Granger

[Glenn]

Can someone help me with understanding what is going on. The Pacers apparently want to shed Granger's contract and at present are essentially considering a one for one trade with the T'Wolves, Jonny Flynn for Granger.

We have traded with the Pacers before and usually that makes another trafe easier as there is a relationship. I personally think getting an all star that can play offense and defense would be great. The thought of starting Danny with Casspi coming off the bench makes me drool. Or maybe it's my meds.

Why aren't we in the hunt? I have to assume we have nothing the Pacers want and the two they may want are untouchable. Does anyone know anything else?

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

That trade wont happen. If its a rumor, and I havent seen it, you bet a ton of teams will go ahead and easily top it. Plus the Pacers have a better young PG in Collison. No need for Flynn.

I want Granger. He's number 1 on my list of guys potentially available, and one of the few, if not the only player I would give up our first round pick for. And I think we will talk to them. It makes too much sense. We have cap room, we have young talent, we have great picks. We are a logical trade partner. The biggest problem is that the Pacers are starting to play some really good basketball now that they fired the coach. They are very much in the playoff hunt.

 

[matthew76]

how about Landry for Granger straight up? We can absorb the extra salary and we give Indiana more flexibility?

 

[Section 101]

Why aren't we in the hunt? I have to assume we have nothing the Pacers want and the two they may want are untouchable. Does anyone know anything else?

$$$$$$$$

 

[mr. moustache]

how about Landry for Granger straight up? We can absorb the extra salary and we give Indiana more flexibility?

Is that a joke? Flynn for Granger is also a joke. That will never happen ever.

If they trade Granger, you're looking at something like Casspi, next years 1st(likely 1-5), and at least one more 1st, maybe 1-5 protected. You could toss Dalembert or Landry in the mix if they want salary or are interested in evaluating either one of them.

I agree he's a great fit, but we're not getting him without giving up major assets. As for whether or not the Kings would take on that salary. They obviously would if the outgoing assets don't hurt too much. Casspi + a future top5 protected pick; I think they absolutely do that.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Can someone help me with understanding what is going on. The Pacers apparently want to shed Granger's contract and at present are essentially considering a one for one trade with the T'Wolves, Jonny Flynn for Granger.

I don't know where you heard this, but it seems far from credible. There have for years been lots of rumors about the Pacers wanting to shed Granger for nothing, but every time the Pacers come out and say "Duh, what do you think, we're stupid?" and Granger naturally doesn't go anywhere. Granger for Flynn is ridicuous on its face as the Pacers could get far more back.

One more thing - nobody here knows what's going on in the Kings front office. Nobody. Petrie and staff are among the most quiet front offices when working on trades, so we often don't see rumors about what's being discussed for the Kings before it happens. Just because there's no rumor out there saying we're going after Granger doesn't mean we aren't. If Granger is available, I would be confident that Petrie has at least had discussions about him.

 

[sidney]

Can someone help me with understanding what is going on. The Pacers apparently want to shed Granger's contract and at present are essentially considering a one for one trade with the T'Wolves, Jonny Flynn for Granger.

That rumor is entering "Pau Gasol trade" bad. I doubt it's true.

Just checked Pacer's Digest and didn't see anything about it. They, however, think that JT for Dunleavy would be a good deal for both sides because we need a veteran wing that won't mess up our cap space. haha

 

[Spike]

If they trade Granger, you're looking at something like Casspi, next years 1st(likely 1-5), and at least one more 1st, maybe 1-5 protected. You could toss Dalembert or Landry in the mix if they want salary or are interested in evaluating either one of them.

Way, way, way too much for one person. This is pretty much what the Nuggets are looking to get for Melo.

 

[Alacron]

Evans/Granger/Cousins would be something, especially if we can keep Dalembert.
~~

 

[Glenn]

This is plain stupid and I apologize. I hate rumoors. This is news from June 2010. My apologies again.

 

[mr. moustache]

Way, way, way too much for one person. This is pretty much what the Nuggets are looking to get for Melo.

