Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Magic P
    PD Magician
    • Jun 2010
    • 2368

    Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

    Since when does being relied on more for offense excuse Danny's poor defense during the dark ages? PG doesn't slack off defensively just because he has a bigger role in the offense.

    Comment

    • GrangerRanger
      Our hero!
      • Jul 2007
      • 967

      Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

      Originally posted by Magic P
      Since when does being relied on more for offense excuse Danny's poor defense during the dark ages? PG doesn't slack off defensively just because he has a bigger role in the offense.
      We have so many more options that isn't a fair comparison. Paul George lets the offense come to him. He isn't THE offense. Granger was running through screens all night, and a majority of the plays were designed specifically for him. George can, and does, take a couple plays off throughout the night. We have 5 guys who are capable of the offense running through. Granger had what.. two or three outside himself that you could reasonably say were capable, but still not at the level that George has?

      Comment

      • Nuntius
        Member
        • Jan 2012
        • 35969

        Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

        Originally posted by Magic P
        Since when does being relied on more for offense excuse Danny's poor defense during the dark ages? PG doesn't slack off defensively just because he has a bigger role in the offense.
        PG is not coached by JOB either.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment

        • Magic P
          PD Magician
          • Jun 2010
          • 2368

          Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

          Originally posted by GrangerRanger
          We have so many more options that isn't a fair comparison. Paul George lets the offense come to him. He isn't THE offense. Granger was running through screens all night, and a majority of the plays were designed specifically for him. George can, and does, take a couple plays off throughout the night. We have 5 guys who are capable of the offense running through. Granger had what.. two or three outside himself that you could reasonably say were capable, but still not at the level that George has?
          If that is true when PG has a bad game you'd think he was the sole reason we lost. With this team being so deep you'd think PG wouldn't get criticized after every bad game. Danny who was relied on for offense still got off to bad starts, why? Birds comments the other day tells us why. So Danny brought no defense and got off to bad starts offensively but the new kid in town (PG) gets crucified on a deep team if he has a bad game. This is why there is a Danny vs PG dynamic on this board, Danny gets excuses for poor play but PG doesn't.

          Comment

          • Magic P
            PD Magician
            • Jun 2010
            • 2368

            Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

            Originally posted by Nuntius
            PG is not coached by JOB either.
            He did for half a season and he still played defense.

            Comment

            • vnzla81
              Member
              • Jul 2008
              • 68174

              Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

              Originally posted by GrangerRanger
              We have so many more options that isn't a fair comparison. Paul George lets the offense come to him. He isn't THE offense. Granger was running through screens all night, and a majority of the plays were designed specifically for him. George can, and does, take a couple plays off throughout the night. We have 5 guys who are capable of the offense running through. Granger had what.. two or three outside himself that you could reasonably say were capable, but still not at the level that George has?
              Top 5 on offense on the JOB years, the Pacers had players capable of scoring the myth that he had to jackup shots because he didn't have enough help is just that a myth.

              And nope George doesn't take plays off because he is always guarding the best player on the other team.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment

              • ilive4sports
                Member
                • Oct 2005
                • 8679

                Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                I love Paul George. But if you don't think he takes plays off you are crazy. Every player I'm the NBA does. Hell there are times Roy doesn't even get down on the offensive end of the court.

                Comment

                • Naptown_Seth
                  NaptownSeth is all feel
                  • Jul 2006
                  • 12714

                  Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                  Originally posted by Nuntius
                  PG is not coached by JOB either.
                  He was for a half season and got to spend of lot of that time on the bench or being told he was doing things wrong by JOB.

                  Danny was a strong defender his first couple of years and then was forced to keep spending seasons with his coach handing huge playing time to Murphy, Dunleavy, even Rasho till he started dying. Posey got way more PT than he deserved. And that entire time JOB played LIP SERVICE to "guys need to play D to earn PT" as an excuse for not developing Roy or Paul (2 future all-stars no less) while letting Troy the Doorman play 36 a night.

                  I know it's different posters at times, but it's really pathetic to see things like "Dunleavy played good team defense" and then see Granger described as a poor defender. I'm really sick of "team defense" as an excuse for the horrible defenders of the past, period. Scola and West are guys that aren't great defenders but play great team defense. Its what makes West the 3rd best defender on the team, rather than West looking like Murphy on defense.

                  And I say this because Granger never needed that excuse, the "but he plays good team defense", because you could see him body guys up in the post and get a fair share of wing shot blocks.


                  Granger has ALWAYS been a far better POST DEFENDER than Paul George. This is why he's a great SF vs Paul being a great SG. Guys like Melo or Lebron have a tougher time going at Danny because of his borderline PF defensive game.


                  It's really sad to see that people either forgot or just jumped on the wagon and don't have any recollection of how Granger and James got into it while James was still in Cleveland. This includes when James and Granger exchanged "game winning" FTAs after drawing fouls on each other.





                  Finally, has anyone ever thought that just maybe Paul George and Danny Granger would both equally benefit from playing on a stable, well-coached team with an AS caliber Hibbert, a fully recovered West, a matured Lance, and backup PG and PF drastically improved?

                  Danny was the star player on a playoff team that nearly STARTED AJ Price, Tyler Hans, a very non-AS Roy and a rookie. That was just 3 seasons ago. The year after Danny put up numbers just as good as Paul when they got to 6 games vs Miami. And lets be honest about last season, the main difference was that they saw Miami in the ECF instead of round 2.




