↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Baseless prediction: Will Bynum is going to be the Detroit Pistons’ starting point guard by season’s end

A lot of people are going to read that headline and assume this is a rant about Rodney Stuckey. It isn’t (Laser will handle that in the comments).

Stuckey is a fine NBA player who I think is perfectly suited to backup both guard spots and get about 30ish combined minutes per game off the bench for virtually any team. If the Pistons cleared a guard (preferably Rip Hamilton, but whoever is more movable between he and Ben Gordon) out of the equation, I’d love for him to fill that role in Detroit. Stuckey plays hard, he’s tough, he has the tools to be a great perimeter defender, he’s very good at getting to the basket (even if his finishing needs work), he improved at drawing contact and getting to the line last year and while he’s not a pure point guard, he can competently man the position for a good team in limited minutes. I would never be ashamed to have Rodney Stuckey on my favorite team.

But I think the Stuckey-as-full-time point guard experiment has run its course. Perhaps in a different system or with different players, Stuckey could excel as a starting point guard playing big minutes. But as the roster is constructed, with the coaching philosophy that’s in place, Stuckey isn’t going to find that situation in Detroit.

Thankfully, the Pistons have an in-house solution: Will Bynum.

This isn’t the first time I’ve broached the topic of Bynum as the team’s better option as a starting PG. The genesis of that belief lies in Bynum’s background: he’s a Joe Dumars-kind-of-guy.

Let’s face it … even for a guy like myself who’s a pretty regular supporter of Dumars, I can face some basic facts: Dumars has made some moves lately that haven’t worked out spectacularly, and he seems to be in a bit of a slump, lacking a clear vision. It happens to the best of us. Human nature is to stagnate, to lose focus, to need something to help make you remember what made you successful in the first place. I believe Bynum is that memory-jarrer for Dumars.

The Pistons 2004 title team, and quasi-dynasty in the 2000s, was built upon picking up under-the-radar talents, castaways, guys with talent who were misunderstood or didn’t fit elsewhere, and most importantly, guys who felt they had something to prove or were openly hostile about teams giving up on them early in their careers. Check out his quote from Bynum:

“I don’t think for one second that the money I’m making makes me a reserve. I just want to clear that up from the beginning. I think that the money that I’m making gives me the opportunity to excel, and I’m trying to do it.”

That sounds like a guy who has something to prove. Bynum was undrafted while luminaries like Travis Diener, Alex Acker, Roko Ukic and Orien Green managed to get picked. He had to play overseas before getting a NBA shot. He had to flee a night club in Tel Aviv because his brother got stabbed. The man knows adversity.

Dan Feldman has already chronicled some of Bynum’s defensive limitations, but this is another reason it makes some sense for him to play with the first unit. With Ben Wallace in the middle, that will make opposing guys less likely to penetrate, so having a weaker perimeter defender paired with Wallace won’t be as big a factor as it would be if Bynum were on the second unit with Charlie Villanueva and Chris Wilcox protecting the rim.

Offensively, Bynum is far from a perfect point guard, but he does two things better than Stuckey: he’s much better at passing out of traffic than Stuckey and, despite being shorter, is a more explosive and craftier finisher. If the roster stays as-is, it’s a good bet that Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince will be starting, along with Wallace. Several players could vie for the PF spot, but I’d wager that based on his contract, if Villanueva comes into camp aggressive and in shape, he’ll be given every opportunity to seize that spot.

A common argument in Pistons land is that Hamilton plays better next to a pure point. Bynum isn’t what I’d call a pure point, but he’s a little purer than Stuckey.

Prince, for all of the criticisms he receives (pipe down Laser), actually had good numbers the last quarter of last season, particularly from three-point range. From Ball Don’t Lie’s Kelly Dwyer:

This could be a huge stretch for Prince, but a good part of this ranking is spurred on by the way he finished the season. Prince averaged well over 15 points per game in the season’s last three months, shooting a good percentage and bringing the usual stout D. He also hit around 40 percent of his 3-pointers during that run …

If Prince continues to shoot the three near that clip, if Villanueva and his long-range threat are in the lineup, and if Hamilton is more in line with his 35 percent career three-point shooting than the 29 percent mark he put up last year, those guys should provide sufficient space for Bynum to operate and get inside, while taking advantage of his ability to drive and kick by knocking down open looks.

