lmao. that's straight up buffoonery. i would sig that shit, but you didn't cuss in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharaoh
Printable View
lmao. that's straight up buffoonery. i would sig that shit, but you didn't cuss in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharaoh
Yes, our Coach often enjoys buffoonery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koolaid
Hell, since we have been missing both Rip and Gordon he's started rookie beanpole Austin Daye and "Haven't started in 2 years" Chucky Atkins.
Will Bynum deserves his shot damn it, Coach.
I don't think Q is a buffoon at all, but he's either been told to try and "hide" Bynum to keep his value down, or, more likely, he's decided to (or been told to) try other safe, "non threatening" options to protect Stuckey from feeling insecure about his role. Another possibility is that it's an effort to keep Stuckey's value high. But I think one of the few things about Stuckey that we can all agree on is that he is playing much better off the ball. It will be interesting to see how long they keep playing this charade to keep the best playmaker on the team from starting, or at least getting the minutes he's earned.
...or just maybe he just wanted to do the right thing and start Atkins, who is probably the only guard on the team that doesnt look for his own shot first.
Not to mention, Atkins is probably the best 3-point shooting guard on the active roster. It spaces the floor out better for Stuckey.
The idea that there's some conspiracy theory behind Bynum not starting is absurd. Yes, there are forces keeping him on the bench. They're called his game. He is not a starting PG.
Best playmaker on the team...that's rich.
Glenn, do you subscribe to New World Order theories?
Maybe they just want Bynum off the bench so he can save the fucking day every game?
I'm pretty sure everyone knows Bynum is pretty good. Allowing him to come off the bench in his current role just highlights his strengths while hiding his weaknesses.
Stuckey? He's being exposed every night as a non-PG. So every single night they start him at that position more and more people see the mistake the franchise is making.
And now that we'll be spending millions and millions of dollars on 2 starting calibre SG's it's a bit of problem that we have a pretty good one here and he's on a rookie deal.
Okay, enlighten us, as usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kstat
I'd say it's Rip.
It's close between the two, but I have to laugh when K makes the assertion seem like an OUTRAGE.
the assertion isnt an outrage. You have to take something seriously before you consider it an outrage.
It's a flat-out joke.
Hey, great to be here...here's one for ya, Wil Bynum leads our team in Asst. and FG% among qualified guards (HIGHHAT). WAKA WAKA!
Thanks, I'll be at the Laugh Factory all week!
Yes, it's a joke to lead the team in assists per 36 night after night (while also being depending on for scoring).
Who's the joke?
Anyways, fuck this bozo.
Does anyone have a better outlook at work today after this game than Langlois?
Instead of trying to put a positive spin about an 8 game losing streak in his mailbag, he gets to say "it looks like they got it corrected on Sunday" to almost any question.
Big win for Keith.
I think Keith is fine either way. It isn't really his job to make people like the Pistons, just put a positive spin on the pieces he writes. This year he has lots of positive things to write about, win or lose.
You don't think he wakes up after an 8 gamer and says in a whiny voice: "What can we get for Rip?" "Stuckey isn't a point guard" ahhhh FUCK MY LIFE!!!
Nah, he get paid. I'm sure he was more sick of answering the same questions for 4 years.
Maybe I just miss Evil Keith/Swami.
:emo kid:
Just because a person "leads" the team in assists per 36 doesn't mean he's necessarily good at creating shots for others or that he isn't a shoot-first guard like bynum is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glan
In 01/02 stackhouse led the pistons with 5.4 assists per 36. Will bynum is averaging 5.5 this year.
Stats can be spun in many different ways. Maybe bynum's per 36 really just means that when he's in the game he dominates the ball too much and passes when he can't find a shot for himself when attacking the basket?
lol at the first question out of the box...Quote:
Originally Posted by Glan
Quote:
Odeh (Dearborn Heights, Mich.): I believe the Atlanta game made a strong case for Stuckey being better suited as a shooting guard. I understand he is more of a combo guard, but his assists were up and he created more for others when he was second to touch the ball. Does this make Rip expendable for a point guard?
Langlois: If Joe Dumars entertained any thoughts about trading Rip Hamilton, my hunch is it would be for a big man β or, in a Billups-Iverson scenario, for an expiring contract that would enable him to target a big man in free agency. As for Stuckey, heβs a guard. I continue to maintain that teams that have elite playmakers β Steve Nash, Chris Paul, Jason Kidd, et al β are best served by keeping the ball in the hands of one player to start every possession. That leaves a whole lot of other teams who spread that responsibility over several players and, for what they might give up in continuity, perhaps they gain back in versatility. Stuckey is going to play off the ball a good deal of the time, at least as long as Will Bynum is in the mix.
Had to listen to this game rather than watch it. Waiting for the Bmac highlights.
Still using Sheed nicknames.Quote:
"Body did a great job in that," said Jerebko, referring to Wallace.
"I'm just trying to do what he does -- get in there and get a hand on all the rebounds."
Breakdown of every Stuckey drive to the basket during the game.
http://detroitpistonsforum.com/forum...-thread-6.html