Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Granger's future with the Pacers

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    4

    Default Granger's future with the Pacers

    Many posters on this board have voiced the opinion that this was a 'down year' for Granger. There were no dirth of opportunities for him and yet his lack of aggressivenes more than negated his basketball talent.
    What should the Pacers do with him ?
    My opinion - even though his trade value may not be at its highest he is still the best 'deal sweetener' the Pacers have and he has to be used as such to unload atleast one ( if not both ) of Murphy and Dunleavy. No point in dragging him along like we did with Fred Jones for a few years before realizing he's not the one for us. Also Shawne Williams has shown that he can more than play and Granger's presence will merely impede his development.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    38
    Posts
    8,752

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    I haven't considered this past year as a "down year" for Granger. I think it's all about realistic expectations and patience. He was just in his second year and became the starting SF all of a sudden.

    He needs to improve, offcourse, but he's young, bright and has the tools and character to do just that.

    I like having both Granger and Shawne. Gives us a lot of flexibility in the near future, especially if the trend towards smaller ball continues. I wouldn't trade either of them, except if we got some "crazy" offer.

    I rather would part ways with JO for financial, potential returns and security reasons for this franchise.

    Regards,

    Mourning
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,312

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    I don't feel any urgency to unload Dunleavy. I think Donnie was right when he said that if Dunleavy bulked up he could flourish and better approach his potential.
    I wouldn't put the untouchable label on Granger, but I certainly would not be shopping him.

  4. #4
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,493

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Was it Donnie's idea for Smits' to bulk up?

    -Bball
    O'Brien has been fired! Yay! What took so long?

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  5. #5
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    38
    Posts
    8,752

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    I overlooked the Dun Dun part, but I subscribe to what Cobol Sam above just posted. I don't see him as a starplayer, but I certainly think we can get a lot more out of him then some seem to think.
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  6. #6
    Member Ragnar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Age
    42
    Posts
    5,734

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Was it Donnie's idea for Smits' to bulk up?

    -Bball
    And J.O.

  7. #7
    Member Dr. Goldfoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    37
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Granger had a fine season. His rebounding was down a little, probably because he took on a greater defensive and offensive responsibility this year. He doubled his point production while maintaining a decent shooting percentage and improved his outside shot.

    Williams, on the other hand, saw even less time than Granger did last season. Before anyone crowns this guy as better, why don't we see what he can do when the pressure is on, the minutes are up and there is something expected of him.

    I also see no reason why they can't co-exist at least for another season if not longer.

  8. #8
    Member odeez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Anyone who says Granger had a bad year is crazy. He had a great year if you ask me. Sure we want more from him, like being more aggressive, but the truth be told, he is doing well for a second year player. He might be considered to be a deal sweetener to some, but I say keep him! But at the same time I want the Pacers to compete for a championship next year, so if he has to go in order to bring someone in who will be the difference maker, than do it (WOULD PREFER TO KEEP HIM). If we go with a youth movement, then we must keep him, he looks like a future on court leader. I think that he is only going to get better.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Granger showed enough improvement this season so calling this a "down" year is overexaggerating it a bit. We need to keep him and Williams too, it's too early to give Shawne the starting SF spot.
    Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

  10. #10

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    I'm okay with Granger's season. A solid B for development. He has this experience to learn from.

    But it is important to note that he only improved his 3-point shooting this year. Add that to the extra minutes and that's why his scoring went up.

    But his assists, blocks, steals, and rebounds didn't budge. And since he increased his playing time 50%, all those numbers actually went down.

    Not worried, and I would say this season wasn't a step back. But it wasn't a step forward either.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,152

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    I think Granger was fine, considering all he was faced with.
    For example (and remember this is as a second year player):

    First he is coming off the bench, then he is starting.
    He was a small forward, then they tried to make him a two-guard at times.
    He had to learn to play with JO, then without him for stretches.
    He was told we were an up-tempo team, then a half court team.
    He had to adapt to playing with a bunch of new teammates.

    I think he spent a certain amount of the year simply being confused about what he was supposed to be and do. That was not his doing.

    He will be fine with a more consistant role, at his proper position, in a more consistant scheme.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    The goal I have had in mind for Granger is to become Richard Jefferson-esque. I think he has the skills and size to accomplish that. But the temperament and fire - umm I dunno. Perhaps his only DOMINATING performance came in the game against Memphis. I would have liked to see him put his stamp on atleast some game even for short periods - but it seems to me like he was a consistent model of deference and timidity. Sure he might give us 15 or so ppg with the occasional 20ish effort - but I just don't think he is hungry enough to do more. That is the aspect which concerns me the most. His talent, ability, willingness to learn, good locker-room presence and all the good stuff is not in doubt at all.

  13. #13
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    38
    Posts
    8,752

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Well how long did it take Richard Jefferson to really reach his peak? Patience. His main level of concentration (to me) this summer should be on individual and team defence.

    Regards,

    Mourning
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  14. #14
    Banned PacerMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,133

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by odeez View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Anyone who says Granger had a bad year is crazy. He had a great year if you ask me. Sure we want more from him, like being more aggressive, but the truth be told, he is doing well for a second year player. He might be considered to be a deal sweetener to some, but I say keep him! But at the same time I want the Pacers to compete for a championship next year, so if he has to go in order to bring someone in who will be the difference maker, than do it (WOULD PREFER TO KEEP HIM). If we go with a youth movement, then we must keep him, he looks like a future on court leader. I think that he is only going to get better.
    Love that avatar!

  15. #15
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    26
    Posts
    29,121

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    How is this a down year for him? To put it in perspective his stats this year aren't that different Josh Howard's second year.

    “WE NEVER SURRENDER, WE NEVER GIVE UP, WE KEEP ATTACKING”- Frank Vogel
    momentarygodsblog.com https://twitter.com/momentarygods

  16. #16
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    22,901

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by sudhan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Many posters on this board have voiced the opinion that this was a 'down year' for Granger. There were no dirth of opportunities for him and yet his lack of aggressivenes more than negated his basketball talent.
    I don't think he had a down year....as many have said....he is progressing how I think any 2nd year player should progress. I think he had certain expectations ( like stepping up immediately to be the starting SF AND 2nd scoring option the second the trade went down ) prematurely hoisted upon him that he did not live up to....but looking at things realistically....he just wasn't ready as evidenced by his inconsitent games. One game he would be Scottie Pippen...aggressively scoring and driving to the hoop...whereas the next game he would become very Dunleavy-esque, missing shots and settling for jumpshots beyond the arc. As many of us have said in another "post trade" thread about Granger not stepping up......this question needs to be re-evaluated 1 year from now after we fail to make it to the playoffs.

    Right now, saying that he had a "down year" is too early. Realistically...I wish that he would be more aggressive all the time..but also not entirely surprised that he isn't at this point in his career.

    Quote Originally Posted by sudhan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What should the Pacers do with him ?
    My opinion - even though his trade value may not be at its highest he is still the best 'deal sweetener' the Pacers have and he has to be used as such to unload atleast one ( if not both ) of Murphy and Dunleavy. No point in dragging him along like we did with Fred Jones for a few years before realizing he's not the one for us. Also Shawne Williams has shown that he can more than play and Granger's presence will merely impede his development.

    Thoughts?
    Granger isn't the best "deal sweetner"...its JONeal. I suspect that when it comes to Granger.....TPTB will guage interest in him and only move him if we can get rid of Tinsley. I don't think that Shawne is completely ready to take over Granger's role....but if the right deal comes along....I wouldn't be surprised if Granger is gone with Tinsley.

    I'm more concerned about figuring out a way to give Dunleavy, Marquis, Granger and Shawne any minutes in the future. Unfortunately, there are only so many minutes that we can give to all 4 players at the SG / SF spot. The only way is to give Marquis some minutes at the backup PG spot...while giving Dunleavy, Shawne, Granger backup mintues at the PF spot ( the latter option is something that I do not want to do ).

    I know its not preferable....but unless Dunleavy or Marquis is moved ( which I think is near impossible and something that I am not in favor of ), I get the sense that Granger is the odd man out who will likely be packaged with Tinsley.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  17. #17
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    31,947

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    Granger is well on his way to being a borderline allstar player. He's a keeper

  18. #18
    You are my Lucifer D-BONE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Nirvana
    Posts
    6,517

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    If it comes down to JO, Shawne, and Danny, I say keep the young guys unless we're getting absolutely hosed on JO offers.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Granger's future with the Pacers

    A LOT of people have been giving Granger a little too much credit IMHO. For some reason, when everyone is looking for a 2007 scapegoat, he gets left off the hook when frankly, I think his subtle progress was part of the team's problem.

    He's a nice, young player. A probable starter for several years. Whether he's the kind of guy you can build around, I'm not so sure about that. My gut says he'll end up a solid, but unspectacular #2 option or very good #3 option, but never "the guy" for a good team.

    As for 2006-07, I'd give Granger a C+ this season. His playing time went up pretty significantly, some areas of his game improved, but a lot of his statistics leveled off a bit and I'm not sure his on the court demeanor during 4th quarter stretches is where it needs to be.

    The Good:

    - His reliable shooting range expanded quite a bit. This was a nice, positive thing to see that he had really worked on his consistency from the arc last summer.

    - With an expanding role in the offense, Danny didn't really fall victim to the turnover bug that a lot of young players do when increasing their PT and scoring opportunities. Although different stages of their careers, look no furthur than the early Glenn Robinson years for how bad the turnover bug could be for a young SF with the pressure to score for a team.

    - Scoring went up slightly with increased minutes and being the #2 and/or #3 option this season. However, his scoring was expected to go up this year. With 30+ MPG, I'm pretty sure his scoring is not where it needs to be to be a #2 option on a playoff type team.

    - Overall shooting percentage a little less than it could have. A lot of guys moving from a 4th or 5th option to a 2nd or 3rd option will see this area of their game suffer significantly as they start to force some shots in order to keep the team in the game, especially considering his 3PT attempt rate went from about 20% of his shot attempts to about .


    The Bad:

    - The biggest telling sign, IMO? His hustle stats (steals, blocks, rebounds) were flat or decreased with 40-50+% more playing time (over 1,000 minutes). FlavaDave hit this one on the head. Obviously you should not expect a guy to produce at his 48 minute rates when given more playing time -- you play longer stretches with less energy, etc -- but to see Danny's stats in those categories stay flat or regress has to one of the biggest disappointments of the entire season.

    - He's not hitting the boards with the aggression that he should for a starting NBA SF, specifically on the offensive end. In over 1,000 extra minutes, Danny's season offensive boards totals actually WENT DOWN. Offensive boards are mostly hustle. Not a good sign at all for a young player.

    - A more reliable jump shot led to Danny not drawing as many foul's as you'd like. If he wants to increase his efficiency on the court, he needs to get to the foul line more, especially during the last minute or so of time before going out for a breather.

    - I think, especially after reading posts around here the last few weeks, that most people feel that his 1 on 1 man defense was lethargic this season. He definitely didn't have the same energy on this side of the court that he brought off the bench in 2005-06.

    Granted, it was a tumultous season and Granger's role changed a bit as the season went on. Overall, however, I was left a little underwhelmed by his progress on the court. He can still be a damn good player in this league, but he's got to get past the mental lapses and "cruise control effect" of increased playing time and make more use of that time on the court.

Posting Permissions

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