Stuckey, meanwhile, gets to play on the second unit with some combo of Ben Gordon, Austin Daye, Tracy McGrady, Jonas Jerebko and Greg Monroe (and occasionally Jason Maxiell and Wilcox). He’s also surrounded by shooters (Gordon, Daye and McGrady), but more importantly, has several guys who will want to get out and run with him.

The other advantage to viewing Bynum as a long-term piece and potential starter is cost. Bynum’s extension is really reasonable for a starter. Financial bargains were a common theme of Dumars’ early Pistons teams. Chauncey Billups and Ben Wallace, the two best players on the 2004 title team, made about $10 million combined. With Dumars’ recent contracts to Gordon, Hamilton and Villanueva, he’s gotten away from that bargain shopper, search-for-hidden-value philosophy that made him so great in the first place. Bynum could be a return to that thinking, both in cost and attitude.

If Bynum stays healthy and is as productive in 25-30 minutes a game as his per-minute numbers suggest he could be, he’d be a great asset as a reliable starter. The Pistons don’t have much financial flexibility in the quest to get better. They have serious deficiencies at center and point guard. The best hope for the Pistons to take a big leap and contend would be Bynum winning the job and supplanting Stuckey as a starter. That becomes one less position Dumars needs to worry about upgrading immediately, and if Bynum can prove to be a reliable starter for the next three years at his cost, it means the Pistons don’t have to extend Stuckey should he prove to be too pricey and the savings on the PG position can be invested in shoring up other weaknesses.

I like a good portion of the talent on the Pistons roster while at the same time having serious reservations about how it all fits together. With the contractual obligations and the difficulty the team could encounter trying to move some of those pricey deals, solutions have to come from within, and with his work ethic, it’s not hard to envision Bynum becoming at least a reliable full-time player. If he can do that, it will make sorting out who stays and who goes much easier for Dumars.

62 Comments

  • Aug 27, 20104:13 pm
    by Dan Feldman

    Reply

    I wish I had more time to comment more on this thread, but I’m really enjoying reading the discussion, at least. I want to make two points:

    1. I think Stuckey should start, and yes Patrick, defense is the primary motivation. Sure, Stuckey can get by playing without Ben Wallace better than Bynum can. But you’re ignoring that starting point guards are bigger and faster than backup point guards. Even with Wallace behind him, Bynum’s job would be much tougher guarding starting PGs.

    2. Laser, did I read correctly that you said you think Stuckey could be good, but not on a team like this, one in chaos and that has players who don’t complement him? Isn’t that a reason to keep Stuckey? How many guys on this team can you with reasonable certainty are good enough to contribute to a contender? Not many. So, by the time the Pistons become a contender, the team’s style could be radically different. That’s why I wouldn’t dump Stuckey if you think he’d be good in the right system (which I do). At this point, the Pistons need to identify the pieces they can with and do their best to get rid of the rest, not find the pieces who can put together the best system right now.

