PDA

View Full Version : Ebay Auction for Granger



Jon Theodore
03-03-2011, 04:43 PM
Next year, Pacers start the season by calling every team in the league and say "We are trading Danny Granger in the next 7 days, we will accept the best offer at the end of the 7 day period."

Seriously, just take the best offer and run. Pacers need to REBUILD for real. Build this team around Paul George, Hansbrough, Stephenson, McRoberts, Hibbert, Price, Collison, D. Jones (perfect vet on a young team), etc.

Paul George will be better than Danny Granger in 3 years...I guarantee that unless he has some crazy injury. (call me in three years to tell me i'm wrong, because I won't be.)

Our starting line-up has been an absolute joke these past couple of games...embarrasing and just plain boring to watch. Dahntay Jones, Hansbrough, Foster and Price give more effort than ANYONE in our starting line-up everytime they are on the floor...they also actually seem to enjoy winning versus losing....enough to give it their all. On a talent level, none of those guys are starters in this league...yet they seem to bail THIS TEAM out on a regular basis. (You mean effort really does make a difference?)

Collison, Rush, Granger...those three guys more than anybody give me the "another day at the office" vibe.

We should have lost the game to Golden State...the defense when our starters came back in was absolutely hysterical (no communication, it's as if they hate playing with each other)...I almost thought I must be watching some reality TV show...because the difference between our starters/bench on defense was absolutely hysterical to watch...I was literally laughing because it was humorous to me. It was like girls vs boys.

Lance Stephenson has already shown flashes of brilliance, along with Paul George who makes everything he does look effortless...that guy just seems like he is always on auto pilot (i mean that in a good way.) I'm ready to watch this team grow, I'm done seeing Granger "dribble" his way into the paint and hope for a bail out from the refs. Anyone who fouls Danny Granger when he drives to the lane needs their head examined, just give the guy a LITTLE tiny bit of resistance and he will miss the shot or dribble off his own foot.

If you can get two young prospects for Granger, it is worth it. Granger is not taking this team anywhere, Lakers or Spurs wouldn't even want him as a third fiddle.



.....now tell me how i'm wrong

Hicks
03-03-2011, 04:54 PM
Well, if nothing else, you're wrong if you think giving 29 teams a pseudo-ultimatum of 7 days will work out well for you.

Jon Theodore
03-03-2011, 04:57 PM
It's not an ultimatum, it's an auction...they don't even have to "bid." But I bet most teams would be worried about another rival team picking him up for peanuts, therefore they'd probably want to make an offer.

I mean whats up psychologys

Trader Joe
03-03-2011, 05:01 PM
Why would they do that if he's as un-interested and useless as you seem to think he is?

Jon Theodore
03-03-2011, 05:04 PM
One mans trash is anothers treasure.

MyFavMartin
03-03-2011, 05:04 PM
Could ask Utah for BRush + PG for Favors. Some teams might actually want the young talent we have rather than DG.

TinManJoshua
03-03-2011, 05:06 PM
It's not an ultimatum, it's an auction...they don't even have to "bid." But I bet most teams would be worried about another rival team picking him up for peanuts, therefore they'd probably want to make an offer.

I mean whats up psychologys

What? Between this and "nauseum" in the other thread I think your crazy. Or at least have "big word" Tourette's.

Anyway, putting an ultimatum out(which is what it really is, not an auction) isn't gonna get you great offers. Second, claiming you'll take best offer means you take ANY offer. That's a ****ty way to deal Danny, if you ask me.

duke dynamite
03-03-2011, 05:08 PM
What? Between this and "nauseum" in the other thread I think your crazy. Or at least have "big word" Tourette's.



:hmm:

smj887
03-03-2011, 05:23 PM
This thread is almost as crappy as the Pacers offense last night.

pacerDU
03-03-2011, 05:27 PM
Pacers need to REBUILD for real.

...yeah 'cause the team hasn't really been rebuilt at all in the last few years

People can bad-talk Granger all they want but honestly, give me one good reason why he's bad for this team.

I think some of it has to do with people expecting him to be a superstar. He's been our best player (and still is) over the last 4 or 5 years, so people expect him to be a perennial all-star. Maybe some people should lower their expectations.

Is he getting paid superstar money - no.
Is his salary commensurate to his production - I think so.

Just because he's been the best player on a team with below-average talent isn't his fault. He doesn't pretend to be a superstar, demanding more shots or acting like a prima donna. He's a good teammate who seems to be well-liked.

