CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: hpantazo on May 25, 2013, 01:16:11 PM
-
This looks a lot like the Rudy Gay issue with the Grizzlies the year they went deep in the playoffs without him. Should the Pacers trade Granger or keep him? If they trade him, what can they reasonably expect to get for him? They could use a legit point guard imo, but I don't see a good one available for Granger. I've seen a few rumors about Pierce for Granger. I'm not sure I like that for either team. What do you think the Pacers can get for Granger?
-
This looks a lot like the Rudy Gay issue with the Grizzlies the year they went deep in the playoffs without him. Should the Pacers trade Granger or keep him? If they trade him, what can they reasonably expect to get for him? They could use a legit point guard imo, but I don't see a good one available for Granger. I've seen a few rumors about Pierce for Granger. I'm not sure I like that for either team. What do you think the Pacers can get for Granger?
I think they will trade Granger for the right package. But they are a smart and well run franchise and will make it a trade that benefits them.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
they do need a pg, but which pg can they reasonably expect to get for Granger?
-
Not sure there is any value out there for Granger. In the trade market.
Yet to see anything that makes sense for Indiana.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
they do need a pg, but which pg can they reasonably expect to get for Granger?
that is the million dollar question. or multi million dollar question if you will. i think anyone better than DJ and george hill at running an offense would be an upgrade and have hill come off the bench. don't have the time to look into right now but if anyone does it would be appreciated. its hard watching this team turn the ball over due to the lack of a true starting pg
-
Not sure there is any value out there for Granger. In the trade market.
Yet to see anything that makes sense for Indiana.
Granger for bargnani swap
Granger for G Wallace swap
I thought the celtics were going to draft granger at 18 but went 17 to pacers then we got green
-
Not sure there is any value out there for Granger. In the trade market.
Yet to see anything that makes sense for Indiana.
Granger for bargnani swap?
I thought the celtics were going to draft granger at 18 but went 17 to pacers then we got green
That's not a bad idea. Toronto could sure use Granger, and Bargniani can help the pacers off the bench.
-
Not sure there is any value out there for Granger. In the trade market.
Yet to see anything that makes sense for Indiana.
Granger for bargnani swap?
I thought the celtics were going to draft granger at 18 but went 17 to pacers then we got green
That's not a bad idea. Toronto could sure use Granger, and Bargniani can help the pacers off the bench.
Pacers might need a pf if west goes to the clippers
-
Not sure there is any value out there for Granger. In the trade market.
Yet to see anything that makes sense for Indiana.
Granger for bargnani swap?
I thought the celtics were going to draft granger at 18 but went 17 to pacers then we got green
That's not a bad idea. Toronto could sure use Granger, and Bargniani can help the pacers off the bench.
Pacers might need a pf if west goes to the clippers
if they lose West they lost their contender status imo. They better not let it happen.
-
Granger for Eric Gordon.
-
« on: May 22, 2013, 06:21:43 PM »
Not sure if salaries work:
CLE sends Waiters (possibly Varejao)
IND sends Granger, Orlando Johnson, #23
CLE then selects McLemore with #1, adding a deadly shooter and good defender to pair next to Irving. They also get a cheap prospect in Johnson, and another mid-round pick (along with #19 I think) to select a big and probably another wing (depending on who is available). The key is Granger. He adds scoring (which CLE desperately needs as Irving is their only option) and he fills their SF void. He's also on an expiring deal, so CLE will have money to throw at LeBron (potential FA) next summer. If they do snag LeBron, resigning Granger is also a possibility.
Granger is now a bit redundant with George breaking out at SF, so he can go. The bring in Waiters, a guy who can come off the bench (his best role, IMO) and score at will. IND goes through ugly stretches where the offense stagnates, so having a super sub in Waiters would help tremendously.
-
Granger for Eric Gordon.
Now this would be an awesome trade for Indiana. Gordon not only provides scoring but much needed ball handling as well. I don't see the benefit for NO though. Granger is too old to add to their core and doesn't save them money.
