PDA

View Full Version : Danny Granger - Superstardom



Spirit
01-08-2009, 07:32 PM
(One of my blogs I wrote for a different site)

Danny Granger has been absolutely amazing so far in this young season. Scoring nearly 26 points per game (currently), and carrying his team. Without him, the Pacers might be Thunder-like bad, considering we would also be without our second leading scorer last season, Mike Dunleavy (until just now).

Since Reggie Miller retired, this team has lacked a face, an identity (which would require a better team), and a leader. With Granger, we might just end up with all three. He certainly is showing he has the skills and leadership to be a franchise player, and is also developing a clutch mentality, as shown by his game winner over the Suns. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_mYPx9Vi2A)

It doesn't stop at scoring either. Lately, he has improved his passing and assist numbers, he averages 1.4 more this year, than last, with 3.5 per game. His past two games, he has had 6 and 5, while showing some skills while getting them. Some lead to turnovers when he tries too hard, but he will make those passes in time.

If he can consistently make big shots, and improve other facets of his game (passing and rebounding) he could end up a top 5-10 player in the NBA, in time. He's is only 25, so he has time to improve. I think a big step for him would be to make the all-star game this year, and I think he will. Coaches love players like him, and I think he could really contribute to the team. The only thing holding him back would be the team he is on, but I see improvement from this team, especially since the Pacers just got Dunleavy back.

Bottom line, I think he on his way to being a true Superstar, and I think he'll get there.

BlueNGold
01-08-2009, 10:30 PM
JGray may be right that he's headed there, but he still has an awful lot to prove.

The best Pacer in the last 20 years was Reggie Miller. No other Pacer, including Artest and JO, were all that close when it comes to competing at the highest level of the game...in the playoffs when the real stars shine. All other games are garbage time. While Artest caved mentally, JO became Kenyon Martin's wife. Only Reggie raised his level of production and led his team to the finals. It's really not even close and the history books have already been written.

Danny is now about to surpass Artest to become the 2nd best NBA Pacer, but even he has to look up and squint to see Reggie. Seriously, I love Granger but he has done nothing. Until he puts this team on his back and at least competes in the playoffs, he is no superstar.

GrangerRanger
01-08-2009, 11:28 PM
Superstars can carry a team. Let's put it this way, you take Lebron off the cavs and and swap him with Granger.. the pacers would be in the playoffs and the cavs would be struggling. :( I don't know if he'll ever ascend to that level.

Jimmy
01-09-2009, 12:44 AM
Looks like Granger will either be in 4th or tied for 4th in scoring average after dirk's 10 point night.

Infinite MAN_force
01-09-2009, 01:35 AM
Don't know if anyone saw this but the current poll question on ESPN in the NBA section is "Is Danny Granger a Franchise player?" 20,000 votes across the country and 60% say yes. They show results by state and he didn't lose a single state. I was kind of surprised...

FireTheCoach
01-09-2009, 06:43 AM
I'll say right now that Granny Danger has the ability to surpass Reggies status as the greatest Pacer of all time.

If he continues progessing in the manner that he has to this date, I've no doubt that he will be considered a better "complete" player than Reggie was.

Reggie brought this franchise back from the gates of the NBA graveyard.... and let me tell ya, it was headed back in that direction again. Danny Granger has stoked this citys passion again for the Pacers and that in itself is one helluva big accomplishment after what has happened over the last four years to our team.

JMO

ftc

Quis
01-09-2009, 07:38 AM
Reggie's Best Statistical Season vs Danny's Current Season

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/2294/86417305sy1.png

Unclebuck
01-09-2009, 09:21 AM
Superstar is a very rare player. In any given season there might be 4 or maybe 5. No DG will never be a superstar - he'll be a star and an allstar.

Right now I would say the following players are superstars - Lebron, Kobe, Wade, Duncan. Really I would stop right there. Sure Dwight Howard is on his way, but he's never played that well in the playoffs. Let me see how he does in this years playoffs and he might be a superstar.

Iverson and Shaq used to be - not anymore.

Chris Paul - probably is a superstar - OK, I'll put him in there. Garnett - that is a tough one - I don't know.

FireTheCoach
01-09-2009, 09:44 AM
I need to know the definition of a "superstar" as opposed to a "star".

Seems a bit silly to me actually.

A superstar must be someone that transcends the game, a person that has mass public appeal on the court and off. I would insist that to be classified a true "superstar" a player would need to possess name recognition even to those that dont follow the game of basketball.The only names I can think of would be Jordan and $haq.

Is Kobe a "superstar".... hmmmm, I'm not sure. The only thing he's known for off the court is a rape trial.

What about Bird... he's a legend on the basketball court but other than that he is just a hick from french lick. Is he a superstar.... depends on the definition I suppose.

