He's a 3-point specialist, nothing more, IMO.

Kstat, who's the better player: Reggie Miller or Ray Allen?

I ask because I was reading a Charley Rosen article a few weeks ago and he said Ray is.

Kstat, what do you think of Charley Rosen's stuff?

Rosen is the kind of writer you would think I'd like to read, but so often his stuff is just so.... wrong.

He listed Jerry West as one of the greatest point guards of all time. That really irked me.

I still like him as an analyst, but anytime he reaches back into history, I want to backhand him.

K...Will Rip average more points with CBill gone? Stuck doesn't take as many shots as CBill did. He should get more opportunities, No?

K is the above question not worth answering?

If so, why?

K is the above question not worth answering?
I never saw it.

I would think Rip would average more points...he certainly plays longer and get more touches with billups gone.

Kstat/Cross/Everyone:

Unless I'm mistaken these are Luther Head's career numbers:

8.8ppg, 2.7 rebs, 2.3 asts, 1.3 tos, 42.2%FG, 39.2%3pt, 76.6%FT

What about him and his game makes you want to sign him and have him play as the 3rd guard?


I think he's been in a system that doesn't fit his style. The Pistons are a much better fit for him.

THat said, he wouldn't be my first choice. He would be on the list, though.

Can you post that list, please?

Can you post that list, please?


1. Stephen Curry
2. Jamal Crawford
3. Ben Gordon
4. Francisco Garcia
5. Bobby Jackson
6. Luther Head

Jamal Crawford? are you serious?

He'd be a real nice combo guard off the bench. I think he'd come cheaper and be more willing to accept a bench role than Ben Gordon.

Need a PG, maybe even a starting PG.

1. Stephen Curry
2. Jamal Crawford
3. Ben Gordon
4. Francisco Garcia
5. Bobby Jackson
6. Luther Head

So, a guy who hasn't played an NBA Game is your #1 pick to be our 3rd guard? You'd know more about him than me but surely someone with actual NBA experience is a better option?

I'm taking cost, chemistry and talent into the equation.

The rest of the players on that list have proven ability, but have questions in the other two areas.

Curry is unproven at an NBA level, yes, but he rates higher than everyone else on that list in the other two categories.

So, if we can't get Curry through via Draft or Trade you have no one else in mind that is cost effective, wouldn't be a chemistry problem (possibly) and has proven talent?

In the entire NBA there is not 1 guy you could name?

finding that kind of 3rd guard is very, very difficult, which is why most teams do not do the 3-guard thing.

Rodney Stuckey could have been that guy also, but we did away with that idea.

we had the perfect 3 guard rotation last year...

Well, we really won't have a 3rd guard - Double A will play a role in the guard rotation, and we shouldn't forget Bynum.

With those 2 on board I wonder if we need to spend significant money on another guard.

Kstat, do you have a list of veteran point guards you would want?

Bynum has showed me enough to count on him as the lone backup to Stuckey (we'll need a 3rd PG for injury, but that's it). At this point I'd like to get a backup wing instead of backup combo guard. Someone to fill the 25-30 minutes a night at the 2/3 positions off the bench. AA might earn that role but we need another guy in the mix as well. Probably a guy closer to 6"8" since AA doesn't have a lot of size.

Probably a guy closer to 6"8" since AA doesn't have a lot of size.

Neither does Bruce Bowen. Don't get too caught up in size when size isn't an issue.

I still contend that AA and Stuckey will be this team's starting backcourt after next season.

Well, we really won't have a 3rd guard - Double A will play a role in the guard rotation, and we shouldn't forget Bynum.

With those 2 on board I wonder if we need to spend significant money on another guard.

Kstat, do you have a list of veteran point guards you would want?


Again, it really depends what path Joe wants to take. He can go the traditional route and include AA in the rotation, or minimize AA and look for a combo guard to back up both spots.

In the former scenario, I'm satisfied with Will Bynam as a backup, but if he left Brevin Knight would be near the top of any list I would make.

We gots a buttload of draft picks too.

Hopefully Joe tries to bundle some of them to move up, but economics make that a bit more difficult unless you are moving from the top of the 2nd to the bottom of the 1st, whre the contracts are guaranteed.

I wouldn't be upset if we drafted a really solid playmaking PG, but those aren't typically available in the second round.

(EXCEPTION: CHALMERS)

I still contend that AA and Stuckey will be this team's starting backcourt after next season.
Where do you see Hamilton being if he's not in our starting backcourt?

I can see Rip being traded or used as a 6th man. Not next season, but the season after that I think we will transition AA to the starting SG spot.

If Stuckey is going to work as a PG, he needs a SG that demands fewer touches.

Wow, moving out two all-stars to get Stuckey on the floor. Kid better be fucking good.

Wow, moving out two all-stars to get Stuckey on the floor. Kid better be fucking good.


Stuckey's already on the floor. Now that they're committed, they need to be putting the ball in his hands, not taking it away.

I can see Rip being traded or used as a 6th man. Not next season, but the season after that I think we will transition AA to the starting SG spot.

If Stuckey is going to work as a PG, he needs a SG that demands fewer touches.

You honestly think AA would start over RIP?

No way. I could see AA with major minutes next year, but not starting over RIP.

