3 years 25 million.

Commence complaining.

I can deal with that only because I was afraid of 5/$50.

I can deal with that only because I was afraid of 5/$50.

This. If he plays off the ball, the damage to the team should be minimized.

I can live with any combination of Stuckey/Gordon/Knight as a three guard rotation.
Stuckey/Knight or Knight/Stuckey or Knight/Stuckey
Gordon/Stuckey or Stuckey/Gordon or Gordon/Stuckey

Bynum will be there, too, deservedly so.

looks like we called stuckey's bluff. he wanted 5 years and more than $10 mil per. this deal only give him half the money that deal would've given him. thank god.

Definately tradable with this contract also.

well, this is going to be a shitty team again this year.

The Pistons just paid 8.3 mil a year to get 15ppg on a horrible percentage, and also have him inevitably fuck over either the high paid Gordon or the potential filled rookie, if not both.

Fuck this news.

well, this is going to be a shitty team again this year.

The Pistons just paid 8.3 mil a year to get 15ppg on a horrible percentage, and also have him inevitably fuck over either the high paid Gordon or the potential filled rookie, if not both.

Fuck this news.
96 minutes to go around. Bynum got 18 mpg last year, so 78 minutes remaining. Stuckey got 31 last year, so 47 left. Gordon averages 30 for his career, so 17 is available for Brandon Knight.
If we were ever to go with a three guard lineup (with Stuckey at SF) we could get all four a few more minutes.

Stuckey 13/Knight 17/Bynum 18
Gordon 30/Stuckey 18

Would this upset people?

I sure as hell want Knight to play more than 17 mpg

Who would you take minutes from? Since there will be a lot of back to backs I could see snagging 2-3 from both Stuckey and Gordon and giving those to Knight.

96 minutes to go around. Bynum got 18 mpg last year, so 78 minutes remaining. Stuckey got 31 last year, so 47 left. Gordon averages 30 for his career, so 17 is available for Brandon Knight.
If we were ever to go with a three guard lineup (with Stuckey at SF) we could get all four a few more minutes.

Stuckey 13/Knight 17/Bynum 18
Gordon 30/Stuckey 18

Would this upset people?

Yeah. Fuck Knight only getting 17 mpg. That's Bullshit. Knight should get starter minutes, and Stuckey's bitch ass shouldn't be the reason he doesn't.

That's my worse nightmare, and the inevitable truth of this team. More success and future is going to be put on hold so Suckey can get another chance at proving himself. No change in coaches is going to make the retard learn to read a defense or shoot a jumper. He's had time at PG, SG, and SF and the only thing he's proved is that he's tall enough to not have PG's shoot over him and that at the end of the season if we're lucky enough to have games against teams that packed it in and started tanking he can put up 20/5/5 against the scrubs. Now we have the pleasure of watching the piece of shit play like Stackhouse with weights on his ankles and wrists again. The same 30 win team is back, and they're going to eat up the rookie's minutes. YAY!

My interest in this team has dropped from about a 7 to a 2.

How about Stuckey sit on the bench where he belongs?

Knight 33/Bynum 15
Gordon 30/ Stuckey 18

That's closer to what I would like, but a shiny new $8m+/yr contract is going to keep it from happening.

I actually don't mind if Stuckey starts at SG, if he splits the minutes with Gordon 50/50.

Given the reality of what we have, I'd like...

Early season

Bynum 26 / Knight 22
Stuckey 24 / Gordon 24


By mid season

Knight 30 / Bynum 18
Same at SG

We'd have about $20m tied up this year in that SG platoon. Fuck.

That's closer to what I would like, but a shiny new $8m+/yr contract is going to keep it from happening.

I actually don't mind if Stuckey starts at SG, if he splits the minutes with Gordon 50/50.


How can that work? Stuck 24 and Gordon 24?

Gordon's numbers are going to suck ass if he only gets 24. Shooters need minutes and touches. Stuckey pretty much prevents BG getting those in any scenario. So basically this season is going to be the same performance from Gordon that the Pistons have been getting.

Then it's either having about 20 million tied up into the SG slot or sacrificing the playing time of promising young lottery pick to bring back a pitiful 30 win team.

Also, the team won't have serious cap space for 3 years.

While I don't agree with how Kuester distributed minutes, those were their averages a year ago. A condensed season with more back-to-backs and a few back-to-back-to-backs mean that lineups could change on a nightly basis. Brandon Knight could get 18 minutes one night, 24 the next, and 30 the third night in order to get fresh, conditioned legs out on the floor.

That said, I have no problem with marginalizing Will Bynum. You have a former #3 overall player making 12 million, a #15 making 8, and a #8 overall pick. The undrafted 28 year old making 3 million a year will just be happy that he's in the league.

How can that work? Stuck 24 and Gordon 24?

Gordon's numbers are going to suck ass if he only gets 24. Shooters need minutes and touches. Stuckey pretty much prevents BG getting those in any scenario. So basically this season is going to be the same performance from Gordon that the Pistons have been getting.

Then it's either having about 20 million tied up into the SG slot or sacrificing the playing time of promising young lottery pick to bring back a pitiful 30 win team.

Also, the team won't have serious cap space for 3 years.

What you've presented is the rationale for either using the amnesty clause on Gordon or signing and trading Stuckey.

Joe chose to do neither.

We're fucked.

While I don't agree with how Kuester distributed minutes, those were their averages a year ago. A condensed season with more back-to-backs and a few back-to-back-to-backs mean that lineups could change on a nightly basis. Brandon Knight could get 18 minutes one night, 24 the next, and 30 the third night in order to get fresh, conditioned legs out on the floor.

