Quote Originally Posted by Bball View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I know Danny Granger slipped quite a bit. I know Lance has improved quite a bit. Also, they are very different players. With very different skillsets. Danny's slippage might've been due to age, his knee, or too much time spent with Jim O'Brien. Or all of the above. I don't need stats to tell me any of that stuff.

Here's the big thing with me, even IF Granger can fully recover and play the game like a 25 year old.... Both he and PG are natural SF's. Lance is more a natural guard. Sure there is some crossover in ability and those roles but all things being equal I prefer players to play the positions that are naturally suited for. In this case, all things aren't equal.... Lance is up and coming, started all year for the ECF finalist Pacers, continues to improve, was part of a starting lineup that wasn't the weak spot of the team, and fits very well with the starting lineup.

Granger is 30 years old, coming off injury, has barely played in over a year, has looked rusty, is currently wearing a suit, hasn't proven to be able to stay healthy or consistent, and is a prototypical SF. The position where we already have a budding star.

This whole argument is really moot in my mind because really the argument should be between Danny or PG at SF.... and that has been settled a long long time ago.

Right now I think the place for Granger is to try to find a role off the bench. And the longer he wears a suit and the more success the team has I'm going to be even less inclined to want to try very hard to find a place for Granger. IMHO the only place on this team that might be able to utilize Granger is the bench. There is no role to carve out for Granger with the starters. He's a SF and we have that position covered. He should be penciled in to backup Paul George with some time together in matchups where interchangeable SF/SG roles work. Neither PG or DG have superstar potential at the SG spot. Lance gives us more of a prototypical SG and some potential to be fairly special and perhaps even the batman and robin combo we've all talked about in Pacerland for years.

And for those who'd argue it doesn't matter who starts, then why would you argue that Granger should start?
I don't understand why you're launching back into your views on Danny that aren't statistically-based while you are quoting a response having specifically to do with stats. It kind of confuses the flow of conversation.