Paul George vs Danny Granger?
What do you think that the Pacers should do with this situation? Do they keep playing the two together or trade one of them? (Lets be honest chances it will be George is very slim)
I think Paul George is the future of Indiana Pacers, he is very good player, could put the numbers soon Danny Granger, he is 7 years younger than Danny Granger
I think they compliment each other very well. Even though they are both similar players it doesn't mean they can't work well together. In fact, I think they will set each other up great as far as driving and kicking. I think George excels at getting to the rim more while Granger is the better jump shooter. A starting back court of Collison and George with Granger at the wing is very formidable and if they can get a better PF (cuz lets face it, Hansbourgh is not a quality starting PF in the NBA) they have a solid team in the east.
just throwing this out there. http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=696b89j
Pacers get Millsap and Bell. Millsap allows them to bring Hansborough off the bench and be that energy guy and get a solid 16-8 from Paul Millsap. Bell adds veteran leadership (but could be bought out)
Utah gets a good wing scorer and someone allows more PT for Hayward at the 2 or 3. Plus maybe you can give the starting 4 spot to Derrick Favors.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves yet. Paul George is a good young player with a bright future, but Danny Granger is an all-star, their franchise player, and one of the best scorers in the NBA. With that being said however, I don't see why they can't co-exist on the court. George can defend guards and forwards alike and Granger can easily be a shooting guard mismatch on offense because of his size and shooting ability.
If Danny Granger is your best player..You dont have a very good team..Granger is more of a 2nd or 3rd option on a serious playoff contender...He's Surprised me thogh,by becoming a 20 point scorer..I felt he should've went in the lottery..But never knew he would become such a big time scorer....
I like Paul George's potential,but he's at 2 years from doing the things we think he's capable of doing...
I don't understand the hype with Paul George. It seems like at least once a week, someone on this site goes off on how great Paul George is going to be. In his rookie season he averaged 8 and 4. His career high is 23 points. Its not like he peaked at the end of the season, as in his 5 playoff games he average 6ppg. Where does the hype come from? I know he's a great athlete, but has he really shown the ability to become a future all-star in this league.
George has proven that he's a great athlete who's long and can defend, plus get out in transition. That's about it. His ball handling and overall offensive ability are still a work in progress. He's not ready to be relied on in any major scoring role.
When you compare Granger's salary to other players at his position, the Pacers are getting him at a bargain. He's a proven 20+ scorer and I see no reason to trade him anytime soon.
Yes, he was 8 and 4... in 20 minutes per game.
I disagree about Granger being a second option. He's a #1 scoring option... and he's quite a versatile player.
Unfortunately Indiana doesn't have a good defensive team behind him. They need interior D. Hibbert is not cutting on D and rebounding. if they had a tyson chandler type they would be completely different.
They also don't have a reliable second option at this point.
Okay, some people are trippin on this site. Granger not #1 option? That is just plain ludacris, he's basically the only real scorer on his team. At, a young age he's been able to get his team to the playoffs and acuttaly perform like a star, he probly didnt get out the first round but, lets be real who else on the team could put the ball in basket consistently... The man needs help, why you think LeBron left Cleveland because, of half-a** all-stars and role-players. Georges, Collisons, Hibberts, are not going to win you champions as a supporting cast now-a-days with all these superstar stacked teams. But, thats still not a reasonable reason to leave your, so I salute you for your loyalty Granger.
But, anyway straight to the point, if you would you were to trade a Granger because, of a borderline all-star Paul George type player than, you can say bye to your job. Just how many times have you seen teams trade their star player because, a rookie with potential gets drafted... Paul is good but I dont see him becoming a player of Grangers caliber. SMH
Indiana Pacers are fine. This is the growth process they need to take, these are the players they have brought together as an organization and they have come quite a long way to clean up their salary cap and have this young talented team.
The teams success will rely on what kind of steps Hibbert takes towards his consistancy and defense. He has shown the abillity to be a dominate and extremely effiecient center for Indiana, the question is can he do this on a consistant basis throughout 82 games and the postseason. He also really has to work on his mobility to be a more active help side defender.
I actaully really like the duo of Josh Mcroberts and Tyler Hansborough. They are both young and great energy guys who help the team in areas such as rebounding, defense, and intensity. Both need to straighten out the way they approach the game from a mental aspect and an attitudfde aspect but I see tons of potential in both of them.
