Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 60

Thread: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

  1. #1

    Default Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    The exception to that stand is if someone were to slip down to them unexpectedly. I'm not sure how I feel about Luke Babbitt, and I'm not a fan of Ed Davis or Al-Farouq Aminu. I could be wrong on all three of them, but I don't see any of them as having a position.

    To me there is a big difference between being a combo player and a tweener. A combo means a player can succeed at multiple (mostly two) positions vs. the opponent's first unit. A tweener means they can't and are likely relegated to the bench or mediocre results.

    Gordon Hayward is a SF, and he would eventually be a combo 3/2. A lot of that, while he won't be a star right away, will be determined by who he can guard. As he stretches out his range, consistently, he'll be a quality shooter with 3pt range, and he will be an intelligent shooter. He will also be a willing defender, ranging toward willing and able.

    I'm not a Granger fan, at least not to the point of he's untouchable or the face of the franchise. Being the best talent on an average at best team isn't necessarily one to build a team around, especially if there is little correlation to him playing and the Pacers winning. He's a low efficiency, high volume shooter, and he's not always a willing defender.

    I'm not suggesting dumping Granger for cheap or that Hayward would challenge a year or two to start, but at some point, I could see Hayward being the starter as he improves his range and strength. He's a play maker, both for himself and his teammates.

    I would love to see the Pacers reshape their roster, using Granger and/or expiring contracts to land a high ceiling point guard. Knowing Dunleavy has a year left on his contract, the pressure on Hayward to start right away wouldn't be there. For some reason I'm sold on Hibbert and Hansbrough as the "Smits and high energy PF" combination the Pacers had in the 90's. Maybe I'm way off on that.

    Dan Dakich seems to think Brandon Rush is going to be really good, and this is just his second year in the NBA. I tend to agree with him in that regard.

    Now...if the Pacers can get a point guard who can make this team better, either through the draft (doubtful at #10) or dealing the pick, I'm all for it. A better PG situation would likely improve the team's efficiency, most especially's Granger, assuming he is suited to play off the ball more and not stall the offense. He's becoming too much like Ron Artest in that regard.

    The team is a rudderless ship on the court, and this offseason the Pacers have a lot of assets they can use to make changes. I doubt the draft can directly yield what they want, so let's hope they either use the pick to get what they need by dealing it or drafting what they would need to be able to make other types of deals to get this team some leadership and talent at the PG spot.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Jim R For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Custom User Titleist
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound, but of mind.
    Posts
    3,542
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    If he comes here, he would be primarily guarding Dahntay and Dunleavy, and occasionally McRoberts when O'B wants to try Hayward at the 4.

  4. #3
    Stay focused SMosley21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Going the distance
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,534

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    So you're suggesting that we draft Gordon Heyward with the 10th pick, and not only that, but that we trade away Danny Granger so that Heyward will eventually be our starting SF?

    Is this a joke thread?
    Grown Man Ball

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SMosley21 For This Useful Post:


  6. #4
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,373

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by SMosley21 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So you're suggesting that we draft Gordon Heyward with the 10th pick, and not only that, but that we trade away Danny Granger so that Heyward will eventually be our starting SF?

    Is this a joke thread?
    Thing is, it's not that unrealistic, if we got some pieces for Granger. We're not trading Granger, though.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  7. #5

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by SMosley21 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So you're suggesting that we draft Gordon Heyward with the 10th pick, and not only that, but that we trade away Danny Granger so that Heyward will eventually be our starting SF?

    Is this a joke thread?

    I bet at one point someone said, "You mean to tell me you'd want Danny Granger to start? Is this a joke?"

    Do you realize how inefficient Danny Granger is on offense? His FG% has tumbled as his role has expanded. He leads the team in turnover average, which isn't a good thing even though he leads the team in minutes played. High volume, low percentage shooters isn't a good thing. You can't be mesmerized by points per game. On a team that produces a great number of possessions per game, on the 29th best offensive rebounding team in the league, given that he is a horrid defender, his production (not just his scoring) could be duplicated in a combination of redistributing shots throughout the offense and finding an improved defender.

    Man...he averages 24 points per game. He must be a stud. Signed, Antawn Jamison.

    It's clear you really didn't read what I posted, given the way you summed up what I wrote. My MAIN point of my post is to improve this team's PG play. One way to do that is to use the draft pick to do it, and since it doesn't appear at #10 to be much direct help there, you either deal it or draft in such a way to increase flexibility elsewhere to make a deal.