You honestly think AA would start over RIP?

No way. I could see AA with major minutes next year, but not starting over RIP.

He said "not next year, but the year after", fwiw.

He said "not next year, but the year after", fwiw.

I know, but RIP is still under contract then.

and I think rip will be traded by then.

After the end of next year, he'll be 32 and still owed 2 years + a partial option for year 3 at roughly $11 million/year (does anyone have more details, here?).

I wouldn't necessarily count on a lot of teams buying on that.

Stuckey's already on the floor. Now that they're committed, they need to be putting the ball in his hands, not taking it away.

Right, but the choice is taking him off the floor or taking Rip off the floor and in your scenario they take Rip off the floor.

Like I said, kid better be good.

32 year old Rip is not the same as other players.
His body type doesn't wear down his joints like bigs or attacking guards
His game is away from the basket so he doesn't need high rising.
Rip is highly conditioned, usually when players hit 30 they start to get chunky, not happening with Rip.
His change of direction ability is what makes him effective on both ends of the floor. And that is more of a natural gift than anything else.

FYI Reggie Miller played until he was 40, and he could have kept going.

GM's know this or they don't deserve their job.

I agree. RIP will be going strong at 32 IMO.

I can't see RIP off the bench in two years unless we hit the jackpot and drafted a player that turned out to be better than him.

32 year old Rip is not the same as other players.
His body type doesn't wear down his joints like bigs or attacking guards
His game is away from the basket so he doesn't need high rising.
Rip is highly conditioned, usually when players hit 30 they start to get chunky, not happening with Rip.
His change of direction ability is what makes him effective on both ends of the floor. And that is more of a natural gift than anything else.

FYI Reggie Miller played until he was 40, and he could have kept going.
This isn't about Rip's ability, but about contract size in these economic times.

One big difference between Rip and Reggie Miller is that Reggie was a volume 3P shooter. He could lose some of his off-the-ball mobility and still be a Kapono or Korver-esque player. I'm not sure Rip could do the same thing.

Another big difference is that Rip's missed more games in just the past two years than Reggie did for the first dozen years of his career.

Rip is a much better defender than Reg.

And there is nothing wrong with Rips deal. What comperable players have better ones? Vince, JTerr, JCraw, Ray Allen, they all get paid. His cost is hardly an anchor.

Agreed that he is paid what others at his level are paid, but I think Mxy's point is that in the current economic climate those figures are hard to swallow for many teams.

That said I could see him being moved as Joe continues to overhaul the roster but at that point we should have our C, PF (who we all hope are acquired this off-season) our SF (Prince) and our PG (Stuckey).

Even assuming AA isn't our starting SG by this point in time one has to assume that either Rip is traded for a younger starter or is traded for 2 role players to beef up the bench.

I'm not saying it's gonna happen, but I could certainly see it happening.

Oh, and it's not about Stuckey being "good" - it's about rebuilding. It was obvious we were no longer a title contender. I'm thankful Joe didn't settle for just being a good team for another 2 or 3 seasons and opted to rebuild.

And Kstat - Brevin Knight was top of my list too.

I might not agree with your 3rd guard list, but when it comes to the vet I couldn't agree more.

EARL WATSON SHOULD BE ON EVERY LIST

Agreed that he is paid what others at his level are paid, but I think Mxy's point is that in the current economic climate those figures are hard to swallow for many teams.




Which would make him impossible to trade.

Hard for some teams to swallow Hermy - not all teams.

I think that some owners would like to acquire Rip at that time - his experience, professional attitude and ability would make him valuable.

And GD- Earl Watson would be on my list too. Good to see you still love Earl. I'm surprised you didn't change your screen name to Earl Watson during one of your crazy days.

I think that some owners would like to acquire Rip at that time - his experience, professional attitude and ability would make him valuable.




To us.

lol - I'm sure some other team wouldn't mind having him.

Maybe Joe doesn't move him - maybe Joe lets his deal run out like he's doing with Sheed.

Maybe Rip ends up finding the fountain of youth and plays like he is now for another 5 years?

I don't know - I sent my little leps into the future to find out about NBA Drafts, not Richard Hamilton's future

On ESPN's main page, there's a video with the caption:

Todd MacCulloch made $35 million in the NBA. So why is he playing pro pinball? Don't worry, it's not for the money.
K, HOW THE FUCK DID TODD MACCULLOCH MAKE THIRTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS?!?!

BTW, Stein had some quotes from Rip in the "WEEKEND DIME" where he is talking about wanting to retire a Piston and never wanting to go elsewhere, "no matter how bad the team becomes". Or something like that.

Loyalty is under-rated.

And a quick note: Joe usually pays. From memory even Cliff Robinson got paid. In fact isn't Ben the only guy Joe hasn't ponied up for?

Shit I think even Stackhouse got an extension..

JUD GOT PAID

On ESPN's main page, there's a video with the caption:

K, HOW THE FUCK DID TODD MACCULLOCH MAKE THIRTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS?!?!

Macculloch was a very promising center before he got hurt. big as hell and he had a great touch around the rim.

At the time, there was no zone in the NBA and 7-footers were still at a major premium, especially ones with enough size to stand in shaq's way, as he was still owning the NBA.