Right. Which is why the Pacers haven't yet traded Granger. Carmelo is an expiring; that changes everything.

 

[ParniValjak]

I have raised the Danny Granger possibility in the past but it will no doubt take a heck of a lot more to pull it off than a lot of people think.

He would be a perfect complement to Tyreke and Cousins and would solidify that troublesome SF position for us. He is a good defender with nice length and size and happens to be a pretty good shooter and scorer.

He also happens to be Indiana's best player who is under contract and would probably be considered as a bit under-priced for his production.

If we are to get him, I would easily trade Casspi, Landry and a future 1st round pick (not this year) under assumption that Pacers would want cheap young talent, picks and a possible solution to their PF problems. They can see if Landry is part of their plans going forward and they get a good, cheap, young talent in Casspi and a future 1st round pick and I am still not sure that they go for it.

 

[Glenn]

I have raised the Danny Granger possibility in the past but it will no doubt take a heck of a lot more to pull it off than a lot of people think.

He would be a perfect complement to Tyreke and Cousins and would solidify that troublesome SF position for us. He is a good defender with nice length and size and happens to be a pretty good shooter and scorer.

He also happens to be Indiana's best player who is under contract and would probably be considered as a bit under-priced for his production.

If we are to get him, I would easily trade Casspi, Landry and a future 1st round pick (not this year) under assumption that Pacers would want cheap young talent, picks and a possible solution to their PF problems. They can see if Landry is part of their plans going forward and they get a good, cheap, young talent in Casspi and a future 1st round pick and I am still not sure that they go for it.

I would be willing to part with a lot. Remember this year's first round pick is in a lean year and I strongly suspect the addition of Granger would get us a lot of wins and change that draft position quite a bit. I don't put a lot of value on this year's draft as there is no franchise player lurking in the colleges or in Europe. I certainly wouldn't hold up a trade to argue over which year's first rounder the Pacers woud get. He's an all star at a position where we have a great need and he has the skills any team would want offensively and defensively.

 

[ParniValjak]

I would be willing to part with a lot. Remember this year's first round pick is in a lean year and I strongly suspect the addition of Granger would get us a lot of wins and change that draft position quite a bit. I don't put a lot of value on this year's draft as there is no franchise player lurking in the colleges or in Europe. I certainly wouldn't hold up a trade to argue over which year's first rounder the Pacers woud get. He's an all star at a position where we have a great need and he has the skills any team would want offensively and defensively.

As Bricklayer has previously mentioned we are going into this off season with 2 major advantages that can bring in 3 high quality players (not necessarily franchise guys). We have another lottery pick this year potentially in the top 5 and that should get us another good young player to add to the mix. We also have enough money to sign 2 max contract type players. Thats ability to add 3 quality players by doing nothing until the off-season.

However, if you trade for someone, chances are that instead of being able to add 3 quality players you only end up with 2 because who ever you trade in will likely take the salary room for that extra max type FA AND it takes away your pick for this year and that could be a huge difference in how the team is constructed.

I would be willing to trade any future pick in this scenario and reluctantly, I might be willing to trade this year's pick but I better be certain that the guy we are getting back will have a MAJOR impact on the team.

For example, as much as I love Granger and and much as I think he is a perfect fit for this team as that 3rd option I think that we could construct a better team going forward if we didn't make the move at this stage.

For example, lets assume we let Landry expire and we keep our pick. Come off-season, there is nothing stopping us from pulling off these sort of moves:

- draft a guard to round out the guard rotation with Evans and Beno (potentially Kemba Walker)
- re-sign Dalembert
- sign Nene
- sign Prince

If you trade for someone with guaranteed contract you can only do 2 of those things (re-sign Dalembert and add another player)

And I still wouldn't be convinced that the line up of

Cousins
Thompson
Granger
Evans
Beno

Dalembert
Garcia
Greene

is better than this line up:

Cousins
Nene
Prince
Evans
Beno

Dalembert
Casspi
Garcia
Walker (or other draft pick)
Greene

A lot more depth here and a better balanced line up. Sure you don't have your 3rd all-star type but you end up with 2 border line all-stars, keep Casspi and add another talented kid who can help from day 1.