No, he's not a superstar, but explain to me how he's hurting us? How does trading our best player for peanuts help us?

pacers74
03-03-2011, 05:30 PM
Could ask Utah for BRush + PG for Favors. Some teams might actually want the young talent we have rather than DG.


I would hope Bird would hang up on them. It would take an awful lot to get Paul from us and Favors isn't enough.

TinManJoshua
03-03-2011, 05:35 PM
:hmm:

well, maybe that isn't the best diagnosis.

In this thread he says "psychologys" which isn't a word, or even what I think he was trying to say.

In the "Debacle" thread he asked "Where's the nauseum?". "Ad Nauseum" is a phrase, but "nauseum" by itself is gibberish.

So unless he's trying to utilize word of the day TP, poorly, he's got something wrong with his brain where he just spews out nonsense accidentally.

yoadknux
03-03-2011, 06:11 PM
Building around Granger isn't optimal, because he isn't a Superstar. But it's by far our best option, and could get good results.
Getting more unproven young talent for our best player? Sorry, no.

That's probably the most bizarre post i've ever seen about the Pacers since I joined. Building the team around Mcroberts and Stephenson? What?
D. Jones a Perfect Vet on a young team?!

I don't understand why some of you guys wanna trade him so badly. He's a good player, among the best scorers today, has a really decent contract, and been here for a long time.
You talk as if Granger is the reason our young players don't develop. And like as long as Granger's around, George won't get better.

Geez I wonder why this thread got opened one day after we got blown out by OKC and Granger didn't play well, and not one day after we beat the warriors thanks to 27 pts by our Best Player.

pacer4ever
03-03-2011, 06:12 PM
we need 4 guys = to Dannys talent to be contenders much like Atlanta.

joeyd
03-03-2011, 06:21 PM
we need 4 guys = to Dannys talent to be contenders much like Atlanta.

Or, we need a go-to guy who can finish games, and a point guard with a high b-ball IQ that can also embrace a "situation-appropriate" pass-first mentality.

Eleazar
03-03-2011, 06:29 PM
...yeah 'cause the team hasn't really been rebuilt at all in the last few years

People can bad-talk Granger all they want but honestly, give me one good reason why he's bad for this team.

I think some of it has to do with people expecting him to be a superstar. He's been our best player (and still is) over the last 4 or 5 years, so people expect him to be a perennial all-star. Maybe some people should lower their expectations.

Is he getting paid superstar money - no.
Is his salary commensurate to his production - I think so.

Just because he's been the best player on a team with below-average talent isn't his fault. He doesn't pretend to be a superstar, demanding more shots or acting like a prima donna. He's a good teammate who seems to be well-liked.

No, he's not a superstar, but explain to me how he's hurting us? How does trading our best player for peanuts help us?

He can be bad for the team because he doesn't give 100% effort all the time. His production in no way is equal to his salary. He has shown he can average 25 ppg and play good defense when he puts in the effort, but instead he plays below average defense and only averages 21 ppg. No one is expecting him to be Kobe or LeBron, but we do expect him to give it his all and he doesn't.

pacer4ever
03-03-2011, 06:31 PM
lets try a cragslist auction instead! :rolleyes:

Speed
03-03-2011, 06:34 PM
Heres the problem with this idea.

Let the bidding start with Brian Scalabrine....

wait, I'll offer Ike Diogu and a second rounder

Wait, no, I'll give you Royal Ivey, Baron Davis (Jabba the Hut sized by the offseason), and TWO second rounders and the rights to Frederick Weis.

Your auction is now closed and the Pacers are the loser.

yoadknux
03-03-2011, 06:45 PM
He can be bad for the team because he doesn't give 100% effort all the time. His production in no way is equal to his salary. He has shown he can average 25 ppg and play good defense when he puts in the effort, but instead he plays below average defense and only averages 21 ppg. No one is expecting him to be Kobe or LeBron, but we do expect him to give it his all and he doesn't.
Danny doesn't wake up in the morning and think "hmm.. how many points should I score today... Nah i dont feel like scoring 25, ill score 21"
He regressed a bit, yes, but still, its more about the supporting cast.
It wasn't a young team back then, it was a pretty decent crew.

PacersPride
03-03-2011, 06:50 PM
...yeah 'cause the team hasn't really been rebuilt at all in the last few years

People can bad-talk Granger all they want but honestly, give me one good reason why he's bad for this team.

