Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/wordpress/?p=145

    Link to new T-bird post on the front page. Hope I did this right for those who wish to comment and thank T-bird for his excellent work.


    Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger


    By thunderbird1245, on August 7th, 2010
    This is the second edition of this series, as we look at ways some of our most important returning players can improve over the summer, and how perhaps the coaching staff can utilize them better to make them better individually, and our overall team better as whole.
    The first in this series was a comprehensive look at Roy Hibbert, tonight we stay in the frontcourt and look at our most talented player, Danny Granger.
    ————————————————————————————–
    Granger is already a top 30 player or so in the NBA and is unquestionably our best player. As he begins to enter his prime, he has started on a path that will make him one of the better players in the history of the franchise from a scoring point of view, but all the points Granger scores for us to this point haven’t led us to significant success in terms of wins and losses. In the world of an NBA player, at some point to be considered truly great a player has to become a significant driving force into making his team win. As of yet, Granger has yet to be able to do that, for whatever reason. Obviously many many factors are at fault here, but the question Granger has to be asking himself this summer is this: What can I do, what can I improve….to make MY TEAM better?
    Let’s take a look at my suggestions, and hopefully generate a great discussion about Granger’s game as it currently stands, and where it needs to get to to maximize our success as a team.
    ————————————————————————————–
    Granger has become not just a good, but an extremely good three point weapon playing for a staff that obviously emphasizes that very aspect. Granger is one of the best “snipers” in the league from beyond the arc, getting shots in a variety of ways both in transition and in the halfcourt.
    Having said that in my view the 3 point shot has become too much of his overall game, and our staffs love affair with the 3 point shot in my opinion has had some negative effect on his develop early in his career.
    Simply put, Granger isn’t hard enough to guard, takes too many of what I consider “bad” three point shots, and doesn’t have as much variety in his game as we need him to have to be successful. Despite his gaudy numbers, Granger’s points don’t necessarily help you win, due to the way he seems to get them with an over-reliance on the 3 point shot, and the jump shot in general. For him to become a player on the next level up in both talent and achievement, that needs to change.
    ————————————————————————————–
    Granger needs more variety in his game, and the coaching staff needs to quit being intellectually lazy and make him score in a more variety of ways, ways that make his teammates better and the team more successful. The way Granger played the game last year, his presence on the court mattered little in terms of whether we played well or not, or whether we won games or not. What greater indictment of your best player and how he is used can you have?
    These are some things I see :
    -Granger needs to take the ball to the basket much more often. While an outstanding percentage shooter, his success in that area is almost a hindrance to our overall team success. Granger catches the ball way too often with “lazy legs”, which is my term for not having his knees flexed and low, ready to drive on a catch, or at least getting quickly into a triple threat position. He is too straight up with the basketball.
    Being too straight up kills him when he does drive, as his dribble is too high and lets defenders be able to slide their feet and bother his bounce. It is extremely hard to start too high and then get lower as you are driving, so particular attention has got to be paid by Danny to get low AS THE BALL IS IN THE AIR COMING TOWARD HIM. As defenders are then rushing to close out on him, he will be one step quicker than he is currently, and that can be the difference in getting by the defender or being shut down.
    ————————————————————————————–
    -A major major flaw in the Pacers winning and losing is the free throw differential. As a team we foul alot, and don’t get fouled enough. Granger is a major cause for this, as he settles for jumpers when he should put the ball on the deck and attack more often.
    The one player we have other than Hibbert who has the talent to increase his foul shot attempts it is Granger. It is a vital key to offensive success to get to the line, and Granger has to get there more often, it simply has to be done.
    To do that, he has to be “harder to guard”. Way too stationary, Granger is easy to find for a defender. Our staff has to make Granger move himself more than he naturally does by calling and designing plays that force him to do that. Our staff needs to not pigeon hole him so much, and move him around to take advantage of all of his offensive gifts. Running him off more screens and in more pick and roll situations (EVEN IF IT IS NOT HIS STRONGSUIT) will give him chances to have a step advantage on a catch, which should give him some driving opportunities he doesn’t get currently.
