Danny Granger
- Thread starter Sac.1989
- Start date
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Surely you jest! Granger is exactly the kind of player were looking for. He's 27 years old, and he's a proven commodity. Your not aquiring him and hoping he'll be good. He's already good. He's a 20 plus pts a game scorer. He's a good rebounder for a SF. And he's a very good defender. In other words he's a player that can play both ends of the floor. I'm amazed that the Pacer's would even entertain the idea of trading him, and to be honest I'm still sceptical about it. But if we could make this deal I would do it in a heartbeat.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
He's averaging just under 6 boards a game. From the SF position thats above average. For instance Casspi is considered a pretty good rebounder for a SF and he's averaging around 4 boards a game, which is down a little from last year. Remember that SF's spend a lot of their time on the perimiter and away from the basket unlike centers and PF's who in most cases play closer to the basket. So most rebounds that SF's and SG's get are usually hustle rebounds.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Whiteside > McGee.....
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Why would they want to take on Dalemberts salary? By only taking on Casspi, Landry, and a 1st round pick, they save money this year. And I don't want TJ Ford.
upinsmoke
All-Star
Ford is expiring he would be nothing more than a filler. The point is there are many ways to make a deal work to get Granger in Purple that can benefit both teams. Im sure the idea of potentially having 2 lottery picks should intrigue the Pacers.
Sac.1989
Starter
This really is the sort of trade we must be looking at, we have cap space to fill and in all honesty hes up there with the best we can get. FA is never good to us without paying over and above to secure talent and danny would give us a dam solid 3 pronged attack with 3 youngsters able to give you 20 each
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
I don't need Grant to tell me it isn't going to happen. Landing Granger would be a big time move. It's the type of move a team that's serious about doing everything in its power to improve would do. Not something a cut-rate outfit like The Kings will pull off. It's too rich for their blood. There may have been a time when The Maloofs had the ambition, bravado, and resources to pull off a trade like this but those days are long gone.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
A player whose done nothing in the NBA yet is better than a player whose averaging 9 points, 8 rebounds, and 2.5 blocks?
ParniValjak
All-Star
If Granger is in FA, he gets the MAX no questions asked! There is no way you would get his calibre of player for $13million per season in FA.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I'm not saying that Whiteside is as good as McGee right now. Come on, you know what I meant. I'm saying going forward into the future Whiteside is projected to be our PF. If he develops of course. McGee is a center and not a PF, and Cousins is a center. I could see McGee as a backup, but not playing along side him.
ParniValjak
All-Star
Maybe on potential but on production its no contest.
McGee is averagin 9ppg, 8rpg and 2.5bpg and I think his length and athletic ability would be a great complement to Cousins' game right now and in the future. Whiteside might well be better than McGee down the track but he has struggled in NBDL this year. Getting McGee would put us ahead of the curve by a couple of seasons. There is no reason why we couldn't have both on the roster.
If we manage to pull off a deal for Grander then we need impact players NOW, not in 2-3 years time.
Cousins - McGee - Granger - Evans - Udrih is a play off team as of next year and would win more games from now in for the remainder of the season. Whiteside would be lucky to get spot minutes here and there.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
It just seems like you're putting a lot of stock in Whiteside. Especially for a guy who's apparently so raw that he can't even get minutes on The Kings. The guy seems like a long-shot to me and even if he does work out as expected it's probably going to take a few years at least. I wouldn't hesitate to trade him for someone who can put up 10-10 and 2 right now.
Last edited:
Alacron
Bench
Getting Granger would be amazing, we'd have our big 3. I'd like to do it while keeping either Casspi or our draft pick, and ideally Landry and Greene would be included. Can't be too picky though, after adding Granger all we'll need to do is find the right roleplayers and let the kids mature.
~~
~~
TheWileyVet
Starter
If Granger is really available we should do everything in our power to trade for him
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I glad your not the GM... We disagree.... Thats life..
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
i gotta agree w/ baja. whiteside has more potential than mcgee. hes a garbage minute type player. he doesn't really have much of a game outside of put back dunks and weak side shot blocking.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
You're glad we don't have Martin and Beasly right now?
Last edited:
didn't you have Beasley under your list of bust/dissapointments just a few days ago?
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
I did. It was a mistake on my part. Once I checked his numbers I saw that they were a lot better than I had been thinking. However, even if he had been a bust in his two years at Miami, I'd still take a chance on him if I could get him for second round picks.
Last edited:
ParniValjak
All-Star
And you need more complete player next to Cousins?!
What you described McGee as being, thats exactly the sort of player that you want next to Cousins. Someone that is a garbage man type of player that will rebound, swat shots and play some good D. You don't need a 20/10 type of player. 9-12ppg, 8-10 rpg, 2-3bpg is the ideal type of player you want next to Cousins and those are the sort of numbers that McGee is producing NOW, not hopefully producing in some 3 years time.
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
And you need more complete player next to Cousins?!
