PDA

View Full Version : Would this be enough for Granger



NappyRootz
05-27-2010, 05:08 PM
I put together a quick rationale for trading Granger on a Minny trade proposal thread and wondered how many would support any or all of the following:

Assuming Minny cant move up to get to Turner..........they then turn to Granger.

1.
Minnesota sends:

Kevin Love
4th pick
16th pick

Indiana sends:

granger

2.
Indiana trades Troy Murphy to team X (plenty of cap space) for a future #1

3.
Indiana trades TJ Ford and Jeff Foster to Golden State for Corey Maggette

4.

Indiana selects

DeMarcus Cousins
Avery Bradley or Xavier Henry
Bradley, Henry , George or Hayward

5.
Indiana signs Raymond Felton to a 4 year $25mm contract

Pretty big roster overhaul in one summer

Hibbert Cousins Jones
Love Hansbrough McRoberts
Maggette Dunleavy draft pick
Rush Jones draft pick
Felton Bradley Price

Shaved $16mm off of 10-11 payroll getting us close to $50mm. Still plenty of cap space after that with Dunleavy falling off payroll.

No star on the roster though unless Cousins becomes Dwight Howard

HC
05-27-2010, 05:15 PM
That is too much for Granger if you ask my opinion.

Pointz
05-27-2010, 05:22 PM
I think it is a good deal for Granger. I am in the minority but I am in favor of a trade w/ GS that I saw on RealGM of...

Granger
Hans
#10

For

Ellis
Randolph
#6

I know this probably belongs in the trade thread so I apologize.

Speed
05-27-2010, 05:35 PM
I like it all, but you won't get a future #1 for Murphy I don't think and how do we sign Felton Spencer, outright?

90'sNBARocked
05-27-2010, 05:37 PM
I put together a quick rationale for trading Granger on a Minny trade proposal thread and wondered how many would support any or all of the following:

Assuming Minny cant move up to get to Turner..........they then turn to Granger.

1.
Minnesota sends:

Kevin Love
4th pick
16th pick

Indiana sends:

granger

2.
Indiana trades Troy Murphy to team X (plenty of cap space) for a future #1

3.
Indiana trades TJ Ford and Jeff Foster to Golden State for Corey Maggette

4.

Indiana selects

DeMarcus Cousins
Avery Bradley or Xavier Henry
Bradley, Henry , George or Hayward

5.
Indiana signs Raymond Felton to a 4 year $25mm contract

Pretty big roster overhaul in one summer

Hibbert Cousins Jones
Love Hansbrough McRoberts
Maggette Dunleavy draft pick
Rush Jones draft pick
Felton Bradley Price

Shaved $16mm off of 10-11 payroll getting us close to $50mm. Still plenty of cap space after that with Dunleavy falling off payroll.

No star on the roster though unless Cousins becomes Dwight Howard

too complicated and really dont think it would have a chance of comming to fruition

90'sNBARocked
05-27-2010, 05:47 PM
I think it is a good deal for Granger. I am in the minority but I am in favor of a trade w/ GS that I saw on RealGM of...

Granger
Hans
#10

For

Ellis
Randolph
#6

I know this probably belongs in the trade thread so I apologize


Now that I would take in a freakin heartbeat!!!

OakMoses
05-27-2010, 05:57 PM
Just say no to Magette.

You're not getting a first rounder for Murphy.

The Granger to Minnesota trade is good, but I don't know if they'd go for it.

Lance George
05-27-2010, 05:58 PM
I'd strongly consider Danny and #10 for Love and #4 if it were on the table.

Peck
05-27-2010, 06:02 PM
Danny & 10 for Love & 4? No way in hell.

Danny for Flynn, 4 & 16? Maybe but I'm not even sure of that.

OakMoses
05-27-2010, 06:03 PM
Danny & 10 for Love & 4? No way in hell.

Danny for Flynn, 4 & 16? Maybe but I'm not even sure of that.

Love is better than Flynn.

Peck
05-27-2010, 06:06 PM
Love is better than Flynn.

Not in our system & until proven otherwise Jim O'Brien is going to be here until he is not (yea I know that is pretty obvious but I don't know when he will be gone so until he is gone there is no point in giving him a player he won't play)

Hicks
05-27-2010, 06:09 PM
Not in our system & until proven otherwise Jim O'Brien is going to be here until he is not (yea I know that is pretty obvious but I don't know when he will be gone so until he is gone there is no point in giving him a player he won't play)

This is backwards unless you're convinced Jim will out-last the player coming in.

90'sNBARocked
05-27-2010, 06:28 PM
Danny & 10 for Love & 4? No way in hell.

Danny for Flynn, 4 & 16? Maybe but I'm not even sure of that.

Ah,

Thank you for a voice of reason

If they traded Danny and the number 10 for Love/four I would be done with the Pacers until they had new management from top to bottom

Hillman's 'Fro'
05-27-2010, 06:48 PM
The Minny deal is more than enough (if not lopsided in the Pacers
favor). But I wouldn't take Cousins at #4 in that scenario. I'd prolly
either take Johnson or Aminu or try and trade back into the 6-8 zone
to do it.

A rotation up front of Hibbs-Cousins-Love and Hans would be too
lacking in athleticism/defensive flexibility.

Note: I'm talking the Nappy Rootz deal (DG for Love, #4 and #16).

Trophy
05-27-2010, 07:04 PM
Why do people want to trade Granger? He's the last guy this team needs to trade.

I'm glad he's off limits.

Peck
05-27-2010, 07:11 PM
This is backwards unless you're convinced Jim will out-last the player coming in.

I have no idea how long O'Brien is going to be here, so yeah until I know he is gone then I don't want them taking on players he won't play or will only play in limited min.

If you think he won't play Hibbert now can you imagine if Love was an option for him? It would be one or the other not both.

OakMoses
05-27-2010, 07:41 PM
Love can stretch the floor.

Willbo
05-27-2010, 07:48 PM
O'Brien wouldnt play Love?.... I am sure he would see potential in this stat;

09/10 3PM 35 A 106

No its not perfect, but perhaps with a lot of hard work (see: Mcroberts' Miller/Bird 3pt shooting reccomendation) he could one day be the stretch forward we need to take us beyond the Murphy years.

green

Cactus Jax
05-27-2010, 07:52 PM
I'd do Love, Flynn (or Rubio), and the #4 for Granger but thats about it. The guy is really being taken advantage of around here for being a 25ppg player. He's not completely untradeable, but its going to/should take a lot to get him out of the Pacers hands.

ESutt7
05-27-2010, 07:53 PM
I don't think trading Granger is the answer to our problems by any means...

pacerDU
05-27-2010, 08:03 PM
Why do people want to trade Granger? He's the last guy this team needs to trade.

I'm glad he's off limits.

Agreed.

Every year, without fail, people fall in love with the idea of a high draft pick, thinking it automatically guarantees a superstar player. If Danny was in this year's draft and everyone knew how good he'd be, where do you think he'd be drafted? I'd say no lower than #3 and quite likely at #2 depending on how you think he compares to Turner. That said, we don't even KNOW how good Wall will be.

We messed up by winning meaningless games at the end of the season. You don't turn around and trade your best player to get what you could have by simply shutting it down when you should have. And before anyone says anything I don't mean tanking, I just mean playing for the future (playing young guys, resting Danny etc).

None of these picks are guaranteed successes in the NBA. Danny is, as has been proven. He's not old, he's a good character guy and he wants to be here. We have an avenue in which to get better with our expirings.

People need to put things in perspective.

NappyRootz
05-27-2010, 10:23 PM
I dont really want to trade him either and I said before that these megadeals are almost won by the team that acquires the best player.

But Granger will already be 28 next year and JOB loves to play him 38 min + .

Is he still going to be an All Star when we finalyy have the talent around him to play meaningful games after Thanksgiving ??

Minnesota HAS to get a franchise player this offseason................Granger is likely their 2nd option after Turner.

No one wants Jefferson or his contract in a deal like that............just as old and just as expensive and he plays no defense.

That leaves Kevin Love and the 4th pick as the only reasonable offer MInny can make.

Im sure they look at Turner first but if Philly balks ............Granger would make sense for them and break up the logjam of Love and Jefferson.

As for taking anyone other than Cousins at 4..........I can't see the point in that. We need All Star players not more good college..........aveage or below average pro players . Johnson doesnt seem liek a star to me and although Im intrigued by Aminu........I cant see gambling on him at 4.

PacerFreak31
05-27-2010, 11:57 PM
Agreed.