    I would much rather have a definitive talent and leader at the PG spot on the roster, along with Hayward at the SF spot going forward, than Granger and what the Pacers have now at the PG spot. Granger is the Pacers' best asset, but from a big picture perspective, no team will achieve what they want with him as their best player.

    The Pacers are second in the league in possessions. The Pacers are 29th in the league in offensive rebounding. Their leading scorer is a forward shooting 43% from the field. If you think the dealing of him is in anyway close to being a joke, you really don't understand much about the game.

  8. #6

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thing is, it's not that unrealistic, if we got some pieces for Granger. We're not trading Granger, though.

    Sadly you're right, and the flaw of the Pacers has been over the last decade building around players who are very inefficient on both ends of the floor.

  9. #7
    I'm on a MAC! graphic-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,371

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Well Granger's efficiency dropped this past season due to injury, he had to settle for bad jump shots instead of taking it to the rim and mixing it up as he did a year ago when he was an all star. That year he was an insanely efficient scorer.

    He wasn't running around screens and getting good open looks this year because he was hobbled. During the 08-09 season the Pacers ran plays for him to curl underneath the basket to catch the ball in stride around the free throw line, too which he could then either drive it or pop up for a relatively easy jumper.

  10. #8
    Chairman of the Boards 90'sNBARocked's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Chicago, but Brooklyn/Naptown Raised!!
    Posts
    7,598

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim R View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I bet at one point someone said, "You mean to tell me you'd want Danny Granger to start? Is this a joke?"

    Do you realize how inefficient Danny Granger is on offense? His FG% has tumbled as his role has expanded. He leads the team in turnover average, which isn't a good thing even though he leads the team in minutes played. High volume, low percentage shooters isn't a good thing. You can't be mesmerized by points per game. On a team that produces a great number of possessions per game, on the 29th best offensive rebounding team in the league, given that he is a horrid defender, his production (not just his scoring) could be duplicated in a combination of redistributing shots throughout the offense and finding an improved defender.

    Man...he averages 24 points per game. He must be a stud. Signed, Antawn Jamison.

    It's clear you really didn't read what I posted, given the way you summed up what I wrote. My MAIN point of my post is to improve this team's PG play. One way to do that is to use the draft pick to do it, and since it doesn't appear at #10 to be much direct help there, you either deal it or draft in such a way to increase flexibility elsewhere to make a deal.

    I would much rather have a definitive talent and leader at the PG spot on the roster, along with Hayward at the SF spot going forward, than Granger and what the Pacers have now at the PG spot. Granger is the Pacers' best asset, but from a big picture perspective, no team will achieve what they want with him as their best player.

    The Pacers are second in the league in possessions. The Pacers are 29th in the league in offensive rebounding. Their leading scorer is a forward shooting 43% from the field. If you think the dealing of him is in anyway close to being a joke, you really don't understand much about the game.


    Puff, Puff, pass
    Sittin on top of the world!

  11. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,604

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Let's hope we find Reggie instead of settling for Alford. Him and Chuck Person would be a pretty good combo for a while. And who knows, down the road we might see the playoffs!

  12. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,604

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Let's hope we find Reggie instead of settling for Alford. Him and Chuck Person would be a pretty good combo for a while. And who knows, down the road we might see the playoffs!
    Which makes me think....I've seen very little of Person when he was a Pacer as I was a youngin right around then. Similar size to Granger and known as a range shooter. How did he in his prime compare to our Danny Granger? talent....play style...etc

  13. #11
    Member Taterhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,220

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim R View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I bet at one point someone said, "You mean to tell me you'd want Danny Granger to start? Is this a joke?"

    Do you realize how inefficient Danny Granger is on offense? His FG% has tumbled as his role has expanded. He leads the team in turnover average, which isn't a good thing even though he leads the team in minutes played. High volume, low percentage shooters isn't a good thing. You can't be mesmerized by points per game. On a team that produces a great number of possessions per game, on the 29th best offensive rebounding team in the league, given that he is a horrid defender, his production (not just his scoring) could be duplicated in a combination of redistributing shots throughout the offense and finding an improved defender.

    Man...he averages 24 points per game. He must be a stud. Signed, Antawn Jamison.

