Granger isn't a leader, IMHO. He doesn't have the personality to lead a team, which isn't a bad thing.
Just because you're the teams best player doesn't put you in a position to lead. Lead by example yes, but not the tone setter and the one to rally the troops when times are tough.
And as long as the actual leader and the best player(s) see eye to eye, I think there's no problem.
Strong moves to the basket.
A reliable 15 footer.
An attitude that cares whether we win or lose.
"I like our group of people," Ainge told USA Today. "I'm trying to teach them about basketball, and they're trying to teach me about analytics."
Does it take an overly aggressive shot, usually driving into a crowd, instead of working the pass and being a little more patient? Sure. But he's not a ballhog.
I think there is a rift in the team, but it doesn't revolve around Danny and DJones.
I also think that Rush, DJ and Granger have strong cases for being the top 2-way players on the team. Yes Danny does lack on straight up defense, but he's a great hustle defender who gets a lot of help defense blocks. Rush and DJ have offensive questions, but technically they balance each other well. Rush has scoring skills but lacks will at times, DJ is the opposite.
DJ and Rush both space the defensive floor well, and in turn that helps set up Hibbert to defend more at the rim where he's been pretty solid. You lack rebounding, though DJ and Rush are both good wing rebounders, but you can defend and you do have multiple offensive attack points.
I also strongly agree that Watson fits as a 2 way guy.
I even think Foster makes a good case on offense due to awareness, passing and screening (slightly, never been great at this). He won't score but he will work the offensive space to help create a score for someone.