GRANGER or J. JOHNSON
Both of these guys r great shooters, and can score, johnson got his chance to show wat he could do once he got to tha hawks...... if u had 2 choose between tha 2 who wuld u pick, I wuld take granger I like his pontential
I think Joe Johnson can do more things. I love Danny Granger and he does have a great stroke and great scoring instincts and potential up the butt. But I would have to take Joe Johnson between the two.
Joe Johnson. Hands down. Better at all facets.
has a better overall game. Grangers scoring will drop this season if the pacers are healthy.
Danny Granger is one of my favorite players, but I'd have to go with Joe Johnson right now because he has a better overall game. Johnson can put the ball on the floor and be a playmaker, while Granger is not quite there yet. It's actually not even close. I'd choose Johnson every time.
I gotta go with Granger.
i would have said Johnson in a heartbeat. But I was a little dissapointed with his consistency last year. Granger has made it very close as he continues to improve. But as of today, I still take Joe.
granger better defender 1.0 steals 1.5 blocks joe johnson no d scoring is equal
You do know that stats don't always tell the story of a good defender, don't you? Joe's D is better than you think. With that'd being said, I'd still say Granger is a better defender. He's more versatile.
Really? Johnson does one thing.... Score! He has a few games every now and then where he'll get a bunch of assist but come on now. Better defender? Hands down that is granger. He's one of the best defenders in the league! I couldn't tell you who is more athletic but it I had to guess I'd say granger. Shooter- Johnson hands down. But overall granger WILL be the better player.
Granger, he gets better every year...he was a candidate for most improved player last year, can you imagine if we won the award TWICE?
Granger simply because his development & potential
that's totally understandable. But all these people hating on Joe's game saying he can't defend or all he does is score, obviously don't watch many hawks games. He is good for about 23-5-5 and he shoots about 40% from 3. He is a very good defender. He also initiates most the offense while bibby plays off the ball. His game is smooth and versatile. He is one of the more complete all-stars in this league.
joe johnson not a difference maker, doesnt make teammates better
Yeah, imo, Grangers the better player, but its not by a landslide like people are making it seem
Better defender that he gets credit for, but Grangers still has the advantage in that category
Hard One. They Play Different Positions. JJ 1-3 vs. Dan 2-4. I like Granger More. He has excellent defense, is a lil taller/bigger/tougher and looks to attack more. JJ prefers shooting over using his size over 2's in the league. Granger Attacks everyone 2-4 hard and guards the best person day in and out.
Because he plays hard and wants to play. Joe settles way to often, and his D, where is his D. Granger has gradually improved every year, so atleast we know he works hard, so I'd be content with that.
I would definitely go with Joe Johnson. I think sometimes people do not realize his over skills. Granger is solid though. It is hard to really compare when they are both versatile but play different positions.
i'm from atlanta but not being bias i love johnson but granger is so good too!!
hmmm i think granger would do just as well if he was put in atlanta but from what joe has done...i'll take joe
nearly beat the celts by himself in the first round...the year they won ha
Wow. I have to get in on this. This is a good one. Um.......Johnson. He's a better player than Granger.
Dhamp.....The King of Kings
Both are good defenders, but Granger is better. Granger is also way more efficient on offense. Johnson really doesn't shoot that well. I'm not sure Johnson could ever be a true number #1, but I think he would always be a great number 2 guy on any team. The same could probably be said for Granger, but I think he is nipping at the bud of being that #1.
People say he cant defend. He's inconsistent. The man went 4 or 5 seasons straight playing 82 games. He's a workhorse. He has to initiate the offense, guard most point guards because Bibby can barely move anymore. And create and score.
It doesnt help that Mike Woodson has a coloring book for a play book. Anyone that has watched the Hawks play knows that all he calls is ISO-JOE. Teams zero in on him because they know whats coming. Give the Hawks an adequate coach and all this nonsense about JJ would stop. He would easily average what Granger averages if he didnt HAVE to do everything else.
Also, he doesnt have a legit #2 option. I think he can lead a team. Bibby is past his prime. Josh Smith is a knucklehead on offense. Marvin is too passive and Horford isnt there yet.
Joe Johnson doesnt shoot that well?? Wow..
I would take Granger because he's younger but people have to stop hating on Johnson's D. He is actually a very strong defender. Johnson is hard to judge because he is like a point forward that plays the 2. He can do it all and I think hes better than Granger now but if I was starting a team Granger is the pick.
How about Granger vs. Iguodala?
Definitely Joe Johnson. And yes he is a very good defender....who ever say he isn't has not watched him play a lot.
I agree with Johnson being better, although I think it is very close. But yeah, the people on here saying he cant play d, is a bad shooter or all he does is score, they obviously don't see him enough. I'm not a hawks fan, but I watch league pass, and Joe can flat out ball. He almost carried the hawks pass the celtics. He did let me down a little this last season playing inconsistent though.
The people saying Joe can't pass and doesn't make his teammates better don't remember that when he signed with Atlanta, they were saying he'd play point guard. I have league pass too and Joe did play inconsistent last season... He battled little nagging injuries all season and I heard reports that his body wore down.