PDA

View Full Version : Is there really a difference?



picasso
02-14-2013, 02:55 PM
I mean between this Paul George and 2005 Grangerover? I am one of the biggest Paul George homers in this forum I am. But you can't be a homer when you spew the truth.

What makes us value George so much higher than Danny? Is it the fact that were winning? Is it the fact that he plays amazing defense? Is it the fact that he's 22 and is developing

at a crazy rate? Is it the fact that he's a great humble young man and has embraced the city? I mean we all loved Danny, I've been a long time reader here. But something feels different

IMO. With Granger it always felt like he needed to drop 40+ in order for us to stay in a game, But with Paul! I get a weird vibe. Like It's going to be okay. Like he's one of those rare breeds

that makes everyone around him better. He hustles and he expects everyone to do the same, He sets the pace for our team. He eats glass, and bangs down low. He's not a try hard because

there is some crazy amount of talent there. What are your expectations for boy George in 2013-14? I feel like he can be our Paul Pierce type player. I don't even think Paul realizes how

good he can be or is. I'll never forget the summer league, He looked beyond raw. Lance was killing it and so was Magnum. Then he quietly kept putting in work. The Bulls series after arriving in Indy

he went to the Gym that same night. Do you think that he can be the greatest Pacer of all time in this modern era? I mean I don't think he'll ever be outspoken like Uncle Reggie, Nor

do I think he'll be as (fake) tough as the Grangerover. But there is a desire that burns within him, That has me coco for his future. I truly love this Indiana team. The way it develops players,

It's just great and something many franchises can't seem to do. But the point is, What type of greatness do you see from Paul?

3rdStrike
02-14-2013, 02:59 PM
The difference is that Paul George is becoming a complete player who contributes in all facets of the game, starting with defense. He's also more athletic and has a much more diverse game. In short, he's a better overall talent.

Smits Happens
02-14-2013, 03:05 PM
When Danny Granger was the age Paul is now, he was a rookie averaging 7.5 points per game. George reaching All-Star level at age 22, coupled with the fact that he has a more complete game, is what makes Pacer fans more excited about his future than we probably ever were about Granger.

Peck
02-14-2013, 03:15 PM
Do we really have to insult Danny just to profess the greatness of Paul George? Is there a law that say's you can't like both of them?

Fake toughness. smh....

There is no possible way at all that Paul has benefitted from playing with better players is there? No, that has nothing to do with anything.

Look there is no doubt that Paul George is a special player, I think he has the potential to be one of the upper star talents in the NBA. But that does not mean that Danny Granger is a piece of crap.

Mackey_Rose
02-14-2013, 03:17 PM
Look there is no doubt that Paul George is a special player, I think he has the potential to be one of the upper star talents in the NBA. But that does not mean that Danny Granger is a piece of crap.

He never said anything like that.

Speed
02-14-2013, 03:23 PM
He's a better ballhandler, better team defender, more versitile defender (guards more range of players), better at a younger age, way way way better passer.

That last one, I was thinking about last night, whats Dannys career high in assists, I will look it up, but I'd be shocked if he's ever had a double digit assist game. (edit he did in 07, he had 10, I stand corrected.)

PG sees the floor better on both sides. He's a better athlete.

Listen, its hard to compare them without saying 'what' PG is better than DG at. Danny is really really good at guarding big 3s and has a great shot even with a hand in his face.

I've said it several times the last two years. I can't think of anything that I can't see Paul George capable of doing on the basketball court. Thats about as big a compliment as I can think of.

If DG can understand and execute his role with how things have changed the last 4 months... I really start to think that being a true contender is possible, this year. Just crazy.

PGs still has tons of room to grow and he's an allstar.

Since86
02-14-2013, 03:26 PM
That last one, I was thinking about last night, whats Dannys career high in assists, I will look it up, but I'd be shocked if he's ever had a double digit assist game.


2.8 is his career high, sandwiched inbetween 2.7 and 2.6. He had 10 assists vs Mil on 4/11/07.

aamcguy
02-14-2013, 03:31 PM
He never said anything like that.

You are right, and maybe it's because of just expecting to have that reaction on this board, but I got the idea that the comparison to Granger's shortcoming was being made quite deliberately. The OP made a point of calling him fake tough, and the 2nd poster said Granger doesn't contribute in all facets of the game. And the point seemed to be that Granger doesn't play defense. While it may be true that PG is better than Granger at defense and rebounding, Granger is a solid rebounder and an above average defender. Just because George is superior in a few ways doesn't negate the fact that Danny is a great all around player.

Since86
02-14-2013, 03:32 PM
Yeah, there's a difference. PG is much more well rounded. Danny is the better scorer, but I think that comes down to attitude. If PG could get Danny's killer instinct, he'd really be a handful for the rest of the leauge.

Magic P
02-14-2013, 03:34 PM
What i get from reading multiple threads on this forum is that Granger supporters are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that PG is the new face of the franchise.

BillS
02-14-2013, 03:38 PM
PG was drafted at 10, DG at 17. One would certainly EXPECT more upside from PG.

PG plays 2/3, Danny plays 3/4. One would EXPECT more assists from PG than DG.

Danny spent his time on the floor as the #1 option (sometimes the only option capable of scoring at all) and hampered by an offense that was, shall we say, less than stellar in its construction.

Yes, I think PG has the ability to be a star. But I'll need to see some consistency over another year or two before he completely takes Danny's place. If one season made a player, then Danny's MIP season would define him forever and we would not be having this discussion.

BillS
02-14-2013, 03:41 PM
What i get from reading multiple threads on this forum is that Granger supporters are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that PG is the new face of the franchise.

Some people throw "new face of the franchise" around like it turns on a dime. It takes a little more than a breakthrough year to take that place. After all, it was being thrown around that Roy was the "new face of the franchise" after last year - how has that stood the test of time?

There's more to it than "what have you done for me lately?" Let's see what Danny does when he gets back on the floor, THEN let's decide who is the "new face of the franchise".

VideoVandal
02-14-2013, 03:41 PM
With Danny as good as he was during some stretches of his career, his potential always seemed capped at what he was in 2005 that was basically as good as he was ever going to get. Which don't get me wrong was very good and I love Danny, but he honestly was kind of a player that maximized his athletic ability to be where he was. Granger quite simply is not close to the athlete that Paul George is which is testament to Granger for capitalizing as much as he has with his more limited skill sets. PG on the other hand has the kind of athleticism that can truly make him great, he has been compared even by ESPN analysts as a Tracy McGrady that can play defense. While his offense isn't at the level of McGrady he has the athleticism and body build to get there if he can completely capitalize on his athletic abilities. For the people saying PG is a more COMPLETE player this is also slightly true but not by as much as perception seems, I mean Danny was a very good rebounding SF as well just not as elite as PG is in that regard. Danny was always more of a 5 RPG guy PG seems like he can easily maintain his current 8 RPG status for the rest of his career if not even build on that. Danny was also some what limited in his playmaking ability as far as setting up other players something he improved on but was never a big weapon of his, PG isn't a great playmaker yet either but again this is something I think he has more potential in than Granger ever did. I love Granger and if PG doesn't improve much more being a 2005 level Granger player for the rest of your career isn't such a bad thing, but where people are getting super hyped about PG is that we think the ceiling is higher than 2005 Granger's was thus meaning he has a chance to be truly special.

able
02-14-2013, 03:44 PM
What i get from reading multiple threads on this forum is that Granger supporters are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that PG is the new face of the franchise.

What you write is the common thread lately on PD, to many star-gazed player worshippers and not enough Pacers Fans.

It is never, it never was and it never will be about who is the most important, but what the sum total can do for our team. between the fake toughness in the first post and this one, they show perfectly why I get more often irritated reading PD then enjoying myself like I have done for years, I find it easier to deal with antagonists like Olblu then these star worshippers.

Smits Happens
02-14-2013, 03:49 PM
PG was drafted at 10, DG at 17. One would certainly EXPECT more upside from PG.

PG plays 2/3, Danny plays 3/4. One would EXPECT more assists from PG than DG.

Danny spent his time on the floor as the #1 option (sometimes the only option capable of scoring at all) and hampered by an offense that was, shall we say, less than stellar in its construction.

Yes, I think PG has the ability to be a star. But I'll need to see some consistency over another year or two before he completely takes Danny's place. If one season made a player, then Danny's MIP season would define him forever and we would not be having this discussion.
One would also EXPECT more rebounds from the guy playing the 3/4.

Magic P
02-14-2013, 03:50 PM
What you write is the common thread lately on PD, to many star-gazed player worshippers and not enough Pacers Fans.

It is never, it never was and it never will be about who is the most important, but what the sum total can do for our team. between the fake toughness in the first post and this one, they show perfectly why I get more often irritated reading PD then enjoying myself like I have done for years, I find it easier to deal with antagonists like Olblu then these star worshippers.

