Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 98

Thread: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

  1. #26
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,926

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by joew8302 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Are we a young team?!
    Yes. West and Scola are the only veterans that receive regular PT.
    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

  2. #27
    Member joew8302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bennettsville, SC
    Age
    31
    Posts
    4,272
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yes. West and Scola are the only veterans that receive regular PT.
    George Hill isn't a vet? Hibbert isn't a vet? These guys have been in the league for a while now. I am not buying what you guys are selling. We aren't an overly young team that desperately needed Granger's leadership. We have West and Rasul. When you have been in the league for 4+ years you aren't a "young guy" anymore in my book.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to joew8302 For This Useful Post:


  4. #28
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,926

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by joew8302 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    George Hill isn't a vet? Hibbert isn't a vet? These guys have been in the league for a while now. I am not buying what you guys are selling. We aren't an overly young team that desperately needed Granger's leadership. We have West and Rasul. When you have been in the league for 4+ years you aren't a "young guy" anymore in my book.
    Hill and Hibbert are 27 years old. They aren't young guys but they aren't what you'd call a vet either. West and Scola are the only vets in the rotation.
    Last edited by Nuntius; 03-08-2014 at 06:30 AM. Reason: typo
    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

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  6. #29
    You Did It Joseph!!!! AesopRockOn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    honolulu
    Age
    26
    Posts
    7,944
    Mood

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Every single day. Every game you play. I'll be watching you.

  7. #30

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacerized View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Everyone dogs on Hibbert but he's still been our best defensive player on a consistent basis. Our perimeter D is killing us.
    Yet it was Al Jefferson, a center, who torched us a few days ago.
    And I have yet to watch the game against Houston, but on ESPN they said the PnR between Parsons and Howard, a center, really affected recently and last night, against us.

    Either way, if you are wrong, no big deal. Even the soon-the-be-DPOY can have bad defensive games/matchups
    If you are right, it would show how important our perimeter defenders are in our team defense

  8. #31

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    He sure ment something. Remember how the Thunder struggled after the Harden trade? They seem allright to me now I would say and Granger on a good day couldn't do what Harden did for them on regular basis.

    It takes time to build chemistry with other players and ECF is still far away, my friend

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to MvPlumlee For This Useful Post:

    J7F

  10. #32
    Custom User Titleist
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pacer Purgatory Praying for Paul
    Posts
    3,576
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    To me, the team seemed to lose focus quickly after acquiring Bynum. While Ian seemed motivated by it, Roy has seemed to slump even more overall.

    Now, Turner has been introduced to the mix while Granger has been removed. I suspect that Turner wants to get minutes any way he can in order to get paid this summer, and it could be that Lance sees Turner as a threat to his own payday because of that.

    After watching the replay of Turner's reaction to Harden, I also wonder if Turner is an immature hothead that Philly was only too happy to launch for what they could get for him.

  11. #33
    Member yoadknux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Israel
    Age
    23
    Posts
    1,322

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    It's not Granger specifically. It's all these fantasy moves that we've been doing that mess up the chemistry.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piston Prince
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to yoadknux For This Useful Post:


  13. #34
    Gotta Play Big
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,757

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eleazar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Young teams rarely win championships.

    Don't underestimate a veteran presence. Especially one who is strong enough, and smart enough to give Paul a break from guarding Lebron. As well as he is a constant 3 point threat.
    Granger is in no condition to guard Lebron, at least not this year. He has lost a step and this is a huge reason he was traded.

  14. #35
    Gotta Play Big
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,757

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by yoadknux View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's not Granger specifically. It's all these fantasy moves that we've been doing that mess up the chemistry.
    This.

  15. #36
    Go Colts! Shade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    36
    Posts
    44,669

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    We were slumping before the trade. In fact, that was probably a big reason the trade was made.

    If we have any chemistry issues right now, I'm not sure it's due to any of the guys (Bynum, Turner, Allen) we've recently acquired. I think one of the "core" (Lance?) could be the issue here, if there is one. That's the only thing that could truly cause this team serious chemistry issues IMO, not bench players that are unlikely to be here next season anyway.

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Shade For This Useful Post:


  17. #37
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    17,572

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hill and Hibbert are 27 years old. They aren't young guys but they aren't what you'd call a vet either. West and Scola are the only vets in the rotation.
    "Veteran" is more about experience than age. You can be a veteran team and still be a relatively young team. Scola has only been in the NBA one year longer than Hibbert and Hill. Hibbert and Hill are without question veteran players with their six years of experience. They are still definitely relatively young guys, but they are vets. Hill grew up in a world class Spur organization and has made the playoffs every single season of his career. Hibbert is the longest tenured Pacer on the team after the Granger trade. These guys are definitely vets.

    4 of our 5 starters are now in their third straight season of starting games together (Hibbert, West, PG, Hill - didn't start till the end of the year but was the playoff starter). We have won a lot of regular season games and have a decent amount of playoff experience under our belt. This team as a whole has a veteran pedigree. Now I do buy into the theory that super young superstars like PG historically have not led their teams to championships. That concerns me a bit, but hopefully we are are balanced in the playoffs.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 03-08-2014 at 09:50 AM.

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  19. #38
    Gotta Play Big
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,757

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Hibbert and Hill qualify as vets. I don't think Hibbert has peaked though. This team is definitely experienced enough at this point to win a championship. The question is if they are really good enough. Hibbert and Paul George need to play like all-stars with more consistency and that can only be done if they share the ball.

    Overall, I think there has been less focus and possibly effort on D and more one-on-one play. Not enough player movement.

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


  21. #39
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    17,572

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wouldn't go that far. Granger was an old figure head on this team and everyone expected him to be on the way out. The issue isn't that Granger is unavailable. It's that the team showed no loyalty to a guy who gave his heart and soul to the team through the dark years. They were going to send him to the Sixers. Guys pay attention to that stuff and it has apparently spoiled the locker room. That and Bynum coming in. It's really a mess.
    I can buy into the fact that guys are upset about their pal DG getting traded, but why should anyone be upset about Bynum except for Mahinimi? If anything that move has already been a big success because it clearly lit a fire under Mahinmi's a**. Bynum has said all of the right things since coming here, has apparently worked hard since coming to Indy, and even stayed here during the all star break. I've seen him yucking it up on the bench with teammates multiple times. I just don't see any evidence that Bynum has uspet the team. They are mentally soft if they can't accept that we're trying to improve the team. I fully understand how Granger could upset them, but Bynum just puzzles me.

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


  23. #40
    Gotta Play Big
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,757

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can buy into the fact that guys are upset about their pal DG getting traded, but why should anyone be upset about Bynum except for Mahinimi? If anything that move has already been a big success because it clearly lit a fire under Mahinmi's a**. Bynum has said all of the right things since coming here, has apparently worked hard since coming to Indy, and even stayed here during the all star break. I've seen him yucking it up on the bench with teammates multiple times. I just don't see any evidence that Bynum has uspet the team. They are mentally soft if they can't accept that we're trying to improve the team. I fully understand how Granger could upset them, but Bynum just puzzles me.
    Maybe tin foil hat on my part.

    I do know that when Bynum was acquired that West made some kind of statement to this effect: "If we win a championship, it's about the guys already here". That statement made me think he didn't want the reason for a ring to be viewed as the Bynum acquisition or perhaps another.

  24. #41
    Member sportfireman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Louisiana
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,201
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Karma
    I'm not perfect and neither are you.

    Romans 3:23 For all have sinned,and come short of the glory of God. kjv
    Ephisians 4: 32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. kjv

  25. #42
    Member PR07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,973

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    I like Granger, but the easy answer is no.

    We've been in a bit of a slump for a while now. As someone said, it's probably the reason the Turner trade was made in the first place. I don't believe that there's been negative chemistry with the additions of Turner and Bynum, and even if there has been, if this locker room wants to be considered championship caliber...it's something they'll have to push through. They can't be a bunch of babies.