Every year, without fail, people fall in love with the idea of a high draft pick, thinking it automatically guarantees a superstar player. If Danny was in this year's draft and everyone knew how good he'd be, where do you think he'd be drafted? I'd say no lower than #3 and quite likely at #2 depending on how you think he compares to Turner. That said, we don't even KNOW how good Wall will be.

We messed up by winning meaningless games at the end of the season. You don't turn around and trade your best player to get what you could have by simply shutting it down when you should have. And before anyone says anything I don't mean tanking, I just mean playing for the future (playing young guys, resting Danny etc).

None of these picks are guaranteed successes in the NBA. Danny is, as has been proven. He's not old, he's a good character guy and he wants to be here. We have an avenue in which to get better with our expirings.

People need to put things in perspective.

NappyRoots makes some good points. Granger is 28 years old. We know we are not going to be able to sign a superstar next year nor are we going to win the championship next year. So then Granger is 29. Next year there is the threat of the Lockout and if that last a year... Granger will be 30.... I know players can be pretty effective from 30 to about 33-34 but I don't think that would be fair to Granger. This is one of the main reasons why I hate taking 4 year players is because you have them during their prime shorter. Even if you take a 19 year old and it takes them 2-3 years to really start getting it they are still only 22-23 years old. Heck even the last few players that we drafted whom were 3 and 4 year players it still took them a while to get it and we still don't know if Hans does get it.

Bottom line is we need to take some chances and make some moves. I love Granger with all my heart and I would be as sad as anyone if he were traded. However, I love the Pacers even more. I might be one of the few that thinks Wes Johnson might be very similar to Granger. I watched him a lot and I saw a lot of Granger in him, plus I think he can create his own shot a little better. I guess one of the main things I would try to do is see how serious Philly is about trading the number 2 pick and see if there is a way we can end up getting the number 2 and 4 picks in this draft. That would definitely speed up the rebuilding process. I know there are no grantees with draft picks but I also know that we have no real options in the future to improve this team. I know Granger is getting older. I also know that now is the time to really think about what is best for this team in the long term instead of always trying to put a band aid on an obvious gaping hole.

I will leave you with something to just think about and you tell me if this sounds more interesting/exciting.

We trade Granger for Love, 4, and 16.
We trade with Philly and get Brand and 2 without giving up any additional draft picks.

We draft Turner at 2, Maybe Johnson or Aminu at 4, Ed Davis at 10, and maybe luck up and get Bledsoe at 16.

We could be looking at

PG Bledsoe
SG Turner
SF Johnson or Aminu
PF Ed Davis or which ever would be the best aviable big at this spot
C Roy Hibbert

It is a VERY young lineup but we would have all of them on cheap rookie contracts, they could all grow together at the SAME time, and in a couple years that could very well be enough to draw in an even better superstar with the salary cap room we would have.

ksuttonjr76
05-27-2010, 11:58 PM
I don't think trading Granger is the answer to our problems by any means...

I concur.

Trophy
05-28-2010, 12:16 AM
I compare the Danny and the Pacers to Paul Pierce and the Celtics a few seasons ago.

The Celtics knew that Pierce was a very good player and leader just like Danny and that's why they didn't move him, but they instead brought in good players to go along with Pierce.

I'm not saying to go out and superstars, but bring in guys who will play well with Danny. Form our own big 3.

We have enough talented individuals on this team (not including Danny or Roy) to trade and get a decent player or 2.

Justin Tyme
05-28-2010, 07:30 AM
he wants to be here. We have an avenue in which to get better with our expirings.


Just how much longer will Granger want to a Pacer stuck in mediocrity when those expirings aren't used to get better?

Justin Tyme
05-28-2010, 07:42 AM
[QUOTE=PacerFreak31;1000486]


We trade Granger for Love, 4, and 16. QUOTE]


I'd do this trade in a heartbeat never looking back while skipping and whistling a tune.

NappyRootz
05-28-2010, 08:35 AM
I compare the Danny and the Pacers to Paul Pierce and the Celtics a few seasons ago.

The Celtics knew that Pierce was a very good player and leader just like Danny and that's why they didn't move him, but they instead brought in good players to go along with Pierce.

I'm not saying to go out and superstars, but bring in guys who will play well with Danny. Form our own big 3.

We have enough talented individuals on this team (not including Danny or Roy) to trade and get a decent player or 2.

