Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: The trading of Danny Granger...

  1. #1

    Default The trading of Danny Granger...

    Let's assume two things:

    1) Granger will get dealt, and the one year remaining at $14M comes off the books for whichever team takes him.
    2) Gerald Green's contract is dealt with him.

    The cap aspect of Granger's contract is an asset in and of itself, so stashing Green with him (unless the Pacers think he can bounce back to the production he had at Brooklyn/New Jersey) with Granger is likely at the tip of their tongue in any trade discussion.

    To me the Pacers need a shooter off the bench, which Granger could be, AND a back up point guard who could bring length to the court like GHill and play alongside of him too. This is where I think dealing him makes sense.

    I guess some of this too depends on how much the Pacers like Orlando Johnson.

    Which way do you go with it?

    Atlanta:
    Pacers trade: Granger, Green
    Atlanta trades: Kyle Korver (sign/trade, $5M per for 3 years), John Jenkins (young shooter) and #18

    Atlanta's consideration:
    Pros: Plenty of cap space, healthy Granger would start for them for sure and still have cap space for 2014. Could probably get Green the minutes where he could play with confidence and thrive.
    Cons: Likely delusional enough to think they'll land CP3 and DHoward

    Pacers definitely get the shooters they need off the bench. Depending on how they view OJohnson, they could move Jenkins in a separate deal. They actually get a little cap relief in this deal, some of which gets soaked up in giving David West a bit of a raise, which could help with that back up PG.

    New Orleans
    Pacers trade: Danny Granger
    New Orleans trades: Eric Gordon

    Normally I've been against this type of thinking. For one, the rumored deals shot down for Granger told me they had a much higher opinion of him than I would, and Gordon has been injury prone. (Still might be, but so might Granger.) Gordon is on the books until 2016, and while the Pacers will eventually need to sign PGeorge to a long term, that would just put the Pacers in cap Hell for two years.

    New Orleans' consideration:
    Pros: They still believe in the Austin Rivers pick. This would give them a chance to show confidence in him, but they'd still have cap room to sign a veteran. If they don't like Granger after a year, they can let him walk, and they may have overpaid for Gordon.
    Cons: I can't really think of any unless they feel Gordon is healthier than Granger. They have a huge hole at the SF spot.

    Let's say the Pacers sign West for two more years at $12M, he'd be on contract until 2015.
    So in 2015 they'd have Hibbert at $15M, Gordon at $15M, West at $12M, and George ~$14M (first year of 2nd contract), Hill at $8M
    2016: Hibbert at $15.5, Gordon at $15.5, George at $15M, Hill at $8M. They'd have to account for the development of a PF
    2017: Hibbert and Gordon would both be done. Leaving their only major commitments to George and Hill.


    Portland:
    What if the Pacers didn't sign West?

    Pacers trade: Granger ($14) and Green ($3.5)
    Portland trades: Hickson (sign/trade at $8M), Matthews ($7M) and Maynor ($3M)

    Portland can be flexible with Batum, and they can even go small (at times) with Aldridge at center and Granger and Batum at forward spots. Again, Portland gets some cap relief if Granger doesn't work out.

    The Pacers get a starting PF in Hickson, can then keep Hansbrough at the backup PF, get a good guard prospect to push Stephenson or come off the bench at SF and SG, giving them a diverse lineup, and they get a very good backup PG.

    The question is, what makes Hickson (aside from "deep stats") such a tough sell on a winning team? He's probably not a great defender, but with Hibbert behind him, as long as he can cover ball screen reads he'd be OK. He's only a secondary offensive option, meaning he'd probably only score on drop offs and offensive rebounds. He can't put out worse effort on defense than Granger has up to now.


    Conventional wisdom would be keep Granger and let his contract slide of the books, but if they can get two+ low risk players or a better name at SG from a team looking to get or keep cap space in 2014, it's a great trading chip to have.

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


  3. #2
    Bring Back Bender bballpacen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,080

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    The Trading Forum is just for appearances I guess...

  4. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to bballpacen For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Member Miller_time04's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Martinsville
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,327
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Yeah I'd pass on all of these. If I had to pick one I'd do the ATL one. I'd much rather let Danny expire if we are not resigning him and then use the money for Paul and Lance.

    Hell no to Eric Gordon, we do that and we can kiss Paul goodbye.

    And the Portland trade doesn't make much sense to Portland. And I'd much rather have David West than Hickson. And we prolly wouldn't be able to keep Paul in this scenario either...or if we did definitely not lance.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Miller_time04 For This Useful Post:


  7. #4

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Quote Originally Posted by bballpacen View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Trading Forum is just for appearances I guess...

    I guess so, or I just posted it in the forum I was already on. Thanks for the response though.
    Last edited by Jim R; 06-10-2013 at 10:38 PM.

  8. #5

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Quote Originally Posted by Miller_time04 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah I'd pass on all of these. If I had to pick one I'd do the ATL one. I'd much rather let Danny expire if we are not resigning him and then use the money for Paul and Lance.

    Hell no to Eric Gordon, we do that and we can kiss Paul goodbye.

    And the Portland trade doesn't make much sense to Portland. And I'd much rather have David West than Hickson. And we prolly wouldn't be able to keep Paul in this scenario either...or if we did definitely not lance.
    You wouldn't have to kiss Paul George goodbye in any of those scenarios. They can sign George above the cap amount, and it wouldn't be to the point of the luxury tax. The only scenario where that would be an issue is in Granger/Gordon. That is my least favorite of the options, but at that the development of Stephenson could justify the future dealing of Gordon, or if he didn't develop as thought after two additional years, resigning Stephenson isn't an issue with Gordon on the roster.