-
Granger for Eric Gordon.
Now this would be an awesome trade for Indiana. Gordon not only provides scoring but much needed ball handling as well. I don't see the benefit for NO though. Granger is too old to add to their core and doesn't save them money.
He's an expiring contract, so it's a trade that basically makes up for NO's mistake of paying Gordon all that cash. He also fills SF for them because they didn't pick up Aminu's qualifying offer.
Gordon is too much of a question mark for IND, a team trying to contend. He'd be great for them, but he's too unreliable with all the injuries. Plus, I don't think he enjoyed his time at IU, so going back to Indiana might not be ideal. He's a wonderful fit for that team when healthy, though.
-
Granger for Eric Gordon.
Now this would be an awesome trade for Indiana. Gordon not only provides scoring but much needed ball handling as well. I don't see the benefit for NO though. Granger is too old to add to their core and doesn't save them money.
He's an expiring contract, so it's a trade that basically makes up for NO's mistake of paying Gordon all that cash. He also fills SF for them because they didn't pick up Aminu's qualifying offer.
Gordon is too much of a question mark for IND, a team trying to contend. He'd be great for them, but he's too unreliable with all the injuries. Plus, I don't think he enjoyed his time at IU, so going back to Indiana might not be ideal. He's a wonderful fit for that team when healthy, though.
Granger is on the books for 14 million through next season. NO would prefer a contract they can get off the books now, like Pierce's.
-
Granger for Eric Gordon.
Now this would be an awesome trade for Indiana. Gordon not only provides scoring but much needed ball handling as well. I don't see the benefit for NO though. Granger is too old to add to their core and doesn't save them money.
He's an expiring contract, so it's a trade that basically makes up for NO's mistake of paying Gordon all that cash. He also fills SF for them because they didn't pick up Aminu's qualifying offer.
Gordon is too much of a question mark for IND, a team trying to contend. He'd be great for them, but he's too unreliable with all the injuries. Plus, I don't think he enjoyed his time at IU, so going back to Indiana might not be ideal. He's a wonderful fit for that team when healthy, though.
Granger is on the books for 14 million through next season. NO would prefer a contract they can get off the books now, like Pierce's.
But my thinking is he could come back and the team could showcase him for half a year and flip him at the deadline. He's still in his prime.
-
Nash/Artest for Granger
Didn't work out so hot last time Artest was in IND though lol
-
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1649043-bostons-paul-pierce-for-indianas-danny-granger-makes-sense-for-both-teams
-
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1649043-bostons-paul-pierce-for-indianas-danny-granger-makes-sense-for-both-teams
Not clicking on that.
-
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1649043-bostons-paul-pierce-for-indianas-danny-granger-makes-sense-for-both-teams
If we trade Pierce, I'd rather get Eric Gordon.
-
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1649043-bostons-paul-pierce-for-indianas-danny-granger-makes-sense-for-both-teams
Not a an overly bad idea.
I dont know why everyone is so high strung on Gordon. This team already has an insane amount of guards. 2 of which i can easily see coming back next year (Terry and Lee).
Gordons contract is pretty horrid imho. bloke has never played 82 games. he has played 50 games in the past 2 season out of approx 145
Granger would fit in well also.
Rondo
Bradley/Lee
Granger
Green
KG/ Center
Not a shocking lineup
-
The Clippers could probably do Bledsoe/Butler for Granger if they miss out on Pierce.
Granger would be a clear upgrade for the Clippers over Butler and adds another scoring option.
-
Not sure there is any value out there for Granger. In the trade market.
Yet to see anything that makes sense for Indiana.
Yeah with his knee issues and contract size I'm not sure you could get much of value for him.
-
I think Indiana needs a SG who can play competent defense.
Danny Granger for Jameer Nelson + Afflalo?
Those 2 magic players are what a rebuilding Orlando should find to be bad contracts, but other teams could find useful.
