06:38 PM
Yes, Danny is overrated.

And you know what? The fault of that is with the talkers and not with Danny. Sports commentators are often full of baloney. They talk a hundred words a minute and never think about whether their words will still be true tomorrow. Some fans, too, overrate Granger. Other underrate him. Most comparisons are unwise, because there are too many variables and too few cons6tants to make those comparisons meaningful. As Since86 points out in the preceding post, Danny would be a different player if he played on a different team.


"The Night Watch" by Rembrandt is a very good painting. I think it is too dark, but my opinion doesn't affect the fact that it is an acknowledged masterpiece. Danny is a very good player. He is as good as his stats indicate that he is. He is exactly as good as he looks, night in and night out. The fact that some people overpraise him and others over-criticize him doesn't affect what he is. He's good.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/SHD/S520%7EThe-Night-Watch-1642-Posters.jpg

Wow, that was an awesome post. IMO, overrated or underrated I know that Danny is a very good basketball player that seems to have the ability to score despite defenses exclusively keying in on him night in and night out.

I don't really care what a lot of people on a message board say but I do pay attention to what the opposing coaches and scouts have to say. George Karl described Danny as an "All-Star this year" and said that Danny is a bigger and stronger Kevin Durant (they had just played OKC a couple of nights before) last night before the game. Doc Rivers had equally nice things to say about Danny and said that he's a difficult player to defend.

Naptown_Seth
01-06-2009, 06:54 PM
We might be growing a star
What I'm saying is we are past that point. He might continue to improve and I hope he does, but he's already playing star caliber ball. When top notch guys go out and drop 20+ per night with a couple of huge blocks, hitting at the rim and from deep and generally being pretty darn impressive this is what that looks like.

To be all time he has to maintain, but to be star caliber right now is something he's already doing. Reggie was never better than this from a regular season standpoint, even offensively he wasn't much better.

Hell, the guy is coming off a 19 ppg season which is itself better than the typical bland player on bad team output. His numbers are in the Reggie first 4 years (or Pip) range. It's nuts, but it's true.

Sickest of all is that this is all coming AFTER the extension. It sure is nice to have a contract go the Pacers way (or at least be fair). That's been really rare the last 10 years.

Anthem
01-06-2009, 07:23 PM
Sickest of all is that this is all coming AFTER the extension. It sure is nice to have a contract go the Pacers way (or at least be fair). That's been really rare the last 10 years.
Great point, I've thought this myself. If this had been last year I might not have felt so excited, but we've got this dude locked up for the next six years. It's awesome.

Naptown_Seth
01-06-2009, 08:00 PM
This is also why I actually liked the length of terms for JO, Ron and Tins. After game 1 vs Detroit that year you are thinking "oh man, at least 5 more years of this pain to rain down on the NBA from the Nap, it's long overdue".

Of course then the sports gods decided to remind me that I live in Indy and that success is only used to trick us into experiencing even more devastating suffering, not unlike the 13-0 Colts or the SB win. Just enough to keep you from giving up, but no more than that.


I suppose this means we should start insisting that Danny travel in a heavily armored and padded bus as well as sleeping in a bubble boy room. Lord knows what is going to happen to him. Probably one of those falcons from downtown will swoop down and claw his eyes out just as he's getting in a limo for the airport in order to fly to his first NBA AS game.


Indy, where game winning buzzer beaters by Reggie are just an appetizer for the main course of game 7 pain. Just enough to cleanse the palette.

owl
01-06-2009, 08:50 PM
Danny gets frustrated with his fellow teammates easily. I know it is not his job to be Mr. Rah Rah or a team prankster, but I do not know if other Pacer's players like playing with him.


You need to watch KG. He is a driven player and he gets into his teamates.
They don't have to like him, just respect him.

owl
01-06-2009, 09:02 PM
Granger is probably the main reason I watch the Pacers play. The guy is unique
and we are lucky to have him.


Toughness? The last time I checked concussions can lead to death.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-06-2009, 09:50 PM
It's not like Danny is all that much more effecient than Durant on the offensive side of the ball.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-06-2009, 09:59 PM
By the way, I think Granger is a very good basketball player. He may be over-rated on this board though. He's still at least one of the guys this team should be built around.

Anthem
01-06-2009, 10:51 PM
It's not like Danny is all that much more effecient than Durant on the offensive side of the ball.
So, he's not better than a #2 pick in a good draft?

How sad for him.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-06-2009, 11:12 PM
So, he's not better than a #2 pick in a good draft?

How sad for him.

That clearly wasn't my point. I'm arguing efficiency at this point. Danny's player efficiency rating is 2 points higher than Jamaal Tinsley's was the brawl year.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-06-2009, 11:20 PM
That clearly wasn't my point. I'm arguing efficiency at this point. Danny's player efficiency rating is 2 points higher than Jamaal Tinsley's was the brawl year.

Which is clearly not the point either......

The actual point is Granger and Durant have about the same stats across the board. Durant is actually hitting his shots at a higher rate (fg & 3pt). They take the same amount of shots and roughly the same amount of free throws. Danny gets the edge due to his extremely high 3pt attempt average. Nearly 4 more per game.



Ahhh.... the hell with it I don't even know what I'm arguing about anymore.

croz24
01-06-2009, 11:21 PM
jeff green will become a better player than granger...

BlueNGold
01-06-2009, 11:25 PM
Granger's efficiency rating is 18th in the NBA, higher than Brandon Roy, Kevin Garnett, Devin Harris, Joe Johnson, Tony Parker, Jason Kidd, Carmello Anthony, Paul Pierce, Caron Butler, Vince Carter, Kevin Durant....man, the list goes on and on.

Maybe we can trade Jamaal for one of those guys. What do you think?

BlueNGold
01-06-2009, 11:28 PM
LOL. JO's inefficiency rating is 73rd in the league right behind Big Al who is 72nd. Stephen Jackson is 65th. While Troy Murphy is 35th.

What the heck does this mean anyway?

Edit: King James comes in at #1 of course.

jeffg-body
01-06-2009, 11:51 PM
jeff green will become a better player than granger...

I'd have to see that first hand before I would believe that. Granger has a ton of optential and he actually shows the hard work ethic.

BRushWithDeath
01-07-2009, 12:07 AM
He's a good player. Perhaps very good. But if he is the best player on your team, your team is not going to be very good. Thus is the case. And that is why I feel he is overrated on this board. Around the league I think he is appropriately rated. He'd be a fantastic complimentary piece.

croz24
01-07-2009, 12:23 AM
I'd have to see that first hand before I would believe that. Granger has a ton of optential and he actually shows the hard work ethic.

some exaggeration on my part...honestly though, they were essentially the same players coming out of college. both used primarily at the 3/4 position and as more of an inside presence. green, imo, is the smarter player with higher bball iq and is more of a winner than granger. granger obviously has developed the better outside game. but overall, i truly don't see much difference between the two at all. green's biggest problem is he's playing 2nd fiddle to, imo, the biggest underachiever in the league. durant is nothing but a stat guy. one of the worst "leaders" out there imo and yes i understand it's only his 2nd year...

Infinite MAN_force
01-07-2009, 12:38 AM
I think some people decided granger was a good second or third guy some time ago (and I would have agreed last year) and no matter how he plays or what kind of crazy stats he puts up people will not accept that he could be a first option player. People act like because the team isn't winning this is somehow because Danny isn't a true number 1, but man there are so many reasons this team is struggling and they have NOTHING to do with Danny Granger. Poor team defense, lack of post presence, lack of frontcourt athleticism, inconsistent PG play... and the fact that there is not a consistent #2 guy to take any pressure off danny in crunchtime.

I mean, basketball is a team sport right? I don't see how Danny's talent is soley weighted on our win-loss record. I don't see how a guy who has averaged nearly 30 points per game over the last 10 games on good shooting percentages is a good "Third" option. Im not trying to be a homer, Im just trying to reconcile perception and facts.

Anthem
01-07-2009, 02:18 AM
jeff green will become a better player than granger...
Didn't you want the Pacers to trade Granger for the rights to Joe Alexander?

Hicks
01-07-2009, 02:36 AM
jeff green will become a better player than granger...

Somehow this will make you happy if it's true. Which is silly.

croz24
01-07-2009, 04:56 AM
Didn't you want the Pacers to trade Granger for the rights to Joe Alexander?

you do realize jeff green's 2nd year is superior to granger's and both share a very similar skillset.

and no, i did not.

Anthem
01-07-2009, 11:44 AM
you do realize jeff green's 2nd year is superior to granger's and both share a very similar skillset.
Granger's second year wasn't impressive, statistically. It's his continual improvement that impresses, and it impresses because it's so rare.


and no, i did not.
Well, you wanted us to trade Granger for a top-5 pick, and you said if you were picking then Joe would be a top-5 pick. So I kind of connected the dots.

count55
01-07-2009, 11:50 AM
It is possible that Jeff Green will become a better player than Danny, but what would that prove besides the fact that Jeff Green will have become a very good-to-outstanding player?

count55
01-07-2009, 12:56 PM
I think some people decided granger was a good second or third guy some time ago (and I would have agreed last year) and no matter how he plays or what kind of crazy stats he puts up people will not accept that he could be a first option player. People act like because the team isn't winning this is somehow because Danny isn't a true number 1, but man there are so many reasons this team is struggling and they have NOTHING to do with Danny Granger. Poor team defense, lack of post presence, lack of frontcourt athleticism, inconsistent PG play... and the fact that there is not a consistent #2 guy to take any pressure off danny in crunchtime.

