BlazerFanFoLife

It matters if Miami wants to take on Dunleyvy's contract. They want to sign Brand when he is a FA.

__________________

ROOKIE
OF THE
YEAR

BlazerFanFoLife - Aim

PFC II Participant. GO PFC BLAZERS!
http://www.nba.com/fantasy/features/pfcII_home.html

Draco

If we can get Granger for Martell/Jack/Frye/2008 first rounder I'm absolutely on board. If they really want Outlaw, well then I'd do it if we get to keep our '08 pick. To match salaries we probably would take back Marquis Daniels as I think they'd want to keep Foster and we have little use for him. Granger would be a great addition before Thursday, or anytime really, but in the end I think we probably stand pat until the draft.

Whats with Indiana trading Granger and getting Mike Miller, Bird must want to assemble an all white lineup. They already play Foster/Murphy/Dunleavy, all thats left after trading Granger is dumping Tinsley and Jermaine.

crowTrobot

jack webster and miller all kinda do the same thing (one more efficiently than the other two). i'm sure if indiana were getting back miller they would be more likely to demand outlaw/frye than settle for jack/webs.

drexlersdad

im leaning towards agreeing with crowTrobot here. everyone just assumes granger is better, but the PER number speak for themselves. basically the only things PER doesnt account for are: lock down defense that doesnt result in many steals or blocks(ala bruce bowen, who ritually has a low PER), and intangibles, such as being clutch, or a leader.

i think outlaw is clutch AND a leader. And if he was getting 36 mpg on a team like the pacers, would be getting at least 20 ppg. He is also a better rebounder.

Lots of people want to say that Outlaw is "dumb", or that granger is "smart", but we dont need a team full of Einsteins, we already have a few. we need people who can score and defend.

outlaw for granger, plus adding valuable assets such as sergio, frye, jack, #1's, and #2's? no thanks.

__________________

MrJayremmie

Cool. Good to hear that Pritchard is trying to adress our problem of having too many players for next season. And he understands that we will needa young solid Pg for the future. Harris did slip away, sadly, i wish we could have goten him, would have been perfect.

Oh well, imo, KP should not make a move now. Wait until the draft and see what happens. Maybe move up and try and snatch Rose or Bayless for our PG of the future.

__________________

Jerryd Bayless

It's_GO_Time

Ouch . . . Travis is top starting SF on 20 teams but Martell is a head case with a fragile psyche.

Anyways, your thoughts are different than Nate's (maybe your right) since he recently benched fragile psyche Webster and started Jack (not Travis).

But I get what you are saying . . . you basically think Travis is better than Granger. I don't think there is a GM in the league that would agree, but this is a message board and it's all about different opinions . . . and I do hope your right about Travis.

Talkhard

You think? Try on this scenario: We trade Outlaw and/or Webster and both of them turn into top-notch NBA players who average 20 pts. a game (which is highly possible). Which means we watched them grow and mature over 3 to 5 years only to let them slip away to another team (a la Jermaine O'Neal), where they finally realized their true potential. Even worse, what if the player we get in return (i.e., Granger) proves to be a poor fit in our system, unlike Outlaw, who is a very popular teammate and a guy who has accepted his role?

In short, there is a considerable amount of risk to trading away some of our young players who still have a great deal of potential in order to find a "quick fix."

__________________
"Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. They are working the rest of the league like a speed bag." --Jay, lifelong Pacers fan

It's_GO_Time

Well then we should keep Outlaw . . . according to PERS he is better than Ray Allen, Jason Kidd, Paul Millsap, Rashard Lewis, JO, Stephen Jackson, Joe Johnson, Tayshaun Prince, Mike Bibby . . . the list goes on.

drexlersdad

Come on man those guys are all having down years or else they wouldnt be putting up AVERAGE or BELOW AVERAGE PER numbers. and he IS better than Paul Millsap. is Granger better than any of those players??

Has anyone put up a good argument WHY Granger is so much better than Outlaw?

Outlaw is younger by more than a year.
Outlaw is signed for two more years after this one at 4 million a year. Granger is due his extension THIS OFFSEASON. which kills any cap flexibility, especially if raef is involved.

I dont watch enough PACERS basketball to pretend i know Granger in and out, so maybe someone could enlighten me. I never said outlaw was a better player, only that the stats suggest that Granger is not running away with it.

__________________

tucsonhanny

How good is Granger anyway? I don't see what people see in him. His numbers this year are just OK. He does shoots well from the field factoring in his three pointers. But his team is struggling in the leastern conference and a quick look at the 82games website shows:

His team performs better when he's off the court than when he's on (-39 on, +175 off)
Defensive field goal percentage is also worse (50.1% on, 47.8% off)
He plays 40% of his time at power forward and is more productive at the 4 than the 3 (PER 19.0 at PF, 16.4 at SF)
Plus he's shooting numbers in the clutch are terrible. (28% FG%, 36% eFG% factoring in 3 pointers) (overall 44% FG%, 51% eFG%)

So perhaps that some of the numbers could be misleading but given that his team has struggled, you can't ignore all of them.

Just as a comparison here's Outlaw's numbers at 82 games:

On court -1, off court -7
Defensive field goal percentage is better (46.9% on, 49.4% off)
They show he plays almost all his time at PF and their calculation of his PER at PF is 18.6
Shooting percentage in clutch are impressive (55% FG%, 57% eFG%) (Overall 44% FG%, 46% eFG%)


I don't see how we would be much better off with Granger than Outlaw. He's an upgrade from Webster and probably has a higher "upside" but not enough to get me excited to have him on this team. If anything I think Webster will be the better three point shooter and help spread the defenses more than Granger.

Foulzilla

I have no idea about Granger's rebounding, but you seem to be implying that Foster is not a good rebounder. He's actually the 9th best rebounder in the league by rebound rate (which is simply a rebounding statistic that adjusts for team pace and minutes played).

Also, just as a random note because I didn't realize this myself, Joel is at #5.

__________________
"If push came to shove, I could lose all self-respect & become a reporter."
-Charles Barkley

It's_GO_Time

I hate to become the Granger Defender . . . but it is almost like some other fans looking at Aldridge and saying what is the big deal. The big deal to Blazer fans is the player he is likely to be in a couple of years.

Granger is that player to the Pacers. He leads their team in scoring, free throw percentage and steals. He is an energy player who contributes in all facets of the game and I think more than anything is he is still on the up swing of his career.

Granger and Outlaw both have potential . . . but Granger has shown more of reaching that potential v. Outlaw, IMO.

That said . . . I love Outlaw and hopes he tears it up this second half of the season.

tucsonhanny

OK, I get that he has upside but how much is he worth to us given what we already have? Is he worth sacrificing our potential cap space for? He'll probably command an extension this year that's bigger than what Outlaw makes.

I could understand how Devin Harris could make a positive net improvement on this team with his defense, slashing and up-tempo