PDA

View Full Version : Danny Granger



heatking
12-05-2010, 11:33 PM
Hey guys i have seen Danny Granger play, and he just doesnt strike me as a franchise caliber player. I know he gets great stats, but it seems like his impact on the floor doesnt reflect his stats.

Where do you guys rank Danny Granger? do you guys think hes a franchise caliber player, or just a good player on a good situation.

210Don
12-05-2010, 11:36 PM
i compare him to t mac very similar play style hell get his points but cant lead a team good thing they have hibbert to build around

John Walls Era
12-05-2010, 11:42 PM
i compare him to t mac very similar play style hell get his points but cant lead a team good thing they have hibbert to build around

Please don't. Mac in his prime was a beast.

210Don
12-05-2010, 11:44 PM
Please don't. Mac in his prime was a beast.

he never won bro he was a beast but danny granger has just as much talent.

Hustlenomics
12-05-2010, 11:51 PM
he's a baller

SteveNash
12-05-2010, 11:53 PM
i compare him to t mac very similar play style hell get his points but cant lead a team good thing they have hibbert to build around

That's one of the worst comparisons I've ever heard of.

adidas2307
12-05-2010, 11:56 PM
Danny Granger is on my fantasy Association team in NBA 2K11.

central2003
12-05-2010, 11:57 PM
Danny Granger would be perfect for a team like the Kings. Where Ty Evans is the leader but Granger and Cousins would Be the Excellent side Kicks. That would be a scary team in 2 years.

210Don
12-05-2010, 11:57 PM
That's one of the worst comparisons I've ever heard of.

i apologize you & i share a difference of opinion.But please respect my opinion.

heatking
12-06-2010, 12:00 AM
I remember back when Danny Granger was said to be better than Amare Stoudamire. Do you guys still agree with that? would you rather have Granger than Amare for the next 5 years?

adidas2307
12-06-2010, 12:01 AM
I remember back when Danny Granger was said to be better than Amare Stoudamire. Do you guys still agree with that? would you rather have Granger than Amare for the next 5 years?

Yes.

IAmKira
12-06-2010, 12:01 AM
hes more of a gasol type player. xcept hes a sf. u dig?

210Don
12-06-2010, 12:02 AM
i think hes very underrated he does play in indy and he avg 25 ppg last year the tmac comparison is on point at this point in his career hes ahead of tmac actually.

SteveNash
12-06-2010, 12:05 AM
i apologize you & i share a difference of opinion.But please respect my opinion.

Your opinion is wrong.

Hustlenomics
12-06-2010, 12:05 AM
i think hes very underrated he does play in indy and he avg 25 ppg last year the tmac comparison is on point at this point in his career hes ahead of tmac actually.

did you watch a prime T-mac?

210Don
12-06-2010, 12:07 AM
Your opinion is wrong.
ok please get off of tmacs nuts i loved him when he played other than my spurs he was my favorite player but granger reminds me of him.:mad:

210Don
12-06-2010, 12:08 AM
did you watch a prime T-mac?

i watched him in orlando yes. he was great but he aint no hall of famer thats for sure. wow i came here thinking yall were smart bball fans i was wrong....

tredigs
12-06-2010, 12:09 AM
Danny Granger would be perfect for a team like the Kings. Where Ty Evans is the leader but Granger and Cousins would Be the Excellent side Kicks. That would be a scary team in 2 years.

Tyreke the leader? Do you think Tyreke is a better player than Danny Granger?

And @Don; TMac was a top 3-5 player in the league during his (fairly short) prime. Granger is nowhere near prime T-Mac levels.

Daze9900
12-06-2010, 12:10 AM
Yes.

Ha ha stop lyin.

adidas2307
12-06-2010, 12:12 AM
Ha ha stop lyin.

I'm not? :shrug:

heatking
12-06-2010, 12:13 AM
What do you guys think about grangers injury issues? will they catch up to him, or are they a thing of the past?

magichatnumber9
12-06-2010, 12:15 AM
i apologize you & i share a difference of opinion.But please respect my opinion.
respect is hard to come by in here.

tredigs
12-06-2010, 12:17 AM
What do you guys think about grangers injury issues? will they catch up to him, or are they a thing of the past?

They were fluke injuries, and I don't think he's actually as hampered by them as people think - and they're not the type of injuries that will catch up to him the way knee/back surgeries would.

drobe86
12-06-2010, 12:25 AM
Danny Granger is an outstanding SF. I think he's definately top 5 in SF in the league and top 15 in the NBA. This guy can absolutely fill it up....

Knowledge
12-06-2010, 12:37 AM
i watched him in orlando yes. he was great but he aint no hall of famer thats for sure. wow i came here thinking yall were smart bball fans i was wrong....