I think this would also make Lance Stephenson available to be traded for the right player.
-
I think Indiana needs a SG who can play competent defense.
Danny Granger for Jameer Nelson + Afflalo?
Those 2 magic players are what a rebuilding Orlando should find to be bad contracts, but other teams could find useful.
I think this would also make Lance Stephenson available to be traded for the right player.
Not sure Granger has much value at this point but I like this deal for the Pacers despite not being a fan of Nelson. Nelson has playoff experience and seems to not really fit with what's going on in Orlando anymore. Afflallo would be a great addition to any team and could really help the Pacers as well. He's good on both sides I the floor and could give them even more athleticism and am extra scoring/shooting option.
With this trade, the emergence of George and a resigned west the pacers could be great competition for the Heat for the next few years.
Hill/Nelson
Aflallo/Stevenson
George/young
West/hansborough
Hibbert/mahinmi
-
Pierce, Melo, various BS, + 2014 1st for Granger and Stephenson?
-
The Clippers could probably do Bledsoe/Butler for Granger if they miss out on Pierce.
Granger would be a clear upgrade for the Clippers over Butler and adds another scoring option.
I hadn't gotten this far in the thread and was playing around with the same idea in trade checker.
You need to do a little more work to make the salaries work:
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=otmr3vo
-
Danny Granger, aka Paul Pierce lite
-
Granger is one guy that doesn't really do anything for me.
He's been injured way too much and even if he ends up being healthy, is he really any better than Jeff Green or even Paul for that matter?
I am thinking a lot of other teams might feel the same way (though I could possibly see the Lakers trying to trade for him.)
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
-
Pierce, Melo, various BS, + 2014 1st for Granger and Stephenson?
Assuming KG is gone from the Celtics too, it depends on how bad Indiana thinks Boston is going to be.
That said, I think they need a wing who is NBA ready if they get rid of Granger and Stephenson.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
I wouldn't go that far, I think he's just suffering from stage fright at the worst possible time. The guy is a superstar, unlike Green.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
I wouldn't go that far, I think he's just suffering from stage fright at the worst possible time. The guy is a superstar, unlike Green.
I wouldn't call him a superstar yet. He hasn't earned it. Hibbert and West have been huge for the Pacers in the playoffs, George imo has been underwhelming.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
I wouldn't go that far, I think he's just suffering from stage fright at the worst possible time. The guy is a superstar, unlike Green.
I wouldn't call him a superstar yet. He hasn't earned it. Hibbert and West have been huge for the Pacers in the playoffs, George imo has been underwhelming.
If you compare George and Green both at their best this season, they're just about equal. Even on the defensive end.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
I wouldn't go that far, I think he's just suffering from stage fright at the worst possible time. The guy is a superstar, unlike Green.
I wouldn't call him a superstar yet. He hasn't earned it. Hibbert and West have been huge for the Pacers in the playoffs, George imo has been underwhelming.
If you compare George and Green both at their best this season, they're just about equal. Even on the defensive end.
I agree. Since about the all-star beak this year, they have been about equal on both ends of the floor, and even in highlight reel plays.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
I wouldn't go that far, I think he's just suffering from stage fright at the worst possible time. The guy is a superstar, unlike Green.
I wouldn't call him a superstar yet. He hasn't earned it. Hibbert and West have been huge for the Pacers in the playoffs, George imo has been underwhelming.
I don't know, he's probably the next best (and versatile) perimeter defender after LeBron, and his offensive game is vastly improved from a year ago.
Would you at least call him a budding superstar?
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
George hit one desperation off balance three off a broken play. Jack has a entire highlight reel of big shots. Huge difference. Btw, where was Paul George in game 3?
Paul George Game 3: 3 for 10, 5 turnovers.
He's as dependable as Jeff Green imo.
I wouldn't go that far, I think he's just suffering from stage fright at the worst possible time. The guy is a superstar, unlike Green.