Magic... probably had more overall star power than Bird but was he a "superstar"... maybe, again it must depend on the definition.

Thinking about the Lakers from the past... I would guess that Kareem actually was more of a superstar personality than either Bird or Magic. Kareem wasn't just a court icon but a cultural one as well during his heyday.

Nevertheless.... Danny Granger is a very special player regardless of how he might be classified in the future.

naptownmenace
01-09-2009, 12:03 PM
A superstar must be someone that transcends the game, a person that has mass public appeal on the court and off. I would insist that to be classified a true "superstar" a player would need to possess name recognition even to those that dont follow the game of basketball.The only names I can think of would be Jordan and $haq.



Based on your criteria I think that Bird, Magic, Jordan, Barkley, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron, DWade, TMac, Yao, and Garnett were/are all superstars. They all have or had huge public appeal on an off the court.

Bird, Magic, and Jordan were the 3 most easily recognized players in the world at the time that they played in the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games. They all had major shoe deals and they made buying basketball jerseys (and the NBA in general) popular.

In fact, all of the players above were/are global Superstars and although he might not deserve it, TMac is right up there because of his popularity (just look at the votes he's received for the All-Star Game this year).


Regarding Granger... it takes years for a player to become a Superstar. He's still in the rising star category with a lot of other players like Kevin Martin, Brandon Roy, and Chris Bosh. If he continues to play this way, and the Pacers become regular playoff contenders, and/or people in New York and China start rushing to the stores to buy Granger jerseys - then he'll have reached Superstar status!

Unclebuck
01-09-2009, 12:54 PM
Public appeal IMO doesn't make a superstar. A superstar player is one of the best players of all time (or on his way to being one of the best of alltime) and has a clear and direct impact on his team winning a ton of games and probably championship or two..Not easy to give a good definition, but you know a superstar when you see one. Bird, Magic, Michael, Duncan, Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Paul. Yeah it isn't that tough. And no, T-Mac isn't a superstar and neither is Yoa - neither are good enough, both are too injury prone and neither has won a playoff series.

Shade
01-09-2009, 12:59 PM
One thing is for certain; Danny's one of the biggest draft steals of all time.

FireTheCoach
01-09-2009, 02:13 PM
I'll still say that theres only been two true superstars come out of the NBA and thats Jordan and Shaq.

The others, Kobe, Garnett, Hakeem, TMac, DWade, Tim Duncan etc.... great players indeed, but I'll bet there isn't a yak herdsman in Tibet thats heard of any one of those guys. Probably can't say the same thing about Jordan or Shaq. They were/are popular/know beyond the bounderies of basketball/sports. Labeling someone a superstar is always going to be an issue open to debate due to it being totally subjective without a clear criteria.

Is doesn't matter to me if Granger is ever considered a "superstar" ... I'm content him just being who he is, thats plenty good enough for me.

ajbry
01-09-2009, 02:15 PM
Being dubbed a superstar isn't indicative of off-court status, it's basically the uppermost echelon of NBA players. If you're not bonafide top-6 then you don't belong in the discussion. The NBA has only a handful of superstars and around 30 stars.

Shade
01-09-2009, 02:15 PM
I'll still say that theres only been two true superstars come out of the NBA and thats Jordan and Shaq.

The others, Kobe, Garnett, Hakeem, TMac, DWade, Tim Duncan etc.... great players indeed, but I'll bet there isn't a yak herdsman in Tibet thats heard of any one of those guys. Probably can't say the same thing about Jordan or Shaq. They were/are popular/know beyond the bounderies of basketball/sports. Labeling someone a superstar is always going to be an issue open to debate due to it being totally subjective without a clear criteria.

Is doesn't matter to me if Granger is ever considered a "superstar" ... I'm content him just being who he is, thats plenty good enough for me.

I hope you're only referring to recent history.

Sollozzo
01-09-2009, 02:18 PM
By my count, Danny has scored under 20 points just FIVE times this season.

http://www.sportsline.com/nba/players/player/gamelogs/2008/555950

FireTheCoach
01-09-2009, 02:26 PM
I hope you're only referring to recent history.


well, would you consider Dave Lombardo a superstar?

Millions of heavy metal fans do... but if you don't listen to it then you probably never heard of him.

Same goes for Dwayne Wade.... you know the NBA so you know who he is, my grandmother doesn't pay attention to the NBA and I doubt she could pick him out of a photo. I pretty sure she knows who Jordan is and what he looks like though. I think therein lies the difference between 'star' and 'superstar'.

Shade
01-09-2009, 02:29 PM
Larry Bird?
Magic Johnson?

I also don't see how you can not call the likes of Walt Chamberlain and Oscar Robertson (among others) superstars, regardless of who has or hasn't heard of them.

Media saturation does not a great player make.

