Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

  1. #1
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    All right, now that people have seen a little bit of Granger, let's talk this through some more.

    Earlier this week, I said that if you really think Granger is going to be good enough to start, why would you start him over Ron? Why not start him over Jax?

    I'd think Jackson would be more qualified to come off the bench at the swingman spots than Ron, since he can play shooting guard and I don't like the idea of Ron spending much time at the 4. So why not have a 3-man swingman rotation of Ron/Granger with Jax off the bench? Between them, those guys should eat up all the available minutes.

    Now, I honestly think we'd be better off (for this year anyway) with Jax and Ron starting, with Granger backing both of them up. But I think it could be worth considering to think of Granger as a 2. He's the same size as Jax, and it sounds like he can do the necessary things: slash, shoot, rebound, defend. What's not to like?
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  2. #2
    Member Pacers#1Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Age
    25
    Posts
    3,781

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    From what I saw at the FamJam I think he could play the 2, 3, and 4.

  3. #3
    Member Frank Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Chaos
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,019

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacers#1Fan
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    From what I saw at the FamJam I think he could play the 2, 3, and 4.

    Yeah well the line on him coming out of College was he could play positions 1-4.. So it certainly is not out of the question.

    Why Not Us ?


  4. #4
    Fat, Drunk and Stupid Lord Helmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Richmond, IN
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,576

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    I think that would make much more sense, Anthem.

    With this idea we wouldn't have to worry about the opposing team's leading scorer getting off to a hot start, because Ron won't be on the bench.

    But, I think the only question is if Granger is truly ready to start, and if he is, try it.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions





  5. #5
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    I can't answer until I see him in a couple of games

  6. #6
    Member Brian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,038

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can't answer until I see him in a couple of games

    Exactly...I wouldnt even go on preseason games,Im gonna wait till I see him in a few season games.
    LoneGranger33 said
    Agreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".

  7. #7
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,163

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    All right, now that people have seen a little bit of Granger, let's talk this through some more.

    Earlier this week, I said that if you really think Granger is going to be good enough to start, why would you start him over Ron? Why not start him over Jax?

    I'd think Jackson would be more qualified to come off the bench at the swingman spots than Ron, since he can play shooting guard and I don't like the idea of Ron spending much time at the 4. So why not have a 3-man swingman rotation of Ron/Granger with Jax off the bench? Between them, those guys should eat up all the available minutes.

    Now, I honestly think we'd be better off (for this year anyway) with Jax and Ron starting, with Granger backing both of them up. But I think it could be worth considering to think of Granger as a 2. He's the same size as Jax, and it sounds like he can do the necessary things: slash, shoot, rebound, defend. What's not to like?
    I like it....but as I think you are saying, one concern would be that he is a rookie.....but he is a rookie who looks like a starter now. I was stunned by his presence on the floor and the quality and breadth of his skills. I know this may be premature, but I think he will develop into a much better player than Jax....and Jax is no slouch.

    If Granger can sufficiently guard the 2, I would play him there with Ron at the 3....particularly when Jax is having a poor game and complaining to officials. Granger looks a litte larger than Jax, so I am not sure how he would handle the quick 2 guards. He looks like a good post defender, but I am not sure about his quickness.

  8. #8
    #PacerNation 317Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    317
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,440

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Yeah I'm probably going to wait until the actual season starts but make observations during preseason.

  9. #9
    Banned PacerMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,132

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    What is this teams biggest weakness? Rebounding would be my answer though outside shooting is certainly a question.
    That guy was a HORSE on the glass in college and blocked a lot of clutch shots. I want his butt up front. Let Jax and Freddie WELL man the 2.

  10. #10
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,163

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by PacerMan
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What is this teams biggest weakness? Rebounding would be my answer though outside shooting is certainly a question.
    That guy was a HORSE on the glass in college and blocked a lot of clutch shots. I want his butt up front. Let Jax and Freddie WELL man the 2.
    Another good point. Only problem is...where do we put Ron. He does not belong on the bench. He is too short to play PF, IMO.

  11. #11
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by PacerMan
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What is this teams biggest weakness? Rebounding would be my answer though outside shooting is certainly a question.
    I agree with that, but I disagree with your proposed answer.

    Putting a guy up front that's shorter and lighter than any of the guys he plays against isn't going to win us the rebound battle. What WILL help is putting big guys up front, and then getting 5 rebounds a game from our shooting guard.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  12. #12

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    I don't know where Danny is going to play, but I'd wager it will be somewhere. The kid is smart, unselfish, and one hell of a ball player already. No doubt about it.

  13. #13
    STRAIGHT UP pizza guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,011
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    My guess is Granger will come out and play at whatever position he catches the ball at. Let's say he gets it at midcourt, he'll make a nice pass or slash to the hoop. How about in the corner? He'll hit a shot. Down low? He'll take it to 'em and make a good power move.

    The kid is a ball player, not neccessarily a 2 or a 3. Just a natural basketball player.
    BLUE COLLAR GOLD SWAGGER

    @The_Real_CJake

  14. #14
    Member Frank Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Chaos
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,019

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with that, but I disagree with your proposed answer.

