Position Analysis: Small Forward

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby khmrP on Mon May 06, 2013 7:43 am

lakerland4444 wrote:get andre iguodala!!!!!!!!!!!!!


get me Lebron James!!!!!!!!!!!
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 9956
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby Lakerjones on Mon May 06, 2013 9:13 am

I'm going to reiterate some of what I said in the Pau thread. SF is the position most in need of improvement. Personally, I think the Lebron 2014 idea is pipe. I don't think he's going to be coming here. And regardless, we need to improve this spot desperately as soon as possible. Not a year from now.

I'd do everything I could to trade Pau for Granger with one of their cheaper expiring guards thrown in. This is assuming the Granger is going to be ok with that knee. If he checks out and he's ok, he'd be a nice piece for us. He's exactly what we need - a two way, good defensive young-ish SF that can knock down the three at a high clip at 38% career. Gives you 18 ppg and 5 boards and he's tough. At only 29 he should have several good years left. Not a high fly act, but solid and fits all of our necessary criteria to play alongside a guy like Dwight.

The knee is of course the question mark.

Otherwise, he would save some money in a trade for Gasol (about 4-5 million), he's a solid role playing starter who can put up points and D it up, and he is an expiring so he doesn't interfere at all with the 2014 plan. If he's good you can renegotiate with him at a lesser price. If he's not, then go after Lebron or whoever . . .
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14888
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Mon May 06, 2013 9:41 am

Lakerjones wrote:I'm going to reiterate some of what I said in the Pau thread. SF is the position most in need of improvement. Personally, I think the Lebron 2014 idea is pipe. I don't think he's going to be coming here. And regardless, we need to improve this spot desperately as soon as possible. Not a year from now.

I'd do everything I could to trade Pau for Granger with one of their cheaper expiring guards thrown in. This is assuming the Granger is going to be ok with that knee. If he checks out and he's ok, he'd be a nice piece for us. He's exactly what we need - a two way, good defensive young-ish SF that can knock down the three at a high clip at 38% career. Gives you 18 ppg and 5 boards and he's tough. At only 29 he should have several good years left. Not a high fly act, but solid and fits all of our necessary criteria to play alongside a guy like Dwight.

The knee is of course the question mark.

Otherwise, he would save some money in a trade for Gasol (about 4-5 million), he's a solid role playing starter who can put up points and D it up, and he is an expiring so he doesn't interfere at all with the 2014 plan. If he's good you can renegotiate with him at a lesser price. If he's not, then go after Lebron or whoever . . .


FWIW, Bynum checked out.

And Granger is 30, not 29.
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby Lakerjones on Mon May 06, 2013 10:16 am

^^ Ok, point taken - he turned 30 last month. So he should have a few good years left instead of several.
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14888
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Mon May 06, 2013 10:33 am

Lakerjones wrote:^^ Ok, point taken - he turned 30 last month. So he should have a few good years left instead of several.


I mean, my point is that he's already 30, past what was probably his prime, and so will now be on the decline. He's not... getting better.

I guess I don't get the point of trading for Granger. Does he make us contender worthy next season? I don't think so. So ... why?
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby therealdeal on Mon May 06, 2013 10:41 am

JGC wrote:I mean, my point is that he's already 30, past what was probably his prime, and so will now be on the decline. He's not... getting better.

30 is only the limit of your prime in video games like 2K13. In real life plenty of players are in their prime past 30. In 2009 Kobe was 31. In 2010 Kobe was 32. Hell this season was arguably his best ever and he was 34.

Jordan won Championships into his 30s. So did Duncan. So did Garnett. So did Abdul-Jabbar. 30 is not the limit of someone's "prime" in real life. Players don't start automatically declining just because they've reached 30. They don't suddenly start moving slower and play less effectively. A player doesn't have to 29 to improve their game.
JGC wrote:I guess I don't get the point of trading for Granger. Does he make us contender worthy next season? I don't think so. So ... why?

Because it balances the team more properly. Gives us a 2 way SF that we don't have. Gives Howard more room inside. Gives Kobe more help outside. It's a better fit for our needs.

That's why.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37019
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby Lakerjones on Mon May 06, 2013 10:49 am

^^ Agreed. The point being that we desperately need a 2 way small forward. Granger would provide that - with the caveat I stated - if he's healthy of course.

Right now Pau is an insurance policy if Dwight leaves. None of this happens theoretically until the Howard domino falls. In early July we'll find out. If Dwight stays, Pau is just too big a luxury to keep. He's too expensive and we can fill out the PF spot much easier with less talented but cheaper guys like Hill and Clark (maybe Jamison if he'd come back) that are so much cheaper.

