Where do you fall on this?

"The problems are fixed" school of thought

3 game winning streak without AI
Good road wins at Orlando and Boston and beat a solid playoff team (Denver) at home


"Fool's gold" school of thought

Orlando choked away a big lead
Boston was without KG
Denver was without Melo

The jury is still out for me. I can't believe that subtracting AI could make the turnaround from an embarrassing team to the team we saw last night.

But a gun to my head choice...I'm drinkin the kool aid.

I think the problems are fixed. I think they are no longer a borderline lotto team and are back to being the 4th best team in the East (or will be come playoff time). I think they will build on these wins and start gelling again.

Will they make the ECF? No way (unless AI really buys into his new role and excels at it). But I think they are at least back to where I think they'll win a playoff round (provided they get a 4-6 seed).

We'll be out of the woods when we beat Utah.

This isn't my opinion, this is fact:

Curry still sucks, AI won't be happy on the bench, the Pistons will be knocked out first round.

I don't care how the "new old Pistons" look.

Fixed is when we contend for our next title. Everything else is meh.

I think Boston being without KG said a lot about that game. He has turned into the heart of that team. The jury is still out for sure. If they'd beaten the Celtics with Garnett, then I'd be more inclined to say it looks bright.

Detroit is the next NBA champion, ....damnit!

Fixed is when we contend for our next title. Everything else is meh.

Then they won't be fixed for two years.

Stay the fuck away from my gold!

we were "fixed" when rip was hurt too.

The fact remains the coaching staff still hasnt proven it can mix both players effectively.

Gold? That must mean there are leprechauns.

WHO ALL SEEN THE LEPRECHAUN SAY YEAAAAA

Then they won't be fixed for two years.

Or more.

Well depends on what the problem is.

If the problem was "they look completely lost and are losing to teams left and right and might miss the playoffs"... then yes I think the problems are fixed.

The greater problems of not being able to go over the hump and being Cleveland and Boston's bitch? No, not really.

We still have serious front-court issues. Sheed is a lazy bum, Sheed + Dice is an aging frontcourt who can't bang around, Maxiell + Amir are just not good enough for a starting spot, or are being mismanaged by The Dumbass (take your pick).

That's what it really comes down to. We really need to pick up someone to bolster that frontcourt, and get a coach who doesn't suck ass.

We fixed some of the new problems this season but not the old problems.

we were "fixed" when rip was hurt too..
Not on defense or up front.

IMO fixed is extreme, we're just playing like a team again.

If I'm understanding the question here, its not whether we are competing for a title now, but if we are finally getting the most out of this roster.

I'm not seeing this question as a title question...more like, even if we still see the problems we've seen over the past 4 years at the end of the season type of thing, did we fix the embarrassment that we've been over the last 40 games(?).

YEAAA!

I'mnotsurewhatthatmeans

I SEEN THE LEPRAKHAN!

yea, that was not the path I was going down...and thanks

Fixed isn't the word, but let's put it this way: I'm a lot more willing to watch a full game now.

I still think the jury is still out. I forget where I read this (and I can't find the article), but the Pistons are something like 17-26 when both Iverson and Hamilton play, which would make them 13-3 when only one of them does.

That's an amazing stat. So in essence, KStat was right. This team hasn't proven it can be consistently successful with both Iverson and Hamilton. The answer to that question won't come until Iverson is incorporated back into the rotation.

For me, personally, I enjoy watching the Rip-led type of basketball over the Iverson-led type. It's actually fun again. While I agree that the core group (Prince, Sheed, and Rip) mentally checked out, for me, their past successes has earned them that leeway with me. Whether that's right, or fair, that's just how it is.

To compare the Rip vs AI injury games... how has the G rotation been? (No this is not about what position Stuckey should play, we're just calling him a PG for this.)

With Rip out, Stuckey started at PG with AI and basically played the role of a PG who didn't have the ball.

With AI out, Stuckey started at PG with Rip and had the ball.

Somebody who can see more games than me can elaborate on how the rotations worked from there, but that sounds like a big difference to me w/out looking past the starting 5.

Either way, I didn't vote because at this point it is neither. Easier to call it fool's gold, but if dumbfuck can allow the TEAM to play then these guys could make it to the second round. I call that a success considering that this season's success is based on the FAs acquired with the cap space and how the future team does.

For me, personally, I enjoy watching the Rip-led type of basketball over the Iverson-led type. It's actually fun again.
This is the touchy part. IMO they've played better than the iverson led version and have looked more responsive to coaching(running more variety of plays). You can't deny that there's something better about them like this in spite of their record. Also Iverson has slowly been getting more an more touches as someone sharing the ballhandling duties with Stuck. But I think it works better with someone like Rip whose gonna spend more plays shooting or passing after the catch rather than dribbling out some crossovers.. Again someone can easily say "well the record says they were just as good", but i don't see a just as good team when i compare them.

To compare the Rip vs AI injury games... how has the G rotation been? (No this is not about what position Stuckey should play, we're just calling him a PG for this.)

With Rip out, Stuckey started at PG with AI and basically played the role of a PG who didn't have the ball.

With AI out, Stuckey started at PG with Rip and had the ball.

Somebody who can see more games than me can elaborate on how the rotations worked from there, but that sounds like a big difference to me w/out looking past the starting 5.

Agreed, seems like it works far better for Stuckey having the ball in hand more plays, something that was slowly receding over the past few months.

This is the touchy part. IMO they've played better than the iverson led version and have looked more responsive to coaching(running more variety of plays). You can't deny that there's something better about them like this in spite of their record. Also Iverson has slowly been getting more an more touches as someone sharing the ballhandling duties with Stuck. But I think it works better with someone like Rip whose gonna spend more plays shooting or passing after the catch rather than dribbling out some crossovers.. Again someone can easily say "well the record says they were just as good", but i don't see a just as good team when i compare them.

I think they're DEFINITIVELY better defensively. The chemistry is much better on that side of the ball, IMO.

We'll be out of the woods when we beat Utah.

Was that a prediction of a Pistons vs Jazz finals or are you looking forward to next season?

Was that a prediction of a Pistons vs Jazz finals or are you looking forward to next season?

I'm guessing he meant once, on any future date, but most likely not in the finals. Maybe next season.

I'm guessing he meant once, on any future date, but most likely not in the finals. Maybe next season.
:cogent:

And if we manage to beat Utah by stealing one of their talented bigs that they can't afford, so much the better...

I hope all 9 of you fuckers get food poisoning.

I hope your tranny blows.

Y'all are wrong and have learned nothing

Does that mean that me, Varsity, Atticus, Joe and V can LOL at all 28 of you who said you liked the Iverson trade?

Hells no.

I still like the trade cuz AI going to come off the bench and do great things (I'm laughing while I wrote that part) and we still have the flexibility thing going forward.

If iverson could be locked in a dungeon away from playing heavy minutes i'd like the trade.

I worry about the cap space because you still need people to be convinced to come to Detroit. I would call the Iverson trade a successful trade once we land two solid free agent big men in the offseason.

Otherwise the trade sucks. REALLY sucks.

Because of who we traded for? AI? or because we traded CBill away?

Were you ready to go into another season and do the same thing we've been doing for 4 years now?

I wasn't unhappy that Billups got traded away. I said for a long time that the team needed a shake-up as I saw us in the decline with Cleveland, Orlando, and Boston all improving. I wasn't unhappy with getting AI either but I definitely wasn't thrilled. He's an ok player but we already had good players in the spots that he plays and I was really hoping that we would have gotten a pick or two or a prospect. The prospect of losing Dice made me outright dislike the deal until he returned.

That being said, if Joe can fanagle a few bargains in the off season (meaning not overpaying for guys like Boozer) and if we get a new coach (because Curry still hasn't gotten a clue) things might work out. That's just a lot of "ifs".

Because of who we traded for? AI? or because we traded CBill away?

Were you ready to go into another season and do the same thing we've been doing for 4 years now?

I have no problem changing things up. The old formula wasn't working. I just think there could have/would have been better trades than Allen Iverson. It gives us cap space, but I feel trading a player like Billups away would have been better if we gave him to a team that could have given us something better.

gotcha

I agree that getting someone other than/better than Iverson would have been a better option.

If we had of traded Billups for Kaman last off-season (surely it was possible?) and then let Sheed expire this off-season would we still have had the money to sign a decent free agent PF?

I would assume so.

Joe talks about getting guys who are going to be part of the core for the next 4 or 5 years.

Imagine Boozer in 3 years time - will he be better than he is now? Worse? The same? That should be the question if Joe is looking at a 3-5 year window.

I'd think Boozer would be about the same in 3 years. He's not getting any better at this point and the only way he'd be much worse would be if he got injured.