Tmac was a much better player than Granger before the injuries took its toll. At the age of 23 he averaged 32ppg 6.5rpg 5.5 apg while shooting 45% from the floor and 38% from 3. He had a per of 30. Granger has never approached those numbers.

210Don
12-06-2010, 12:40 AM
Tmac was a much better player than Granger before the injuries took its toll. At the age of 23 he averaged 32ppg 6.5rpg 5.5 apg while shooting 45% from the floor and 38% from 3. He had a per of 30. Granger has never approached those numbers.

two years tmac avg 32 & 28 back to back ppg im sure granger could get up to 28 ppg hes a good player yall are selling him short.
at that time tmac was good but there were alot better players than him 7 yrs ago i doubt anywyone would pick him to start a team with at that time. he just had numbers like granger both are great but wont ever win.

NYtilIdie
12-06-2010, 12:40 AM
:laugh: at the T-Mac comparison.

Where the hell is Hawkeyes and Chronz when you need them.

drobe86
12-06-2010, 12:43 AM
Granger will end up being better than TMac though.... Much more consistent and better shooter. TMac is a play maker though, but he flamed out years ago.... No way Granger rises and falls as quickly as TMAC did...

WindyCityFlyer
12-06-2010, 12:44 AM
One of the most underrated players in the NBA IMO. Mainly due to the market he plays in.

NYtilIdie
12-06-2010, 12:47 AM
two years tmac avg 32 & 28 back to back ppg im sure granger could get up to 28 ppg hes a good player yall are selling him short.
at that time tmac was good but there were alot better players than him 7 yrs ago i doubt anywyone would pick him to start a team with at that time. he just had numbers like granger both are great but wont ever win.

Did you see the s**t T-Mac had to play with when he was on the Magic? They actually had the nerves to call that a "team".

Theres just so much wrong with this statement. First off T-Mac in his prime was a Top 5, even Top 3 player in the league and to say you wouldn't pick him to build around is just foolish and idiotic. He was very efficent in every advanced stat you can think of and his ball-handling and TO% was phenomenal for a forward who dominated the ball.

Second off, Grangers squad right now is better then anything T-Mac had in his Orlando days. T-Mac never had a PG like Collison or a big man like Hibbert, plus the Pacers are playing 500. ball so you can't say Granger will never win.

drobe86
12-06-2010, 12:49 AM
Did you see the s**t T-Mac had to play with when he was on the Magic? They actually had the nerves to call that a "team".

Theres just so much wrong with this statement. First off T-Mac in his prime was a Top 5, even Top 3 player in the league and to say you wouldn't pick him to build around is just foolish and idiotic. He was very efficent in every advanced stat you can think of and his ball-handling and TO% was phenomenal for a forward who dominated the ball.

Second off, Grangers squad right now is better then anything T-Mac had in his Orlando days. T-Mac never had a PG like Collison or a big man like Hibbert.

Collison is playing horrible. Thats hardly a good comparison. Hibbert is up and coming but you guys are talking like the pacers are a stacked squad... PSD Fans:facepalm:

NYtilIdie
12-06-2010, 12:52 AM
Collison is playing horrible. Thats hardly a good comparison. Hibbert is up and coming but you guys are talking like the pacers are a stacked squad... PSD Fans:facepalm:

They're better then any squad the Magic put together in the T-Mac days, plus its only Collison's 2nd year, he'll get better. T-Mac had a washed up Darrell Armstrong as his PG.

210Don
12-06-2010, 12:52 AM
Collison is playing horrible. Thats hardly a good comparison. Hibbert is up and coming but you guys are talking like the pacers are a stacked squad... PSD Fans:facepalm:

thank you bro i love tmac when he played but he is so overrated....:facepalm:

210Don
12-06-2010, 12:55 AM
They're better then any squad the Magic put together in the T-Mac days.

wow in tmacs 32 ppg year they had a good team just as good as this pacer team
drew gooden
mike miller
grant hill even tho he was hurt he was there
giricek
jacque vaughn was solid

the pacers roster prolly worse lol
then the next year they added deshaun stevenson & keith bogans & juwan howard
juwan was a beast for them

Chronz
12-06-2010, 12:57 AM
i compare him to t mac very similar play style hell get his points but cant lead a team good thing they have hibbert to build around

i think hes very underrated he does play in indy and he avg 25 ppg last year the tmac comparison is on point at this point in his career hes ahead of tmac actually.