Actually, the star worshippers are those who keep saying everything is going to be alright when Danny gets back. Do those post equally upset you? I bet you that they don't.

Mackey_Rose
02-14-2013, 03:50 PM
Some people throw "new face of the franchise" around like it turns on a dime. It takes a little more than a breakthrough year to take that place. After all, it was being thrown around that Roy was the "new face of the franchise" after last year - how has that stood the test of time?

There's more to it than "what have you done for me lately?" Let's see what Danny does when he gets back on the floor, THEN let's decide who is the "new face of the franchise".

It is a much easier argument to make that Danny was never a "face of the franchise," than it is to say that someone else currently is.

Peck
02-14-2013, 03:52 PM
He never said anything like that.

IMO the implication was heading in that direction. Sure the piece of crap thing was hyperbole but still the idea was to elevate Paul by trampling on Danny.

BillS
02-14-2013, 03:56 PM
One would also EXPECT more rebounds from the guy playing the 3/4.

My only argument against that is to remind you that the coaching philosophy for Danny's years has usually emphasized long shots that are almost impossible for a 4 to rebound OR getting back on defense in lieu of rebounding (offensive) or getting Danny back on offense so he could be the shooter rather than having him be the rebounding option (defensive).

able
02-14-2013, 04:04 PM
Actually, the star worshippers are those who keep saying everything is going to be alright when Danny gets back. Do those post equally upset you? I bet you that they don't.

Your answer show you have no idea what you are talking about, thank you.

Oh and please don't attempt to insult me, it would really make only for more ugliness.

aamcguy
02-14-2013, 04:05 PM
Actually, the star worshippers are those who keep saying everything is going to be alright when Danny gets back. Do those post equally upset you? I bet you that they don't.

You don't have to be for 1 player or the other; that's crazy. They're my two favorite players on the team, and I appreciate the talents of both.

We are on pace for a 49-50 win season without Danny Granger. Why wouldn't everything be alright when Danny gets back? It's not like we need him to turn a losing ballclub into championship material, we need for him to turn a 50 win team into a 60 win team.

Smits Happens
02-14-2013, 04:06 PM
My only argument against that is to remind you that the coaching philosophy for Danny's years has usually emphasized long shots that are almost impossible for a 4 to rebound OR getting back on defense in lieu of rebounding (offensive) or getting Danny back on offense so he could be the shooter rather than having him be the rebounding option (defensive).

Those are good points. But then again I could also point out that the Pacers were a top-10 team in assists for some of those years you referenced and a higher-scoring team, whereas now they are near the bottom of the league in scoring and assists, so assists should be harder to come by for Paul.

By the way I'm not trying to put down Danny with any of this, but rather just pointing out why I have even higher hopes for Paul's future.

Since86
02-14-2013, 04:12 PM
It is a much easier argument to make that Danny was never a "face of the franchise," than it is to say that someone else currently is.

Huh? Who was the "face of the franchise" over the past 5 seasons then?

EDIT: Or who could have been, I guess I should say? I don't think anyone can argue it wasa player besides Danny, and be taken seriously.

duke dynamite
02-14-2013, 04:15 PM
I have no problem with liking them both. Danny is a great player and has been the face of this team for almost 7 years.

Paul George is apparently bolting to stardom faster than anything I've ever seen.

I love it. I love having both of them in the uniform of my favorite team.





And PLEASE... enough of this Danny Granger "fake tough" garbage.

http://www.bothteamsplayedhard.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/granger-teeth.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gyv5l_gQwRs/T-X2mc5jX9I/AAAAAAAAAGM/4oSi1u6tS2k/s1600/granger-teeth-2.jpg

Mackey_Rose
02-14-2013, 04:17 PM
Huh? Who was the "face of the franchise" over the past 5 seasons then?

Well the attendance figures don't really portend anyone truly deserving that mantle, but I would say Larry Bird.

picasso
02-14-2013, 04:20 PM
IMO the implication was heading in that direction. Sure the piece of crap thing was hyperbole but still the idea was to elevate Paul by trampling on Danny.


I think you must of read the line wrong. I have been on the record that Danny is great, I still think that he's our best player. I have defended Danny to tooth and nail in this board.

I thank Granger a lot, He has put in work. Without Granger I have zero doubt that we are the team we are at the moment. By me calling him fake toughness, I meant to take a jab at the

popular belief of a lot of NBA fans. Everyone thinks outside of Indy that Granger is this fake tough guy. Specially this board that I am in, Others ala GM as well share the same misconception.

Danny was well on his way to becoming a Scottie esque player, It's just that his game slowed down so much. He was a lot faster and athletic when he was 22. I just want the opinions and It's

exactly what I'm getting from the this board. Thanks to all of you for contributing.

Since86
02-14-2013, 04:21 PM
Well the attendance figures don't really portend anyone truly deserving that mantle, but I would say Larry Bird.

Okay, so we're just working with different definitions.

Mackey_Rose
02-14-2013, 04:25 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to explain how getting your veneers busted up is the end-all, be-all of any kind of toughness debate.

Peck
02-14-2013, 04:29 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to explain how getting your veneers busted up is the end-all, be-all of any kind of toughness debate.

It's not.

Diving on the floor and putting your face out there to get fallen on, having any form of dental work knocked out and then continuing to play the game though does not make you NOT tough. Just because they are not his real teeth doesn't mean the impact of having your face hit the floor, you teeth hit your lip and Pierce further knocking your teeth into your lip and your face into the floor deosn't hurt like hell.

Magic P
02-14-2013, 04:31 PM
Your answer show you have no idea what you are talking about, thank you.

Oh and please don't attempt to insult me, it would really make only for more ugliness.

Your post actually shows you have no idea what you're talking about, the fact that I usually only post in game day threads proves you have no idea if I am a star worshiper or not since I don't usually post in non-gameday threads.

Danny plays hero ball and you call me a star worshiper? The guy doesn't make any one around him better. Paul passes better than Danny, plays better defense and is a better all-around player/teammate. Danny wants to put the team on his back and play hero with his 40% shooting lmao.

OlBlu
02-14-2013, 04:32 PM
What you write is the common thread lately on PD, to many star-gazed player worshippers and not enough Pacers Fans.

It is never, it never was and it never will be about who is the most important, but what the sum total can do for our team. between the fake toughness in the first post and this one, they show perfectly why I get more often irritated reading PD then enjoying myself like I have done for years, I find it easier to deal with antagonists like Olblu then these star worshippers.

Why thank you, able..... One grumpy old man to another......:cool: ...

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 04:35 PM
What i get from reading multiple threads on this forum is that Granger supporters are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that PG is the new face of the franchise.

Yep and is going to take a while before they let it go, Paul George is twice the player DG ever was right now at 22 and they still want to see more from PG to make a decision lol

Magic P
02-14-2013, 04:38 PM
You don't have to be for 1 player or the other; that's crazy. They're my two favorite players on the team, and I appreciate the talents of both.

We are on pace for a 49-50 win season without Danny Granger. Why wouldn't everything be alright when Danny gets back? It's not like we need him to turn a losing ballclub into championship material, we need for him to turn a 50 win team into a 60 win team.

I agree with this post but, I think Danny has always been a Robin and not Batman. Danny can make us better but by having a role where he is second fiddle.

Kid Minneapolis
02-14-2013, 04:39 PM
What you write is the common thread lately on PD, to many star-gazed player worshippers and not enough Pacers Fans.

It is never, it never was and it never will be about who is the most important, but what the sum total can do for our team. between the fake toughness in the first post and this one, they show perfectly why I get more often irritated reading PD then enjoying myself like I have done for years, I find it easier to deal with antagonists like Olblu then these star worshippers.

Maybe you need to pass off host if this site pisses you off. The last sentence borders on ridiculous.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

able
02-14-2013, 04:42 PM
Maybe you need to pass off host if this site pisses you off. The last sentence borders on ridiculous.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

yes maybe I should, so you can do it on your mobile phone perhaps?

daschysta
02-14-2013, 04:45 PM
Yep and is going to take a while before they let it go, Paul George is twice the player DG ever was right now at 22 and they still want to see more from PG to make a decision lol

I accept that Paul is the superior talent, and has massive upside. Accepting that doesn't mean that we need to put Granger down to build Paul up, Paul's game speaks for itself. Sheesh, they are TEAMMATES, and they have games that compliment eachothers... Watch George's game last night, he was able to get many of the assists he had because he was posting up smaller players and drawing double teams in the post, he can do that all day against 2 guards, except instead of passing to Jeff Pendergraph he'll be passing to Danny Granger. Paul's developed a great on the ball game, that doesn't have to change when Granger returns, since Granger's greatest strength has always been his shooting ability. If anything they will both benefit from playing with the other, Paul will be able to face single coverage and if he doesn't then Granger will get more open shots than he ever has in his career. Paul being better doesn't make Danny bad, and frankly, that is the tone this OP struck. Being disgusted that some people feel the need to tear down one player to prop up another doesn't make us "danny people" or "paul people" it makes us fans of the PACERS, the team which both players are on, I hope both of them thrive, it isn't a contest, their individual success just means the Pacers will be all the better.

