Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 98 of 98

Thread: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

  1. #76
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    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
    Yes, but after all that Granger paid into the franchise, he really deserved an opportunity to go out in style with a final run for a championship. Instead, he was kicked out of the car like an old dog...and sent to Philly. As many here know, I'm not a Granger big fan. But I recognize what he did for this franchise and so do the other players. They have to feel a lack of loyalty from the franchise.
    Wait, who are you and what have you done with BnG? I've been gone a week, and I come back and find this?

    For what it's worth, the Clips are undefeated since acquiring Granger.
    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!

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


  3. #77
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,036

    Sports Logo

    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
    That is a slippery slope no matter the subject matter. What is legal and what is right are not always equivalent.
    Yes. That's exactly what I wanted to say, actually. I was just really tired and instead of writing "not talking about the NBA" I wrote "talking about the NBA". My bad
    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

  4. #78
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    15,252

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Wait, who are you and what have you done with BnG? I've been gone a week, and I come back and find this?

    For what it's worth, the Clips are undefeated since acquiring Granger.
    He had a nice stretch of padded stats to fool the 5000 fans in the stands for a few years...so he deserves a bone.

    FWIW, they had won the prior 5 without Granger...including wins against Houston and OKC. With Granger, they edged the Atlanta Hawks by 1 point at home. He's not exactly giving them a bump.

  5. #79
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    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
    He had a nice stretch of padded stats to fool the 5000 fans in the stands for a few years...so he deserves a bone.

    FWIW, they had won the prior 5 without Granger...including wins against Houston and OKC. With Granger, they edged the Atlanta Hawks by 1 point at home. He's not exactly giving them a bump.


    Well, he was 0 for 1 in 3 minutes in his first game. Since then, he's shot close to 50%. Regardless, I think everybody including Danny knows he's not a superstar on that team; more of a 3-and-D. They roll with GriffinForce and CP3, and whatever they get from the SF spot is a bonus. I wouldn't be surprised to see him win a starting role over there, though, which is pretty good for a washed up, over-the-hill injured guy who can't dribble, pass, or defend.
    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!

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Anthem For This Useful Post:


  7. #80
    Bring Back Bender bballpacen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,044

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What is the "right way" to build an NBA championship team that Larry Bird doesn't understand? Please tell us.
    To be fair, to date, Larry has not built an NBA champion, so I would contend that Larry does not know or understand how to build a champion...

  8. #81
    Bring Back Bender bballpacen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,044

    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
    In the end, the players are going to decide who wins the games. Bird has to deal with that. He may acquire the best talent in the world...and make all good trades...but if they are not pleased with the moves he's made, things just might not go well. It shouldn't be that way I agree. They all should be professionals and understand that even a faithful Pacer like Granger can be set aside like a used up doll. But it does matter. They are friends and human beings and they do want a say. Perhaps that's not their role. But in the end it does matter what they think their role might be.
    Kstat has made it clear that employers and employees are to be soul-less machines that are supposed to do excel at their jobs with no regard for emotional or other "human" issues... If he were running his own business, he would gladly put you out on your bum if it was better for his bottom dollar... Unfortunately for that perspective, people are moody and might not see the loss in production that would comes with poor loyalty to tried and tested employees...

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


  10. #82

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    He may not have been playing well, but chemistry is a big deal. The slump started when the team signed Bynum.

    I understand why Larry did the Turner trade, not only getting a decent player but also getting insurance for if the Pacers lose Lance. But you don't mess with the chemistry on a championship level team.

    That being said..there is plenty of time to get it together. This team, since Vogel has been a coach, has gone through some slumps and then popped out of them..and always plays it's best in the playoffs. (Just like any well coached team.) I really wish people would stop being so paranoid. This is a great team with a legit shot at a championship. Understand there will still be some peaks and valleys and that they are human.

    And at the end of the day, Larry ****ed up. He did a great job with this team. He's taken some chances he shouldn't have but had them work out. And he's made some mistakes. The signing of Bynum and the Granger trade happen to look like two mistakes right now. Maybe in the future they won't be...but right now it seems to be going that way.
    Last edited by Sookie; 03-09-2014 at 09:13 PM.

