Was Danny Granger on the same level as Paul George before the injuries?

[bdreason]

Danny G had a better peak (so far), but boy was that peak short. If George can string together a few seasons with his current production it won't be much of an argument. Even prime Danny G was missing like 20 games a season.

[CP3PO]

Danny G had a better peak (so far), but boy was that peak short. If George can string together a few seasons with his current production it won't be much of an argument. Even prime Danny G was missing like 20 games a season.

Granger never had the MVP buzz of George.

[bizil]

Except he can't. Post up proof that he can score better than Granger or stop trolling. Granger was a more efficient, better shooter across the board and on higher volume to boot.

I aint trolling!! Check my pedigree on here!! I'm ALL BUSINESS!!! And SECONDLY, LEARN HOW TO READ!!! I NEVER SAID George was a better scorer than Granger. I SAID he can score just as good. Granger's two best scoring seasons came at 67 games (25.8) and 62 games (24.1).

ANYTIME Granger played OVER 70 games, his best two scoring seasons were 20.5 and 19.6. Whenever George did the same, his best two scoring seasons were 23.4 and 21.7. PG isn't as efficient as Granger was, but at the same time George is more DYNAMIC scoring than Granger was.

George is capable of MANY OF the things Granger could do scoring wise. BUT Granger could NEVER be as dynamic DOMINATING a game scoring with freak athletic ability. So ONCE AGAIN, I NEVER said George was better than Granger scoring. I SAID they were even. AND EVEN IF u prefer Granger to George scoring, it isn't by much. So if u wanna disagree with me, THEN FINE!! But don't get on this site ACCUSING me of trolling!!! I don't consider EITHER guy on the scoring level of a Durant, Bron, or Melo ANYWAY!! Saying PG is just as good of a scorer as Granger ISN'T a stretch...

[nightprowler10]

PG was better 3 years ago than Granger ever was. Much bigger impact on his team.

[feyki]

Granger's 100 poss numbers in his prime(09-11) ;

33.5 Pts , 7.5 RB , 4 Ast , 1.6 Stl , 1.3 Blk , %58 TS

PG's this season ;

33 Pts , 9.5 RB , 6 Ast , 2.7 Stl , 0.5 Blk , %55 TS


Granger was better shooter (and he had less to's) and better shotblocker .

George is better rebounder,playmaker,on ball defender and as good as Granger on scoring volume .

[Smoke117]

Granger wasn't as versatile or even as good of a defender.

He wasn't a good defender, period. Paul George is one of the best in the league...huge difference on the defensive end.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Granger's 100 poss numbers in his prime(09-11) ;

33.5 Pts , 7.5 RB , 4 Ast , 1.6 Stl , 1.3 Blk , %58 TS

PG's this season ;

33 Pts , 9.5 RB , 6 Ast , 2.7 Stl , 0.5 Blk , %55 TS


Granger was better shooter (and he had less to's) and better shotblocker .

George is better rebounder,playmaker,on ball defender and as good as Granger on scoring volume .

Why would you post up 3 seasons of Granger (with one being much worse than his other two) and compare it to one season of George (his best season)? Either compare their best single seasons against each other or compare their best 3 seasons against each other or compare their best span of 3 consecutive seasons against each other. Arbitrarily comparing 3 of Granger's seasons against George's best season makes absolutely no sense and is disingenuous to the debate at hand.

If you take Granger's best season and stack it up against George's best or if you take Granger's 3 best and stack them up against George's best 3 or if you take Granger's best 3 consecutive seasons and stack them up against George's best 3 consecutive series, it all shows that Granger is clearly the better volume scorer (scoring more points on better efficiency and shooting across the board.

It's also disingenuous to say that George is flat-out a better play-maker. Yes, he has a small assist edge, but at the expense of more turnovers. He also has a higher usage rate, the ball is in his hands more. The biggest edge George has is in the rebounding department. Granger's offense is as much better than George's defense as George's defense is compared to Granger's defense. George might be very slightly more impactful overall, but Granger has an argument to say the least.

