Granger again

[ParniValjak]

funny how the pulling of the iggy offer coencides with the rumor of granger up for trade.

I am not convinced that these two events are related. Who ever trades for Granger is taking a pretty big risk because you could easily be pissing $13 million into the wind as there is a real chance Granger does not play much next year.

Having said that, we might be one of very few teams that just might be willing to dump some salary and see this as a salary dump at worst and great deal at best.

Interesting that Indy renounced their rights to Hansborough as well. The cap is either super tight or they are getting a PF in return from a trade. Thornton and Hayes for Granger makes some sense for both teams.

 

[Entity]

I am not convinced that these two events are related. Who ever trades for Granger is taking a pretty big risk because you could easily be pissing $13 million into the wind as there is a real chance Granger does not play much next year.

Having said that, we might be one of very few teams that just might be willing to dump some salary and see this as a salary dump at worst and great deal at best.

Interesting that Indy renounced their rights to Hansborough as well. The cap is either super tight or they are getting a PF in return from a trade. Thornton and Hayes for Granger makes some sense for both teams.

Makes alot more sense now. Cuz obviously the #1 guy now Lopez and Vasquez are true role players at their position. Bmac an uproven star in the making (maybe). Need the obvious #2 and it needs to be a sf. Ladies and gentleman I give your Thornton + PF for Granger. We are at 50 mil with the tyreke trade and bmac signing. 8.5 mil under the cap and still would be with with a trade for granger. so we could still keep Salmons as the sg/sf or have the space to get a 6-7 mil a year guy to insert in that spot.

Vasquez/IT
Bmac/salmons
Granger/Outlaw

 

[Sac.Kings]

Makes alot more sense now. Cuz obviously the #1 guy now Lopez and Vasquez are true role players at their position. Bmac an uproven star in the making (maybe). Need the obvious #2 and it needs to be a sf. Ladies and gentleman I give your Thornton + PF for Granger. We are at 50 mil with the tyreke trade and bmac signing. 8.5 mil under the cap and still would be with with a trade for granger. so we could still keep Salmons as the sg/sf or have the space to get a 6-7 mil a year guy to insert in that spot.

Vasquez/IT
Bmac/salmons
Granger/Outlaw

I could live with that for the upcoming season (as long as we get a starting defensive 4). The FO really thought highly of Bmac. They just gave him and Cousins the keys to the team. I hope he's ready.

 

[Entity]

I am gonna keep coming back to this. I mean with paul George and soloman hill now. only makes sense for them to trade granger for a need. I think we have a few ppl they might need.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Chris Copeland signed with Indy. Hmmmm.

 

[Fear the Putin]

No reason to not try. If his knees end up failing on him and us, his massive contract expires after the end of the season and we get even more cap space. But, if his knees are actually not degenerating and he returns to the Granger of old, then halleluyah.

 

[HndsmCelt]

When you are a small market team with a loosing record (for years) then you HAVE to take risks. You have a doc check him out and if the knees look ok you make the deal.

 

[twslam07]

The census with Pacer fans is that they want to keep Granger. He is their assurance for not going over the luxury tax level in the 2014-2015 season when they have Geroge, Hibbert, West, Hill, and Stephenson on the books (nobody would be on a rookie deal anymore). Plus they think he can come back this year and help them make a run at the title. Even Bird said a couple of days ago that he wasn't going to trade Granger.

 

[Entity]

Chris Copeland signed with Indy. Hmmmm.

They got George drafted hill now Copland. But they want to keep granger?? We'll see

 

[kingwin]

salmons and thorton or jimmer for granger. make it happen pete

 

[ovrush]

I'm just not sure we have anything Indianapolis would want. Maybe Thornton, but I don't think he fits into their style of defense first with a patient inside out offense. Cap space isn't important on a guy like Granger on an ender. They're already winning, I think they'd be hesitant to risk what they have and future cap space on a guy like Thornton. Easier to just see if Granger's back as a long range shooter without the risk.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm just not sure we have anything Indianapolis would want. Maybe Thornton, but I don't think he fits into their style of defense first with a patient inside out offense. Cap space isn't important on a guy like Granger on an ender. They're already winning, I think they'd be hesitant to risk what they have and future cap space on a guy like Thornton. Easier to just see if Granger's back as a long range shooter without the risk.

Thornton is the guy, if there is a guy. They lack scoring punch and a natural SG. Thornton is both.

 

[Entity]

Thornton is the guy, if there is a guy. They lack scoring punch and a natural SG. Thornton is both.

Exactly. It actually makes sense for both teams. the have pretty good load at SF now and need perimeter shooting from the SG. If they want something else like a back up defensive big (hayes) or a true pure shooter (jimmer) we can acomidate with that as well. then we can actually play around with backups.

Vasquez/IT/Maccallum
Maclemore/salmons/Lighty lol
Granger/salmons
Jt/Ppat
Cuz/Jt/ (aldrich type player)

still could get wright and something else. If anything it solidifies our starting lineup then we can spend to get bench role players and not leave the fanbase wondering wtf is going on.

 

[Entity]

thats really my only gripe. I don't think we are in a position to just get a run of the mil SF now we need to go with somebody that excells at something or does all things well. Granger does all things well and AK excels on defense so does Wallace btw.

 

[jalfa]

I'm not sure they'd actually want anything in return, really, and if they did, it might be more along the lines of a replacement for Hansbrough. they're fairly thin up front right now, so a guy like JT or PPat might actually be more of what they'd want.

 

[dude12]

Thornton is the guy, if there is a guy. They lack scoring punch and a natural SG. Thornton is both.

Thornton is the one who must have trade value on our team. He's a legit scorer. Jimmer's trade value is very low until he can establish himself and that hasn't happened.

 

['89 Kings Fan]

Thornton is the one who must have trade value on our team. He's a legit scorer. Jimmer's trade value is very low until he can establish himself and that hasn't happened.

Thornton has negative value around the league, we would have to probably include Patrick Patterson to move him. He doesn't defend, doesn't pass and doesn't rebound. He does chuck a lot with 3 shots per game in the 'dumb zone' (3-23 feet) at a 31.5 FG%. He is a 37.5% 3pt shooter, only 4 points above Tyreke. No one wants to pay $8 million for a non-starter.

 

[Kingsfan23]

Thornton has negative value around the league, we would have to probably include Patrick Patterson to move him. He doesn't defend, doesn't pass and doesn't rebound. He does chuck a lot with 3 shots per game in the 'dumb zone' (3-23 feet) at a 31.5 FG%. He is a 37.5% 3pt shooter, only 4 points above Tyreke. No one wants to pay $8 million for a non-starter.

Thank you. If you don't want someone on your team (and if a poll were taken on the forum the majority would wan to move Thornton), why do you think the opposition wants him? Thornton has negative value and isn't going anywhere currently without us giving up assets to unload him