  11. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sookie For This Useful Post:


  12. #83

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sookie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He may not have been playing well, but chemistry is a big deal. The slump started when the team signed Bynum.

    I understand why Larry did the Turner trade, not only getting a decent player but also getting insurance for if the Pacers lose Lance. But you don't mess with the chemistry on a championship level team.

    That being said..there is plenty of time to get it together. This team, since Vogel has been a coach, has gone through some slumps and then popped out of them..and always plays it's best in the playoffs. (Just like any well coached team.) I really wish people would stop being so paranoid. This is a great team with a legit shot at a championship. Understand there will still be some peaks and valleys and that they are human.
    Not only chemistry, but talent-wise the trade sucked. Turner was putting up inflated numbers on one of the worst teams in the league. He's shown little to no potential since he's been in the NBA. The only place he had to go is down. Granger was coming back from a year and half of injury. The only place he had to go is up.

    There's also no way trading an extremely well-liked guy who took a below market deal while playing for one of the worst coaches in the NBA to stay for the '3 year plan' in a possible championship season to one of the worst teams in the NBA doesn't affect team chemistry. That type of 'business' hurts employee morale greatly no matter the industry.

  13. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to oxxo For This Useful Post:


  14. #84

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

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

    There's also no way trading an extremely well-liked guy who took a below market deal while playing for one of the worst coaches in the NBA to stay for the '3 year plan' in a possible championship season to one of the worst teams in the NBA doesn't affect team chemistry. That type of 'business' hurts employee morale greatly no matter the industry.
    I agree completely.

    And people suggesting that players should act like "professionals" and essentially suck it up, don't really understand business as well as they think they do, at least until businesses are run by computers instead of human beings.

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sookie For This Useful Post:


  16. #85
    Honorary Area 55'er TMJ31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,857

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sookie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree completely.

    And people suggesting that players should act like "professionals" and essentially suck it up, don't really understand business as well as they think they do, at least until businesses are run by computers instead of human beings.
    I think folks get so conditioned to hearing professional athletes spout off the cliche'd "Well, it's a business, what can you do? We're just going to move ahead" - the so obviously rehearsed and canned response, that we start to believe it.

    I would be willing to bet that if you were personal friends with Danny, PG, or any of the other Pacers when the Bynum deal and the Danny trade went through and they confided their actual feelings about it with you, it would not even have a whiff of that canned response to it.

    These people are public figures. They make obscene amounts of money. That does NOT mean they are somehow immune to insecurities, a sense of loyalty or a general feeling of honor and duty to a team and/or their teammates.

    To say otherwise is just, I'm sorry, really out of touch with reality.

  17. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TMJ31 For This Useful Post:


  18. #86
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,753

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sookie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He may not have been playing well, but chemistry is a big deal. The slump started when the team signed Bynum.

    I understand why Larry did the Turner trade, not only getting a decent player but also getting insurance for if the Pacers lose Lance. But you don't mess with the chemistry on a championship level team.

    That being said..there is plenty of time to get it together. This team, since Vogel has been a coach, has gone through some slumps and then popped out of them..and always plays it's best in the playoffs. (Just like any well coached team.) I really wish people would stop being so paranoid. This is a great team with a legit shot at a championship. Understand there will still be some peaks and valleys and that they are human.

    And at the end of the day, Larry ****ed up. He did a great job with this team. He's taken some chances he shouldn't have but had them work out. And he's made some mistakes. The signing of Bynum and the Granger trade happen to look like two mistakes right now. Maybe in the future they won't be...but right now it seems to be going that way.
    It's just not true that the team started slumping when they signed Bynum. Bynum was signed on February 1. The team won the first four games after that (counting the game on February 1, hours after the news broke) and 5 of the first 6 games after that trade. From February 1 to March 2, the first month with Bynum, the team went 10-3. This took us up through that 5 game winning streak. Now the record with Bynum on the roster is just 10-7 because of the last 4 games, but the team won for a full month after his addition. We aren't losing games because guys are just so distracted by their hatred of looking at Bynum on the bench. I'm not saying that guys were wild about the signing, but since he's been with the team I really haven't heard any negativity. David West wasn't happy about it at the time, but all he did in the month of February after we added Bynum was play the best ball of the season.