  • Aug 27, 20105:34 pm
    by Josh V

    Reply

    Dan-
    That’s a great point about Stuckey’s future value.  Unfortunately I don’t think the team’s style will drastically change given the coach at the helm.  Since he comes from Larry Brown’s school of thought I really don’t think he’ll ever have much to offer a PG that plays like Stuckey, but as long as he is here I hope he can at least offer Stuckey some stability this season and feedback that will allow him to improve his ability to run an offense.
    I believe Stuckey has the raw talent to be a solid starter at either guard position, and if he can continue his aggressive play style and elevate his ability to finish and knock FTs down, his ppg and shooting % should go up somewhat significantly.  I don’t ever see him becoming a substantial playmaker, but that isn’t necessarily an abhorrent thing (look at Derek Fisher; he’s not an amazing playmaker, but he doesn’t make a ton of mistakes).  <– That leads me to the next point though, Stuckey desperately needs to trim down the number of mistakes he makes when he drives and isn’t able to get to the rim.  If he can simply tone down the mistakes (not necessarily become a 7-8 apg PG, but just eliminate TOs) then he will instantly become more valuable and a better PG overall.  That probably sounds obvious, but if he was coached that way; to make better decisions to kick it out, and not necessarily in the interest of scoring off the pass, but just to eliminate the TOs, I think our offense would be much smoother.  I would really like to see Monroe get some solid PT with Stuckey as well given Monroe’s skill at passing and his great court vision.
    Ultimately, I hate to say it because I do appreciate what Stuckey has had to endure and what he’s attempted to become (almost forced to by Joe D given the Billups trade), but if the right trade appears for a pure PG or a solid C, I think we should pull the trigger.  Prior to any of that though I think we all know Rip needs to be moved (or Ben Gordon, but I for one want to see BG get a legit chance at a full season as a Piston).  Hopefully by the end of this season we’ll have a lot more to show at the 1 and 5 positions than what we have now.

  • Aug 28, 20105:43 am
    by Laser

    Reply

    @feldman:
    1) if we’re talking about a center, defense is at the top of my concerns. if we’re talking about a point guard, i’ll go with the guy who does a better job running the team. rip, tayshaun, jonas and big ben are all fine defenders and can collectively pick up the slack on defense. certainly more so than the likes of ben gordon, charlie villanueva and t-mac. what use is a good (not great) defensive starting lineup that can’t score any points? i don’t understand how you can pair bynum with ben gordon, especially if you’re so concerned about defense. and it’s not like bynum is iverson. he’s more lindsey hunter than iverson. iverson got torched nightly, and it was absolutely necessary to bench him. even if stuckey was a “great” defender, i doubt he’d be good enough to warrant starting him over bynum. he’d pretty much need to get a steal every other possession, and we’d still have trouble converting on any of them.
     
    2) look, i think stuckey would be a fine sixth man, spark off the bench type of guy, playing behind two very good guards, like he did his rookie year. but we aren’t able or likely to surround him with such players, so he’s more useful as a trade piece. if we could freeze 23 year old stuckey and thaw him when we have the second coming of chauncey and rip, i’d do it. but gordon and rip are NO chauncey and rip, and we have long-term, burdensome commitments to those two. stuckey’s the movable piece, and we have a great many needs on this team, not the least of which is reducing the number of shooting guards we have. and who’s to say joe would ever share my vision for stuckey at all? you can’t look at these things in bits and pieces. “well if we had a big shot-blocking center he could cover for charlie, so let’s not trade charlie. and if we had a pass-first point guard he could play with rip and rip could be an all-star again, so let’s not trade rip.” you can’t play fantasy GM like that.
     
    the fact is that a lot of the guys on our team could be contributors to winning teams, but that’s not a reason to keep all of them or any one of them. ben gordon, tayshaun, potentially t-mac. even charlie v could be an asset in the right system. who wouldn’t want a guy like that at the end of the bench to throw out and see if he’s got it on a given night? you can bet he’s going to take over a handful of games over the course of a season, but if you’re relying on him to contribute night-in and night-out, you’ll get burned.
     
    i try to propose realistic scenarios, and trading stuckey is one of our few realistic options for improvement. he could certainly fetch a good draft pick. joe sealed his fate when he extended rip and signed gordon in the same year. you’ve got an unbelievably expensive backcourt that does not fit together, and your three go-to scorers all play the same position (and somehow your best-case scenario for t-mac is that he becomes a fourth go-to scorer at that same position). something has to give. are you content to watch this parade of guards crash and burn and break every jump-shooting record in the book EXCEPT for “jump shots made?” i’m not.
     