I mean, basketball is a team sport right? I don't see how Danny's talent is soley weighted on our win-loss record. I don't see how a guy who has averaged nearly 30 points per game over the last 10 games on good shooting percentages is a good "Third" option. Im not trying to be a homer, Im just trying to reconcile perception and facts.

There are skills and tools that Danny currently lacks to be a "go-to" player down the stretch. His handle is too weak, and he is too easy to guard away from the ball. It is currently fair, and may continue to be accurate throughout his career, to say that Danny is not a franchise cornerstone.

However, exactly how many are there (currently playing at that level) in the league? James, Wade, Paul, Bryant, Howard, and Duncan are the only ones that I come up with that would probably be consensus picks. Then there are those who may be on the verge, like Brandon Roy or Devin Harris. That's 6-8 players, or less than 2% of the 416 players who have played a game this season. Even if you expand the list to throw in guys like Nash, Stoudemire, Garnett, Pierce, or others, you'd struggle to come up with 5%.

Anthem is right...Danny has consistently improved his production:

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/3673/dannybyyearxv1.png (http://imageshack.us)

and, he's consistently improved his ability to get to the line:

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/2627/dannyftzk8.png (http://imageshack.us)

Given his consistent upward curve, is it so hard to believe that Danny will look to correct his weaknesses, and have a good chance at being successful?

It seems to me disturbing to try to denigrate a player who has done nothing but work hard, get better, and be a good representative for our franchise (not directed at IMF, who's quoted here). While there are a few who are prone to exaggerate Danny's abilities, it is evident time and time again that the majority of the fans and the Pacer organization have an appropriate opinion of who he is and what he's worth. I believe this is evident in the contract he signed, which is on par with contracts received by players like Andre Iguodala, Luol Deng, Josh Smith, and Monta Ellis.

There is also no evidence, whatsoever, that he is a bad teammate or a stat padder. It is clear watching him that he hates losing. And, one of the most impressive things I've seen him do was in OKC game (IIRC). Josh McRoberts had just seen his first extended minutes, and played really well. When McBob was taken out late in the third, Danny was standing near half court waiting to inbound the ball. Danny told the ref to wait, ran over to McBob as he was nearing the bench, and congratulated Josh on the effort. I like that he showed the effort to go find the guy who was, at the time, the 14th or 15th man on the team and recognize his contribution.

Whatever is "wrong" or "lacking" (real or perceived) with Granger, there is way, way more that is right.

Anthem
01-07-2009, 01:02 PM
It is possible that Jeff Green will become a better player than Danny, but what would that prove besides the fact that Jeff Green will have become a very good-to-outstanding player?
Hey, Jeff Green was a top-5 pick. So he's SUPPOSED to be good. :D

Trader Joe
01-07-2009, 02:01 PM
I like how Danny Granger can be accused of putting up great stats on a bad team, yet someone says, "Hey Jeff Green is putting up great stats.", and no one even blinks.

croz24
01-07-2009, 03:30 PM
Granger's second year wasn't impressive, statistically. It's his continual improvement that impresses, and it impresses because it's so rare.


Well, you wanted us to trade Granger for a top-5 pick, and you said if you were picking then Joe would be a top-5 pick. So I kind of connected the dots.

pretty sure you are incorrect. i wanted to draft joe, along with some others, at #11 if they were to fall. mayo, rose, bayless, and to a lesser extent beasley were the only 4 players i viewed as franchise type players in that draft.

Putnam
01-07-2009, 03:40 PM
Well, I hope we can agree that this thread:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?t=43699


Provides a definite, affirmative answer to the question posed in this thread.

Yes, Danny is overrated, under-rated, misjudged, inaptly compared to other players and who knows what all. I know I'm on my way to becoming a crank, but the level of unsubstantiated dither on PD is growing. I'm sure those who post it feel they are "just posting an idea or opinion to try and start discusion." But some posts don't even qualify as ideas and don't deserve to be discussed.



"The Pacers. They're beautiful, aren't they? Seems like we never just look at them any more."


.

Anthem
01-07-2009, 03:48 PM
pretty sure you are incorrect. i wanted to draft joe, along with some others, at #11 if they were to fall. mayo, rose, bayless, and to a lesser extent beasley were the only 4 players i viewed as franchise type players in that draft.
Hmm. I'm going from this:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showpost.php?p=736235&postcount=11

after mayo, rose, and bayless, the only player i desperately want on the pacers and who would be a joy to watch is joe alexander. some call me crazy for wanting him because he's a tweener sf/pf, but not only can you not teach athleticism, you also can't teach desire, intensity, and unrivaled work ethic.

Anthem
01-07-2009, 03:50 PM
I know I'm on my way to becoming a crank
Well on your way, buddy. :buddies:

croz24
01-07-2009, 08:20 PM
Hmm. I'm going from this:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showpost.php?p=736235&postcount=11

not exactly sure how that implies i wanted joe in the top 5. i also preferred guys like walker, greene, singletary, thompson, randolph etc but that doesn't mean i would have drafted them top 5. joe is a guy i wanted at #11 and liked his value at #11 more than a kevin love's value at #5.

Dr. Awesome
01-08-2009, 12:30 AM
Sit down.

MyFavMartin
01-08-2009, 12:31 AM
HOW YOU LIKE THEM APPLES?

Sollozzo
01-08-2009, 12:31 AM
Another prime example of Danny's unclutchness tonight.........NOT

Roaming Gnome
01-08-2009, 12:35 AM
Robertmto... :bond:

MrSparko
01-08-2009, 12:35 AM
We could of had Gerald Green :(

aceace
01-08-2009, 12:36 AM
Maybe this will be Danny's breakout clutch game...

Shade
01-08-2009, 12:36 AM
Overrated? Ha. Ha, I say!

MyFavMartin
01-08-2009, 12:39 AM
...what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough.

REALLY?

SOMEONE NEED TO KNOCK YOUR TEETH OUT?

Infinite MAN_force
01-08-2009, 12:40 AM
Good team. On the road. 37 points. Game winning three pointer with less than a second left. yeah.

edit: Shouldn't leave out 6 assists, 5 boards, and 4 steals, and a block.

Trader Joe
01-08-2009, 02:18 AM
I like how Danny Granger can be accused of putting up great stats on a bad team, yet someone says, "Hey Jeff Green is putting up great stats.", and no one even blinks.

Can someone answer this for me?

Hicks
01-08-2009, 02:18 AM
No, they really can't.

Trader Joe
01-08-2009, 02:18 AM
he also takes ALOT more shots in the 4th than any other quarter, especially alot more (missed) 3s

Right.

Trader Joe
01-08-2009, 02:20 AM
No, they really can't.

Well that's damn sad we beat up a guy (as a good player on a bad team) who is literally one of the best offensive players in the NBA right now, and someone comes around and says hey this guy is putting up 17 ppg on the worst team in the NBA and no one even blinks.

Hicks
01-08-2009, 02:21 AM
I think this fits here, too:
----

This video is not safe for work, but I'll go with it because I couldn't find the clip from when this bit was in his TV show (in which case wouldn't include the cussing at the beginning).

There are a lot of comments that get thrown out sometimes that make me think of Anti-Dad. In this case, I guess it's either Anti-Danny or Anti-Pacer.

zZ3c5bJtiKw

Infinite MAN_force
01-08-2009, 02:23 AM
Can someone answer this for me?

I am yet to have been convinced its a valid line of reasoning. Sure there are examples of mediocre players putting up 20 ppg on miserable teams, but I just don't see that when I watch Danny, Danny is well... really really good. Hes efficient, he impacts both ends of the floor, he makes his teammates better, hes mentally tough/clutch... "best player on a bad team" just does not even come close to telling the whole story here.

Big Smooth
01-08-2009, 02:26 AM
I'm not sure where I'd put Granger's ceiling at this point but I know this much - he has not reached it yet. He is still improving. And I'm not a "fan boy" even though I do have Granger in my signature. He has transformed into an All Star caliber player so far, at the very least.

The one thing that struck me in the season opener vs Detroit was his confidence level. He looked the part of a guy who is ready to be The Man for the Pacers. I feel like he is more assertive now, if that makes sense.

Sollozzo
01-08-2009, 02:28 AM
Can someone answer this for me?

Quit using logic and common sense. It's much easier to say Granger is overrated while hyping arbitrary players on horrendous teams.

WetBob
01-08-2009, 02:33 AM
That a was a huge shot he hit tonight. I still think this board overrates him far too much, but he's on a roll right now.

