<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Joe Dumars is not the 24th worst general manager in the NBA</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/</link>
	<description>Your Go-To Source For Pistons Coverage</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 16:34:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: no need</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-6669</link>
		<dc:creator>no need</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:45:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-6669</guid>
		<description>Who picked Joe Forte and Kedrick Brown? I think you don&#039;t know about Celtics, It was Wallence not Ainge. Besides, it can&#039;t be compared with Piston use the Second Pick to choose Darko, that was worst ever</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who picked Joe Forte and Kedrick Brown? I think you don&#8217;t know about Celtics, It was Wallence not Ainge. Besides, it can&#8217;t be compared with Piston use the Second Pick to choose Darko, that was worst ever</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laser</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-6189</link>
		<dc:creator>Laser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-6189</guid>
		<description>i agree with basically everything david said. it feels really good to read some sane, rational perspective on the team.
 
feldman, let it never be said that you&#039;re not an optimist. i only wish i could see a glass with a thin coating of backwash on the bottom and call it &quot;half full.&quot;
 
for the record, i&#039;ll say dumars is as medocre as a GM gets, so let&#039;s put him somewhere in the middle. he came into the job with a terrible team and tons of work to do, and he&#039;s come full circle. thanks for the memories, joe, but it&#039;s not 2004 anymore. as good as most of the last decade was, it just doesn&#039;t have the same luster when you&#039;re wallowing at the bottom of the conference and you don&#039;t even have the flexibility to make a single personnel move after a 55 loss season. we&#039;ll be playing the lottery until some of these bad contracts come off the books, then we&#039;ll be good like the thunder in about five years, and joe will look like a GENIUS again! huzzah!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i agree with basically everything david said. it feels really good to read some sane, rational perspective on the team.<br />
 <br />
feldman, let it never be said that you&#8217;re not an optimist. i only wish i could see a glass with a thin coating of backwash on the bottom and call it &#8220;half full.&#8221;<br />
 <br />
for the record, i&#8217;ll say dumars is as medocre as a GM gets, so let&#8217;s put him somewhere in the middle. he came into the job with a terrible team and tons of work to do, and he&#8217;s come full circle. thanks for the memories, joe, but it&#8217;s not 2004 anymore. as good as most of the last decade was, it just doesn&#8217;t have the same luster when you&#8217;re wallowing at the bottom of the conference and you don&#8217;t even have the flexibility to make a single personnel move after a 55 loss season. we&#8217;ll be playing the lottery until some of these bad contracts come off the books, then we&#8217;ll be good like the thunder in about five years, and joe will look like a GENIUS again! huzzah!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Hayes</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-6010</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Hayes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 22:12:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-6010</guid>
		<description>Ash, I wrote the post, when did I say it was unbiased? Also, what about Dumars&#039; resumé screams &quot;terrible GM&quot; to you? The object is to win, and Dumars&#039; teams have won at a clip only one or two other organization&#039;s GMs (Spurs, Lakers) can claim over the last decade.
