RealGM

Some mud on the wall idea

Flynn/Beasley/Telfair
for
Granger

2011 10-man roster
Rubio/Ridnour
Webster/Johnson/Ellington
Granger/Brewer
Love/Pek
Darko/Pek

Granger is not winning us anything and he's 27 and had some injuries. Beasley is much younger and has higher upside. Keep him and hope for the best.

Not realistic at all.

How many Granger to Wolves trades do I have to witness? As many as the Rubio to Knicks? This will never happen, no interest in Granger anymore, and I'm sure Indy won't trade him anyways.

Krapinsky wrote:Not realistic at all.

yes it is.

J_Era_3 wrote:How many Granger to Wolves trades do I have to witness? As many as the Rubio to Knicks? This will never happen, no interest in Granger anymore, and I'm sure Indy won't trade him anyways.

so somewhere we added a 24 point scorer?

True ... they likely won't take two potential busts (and piece of toast) in exchange anyway

I'd rather keep Beasley and Flynn and use our cap space for Iggy at the deadline.

Dewey wrote:

J_Era_3 wrote:How many Granger to Wolves trades do I have to witness? As many as the Rubio to Knicks? This will never happen, no interest in Granger anymore, and I'm sure Indy won't trade him anyways.

so somewhere we added a 24 point scorer?

True ... they likely won't take two potential busts (and piece of toast) in exchange anyway

I mean I like him just not for this team, basically what Turnover 21 said. Plus he would get us around 33-35 wins, maybe I'm low balling but no playoffs. I'm a fan of getting Iggy. I think he has really matured as a player and will see his game improve. I'm hoping Turner + Iggy won't work and we can get him.

Pacers laugh you off the phone. Not sure why you guys think Beasley all of a sudden has so much value.

Krapinsky wrote:Pacers laugh you off the phone. Not sure why you guys think Beasley all of a sudden has so much value.

He's dope-free!

Krapinsky wrote:Pacers laugh you off the phone. Not sure why you guys think Beasley all of a sudden has so much value.

The were the eastern team that was after Beasley ... if they offered #10 for Flynn and wanted Beasley ... wouldn't they even consider Flynn/George/Beasley vs. #10/Granger?

I think the only way we do a granger deal is if we are trying to do a celtic makeover and use all of our assets to bring in 2 or 3 big time guys. One 27-year-old borderline all-star will do nothing for the team accept eleveate us to mediocre. I would rather take our chances with Beasley and see what happens.

prefuse73 wrote:I think the only way we do a granger deal is if we are trying to do a celtic makeover and use all of our assets to bring in 2 or 3 big time guys. One 27-year-old borderline all-star will do nothing for the team accept eleveate us to mediocre. I would rather take our chances with Beasley and see what happens.

Can't say I disagree ... I just have more doubts about Beasley and Flynn than most.

The problem here is that on a team with little to be excited about for several seasons, Danny Granger has emerged as IND's fan favorite and the focus of their marketing campaign. His value in that respect probably makes him worth more to IND than any team would reasonably offer for his talent. Add in the fact that Bird has a history of shooting down trades by over-valueing his assets, and I don't think Granger will be traded, at least any time soon. It will be interesting though to see what happens with Paul George.

I don't really want Granger. That'd make us have to focus on winning very soon, and we have players around him that wouldn't be able to do that.

Rubio-Wes-Granger-Love-Darko....pretty average team.

Dewey wrote:

Krapinsky wrote:Pacers laugh you off the phone. Not sure why you guys think Beasley all of a sudden has so much value.

The were the eastern team that was after Beasley ... if they offered #10 for Flynn and wanted Beasley ... wouldn't they even consider Flynn/George/Beasley vs. #10/Granger?

There's a difference in how Indy values the face of their franchise and a late lotto pick, and Beasley/Telfair doesn't seem like a realistic/plausible way to make it up.

prefuse73 wrote:I think the only way we do a granger deal is if we are trying to do a celtic makeover and use all of our assets to bring in 2 or 3 big time guys. One 27-year-old borderline all-star will do nothing for the team accept eleveate us to mediocre. I would rather take our chances with Beasley and see what happens.

I have to agree. I think I would rather see what we have in Beasley and Flynn and move forward from there. Granger would obviously become our best player but he's closer to depreciating in talent than appreciating. A much smaller deal for George could be interesting, but I really want to see the guy play some minutes in the NBA and find out how much he has to work on his game first.

moss_is_1 wrote:I don't really want Granger. That'd make us have to focus on winning very soon, and we have players around him that wouldn't be able to do that.

Rubio-Wes-Granger-Love-Darko....pretty average team.

Rubio: hall of famer
Wes: all star
Granger: all star
Love: replaces Jerry West as NBA logo
Darko: keeping all the refs in check under threat of housing their mums & daughters

you call that "pretty average?"