Please do explain, Im finding it difficult not to ridicule your comparison

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:00 AM
Please do explain, Im finding it difficult not to ridicule your comparison

they were both good my point is tmac is overrated & granger is underrated eventually both will never win

Chronz
12-06-2010, 01:01 AM
wow in tmacs 32 ppg year they had a good team just as good as this pacer team
drew gooden
mike miller
grant hill even tho he was hurt he was there
giricek
jacque vaughn was solid

the pacers roster prolly worse lol
then the next year they added deshaun stevenson & keith bogans & juwan howard
juwan was a beast for them

I sincerely hope this isnt the best argument you have. Gooden and Mike Miller were traded for one another. The fact that you mentioned Grant Hill tells me you dont know what your talking about. He was there? Thats your argument, your ****ing kidding me. Vaughn was solid? So your just going to say Collison isnt worth mentioning but you mention bums like Vaughn and Giricek?

They were no where near as good as the current pacers squad, just look at their defensive efficiency. Tmac didnt have that luxury.

SeoulBeatz
12-06-2010, 01:05 AM
he never won bro he was a beast but danny granger has just as much talent.

hmmm...

i dont know man.

I like Granger, but he is no PRIME T-Mac.

PRIME T-Mac was one of the best scorers I've ever seen, arguably one of the best

Granger clearly isn't.

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:06 AM
I sincerely hope this isnt the best argument you have. Gooden and Mike Miller were traded for one another. The fact that you mentioned Grant Hill tells me you dont know what your talking about. He was there? Thats your argument, your ****ing kidding me. Vaughn was solid? So your just going to say Collison isnt worth mentioning but you mention bums like Vaughn and Giricek?

They were no where near as good as the current pacers squad, just look at their defensive efficiency. Tmac didnt have that luxury.

yall said that the magic didnt try to build around tmac and didnt have good players that 02 03 team made the playoffs even with grant hill hurt most the year with him they coulda been a 50 win team the pacers arent even close to a 50 win team please....

Chronz
12-06-2010, 01:07 AM
they were both good my point is tmac is overrated & granger is underrated eventually both will never win
You said something about playing style, defend that because they play nothing alike. Tmac was a playmaking scorer whos quickness/driving ability set up his shot. Granger is still trying to master the art of passing and his jumper sets up his drives. Big difference in playing style. As for their actual IMPACT.... ROFL


Sure they were both good, just like Stephen Jackson and Paul Pierce are both good, it doesnt mean they are equally good or anywhere near eachother. Tmac was ELITE, he put up production unmatched. Granger couldnt even do that on a team that desperately needed him to the past few years and despite the fact that hes further along in his career.

Injuries derailed Tmacs career.

NYtilIdie
12-06-2010, 01:08 AM
wow in tmacs 32 ppg year they had a good team just as good as this pacer team
drew gooden
mike miller
grant hill even tho he was hurt he was there
giricek
jacque vaughn was solid

the pacers roster prolly worse lol
then the next year they added deshaun stevenson & keith bogans & juwan howard
juwan was a beast for them

No, the only player that was good on the Magic was Hill and like you said he was hurt majority of the time. Mike Miller only played half the season, Giricek only played 27, and Jacque Vaughn was just horrible.

His PER was 10, he had a crazy TOV% of 17, and only averaged 5 PPG.

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:09 AM
You said something about playing style, defend that because they play nothing alike. Tmac was a playmaking scorer whos quickness/driving ability set up his shot. Granger is still trying to master the art of passing and his jumper sets up his drives. Big difference in playing style. As for their actual IMPACT.... ROFL


Sure they were both good, just like Stephen Jackson and Paul Pierce are both good, it doesnt mean they are equally good or anywhere near eachother. Tmac was ELITE, he put up production unmatched. Granger couldnt even do that on a team that desperately needed him to the past few years and despite the fact that hes further along in his career.

Injuries derailed Tmacs career.

he had at most 3 years of dominance i dont consider that ELITE your acting like tmac was kobe or jordan get real hes not a hall of famer

John Walls Era
12-06-2010, 01:14 AM
You said something about playing style, defend that because they play nothing alike. Tmac was a playmaking scorer whos quickness/driving ability set up his shot. Granger is still trying to master the art of passing and his jumper sets up his drives. Big difference in playing style. As for their actual IMPACT.... ROFL


Sure they were both good, just like Stephen Jackson and Paul Pierce are both good, it doesnt mean they are equally good or anywhere near eachother. Tmac was ELITE, he put up production unmatched. Granger couldnt even do that on a team that desperately needed him to the past few years and despite the fact that hes further along in his career.

Injuries derailed Tmacs career.

Please talk some sense to this kid. Tmac was arguably the best SG in the league at one point (or just behind Kobe).

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:16 AM
unfortunately at the end of the day tmac and granger will be lost souls in the nba it doesnt matter neither are top 50 in the nba...

Chronz
12-06-2010, 01:17 AM
yall said that the magic didnt try to build around tmac and didnt have good players that 02 03 team made the playoffs even with grant hill hurt most the year with him they coulda been a 50 win team the pacers arent even close to a 50 win team please....
I never said anything about them not building around Tmac. And yes the 02-03 team made the playoffs, thats kind of why they are ridiculing you. That Mac made the playoffs with THAT supporting cast is what makes it impressive.