    It's clear you really didn't read what I posted, given the way you summed up what I wrote. My MAIN point of my post is to improve this team's PG play. One way to do that is to use the draft pick to do it, and since it doesn't appear at #10 to be much direct help there, you either deal it or draft in such a way to increase flexibility elsewhere to make a deal.

    I would much rather have a definitive talent and leader at the PG spot on the roster, along with Hayward at the SF spot going forward, than Granger and what the Pacers have now at the PG spot. Granger is the Pacers' best asset, but from a big picture perspective, no team will achieve what they want with him as their best player.

    The Pacers are second in the league in possessions. The Pacers are 29th in the league in offensive rebounding. Their leading scorer is a forward shooting 43% from the field. If you think the dealing of him is in anyway close to being a joke, you really don't understand much about the game.
    I agree with the basis of your post here, and if we could use Danny in a mega deal for someone like Chris Paul I would be all for it. But I just doubt that is a possibility at all.

    I think Danny would be the biggest beneficiary of improved PG play. He is not a play maker by any means he is more of a shot maker. And I think his efficiency has suffered mainly because he has garnered more attention from opposing defenses as his scoring average has increased. Granger is a very good piece to have moving forward. He can shoot from deep, stretch the floor and give you pretty consistent offensive production. And that should get even better with improved PG play.

    As far as Hayward? No thanks. Way too passive for me. He has got some talent no doubt but I view him as a quality bench player at best. He will not be a good defender in the pros willing or not. He will be able to score, and make plays for his teammates as you have said but that doesn't make you a starter. Would I mind us having Hayward on the team? No, I would actually love to see him as a replacement for Dunleavy on our roster and a back up to Granger. But at this time? I just think we are better served going another direction.

  14. #12
    I'm on a MAC! graphic-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,371

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    I would agree with the original posters theory though that if we don't draft hayward then I want the pick traded to bring in a real point guard. I want to get Danny some help at point guard, not a prospect that we have to develop for 3-4 years. Only to be a become a pretty good player during the last year of Danny's contract. When he is in his thirties.

    Get the man some help now! Turn that pick into Collison! Turn those other expirings into another allstar caliber player.

  15. #13

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Jim-

    Nice try. I don't disagree at all re Granger. You won't find many
    others on PD who concur though. When it comes to DG they 'see
    what they believe'.

    Just for the sake of discussion though, I'm not sure who is out there
    in the PG realm (wether existing or in the draft) to make that kind of
    move a fit right now.

    If Granger and an expiring deal is enough to bring back an existing,
    top-5-6 PG, it's worth doing. But I doubt it is. And obviously, there
    is no PG beyond Wall (who is presumably unobtainable) worth trading
    into the top few slots in this draft for.

  16. #14
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,885
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

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

    How did I get left out of that circle?

    I don't really like Gordon Hayward as an NBA prospect. But the sentiment about possibly trading Granger in his prime might be the best thing for the franchise long term. I wouldn't do it, but that possibility might become a reality if we just can't put together a winner within his career timeline.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to pacergod2 For This Useful Post:


  18. #15
    Member thewholefnshow31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,244

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Any decision about moving the 10th and Granger should not center around Hayward. To me he is not one of those cannot miss prospects like Durant that will turn your franchise around.

    I am not opposed to moving Granger if we can get back a top 5 point guard or shooting guard, but I just do not see that happening.

    I did find it rather humorous that you wanted Dunleavy to start. The guy has played a total of 29 games in two years. That knee is not something I am willing to take a chance. That would thrust Hayward into the starting spot and no way is he ready for that.

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to thewholefnshow31 For This Useful Post:


  20. #16
    Member ksuttonjr76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Marion, IA
    Posts
    3,360

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Hayward would be a complete waste of a pick for Indiana, unless we're using him in a trade to get a good PG. Period. We have more than enough perimeter players. I would burn The Fieldhouse to ground, if we picked Hayward, but didn't make a trade with him.

  21. #17

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    I believe the point is to use an all-star level SF, Granger, to get an all-star level PG. Whatever your attachment to Danny, and I like him, you must admit that his skill set is easier to replicate than is the skill set of a high quality pass-first PG who also can score and is not a defensive sieve. So in theory it is not a half-baked idea. But identifying that PG and a team willing to give him up is a task probably too great for Larry Bird.