This is the big boy table. You want to make arguments, bring data, facts and points to the discussion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ash, I wrote the post, when did I say it was unbiased? Also, what about Dumars&#8217; resumé screams &#8220;terrible GM&#8221; to you? The object is to win, and Dumars&#8217; teams have won at a clip only one or two other organization&#8217;s GMs (Spurs, Lakers) can claim over the last decade.<br />
This is the big boy table. You want to make arguments, bring data, facts and points to the discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ash</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-6009</link>
		<dc:creator>Ash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-6009</guid>
		<description>Funny how the Piston blogger calls his own piece about a terrible Piston&#039;s GM &quot;unbiased.&quot;  High comedy right there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Funny how the Piston blogger calls his own piece about a terrible Piston&#8217;s GM &#8220;unbiased.&#8221;  High comedy right there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Feldman</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-5973</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Feldman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 21:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-5973</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Tads, I think you&#039;re right on. I think there is the base — not all the pieces, mind you — of a good team on this roster. It&#039;s just a matter of figuring out which pieces comprise that base. Hopefully, this year, the cream will rise to the top. Then, it will be time to start building around those players and ridding the team of the redundancies. The injuries of last year really put the Pistons a year behind in rebuilding.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tads, I think you&#8217;re right on. I think there is the base — not all the pieces, mind you — of a good team on this roster. It&#8217;s just a matter of figuring out which pieces comprise that base. Hopefully, this year, the cream will rise to the top. Then, it will be time to start building around those players and ridding the team of the redundancies. The injuries of last year really put the Pistons a year behind in rebuilding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Feldman</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-5972</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Feldman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 21:20:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-5972</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Odeh, I don&#039;t think that trade is anywhere near what the Hornets would do.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Odeh, I don&#8217;t think that trade is anywhere near what the Hornets would do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Feldman</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-5971</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Feldman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 21:18:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-5971</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;David, first off, my apologies. Given the context of this post, I thought you meant you love Dumars&#039; GM abilities as much as anyone. I have a lot of respect for those who still think fondly of him as a person and player. Again, sorry for misinterpreting that.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For the rest, I&#039;ll go point by point again.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;26 isn’t NBA young.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All-Star-level players who have gotten significantly better at 26 (or older): Chauncey Billups, Ben Wallace, Steve Nash, Mehmet Okur, David Lee, Tony Parker, Peja Stojakovic.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;As for Charlie V, like I said I have no problem with Charlie V except in the context of the rest of Joe D.’s moves. Charlie V, Jerebko and Daye (and Summers for that matter) all serve relatively similar functions.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When the Pistons signed Villanueva, none of those other three had played a game. None of the three were can&#039;t-miss prospects. You just can&#039;t pass one a free agent you like for those three at that point. Plus, I&#039;m not sure how redundant they are. Villanueva is a power forward. The other three are probably best at small forward.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Doesn’t mean that I’m not fond of them, but that much replication suggests that the money might have been better spent elsewhere.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Tads basically explains the logic behind this in the comment right above this.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Joe Johnson doesn’t deserve any part of a max contract, but he’s also led a team to the 2nd round of the playoffs in back to back years. And he makes only 3.5 mil more per year than Rip.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Joe Johnson will make $7.5 million more per season than Hamilton will make per year the next three seasons (if Hamilton&#039;s option is picked up for the final year).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Lewis isn’t a franchise player but he also provides a valuable skill set to a title contender. So his marginal value to a contender is much higher. I wouldn’t pay Lewis in a vacuum but his contribution, though limited, has increased value to a title contender.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When Hamilton agreed to his extension — remember, this was before the Billups trade — the Pistons were still probably considered contenders, maybe on the fringe of that label, but still deserving nonetheless. So, Hamilton should get the same benefit of the doubt you&#039;re giving Lewis.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;The other issue that I have is that when Arenas and Brand signed those deals they had a chance to be franchise corner stones, I don’t know who we were supposed to be bidding against for Rip, but I can’t imagine anyone else was in a rush to give him 12.5 million dollars a year.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don&#039;t think anyone expected Hamilton to be a franchise player, and he&#039;s certainly not paid like one. Only seven teams — the Warriors, Bobcats, Pacers, Timberwolves, Nets, Thunder and Raptors — are slated to enter next season with a player paid more than Hamilton. The Raptors and Nets desperately tried to sign someone for than Hamilton makes, and they failed. The Timberwolves and Pacers are conserving cap space for the future. The Thunder will have a player who makes more next season, when Kevin Durant&#039;s extension kicks in. That leaves only two teams, the the Bobcats and Warriors, who you can legitimately make the case believe a franchise player in their plans should be paid like Hamilton.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If Dumars thought Ben Gordon was a special player that’s a huge strike against him. Ben Gordon was nobody’s idea of a franchise player. Again, I don’t have a problem with paying Ben Gordon 10 mil a year.
