I miss Roy Hibbert
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...
There is literally not any sane argument that could possibly be made which would indicate that 2014 Danny Granger is anywhere close to the player that 2014 Evan Turner is. Hell, 2014 Danny Granger isn't even the player that 2014 Lavoy Allen is.
This is the biggest steal of Larry Bird's life that didn't immediately precede a pass to Dennis Johnson.
"I had to take her down like Chris Brown."
Really, really hard for me to say, but in many ways Evan looks like a less polished Lance right now, and all of Evan's major cons strike me as things the coaching staff can either coach out of his game or fix outright. Even his 3 point shot has the potential to evolve like Lance's has. Evan is decent in the corner and pretty bad everywhere else which sounds exactly like Lance last year to me. I think we will see Evan evolve and add over the next three months. Right now I would say Lance is worth that premium if it is only 2.5 mill difference, but if Evan shows me enough growth between now and June it is not a tough thing to imagine Lance no longer being worth that premium.
Even Bird is already pushing the brakes on Lance, what did he call him the day after the trade? I'd have to look it up to be sure, but I think larry called Lance a "nice little ball player", I mean still probably praise coming from the Legend, but he's definitely not calling him the most talented Pacer on the roster anymore. Larry is very, very good at working a situation IMO, he showed it with his first move of his basketball career when he got himself drafted to Boston. Dude is much smarter than the Hick from French Lick moniker ever gave him credit for.
The negotiation triangle between Lance, Turner and Larry will be very interesting to watch this seaosn, but much like you I feel pretty comfortable with Evan as a backup plan especially since their games are so similar.
Larry bounced from Indy just in case a team called up with a Hail Mary trade offer 30 minutes before the deadline just so he wouldn't have talk to Danny.
Or more likely, Larry decided it is too ****ing cold in Indy right now and took an extended all star break trip to Florida.
Larry himself has laways talked about his open line of communication with Danny. That is why we have Paul George it seems, or at least one of the reasons. Plus didn't Larry say Friday he had called Danny ASAP on Thursday but had not heard back? Not blaming Danny for that either I'm sure it was a whirlwind 24 hours, but yeah I agree with you, pretty tough to blame LArry for not being Indy when he wasn't even planning on chasing a deal til Philly pretty much gave us an offer we couldn't refuse.
I don't think this was about the team. I think it was about him. I haven't had time to look at this closely, but my eyes saw a player who got worse over the course of the season, not better. Off kilter, and losing confidence.
About what you'd expect from a player that was the top dog, out for ~two years from injury, and believed in the back of his mind that his time with the team was coming to an end. It's just a tragic circumstance.
Part of me wonders if he was saving up for the post-season, but given the circumstances, and the offer... Bird did the right basketball move with the information he had at the time.
Sure it could be argued. Anything can be argued. It could be argued that if Granger could log Turner's minutes and was given Turner's green light in Philly, he could probably also approach 17/6/3 per game. It could be argued that Granger is a better locker-room leader. It could be argued that Granger did what he did as a backup in limited minutes, in Indy's slow plodding offensive system, coming off a major injury and was just starting to get back into game shape, while Turner got his in starter's minutes, with the starting 5, in a very up-tempo system that perhaps inflated the stats a bit.
It's all arguable. Obviously, I'm in favor of the trade from a business perspective. But to say that it isn't arguable is not being objective and reasonable. But the clear factor for me is that Turner is much younger, is on the up-swing of his career, is much cheaper... and Granger is on the down-swing, is older, injured, and was damn expensive. I think Turner will be an upgrade and better fit system-wise. I wouldn't expect him to duplicate his stat-line here in Indy, though. And likewise, if Granger hangs on in Philly and contributes, I expect his stats to see a pretty noticeable improvement.
Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-24-2014 at 02:09 PM.
There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.
I think this trade has as much to do with this year as it does next year. Bird is no dummy when it comes to Lance and what he will get offered next year and he knows he's up against the LT.
Now my opinion would change if Bird was actively shopping Granger but he wasn't so I think he was happy with letting it play out. I mean if he needed a reason why they were losing there would be easier scapegoats than Danny and I would think a great basketball mind wouldn't succumb to the notion that Danny was at fault for the entire teams bad play or that removing him from the equation would solve all the losing going on.
Just excited to see Evan play tomorrow so we can hopefully fully move on from this.
For example, Granger scores 1.07 points per shot this season while Turner has scored 1.12 points per shot. For a grand total difference of 0.03 points per shot. Or in the very likely occurrence that we face Miami in the playoffs, who is going to guard Lebron if Paul is in foul trouble or just to give Paul a break? Personally I don't think it is a good idea to have Paul guard Lebron for 40+ minutes a game. Danny was the only other player on this team that had the ability to not get absolutely destroyed by Lebron, and I doubt Turner is capable. As well most team statistics put Granger as having the 5th or 6th most positive affect on the team, usually ahead of Lance. He may have been shooting poorly, but he was still having a very positive affect on the team as a whole. Part of it was his presence alone opening things up offensively for others, and part of it was his hustle and hard work on the boards and defense. As well it is usually teams with veteran cores that win championships, not young ones.
Things aren't as always clear cut as they seem on the surface. In order for this trade to work out there will be a major shift in rotations, or Butler is going to prove he can be a consistent threat from 3. Either way there is a whole new set of questions to ask.
WHAT?? We let Vern Fleming go??? Dammit, Bird! You're f'n everything up!
Outside of the game against Atl when he lost Korver a few times, I thought he was playing pretty good defensively, was rebounding well, and was doing a good job of being active. Also like Lance from last year, we hadn't seen any proof that Danny was going to be able to be a consistent scorer for us, especially in the playoffs.
It all boils down to the idea that Turner can provide all of those intangible things AS WELL as offer some punch offensively, and the idea that we can keep Turner in case Lance decides to take a big contract elsewhere. But if we are going to put Turner in the best position to succeed, we should probably tweak the rotation a bit so that Turner isn't playing most of his minutes with Lance the way that Granger was.
I really, really can't buy into the notion that somehow Granger was handicapped by having to play a large portion of his minutes with Lance.
Are you guys just being hard-headed when it comes to the rotation? Sual is not going to be in the rotation. Copeland is not going to back up Paul. Turner is taking Danny's spot in the rotation, and will therefore play half his time with Lance and half with Paul. Straight from Coach's mouth. Why is this still being discussed.
I thought adding Evan was to give Lance less minutes? All this talk about how Evan is a good playmaker and distributor. I am thinking that maybe they want to see less of Lance with the bench guys. Er go, Evan is the new Lance for the second unit. That's what I was led to believe this trade was about. I guess not, or we'll see? Also playing Copeland at backup 3 and Evan at backup 2 stretches the floor more. Just makes more sense. Evan can go to the basket, draw & kick. Bynum can draw double-teams and kick. And out there is Turner/Copeland/Watson/Allen/Scola.
Lance is not a great spot up shooter. Cope is more accurate. With Lance, Evan will draw and kick, and Lance will then drive. That would clutter the lane. Also I think our team would benefit more from exploiting the threat of the 3 ball. We can do that with Cope getting dish-outs from ET or AB.
Last edited by Grimp; 02-24-2014 at 04:27 PM.