Trader Joe
01-08-2009, 02:34 AM
BTW, at risk of your head exploding, I would advise everyone to be very careful and take a look at Danny's stats over the past 5 games. THey are well, they are, the only way you can describe them is incredible.

travmil
01-08-2009, 02:37 AM
5 games? He's been on a serious roll all season. He's not just scoring either. He always manages to get his rebounds, assists, and even a block and steal or two in there as well. Far from a one trick pony.

Trader Joe
01-08-2009, 02:40 AM
I'm not knocking him, I'm being 100% serious, look at his last 5 games. They are off the charts. THere are maybe 4-5 other players in the league capable of that kind of stretch.

Infinite MAN_force
01-08-2009, 02:46 AM
BTW, at risk of your head exploding, I would advise everyone to be very careful and take a look at Danny's stats over the past 5 games. THey are well, they are, the only way you can describe them is incredible.

how about the last 10 games (including tonight)?

30.9 PPG, 5.7 rebounds, 4.7 assists, shooting a little less than 50% from the field and over 40% from three.

Yea, just keep blowing off these kinds of stats people. They are pretty meaningless considering our record. (Which is actually 5-5 in that stretch) With 4 of those losses decided by 6 points or less. 3 of them by 3 points or less.

If only we had a go-to guy.

SoupIsGood
01-08-2009, 05:38 AM
I'm not knocking him, I'm being 100% serious, look at his last 5 games. They are off the charts. THere are maybe 4-5 other players in the league capable of that kind of stretch.

Just looked. If you showed me that set of numbers without first telling me who the player was, my first guess would be King James.

Kemo
01-08-2009, 10:43 AM
I like how Danny Granger can be accused of putting up great stats on a bad team, yet someone says, "Hey Jeff Green is putting up great stats.", and no one even blinks.


lol probably because not many here really give a crap about jeff green ..

rexnom
01-08-2009, 10:49 AM
I feel like good player on bad team stats are like Shareef Abdur-Rahim like performances of the past. Danny's game this year reminds more of T-Mac during his Orlando years.

Frostwolf
01-08-2009, 11:09 AM
lol probably because not many here really give a crap about jeff green ..

croz24 does

ChicagoJ
01-08-2009, 11:35 AM
croz24 does

Does he really, or is he just doing that to get a reaction?

And if its the latter, may I suggest just skipping ahead to the next post/ topic?

Wu-Gambino
01-08-2009, 11:42 AM
Good team. On the road. 37 points. Game winning three pointer with less than a second left. yeah.

edit: Shouldn't leave out 6 assists, 5 boards, and 4 steals, and a block.

Not to forget the game tying shot that he hit...

count55
01-08-2009, 11:43 AM
Does he really, or is he just doing that to get a reaction?

And if its the latter, may I suggest just skipping ahead to the next post/ topic?

It is in having that opinion and following this advice that I came to fully understand and empathize with the motivation behind grace's sig.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-08-2009, 12:00 PM
It's funny to read the difference of opinions between this thread and the "Danny for MVP" thread regarding individual performance and overall team performance.

naptownmenace
01-08-2009, 12:09 PM
He's a good player. Perhaps very good. But if he is the best player on your team, your team is not going to be very good. Thus is the case. And that is why I feel he is overrated on this board. [b]Around the league I think he is appropriately rated.[b] He'd be a fantastic complimentary piece.

Around the league several people have recognized Danny as a franchise player not just a "complimentary piece". If you actually have NBATV and watch their pre and postgame coverage regarding the Pacers or you patrol the message boards of other teams after they play the Pacers you really don't know how Danny is viewed.

Amhad Rashad, Gary Payton, and Chris Webber gave Granger the nickname Batman. They even called him that in an interview after the win against the Lakers. Prior to the game, they were discussing whether or not Granger was a Batman (1st option level) player or a good Robin (2nd option) player. They all agreed that he was clearly a 1st option level player that needed a Robin player to step up and help him out. They attributed the Pacers stuggles to close out games to the lack of a good second option on the team.

The Suns announcers last night stated a couple of times that they are sure that they'll see Danny again during the All-Star game there in Phoenix. After hitting that walk-off three pointer, I'm sure it will garner him even more attention.

Of course, we need to see how the rest of the season goes but so far Danny is improving with each game and keeping the Pacers close in almost practically every game - no matter how outmatched they are talent-wise. Only great players can do that for a team.

naptownmenace
01-08-2009, 12:25 PM
how about the last 10 games (including tonight)?

30.9 PPG, 5.7 rebounds, 4.7 assists, shooting a little less than 50% from the field and over 40% from three.

Yea, just keep blowing off these kinds of stats people. They are pretty meaningless considering our record. (Which is actually 5-5 in that stretch) With 4 of those losses decided by 6 points or less. 3 of them by 3 points or less.

If only we had a go-to guy.

Wow. That Granger sure would make a great complimentary player. :rolleyes:



Keep it up Danny!

Since86
01-08-2009, 02:18 PM
Wow. That Granger sure would make a great complimentary player. :rolleyes:



Keep it up Danny!

And to think. Some would have us believe he's not even good enough to be a second option.......:eek:

count55
01-08-2009, 02:35 PM
I think we are rapidly approaching the point where Danny could be considered a good-to-very good Number 1 option. He scores consistently and efficiently enough, IMO, to be a leading scorer many places throughout the league.

That being said, there is a difference between a Number 1 option and a go-to guy down the stretch. The prime example of this was Shaq, who was most definitely a Number 1 option, but had a glaring weakness that would limit his effectiveness as a go-to guy down the stretch. While he certainly had his share of success, I don't think it's a stretch to say that Kobe was the player the Lakers wanted with the ball in his hands down the stretch.

Danny, IMO, has shown that he has the ability to be a clutch player and big scorer. However, it would be really special if Danny could improve his handle and develop his game in such a way that we could run our offense through him down the stretch. Right now, he's still a little to reliant on either the catch-and-shoot or the pull up. It's a little too "all or nothing" to be consistently effective.

But, again, all this guy has done is improve his game over his career. I'm currently having a hard time containing my enthusiasm about him.

naptownmenace
01-08-2009, 02:55 PM
But, again, all this guy has done is improve his game over his career. I'm currently having a hard time containing my enthusiasm about him.

I agree with everything you said. More than anything, what has impressed me the most is how he has made huge improvements to his game not only from year-to-year but from month to month in his career.

This is starting to really feel like the start of a new Pacers era, don't it? :D

count55
01-08-2009, 02:59 PM
I agree with everything you said. More than anything, what has impressed me the most is how he has made huge improvements to his game not only from year-to-year but from month to month in his career.

This is starting to really feel like the start of a new Pacers era, don't it? :D

While there are certainly better players in the league, I'd have to say that Danny's combination of skill and demeanor are a great elixir for our franchise after the types of woes we've experienced the last three or four years.

Unclebuck
01-08-2009, 03:32 PM
The biggest improvement I've seen is his ability to hit tough well defended shots.

duke dynamite
01-08-2009, 03:33 PM
The biggest improvement I've seen is his ability to hit tough well defended shots.
Yeah, he's getting Dunleavy-like in your face shots.

rexnom
01-08-2009, 04:37 PM
I think we are rapidly approaching the point where Danny could be considered a good-to-very good Number 1 option. He scores consistently and efficiently enough, IMO, to be a leading scorer many places throughout the league.

That being said, there is a difference between a Number 1 option and a go-to guy down the stretch. The prime example of this was Shaq, who was most definitely a Number 1 option, but had a glaring weakness that would limit his effectiveness as a go-to guy down the stretch. While he certainly had his share of success, I don't think it's a stretch to say that Kobe was the player the Lakers wanted with the ball in his hands down the stretch.

Danny, IMO, has shown that he has the ability to be a clutch player and big scorer. However, it would be really special if Danny could improve his handle and develop his game in such a way that we could run our offense through him down the stretch. Right now, he's still a little to reliant on either the catch-and-shoot or the pull up. It's a little too "all or nothing" to be consistently effective.

But, again, all this guy has done is improve his game over his career. I'm currently having a hard time containing my enthusiasm about him.
Well, even if Danny was all these things, he still needs some reliable shot makers around him. Getting Mike back is a great start.

D23
01-08-2009, 05:42 PM
...Amhad Rashad, Gary Payton, and Chris Webber gave Granger the nickname Batman. They even called him that in an interview after the win against the Lakers. Prior to the game, they were discussing whether or not Granger was a Batman (1st option level) player or a good Robin (2nd option) player. They all agreed that he was clearly a 1st option level player that needed a Robin player to step up and help him out. They attributed the Pacers stuggles to close out games to the lack of a good second option on the team...


So if this nickname does stick, we need to petition the Pacers to play the Batman theme from "Begins" and "Dark Knight" during the starting lineup intro. Imagine Danny walking out as the crescendo hits full force :yay2: Who's with me?

count55
01-08-2009, 05:45 PM
Well, even if Danny was all these things, he still needs some reliable shot makers around him. Getting Mike back is a great start.

