Will the Pacers ever get a Star Player

[PPAW4Life]

Granger is an All-Star in production and talent already. He just needs to be on a winning team to get the notoriety and publicity.

The Pacers have gone through a lot throughout the years and Bird may have made some mistakes but the biggest factors were beyond his control (psychotic players and injuries).

I think the Pacers do need to play better defense and get another star with Granger and this team will be a force to be reckoned with really soon.

They're already playing hard every night and giving 100% effort playing an uptempo and exciting basketball so this team is on the right track.

[Kuq_e_Zi91]

On NBA.com they have a race to the MVP. It lists 10 guys, and the writer says Danny would be in it if his team wasn't 9-16 (now 9-17). So I'm pretty sure that we will see Danny grow into a star player, if he is not one already.

http://www.nba.com/2008/news/features/r ... index.html

[realfung]

You guys will probably not going to get a star, but you guys breed one in Granger already.

[paulpressey25]

I'm not trying to troll guys, but this thread intrigued me because I agree with the original poster. What the OP is trying to say is that he'd like Indy to have a true superstar player like a LeBron, Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, Kobe, Dirk, Shaq, Amare, Wade, etc. play in Indy. We'd like to have the same thing happen in Milwaukee someday as well, but it never happens.

Granger is a really nice player, but he's a guy who turns 26 next year and plays swingman/small forward which is one of the least valuable positions on the court as far as being able to impact wins.

Granger is probably a more rounded guy than Glenn Robinson, but I think that's the type of relative impact you'll get from him. Maybe he becomes as good as Paul Pierce if he improves his ball-handling. But you've got to find a Kevin Garnett before a Granger will mean anything serious as to establishing the Pacers back as a regular 50-win team.

[cdash]

No, we dont. We have to find the right mix of guys to put around Granger to get back to being a regular 50-win team. I really hate the line of thinking, "You have to have a superstar to win big". Granted, its easier to win big when you have a superstar, but its certainly not a must. Take the Pistons for example. They won a title with no superstars. Hell, the Pacers went to the finals in 2000 without a superstar. You wont find a bigger Reggie Miller fan than me, but he wasnt what you would consider a "superstar". You just have to find the right mix of guys. The team currently constructed wont get there, because we are seriously flawed. We wont be much more than a novelty if we cant find a guy who can score in the post consistently, but I certainly dont think we need a KG, Wade, Amare, LeBron, or whoever to come in here and be the savior. We can do it without them. And we will.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

No, we dont. We have to find the right mix of guys to put around Granger to get back to being a regular 50-win team. I really hate the line of thinking, "You have to have a superstar to win big". Granted, its easier to win big when you have a superstar, but its certainly not a must. Take the Pistons for example. They won a title with no superstars. Hell, the Pacers went to the finals in 2000 without a superstar. You wont find a bigger Reggie Miller fan than me, but he wasnt what you would consider a "superstar". You just have to find the right mix of guys. The team currently constructed wont get there, because we are seriously flawed. We wont be much more than a novelty if we cant find a guy who can score in the post consistently, but I certainly dont think we need a KG, Wade, Amare, LeBron, or whoever to come in here and be the savior. We can do it without them. And we will.

I'm surprised to say this, but I actually agree with you on this one. The Pacers are starting to get on track with a core of Granger, Rush, and Hibbert for the future, now for the rest of the team...

[cdash]

Do you usually not agree with me or something?

[TJFordisGod]

No, we dont. We have to find the right mix of guys to put around Granger to get back to being a regular 50-win team. I really hate the line of thinking, "You have to have a superstar to win big". Granted, its easier to win big when you have a superstar, but its certainly not a must. Take the Pistons for example. They won a title with no superstars. Hell, the Pacers went to the finals in 2000 without a superstar. You wont find a bigger Reggie Miller fan than me, but he wasnt what you would consider a "superstar". You just have to find the right mix of guys. The team currently constructed wont get there, because we are seriously flawed. We wont be much more than a novelty if we cant find a guy who can score in the post consistently, but I certainly dont think we need a KG, Wade, Amare, LeBron, or whoever to come in here and be the savior. We can do it without them. And we will.

I'm surprised to say this, but I actually agree with you on this one. The Pacers are starting to get on track with a core of Granger, Rush, and Hibbert for the future, now for the rest of the team...

Rush? I'M not sure about that one. I know it is still early in the season but I dont know if he can be considered part of the "core" just yet. His defense has been there most nights, but he has really struggled offensively. He has shown signs of being able to drive it to the basket, but doesn't do it nearly enough. And for someone who is suppose to be considered a "shooter", he is shooting 31% from the 3 point line and 38% from the field. Those percentages are pretty horrid for a so called shooter. I'M not trying to hate on rush, but he is going to have to drastically improve offensively to be considered as a major part of this Pacer future. But again, it is still early and time will tell.

[PR07]

The Pacers already have a "star" in Granger. Will they get a superstar? Probably not, unless they get a Top 5 pick in some draft. I can't really envision a LeBron, Wade, or someone of that caliber wanting to sign here when there are big market teams available with probably better rosters when the time comes.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Do you usually not agree with me or something?

We usually seem to have different opinions about the team, especially concerning Jim O'Brien. We just seem to have different opinions, which is fine, I don't fault you for having a different opinion or anything.

As for TJFord, Rush is a rookie. Rookies struggle, theres nothing new about this. He has been a great defensive presence, and has consistantly got himself open shots. I seriously do not think we've had a wingman, who could create shots for himself like Rush can in a long time. He always gets himself open, and if he doesn't get it together later this year, he certainly will work on it over the summer. Rush really looks like a SG version of Granger, once he gets his shot to fall, he could be great. Also, its not like his shots are bad, almost all of them are in and out, its ridiculous. He will get it together, that doesn't concern me at all.