That said, I have no problem with marginalizing Will Bynum. You have a former #3 overall player making 12 million, a #15 making 8, and a #8 overall pick. The undrafted 28 year old making 3 million a year will just be happy that he's in the league.

You'd be marginalizing the one guy that will actually meet or outperform his contract (not including the rook).

The way that franschises like the Pistons compete is by having players that outperform their contracts, see 2004. This is even more true today than it was then.

What you've presented is the rationale for either using the amnesty clause on Gordon or signing and trading Stuckey.

Joe chose to do neither.

We're fucked.

All the pressure in the world is on Ben Gordon to prove his worth. But that's only if he cares to stick with the pistons. I'm guessing he stays his normal, half-assed self and will get amnestied this summer, get paid the rest that he is owed by the pistons and will sign elsewhere (he'd be a good fit on the lakers and heat). Fine. Good riddance. That money is better spent on a big which this team needs big-time.

I hate both stuckey and ben gordon but of the two we can only amnesty gordon this summer. Let's see what BG has and get rid of him once his excuses run out.

If he proves his worth and if stuckey proves that he's more than the shithead he really is then this is a good problem to have. I expect both to fail, the pistons to amnesty gordon and then us having to deal with stuckey for 2 more seasons.

Really the competition now becomes bynum vs. knight for the extra minutes. That's not a bad thing for a 20-year old in year one of his NBA career and playing potentially the most difficult position to learn in the league (pg vs. center). I fully expect knight to take the brunt of the minutes away from bynum by the end of the season.

Really the competition now becomes bynum vs. knight for the extra minutes. That's not a bad thing for a 20-year old in year one of his NBA career and playing potentially the most difficult position to learn in the league (pg vs. center). I fully expect knight to take the brunt of the minutes away from bynum by the end of the season.

No, that is a bad thing. Especially when you consider that the 20 year old already looks like he knows much more about playing the 1 then the "sacred cow" starter. Now it not only holds back his development but it also outright insults him.

Also, name 1 point guard who didn't end up starting in his rookie year and then became a star/quality player for the same team that didn't play him. I'm guessing you'd have to go back quite a long ways, because I can't think of a single player off hand.


... I can't believe you'd rather have a very promising lottery pick be buried on the bench of a shitty team. That's lunacy dude.

I just hope Frank and Dumars agree that Knight is the future & present at PG, i hope Stuckey barely plays at PG anymore, he is OK at SG. even if you dont like Stuckey at all, at least he can get to line a lot and play some defense, thats a lot more than Gordon can do. The 3 year contract is good forboth sides.Dumars next task, try to trade one of Gordon or Charlie and amnesty the other. Oh and get a franchise PF to play next to Monroe.

How it should be...
Stuckey 26 min @ SG... 6 min backup PG
Knight 24 min PG (first year)
Bynum 8 min PG
Daye 12 min @ SG... 8 min SF
Gordon traded for expiring deal or defensive big + T.E.


W.A.G. at what will actually happen ...
Stuckey = 20 min @ PG
Knight = 18 min @ PG
Gordon = 24 min @ SG
Stuckey = 14 @ SG

Stuckey = 30 minutes
BG = 30 minutes
Knight = 18 minutes
Bynum = 18 minutes

That's how it should be to start the season. You want to showcase what BG and Stuckey can do so you can trade them!

What do you think we can get for BG based on his contract and his previous 2 seasons? Anything of value? Or would we be forced to amnesty him? Using the amnesty clause is not the best possible outcome. We should want him (and we need him) to perform at a high level.

Same for Stuckey - now we've locked him in for 3 years we need him to perform. Even if the front office doesn't want to trade him the best possible outcome for this team is that he performs well

Best case scenario is that we have BG, Stuckey and Knight all worthy of playing big minutes.

Bynum? IMO his role shall always remain the same. He's the one fucking guard we can count on to perform well and do his job. Regardless of what happens with Stuckey, BG and Knight Will Bynum should play 15-20 minutes

I should note that if we didn't re-sign Prince minutes at guard wouldn't really be a problem:

Knight 30/Bynum 18
BG 30/Stuckey 18
Daye 30/Stuckey 12/Jonas 6
Jonas 24/Nova 24
Monroe 30/Maxiell 18

Again I'd be looking to showcase BG, Stuckey, Daye, Nova and Maxiell... we need to move these guys for better players and/or contract and/or picks

The problem with Gordon being showcased next to Stuck running the point is that he doesn't get touches next to him. It's not like he's going to make a name for himself elsewhere. If someone was on the fence about the guy, watching him only get 12 or so shots a game isn't going to seal the deal. It's more likely to hurt his case.

Maybe start Knight with BG and bring Stuckey off the bench?

This way Knight can feed BG for a while before Stuckey comes in and fucks it up lol

IF Stuckey came off the bench for Knight how long would we play BG/Stuckey as a combo? 5 minutes? 10 minutes?

Bynum would come in for BG and play PG with Stuckey moving to SG

That's the key - how many minutes would we be forced to play BG with Stuckey as we showcase them?

IF we couldn't trade BG or Stuckey after 20 games then I'm guessing we'd be stuck with them... in which case you simply play the best combination the most minutes.

I must say that having BG, Stuckey, Knight and Bynum makes me feel a hell of a lot better than when we had Rip, BG, Stuckey and Bynum....

Koolaid... do you still have those rubber bands for sale?

I clicked your sig and...

LMAO!

It could be worse, I suppose.

I was really hoping his reported demands would get him traded.

Koolaid... do you still have those rubber bands for sale?

I clicked your sig and...

LMAO!

nope. lol.