I agree, but let me say this:

I am very surprised and pleased that we are starting to ask things like this of Danny, and not rejecting them out of hand as impossibilities.

Naptown_Seth
01-08-2009, 06:29 PM
That clearly wasn't my point. I'm arguing efficiency at this point. Danny's player efficiency rating is 2 points higher than Jamaal Tinsley's was the brawl year.
The problem with the efficiency rating is the name itself. It's not a great stand-alone stat for efficiency at all. It's really mostly a stat-stuffer per minute thing.

My point on efficiency was that as a volume scorer he was already in elite company in terms of efficient scoring. He doesn't need any more FGAs than any of the other great players scoring a lot.


That a was a huge shot he hit tonight. I still think this board overrates him far too much, but he's on a roll right now.
The dude is an all-star and is quickly pushing his way right past Robin status and into Batman before our eyes. It's not "hype". What does a Batman do anyway?

Well, he flat out takes the ball right out of Amare's hands, comes up with several big swats, creates 4-5 easy scores for others with misssed open FGs that would have bumped that up even more, yanks down a fair share of boards, intimidates other shots into misses, drives to the hole, scores in traffic and when defended, scores from all over the court, gets to the FT line, ties games with huge shots, wins games with huge shots.

If you are waiting on something better to come along than what you saw vs. Phoenix you can stop now. It ain't happening. This isn't hyperbole, this is facts. You look at the kinds of plays he made, the way those plays are filling up the box score and helping his team have a shot to win games, and there simply isn't anything else to say.

The ONLY argument against Danny's greatness at this point is this - "can he keep it up". Because if he keeps playing anywhere close to this then he's going to make a truckload of AS games and end up in the HOF.

If he keeps this up. Keep that part in mind. Because guys that put up 25/5/5 with a few steals, blocks and near 40% from 3 for 8-10 years do get discussed for the HOF.

In less than half a year he's blown right past might be an AS next year to should be mentioned as a possible starter. It's truly nuts and has zip to do with being on a bad team. Danny was a big part of those wins over Boston and LA, he's not just piling on stats vs junk teams.


And the thing is you look at his shooting style, his touch, and it looks repetitive and dialed in. His moves to the rim look controlled and comfortable. This is not a kid just getting a bit lucky or getting ignored. He's found the kind of game you can typically rely on night after night. Injury and laziness appear to be the only things that can stop him now.

Naptown_Seth
01-08-2009, 06:33 PM
BTW, I guess I'll pull out my recommended nickname for Granger, though I was hoping to save it for a sign at a game.

Dental Plan Dan
:D
Can we get that smiley done so it's missing its front teeth. ;)

Naptown_Seth
01-08-2009, 06:59 PM
It's not like Danny is all that much more effecient than Durant on the offensive side of the ball.
You are correct, but as was already said, not really being any better than a kid that is considered an elite scorer already and certainly has way more AS hype than Danny isn't exactly a knock.

With Durant I don't think anyone thinks he'd suddenly be worse if he were on the Suns, Celts or Spurs. When you see Durant in person you quickly recognize that he is indeed an elite offensive player. And yet Danny is slightly better than him on offense. And then we bring up the defensive end and the comparison is a joke.

Points Per Shot
Danny 1.365
Durant 1.28

FG%
Danny 45.6
Durant 46.5

3P%
Danny 38.5
Durant 42.5

FT%
Danny 85.2
Durant 84.9

FTAs
Danny 7.0
Durant 6.1

Assists
Danny 3.5
Durant 2.3

TOs
Danny 2.9
Durant 2.9

Offensive Reb
Danny 0.7
Durant 0.9

Hicks
01-08-2009, 07:49 PM
So if this nickname does stick, we need to petition the Pacers to play the Batman theme from "Begins" and "Dark Knight" during the starting lineup intro. Imagine Danny walking out as the crescendo hits full force :yay2: Who's with me?

Sign me up. Just today I was thinking of making a highlight video of Danny using the audio from one of TDK's trailers.

Don't have the video clips to play with, though, so no go. :(

Still, they could really play up the Batman stuff at the games given TDK's recent success/popularity.

Imagine making a Danny Granger poster or splash screen at the games based on this (not wanting him dressed like Batman, but otherwise match it up:)

http://d.emule.com/batman-begins-wallpaper/batman-begins-wallpaper--.jpg

Infinite MAN_force
01-08-2009, 09:02 PM
So if this nickname does stick, we need to petition the Pacers to play the Batman theme from "Begins" and "Dark Knight" during the starting lineup intro. Imagine Danny walking out as the crescendo hits full force :yay2: Who's with me?

Don't know, Im feeling Danny Elfman a little bit more. Avatar bias.

Argue the movies all you want, there is only one Batman score...

Hicks
01-08-2009, 09:32 PM
Actually, there are multiple :-p

D23
01-09-2009, 10:06 AM
Sign me up. Just today I was thinking of making a highlight video of Danny using the audio from one of TDK's trailers.

Don't have the video clips to play with, though, so no go. :(

Still, they could really play up the Batman stuff at the games given TDK's recent success/popularity.

Imagine making a Danny Granger poster or splash screen at the games based on this (not wanting him dressed like Batman, but otherwise match it up:)

http://d.emule.com/batman-begins-wallpaper/batman-begins-wallpaper--.jpg

Hmm... ever since IU released Adobe products for free, I've been learning how to use Premier. Still haven't started any projects, though I've been trying to think about something I'd like to do. Perhaps this would be a very interesting place to start :chin:

BRushWithDeath
03-10-2011, 01:18 PM
Maybe crazy ol' WetBob wasn't too far off...

Hicks
03-10-2011, 01:58 PM
Maybe crazy ol' WetBob wasn't too far off...

Do you guys do anything but pat each other on the back (when you're not patting Josh on the back, that is) and seemingly feed off of anything wrong with this team?

Good grief.

gummy
03-10-2011, 02:09 PM
I think some people overrate his defensive effort. Notice I didn't say ability. We've seen DG play some really good defense but most of the time he just settles for OK defense - and sometimes it's bad.

Other than that, no Danny isn't overrated. I am, however, disappointed in his erratic defense and what appears to be his lack of leadership. But hey, some guys just aren't leaders and other guys also have to be willing to be lead...

Eleazar
03-10-2011, 06:27 PM
Danny is completely capable of what we want him to do, he just doesn't seem to care enough on the defensive end, and this year he has shown a lack of effort on all sides of the ball at various times of the season.

presto123
03-10-2011, 06:47 PM
To not want to be a leader I am fine with but to consistently give less than 100% to fans that pay hard earned money while you make millions is unacceptable to me. That's why I don't care if we do get rid of him. I only want guys here that will bring 100% effort 100% of the time.

FireTheCoach
03-10-2011, 06:48 PM
I don't know so much about the toughness issue that was brought up here originally but I DO think that Danny has stopped giving a **** and wouldn't mind being out of Indy.

Other than that I think, yeah, he's probably over rated by most Pacer fans, at least PDers anyway.

PacerDude
03-10-2011, 07:13 PM
Ever since he started complaining about the 'super teams' being built around the league, his game has gone in the crapper.

I certainly hope he doesn't see himself as an important piece on a 'super team'.

He'd be nothing more than Chris Bosh Ultra Lite.

NapTonius Monk
03-10-2011, 07:35 PM
I just think this is a tough stretch that needs to be weathered. Maybe a Larry Bird pep talk would do the trick.

NapTonius Monk
03-10-2011, 07:47 PM
Sigh...I miss Reggie Miller.

vnzla81
03-10-2011, 07:56 PM
Not as overrated as Dunleavy ........

Roaming Gnome
03-10-2011, 09:33 PM
It seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all?

This line will live in infamy here on PD... Or, I will try to make it that way!

luis3ep
03-10-2011, 10:55 PM
he's overrated in the sense as he was viewed, and sadly by some people still IS viewed as the face of the franchise when A.) he's average at best defensively. B.) He isn't a leader of "his" team C.) he's like reggie miller in the sense that they are almost like scared to dunk, despite Granger being taller and more athletic. D.) disappears frequently during games. he's good and all, but i think a tad overrated.

Anthem
05-26-2011, 03:32 PM
:bump:

What a great thread.

croz24
05-26-2011, 03:36 PM
pacersdigest would have you think danny was a top 10-20 player in the league. homerism is what you get on message boards like this.

ilive4sports
05-26-2011, 03:41 PM
pacersdigest would have you think danny was a top 10-20 player in the league. homerism is what you get on message boards like this.

I'm one of Danny's biggest supporters and don't think he is top 10-20. I bet most people here don't think that actually.

mattie
05-26-2011, 03:44 PM
pacersdigest would have you think danny was a top 10-20 player in the league. homerism is what you get on message boards like this.

Not a single boarder on this forum has said that or believes that. So. I guess you're just trolling then?

vnzla81
05-26-2011, 03:52 PM
Not as overrated as Dunleavy ........