[Kawhi]

I remember how everyone in the country thought Larry Legend had traded for the Larry O'Brien trophy when he made the Granger/Turner deal.

[Jasper]

For those that who did watch him, how does he compare to Paul George in terms of being a franchise caliber player?

sorry but the first question in my mind is HOW OLD ARE YOU ?

These guys are still in the league last time I looked.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

I aint trolling!! Check my pedigree on here!! I'm ALL BUSINESS!!! And SECONDLY, LEARN HOW TO READ!!! I NEVER SAID George was a better scorer than Granger. I SAID he can score just as good. Granger's two best scoring seasons came at 67 games (25.8) and 62 games (24.1).

ANYTIME Granger played OVER 70 games, his best two scoring seasons were 20.5 and 19.6. Whenever George did the same, his best two scoring seasons were 23.4 and 21.7. PG isn't as efficient as Granger was, but at the same time George is more DYNAMIC scoring than Granger was.

George is capable of MANY OF the things Granger could do scoring wise. BUT Granger could NEVER be as dynamic DOMINATING a game scoring with freak athletic ability. So ONCE AGAIN, I NEVER said George was better than Granger scoring. I SAID they were even. AND EVEN IF u prefer Granger to George scoring, it isn't by much. So if u wanna disagree with me, THEN FINE!! But don't get on this site ACCUSING me of trolling!!! I don't consider EITHER guy on the scoring level of a Durant, Bron, or Melo ANYWAY!! Saying PG is just as good of a scorer as Granger ISN'T a stretch...

But he can't score just as good. You haven't posted any facts or statistics proving that he can. What does games played have to do with anything? Granger is less durable than George. Okay, and?

Why are you trying to troll me? 'Anytime Granger played over 70 games...'



Are you ESPN? What's with the arbitrary cut-off to push your agenda? I could make up something like that, too. Granger only has two seasons where he played over 70 games. Too small of a sample size to prove anything one way or the other. No one here is arguing that Granger has LeBron level durability. We already know he's fragile. All I'm saying is that when they are both on the court, he put up more points on better shooting across the board.

Not only that, but here's another stat for you: Granger averaged more minutes per game than George up until his injury. Not only that, but he played more seasons up to that point than George has played for his entire career (even counting George's season last year where he played only 6 games). So if you really want to look at it like that, Granger had far more NBA minutes under his belt and wear on his body, and was still putting up better scoring numbers on higher volume.

So George is a more dynamic scorer than Granger ever was because he's a freak athlete, yet has worse efficiency across the board? Why isn't he using all of that 'freak athletic' ability to get easy buckets in the paint or in transition then? Shouldn't he at least have higher 2P% or something? How is it possible he has less attempts from inside the arc on worse efficiency then? That in addition to Granger being able to shoot better from 3-point land and the line tells me George's 'more dynamic scoring due to freak athleticism' isn't all that special and is overstated to say the least.

They're not even at all, though. Better efficiency across the board on higher volume. You just can't argue against that. Better offensive rating, better PER, better offensive winshares, etc. What more do you want? If Granger is a better scorer than George, but not by much, the same can be said for the defensive end where Granger lacks the same exact 8 in defensive rating that he holds over George in offensive rating. You can't have it both ways. And I disagree about it not being a stretch that George is just as good of a scorer as Granger. He clearly isn't. All objective stats and advanced stats point to Granger being a better scorer than George, at least comparing this season of George (which is his best season) to Granger's best.

[Kawhi]

sorry but the first question in my mind is HOW OLD ARE YOU ?

These guys are still in the league last time I looked.

Granger isn't.

[JohnnySic]

I liked Granger's game better. Reminded me of a poor man's Pierce/Carmelo.

[feyki]

Why would you post up 3 seasons of Granger (with one being much worse than his other two) and compare it to one season of George (his best season)? Either compare their best single seasons against each other or compare their best 3 seasons against each other or compare their best span of 3 consecutive seasons against each other. Arbitrarily comparing 3 of Granger's seasons against George's best season makes absolutely no sense and is disingenuous to the debate at hand.