Jim McIlvaine was neither promising or talented, as a 2nd year player who averaged 2.3 points, 2.9 rebounds and two blocks per game and he got 33.6 mil for 7 years from the Sonics...

McIlvane was nothing more than a defensive presence and Seattle saw a one-dimensional shot blocker as the final piece to a championship team that badly lacked defense in the paint. Maculloch showed post moves and an actual scoring touch. Their situations were different.

Seattle saw Jimmy as the final piece of the puzzle.

Shawn Kemp him as a major fucking waste of money.

Looks like Kemp was right.

Seriously...

Luther Head?
http://i40.tinypic.com/mtpchj.gif

i remember i was pretty pissed when Houston drafted Head one spot before the Pistons were on the clock...(he seemed like the perfect backup combo Guard at the time) then we drafted an undersized PF i had never heared off before, and my draft night was ruined, lol...

That's something you should be used to Joe.

K, I still like Kwame a lil bit. How can :we: make him more productive on the offensive end? If we feed him quick passes, he just can't handle them.

Remember how we used to feed Budha at the beginings of games? Can he get a shot off if we feed him down low?

Or wouldn't you even run an offensive play for him?

Just let him get garbage points and look to him to clog up the middle defensively?

Signed,
7footersarehardtofind

he was productive today. Mainly because they gave him the ball and let him face up his man, something he's always been able to do.

It pissed me off that he never saw the floor in the 4th quarter, when none of the other bigs showed up to play.

The games where Kwame has caught the ball 5-8 feet from the hoop and dribbled his way in, he's been good. When he's been asked to play garbage man or catch the ball in the low posts, he's sucked.

That said, I don't see Kwame ever being a quality center, because his defensive IQ is so terrible. He will stop anybody from shaq to gasol in the post, but run a pick and roll and he's clueless.

Turning him into a productive scorer is relatively easy. His team defense is what holds him back

Well, maybe if he had weak side help he'd be ok.

I never thought Vlade or CWebb were great 1 on 1 defensive players but they helped each other out and were prolly close to the best team that one year...can't think of the year.

Once Ben left, our interior D suffered. We need to get a tandem of D players down low. Til that happens, we are going to continue to lose, imo.

Kwame is slow like Buddha, Buddha was a good team defense type player. I think KB can be better defensively if he is tought by a coach like Izzo and has a defensive player he plays with consitently.

Is that a stretch?

I'm not sure coaching has much to do with it. He's had Phil Jackson tutoring him, and Phil almost never has poor defensive bigs. It's just not setting it.

K-

Do you think Joe worked something out with Hammond to not offer CV in the midst of our deal?

K - Will Rip or Tayshaun be on our roster for the first game?

K-

Do you think Joe worked something out with Hammond to not offer CV in the midst of our deal?

I think it was more along the lines of Hammond asking Joe if he was going to offer V a +MLE deal, and knowing he wouldn't be able to match, saves his friend the hassle by simply cutting V loose.

K - Will Rip or Tayshaun be on our roster for the first game?


Really a crapshoot right now. My guess is Tayshaun has the better chance of staying. Right now we'e stronger at SG and we need a defensive oriented wing to compliment Gordon.

K, who is our next coach?

I still think its Avery Johnson. They are the best he's going to get and he's the best they're going to get.

K - Did we spend Iverson's cap space or Sheeds cap space on Gordon and V?

We'd have to spend both, unless you can tell me that we have $13+ million in cap space left.

To simplify things, you could argue that the guys we signed will make about as much combined as Sheed did last season.


That said, we had to shed Iverson's contract just to get down to the cap limit.

WHAT?

I thought they were making close to 35 combined? We didn't just spend 35 did we?

WHAT?

I thought they were making close to 35 combined? We didn't just spend 35 did we?


We were 15+ mil over the cap to begin with. I don't get why so many people overlook this.

We were like 10 cents under the luxury tax last year. That's way, way over the cap.

If you do the math, you slash 33 million from +15 mil, and you get -18 mil, which is about how much cap space we have (had).

It's your calling to educate them/us.

That's what made the Iverson deal so crucial. Even with Sheed's expiring contract, we would have had practically no cap room.

We were 15+ mil over the cap to begin with. I don't get why so many people overlook this.

We were like 10 cents under the luxury tax last year. That's way, way over the cap.

If you do the math, you slash 33 million from +15 mil, and you get -18 mil, which is about how much cap space we have (had).

ESPN can shove their cap peeps right up their...nvm.

I get that, but didn't know it. I follow the Lions cap, not the Pistons.

Kstat I took this from another thread-
=================================
Jerry Sloan never had as much talent on his team as the 2008 celtics had. He never had that third superstar to go with Malone and Stockton.
=================================

I would say that Horny during his first couple years was as good as Ray was last year. Malone was as good as KG who was a bit dinged up during that run. Stockton-Pierce (who played very, very well)....toss-up? I simply think the competition Utah saw was greater. I don't think Boston ran into anything like the Rockets or Bulls. Disagree?

I have no beef with Sloan, he's had a lot of talent and won a lot of games, it was a tough time.

No.

The Celtics were a better defensive team than the Jazz ever hoped of being, and Ray Allen is and always will be better than Jeff Hornacek could have ever hoped of being.

