PDA

View Full Version : Denver interested in Danny.



Will Galen
11-19-2010, 04:08 PM
http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-101119-21/carmelo-anthony-latest

1. Melo's Big Five
By Marc Stein
ESPN.com

This week's visit to Denver by the New York Knicks, accompanied by the the famously smothering New York media, came with precisely 100 days to go before the trading deadline.

So you had to know we were going to make a contribution to the countdown.

Here, then, are a few fresh nuggets from the Carmelo Anthony trade watch, which we're indeed contractually obliged to refer to as the NBA's Melo Drama inside the first three paragraphs of any such update.

1. The myth

You've heard it a zillion times already this season: No team out there is going to be willing to trade for Melo unless he also commits to a contract extension as part of the transaction.

Consider this your invitation to forget what you've heard.

The theory implies that Anthony will ultimately be able to force his way to the Knicks before the Feb. 24 trading deadline -- if that's indeed where he wants to be, as is widely presumed -- because the other 28 teams wouldn't dare consent to merely renting Melo for the rest of the 2010-11 campaign this close to his free-agent summer, thereby leaving Denver with no choice but to work with New York.

Yet that's just not so.

"Ridiculous," said one Western Conference general manager.

A handful of team executives consulted this week by ESPN.com believe there are more than a few teams in circulation that would be willing to trade for Melo without getting his name on an extension, even though the risk of losing Anthony without compensation in July is precisely why countless league observers believe the Nuggets will eventually have to give in and give him up.

How is that possible? As another GM explains, there are always teams willing to bet that a star like Anthony will like their situation if they can just get him to town.

I know of two such risk-taking teams in Texas alone -- Dallas and Houston -- that would take on Anthony sans extension if their assets proved sufficiently attractive to construct a three-team (or more) deal palatable to Denver. Orlando is also presumed to be another such risk-taker, given the obvious lure of pairing Anthony with Dwight Howard. And Charlotte, with Melo's buddy Michael Jordan in charge, has been suggested as another willing Melo dice-roller by various front-office sources.

The Nuggets, if and when they reach that point, would obviously prefer to trade with a team Melo wants to join long term because they'd get more in return. Assets of the highest quality will be harder to score in a deal that isn't an extend-and-trade, as the GMs call it.

The fact, however, remains that the extension is not everything as I once believed, too.

2. The back pocket

Another reason why Denver won't be obligated to deal only with the Knicks if it ultimately concludes that a trade is unavoidable?

Numerous executives still believe that the main pieces that were Denver-bound in the original four-team trade construction that surfaced and then collapsed in late September -- Nets rookie Derrick Favors and at least two future first-round picks -- remain available to the Nuggets and will be available from now until the trade deadline.

Not sure I agree unreservedly, since parting with Favors strikes me as surrendering the sort of young asset that the Nets can't give up without an extension in place. But that is the consensus on the GM grapevine.

3. The preference

My man Ric Bucher said it in a chat last Friday and I've heard the same: Anthony is more than content to play the entire season in Denver as opposed to being traded in the next 90-something days. And the Nuggets know it.

Melo's reasoning makes plenty of sense, too. Sticking it out with the Nuggets for the rest of the season would allow him to pick his next destination without restrictions in free agency -- once we get past the pesky obstacle of a potential lockout next summer -- and also prevents the team he chooses from being decimated by what it would have to surrender in a Melo deal.

Says one West exec: "The hard part won't be finding teams that are willing to gamble on Melo. The hard part is having what Denver wants and being able to complete a trade without killing your team. You can't kill your roster and just take him back. That's just guaranteeing that he'll leave."

4. The latest target

Perhaps target isn't the best word choice, because the Nuggets have made it clear they're not presently pursuing deals for Anthony.

Not since longtime Nuggets adviser Bret Bearup was ousted earlier this month, completing a front-office purge that earlier claimed Mark Warkentien and Rex Chapman, and, in Bearup's case, ushered away the organization's loudest pro-trade voice.