I think some of it has to do with people expecting him to be a superstar. He's been our best player (and still is) over the last 4 or 5 years, so people expect him to be a perennial all-star. Maybe some people should lower their expectations.

Is he getting paid superstar money - no.
Is his salary commensurate to his production - I think so.

Just because he's been the best player on a team with below-average talent isn't his fault. He doesn't pretend to be a superstar, demanding more shots or acting like a prima donna. He's a good teammate who seems to be well-liked.

No, he's not a superstar, but explain to me how he's hurting us? How does trading our best player for peanuts help us?

trade DC he has low bball iq, trade Hibbert he is garbage, trade Granger for peanuts! a broken record.

the one vet we have on this team capable of starting and lets trade him away for more younger players. are we wanting to represent the east in the rookie/sophmore game here?

we need vets on this team in order to WIN. we have enough young players as is. Lets add too Danny unless we get an offer too good to pass up (and no this doesnt mean a free beer and pretzel with the peanuts many are willing to accept on here).

I hope Bird can make a move like acquiring AI and West this offseason to add too Granger.

i realize Danny looks half asleep sometimes, but i need to see this guy in the playoffs before i write him off as a failure and poor leader.

Granger like any star needs talent around him. Kobe pouted about it until he got Gasol, Kobe could not get this team out of the first round by himself, how does anyone expect Granger too.

and another thing.. please realize what Granger has had around him for the past 3 seasons. Troy "no defense" Murphy as our team mvp? earl watson? brandon rush? james posey for a half a season?

if kobe cant do it, why should we expect Granger to be able too. Granger has had garbage around him for 3 seasons. only now is DC, and Roy provided any sort of help scoring wise.

Add West and AI too this team then consider if Granger is the right fit or not. by then George may be able to take over and we trade him then.

Almost every star in this league whose team is any good has a second and maybe even solid third option.

Howard> arenas, hedu, jrich, nelson
KG> Allen Pierce
DRose> Boozer, Noah, Deng
Bron> Wade, Bosh
Kobe> Gasol, Odum, Artest, Bynum
Paul> West, Ariza
Duncan> Manu, Parker, Jefferson
Durant> Westbrook, Perk, Ilbalka, Harden
Melo> Stat, Billups
Johnson> Smith, Horford

Granger> Hibbert, Collison, Rush, McBob. Granger is the only player over 25.

in previous seasons:

Granger> Murphy:laugh:Watson:laugh:Dunleavy:laugh:Nestoravi ch:laugh:Ford:laugh:.

More than any other player I believe Granger was affected most by Obriens poor coaching. Granger is still a very good player but Obrien turned into a player who shot alot of 3's..

below are Dannys stats, the month of February he shot 48% fg%. His 3s have decreased and FT attempts have went up.

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/2760/danny-granger

Rogco
03-03-2011, 06:54 PM
...yeah 'cause the team hasn't really been rebuilt at all in the last few years

People can bad-talk Granger all they want but honestly, give me one good reason why he's bad for this team.
?

1.) His defense is freakin' awful
2.) He couldn't win a 50/50 ball if his life depended on it (i so miss the Granger days of him diving on the floor against the Celtics and knocking out his teeth, and being a badass)
3.) He tends to make momentum killing mistakes

Jrod Jones
03-03-2011, 06:59 PM
This thread is a joke but I understand some of the frustrations.

Nothing worse then watching your best scorers jog around on defense and show minimal effort. BUT I am not going to pretend that Granger is not vital to the team. Having a guy drop 20+ is more valuable then a lot of you give credit for (There are only 19 guys in the NBA doing it this year.)

And as others have pointed out, its not like we are paying him 16mill a year, nor are we dealing with any "superstar" drama with him. He seems pretty well liked by the team too.

Yes he seems pretty lackadaisical on defense most of the time, but his offense is very important. I also have a feeling that his defensive effort will step up tremendously when faced with a legitimate playoff series in the national spotlight...

ilive4sports
03-03-2011, 07:42 PM
Ummm you're wrong.

One, saying you will trade him to the best off at the end of 7 days is extremely dumb. You don't put a time limit on it. It only encourages low ball offers.

Two if Granger is so bad and worthless to this team, what makes you think we are going to get a good offer for him? You are underrating him on this team and overrating him on others. It doesn't make sense. Your hate for Granger has gone from comical to just sad.