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I think it&#039;s completely reasonable to think Ben Gordon is a special player. He&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;../../../2009/07/signing-review-ben-gordon/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a special scorer&lt;/a&gt;, and he was the Bulls&#039; best player the two years before coming to Detroit. Here&#039;s what&lt;a href=&quot;../../../tag/ben-gordon/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; Matt McHale of  By the Horns said before this season&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;One last thing (or perhaps a couple things) worth noting. The biggest dig on Ben has been &quot;He may score 20 PPG, but he gives up 25 PPG.&quot; That’s not quite fair. According to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.82games.com/0809/BYPOSIT.HTM&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;82games.com&lt;/a&gt;, the 2008-09 Bulls scored 23.8 PPG from the SG position while giving up 20.2. That’s a net production of +3.6, which ranked 6th in the league at that position. The Bulls also had a net PER of +2.6 at shooting guard, which ranked 7th in the league. Since BG played about 37 MPG, most of that was his handiwork. The point is, Ben Gordon — on average — solidly outperformed opposing shooting guards last season.”&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(And Gordon actually makes $11.6 million per year with a player option for his fifth season.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Cap space doesn’t disappear if you don’t use it.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Yes, it does. Most players contracts are designed to go up year-by-year, which eats into cap space in future years. Plus, most projected the cap would go down this year, which would further decrease cap space.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Wouldn’t we look a lot better if we had been able to chase after Carlos Boozer this summer? Instead we have 25 million tied up in 2 players that can’t play together.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Even if the Pistons hadn&#039;t signed Gordon, they wouldn&#039;t have had enough money to sign Boozer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;By all accounts Dumars scuttled this trade over Tayshaun.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&quot;../../06/trade-idea-trading-up-two-spots-to-get-demarcus-cousins/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;wrote about this trade&lt;/a&gt;, and I was for it. But, as BrGulker, addressed in the comments, it would have been a big risk before the draft. What if someone traded up with Minnesota to get Cousins? Then, you just made that trade for Wesley Johnson, Ekpe Udoh or Greg Monroe, and it&#039;s an abject failure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So, I don&#039;t think it&#039;s fair to say Dumars passed on the deal because of Prince. There&#039;s a solid chance he would&#039;ve made the deal when the Kings&#039; pick came up. But Sacramento found someone willing to take Nocioni before the draft and pulled the trigger.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The holdup could have just as likely been agreeing on when to make the trade as it was a reluctance to part with Prince.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;We have spent our entire cap on players who can’t take us to a title. I love the ’04 team, but it is such an outlier that it can’t be assumed to be repeatable.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Maybe it hasn&#039;t be repeated because nobody else has really tried it.  Everyone else&#039;s plan has been to get to the lottery and draft a star or clear enough cap room to sign a star. There&#039;s a lot of competition for building that way. Maybe the quiet signings and trade route, with no competition, is more prudent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;That was a truly special collection of complimentary talents and it remains the only title team since the ’79 Sonics to win without a superstar. I’m not knocking the guys on that team, but none of them were superstars.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ben Wallace was a superstar. He wasn&#039;t recognized as one, but without a doubt, his impact on the game was that of a superstar&#039;s.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Monroe is a great start, Thanks GS Warriors for picking Udoh!&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I completely agree with that. What were they thinking?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;His FG% took a dive without Chauncey&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There have been a TON of variables other than Billups being gone. I&#039;m not convinced that&#039;s why Hamilton has fallen off.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt; I just don’t see his value at this point.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Few teams do, but I think Hamilton will rebound in a year without Iverson and injuries. That&#039;s when his real value will emerge.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David, first off, my apologies. Given the context of this post, I thought you meant you love Dumars&#8217; GM abilities as much as anyone. I have a lot of respect for those who still think fondly of him as a person and player. Again, sorry for misinterpreting that.</p>