    ————————————————————————————-
    -It is IMPERATIVE I feel for this coaching staff to put Granger on the low block and force him to develop a back to the basket game. This will make him a much tougher matchup than he is now, and will really expand his game.
    I think Granger already is a good back to the basket player, we just never see him in there. He has good footwork, good hands, and a very good touch. It is easy in my mind’s eye to see him developing a great turnaround fadeaway move, plus all the basic power post moves that he can use against smaller defenders.
    He doesn’t naturally go to the post, so the staff is going to need to force him to get in there, both in emphasis and on play design. Basically, if Hibbert is out of the game (and sometimes even when he is), I think Granger has got to be a weapon in the paint offensively. He has had success in the paint with his back to the basket in spurts, we need to be smart and get him in there much more.
    ————————————————————————————–
    -As mentioned above, we need to use him more as A SCREENER in pick and roll/pick and pop basketball. Granger may lack the passing skills to be a ball handler in a screen/roll, but he can be a major weapon as the screener I think, because no one will be able to help off him much.
    -We need to screen more for him away from the ball, and force teams to switch to help him get an advantage. And we need Granger himself to screen more for his teammates.
    In other words, we need to actually have MOTION in our “motion” offense where Granger is concerned. Boston does a great job with Paul Pierce offensively (a player I have compared Granger with for years, and I still do) with using complicated screen action involving Pierce in all sorts of ways to help him get a step on the defense, instead of just making him be stationary and throwing him the ball in a position where the defense knows exactly where he is. We need to take a page out of the Doc Rivers playbook and use Granger with much more sophistication.
    ————————————————————————————-
    Remember this truism always: A player on the move rebounds better than a player who is stationary.
    One of the by products of forcing Granger to move more and in a greater variety of ways is that his offensive rebounds should increase, as he will be closer to the areas where offensive rebounds occur. Standing stationary 25 feet from the basket launching a three pointer is counter productive to offensive rebounding anyway, so while we don’t want to eliminate the bomb from Granger’s game, we do have to expect him to increase his offensive rebounding prowess if forced to be a better and more relentless cutter.
    ————————————————————————————-
    We need as a staff to use Granger as our primary post feeder, which in reality we already do. But as a greater emphasis needs to be put on pounding the ball to Hibbert, so too does the need to get Granger to move more after he feeds the ball inside. The concept of “relocating” after a ball is passed to the post is something other Pacers do better than Granger, who tends to like to stand and survey the festivities. That can’t be allowed to continue. He needs to either cut through, go screen, or move somewhere else, because Hibbert I think will become very shortly an offensive weapon teams will be forced to double team. A powerful 2 man game between our 2 current franchise cornerstones needs to start developing, and it will if we make a commitment to get the ball to Hibbert thru Granger. If we are constantly forced to use others to feed the ball inside instead of Granger, that hurts our offense in a variety of ways.
    ————————————————————————————–
    Here is a big elephant in the room that no one talks about enough: Danny Granger ROUTINELY TAKES AWFUL SHOTS. He makes some of them, but many times his quick trigger hurts our team more than the stats show. Granger needs to be more selective, no matter what our coaching staff currently may think.
    A quickly clanged bomb by Granger kills us at crucial times I think. He seems to have no sense of the game situation, instead just randomly firing away thinking ANY shot he takes must be a GOOD shot. As much criticism as Murphy takes, Granger hurts us much more in shot selection I think. Danny needs to think the game more I feel. He needs to say to himself “Ok, we haven’t scored in 2 straight possessions, let’s really get a great shot here”, or “Hibbert hasn’t touched the ball in 5 straight trips, let me see if I can get it to him this time and play off him”, or “we’ve missed 20 foot jumpers on 5 straight trips, I need to pass up this jumper and take it to the rim”, or “my man is in foul trouble, I think I’ll take him inside and post him up”.
    Those are the thoughts and signs of progress I was hoping to see in Granger by now, but sadly I don’t see it enough. Granger can do anything he sets out to do as an offensive player I think, but he has morphed into this stand outside, shot chucking perimeter guy that I think is just a small percentage of what he can be.
    That has to change to make Granger a player who truly helps you win, instead of just a guy who puts up numbers on bad teams.
    ————————————————————————————–