Who are we going to get for Granger that will make us so much better? Its too much of a risk to trade Danny. So what if Paul George is going to be better in a few years. That doesn't mean Danny doesn't have a lot of value to this team.

Kaufman
03-03-2011, 07:46 PM
Next year, Pacers start the season by calling every team in the league and say "We are trading Danny Granger in the next 7 days, we will accept the best offer at the end of the 7 day period."


weren't you the peyton manning trade guy

CableKC
03-03-2011, 07:52 PM
I'd wait until we get a real Starting SG and PF to judge how well Granger fits on this Team and whether we should move him or not.

This is just like the whole "I want to see how ???? plays under a different Coach not named JO'B" argument when it comes to moving/keeping a Player.

The closest thing Granger had to playing with a solid SG was the Pre-Injury version of Dunleavy ( a few years ago when we should have traded him when his value was high ) and even then...that version of Dunleavy wasn't really a real SG but one that we hope was one.

Trophy
03-03-2011, 08:01 PM
we need 4 guys = to Dannys talent to be contenders much like Atlanta.

We have players with the potential to be top guys or guys who will be big for this team moving forward.

Roy is on the right track to becoming a potential All-Star in his future.

It seems like Paul is going to be a top player the Pacers have ever had.

DC is a good a PG who is young and has what it takes to become a solid NBA PG given more experience.

Lance seems like a solid combo guard who will be a solid contributer off the bench for another few seasons.

And Danny who was already an All-Star and a top 5 scorer.

Plus we have some good guys off the bench. Tyler and AJ.

That looks to be our core and now we just need to bring in the right pieces to add to it and hopefully with the cap space, Bird has some ideas in mind.

He probably still has Mayo in mind and is interested in a decent PF.

pacerDU
03-03-2011, 08:07 PM
1.) His defense is freakin' awful
2.) He couldn't win a 50/50 ball if his life depended on it (i so miss the Granger days of him diving on the floor against the Celtics and knocking out his teeth, and being a badass)
3.) He tends to make momentum killing mistakes

These are somewhat exaggerated, but lets for a moment assume it's as bad as you claim:

For the money, could we get anything better than what Granger brings?

I think for the most part what you've highlighted as his weaknesses can largely be attributed to O'Brien. The effort aspect, maybe not. However, if you're playing for a coach who's lost the players (as O'Brien had) and in a system you don't believe in, you tend to lose motivation slightly. It's only natural in any job. But is his effort really as bad as you claim? I personally don't think so.

Now of course it's not all on O'Brien. Granger has his weaknesses that he needs to work on. I'm certainly not denying that. But again are they so bad right now that he's just not worth it for us?

It's going to take some time for him to re-adjust from the coach he had for 4 years. Once he gets some better players around him (and/or the current players improve), he won't have so much of the offensive burden on himself.

I personally feel that next season Danny will be an improved player. As others have mentioned, I'm also eager to see how he does in the playoffs should we make it.

pacer4ever
03-03-2011, 08:19 PM
We have players with the potential to be top guys or guys who will be big for this team moving forward.

Roy is on the right track to becoming a potential All-Star in his future.

It seems like Paul is going to be a top player the Pacers have ever had.

DC is a good a PG who is young and has what it takes to become a solid NBA PG given more experience.

Lance seems like a solid combo guard who will be a solid contributer off the bench for another few seasons.
And Danny who was already an All-Star and a top 5(15) scorer.

Plus we have some good guys off the bench. Tyler and AJ.That looks to be our core and now we just need to bring in the right pieces to add to it and hopefully with the cap space, Bird has some ideas in mind.

He probably still has Mayo in mind and is interested in a decent PF.

everything in bold is a big assumptions

Trophy
03-03-2011, 08:27 PM
everything in bold is a big assumptions

I'm not predicting the future of these guys, but because they're young and they've contributed to this team so far, they have a lot of potential.

This is a wait and see....

BringJackBack
03-03-2011, 08:28 PM
everything in bold is a big assumptions

Outside of the Roy Hibbert potential All-Star thing, not really..

-People who see Paul every single day say that he can (And will) be one of the top guns that we've had.

-DC has been solid outside of this pathetic stretch for this past week in a half. If he improves just a little bit over the next couple of years, than he's solid.. Andre Miller, Jameer Nelson, etc. caliber point guard.