FireTheCoach
01-09-2009, 02:35 PM
Larry Bird?
Magic Johnson?

I also don't see how you can not call the likes of Walt Chamberlain and Oscar Robertson (among others) superstars, regardless of who has or hasn't heard of them.

Media saturation does not a great player make.

No, basketball skills make a great player... but media saturation does make the superstar.

Shade
01-09-2009, 02:36 PM
No, basketball skills make a great player... but media saturation does make the superstar.

I'll just have to disagree with you on that one.

I get what you're driving at, but I don't agree with it.

avoidingtheclowns
01-09-2009, 03:50 PM
i don't believe Danny is a superstar - i think he's starting to become a star and while i'm not nearly as confident as JayRedd, i think he should make the all-star team.

that being said, this was an interesting little thing from ESPN's NBA Today Podcast yesterday (1/8) when talking about the Pacers / Suns game (the section begins around the 13:56 mark and runs for a little over a minute).



Frank Dale: "Well he two games ago (Granger) had 35 points, last game 36, last night 37. So if you keep doing that out with my math skills in 20 games he's going to score 57 points."

Joe Mead: "By the end of the season hes going to be up around 80."

Frank Dale: "Its going to be really exciting. I think this is certainly a storyline to watch. One thing I would like to see from him, Id like to see him raise -- and again this is just being critical of someone who is a supreme talent, hes shooting 45.6% from the field. You look at how that compares to some of the other superstars in the league: Lebron 50.8%, Kobe 48.3%, D-Wade 47.9%. But obviously hes gonna take a lot of shot attempts cause hes by far the best player on this Indiana team. Currently ranks 18th in the player efficiency ratings but Danny Granger, if you dont know him yet -- which if you listen to this podcast we have to think that you do because we talk about him a lot -- if you dont know him yet certainly make yourself familiar with Danny Granger out of New Mexico."

http://search.espn.go.com/nba-today/audio/7
[visit the link and listen to the podcast from Jan 8, unfortunately that's the most direct link i think i can provide]



like i said, i think that's a bit of a stretch... but i found it interesting that some national media types, even if it isn't Marty Burns or Marc Stein, are referring to Danny as a superstar. even if i think it's not entirely accurate, it is certainly nice to hear.

Unclebuck
01-09-2009, 03:57 PM
Larry Bird?
Magic Johnson?

I also don't see how you can not call the likes of Walt Chamberlain and Oscar Robertson (among others) superstars, regardless of who has or hasn't heard of them.

Media saturation does not a great player make.

I'm just talking about the players I've seen

Peck
01-09-2009, 04:22 PM
I'll still say that theres only been two true superstars come out of the NBA and thats Jordan and Shaq.

The others, Kobe, Garnett, Hakeem, TMac, DWade, Tim Duncan etc.... great players indeed, but I'll bet there isn't a yak herdsman in Tibet thats heard of any one of those guys. Probably can't say the same thing about Jordan or Shaq. They were/are popular/know beyond the bounderies of basketball/sports. Labeling someone a superstar is always going to be an issue open to debate due to it being totally subjective without a clear criteria.

Is doesn't matter to me if Granger is ever considered a "superstar" ... I'm content him just being who he is, thats plenty good enough for me.


Wise words to which I will just say I totally agree.

IndySDExport
01-09-2009, 07:01 PM
I don't think you can call Danny a Superstar by any degree, but I do know this is the most I've enjoyed watching the pacer's since Reggie left and that's primarily due to Granger. Reggie wasn't a superstar either but he was the heart of this team. Danny is quickly filling that role better than anyone has since Reggie.

I was working late listening to the Pheonix game online. When Danny hit the three to win it, I instinctively started yelling Danny! Danny! Danny! I haven't done that in a long time. Now we just need to get this team back into the playoffs to carry on Reggie's legacy. I'm looking forward to Conseco Field House filling up with the same chant and giving Granger the prop's he deserves.

Danny! Danny! Danny!...

Shade
01-09-2009, 08:19 PM
I don't think you can call Danny a Superstar by any degree, but I do know this is the most I've enjoyed watching the pacer's since Reggie left and that's primarily due to Granger. Reggie wasn't a superstar either but he was the heart of this team. Danny is quickly filling that role better than anyone has since Reggie.

I was working late listening to the Pheonix game online. When Danny hit the three to win it, I instinctively started yelling Danny! Danny! Danny! I haven't done that in a long time. Now we just need to get this team back into the playoffs to carry on Reggie's legacy. I'm looking forward to Conseco Field House filling up with the same chant and giving Granger the prop's he deserves.

Danny! Danny! Danny!...

Ya gotta love the two-syllable names.

Reg-gie! Dan-ny!

:D

Kid Minneapolis
01-10-2009, 12:49 AM
In my mind...

A great player with high skill and notable (playoff?) accomplishments on the court would be "legend".