That was teh example that I thought about as well when trying to decide what I would do.............a couple of differences though..........they didn't think winning 11 of 16 down the stretch was paramount for future success giving away a legit chance at a top 5 pick............and 2 they had already made a terrific trade for Rondo as their PG of the future......just no one knew it at the time.

If we can get our Rondo by picking up a late 1st and make at least a decent selection at 10 then maybe we can stay in the top 5 next year and have enough groceries in the cupboard to make a trade for a Garnett and an Allen to go with Danny sooner than you would think.

Not sure how much faith I have in Larry to pull all that off in teh next 2 or 3 years and Indy isnt exactly the #1 destination of choice for most of the leagues All Stars which could be a problem as well.

Sparhawk
05-28-2010, 09:18 AM
[QUOTE=PacerFreak31;1000486]


We trade Granger for Love, 4, and 16. QUOTE]


I'd do this trade in a heartbeat never looking back while skipping and whistling a tune.

I'd do the same thing. The Pacers aren't going to win with Granger. I love the guy too, but he is starting to get older and this team isn't really going anywhere anytime soon. Best to go young and then next year bring in a coach who knows how to develop young guys (whoever that would be).

I do that trade and the person who mentioned trying to trade for Brand and the #2. I want Turner!!!:dance:

Lance George
05-28-2010, 09:35 AM
Love's a super-skilled big man capable of putting up 20 points a night and who has shown signs of being a dominant rebounder. Throw in the #4 pick, where a good pick up can easily land you an All-Star, and I think I'd have to do it. There's also the fact that #4 would make it much easier to move up to #2 or 3 and draft Evan Turner,

ksuttonjr76
05-28-2010, 09:42 AM
[QUOTE=Justin Tyme;1000521]

I'd do the same thing. The Pacers aren't going to win with Granger. I love the guy too, but he is starting to get older and this team isn't really going anywhere anytime soon. Best to go young and then next year bring in a coach who knows how to develop young guys (whoever that would be).

I do that trade and the person who mentioned trying to trade for Brand and the #2. I want Turner!!!:dance:

He's only 27 turning 28 in April next year. Granger will outlast most SF's, since he doesn't attack the basket aggressively, and is pretty much a shooter. Granted, JOB will shorten his longevity, if he keeps playing Granger at the 4, but hopefully the next coach won't do that.

Some of you are putting way too much value in getting "younger" with unknown talent vs. continuing to build around the solid talent that we already have. Indiana is NOT an untalented team. We just have too many holes to plug (due to injuries), and we have a coach who doesn't know how to plug those holes (D. Jones/Granger at the PF, two PGs in the backcourt, benching a rookie PG w/promise, calling a young PF's inspiring play irrelevent, publicly dogging a young SG, relying too much on the 3, etc).

As easily we can get the next Kevin Durant, we could just as easily end up with the next Greg Oden.

Mr. Sobchak
05-28-2010, 11:20 AM
Some of you are putting way too much value in getting "younger" with unknown talent vs. continuing to build around the solid talent that we already have. Indiana is NOT an untalented team.

We are one of if not the least talented teams in the league. Name 3 other rosters that you would take ours over...I can't even do it - maybe the Wizards and Detroit, but even that is debatable IMO.

Unclebuck
05-28-2010, 11:22 AM
I'll admit I have not seen Love play all that often, but I don't understand the love for Love. he doesn't seem very good to me, perhaps a decent smart workman type player, but hardly a difference maker at all

Justin Tyme
05-28-2010, 12:11 PM
he doesn't seem very good to me, perhaps a decent smart workman type player, but hardly a difference maker at all


AND neither were either Davis' difference makers. BUT they brought talents that could be used successfully.

Love is a rebounder, excellent passer, and can score. He's not the fleetest of foot but neither were either DD or AD. Love isn't the "D" player/enforcer DD was, but he plays decent "D".

Love has more upside to come, only a 2nd year player, and is 9 mil cheaper than Granger. SF is the easiest position to fill, and there are some nice SF talent in this draft. I'm not going to try and snow you that there is a SF in this draft better than Granger, but having the #4, and 16 picks to use to better this team for the future would be a major plus.

I like Granger, but I'm not a fanatic about him. He's had injuries, he plays less "D" than his 1st 2 seasons, and I'm not sure he will ever be an Allstar again. Then on top of that "IF" Dunleavy gets his game back, he makes it easier to have traded Granger, and his next contract should be 3-5 mil less a year than Granger while developing a player like Paul George, Stanley Robinson, or Gordon Hayward for the future.