Sources close to the situation maintain that Nuggets president Josh Kroenke and new personnel chief Masai Ujiri won't even consider the prospect of moving Melo before Dec. 15, when players who signed new contracts in the summer become eligible to be added to trades for the first time. And word is even mid-December is a lot sooner than the Nuggets are prepared to move, with team officials clinging to the hope -- remote as it sounds -- that they'll start looking like more of a hard-to-bolt contender around that time once big men Kenyon Martin and Chris Andersen have returned from their respective knee injuries.

Yet there are a few names known to intrigue the Nuggets in those moments when they force themselves to contemplate contemplate life minus Melo, as detailed in this cyberspace a few weeks back when their interest in Blazers untouchable Nicolas Batum was detailed.

Another name on the Nuggets' list of fantasy targets in a three-team (or more) trade scenario, I'm told, is Indiana's Danny Granger. But sources say that Granger, just like Batum, bears an "unavailable" stamp.

The Pacers, as you'd imagine, have made it clear they have zero interest in serving as the third team in a deal that costs them Granger and lands Anthony somewhere else. And Indy isn't one of those teams willing to trade for Anthony without a signed extension, which only adds to the notion that Granger is unattainable.

Just like Batum.

5. The optimist

It can't be a huge surprise after what he's been through in his battle against neck and throat cancer, but it is another fact: Nuggets coach George Karl dispenses positivity about his team, in spite of its plight, more readily than ever before.

Cynics would say that Karl's own desire for an extension factors into that stance, but Karl simply won't surrender the belief that Anthony can still be swayed to commit to the three-year, $65 million extension that has been on the table since June. Team officials were cautiously convinced around the time of the draft that Melo was on the verge of signing it ... until LeBron James and Chris Bosh landed on South Beach soon thereafter to flank Dwyane Wade and alter not only the league's landscape but also the way Team USA's biggest names look at team-building.

The undersized Nuggets are scuffling along at 6-6, having dropped four successive road games since a quality Nov. 6 win at Dallas. But Anthony has been a true, committed pro and Karl has helped him stay engaged -- Melo's averaging 24.1 points and a career-best 9.3 boards -- amid questions and scrutiny and speculation that won't go away.

"I'm enjoying it, man," Melo told me two weeks after the road win over the Mavs. "When we're winning, I'm enjoying it."

"He's been great," Karl insists.

The stunning 54-point third quarter Denver surrendered at Indiana on Nov. 9 appeared to be the first warning sign to support the thinking of know-it-alls like me who came into the season convinced this team would not be able to withstand the Melo Drama and eventually unravel ... except that the Nuggets rallied at home two nights later to deal the Lakers their first loss.

"I've been energized by last year a little bit," Karl said, "and the passion to come back on the court. But I've never understood why [the Nuggets were dismissed by so many experts] when we knew -- and I think most basketball people knew -- that Ty [Lawson] and Arron [Afflalo] were going to be better than they were last year. We get Al Harrington as a shooting 4, which with the way we play ... it helps us. It magnifies the good things that we do.

"The injuries, yeah, we're probably not going to be as good without Kenyon and Chris, but you can survive in the season. ... I think there's an excitement in our team that I don't think people have given us credit for. Even though we have some things that people could look at and say, 'What the hell is going on?' ... it hasn't gotten in on the practice court or in the games."

SMosley21
11-19-2010, 04:15 PM
Makes sense to me. No way in hell we give up Granger just to rent Melo for half a season.

pacers74
11-19-2010, 04:15 PM
There is nothing short of Amare' that the Knicks could offer that would get us involved in a 3 way trade.

90'sNBARocked
11-19-2010, 04:16 PM
Just out of curiosity , and highley unlikely, but say we landed Melo, without giving up Granger, and he signed an extension

Could Granger and Melo play at the same time and be productive? and if so, which position would each play?

Will Galen
11-19-2010, 04:17 PM
Personally, I wouldn't trade Danny for anyone. The same goes for Roy.

I'm not someone that would trade his mother to win. I wouldn't trade my favorites for anyone, regardless of relative values.

pacers74
11-19-2010, 04:18 PM
Sure Denver wants Danny, he has a really good contract, is playing great team ball, and is back to being an elite defender.