I wouldn't call him a superstar yet. He hasn't earned it. Hibbert and West have been huge for the Pacers in the playoffs, George imo has been underwhelming.
I don't know, he's probably the next best (and versatile) perimeter defender after LeBron, and his offensive game is vastly improved from a year ago.
Would you at least call him a budding superstar?
Yea, budding superstar is valid :)
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
Are we talking clutch plays? Like, "we need a basket and we need someone to do it on his own" plays? In the Playoffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg)
And while we are at it, add the game tying jump shot he had on Game 4 to send that game in OT.
(i would post the vid, if I could find it)
-
And these are just recent playoff big shots. Notice how he created these shots himself, all under control, unlike George's broken play desperation heave. He has a ton from regular season games too.
Maybe one day George will get there, but he isn't there yet.
-
If the Pacers want an affordable solid point guard that would really help their team though, they should go for Beno Udrih. Drive up the cost on Jack, see if anyone wants to offer good value on Granger, and then get Udrih on a reasonable price.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
Are we talking clutch plays? Like, "we need a basket and we need someone to do it on his own" plays? In the Playoffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg)
And while we are at it, add the game tying jump shot he had on Game 4 to send that game in OT.
(i would post the vid, if I could find it)
Look, nobody likes the guy that "hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling". Can JET hit big shots? Yes. Can JET provide scoring? Yes. Can JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Did JET hit big shots? Yes. Did JET provide scoring? Yes. Did JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Do we like JET? No. Do we think JET is overpaid? Yes. If we were given the opportunity to go back, would we resign him again? Absolutely not.
Jarrett Jack is a pitfall, just waiting to happen. No hate. Keep George Hill.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
Are we talking clutch plays? Like, "we need a basket and we need someone to do it on his own" plays? In the Playoffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg)
And while we are at it, add the game tying jump shot he had on Game 4 to send that game in OT.
(i would post the vid, if I could find it)
Look, nobody likes the guy that "hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling". Can JET hit big shots? Yes. Can JET provide scoring? Yes. Can JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Did JET hit big shots? Yes. Did JET provide scoring? Yes. Did JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Do we like JET? No. Do we think JET is overpaid? Yes. If we were given the opportunity to go back, would we resign him again? Absolutely not.
Jarrett Jack is a pitfall, just waiting to happen. No hate.
Except that jack is not old, JET is. BIG difference. Would most people want the Jason Terry from 6 years ago? Heck Yes!!!
Your comparison is not valid at all.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
Are we talking clutch plays? Like, "we need a basket and we need someone to do it on his own" plays? In the Playoffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg)
And while we are at it, add the game tying jump shot he had on Game 4 to send that game in OT.
(i would post the vid, if I could find it)
Look, nobody likes the guy that "hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling". Can JET hit big shots? Yes. Can JET provide scoring? Yes. Can JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Did JET hit big shots? Yes. Did JET provide scoring? Yes. Did JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Do we like JET? No. Do we think JET is overpaid? Yes. If we were given the opportunity to go back, would we resign him again? Absolutely not.
Jarrett Jack is a pitfall, just waiting to happen. No hate.
Except that jack is not old, JET is. BIG difference. Would most people want the Jason Terry from 6 years ago? Heck Yes!!!
Also, he just had a season shooting 40.4% from three; that's totally unsustainable seeing as the last time he shot that well he dropped off by 10.6% the next season.
He definitely doesn't seem reliable to me... one of those players who has a career year and gets a long contract only to villanueva away.
-
Jack is a career 35.8 % 3 pt shooter over 8 seasons and has shot 40% for the season from 3 pt land twice already, as you said. He is well established, and in his prime. Teams know what they are getting with Jarret Jack.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
Are we talking clutch plays? Like, "we need a basket and we need someone to do it on his own" plays? In the Playoffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg)
And while we are at it, add the game tying jump shot he had on Game 4 to send that game in OT.