I might put up an old crunchy sock or a crushed empty cigarette pack in the future though.

Obviously the less time Stuck gets at the point the better. I remember the time that Gordon was the 2 and stuck was 3 and that was pretty good (for them at least), so that might be the best option. Then Daye isn't going to get any time though, but he's become a lost cause anyways. I like the dude but he's never got a shot to develop and the closest he's come to getting minutes was as a PF where he's so outmatched it might as well be Knight there. Now he's coming into his third year and he still looks like a rookie. He's not going to get touches with stuck, spreading the floor and shooting .400 from three means nothing if the dude won't kick it out to you, and with Tay here he won't get minutes to find his game either. We're not going to do shit with that guy, so he might as well get traded too.

Are there any decent big men that we could get by packaging Stuckey or BG with Daye?

Stuckey + Daye surely has some value around the league...

No, that is a bad thing. Especially when you consider that the 20 year old already looks like he knows much more about playing the 1 then the "sacred cow" starter. Now it not only holds back his development but it also outright insults him.

Also, name 1 point guard who didn't end up starting in his rookie year and then became a star/quality player for the same team that didn't play him. I'm guessing you'd have to go back quite a long ways, because I can't think of a single player off hand.


... I can't believe you'd rather have a very promising lottery pick be buried on the bench of a shitty team. That's lunacy dude.

I disagree that throwing kids into the fire immediately is proven to be the best way to go when it comes to developing players, especially point guards, and I certainly don't think the pistons have insulted brandon knight by re-signing stuckey.

I love Brandon Knight and made those observations well known after draft day but what's wrong with letting a 20-year old get his feet wet during a condensed pre-season and regular season on a team that isn't going anywhere? Let him earn his stripes, prove first that he's a better point guard than bynum (which shouldn't be too difficult) and then see if his game compliments stuckey's which it might since knight is a point guard that has a jump shot.

As for pt. guards that took a while to develop......John Stockton didn't become a full-time starter for the Jazz until his 4th NBA season (he only started 45 of his first 246 games) and he was a 4-year college player. Kevin Johnson. Mark Price. Kenny Anderson. The list goes on and on of pt. guards that were "buried" on the bench their rookie season and given time to develop and most with significantly more collegiate experience than knight.

Let's see what we have here first with knight and put him in the best possible situations to succeed (and by him coming off the bench against other back-ups will put him in the best possible situation to succeed at first) and if he proves to be something make changes accordingly.

I disagree that throwing kids into the fire immediately is proven to be the best way to go when it comes to developing players, especially point guards, and I certainly don't think the pistons have insulted brandon knight by re-signing stuckey.

I love Brandon Knight and made those observations well known after draft day but what's wrong with letting a 20-year old get his feet wet during a condensed pre-season and regular season on a team that isn't going anywhere? Let him earn his stripes, prove first that he's a better point guard than bynum (which shouldn't be too difficult) and then see if his game compliments stuckey's which it might since knight is a point guard that has a jump shot.
First of all Bynum has beat out Stuckey many many times, and it did nothing. What would Knight have to do? Set a franchise record for points in a quarter in the fourth while playing against a competitor for the a playoff seed? post a 20 assist game on a team with horrible ball movement? Score at a higher percentage and dish more assists? Naw, then the idiots here call you a bundle of energy and you stay in a smaller role forever.

Second, this team sucks. If it was a 50 win team I could understand not having dude start, but not on this piece of shit team. What's the advantage of having him not start? More 30 win team on the court? Fuck that, the dude needs playing time to see how is his game adjusts to the NBA.


As for pt. guards that took a while to develop......John Stockton didn't become a full-time starter for the Jazz until his 4th NBA season (he only started 45 of his first 246 games) and he was a 4-year college player. Kevin Johnson. Mark Price. Kenny Anderson. The list goes on and on of pt. guards that were "buried" on the bench their rookie season and given time to develop and most with significantly more collegiate experience than knight.

Let's see what we have here first with knight and put him in the best possible situations to succeed (and by him coming off the bench against other back-ups will put him in the best possible situation to succeed at first) and if he proves to be something make changes accordingly.

Everyone of those guys you named was old. That doesn't fly anymore. Now if a high quality/potential dude is on the bench he does not resign with his team. The team knows it so they typically end up trading them. Take a look at Devin Harris and Darren Collison. Of course they were behind Steve Nash and Chris Paul, respectively, and not Stuckey and Will Bynum. You're on the Pistons, the weather sucks, your team sucks, and you barely even get court time. the guys getting play in front of you are definitely not better than you... now you want to sign this extension? By year four the team would have to trade him just in fear that he walks for nothing, and there wouldn't even be much coming back because unlike Paul, Williams, ETC. Knight would be unproven.

Playing against the bench doesn't make a player a good starter. That's not the best situation for him to exceed, it's the most likely to make a mediocre player with lackluster talent. How can someone adjust to the strength, speed and skill of an opposing player if they never get to experience it? The reason he should be a starter is the same reason little kids who play with older kids get so much better so much quicker.

Koolaid- I'm not going to bring up the bynum argument here but he's never proven to be a more vailid starting NBA guard than stuckey or anyone for that matter. Don't get me wrong, I despise stuckey, but at least he's not a complete abomination on the defensive end like bynum is. Bynum is what he is, a tiny, ultra-quick player that doesn't have a consistent jumper and prefers to shoot layups (which is a bad thing when you're under 6-feet), does get hot at times but isn't nearly consistent enough on offense nor good enough on the defensive end (in fact, he's terrible) to warrant starters minutes. His role for any team is obvious. He's a solid back-up.