As for George and Granger they compliment eachother perfectly, why would that have to change. People see the words athletisism, skill, and potential alongside George's name so often they just assume he will be the next T-Mac. Why dont we get realistic. He is praised for having the potential to lockdown superstar wings on the defensive side of the court. To have such a young player on your team that became the go to guy on the team defensively in his rookie year is an amazing asset. Then on top he has great skill and athletisism. Think about if Thabo Sefelosha could consistantly knock down threes, wasnt an offensive liability, and at the same time had the abillity to dunk the ball from the free throw line. Thats what George's "potential" is based off of.
Indiana just really needs to grow up, understand the game more, and have a more professional approach towards the sport...and Danny Granger maybe one of the biggest punks in the league.
I like George better as a long-term prospect simply because of his commitment to D. Granger has been somewhat lackadaisacal in that aspect, and true superstar wings (Michael, Kobe, Wade) show commitment on both ends. That said, I see no reason why Granger needs to be traded. This Pacers team is very young and already in playoff contention, I say let them get better of their own accord, try and find a PF while they're at it and possibly let Granger go when his contract is up.
It's up to Vogel to find a way to free up PT for their young prospects whilst staying competitive.
I agree that Danny Granger is a 2nd option. He's in the same situation as Andre Igoudala, both very versatile players but just not number 1 options. When you're a number 1 option, you should average more than 21.6 point per game. He's the number 1 option because they have no one else. He's a perfect 2, the guy who I thought should be the next Scottie Pippen.
But I also don't think Paul George is a 1. Maybe Indiana can go the Dallas Mavericks way with a great team because before the playoffs last year, Dirk was good but not great.
Right now Granger, Paul George has a very high ceiling but that's all that is right now, potential. The kid is athletic as hell too.
ive said this b4, some of u guys over hype paul george...
granted, great athlete, lots of length, tons of talent, but his offesive game is still so raw... and relies on his god given hops, speed, etc. to make plays for now
i agree with rudeboy, hes at least 2 yrs away from exploding
him and granger could be deadly in a few yrs from now
Very similar to the Kings situation a few years ago. Do you keep Kevin Martin and Tyreke or do you trade Martin for complimentary pieces? I don't know if the Kings regret trading Martin considering they have the most cap space this offseason but when you have a player like Granger and an up and comer like Paul George I think you should find a way to make it work.
I personally think people are getting ahead of themselves with George. He's got good potential and is going to be a good 2-way player, but IMO, if he can be a key piece in acquiring a major player at either the 2 or 4, who can help Indy win NOW, i say send George packing. Granger is no chump and could actually be a #1 scoring option on a team that is actually developed properly with everyone playing a role and complimenting each other the way Rip Hamilton did with Detroit.
Why does everyone hold Danny Granger in such high regard. The reason he scores 20+ per game is because he takes 20+ shots. His shooting percentage is terrible, his shot selection is horrible and he doesn't make his teammates better. He is not a #1 option for a contender, he's not a #2 option on a contender, he's Stephen Jackson on the Championship San Antonio Spurs and nothing more. He will never win a title being the leader because, much like Iverson, he cannot elevate the play of his teammates. Paul Georges game is more built for winning and that's why i would trade Granger before his game gets exposed and his value decreases. Dump him now Indiana or you'll regret it!!
Granger is clearly a #1 scoring option. He doesn't play well enough on D... so I wouldn't necessarily want him as my overall best player, but one thing he can do it score efficiently, taking a high volume of shots.
True Shooting% for 20 point scorers over the combined last 3 years:
Do you watch basketball? Your post was one of the worst I've ever read...
He has never attempted 20 shots per game. Last season he attempted just under 16. His overall FG% was just under 43%, BUT he shot almost 39% from three-point and almost 85% from the line. And the only reason Granger even takes that many shots is because he has to. IF Hibbert would step up consistently and he could get consistent offensive output from his teamamtes, he would have no problem decreasing his shot attempts. Being relied upon to score so much is also why his defense slipped. He's picked up bad habits reserving his energy on the defensive end to not get in foul trouble and to have more energy on offense. Being a Pacers supporter since before Granger was drafted, I can tell you that he came into the league as a rookie being able to defend the 3/4 positions. He still can, just not with as much intensity as he used to before being relied upon to be the team's go-to offensive player.