This :)

Pacersalltheway10
05-26-2011, 03:56 PM
He's not overrated right now. Most pacers fans here would say that he isn't giving it his all.

BRushWithDeath
05-26-2011, 04:02 PM
:bump:

What a great thread.

Why?

The mood has collectively cooled on Granger since 2009. When the thread was originated, he was absolutely overrated. Now? Not by most.

Shade
05-26-2011, 04:20 PM
If anything, Danny is underrated these days.

Infinite MAN_force
05-26-2011, 04:28 PM
Why?

The mood has collectively cooled on Granger since 2009. When the thread was originated, he was absolutely overrated. Now? Not by most.

You could probably argue he was overrated in 2009 and he is underrated currently, has more to do with the average fan base and their fickle attention spans toward players. He is a good player, ideally a #2 scorer type, but far from elite. You can't argue with his consistency though, he was the ONLY player with consistent production through our playoff series, it would have been an absolute murder without him.

spazzxb
05-26-2011, 04:35 PM
Danny Granger is a very good player. Right now. He still has a chance of being a great player by next year.

Right now I see a guy who is a pretty good shooter from 3 and from mid range, who can shoot off the dribble in traffic, who can drive and get fouled, who hits almost 90% of his free throws, and now a days can also find people for a few assists a game. He can also rebound well and block shots and grab a steal a game. His FG%s are solid. He's a good (not great) defender (who can have lapses). He's doing all of this and averaging 25ppg with the opponent's defense trained almost completely on him every night because Dunleavy isn't playing. That's a very good player.

If he can continue to develop his handles in the summer time, he could become a great player if he rises above mediocrity in that area.

I would say he's neither over or underrated at this point.

I would say he is both overrated and underrated depending on who your paying attention to.:-)

ilive4sports
05-26-2011, 04:51 PM
I really don't find anything wrong with what Hicks said. Its pretty damn accurate.

graphic-er
05-26-2011, 04:54 PM
Not a single boarder on this forum has said that or believes that. So. I guess you're just trolling then?

I would actually tend to put him in the top 20, in the 17-20 range for sure. Main reason is that alot of the players one might put above Danny Granger are actually playing with other similarly skilled players while Danny is going it alone. He does not have anybody on this team than can make him look better. That is just not the case with half the stars around this league. So for me a Danny Granger is who gets double teamed by the #1 seed in the playoffs and still averages 20+ a game is easily a top 20 player.

But i do recognize that there are alot of players in the league who are also the same caliber as Danny so I think in that 15-25 range its very subjective because many of those spots you could swap names around and no would notice, But since Danny does it with no help, I definitely place him in the upper teens.

spazzxb
05-26-2011, 04:59 PM
I really don't find anything wrong with what Hicks said. Its pretty damn accurate.

I agree

Trophy
05-26-2011, 05:11 PM
I agree with what Hicks had said.

At this point, Danny is known player. Not like in 2009 when he was doing a lot and still went unnoticed up until All-Star weekend. He's looked at as the "leader/star" of this team.

I like Danny. He's a great person, he's academically intelligent, and a solid player.

Danny doesn't have enough to be a sole leader. He's a good shooter, but he lacks a lot of the things you'd want in a leader. I'm not talking about being vocal, but he tends to take shots he feels obligated to take and clearly isn't comfortable.

I've been saying a team like Memphis would be the best place for Danny and Rudy Gay would do very well here. Both teams would get value that would contribute greatly towards the team chemistry and get what they really need.

Will Galen
05-26-2011, 05:16 PM
Not a single boarder on this forum has said that or believes that. So. I guess you're just trolling then?

I don't know about now, but when Danny was averaging 24 and 25 points a game, I had the opinion a lot of us thought he was a star. I think most of us think he's stepped back, not up.

mattie
05-26-2011, 05:33 PM
I don't know about now, but when Danny was averaging 24 and 25 points a game, I had the opinion a lot of us thought he was a star. I think most of us think he's stepped back, not up.

Sure.

Some people on here probably think he's a little better than he is. Some think he's a little worse. But of almost all the topics that this board is polarized on, Danny I don't think is one of them. For the most part the majority of the board understands who Danny is and acknowledges his weaknesses.

We could argue over and over on what his actual ranking is, but almost as a whole the entire board feels we need a true all star to play with Danny.

Edit- Also, I was just letting croz get under my skin. Literally every one of his posts is negative.

Will Galen
05-26-2011, 05:33 PM
I would actually tend to put him in the top 20, in the 17-20 range for sure. Main reason is that alot of the players one might put above Danny Granger are actually playing with other similarly skilled players while Danny is going it alone. He does not have anybody on this team than can make him look better. That is just not the case with half the stars around this league. So for me a Danny Granger is who gets double teamed by the #1 seed in the playoffs and still averages 20+ a game is easily a top 20 player.

But i do recognize that there are alot of players in the league who are also the same caliber as Danny so I think in that 15-25 range its very subjective because many of those spots you could swap names around and no would notice, But since Danny does it with no help, I definitely place him in the upper teens.

DANG! I actually . . . well . . . mostly agree with you.

My ONLY problem with Danny is he gets tied up or loses the ball to much when driving the lane. He just stops. When you're double and triple teamed you have to learn to do something with the ball. He needs to learn to hit a floater, and go to his step back jumper when that happens.

It's good that he doesn't force things, but even a bad shot is better than getting the ball stolen or tied up. That had to happen a lot for ME to notice.

I do think if he gets some help we'll see Danny's efficiency and points per game go back up. If that happens I know I'll think Danny's at least an all star again.

And one more thing. Danny made the all star team and only 20 players do that. So I'm not the only one that thought Danny was a top 20 player back then. Plus I think he can be again!

Pacer Fan
05-26-2011, 05:41 PM
Sure.

Some people on here probably think he's a little better than he is. Some think he's a little worse. But of almost all the topics that this board is polarized on, Danny I don't think is one of them. For the most part the majority of the board understands who Danny is and acknowledges his weaknesses.

We could argue over and over on what his actual ranking is, but almost as a whole the entire board feels we need a true all star to play with Danny.

Edit- Also, I was just letting croz get under my skin. Literally every one of his posts is negative.

What we need is 2 more all stars so we can have a big 3!

The Jackson shimmy
05-26-2011, 05:57 PM
At best, I'm a lukewarm DG fan. I just went thru a top-50 list. I
counted 22 guys who are clearly better, another 5-6 who have
been and may still be, but are old enough to make it questionable.
And then another 10-12 who are essentially DG's equal (depending on
perspective, some or many may rank above DG).

In sum, I'd say he's somewhere in the 25-40 range.

Given that he plays SF, the easiest spot to fill in the NBA, I'd say that
his 'value' is in the mid-30's range.

Pacer Fan
05-26-2011, 05:59 PM
DANG! I actually . . . well . . . mostly agree with you.

My ONLY problem with Danny is he gets tied up or loses the ball to much when driving the lane. He just stops. When you're double and triple teamed you have to learn to do something with the ball. He needs to learn to hit a floater, and go to his step back jumper when that happens.

It's good that he doesn't force things, but even a bad shot is better than getting the ball stolen or tied up. That had to happen a lot for ME to notice.

I do think if he gets some help we'll see Danny's efficiency and points per game go back up. If that happens I know I'll think Danny's at least an all star again.

And one more thing. Danny made the all star team and only 20 players do that. So I'm not the only one that thought Danny was a top 20 player back then. Plus I think he can be again!

Danny averages 2.0 T.O. per game. Danny has a very high rate of touching the ball on possesions and he turns the bal over to much? Really.

Lebron avg. 3.3, Wade averages 3.6, Gay avg. 2.3, Iggy avg. 2.4, Kobe avg. 2.9.

Pacer Fan
05-26-2011, 06:01 PM
At best, I'm a lukewarm DG fan. I just went thru a top-50 list. I
counted 22 guys who are clearly better, another 5-6 who have
been and may still be, but are old enough to make it questionable.
And then another 10-12 who are essentially DG's equal (depending on
perspective, some or many may rank above DG).

In sum, I'd say he's somewhere in the 25-40 range.

Given that he plays SF, the easiest spot to fill in the NBA, I'd say that
his 'value' is in the mid-30's range.

come on...Post your list then...k

Justin Tyme
05-26-2011, 06:17 PM
I think most of us think he's stepped back, not up.


I'd say you are correct. I believe the word regressed has been used in describing Granger since his Allstar year.

Justin Tyme
05-26-2011, 06:19 PM
[QUOTE=mattie;1242043]Sure.

almost as a whole the entire board feels we need a true all star to play with Danny. /QUOTE]


OR 2 more players the caliber of Granger.

PaulGeorge24
05-26-2011, 07:39 PM
He's not overrated but I think people forget about his age. He wasn't a one-and-done product and has a youthful appearance. Even I can't believe he's 28 years of age, seven years older than Paul George.