With Knight, if he proves capable of handling an offense, hitting a consistent jumper (he's going to prove to be a very good shooter with an ultra-quick release) and defending his position he'll play more minutes and hopefully will be closing out games in the near future. What's wrong with having him prove himself first especially when there are 3 other guards ahead of him on the depth chart that have at least proven something in the NBA? Let's have him prove that at least at first he's better than bynum in practice and off the bench before annointing him our savior. What's wrong with exposing him to a little internal competition before saying he's guaranteed 35+ a night?

(it's funny how you say you're concerned about insulting brandon knight by re-signing stuckey and then use bynum as an example of someone that has supposedly out-played stuckey and deserves a starting role....wouldn't giving the starting role to knight after 2 weeks of pre-season be insulting to both stuckey and bynum instead? Your logic is skewed).

As for your 50-win team or 30-win team argument it doesn't matter. If you're a rookie and there are people on your team that play your position that have proven to be semi-serviceable I'm of the opinion you have to prove yourself first before you should automatically be given that position. Knight was drafted at a position of (supposed) strength. If he were a dominant 4 this would be a completely different argument.

Knight will get the playing time to do prove himself and, in my opinion, will eventually prove that he is better. Again, what's wrong with asking him to prove himself first? This isn't like the michael curry/tayshaun prince situation a few years back when it was blatantly obvious we had a player that had no business playing 30+ minutes a night and a capable replacement ready to go. Brandon Knight has at least 2 capable NBA players that he now needs to prove he's better than. I feel he will.

And finally, just because john stockton and the others "was old" doesn't mean there aren't parallels to the current situation with the pistons. Each one of those guys (and may others previous to and after) came into situations where there were other guards higher up on the depth chart that played their position. They then had to go about and prove that they were better than the incumbent (although in the case with KJ he was dealt to phoenix mid-season where he was given much more floor time). Having said that, they eventually did prove themselves capable. Brandon knight now finds himself in a similar situation.

And as for collison/harris, if the hornets thought that collison was going to be a better player than paul they would have dealt paul. Obviously collison is no chris paul so they dealt him. Either way, collison had to prove himself first before being given the reigns of any team.

And as for Devin Harris, he actually never played on the same team as Steve Nash. Devin harris was a rookie in 2004. Steve nash's first season with the suns was in 2004. Even without nash on the roster avery johnson felt it better for harris to come off the bench, learn the game and prove himself. He eventually did prove himself to be a capable NBA player although it took some time and arguably a different franchise to do it.

And don't give me this "high potential guy won't resign with the team if he's on the bench and/or because the weather is shitty" argument. That's only valid if the guy wasn’t given an opportunity to play and prove his worth and if he does prove himself capable, then perceives his chances of success is greater elsewhere. We're WAY too early in the brandon knight game to even consider this argument as being valid. Brandon Knight is going to be given every chance to succeed. If he does and it leads to wins and if the pistons prove they are a franchise that can get and keep good players to play with him I'm guessing the chances are good he'll stick with the franchise that gave him the best chance to win.

It's now up to brandon knight to prove himself (and for the pistons to continue to rehaul the roster and make it a contender again).

And who knows? Maybe he does start opening night? We don't know yet. My guess is no, too soon, but who knows? We'll find out soon enough.

I do find it funny people hated the fact Stuckey was handed the starting PG job and have complained since it happened...

Now people want Knight to be handed the same job?

How fucked up is that?

Back when Stuckey was handed the job he seemed like he had a lot of potential, seemed like he could become a real quality player and he had a veteran starting line up to help him out when he struggled.

Now? We're fucked!

Knight seems to have a lot of potential, seems like he could become a real quality player... but our roster is shit!

The majority of this roster is a joke. We have very few guys that deserve big minutes. There should be no guarantees anymore

Forcing ALL players to earn their minutes is the way to go. Forcing them all to work for the betterment of the team is the way to go. Some of these guys have had their little moments of personal glory, their moment in the sun. Now it's fucking time for those guys to do what is best for the team.

I don't advocate handing Knight the starting job.... but he's the best PG on the roster (the only one?) and he should get the job. It shouldn't be handed to him because he's the "future"... it should be earnt by him because he's proven in camp/pre-season that he's the man for the job.

As for Bynum: Are we really going to have this "debate" again? The fucker does his job extremely well. To say that he would perform a completely different job just as well isn't smart.

Let's say you can make an awesome website... you do it so well every one of your friends and family want you to make one for them. And you do. And they all kick arse. You are regarded by your family and friends (and their friends) as the best website designer in the known universe.

Then someone asks you to build a house!

Completely fucking different thing!

Bynum is an awesome bench player and we're lucky to have him but you can't look at his performances in that role and say "Dude would kill it as a starter"... starting at PG is completely different to coming off the bench and being the "energy" guy.

I do find it funny people hated the fact Stuckey was handed the starting PG job and have complained since it happened...

Now people want Knight to be handed the same job?

How fucked up is that?

Back when Stuckey was handed the job he seemed like he had a lot of potential, seemed like he could become a real quality player and he had a veteran starting line up to help him out when he struggled.

Hope you're not looking this way.

I hated it when Darko was handed minutes, hated it when Stuckey was anointed, and would feel the same about Knight. I do hope that he earns the starting role soon (I mentioned "by the all star break" earlier), mostly because that would likely mean that we have a stud on our hands.

That's really what it's going to come down to. If he's that good and that ready, the problem will take care of itself. The coaches see what's going on in practice.

wow, you're backwards as fuck. let me break down...