    What does Granger have to do with Paul George and Roy Hibbert going 2-17 the other night? Or Lance's ineffectiveness? Or bad perimeter defense?

  26. #43

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    It may be a coincidence, but it's almost like our smashmouth swagger left in Granger's luggage. Where did the confidence go, the unity, the take no prisoners attitude. Slumps come and go, but this seems deeper. We seem to be playing confused and tentative. When you lose your mojo and swagger you become just another mediocre NBA team. Maybe it's time for Larry Legend to bring the guys together and begin isolating issues and concerns before this losing mindset takes root. It's one thing to lose some games by a few points...but we're starting to get blown out and overwhelmed by good but not great teams.
    Last edited by NashvilleKat; 03-08-2014 at 11:58 AM.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to NashvilleKat For This Useful Post:


  28. #44
    Pacers Fan For Life J7F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Seymour, IN
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,063

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad8888 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    After watching the replay of Turner's reaction to Harden, I also wonder if Turner is an immature hothead that Philly was only too happy to launch for what they could get for him.
    I wouldn't call that being a hot head... Harden tried to meld faces with him... Not too many dudes will stand there and accept that...
    Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to J7F For This Useful Post:


  30. #45
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,051

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    If the team had not already been having some struggles (and that includes Granger struggling to be consistent on the floor), then the trade probably doesn't happen.

    I blame it on either the Indian Burial Ground under the Fieldhouse, the guy who wasn't allowed to bring his goat to the game, or the dudes from Moron Mountain. One of those things is stealing the shooting ability of every Pacer player.

    Prove me wrong - get Larry out there at halftime and let's see how many shots he makes.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to BillS For This Useful Post:

    J7F

  32. #46

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by sportfireman View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Karma
    I hope this is said in jest Karma is relative and I don't believe exists in sports its just used as an excuse for haters of certain teams.

  33. #47
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,926

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    "Veteran" is more about experience than age. You can be a veteran team and still be a relatively young team. Scola has only been in the NBA one year longer than Hibbert and Hill. Hibbert and Hill are without question veteran players with their six years of experience. They are still definitely relatively young guys, but they are vets. Hill grew up in a world class Spur organization and has made the playoffs every single season of his career. Hibbert is the longest tenured Pacer on the team after the Granger trade. These guys are definitely vets.

    4 of our 5 starters are now in their third straight season of starting games together (Hibbert, West, PG, Hill - didn't start till the end of the year but was the playoff starter). We have won a lot of regular season games and have a decent amount of playoff experience under our belt. This team as a whole has a veteran pedigree. Now I do buy into the theory that super young superstars like PG historically have not led their teams to championships. That concerns me a bit, but hopefully we are are balanced in the playoffs.
    I agree that being a veteran has more to do with experience than it does with age. And it certainly plays a role that Hill grew up in a world class Spurs organization and that Hibbert is the longest tenured Pacer.

    But I still consider us young. Just compare our experience to the other contenders:

    Miami: LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Battier, Haslem and Allen all have 10 or more years of experience in this league.

    Spurs: Parker, Duncan, Manu and Diaw all have 10 or more years of experience in this league. They also have Pop.

    Clippers: Matt Barnes and Jamal Crawford have 10 or more years and Chris Paul with JJ Redick hover around 8 and 7 years.

    OKC is relatively young as well. Only Caron Butler, Kendrick Perkins and Derek Fisher have 10 or more years of experience in this league and Caron just came along while you could argue that the other two shouldn't touch the court. But they still have Collison who is an important piece that has 9 years of experience in this league and Durant himself has 1 more year of experience than Roy (so if Roy counts as a vet then so does him). Westbrook is at 5 years as well and in overall their stars are more experienced than ours.

    The Rockets and the Blazers are younger than us.
    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. #48
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,635

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...=1#post1780370

    That was a fun thread and it was fun to get the s*** kicked out of me by a bunch of people saying the Zeke year 3 team wasn't something that could happen or be happening.