-How is Lance's solid contribution off the future a stretch at all? He's a project who is supposedly supposed to make leaps over the next couple of years.

-How are AJ and Tyler NOT good off the bench..? A lot of good teams would love guys like them. Plus they are supposed to grow.

Again outside of the Roy/All-Star thing, I don't see your point.

Get a starting shooting guard and a power forward along with the improvement of our guys and we're ready to start making strides.

Trophy
03-03-2011, 08:35 PM
Outside of the Roy Hibbert potential All-Star thing, not really..

-People who see Paul every single day say that he can (And will) be one of the top guns that we've had.

-DC has been solid outside of this pathetic stretch for this past week in a half. If he improves just a little bit over the next couple of years, than he's solid.. Andre Miller, Jameer Nelson, etc. caliber point guard.

-How is Lance's solid contribution off the future a stretch at all? He's a project who is supposedly supposed to make leaps over the next couple of years.

-How are AJ and Tyler NOT good off the bench..? A lot of good teams would love guys like them. Plus they are supposed to grow.

Again outside of the Roy/All-Star thing, I don't see your point.

Get a starting shooting guard and a power forward along with the improvement of our guys and we're ready to start making strides.

I agree with what just about everything you're saying.

Roy being an All-Star is definitly a possibility down the road. He just has to be more confident in himself and play like a 7-2 big man and not take **** from anyone in the paint. He needs to continue to add more muscle strength.

Everyone else has a bright future with this team and there's finally a light at the end of this long tunnel to actually gather a core we feel comfortable building around.

PacerDude
03-03-2011, 09:23 PM
Wasn't everybody really, really, really excited a few years ago when Granger started playing beyond expectations ??

Didn't quite work out as well as everyone (me included) had hoped.

George is no different at this point of his career. Let's not put the franchise in his hands like we did with Granger.

oxxo
03-04-2011, 01:09 AM
11 mil.
Would be a GREAT complement to a good creator/#1 guy.
Works hard on his game.
Has a game that will age well.
Doesn't mind/likes being in Indiana.

There is no reason to trade or get rid of Granger, and some people need to take a step back and stop overreacting to a couple of losses.

mattie
03-04-2011, 01:16 AM
Wasn't everybody really, really, really excited a few years ago when Granger started playing beyond expectations ??

Didn't quite work out as well as everyone (me included) had hoped.

George is no different at this point of his career. Let's not put the franchise in his hands like we did with Granger.

I still love what Granger does. He's much better than what people give him credit for... For instance:

Ever single season including this one he has shot a higher effective field goal percentage than Kobe. I say this point out that he is shooting much better than everyone will give him credit for. Since Vogel has taken over he has shot absolutely exceptional from the field.

His eFG% is .497 this season.

He can play great defense as everyone knows and I think we will see it regularly when the team starts to improve more, play better defense as a team and some of the scoring load is taken off of Granger's shoulders.

Granger has shown a phenomenal ability to hit big shots down the stretch, however he just doesn't have the ability to create it for himself especially when everyone else on the court is playing turrible.

Granger is a really good player, and if Paul George is ever given the opportunity to step in the role as full time starting 2g and scorer, everyone will begin to value Granger's play much more.

Jon Theodore
03-04-2011, 11:46 AM
well, maybe that isn't the best diagnosis.

In this thread he says "psychologys" which isn't a word, or even what I think he was trying to say.

In the "Debacle" thread he asked "Where's the nauseum?". "Ad Nauseum" is a phrase, but "nauseum" by itself is gibberish.

So unless he's trying to utilize word of the day TP, poorly, he's got something wrong with his brain where he just spews out nonsense accidentally.

Did you read the debacle thread? Original poster used the phrase "at nauseum" that is why I asked where the Nauseum was. I just wanted to know where he was.

Also, I do have something wrong with my brains.

righteouscool
03-04-2011, 11:56 AM
Man, you guys really hate Granger for some reason.

naptownmenace
03-04-2011, 01:01 PM
weren't you the peyton manning trade guy

Thanks I kept trying to remember the other ridiculous thing that JT kept harping about and you nailed it.

Joe Theodore is at best a contrarian and at worst a troll. Move along people... there's nothing here to see.

:ignore:

Jon Theodore
03-04-2011, 01:24 PM
Thanks I kept trying to remember the other ridiculous thing that JT kept harping about and you nailed it.