McKeyFan
02-14-2013, 04:47 PM
Paul passes better than Danny, plays better defense and is a better all-around player/teammate.

Granger is better right now than PG.

I believe both PG and Lance will be better than Danny in the not too far distant future (very quickly if the knee doesn't recover well). I actually believe Lance will be better than PG but that's another thread.

I am grateful for Danny Granger. He is a very good player who has done much for our franchise. But he has always bothered me for not really playing "the right way" all the time. Call it the JOB effect, call it that he must shoot more than pass and emphasize offense more than defense due to the rest of the team being pitiful scorers, or call it the mini JO syndrome who mentored to him what it means to be the "face of the franchise." I'm not sure the reasons, but I know it exists. Just ask Coach K.

Danny has been very good. But PG and Lance have the potential to be great. We need great in order to win a championship.

I won't complain if Danny returns and plays fantastically. What a great problem! But I think this growing pain we are feeling will be with us until the better player at the moment (Danny) is replaced by the player or players destined to eclipse him.

Lord Helmet
02-14-2013, 04:52 PM
Sigh.

Fake tough? No.

Boy George? No.

I'm pretty excited at Paul's growth but I think this board may be going a little overboard. If his production decreases anytime soon we will have a thousand Trade PG threads.

Enjoy the ride and the season, folks. I have a feeling it's only going to get better.

OlBlu
02-14-2013, 04:52 PM
Granger is better right now than PG.

I believe both PG and Lance will be better than Danny in the not too far distant future (very quickly if the knee doesn't recover well). I actually believe Lance will be better than PG but that's another thread.

I am grateful for Danny Granger. He is a very good player who has done much for our franchise. But he has always bothered me for not really playing "the right way" all the time. Call it the JOB effect, call it that he must shoot more than pass and emphasize offense more than defense due to the rest of the team being pitiful scorers, or call it the mini JO syndrome who mentored to him what it means to be the "face of the franchise." I'm not sure the reasons, but I know it exists. Just ask Coach K.

Danny has been very good. But PG and Lance have the potential to be great. We need great in order to win a championship.

I won't complain if Danny returns and plays fantastically. What a great problem! But I think this growing pain we are feeling will be with us until the better player at the moment (Danny) is replaced by the player or players destined to eclipse him.

I do not believe Granger is even close to PG right now. PG is going to make multiple all star games and Granger appeared in how many? That is why Danny should come off the bench to keep him out of PG's way......:cool: ...

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 04:52 PM
Granger is better right now than PG..

No he is not, man you guys are killing me.

Mackey_Rose
02-14-2013, 04:56 PM
I really don't know how anyone can say that Granger is better than George right now, when Granger has yet to set foot on the court in over 8 months and George is getting ready to play in the All-Star Game.

OlBlu
02-14-2013, 04:58 PM
Maybe you need to pass off host if this site pisses you off. The last sentence borders on ridiculous.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I am not surprised that you read that last sentence and think it is absurd but able is right as usual. He writes me a note to tone it down a notch and I listen to him. I don't listen Bill S or Shade at all. I think the star worshippers are hard to deal with too because they go deaf, blind but unfortunately not mute over the stars they support. I am guilty of that too with Peyton Manning. I gave up on the whole team because of how they treated Peyton and I can't stand to watch the man who replaced him. I was a fan back to the late 50s and the days of Johnny U. Not any longer. Able is completely right about the sum total being what is really important. If you don't like what able has to say or how he handles the forum, perhaps you should go somewhere else......:cool: ...

SkipperZ
02-14-2013, 05:08 PM
Paul George is a more talented player than Danny overall, but that's no slight on Danny. PG would be the most talented 2 way player on about half of the teams in the league. His potential is clearly greater than Danny's, especially considering hes about 7 years younger, which is partly why we "value" him more.

But make no mistake, Danny is still a great player. He was a very well-deserving all-star, and despite what some say, between the years of Reggie and (hopefully) Paul George in the near future, Danny was absolutely the face of the Pacers. People complain about how much he makes and all of that, but people forget that he absolutely would have gotten comparable money offers from multiple other teams and chose to sign an extension with the Pacers. I'm just saying lets make sure Paul George signs a long term deal with Indy before we go calling him the face of this franchise. When I talk to my non-Pacer fan friends about the PAcers, when I bring up the possibility of Granger getting traded, they think it would be crazy, because to them, DAnny is still the face of this franchise.

I am one of Paul's biggest supporters, and have been even before this season. I don't post much, but if you look at my posts regarding Paul, its clear that I think he's better than even the majority of this board thinks he is now. I think its absolutely ridiculous that some people here as recently as a month ago thought Greg Monroe was better than PG, let alone remotely close.

But as Peck said, I feel like the clear implication of this thread, or at least hte direction it would likely go, is to elevate Paul by trampling on Danny. To make threads the subject being why Paul George is more special or "valued" more than DAnny was is a little silly IMO. It's like a Heat fan asking why Lebron is more valued than Wade was. Lebron is obviously a special player, even moreso than Wade, so there's no point in the discussion other than to sort of belittle what Wade has meant to the franchise pre-Lebron IMO.

If you want to argue he should be traded for this reason or that, or even why for basketball reasons this team might struggle to fit Danny in, thats completely fine. But a thread about why Paul George is more "valued" than Danny ever was is a bit belittling, and short sighted considering how much Danny meant to this team during its not-so-great years.

And do you want to know why "With Granger it always felt like he needed to drop 40+ in order for us to stay in a game, But with Paul! I get a weird vibe. Like It's going to be okay"? And the main reason why people "value" Paul more than DAnny? Because this team is miles better than the PAcers from 3 or 4 years ago. And the reason why its better now has a lot more to do with the difference between Hibbert/DWest/Lance/Hill and Murphleavy/McRoberts/TJ Ford than the difference between Paul and Danny.

Oh and the fake toughness thing always confused the hell out of me.

Pacerized
02-14-2013, 05:09 PM
If you're going to compare them I don't know why you'd compare the 2005 Granger.
In his 3rd year Granger averaged 19.6 ppg and a little over 6 boards. George is averaging 17.6 and 7.8 boards. Granger was also a really good defender in 08.
09 Granger averaged 25.8 ppg, I really hope PG picks up over 6 ppg next year because we will be a deadly team. As of now I still don't see PG on the road to being a better scorer then Granger but I'll say that he is a better rebounder and only slightly better defender then Granger was 3 years in the league. We'll see where PG goes moving forward, in 09 we all thought Danny was going to become a threat to lead the league in scoring. I still don't think overall that PG is a better player then Granger was in his prime. He might become the face of the franchise and he might still fall to the 2cd. leading scorer to Granger. No one really knows how it's going to play out and I don't care as long as the team improves from where it is now.
The truth is that Granger haters have wanted him gone for the past several years as he's been our leading scorer and will be very upset if he takes back the alpha scoring roll and will just want him moved. Most Granger supporters don't care who leads the team, they just want Granger on the team.

OlBlu
02-14-2013, 05:13 PM
If you're going to compare them I don't know why you'd compare the 2005 Granger.
In his 3rd year Granger averaged 19.6 ppg and a little over 6 boards. George is averaging 17.6 and 7.8 boards. Granger was also a really good defender in 08.
09 Granger averaged 25.8 ppg, I really hope PG picks up over 6 ppg next year because we will be a deadly team. As of now I still don't see PG on the road to being a better scorer then Granger but I'll say that he is a better rebounder and only slightly better defender then Granger was 3 years in the league. We'll see where PG goes moving forward, in 09 we all thought Danny was going to become a threat to lead the league in scoring. I still don't think overall that PG is a better player then Granger was in his prime. He might become the face of the franchise and he might still fall to the 2cd. leading scorer to Granger. No one really knows how it's going to play out and I don't care as long as the team improves from where it is now.
The truth is that Granger haters have wanted him gone for the past several years as he's been our leading scorer and will be very upset if he takes back the alpha scoring roll and will just want him moved. Most Granger supporters don't care who leads the team, they just want Granger on the team.

Most of those people you mention at the end know that Granger has NEVER been a good defender and he never will be...... His replacement is on hand and it time for him to move on.....:cool: ...

Hoop
02-14-2013, 05:14 PM
What i get from reading multiple threads on this forum is that Granger supporters are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that PG is the new face of the franchise.
That is so completely wrong.

If I must be labeled a Granger supporter or not (I'm a Pacer Supporter) I'll bite. We have no problem at all with Paul being the Man, the #1 option or what ever you want to call him, in fact I love what he is becoming. What we get mad at is the constant uncalled for dissing of Granger, that has done nothing wrong. Most logical people always thought Danny would be a great #2 or #3 option and was never going to be the MAN on a championship caliber team.