    The risk is being massively underrated. Isiah was AS coach with 2 players on the AS team - JO and Brad. He had another that was making the case for DPOY in Artest. The team was out in front and on it's way to a big playoff run. Then Ron's chemistry issues happened, the team fell to 3rd, lost in round 1 and Isiah was fired.

    Of course AFTER THE FACT it was all obvious, but I have the articles to prove that plenty of people were feeling pretty good about where the Pacers were at as they headed toward the AS break.
    This was in regards to the Bynum addition, not the Granger/Pulp deal, but the primary point was the same...CHEMISTRY IS DELICATE and we are 10 years removed from a nearly identical season up to this point. Finally breaking through to the top level, MVP candidate type is an AS starter, the team's center is an AS reserve, the team has the top record so their coach is the AS coach...and then the wheels come totally off.

    I said in that thread that it's already happened TO VOGEL when he tried to incorporate Lance into the rotation that first year and a team that had been in a groove completely went south till Lance was pulled back out of the rotation.


    And all the 20/20 hindsight people went "oh but this is different, we all know why that happened". No one knew either of those things was definitely about to happen. Not Peck (who didn't like that roster), not me, not any of us older fans who had seen it all, not any of the local or national writers. None of us thought "post AS I'm sure the Pacers will have one of the worst records, fall to the 3rd seed and lose in round 1 ending with the coach being fired". Not one single person thought that as they watched Brad Miller play in the ASG that weekend. Trouble maintaining maybe? Isiah being overrated as a coach? Sure. But not "I bet they have an epic implosion now".

    And no one thought "I bet they go down to Houston and just get demolished by a sub-par team" followed by a locker room fight while they were in the midst of the Vogel hot start, especially with vets like Foster, Dunleavy, DJones and Granger in the locker room.


    After the fact you start to learn about all the nasty issues and problems, and honestly there are plenty of other seasons with nasty issues that DO NOT SHOW UP because the team is able to keep winning at the same pace. The Atlanta strip club didn't send the Reggie/Dale Pacers into the tank as far as we know.



    Paul's got baby mama drama, remember. The team was annoyed by the Bynum signing and the questions around it, along with a bit of annoyance that mgmt thought they needed more help, they loved Danny and it clearly shook up guys like Roy (I don't want to talk about it) and Paul.

    It's not like they are cruising around on the Good Ship Lollypop here, they've got issues even if they have maturity and good guys in the locker room.



    I can see a path to them getting things straightened out, I just think it's going to be too late by then. This is why it's so hard to win a title and why you have to respect teams that can put up 58+ wins year after year after year.


    But they have been WAY TOO COMPLACENT the last month in regards to their poor play. Solomon Hill was even giving the company line of "they are just gunning for us, they have nothing to lose, they are just hitting tough shots" when none of that makes much sense.

    Teams are gunning for all the other top teams that are not falling apart (like LAC), most of the teams with nothing to lose have more to gain by tanking (a popular misconception that many teams believe), and teams don't just lucky against you for a month straight without your defense having something to do with it.



    As I said on Twitter, I'm not off this wagon. I'm riding this flaming wooden death cart right off the cliff with the team...but I'll be shocked if that isn't the final outcome. I'll suffer through every bitter moment even as my hopes fade. At the very least it was an awesome first half....and who knows, maybe a last second save of this clusterf*** will be part of the story.

  35. #49
    Member joew8302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bennettsville, SC
    Age
    31
    Posts
    4,272
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...=1#post1780370

    That was a fun thread and it was fun to get the s*** kicked out of me by a bunch of people saying the Zeke year 3 team wasn't something that could happen or be happening.


    This was in regards to the Bynum addition, not the Granger/Pulp deal, but the primary point was the same...CHEMISTRY IS DELICATE and we are 10 years removed from a nearly identical season up to this point. Finally breaking through to the top level, MVP candidate type is an AS starter, the team's center is an AS reserve, the team has the top record so their coach is the AS coach...and then the wheels come totally off.