<p>For the rest, I&#8217;ll go point by point again.</p>
<p><em>26 isn’t NBA young.</em></p>
<p>All-Star-level players who have gotten significantly better at 26 (or older): Chauncey Billups, Ben Wallace, Steve Nash, Mehmet Okur, David Lee, Tony Parker, Peja Stojakovic.</p>
<p><em>As for Charlie V, like I said I have no problem with Charlie V except in the context of the rest of Joe D.’s moves. Charlie V, Jerebko and Daye (and Summers for that matter) all serve relatively similar functions.</em></p>
<p>When the Pistons signed Villanueva, none of those other three had played a game. None of the three were can&#8217;t-miss prospects. You just can&#8217;t pass one a free agent you like for those three at that point. Plus, I&#8217;m not sure how redundant they are. Villanueva is a power forward. The other three are probably best at small forward.</p>
<p><em>Doesn’t mean that I’m not fond of them, but that much replication suggests that the money might have been better spent elsewhere.</em></p>
<p>Tads basically explains the logic behind this in the comment right above this.</p>
<p><em>Joe Johnson doesn’t deserve any part of a max contract, but he’s also led a team to the 2nd round of the playoffs in back to back years. And he makes only 3.5 mil more per year than Rip.</em></p>
<p>Joe Johnson will make $7.5 million more per season than Hamilton will make per year the next three seasons (if Hamilton&#8217;s option is picked up for the final year).</p>
<p><em>Lewis isn’t a franchise player but he also provides a valuable skill set to a title contender. So his marginal value to a contender is much higher. I wouldn’t pay Lewis in a vacuum but his contribution, though limited, has increased value to a title contender.</em></p>
<p>When Hamilton agreed to his extension — remember, this was before the Billups trade — the Pistons were still probably considered contenders, maybe on the fringe of that label, but still deserving nonetheless. So, Hamilton should get the same benefit of the doubt you&#8217;re giving Lewis.</p>
<p><em>The other issue that I have is that when Arenas and Brand signed those deals they had a chance to be franchise corner stones, I don’t know who we were supposed to be bidding against for Rip, but I can’t imagine anyone else was in a rush to give him 12.5 million dollars a year.</em></p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think anyone expected Hamilton to be a franchise player, and he&#8217;s certainly not paid like one. Only seven teams — the Warriors, Bobcats, Pacers, Timberwolves, Nets, Thunder and Raptors — are slated to enter next season with a player paid more than Hamilton. The Raptors and Nets desperately tried to sign someone for than Hamilton makes, and they failed. The Timberwolves and Pacers are conserving cap space for the future. The Thunder will have a player who makes more next season, when Kevin Durant&#8217;s extension kicks in. That leaves only two teams, the the Bobcats and Warriors, who you can legitimately make the case believe a franchise player in their plans should be paid like Hamilton.</p>
<p><em>If Dumars thought Ben Gordon was a special player that’s a huge strike against him. Ben Gordon was nobody’s idea of a franchise player. Again, I don’t have a problem with paying Ben Gordon 10 mil a year.<br />
</em></p>
<p>I think it&#8217;s completely reasonable to think Ben Gordon is a special player. He&#8217;s <a href="../../../2009/07/signing-review-ben-gordon/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">a special scorer</a>, and he was the Bulls&#8217; best player the two years before coming to Detroit. Here&#8217;s what<a href="../../../tag/ben-gordon/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> Matt McHale of  By the Horns said before this season</a>:</p>
<p>&#8220;One last thing (or perhaps a couple things) worth noting. The biggest dig on Ben has been &#8220;He may score 20 PPG, but he gives up 25 PPG.&#8221; That’s not quite fair. According to <a href="http://www.82games.com/0809/BYPOSIT.HTM" rel="nofollow">82games.com</a>, the 2008-09 Bulls scored 23.8 PPG from the SG position while giving up 20.2. That’s a net production of +3.6, which ranked 6th in the league at that position. The Bulls also had a net PER of +2.6 at shooting guard, which ranked 7th in the league. Since BG played about 37 MPG, most of that was his handiwork. The point is, Ben Gordon — on average — solidly outperformed opposing shooting guards last season.”</p>