    Why exactly wouldn't Portland do it? They'd deal a starting SG, back up PG and a PF who they won't want to sign and keep at the number he'll want. Moving Meyers Leonard to the starting lineup, could allow them to sign Hickson and use him in a deal to upgrade their wing, while maintaining some cap flexibility in 2014. I'd rather have West than Hickson too, but Hickson can come more cheaply AND with two other players who fit nicely in the cap space of Granger and Green. If they did that deal, they'd be $10M under the cap, keeping Hansbrough too and no cap issues going forward.

    I'd be all for keeping Granger if the Pacers didn't still need scoring off the bench AND a very solid back up PG.

  9. #6
    Member BobbyMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Homeless Traveler
    Posts
    1,198
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    sigh, so I suppose I'll have to put up with "Trade Granger" posts all summer, Please tell me I'm wrong....

  10. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to BobbyMac For This Useful Post:


  11. #7
    Member Miller_time04's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Martinsville
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,327
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Doesn't work for Portland because where would they play Danny at? They got Aldridge at PF and Batum at SF. He could prolly play SG but that's not his natural position.

    And Paul is probably gonna make 17-18 mil because of the Rose Rule if he makes an All NBA team again. That would definitely put us close or over the lux tax in most of those scenarios. If we weren't in luxury then we would barely have any money to do anything with the bench.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Miller_time04 For This Useful Post:


  13. #8

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...


  14. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to imawhat For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  15. #9

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    I'd prefer Matthews of all the players mentioned. Healthy Gordon is the best player but his contract would cause financial complications, the ownership would have to be ready to go into tax. Matthews would be nice, though.

    Re David West, in the unlikely event that he decides to leave, I hope that the Pacers go after Millsap. Possibly sign and trade Granger to Utah (would make sense for Utah, IMO); if not, trade him to a 3rd team to make room for Millsap. JJ Hickson = no ty.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to hackashaq For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,857

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Quote Originally Posted by hackashaq View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'd prefer Matthews of all the players mentioned. Healthy Gordon is the best player but his contract would cause financial complications, the ownership would have to be ready to go into tax. Matthews would be nice, though.
    Matthews fits exactly what we're doing as a club.

    6'5 SG / SF with a 6'8.5 wingspan that plays very good perimeter D and is a career 39.5% shooter from 3 at the NBA level.

    He would be a match made in heaven.

    He is also under a nice contract. A bit over 14$ mil in the next 2 years for a quite good starter is not a big price to pay. He also is 26 years old and fits right in the age group of Roy and Hill.
    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

  18. #11

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

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

    Yes, I'm sorry I did that, but there is positional logic. Contracts and roster movement is always a fluid issue beyond the short term. I suppose George could put the Pacers heels to the fire, but I'd wager he'd take a contract up to the luxury tax line if it meant the type of roster the Pacers would have. The cap and luxury thresholds will be hire by then, and perhaps the continued development of Orlando Johnson and Lance would facilitate the trading of Gordon going forward. I'd have no reservations about it if Gordon's contract was one year shorter, but by then, it could be the kind of asset Granger's can be now.

    Of the trades I proposed, the Portland option would be my preference. Batum is flexible enough defensively for them to start as wings, and Granger's size (he rebounds the SF spot fairly well) allows them to play smaller in stretches.

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


  20. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Evansville
    Posts
    571

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    How about Granger, Green for Thornton, Thompson of the Kings.

    Thompson and Thornton are signed long term to lead the bench group.

  21. #13

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Not a big fan of Thornton but it would be a solid bench upgrade. However, these guy combined make near max for the next two years, and I doubt the Pacers could afford that. With those two on the payroll, we would have to go quite a bit into tax once we extend George and Lance, as well as sign future draft picks.

  22. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Evansville
    Posts
    571

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    With Green and Granger, you would be cutting about 4 million

  23. #15

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Yeah, but Granger is off the books before George/Lance new contracts. Thornton/Thompson would be making 14.6 mil combined that year.

  24. #16
    Formerly PacerFanInAZ Cactus Jax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    4,185
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Did I just see where the Pacers would be signing Kyle Korver for 5 million dollars a season over 3 years... I wouldn't take him for 5 million total over 3 seasons, I'd take him for 1 season at the split of that though, like 1.6 mil.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

  25. #17
    Member Sparhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Age
    34
    Posts
    5,431

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    Quote Originally Posted by Cactus Jax View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Did I just see where the Pacers would be signing Kyle Korver for 5 million dollars a season over 3 years... I wouldn't take him for 5 million total over 3 seasons, I'd take him for 1 season at the split of that though, like 1.6 mil.
    $5M/season for 3 years. Yeah, definitely a hell no to that. That would also mean that Lance isn't getting resigned. After PG gets his max (though I'm hoping he takes a Granger type discount), then there really would be no money for Lance. At that point, you better hope the Pacers are smart enough to trade Lance while his value is really high. I'd rather try and keep Lance than go get Korver.
    With the #3 pick in the 2015 draft, your Indiana Pacers!

  26. #18

    Default Re: The trading of Danny Granger...

    It wasn't really a discount back then for Granger. He signed the contract before his All Star season. I think there's no way George gets anything less than the max. He'll probably get the Westbrook type 5 year contract without the Rose rule. Hopefully he doesn't demand the Rose rule.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 08-09-2012, 10:09 PM
  2. Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-06-2011, 12:35 PM
  3. Ideas for trading Danny for very good pieces
    By BringJackBack in forum Trade Proposals
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 01-21-2011, 11:57 AM
  4. If trading Granger-
    By BBALL56HACKER in forum Trade Proposals
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-10-2010, 04:01 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
  •