Now we have our #1 and I'm thrilled. I'm sick and tried of the made up problems in people's heads that have not happened and may never happen. Why can't we be happy that we are getting all-star talent back to go along with a Paul, a budding superstar talent.

The ones that think we can only have one of them are just being a divisive disruption on this board for some other reason than what's best for the team.

tnasty4l
02-14-2013, 05:15 PM
Why cant we have two players that are both really good.we are going to need both of them playing great team ball if we want to win a championship.other good teams have at least two superstars,why cant we.

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 05:22 PM
That is so completely wrong.

If I must be labeled a Granger supporter or not (I'm a Pacer Supporter) I'll bite. We have no problem at all with Paul being the Man, the #1 option or what ever you want to call him, in fact I love what he is becoming. What we get mad at is the constant uncalled for dissing of Granger, that has done nothing wrong. Most logical people always thought Danny would be a great #2 or #3 option and was never going to be the MAN on a championship caliber team.

Now we have our #1 and I'm thrilled. I'm sick and tried of the made up problems in people's heads that have not happened and may never happen. Why can't we be happy that we are getting all-star talent back to go along with a Paul, a budding superstar talent.

The ones that think we can only have one of them are just being a divisive disruption on this board for some other reason than what's best for the team.

And there is a lot of people dissing Paul George, when somebody says that Danny is better than Paul George right now that is dissing PG in my opinion, some people are maybe just doing to it to create "disruption on this board" as you call it.

How about the people that wanted Paul George traded because he was pretty much stealing Danny's thunder? the guy is the Pacers All Star representative this weekend and people still don't believe on the guy, amazing.

daschysta
02-14-2013, 05:25 PM
Who in the world wanted PG traded because he was "stealing Danny's thunder"?

OlBlu
02-14-2013, 05:26 PM
Why cant we have two players that are both really good.we are going to need both of them playing great team ball if we want to win a championship.other good teams have at least two superstars,why cant we.

You can. One of them just needs to come off of the bench and not disrupt the chemistry it has taken all season to develop......:cool: ...

Lord Helmet
02-14-2013, 05:28 PM
And there is a lot of people dissing Paul George, when somebody says that Danny is better than Paul George right now that is dissing PG in my opinion, some people are maybe just doing to it to create "disruption on this board" as you call it.

How about the people that wanted Paul George traded because he was pretty much stealing Danny's thunder? the guy is the Pacers All Star representative this weekend and people still don't believe on the guy, amazing.
Who wanted him traded because he was stealing Danny's glory?

Just because someone might think Granger is better now doesn't mean they don't believe in Paul. Paul is better right now because he has played this season and has played amazing, IMO.

Pacer Fan
02-14-2013, 05:42 PM
Seriously guys...I had to stop reading this thread.

These are our guys, who cares where they stand with each other.
It's about where they stand as a team and what this team is gonna do about it.
Just love the guys and the fact that we have something special again.
Love the fact that we have both Paul and Danny and the rest of these guys.

This has gotten brutal in here.

And don't call me thinned skinned...sigh

Ace E.Anderson
02-14-2013, 05:42 PM
I think I speak for all of the "Granger Homer's" when I say-- I don't really care one bit that Paul is the "face of the franchise". It's IMO that a good half a season doesn't erase 5 consistent seasons of being pretty damn good, but even THAT doesn't matter.

As a Granger fan I am simply happy to see a guy who had the majority of his prime wasted with sh*tty teammates, and bad coaching (and never complained about it); finally get a chance to play on a successful playoff contender.

Who care's if he is or isn't as good as Paul George. Paul is more naturally talented than Danny ever was, but that doesn't mean that Danny all of a sudden doesn't get a chance to shine with the team now that he's no longer the best player.

Hypothetically If Danny came back, and Paul automatically started to deferring to him, is that really Danny's fault--or is that the fault of the face of the franchise? I'd believe it's the latter. But I also don't get that type of vibe from Paul nor from Danny. They seem pretty tight, and they both want to win. That's all that (should) matter here.

One last thing: Anyone that's watched Danny play has often said that he doesn't have the talent to lead a team as a first option, but he would be perfect as a second option (myself included). Now that Paul has shown at least the potential to be that true number one option, why can't Danny be that second option that he's probably most suited for? Especially when offensively they would be able to put a lot of pressure on opposing defenses with their contrasting yet complimenting styles.

Magic P
02-14-2013, 05:44 PM
That is so completely wrong.

If I must be labeled a Granger supporter or not (I'm a Pacer Supporter) I'll bite. We have no problem at all with Paul being the Man, the #1 option or what ever you want to call him, in fact I love what he is becoming. What we get mad at is the constant uncalled for dissing of Granger, that has done nothing wrong. Most logical people always thought Danny would be a great #2 or #3 option and was never going to be the MAN on a championship caliber team.

Now we have our #1 and I'm thrilled. I'm sick and tried of the made up problems in people's heads that have not happened and may never happen. Why can't we be happy that we are getting all-star talent back to go along with a Paul, a budding superstar talent.

The ones that think we can only have one of them are just being a divisive disruption on this board for some other reason than what's best for the team.

I believe this forum has become a Granger vs PG board. The Granger supporters have a bias towards Granger for some reason. When Danny was struggling last season shooting below 40% any one who was frustrated by his play and made it known they were crucified for it, if they brought up trading him they were banned to the isle of patmos (figuratively).

When PG was struggling people wanted him traded because his value wouldn't be any higher?

Why are people so quick to trade PG because he wasn't playing like a star after 2.1 years in the league but Danny can play like an old man, shoot under 40% and you better not criticize him for it or say we should trade him or we're all going to pounce on you for saying something so stupid.

If this is a Granger vs PG fan board it's not because of the PG supporters it's the Danny lovers who have made it this way. Danny is simply above reproach around here.

Edit- I don't hate Danny I just don't think he's a number one, he is Robin and always have been Robin.

Since86
02-14-2013, 05:49 PM
There has been post after post by posters saying they like Danny and they like PG, and we still have you guys trying to make this a Danny V PG discusion, and place the blame on the people who are saying they like both.

This place just cracks me up sometimes.

The Danny "homers" are the ones saying they can co-exist. I just don't get it...

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 05:55 PM
I believe this forum has become a Granger vs PG board. The Granger supporters have a bias towards Granger for some reason. When Danny was struggling last season shooting below 40% any one who was frustrated by his play and made it known they were crucified for it, if they brought up trading him they were banned to the isle of patmos (figuratively).

When PG was struggling people wanted him traded because his value wouldn't be any higher?

Why are people so quick to trade PG because he wasn't playing like a star after 2.1 years in the league but Danny can play like an old man, shoot under 40% and you better not criticize him for it or say we should trade him or we're all going to pounce on you for saying something so stupid.

If this is a Granger vs PG fan board it's not because of the PG supporters it's the Danny lovers who have made it this way. Danny is simply above reproach around here.

Edit- I don't hate Danny I just don't think he's a number one, he is Robin and always have been Robin.

Good post 100% spot on, I would also like to ad that if you want to open a thread to talk about trading Danny that thread ussually gets locked or moved while the "we have to trade Paul George" threads are still open at this moment and nobody gets s*** on either.

Magic P
02-14-2013, 05:56 PM
There has been post after post by posters saying they like Danny and they like PG, and we still have you guys trying to make this a Danny V PG discusion, and place the blame on the people who are saying they like both.

This place just cracks me up sometimes.

The Danny "homers" are the ones saying they can co-exist. I just don't get it...

Words and actions are two different things.

People say they like PG and Danny after PG made most people shut up by playing like an all-Star. People were quiet as a church mouse when Paul was struggling early on and people said they wanted him traded. Where were all of you then? I saw you guys when people complained about Granger last year but, where was the same enthusiasm to rebuff the trade PG crowd?

Ace E.Anderson
02-14-2013, 06:02 PM
Words and actions are two different things.

People say they like PG and Danny after PG made most people shut up by playing like an all-Star. People were quiet as a church mouse when Paul was struggling early on and people said they wanted him traded. Where were all of you then? I saw you guys when people complained about Granger last year but, where was the same enthusiasm to rebuff the trade PG crowd?

I feel there are just as many people that "wanted Paul George traded" as there were people that "wanted Danny traded". Both opinions stemmed from that specific player playing poorly over a certain amount of time, and both players eventually came out of their slump and played at an AS level (Danny raised his level of play towards the end of the season)

Maybe it's because I'm a Granger fan, but I don't see anyone "threatened" by Paul's recent strong play. Individuals normally don't get their panties in a bunch until posters suggest that because Paul's level of play has risen to AS heights, Danny is now chopped liver and extremely expendable. That's not right nor is it fair for a guy that's played as well, as long, as Danny has for the franchise. THAT'S when the sensitivity of "trading Danny" gets intensified.

Edit: for example, that would be like Heat fans saying that they could trade away D.Wade once they signed Lebron. "Ohh we have a better wing player now, there's no need to keep D.Wade's washed up, injury prone self". It's almost like it's not possible for two talented scoring wings to have the ability to play together or something.

daschysta
02-14-2013, 06:02 PM
Words and actions are two different things.