<p>(And Gordon actually makes $11.6 million per year with a player option for his fifth season.)</p>
<p><em>Cap space doesn’t disappear if you don’t use it.</em></p>
<p>Yes, it does. Most players contracts are designed to go up year-by-year, which eats into cap space in future years. Plus, most projected the cap would go down this year, which would further decrease cap space.</p>
<p><em>Wouldn’t we look a lot better if we had been able to chase after Carlos Boozer this summer? Instead we have 25 million tied up in 2 players that can’t play together.</em></p>
<p>Even if the Pistons hadn&#8217;t signed Gordon, they wouldn&#8217;t have had enough money to sign Boozer.</p>
<p><em>By all accounts Dumars scuttled this trade over Tayshaun.</em></p>
<p>I <a href="../../06/trade-idea-trading-up-two-spots-to-get-demarcus-cousins/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">wrote about this trade</a>, and I was for it. But, as BrGulker, addressed in the comments, it would have been a big risk before the draft. What if someone traded up with Minnesota to get Cousins? Then, you just made that trade for Wesley Johnson, Ekpe Udoh or Greg Monroe, and it&#8217;s an abject failure.</p>
<p>So, I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s fair to say Dumars passed on the deal because of Prince. There&#8217;s a solid chance he would&#8217;ve made the deal when the Kings&#8217; pick came up. But Sacramento found someone willing to take Nocioni before the draft and pulled the trigger.</p>
<p>The holdup could have just as likely been agreeing on when to make the trade as it was a reluctance to part with Prince.</p>
<p><em>We have spent our entire cap on players who can’t take us to a title. I love the ’04 team, but it is such an outlier that it can’t be assumed to be repeatable.</em></p>
<p>Maybe it hasn&#8217;t be repeated because nobody else has really tried it.  Everyone else&#8217;s plan has been to get to the lottery and draft a star or clear enough cap room to sign a star. There&#8217;s a lot of competition for building that way. Maybe the quiet signings and trade route, with no competition, is more prudent.</p>
<p><em>That was a truly special collection of complimentary talents and it remains the only title team since the ’79 Sonics to win without a superstar. I’m not knocking the guys on that team, but none of them were superstars.</em></p>
<p>Ben Wallace was a superstar. He wasn&#8217;t recognized as one, but without a doubt, his impact on the game was that of a superstar&#8217;s.</p>
<p><em>Monroe is a great start, Thanks GS Warriors for picking Udoh!</em></p>
<p>I completely agree with that. What were they thinking?</p>
<p><em>His FG% took a dive without Chauncey</em></p>
<p>There have been a TON of variables other than Billups being gone. I&#8217;m not convinced that&#8217;s why Hamilton has fallen off.</p>
<p><em> I just don’t see his value at this point.</em></p>
<p>Few teams do, but I think Hamilton will rebound in a year without Iverson and injuries. That&#8217;s when his real value will emerge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tads</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-5967</link>
		<dc:creator>Tads</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-5967</guid>
		<description>I believe that Joe Dumars must be operating with a completely different philosophy of late.   This philosophy centers on developing talent, something Dumars has had success in, not on trying to appeal to the current free agent prize of the moment.  This might be why he isn&#039;t ever seen positioning to get the Chris Pauls of the world.  This might not have always been the strategy, with the rasheed, and AI trades he showed this.  But he was vocally angry about the attitude that these players had, and perhaps to avoid the divisive, lockerroom-poisoning attitude of outsiders, he is working only to get players that he can develop.  After seeing Rodney&#039;s struggles, I can imagine Joe wishing he had kept Chauncey around as a mentor, and a model, and deciding to keep Rip and Tayshaun around, and getting Chucky and Ben around to help.   With the big men, there are not a lot of people out there that can serve as a good mentor for the kind of basketball that Detroit should play.  Bringing in a big who A) isn&#039;t developable, B) doesn&#039;t fit the philosophy, and C) isn&#039;t interested in developing young players now, and is more interested in winning now, would be completely against this philosophy.  With the lack of effective players out there, it would be more useful for Joe D to keep his trade assets around than trade for a bad fit.
