[綜合外電]Danny Granger

看板PACERS (印第安那溜馬)作者Granger33 (預約下一個Super Star)時間18年前 (2006/05/21 15:58)推噓1(1推 0噓 0→)

留言1則, 1人參與討論串1/1

首先，第一部份這算是過期已久的外電，原文在溜馬官網上： http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_archive.html 內容主要是球迷問到Granger是否該增重的問題（應該是看到對Nets的慘況XD），以及他的位置問題，因為看到Chinapacers.com有Bird對Granger的不足之處一些看法，所以翻譯一下。第二部分就是Chinapacers.com上Bird提到有關Granger的部分。 Q. (Danny) Granger played the three and four spots this year and did a pretty good job for a rookie. He also defended players like Kobe (Bryant), Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson, and Paul Pierce, just to name a few. One analyst here in Sacramento said that if this kid adds 10 to 15 pounds of muscle he could be a nightmare for other teams. I think if he adds the muscle it will improve his post-up game as well as make life much tougher on the guys he will defend next year. What do you think? (From Kirven in Sacramento, Calif.) Q. Granger今年打過3號跟4號位置，而且對一個新人來說他算是打的挺不錯的。他防守過Kobe、Vince Carter、Richard Jefferson和Paul Pierce及其他球員。一個在沙加緬度的球評曾說假如這個孩子增加10-15磅的肌肉，他將會是其他各隊的夢魘。我想假如他多一些肌肉將可以增強他的低位進攻，而明年他所防守的球員日子也會太好過。你認為呢？ A. This answer hinges on how you view Granger's NBA future. If you believe he is best suited to play both forward spots, then it would seem reasonable for him to bulk up a bit in order to better contend with power forwards. My belief is he is better suited to shooting guard as a secondary position and not power forward. 這個答案決定於你怎麼看待Granger的NBA未來。假如你相信他在兩個前鋒是最適合的，那增點重去跟其他大前鋒放對似乎是蠻合理的。但我相信他比較適合把得分後衛當作第二個位置，而非大前鋒。 At 6-9 and 228 pounds, Granger already has an ideal frame for a small forward. His primary physical attributes are quickness, athleticism and footwork. As you mentioned, he has defended shooting guards and small forwards with some effectiveness, showing potential to become a perimeter stopper as he learns the nuances of the game as well as the tendencies of his opponents. Offensively, he has the mid-range and 3-point shooting to blend with the abilities to either post up or drive. To my way of thinking, his skill set screams swingman. 6-9加上228磅，Granger已經有一個小前鋒的理想框架。他主要的體能優勢是敏捷、運動性及腳步。你應該注意過，他在防守得分後衛與小前鋒上比較有效果，並且展現了成為外圍防守終結者（perimeter stopper）的潛力，只要他能更懂得比賽並且能預測對手的行動。在進攻上，他具備的中距離及三分線能力能夠讓他結合體能優勢去打低位或進行切入。在我看來，他的技巧與天賦在在說明了他應當是一個鋒衛搖擺人。 He played semi-regularly as a power forward out of necessity his rookie season and struggled mightily against the bigger bodies. To add bulk could mean two things: it could slow him down, mitigating the advantages of his athleticism, as well as increasing the risk for injury because the extra load his legs must carry. I don't think it's a coincidence that Jermaine O'Neal's two injury-plagued seasons came after he bulked up from 250 to 265, and I'd expect to see him back at his former playing weight in 2006-07. 他在新秀球季不可避免的需要半常態性打些大前鋒的位置，並且跟那些大個子努力抗衡。增重意味著兩件事情：他的速度會減慢，導致減少他在運動力上的優勢，以及因為腳部的負擔加大而增加受傷的風險。我就認為小歐會在他從250磅增重到265磅後連續兩個球季有傷痛困擾不會是一個巧合而已，我也預期小歐會在2006-07球季回到他原本的體重。 I understand your point, and do believe Granger should work to increase his strength – but not his bulk. To do the latter would be an attempt to turn him into something he is not, and those types of experiments generally fail. 我瞭解你的論點，也確實相信Granger應該努力去增加他身體的強度--但絕非是增重。增重是企圖在他身上加些不屬於他的東西，而這種實驗通常都是失敗收場的。以下為Bird的發言： Q：你認為Danny Granger暑假應該怎樣補課？ A：我想Danny跟我一個暑假。很多東西他可以改進的，他是一個很有才華的球員，但 Danny和David Harrison都知道自己要做什麼。David過去兩年都在這裏，今年暑假也一樣，很賣力去練，他喜歡這樣來改善自己。至於Danny，他的控球要改進，還有我發覺他開始沉迷射三分。我寧願他多點像大學時那樣背籃攻，他有很多板斧的，只是需要磨利。 Q：Granger可以打得分後衛嗎？ A：我已經聽過Rick提過幾次，在防守上，我想他的確做得到。但Danny Granger是非常優秀的三號位球員，你可以在防守時擺他在二號位一段時間，也可以客串四號位，但未來我覺得他最好的位置是三號位。明年，他可以打35分鐘一場。 Q：如果和Stojakovic續約了，怎麼保證那麼長時間？ A：他可以打三個位置，所以上陣時間是不用擔心的。 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.123.201.102 ※ 編輯: Granger33 來自: 59.113.217.102 (05/21 21:17)