    @josh: some feedback for stuckey to help him run an offense… when you penetrate, you don’t always need to put up a feeble shot after you’ve drawn five defensers. basketball is a team sport. for once, try passing to one off the other guys on the floor who are wearing the same color outfit as you. these people are called “teammates.” after you’ve drawn all the defenders who used to be covering these “teammates,” pass to one of them (almost any one will do). you might even get an “assist!” “assists” are those things you luck into about once every ten minutes played when you make a good pass. “assists” are good. well, there’s one note that instantly makes him at least twice as good and fifty times less predictable. a good start!
     
    also you just made me realize something. a missed shot isn’t a turnover, no matter how ill-advised or far off it is, and obviously shots shouldn’t generally be counted as turnovers, but every time stuckey penetrates, draws 4-5, sometimes it seems like 6, defenders and attempts a feeble layup that’s blocked with no whistle, it should absolutely be viewed as a turnover. that guy turns it over waaay more than his numbers indicate.
     
    i’ve seen the kid interviewed, and he says he’s always looking to score. it’s who he is. it’s not in his makeup to set people up and get them involved. what more do you need to know. physical tools mean nothing if you can’t capitalize on them.

  • Aug 30, 20103:52 am
    by Vince

    Reply

    Ok first of all, I have to agree with Laser. The only way I see the logjam and evry other problem go away is quite simple:
    -Monitor T-Mac, if shits’ gonna hit the fan, its with him.
    -Switch Bynum to the PG spot withWhite backing him up.
    -Trade Stuckey and Wilcox, (possibly CV if he played as bad as last year)
    -Send Summers to the D-League.

    Which gives you: Gordon, Rip, Tay, Jerebko, and Big Ben as starting lineup. And a second Unit of  Bynum, T-Mac, Daye, CV, and Monroe, with Terrico and Max as  back up. I don’t know about you but that seems much better than what we have now. Oh and BTW, I put Gordon as PG, T-Mac at SG and Daye as SF, it can change around, but I thought it would work out better this way.

  • Aug 30, 20108:37 pm
    by Josh V

    Reply

    Vince,
    I don’t see BG as a good playmaker, I think ultimately his shots would go way up and everyone else who starts would see fewer shots.  BG is great at creating his own shot, but I’ve never seen him as someone who can run an offense.  Not dogging on your idea, I’m just saying I think he’d force too many shots and actually be WORSE than Stuckey at running the offense.  Bynum would be better at starting than Gordon, and if that was the case than I think he should be starting next to Rip and Tay with BG as the 6th man and T-Mac coming in to soak up the majority of what’s left for back-up guard/SF minutes.  I don’t think Daye can really play much more than 20 mpg and I think that’s his ceiling this year.  I think he could end up as a formidable pro bball player, just not this soon.  We’re only paying T-Mac 1.5 mil, and I think he deserves to get a shot at ~25 mpg just to see what he can do.  If he puts up lackluster numbers and looks feeble than I say we cut our losses and trim him down to about 15 mpg; either way it’s a low risk high reward scenario (and lets face it this team isn’t going to excel either way [unless T-Mac miraculously returns to his from cerca 3 years ago]).  ultimately Stuckey, Rip, and Tay should most likely be moved (MAYBE hold onto Tayshaun, but that’s a big maybe if you ask me).

  • Aug 31, 20102:30 am
    by Laser

    Reply

    well vince, i guess you agree with, uh, some of the stuff i’ve said. but we’re certainly not on the same page. here’s where we differ, hard.
     
    ben gordon should not start over stuckey, because that means he’s being paired with rip or bynum, the two guys i cringe at pairing him with. gordon and rip hamilton should never be on the floor together unless they’re on opposing teams, and never ever in the same starting lineup. that sounds just awful. though it is impressive that you’ve downgraded the seemingly undowngradable.
     
    josh v is being polite. to be perfectly clear here, i’m dogging on your idea. hard.
     