Granger isn't a playmaker. He's a scorer. He's never going to average more than 3 assists. IF Granger doesn't make his teammates better, then neither does Durant. Granger makes the team better by being able to play without and move without the ball. He makes his teammates better by not holding onto the ball for majority of the shotclock and needing clearouts and isolations to be effective. Granger makes his teammates better by being unselfish. Last season he was completely okay with running the offense through Hibbert.
Where are you getting that Granger is a punk? He's a great teammate. He's unselfish. He plays hurt. He leads by example. I'm just not getting where you're getting Granger is not only a punk, but "one of the biggest punks in the league".
No one knows more about George's skills/potential than Indiana's coaches, and it comes down to how well they evaluate him. If they truly believe George is a budding Star, as good as Granger or better, then by all means it makes more sense to move Granger for other pieces. Other teams out there will love to have him and Im sure you can add a starting SG and depth at C for him. I think George Hill is best as a six-man combo guard. Indiana historically is a one superstar team, salary-wise, and with this economy things arent going to change. They will not move the less paid George right now for another well paid star to pair with Granger. I cannot think of who, but if there's a star sg to be had, theyll be more likely to move Granger, thinking George can play at a star level real soon.
Just messing around.... http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4x429jh
Clippers want a SF, and have been dangling Kaman. Rumors has them interested in Iggy, but again, Clippers arent spenders and arent about to begin that trend. I think theyll take George and his rookie contract.
Houston needs a Center with Yao gone.
Pacers gets a starting SG, who defends and knocks down 3s. A Veteran PF for Psycho T to learn from and a Center ( you know how Birds loves white players).
I gave you a plus 1 simply because your picture is f'in AWESOME. The game way truely terrible yet I enjoyed every second of it when I was little.
"Okay, some people are trippin on this site. Granger not #1 option?"
I think what people are trying to say is that if Granger is your #1 option you probably aren't a serious contender for the championship.
Indiana puttin the snmack down in this thread +1
I believe he did well for a rookie who was being given inconsistent time to start the season, just like most rookies it took him time to figure things out and once he started to people started to see the talent that made him a top 10 pick. Most people see a player who averaged 6 ppg in the playoffs, what I saw was a young player who knew his role in a big time situation and did not complain and arguably played the best defense of the whole post season on the league MVP. He has great work ethic and is trying to improve every day, so we'll see what happens.
I'll be honest, Gordon Hayward and Paul George have been WAY over hyped. Sure they have huge upside, and have the potential to be somthing special, but let them even get a spot in the rotation before we start talking about them being All-Stars, or being better than currnet or former ones.
Actually Indiana, I thought Granger was kinda punkish this year as well trying to "fake tough guy" people when it wasn't needed. Just seem like he was always getting into it with someone this year. I wouldn't call him a punk because he's really not. He's smart, polite, and humble, just seems maybe he was tired of having a soft label and decided to come out trying to prove people wrong. He and Charlie V both seemed to do that this year IMO.
Still a terrific talent and a great team guy.
Ummm... Both Hayward and George were in the rotation last season. George started every game versus the Bulls in the playoffs.
I think most people started considering Granger a "punk" when he said what he said about Noah after the Pacers lost to the Bulls in the first round. Players say things after fresh losses. I didn't see anybody calling Durant a punk after they lost to the Heat and he was acting like a sore loser.
Granger isn't a tough guy, but he's played through more injuries and returned from them sooner than most players in the league. I saw nothing from Granger last season that he hasn't done his entire career.
^ My bad, but what I meant to say is wait till they an play at a high level consistantly before we start hailing them to be future All-Stars.
Grangerhas never been in as many unneccesary altercations as he was this year(that he started by the way). But I agree that doesn't make him a punk perse'. I was really just giving an example of why one might call him a punk.
I dont know why people dont like Granger....since hes been in the NBA hes been a great scorer and even nicer guy...ive never heard ONE negative thing about the guy...
Who wouldnt want a lights out shooter on their team? If you leave him open, he will knock it down. He can also put the ball on the floor and get to the hoop...his defense isnt incredible, but its decent. Im not saying hes a go-to-guy on a championship team, but you can win with this guy as your first option.
The real question is, where do the Pacers want to take this team? Right now, they are a low seed and a 2nd round exit at best...the team is still young and can improve...but with Grangers big contract, it does look like the logical thing to do is to move him for some cap space and young players and hand the keys to George...
But if i am the GM of this team, i keep it how it is and just let Grangers contract run out (i think its like 4 or 5 years?) and by then George should be ready to take this team over. If you just let Granger go, your lottery-bound and losing money with a team that cant afford it right now...