    Regarding Gordon, I'm more strongly in favor of trading up or down than taking him, reaching for Bradley or Bledsoe, or taking Davis
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 06-17-2010 at 01:06 PM.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  22. #18
    Member ksuttonjr76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Marion, IA
    Posts
    3,360

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I believe the point is to use an all-star level SF, Granger, to get an all-star level PG. Whatever your attachment to Danny, and I like him, you must admit that his skill set is easier to replicate than is the skill set of a high quality pass-first PG who also can score and is not a defensive sieve. So in theory it is not a half-baked idea. But identifying that PG and a team willing to give him up is a task probably too great for Larry Bird.

    Regarding Gordon, I'm more strongly in favor of trading up or down than taking him, reaching for Bradley or Bledsoe, or taking Davis
    We need an All-Star PG for what? That's like trading an All-Star SG for an All-Star PF. What's the point? You already have an All-Star player. Why not just build around that All-Star player?

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ksuttonjr76 For This Useful Post:


  24. #19

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Isn't Granger a top 5 SF? LeBron, Melo, Durant, Pierce...I'm sure there's 2-3 guys you could argue are on or near Granger's level. But for those saying they'd trade him for top 5 at another position, why do that when we've got one? Why not add to him?

  25. #20

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    We need an All-Star PG for what? That's like trading an All-Star SG for an All-Star PF. What's the point? You already have an All-Star player. Why not just build around that All-Star player?
    Because a great PG does more to elevate the game of every player on the floor with him than does a great SF, unless that SF has exceptional all-around skills that go beyond scoring (passing, rebounding , defense, leadership...)

    The way most teams are configured (and the triangle offense is a rare exception) you have no shot at contending for anything unless you have an all-star level PG. The triangle is an exception because the PG responsibilies are transferred to uber-skilled swingmen like Kobe or Jordan that we will never have.
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 06-17-2010 at 01:16 PM.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  26. #21
    I'm on a MAC! graphic-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,371

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by ESutt7 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Isn't Granger a top 5 SF? LeBron, Melo, Durant, Pierce...I'm sure there's 2-3 guys you could argue are on or near Granger's level. But for those saying they'd trade him for top 5 at another position, why do that when we've got one? Why not add to him?
    I agree, he is certainly in the top 5 SF. I just think most Pacer fans just don't think the Pacers can get more than one really good Player. So if that really good player isn't cutting the mustard by himself they just want to ship him out and try another one. Hey we got a guy who can score 25pts, but we still stuck, lets get rid of him!

  27. #22

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    "Getting rid of him" is what we did with Ron Artest and Stephen Jackson. I don't see anyone advocating that.

    If you assume that Bird is an incapable team president and can't find a PG who would do more for the team than Danny does as a SF, then you don't contemplate trading Danny. Maybe that's what we have.

    If the team management has any clues about building a team, I would hope that all options are on the table since this team is stuck in perpetual lottery mode even with Danny, as far as I can tell.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  28. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tampa, Florida
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,604

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If you assume that Bird is an incapable team president and can't find a PG who would do more for the team than Danny does as a SF, then you don't contemplate trading Danny.
    Okay so, a guy is an incapable team president if he can't acquire a better player for a worse. It's all so clear now.

  29. #24

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Who said Danny is a bad player? Who?

    This is pointless. A one-time all-star, yet he is our Jordan. Some minor tweaks and a dynasty will be born.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  30. #25
    Parachromis HC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hartford City
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,794
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Any more, if the Pacers don't get Hayward, I want them to deal #10...

    Quote Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    We need an All-Star PG for what? That's like trading an All-Star SG for an All-Star PF. What's the point? You already have an All-Star player. Why not just build around that All-Star player?
    Unless you have Dwight Howard in the middle, you build around a point guard.
    "Can you take away every single day that we have given to another false prophet" -- Corey Taylor

Similar Threads

  1. Look back at Pacers Trades
    By Teddy Green in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-16-2009, 08:00 PM
  2. USA Today Pacers update
    By Speed in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 09-18-2008, 11:52 PM
  3. IndyStar: Pacers' Granger wants long-term deal
    By duke dynamite in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 141
    Last Post: 07-14-2008, 01:48 PM
  4. Teams looking to trade for Jason Kidd (Insider)
    By Slick Pinkham in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-09-2004, 06:07 PM
  5. Complete Game 2 Coverage From The Detroit News & Detroit Free Press
    By obnoxiousmodesty in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-24-2004, 11:21 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
  •