CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: Smitty77 on January 25, 2013, 09:58:27 AM
-
I think that PP for Granger makes sense for both teams. We might have to through in a future first or second. Indy is playing GREAT without Granger, but probably could use a clutch (please forget last night's game when reading this!!:-))) shooter and veteran to really get near Miami in the East.
I am not exactly sure when Granger is due back, but I am pretty sure it is soon. His contract expires next year.
Thoughts???
Smitty77
-
I think that PP for Granger makes sense for both teams. We might have to through in a future first or second. Indy is playing GREAT without Granger, but probably could use a clutch (please forget last night's game when reading this!!:-))) shooter and veteran to really get near Miami in the East.
I am not exactly sure when Granger is due back, but I am pretty sure it is soon. His contract expires next year.
Thoughts???
Smitty77
Pierce = Celtic for life.
Granger has fallen off the past couple years. Now with the injury Im not sure he would return to form.
'09-'10
IND
62 62 36.7 7.9-18.4 .428 2.5-7.1 .361 5.9-6.9 .848 1.1 4.4 5.5 2.8 0.8 1.5 3.0 2.5 24.1
'10-'11
IND
79 79 35.0 6.8-15.9 .425 2.0-5.2 .386 5.0-5.9 .848 1.1 4.3 5.4 2.6 0.8 1.1 2.7 2.6 20.5
'11-'12
IND
62 62 33.3 6.3-15.2 .416 2.0-5.2 .381 4.1-4.7 .873 1.3 3.7 5.0 1.8 0.6 1.0 2.3 1.8 18.7
Numbers have decreased the last two years. Plus he will be 30 in April. Rather have Pierce.
*edit* dang, in the preview that stat sheet worked perfectly. Ill just link him stats instead http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2760/danny-granger (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2760/danny-granger)
-
I don't want to see the C's tossing in what picks they have that lightly, given their need to rebuild. They need those picks to bundle into trading whatever they can of what they have for younger players with high potential.
-
No thanks. Not with Granger coming off that knee surgery.
-
pierce's contract....
nuff said
-
OK, PP will turn 36 this year and Granger will turn 30. A big difference.
The main difference is in minutes played (not counting preseason minutes which would make it even MORE exaggerated).
PP has played 49,000+ regular season and playoff minutes in his career.
Granger has played about 18,500 regular season and playoff minutes in his career.
That is a HUGE difference, no matter how you slice it.
Yes, we would be taking a CHANCE that DG can come back from jumper's knee and his surgery, but we need to take some risks or we are heading or already in a state of oblivion.
Danny is going to have to take some chances and gamble.
PP can help Indy and they can keep him next year is it works out of pay him $4 million to go away next year.
I would not include a first rounder on second thought as this helps Indy about equally as well. I might include a second rounder though.
Smitty77
-
I don't like it, I'm not a huge Granger fan and it doesn't give the C's extra assets or flexibility over Pierce.
Granger is younger, but a far lower level of player. Not the sort of piece I want to be paying his sort of salary on his next contract.
-
Id trade pierce for a slice of cake right about now.
-
Wouldn't put us over the top and would just mean that we're on the hook for more money and for longer.
I also don't really see it for the Pacers. Pierce won't put them over the top this season and they could probably get some longer term assets for Granger.
-
This Pierce is a Celtic for life thing is crazy.
Patrick Ewing is a Knick for life, but where did he finish his playing career? Seattle.
Jordan is a Bull for life. He last played for the Wiz.
It happens and it's not a big deal. Pierce can be traded and still be a Celtic for life. We shouldn't keep him around if it is better to move him.
-
I am not a huge Granger fan either Fafnir, but he is a younger PP with less assists, but less turnovers. He is a career about 38-39% shooter from long distance and a career 85% FT shooter.
And we would NOT be on the hook for more money and longer. If we keep PP, we will NOT buy him out for $4 million next year. He will finish his contract with us and will will pay more for him than for Granger.
Smitty77
-
This Pierce is a Celtic for life thing is crazy.
Patrick Ewing is a Knick for life, but where did he finish his playing career? Seattle.
Jordan is a Bull for life. He last played for the Wiz.
It happens and it's not a big deal. Pierce can be traded and still be a Celtic for life. We shouldn't keep him around if it is better to move him.
Well I wouldnt move him for Granger.
-
This Pierce is a Celtic for life thing is crazy.
Patrick Ewing is a Knick for life, but where did he finish his playing career? Seattle.
Jordan is a Bull for life. He last played for the Wiz.
It happens and it's not a big deal. Pierce can be traded and still be a Celtic for life. We shouldn't keep him around if it is better to move him.
Agreed. Like others, though, I wouldn't trade him for Granger. Not worth it.
-
Pass on Granger. Too much health uncertainty plus he's a homeless man's Pierce.
-
Granger's FG % the past 3 years has been about 42%, no way i'll pass. Tired of guys that can't shoot.
-
This would include us getting JJ as well in a separate deal.
Pierce has shot 49.7, 44.3, and 42.2 the last three years and about 86% at the FT line and about 36.5% from long range.
Granger has shot 42.5, 41.6, and 43.8 the last three years and about 86% at the FT line and about 38% from long range.
The ONLY real difference was 3 years ago and that PP is NOT coming back!!!! Also, PP had a LOT more options around him and a MUCH BETTER PG to get him the ball in HIS spots.