Koolaid- I'm not going to bring up the bynum argument here but he's never proven to be a more vailid starting NBA guard than stuckey
wrong. He's accomplished more in half the time, and only a fucking idiot would think that means he should play less. Unless you're givng Stuck minutes hoping he'll develop from them, but you definitely don't feel that way, as it's counter to this whole spiel.

Don't get me wrong, I despise stuckey
So you want to keep giving him shit loads of minutes? I hate child molesters, I guess I'll go to the sex registry site and mail one a check for 20 bucks.

Bynum is what he is, a tiny, ultra-quick player that doesn't have a consistent jumper and prefers to shoot layups (which is a bad thing when you're under 6-feet)
He makes those lay-ups. He's surprisingly efficient. Fuck what you're saying, it's not better to have a guy 5 inches taller miss shots just because he's taller.

does get hot at times but isn't nearly consistent enough on offense
You're asking for consistent results without a consistent role? That's not possible.

nor good enough on the defensive end (in fact, he's terrible) to warrant starters minutes. He's bad in a halfcourt set defense with no big to funnel the driving guard into. With the inability to hand check that's going to happen to every guard in the league. That said, he's better at guarding the 1 than Stuckey is. Stuck's D was the most blindly hyped shit on the team. He didn't even TRY to put pressure on the ball handler, Bynum does.

His role for any team is obvious. He's a solid back-up.
Now he is. He's almost 29 years old and he never gained experience as a starter. It'd take about 2 years to find rhythm, get the used to his team mates abilities, ETC. A 29 year old with very limited experience who relies on his speed is not what you want to push for basing a team around.
2-3 years ago is a whole different story. He'd be in his prime right now. Instead those years were wasted on a guy who isn't a PG (or even a good player)in a failed experiment. Apparently, you want to make that mistake again but this time with Knight getting fucked over.



With Knight, if he proves capable of handling an offense, hitting a consistent jumper (he's going to prove to be a very good shooter with an ultra-quick release) and defending his position he'll play more minutes and hopefully will be closing out games in the near future.
So if he learns to do all the shit the guys in front of him can't do he can get minutes? What if he proves to not know how to run an offense or shoot? We play the older guy who doesn't know shit but how to put up bricks and is less likely to learn and grow?


What's wrong with having him prove himself first especially when there are 3 other guards ahead of him on the depth chart that have at least proven something in the NBA?
What exactly has Stuckey proved? That he can't shoot or pass? That he's whiny? That's his B-ball IQ came from playing NBA Jam?
You know what Gordon proved? That some sort of change here is badly needed.

Let's have him prove that at least at first he's better than bynum in practice and off the bench before annointing him our savior.
So he needs to learn to be a bench player, then a starter, then.. hopefully... a star and a leader?
How about we try to see if he can play the role that we want him to play instead? STARTING POINT GUARD?

What's wrong with exposing him to a little internal competition before saying he's guaranteed 35+ a night?
Because it's not competition. It's just increasing the chance of him learning bad habits. The last thing he needs is to look at stuckey as if he's a role model for growth.


(it's funny how you say you're concerned about insulting brandon knight by re-signing stuckey and then use bynum as an example of someone that has supposedly out-played stuckey and deserves a starting role....wouldn't giving the starting role to knight after 2 weeks of pre-season be insulting to both stuckey and bynum instead? Your logic is skewed).
No, It's not skewed.
I don't give a flying fuck about insulting Stuckey. The dude has gotten everything he wanted and he did nothing but disappoint with it. I feel like I'm being insulted by him when he puts on a Detroit jersey and plays basketball. If he's insulted by a young promising rook who's likely already better then him then he should've worked on finding team mates and shooting over .440 when he doesn't even shoot 3's.
As for Bynum, The damage is already done. He is what he is, but one of the pleasant things is that he's a true professional. From playing 48 to DNPs, he is happy to be here.
Also, it's not the signing that it's insulting, it's the playing time.


As for your 50-win team or 30-win team argument it doesn't matter. If you're a rookie and there are people on your team that play your position that have proven to be semi-serviceable I'm of the opinion you have to prove yourself first before you should automatically be given that position. Knight was drafted at a position of (supposed) strength. If he were a dominant 4 this would be a completely different argument.

So you dislike Stuckey, but you're arguing for him being a "supposed" strength as a PG? What? You're arguing to support something you don't even believe in. That's fucking dumb.

As for 50 wins verse 30 wins, one is effective and working and the other isn't. One doesn't need change and should be very careful dealing with chemistry and the other is the exact opposite.


This isn't like the michael curry/tayshaun prince situation a few years back when it was blatantly obvious we had a player that had no business playing 30+ minutes a night and a capable replacement ready to go. Brandon Knight has at least 2 capable NBA players that he now needs to prove he's better than. I feel he will.

The Curry/Tay situation was a little different. Tay wasn't a lottery pick for a losing team. He was a late first for a winning team. Yes, he was better than Curry, but Carlisle was apprehensive with messing with team chemistry. Having said that I still don't think it was the right move, but it's definitely understandable. Curry is similar to Stuck as neither deserve their time and neither truly help their team win. Stuck is probably worse though, Curry had no impact and Stuck has a negative one. Knight is also a much more highly regarded player than Prince was when he was drafted.


And finally, just because john stockton and the others "was old" doesn't mean there aren't parallels to the current situation with the pistons.
Yes it does. The CBA and the culture have changed so much since the eighties that it makes that thought absurd. there's a reason why you had to dig back into the day for a player that fit your situation, it's because it doesn't happen anymore.

Each one of those guys (and may others previous to and after)
AFTER!?
pfftt, yeah right.
Who?
Remember. same team! The goal isn't to take your slow development approach so he ends up looking great on some other squad and Detroit gets nothing.