Joe Theodore is at best a contrarian and at worst a troll. Move along people... there's nothing here to see.

:ignore:

He didn't nail anything, because I do not watch football and have zero opinion on Peyton Manning or the Colts. What you may remember me "harping" about was probably Jermaine O'neal (whom I never liked)

Jon Theodore
03-04-2011, 01:25 PM
Man, you guys really hate Granger for some reason.

I don't hate Granger, I have a tendency to exaggerate my feelings when posting....I am just done with him being our best player. I'd rather go 100% with the youth movement. If he played Defense with the same intensity D Jones or AJ Price did, he would be my favorite player bar none.

Rogco
03-04-2011, 01:54 PM
These are somewhat exaggerated, but lets for a moment assume it's as bad as you claim:

For the money, could we get anything better than what Granger brings?

I think for the most part what you've highlighted as his weaknesses can largely be attributed to O'Brien. The effort aspect, maybe not. However, if you're playing for a coach who's lost the players (as O'Brien had) and in a system you don't believe in, you tend to lose motivation slightly. It's only natural in any job. But is his effort really as bad as you claim? I personally don't think so.

Now of course it's not all on O'Brien. Granger has his weaknesses that he needs to work on. I'm certainly not denying that. But again are they so bad right now that he's just not worth it for us?

It's going to take some time for him to re-adjust from the coach he had for 4 years. Once he gets some better players around him (and/or the current players improve), he won't have so much of the offensive burden on himself.

I personally feel that next season Danny will be an improved player. As others have mentioned, I'm also eager to see how he does in the playoffs should we make it.

I never claimed he was anything, I was answering the question on hand, which is name one way he is detrimental to the team. It didn't ask me to discuss his positive attributes, so I didn't.

Bball
03-04-2011, 02:20 PM
Danny Granger is a product of bad coaching the past few years. It's going to take a training camp and games to undo some of the damage so that he can get back to playing the game instinctively and with a better understanding of the flow and pace necessary. You don't have bad basketball drilled into your head everyday for 4 years while expected to be the #1 guy and then just leave that behind.

That may be where Vogel has a problem because undoing the damage might take more than just rebuilding Danny's confidence and being a player's coach.

MyFavMartin
03-04-2011, 04:05 PM
We have players with the potential to be top guys or guys who will be big for this team moving forward.

Roy is on the right track to becoming a potential All-Star in his future.

It seems like Paul is going to be a top player the Pacers have ever had.

DC is a good a PG who is young and has what it takes to become a solid NBA PG given more experience.

Lance seems like a solid combo guard who will be a solid contributer off the bench for another few seasons.

And Danny who was already an All-Star and a top 5 scorer.

Plus we have some good guys off the bench. Tyler and AJ.

That looks to be our core and now we just need to bring in the right pieces to add to it and hopefully with the cap space, Bird has some ideas in mind.

He probably still has Mayo in mind and is interested in a decent PF.

The Jay Redd article is inciteful because I think Bird has a list of Mayo like players targeted for the 2 spot... I would think he also has a similar list for other positions, including starting PF. This summer should be interesting.

naptownmenace
03-04-2011, 04:31 PM
He didn't nail anything, because I do not watch football and have zero opinion on Peyton Manning or the Colts. What you may remember me "harping" about was probably Jermaine O'neal (whom I never liked)

If that's the case, I'm sorry. It's easy to get people mixed up. My bad.

I don't remember you harping about Jermaine O'Neal but if you did, I probably disagreed with you. :D I still think that putting on too much weight and injury more than anything else derailed JO's career and I give him a lot more slack because of that.

naptownmenace
03-04-2011, 04:52 PM
Danny Granger is a product of bad coaching the past few years. It's going to take a training camp and games to undo some of the damage so that he can get back to playing the game instinctively and with a better understanding of the flow and pace necessary. You don't have bad basketball drilled into your head everyday for 4 years while expected to be the #1 guy and then just leave that behind.

That may be where Vogel has a problem because undoing the damage might take more than just rebuilding Danny's confidence and being a player's coach.

Danny's played much better during the past month under Vogel than he's done all season prior to OB getting fired.

I really agree with you on everything you said. However, I was really surprised to see how many more free throws Danny had shot during the month of February. At this very moment he's 18th in the league in free throws made and 19th in free throws attempted. He's been much more aggressive on the boards too. I'll look at that as an improvement and a good step in the right direction and I think Vogel has had a lot to do with that.