If this philosophy is right, the evidence is in the redundancy, every player has one or two people on the roster that they can look to to help them learn.  Additionally, as we go forward the philosophy should show itself as people get developed, or run out of time.  This year should see this roster get shaken out into the players who an do it or who can&#039;t, and we should see Joe, at least by the trade deadline, getting rid of those players who can&#039;t, and replacing them with more young developable players while the players who can ascend into larger roles with the team.  With the exception of maybe one rasheed-like trade, I believe that Joe imagines he can put together a 50-win starting line up with most of the players we currently have now.  Now if this is not the philosophy, then we will see our starting line up essentially swapped out, like machine parts, replacing whoever we currently have with the best person on the market.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe that Joe Dumars must be operating with a completely different philosophy of late.   This philosophy centers on developing talent, something Dumars has had success in, not on trying to appeal to the current free agent prize of the moment.  This might be why he isn&#8217;t ever seen positioning to get the Chris Pauls of the world.  This might not have always been the strategy, with the rasheed, and AI trades he showed this.  But he was vocally angry about the attitude that these players had, and perhaps to avoid the divisive, lockerroom-poisoning attitude of outsiders, he is working only to get players that he can develop.  After seeing Rodney&#8217;s struggles, I can imagine Joe wishing he had kept Chauncey around as a mentor, and a model, and deciding to keep Rip and Tayshaun around, and getting Chucky and Ben around to help.   With the big men, there are not a lot of people out there that can serve as a good mentor for the kind of basketball that Detroit should play.  Bringing in a big who A) isn&#8217;t developable, B) doesn&#8217;t fit the philosophy, and C) isn&#8217;t interested in developing young players now, and is more interested in winning now, would be completely against this philosophy.  With the lack of effective players out there, it would be more useful for Joe D to keep his trade assets around than trade for a bad fit.<br />
If this philosophy is right, the evidence is in the redundancy, every player has one or two people on the roster that they can look to to help them learn.  Additionally, as we go forward the philosophy should show itself as people get developed, or run out of time.  This year should see this roster get shaken out into the players who an do it or who can&#8217;t, and we should see Joe, at least by the trade deadline, getting rid of those players who can&#8217;t, and replacing them with more young developable players while the players who can ascend into larger roles with the team.  With the exception of maybe one rasheed-like trade, I believe that Joe imagines he can put together a 50-win starting line up with most of the players we currently have now.  Now if this is not the philosophy, then we will see our starting line up essentially swapped out, like machine parts, replacing whoever we currently have with the best person on the market.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Hayes</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-5966</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Hayes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:49:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-5966</guid>
		<description>Odeh:
First impression, for the Pistons, is I would love that. Second impression is that It sounds really unlikely because New Orleans is getting way, way, way too little, unless Orlando and Detroit are each sending a few future first round picks as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Odeh:<br />
First impression, for the Pistons, is I would love that. Second impression is that It sounds really unlikely because New Orleans is getting way, way, way too little, unless Orlando and Detroit are each sending a few future first round picks as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Odeh</title>
		<link>http://www.pistonpowered.com/2010/07/joe-dumars-is-not-the-24th-worst-general-manager-in-the-nba/comment-page-1/#comment-5965</link>
		<dc:creator>Odeh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:19:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pistonpowered.com/?p=3135#comment-5965</guid>
		<description>Joe can redeem himself to a top 3 GM  (I see him as a top 10 right now) if the rumored 3 team trade I heard is true.  Detroit gets Jameer Nelson and Emeka Okafor, Orlando gets Chris Paul and Rip, New Orleans gets Marcin Gortat, Vince Carter, Austin Daye, and Chris Wilcox.  Have you guys heard anything?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe can redeem himself to a top 3 GM  (I see him as a top 10 right now) if the rumored 3 team trade I heard is true.  Detroit gets Jameer Nelson and Emeka Okafor, Orlando gets Chris Paul and Rip, New Orleans gets Marcin Gortat, Vince Carter, Austin Daye, and Chris Wilcox.  Have you guys heard anything?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