That's only valid if the guy wasn’t given an opportunity to play and prove his worth and if he does prove himself capable, then perceives his chances of success is greater elsewhere. We're WAY too early in the brandon knight game to even consider this argument as being valid. Brandon Knight is going to be given every chance to succeed.

This sounds like the Langlois response to someone questioning him. When you're talking about putting him 3rd in the depth chart, he's not getting every chance to succeed. The fact that you would even attempt to say that is either insulting to my intelligence or telling of yours.



And who knows? Maybe he does start opening night? We don't know yet. My guess is no, too soon, but who knows? We'll find out soon enough.

True, we're not addressing what will actually happen (unless you're Dumars or Frank or something).

I'm speaking of what should happen, and I'm letting you know that what you're saying is beyond wrong. It's satanic and retarded.

Dude you're comparing someone getting minutes after Chauncey was traded away and the team becoming shit afterward to the team already being shit and getting from a shitty player who's had ample time to prove himself. There's a problem there.

Also, If Bynum's role off the bench is so drastically from starting then having Knight be on the bench is a waste of his youth and horribly developing him. After all, you wouldn't practice at building websites to be a good architect in the future. dur hur hur.

for the record, I'm not saying that a youthful player should get the start automatically on a crap team. I'm saying that if the talents even remotely close and the team sucks, fuck that veteran.

Dude you're comparing someone getting minutes after Chauncey was traded away and the team becoming shit afterward to the team already being shit and getting from a shitty player who's had ample time to prove himself. There's a problem there.

Also, If Bynum's role off the bench is so drastically from starting then having Knight be on the bench is a waste of his youth and horribly developing him. After all, you wouldn't practice at building websites to be a good architect in the future. dur hur hur.

for the record, I'm not saying that a youthful player should always get the start automatically on a crap team. I'm saying that if the talents even remotely close and the team sucks, fuck that veteran.

Koolaid: On the Knight situation we agree: He's young, talented and IMO became the best PG on the roster the second he was drafted.

IF you believe he is the best PG on the roster then he MUST start at PG. His age, experience and pay check don't matter

IMO BG, Stuckey and Bynum are not PGs... so Knight wins the battle before a ball is bounced

I'm not saying play him 35 minutes as a rookie... I'm saying you play him whatever minutes we play him because he's the best PG we have

On the Bynum topic: He is what he is and he's great in that role. No one can point to his poductivity in that position and say "it proves he'd be a good starter".

The only thing that proves anyone would be a good starter is .... being a good starter!

Bynum never got the chance and it's not because of me. It's because he's just not a starting guard in the NBA. No harm in that. Dude kills it coming off the bench and doing his job. Not every fucker can play 35 minutes and score 20 points per game. Some guys have to play a role for the good of the team.

Bynum is one of those guys and it's to his credit he has never whined, bitched or fucking moaned about his role, pay or anything else. Back in the day this would make him normal. In today's league it seems we shold erect a fucking statue for him!

On the Bynum topic: He is what he is and he's great in that role. No one can point to his poductivity in that position and say "it proves he'd be a good starter".

The only thing that proves anyone would be a good starter is .... being a good starter!



This is why I can't agree with that.
By that logic no bench player would ever get to break into a starter's role. Chucky was pretty good, should Chauncey have gotten the nod over him?
I really doubt that's something you believe in. It's just something you made up during the old Bynum vs. Stuckey discussion to justify your stubborn idea that Bynum shouldn't start games off trying to get dudes shots when he was the only guy on the squad even remotely capable of doing that.

Whatever though, Bynum never got the chance to learn to run an offense out the gate. Now he's too old to play the role of a starting prospect. I'm cool with a 25-26 maybe even 27 year old who's learning the game. By 29 that window has closed. It's just unfortunate that every year his FG% went up, and his 3% got exponentially better to the point where he might be a legitimate threat now. Meanwhile the guy eating up most of his minutes seemed to stay the same old crappy player he's always been despite being younger. We'll never know what the results would've been of having Bynum play a starter's minutes. We do know what's become of Rodney Stuckey and what's become of the Pistons though and if you think that where we are at now is okay I gotta say you're crazy. Now, even under the best scenario, we're supposed to watch Stuck get acquainted with being a 2 at the age of 26 and instead of having a thirst for knowledge, he has a sense of entitlement.

I didn't make it up during the original "Bynum as a starting PG" debate.

I believe bench players first must prove themselves capable of a bigger role. Let's assume they do this and are granted a larger role by their Coach (it's in the Coach's best interests to play the best players available - he needs to win to keep his job)

Then when the opportunity arises for them to start (starter gets injured) or they get bigger minutes consistently these players then need to prove that they can deliver.

Does Knight need to do this? Of course not! He's the only fucking PG we have!

Bynum? That ship sailed long ago and there is nothing anyone can say that will make me believe he should have ever been a starting PG in the NBA.

I think the problem with the whole Bynum thing is that you view it as Stuckey v Bynum. Stuckey is such a poor excuse for a PG that he doesn't even factor into my thinking when the whole "Is Bynum capable of being a starting PG" discussion comes up.

I compare Bynum with PGs, not fuckers who were handed the keys to the executive bathroom

Anyway, like I said: Bynum is great at what he does. He is what he is - an outstanding back up guard. I'm sorry that's not enough for you

You can't go back and change things. As much as I like to point out how many times Joe failed in the Draft it doesn't change that it's been and gone. By all means point out how fucked up this franchise has been for the past 4-5 years.. but not giving Bynum more of an opportunity is just one of many

Does Knight need to do this? Of course not! He's the only fucking PG we have!