    also, josh v seems to be ignoring facts i seem to spell out daily here. to wit: dude, you’re talking about handing out 25 perimeter minutes like candy corn on halloween. how does this not get through thick skulls?? please read the following sentence and PROCESS the thought before you go about posting thoughtless suggestions: if we split ALL of our perimeter minutes six ways (among stuckey, bynum, rip, gordon, tayshaun, t-mac. note that i did NOT include daye), each averages 24 minutes. TWENTY-FOUR. that’s the kind of minutes for a significant contributor off the bench. so if you’re giving t-mac “a shot at maybe 25 minutes JUST TO SEE WHAT HE CAN DO,” you’ve handed him ONE MINUTE MORE THAN THE AVERAGE FOR YOUR SIX MAN PERIMETER. and forget about 20 minutes for daye. he’ll be lucky to play at all behind all those other guys. and if he’s lackluster he’s cut to 15. right. i’m sure we’ve got the luxury of giving 15 minutes to a guy who’s not contributing, while our five other rotation perimeter guys average a luxurious sub-26 minutes. are you bad at math or something? i’m not trying to be rude here, but where the F are you getting these crooked numbers? “daye’s not ready to REALLY contribute yet. let’s limit him to 20 minutes!” hahahahaha you’re kidding, right? he’s kidding. he’s gotta be kidding, right? if austin plays 20 minutes, the six guys ahead of him in the rotation will average 20 AND TWO THIRDS of a minute.
     
    the plain fact is that you’re either not using your brain or you are not smart. i won’t bother to guess the answer. and hey, i’m sure people will think i’m mean. so be it. you can’t possibly understand what you’re talking about. and i wouldn’t be doing you any favors by pretending that your thoughts about the distribution of minutes are valid. they aren’t. even my staunchest detractors will agree.

  • Aug 31, 20107:24 am
    by Vince

    Reply

    I can see where you guys are coming from, if  we can put Bynum as a starter that’d be great, but I think a lot of people are asking themselves if he can play straight up like that. 

    @Laser
    I understand your case with the minutes, but I think its a waste of good talent if we dont have time for Daye, White, and hell, even Summers. Taking T-Mac was a mistake, if he turns out to be a dud, which he probably will be, I can only hope that he either makes the bench behind Tay and Daye, or even better, the inactive list. Don’t get me wrong, I like the guy, I just think it was a bad call, and now we’re stuck with a big logjam. Regarding minutes though, I have to agree completely. I just think we need to give more time to young talent and get rid of  older players who’s time has passed (Mostly T-Mac), The Pistons are rebuilding, they don’t need egotistical has-beens complicating the roster.
    On another note I’ll take the compliment on the roster make-over.
    I still do honestly believe that we have to clear the roster: Stuckey and Wilcox haven’t really deserved their spot on the team (my opinion), and Summers needs to go to Development League. I’d love to see a situation where we keep Tay and Rip, but thats seeming less possible. Trade T-Mac, he’s not worth all the trouble. The roster I’d love to see now would be Bynum, Rip, Tay, Jerebko and Big Ben, with White, Gordon, Daye, Villanueva, Monroe and why not Max and Summers on the bench.

  • Aug 31, 20105:42 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    look, man. i’m with you on t-mac. at first i was 100% sure that signing was an immediate precursor to trading rip. every day i get surer and surer it’s not happening and that we’re actually going forward like this. and the pistons organization is going to act surprised and make more bogus excuses when it doesn’t work out. i can see it now. another season of the pistons’ spin machine saying “the team is better than this.” and it won’t be.
     
    so assuming rip’s here to stay, joe dumars would have been hard-pressed to come up with a worse roster move than adding t-mac. either he stinks and we waste time and precious minutes figuring it out, or he’s productive and eats up even more minutes in a losing season. but i’m trying to be realistic here. he wasn’t signed NOT to play. he’s going to play. so when we play fantasy head coach and distribute imaginary minutes, we may as well do it within realistic guidelines.
     
    we agree on moving stuckey. i think we should have traded that guy by now, but the sooner the better. his value isn’t going to increase as he gets more and more exposed year after year. i do think it’s a bit ambitious to pencil terrico white into the rotation right away as our backup PG, but not quite as crazy as trying to juggle all the guys we have right now.

  • Aug 31, 20107:33 pm
    by Josh V

    Reply

    I have been saying that Rip needs to be moved asap for as long as I can remember.  If he is moved then that would allow for the 48 minutes at the 2 to be shared between T-Mac and Gordon.  I see T-Mac as a low risk trial type of situation with the ability to perhaps prove everyone wrong.  If that became the case I see him backing up the 2 and playing the 3 occasionally to be able to achieve the ~20-25 mpg I’ve spoken about earlier.  That leaves minutes for Tay at the 3 in the ballpark of 30 mpg with chump change for Daye at the 3 and occasionally (VERY) at the 4.  Put Stuckey at the 1 with ~25-30 mpg and Bynum at 15-20 mpg.  Have Ben play ~25 mpg with Max backing him up at about 15 mpg while throwing in Monroe to soak up what’s left over (5-12 mpg depending).  That leaves who starts at the 4; which is a toss up between Villanueva and Jerebko if you ask me (with Jerebko getting the edge).  Have Jerebko play the 4 ~25 mpg and Villanueva do the same thing (~25 mpg).
    Stuckey, Gordon, Tayshaun, Jerebko, Wallace
    Bynum, T-Mac, Daye, Villanueva, Maxiel/Monroe
    Gordon shouldn’t really play next to Bynum due to size unless playing against a very small opp., and this is all assuming T-Mac is playing healthy and contributing (which I realize there’s a very good chance that will not happen).  Tayshaun, Jerebko, and Gordon should all play heavy minutes when possible.  I feel the PG mpg should be somewhat equal b/w Stuckey and Bynum.  T-Mac can play the 2 and the 3 to get his ~20-25 mpg.  Unless we see something legit out of Villanueva, I don’t see him averaging a ton of minutes (which makes his contract pretty f*cking terrible) because Jerebko has earned the right to more mpg.  Wallace will not be able to play much past 25 mpg and Max’s productivity hits a ceiling at about 20 mpg (on a good night).  Fit in Monroe and Daye as much as possible.  Worst case scenario with T-Mac is he doesn’t do shit, costs us 1.4 mil and opens the door for White and/or Summers to get some solid PT.
    I have a feeling you will point out my deficiencies from every possible aspect Laser, but I’m comfortable with my logic and my math.  As I seemingly do with all my posts, I’ll end it with TRADE RIP.  At this point an expiring contract with some draft pick(s) is worth it.  He’s too expensive and with or without him this team isn’t doing much.

  • Sep 1, 201012:53 am
    by Laser

    Reply

    daye at the 4? are you f*cking kidding me? who wrote this, keith langlois?? daye will never play the 4 next season. not for a second. he’s barely strong enough to play the 3. don’t be stupid.
     
    also, way to conveniently adjust your minutes distribution by adding the highly unlikely (however attractive) variable that rip is suddenly just gone. there is no greater waste of time in the world than playing fantasy coach under imaginary circumstances THAT DO NOT REFLECT REALITY. i don’t think minutes are a real problem if rip is moved. but that “if” indicates that you’re living in a DREAM WORLD. my personal dream world, but a dream world nonetheless.
     
    i don’t care about my own time (that much should be obvious). but your life is probably precious, so you really shouldn’t waste it. you have loved ones, or people who tolerate you, or at the very least, other people on the internet to have meaningless interactions with. don’t waste your time distributing imaginary minutes for a team that does not exist. there’s so much more to life!
     
    also, i love that even in this modified scenario, where you’ve obviously considered a portion of my irrefutable logic, you still have daye playing chump change minutes. a far cry from the 20 you were going to let him “test the waters” with. and this is (magically) without rip. try distributing minutes in reality if you’re looking for a productive way to waste time. also it should give you an adequate sense of terror for the coming holocaust– er, basketball season.
     
    i can’t tell if you’re slow or just stubborn. i’d feel bad (a little bad) if it turned out you were just very slow. but you think t-mac’s departure would open the door for white and/or summers? what about daye and the chump change he’s lucky to get? and the career low minutes you’ve allocated to the core players (taking into account, of course, this magical and fanciful omission of rip). stuckey and bynum are sharing 48 total, t-mac and gordon are doing pretty much the same, tayshaun’s limited to 30. and when 24 minutes get freed up, they go to white and/or summers. right. very thoughtful analysis. it would take a catastrophic series of injuries or deaths for those guys to dress at all.
     
