Comments on: Charlie Villanueva starting would be the best lineup option for the Detroit Pistons

By: Jugadores revelación (II): Jóvenes « Manager Fantástico

Jugadores revelación (II): Jóvenes « Manager Fantástico — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 23:36:51 +0000

[...] similares que hacen el trabajo sucio, aportan energía y centran sus esfuerzos en la defensa. Hay quien piensa que el equipo estaría más equilibrado si Villanueva, mucho mejor atacante e infinitamente peor [...]

By: Puso 3 initiative boys : Team Sport Guide

Puso 3 initiative boys : Team Sport Guide — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:27:47 +0000

[...] Charlie Villanueva starting would be the best lineup option for the Detroit Pistons – PistonPo… [...]

By: Laser

Laser — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 00:37:22 +0000

trust me on this: i don’t put blind faith in statistics, and i don’t look at anything in a vacuum. but we’re not talking about obscure, esoteric stats here. or stats that muddy the waters between individual merit and what the team was doing as a whole. we’re talking about how many shots they took and now many points they resulted in. pretty basic stuff, and when jonas (who, as you agreed, gets no plays run for him) put up a shot, it netted more points than when charlie hustle did.

charlie has more ways of scoring, but he also has worse shot selection and worse results from a scoring standpoint. he’s capable of better than he did last year, but he’s got to come out and prove he deserves to play before we throw him out there. i don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing not to run plays for a guy and have him still average ten points. and jonas is just so much better at all the things we need from charlie hustle. it’s not exactly a “luxury” to choose to (have to?) run plays for a guy who’s supposed to be a scorer and offers nothing else, yet shoots below your already bad team average.

jonas has shown the ability to play one-on-one, he can stretch the floor some and shoot some three. but he can also shot fake and drive. he doesn’t make foolish plays with the ball. and even though i’ll concede that his ceiling might not be terribly high, but he has plenty of room for improvement. it would be silly to discount that because some other guy has a higher ceiling but refuses to exert the energy necessary to reach it.

if charlie hustle was as good as he should be on the offensive end, you might be able to convince me that it makes sense to live with his defensive deficiencies. but he’s got to prove himself. he was our worst player last season. a free agent “prize” with a rich, long-term contract who couldn’t establish a consistent role in the worst frontcourt the NBA has seen in a long time.

amen on gordon and bynum. this doesn’t take a genius. part of me thinks the team might actually make that switch just because it’ll mean stuckey’s a bench player and could get extended at a discount. god knows they’re not going to make the move just because it makes sense on every level imaginable. i’m not really holding out hope that they let him go (dumars is too stubborn for that), but as long as they extend him for a reasonable price it won’t bother me. nothing more than the midlevel exception.

By: kent

kent — Sat, 04 Sep 2010 03:20:38 +0000

Laser…

i love JJ, and i dont underestimate the value of garbage scorers. Although it sounds like an insult, it’s actually a compliment when you can do it reliably. The problem is that you can’t run plays for Jonas, and you definitely can’t run plays for Wallace. Wallace is good for the occasional put-back or alley-oop (although his hops have diminished somewhat with age), and that’s about it offensively. When you have a below average passing point guard, you simply can’t limit him to Rip and Tayshaun for scoring options. Tayshaun was the 4th option when the pistons were good.

Although you provided offensive efficiency numbers that you say prove otherwise, we shouldnt pull a Hollinger and get blinded by statistics while ignoring what most people can see from watching the games: Villanueva is much more talented offensively and he gives the Pistons more scoring options. JJ can give you reliable energy and rebounding, but Villanueva opens up more possibilities in the half-court, which has been Detroit’s game for as long as i can remember. The problem with Villanueva is that he sucks on the other end, which is why i want to pair him with Wallace.

No matter what, every team in the league could score with ease against a second unit consisting of Bynum, Gordon, McGrady, Villanueva and Monroe. If this were hockey, they’d allow 2 goals per shift.

I’m willing to entertain starting Bynum over Stuckey like you said. Gordon and Bynum together are too small and are a liability on the defensive end.

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 18:14:12 +0000

1) i swear to god you people are talking about jonas like he’s kwame freaking brown on offense! the guy put up 9.3 points in 27.9 minutes on .481 shooting and is at least a threat from long distance. that looks pretty much like your average 4th option. and as for efficiency, charlie hustle (with 931 total points last season on 827 shots) scored 1.126 points per FGA, and jonas (741 points on 603 FGA) gave us 1.229 points per FGA. add to that his defense, motor and knack for being in the right place at the right time, and you’ve got a solid argument for jonas. i also think people treat garbage men like garbage. a basketball team made entirely of spoiled millionaires jacking up shots won’t go far. you need people who are willing to do the dirty work (your luis scolas, ron artests, chris “birdman” andersens), and these guys are basically fourth options.

also you can’t possibly be taken seriously without adding the crucial caveat that charlie’s got to produce in order for any argument in his favor to be valid. if he looks anything like he did last season he has no business taking the floor, let alone starting over a good player. the spirit of this article isn’t that charlie should be handed the job no matter what his production is like. nobody could rightly argue that charlie’s ceiling isn’t higher, but he’s got to be better this season to earn the job.

2) your argument about jonas’s defense not being sufficient to compensate for his offense (which, as you can see above, is more efficient than charlie’s) is the same one i use for bynum starting. stuckey’s defense just isn’t nearly enough to compensate for his abysmal point play. and when they go to the bench, bynum and gordon are going to have to be awfully effective on offense to compensate for their physical shortcomings. on the other hand, i think either combination of bynum-rip or stuckey-gordon is at worst an average backcourt tandem.

perhaps our starting perimeter players are average, but IMO that’s because you’re including tayshaun. his playmaking, decision making and versatility can compensate for a lot. he can guard the other team’s best perimeter player, he can score in bunches, spread the floor some, run the point. but if we’re looking just at the guards, i think rip and stuckey have had sufficient time to prove that they are a below average tandem.

By: Give Me The Rock » Blog Archive » Fantasy Basketball Preview: Detroit Pistons

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:27:29 +0000

[...] Piston Powered makes the case for starting Villanueva at PF (and it’s a pretty good case), but even if he starts, he’ll be squeezed for minutes because Jonas Jerebko has emerged as a legitimate NBA player. The 23-year old Swede quickly became the Pistons starting PF last season because, as The Detroit news’ Vincent Goodwill puts it, he has a hot motor. [...]

By: kent

kent — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 03:33:49 +0000

Let me disagree with myself. I think Stuckey, Rip and Tayshaun is an above average BACK court, not a mediocre front court. However, that defensive lineup simply wont score enough to win games.

By: kent

kent — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 03:28:14 +0000

I completely agree that Villanueva and Wallace is better than Jerebko and Wallace. JJ and Ben coupled with a mediocre defensive front court arent good enough defensively to compensate for their lack of offensive production. It’s always 4 on 5 with Ben on the offensive end, and JJ is only reliable for garbage scoring. On a good night, Wallace can get some garbage offensive production. You want your garbage scorer to be your 5th option on the floor, not your 4th AND 5th option.

If Jerebko moves to the second unit with Bynum, Gordon, McGrady and Monroe, the defense wont be as terrible as it would be with Villanueva. The second unit will still be very capable of scoring.

Patrick is right. Villanueva and Wallace need to play together to compensate for each other’s weaknesses.

By: nuetes

nuetes — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:41:35 +0000

like laser said it’s pretty self explanatory just by looking at the roster. monroe has to play center, and he has to backup ben wallace, because ben is going to start. we have villanueva and jerebko to play PF, and while that position could certainly use an upgrade, you can’t do it at the expense of another position. playing monroe at PF leaves the cupboard pretty bare behind wallace. thing is we really have no idea about what the organization feels monroe is best suited to be moving forward. i would like him to play PF in the future, and from other fan sentiments it looks like most people would agree with that, but maybe the organization feels he’s the center of the future.

By: Laser

Laser — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:16:01 +0000

yeah, you’re almost certainly right about monroe being better off playing PF, but we’re short on options. if you move max into the depth chart at backup center, you’re looking at a 3-way logjam at PF between jonas, charlie and monroe, and you have a rotation of 11 guys at minimum (12 if you want austin daye to play at all).

and monroe wouldn’t be the only guy who was playing at least somewhat out of position. max has shown he can hold his own at center for stretches, but he’s underiszed for a PF; stuckey isn’t a bad player, but he’s a poor PG; and with all these perimeter players, trying to develop rotations for these guys means we’re sure to see odd combinations like gordon or t-mac or prince at the point. stuff like that. so, yes, it’s not ideal. but playing everyone at their natural positions isn’t a luxury you can afford when your team is this badly mismatched.