Allen is a hall of famer capable of taking games over with his shooting, and be a #1 option on the floor. Ray always demanded special defensive attention, hot or cold.

Jeff Hornacek was a really good role player at his peak, which he certainly wasn't at by the time he got to Utah in his mid 30's. He wasn't even at Ray's level as a defender, and he was mainly a floor spacer for stockton and malone. You never saw them making hornacek into a go-to guy like the celtis did for ray allen in the 2008 ECF and finals.

As for the competition, the LA team that Boston ran (over) into in 2008 wound up stampeding their way through the finals this year, so while they are not MJ's Bulls, they were certainly not a weak opponent.

Holy shit thats a good post.

OK. I disagree about the Jazz defense and Horny just being a spacer. And him not being as good on D as Ray.

I agree he wasn't a "go to" as Ray was those last two weeks. But he was just flat out bad at times earlier when the Cs went to him.

I never considered him a superstar on that team. Excellent for what they needed though.

the point is that on any given night he had the potential to be a superstar. Jeff Hornacek only had the potential to be Jeff Hornacek.

By comparison, in the 1998 finals Hornacek averaged under 11ppg. In the 2008 finals, Ray Allen averaged over 20.

He did go 34-53 on 3s one year in the playoffs. Had a couple 30 point games, but you're right he was never a stud. Just a bit more consistent than Jesus.

But if that was your take, I agree. Ray had a much better chance to turning into old ray than Horny had of being "never was Horny"

This is making me horny.

Um, carry on.

I'd argue that Jeff Malone was more a go-to third option than Hornacek.

What about Tag? God we could use him right now.

So if the Pistons DID make a move in the 1st part of the season, what would it be? Try to bring in another big?

well, a legit go-to guy in the low post is really all they lack offensively, so yeah that'd be the call.

Is there a bigger clown in the NBA than Stephen Jackson?

Related question: Will Stephon Marbury play for another NBA team?

No and no.

Is Max a rotation guy still?

yes, but he's going to be one bad game away from being on the bench.

And since Maxiell was never gonna amount to anything more than a bench player anyway do you feel we drafted the best player available at the time or do you think that with the team we had then that a different player would have been a better choice?

Referring to Maxiell?

I'm still of the opinion that Maxiell is a legit 6th man in the NBA. He just needs to play in a structured halfcourt offense. The slower the tempo is, the more comfortable Max is with the ball.

Had we kept Flip, I think Maxiell would still be as valuable as he was when we won 59 games with him making major contributions.

I also think a 6th man is nothing to scoff at. A lot of vary good players in the NBA are 6th men. Maxiell has that kind of ability, but he needs the right atmosphere to show it.

You really feel he can be a 6th Man here?

Or in a different situation with a different coach, different players, different style?

Cause I don't see it here. What makes you that high on him?

He WAS a 6th man here two years ago. He came off the bench and wrecked the shit out of a lot of teams, both offensively and on the offensive glass.

Flip's system was perfect for him in that it got him the ball in space, where he could face up his man and either shoot over the top or drive. He didnt have to think about passing or worry about help D, he just attacked one-on-one, and he had a career year doing it.

But you cant have maxiell in a free flowing offense, because he simply cant make snap decisions.

But other than that 1 season what has he done?

I know he's got talent and he can play a role - he just isn't gonna be anything of note here IMO.

It would be better for him if he got dealt.

that 1 season was really the only year where he was on a team set up for his style of play, and with the playing time to hand him.

And yeah he'd be better off on another team, because I dont see him doing much better this season. Kuester's up-tempo system isnt for him, either.

I could see a team like Dallas or Washington or new jersey make a play for him.

K, what are your thoughts about the signing and releasing of Deron Washington?

I'm disappointed, but the only reason this reflects poorly on the Pistons is if he signs on somewhere else and becomes a star.

If the coaches dont like what they saw in practice, im going to take them at their word that he just wasnt NBA material.

K, What did you think of Bynum's performance today? Awesome?

He was okay. Way too careless with the ball, but he hit some big shots.

He continues to be the other team's offensive focus every time he checks in. I continue to see endless isolation plays meant to take advantage of him defensively.

Do you think all of these injuries are the silver lining in seeing what 'our' youngsters can do?

Jerebko, Absolutely.

Austin and Summers, not as much. They arent showing much that wasnt expected of them early on.


Mainly, the two biggest beneficiaries of the injury bug have been Jerebko and Bynum, in that order.

I honestly don't know if any 2nd rounder in the entire league is playing a more complete game than Jerebko is right now. His growth has been nothing short of remarkable.

Remember, it took him three starts to score his first point. Now he's showing enough confidence to score in the 20's.

Out of the 3 injured players, who would you want back first?

Tay
Rip
BG

Interesting question, because no matter who you pick, it displaces someone that's playing pretty well.

I'd have to pick Rip. if nothing else, he's our 2nd best defensive guard, and that's one area where we're getting burned right now.

Also, he improves the flow of our offense just by being on the floor.

Personally, I thought it was a kick ass question too.

I like Ben's scoring. I'd have to go with him.

I wouldn't mind having Ben back either. I'd just prefer to have a starting backcourt for once.

From what you hear, who is coming back 1st?

seems to be tayshaun.