If you take Granger's best season and stack it up against George's best or if you take Granger's 3 best and stack them up against George's best 3 or if you take Granger's best 3 consecutive seasons and stack them up against George's best 3 consecutive series, it all shows that Granger is clearly the better volume scorer (scoring more points on better efficiency and shooting across the board.

It's also disingenuous to say that George is flat-out a better play-maker. Yes, he has a small assist edge, but at the expense of more turnovers. He also has a higher usage rate, the ball is in his hands more. The biggest edge George has is in the rebounding department. Granger's offense is as much better than George's defense as George's defense is compared to Granger's defense. George might be very slightly more impactful overall, but Granger has an argument to say the least.

Actually , i don't think George peaked yet . He was going to that way when league began . But he slowed down and been very inconsistent since mid-december .

Before mid-december , He played with 28-8-4 and with %59 TS .

But anyway , okay . Let's compare them peak to peak ;

35.5 Pts , 7 RB , 3.8 Ast , 1.4 Stl , 2 Blk , 3.4 To , %58.4 TS and 114 Ortg , 109 Drtg

33 Pts , 9.9 RB , 5.7 Ast , 2.7 Stl , 0.5 Blk , 4.7 To , %55.4 TS and 106 Ortg , 101 Drtg

..

They have %2 percentage of points per possesions differantial in their seasons .

So ,

34.8 Pts , 7 RB , 3.7 Ast , 1.45 Stl , 2.05 Blk , 3.45 To , %57.2 TS , 111.7 Ortg , 106.8 Drtg

33.6 Pts , 9.9 RB , 5.8 Ast , 2.65 Stl , 0.45 Blk , 4.6 To , %56.5 TS , 108.1 Ortg , 103 Drtg

There are 0.8 Pts , 2.9 RB , 2.1 Ast , 1.15 To , %0.7 TS and 3.8 Def poss rating differantial over here .

Granges has less assists means isn't only he has less assist , he has more assisted scores . Probably around %2 . So , 1.2 gonna be around 0.9 .

2.9 rebounds probably valued as 2 possesions .

2.1 assists means around 2-2.5 points effect to the game .

1.15 turnovers = 1.15 possesions .

%0.7 TS means 2.1 points .

And there's 3.8 defensive differantial . W/out Rebounding that would 2.9 . Oliver overrate rebounding on defence . So , i select w/out rebounding number .


And result ;

Granger was better on offence with 0.3 +/- .

George is better on defence with 2.9 +/- .

George has 2.6 Total +/- than Granger had as mathematically .

Edit ; oopps , i had few mistakes .

And Oliver underrate feeding teammates and overrate shooting . If you do pick his calculation , Both have +5 . So draw . But as i said , he underrate playmaking and overrate shooting ( also overrate rebounding on defence ) .

[bizil]

But he can't score just as good. You haven't posted any facts or statistics proving that he can. What does games played have to do with anything? Granger is less durable than George. Okay, and?

Why are you trying to troll me? 'Anytime Granger played over 70 games...'



Are you ESPN? What's with the arbitrary cut-off to push your agenda? I could make up something like that, too. Granger only has two seasons where he played over 70 games. Too small of a sample size to prove anything one way or the other. No one here is arguing that Granger has LeBron level durability. We already know he's fragile. All I'm saying is that when they are both on the court, he put up more points on better shooting across the board.

Not only that, but here's another stat for you: Granger averaged more minutes per game than George up until his injury. Not only that, but he played more seasons up to that point than George has played for his entire career (even counting George's season last year where he played only 6 games). So if you really want to look at it like that, Granger had far more NBA minutes under his belt and wear on his body, and was still putting up better scoring numbers on higher volume.

So George is a more dynamic scorer than Granger ever was because he's a freak athlete, yet has worse efficiency across the board? Why isn't he using all of that 'freak athletic' ability to get easy buckets in the paint or in transition then? Shouldn't he at least have higher 2P% or something? How is it possible he has less attempts from inside the arc on worse efficiency then? That in addition to Granger being able to shoot better from 3-point land and the line tells me George's 'more dynamic scoring due to freak athleticism' isn't all that special and is overstated to say the least.