Once upon a time that was true for Bynum too. You didn't see it that way back then.
What changed your mind?

and before you say Bynum isn't a PG..

I compare Bynum with PGs
I really doubt you say that if you're thinking he's a power forward.



IYou can't go back and change things. As much as I like to point out how many times Joe failed in the Draft it doesn't change that it's been and gone. By all means point out how fucked up this franchise has been for the past 4-5 years.. but not giving Bynum more of an opportunity is just one of many
True. BG and CV's contracts, giving Stuck a superstar push when he's clearly not, and not giving bynum more growth time are collectively what made these last few years so god damn horrible. It's not one thing, but the last two are related though, and I'd be damned if that wouldn't have made a huge difference.
I know you're not suggesting that it's bad to look at past mistakes and avoid repeating them, are you?

On another note, the Stuckey twitter was confirmed by a dude at MLive who interviewed him during the open practice. Then Stuck's bitch ass deleted it..

see..

http://twitter.com/Justin_Rogers


Everytime I think Stuck couldn't be a more self absorbed, worthless piece of shit he proves me wrong. God, I wish this fucker would just disappear.

I never viewed Will Bynum as a PG though - and that's pretty much the key

I don't think he has the mentality or the shot to be a quality PG, much less a starter.

Like a lot of fuckers today Bynum is neither a legit SG or a legit PG (Stuckey and BG fit here too). He doesn't have the size or the shot to play SG and he doesn't have the handles and mentality to be a PG.

A PG to me is John Stockton.

That's the bench mark - not in stats but in game. Pass first but certainly capable of taking what the defence gives you offensively. Long jumpers, 3's, drive and dish, take it all the way... Stockton could do it. Granted he's one of the best PGs of all time but I'm talking about a PG not only having the mentality to run the offense but also have the skills on that end of the floor to take whatever opportunities are given.

Assuming we had an offensive player like that, with a PGs mentality but he sucked on D... I'd start the fucker at PG!

I believe Knight is the closest thing we have to that kind of player... because again:

I don't view and never have viewed Bynum, Stuckey or BG as PGs

As for the failings of the past few years... it began with the "Michael Curry is the new Coach" announcement and the Chauncey trade. It didn't snowball after that - it came like a fucking Avalanche. Iverson, Sheed, Prince, Rip, Johnny Q, Kwame fucking Brown,, Mr D's death, no ownership...

Fuck me!

I want Gores to make a splash. They had their chance to dump most of the shit holding us back and didn't. I hope they have a plan cause 2 more years of this shit will fucking end me

(Kwame Brown wasn't that bad for us.)
((I'd take him back in a second.))
(((Not for 7 million, though.)))

Mr D's death

Dude, you can't say his death was a fail. lol. He got old and died. Unless you think we all should've prayed for him or something.

It was certainly a blow, but it's also one that would've been a lot less if his family gave a shit about the team.

anyhow, as much as I'd like to reengage in this moronic discussion which is almost verbatim to the same fucking thing that happen a long ass time ago, which ended with you saying something along the lines of 'fuck it, i guess he should start' because he was the closest to being a true distributor and the most likely of the bunch to assume that role, I'm just going to gracefully bow out. I'm not going to argue that SOMEONE has to play fucking starter, even if they aren't good, again. Feel free to block this out just as you did last time this same topic came up. You just say whatever idiotic thing comes into your head, even if it directly conflicts with some shit you just said. When I get frustrated enough, I'll leave and then you can declare yourself champ!

I'm more focused on the fact that the twitter account has been confirmed. The same twitter account that begged for "a new start", quoted that the pistons are going to suck, and spoke freely of a desire to play for Portland did actually belong to the 'sacred cow' that just got millions to wear the name of a city that represents me across his chest.

ESPNSteinLine Marc Stein
Just going up on ESPN online: Sources say Nuggets and restricted free agent Arron Afflalo agree to five-year deal in excess of $43 million


Afflalo just got paid, i bet Stuckey gonna be pissed :D

Koolaid - are we having the same debate we had back then?

The debate you had back then was "Bynum vs Stuckey". My point was that Bynum is not a PG.

In fact, neither is a fucking PG and if you're gonna start someone who isn't a PG then you pick the young kid with potential.

You can get frustrated or whatever dude. It's not that fucking serious.

IF you really believe that Bynum could have been a starting PG in the NBA then there is nothing I can type that will change your mind. I simply don't believe that Will Bynum was or is a PG and I'd never start the guy long term EVER!

I'm sure we're clear on this. Crystal clear!

As for right now: Knight should fucking start. End of story. He's the closest thing we have to a PG and we've proven over the last couple of seasons that Stuckey at PG is a terrible fucking idea. Bynum? Not a PG, not part of the discussion.

As for his twitter and shit? Stuckey is a fucking idiot and needs a better agent or at the very least better people around him. He also needs to get his fucking arse in the gym and work on his game cause right now he's a borderline starter in the league.

And the truth is he could be so much more. But you have to work at it. The mere fact he still can't shoot from 15 feet out is a clear indication the guy doesn't give a fuck.

Why the fuck do we draft these cunts?

Congrats to my boy Double A the Enforcer for getting paid. Apparently he's the glue guy on that team!

Remember people: we traded him away for nothing!

I have to say, I'm not understanding this new "Bynum is not a PG" thread. Did I just get whacked in the head or something? Of course he is. He may not be prototype, but it's certainly his best (only?) position, the one that he is best suited for.

It's his only position cause he's a midget

He has the game of a SG but the body of a midget... so he plays PG and has been forced to learn that position.

I'm not sure you can learn to be a PG...

