Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 42 of 42

Thread: Still think Granger is not our answer

  1. #26

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by MagicRat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    lol, tyler set about as pathetic a pick as i've seen.

  2. #27
    thx4tehmRys Danny! daschysta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Geist, Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,952
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by jcouts View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He didn't lose the game for us by any means, but he's not the long term answer at SF if we ever want to get past the first round.
    What is this noise?? You mean long term answer at unquestioned number one? Your right, but he can absolutely be a gigantic part of a successful team in either a pistonish team witha few players around grangers level ont he same team, or as a second option with a top flight star.

    Granger has been our best player all playoffs (george has actually been close though and it wuold be him if he showed any sort of offense at all), in which, may I add our team is playing very well, and going down to the wire with the team that had the leagues best record. He's shooting about 50 percent for the series, despite having to face triple and double teams... Our team also isn't even makign the bulls pay for the doubles since everyone else ahs been offensively inept... It isn't like danny has been shooting too much, he's been efficient. He's taken some bad shots, sure, but how can you blame him?!?! He's hitting a higher percentage of those supposed bad shots, while players like hansbrough are bricking open jumpers at an alarming rate... Without granger we'd be hitting about 30 percent of our field goals throughout the series... Granger has been a gamer these playoffs and i'm proud of him. If he's never going to be a part of a winning team then what does that make our starting pf/center rotation, who have shot a combined 11/43 over the last two games and rebounded the ball a combined 22 times?!

    Danny has done his job, he's been the clear second best player in the series after rose.

  3. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to daschysta For This Useful Post:


  4. #28

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    I don't get why people keep bringing this up. Almost no one is saying he is the answer. He'd be an awesome #2 scoring option though.

    And for what it's worth, I think it's pretty ridiculous how much crap he's been getting lately. He has a good contract, he wants to be here, and he's a good player. People say 'oh he's not a #1' and then talk bad about him because he's not playing like a #1... which makes absolutely no sense.

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


  6. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    5,941

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

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

    If anything, I woud have liked to have seen him drive it to the hole there, but considering he was our go to guy, who had been hitting his jumpers for most of the night, we have to live with that shot.

  7. #30
    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: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Were you saying this after he hit four straight shots to single-handedly keep us in the game?
    TBH, I was standing there going "No, no, no-Thank God" for those shots.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Day-V For This Useful Post:


  9. #31
    Get well PG! QuickRelease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    4,768

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by MagicRat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Watching this made me realize the vocal presence of Bull's fans there. I hope we drown them out Saturday. At floor level no less.

  10. #32
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by MagicRat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Those screens were pathetic. Tyler has to improve that.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  12. #33
    Member jcouts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Age
    35
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by Blink View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Wtf?
    I bring it up because I'm really trying to think of an answer to how many "Robins" on teams currently competing in the playoffs can't defend their position better than Danny OR create a quality shot for themselves or a teammate better than Danny, while already chipping in what he does.

    The vast majority of the #2 scoring options on the teams currently in the playoffs, especially those that are expected to get out of the first round, can at least do 1 of those 2 things - in most cases they can do both of those 2 things better than Danny can, on top being able to essentially do what he does as far as scoring methods.

    There are even some teams where even the 3rd or 4th scoring option is equal to or better at those 2 things than Danny is.
    Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

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


  14. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by Day-V View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    TBH, I was standing there going "No, no, no-Thank God" for those shots.
    Me too

  15. #35

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by jcouts View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He didn't lose the game for us by any means, but he's not the long term answer at SF if we ever want to get past the first round.
    WTF!!!

    I want a little of that thing you're smoking!

  16. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    43

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by PR07 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He's not a great one on one scorer, and those are the types of guys that tend to succeed in late game possessions. There's nothing wrong with being a really good #2 scoring option in this league, as there are very few guys that are true #1's. Be happy with what we have, but could we use a #1 guy? Yeah, absolutely.
    Unfortunately there's only a handful of players good enough to be "#1 guys," and the only way to get one is through the draft, or already have one so you can attract another through free agency.

    Your best best is to lose as much as possible, get a high draft pick, and hope that Bird doesn't fall in love with a European stiff.

  17. #37
    Member jcouts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Age
    35
    Posts
    434

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by ensergio View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    WTF!!!

    I want a little of that thing you're smoking!
    So if everyone thinks Granger is the long term solution at SF, and we get this prized create-his-own shot SG...let's think about the final minute of the game against a team like the Bulls -

    We have Granger in at SF. We have this prized SG we're all talking about...let's just say it's EJ for fun.

    Is Paul on the bench?

    If so, who's guarding Rose? It sure ain't Granger or Collison. Is it EJ?

    Is Paul going to be a 6th man until Danny retires?

    I'm assuming people aren't counting on Paul being a #1, since people are talking about going out and getting this prized SG. I'm not sold that Paul's going to be a clear cut #1 scoring option. To me, he seems more like an ideal #2 option or, as I think the trend will be, a 1a/1b option that teams like the Thunder have with Durant/Westbrook.

    Either way, I like him better for that #2 role than Danny.
    Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

  18. #38
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,241

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Danny would make a great #2. He only gets heat because he's our #1 player right now but he's not in that tier with Rose, Lebron, DWade, Pierce, Garnett, Allen, Dwight, Mello, Amare, Love, etc. I'm just talking the east here. I know we could not acquire Al Horford for Danny. Maybe not Josh Smith. At 20 years old, I woud not trade away Jrue Holiday to get Danny either. The way Deng plays defense I seriously question who the better player is between him and Danny. The same can be said for Iggy. Danny might beat them on offense, but defense is the other side of the coin and their values get close or match his when you consider the whole package.

    IOW, he's not a top 10 player in the east which makes it virtually impossible for him to be a Batman and really lead this team to contention. That is the expectation of a #1. Perhaps that's unfair and we shouldn't expect this team as presently constructed to get past the first round. Maybe with some age we go a bit further, but this team is not going to contend until there are more changes...because the talent level is not high enough.

    Edit: This is a numbers game. Danny will be on the backside of his career by the time Paul George is fully bloomed. IOW, not the best timing to peak as a team. That's probably a prime reason why Danny needs to be traded at some point...for more youth.
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 04-22-2011 at 01:09 PM.

  19. #39
    Professional Beachcomber mildlysane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Port Charlotte, Florida
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1,263
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Those screens were pathetic. Tyler has to improve that.
    I agree, but would add that our ball handlers are not very good at setting their man up to get picked either.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to mildlysane For This Useful Post:


  21. #40
    thx4tehmRys Danny! daschysta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Geist, Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,952
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Quote Originally Posted by jcouts View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I bring it up because I'm really trying to think of an answer to how many "Robins" on teams currently competing in the playoffs can't defend their position better than Danny OR create a quality shot for themselves or a teammate better than Danny, while already chipping in what he does.

    The vast majority of the #2 scoring options on the teams currently in the playoffs, especially those that are expected to get out of the first round, can at least do 1 of those 2 things - in most cases they can do both of those 2 things better than Danny can, on top being able to essentially do what he does as far as scoring methods.

    There are even some teams where even the 3rd or 4th scoring option is equal to or better at those 2 things than Danny is.
    Danny is holding Luol Deng to 40 percent shooting for the series, danny is also averaging the second mosts assists on the team, and our leading assist guy (collison) is only averaging about 1 more per game. He'd likely have even more if our players could hit the shots that are made for them.

    You don't have a point whatsoever, and even if you did you phrased it in a really bad way. You claimed granger isn't the answer at SF if we're ever going to the second round as if he ISNT a top 5is SF in the league, it's the one position where we typically have a better player than the opposing team. The answer is to either develop, or acquire more talent around him.

    You must not have liked reggie much... He was our number one option and danny is a better defender and rebounder than reggie and at least as good of a passer (not comparing them overall just in the salient aspects brought up by jcouts).

    If you can make an absolute homerun trade by trading danny sure, noone in the league almost is 100 percent untouchable. But the bottom line is

    A. Danny is paid like a second option, yet is forced to be a first option, despite being the focus of the bulls defense he's upped his game in the playoffs, and is at his best when he can play off another player. Most players as good as granger are getting payed signifcantly more money, see Johnson, Joe, or Gay, Rudy...

    B. Danny is actually a damn good defensive player when he's free to focus on it rather than having to take over offensively to give us a chance, do you not remember when hibbert was playing MIP basketball early in the year? Danny was phenomenal defensively, then hibbert fell off a cliff and danny was forced to be our offense again, Ditto when tyler was tearing it up.

    C. Danny is an elite shooter, one of the best in the league, yet he's on a team where noone else is enough of a threat to prevent doubles most nights, he shoots a respectable percentage for someone that plays like he does and attracts the double, get some more credible threats and his efficiency will skyrocket, he'll eat teams if he can gets some uncontested looks at the net.

    Lastly it's hard to rag on danny when he and paul george are the only players that have stepped up their game considerably in the playoffs consistantly so far. If Danny is somehow our second best player then i have no doubt that we win at least 50 games and compete for homecourt advantage in the playoffs.

    As for other teams second options...

    Danny would be far and away the second best player in orlando, especially with howard attracting so much attention in the middle, if Danny were on dwights team today then they would have a good shot at winning the title.

    Danny would be the top offensive option in philadelphia. Danny would also be the second option in chicago, and one of atlanta's top options.

    EDIT:

    Yikes those were some awful screens by tyler. Makes me miss the davis's all the more. For such a tough intense guy Tyler sets screens like my little sister.
    Last edited by daschysta; 04-22-2011 at 01:17 PM.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to daschysta For This Useful Post:


  23. #41
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

    Granger is the long term solution at SF. He just isn't the longterm solution as our best player.

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  25. #42

    Default Re: Still think Granger is not our answer

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

    Edit: This is a numbers game. Danny will be on the backside of his career by the time Paul George is fully bloomed. IOW, not the best timing to peak as a team. That's probably a prime reason why Danny needs to be traded at some point...for more youth.
    I don't know about that. Danny plays an old man's game. He doesn't beat people off athletic ability or speed.

    I can't stand some of the stupid shots he takes. I think an off season with a good coach will benefit Danny a lot. He should work on his post up game, because I think he could definitely improve there. I almost wish we'd trade Granger to a contender. He gets so much crap from Pacers fans I just don't understand it. He's not a number 1 option, he's not paid like a number 1 option, what do you want him to do?!
    Last edited by righteouscool; 04-22-2011 at 01:46 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Danny Granger and team USA camp
    By pianoman in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 01:39 AM
  2. Danny Granger Chat ESPN 3:15 Eastern
    By dannygranger in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-30-2009, 09:19 PM
  3. 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
  4. 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
  •