I don't know what the fuck Rip's deal is...a month for a sprained ankle?

Ok, last question...do you think Joe makes a serious trade? I mean one of the starters?

Yeah, and I think unfortunately Rip's the one to go. Stuckey probably needs to end up at SG, which gives us three outstanding SGs and no starting PG...

Would a starting backcourt of . . .

PG: John Wall
SG: Rodney Stuckey

. . . need to be complemented by at least two good-or-better shooters in the frontcourt positions to be offensively effective?

Im not even sure John Wall is that good, to be honest. He's gifted, but mentally I'm not sure where he is.

PTI type questions . . .

What's the (%)chance one of Tay/Rip gets traded this year?

Both?

Joe trades Stuckey?

Bynum ever starts over Stuckey(assuming Stuckey's not traded)?

I'd say %60 Rip %40 Tay.

%10 both

%5 Stuckey

%0 Bynum starting over Stuckey.

So let's assume we get our guys back soon and the team will stay healthy for the rest of the season. What do you think the Pistons record could be the night it ends (best case scenario)?

Still thinking 50-32 best case. This team has a chance to peak late.

That would most likely put them in the #4 spot, correct? If I remember correctly, you aren't too high on Atlanta.

I wasnt last year. They are better this year.

I think 50 wins would put us 5th.

Me and my 158 IQ say it's a pretty safe bet we don't get to 50 wins.

39 is generous, but so is 158.

So is 158

Added it on the edit, lol

You peons dare doubt my intellect?

No worries, its just us morans

K,

You seem to be opposed and outspoken against any suggested changes to the team that are brought up here. So what changes would YOU like to see made?

my only requirement is that we trade for someone we can reasonably expect to be in our long-term plans. No projects, and no short-term rentals.

If we deal for cap room, that's ok too, so long as we don't give up any young assets.

I don't know what;'s available right now, but I'd love to see us deal for Kamen, or Anthony Randolph, or Maybe Kevin Love.

I have a mancrush on Kevin Love, too. He'd be a great Piston.

Problem is that Minny has no motivation to move him. He's cheap (like Randolph) and their payroll is completely in check. They have 2 bad contracts (Cardinal and Blount) that are going away this year.

I could see them dealing the rights to Rubio for sure (maybe for a good young SF), but no reason to move Love.

I agree that's the whole problem with this discussion. It's fine to wish for other team's young star bigs, but it's unlikely that these teams will be parting with them anytime soon. Either the dice are going to need to be rolled in a trade for a pending FA, or we'll need someone to fall in love with Stuckey and do us the favor of a lifetime, ala Kevin McHale sending KG to Boston.

The only other hope is that we continue to shit the bed this year and hit a home run with a big in the lottery.

Of course all of these are unlikely. Teams generally don't trade promising young bigs. That being said, there are valid reasons why some teams might deal players (Clips have 3 bigs making decent money, GSW needs to shed other salaries, Bosh might leave & Toronto gets nothing, Boozer will leave & Utah gets nothing).

I'm not saying they would do any of our deals, but certainly there is cause for a deal to be made on their part. I have a very hard time with Minny dealing Love unless they got an even better big (for Love and Rubio).

IMO the only (realistic) big that might be available that I could see making a spirt of difference is Okafor.

I think here he'd be "home", appreciated for what he can do and not what he can't. Like Ben Wallace was/is.

And Okafor compliments Nova, Rip and BG.

I just don't know if we have the players/contracts to suit N.O

I'd also be receptive to a TMac deal, and I'm still open to Boozer.

I'd also be receptive to a TMac deal, and I'm still open to Boozer.

i would as well. What kind of deals would you offer them?

I don't get you, Kstat. You don't want Bosh because he's going to be a free agent and he *might* leave after the season, yet you want Boozer or TMac, who are even MORE likely to leave than Bosh would be. And in the case of TMac, it might actually be preferrable if he left.

because the price tag would be vastly different. We would not have to give up any young players or picks. Possibly only Rip, Kwame, Maxiell and Wilcox.

It would clear off a ton of cap space next summer, and we would only have to give up one quality player.

The only issue with that is, Ben Wallace would be our only remaining center, but I'm sure we could scrape a big off the wire to replace the small production Kwame and Wilcox gave us.

I doubt that the price tag would be all that different, especially for Boozer, he's having a great year.

Toronto would demand a lot more for Bosh than Utah or Houston would for TMac and boozer, mainly because Houston and Utah have zero attachment to their players. They could give them away outright with little PR backlash. Toronto needs to sell its fans in any Bosh deal.

If you give up peanuts for Bosh, obviously its a great deal as well. Bu that would never happen.

Boozer is definitely a mercenary, so there is little to no chance that he re-signs here longterm, he'll almost certainly head to a Florida or Texas team wher there is no income tax and warm weather. So if we deal for him, we'd be relying on the salary relief that we get from his expiring deal to look for our franchise big.

exactly. That's not a bad thing, if the price is right.

It could be a good thing if that means we have 12m-ish to work with, but would we? Do we let Bynum walk? And with all the competition for this year's free agents, which big would we realistically land?

Which is why I keep coming back to a guy like Okafor, remove the doubt/risk and get a guy that is under contract for a few years.

We'd be clearing $19 million in salary. We could re-sign Bynum for a few million and still have enough cash to go after a max big- like Chris Bosh!

Which is why I keep coming back to a guy like Okafor, remove the doubt/risk and get a guy that is under contract for a few years.
I'm all for David West or Okafor. I just dont see New Orleans gutting their roster without firing their GM first.

Kstat, what'd you have for dinner tonight?

We'd be clearing $19 million in salary. We could re-sign Bynum for a few million and still have enough cash to go after a max big- like Chris Bosh!
Of course, clearing 19m is not the same thing as having 19m to spend, especially with the cap # going down. Can you explain how we clear that 19m, too?

even if the cap number goes down, so does the max salary number.

Rip, Wilcox and Maxiell make around $19 mil next year, combined.

Boozer is definitely a mercenary, so there is little to no chance that he re-signs here longterm, he'll almost certainly head to a Florida or Texas team wher there is no income tax and warm weather. So if we deal for him, we'd be relying on the salary relief that we get from his expiring deal to look for our franchise big.
Why would Dumars trust any promise out of Boozer's camp about what would happen after a trade? Why would any team? He's not just a merc, but a liar.

I think everyone is agreed Boozer would be a rental. I'm fine with that as long as we don't give up our young assets and get enough space to land Bosh.

Rockets sources say they are looking for expiring deals and at least one good, young player for TMac.

good luck to them, then.

Why would anyone give them expirings and a young for an expiring that may provide nothing for you? Tmac is basically a contract unless he can prove he'll be some help in the playoffs. And I doubt any other team has 20 mil in expirings laying around anyway.

kstat - why didn't the Pistons go after David Lee in the offseason?

Also, would you consider this a lost season with all these injuries and 50 games to go?

Kstat, do you only answer questions about basketball in this thread?

so far, but not as a rule.

Kstat, do you know anything about any of these young Kings players? They seem impressive to me.

Donte Greene
Omri Caspi
Spencer Hawes

Donte Greene is a bit of a tweener. He's got the game of a SF, but he's got the body of a PF, albeit not a lot of muscle. He's got the potential to be a Marvin Williams-type player, but his jumper isn't quite there yet.

Omri Casspi is a smoother, less dirty version of Andres Nocioni. Similar game, but sleeker. He's an energy guy with good offensive skills. Not sure if he has the same toughness though.

Spencer Hawes is probably going to be a more athletic vlade divac. It's taking him a while to develop, and his defense is very poor. But the kid is athletic, can shoot with range, and is a very good passer out of the high post. If he can figure out how to stop getting beaten up down low or grab a rebound that matters, he'll be elite.

Kstat, would you care to force-rank this year's Pistons players?

And yes, I've left the criteria open-ended.

force-rank?

Rank each player against each other from 1-15. It's a technique for deciding who should/shouldn't get fired, typically. There are other variations depending on management style -- top 20%, middle 70%, bottom 10% is a common one from the Jack Welch days of GE.

Is Arnie Kander losing his touch?

Kstat did you see the Kings Lakers tilt last night?

Is Arnie Kander losing his touch?
I don't think so. Everybody has an off year, eventually.

Kstat did you see the Kings Lakers tilt last night?
Yes and it was disgusting. How the hell does Kobe get that wide open with 2 seconds left?

I'm going to try to put this in a form of a question? So just do like some of these youngsters do these days and say the last word like its a question? I thought Hawes played pretty good defense last night?

Yes and it was disgusting. How the hell does Kobe get that wide open with 2 seconds left?

kobe put a nice forearm to the chest of sergio rodriguez tossing him to the floor. When you're a superstar you can do things like that.

the point was why is Sergio Rodriguez the only thing between Kobe Bryant and a wide open shot?

hey kstat, what would our record be with no injuries?

hard to say. I'm guessing we'd be 6-7 games over .500.

That said, Jonas Jerebko would probably still be a secret.

He'd be a nobody cause the kid would hardly have played.

We'd have gone with Big Ben, Nova, Prince, Rip, Stuckey, BG, Bynum, Kwame, Maxiell as a 9-man rotation with Daye and Jerebko fighting for whatever minutes remained.

And I look at that group and think IF we were healthy that's a pretty good group.

hard to say. I'm guessing we'd be 6-7 games over .500.

That said, Jonas Jerebko would probably still be a secret.

lol

100% healthy and with some breaks this would have been a .500 team, at best.

But this ain't "aks Glan".

I'm not convinced that Maxiell would still be in the rotation, because he was stinking it up big off the bench early on.

lol

100% healthy and with some breaks this would have been a .500 team, at best.

But this ain't "aks Glan".

Yellow flag?

KStat, why did the band choose the name "Mookie Blaylocks" before ultimately changing it to Pearl Jam.

Kstat, how the fuck does Ben miss that bunny?

Kstat, what do you think about signing Sean Williams to a 10 day contract?

use the money for a new plasma screen for the team plane. You'd get more value out of it.

Could you rank your top 5 players in the 2010 NBA Draft?

Or if you don't wanna do that...

Could you name a couple of college dudes you'd like to see us Draft?

[Please note I don't watch college ball at all]

The top 5 picks will be some combinatin of John Wall followed by Favors, Wes Johnson, the big Lithunanin kid and either Ed Davis or Evan Turner.

To Summarize, if we don't get the #1 pick, we're in trouble. All the other top prospects are either wings or big men that play like wings. Favors is a legit bhysical beast, but he looks a long, long way from being NBA-ready.

The best case scenario is that Ed Davis and Cole Aldrich start looking like cant-miss bigs. Otherwise, we'll be targeting Motiejunas (7-foot euro) with a 2-5 range pick. You already know how that will play out here.

And I don't mean he's a bust waiting to happen. He looks damn good. I mean I don't want to hear all the bitching when we pick him, nor am I interested in tempting fate.

We need a pure point guard and a center. There are only a few bigs in the draft and only one point guard, and he'll be gone after the first pick. It's going to be rough.

The wild card is Derrick Favors, but again, he lacks a lot of skill in his game. He's mostly just an athletic freak that gets by on dunking on people. Amare did that and was OK in the NBA, but a ton of other bigs didn't (see: Chris Wilcox).

Would you draft a european player in the top 10 judging from past history?

Would you draft a european player in the top 10 judging from past history?

We may not have a choice.

Say we draft 4th. John Wall is off the board. Derrick Favors is off the board. Both Ed Davis and Aldrich are reaches. Every other prospect left is a SG/SF.

We'd basically be pigeonholed into drafting Motiejunas.

I do believe this kid could be the next Dirk-type NBA megastar. But he could be another Darko, too. You just never know until the kid steps on to an NBA floor.

Does John Wall remind you most of Dwyane Wade, Rajon Rondo, or Derrick Rose?

He reminds me of Jason Kidd. But that's very, very premature. What sells him is that he looks like the kind of player that can lead a team from the PG position. None of the players above have that quality. Rondo and Rose are PGs, but they aren't mature floor leaders. They can't be your best player and take you anywhere.

Hey, hey, hey - don't you dare say that about Rondo.

He's a living God, or didn't you get the memo?

Who do you think probably talks the most shit besides Garnett? Kobe?

You have to specify: to players? Fans? Refs?

Other players.

pretty close between LeBron and Kobe.

What do you think about Daye, Special K?

What do you think about Daye, Special K?

Nobody's called me that since highschool.

Daye is a good player with more skill than your average small forward, and he's also taller than any SF in the entire league. But none of that will make a difference until he starts hitting the weights. When teams see a 6'11" wing that can handle and shoot like Daye can, they are going to do the only thing they can: try to out-muscle him at every opportunity. Every time Daye has struggled, that has been the case. It was also the case with players like TMac and Jermaine O'Neal early on.

God forbid he puts on 15-20 lbs of muscle, he could be a very good small forward. There isnt anything he can't do, skill-wise.

I agree with that, Special K.

hey kstat. doesn't all the bitching we did about flip saunders and not making the finals seem just silly when compared to the downfall last year and the abortion of a season this year?

They aren't losing because Flip isn't here, so no.

So K, will we make the playoffs this year...if we don't have any injuries?

Probably not. I don't see us getting off to a good start with maxiell starting.

K - Did you know that your use of the word 'abhorrant' in the Piston's Preseason thread is the first time that its ever been used on this board?

Just thought you might like to know.

But not abhorrent.

A whore ain't?

Who won this Lee/Bayless deal in your opinion?

Has a team w/ a losing reg season record ever won a playoff series before?

Omg, when you first posted that I thought to myself "he should aks Kstat", lolz

In the Detroit Pistons first season as the Detroit Pistons, they had a losing regular season record but won a playoff series against the Royals.

Thanks you, Mxstat!

There's plenty of other examples, back when more of a % of teams made the playoffs and the playoff series were best 2 out of 3.

Mods, please change to Aks Mxy. Thanks.

Kstat/Mxy,

Assuming we stay put and don't trade up, who's a prospect to watch for at #38?

(cried while I was typing that)

CJ Wilcox, perhaps??

My hunch is that SVG goes for someone who can shoot the rock.

CJ Wilcox, perhaps??

My hunch is that SVG goes for someone who can shoot the rock.
Wilcox was off the board, so he got someone who can shoot the rock.
Cool.

Why does this thread still exist....

Oh snap

Has a team w/ a losing reg season record ever won a playoff series before?

The 1981 Rockets made it to the NBA Finals at 40-42. That's the short answer to your question.

The irony is they beat a 40-42 Kings team in the conference finals to get there. To be fair, they did knock off defending champ LA in the first round and Gervin's Spurs prior to that, so they earned it. The Kings on their end beat Portland and Phoenix before they ran into Houston.

Another example would be the 39-43 1987 Sonics that caught fire and small-balled their way past Dallas and Houston to the conference finals where the Lakers pummeled them.

The Pistons actually pulled this off themselves. They went 36-46 in 1976 but Bob Lanier carried them past a sad post-Kareem Bucks squad that managed to win the division despite winning just 38 games.

Prior to the 70's this happened all the time, but given the NBA was just 8-10 teams deep (with the exception of the screwy 17-team 1950 merger season) back then and 6-8 of them made the playoffs every year, you often had sub- .500 teams going against each other in the first round. For example:

The Pistons were the #2 seed in the west at 30-45 in 1960, and got swept by a 25-50 Lakers team in the first round. That Lakers team actually came within one game of making the finals before the Hawks put them away.