A good/great player with somewhat media saturation is a "star".

A good/great player with massive media saturation is a "superstar".

A legend can be a superstar, but doesn't have to be. A superstar can be a legend, but doesn't have to be.

The word "superstar" itself indicates "star" power, much like Hollywood "movie stars", who often don't possess as much skill, as they do media recognition. There are great players in this league who lack media saturation, like Tim Duncan, who in my mind is a legend, but not a superstar. Kobe is a superstar, LeBron is a superstar, because both of these guys have huge media saturation. You can also be both... a legend and a superstar. Jordan, Shaq, Magic. Bird is a tough one... he's definitely legend because of his skills and accomplishments on the court (hence the nickname "Legend"), but I never really got the feeling he clamored for the limelight, he was more of a reluctant recognizable media figure. LeBron is not a legend at this point, for the simple reason he's too young, his accomplishments are undefined at this point, but it's easy to see him becoming a legend down the road, if he wins the assumed NBA crown that he should eventually win. Kobe could be considered a legend, except he hasn't won without Shaq and I can't shake the feeling he's just a Jordan copy-cat. Still a helluva player, though, and probly a legend if you have to twist my arm. :)

Reggie, in my mind, was more legend than superstar, but Reggie *does* have some media recognition. He's at least a "star", and a "legend" in my mind.

Granger, right now, is neither. He's not a legend, nor a superstar. His career is too young and undefined at this point, and he's not exactly a tabloid/movie/endorsement-fixture, and probly isn't recognizable outside of Indianapolis. To be honest, I see him going down in history as a good, maybe great, player but he may never reach "legend" or "superstar" status. Maybe he proves me wrong, though. He's a damn good player, I'll give him that.

croz24
01-10-2009, 01:33 AM
still don't understand how dunleavy and granger are that much different as players. granger gets treated like a superstar, and many couldn't wait to trade dunleavy earlier. i just never understood the mindset on here regarding the two when they are essentially the same quality of player. if only the pacers could find a legit big man to go with the two...

Midcoasted
01-10-2009, 02:45 AM
still don't understand how dunleavy and granger are that much different as players. granger gets treated like a superstar, and many couldn't wait to trade dunleavy earlier. i just never understood the mindset on here regarding the two when they are essentially the same quality of player. if only the pacers could find a legit big man to go with the two...

Granger is more athletic but there's a certain smoothness and fluid motion to Dunleavy's game. I just see Granger as the more dominant player, but Dunleavy isn't anywhere close to run of the mill. I still can't believe people question his game. He is a pleasure to have out there 20 minutes a night and rising. Getting Daniels and Ford back would be nice heading into the home stretch.

Infinite MAN_force
01-11-2009, 04:18 AM
well, would you consider Dave Lombardo a superstar?

Millions of heavy metal fans do... but if you don't listen to it then you probably never heard of him.

Same goes for Dwayne Wade.... you know the NBA so you know who he is, my grandmother doesn't pay attention to the NBA and I doubt she could pick him out of a photo. I pretty sure she knows who Jordan is and what he looks like though. I think therein lies the difference between 'star' and 'superstar'.

A Slayer reference is usually the last thing I expect to see on Pacers Digest. Very nice... \m/

nerveghost
01-12-2009, 08:17 AM
I can't call DG a superstar yet - but I admit he's been pretty unstoppable all season. He needs a strong playoff performance to be truly recognized nationally as a force.

I will say this - DG seems to be gaining the respect of players and coaches - my hope is that this will manifest itself in the offseason when higher clout free agents are willing to consider coming to Indy because of Granger. Example - Garnett would have never considered Boston (a perennial loser) until Ray Allen signed there.

cinotimz
01-12-2009, 09:13 AM
still don't understand how dunleavy and granger are that much different as players. granger gets treated like a superstar, and many couldn't wait to trade dunleavy earlier. i just never understood the mindset on here regarding the two when they are essentially the same quality of player. if only the pacers could find a legit big man to go with the two...

Dunleavy is good. Granger is closer to being great than good. Dunleavy has, for the most part, maxed out his potential. One gets the feeling Danny still has some room to improve.

Individually, they are not that close. Dannys individual abilities on both ends are significantly greater than Mikes. Hes quicker, better leaper, more athletic which allows him to be a better defender-especially straight up. On the offensive end, Granger can definitely get his own shot-a better shot-more effectively than Dunleavy.

Bottom line is, IMO, Danny has the ability to impact the game on both ends significantly more than Mike.

count55
01-12-2009, 09:40 AM
Still don't understand why I can't be really happy with both Dunleavy and Granger.

Dunleavy was a better, more complete player than Danny last season, but Granger is now playing at a consistently higher level than Junior did. That being said, they play together well, and this team is better with both on the floor.