    Granger has to make more of a commitment to the defensive end instead of becoming another guy who scores 25 and gives up close to that. Granger has all the tools to be a strong defender, but it simply is effort I think that prevents this from happening, along with admittedly a sometimes wacky defensive scheme and poor defenders around him as well.
    The bottom line though is this: defense isn’t IMPORTANT enough to Granger yet, so therefore as the de facto leader of this team it hasn’t been important enough to the team as a whole.
    Granger isn’t good enough to be a guy who scores major points and guards the best player on the opponent, I realize that. Only the uber stars can do that….the LBJ’s, Wade’s, or Kobe Bryant types of which Granger decidedly isn’t.
    But with the game on the line in the last 5 minutes, or win a guy is simply killing us in the middle of a game, I WANT TO SEE GRANGER MAN UP, take the responsibility of winning on his shoulders, and step up and guard the opponents best guy and shut him down. Even if he fails at it, I want to see him grow a sack and take on the challenge. Right now he shrinks into the background and hides defensively all throughout a game, and you simply cannot build a winning team if your best player does that on you.
    ————————————————————————————–
    The last thing I would definitely do is somewhat controversial, but I don’t care. After alot of thought about this team and it’s current roster and situation, I’d make the following roster/lineup decision:
    1. Start Hibbert 82 games
    2. Start Granger 82 games at the 4 position
    3. Bring Troy Murphy off the bench.
    For the purposes of this article, lets only look at what I think are the advantages to this in terms of using Granger better:
    -Gives him a quickness advantage offensively over almost every “4″ player in the league.
    -This quickness advantage should let him be able to beat more people more often off the dribble.
    -Forces us to have to use him in the paint more frequently offensively, which I want to do no matter who is guarding him.
    -Gives him a bigger and slower guy to match up with instead of a quicker and smaller player, normally keeping him closer to the goal to defensive rebound better, but to also hit the offensive glass more frequently.
    -Makes it easier to use him as a screener AND as a ballhandler in pick and roll plays, as he will be able to drive on bigger players, and be hard to close out on if we run “pick and pop” stuff.
    -Gives us 1 more ballhandler and post feeder on the floor to pressure the defense, and to give Hibbert more room to operate inside.
    -Lets us pressure the basketball more, and helps our overall defense by making us quicker and more athletic.
    -Forces us to use Granger in a smorgasboard of ways, which we need to do to get him out of the comfort zone he has fallen into.
    ————————————————————————————–
    I’m not saying play him as the second biggest guy on the floor 100% of the time, but I would start the game, start the second half, and end the game with him at that spot. I think the positives far out weigh the negatives with this way of thinking (though I admit there are negatives, and I don’t necessarily see it as a long term solution years down the road).
    ————————————————————————————–
    Lastly, I do believe in Bill Simmons view of the concept of “reps”, meaning that in sports experiencing things DOES MATTER. Where Granger is concerned, that means this: Granger I feel is closely becoming a player who is getting USED TO LOSING. That is a major concern for me. We need to get him used to winning, and have it become a central focus of his athletic life. Losing can be contagious no question, and he has never really won big at any level that I can recall.
    Granger needs playoff reps badly, and needs to finally grasp the concept of being the guy who is responsible for winning and losing. He needs to own our results, for better or worse. If that means sacrificing shots or points or playing time or playing a different position, then he needs to embrace that and make it happen.
    If he is ever going to become a leader, this is the time to do that. I have high hopes he makes the USA team this August, just so he can be around a winning culture for once, and hopefully he likes the taste of winning that leaves on his tongue. For a team and a franchise dying for a leader in the lockerroom and in the media, this is his time to either take the helm or forever forfeit the right I think. I think Granger wants to win, and I think he is a good citizen….but I don’t see the HUNGER, the DESPERATION, the FANATACISM, the SINGLE MINDEDNESS, that winning in a losing culture will take.
    I need to see Granger step up and become the winner we need him to be. It has to be his duty and his responsibility to wear the hat for this team, be willing to say and do and sacrifice whatever he needs to in order to create wins where he can….to not settle for being very good, but to do what he needs to to become better than that, and inspire others around him. He hasn’t done that yet, but a golden opportunity awaits him once again this season to make it happen.
    ————————————————————————————-
    As always, the above is just my opinion.
    Tbird
    Last edited by dlewyus; 08-07-2010, 09:54 PM.
    “It is what we learn after we know it all that really counts” - John Wooden
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

