What about Stuckey for Granger?

Dre Drummond · Post #1 » by **Dre Drummond** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 2:39 pm

Indy could have used more guard help and mainly for Indy this is a salary dump. Saves them $5.75 million this year and gives them a player off the bench who can come in and score... Also would give Indy a traded player exception that could come in value down the road for them.

Detroit takes a risk on a player coming off injury, but the risk is minimal as its a 1 year deal.

Best case scenario would be to trade both Stuck and CV for Granger and actually create more capspace for us but that seems a bit unlikely.

joeposh · Post #2 » by **joeposh** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 2:53 pm

Dre Drummond wrote:Indy could have used more guard help and mainly for Indy this is a salary dump. Saves them $5.75 million this year and gives them a player off the bench who can come in and score... Also would give Indy a traded player exception that could come in value down the road for them.

Detroit takes a risk on a player coming off injury, but the risk is minimal as its a 1 year deal.

Best case scenario would be to trade both Stuck and CV for Granger and actually create more capspace for us but that seems a bit unlikely.

I'd rather do the Gay deal, as no one knows if Granger will ever be starting material again. That said, if all our other options dry up, I'm open to exploring it -- just don't want to trade for another Maggette.

ThirdMan · Post #3 » by **ThirdMan** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 2:59 pm

I like that option better than the Gay trade because I'm more of a fan of Granger and because MU would prob destroy JoeD in any trade.

Post #4 » by **Cowology** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 3:11 pm

My problem with Granger is actually not the contract or injury concerns. I'd be willing to gamble on that given how good a fit he'd be and the low risk implications of a 1 yr contract. But he's 30 yrs old, which means that even IF he works out he's not a long term-solution or somebody we'd wanna bring back on a multi-year contract.

I'm OK with it as a stop-gap, but would prefer to find a younger player that could potentially stay with our core for 3-4 years.

Brt19 · Post #5 » by **Brt19** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 3:15 pm

I like him more than Gay. I say yes. I think he's a realistic, possible target although Indy would rather more depth than one on one trade.

bennett13 · Post #6 » by **bennett13** » Thu Jul 4, 2013 4:13 am

Not going to trade him to a Team that's in their division.