[TJFordisGod]

Do you usually not agree with me or something?

We usually seem to have different opinions about the team, especially concerning Jim O'Brien. We just seem to have different opinions, which is fine, I don't fault you for having a different opinion or anything.

As for TJFord, Rush is a rookie. Rookies struggle, theres nothing new about this. He has been a great defensive presence, and has consistantly got himself open shots. I seriously do not think we've had a wingman, who could create shots for himself like Rush can in a long time. He always gets himself open, and if he doesn't get it together later this year, he certainly will work on it over the summer. Rush really looks like a SG version of Granger, once he gets his shot to fall, he could be great. Also, its not like his shots are bad, almost all of them are in and out, its ridiculous. He will get it together, that doesn't concern me at all.

Yeah I love his defense and I hope he continues to get the right amount of minutes to help him develop. But u never know with Obie. Its just a bit odd seeing a shooter consistently missing wide open shots u know? I don't mean to get down on the guy in his rookie year, I just dont wanna be jumping to any conclusions as to how good he is going to be. But he does look like he has all the tools to be a great shooting guard, hes just having trouble getting that shot to go down. But hey, it's still very early in the season and it should be interesting to see how he develops throughout the years.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

To put things into perspective:

TM G GS MIN FG----- FG% 3P ------3P% FT ------FT% STL BLK TO PF OFF DEF TOT AST PTS
IND 24 1 22.5 2.8-7.0 .402 0.8-2.3 .345 0.8-1.0 .783 0.7 0.5 1.2 1.9 0.8 1.8 2.6 0.8 7.2
IND 78 17 22.6 2.8-6.1 .462 0.4-1.2 .323 1.5-1.9 .777 0.7 0.8 1.0 2.7 1.7 3.2 4.9 1.2 7.5

The top is Brandon Rush's rookie year, the bottom is Danny Granger's rookie year. Obviously Granger has better all around stats, but Rush has the better 3P% and FT%, frankly if half those in and outs fell down, he'd probably have the better FG%. The only thing that has dissappointed me about Rush so far is his assist and rebound numbers. If he can improve those, and gets his shot to fall, we have a SG version of Granger.

[TJFordisGod]

God I hope so lol. A shooting guard version of granger would be awesome, but thats some hard shoes to fill. Also updated after yesterdays game Rush's 3 point % has dropped to 31. Not a big deal though. It will definitely improve as the season moves along.

[Grang33r]

No, we dont. We have to find the right mix of guys to put around Granger to get back to being a regular 50-win team. I really hate the line of thinking, "You have to have a superstar to win big". Granted, its easier to win big when you have a superstar, but its certainly not a must. Take the Pistons for example. They won a title with no superstars. Hell, the Pacers went to the finals in 2000 without a superstar. You wont find a bigger Reggie Miller fan than me, but he wasnt what you would consider a "superstar". You just have to find the right mix of guys. The team currently constructed wont get there, because we are seriously flawed. We wont be much more than a novelty if we cant find a guy who can score in the post consistently, but I certainly dont think we need a KG, Wade, Amare, LeBron, or whoever to come in here and be the savior. We can do it without them. And we will.

I'm surprised to say this, but I actually agree with you on this one. The Pacers are starting to get on track with a core of Granger, Rush, and Hibbert for the future, now for the rest of the team...

I totally agree. I think Granger is enough of a star to carry a team in tough spots, but most importantly, team basketball is more important. I do think the Pacers have made big steps in the right direction and i think we are still years away from a 50-game win season like CDash said. However, that 50-game win season isn't in the unforeseeable future anymore. Maybe next season? Maybe in 2 seasons? I'd bet my money in 2 years, but who knows how the East will look next season? But i'd really doubt if they don't come out big in the next two seasons.

This reminds me of an article by Peter May on Yahoo Sports.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=A ... &type=lgns

The Pacers are getting guys who work hard. Play hard. And have fun. They may still lose a lot of games, but the future is bright. I think this is the first time i can truly say that in years. Danny Granger is a star player IMO and will only get better when the team around him improves. Larry Bird knows we still have a lot to work on. It's a building process. But, i really do love what we have going for our selves. Heck, we even have trading chips now as Daniels or a healthy Dunleavy (assuming he plays soon and when he plays he plays well) could become very valuable trading pieces. Not to say we will trade them, but in all seriousness, when's the last time Pacers had a good player we can trade and get a solid return for ?

[Miller4ever]

Two words to end this thread once and for all:

Josh McRoberts

[MillerTime101]

To put things into perspective:

TM G GS MIN FG----- FG% 3P ------3P% FT ------FT% STL BLK TO PF OFF DEF TOT AST PTS
IND 24 1 22.5 2.8-7.0 .402 0.8-2.3 .345 0.8-1.0 .783 0.7 0.5 1.2 1.9 0.8 1.8 2.6 0.8 7.2
IND 78 17 22.6 2.8-6.1 .462 0.4-1.2 .323 1.5-1.9 .777 0.7 0.8 1.0 2.7 1.7 3.2 4.9 1.2 7.5

The top is Brandon Rush's rookie year, the bottom is Danny Granger's rookie year. Obviously Granger has better all around stats, but Rush has the better 3P% and FT%, frankly if half those in and outs fell down, he'd probably have the better FG%. The only thing that has dissappointed me about Rush so far is his assist and rebound numbers. If he can improve those, and gets his shot to fall, we have a SG version of Granger.

This is a great comparison, if Rush can develop even close to Granger we will have a great young core

I still think we need to move Murph to Center and get a low post scorer.