    Putting a guy up front that's shorter and lighter than any of the guys he plays against isn't going to win us the rebound battle. What WILL help is putting big guys up front, and then getting 5 rebounds a game from our shooting guard.
    Granger can rebound . lets not discount his height he is not 6'6 or 6'7 he is actually closer to 6'9 6'8 1\2 actually with shoes. However certainly not the most imposing figure he can get up ,, and rebounding is never about height or size ...it's all about positioning and desire

    Why Not Us ?


  15. #15
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,959

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    I think you need to look at the psych factor here, too. We know Ron has always enjoyed playing with the scrubs, and he's coming in a bit humbled by last year. Jack may not be as accommodating, and with babysitter Mike not around, Rick may not want to rock the boat.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  16. #16
    Member Frank Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Chaos
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,019

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Agreed.. on that one.. putting it nicely , yes Jax would be less accomodating for sure as opposed to Artest.. and I will leave it at that....

    Why Not Us ?


  17. #17
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Well, I don't think either of them should come off the bench. Let Granger, he's the rookie.

    I'm thinking more in terms of "who is our long-term answer at shooting guard."
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  18. #18
    Naptown Seth
    Guest

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Right now you have to start Jackson and Artest. However I like the prospect of Granger at SG more so than at PF because it's always better to be oversized than undersized in the NBA. If Granger is legit, then I could see him starting at SG, but no earlier than 2006-2007. And thats a long ways away, Ron and/or Jackson could be gone by then,

  19. #19
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Here is what I posted back in September

    Rick rarely says something that he does not intend to. When he says they might bring one of their better players off the bench, he obviously has thought about this as a possibility.

    The only logical choice is Jackson. Rick tried last season several times to bring Jax off the bench and I think he will experiment with that in the preseason. Jax is capable of bringing instant offense off the bench and if Rick worries whether Ron, J.O and Jax can learn to share the ball, then I could easily see Jax come off the bench.

    Who would start at shooting guard? I don't know. Fred, Saras, who knows. But don't be shocked if Artest starts at shooting guard and Granger starts at small forward. I'm not predicting that, but I could envision that as a possibility. Remember last season how JJ started when I thought it was clear Fred and Jax were both better players.

  20. #20
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    6'8"/ 230 lbs.

    Prototype SF.

    I don't like the idea of playing Granger at the "2" any more than I like the idea of playing Granger at the "4".

    Granted, I've got to see him play...
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,136

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can't answer until I see him in a couple of games
    Same here - and in his case I didn't even see him play in college - how many times was New Mexico (or is it NM State?) on National TV?

    I've been mentally thinking of Saras as the 1/2 backup up to now, Granger just backing up the 3.

    However, your biggest positional dropoff is at PF. I'm beginning to think more along starting Granger at 3 and having Ron backup the 3/4.

    There's a bunch of flexibility and a lot of different ways you can go:

    - start Foster at C and move JO to the 5 and Artest to the 4 when he goes out
    - use Harrison to back Foster up
    - use Granger at the 2 and 3
    - use Artest at the 3 and 4
    - use SJax at the 2 and 3
    - use Saras at the 1 and 2

    Makes my head spin.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  22. #22

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    It would be nice to have either Ron or Jackson coming off of the bench. Either would definitely give some scoring to a bench that just isn't going to give that right now.

    Also, from the games I saw last year, Fred plays so much better when he starts. Granted, so do most people. But he seems a bit more confident of sorts. Something to maybe look into.

    But I do like the idea of Granger starting.
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

  23. #23
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    6'8"/ 230 lbs.

    Prototype SF.

    I don't like the idea of playing Granger at the "2" any more than I like the idea of playing Granger at the "4".

    Granted, I've got to see him play...
    Same here. I feel like we got a more aggressive Tayshaun Prince tossed in our laps, and I want him playing SF.

  24. #24
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    I think almost everyone would rather Granger play exclusively the small forward position. But if he is as good as we are hearing he needs to play more than the 10 minutes that will be available behind Artest.

    So that raises the question how do you get them both on the floor at the same time. I really expect Ron and Granger to be playing the forward positions. In other words one will be the small forward and one the power forward. Who plays what, I don't care, take your pick.

  25. #25
    teY dennaB toN
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,606

    Default Re: Let's revisit the idea of Granger at the 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think almost everyone would rather Granger play exclusively the small forward position. But if he is as good as we are hearing he needs to play more than the 10 minutes that will be available behind Artest.

    So that raises the question how do you get them both on the floor at the same time. I really expect Ron and Granger to be playing the forward positions. In other words one will be the small forward and one the power forward. Who plays what, I don't care, take your pick.
    I really want to see DG in a few preseason games first, but.....

    I'll admit I'm excited at the potential of this line-up under the right circumstances.

    Tinsley
    Jackson
    Granger
    Artest
    O'Neal

    Intriguing.....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •