Sam Amico: Rockets have a "keen eye" on Danny Granger

On defense definitely, but on offense I don't think it matters -- they would probably be interchangeable in the flow of the offense.

 

I think you need to make a serious investment at the 5 behind Asik if this is going to be your style of play. Our run game only works efficiently with a wall in the middle who can swallow rebounds and get you out on the break quickly.

Parsons, Granger and Asik are all good to great team defenders. Harden and Lin have shown the potential to be good to great defenders but have been inconsistent...and at times just plain bad man defenders after seeing an increase to their workloads.

if this was a halfcourt team that starting 5 would have the potential to be lockdown, similar to the Heat's small ball. our fast style of play compounds our defensive lulls methinks.

 

Hey, here's a crazy idea vis a vis the question of who defends the 4 if the Rockets acquired Granger and started him along side Parsons.

You would not want to sacrifice Parson's perimeter defense on defending 4's. But, considering how terribly poor Harden has been guarding the perimeter, would it be possible to hide him on less offensive minded PF's? Or even PF's like Bonner who are just spot up shooters anyway. Then, with Parsons and Granger gaurding the perimeter, the defense on the team might actually improve.

 

We are a mediocre team right now. The question is what you have to give up for Granger and how it hamstrings you long term. If the Rockets can get him without giving up any major assets (Parsons), it is worth it for a few reasons. First, having Granger and Harden already on the team will make the Rockets more attractive to free agents. Second, Granger fits the Rockets offensive system perfectly.

 

Also, bigger 4's usually cannot run the floor well and if the Rockets dictate the pace, you will not see many chances for set plays for the bigger 4's.

 

I like the idea of a rotation that gives Parson and Granger @ the 4. But it feels like we would different back up center. Another Asik type. Smith is really not that good on the defensive end.

 

Keep in mind, he'll be 30 in April and he's coming off a knee injury. He's locked up through next season at $14 mil, and plays the exact same position as Parsons. No doubt he's a great player, but he is in decline. If we are contending next year, getting him is a no-brainer. If not, i think there are some questions. Of course it all depends on what we are giving up. If the price is low, i don't see a lot of down-side, especially given how short the contract is. If the price is high, i would probably be against trading for him.

 

I agree with you. I do not think this would be a finished product. The Rockets would still have numerous assets and cap space. I personally do not think that Asik will be a Rocket in a season or two. He simply hurts their offense too much. I believe someone like Gortat is far more likely.

Defense will be a work in progress, and you need an interior presence, but over the last few seasons team defense has become far more important, especially with a high pace. The Rockets will never be an elite defensive team with the offense they want to run, but they can be average.

 

If Rockets get Granger w/o losing Parson, PPat is losing starting job not Parsons.

My guess Parson would be listed as PF and Granger SF.

 

Adding a player like Granger without giving up any of our core 4 would be great (if he can get 100% healthy again). He is a great shooter, can create for himself or others, is a decent defender and a great second tier star. And we should still have enough cap space to get a player like Millsap.

The problem is: would a package of our bench players be enough to pry him away from Indiana? His contract isn't horrible and he might fit nicely next to George. I am sure they would be willing to trade him, but they don't have to. So I think it would take a much better package to get him.

But if we could and then to on and sign Millsap, well I really like that lineup:

Lin/Douglas (or Beverly)
Harden/Parsons (or Douglas)
Granger/Parsons
Millsap/Parsons (or Patterson)
Asik/Smith

I don't know if that is a championship team, but it would be a real fun team that's hard to stop.

 

Or they could just move Parsons to the bench. That way the Rockets would have a starting caliber player coming in off the bench like many of the better teams in the NBA have. And because he can play the 2-4 position makes him a dangerous weapon.

But if the Rockets want to upgrade at the small forward, without having to trade away assets _ I think Iggy would be a better option. Lock down perimeter player and he can do just about everything offensively on the court. He makes the team better offensively and defensively.

Just my opinion though.

 

Watching Gasol recently setting screens for Kobe/Nash with Howard out, I think I rather take flier for him. Samething 1 year left on contract which leave Rockets flexibility in 2014. Laker potential paying up the butt in luxury tax, so DM could get him for cheap.

 

a) And just how do we get Iggy? The nuggets only just grabbed him to make him the centrepiece of their team. [he's not a centerpiece, but that's their problem]

b) Granger is a far superior offensive player to Iguodala.


Granger would be an excellent pickup. I'm certain we could offer the Pacers depth and salary cap space this summer (ie, take on Green's contract as well) and they might perhaps pay us a pick for the privilege
[Patterson/ Delfino/ Douglas/ Aldrich for Granger/Green/pick works]

 

I think the idea of who should play at the 4 spot is irrelevant.

You can't have two players of Granger's/Parson's caliber and style ultimately on a championship team. One, you're not going to win any championships with either as a starting 4. The Rockets struggle enough as is against bigger teams when they go small. It's way too much to put on Asik. Second, they are both ultimately going to require meaningful contracts. You're going to have to spread you contracts around by position more evenly.

The hole is clearly at PF.

Meaning getting Granger without giving up any of Parsons, Harder, Asik and Lin is beneficially because it gives you the flexibility to then trade Parsons.

I know it doesn't seem to make sense to trade Parsons, but I think for the same reason we think he has more value than a Granger, he actually does have more value than a Granger. Younger, considerably cheaper for at least 2 years, not coming off an injury.

You only trade Parsons for a legitimate return. You don't trade him for Pau, or Millsap. But you see if Minny budges on Love, or Portland budges on Aldridge.

If that doesn't happen, that's fine, too, given Granger's contract is only 1.5 more years. I'd still argue you'd want to generalize minimize lineups with either Parsons or Granger at the 4 if going against a true PF, but certainly you would use it some.

 

How do you do Parson for Granger and then Parsons for Love??

 

you crazy if you think pacers will trade granger without getting parsons in return...

 

An inefficient Kevin Martin with slightly better defense.

No thanks. Oh, he shoots nothing but 3 pointers, Morey's fantasy player.

 

He's had minor knee injuries going all the way back to college, absolutely nothing major, but they add up with age, and this last one kept him out 3 months. It was only tendonitus, but that's the kind of thing that doesn't usually improve with age. it's likely to reoccur. No telling how big of an issue it will be going forward. i don't think you pass on Granger for knee issues given the lack of severity, but i'm also not a Dr.

The good thing about his situation is that he's not locked-up long-term at big money. There's very little risk in trading for him as long as you are not giving up too much. I don't think there's any chance we give up Parsons to rent Granger for 1.5 seasons, but i do think there's a chance we give up Jones or D-mo. Sadly i would probably be upset given that i have high hopes for both, but i don't see how Indy parts with him for less.

Still, Granger does not make us a contender and it's hard for me to understand how he fits into our rebuilding process. I guess it all depends on what we give up.