PDA

View Full Version : Granger vs. Bynum



Shade
01-09-2009, 05:36 PM
This is a question out of sheer curiosity. There has been a rather large man-crush on Andrew Bynum ever since the rumors of us trading JO for him surfaced. With Danny's emergence this season, combined with Bynum being solid, but not the monster so far that seemingly everyone expected him to be, I'm curious as to how many PDers would be willing to trade Granger for Bynum, today, if the offer was on the table? Forget contracts; just vote for whoever you would rather have as a Pacer.

vnzla81
01-09-2009, 05:37 PM
At this moment I would not trade Danny for anybody(maybe lebron):cool:

Coop
01-09-2009, 05:38 PM
I'm a huge fan of Bynum, and at the beginning of the year, I might have chosen AB. Danny has been playing out of his mind though. If he keeps on a multi-year pace even close to where he's at now, there aren't many players I would trade him for.

MillerTime
01-09-2009, 05:42 PM
At this moment I would not trade Danny for anybody(maybe lebron):cool:

Not trade Danny for anybody??

I would trade Danny for Lebron, Wade, Kobe, CP3, Bosh or Dwight in a heart-beat, thats a no brainer

But I would keep Danny over Bynum

Quis
01-09-2009, 05:45 PM
Give me a decade of Granger over 1.5 seasons of LeBron.

Dece
01-09-2009, 06:23 PM
All these Danny Granger love fest posts, I think there's like 4-5 going now, are starting to get a bit ridiculous. I understand we want something to be positive about since our record is total trash, but c'mon, seriously here guys, he's good, but if he was THAT damn good we wouldn't be 10 games under .500.

I just don't understand alllllll these different buzz posts like we're taking teams to task led by Danny, that's not what's been happening this season.

Major Cold
01-09-2009, 06:27 PM
All these Danny Granger love fest posts, I think there's like 4-5 going now, are starting to get a bit ridiculous. I understand we want something to be positive about since our record is total trash, but c'mon, seriously here guys, he's good, but if he was THAT damn good we wouldn't be 10 games under .500.

I just don't understand alllllll these different buzz posts like we're taking teams to task led by Danny, that's not what's been happening this season.

:rolleyes:

Anthem
01-09-2009, 07:46 PM
I understand we want something to be positive about since our record is total trash, but c'mon, seriously here guys, he's good, but if he was THAT damn good we wouldn't be 10 games under .500.
True.

But we'd be worse with Bynum instead of Danny.

count55
01-09-2009, 07:52 PM
True.

But we'd be worse with Bynum instead of Danny.

I agree with this, but...

it is fair to say that the Danny threads have become more numerous than the "Fire O'Brien" threads.

clownskull
01-09-2009, 08:03 PM
i won't argue that there are probably too many granger threads. however, to say that if he was THAT good (just how good is that anyway?) they wouldn't be so far under .500 is a bit unfair. last year the miami heat were awful despite wade doing what he could. simple fact is no matter HOW good a player might be, they need help because no one can do it alone.
some people might be a little high on him while some think he is a 3rd option (pretty laughable imo).
i will say this- he has proven himself capable of putting up production that i never thought he was capable of. he probably will never develop the amazing handles and ultra tough D that pipen had but, he is showing me an ability to drive and finnish and the 3point shot is a proven weapon in his arsenal. knowing we got this caliber a player at the price paid, tells me he is a great bargain.
i remember when glen robinson was taken at #1, i thought he'd prove to be the greatest player to come out of indiana since bird, but robison never had half the intensity/desire that danny plays with, he turned out to be a big disappointment in my book never coming close to fulfilling his potential. it was like once he got the big check, he just stopped giving a damn. but danny cares and wants to get better and i see a guy who will prove to be a fantastic value.
and no, i would not trade granger for bynum. bynum is going to get paid more (i believe) and although good, granger has amazed me at times. if hindsight were 20/20, granger would not have been taken at 17, he'd be a lottery pick (likely #1).

cgg
01-09-2009, 08:52 PM
if hindsight were 20/20, granger would not have been taken at 17, he'd be a lottery pick (likely #1).

Don't get too crazy now. Chris Paul and Deron Williams were in that draft.