What I am saying is that Granger would immedietly make us better but getting him now could potentially be counter productive for us in the long run because IMHO, the line up with Nene and Prince would make us more talented overall than just getting Granger and losing Casspi and a pick (Walker) and some mroe depth.

 

[hrdboild]

I don't know that I would be on board for Prince and Nene specifically -- sounds like we'd be committing ourselves to years of injury problems -- but the overall sentiment I would agree with. We might actually be better off doing nothing this year and waiting for the off-season. Nevermind the cash issue for a second (which is a real consideration)-- any kind of move we make now is going to have a domino effect one way or another. If we trade for Granger, for instance, we'd be giving up assets to get him. Probably one of our SFs, Greene or Casspi, and at least one first round pick. We'd also be increasing our overall talent for the last 30 or so games of the year which alters our draft outlook. And lastly, we'd be committing a lot more salary to our payroll which limits our FA options.

So if we do make a big move now, we'd better be certain that the player we get is going to be our third option for the next 5 or 6 years and that they're going to fit in well with the talent we already have. It's a lot of eggs to throw into one basket. Most franchises don't get the opportunity to do a complete rebuild with 30 million of cap space and a top 5 pick while already boasting two potential All-Stars on their roster and a handful of other talented young players.

 

[sc3252]

I would like to see how we are going to get better this off season by using our "valuable" cap space. For starters no one good is coming here, second if they do we just used up all our money(we overpaid), 3rd we are cheap so the second part didn't happen. Our only option for getting better is using the cap space right now to absorb a player like Danny Granger, if we have to give up our pick then so be it. If we don't trade our assets now for a good player its because the Maloofs are poor and they don't want to spend the money(understandable), but it means we will continue to suck!

 

[sc3252]

- re-sign Dalembert
- sign Nene
- sign Prince

How many centers do we need!? Also why would Dalebert come back?

 

[Nighthawk1]

Generally I would say I would be shocked if any extremely talented FA decided to sign with us. But with the new CBA, teams having less money to spend I think our chances improve in this category but I'm not getting my hopes up. I still think our best shot at a very talented veteran player will be via Free Agency. I think the place time for that will be after the season when the CBA is announced right before draft time. There will be many avenues we could possibly trade down in the draft to pick up a talented player we can use and still trade for a FA during this period..

 

[Bricklayer]

Generally I would say I would be shocked if any extremely talented FA decided to sign with us. But with the new CBA, teams having less money to spend I think our chances improve in this category but I'm not getting my hopes up. I still think our best shot at a very talented veteran player will be via Free Agency. I think the place time for that will be after the season when the CBA is announced right before draft time. There will be many avenues we could possibly trade down in the draft to pick up a talented player we can use and still trade for a FA during this period..

Talented FAs have this tendency to follow the money, and our maneuvering ahs left us with more of it than anybody else. Sacramento will never signa LeBron, but they could easily sign a Green or Pirnce type character by flashing their wallets.

 

[Bricklayer]

How many centers do we need!? Also why would Dalebert come back?

Nene would be a great PF. Probably actually his natural postion. Very skilled big. And I am not even interested in arguing wiht people about why spo many of the top teams have gigantic stacks of big guys -- its because big guys are a huge part of winning at a high level. The bigger the better. If you can find a way to trot out a 6'11" PF, you do it. And are still looking up at Pau Gasol or Kevin Garnett at the positon.

 

[sidney]

Nene would be a great PF. Probably actually his natural postion. Very skilled big. And I am not even interested in arguing wiht people about why spo many of the top teams have gigantic stacks of big guys -- its because big guys are a huge part of winning at a high level. The bigger the better. If you can find a way to trot out a 6'11" PF, you do it. And are still looking up at Pau Gasol or Kevin Garnett at the positon.