What you described McGee as being, thats exactly the sort of player that you want next to Cousins. Someone that is a garbage man type of player that will rebound, swat shots and play some good D. You don't need a 20/10 type of player. 9-12ppg, 8-10 rpg, 2-3bpg is the ideal type of player you want next to Cousins and those are the sort of numbers that McGee is producing NOW, not hopefully producing in some 3 years time.
why trade for that kind of player when we already have him. whiteside can actually hit a jumpshot
Nighthawk1
Starter
And you need more complete player next to Cousins?!
What you described McGee as being, thats exactly the sort of player that you want next to Cousins. Someone that is a garbage man type of player that will rebound, swat shots and play some good D. You don't need a 20/10 type of player. 9-12ppg, 8-10 rpg, 2-3bpg is the ideal type of player you want next to Cousins and those are the sort of numbers that McGee is producing NOW, not hopefully producing in some 3 years time.
Do you want someone who was suspended for fighting just recently with a teammate next to cousins? Someone whom looks to be a bad influence on Cousins when we're trying to mold him into a better player right now? Sure McGee has a solid skillset but his attitude that goes with it doesn't need to be near this team...
We can't afford to just look at raw numbers - we have to look at fit. I agree with Nighthawk's assessment of McGee.
As for how Martin and Tyreke don't fit together, well,
Beasly? You never know. He may have fit here, or he may have been struggling for minutes at the end of the bench and we all would have said, "Yeah, told you he was a bust." Clairvoyance is easy when you're looking to the past.
Back to Granger, no? Anyone we pick up would certainly be a risk, but I think at this point in his career, declining stats or not, we're pretty sure what we will get with him, and it might just be the piece we need to officially end the rebuild. I'm willing to go with a player on the older end of the spectrum, 25-ish, because we need a little more maturity and stability. Take that with a grain of salt, because I'm implying 25/27 year olds are mature, but certainly more so than 20 year olds. At least their brains are technically still developing. Especially the part responsible for decision making.
As for how Martin and Tyreke don't fit together, well,
Beasly? You never know. He may have fit here, or he may have been struggling for minutes at the end of the bench and we all would have said, "Yeah, told you he was a bust." Clairvoyance is easy when you're looking to the past.
Back to Granger, no? Anyone we pick up would certainly be a risk, but I think at this point in his career, declining stats or not, we're pretty sure what we will get with him, and it might just be the piece we need to officially end the rebuild. I'm willing to go with a player on the older end of the spectrum, 25-ish, because we need a little more maturity and stability. Take that with a grain of salt, because I'm implying 25/27 year olds are mature, but certainly more so than 20 year olds. At least their brains are technically still developing. Especially the part responsible for decision making.
Last edited:
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I wasn't that big a fan of Martin's game. He was a good scorer, but that was about it. Not that you don't need that, but defensively he was just OK. He wasn't a very good passer of the ball, so once he got it, you pretty much knew that he was going to shoot it. I was willing to wait and see how he and Tyreke fit together, and after watching the two of them interact, it just didn't look like a good fit. I don't think Martin is that mentally tough, and I think he had to be to play along side Tyreke. So my conclusion was that one of them had to go, and logic tells me its not going to be Tyreke. Now we can argue that maybe we should have got more for him, but remember that he just signed a big contract, so that probably reduced the amount of suiters beating down the door.
At the time the Kings were looking for a low post threat. Landry seemed to fit the bill, and we had the opportunity for a year and a half tryout to see what he brought to the team. Not many people on this fourm, other than those who Martin was their favorite player, thought it was a bad trade. I don't remember hearing much from you then. Maybe you weren't posting then.
As for Beasley. I wasn't interested at the time. I had reservations about him coming out of college and while in Miami he lived up to all the bad things said about him. In college he had huge mood swings. Almost like he was Bi-Polar. He would be high one moment and in a depression the next. He also had a reputation with drugs. We were drafting a player in Cousins that was talented but immature. Its my opinion that the last thing we needed, was to add another player with problems to the mix. It looks like Beasley is doing well, as far as we know. And I wish him well. But I don't have any regrets.
I don't live in the past. Whats done is done, and all that matters is what you do going forward. You make a decision, and you live with it. And you move on. You can't go back and re-do it. I'm sure everyone on this fourm has made decisions that would warrant a do over. I'll pass judgement after the next offseason freeagency period is over. I'm not a kneejerk type of person. And Petrie isn't either. The Kings are in a critical period of their rebuild right now. And they have to make sure, or as sure as they can be, that they don't make any critical mistakes. The last thing you want to do right now is add the wrong piece with a long and expensive contract. In other words the Kings can't afford to be impulse buyers right now. They have to make sure everything fits together properly.
Your welcome to disagree with me. Thats what makes the world go around. I just happen to be a patient person when it comes to building a team, buying a house, buying a car, building a deck, and picking the best dog from the litter.