Rogco
05-26-2011, 07:45 PM
I'm not sure if Danny is over rated, because I'm not sure he's that highly rated. IMO his strengths are he's a very good scorer, fairly athletic, good at drawing fouls and great foul shooter, excellent 3 point shot. Weaknesses: He turns the ball over a lot, get's a lot of his shots blocked, plays poor defense, can't go Iso, is lazy on defense (he's not bad on defense, just lazy. He blames other people instead of himself for his defensive lapses) and he is NOT clutch. In the last five minutes of the first game against Chicago he scored 0 points. In the last five minutes of the second game against Chicago he scored 0 points. Two close games we should / could have won, and our best player who the plays are being run for can't score.

I'm in the trade Granger if we can get something good in return camp. The NBA is not about loyalty, it's about paychecks and winning, and there are other types of players that would help our team more. His stats and his hustle have both declined over the last 2 years, and it might be best for the team and the player to part ways. Also, I don't think he's good for the locker room. I don't think he's a hard enough worker and that he shed's responsibility, not traits to have in our senior leader.

PacerHound
05-26-2011, 07:57 PM
He is what he is. What you see is what you have and in my opinion what you are going to get going forward. Some are expecting him to get better. I think he has peaked. If I recall correctly Bird said at a press conference after the season he thought Danny had regressed a little.

Don't misunderstand. I think he if a fine player, a good offensive player. I am not knocking him. I think he may even look better next year than this year even if we do nothing by way of free agency, trades, draft picks, whatever but it will be because the team has gotten better (my opinion) making him look better.

All just my opinion. I am glad he is a Pacer. I just think he has peaked.

mikeyism
05-26-2011, 08:19 PM
Danny Granger is a top 5 SF..hands down Lebron, Carmelo and Durant IMHO would be an upgrade, and maybe Paul Pierce. In the big scheme of things the SF pack in the league is fairly weak these days. There are about 20 players I would take over DG in a 1-for-1 swap.

The weakest part of his game seems to be when he has to create his own shot. This wasn't as big of a problem back in 2009, but our ball movement has really fallen off since then. If only we could talk Mark Jackson out of retirement!

Scot Pollard
05-26-2011, 08:22 PM
No.

It's pretty funny that the person who posted this thread can't even post anymore.

Looks like a troll to me.

Pacersalltheway10
05-26-2011, 09:21 PM
Sure.

Some people on here probably think he's a little better than he is. Some think he's a little worse. But of almost all the topics that this board is polarized on, Danny I don't think is one of them. For the most part the majority of the board understands who Danny is and acknowledges his weaknesses.

We could argue over and over on what his actual ranking is, but almost as a whole the entire board feels we need a true all star to play with Danny.

Edit- Also, I was just letting croz get under my skin. Literally every one of his posts is negative.

This.

Major Cold
05-26-2011, 09:38 PM
WetBob on Danny Granger It seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all?


This topic gives me a headache.

Anthem
05-26-2011, 09:46 PM
He turns the ball over a lot, gets a lot of his shots blocked
For the first half, you're incorrect.
For the second, I'm going to need a link.

vnzla81
05-26-2011, 10:02 PM
He is overrated on PD for sure, some here wouldn't trade the guy for Dhoward.

Ramitt
05-26-2011, 10:16 PM
He is overrated on PD for sure, some here wouldn't trade the guy for Dhoward.

There is the mistake you and others make, one or two wouldn't and you try to pretend PD is like the borg and all share the opinion. That gets tiresome on message boards.

Hicks
05-27-2011, 12:02 AM
I really don't find anything wrong with what Hicks said. Its pretty damn accurate.

It's interesting to read that again, that as January of 2009. Wow, 2 1/2 years ago already.

I still stand by what I wrote, more or less, though now it's pretty obvious Danny isn't going to improve any further.

But that just means he's "only" a very good, not great, player.

I still prefer to add pieces to go with him, rather than trading him away. I'd only advocate it if I thought it was a steal or as part of a package for a great player.

Bball
05-27-2011, 12:33 AM
It's interesting to read that again, that as January of 2009. Wow, 2 1/2 years ago already.

I still stand by what I wrote, more or less, though now it's pretty obvious Danny isn't going to improve any further.



I don't know about that... The problem is that somewhere along the line Granger seemed to lose some fire. Not that his skills declined or that injuries took over. His intensity and passion slipped, his attitude changed (on the court), and so it doesn't just seem a matter of him plateauing as a player that's led to the question marks that now arise when his name is mentioned.

So, figure out the reason for the attitude change and fix it and then let's see where he is in regards to using his skills and the veteran savvy acquired by having all this game time under his belt.

spreedom
05-27-2011, 01:43 AM
I don't believe he has any presence in the mind of the casual fan, so in that regard he is underrated.

I think there are some people here that think he can be the best player on a contending team, so in that regard he is overrated.

There are some people here that think he is good enough to be the third best player on a contending team, and in that regard I agree.

ilive4sports
05-27-2011, 02:37 AM
He is overrated on PD for sure, some here wouldn't trade the guy for Dhoward.

I haven't read one post that has ever said anything near that.

Eleazar
05-27-2011, 03:55 AM
Granger has the ability to be a top 3 SF in this league. I can only say LeBron and Durant are better, and he is every bit as good as Melo and Pierce. For whatever reason mentally he has fallen off, and this is where peoples problems with him begin. He no longer gives an adequate amount of effort on the defensive end night in and night out, and his shot selection has been crap recently. He still has the skill he had back when he averaged 25ppg, was an all-star, and there were arguments by non-Pacer fans of whether or not he was as good as LeBron he just doesn't seem to care enough though.

croz24
05-27-2011, 04:03 AM
Not a single boarder on this forum has said that or believes that. So. I guess you're just trolling then?

yup, a troll who's been here 6 years longer than you... you obviously haven't been around for our discussions in the past on where pd thought granger ranked in the nba or who we would or would not trade granger for.

Constellations
05-27-2011, 04:12 AM
pacersdigest would have you think danny was a top 10-20 player in the league. homerism is what you get on message boards like this.



yup, a troll who's been here 6 years longer than you

:picardriker:

croz24
05-27-2011, 04:19 AM
another facepalm from a member who wasn't on the board to counter the entire boards lovefest for danny 2, 3, 4 years ago where many truly wldn't trade danny straight up for a chris paul, dwight howard, carmelo anthony, blake griffin, kevin durant, derrick rose type player. why do i know these happened, because i was banned for suggesting we should trade danny for things like the #1 overall pick to draft rose and was blasted for it.

Constellations
05-27-2011, 05:28 AM
another facepalm from a member who wasn't on the board to counter the entire boards lovefest for danny 2, 3, 4 years ago where many truly wldn't trade danny straight up for a chris paul, dwight howard, carmelo anthony, blake griffin, kevin durant, derrick rose type player. why do i know these happened, because i was banned for suggesting we should trade danny for things like the #1 overall pick to draft rose and was blasted for it.

:picard:

xIndyFan
05-27-2011, 05:30 AM
Granger has the ability to be a top 3 SF in this league. I can only say LeBron and Durant are better, and he is every bit as good as Melo and Pierce. For whatever reason mentally he has fallen off, and this is where peoples problems with him begin. He no longer gives an adequate amount of effort on the defensive end night in and night out, and his shot selection has been crap recently. He still has the skill he had back when he averaged 25ppg, was an all-star, and there were arguments by non-Pacer fans of whether or not he was as good as LeBron he just doesn't seem to care enough though.

i think the 'three year plan' thing has, if not beaten danny down, has effected his game some. Hopefully he will start playing more like his playoff self rather than his regular season self going forward. There are lots of little reasons/excuses that could explain danny's lack of progress this year and last. Some of those questions should be answered next year. The pacers should have a decent team with an expectation of a good season. Let's see if Danny comes out with more fire and better execution before writing him off.

croz24
05-27-2011, 05:39 AM
For the first half, you're incorrect.
For the second, I'm going to need a link.

granger was tied for 27th in the league in turnovers per game at 2.6. which is actually fairly high considering how little granger touches the ball compared to the average nba pg or players like lebron, wade, howard, ellis, etc. also, granger actually ranked 7th this year in the nba in terms of the amount of his shots blocked at 102 blocks against. based on a % this doesn't rank towards the top, but in terms of total of his shots blocked it does.

turnovers...
http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Turnovers.jsp?league=00&season=22010&conf=OVERALL&position=0&splitType=9&splitScope=GAME&qualified=N&yearsExp=-1&splitDD=

blocks against...
http://www.hoopdata.com/scoringstats.aspx?team=%25&type=tot&posi=%25&yr=2011&gp=0&mins=20

vnzla81
05-27-2011, 07:37 AM
There is the mistake you and others make, one or two wouldn't and you try to pretend PD is like the borg and all share the opinion. That gets tiresome on message boards.

Yep, only one or two people ....... :rolleyes:

Speed
05-27-2011, 08:11 AM
Danny is an excellent scorer. I wish he was the best player on a great team, maybe doing well in the playoffs will let him take the next step. What I mean is, he now has an idea of what it takes. I give him tons of credit for stepping up against Chicago. I didn't think he had it in him, honestly.