    Thanks, dlewyus, for bringing this here! I have been forgetting to go to the front page recently.

    Excellent article as usual, T-Bird.

    I only disagree about consistently putting Granger at the 4 on a consistent basis. It would probably shorten his career to play there consistently due to injuries from being asked to absorb more contact with heavier and taller players when he does go inside as a back to the basket player, and he likely would end up being utilized as a Murphy style stretch 4 with more ability to drive to the basket as a result of that very issue. That would minimize his effectiveness at driving, which, as you repeatedly and with emphasis pointed out is exactly what is wrong with both his game and the overall offensive strategy Granger is forced to endure due to, as you eloquently put it, the intellectual laziness of the coaching staff (man, I LOVE that phrase...intellectual laziness!).

    Otherwise, brilliant as usual T-Bird!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

      T-Bird- Thanks for the interesting and insightful analysis. Danny does seem to be at a crossroads in his career, and even though he's been my favorite Pacer since the day we drafted him, I think he was the biggest underachiever on the team last year.

      I love the idea of Danny's primary position being at 4. I'm not sure we'd give up that much defensively, as teams seem to have more and more Bosh-types than Oakley-types. I seem to remember Danny's quickness matching up well with Bosh last year. We could always match up with Hansbrough if the other team has a banger and slide Danny to the 3.

      The ripple effects, aside from the fantastic idea of bringing Murphy off the bench, would include opening up time for DJones especially, and the rest of the strength of the team, wing depth.

      Thanks again for the insight!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

        Nice article.

        He won't play 60 games if he's used mostly at the 4. I'd guess is would shorten his prime by 2 years and his career by 4. Great Idea situationally or even a playoff series, but long term impacts are too big, imho.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          Nice article.

          He won't play 60 games if he's used mostly at the 4. I'd guess is would shorten his prime by 2 years and his career by 4. Great Idea situationally or even a playoff series, but long term impacts are too big, imho.
          I agree with you 100% Speed.
          I'm not perfect and neither are you.

          Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
          Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

            I think danny could play the 4 a lot in today's nba. You don't have the physical power forwards that you had in the past. It is a much more free flowing game now than it was a few years ago. So there would be a lot of teams that he could help us a lot at the 4. However, I wouldn't want him playing the 4 all the time.

            What this team needs more than a power forward or point guard is a true commitment to playing defense and rebounding. Danny should be the leader in doing those two things and until that happens we just won't be very good.

            When Larry Bird played in college and the NBA, he would do what the team needed in that game to win. Rebounding defending or scoring whatever it took, that's what danny needs to do.
            Good is the enemy of Great


            We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
            -- Frank Vogel.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

              I love the analysis Tbird... As always.

              The thing that will help Granger understand the necessary leadership he needs is that he is playing for USA basketball. Expectations in that program, just walking through the doors, are the highest in the entire game of basketball. That is the apex of individual awards... to be asked to participate on a team of the greatest players on the planet. I think we will see a different Danny Granger coming back from the experience. You know our entire locker room will give him the attentiveness necessary to get a simple message to them, "Expect yourself to play better team basketball". Danny Granger should come back a much better defender than he left. I watched closely the USA team's inter-squad scrimmage in NYC. Granger looked like he belonged. He also looked like his attention to defense was much improved. I saw focus. Something I think he lacked throughout the season, and it showed when the entire team displayed this attribute.

              Danny is a very good player. He is tall and long. He is athletic and smart. There are so many good qualities he possesses that make him versatile enough to temporarily move to the "4". I think it would make him a more complete player like you said. He has a pretty turn around jumper when he uses it. I think one thing that does hurt Granger is that he is asked to stay clear of the lanes in the high post offense and to move into the area just cut through as an easy way to get our best player the ball. We want the ball in his hands and I think that plays into his forcing of shots. Would we rather have 30 inefficient shots from our best player or get 15 good shots in the flow of offense. I think we need him to take 15 and then in certain situations and close games he ends up with 25 (and 40 points). Granger needs to become more well rounded. I think he has done an excellent job up to this point in his career with his off-season work. He gotter stronger after year one. He toughened up defensively as well. He worked his way to minutes because he could play defense. He adjusted to taking more three pointers by becoming a better shooter. He really made a commitment to going to the hole. He became proficient two years ago adding these two areas offensively. He kind of over-looked the defensive end a bit because of how much we relied on him for scoring with injuries not helping matters.

              Danny at the four would continue to make his game evolve. He would do wonders watching old film of Jordan playing the post. He would do wonders emulating Kobe in the modern game. He has size like Carmelo and can take advantage of smaller SF's and PF's from a quickness standpoint. He would create a lot of matchup problems for the other teams and we would actually improve offensively. Many teams avoid a move like this because their defense would decline significantly. With Troy Murphy at the four, our defense would improve. Troy is a very efficient player who is terrible at defense. That SCREAMS second unit to me. TJ, Dun, DJones, Murphy, and Foster/McRoberts as a second team makes a heck of a lot of sense (but is a different thread altogether). Granger would give us MUCH better helpside defense for Hibbert. Granger is an excellent helpside defender. He needs to do A LOT more this upcoming season. When he is guarding opposing two's and three's he stays toward the perimeter. This disallows him opportunities to play great helpside defense. His defense must be better next year. Guarding fours won't hurt us. Just don't get him overly beaten up.

              Overall, leadership is the biggest single factor I want him to improve upon this off-season, with a close second going to his team defense. I think Granger will continue to get better. We need to move away from the "old" lineup and moving Granger forces the bigs we have to work harder (and get traded). I like it only for use as our "primary" lineup. The one that starts first and third quarters and ending the game much like you siad. We have a lot of front line depth so it won't hurt our overall size too much for the majority of the game. Our switch-up would be to go bigger, not smaller, which is a plus. Most of our talent is on the wings. We need to understand that and adapt. Please. Get our best talent on the floor. Not our most veteran. Veterans become bench players eventually. This is our turnaround year in so many ways. It might be the least fun to look forward to. Not much hype. Not much exposure. But a hell of a lot of hard work, and a change in culture we have been building for should get us over the hurdle from "only hope" to "fulfilling the hope".

              Let's Go Pacers!!! This team is yours Danny if you really want it.
              "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                Just brilliant! There are a bunch of outstanding points in that post.

                It's nice to see someone thinking outside the box in a way that will lead to more wins. I've always believed that Danny's skills could be best utilized at the 4. He is 6'9" you know...and has the capability of being a good shot blocker. IMO, he could be groomed to be an outstanding rebounder as well. If we face a bigger, stronger team, put Foster, Hans or McBob in there to contend with the muscle. If we got a stud for the 4 position at some point, we'd have to move him down to 3...but until that happens I think he should be the PF.

                The biggest benefit for now is that it would relieve the log jam at SF and allow ample time for young players to develop...which will be critical for the Granger era considering he is moving into his prime now. Lance, Paul, MDJ, DJones and Rush should be able to split minutes at the wing...while Granger is on the floor. I truly believe that would make us a much better team. Another benefit here is that we would get to keep Lance, Paul and Rush if they all pan out relatively well.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                  First off, great writeup by t-bird, as usual.

                  I love the idea of moving Danny to the four. And we don't have to leave him there the rest of his career, so I don't understand all the concern over it shortening his career. Some players can take contact better than others. There is no telling whether his body could handle it or not.

                  Plus, last year Obie moved Danny to the 4 against the Raptors and he really got after Bosh defensively. And Bosh is a very tough cover. Just the improved athleticism on the floor for us by replacing Murphy with Granger is a huge plus for us, especially playing this style. You think Murphy causes a defense problems at the four spot? Well Danny could be that and then some. He's much tougher defensively and even more potent outside the arc. Murphy can only shoot them from the top of the key it seems at times anyways.

                  I say slide him to the four and take him out of his comfort zone a little. Force him to evolve. Danny has turned into a pretty one dimensional offensive player over time and this could be a way to shake him up a little bit.
                  "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                    Will Danny's body be able to handle this if he defends 4's for 18mpg? He's always had some knee trouble, and the past couple of years, he's found new ways to get hurt.....

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                      First off, great writeup by t-bird, as usual.

                      I love the idea of moving Danny to the four. And we don't have to leave him there the rest of his career, so I don't understand all the concern over it shortening his career. Some players can take contact better than others. There is no telling whether his body could handle it or not.

                      Plus, last year Obie moved Danny to the 4 against the Raptors and he really got after Bosh defensively. And Bosh is a very tough cover. Just the improved athleticism on the floor for us by replacing Murphy with Granger is a huge plus for us, especially playing this style. You think Murphy causes a defense problems at the four spot? Well Danny could be that and then some. He's much tougher defensively and even more potent outside the arc. Murphy can only shoot them from the top of the key it seems at times anyways.

                      I say slide him to the four and take him out of his comfort zone a little. Force him to evolve. Danny has turned into a pretty one dimensional offensive player over time and this could be a way to shake him up a little bit.

                      This is what sparks a big part of my concern, guarding Bosh that stint was very effective, it also completely drained him, imo. He looked cashed out after battling Bosh in the 4th. I remember isolating on him in that game and it really seemed to take it's toll, imo.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                        I see starting Danny at the 4 resulting in the exact same thing that resulted with starting JO at the 5, a plethora of injury problems, and an early end to the prime of his career. PASS, PASS, PASS.

                        It generated huge numbers early on in the experiment for JO, but it became clear soon that his body could not take the pounding at the defensive end.

                        I would play Danny at the 4 for tops 8-10 MPG. Anymore than that, and I think you are taking a huge risk.


                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                          Maybe you could get away with starting Danny at the 4, keeping him there about 5-6 minutes, then subbing another 4 in or subbing him out, rotate him as a 3 the rest of the way unless there's an obvious reason not to, then perhaps put him back at the 4 the last 5-6 minutes of the game, so he only sees about 10-12 min. at the 4.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                            There seems to be some kind of accepted assumption that putting a 3 at the 4 position naturally leads to more injuries. I'm not sure I can just accept this.

                            I'm not saying it's for sure wrong, I'm more asking, is this a fair assumption? Do we have some kind of historical precedent to believe this?

                            There's quite a few players Danny's size or so who play 4 without being especially injury prone, I know that for sure.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: T-bird post: Coach ‘em up, summer of 2010: Danny Granger

                              Originally posted by Dece View Post
                              There seems to be some kind of accepted assumption that putting a 3 at the 4 position naturally leads to more injuries. I'm not sure I can just accept this.

                              I'm not saying it's for sure wrong, I'm more asking, is this a fair assumption? Do we have some kind of historical precedent to believe this?

                              There's quite a few players Danny's size or so who play 4 without being especially injury prone, I know that for sure.

                              I wouldn't want him playing minutes at the 4 against Hansbrough in practice, for the same fears. Ya, he'd kill Tyler for awhile but then it could be trouble. I mean is he going to grind with Jokim Noah and Verajao for 30 mins a game? It's as much of the Spaz's of the league I'm concerned about at the Bosh's. I mean Spaz respectfully in this usage, btw.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X