90'sNBARocked
11-19-2010, 04:18 PM
Personally, I wouldn't trade Danny for anyone. The same goes for Roy.

I'm not someone that would trade his mother to win. I wouldn't trade my favorites for anyone, regardless of relative values.



Can your mom play strong interior D and has a low post game?

:) just kidding around of course :)

Psyren
11-19-2010, 04:19 PM
I sure as hell would never trade Danny just to help Denver put Melo elsewhere.

pacers74
11-19-2010, 04:20 PM
Personally, I wouldn't trade Danny for anyone. The same goes for Roy.

I'm not someone that would trade his mother to win. I wouldn't trade my favorites for anyone, regardless of relative values.


I love my favorite players, but I would not be opposed to trading them for the right price. That price would be something along the lines of Kevin Durant.;)

MillerTime
11-19-2010, 04:32 PM
If we trade Granger, I would defintely want Melo in return. But taking Melo also means taking on a lot more salary. Granger's contract is VERY reasonable

duke dynamite
11-19-2010, 04:42 PM
It would be interesting to see what Danny would be capable of in a different environment. Ideally, I'd love to see him paired WITH Carmelo and not as the primary piece of a team like he's been in recent years with us.

PaceBalls
11-19-2010, 04:47 PM
Melo is a malcontent too, as good as he is, he is self centered, narcisstic and I don't want that on our team. Danny has been everything you want from your star player as far as attitude and wanting to be here and that is hugely important for a small market team like ours.

NapTonius Monk
11-19-2010, 04:49 PM
Just out of curiosity , and highley unlikely, but say we landed Melo, without giving up Granger, and he signed an extension

Could Granger and Melo play at the same time and be productive? and if so, which position would each play?Sure! You'd already be in fantasy land anyway, so sure it'd work! :hippie:

ThA HoyA
11-19-2010, 04:54 PM
How is melo a malcontent??? Because he doesn't like the direction management is taking the franchise and won't committ?! He's play well for them and if he walks at the end too bad he played his contract out...

Noodle
11-19-2010, 04:54 PM
Just out of curiosity , and highley unlikely, but say we landed Melo, without giving up Granger, and he signed an extension

Could Granger and Melo play at the same time and be productive? and if so, which position would each play?

Insiting conventional wisdom, Granger would be at the 2 spot. Carmelo is a better post player and rebounder. Granger is a better perimeter player than Carmelo. In Jim's offense he would fit in as a four, which would actually be ideal for this team. Collison, Rush, Granger, Melo, Hibbert. That would be a starting five of a real contender.

cdash
11-19-2010, 05:00 PM
Personally, I wouldn't trade Danny for anyone. The same goes for Roy.

I'm not someone that would trade his mother to win. I wouldn't trade my favorites for anyone, regardless of relative values.

I would. I can always get new favorites. I want to win.

Gamble1
11-19-2010, 05:00 PM
ITs never going to happen so why bother reading this work week filler from Stein.

vnzla81
11-19-2010, 05:02 PM
I would. I can always get new favorites. I want to win.

I would too, every day of the week and twice on Saturday.

xBulletproof
11-19-2010, 05:04 PM
I'd trade Danny for a few guys. Carmelo isn't one of them.

Either way, nothing will come of this. Makes no sense for us.

MTM
11-19-2010, 05:38 PM
Personally, I wouldn't trade Danny for anyone. The same goes for Roy.

I'm not someone that would trade his mother to win. I wouldn't trade my favorites for anyone, regardless of relative values.


I respect the view of keeping favorites and being loyal to the players that got you there. But I still prefer following a winner than following guys I like who keep losing more than half of their games. Somehow Danny still hasn't made it into that spot for me.

A comparison in an unrelated sport - I am a huge Reds fan and was not necessarily excited when they traded a young homegrown player for Scott Rolen, an aging, injured player who had played the villain many times in other uniforms. But it took less than one season for me to embrace him on MY team and for him to become one of my favorite players.

In other words... if a player is good and plays elsewhere... then unless I am indelibly attached (Peyton Manning, Reggie Miller type face of the franchise border line hall of famer types) to a player, I would trade anyone for them if it means making the team better.