That goes to me thinking he's underated, at this point. We want him to do the things he's not doing, which is understandable, but the book isn't done being written on him.

Can he do it?? I don't know, I'm starting to have hope after the playoffs. If you asked me in January, I would have said no, not even possible.

Danny has to start to understand now, what it means to be an elite player, then we have to see if he has that next level as even a possibility.

This will sounds simplistic, but I think its the key to him moving forward. Can he make others around him better? Thats the key. Which leads to the question, can he? It means this, to me.

1.) Make others around you better - he has to get smarter to do so. How many times does he drive 1 on 3 when Hansbrough is open on the baseline? Defensively, how many times has he lost his man when he doesn't have the ball and gives up an offensive rebound? It's a mental mindset in doing ALL of the little things ALL the time. It's not that he's selfish, he's not, its a deeper understanding of the game that comes to some with age. Some guys never get it. It's not all his fault, he's been surrounding in recent years by guys who aren't good, guys he couldn't trust. For him to help his team, the best option WAS 1 on 3 or a early 3 in the shot clock. Not now, not with this group. Not accept being a great scorer only. If Danny can attain the rarity of making players around him better, that IS the next step, imo.

2.) Ceiling of abilities - Can he become good enough to be a go-to guy at the end of games. That doesn't mean score, it doesn't mean have one move in the step back jumper. It means can he elevate his game to where he has to be doubled or he's going to score? It applies to defensively too. Can he be disciplined enough to have a fitness level that allows him to play dynamic hard defense all game and also have the energy to be the offensive weapon. Danny may not have this ability as a ceiling. I don't think we know. I think of Bird and Rodman, who would runs steps after games/practice, so that they could eliminate fatigue as a deciding factor in games. I'm not saying Danny isn't in shape, he is, but he needs to be able to physically allow himself a chance to impact a game on both ends of the floor, the entire time. Thats different. Danny needs to reach his ceiling for his abilites, keep pushing to attain that rare level.

I want to put leadership as 3rd, but I think if he can accomplish the first two things, he'll be leading by actions. Really a pretty meaningful way to do it.

I've rambled, but I've always thought you should be wary of players that look great on bad teams, Danny needs to not be this anymore. He needs to be a great player on a good team. I guess we'll see if he's willing and if he's capable.

I said I thought he was underated, but maybe he's just properly rated. It's like Bill Parcells says, you are what you are. Right now, he's the best player on a 37 win team, hopefully theres more.

Rogco
05-27-2011, 08:51 AM
For the first half, you're incorrect.
For the second, I'm going to need a link.

Hi Anthem,

Calling me out made me check my stats, and you're basically right. His turnover per usage rate is really pretty good, and while his block % is above the league average, it's not high either, though it is one of the highest on the team (I think 3rd). Actually looking through all the stats on Granger made me realize they are pretty good. The biggest downside is that his offensive stats have gone down the last two years, while turnovers, shots blocked etc have gone up.

Pacer Fan
05-27-2011, 10:47 AM
IMO

As I Mentioned acouple months ago, Danny will be there when it counts and He is / was one of the most consistant players in the playoffs so far and he did against the best defensive team.

There is no doubt in my mind that the coaching staff in the past has asked him to tone down his game abit. This is a young team and in order to get a team to compete and grow, Danny cannot be the main focal point. For every play that is ran through Danny is one less for someone else to grow. We know what Danny is capable of. We seen him step it up in the playoffs and looked like his old self. If he plays his rear off all season, that will not be good and in the past wouldn't had made a difference (in wins) except raising his personal stock. To me Danny is a stiff athelete, not nimble, so he will not make extreme athletic plays that people want to see. He will always have a tough time with double / triple teams, all the more reason he needs more offensive threats around him. But this shouldn't make him underrated. People just want to have him do things that he can't do. He does not carry a contract of Kobe and others in that upper tier. So why put him up there? Just to turn around and beat him down where he is suppose to be anyways, then say he is overrated? I would take Danny, his skill set and contract over Melo, his skill set and contract any day. This doesn't mean Danny has to like avg. more pts per game tho! But it does mean that he should have better supporting cast for the money saved between the 2 contracts and thats not Danny's fault.

Ownagedood
05-27-2011, 11:10 AM
Meh. I would say he is slightly overrated.. Just because im thinking people probably dont think as highly of him as a lot of us do. I think he is quite overrated around here as Pacer fans.. But thats because he is our "leader" and best player.. Teams tend to be more protective of the guy that fits that description for their specific team. I would prefer we trade him because he is not quite the leader that we need him to be. He really isn't clutch, though he has pulled through on a couple occasions. He is a good scorer for sure, but not a great one, put someone like a focused Bron on him and he gets practically shut down.. (Not really a fair comparison though, very tough matchup for anyone) He gets a few rebounds here and there, enough. His defense lacks a lot of the time, though he is a capable defender. He also isnt a great dribbler, but against a weak defender can get to the hoop everytime. Thats my thoughts.. Don't hate him, but soon enough he wont be the best player and i honestly think if we make a deal sending him out, we wont miss him as much for his skills as we think we might.

The Sleeze
05-27-2011, 12:48 PM
Here are the rankings for Granger compared to other FORWARDS ONLY, not against the whole NBA.
http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Assists.jsp?league=00&season=22010&conf=OVERALL&position=2&splitType=9&splitScope=GAME&qualified=N&yearsExp=-1&splitDD=All%20Teams

Granger's Rankings-

Rank Category Value

21 Assts/Gm 2.6
34 Blocks/Gm .78
26 Efficiency 17.7
17 Pts/Reb/Assts 28.5
50 Rebounds 5.4
8 Pts/Gm 20.5
18 Steals/Gm 1.13
8 Turnovers/Gm 2.6 (he is actually 8th worst, if that makes sense)
5 Total Turns. 206 (again, 5th worst)

Rogco
05-27-2011, 01:05 PM
I'm slightly confused about how people view Granger's play in the playoffs. People seem to think he was great, but his defense was middling to poor throughout, and he was absolutely terrible at the end of games. For being the guy we run our offense through in clutch time, one could argue Granger IS the reason we lost the first two games.

I thought he shot well and his decision making for the first 3 1/2 quarters was good, but all things considered an average playoff showing at best!

ksuttonjr76
05-27-2011, 01:31 PM
For what the FO pays Granger, we're getting good vaule for him, and his salary gives Indiana room to acquire better players.

From there, it's your opinion to believe whether or not salary cap is overrated.

aaronb
05-27-2011, 01:46 PM
He's probably best suited to be a 3rd option.

A guy who can play off of a low post scoring big, and another wing who can create his own shot.

Not a franchise guy, not a good #1 option.

As long as you have reasonable expectations, he is a completely reasonable asset.

Anthem
05-27-2011, 01:47 PM
because i was banned for suggesting we should trade danny for things like the #1 overall pick to draft rose and was blasted for it.
Gonna need a link on that. You've suggested many times trading Danny for a top-5 pick, but I don't remember a situation where a #1 pick was for sale where anybody would have said we shouldn't go for it.

Anthem
05-27-2011, 01:58 PM
Hi Anthem,

Calling me out made me check my stats, and you're basically right. His turnover per usage rate is really pretty good, and while his block % is above the league average, it's not high either, though it is one of the highest on the team (I think 3rd). Actually looking through all the stats on Granger made me realize they are pretty good. The biggest downside is that his offensive stats have gone down the last two years, while turnovers, shots blocked etc have gone up.
Yep... he definitely lost some fire the longer he played ObieBall.

I want to see what happens under Vogel.

ksuttonjr76
05-27-2011, 02:11 PM
Yep... he definitely lost some fire the longer he played ObieBall.

I want to see what happens under Vogel.

Honestly, that's really what I want to see. Are we really a "bad" team, or was we underperforming under JOB?

croz24
05-27-2011, 02:14 PM
Gonna need a link on that. You've suggested many times trading Danny for a top-5 pick, but I don't remember a situation where a #1 pick was for sale where anybody would have said we shouldn't go for it.

i've tried going back that far to find old posts and must not know what i'm doing b/c i can't seem to find posts from 2+ years ago... and these were hypothetical discussions where it was would you trade granger for player x when player x wasn't exactly on the market.

Rogco
05-27-2011, 02:16 PM
Yep... he definitely lost some fire the longer he played ObieBall.

I want to see what happens under Vogel.

Good point (and someone had a good point above as well). When salary and coach are taken into account, I think there are a lot of reasons to be positive about Granger. I'm not sure Vogel is the coach for Granger, but anything has to be better than O'Brian.

While I've been more in the trade Granger if we can get a good deal for him, there are actually very few moves the Pacers can make with Granger that would make me happy based on talent or contracts. I wouldn't mind a package trade for one of the top picks (I trust if we do that then the Pacers brain trust are sold that a player could be truly special), which could provide us with young cheap talent for years. I also wouldn't mind a trade for Eric Gordon with George then moving to the 3. (before you ask, a reasonable trade would be something along the lines of Granger and Hibbert for Gordon and Kaman. Feel free to wiggle the trade at will, but something like that would work.)