                  Freaking Reggie Miller putting up 57...he sucked, it was just that he was on a bad team. smfh in embarrassment

                  Comment

                  • cinotimz
                    You can call me Taz
                    • Jan 2009
                    • 2567

                    Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                    Originally posted by Magic P
                    If that is true when PG has a bad game you'd think he was the sole reason we lost. With this team being so deep you'd think PG wouldn't get criticized after every bad game. Danny who was relied on for offense still got off to bad starts, why? Birds comments the other day tells us why. So Danny brought no defense and got off to bad starts offensively but the new kid in town (PG) gets crucified on a deep team if he has a bad game. This is why there is a Danny vs PG dynamic on this board, Danny gets excuses for poor play but PG doesn't.
                    Lol....Crucified? Really? Really???? George Hill certainly has been drawing quite a bit of criticism lately and seems to be the new whipping boy. About the only criticism Paul George receives is with his constant complaining to the refs and diva-like actions at times-and justifiably so...other than that, he receives little to no criticism even though hes the new face of the franchise with a max contract and as such its natural to expect a fair amount of criticism when he doesnt play well.

                    Now what all that has to do with Danny is beyond me...Its like some of you dont understand that probably the biggest key to winning a championship is having them both performing at a high level and having the two of them healthy along with the other top 9 players.

                    You do realize they play for the same team, correct?? You know, YOURS and OUR Indiana Pacers????? Some of you talk about Danny as if he played for the Heat or something.....crazy nonsense.
                    The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                    Comment

                    • Naptown_Seth
                      NaptownSeth is all feel
                      • Jul 2006
                      • 12714

                      Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                      Originally posted by Magic P
                      He did for half a season and he still played defense.
                      Not according to JOB. Sitting 5 feet from JOB I watched Paul come in off the bench vs ORL and after 2 trips JOB called him over and *****ed him out like he'd just blown everything.

                      Also being an eager rookie who hasn't already spent 3 years on "chuck it with no consequences for not defending" is not the same as being a guy emulating Artest his rookie year only to see those dreams and that coaching style flushed down the toilet....over and over.

                      Comment

                      • cinotimz
                        You can call me Taz
                        • Jan 2009
                        • 2567

                        Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                        Originally posted by vnzla81
                        Top 5 on offense on the JOB years, the Pacers had players capable of scoring the myth that he had to jackup shots because he didn't have enough help is just that a myth.

                        And nope George doesn't take plays off because he is always guarding the best player on the other team.
                        Now its official...you just proved it...you dont watch the games...

                        Theres at least a couple plays a game he takes off because hes too busy whining to the referee that he was fouled...and he definitely misses some rotations that lead to a couple easy baskets each game....that makes him human...hes still an all-world defender...
                        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                        Comment

                        • Naptown_Seth
                          NaptownSeth is all feel
                          • Jul 2006
                          • 12714

                          Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                          Originally posted by Major Cold
                          And Joe Johnson. And Kawhi. And Dudley. And Melo. And Parsons.

                          I am not expecting perfection. But we need low post defense against periemeter players besides George. Lance is good, but even Joe Johnson destroyed him on the block. I was surprised that when we put Lance on Lebron they didn't go to the post with Lebron. In fact that alone is why Spoelstra is a great coach. The Heat pressured our defense most when they put Lebron in the post.
                          Exactly. It's like people have completely forgotten every game this team played just 2 years ago. Of course they also think Granger is a chucker even though he's shown far more success drawing FTAs per game than Paul has up till now.

                          Comment

                          • vnzla81
                            Member
                            • Jul 2008
                            • 68174

                            Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                            So you are tired of people using "team defense" as an excuse but then Danny is a good "team defender"? what I'm missing here?
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment

                            • Naptown_Seth
                              NaptownSeth is all feel
                              • Jul 2006
                              • 12714

                              Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                              Good numbers on bad team - THIS IS THE DUMBEST MYTH, THE MOST CONTRADICTED MYTH, IN ALL OF SPORTS

                              How does Iverson get credit for "carry a team on his own" but Granger get bashed for putting up more efficient scoring numbers on a team that did NOT feature a DPOY at center (Mutumbo).


                              How is it that Shaq helped make his shooters look better cause he got them open looks, but Granger hit all his threes because he DIDN'T HAVE SHAQ? When you make the statement that guys put up good per minute/per FGA numbers on bad teams specifically because their teammates are so bad it just sounds dumb and instantly contradicts the idea that a guy can't be blamed cause his teammates are so bad.

                              Having better teammates must make your numbers look better...unless you are someone that only looks at pure volume (ie PPG or maybe RPG). You need guys to make shots to get assists, you need guys to help get open looks to carry a good FG%.


                              Or would someone like to make the case that if ANY PLAYER went 1 on 5, literally being the only player on the court for his team, that he'd get better numbers? Somehow being the only guy out there would means your FG% would go up and you'd be getting all the rebounds by outplaying all 5 opponents at once?

                              THINK ABOUT THE LOGIC OF BEING "HELPED" BY HAVING BAD TEAMMATES! Then put that BS statement 6 feet under forever.....this message brought to you by Gerald Green on the WINNING Phoenix Suns.

                              Comment

                              • AesopRockOn
                                You Did It Joseph!!!!
                                • Jul 2006
                                • 9159

                                Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                                Fifty five pages in, and it's become a personal memory retention contest.
                                You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...