RealGM

http://www.hoops-nation.com/monta-ellis-to-be-traded-for-danny-granger/

Apparently Monta Ellis has been offered for Danny. (per Hoops-nation)???

We'd definitely lose in some areas, but we'd gain in others. I think it's a risky move from the standpoint of our early success. It would definitely give Paul the opportunity to play unlimited minutes.

In the end I'd want the pot sweetened in order to consider this.

Next step:

Trade George Hill for Wes Johnson

5.Hibbert/Foster
4.West/Tyler
3.George/Johnson
2.Ellis/Stephson
1.Collison/A.J

Wes Johnson is a goonsberry. Hill is way better than him.

Start Ellis and Hill and let Hibbert initiate more offense. DC of the bench

It makes sense for the Pacers but I don't understand why GS would look to move Ellis with Curry half broken down.

I would do this if we have George Hill run the point. Monta/DC is too small of a backcourt IMO.

Ellis is too small at SG.

The Pacers either need a PG that is 6-5 or bigger so he can guard the SG. Then Hill can start at SG and guard the PG.

On paper I wouldn't mind this at all because Ellis assures us offense that we've been lucky.

But... it not only makes us smaller but if people are questioning Granger's attitude, not sure why they'd want Ellis.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/73764 ... al-texting

Whether it's true or not, he at the very least was cheating on his wife according to the Warriors. Awesome?

Obviously cheating would be nothing new for a millionaire athlete but this is the type of crap you don't trade for. Especially when the guy you're trading is also capable of putting up big numbers and wants to be in Indiana of all places.

By the way... I've seen Granger say in interviews he likes that he doesn't have to do it all by himself anymore and he'll do whatever as long as the Pacers are winning. Pendergraph's first or second game(not the other night when he made his first basket), Granger was high fiving him as he left the court just because he got playing time. He's always high fiving players and giving them props/encouragement on the court. It's too bad that stuff happened to Monta recently and that he's so small because we could use a shooting guard like him and move George to SF but at this point, I wouldn't trade Granger for Monta.

No! Absolutely no!

Ellis is a good SG, but he's undersized and has some off-court issues. He used to hurt his knee and rest for almost half or more season simply bucause he played the scooter. That's something harm for the team chemisty.

The Pacers just got back in the playoffs last season, and it's quiet reasonalbe that this season they are going to challenge to be one of the contenders in the East. So, if the Pacers are moving Granger, they don't just get youth or picks in return. They would seek for the upgrade.

And George Hill for Wes Johnson? WTH is that?

laydo wrote:No! Absolutely no!

Ellis is a good SG, but he's undersized and has some off-court issues. He used to hurt his knee and rest for almost half or more season simply bucause he played the scooter. That's something harm for the team chemisty.

The Pacers just got back in the playoffs last season, and it's quiet reasonalbe that this season they are going to challenge to be one of the contenders in the East. So, if the Pacers are moving Granger, they don't just get youth or picks in return. They would seek for the upgrade.

And George Hill for Wes Johnson? WTH is that?

We still need someone who can create their own shot, and Monta is one of the best in the NBA. He is undersized, but if George Hill plays PG, they can switch and let Monta guard the 1's which will be easier for him w/ his speed, and Hill can guard the 2's. Monta isn't an injury risk, since his scooter accident he's played tons of minutes, and he's only really had one off court issue, and that's this year and it's pretty much died off.

Pacersike wrote:Start Ellis and Hill and let Hibbert initiate more offense. DC of the bench

It makes sense for the Pacers but I don't understand why GS would look to move Ellis with Curry half broken down.

Seems damn unlikely since Ellis is the guy who carries GSW when stuff goes wrong (which happens).

That Dorrel Wright was slow finding his j...is offset in that Danny's shot hasn't been on either. Wright...however...is a bargain guy. straight up, GSW MIGHT be dumb +restless enough to jump into...whatever. While I like Granger...right now, I'd keep Ellis unless Indy adds more than i expect.

There have been 50 bogus "rumors" where GSW is offering Monta for guys who...frankly..don't make any sense. None happened.
GMs, as far as I know, talk all the time, probe for whatever plus deal, but...most such chats don't get anywhere. GSW's general position is that they might trade anyone...if you pay enough. Meanwhile, they have not wanted to trade Ellis or Curry. Indy? Indy's guy they count on is Granger, much as for GSW it's been Ellis. Indy won't want to add what it would take.

Not gonna happen.

We have someone who can create his own shot. Lance Stephenson. I'd rather let him develop and trade Granger for a similarly-sized (physically) piece. I'd trade him for an Iggy or a Crash or Batum + pieces, for example.

laydo wrote:No! Absolutely no!

Ellis is a good SG, but he's undersized and has some off-court issues. He used to hurt his knee and rest for almost half or more season simply bucause he played the scooter. That's something harm for the team chemisty.

The Pacers just got back in the playoffs last season, and it's quiet reasonalbe that this season they are going to challenge to be one of the contenders in the East. So, if the Pacers are moving Granger, they don't just get youth or picks in return. They would seek for the upgrade.

And George Hill for Wes Johnson? WTH is that?

If the team were to hold a grudge against Ellis for a scooter accident he got into 4 years ago, then they have bigger issues than "chemistry" to worry about.

This trade would obviously hurt a bit defensively, but there would be a primary consistent scoring option that can not only create for himself but create for others as well. If this rumor is true I would definitely do it in a heartbeat. Watching Granger trying to create for himself with his lack of dribbling skills as well as his awkward inability to finish around the rim is hard to watch. If they are going to trade Granger it's best to do it while he still has high value.