In 1957, every single team in the west finished below .500. The 38-44 Hawks were the #1 seed and came within 1 game of winning the whole thing against Russell's Celtics.

Kstat,

Who do you see on this Pistons roster to still be here in 5 years

Kstat,

Who do you see on this Pistons roster to still be here in 5 years
Drummond, KCP, Dinwiddie.

Mxy?

Was it a mistake getting rid of Charlie V considering that Van Gundy loves triples?

Kstat, do you know anything about zip ties?

You ever coming back, K?

Mxy?

Shit, I missed this altogether -- apologies. I would've answered Drummond, and that's about it.

You ever coming back, K?


He'll make a showing this year.

Kstat/Mxy,

Have a question for you two. Pundits on both sides of the aisle, over the past few days, have pointed to Biden's numbers in recent polls as a sign that he should NOT get in, e.g. "If he's only getting 22% right now and he hasn't even taken any shots yet from opponents, how can he possibly think he can win?"

My question is, isn't that terribly flawed logic? How can you accurately the assess the support for a candidate using polls that are taken when the candidate hasn't even declared? In other words, how many people in these polls are choosing Hillary or Bernie because they don't (yet?) view Biden as a viable or even ELIGIBLE option?

I don't hear anyone discussing this, so I'm wondering if I'm just overlooking something here.

I'm not either but I'm going to answer...throw the yellow flag. :)


It is flawed logic. But Joe's poll numbers aren't the determining factor on whether Biden gets in. So they are pretty much meaningless as long as he is in the ballpark with polling with support, which he is. I think its a little personal but he could be pushed in by the Dem Party big wigs, imo.


And if he gets in, he will instantly pull support from both. If he wins Iowa, watch out.


There will be a small percentage that won't ever leave Bernie and a few dipshits that won't leave Hillary but he will get the entire Dem machine behind him and breeze to the nomination.


NTAGAS

Another Q for Mxy, 'cause you seem to keep up with science news: Is there a study somewhere that says that medicine commercials are more effective if they abbreviate the name of the malady in question? Because it seems like every drug ad uses a shortened name for the disease (low-T/OAB/OIC/etc.) and it bugs me a little.

Another Q for Mxy, 'cause you seem to keep up with science news: Is there a study somewhere that says that medicine commercials are more effective if they abbreviate the name of the malady in question? Because it seems like every drug ad uses a shortened name for the disease (low-T/OAB/OIC/etc.) and it bugs me a little.

The study of money suggests that "low T" led to a whole lot more testosterone than "andropause", which was the name in the 90s before Solvay figured out a way to push more AndroGel (an estrogen blocker, not really a direct testosterone injection -- shh). The real question here -- is "low T" (as distinct from virtually "no T" since birth) even a "disease", any more so than aging as a whole is? Likewise, are most instances of over-active bladder really a "disease" or symptomatic of some other problem (diabetes, diuretics)? Same for "ED". I think the assertion that these fad acronyms are "diseases" deserves reflection. I like your initial word "malady" a lot better, since it gets at the heart of what a lot of drug pushers are going after. Of course, it's hard to get insurance to cover a malady like "my bitchy wife is unattractive to me, so Mr. Happy isn't coming out", so it has to be disease-ified.

Fuck, I don't even know what OIC is (Google suggest constipation), so whatever they're doing to market it isn't working on me.

Not sure it's exactly an answer... it's what I have.

Kstat/Mxy,

Have a question for you two. Pundits on both sides of the aisle, over the past few days, have pointed to Biden's numbers in recent polls as a sign that he should NOT get in, e.g. "If he's only getting 22% right now and he hasn't even taken any shots yet from opponents, how can he possibly think he can win?"

My question is, isn't that terribly flawed logic? How can you accurately the assess the support for a candidate using polls that are taken when the candidate hasn't even declared? In other words, how many people in these polls are choosing Hillary or Bernie because they don't (yet?) view Biden as a viable or even ELIGIBLE option?

I don't hear anyone discussing this, so I'm wondering if I'm just overlooking something here.
Most of the pundit class falls apart in the face of common sense.

Clearly, Joe Biden's not running. You don't need two hands and a flashlight to see this, unless you're a moron talking head. He's raised no money. He didn't have the pet projects that a VP angling for Prez does (Bush Sr's "war on drugs", Gore the eco-warrior). He's expressed about as much doubt as a sitting VP can, keeping in mind that Obama could die tomorrow and Biden's next in line. The polls reflect that ambivalence as much as anything. They're mostly to show how weak Hillary is. Apart from disassembling Giuliani, he wasn't a good candidate the first two times he ran for POTUS. So, what's the point?

Enough words...

All good points, but... I just remember him being interviewed back before Obama selected him and he repeatedly said "I will not accept the VP role if it is offered". He said it straight out, point blank, repeatedly.

Ultimately he said that when your country calls you to duty, you cannot refuse.

Here's the piece that Heilemann was teasing on Face the Nation yesterday

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-14/biden-secretly-met-with-top-obama-bundler-during-new-york-swing

Will I love the way you mock tonight's draft?

Hasheem Thabeet. Never forget.