I gather your cup of tea is a good PG. Just think with the 4 and 16 picks you could get a Bledsoe, Bradley, or a White for the PG of the future. OR trade the 16 pick and player for Collison who you seem to like. Then with the expirings of Murphy, Dunleavy, Ford, Foster, Solo and Tinjury you can even do more.

If I'm going to have to watch a 32-36 win team, I'd rather watch one that is building for a championship run in 3-4 years with youth. JMOAA

I'm not trying to sell you I'm right, just pointing out the possibilities. JMOAA

pacerDU
05-28-2010, 12:56 PM
Just how much longer will Granger want to a Pacer stuck in mediocrity when those expirings aren't used to get better?

What makes you believe they won't be used to get better? If there's any way to use them (which there are) I'd have to believe Bird and Co wouldn't be stupid enough to not use them. We've seen heaps of situations in the past where teams give up talent for expirings. The Lakers wouldn't still be in the playoffs if it wasn't for the Grizzlies giving them Gasol. Rasheed Wallace when he went to the Pistons is another example. Jameison to the Cavs is the latest example.

Also, 28 is not old. The Paul Pierce comparison is pretty good I think. Not saying they're the same player, but their situations were pretty similar. If he was 32, sure I'd agree, but not at 28.

We absolutely need more talent, but I think that can be garnered by drafting intelligently as well as making use of those expirings.

Edit: Danny only turned 27 last month.

pacers74
05-28-2010, 01:21 PM
I think either trade option would work. love the 4th pick and 16th pick , or flynn 4th pick and 16th pick. Both love and flynn have tremendous upside.

You have to explore all options. To get out of mediocrity you have to make some dramatic moves. If it means trading Granger than you need to at least explore the options. Getting a young up and coming player and two high first round draft picks would be great, but I'm sure there are other teams willing to trade for him. What about New Orleans, Portland, Philly, or New Jersey. I hope Bird is at least exploring the options.

As for Grangers age, I don't think it is a factor yet. We could turn it around in 2 years and he will only be 29. It is more about him being the top asset that we have. We are rebuilding and need to explore all options.

Peck
05-28-2010, 01:27 PM
AND neither were either Davis' difference makers. BUT they brought talents that could be used successfully.

Love is a rebounder, excellent passer, and can score. He's not the fleetest of foot but neither were either DD or AD. Love isn't the "D" player/enforcer DD was, but he plays decent "D".

Love has more upside to come, only a 2nd year player, and is 9 mil cheaper than Granger. SF is the easiest position to fill, and there are some nice SF talent in this draft. I'm not going to try and snow you that there is a SF in this draft better than Granger, but having the #4, and 16 picks to use to better this team for the future would be a major plus.

I like Granger, but I'm not a fanatic about him. He's had injuries, he plays less "D" than his 1st 2 seasons, and I'm not sure he will ever be an Allstar again. Then on top of that "IF" Dunleavy gets his game back, he makes it easier to have traded Granger, and his next contract should be 3-5 mil less a year than Granger while developing a player like Paul George, Stanley Robinson, or Gordon Hayward for the future.

I gather your cup of tea is a good PG. Just think with the 4 and 16 picks you could get a Bledsoe, Bradley, or a White for the PG of the future. OR trade the 16 pick and player for Collison who you seem to like. Then with the expirings of Murphy, Dunleavy, Ford, Foster, Solo and Tinjury you can even do more.

If I'm going to have to watch a 32-36 win team, I'd rather watch one that is building for a championship run in 3-4 years with youth. JMOAA

I'm not trying to sell you I'm right, just pointing out the possibilities. JMOAA

Dude the thing that made Dale such a special defender was the fact that he was very fleet of foot for a man his size. His lateral quickness and ability to recover are the very things (beyond his strength) that put him head and shoulders above Antonio. Tony was strong (Not as strong as Dale of course) but he was nowhere near the defender because he could not jump as high, run as fast or recover as quickly.

HC
05-28-2010, 01:42 PM
Really, I am amazed that people think there is even a possibility that a team gives up the equivelant of basically 3 top 15 picks for Danny Granger.

