Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 88

Thread: Wolves after Granger for #4?

  1. #51
    Member Dr. Awesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    4,249

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    How would that be "Dr "?
    Well, the title says the Wolves are after Granger with the 4th pick, when it turns out that Chad Ford just brought it up as the only piece the Wolves have that the Pacers might want. There's a big difference.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Dr. Awesome For This Useful Post:


  3. #52

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    You might want to read my second post. I never said he was untouchable. but he is worth a hell of a lot more than the #4 pick in THIS draft. And Throwing in a late round pick or Al Jefferson is NOT enough.

    Granger is a player you try to build around, he is an established player and believe me, he will be an all star again if he ever gets a team around him.

    You might want to re-read my post. I NEVER mentioned Al Jefferson, nor a late draft pick. I said #16 which is 2 spots out of the lottery and 1 a past the 1st half of the draft. That's called a mid teen pick not a late draft pick.

    Again, I said the trade of Love, #4 & 16, plus a 7 mil TE is something that should be considered. I also said I feel it's MORE than what the T-Wolves feel Granger is worth. I'd never give it up for Granger, but I'd sure as heck would have to "seriously consider" it if it was offered.

    The T-Wolves have an opportunity to turn either the #4 or the 16 into SF that should be very good players in Johnson and George, and not have to give up Love, 7 mil TE, and keep either the #4 or 16 for another good player. Granger is a good player, but not that good to command the type of trade I've suggested.

  4. #53

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well, the title says the Wolves are after Granger with the 4th pick, when it turns out that Chad Ford just brought it up as the only piece the Wolves have that the Pacers might want. There's a big difference.
    Don't see your point at all. Sometimes I wonder if you post stuff just to get a rise out of someone.

  5. #54
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,960

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by indygeezer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've been meaning to ask, Can anybody promise me that Rubio isn't another Sarunas?


    I'll even go as far as to say, if by some wild stretch of the imagination he does, then Buck will eat Jermaniac's shoes.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  6. #55

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    No. They can't have Granger.

  7. #56
    Member trailrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    85

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To me, it doesn't make sense for either team. It puts Minnesota in win now mode and they aren't structured that way. For the Pacers its giving up your best player/face of the franchise for either Favors (couple of years away) or Cousins (risky pick for intangibles) or Wesley Johnson (could be Danny Granger, could be Corey Magette light)

    I don't mean to sound like a homer, but I would not do this on either side, but for the Pacers, I'd want the #4 and the rights to Ricky Rubio. To me, it's just not worth starting ALL the way over, unless you can immediately get two pieces.

    Look Danny is a top 10 scorer, in his prime, who's a good guy. It's one of those deals where he's worth more to the Pacers than Minnesota at this moment. If you trade him you need a nice group of youngster ala OKC to move forward with. You'd need to convince Rubio to come over to the Pacers, but if you woo him by saying you are going to be the man, the franchise guy, I think it's possible.

    It's all blantant speculation anyway.

    I agree with you about acquiring #4 and Rubio for Granger. And I endorse the idea. However we would have to find a way for salaries to match. How do draft choices factor into the financial equation?

  8. #57
    Member trailrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    85

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by indygeezer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm not as high on Granger as most of you but this is nuts. Giving up a proven player for a risk at #4? Giving up DG for what...are any of them franchise players? There is no promise that ANY top draft pick will be 1/2 as good as anybody currently starting. Sure, you can project what they will do but at least with DG you KNOW you have a solid player. We have so many needs that I just can't see creating another hole in order to get a "possibility".
    You are correct that we have many needs. They will never be filled while Granger is in his prime. Unless we can get lucky in the free agent market after next season. If we used Granger for a trade chip, take Johnson at 4, Henry at 10and bring over Rubio I think we have a situation similar to the Thunder. And we would have cap room to pursue free agents next year.

  9. #58
    Shooting for the Moon Day-V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SoBro
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,307
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Who's to say that Rubio would want to come play for us?

  10. #59
    Yeah, I'm a Pacers fan. MyFavMartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    In the Washington DC area
    Posts
    4,303
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    If I was trading Granger to the Wolves, I'd be getting Monroe at #4 (assuming Wall, Turner, and Favors are 1,2,3), and Johny Damon and their #16 and expiring contracts... I don't want Rubio (too many unknowns).

    I know that might seem a lot, but Danny's a proven franchise guy, which don't come around very often.

  11. #60
    Shooting for the Moon Day-V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SoBro
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,307
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by iPACER View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If I was trading Granger to the Wolves, I'd be getting Monroe at #4 (assuming Wall, Turner, and Favors are 1,2,3), and Johny Damon and their #16 and expiring contracts... I don't want Rubio (too many unknowns).

    I know that might seem a lot, but Danny's a proven franchise guy, which don't come around very often.
    No wonder the Wolves suck. They're signing old, over the hill baseball players to their squad.

  12. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,655

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    If I were trading Granger, I'd want a heck of a deal in return. I would also use the trade to reduce payroll, therefore I would NOT want Jefferson in return. The TWolves have some young players and also own the #4, #16 and #23 picks in the 2010 draft.

    I would probably go for something like Granger for Love, #4 and rights to Rubio. This assumes that Count55 is correct in stating that Minnesota has the cap room to absorb the extra salary.

    If The TWolves would not give up the rights to Rubio, then I would still want Love, #4 and #16, but only if the Pacers could pre-arrange a deal that would involve trading the #4 and either our #10 or the #16 for a pick that would land us either Wall or Turner. If necessary, I would trade the #4, the #10 and the #16 to get Wall.

    The possible outcomes would be:
    1. Danny for Love and Wall, without having a first round pick.
    2. Danny for Love and Turner and having a #16 pick.
    3. Danny for Love and rights to Rubio and having the #4 and #10 picks.

    Each of these outcomes is a pretty significant stretch... but if I could not achieve one of the 3 outcomes, I would not make the deal.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to beast23 For This Useful Post:


  14. #62
    Member tsm612's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Noblesville
    Posts
    426

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ballerzfan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Don't see your point at all. Sometimes I wonder if you post stuff just to get a rise out of someone.
    I completely agree with Dr. Awesome. The comment from Chad Ford was "I think Granger would cost the Wolves #4". That doesn't mean that the Wolves are trying to trade the #4 for Granger. It sounds to me like that was just Chad Ford giving his opinion about what Granger would be worth as a rebuttal to someone else's trade proposal. And as Dr. Awesome said, there's a big difference.

  15. #63
    Shooting for the Moon Day-V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SoBro
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,307
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ballerzfan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Don't see your point at all. Sometimes I wonder if you post stuff just to get a rise out of someone.
    Well, it looks like he definitely got a rise out of you.

  16. #64
    Member trailrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    85

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by thefeistyone View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Wouldn't trade Granger for much less than an all star in return + a pick.

    I know that's a lot, but as some of you stated in Granger we have a leader, a good role model, and a reasonable salary...How can you just give that away for an unproven European pg that might come over and a far from sure #4 pick. There are 2 players in the draft that have low risk and they will be gone in the first 2. If it was for wall or turner I listen. Anything after that you don't give up the franchise.
    I like Granger. But he is not a franchise player. He is a good compliment to a franchise player. IMO the Pacers could either trade Granger for very high picks and pick up a star in free agency or trade away their young players and future first round picks for two stars to add to Granger like the Celtics did. Perhaps they could choose the second option and then add a star after they dump salaries next year.

  17. #65
    Member trailrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    85

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Amen,

    Rubio did work against NBA players in the Olympics (world games , whatever)

    but he makes a young Reggie Miller look diesel, and he has yet to playa single game, nor commit to the sates. If his handlers were pissed he went to Minnesota, not sure they will be thrilled with Indy
    He stayed in Europe because of how much it would have cost him to buy out his Euro contract. This year the cost is substantially less. He will be in the NBA soon and I suspect play at a very high level. He would play for LB. It is worth the gamble. Johnson, Rubio, #10, our young players and cap space next year. Looks pretty darn good to me. Or we can pick #10 and win 32 games next year.

  18. #66

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    The conversation starts with Rubio, but I believe that Jefferson and the #4 pick is all Minnesota wants to part with. In any deal where the Pacers can keep the 10th and possibly move Granger, then look for Hayward being drafted.

  19. #67
    Twitter @M_Murph11 PacerPride33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lafayette IN
    Posts
    268

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    If your going to trade Granger and the Wolves' draft picks, one of the picks need to to be used on Paul George for sure
    Murph

  20. #68
    Fat, Drunk and Stupid Lord Helmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Richmond, IN
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,577

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    I just don't see the logic in trading a proven player for a draft pick.