Nene / Cousins / Dalembert would be quite the trio to contend with up front.

Apparently Denver has not offered Nene an extension. I wonder if they would be open to trading him for youth once this Melo situation gets sorted out (JT?). It's hard to imagine Nene would stay in Denver as an UFA without Melo. That team will be a mess.

 

[Glenn]

How many centers do we need? If we have centers that can play PF, how about, er, three. If we can afford it, four in case of injury. Right now I think resigning Dalembert and getting Nene would make us frightening in the paint. Not sure why anyone would complain about that unless losing is ingrained in your soul.

Dalembert would come back because we listened to him and gave him the minutes he wanted. We have shown him respect. We are letting him display his awesome offense. He would come back because for a reason that I don't understand and that is that people, once horrified at the idea of coming to Sacto, once here tend to like it. I think he would like playing alongside a guy who needs his input and laid back personality, Cousins. He would like to be on a team that is on its way up. He seems to be enjoying himself. And then there is the money. It very well could depend on who has the biggest check book but I suspect he is motivated less by money than the average guy. Is that enough? Take a trip to a third world country and you will understand that there are many more things more important than money. He's from Haiti.

 

[ParniValjak]

How many centers do we need!? Also why would Dalebert come back?

Why wouldn't Dalembert come back? After a slow start he has been getting his minutes and has been getting his shots on offence. I am not saying he will definitely come back but I don't think he is a certainty to go either.

As for how many centers do we need....As many as it takes to be a force inside. Each and every one of those players can play with each other and before Cmabuu got traded by the Nuggets, Nene has played both PF and C and is probably more of a natural PF than C.

Give me a Cousins-Nene-Dalembert front court rotation and there is not a front court in the league that would not have nightmares playing us. That trio bring EVERYTHING one wants in a front court. Size, scoring, rebouding, defence, shot blocking and there is no reason why Cousins-Nene, Cousins-Dalembert, Nene-Dalembert pairings would not work.

With that trio we would have a better froncourt rotation than the Lakers! Every great team has significant frontcourt depth. Give me Cousins, Nene and Dalembert and you have the best front court rotation in the league.

 

[swisshh]

No use in getting Granger until we have a PG to set him up. He needs a structured offense to put up numbers.

 

[Glenn]

No use in getting Granger until we have a PG to set him up. He needs a structured offense to put up numbers.

A position full of talent in the draft is PG. Besides I heard we had money for free agents assuming your judgment of Granger is accurate.

 

[Bricklayer]

No use in getting Granger until we have a PG to set him up. He needs a structured offense to put up numbers.

We don't need him to put up huge numbers, and a "structured offense" isn;t exactly what I would call Jim OBrien's system anyway. We need an 18ppg third option who can also defend and do all the other things. Granger can more than fill that role, and is good enoguh he doesn't need the mythical "pure PG" to set him up. We've gto two guys oout frotn that can more than get him the shots we'd need from him. And with all the attention Reke and Cousins draw, for the first ime in years he'd be able to work against single coverage. You get three talents like that out there together, they all benefit because the defense can't focus on anybody, and they are all capable of beating just one man.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

The problem with Granger is that he turns 28 years old this year, which could put him past his prime 3, 4, and 5 years down the road when the Kings should be in the position to be a top team in the west. Sure there's a chance he could be one of those players who doesn't decline after 30, but it's a gamble. Don't get me wrong, he'd be a great addition to the team, I'm just not sure it would be wise for a team like The Kings that isn't in win now mode to give up too much to get him. After all, by the time (and if) Cousins and Evans develop into the all stars we hope they will become, Granger would be well into his 30s. because of that, he probably isn't the guy who will catapult the team to contender status right now, unless Cousins and Evans start developing well ahead of the curve.