People say they like PG and Danny after PG made most people shut up by playing like an all-Star. People were quiet as a church mouse when Paul was struggling early on and people said they wanted him traded. Where were all of you then? I saw you guys when people complained about Granger last year but, where was the same enthusiasm to rebuff the trade PG crowd?

Because the "trade PG" crowd wasn't a constant drone on and on. Danny people aren't Anti-PG the way the people ripping Danny apart for no other reason than to puff PG, who doesn't need it. Also Danny was a vet and had been the teams best player for years, George hadn't earned the same seniority. Either way calls to "trade pg" (which weren't really that prominent) weren't driven by a pro-granger bias, while the people ripping on Danny 24/7 are doing so to efface George. They can play together, that's what the "pro danny" crowd stands for insomuch as it exists.

Lord Helmet
02-14-2013, 06:06 PM
There has been post after post by posters saying they like Danny and they like PG, and we still have you guys trying to make this a Danny V PG discusion, and place the blame on the people who are saying they like both.

This place just cracks me up sometimes.

The Danny "homers" are the ones saying they can co-exist. I just don't get it...
I like how it was said that it is the Danny homer's fault for making this a PG vs Granger board. :laugh: It is the same old stuff every time.

Never take any responsibility on yourself for creating a mess. Point at the others and say "The did it" and while doing so label them Granger homers.

I like the Pacers. We are a good team. Adding Granger into the mix should probably help. I'm not biased towards anything except maybe ya know, the Pacers and Colts?

A lot of people here just like to stir stuff up and can never be happy. Oh well, their loss.

BillS
02-14-2013, 06:12 PM
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?79343-Granger-for-Gordon

That's a complete proposal to trade Danny, with lots of people presenting places where it would make sense to trade Danny, not locked away or moved to another direction.

No, not every person agreed with trading Danny, but why is that somehow some kind of horrible thing? This idea that anyone who disagrees is somehow wrong and taken as evil and wrong is getting ridiculous.

Wage
02-14-2013, 06:14 PM
This thread...

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/Dishface93/Gifs/seinfield.gif

Since86
02-14-2013, 06:16 PM
Words and actions are two different things.

People say they like PG and Danny after PG made most people shut up by playing like an all-Star. People were quiet as a church mouse when Paul was struggling early on and people said they wanted him traded. Where were all of you then? I saw you guys when people complained about Granger last year but, where was the same enthusiasm to rebuff the trade PG crowd?

That whole argument revolves around the assumption that you're talking about the same group of people. Which you're not.

We spend more time addressing stupid straw men arguments, than we do actually providing thoughts.

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 06:25 PM
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?79343-Granger-for-Gordon

That's a complete proposal to trade Danny, with lots of people presenting places where it would make sense to trade Danny, not locked away or moved to another direction.

No, not every person agreed with trading Danny, but why is that somehow some kind of horrible thing? This idea that anyone who disagrees is somehow wrong and taken as evil and wrong is getting ridiculous.

That was a Hornets fan that was asking a question.

BillS
02-14-2013, 06:30 PM
That was a Hornets fan that was asking a question.

Not sure I understand why that matters since a huge number of people responded to the situation.

Please give me the complete definition of the discussion involving Danny that was always dismissed.

Cousy47
02-14-2013, 06:42 PM
I know I should be worried about the total loss of chemistry that is sure to happen when Granger and George are forced to play together. Some how I am such a "homer" that I look forward to seeing which of the five(yes 5) starters are going to go off on teams in any given quarter. GH, DG, PG, DW and even RH are subject to get 10-15 points in a quarter. That's a lot of scoring for an opponent to match up with from one of the best defensive team in the league. I'm a little excited to see it.

tnasty4l
02-14-2013, 06:49 PM
I think that the pg supporters arent giving dg a chance. Let him come back and see what he can bring to the team.danny was a good player for us when we sucked.give him a chance to prove that they can play together and not worry who is the alpha male.

Mourning
02-14-2013, 08:30 PM
I accept that Paul is the superior talent, and has massive upside. Accepting that doesn't mean that we need to put Granger down to build Paul up, Paul's game speaks for itself. Sheesh, they are TEAMMATES, and they have games that compliment eachothers... Watch George's game last night, he was able to get many of the assists he had because he was posting up smaller players and drawing double teams in the post, he can do that all day against 2 guards, except instead of passing to Jeff Pendergraph he'll be passing to Danny Granger. Paul's developed a great on the ball game, that doesn't have to change when Granger returns, since Granger's greatest strength has always been his shooting ability. If anything they will both benefit from playing with the other, Paul will be able to face single coverage and if he doesn't then Granger will get more open shots than he ever has in his career. Paul being better doesn't make Danny bad, and frankly, that is the tone this OP struck. Being disgusted that some people feel the need to tear down one player to prop up another doesn't make us "danny people" or "paul people" it makes us fans of the PACERS, the team which both players are on, I hope both of them thrive, it isn't a contest, their individual success just means the Pacers will be all the better.

+1. Abslutely THE post of this topic for me and what it boils down to and something people like vnzla81 seem uncapable to grasp, unfortunately.

yoadknux
02-14-2013, 08:58 PM
Yep and is going to take a while before they let it go, Paul George is twice the player DG ever was right now at 22 and they still want to see more from PG to make a decision lol
Paul George is NOT twice the player DG ever was. I'd take any of Granger's seasons over the last 5 years and say he had a better year than what George is having now. The only debate that is possible is last year's Granger and this year's George and even then it's very close.

Does George have the upside to be better than Granger? Absolutely and it would be amazing if he could turn into a superstar. But people here are treating George as if he's the second coming of MJ while dumping "old trash" Danny. People here hype George as a player because of his age & potential but in terms of play and production he has yet to surpass Danny

docpaul
02-14-2013, 09:04 PM
Looking forward to watching them both play together, myself. We'll know later in the season as to whether Granger stays or goes. In the meantime, I'll take our chances contending for the ECF. That starts if Granger is a net add to the team.

Excited.

Granger and George are two players with different games.

15th parallel
02-14-2013, 09:08 PM
Man, it just got ugly here.

To those who say Danny doesn't make his teammates better then says PG makes his teammates better, who were the players who played Danny with when he reached his peak? And who was the coach then and what was the kind of plays that they used to run to? Have anyone watched last season where the Danny-led Pacers were one of the best starting 5 in the league, where Danny need not even average 20+ppg?

You see, the hate on Danny just because he's Danny Granger is really weird. Paul George is great, and so is Danny. What's not to love about that and why do some need to put Danny down?

Danny needing to drop 40+ in order for us to stay in the game? That was the case when the next best player was Troy Murphy,. With a David West, George Hill and an All-star Roy Hibbert playing alongside him, we were the 5th best team in the league even with Danny putting up his worst scoring season since he broke out. So that argument cannot be used against him. And about defense? There's no doubt that PG is better than Danny, but what's with the implication of some that Danny does not play defense?

And the fake tough argument needs to stop. I couldn't even understand why people are always bringing that up.

Hoop
02-14-2013, 10:37 PM
And there is a lot of people dissing Paul George, when somebody says that Danny is better than Paul George right now that is dissing PG in my opinion, some people are maybe just doing to it to create "disruption on this board" as you call it.

How about the people that wanted Paul George traded because he was pretty much stealing Danny's thunder? the guy is the Pacers All Star representative this weekend and people still don't believe on the guy, amazing.
That is made up crap from you, who has ever wanted to trade Paul because he's stealing Danny's thunder. Show me someone who says Paul is stepping on Danny's toes, stealing his thunder, how ever you want to say it. Where are these people at?

It's just you making crap up, you are the drama queen on the forum, no one else is even close to your level, except your mentor :cool: .

McKeyFan
02-14-2013, 10:53 PM
I really don't know how anyone can say that Granger is better than George right now, when Granger has yet to set foot on the court in over 8 months and George is getting ready to play in the All-Star Game.

Right. I mean a 100% Granger.

So, you have a good point. With PG's arc, by the time Danny reaches 100% (if he ever does), PG may continue to be better than him.

daschysta
02-14-2013, 11:04 PM
Paul George is NOT twice the player DG ever was. I'd take any of Granger's seasons over the last 5 years and say he had a better year than what George is having now. The only debate that is possible is last year's Granger and this year's George and even then it's very close.

Does George have the upside to be better than Granger? Absolutely and it would be amazing if he could turn into a superstar. But people here are treating George as if he's the second coming of MJ while dumping "old trash" Danny. People here hype George as a player because of his age & potential but in terms of play and production he has yet to surpass Danny


That simply isn't true. George this year is better than any of Granger's years except perhaps 07'08. That's considering the whole body of work so far. Since George broke out in december he's been putting up 19.6 ppg 8.5 rpg 4.3 apg 2.1 spg on 55% TS. I'm one of the biggest Danny fans that you'll ever find, but those raw stats are more impressive than what Granger has put up in all but one year, and when you take into account the defense it puts him comfortably above most of Danny's seasons.