    A lot of you didn't want to tank to take a chance on a high lotto pick, now some of you find it OK to deal Granger for the pick you didn't want to tank for?
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions





  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lord Helmet For This Useful Post:


  22. #69
    - .-- ... ... Natston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Timbuktupolis, IN
    Age
    31
    Posts
    8,318
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    The only reason I would consider trading Granger is that he's already 27, and will be at least 30 before this team is worth a damn again.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Natston For This Useful Post:


  24. #70
    Member trailrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    85

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Natston View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The only reason I would consider trading Granger is that he's already 27, and will be at least 30 before this team is worth a damn again.
    And that is the precise reason to trade him while he is still valuable. Or add Parker and a star free agent next season but that still would not be enough to win a title I suspect.

  25. #71
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,099

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Why trade Granger???? Granger put up solid numbers for two years straight, but instead of continuing to build around him, some people want to try him for Love/Jefferson? We got draft picks who could be groomed. With this type of thinking, we'd be revamping our entire lineup every 2-3 years.
    Because we seem to be on a salary dump heading.... And any "3 year plan" is either the most woeful attempt at a playoff plan ever devised or it's simply a plan to be rid of several high dollar contracts at the end of 3 years so we can then START some type of rebuild. Not that at the end of 3 years we're on getting Unicorns and trophy presentations.

    IOW... we're so far from mattering at this rate that Granger is going to be at the wrong end of his career (and value) before we sniff being relevant again.

    Maybe a Granger trade jumpstarts something?

    Maybe a Granger trade means we'll finally accept a lost season for what it is and use it for a high draft pick and a youth movement.

    Of course it's absolutely stupid to be in this position because we could've had the 4th pick anyway and could've teamed our pick with Granger on the court and/or still had Granger as an asset to acquire another piece of the puzzle now or in the immediate future.

    So yeah... I'd say management has painted themselves into a corner where they are d-mned if they do or da-ned if they don't... At least if they're going down this road.
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "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, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bball For This Useful Post:


  27. #72

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Helmet View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I just don't see the logic in trading a proven player for a draft pick.

    A lot of you didn't want to tank to take a chance on a high lotto pick, now some of you find it OK to deal Granger for the pick you didn't want to tank for?

    I understand and even agree Granger is worth more than just the #4 pick. Minnie would have to ante up a lot more than a #4 pick b4 the Pacers would even consider it. BUT if the trade was Love, #4 & 16, and 7 mil TE the Pacers HAVE to seriously consider it. A nice young player like Love on a rookie contract, a player like Johnson at #4, a player like Bradley/Bledsoe at #16, and 7 mil TE to spend on a good vet is just too good not to seriously consider an offer like that. AGAIN, I don't feel Minnie feels Granger is worth that much, and wouldn't make such an offer. Just stop and put yourself in a T-Wolves fans place, would you give up that much future of your team for Granger? I seriously doubt it. If I was an T-Wolve fan and this proposed trade I stated happened, I would do a Rumplestilskin, as a avid Pacers fan since their beginning I would do this trade. I like Granger, but I think we all at times think with our hearts as a Pacer fan and have a tendancy to over value a player wearing the blue n gold, but this proposed deal would just be too hard to pass up.

    Every season this type of rumor comes up numerous times, and nothing ever happens. This is just other case of that happening. Granger is safe and all is back to normal.

  28. #73
    FREE LANCE MillerTime's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    4,826

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    This could be used to our advantage. If we could get Jefferson and #4 for Granger, 2010 #57, and 2011 2nd rounder then I wouldnt be too against it. This is when I would look to pull off the Murphy and #10 for Parker (if re-signed). Then use the #4 to draft Wes Johnson.

    I think we'd look pretty good for next season. We would have a ridiculously young core with Parker (at 28) the vetern. Them main concerns here would obviously be Jefferson's knee and Parker's long-term committment to the team.

    Parker/Price
    Rush/Jones
    Wes Johnson/Dunleavy
    Jefferson/Hansbrough
    Hibbert/McRoberts

    SIGN ME UP
    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.



  29. #74
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Helmet View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I just don't see the logic in trading a proven player for a draft pick.
    It depends on the entire package. I'm not particularly interested in any kind of deal for Danny, at least in this context.

    However, the logic for a team trading a proven player for a draft pick is based on the thought that you can get farther with the assets you get back than you can with the player.

    Are the Pacers at that point with Danny? No, probably not.

    But...

    Considering the financial situation of the Pacers, and the fact that Minny is under the cap, and can take back Danny's entire salary without having to send, really, any payroll back, consider this deal:

    Pacers send Danny Granger

    Minny sends Jonny Flynn, #4 and #16 pick.

    With no other moves this summer (including not signing their 2nd round picks), the Pacers would have a 15-man roster with a payroll at about $65.3mm, or over $3.5mm less than it would cost them if they just signed the #10 and the 2 second rounders.