The SF spot is a disaster right now. Pau is our piece to trade to improve there. Granger gives us both some salary relief, a very nice position player, and allows us to amnesty MWP (saving almost 8 million next year). Plus Granger is an expiring contract so he fills the roster out nicely now, and it's a low risk high reward situation going forward. If he works well, negotiate with him for a lower price contract, and still try to attract a number 2 player to go along with Howard - probably a point guard.
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14888
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby therealdeal on Mon May 06, 2013 10:54 am

^ Yep.

In 2014, hopefully Nash retires and you're looking at Granger/Howard for maybe 30 million.

Then you've got at least 20 million to find other pieces to fit around them. A young PG would do wonders.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37019
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Mon May 06, 2013 7:41 pm

therealdeal wrote:
JGC wrote:I mean, my point is that he's already 30, past what was probably his prime, and so will now be on the decline. He's not... getting better.

30 is only the limit of your prime in video games like 2K13. In real life plenty of players are in their prime past 30. In 2009 Kobe was 31. In 2010 Kobe was 32. Hell this season was arguably his best ever and he was 34.

Jordan won Championships into his 30s. So did Duncan. So did Garnett. So did Abdul-Jabbar. 30 is not the limit of someone's "prime" in real life. Players don't start automatically declining just because they've reached 30. They don't suddenly start moving slower and play less effectively. A player doesn't have to 29 to improve their game.


Sorry, but I don't agree that Kobe's best year as a player was in 2009, 2010 nor 2013. IMO, his best year, or his prime season, was the 2005-2006 season when he posted a ridiculous 35.4 PPG highlighted by the famous 80 pt outburst. He may not have won a championship that season but in terms of where he was a player, IMO, that's when he was at his best in terms of athleticism, ability to get to the rim, defense, etc. That isn't to say he wasn't still good in years before or after, but the pinnacle of his physical and mental capabilities came, IMO, in that year. If I could take the Kobe of any season on my team right now, that's the Kobe I'm taking. By the way, he was 27 that year.

Just going through some older players still in the league or recently retired and picking out their 'best' seasons. By best, I'm going to pick what I believe was their best season (and I'll list it in case anyone wants to debate whether it was their best).

Out of the 15 players, only 30 had their prime years at 30 or older. 1 (Nash) had his prime season at 32. The other players were in their 20s. 6 of the players were 27 (what I would consider to be the average 'prime' age). The average age of the 15 below is 27.6 years.

Tim Duncan - 2002-2003 season (age 26).

Ray Allen -2005-2006 season (age 30).

Paul Pierce - 2005-2006 season (age 28).

Kevin Garnett - 2003-2004 season (age 27).

DIrk Nowitzki - 2005-2006 season (age 27).

Jason Kidd - 1998-1999 season (age 25).

Pau Gasol - 2006-2007 season (age 26).

Manu Ginobili - 2007-2008 season (age 30).

Tony Parker - 2008-2009 season (age 26).

Vince Carter - 2004-2005 season (age 27).

Steve Nash - 2006-2007 season (age 32).

Rip Hamilton -2005-2006 season (age 27).

Shaq - 1999-2000 season (age 27).

Chauncey Billups - 2005-2006 season (age 29).

Jermaine O'Neal - 2004-2005 season (age 27).

Didn't include some such as Kenyon Martin (age 26 in best season), Amare Stoudemire (age 25 in best season), Jose Calderon (age 27 in best season), Gerald Wallace (age 27 in best season), Joe Johnson (age 25 in best season), Jerry Stackhouse (age 26 in best season), Andre Miller (age 25 in best season), Peja Stojakovic (age 26 in best season), Mike Bibby (age 27 in best season). Any others? Make a big list and you'll make a list of players in their mid to late 20s and it'll average out to about 27-28 just like I said.

therealdeal wrote:
JGC wrote:I guess I don't get the point of trading for Granger. Does he make us contender worthy next season? I don't think so. So ... why?

Because it balances the team more properly. Gives us a 2 way SF that we don't have. Gives Howard more room inside. Gives Kobe more help outside. It's a better fit for our needs.

That's why.


But if doesn't make us a contender, then I just don't see the point. There are lots of ways to make the team more balanced. Doesn't make them all good ideas, right? But if it nets us a true 2-way player (ideally SF, I agree) and it is a piece we can conceivably see as a long term piece, then I agree, move him.

I just don't see Granger as that piece. He's hurt, and he's not a very efficient player. I think many, cheaper SFs can get you 19 points and 2 assists (Granger's numbers in his last healthy season) if you get them over 15 shots and 5 FTs every game. By the way, Granger had his career year in 2008-2009. He was 25. It's been downward bound ever since.