Shade
01-09-2009, 08:57 PM
This thread was not intended to be a "Danny love-fest" thread, but rather to gauge how peoples' opinion have changed on Granger/Bynum since a few months ago.

Shade
01-09-2009, 08:59 PM
Don't get too crazy now. Chris Paul and Deron Williams were in that draft.

In hindsight, Danny would not go below #4:

1) Chris Paul
2) Deron Williams
3) Andrew Bynum
4) Danny Granger

At this point in time, Danny is worse only than Paul on that list. But quality PGs and bigs are harder to come by than SFs, and Deron and Bynum have been far from scrubs so far.

circlecitysportsfan
01-09-2009, 09:04 PM
i granger would not have been taken at 17, he'd be a lottery pick (likely #1).



My 2005 Redo Top 4

1. Chris Paul
2. Deron Williams
3. Danny Granger
4. Andrew Bynum

clownskull
01-09-2009, 09:20 PM
Don't get too crazy now. Chris Paul and Deron Williams were in that draft.

oops. sorry about that. forgot those 2. but still..... he'd be a definite lottery pick no doubt.

Justin Tyme
01-09-2009, 09:25 PM
I agree with this, but...

it is fair to say that the Danny threads have become more numerous than the "Fire O'Brien" threads.


Maybe admin should combine them like the "Fire O'Brien" threads.

count55
01-09-2009, 09:40 PM
In hindsight, Danny would not go below #4:

1) Chris Paul
2) Deron Williams
3) Andrew Bynum
4) Danny Granger

At this point in time, Danny is worse only than Paul on that list. But quality PGs and bigs are harder to come by than SFs, and Deron and Bynum have been far from scrubs so far.

Knowing what we know today, I would agree that the general consensus would be the order as you've laid out here.

However, I, personally would take Danny ahead of Bynum.

Trader Joe
01-09-2009, 10:27 PM
Bynum has shown zero improvement from last year.

BlueNGold
01-09-2009, 10:32 PM
I would have traded Danny for Bynum 4 months ago. That has changed for now.

Bynum's production is down from last year. Less points. Lower FG%. Lower boards. More fouls. Blocks are down. He's a big guy, but he doesn't seem to be improving much. He's heading toward Brendan Haywood and away from Dwight Howard.

avoidingtheclowns
01-09-2009, 10:36 PM
i think you can attribute some of bynum's lower numbers to playing alongside pau this season.

count55
01-09-2009, 10:36 PM
Bynum has shown zero improvement from last year.


I would have traded Danny for Bynum 4 months ago. That has changed for now.

Bynum's production is down from last year. Less points. Lower FG%. Lower boards. More fouls. Blocks are down. He's a big guy, but he doesn't seem to be improving much. He's heading toward Brendan Haywood and away from Dwight Howard.

I have never been as enthusiastic about Bynum as some, but, to be fair, he is coming off of a major injury. I don't know if he's back to 100% or not.

Trader Joe
01-09-2009, 10:38 PM
Well, I agree count, but that makes me all the more skittish about him. I always thought he could be a solid big man, and he still will be I think, but I never felt that he could be the next Shaq like some. I think that the knee injury has put the possibility of that occurring to rest. I think Bynum is gonna put up similar stats to this, maybe a little better, for the rest of his career.

BlueNGold
01-09-2009, 10:59 PM
I still expect Bynum to get better, but the only thing similar between him and Shaq is the fact both played C for the Lakers. Bynum has no shot of being remotely as good as Shaq primarily due to size alone. Some people forget that Shaq was averaging 14 boards and over 23 ppg his rookie year....and his points moved up close to 30 his 2nd and 3rd years in the league. Teams had to change their entire defensive scheme to slow him down. Nothing like this is needed against the much, much smaller Bynum. Mere mortals can guard Bynum and even Dwight Howard. Nobody could guard Shaq.

Anthem
01-09-2009, 11:04 PM
i think you can attribute some of bynum's lower numbers to playing alongside pau this season.
I suspect you can attribute some of it to contractyearitus.

LG33
01-09-2009, 11:42 PM
A lot of Pacers, present and former, in that draft - Travis Diener (36), Jarrett Jack (22), Lorbek (48), Ike Diogu (9), Orien Greene (53) in addition to the aforementioned Danny Granger. I wouldn't say Bogut is better than any of those four, but he has to be mentioned - he's not bad.