Infinite MAN_force
11-19-2010, 05:50 PM
The only players worth trading Danny for, are guys who we are never going to get anyway. Its really a useless conversation. Danny will always be worth more to us than he will net in a trade.

Trophy
11-19-2010, 05:53 PM
Danny is unavailable.

He's one of the last guys this team will trade along with Roy and DC.

He's improving his defense and is looking more like a leader and an elite player. He has more guys to help him out now.

Danny is the face of the franchise.

ballism
11-19-2010, 06:08 PM
Well, the most realistic scenario with NY teams I could see would be
Melo to Nets
Granger to Denver
Derrick Favors, Nets 2 first round picks and Ty Lawson and/or Terrence Williams to Indiana

We add talent with this deal. But lose current performance. We have by far the most cap space in NBA after this year. But we probably aren't any good for another 1-2 years, till Favors develops - which he will, judging by how he plays atm.

That deal makes us possibly the most talented young team in NBA. Then you consider all you can do with the picks and cap space. In another 3-4 years we could very well shoot for one of top seeds.
Personally, I'm not tired of waiting, and would absolutely watch such a young and super talented team. But I know that most of you are tired of '3 year plans'. :)

pacers_heath
11-19-2010, 06:21 PM
I personally think we should trade danny for a star PF of equal talent. We'd still have some talent at the wing spots and be an overall more balanced team. Paul George is DG 2.0 + its a lot easier to replace wing players in this league and we could easily do that next summer if we feel George isn't the answer (or Rush)

ballism
11-19-2010, 06:29 PM
Well I don't see anyone offering star PFs. Besides, Danny's contract is great for his talent.
So I don't see a point in trading him - and I don't think we could get a fair value - unless it's for young talented player + assets.
Which in turn implies another '3 year plan'. Which is very unlikely. I doubt the franchise can simply afford it. Arena is getting empty as it is.

But personally, if money was not an issue, there's some 5-6 young players I'd pull the trigger for. Especially when you add considerable number of picks + lesser young assets.

Dr. Awesome
11-19-2010, 06:32 PM
Well, the most realistic scenario with NY teams I could see would be
Melo to Nets
Granger to Denver
Derrick Favors, Nets 2 first round picks and Ty Lawson and/or Terrence Williams to Indiana

We add talent with this deal. But lose current performance. We have by far the most cap space in NBA after this year. But we probably aren't any good for another 1-2 years, till Favors develops - which he will, judging by how he plays atm.

That deal makes us possibly the most talented young team in NBA. Then you consider all you can do with the picks and cap space. In another 3-4 years we could very well shoot for one of top seeds.
Personally, I'm not tired of waiting, and would absolutely watch such a young and super talented team. But I know that most of you are tired of '3 year plans'. :)

Danny Granger is nowhere remotely close to being worth Favors, 2 1st round picks, and Lawson or Williams.

Smoothdave1
11-19-2010, 06:33 PM
Well, the most realistic scenario with NY teams I could see would be
Melo to Nets
Granger to Denver
Derrick Favors, Nets 2 first round picks and Ty Lawson and/or Terrence Williams to Indiana

We add talent with this deal. But lose current performance. We have by far the most cap space in NBA after this year. But we probably aren't any good for another 1-2 years, till Favors develops - which he will, judging by how he plays atm.

That deal makes us possibly the most talented young team in NBA. Then you consider all you can do with the picks and cap space. In another 3-4 years we could very well shoot for one of top seeds.
Personally, I'm not tired of waiting, and would absolutely watch such a young and super talented team. But I know that most of you are tired of '3 year plans'. :)

If Bird could get Favors, Lawson, Williams and a few 1st rounders, Danny would already be looking for a house in Denver. No way Denver trades Melo & Lawson for Granger.

Denver's reluctance to do the original deal was because of luxury tax implications. Therefore, if a deal were to go down, I could see a deal that looks like:

Melo & Solo to Jersey
Granger, Dahntay & 1st rd pick from Nets to Denver
Favors, Murphy & maybe Williams and/or a pick to Indy?