    As someone who supported the Turner trade, I freely admit that losing Granger has probably upset some of the guys. But being upset about losing a beloved teammate is way different than getting so offended by a backup center being added that you start playing bad as a team. The Bynum theory doesn't make sense because they continued to win several weeks after he was signed and this current slump is now five weeks after the fact.

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


  20. #87
    Bring Back Bender bballpacen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,044

    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
    As someone who supported the Turner trade, I freely admit that losing Granger has probably upset some of the guys. But being upset about losing a beloved teammate is way different than getting so offended by a backup center being added that you start playing bad as a team. The Bynum theory doesn't make sense because they continued to win several weeks after he was signed and this current slump is now five weeks after the fact.
    It might not even be that the guys are upset, as I believe that they have gotten over it, but that the loss of Granger has done enough to disturb the chemistry or balance enough to cause the play that we have been seeing...

  21. #88
    Member Wage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    406

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

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

    And people suggesting that players should act like "professionals" and essentially suck it up, don't really understand business as well as they think they do, at least until businesses are run by computers instead of human beings.
    The players have every right to feel sad, mad, betrayed, whatever the hell they want. That doesen't change the fact that they still need to go out and do their job. A competitor, and yes a "professional" does exactly that. Look at the Bulls. They trade Deng away and Noah comes out and publicly announces he is pissed at the management. He then goes on the court and takes that frustration out on any individual stupid enough to put on an opposing jersey.

    And the "it's a business" line is a shield the players have been using forever. I guess it shouldn't go both ways? When Hibbert, PG, and West were all signing their contracts that all but assured this was Danny and possibly Lance's last season with the team, did they get mad at themselves and go into a slump? Did they cry for the fact they were signing contracts that would make it impossible to bring back the crew next year?

  22. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Wage For This Useful Post:


  23. #89
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,485

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    It's a lull, stop freaking out.

    Sent from my KFTHWI using Tapatalk
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kid Minneapolis For This Useful Post:


  25. #90
    You can call me Taz cinotimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,324

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Prior to the granger trade: 41-13 .759 winning percentage

    After the granger trade: 5-4 .556 winning percentage with the 5 wins coming against 4 of the worst teams in the league: Milwaukee twice, Boston, Lakers, and Utah...3 of the 4 losses have been by double digits...

    Larry has earned the benefit of the doubt...but this team has very little resemblance to the one we watched for most of this season...

  26. #91
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,753

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The players have every right to feel sad, mad, betrayed, whatever the hell they want. That doesen't change the fact that they still need to go out and do their job. A competitor, and yes a "professional" does exactly that. Look at the Bulls. They trade Deng away and Noah comes out and publicly announces he is pissed at the management. He then goes on the court and takes that frustration out on any individual stupid enough to put on an opposing jersey.

    And the "it's a business" line is a shield the players have been using forever. I guess it shouldn't go both ways? When Hibbert, PG, and West were all signing their contracts that all but assured this was Danny and possibly Lance's last season with the team, did they get mad at themselves and go into a slump? Did they cry for the fact they were signing contracts that would make it impossible to bring back the crew next year?


    That's just a phenomenal point. Hibbert, Hill, PG, and West all made sure to cash in for themselves over the last couple of years. Hey that's fine, they earned it. But Roy was ready to bolt Granger and everyone else two years ago when Portland was coughing up the cash. Nothing wrong with that, but he didn't seem to be too heavy on nostalgia and loyalty when he saw that jack from the Blazers.

    I get that these guys are human and have emotions. But they also get paid an obscene amount of money to play a child's game and live a charmed life. It's just hard for me to feel too much sympathy for them. One of the few pitfalls of playing professional sports is that you will either get traded yourself or at least see a ton of friends leave throughout your career. Everyone understands this going in. Edgerrin James was one of the most beloved Colts ever, but when we let go of him guys got over it quickly and won the Super Bowl the next season. I understand that they had the whole off-season to get over it as opposed to this Granger thing being in the middle of the season, but still.