A reasonably smart player can run the offense... but does that mean he's a PG?

I always thought the PG was the guy that would rather dish it than shoot it

He's consistently led the team in assists/48 the past few years, IIRC.

I know others will dispute this, but based on what I see when I watch the games, the ball (and player) movement is at it's best when Bynum is at the point. (vs. our other alternatives)

I always thought the PG was the guy that would rather dish it than shoot it

And I don't care what they'd "rather" do, I care about what they actually do. When Bynum has been asked to run the offense and distribute, he's done it better than anyone else on this piss ass squad.

Hopefully Knight takes it to yet another level.

So... according to Koolaid and Glenn Will Bynum has been the best PG on the roster for the last couple of seasons....

LMAO

It's not like we're comparing him to any real PGs. We're comparing him to Stuckey!

As I've already said: IMO Knight became the best fucking PG on this roster the second he was drafted.

Bynum is not a starting PG. Anyone who wants him to start over Knight has rocks in their head.

Stuckey is not a PG. He'll likely start over Knight and I think that's fucking stupid.

Long story short (and in an effort to stop talking about the same subject): I want Knight to start at PG.

I'll take the middle road... Bynum can be frustrating as hell when there's a spot up shooter with nobody close by and Bynum doesn't recognize the situation because he's in Stuckey mode.
However there are times that he drives and dishes where he can't be stopped.
I saw over at real GM they were heaping praise on Knight and saying Bynum played like shit... WRONG... he played a complete PG type game... it just needs to be more than once every three games.

Apparenly, Larry told Stuck that he wants him to "live in the paint". Probably the best way to use him, since he's got no jumper.

If true, I expect his FTs and FG% to increase, along with his turnovers and offensive fouls.

Bull in a china shop, baby.

I'll take the middle road... Bynum can be frustrating as hell when there's a spot up shooter with nobody close by and Bynum doesn't recognize the situation because he's in Stuckey mode.
However there are times that he drives and dishes where he can't be stopped.
I saw over at real GM they were heaping praise on Knight and saying Bynum played like shit... WRONG... he played a complete PG type game... it just needs to be more than once every three games.


Over at Ralgm they banned everyone who liked bynum. seriously, only the stuckey nut riders were allowed to stick around, dudes who say stuck played great while going 2/15 from the floor. Don't expect shit to not bias and retarded over there.

But bynum and Knight both were pretty bad with turnovers, as well as Daye.

Apparenly, Larry told Stuck that he wants him to "live in the paint". Probably the best way to use him, since he's got no jumper.

If true, I expect his FTs and FG% to increase, along with his turnovers and offensive fouls.

Bull in a china shop, baby.
I don't expect it to rise. He isn't good at finishing.

I'd expect him to get to line a lot more though.

Agree on his inability to finish, I just figure that he'll pick up a little % based on being closer. I'd have to look at his shooting % zone chart to justify that, though.

Detroit Pistons: Why Will Bynum is the Most Important Guard

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/994865-detroit-pistons-why-will-bynum-is-the-most-important-guard?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

^ I agree with pretty much everything said in that article, but does that really make him the most important guard?

How can a dude being the role model for Knight possibly be more important than Knight himself?

Yeah, the "most important" part is pretty weak.

Each of the 4 guards are important in their own way.

It's important that Knight live up to the early hype.
It's important that Bynum doesn't get crowded out because of Stuckey's new deal.
It's important that Gordon be moved, if at all possible.
It's important that Stuckey doesn't go emo/prima donna/chucker/heart failure, again.

Pulled this from Chicago Trib...
"Statistically, guard Wil Bynum is one of the top clutch performers in the league. He finished top ten in production per 48 minutes of clutch time last year, ahead of players like Dwyane Wade and Carmelo Anthony."

Pulled this from Chicago Trib...
"Statistically, guard Wil Bynum is one of the top clutch performers in the league. He finished top ten in production per 48 minutes of clutch time last year, ahead of players like Dwyane Wade and Carmelo Anthony."


That's old isn't it?

I remember hearing that stuff awhile ago. I didn't think it'd be true anymore.

It's from yesterday's paper

No surprise Bynum is clutch - he has no fear and is not afraid to call his own number while he's running the show.

The fact that he's been the "best" PG on this roster the last few seasons tells you what you already knew:

We've sucked monkey spunk for the last few seasons!

You can not have Will Bynum as your best PG and be a good team.

No surprise Bynum is clutch - he has no fear and is not afraid to call his own number while he's running the show.

The fact that he's been the "best" PG on this roster the last few seasons tells you what you already knew:

We've sucked monkey spunk for the last few seasons!

You can not have Will Bynum as your best PG and be a good team.

Would the Heat cease to be a good team with Bynum instead of Chalmers? :)

LMAO

Of course not... since Wade and Lebron would run the show and Bynum would come off the bench :)

Stuckey's last year is only partially guaranteed:

http://www.freep.com/article/20120115/SPORTS03/201150526/1051/sports03

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120308/OPINION03/203080391/Pistons-president-Joe-Dumars-resolute-about-task-at-hand?google_editors_picks=true


On what he sees in fifth-year guard Rodney Stuckey: "I see a guy who's having his best year right now. Sometimes you have to be patient and stick with a guy who has that kind of talent. He's 25, and when he didn't blossom after the first couple years, the answer for me wasn't, OK, let's just get rid of him."

Anyone else think that Stuckey hasn't really improved much? He'll have some good games, then some bad games, and at the end of the day he's the same player who can't finish at the rim very well that he was a few years ago. About his biggest improvement is doing better with 3P shots, but given his FT%, I'd expect that to come to him.

:blossom: