Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 294

Thread: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

  1. #176

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    [QUOTE=Slick Pinkham;1581947]
    He guards the best opposing wing, no matter what, so he is chasing exactly the same player around. Do we have to keep repeating this fact?
    Point is he 's better at defending SFs . He won't be spending nearly as much time on the court guarding them when he's playing alongside Danny. So no he won't be guarding the same players. Danny can't keep up with very many 2 guards


    playing the 2 allows him to use his huge length advantage, with no speed disadvantage either, against nearly every player at his position, whereas some 3s he has to guard are much heavier and stronger (see LBJ).
    That's a very backwards way to develop a player. We shouldn't force our best player to learn how to play a power game when he's just now figuring out how to use his speed and quickness against guys his height. Why make him adjust when he's the our best player and All-Star? I want him to comfortable, and he's said himself he feels more comfortable at the 3 because of matcups. People seem to forget that.

    [QUOTE]

    His defensive rebounding numbers should be the same per-minute once Danny comes back, since (again) he is guarding and boxing out the opposition's best wing player, same as always. [/

    Again, he'll be guarding SGs more often so not only will he be in worse rebounding positions, he won't able to keep the opposing SF off the boards.


    Playing the 2 on offense should greatly help him as a passer and playmaker, with a huge size advantage over the man guarding him.
    Disagree. One of these days maybe, but not right now. He's not a good enough post player.

    I'll stop there too.
    Please do.

  2. #177
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,151

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    I really have nothing more to add here, except that I think I've gotten an extremely good feel for this team. I think last year's Danny granger , while being a better offensive player, is not nearly as well suited to play in the starting 5 as Stephenson. I think he will eventually start, and I think eventually that fact is going to bear out.

    I have never had any love for lance Stephenson. That's not a secret. And I've always liked Danny granger.

    And I think replacing him in the starting 5 for granger would be a mistake. I think nostalgia is clouding better judgement here.

    If you're going to rely heavily on defense, you can't always compromise that because you found a better offensive player.
    Last edited by Kstat; 02-07-2013 at 05:09 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kstat For This Useful Post:


  4. #178
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    It's not nostalgia clouding judgement it's just the numbers.

    There are some that fantasize about the way the game should be played. And then those who simply require results. Those who fantasize think pointguards have to play like Chris Paul, Shooting guards must be ball dominant ball handlers, (scoring efficiency be damned), Small forwards are 6 foot 8 and taller (ability be damned), and so on.

    Forget that the only rule that has ever been important is the results. That's it. Put the ball in the basket. If you have too tall wings that can defend and shoot anywhere on the court, it's probably better than one wing who can shoot and defend to go along with a guard who averages EIGHT POINTS A GAME.

    It's a ridiculous agenda to support your basketball ideal. "Paul George's a small forward, that's why he's playing good." Or maybe he's just a 22 year old wing who's finally growing up? No imposssible. Wait let's ask him: Hey Paul, which do you prefer the 3 or the 2? "It doesn't matter." Oh it doesn't matter? But wait, you averaged a STUNNING .5 rebounds per 36 more this year rebounding than you did last year!!! (we know that massive improvement has nothing to do with a third year player improving) Obviously you won't be able to rebound at the two position, even though you've been defending two guards all season. (Forget that fact, this doesn't play along with my stupid narrative).

    Fantasize all you want about how positions work in the NBA folks. The rest of us are going to watch Danny get healthy, start along the rest of his teammates and the Pacers will develop into a juggernaut offense. Oh and I'm going on a limb to suggest Lance doesn't suddenly regress to a non-contributor.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

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


  6. #179
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,151

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Again, Im not the one with a dog in this fight. If it makes you feel better to accuse me of having some silly bias based on position terminology, so be it.

    If I were shoehorning every player in the NBA by position (which is a hilarious accusation, given thy I've been here for 10 year), I would have a problem with George hill running the point. But that doesn't fit your little rant, so let's look past it.

    Stats in this case don't lie, but the only stats you're looking at are individual points and rebounds. It much more
    Complicated than that.
    Last edited by Kstat; 02-07-2013 at 05:38 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Kstat For This Useful Post:


  8. #180
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Again, Im not the one with a dog in this fight. If it makes you feel better to accuse me of having some silly bias based on position terminology, so be it.

    If I were shoehorning every player in the NBA by position (which is a hilarious accusation, given thy I've been here for 10 year), I would have a problem with George hill running the point. But that doesn't fit your little rant, so let's look past it.

    Stats in this case don't lie, but the only stats you're looking at are individual points and rebounds. It much more
    Complicated than that.
    No, I'm talking about last years top 10 offense. It worked. That simple.

    If someone can prove how my idea is faulty that would be fine. No one has brought any evidence other than earnest pleas to believe in their vision of the NBA.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  9. #181
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,741

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by AesopRockOn View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm surprised no one has mentioned leaving Lance in at the end of games and leaving Hill on the bench.
    Hill's had more game-winners than any other Pacer this year, though. Dude is pretty clutch.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  10. #182
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    And I am talking about silly position terminology. Because that is all that is being talked about.

    I'm for putting the best players on the court.

    Others are arguing NOT putting the best players on the court because their positions are too similar to play together. Seriously, for ****s sake please show me how I can be wrong so I can just drop it. I'd love it.

    Edit - and I'll eat my crow. I have no problem admitting everytime I said something really dumb. It happens a lot. So I've become quite comfortable with it.
    Last edited by mattie; 02-07-2013 at 05:52 PM.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  11. #183
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,151

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And I am talking about silly position terminology. Because that is all that is being talked about.

    I'm for putting the best players on the court.

    Others are arguing NOT putting the best players on the court because their positions are too similar to play together. Seriously, for ****s sake please show me how I can be wrong so I can just drop it. I'd love it.
    I only used the positional terminology to make it easier to communicate.

    From an analytical standpoint, this is a far different team than last season, and I believe them to be a far more dangerous playoff team.

    Stephenson compliments Hibbert, West, and George both offensively and defensively better than Granger. He's a better defensive compliment, and on offense he's a low-usage player, meaning Hibbert and West have the all in their hands more often and in better spots on the floor, which keeps them better involved in the game. I do not at all think it's a coincidence that David West is playing much more consistently now as opposed t last year. Yes, he's healthier, but also more engaged.

    Granger supports the flow of the team by assisting a very weak bench and putting up points. The overall offense would be better with him, but at the expense of the defense, which IMO disrupts what has worked tremendously for them all season.

    I have no bias here. I'm simply stating what I see working. The Pacers win games because they don't have any defensive weaknesses to exploit. If teams see Granger as a defensive weakness, that constitutes a crack in the armor, and his scoring output is not going to offset that.
    Last edited by Kstat; 02-07-2013 at 05:57 PM.

  12. #184
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I only used the positional terminology to make it easier to communicate.

    From an analytical standpoint, this is a far different team than last season, and I believe them to be a far more dangerous playoff team.

    Stephenson compliments Hibbert, West, and George both offensively and defensively better than Granger. He's a better defensive compliment, and on offense he's a low-usage player, meaning Hibbert and West have the all in their hands more often and in better spots on the floor, which keeps them better involved in the game. I do not at all think it's a coincidence that David West is playing much more consistently now as opposed t last year. Yes, he's healthier, but also more engaged.

    Granger supports the flow of the team by assisting a very weak bench and putting up points. The overall offense would be better with him, but at the expense of the defense, which IMO disrupts what has worked tremendously for them all season.

    I have no bias here. I'm simply stating what I see working. The Pacers win games because they don't have any defensive weaknesses to exploit. If teams see Granger as a defensive weakness, that constitutes a crack in the armor, and his scoring output is not going to offset that.
    See, I completely get that. I understand that, and I know there is no set rule to how an offense should run. They should simply support each other the best way they can as you eloquenly stated. And theoretically, I actually agree that Lance in the lineup actually should be better! I completely agree. But the numbers don't back it up.

    But here's the thing. I think last year's five man unit, was something like the second or third best five man unit in the league. They absolutely blitzed the rest of the league as Zach Lowe has said on numerous occasions. So while this years five man unit may be prettier, according to the numbers I'm not sure if they're better. (someone will have to compare the numbers for me, I'm going off of memory). <--- That is why I am having such a horrible time understanding why Granger in the lineup will not be better.

    (I won't comment on the defense. It's a no brainer the defense is better this season. I'd suggest PG's massive improvement and Roy's massive improvement are the cause, but I have absolutely no proof)
    Last edited by mattie; 02-07-2013 at 06:04 PM.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  13. #185

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

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

    Edit - and I'll eat my crow. I have no problem admitting everytime I said something really dumb. It happens a lot. So I've become quite comfortable with it.
    You can start with you're incessant whining that Paul George is too weak to defend SFs...

  14. #186
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,151

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    See, I completely get that. I understand that, and I know there is no set rule to how an offense should run. They should simply support each other the best way they can as you eloquenly stated.

    But here's the thing. I think last year's five man unit, was something like the second or third best five man unit in the league. They absolutely blitzed the rest of the league as Zach Lowe has said on numerous occasions. So while this years five man unit may be prettier, according to the numbers I'm not sure if they're better. (someone will have to compare the numbers for me, I'm going off of memory).

    (I won't comment on the defense. It's a no brainer the defense is better this season. I'd suggest PG's massive improvement and Roy's massive improvement are the cause, but I have absolutely no proof)
    The Pacers had a very good starting 5 last season, and their bench was their ultimate downfall, along with the fact Miami overpowered their defense when it mattered.

    This year the pacers still have a very good 5, but it's a better defensive unit, and the bench remains a sore spot. The logical move here is to let Granger play the Manu Ginobili role and score points on a unit that struggles to get anything done offensively. Scoring points has always been what he does best.

    That's not to say he will never play with the starters, or finish games. But your starters set the tone for the rest of the team.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kstat For This Useful Post:


  16. #187
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Pacers had a very good starting 5 last season, and their bench was their ultimate downfall, along with the fact Miami overpowered their defense when it mattered.

    This year the pacers still have a very good 5, but it's a better defensive unit, and the bench remains a sore spot. The logical move here is to let Granger play the Manu Ginobili role and score points on a unit that struggles to get anything done offensively. Scoring points has always been what he does best.

    That's not to say he will never play with the starters, or finish games. But your starters set the tone for the rest of the team.
    I will completely agree that strategy wise, you may want to go with a weaker starting lineup so you can prop up the bench. It wouldn't be my choice, but that's strategy, and I'm no coach. Or smart enough to ever be one.

    Note - my choice would be to have the best starting five play as many minutes as possible staggering their subs so they could be on the court as much as possible.
    Last edited by mattie; 02-07-2013 at 06:10 PM.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  17. #188
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by CJ Jones View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You can start with you're incessant whining that Paul George is too weak to defend SFs...
    I said he was last year. And I was right. The numbers backed it up. Amazingly enough, unlike most really young players in the league (we never see this), PG put on a lot of muscle in the offseason and his performance against 3's has dramatically changed. His defense on the whole has changed. He was good at times last season. He's great this season.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  18. #189
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,490

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I only used the positional terminology to make it easier to communicate.

    From an analytical standpoint, this is a far different team than last season, and I believe them to be a far more dangerous playoff team.

    Stephenson compliments Hibbert, West, and George both offensively and defensively better than Granger. He's a better defensive compliment, and on offense he's a low-usage player, meaning Hibbert and West have the all in their hands more often and in better spots on the floor, which keeps them better involved in the game. I do not at all think it's a coincidence that David West is playing much more consistently now as opposed t last year. Yes, he's healthier, but also more engaged.

    Granger supports the flow of the team by assisting a very weak bench and putting up points. The overall offense would be better with him, but at the expense of the defense, which IMO disrupts what has worked tremendously for them all season.

    I have no bias here. I'm simply stating what I see working. The Pacers win games because they don't have any defensive weaknesses to exploit. If teams see Granger as a defensive weakness, that constitutes a crack in the armor, and his scoring output is not going to offset that.
    Lance is not a better defender than Granger. On the ball, he can be somewhat disruptive AT TIMES, but he still fouls jump shooters, loses guys in transition, doesn't know when to go under/over a screen, etc. he's young so these issues can be alleviated, but to suggest that Lance is really good defensively and Danny is really bad--to the point that he's going to be "exploited" is an incorrect accusation imo

  19. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Ace E.Anderson For This Useful Post:


  20. #190
    yawn cgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Delray Beach, FL
    Age
    30
    Posts
    2,955

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    http://www.82games.com/1213/1213IND2.HTM
    http://www.82games.com/1112/1112IND2.HTM

    Last years starters .97 on def with hill, 1.00 on def with collison. 1.09 and 1.12 of off.

    This years starters 1.00 on def, 1.08 on off.

  21. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to cgg For This Useful Post:


  22. #191
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,741

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Pacers had a very good starting 5 last season, and their bench was their ultimate downfall, along with the fact Miami overpowered their defense when it mattered.

    This year the pacers still have a very good 5, but it's a better defensive unit, and the bench remains a sore spot. The logical move here is to let Granger play the Manu Ginobili role and score points on a unit that struggles to get anything done offensively.
    No, the logical move is to stop switching back and forth between the bench and the starters as a platoon. Let Mahinmi get minutes with West and Tyler get minutes with Roy. Heck, let Mahinmi get minutes with Roy! Play Granger with Stephenson, and Granger with Paul George, and Stephenson with Paul George. Get ready to throw a bunch of different looks out there, because we've got a really flexible roster and should be planning to take advantage of that.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  23. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Anthem For This Useful Post:


  24. #192
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by cgg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    http://www.82games.com/1213/1213IND2.HTM
    http://www.82games.com/1112/1112IND2.HTM

    Last years starters .97 on def with hill, 1.00 on def with collison. 1.09 and 1.12 of off.

    This years starters 1.00 on def, 1.08 on off.
    So everyone, can we agree with Granger in the lineup, the Pacers will be better on offense, and better on defense?

    If you'd like to argue you'd still have Granger on the bench so he can be a scoring weapon, that'd make sense but I think we can probably put to bed the idea that the Pacers will be better in anyway with Lance in the lineup instead of Granger...
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  25. #193

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I said he was last year. And I was right. The numbers backed it up. Amazingly enough, unlike most really young players in the league (we never see this), PG put on a lot of muscle in the offseason and his performance against 3's has dramatically changed. His defense on the whole has changed. He was good at times last season. He's great this season.
    Yeah okay, I'm sure the fact that he only guarded the best players at that position last year didn't have any affect on those numbers. Smh you and your numbers.

    Arguing with you reminds me of a line from one of my favorite tunes... " pardon me brotha, while you stand in your glory, I know you won't mind, if I tell the whole story..."
    Last edited by CJ Jones; 02-07-2013 at 06:48 PM.

  26. #194
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,533

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by CJ Jones View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah okay, I'm sure the fact that he only guarded the best players at that position last year didn't have any affect on those numbers. Smh you and your numbers.

    Arguing with you reminds me of the chorus from one of my favorite tunes... " pardon me brotha, while you stand in your glory, I hope you don't mind, if I tell the whole story..."
    He got beat last year, he's not this year. So when I say he couldn't last year and he can this year I think my statement was correct.

    Meanwhile, the numbers I've presented have disprovent nearly every theory you've presented. =)
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  27. #195
    You Did It Joseph!!!! AesopRockOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    honolulu
    Age
    26
    Posts
    7,881
    Mood

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hill's had more game-winners than any other Pacer this year, though. Dude is pretty clutch.
    Definitely true, which is why I added the note about Hill being in for offense and Lance in for defense as possibilities.


    I think that some posters on both sides of this issue are putting things in more concrete terms than they need to be.

  28. #196
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Everywhere. I live in a big motorhome and I travel the entire country
    Age
    67
    Posts
    3,288
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Cool Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So everyone, can we agree with Granger in the lineup, the Pacers will be better on offense, and better on defense?

    If you'd like to argue you'd still have Granger on the bench so he can be a scoring weapon, that'd make sense but I think we can probably put to bed the idea that the Pacers will be better in anyway with Lance in the lineup instead of Granger...
    No, I do not agree. The Pacers go down several notches on defense with Granger in the lineup. He is a great shooter but we get more ball movement with Lance as the SG and George as the SF. We don't even know if Granger can play at all.... ...

  29. #197

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

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

    Meanwhile, the numbers I've presented have disprovent nearly every theory you've presented. =)
    If you say so, brotha.

  30. #198

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by cgg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    http://www.82games.com/1213/1213IND2.HTM
    http://www.82games.com/1112/1112IND2.HTM

    Last years starters .97 on def with hill, 1.00 on def with collison. 1.09 and 1.12 of off.

    This years starters 1.00 on def, 1.08 on off.
    Are those aggregates for the starters or just for when they were all on the floor together? Important variable.

  31. #199
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,189

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by CJ Jones View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You can start with you're incessant whining that Paul George is too weak to defend SFs...
    I'll repeat it then:

    Paul George was the primary defender on 14 of LeBron James' 25 plays Friday, and James had success on those plays. He was 7-for-10 when guarded by George, with five of those seven field goals coming inside 10 feet.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/recap?id=400278405

    Paul is, of course, an excellent defender. He knows how to play D, he wants to do it and he seems to enjoy being a defensive stopper.

    Still, that didn't change the fact that LeBron manhandled him in the post in our last game. 70% shooting when guarded by PG and 5 field goals coming inside 10 feet is not what one would consider a good defensive performance.

    I cannot fault PG, of course. LeBron is a freak. No SF can stop him in the post.

    In the playoffs, if we try to match up Wade with Lance and LeBron with PG then they will keep posting us up.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

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


  33. #200
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,189

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Maybe Granger should go to the bench when healthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The logical move here is to let Granger play the Manu Ginobili role and score points on a unit that struggles to get anything done offensively. Scoring points has always been what he does best.
    Manu Ginobili wasn't only a scorer, though. Yes, he would score in bunches but he would also facilitate and change the pace. Manu would involve everyone playing alongside him.

    Why? Because he is big guard with excellent court vision and good scoring ability.

    Granger is not a facilitator. Yes, he would score in bunches in the second unit but he wouldn't involve everyone else playing alongside him. That's not his talent.

    Lance, on the other hand, can both involve everyone else and change the pace of a game. He's a guy that can create runs in his own. He can both score and facilitate. That's something that Granger cannot do.

    Which is why I think that Lance fits the 6th man role a lot better than Granger.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  34. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Lakers will have healthy Gasol coming off bench [ESPN]
    By RoboHicks in forum NBA Headlines (RSS Feeds)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-21-2013, 10:50 PM
  2. Granger from the bench
    By Rogco in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-05-2011, 08:33 AM
  3. What say you we bring Granger off the bench?
    By Phree Refill in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-13-2011, 08:13 PM
  4. Healthy Granger hopes to cure Pacers' painful season
    By Trophy in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 01-14-2010, 11:58 AM
  5. Reasons why Granger should come off the bench
    By Isaac in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 12-30-2007, 04:32 PM

Posting Permissions

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