Denver saves some money and gets a player in Granger who is locked up for a few more years. They also get back Dahntay, who thrived in Denver and can give them quality minutes and play D. Jersey gets their superstar in Melo to pair with Harris, Lopez & Morrow. Pacers get a legit 4, a possible replacement for Danny and JOB gets Murphy back, albeit for a short-term rental.

Pacers would then have Murphy, Foster, Ford, Tinsley & Dunleavy coming off the books this summer or about 43 million in salary. We'd go with the core of Collison, Price, Lance, Rush, Williams, Josh, Favors, Paul, Tyler, Roy and maybe someone like Magnum?

I'm not advocating a deal, but I wouldn't put anything past Bird if he thinks we can be better. However, I think Bird would be hesitant to do a deal as I think he knows we may make the playoffs as a #8 or 7 seed and wants to see the Pacers do so before shipping Granger out.

PaceBalls
11-19-2010, 06:49 PM
How is melo a malcontent??? Because he doesn't like the direction management is taking the franchise and won't committ?! He's play well for them and if he walks at the end too bad he played his contract out...

I guess loyalty to the people paid him more money than any of us will ever see in our lifetimes combined counts for nothing. Or the comraderie of his teammates.

It's not just "too bad for Denver, he played out his contract" They invested a ton of money and built their team around him only to have him give up on them. I hate this ego centric attitude and I would never want anyone like that on the Pacers as a franchise player.

How would you feel about him if he were on the Pacers pulling this crap? Yea, I would be pissed too and he would get booed, loud.

I'm so glad we have guys like Roy and Danny who are happy to be on the team, even we are not winning 50 games, but are trying their hardest to make our team better.

ThA HoyA
11-19-2010, 06:54 PM
I guess loyalty to the people paid him more money than any of us will ever see in our lifetimes combined counts for nothing. Or the comraderie of his teammates.

It's not just "too bad for Denver, he played out his contract" They invested a ton of money and built their team around him only to have him give up on them. I hate this ego centric attitude and I would never want anyone like that on the Pacers as a franchise player.

How would you feel about him if he were on the Pacers pulling this crap? Yea, I would be pissed too and he would get booed, loud.

I'm so glad we have guys like Roy and Danny who are happy to be on the team, even we are not winning 50 games, but are trying their hardest to make our team better.

You make it sound like he owes them anything besides fulfilling his contract, yes he being paid by then to do a job! It's not like denver hasn't gotten any rewards from having him on the team. He's not locked into a lifetime loyalt because the team drafted him. If he wasn't playing well and wasn't worth it to the team they would be trying to trade him right away.

ballism
11-19-2010, 07:02 PM
If Bird could get Favors, Lawson, Williams and a few 1st rounders, Danny would already be looking for a house in Denver. No way Denver trades Melo & Lawson for Granger.



Danny Granger is nowhere remotely close to being worth Favors, 2 1st round picks, and Lawson or Williams.

You guys may be right, Indiana might be getting too much in this deal. However, Melo is about to leave. Nets offer seems outrageously good in this case. Denver obviously wants a star instead of young talent and picks. We are the only team who can provide a star - on a great longterm contract nonetheless.

Therefore, my line of thought is: Nets are already prepared to give at least Favors + 2 1st rounds picks to get Melo straight up - if we believe this article. Anything more than Granger - an All Star with a great contract - is simply too much for Melo if he is leaving after this year. Even Granger would seem like a huge find in this situation.
By default then, Nets' side of current deal could be asked for by Indiana.

I don't know if Williams or Lawson might be available to make this deal work. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised either way. Lawson is a talented backup, and I keep hearing rumors that Billups is as close to untouchable as anyone. Nets on the other hand seem to be pressed to make the playoffs this year by the new owner. If they are desperate enough to give Favors after a great start, I'm no longer sure Williams is safe either. I might be wrong. :p

Now, if this article is missinformed, and the original Nets offer is no longer available. Or Denver still believes it has a good chance at keeping Melo at February... Then this whole discussion is of course moot.

BlueNGold
11-19-2010, 07:05 PM
Melo, Nene and Ty Lawson for Granger, Dunleavy and TJ.