    I said in that thread that it's already happened TO VOGEL when he tried to incorporate Lance into the rotation that first year and a team that had been in a groove completely went south till Lance was pulled back out of the rotation.


    And all the 20/20 hindsight people went "oh but this is different, we all know why that happened". No one knew either of those things was definitely about to happen. Not Peck (who didn't like that roster), not me, not any of us older fans who had seen it all, not any of the local or national writers. None of us thought "post AS I'm sure the Pacers will have one of the worst records, fall to the 3rd seed and lose in round 1 ending with the coach being fired". Not one single person thought that as they watched Brad Miller play in the ASG that weekend. Trouble maintaining maybe? Isiah being overrated as a coach? Sure. But not "I bet they have an epic implosion now".

    And no one thought "I bet they go down to Houston and just get demolished by a sub-par team" followed by a locker room fight while they were in the midst of the Vogel hot start, especially with vets like Foster, Dunleavy, DJones and Granger in the locker room.


    After the fact you start to learn about all the nasty issues and problems, and honestly there are plenty of other seasons with nasty issues that DO NOT SHOW UP because the team is able to keep winning at the same pace. The Atlanta strip club didn't send the Reggie/Dale Pacers into the tank as far as we know.



    Paul's got baby mama drama, remember. The team was annoyed by the Bynum signing and the questions around it, along with a bit of annoyance that mgmt thought they needed more help, they loved Danny and it clearly shook up guys like Roy (I don't want to talk about it) and Paul.

    It's not like they are cruising around on the Good Ship Lollypop here, they've got issues even if they have maturity and good guys in the locker room.



    I can see a path to them getting things straightened out, I just think it's going to be too late by then. This is why it's so hard to win a title and why you have to respect teams that can put up 58+ wins year after year after year.


    But they have been WAY TOO COMPLACENT the last month in regards to their poor play. Solomon Hill was even giving the company line of "they are just gunning for us, they have nothing to lose, they are just hitting tough shots" when none of that makes much sense.

    Teams are gunning for all the other top teams that are not falling apart (like LAC), most of the teams with nothing to lose have more to gain by tanking (a popular misconception that many teams believe), and teams don't just lucky against you for a month straight without your defense having something to do with it.



    As I said on Twitter, I'm not off this wagon. I'm riding this flaming wooden death cart right off the cliff with the team...but I'll be shocked if that isn't the final outcome. I'll suffer through every bitter moment even as my hopes fade. At the very least it was an awesome first half....and who knows, maybe a last second save of this clusterf*** will be part of the story.
    The way you make it sound we are very, very fragile. If we are that fragile were we ever legit contenders to begin with? the 2004 Pistons shook up their roster with Rasheed and he led them to a championship. Miami added Oden and it didn't shake them. If the Bynum addition and the Granger trade shook us this much it doesn't say much for our toughness (or lack there of).

  36. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to joew8302 For This Useful Post:


  37. #50
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,259

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by joew8302 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The way you make it sound we are very, very fragile. If we are that fragile were we ever legit contenders to begin with? the 2004 Pistons shook up their roster with Rasheed and he led them to a championship. Miami added Oden and it didn't shake them. If the Bynum addition and the Granger trade shook us this much it doesn't say much for our toughness (or lack there of).
    1989: traded away the top scorer from their 1988 finals team mid-season (Adrian Dantley) to a crumbling Dallas team. Won championship anyway.

    1990: left locker room leader (and starting power forward) rick mahorn unprotected in the expansion draft. He had to be pulled away from the championship parade to be told he was now a member of the expansion TWolves. Isiah Thomas was furious. Won championship anyway.

    2004: Traded half the team (albeit not important pieces) to Boston and Atlanta for Rasheed Wallace and Mike James mid-season. Basically told Mehmet Okur he was not needed anymore. Won Championship anyway.

    Contending teams are either trying to improve their roster all the time or they are falling behind while everyone else does.
    Last edited by Kstat; 03-08-2014 at 04:00 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

  38. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Kstat For This Useful Post:


Posting Permissions

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