I'm not sure what settings you're using in 2K13 (I haven't played it) but I think you might want to change them since they appear to be slightly off what happens in the real real world.
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby dj vitus on Mon May 06, 2013 8:40 pm

When therealdeal is talking about "prime" I think he's referring to being a "winner" rather than simply putting up big numbers.

Michael Jordan put up big numbers early in his career, but never won anything until he settled down and played smarter.

That said, I think Granger would get more open looks with us, so that can only mean good things.

You say there are "many" players we can get for cheap that can do 19 and 2. Who?
"Why are they blocking out all the good stuff? They let Sarah Jessica Parker's face on TV and she looks like a foot!!"
User avatar
dj vitus

 
Posts: 9233
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: Walnut, CA by way of Laaaas Vegas!

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby Lakerjones on Mon May 06, 2013 10:25 pm

JGC wrote:
therealdeal wrote:
JGC wrote:I mean, my point is that he's already 30, past what was probably his prime, and so will now be on the decline. He's not... getting better.

30 is only the limit of your prime in video games like 2K13. In real life plenty of players are in their prime past 30. In 2009 Kobe was 31. In 2010 Kobe was 32. Hell this season was arguably his best ever and he was 34.

Jordan won Championships into his 30s. So did Duncan. So did Garnett. So did Abdul-Jabbar. 30 is not the limit of someone's "prime" in real life. Players don't start automatically declining just because they've reached 30. They don't suddenly start moving slower and play less effectively. A player doesn't have to 29 to improve their game.


Sorry, but I don't agree that Kobe's best year as a player was in 2009, 2010 nor 2013. IMO, his best year, or his prime season, was the 2005-2006 season when he posted a ridiculous 35.4 PPG highlighted by the famous 80 pt outburst. He may not have won a championship that season but in terms of where he was a player, IMO, that's when he was at his best in terms of athleticism, ability to get to the rim, defense, etc. That isn't to say he wasn't still good in years before or after, but the pinnacle of his physical and mental capabilities came, IMO, in that year. If I could take the Kobe of any season on my team right now, that's the Kobe I'm taking. By the way, he was 27 that year.

Just going through some older players still in the league or recently retired and picking out their 'best' seasons. By best, I'm going to pick what I believe was their best season (and I'll list it in case anyone wants to debate whether it was their best).

Out of the 15 players, only 30 had their prime years at 30 or older. 1 (Nash) had his prime season at 32. The other players were in their 20s. 6 of the players were 27 (what I would consider to be the average 'prime' age). The average age of the 15 below is 27.6 years.

Tim Duncan - 2002-2003 season (age 26).

Ray Allen -2005-2006 season (age 30).

Paul Pierce - 2005-2006 season (age 28).

Kevin Garnett - 2003-2004 season (age 27).

DIrk Nowitzki - 2005-2006 season (age 27).

Jason Kidd - 1998-1999 season (age 25).

Pau Gasol - 2006-2007 season (age 26).

Manu Ginobili - 2007-2008 season (age 30).

Tony Parker - 2008-2009 season (age 26).

Vince Carter - 2004-2005 season (age 27).

Steve Nash - 2006-2007 season (age 32).

Rip Hamilton -2005-2006 season (age 27).

Shaq - 1999-2000 season (age 27).

Chauncey Billups - 2005-2006 season (age 29).

Jermaine O'Neal - 2004-2005 season (age 27).

Didn't include some such as Kenyon Martin (age 26 in best season), Amare Stoudemire (age 25 in best season), Jose Calderon (age 27 in best season), Gerald Wallace (age 27 in best season), Joe Johnson (age 25 in best season), Jerry Stackhouse (age 26 in best season), Andre Miller (age 25 in best season), Peja Stojakovic (age 26 in best season), Mike Bibby (age 27 in best season). Any others? Make a big list and you'll make a list of players in their mid to late 20s and it'll average out to about 27-28 just like I said.

therealdeal wrote:
JGC wrote:I guess I don't get the point of trading for Granger. Does he make us contender worthy next season? I don't think so. So ... why?

Because it balances the team more properly. Gives us a 2 way SF that we don't have. Gives Howard more room inside. Gives Kobe more help outside. It's a better fit for our needs.

That's why.


But if doesn't make us a contender, then I just don't see the point. There are lots of ways to make the team more balanced. Doesn't make them all good ideas, right? But if it nets us a true 2-way player (ideally SF, I agree) and it is a piece we can conceivably see as a long term piece, then I agree, move him.