 

[Bricklayer]

The problem with Granger is that he turns 28 years old this year, which could put him past his prime 3, 4, and 5 years down the road when the Kings should be in the position to be a top team in the west. Sure there's a chance he could be one of those players who doesn't decline after 30, but it's a gamble. Don't get me wrong, he'd be a great addition to the team, I'm just not sure it would be wise for a team like The Kings that isn't in win now mode to give up too much to get him. After all, by the time (and if) Cousins and Evans develop into the all stars we hope they will become, Granger would be well into his 30s. because of that, he probably isn't the guy who will catapult the team to contender status right now, unless Cousins and Evans start developing well ahead of the curve.

OUr planned window really isn't that far away.

For instance, I am quite sure that we are planning on doing the OKC and being a playoff team NEXT year. Within 3 years we would like to have both Reke and Cousins as perennial All Stars and the team moving toward contender status. Basically all of the names available that we might pick up for those runs are going to be in the 26-30 yr old range (partially due to when rookie contracts run out). And I rather strongly suspect we are precisely looking for experienced vets to provide stability and leadership. Not old vets, not 33 yr old guys who really would be done before we got going. But for in their prime guys who won't be there to see Reke/Cousins turn 30, but could be critical cogs to turning the kids into contenders in the first half of their careers. I think Prince is maybe the outer limit guy -- he's 30 and the age bothers me a bit. But almost all of the other main names I can up with -- Wallace, Iggy, Green, Granger, Nene etc. etc. are 25-28. Been around. Seen the world. Ready to win. But won't be ready for the scrap heap until we have hopefully turned this thing into a perennial power.

 

[bajaden]

If you look at the teams that have won championships, they're veteran laden. If we've gotten to the point that we think a very good basketball player is too old for us at age 28, then we might as well forget about winning a championship. Granger is exactly the kind of player we should be looking to trade for, or sign. At the moment he's 27 years old, not 28, and won't be 28 until april 20th. So essentially, for all of next season he would be 28 years old, if the really matters to anyone.

I've made some comparisons to other scorers and their production from age 28 to age 34. Thats a span of 6 years, and in all likely hood the longest amount of time we would extend him for. At the moment Granger is averaging 21.1 PPG, 5.5 RPG, and is shooting 39.0% from behind the arc. For those that don't know, he's also a very good defender at the SF position.

Kareem Abdul Jabbar:
Age 28: 27.7 PPG - Age 29: 26.2 PPG - Age 30: 25.8 PPG - Age 31: 23.8 PPG
Age 32: 24.8 PPG - Age 33: 26.2 PPG - Age 34: 23.9 PPG

Ray Allen:
Age 28: 23.0 PPG - Age 29: 26.2 PPG - Age 30: 25.8 PPG - Age 31: 23.8 PPG
Age 32: 17.4 PPG - Age 33: 18.2 PPG - Age 34: 16.3 PPG. His scoring dropped a little at age 32, but that was also the year he was traded to Boston.

Charles Barkley:
Age 28: 23.1 PPG - Age 29: 25.6 PPG - Age 30: 25.1 PPG - Age 31: 23.0 PPG
Age 32: 23.2 PPG - Age 33: 19.2 PPG - Age 34: 15.2 PPG. Considerable drop off at age 34, but then Barkley wasn't one to keep himself in great shape.

Rick Barry:
Age 28: 22.3 PPG - Age 29: 25.1 PPG - Age 30: 30.6 PPG - Age 31: 21.0 PPG
Age 32: 21.8 PPG - Age 33: 23.1 PPG - Age 34: 15.2 PPG. A big drop off at age 34, but Barry averaged over 38 minutes a game, and age 34 had already played in 948 games when you count in the ABA games. Most players don't make it past 1000 games.

Wilt Chamberlain:
Age 28: 38.9 PPG - Age 29: 33.5 PPG - Age 30: 24.1 PPG - Age 31: 24.3 PPG
Age 32: 20.5 PPG - Age 33: 27.3 PPG - Age 34: 20.7 PPG. Wilt averaged 18.2 RPG at age 34.