Putnam
05-28-2010, 01:44 PM
Really, I am amazed that people think there is even a possibility that a team gives up the equivelant of basically 3 top 15 picks for Danny Granger.


Bing!


Danny is worth more to us than to anyone else.




.

NappyRootz
05-28-2010, 10:47 PM
Bing!


Danny is worth more to us than to anyone else.




.

I dont really think so.

I normally undervalue Pacer players.

I think we have the 30th best backcourt in the league for instance and that is actually being kind since Phoenix, Boston and probbaly others have better backups at the 1 and 2 than we have starting.

Granger is a top 15 player.

Very few players can average 25 /gm and be solid defenders and rebounders as well.

I think he is an older Kevin Durant. A similiar talent to Joe Johnson, Paul Pierce and Dirk Nowitzki.

Hes not in the elite class of players but he is in the next tier.

That is my issue with trading him and in getting enough value in return for him.

Kevin Love and DeMarcus Cousins may sound liek a kings ransom to some....but Love is only marginally above average at his position and Cousins could be a complete bust.

At the end of teh day I probably wouldn't make the trad either but I have a strong suspicion that I would regret passing on such a trade if it was available.

Hillman's 'Fro'
06-01-2010, 10:23 AM
I like Granger a lot. But comparing him to Paul Pierce is laughable.

Pierce has played in 94 playoff games and led or helped lead the
Celtics to 3 EC Finals and 2 NBA Finals. As a result, he may well
end up being an NBA, Hall of Fame inductee.

What has DG done thus far that is even remotely comparable ?

NappyRootz
06-01-2010, 04:21 PM
I like Granger a lot. But comparing him to Paul Pierce is laughable.

Pierce has played in 94 playoff games and led or helped lead the
Celtics to 3 EC Finals and 2 NBA Finals. As a result, he may well
end up being an NBA, Hall of Fame inductee.

What has DG done thus far that is even remotely comparable ?

How good were teh Celtics before Garnett and Allen arrived ??

The playoff comparison implies that Pierce alone is capable of winning playoff gms ..........which isnt true.

Joe Johnson, Kevin Durant and Chris Bosh havent won meaningful playoff games. LeBron doesnt have a ring................neither does Howard or Dirk . Amare never made teh Finals.

Granger and Pierce are different players but they are comparable in their staus as All Star level players.

Give us Garnett or even Gasol and you would be surprised how quickly teh Pacers would start winning playoff games.

Hillman's 'Fro'
06-02-2010, 08:25 AM
Nappy-

A bunch of those playoff games and 1 of the EC Finals appearances
were prior to KG and Allen arriving in Boston. And aside from Antoine
"I never met a bad shot I won't chuck up" Walker, those Celts teams
were a bunch of role players and Pierce.

I'm not trying to overly inflate Pierce or needlessly denigrate Granger.
But they simply aren't on the same level as NBA players.

Pierce has been a perrenial All-Star and hit more big, clutch shots in
huge playoff games than can be counted. Granger has been an All-Star
once, may or may not ever be again and hasn't played a meaningful
role in even a single, playoff game.

Note: Given that Pierece is 33 and DG is only 27, if forced to choose
between them, while Pierce has certainly been and still is
the superior player, going forward, I'd take Granger.

NappyRootz
06-02-2010, 11:46 PM
Nappy-

A bunch of those playoff games and 1 of the EC Finals appearances
were prior to KG and Allen arriving in Boston. And aside from Antoine
"I never met a bad shot I won't chuck up" Walker, those Celts teams
were a bunch of role players and Pierce.

I'm not trying to overly inflate Pierce or needlessly denigrate Granger.
But they simply aren't on the same level as NBA players.

Pierce has been a perrenial All-Star and hit more big, clutch shots in
huge playoff games than can be counted. Granger has been an All-Star
once, may or may not ever be again and hasn't played a meaningful
role in even a single, playoff game.

Note: Given that Pierece is 33 and DG is only 27, if forced to choose
between them, while Pierce has certainly been and still is
the superior player, going forward, I'd take Granger.

I like Pierce to.

I just think that in his prime, Pierce was probbaly the league's 10th-12th best player and Granger is currently somewhere in the mid teens........pretty close.

Hillman's 'Fro'
06-03-2010, 06:24 PM
I put DG in the mid-20's or so. Therein lies our difference of opinion
on him. Nice to have a place like PD to hash it all out...