You would make a great point if Hill was healthy, yes they couldve been 50 win good, but he wasnt around and when he was he was inconsistent on both ends. But because he wasnt, the team was crap without him. Thankfully the East was crappy or else we wouldve missed out on Tmacs playoff performances.

theBraveRocket
12-06-2010, 01:17 AM
I haven't posted at PSD in forever, but the Granger to a prime T-Mac is insane. I do not want to hear about the market he plays in, overrated, underrated, etc. Granger has never even averaged 3 assists per game. T-Mac averaged over 5 per game in seven different seasons. Granger is no where near the playmaker that Mac was. Granger may be consistent for longer, but he will never accomplish what T-Mac did in his prime. Never

John Walls Era
12-06-2010, 01:19 AM
Tmac was an elite playmaker. In 9 years (Prime): 25+ PPG, 5.5+ APG and 6+ RPG.
Sure you could say Granger is better [though you would be wrong], but to compare them and say they are similar is outright wrong. Tmac could do more than shoot, he handled the ball and made the team and the players around him much better.

Chronz
12-06-2010, 01:20 AM
he had at most 3 years of dominance i dont consider that ELITE your acting like tmac was kobe or jordan get real hes not a hall of famer

Yes 3 years of ELITE dominance. Thats kind of the point we're making here, how do you not get that?

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:20 AM
Yes 3 years of ELITE dominance. Thats kind of the point we're making here, how do you not get that?

i see i was completely wrong....

thekmp211
12-06-2010, 01:21 AM
yikes !

heatking
12-06-2010, 01:22 AM
Back on track is Granger just a jumpshooter, or can he eventually become a player you can build around? will he be able to keep up the statistical production for years to come, or are they just the product of a bad team?

theBraveRocket
12-06-2010, 01:23 AM
i see i was completely wrong....

Yea. You were

Knowledge
12-06-2010, 01:24 AM
two years tmac avg 32 & 28 back to back ppg im sure granger could get up to 28 ppg hes a good player yall are selling him short.
at that time tmac was good but there were alot better players than him 7 yrs ago i doubt anywyone would pick him to start a team with at that time. he just had numbers like granger both are great but wont ever win.

You would be a total fool to not start a team with a healthy young player of Tmac's caliber.

TMac didnt just average points. He did it very efficiently. If Granger did put up those point numbers I doubt he would be able to average the assist/rebound numbers and Fg% numbers TMac did.

Granger is already 27 and his highest per for any season is 21. TMac had a per of 30 at age 23. The further you look into the advanced Stats you find there is no logical comparison.

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:25 AM
i still think there games are the similar aside from the assist he reminds me of tmac rebounds blocks point everything else is there other than assist.
yall must not seen granger play

redsox0717
12-06-2010, 01:25 AM
Poor man's Paul Pierce

OaklandsFinest
12-06-2010, 01:26 AM
T- Mac actually had a better offensive game than Kobe, rebounded better and shot better. Eventually the pressure of carrying that load that long lead to him breaking down, just as Kobe is now from his post Shaq years.

210Don
12-06-2010, 01:27 AM
You would be a total fool to not start a team with a healthy young player of Tmac's caliber.

TMac didnt just average points. He did it very efficiently. If Granger did put up those point numbers I doubt he would be able to average the assist/rebound numbers and Fg% numbers TMac did.

Granger is already 27 and his highest per for any season is 21. TMac had a per of 30 at age 23. The further you look into the advanced Stats you find there is no logical comparison.

at that time there were alot of better players to start a team
kobe
shaq
tim duncan
garnett
theres just a few

theBraveRocket
12-06-2010, 01:28 AM
i still think there games are the similar aside from the assist he reminds me of tmac rebounds blocks point everything else is there other than assist.
yall must not seen granger play

Seen him play many times. Very good player. In fact, he's an excellent player. But T-Mac in his prime was extraordinary.

NYtilIdie
12-06-2010, 01:38 AM
at that time there were alot of better players to start a team
kobe
shaq
tim duncan
garnett
theres just a few

The only two who I would actually choose over T-Mac at the time are Shaq and Duncan. T-Mac was better then Kobe in his prime this has been beaten to death. When T-Mac went to the Rockets then Kobe surpassed him.

John Walls Era
12-06-2010, 01:46 AM
Poor man's Paul Pierce

Closer comparison, but still no imo. Pierce is a decent playmaker.

hotpotato1092
12-06-2010, 01:47 AM
He's not Tmac, Tmac in his prime was a top 5-7 player. Granger is a top 15-20 player. He'd be a great sidekick if a team like Orlando could get him, but he'll never be the best player on a title team.