Clyde Drexler:
Age 28: 21.5 PPG - Age 29: 25.0 PPG - Age 30: 19.9 PPG - Age 31: 19.2 PPG
Age 32: 21.8 PPG - Age 33: 19.3 PPG - AGe 34: 18.0 PPG

Alex English:
Age 28: 25.4 PPG - Age 29: 28.4 PPG - Age 30: 26.4 PPG - Age 31: 27.9 PPG
Age 32: 29.8 PPG - Age 33: 28.6 PPG - Age 34: 25.0 PPG

Julius Irving:
Age 28: 23.1 PPG - Age 29: 26.9 PPG - Age 30: 24.6 PPG - Age 31: 24.4 PPG
Age 32: 21.4 PPG - Age 33: 22.4 PPG - Age 34: 20.0 PPG

Patrick Ewing:
Age 28: 26.6 PPG - Age 29: 24.0 PPG - Age 30: 24.2 PPG - Age 31: 24.5 PPG
Age 32: 23.9 PPG - Age 33: 22.5 PPG - Age 34: 22.4 PPG. Ewing averaged 10.7 RPG at age 34.

Paul Pierce:
Age 28: 26.8 PPG - Age 29: 25.0 PPG - Age 30: 19.6 PPG - Age 31: 20.5 PPG
Age 32: 18.3 PPG - Age 33: Pierce is currently averaging 18.8 PPG this year. Like Allen, his scoring dropped off a little when he joined Allen and Garnett.

Michael Jordan:
Age 28: 30.1 PPG - Age 29: 32.6 PPG - Age 31: 26.9 PPG - Age 32: 30.4 PPG
Age 33: 29.6 PPG - Age 34: 28.7 PPG. Jordan skipped age 30 to tinker with baseball.

Robert Parish:
Age 28: 19.9 PPG - Age 29: 19.3 PPG - Age 30: 19.0 PPG - Age 31: 17.6 PPG
Age 32: 16.1 PPG - Age 33: 17.5 PPG - Age 34: 14.3 PPG. Before anyone says wow, look at that drop off, Parish came back at age 35 and averaged 18.6 PPG and 12.5 RPG

Steve Nash:
Age 28: 17.7 PPG & 7.3 APG - Age 29: 14.5 PPG & 8.8 APG - Age 30: 15.5 PPG & 11.5 APG - Age 31: 18.8 PPG & 10.5 APG - Age 32: 18.6 PPG & 11.6 APG - Age 33: 16.9 PPG
& 11.1 APG - Age 34: 15.7 PPG & 9.7 APG


I could go on, but I think you see my point. Yes, there are players that have significant drop offs in their game after age 32 or 33. But there are just as many, especially among the top scorers in the league that continue to be productive up to age 34 and beyond.

Now if a player has been trouble by some chronic injury, such as a back injury that Bird had and Peja has been fighting, then all bets are off. But in general, very good players that take care of their bodies and don't have chronic injuries, usually have productive years into their late thirtys.

The exceptions are those players that came in at age 18 and by age 32 they've already played in close to 1000 games. Even though they're still relatively young, there's been a lot of wear and tear on thier bodies. Players like Kobe and Garnett fit that scenario.

I realize that a lot of the players I used for comparison are HOFers or great players. But Granger is a player that averages 20 plus pts a game, and so I had to use players that number one, have already played past the age of 34, and number two, were scorers like Granger. Alex English didn't really start scoring a lot of points until age 27.

 

[ParniValjak]

I wouldn't worry too much about the production drop off once he passes 30.

His points would drop off the minute he gets here because he goes from being #1 options in Indiana to being #3 option here. However, his life also gets a lot easier because the opposition teams do not focus their defensive schemes to stopping Granger. They would be more worried about Evans and Cousins. This would also prolong Granger's longevity because he wouldn't be banged up as much as he is now. Its easier playing one on one than one on two or three.

The only thing I might be a little bit nervous about is Granger's history of knee injuries. If I recall correctly, this was one of the reasons why he dropped that far down the draft order. On talent alone he was considered a top 10 picks but knee history saw his drop far enough for Pacers to get him.