# What about Danny Granger?



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

The guy is 6'8 + in shoes with a 7'1 wingspan!...shoots lights out...has a handle...boards...and plays D. We all know that we need a wing player and he has had great workouts. If nobody is really enamored with the pivot prospects, maybe we should look at this guy. He seems to have everything plus he is tough. Warrick and him had a real knock-down drag-out workout with Hakeem completely unable to slow him down. Maybe a bigger Wade? I thought he was too small but I'm pleasantly suprised at his ht. I'm interested..hell, he's as big as Taft.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

alphadog said:


> The guy is 6'8 + in shoes with a 7'1 wingspan!...shoots lights out...has a handle...boards...and plays D. We all know that we need a wing player and he has had great workouts. If nobody is really enamored with the pivot prospects, maybe we should look at this guy. He seems to have everything plus he is tough. Warrick and him had a real knock-down drag-out workout with Hakeem completely unable to slow him down. Maybe a bigger Wade? I thought he was too small but I'm pleasantly suprised at his ht. I'm interested..hell, he's as big as Taft.


alfa,i read mixed things on Granger regarding his athleticism....he appears to be a stud....If Ariza develops a jumper,he could eventually play the 2,granger the 3 with JC playing 1/2,depending on marbury...


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

i like granger, but i think if we were to draft him we have to trade for a true center, and sweetney needs to be the guy we trade.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Debt Collector said:


> i like granger, but i think if we were to draft him we have to trade for a true center, and sweetney needs to be the guy we trade.


i think the wizards would trade kwame for ex hoya sweetney


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

I'm glad everyone is enamored with these wing players, but again what about the 5 spot? Most of you are just continuing a trend started long ago. Ignore it, ignore it, ignore it. The way we're going, we're never going to get a C. Ever.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

Tapseer said:


> I'm glad everyone is enamored with these wing players, but again what about the 5 spot? Most of you are just continuing a trend started long ago. Ignore it, ignore it, ignore it. The way we're going, we're never going to get a C. Ever.



i agree we need to address the center problem this year. problem is its looking harder and harder every day to be able to get one in the draft. i think we really should consider trading down to 15-20 and taking taft if vasquez isnt there at #8. i think taft is still as good as frye, and everyone in between vasquez and taft is a 3-4 tweener or an undersized PF.

i wouldnt be angry though if we just drafted the best player available at #8 and went hard for a true center via trade or FA whether thats Z, magloire, or someone else.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*What is wrong with you guys??*

1) Taft is not, and never will be, a center. Plus, have you not been reading the reports? He has been miserable in nearly every one. He is NOT a number 8 pick and certainly not a center.

2) As I have said many times, and which DC just reiterated.....we may not get a center worthy of a #8 pick. You simply cannot pick a center just because you need one. Remember Steve Stipanovich? That was one great pick, huh? They needed a center, had the #2 pick, and drafted the second best center...who sucked. You have to take the BEST PLAYER available. If it is redundant to your needs then keep the better player and trade the other for what you need. What we are talking about here is VALUE, not position. If you need a dime but have a chance to get 6 nickels for the same amount, I would take the nickels, keep the best one and trade the others to someone that had a dime but needed nickels, solving one problem and upgrading another.

If there is a TRUE center that is a TRUE top 10 pick at #8, nab him. Otherwise, grab the best player, regardless of position, and trade for a big. There is plenty of potential players at the 5 for later picks, plus next years draft also has plenty of guys.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

also,rebuilding isnt an overnight process....as alfa barks,if there is no true center at 8,the we have to fill the needs..theres always a trade or next year..thats rebuilding


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i agree at 8 you simply take the best player available ...although the knicks should hope that guy isn't a point guard every other spot could use an infusement of talent , even the power forward spot.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Granger is a stud. I don't know how I'd feel about him coming to NY though. This team is such a mess, I'd prefer for him to go somewhere where a plan was in place of some kind. I'll be happy for him, wherever he goes though.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

HKF said:


> Granger is a stud. I don't know how I'd feel about him coming to NY though. This team is such a mess, I'd prefer for him to go somewhere where a plan was in place of some kind. I'll be happy for him, wherever he goes though.


its worse than a mess..we cant even name a head coach and the frontrunner cant even get the support of the star..bury....

as for Granger

have you seen him play???

who does he play like??

whats his upside


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

truth said:


> its worse than a mess..we cant even name a head coach and the frontrunner cant even get the support of the star..bury....
> 
> as for Granger
> 
> have you seen him play???


Haha, yeah. I used to eat lunch with him in the food court all the time when he was at Bradley. We played pickup many times when season wasn't in session.



> who does he play like??


He reminds me of a better scoring, more athletic Shane Battier. He wasn't the college player Battier was, but he can score with his back to the basket or facing and his handles and jumpshot are very fluid. Some are comparing him to Pippen, but I think a Rich man's Battier is a good comparison to him.



> whats his upside


Well there is two things about Danny. I'm going to be in his ear for the rest of his playing days telling him to bust his ***, so you won't have to hear about him quitting on a team, but I think he can be an all-star caliber SF. He's a great person.


----------



## Phyr (Mar 3, 2005)

Turiaf for Center at pick #30


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Get real...*

Turiaf is a slightly undersized PF who may may a decent back up someday but prolly not a NY caliber one. Center? Never gonna see it. You must not watch much ball, eh?


----------



## Phyr (Mar 3, 2005)

*Re: Get real...*



alphadog said:


> Turiaf is a slightly undersized PF who may may a decent back up someday but prolly not a NY caliber one. Center? Never gonna see it. You must not watch much ball, eh?


I guess you havent seen much of Turiaf. He is 6'9 and 250. While this maybe undersized you don't take into account for his motor or defensive skills. Oh yeah this other guy named Ben Wallace is 6'9 and 240 with a motor and defensive skills. Hes pretty good too. Turiaf is taller then Sweets and not lazy/fat. Top 5 rated athelte at the combine.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

Johan Petro? Channing Frye?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

sheefo13 said:


> Johan Petro? Channing Frye?


petro is M.I.A


----------