Last edited:
bajaden
Hall of Famer
And you need more complete player next to Cousins?!
What you described McGee as being, thats exactly the sort of player that you want next to Cousins. Someone that is a garbage man type of player that will rebound, swat shots and play some good D. You don't need a 20/10 type of player. 9-12ppg, 8-10 rpg, 2-3bpg is the ideal type of player you want next to Cousins and those are the sort of numbers that McGee is producing NOW, not hopefully producing in some 3 years time.
I guess I'm not sure why you want to put McGee next to Cousins. Both players are centers. Now if you wanted him as the backup to Cousins, then I would understand. Right now, even without landry, we have three potential players to play along side of Cousins in Thompson, Jackson, and Whiteside. And I think that Whiteside has more long range potential than McGee. Whiteside should have been a 1st round pick. Not a lottery pick as some suggested, but definitely somewhere between 15 and 25. I loved everything about the kid in college except his immaturity and inexperience. But I thought he had way more potential than Thabeet, who has no natural feel for the game. Whiteside does, but once again, he came to the game late, and had a learning disability. His biggest weakness in college, aside from knowledge of the game itself, was his ballhandling, and just terrible passing ability. But he can jump out of the building and is a very good athlete. He has a very nice jumpshot out to 18 feet. He also needs work on his post game, which consists mostly of dunking the ball. The difference between Whiteside and Dalembert is that I think Whiteside can be a much better offensive player. He has very good touch around the basket. His shotblocking is a gift, and very few people have it.
What he needs is playing time in the NBA. He's going to be a foul magnet until he figures out what he can and can't do. And the only way to find that out is to get out on the floor with real NBA players and ref's. So I would try and get him some minutes. Even if its only 7 or 8 minutes a game. Let him get a feel for the speed of the NBA and how the ref's call the game. If he gets 5 fouls in 8 minutes, so be it. He'll eventually figure it out. Down the road I see him as a terrific weakside helper, that can grab 8 boards and score 12 to 15 pts a game. In truth, he has the potential to be more than that. Much more. But then so does Greene. So we'll see..
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Completely agree. Most of the posters who don't see, or chose not to see Hassans potential, are the same posters who can't stomach a rebuild, and don't have much patience to speak of.
Hassan just needs time. He's a project, and a project we are lucky to have had a chance at nabbing in the 2nd round. He's not ready, but the talent and potential are there. I see Hassan game growing into something similar to Camby, not Dally.
I don't ever see him being a back to the basket post guy who you just throw the ball into. And why would we need that enxt to Cousins anyway? But with his athleticism and reach, I see him developing into a very good offensive rebounder, and someone who will get some buckets on putbacks and an ability to finish dumpoff passes inside, or from feeds when cutting off the ball.
The comparison to Camby would be his weekside/help defense, where he'll get the majority of his blocks, and will be a great compliment to Cousins. Also, like Camby, I see him becoming a consistent spot up shooter out to 20 ft.
So yes, I think 12-15ppg, 8 rebs, and 2-3 bpg is in his future. But for that to happen in a kings uniform will require patience, and patience which seems to be more the exception than the norm.
Peter_Gibbons
Starter
I like Granger, but I don't think Pacers will give up their star player for Dally + Landry/Casspi. They will probably expect our 1st round pick which most likely will be a top 5 pick.
Are we really willing to do that? Say we get Harrison Barnes in the draft. Reke + Cousins + Barnes may very well be better than the OKC trio. Granger will make us a playoff team next year, but I'm not sure thats the route the Maloofs/GP wants to take. They've said many times they will spend the cap money but have also said even more times that they are trying to rebuilt through the draft.
Are we really willing to do that? Say we get Harrison Barnes in the draft. Reke + Cousins + Barnes may very well be better than the OKC trio. Granger will make us a playoff team next year, but I'm not sure thats the route the Maloofs/GP wants to take. They've said many times they will spend the cap money but have also said even more times that they are trying to rebuilt through the draft.
sidney
Starter
Interestingly, if we traded Landry/Casspi/1st for Granger and let Dalembert expire, we'd still be a few million below the league salary minimum next year with just a couple of slots to fill. One thing often overlooked here is that barring a major CBA change in min/max salaries, the Kings HAVE to spend 15M or so this summer just to get to the minimum. Getting a guys like Granger would be a perfect way to fill the need while still not breaking the bank. I don't think the Maloofs would be standing in the way of this. The holdup would be Indy letting him go.
I also think that once we clear Landry's minutes, Dalembert will be playing more often and he will be perceived as being more effective. I hope so anyway since I'd like to see him sign a longer term extension.
I think owners are banking on a major CBA change, from what I've been reading. Because of that, (and other reasons), there might be less spending than in previous years. Who knows what the minimum will be? Who knows what Indy is asking for? I would offer a top 5 protected. Is there anyone of impact below #5 that would make the same sort of impact that a solid vet like Granger would?
Similar threads
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
- Kings News Links