    Since just signing the #10 currently puts them right at the tax threshold, and adding the 2 second rounder put them $1mm over, this represents significant savings. (I'd say about $7.5mm - $3.5mm in payroll, $1mm in tax, and they'd also get the $3mm-ish payout for teams under the luxury tax.)

    Going into next year, they'd have 9 players under contract:

    Flynn/Price/Rush/DJones/Hansbrough/Hibbert/#4/#10/#16

    with a total payroll of $22.9 mm.

    Add #1 (which is likely to be another Top 5-10 pick), and they're at no more than $28.6mm.

    Cap space is overrated, because you don't know what you're going to get for it. However, it does have a very tangible value. Under this scenario, the Pacers will be bad again this year (which they're likely to be anyway), but they'll have tons of options over the next 12 months to make moves.

    They already have the big expirings (Murphy/Dunleavy/Ford/Foster), now they'd also have more young assets to go with them, which is really the way you get value out of the expirings.

    There's obviously a ton of risk in such an approach, but for all the people advocating that we take the "OKC" approach (something of a snipe hunt, if you ask me), they've got to realize that Danny probably is in the way of that. He's too good to let the team be horrible, he's not good enough to make the team great, and he's already out of his rookie contract and is making big (but appropriate) money.

    All in all, I'd much rather try to make it work with Danny. I'd love to see the Parker deal get done, particularly if we can get them to throw in a future 1st. However, I'd be open to trading Danny for a ton of young assets, and Minny has the assets and the cap space to put together the kind of deal I'd want. (Though, the deal I'd want would probably be #4/#16 and either Love or Rubio.)


    A lot of you didn't want to tank to take a chance on a high lotto pick, now some of you find it OK to deal Granger for the pick you didn't want to tank for?
    Two completely different things.

    I can't speak for others, but I was opposed to throwing games in order to get a high draft pick. It's sleazy.

    Over the last 16 games, the Pacers went 11-5. They played Rush 33.5 minutes a night, Hibbert 28.5 minutes a night, Price got 18 minutes, and McBob got 16 minutes a night in 14 games.

    They played a ridiculously easy schedule, with 11 of 16 at Conseco. They won 9 at home, over CHA, DET, OKC, WAS, UTA, SAC, HOU, NYK, and NJN - teams that had a combined road record of 119-250. The two road wins were at Detroit - who was sucktastic - and at Cleveland - who started two cheerleaders and a video guy.

    Look - had the Pacers traded away Murphy and Watson at the deadline for cap relief and picks, I would have been fine with that. Had the Pacers continued to play like microwaved dog**** - it would have been painful - but I'd have been fine with that.

    However, from March 15th on, DET and PHI went 4-11 each, and SAC went 3-13. WAS went 5-12. For the Pacers to stay in the bottom 4-6 records, they would have had to intentionally throw games. I can't get behind that.

    For some reason, the term "tanking" has gotten some creep to include broader type personnel moves. I don't know why this is happening, but I don't agree. To me, tanking means to deliberately lose games, and that's what I firmly believe would have been necessary to finish with a record bad enough to be in the top 4-6 picks.
    Last edited by count55; 06-03-2010 at 07:39 PM.

  30. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to count55 For This Useful Post:


  31. #75
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Wolves after Granger for #4?

    Oh, and I don't like the #4 pick either - as a slot.

    I'm just about 100% sure that the first three picks will be Wall, Turner, and Favors, leaving us Cousins.

    Cousins is just an insane talent, but I worry that he (appears to be) a douchebag, and I worry that he apparently was heavy ("fat" is what some said) when he showed up in Chicago. If those prove to be untrue (or at least manageable), then he's going to be a hell of a player.

    I'd be way more comfortable with Favors there, who I like a great deal. I'd feel that Wes Johnson or even Greg Monroe would be safer than Cousins, but at 4, I just think he'd end up being way too much talent to pass up.
    Last edited by count55; 06-03-2010 at 11:37 AM.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to count55 For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Danny Granger Chat ESPN 3:15 Eastern
    By dannygranger in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-30-2009, 09:19 PM
  2. Danny Granger ranked 44th out in the Top 50 (AOL Sports)
    By naptownmenace in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-30-2008, 11:32 AM
  3. Mike Wells: How Much is Granger Worth?
    By Putnam in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 08-25-2008, 04:51 AM
  4. Danny Granger: Headed to Phoenix
    By GrangerRanger in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-28-2008, 06:40 PM
  5. Granger reminds Magic of the past
    By Will Galen in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-10-2007, 12:56 AM

Posting Permissions

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