It works on trade checker...and for us...;<)

Doddage
11-19-2010, 07:17 PM
I'd do Granger for a package centered around Favors and picks. Favors has shown me enough so far to lead to me to believe he'll be an impact player in the league. He'd be a nice complement to Hibbert to boot with his defensive potential. Don't get me wrong, I like Granger a lot, but this is the right kind of deal to make, imo.

Dr. Awesome
11-19-2010, 07:57 PM
I'd do Granger for a package centered around Favors and picks. Favors has shown me enough so far to lead to me to believe he'll be an impact player in the league. He'd be a nice complement to Hibbert to boot with his defensive potential. Don't get me wrong, I like Granger a lot, but this is the right kind of deal to make, imo.

It would be one of the few deals I would consider trading Granger in. Collison/Rush/George/Favors/Hibbert would be a great young core, especially with Hibbert and Favors leading it. That could be a huge duo moving forward.

PR07
11-19-2010, 08:09 PM
Danny Granger is in his prime and is a very affordable all-star level talent, why wouldn't someone want him? It makes sense why Denver would want him, if you trade the face of your franchise, you're going to have to get in a big name to take some of the backlash.

Problem is, the Pacers have no intention of moving DG, and likely wouldn't, unless it's for a sure-fire upgrade. While Anthony IS, in fact a sure-fire upgrade, no way Indiana acquires him without him signing an extension (which he's not going to want to do, because he's leaving for the Knicks one way or another).

oxxo
11-19-2010, 08:57 PM
We would never get fair value in any trade for Danny, especially once you take his EXTREMELY good contract into consideration. For some reason alot of people ignore his contract when they talk about trading him. Danny did the Pacers a favor in signing his contract, he could've gotten much more. We are lucky to have him for (relatively) cheap, especially if he keeps up the recent improved defense.

15th parallel
11-19-2010, 09:54 PM
I'll point out some reasons not to trade Danny for Melo:

1. Danny has shown in his career that he can play solid defense, while Melo...I can't remember somebody telling me he's a good defender.

2. In recent games, we have seen that for the team to win, it must be a team effort on offense. So offense + defense in Danny is much better fit for this team rather than all offense from Melo. We have a lot of scorers although they're streaky at times.

3. Granger's contract is very cheap for an all-star talent. It's not a franchise-killer contract given the effort he has given up to this point, and the fact that even with injuries he played more than half of all regular season games. Melo's contract is much larger but with only a slight upgrade on offense. If in case he re-signed with the Pacers, I believe it will be a max and the fact that we still have to resign young players such as Hibbert and Rush for large contracts, then that can hurt the team.

4. If Denver truly eyes Granger on a trade, that tells you something about his value, right? If I would have to trade Danny to other teams, then I might as well target much better players than Melo.

Gamble1
11-19-2010, 10:58 PM
I'll point out some reasons not to trade Danny for Melo:

1. Danny has shown in his career that he can play solid defense, while Melo...I can't remember somebody telling me he's a good defender.

2. In recent games, we have seen that for the team to win, it must be a team effort on offense. So offense + defense in Danny is much better fit for this team rather than all offense from Melo. We have a lot of scorers although they're streaky at times.

3. Granger's contract is very cheap for an all-star talent. It's not a franchise-killer contract given the effort he has given up to this point, and the fact that even with injuries he played more than half of all regular season games. Melo's contract is much larger but with only a slight upgrade on offense. If in case he re-signed with the Pacers, I believe it will be a max and the fact that we still have to resign young players such as Hibbert and Rush for large contracts, then that can hurt the team.

4. If Denver truly eyes Granger on a trade, that tells you something about his value, right? If I would have to trade Danny to other teams, then I might as well target much better players than Melo.

OR it could mean no other team is willing to give a star player for an unsigned Melo.

I am not trying to hate on Danny's value it just that the Nuggets are in a tough spot with their franchise player and the only offer we have heard about was 2 first rounders and a rookie for him. IF I were the Nuggets I would be interested in any of the franchise player too.

Indra
11-20-2010, 10:41 AM
Probably 90% of the teams in the league are interested in Granger. That's what happens when you play as well as he is playing.