    While I'm sure that the Granger thing has upset some of the guys, I still think that the issues right now are deeper than that. We played an entire season without Granger last year and made it to Game 7 of the ECF's. I get that he was still on the team, in the locker room, and able to talk to guys on the bench, but the point remains that we successfully executed without him on the basketball court.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 03-10-2014 at 05:59 AM.

  27. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  28. #92
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    8,046

    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
    While I'm sure that the Granger thing has upset some of the guys, I still think that the issues right now are deeper than that. We played an entire season without Granger last year and made it to Game 7 of the ECF's. I get that he was still on the team, in the locker room, and able to talk to guys on the bench, but the point remains that we successfully executed without him on the basketball court.
    I agree. I think it is far more likely the injuries Paul, Hill, and Watson have sustained are the reason than the team quitting because Granger was traded. I won't say it doesn't have an affect, but it is unlikely to the the sole or biggest reason.

  29. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Eleazar For This Useful Post:


  30. #93
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Clips are still undefeated, with Danny playing a pretty important role last night.
    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!

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


  32. #94
    THE WITCH IS DEAD!!! Coopdog23's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Da Bank
    Posts
    2,916

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    He did mean a good deal, but I think with PG being where he is now and I believe Turner will be able to be a key off the bench, I think it was the right move letting Danny go. I hope he does well in LA. He deserves it
    Smothered Chicken!

  33. #95
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Coopdog23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He did mean a good deal, but I think with PG being where he is now and I believe Turner will be able to be a key off the bench, I think it was the right move letting Danny go. I hope he does well in LA. He deserves it
    Yeah, there was no possible future where Danny stayed after this year. I get that. And Evan Turner gives us better "Lance Insurance." I get that too. But I would have really liked to see Danny be a part of this year's postseason run. He's clearly still got it in him.
    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!

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


  35. #96
    THE WITCH IS DEAD!!! Coopdog23's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Da Bank
    Posts
    2,916

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, there was no possible future where Danny stayed after this year. I get that. And Evan Turner gives us better "Lance Insurance." I get that too. But I would have really liked to see Danny be a part of this year's postseason run. He's clearly still got it in him.
    Yeah we could have released Danny after the season. Danny gave us a shooting threat while Turner does give us scoring, but if we would need a shooter, he's not an option
    Smothered Chicken!

  36. #97

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Coopdog23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah we could have released Danny after the season. Danny gave us a shooting threat while Turner does give us scoring, but if we would need a shooter, he's not an option
    Turner has like a -7 net efficiency rating while Granger has like a +8 just going off of memory. Granger is the better defender/player and is a veteran who was looked up to by the team. Usually teams win championships with veterans like Granger off the bench, not underpeforming lottery picks still on their rookie deal. Turner is not very good Lance insurance IMO. If we want to remain a contender without Lance, we better pull a fringe All Star out of nowhere, because Turner is not even close to that guy.

    I personally don't think Turner was ever a back up option anyways. Our front office will be forced to keep Lance, and they know that. At least I think they should. And I think that keeping him is a must for us to remain competitive. We weren't true contenders until he came along. He is the piece that put us in the same league as Miami IMO. I mean you can't discredit West, PG, Hibbert, Hill, but Lance is like that missing piece that brings it all together.

    That said I hope Turner has the best run of his career,and helps us win a championship even if he is just a one year rental. Maybe I'm wrong and he helps us more than Granger ever could this year. I just think it was a lateral move at best. So maybe we do win it all, but I believed we could with Granger and would rather he get the ring instead of Turner.

  37. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Midcoasted For This Useful Post:


  38. #98
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,951

    Default Re: Did Granger Really Mean That Much?

    I really think Danny would have been better Lance insurance then Turner is but it's water under the bridge now. As hard as this had to be for Danny I think he'll be glad he was traded someday. Danny would have never been used to his potential this year while playing on the bench for us. He should be able to have a bigger impact playing for the Clippers and most likely will net a better contract then he would have here. Turner on the other hand won't be getting many calls for anything more then and MLE offer after getting his shot opportunites cut in half here.

Posting Permissions

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