However that doesn't mean they can't play together. George is hyped not because of his age and potential, though that is a part of it, but because he's already a legit all-star player (that's now, not a hypothetical) and still has so much upside to mine.

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 11:14 PM
That is made up crap from you, who has ever wanted to trade Paul because he's stealing Danny's thunder. Show me someone who says Paul is stepping on Danny's toes, stealing his thunder, how ever you want to say it. Where are these people at?

It's just you making crap up, you are the drama queen on the forum, no one else is even close to your level, except your mentor :cool: .

A six years old kid would have done a better job at responding to my post than you, "I disagree with you so you are making some crap up" :growup:


And welcome to my ignore list.

Sollozzo
02-14-2013, 11:26 PM
Right. I mean a 100% Granger.

So, you have a good point. With PG's arc, by the time Danny reaches 100% (if he ever does), PG may continue to be better than him.

I don't think any GM in the league would trade 2013 George for 2012 Granger.

vnzla81
02-14-2013, 11:31 PM
That simply isn't true. George this year is better than any of Granger's years except perhaps 07'08. That's considering the whole body of work so far. Since George broke out in december he's been putting up 19.6 ppg 8.5 rpg 4.3 apg 2.1 spg on 55% TS. I'm one of the biggest Danny fans that you'll ever find, but those raw stats are more impressive than what Granger has put up in all but one year, and when you take into account the defense it puts him comfortably above most of Danny's seasons.

However that doesn't mean they can't play together. George is hyped not because of his age and potential, though that is a part of it, but because he's already a legit all-star player (that's now, not a hypothetical) and still has so much upside to mine.

Amazing that if Roy was averaging those numbers he could probably be proclaimed "the best center to ever play with the Pacers", but is Paul George the one putting up those numbers so "I have to see him doing this more often" and "Danny is still better", I can't imagine what people would say if Danny was the one putting those numbers, "the next Reggie Miller" comments come to mind.

graphic-er
02-15-2013, 02:17 AM
Wow, I can't believe somebody on here actually called Granger fake tough....still

Ahem...
Granger got his front teeth smashed in going for a loose ball in blow out win for the Pacers, and he came back to finish the game.
Following his all-star year Granger played the first 30 or so games with a partially torn Plantar Fascia, basically playing on one foot, and still averaged 24 pts a game.

Also I think Granger's defensive woes is a real myth here. He has always been a very good on the ball defender. (i've seen it first hand, shutting down Players like Bosh and Dirk in crunch time), however he lacks in team defense as he is always losing his man on the rotation sets and fails to close out effectively.

One thing I have noticed Danny having over PG is a sheer Passion for competing, you won't like Danny when he is mad. Something his team really lacked early in the season.

yoadknux
02-15-2013, 08:36 AM
That simply isn't true. George this year is better than any of Granger's years except perhaps 07'08. That's considering the whole body of work so far. Since George broke out in december he's been putting up 19.6 ppg 8.5 rpg 4.3 apg 2.1 spg on 55% TS. I'm one of the biggest Danny fans that you'll ever find, but those raw stats are more impressive than what Granger has put up in all but one year, and when you take into account the defense it puts him comfortably above most of Danny's seasons.

However that doesn't mean they can't play together. George is hyped not because of his age and potential, though that is a part of it, but because he's already a legit all-star player (that's now, not a hypothetical) and still has so much upside to mine.
George's high 55 TS% is probably Granger's lowest TS% over the last 5 years. Granger in his 3rd season had a similar season to George's current season except he was more efficient and was more of a scorer while playing next to garbage players. And I would take a 25.8 ppg 44.7% FG% 40.4% from 3 on any given day over a balanced two way player.

TinManJoshua
02-15-2013, 09:10 AM
When was the last time someone actually advocated trading PG? I'll give you a hint... It's when he laid a great big ol' goose egg against Golden State. I would call that an overly emotional response.

Since his rise, the only thing we hear is certain posters stuffing peck's statement back in his face. Yes he was wrong. He admitted that already. The hilarious thing is that this "eat your words peck" is led by the most thin skinned poster on this board who, if ever prodded about his own incorrect predictions, gets uber-defensive and starts complaining about how everyone attacks him.

Danny has always been the subject of trade proposals, as far back as I can remember. He was never considered "untouchable" like Paul is now, including his MIP year.

So yeah, I don't see this whole "DG fans are threatened by Paul's success". I'm happy Danny finally has a bunch of winners around him.

Doddage
02-15-2013, 09:27 AM
This thread is giving me flashbacks of the Hansbrough vs. McRoberts fiasco where evidently it was necessary to compare the two without being able to appreciate both.

Mourning
02-15-2013, 09:56 AM
When was the last time someone actually advocated trading PG? I'll give you a hint... It's when he laid a great big ol' goose egg against Golden State. I would call that an overly emotional response.

Since his rise, the only thing we hear is certain posters stuffing peck's statement back in his face. Yes he was wrong. He admitted that already. The hilarious thing is that this "eat your words peck" is led by the most thin skinned poster on this board who, if ever prodded about his own incorrect predictions, gets uber-defensive and starts complaining about how everyone attacks him.

Danny has always been the subject of trade proposals, as far back as I can remember. He was never considered "untouchable" like Paul is now, including his MIP year.

So yeah, I don't see this whole "DG fans are threatened by Paul's success". I'm happy Danny finally has a bunch of winners around him.

This is so true :thumbsup:.

the pac
02-15-2013, 10:02 AM
the one thing I appreciate is that Danny never turned his back! Pg is more athletic than Danny ever was and I don' t think there will be a problem moving forward. Besides we need a 1,2 punch on this team. All great teams have it. In our case our whole starting 5 would be a mismatch imo when Danny returns. (assuming he is almost at full strength) the only thing we have to work on is the bench. I think we should always have a starter on the floor at all time. It will be a work in progress but some nights we could use Danny's scoring during the long droughts. This will give us a next dimension! Just think of it, we will finally have our team at (almost) full strength and we are in 3rd in the east.

Mackey_Rose
02-15-2013, 10:03 AM
I don't think any GM in the league would trade 2013 George for 2012 Granger.

I don't think there is any GM in that league that would trade 2013 George for Granger of any year.

Since86
02-15-2013, 10:45 AM
No one is advocating a trade, so it's moot to begin with.

Sollozzo
02-15-2013, 10:56 AM
No one is advocating a trade, so it's moot to begin with.

McKeyfan in post 37 said that Granger right now is better than PG, which is fine. I was responding to that when I said that I don't think any GM in the league would trade PG for last year's Granger, or any other version of Granger for that matter.

BillS
02-15-2013, 11:02 AM
Amazing that if Roy was averaging those numbers he could probably be proclaimed "the best center to ever play with the Pacers", but is Paul George the one putting up those numbers so "I have to see him doing this more often" and "Danny is still better", I can't imagine what people would say if Danny was the one putting those numbers, "the next Reggie Miller" comments come to mind.

Danny coming back and playing very well in the second half of the season last year (bringing himself to 18.7 ppg after a season at 20.5 ppg) garnered an attitude of "he still has to go a whole season" and "he won't make up for it in a few games", along with this year's "he'll never be anywhere near his old self". Meanwhile, PG at 17.6 ppg for this season (19 ppg in the last 3 months) is somehow "better now than Danny EVER was". The whole "everyone hates PG and that's why he gets no props" garbage gets ridiculous.

I mean, OK, Paul is getting better, but the point is at least ARGUABLE that he isn't there yet, not somehow obvious to all but the most stupid people on the planet.

Since86
02-15-2013, 11:10 AM
McKeyfan in post 37 said that Granger right now is better than PG, which is fine. I was responding to that when I said that I don't think any GM in the league would trade PG for last year's Granger, or any other version of Granger for that matter.


Right, but that's not advocating a trade. It's just giving the ones who like to make up arguments more ammo to do so.

naptownmenace
02-15-2013, 11:16 AM
Yep and is going to take a while before they let it go, Paul George is twice the player DG ever was right now at 22 and they still want to see more from PG to make a decision lol

Let's look at Danny's breakout season again before we revise history:

07-08: 19.6 ppg, 6.1 rebs, 2.1 asts, 1.1 blks, 1.5 stls, 45% fgs, 40% 3pts, 85% FTs on 5 atts per game

Not too shabby and not that different that Pauls season this year. PG has him beat in assists and rebounds. Danny was better at points, blocks, shooting in every category, and free throw attempts.

The following two seasons were even better. If we just look at his best statistical season, the MIP year, we see just how good Danny was:

26 points per game with better shooting percentages in every category, 7 free throw attempts per game, 1.4 blocks per game, and better defense. If he hadn't missed 15 games that season, the Pacers might've made the playoffs. They only missed them by 1 or 2 games, IIRC.

If you compare the talent level of those teams with the talent currently on the roster, you can't help but laugh. Especially when you consider who the coach was and what his defensive philosopy was (or wasn't).

I love Paul George. He has the potential to be better than Danny Granger but he needs to improve his shooting ability, especially on the road, and get to the basket/paint area and free throw line more (which were areas of strength for Danny). We also need to see how he performs in the playoffs offensively before we have a clear picture of whether he's the next Paul Pierce or the even the next Danny Granger.

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 11:25 AM
Danny coming back and playing very well in the second half of the season last year (bringing himself to 18.7 ppg after a season at 20.5 ppg) garnered an attitude of "he still has to go a whole season" and "he won't make up for it in a few games", along with this year's "he'll never be anywhere near his old self". Meanwhile, PG at 17.6 ppg for this season (19 ppg in the last 3 months) is somehow "better now than Danny EVER was". The whole "everyone hates PG and that's why he gets no props" garbage gets ridiculous.

I mean, OK, Paul is getting better, but the point is at least ARGUABLE that he isn't there yet, not somehow obvious to all but the most stupid people on the planet.

What you conviently omit is that PG is an all NBA class defender while Danny has always been just about useless on defense. Yes, some of of his fans will jump in and say that he is a very good defender but it just isn't true. It has never been true. Coach K benched him in the world games because he didn't give him a defensive effort. He still won't. :cool: ...

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 11:25 AM
I don't think there is any GM in that league that would trade 2013 George for Granger of any year.

Amen.... :cool: ...

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 11:28 AM
This thread is giving me flashbacks of the Hansbrough vs. McRoberts fiasco where evidently it was necessary to compare the two without being able to appreciate both.

There was nothing to appreciate about one of them. He could make thunderous dunks and that was it. He was a marginal NBA player and worth about three minutes per game. He got more because the Pacers were remaking the team. Hansbrough is many times the player McBrick ever was but that isn't saying a whole lot........:cool: ...

Hicks
02-15-2013, 11:30 AM
That simply isn't true. George this year is better than any of Granger's years except perhaps 07'08. That's considering the whole body of work so far. Since George broke out in december he's been putting up 19.6 ppg 8.5 rpg 4.3 apg 2.1 spg on 55% TS. I'm one of the biggest Danny fans that you'll ever find, but those raw stats are more impressive than what Granger has put up in all but one year, and when you take into account the defense it puts him comfortably above most of Danny's seasons.

However that doesn't mean they can't play together. George is hyped not because of his age and potential, though that is a part of it, but because he's already a legit all-star player (that's now, not a hypothetical) and still has so much upside to mine.

Fine, but this 'twice the player DG was' crap is just that: Crap.

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 11:30 AM
That is made up crap from you, who has ever wanted to trade Paul because he's stealing Danny's thunder. Show me someone who says Paul is stepping on Danny's toes, stealing his thunder, how ever you want to say it. Where are these people at?

It's just you making crap up, you are the drama queen on the forum, no one else is even close to your level, except your mentor :cool: .

Hey!! :cool: ...

Ace E.Anderson
02-15-2013, 11:45 AM
Fine, but this 'twice the player DG was' crap is just that: Crap.

Lol you may be giving in, but I still say that when you compare the players around them and the numbers that those guys put up, it's still debatable that PG is having "that much better of a season" than Danny ever did.

I mean in just 07/08 Danny's 3rd or 4th best year, he averaged: 19.6 ppg, 6.1 rebs, 2.1 asts, 1.1 blks, 1.5 stls, 45% fgs, 40% 3pts, 85% FTs. Those are VERY comparable and that was like his 3rd or 4th best year!

Ace E.Anderson
02-15-2013, 11:47 AM
What you conviently omit is that PG is an all NBA class defender while Danny has always been just about useless on defense. Yes, some of of his fans will jump in and say that he is a very good defender but it just isn't true. It has never been true. Coach K benched him in the world games because he didn't give him a defensive effort. He still won't. :cool: ...

Nobody said he was a very good defender!! He is an above average on-ball defender, below average off the ball defender which=an AVERAGE defender.

When you have ELITE defenders on a team (Iggy) of course you're going to play him over the guy who is an average defender.

What happened at the world games is irrelevant to the discussion or the notion that Paul is so much better than Danny EVER was.

Ace E.Anderson
02-15-2013, 11:48 AM
I don't think there is any GM in that league that would trade 2013 George for Granger of any year.

This fact isn't in question.

Does this fact make him twice as good as Danny ever was? That's the question. And I think the answer is no

Mackey_Rose
02-15-2013, 11:59 AM
This fact isn't in question.

Does this fact make him twice as good as Danny ever was? That's the question. And I think the answer is no

McKeyFan made the argument that Granger is better than Paul is right now. That was what I responded to.

Ace E.Anderson
02-15-2013, 12:43 PM
McKeyFan made the argument that Granger is better than Paul is right now. That was what I responded to.

my bad, lol i was reading it within the context of the thread.

Naptown_Seth
02-15-2013, 03:35 PM
Do we really have to insult Danny just to profess the greatness of Paul George? Is there a law that say's you can't like both of them?

Fake toughness. smh....

There is no possible way at all that Paul has benefitted from playing with better players is there? No, that has nothing to do with anything.

Look there is no doubt that Paul George is a special player, I think he has the potential to be one of the upper star talents in the NBA. But that does not mean that Danny Granger is a piece of crap.
Mackey is right that this wasn't explicitly said here, but there is this weird "let's dump Granger because he's no Paul".

First, Granger was a solid defender early on who was learning from Ron Artest, as well as practicing against him. Second, JOB ruined a bunch of guys and skewed things in a bizarre way. Look at post-JOB Troy Murphy for example.


So while it isn't quite Granger = suck, there is a lot of truth to Peck's curiosity of what Granger would have looked like if he had come in the year Paul did. Paul still isn't a great ball handler as evidenced by some of his NBA follies dribble attacks vs Charlotte, he's only slightly better than Danny. Danny has always been a great rebounder. Danny is a better defender in the post and against size, while Paul uses better lateral movement and reach to cover ground.

Right now Paul's nose for defense seems a bit higher than Danny had/has, but we will see. Danny typically has shot the 3 better, though Paul is really on it this season (at home).

But had Danny been 23 last year and not hurt this year....well there is a reason no one minded the deal he got when he got it. Especially after he followed it up with some killer effort despite playing for one of the worst coaches in Pacers history (and that's an elite list).


Danny has always been just about useless on defense.
Reason one million to tune him out. Just not even close to true, especially last year. PG is an elite defender. Danny is just a good defender, and last year Danny reminded everyone that without JOB he could clearly be a tough defender.

Mackey_Rose
02-15-2013, 03:45 PM
Mackey is right that this wasn't explicitly said here, but there is this weird "let's dump Granger because he's no Paul".

I think the biggest issue is that, in an ideal scenario, they both play the same position. Obviously, you can slide Paul over and play him with Granger, and it is effective. I'm really excited that we will get to do, just that, here soon.

However, as long as they are both on the court at the same time, one of them will have to be playing out of position.

Naptown_Seth
02-15-2013, 03:46 PM
I just signed a big, new contract. It's the home opener. And they spent so much time picking up my teeth pieces that I didn't even miss a second of game time while they fixed my mouth. So enough with the short term memory or fickle fan attitude.

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l8/Naptown_Seth/Pacers-Celtics08/s_5354.jpg

Naptown_Seth
02-15-2013, 03:51 PM
I think the biggest issue is that, in an ideal scenario, they both play the same position. Obviously, you can slide Paul over and play him with Granger, and it is effective. I'm really excited that we will get to do, just that, here soon.

However, as long as they are both on the court at the same time, one of them will have to be playing out of position.
Paul doesn't play SF half the time. He spots up for tons of 3s like an SG, he's going one on one for dribble attacks or running through post feeds in ways that are identical to what they have Lance do, and a good portion of his defensive time is spent shutting down SGs or even PGs if they are the guy that needs stopped.

This happens every game. Paul won't just get switched, they'll assign him to a guy that he'll even go through picks/screens to stay with. Like he would have been on Joe Johnson late in the Nets game if he hadn't fouled out. He's constantly thrown at smaller, "quicker" SG types from other teams.

Plus his lateral game and weaker post game suggest SG vs Danny's much more traditional SF game. Both shoot the 3, but the rest of their games are similar in a way that Pippen and Jordan were similar. They could be interchanged, but Mike was always a bit more of the true SG vs Pippen's SF game.

That's why I'd love to see them stay together, to see a few seasons of our poor man's 23/33. The only problem is the Bulls didn't have the talent/cost of West/Roy on the frontline.




The other problem you're having in this thread is the unintentional allies with whom I don't think you'd normally care to be "on the same side" of a debate. ;)

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 04:00 PM
I think the biggest issue is that, in an ideal scenario, they both play the same position. Obviously, you can slide Paul over and play him with Granger, and it is effective. I'm really excited that we will get to do, just that, here soon.