Don't forget that PP has played about 2 and a half times MORE minutes than Granger. That is HUGE.
Smitty77
-
This would include us getting JJ as well in a separate deal.
Pierce has shot 49.7, 44.3, and 42.2 the last three years and about 86% at the FT line and about 36.5% from long range.
Granger has shot 42.5, 41.6, and 43.8 the last three years and about 86% at the FT line and about 38% from long range.
The ONLY real difference was 3 years ago and that PP is NOT coming back!!!! Also, PP had a LOT more options around him and a MUCH BETTER PG to get him the ball in HIS spots.
Don't forget that PP has played about 2 and a half times MORE minutes than Granger. That is HUGE.
Smitty77
JJ? Talking about Redick?
So the Granger deal is contingent on us getting Redick?
-
I did NOT say contingent on, but if we picked up JJ, he would make up for losing the assists that PP gives us. Does that make sense??
-
I am not a huge Granger fan either Fafnir, but he is a younger PP with less assists, but less turnovers. He is a career about 38-39% shooter from long distance and a career 85% FT shooter.
And we would NOT be on the hook for more money and longer. If we keep PP, we will NOT buy him out for $4 million next year. He will finish his contract with us and will will pay more for him than for Granger.
Smitty77
Trading Pierce for Granger is a downgrade (and that's assuming Granger is able to get on the court again), pointless unless you are looking at keeping Granger long term.
I want no part in Granger long term.
-
Have you all been watching Pierce that last, say, five to ten games????
-
I don't think you can trade Pierce now. If he continues to struggle, gets injured and shut down, then you pay his 5 million dollar buy out option and have a number hanging ceremony. Then you turn to Jeff Green.
-
Have you all been watching Pierce that last, say, five to ten games????
Yes.
Have you seen Granger's last 5-10 games? Oh wait, he hasn't seen the floor yet this season.
Granger is a HUGE question mark right now and that's before you consider the talent aspect of things.
-
Have you all been watching Pierce that last, say, five to ten games????
Yes.
Have you seen Granger's last 5-10 games? Oh wait, he hasn't seen the floor yet this season.
Granger is a HUGE question mark right now and that's before you consider the talent aspect of things.
Touche. TP
-
I don't think you can trade Pierce now. If he continues to struggle, gets injured and shut down, then you pay his 5 million dollar buy out option and have a number hanging ceremony. Then you turn to Jeff Green.
This. I honestly think if Green was starting he would be better than Granger at this point. Thats how far his stock has fallen in my eyes.
-
I realize this is taking a small risk. But, Pierce simple has cost us several games of late and IMHO he will continue to cost us games. His defense is far below average. He no long has the balls to take the ball to the hole. Or maybe it is because he simply cannot beat his man off the dribble.
Ainge will have to take some chances IF he is not happy with us being a .500 team or below and maybe not even making the playoffs. I bet he will not settle for that considering how much he spent in free agency and how much he has invested in KG for two more years after this one.
Have you seen our team play of late??:-)))) I have, and it is plain painful to watch. We played hard last night, but we simply were NOT good enough to beat the Knicks on our HOME floor. That is sad and unacceptable to me.
What do you all suggest we do?? Stay the course???
Smitty77
-
Trading for Granger isn't a small risk, its a massive risk as he's not on the court.
Pierce has cost us games during his stretch of awful play, but not having anyone to play his minutes will cost us as well.
Meanwhile what is the upside? I guess you're banking Granger comes back and has a career year? Because he'd need a career type year to surpase even Pierce's shaky level of play this year overall.
-
Granger? Really? Already 30 years old, with no standout abilities?
Why do we even need that sort of player? He just happened to be a scorer for the Pacers teams that cannot score at all. He isn't an elite scorer by any means and he won't be scoring anywhere around 20 ppg here, that is, if he can play again this season.
I could understand criticism for Pierce, but I'd let Green play the SF if we are really looking forward to trade him, instead of Granger.
-
Fafnir,
I am counting on Green starting and putting up far better numbers than PP has the last 10 games. I feel rather comfortable with that personally!!!
I don't know what Granger can give us this year, but I am willing to role the dice and give PP a nice gig with an Eastern Conf. playoff contender.
BTW, Granger is not even 30 yet. Can I please remind you all that DG has ONLY played 18,500 minutes and PP has played 49,000 plus. Not even close.
Granger's numbers are just as good as PP's over the last three years too. If he can come back from that knee surgery, he SHOULD have a lot of tread left!!!
Smitty77
-
This Pierce is a Celtic for life thing is crazy.
Patrick Ewing is a Knick for life, but where did he finish his playing career? Seattle.
Jordan is a Bull for life. He last played for the Wiz.
It happens and it's not a big deal. Pierce can be traded and still be a Celtic for life. We shouldn't keep him around if it is better to move him.
Neither was traded. They signed as FA's. Completely different.
-
Granger is a better version of Green, but paid way more money.
No thanks.
-
If I was assured of Granger's health, I'd do it.
-
Yes, Granger is better and stronger than Green. Granger shoots 38.4% from long range for his career and 84.7% from the line compared to Green's 33.6% and 77.4%. You are right, Granger is better and stronger.
I think we might have to trade Green to Orlando to get Redick anyways.
Smitty77
-
Even though I'm not a baby about a potential pierce trade, just don't like Granger much at all