    nobody else would be comfortable with your logic (“where’s rip? i coulda’ sworn we were paying him $13 million and he’s a captain”) or math (see above). i’m with you on advocating a trade of rip, but the overlap stops right there. dead in its tracks. come up with some useful scenarios (here’s an example to get you going: how would you realistically split the minutes for our ACTUAL team?) and i’ll gladly analyze them fairly. for what you’ve done, you might as well have come up with an imaginary distribution of minutes if we had a young larry bird and magic johnson. it’s precisely as useful (which is to say, “not useful in any way”) for the sake of conversation.

  • Sep 1, 20107:32 pm
    by Josh V

    Reply

    I’ve always enjoyed checking out possible trade scenarios and other news topics discussed here, but I’m currently realizing why I stopped posting in online forums and kept my sports talk with real people that aren’t as stupidly opinionated as the trash talking p*ssies on the internet. 
    To everyone else that can respectfully discuss sports topics, Feldman and others who lead these posts have discussed “dream” scenarios where players are traded or FAs are signed in the offseason.  I see nothing wrong with discussing a scenario where Rip is not a part of this team and see if you guys come up with different trade scenarios (other than the Eddy Curry/Dampier deals that have been discussed earlier).  I’d ask you to do me the favor of keeping your genius to yourself Laser, but you seem to be the type that enjoys attempting to piss people off over the internet.
    I want Rip off this team and as I’ve stated before at this point I’m not sure I care what we have to do to move him.  The only other scenario that would make any sense to me whatsoever would be to trade Ben Gordon, but I feel he has a lot more to offer this team; anyone disagree?

  • Sep 1, 20108:38 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    talk about dream scenarios all you want, but as long as rip is here, divvying up minutes to the rest of the guys in your head accomplishes nothing. it doesn’t paint a picture for people about the upcoming season, it doesn’t stimulate anyone’s mind or spur productive conversation. it’s one thing to fantasize about trades and get people thinking, but going so far as to distribute minutes among a team that doesn’t exist? isn’t that a bit funny? i think so.
     
    and believe it or not, i don’t go out looking for people to piss off on the internet. i just happen to find them fairly regularly. i’m definitely opinionated, and certain types of people and inane conversations bother me. like when i question someone’s proposed outline for distributing minutes and they chime in after the fact with the crucial (and convenient and bizarre) caveat that rip is suddenly out of the equation entirely. if you’d said from the get-go that you were discussing a dream scenario where rip doesn’t exist i would have had a different approach. i wouldn’t have berated your specific guidelines for imaginary distribution, because in this imaginary world, they’re not so outrageous as to make a big deal of them on their own. i probably still would have pointed out that this world isn’t real and that you’re wasting your time trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist, but i wouldn’t have made such a big deal about your solution itself (as i don’t think minutes would be a problem if rip was gone). you can take that to the bank!
     
    i’m certainly willing to explain myself, so give me that. you don’t have to like me or read anything i say. i’m an easy target because i don’t pussyfoot around things, and i say what’s on my mind. i’m like judge judy: harsh but fair. some people around here (ones who appreciate logic and thoughtful debate) appreciate me and are willing to put up with a little brashness. some people don’t. i’m quite a nice guy in person, i don’t say anything on the internet that i wouldn’t say to someone’s face, and i don’t resort to personal attacks like calling people pussies or telling them to die. i criticize what people say, not who they are. when they’re dreaming, i call them dreamers. when they’re clueless, i call them clueless. when they’re clowning around (not in the fun way, but in the way that guy called Adam does around here; the bad way), i call them jokers. at worst, on the rare occasion, i call them idiots. but that’s only when they’re being idiots, and i tend to use this particular word in reference to groups of idiots as opposed to singling out one of the idiots and calling him an idiot. also i call slow people slow. and occasionally i tell them to stop talking, but i guess that’s more of a command than an insult. i think that’s it. god bless. you’ve been great.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here