(i would post the vid, if I could find it)
Look, nobody likes the guy that "hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling". Can JET hit big shots? Yes. Can JET provide scoring? Yes. Can JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Did JET hit big shots? Yes. Did JET provide scoring? Yes. Did JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Do we like JET? No. Do we think JET is overpaid? Yes. If we were given the opportunity to go back, would we resign him again? Absolutely not.
Jarrett Jack is a pitfall, just waiting to happen. No hate. Keep George Hill.
No hate as well but this is absolutely false.
Jarret Jack is in his absolute prime and a starting level PG. One thing George Hill is better than Jack is defense.
Jack can be a scoring option when plays break down, George Hill can't do that. Jack is playing less minutes but is averaging MORE assists and less turnovers, that's because he's a dangerous dribble drive guy and can find open guys. George Hill can't do that in Jack's level either.
He's been healthy the whole time, so saying that he'll be a downfall, that's sort of out of the park. He's 29, he's not 34. How can you say Jarret Jack is in a pitfall?
And what do you mean by "having a career year"? His number during his 7 year career has been really consistent.
This is who Indiana should get for a PG. If they are trading Granger, they better clear up salary and try to acquire Jack and make Hill the backup or trade him as well. Jack's skill set is perfect for Indy. A guy who can be a very steady PG at the same time can make shots for his own if needed. George Hill can't do that. Indy should get him back.
-
they should flip him for a point guard that they desperately need.
You took the words right out of me.
George Hill is a good PG, but if they want to get past in the East, they need a better PG than Hill IMO.
If I'm Indy, I would trade Granger to shed salary, get future picks and some guys who's not under a ton of money contract wise. Maybe a backup for Paul George or a SG along with the pick/s. I would then offer a lot of money (i mean a lot) to acquire Jarret Jack. That would be an easy sell for him. He will be generously get paid to be a part of a contender, then his addition would make Indy even more of a contender.
Indiana doesn't need a chucker! ;D
Are you sure?
Last time I check Paul George, while an All-Star is still not known as a go to scorer. Jack, chucker and all, can create shots for his own, plays decent defense and find and create for others.
Yea, Jack would be a perfect addition to the Pacers. He's exactly what they need. Hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling. They have no one on the roster right now that can do those things for them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmRykTdh8E
Are we talking clutch plays? Like, "we need a basket and we need someone to do it on his own" plays? In the Playoffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSf3KXPouo)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGd66fijJzg)
And while we are at it, add the game tying jump shot he had on Game 4 to send that game in OT.
(i would post the vid, if I could find it)
Look, nobody likes the guy that "hits big shots, provides scoring and steady ball handling". Can JET hit big shots? Yes. Can JET provide scoring? Yes. Can JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Did JET hit big shots? Yes. Did JET provide scoring? Yes. Did JET provide steady ball handling? Yes. Do we like JET? No. Do we think JET is overpaid? Yes. If we were given the opportunity to go back, would we resign him again? Absolutely not.
Jarrett Jack is a pitfall, just waiting to happen. No hate. Keep George Hill.
No hate as well but this is absolutely false.
Jarret Jack is in his absolute prime and a starting level PG. One thing George Hill is better than Jack is defense.
Jack can be a scoring option when plays break down, George Hill can't do that. Jack is playing less minutes but is averaging MORE assists and less turnovers, that's because he's a dangerous dribble drive guy and can find open guys. George Hill can't do that in Jack's level either.
He's been healthy the whole time, so saying that he'll be a downfall, that's sort of out of the park. He's 29, he's not 34. How can you say Jarret Jack is in a pitfall?
This is who Indiana should get for a PG. If they are trading Granger, they better clear up salary and try to acquire Jack and make Hill the backup or trade him as well. Jack's skill set is perfect for Indy. A guy who can be a very steady PG at the same time can make shots for his own if needed. George Hill can't do that.
If the Pacers really do get Hill, they need to find some way to get rid of Hill's $40mil/5yr contract. I guess we'll just see how Hill goes even though you make a convincing argument. We'll see ! :)