Granger vs Gay

[granger05]

There's an ESPN Insider article comparing Danny Granger to Rudy Gay.

Expurgated version:

Think of them as the other guys. As small forwards go, Rudy Gay and Danny Granger operate in the shadows of their much more celebrated swingman brethren...But who is the better player?

Shooting
Gay: 8.5 (out of 10)
Granger: 9

Ballhandling
Gay: 7.5
Granger: 7.5

Athletic ability
Gay: 10
Granger: 7.5

Defense
Gay: 8.5
Granger: 7

Passing
Gay: 7
Granger: 7.5

Conclusion
Gay: 41.5
Granger: 38.5

Granger may be the former All-Star, but Gay has proved to be the better player. For several years now we've been waiting for him to take his game to the proverbial next level, and that appears to have happened this season. Gay's numbers across the board aren't much different, but his decision-making, leadership and defensive improvements have made him a more well-rounded player.

The 2012 playoffs give Gay an opportunity to kick open the door and step into the ranks of elite NBA small forwards. Given his drive, ability and potential, the idea of Gay becoming a top-3 small forward (behind James and Anthony) looks more and more like a possibility.

There's little difference statistically between Gay and Granger, but two pillars of the modern small forward put Gay ahead: athleticism and defense. Granger has played without flash or fanfare for much of his career as a perpetually overlooked, quiet star. It works for Indiana, but as small forwards go, Gay is simply the better player.

As a biased Pacer fan, I'd take Granger even if they were paid the same (Gay is due about $3million more PER SEASON each of the years Danny is under contract and then as another $19+million player option after that). The difference in their total here is almost entirely due to the athleticism category and athleticism is great, but only when it makes you a better basketball player. If being athletic is what makes him a better defender then you're already counting his athleticism and if it doesn't make him a better passer, shooter or ball handler then it doesn't make him a better basketball player.

Also, Memphis was better last season without Rudy Gay, at least in the playoffs. So I don't think that Gay's leadership is looking like a plus.

[Wizop]

I sure wouldn't swap them even and risk the chemistry loss. I remember years ago we traded a young Alex English for an old George McGinnis thinking it would put us over the top as we were headed towards the playoffs for the first time in a while. the team got worse even though George had more to give even that late in his career than a young Alex could offer but the starters just didn't like being pushed aside for George. Bob Leonard was our GM and I've always thought the fact that the deal didn't work cost him his job. ironically, Donnie Walsh was the Denver GM. anyway,

Danny has adjusted to being one of many this year. the ultimate question for us is not who could win a game of horse but whether the Pacers would win more games with Danny or Rudy.

[Miller4ever]

That's 5 over-generalized categories. This is not the first time this debate has taken place, and it's nowhere near the most extensive.

[celtspacers]

Theres alot of difference in Granger and Gays game. Gays alot more willing to pass. Gay handles the ball alot better. Grangers more of a chuck up 30 shots to get 15 pts guy. Gay is by far the better player.

[Moooose]

I kinda agree Gay would be the better overall player but our boy Danny is really just right behind.

[Indy2thaWindy]

The only real negative about Rudy is his contract, but he'd be a much better fit here than Danny IMO. Like celtspacers said he's a much better ballhandler and a more willing passer. He's younger too. There is no reason to think he won't get better while Granger has most likely reached his ceiling.

[Indy2thaWindy]

Granger's ballhandling and passing should be in the 3 or 4 area, at most 5 too.

[Miller4ever]

Granger is actually more efficient than Gay. Better TS%, but also more points per shot attempt.

[Indy2thaWindy]

Rudy doesn't get to the line enough. I think it would be different though here if we put the ball in his hands like we do with Granger. He'll get to the rim much easier than Granger does. It seems like the only time Granger ever gets into the paint with the ball is on an offensive rebound. Even on fastbreaks he usually pulls up for a 16 footer.

[Miller4ever]

They both have good go-to- jumper moves, but Gay can't shoot the 3 as well. It really raises Granger's scoring production and efficiency and stretches the floor more. Unlike Gay, you have to close out hard on Granger. It opens things up.

They play different roles, though.

[Nuntius]

Granger has reached his ceiling but his game is not going to wither away when he loses his athleticism. He will continue to contribute even at 33+. Just like Paul Pierce.

Gay is much younger and probably has a higher ceiling but will he continue to contribute the same when he loses his athleticism? I'm not sure about it.

[Boneman2]

To be fair Granger reached his ceiling just before his prime, and he has been the same every since.

I think Gay has hit his too.

The only comparison I need to see is who is more effective for their respective team. Memphis actually plays worse with Gay in the lineup, and Indy plays better with Granger in the lineup.

The fact this article says Granger has similar ball-handling and passing to Gay diminishes the author's credibility, because this is one of the few areas where Gay is superior. Rudy is better at moving w/o the ball and utilizing dribble penetration too.

Granger is superior in strength, overall defense, rebounding, shooting, and actually leading a team.

Danny's age and Rudy's contract equal out.

[tocooks]

Potateo Potato, they are essentially a wash. One thing I will mention is Danny has developed into more of a leader then Gay imo but not so much it sets them apart.