I just don't see Granger as that piece. He's hurt, and he's not a very efficient player. I think many, cheaper SFs can get you 19 points and 2 assists (Granger's numbers in his last healthy season) if you get them over 15 shots and 5 FTs every game. By the way, Granger had his career year in 2008-2009. He was 25. It's been downward bound ever since.

I'm not sure what settings you're using in 2K13 (I haven't played it) but I think you might want to change them since they appear to be slightly off what happens in the real real world.


Gotta love the way you are absolutely belaboring this point. So 27-28 is a player's prime? I'd say it's more of a physical peak than his prime which would usually be a stretch of years. I guess in your stretch of years you'd pick 24 - 28 for a prime? I believe it was Phil Jackson that said players were in their prime to win championships between 28 and 32. He supported it with what I said, that during that time the players themselves may have peaked already physically, athletically, but that their minds have caught up with their bodies and the concern is less about attaining skills and nabbing stats than it is about winning a championship at all costs. There's a maturity that comes during that age is very helpful in putting it all together and going all the way.

So again, I guess to you 30 is the new 40 on the court. But to me it's not old. And regardless, with Granger my concern is not about his age but about his knee. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about the guy as far as what you want for Pau. To me, that's a good trade that helps both teams. Who do you want in return for Pau, or do you not want to trade Pau and just let him expire? I don't see that making us a contender either.
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14888
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Mon May 06, 2013 10:45 pm

dj vitus wrote:When therealdeal is talking about "prime" I think he's referring to being a "winner" rather than simply putting up big numbers.

Michael Jordan put up big numbers early in his career, but never won anything until he settled down and played smarter.

That said, I think Granger would get more open looks with us, so that can only mean good things.

You say there are "many" players we can get for cheap that can do 19 and 2. Who?


Hmm. Not sure about that. After all, he did say that this season is arguably Kobe's best ever. Which, wouldn't make sense if he's talking about winning. Plus, his post was in response to my comment which was clearly about playing ability.

Jordan won his first championship in the 1990-1991 season. He was, you guessed it, 27. So if you want to discount his big early numbers, ok, but his best years came in the first 3peat when he was 27/28/29 years old. (In the first 3 peat he shot at least 50%, 5.5 APG and over 30 PPG in each season. He did none of those in any season in his second 3 peat). Either way you slice it, his best years were in his 20s whether you want to define it in terms of his individual skills or winning skills. To his point though, lots of players have won in their 30s, so I don't think being 30 is a deterrent to winning per se, but I do think that if you're trying to get younger, you might want to steer away from a player that is 30 or older since in the vast majority of cases, said player is on the way down at that point.

I agree Granger would get more open looks with us. As would virtually any player playing small forward for us.

As for the 19 and 2, my point is that if you give almost any NBA player more than 15 shot attempts and 5 FT (or enough possessions to average that for a season as Granger did in his most recent healthy season), they will give you about 19 points if not more.

This season, there is only one player in the league that gets the ball enough to take 15 or more shots & 5 FTs that doesn't average 19 points and that player is Demar Derozan but he doesn't shoot any 3s and got slightly more assists. Last season, there were zero, well, except Mr. Granger himself.

I wouldn't mind a 30 year old player, coming off a season where he came in hurt, tried to play, couldn't play, had to shut it down for the season to get surgery, can't pass and never has, isn't an efficient scorer, but can shoot the 3 ball ... but it has to be at the right price. To my point above, if you want 19 pts and 2 assists you can get it for a lot cheaper, in fact you can probably get that for the mini MLE if you really want to give the ball to someone that often for that little production in return.
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Mon May 06, 2013 11:12 pm

Lakerjones wrote:Gotta love the way you are absolutely belaboring this point. So 27-28 is a player's prime? I'd say it's more of a physical peak than his prime which would usually be a stretch of years. I guess in your stretch of years you'd pick 24 - 28 for a prime? I believe it was Phil Jackson that said players were in their prime to win championships between 28 and 32. He supported it with what I said, that during that time the players themselves may have peaked already physically, athletically, but that their minds have caught up with their bodies and the concern is less about attaining skills and nabbing stats than it is about winning a championship at all costs. There's a maturity that comes during that age is very helpful in putting it all together and going all the way.

So again, I guess to you 30 is the new 40 on the court. But to me it's not old. And regardless, with Granger my concern is not about his age but about his knee. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about the guy as far as what you want for Pau. To me, that's a good trade that helps both teams. Who do you want in return for Pau, or do you not want to trade Pau and just let him expire? I don't see that making us a contender either.