However, as long as they are both on the court at the same time, one of them will have to be playing out of position.

I don't know if it is out of position exactly but the fact is that PG has blossomed and he has become an all star playing SF. Granger can't play anything else. Oh, he can log a few minutes at PF but he really isn't a good enough rebounder or defender to do that without hurting you in the long run. PG is approaching being a star. Granger isn't. Just bring Granger in off the bench for the rest of the season and if they are on the floor at the same time, make it in the last five minutes of the game when you need some more scoring. Granger should probably be held to under 20 minutes for quite a while any way.......:cool: ...

Ace E.Anderson
02-15-2013, 04:15 PM
I don't know if it is out of position exactly but the fact is that PG has blossomed and he has become an all star playing SF.

Does anybody really feel that Paul couldn't/wouldn't have been an AS if he were playing the SG position?

It's one thing if the two players were redundant in terms of strengths and weaknesses, but they aren't at all--and in fact compliment one another quite well.

Trader Joe
02-15-2013, 04:17 PM
Again, the SG/SF debate is old and comical when it comes to the P's scheme. Paul will keep starting on the side of the court he is comfortable with. We just accidentally found that side because it used to be the side Danny played on. Danny will play on Paul's old side where Lance plays now because as mostly a shooter it matters less to him. Just call them our wings and be done with it.

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 04:30 PM
Does anybody really feel that Paul couldn't/wouldn't have been an AS if he were playing the SG position?

It's one thing if the two players were redundant in terms of strengths and weaknesses, but they aren't at all--and in fact compliment one another quite well.

The fact is he is much better as a SF. You will see that if Granger forces him back to SG. He is going to lose touches to Granger as he has always done. If Granger is moved back to starting, I think the Pacers will struggle to play at .500 for the rest of the year. That is how much difference I believe it makes.......:cool: ...

BillS
02-15-2013, 04:53 PM
The fact is he is much better as a SF. You will see that if Granger forces him back to SG. He is going to lose touches to Granger as he has always done. If Granger is moved back to starting, I think the Pacers will struggle to play at .500 for the rest of the year. That is how much difference I believe it makes.......:cool: ...

Weren't you the one who said the Pacers would be struggling to make .500 because Danny was going to be OUT?

Ace E.Anderson
02-15-2013, 05:21 PM
The fact is he is much better as a SF. You will see that if Granger forces him back to SG. He is going to lose touches to Granger as he has always done. If Granger is moved back to starting, I think the Pacers will struggle to play at .500 for the rest of the year. That is how much difference I believe it makes.......:cool: ...

What is he doing at "SF" that he can't do at "SG"??

Also, if Paul is so much better than Danny (other posters words--including yourself; not mine) then why would he lose touches to him? If player A (George) is clearly twice the player that player B (Granger) ever was, then he's going to get his shots regardless of who's within the lineup. It's just how basketball works.

Now in reality Paul is better than Danny, but he's not that much better OFFENSIVELY than Danny is. As was the case last year (and has been the case for the most part this year) our offense will be an equal opportunity type of attack. If Danny has it going one night, then he is going to be taking more shots, same thing for Paul, George, David, etc. All Danny is going to add to the team is another perimeter shooting/scoring threat which is exactly what our (at times) anemic offense needs.

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 05:48 PM
What is he doing at "SF" that he can't do at "SG"??

Also, if Paul is so much better than Danny (other posters words--including yourself; not mine) then why would he lose touches to him? If player A (George) is clearly twice the player that player B (Granger) ever was, then he's going to get his shots regardless of who's within the lineup. It's just how basketball works.

Now in reality Paul is better than Danny, but he's not that much better OFFENSIVELY than Danny is. As was the case last year (and has been the case for the most part this year) our offense will be an equal opportunity type of attack. If Danny has it going one night, then he is going to be taking more shots, same thing for Paul, George, David, etc. All Danny is going to add to the team is another perimeter shooting/scoring threat which is exactly what our (at times) anemic offense needs.

I never said he was twice the player. The team will suffer defensively with Granger playing with PG because PG does not guard SGs as well as he does SFs. Granger just never guards anyone..... Frankly, the Pacers would be better off if Granger did not come back at all this year, the present chemistry is that good. It took about six weeks to get there. Granger will destroy that immediately. :cool: ...

OlBlu
02-15-2013, 05:49 PM
Weren't you the one who said the Pacers would be struggling to make .500 because Danny was going to be OUT?

Perhaps in the early part of the season but this team has really come together since then. Have Granger come back next year. He can't do anything but be a problem now......:cool: ...

Major Cold
02-15-2013, 05:59 PM
Do any of you think that Paul George can be what Grant Hill was suppose to be?

Hicks
02-15-2013, 06:28 PM
Again, the SG/SF debate is old and comical when it comes to the P's scheme. Paul will keep starting on the side of the court he is comfortable with. We just accidentally found that side because it used to be the side Danny played on. Danny will play on Paul's old side where Lance plays now because as mostly a shooter it matters less to him. Just call them our wings and be done with it.

count had asked Frank about his views on the difference between the two and the three in his offense, and I believe Frank said it basically came down to them being six of one, half dozen of the other, with the exception of who they would pair up with in pick and rolls.

Basically, to make it harder for teams to switch on pick and rolls, he prefers to run pick and rolls with SG's and PF's and SF's with C's. So expect more Paul pick and rolls with West (sweet!) and Danny will run them more with Roy (err, um, knock down those jumpers, Danny!).

tnasty4l
02-15-2013, 07:29 PM
Amen bills lets just wait and see what pg does from here on out.you cant have a superstar player in just one half of a season.at least dg produced in a longer period of time.

Hicks
02-15-2013, 07:32 PM
I guess the real question is: Just how much faith do you really have in Paul George to be a star if you worry that he'll get derailed just from having to go back to the 2? It's not exactly like asking Dirk Nowitzki to play the point with that change in spots...

yoadknux
02-15-2013, 07:59 PM
So expect more Paul pick and rolls with West (sweet!) and Danny will run them more with Roy (err, um, knock down those jumpers, Danny!).
:laugh:

SMosley21
02-16-2013, 12:17 AM
About 90% of this thread is ridiculous.

Naptown_Seth
02-16-2013, 03:22 PM
Again, the SG/SF debate is old and comical when it comes to the P's scheme. Paul will keep starting on the side of the court he is comfortable with. We just accidentally found that side because it used to be the side Danny played on. Danny will play on Paul's old side where Lance plays now because as mostly a shooter it matters less to him. Just call them our wings and be done with it.
Exactly. When I hear the SG/SF debates I wonder if people have watched them play much this year, and I'm not joking. Because when I watch I rarely see "oh, now he's at SG". You can't tell at all because a lot of times they'll have Lance start a PnR even though he's not the PG, and they'll ISO Paul on the outside even though he's the SF, or they'll have Paul guarding the PG or SG for the other team.

The team has different roles - low post threat, high post PnPop, high post passer, wing that runs through the low post for potential give and go, breakdown ball hander, etc. And the people in those roles varies as the game progresses.

Paul is the current all star and even he doesn't get the exact same situations set up for him during a game in the way that Reggie would constantly get the double-screen catch and shoot curl play run for him.


The Pacers are missing one type of play on a consistent basis - the spot up shooter. And Danny does that very well. He dribble drives enough to punish hard close outs, but he's very comfortable drifting out to the weakside arc for a kick-out 3. If anything Paul's progress with his own slashing drive helps relieve Danny of that role and puts him back in a position of strength on offense.

daschysta
02-16-2013, 04:17 PM
Exactly. When I hear the SG/SF debates I wonder if people have watched them play much this year, and I'm not joking. Because when I watch I rarely see "oh, now he's at SG". You can't tell at all because a lot of times they'll have Lance start a PnR even though he's not the PG, and they'll ISO Paul on the outside even though he's the SF, or they'll have Paul guarding the PG or SG for the other team.

The team has different roles - low post threat, high post PnPop, high post passer, wing that runs through the low post for potential give and go, breakdown ball hander, etc. And the people in those roles varies as the game progresses.

Paul is the current all star and even he doesn't get the exact same situations set up for him during a game in the way that Reggie would constantly get the double-screen catch and shoot curl play run for him.


The Pacers are missing one type of play on a consistent basis - the spot up shooter. And Danny does that very well. He dribble drives enough to punish hard close outs, but he's very comfortable drifting out to the weakside arc for a kick-out 3. If anything Paul's progress with his own slashing drive helps relieve Danny of that role and puts him back in a position of strength on offense.

Exactly, there is no reason to believe Danny will somehow make us "worse". We had the BEST starting lineup in the entire NBA last season on a +- basis, Paul is better this year, West is better this year, there is no way Danny makes us worse unless he's just not himself whatsoever, in which case he'd probably come off of the bench anyway.