They're not even at all, though. Better efficiency across the board on higher volume. You just can't argue against that. Better offensive rating, better PER, better offensive winshares, etc. What more do you want? If Granger is a better scorer than George, but not by much, the same can be said for the defensive end where Granger lacks the same exact 8 in defensive rating that he holds over George in offensive rating. You can't have it both ways. And I disagree about it not being a stretch that George is just as good of a scorer as Granger. He clearly isn't. All objective stats and advanced stats point to Granger being a better scorer than George, at least comparing this season of George (which is his best season) to Granger's best.

You're a clown FLAT OUT!! U are giving me ALL THIS SHIT because I said Paul George and Danny Granger are EVEN in terms scoring ability? LMAO You called me A TROLL because I think that. Check my rep bro... I DISAGREE with what u said. That doesn't MAKE ME a troll!!

U could ask ANY NBA analyst and they WOULD TELL u one of three things:

- George and Granger are even scoring wise

- George is a better scorer than Granger scoring but not by much

- Granger is a better scorer than George but not by much

Any of those three answers is SUITABLE for me!! I can agree to DISAGREE with people. But once u call me a TROLL, u making shit personal... Take these basketball players ***** out of your mouth! And LEARN to respectively disagree with people. And for the record, George SMOKES Granger as player!!! Granger NEVER REACHED George's level as a player!! Any NBA analyst on ESPN, NBA TV, or ABC would agree with my post BEFORE YOURS EASILY on this topic!!

[bizil]

Actually , i don't think George peaked yet . He was going to that way when league began . But he slowed down and been very inconsistent since mid-december .

Before mid-december , He played with 28-8-4 and with %59 TS .

But anyway , okay . Let's compare them peak to peak ;

35.5 Pts , 7 RB , 3.8 Ast , 1.4 Stl , 2 Blk , 3.4 To , %58.4 TS and 114 Ortg , 109 Drtg

33 Pts , 9.9 RB , 5.7 Ast , 2.7 Stl , 0.5 Blk , 4.7 To , %55.4 TS and 106 Ortg , 101 Drtg

..

They have %2 percentage of points per possesions differantial in their seasons .

So ,

34.8 Pts , 7 RB , 3.7 Ast , 1.45 Stl , 2.05 Blk , 3.45 To , %57.2 TS , 111.7 Ortg , 106.8 Drtg

33.6 Pts , 9.9 RB , 5.8 Ast , 2.65 Stl , 0.45 Blk , 4.6 To , %56.5 TS , 108.1 Ortg , 103 Drtg

There are 0.8 Pts , 2.9 RB , 2.1 Ast , 1.15 To , %0.7 TS and 3.8 Def poss rating differantial over here .

Granges has less assists means isn't only he has less assist , he has more assisted scores . Probably around %2 . So , 0.8 gonna be around 0.5 .

2.9 rebounds probably valued as 2 possesions .

2.1 assists means around 2-2.5 points effect to the game .

1.15 turnovers = 1.15 possesions .

%0.7 TS means 2.1 points .

And there's 3.8 defensive differantial .


And result ;

George is better on offence with 0.25 +/- .

George also better on defence with 3.8 +/- .

George has 4.05 Total +/- than Granger had as mathematically

Well said! George HASN'T even peaked yet. And he's doing this off of that terrible injury he suffered. Granger or George NEVER PROVED to be alpha dog level scorers over a 5-7 year stretch anyway.

The guys like Bron, Melo, Durant, etc. have proven that. I think George is gonna prove to be that kind of scorer. Granger due to injuries didn't prove that. In three of the seasons he averaged 20 points, two of them happened when he missed a minimum of 15 games.

So it's not like Granger was this long term prolific scorer. Granger is SEVEN YEARS older than PG. And he came in the L in TEN YEARS AGO!! For people to say Granger was EVER a much better scorer than PG is laughable!!