My Warriors are a hot mess. You should absolutely trade with them because they are the dumb money in every trade. Please crush us tonight. Getting lucky in the draft is likely our only way forward, and we don't even get to keep our draft pick unless it ends up top 7.

^^^ Why did GS overpay for DLee? I'm not talking hindsight, the Warriors were bidding against themselves when they gave him 15 per.

I think the short answer is that the warriors have to overpay other offers by at least 25% in order to get players. This makes it appear that we are bidding against ourselves.

Pacersike wrote:Start Ellis and Hill and let Hibbert initiate more offense. DC of the bench

It makes sense for the Pacers but I don't understand why GS would look to move Ellis with Curry half broken down.

Because we want to tank. (I hope.)

Ok, but then gettting Granger doesn't make any sense.

Miller4ever wrote:We have someone who can create his own shot. Lance Stephenson. I'd rather let him develop and trade Granger for a similarly-sized (physically) piece. I'd trade him for an Iggy or a Crash or Batum + pieces, for example.

I wouldn't trade Granger for Iggy with his tendonitis problems and I don't think the Blazers would add anything on top of Batum in a trade. Batum is younger and will probably get less than Granger in his new contract. I don't think it makes sense for either team to trade with each other, especially after signing David West. Collison(24), George(21), Batum(23), West(31), Hibbert(25). We're already young enough and that would leave the roster with virtually no veteran leadership.

Also, when you say Lance Stephenson can create his own shot, you mean driving to the basket? If you mean jump shooting, I don't know why people think this guy can shoot. I watched him at Cincinnati and he can't shoot. That's why he went from lottery pick coming out of high school to second round pick after one year of college. He's really talented but the guy can't shoot. I hope that changes but anyone who currently believes he is capable of shooting is confused. He played 12 games last season and shot 33.3% from the field, 0% from three. He has played 11 games this season and shot 26.7% from the field, 0% from 3. In college, he shot 44.0% from the field and 21.9% from three. If by creating his own shot you mean he can drive to the basket, sure. Otherwise, I don't consider bricking a jumper as creating a shot. The guy flat out can't shoot and his stats show just that. You guys are free to believe he can but I don't know what you're watching. Maybe he'll pull a DeRozan and become awesome at shooting jumpers/3's but for now, he has made 0% in the NBA and 26.7% in college.

And before someone brings up Bird's comments about Stephenson, keep in mind he was trying to do everything he could to move up and take Luke Jackson in the 2004 draft.

1. Dwight Howard
2. Emeka Okafor
3. Ben Gordon
5. Devin Harris
7. Luol Deng
9. Andre Iguodala
11. Andris Biedrins
14. Kris Humphries
15. Al Jefferson
17. Josh Smith
18. JR Smith
19. Dorrell Wright
20. Jameer Nelson
24. Delonte West
25. Tony Allen
26. Kevin Martin
27. Sasha Vujacic
28. Beno Udrih
31. Anderson Varejao
39. Chris Duhon
44. Trevor Ariza

Luke Jackson went 10th and we drafted David Harrison with the 30th pick. I love the current team Bird has built but my point is, I'm not going to take his comments about Stephenson as gospel when out of all the guys in that draft, he wanted Luke Jackson. Not to mention, Anderson Varaejao went the next pick after Harrison. Also in 2006, he took Shawne Williams at 17 while Rajon Rondo went 21st and Kyle Lowry went 24th. Then he traded multiple 2nd rounders to take James White with the first pick of the 2nd round(31st) while Craig Smith went 36th, Daniel Gibson went 42nd and Paul Milsap went 47th.

Again, I love where Bird has gotten us and you're going to make mistakes drafting players, but his assessment of Luke Jackson and trying to trade up for him in a draft that deep doesn't exactly instill a lot of confidence that Lance Stephenson is the most talented player on the roster as he claims. I'll look the other way on Shawne Williams over Rondo because that draft wasn't deep but yeah... Stephenson needs to prove what Bird is saying before I believe Bird because I think Bird is high if he believes Stephenson is the best player on the team. He made similar outrageous comments about Luke Jackson and James White.

So anyways... I hope he's right about Lance Stephenson but I think a lot of our fans are a little too confident in Lance Stephenson's ability based on Bird's comments. I won't be surprised if he becomes a good player but I also won't be surprised if he ends up doing virtually nothing. If we compare him to other New York high school basketball players that were hyped up, he definitely didn't tear up the college ranks like Melo. He's been more like Telfair who was hyped as the next great pg but has struggled. Whether he ever finds his game is beyond me, I hope he does. I really haven't noticed anything special about him although he has had little playing time and is still young. He's only had 1 or 2 good games out of 23 though. If you ask me(nobody would because most here disagree), he's currently just a younger version of Dahntay Jones. 6'5 220 - 6'6 225. Both are slashers that are better off limiting their jump shots to 15 feet, maybe 10. If he can learn to become a good passer, he really doesn't have to be a good shooter. Although he should be able to take advantage of shorter defenders. Regardless, I think he'll have to find his niche as a pg or sf unless he does something about his awful shooting. Preferably pg.

Probably just some guy trying to get attention but:

http://www.sulia.com/post/golden-state- ... bd3b80c21/

Warriors still hold interest in Danny Granger, though Indiana won't trade him. But if you think about it, what's the better tandem: Paul George/Granger or Paul George/Monta? Perhaps the better question is what's the better trio: Collison/George/Granger or Collison/Ellis/George? ... I'd have to go with the former

I have to admit, Collison with Ellis in the backcourt is asking for problems and since our staff doesn't think Hill can run the point, it doesn't look like it will ever happen.

Monta could be a Manu-style 6th man who plays starters minutes but does not start. That way you could have him run the point when Collison is resting. It frees up a roster spot you would otherwise spend on a backup PG.