I don't ever remember Phil Jackson saying that. If you have a quote, I'd love to see it. How else would I know that you're not just making that up (or, remembered incorrectly?)

We can debate all day about what prime means. There is mental prime, physical prime, winning prime, sub prime, prime rib. But when I said Granger was past his prime, I was referring to his best years as a player. I mean, you didn't think I was referring to his winning prime did you? He's never won. His best years are over. He's already started his descent marked by 4 consecutive years of decline since his best season. He came in to this season hurt, tried to play, couldn't, had to shut it down and get surgery. He's Bynum right now. Lots of question marks. Sure, he may see an uptick here or there but he's on a downward, not upward trend from here on out. For me, I'd like to see the team get younger. If not this year, then definitely in 2014 when we can rebuild.

Even if he were healthy, why would I want to pay $15M for Granger? Because he had an awesome season FOUR years ago? (And 3 years ago). He's inefficient. Only Demar Derozan gets as many FGA and FTA as he does and doesn't score 20 a night. And he can't pass worth a lick. And he doesn't rebound at all. Have you ever watched him play? He hasn't had more assists than turnovers in FOUR seasons. He's a 6-9 forward and has career rebounding averages lower than Jason Kidd and only 0.4 higher than Russell Westbrook. Yes, 6-3 Westbrook!
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby Murdock on Tue May 07, 2013 2:07 am

karacha wrote:^

Well, I think Sasha's contract in Turkey expired this year, so he will be looking for a job. He played well in Europe, on both ends of the floor. He's only 29.

to add to that ... he was never truly healthy since his best season with us ... he is a great role player wish he could get him back
User avatar
Murdock

 
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:33 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby therealdeal on Tue May 07, 2013 9:11 am

This thread is off topic. This is the SF analysis thread.

Fix it.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37019
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Tue May 07, 2013 9:31 am

How is it off topic? We're talking about the merits of Danny Granger. I mentioned I didn't think he'd be a great fit because he's past his prime years.

Then someone started breaking down what 'prime' supposedly means and video games! Haha =)

I think we're good now though ... no?
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby therealdeal on Tue May 07, 2013 9:55 am

I will not warn you again and I will not be baited with snide remarks.

Last chance.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37019
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby khmrP on Tue May 07, 2013 10:13 am

IF Granger can be had, you take that chance, not only can he be semi half way decent Kobe replacement he DOESN'T totally destroy our 2014 plans. Best case scenario he works out and maybe we get him back at a cheaper rate, worse case we dont bring him back waive his bird rights and use that money for 2014 SF. At least that would show Howard that we're trying to improve and not stay stagnant.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 9956
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby therealdeal on Tue May 07, 2013 10:36 am

khmrP wrote:IF Granger can be had, you take that chance, not only can he be semi half way decent Kobe replacement he DOESN'T totally destroy our 2014 plans. Best case scenario he works out and maybe we get him back at a cheaper rate, worse case we dont bring him back waive his bird rights and use that money for 2014 SF. At least that would show Howard that we're trying to improve and not stay stagnant.

Agreed completely.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37019
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby JGC on Tue May 07, 2013 12:13 pm

Ya, me too. After further review, Granger would be a fantastic fit here (his outside shooting esp).

I'm really not sure what I was thinking earlier (maybe still bitter about us not being in the playoffs hehehe).

Granger is good with me. Completely. I am fully on board with you guys here and will continue to support the movement to acquire Granger from here on out.
JGC

 
Posts: 3781
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:07 am

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby C0TT0NCANDY on Tue May 07, 2013 1:30 pm

Granger would be a solid choice, especially since he would be a 1-year rental... but those knees are probably gonna make him retire at an early age... so the risk is certainly acceptable since it would be a high-risk... low-risk situation.
User avatar
C0TT0NCANDY

 
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 5:33 pm
Location: SILVER & GOLD

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby Chillbongo on Tue May 07, 2013 1:32 pm

1 year rental. Get me a Vitti physical and DJ Augustin in the deal and I'll let Pau go.
User avatar
Chillbongo

 
Posts: 3140
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Position Analysis: Small Forward

Postby karacha on Tue May 07, 2013 3:31 pm

Granger would be good, because his contract is not long, he can shoot the 3 and play defense. He takes probably too many shots, but then we need someone who is willing to take over from time to time. The risk is obvious - he can get injured again.... but then, even if he does, it's only one more year of suffering for us. :man10:

If he seems to be doing well, fits with Dwight and is healthy, we can try to offer him a short contract and see how that pans out.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37061
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Previous

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: revgen, Yahoo [Bot] and 14 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.