Eleazar
05-27-2011, 03:56 PM
I'm slightly confused about how people view Granger's play in the playoffs. People seem to think he was great, but his defense was middling to poor throughout, and he was absolutely terrible at the end of games. For being the guy we run our offense through in clutch time, one could argue Granger IS the reason we lost the first two games.

I thought he shot well and his decision making for the first 3 1/2 quarters was good, but all things considered an average playoff showing at best!

I agree,, but if you are comparing it to how he played in the regular season it was much improved. The way he played in the playoffs should be our minimum expectations for him during the regular season.

ilive4sports
05-28-2011, 03:21 AM
I just looked at some of the lineups Danny has played with in years past. These are the major minute lineups:
2007:
Diener/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/Foster
Tinsley/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/O'Neal
Murray/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/Foster
2008:
Ford/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/Rasho
Jack/Rush(r)/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert(r)
2009:
Watson/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert
Watson/Rush/D. Jones/Granger/Hibbert

LeBron James wouldn't do much with that roster. I'm not saying Granger is near LeBron's level, but come on, look at those rosters! Look at the point guards alone: Diener, Tinsley, Murray, Ford, Jack and Watson... Jack is by far the best one and isn't really even a starting PG in the league. Dunleavy plays out of position. Murphy, we all know what Murphy is. And the different centers haven't been anything to write how about. I love Hibbert and Foster, but Hibbert still has a ways to go and Foster is great when we can afford to have a guy who isn't an option on offense.

I don't really think it is fair to judge Danny on how good he can be when the roster has been this bad. This year is finally a year where our roster looks respectable at least. But our guys are young and we didn't have a true second option this year. The next season seems like it may be the best judgement of Danny just because we are giving him a team to work with.

Ownagedood
05-28-2011, 10:49 AM
I just looked at some of the lineups Danny has played with in years past. These are the major minute lineups:
2007:
Diener/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/Foster
Tinsley/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/O'Neal
Murray/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/Foster
2008:
Ford/Dunleavy/Granger/Murphy/Rasho
Jack/Rush(r)/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert(r)
2009:
Watson/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert
Watson/Rush/D. Jones/Granger/Hibbert

LeBron James wouldn't do much with that roster. I'm not saying Granger is near LeBron's level, but come on, look at those rosters! Look at the point guards alone: Diener, Tinsley, Murray, Ford, Jack and Watson... Jack is by far the best one and isn't really even a starting PG in the league. Dunleavy plays out of position. Murphy, we all know what Murphy is. And the different centers haven't been anything to write how about. I love Hibbert and Foster, but Hibbert still has a ways to go and Foster is great when we can afford to have a guy who isn't an option on offense.

I don't really think it is fair to judge Danny on how good he can be when the roster has been this bad. This year is finally a year where our roster looks respectable at least. But our guys are young and we didn't have a true second option this year. The next season seems like it may be the best judgement of Danny just because we are giving him a team to work with.

Look at what the Cavs had... I would pick our team with LBJ to win against the cavs teams with LBJ.. Tinsley was a good player, just crazy off the court. Rookie of the year. The other guards aren't starter material, except one year you happened to leave out.. DC is definitely a starter in this league.. But what good PG has LBJ had other than one year of Williams and a half year with Bibby? JO was also an All-Star and Reggie was also here.. Murphey is a nice weapon to have, over paid, but underrated talent. All that said, a superstar makes plays himself. Look at the Cavs now, Pacers wouldn't be near that bad without Danny, though we would be worse.

Not trying to attack you like it probably sounds, but come on. The Cavs didnt have much after Lebron.. Granger cant do things himself, because he isn't good enough. Pacers have a better overal team than a lot of teams out there.. But we dont have a closer or a dominant leader. That as well as being young and unpolished is the difference.

ilive4sports
05-28-2011, 03:55 PM
Look at what the Cavs had... I would pick our team with LBJ to win against the cavs teams with LBJ.. Tinsley was a good player, just crazy off the court. Rookie of the year. The other guards aren't starter material, except one year you happened to leave out.. DC is definitely a starter in this league.. But what good PG has LBJ had other than one year of Williams and a half year with Bibby? JO was also an All-Star and Reggie was also here.. Murphey is a nice weapon to have, over paid, but underrated talent. All that said, a superstar makes plays himself. Look at the Cavs now, Pacers wouldn't be near that bad without Danny, though we would be worse.

Not trying to attack you like it probably sounds, but come on. The Cavs didnt have much after Lebron.. Granger cant do things himself, because he isn't good enough. Pacers have a better overal team than a lot of teams out there.. But we dont have a closer or a dominant leader. That as well as being young and unpolished is the difference.

I purposely left the most recent season out because I said our roster is finally respectable. It's much better than the three previous seasons. Two years of Mo Williams is better than any two years that Granger had. Mo Williams is better than anyone Granger has played with... Sure he got a pity All Star appearance, but no one Danny has played with has come close to getting one.

By the time Danny has been the best player on this team, Reggie was gone and JO was too. The last year he spent with JO, O'Neal wasn't near his All Star level. Tinsely was good as a rookie and then just went downhill. And in that 07-08 season he played a total of 39 games. Troy Murphy is underrated? What? He's so underrated that he couldn't get off the bench in New Jersey or Boston. And he was our starting PF here...

What pg do you want to start, Mo Williams, Jarret Jack, TJ Ford, Earl Watson, Jamaal Tinsley, Flip Murray or Travis Diener? Mo Williams is the right answer.

Do you want Troy Murphy to start or Jamison or Varejao? I wouldn't take Murphy over either of those guys.

Through 08/09 Ilgauskas was a better center than any of the Foster/Hibbert/Rasho combo.

If you take the rosters before this seasons, they are terrible without Granger. Then riddle them with the injuries that the Cavs had this year too and they would be pretty damn close to the Cavs record this year.

Finally this past season our roster was respectable. A lot of that is because of bringing in DC and because our younger guys matured a bit. And those are also reasons why we will be better next year and give us a better read on how Danny can play on a team that is respectable. Looking at these past rosters, I'm embarrassed. I'm surprised we won as many games as we did.

Eleazar
05-28-2011, 05:11 PM
Personally I think all of those teams under achieved, and mostly because of JOB. Give them a half-decent coach and they make the playoffs.

oxxo
05-29-2011, 02:33 AM
Look at what the Cavs had... I would pick our team with LBJ to win against the cavs teams with LBJ.. Tinsley was a good player, just crazy off the court. Rookie of the year. The other guards aren't starter material, except one year you happened to leave out.. DC is definitely a starter in this league.. But what good PG has LBJ had other than one year of Williams and a half year with Bibby? JO was also an All-Star and Reggie was also here.. Murphey is a nice weapon to have, over paid, but underrated talent. All that said, a superstar makes plays himself. Look at the Cavs now, Pacers wouldn't be near that bad without Danny, though we would be worse.

Not trying to attack you like it probably sounds, but come on. The Cavs didnt have much after Lebron.. Granger cant do things himself, because he isn't good enough. Pacers have a better overal team than a lot of teams out there.. But we dont have a closer or a dominant leader. That as well as being young and unpolished is the difference.

Please. This whole 'LBJ had no supporting cast in Cleveland' thing is complete BS. Yes compared to WADE AND BOSH he had nothing. The Cavs lost their focal point AND had massive injuries AND lost other players like Z/Shaq this year leading to their poor record.

xBulletproof
05-29-2011, 04:16 AM
Please. This whole 'LBJ had no supporting cast in Cleveland' thing is complete BS. Yes compared to WADE AND BOSH he had nothing. The Cavs lost their focal point AND had massive injuries AND lost other players like Z/Shaq this year leading to their poor record.

So you think if the Cavs kept Shaq, and Big Z, they'd have not sucked? Sorry, I can't picture it going that way.

cgehlhausen4
05-29-2011, 04:43 AM
It depends how you look at it. As a Pacer fan its easy to say he is overrated because we expect him to be gods gift to indiana. As a bystander I see a player who is really good. He is a top 25-30 player. If your looking at it as the people on ESPN recognizes him, he is underrated. For as good as he is he is never mentioned on TV. Basically what I am saying is hes an over average player surrounded by role players. You cant expect him to carry a team. He has the potential to be a great defender if he tries. He can shoot the ball but teams plan to keep him from getting good looks. He needs to go in stronger on rebounds hes a big guy. The one thing I dont get about danny is his lack of athletic ability. I believe he has it in him but hes afraid to use it. He is 6ft8. I would like to see him come driving in and just jam on someone. Ive seen him do it a couple times so i know its there, i think hes scared of the contact. He needs to excite the crowed. Come in strong and draw the foul. We need another legit scorer (OJ Mayo and Jr Smith/Jamaal Crawford) to help take pressure off him