PDA

View Full Version : compare PG and DG in 2nd year



colts19
02-29-2012, 06:25 PM
I haven't looked up their numbers but from memory it would seem danny was a little more advanced as a scorer but PG has shown more signs of absolute greatness in spurts than Danny did in his 2nd year.

I think PG has shown more star potential than any player that I can remember at his age as far as Pacer except for maybe Big George MaGinnis.

What do you think. Looking forward to your thoughts.

yoadknux
02-29-2012, 06:34 PM
If you compare stats, they were about the same. The factor here is that Granger was 23 on his 2nd year while George is only 21.

Anthem
02-29-2012, 06:40 PM
Paul's defense was better, and he looks smoother on the court.

ilive4sports
02-29-2012, 06:47 PM
Paul's defense was better, and he looks smoother on the court.

thats why i think PG is gonna be so special. He just has the flow to the game down. When he cleans up his handles, he is going to be so damn fun to watch

adamscb
03-01-2012, 09:34 AM
i think PG is a better all-around player than granger was his second year. when comparing stats, PG has more rebounds, steals, and assists. it's only a matter of time until paul's ppg starts to rise

Lance George
03-01-2012, 10:20 AM
Second Year: Paul George vs. Danny Granger (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=grangda01&y1=2007&p2=georgpa01&y2=2012)

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2751/21722280.gif

Scoring wise, it's near equal, but George has shown a far more complete game to go along with being two years younger and far more athletic.

Rogco
03-01-2012, 10:24 AM
I think 3rd year will really be the interesting point of comparison.

colts19
03-01-2012, 06:14 PM
So from the numbers it would appear that PG could be at least on a level with danny in a year or two. Add that to what Roy is becoming and I think our future is very bright indeed.:dance::dance:

ksuttonjr76
03-01-2012, 07:41 PM
So from the numbers it would appear that PG could be at least on a level with danny in a year or two. Add that to what Roy is becoming and I think our future is very bright indeed.:dance::dance:

I was thinking the same thing.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/IND/2007.html#roster::none

Granger could have been a 2nd or 3rd scoring option under Rick, where the Vogel-led Pacers is more "team-oriented" when it comes to sharing the basketball. In short, Paul George could average more PPG under a system where he's the 2nd or 3rd option. I want to say he's currently the 4th option on this team.

BlueNGold
03-01-2012, 09:50 PM
Paul George has better skills than Granger in multiple areas. Whether he takes advantage of it is the only question.

I think his first year he was held back quite a bit by a lack of strength. It's getting better, but it's still holding him back a little. Imagine Granger coming into the league two years earlier and you would probably see a less effective player than Paul George is right now. Not just on defense btw.

mcampbellarch
03-01-2012, 10:33 PM
Good to be in the position to have this type of conversation.

danman
03-01-2012, 10:44 PM
I would caution against using Granger as a baseline. He steadily upped his scoring average by 6 points per game each year for his first 4 years, which may be unprecedented.

The more typical model is a sudden "leap" year in a player's second or third year (for someone who will become a star). Or put another way, if PG doesn't explode onto the scene next year, going up to 20 ppg or thereabouts, odds are stacked against him ever becoming a star. This holds even for guys who come to the Nba out of high school.

Mind you, I think Paul is at least on a solid starter trajectory. But "special" shows up early. We'll see next year... or not.

picasso
03-01-2012, 11:26 PM
Some of you guys are under selling Granger.. Hindsight 20/20 it's not even close.
Granger was freaky athletic when he was younger, Now for some reason his knees look like they have aged 30 years.

He was being compared to freaking Scotty Pippen because he was versatile.
And there were many discussions where people would take DG over KD back then. Granger was good... Real good..

Nothing is a given IMO, Granger has worked his butt off to get where he is at. Lets just hope that Paul has that same drive, because the talent is there to be great.

Pacerized
03-02-2012, 12:47 AM
Some of you guys are under selling Granger.. Hindsight 20/20 it's not even close.
Granger was freaky athletic when he was younger, Now for some reason his knees look like they have aged 30 years.

He was being compared to freaking Scotty Pippen because he was versatile.
And there were many discussions where people would take DG over KD back then. Granger was good... Real good..

Nothing is a given IMO, Granger has worked his butt off to get where he is at. Lets just hope that Paul has that same drive, because the talent is there to be great.

I agree, for his first 4 years Granger grew by leaps and bounds every year. Very few players develop from year to year the way Granger did. If Paul develops at the speed Granger did I'll be very happy.

croz24
03-02-2012, 01:06 AM
Only the homers were comparing Danny to Scottie. And you can't measure the two strictly on scoring. Put George on a 30 win team and make him the go to guy and I guarantee he too would up his scoring average the way Granger did. The only two areas Granger was superior to George at that point in their careers are composure and mid range shooting. Earlier in Granger's career, when he had an open 20 footer where he could square up, he just didn't miss. Also, 4 years in college vs 2 for George added more composure to Granger's game and mentality.

picasso
03-02-2012, 02:30 AM
Only the homers were comparing Danny to Scottie. And you can't measure the two strictly on scoring. Put George on a 30 win team and make him the go to guy and I guarantee he too would up his scoring average the way Granger did. The only two areas Granger was superior to George at that point in their careers are composure and mid range shooting. Earlier in Granger's career, when he had an open 20 footer where he could square up, he just didn't miss. Also, 4 years in college vs 2 for George added more composure to Granger's game and mentality.


You can't say that.. It is not a given because of how RAW PG is.. Put Paul George on a 30 win team and he might not develop and bust out. We saw how terrible he looked when he was the main man vs Cleveland. He would have to be guarded by the tams best defense man and he would have to carry the load for us. PG has the luxury to step back and be the 3rd-4th scoring option! there is no pressure put on him. He gets to roam around and change the game defensively. He's not there yet offensively.

I was reading a Golden state forum the other day. They were saying how they needed a super lobsided trade to jump start them again. The Baron Davis Speedy Claxton one then the Mike-Troy for Capt Jack and Harrington.

Danny was thrown to the fire with a crappy team around him and he has developed very nicely. He responded well to adversity and has carried this franchise.

And IDK about Pacer homers lol.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3748281

Lance George
03-02-2012, 11:09 AM
The Scottie Pippen comparisons for Danny were always silly. Maybe in terms of size and scoring ability, but what made Pippen so great was his overall game; rebounding, defense, and point forward skills. Danny never had one-fifth of Pippen's complete game.

George probably never will have Pippen's overall game, either, but the early results are quite promising.

Second Season: Paul George vs. Scottie Pippen (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=georgpa01&y1=2012&p2=pippesc01&y2=1989)

http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/2170/15034289.gif