Comments on: The Rise and Fall of Joe Dumars

By: detroitpcb

detroitpcb — Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:11:17 +0000

@ Patrick & Frankie D
I think Joe D’s worst trait as a GM is also one of his greatest strengths: loyalty. He is loyal to players who perform for him and seems to reward them with contracts that they might not deserve going forward: i think of Corliss, Max, Rip, & now Bynum.

and if you want to look at a franchise were winning has not mattered and only making money counts – just look at the Lions. As long as the Ford family owns that franchise nothing good will ever happen.

Joe did a great job working under the salary cap.

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 22:09:44 +0000

@hayes: on this whole “making money = good job” thing, it doesn’t hold up. for a few reasons. there are too many outside influences, and there’s too much of a continuity to things to judge a GM’s performance on profitability. first, you have to look at the market. the knicks always make money, because their market is the biggest, but that has no bearing on the GM. anybody could make them profitable. detroit also has a good fanbase, though the market is considerably smaller. there will always be die-hards, no matter what joe does. you also have to look at the continuity angle. there’s a continuum here. you don’t just want to be profitable today, you want to be profitable forever, and palace attendance is certainly in a freefall. it may take ten seasons for the team to become unprofitable, but the damage is being done right now.

i was never a lions fan or a football fan at all. i’m 28, and the lions have been rubbish forever. if the lions were ever good in my lifetime, maybe i’d be chatting on a lions’ blog right now. but sports are a generational thing. if i had kids three years ago, i’d be buying them pistons swag, taking them to games, fostering a passion for the stones. if i had kids today, i’d probably buy them tigers gear or something. my passion for this team dies by the week, and come february, i’m at a crossroads. if nothing changes, i’m not going to encourage the next generation to be pistons fans. i’ll adopt another team. maybe i’m rambling now, but i hope i made my point.

also, profitability needs to be judged on a continuum too. if the profitability is in freefall, you’re not doing a good job.

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:52:48 +0000

@oats: buddy, you’re killing me. please read this carefully, so i don’t feel like i’ve wasted my time…

my thesis statement here is that the team is RUBBISH, that injuries DID NOT have a significant impact on last year’s record, and that there’s no reason to believe that this year’s record will be any better.

as for jerebko, let’s drop this “unskilled” debate. he’s in the damn NBA, so he has skills. duh. i get it. but in the broad spectrum of NBA players and skills, he’s not considered a “skilled” player. he gets by on effort and energy, not shooting abilities, passing, leaping. so drop it. it’s over. my whole point, if you were paying attention, is that JEREBKO isn’t a better piece to have than MONROE. daye’s got nothing to do with it, because he’s been on the roster both years. and that’s what i’m comparing: 09-10 and 10-11 rosters. so you’ve traded jerebko (second rounder) for monroe (lottery pick), and that’s not a downgrade. jerebko’s a loss, but not significant enough to negate the addition of a lottery pick. so for all intents and purposes, you’ve traded jj for monroe. so let’s leave daye out of this. if you started monroe at PF you would be ADDING size over jj. it’s not my fault the pistons insist on misusing their talent, but the team itself is no worse than last year’s.

as for rip vs. max: we have too many shooting guards. this team would be better off with one of our shooting guards breaking both legs. so if you deactivated rip, the team is instantly better. he may be a better player than max overall, but maxiell is a big man, and we only have 2.5 big men in our rotation right now.

i am not saying the team will be good or better than last year. i’m only saying it’s basically the same team. so nobody can complain anymore about all those injuries last year. because THIS is that team. that’s my whole point.

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:37:37 +0000

@pcb: regarding post #7… ok so we’re “set” for the future, (according to a sure-fire bastion of unbiased opinions, dumars’s close friend and teammate) and all they needed was TWO LOTTERY PICKS???? give me a damn break. if you take an elite team, immediately turn it into a lottery team for two straight seasons, and then you’ve got a “nice core” going forward… IT IS NOT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT. building through the draft is for losers, and make no mistake that’s who we are. keep on making excuses for dumars and sporting rose-colored glasses. it suits you.

also, regarding post #8… you obviously get my point, and it’s got nothing to do with jerebko himself, so why picks a fight? leave it alone. you get what i’m saying. this is last year’s team, only with monroe (pick #7) instead of jerebko (pick #39) and the addition of t-mac. all i was saying is that the “155 man games lost” excuse needs to die, because we’re looking at that team right now.

By: frankie d

frankie d — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:15:39 +0000

i’ll plead guilty to using intemperate words to describe the original post. it would have been better to use less incendiary language.
no doubt.
true.
but to your main point, it is simply false and now you’ve admitted that it was false.
you made the categorical statement that “EVERY” gm is judged simply by whether he made money and that is simply not true, as you’ve essentially admitted – though you will not actually say, “i was mistaken and wrote something that was incorrect” – in your last post.
lots of owners ARE fanboys who use their franchises as playthings.
again, paul allen is exhibit A. he is in the draft room and has real input on who gets drafted. he even gives media interviews where he talks very specifically about players and why they are valuable.
(the whole darius miles fiasco was almost entirely allen’s fault. he fell in love with miles and the horrible contract was all his doing. all parties have essentially admitted that fact.)
he fired pritchard because, as you correctly noted, pritchard basically was acting like an egotistical jerk. his job evaluation had nothing to do with whether the team made money, as the team is making tons of money and had done so since pritchard had been the gm.
there are plenty of other gms all across the sports landscape who run their franchises in a similar way. for better or worse. usually for the worse.
so your unequivocal statement about how gms are evaluated is simply untrue and that is what i had a problem with, as far as your response is concerned.
as far as dumars is concerned, i’d long been of the mind that he should be given the chance to clean up the mess he’s made.
however, his recent actions and his words seem to indicate that he is simply incapable of doing what needs to be done in order to right the team.
he talks about winning every game and he mocks the idea of trying to develop young players who can help the team transition. that attitude is not new. he has long been resistant to the idea that he actually nurture and develop young players. he’s stated such and his actions back up what he has said.
again, i take him at his word when he says that he really doesn’t want to depend on young players to win.
unfortunately, for the team to get back to a winning path, imho, it is essential that he make an investment in his young players. and that means letting them play and make mistakes and work through those mistakes.
and in my view, it also includes doing stuff like taking d-league and its potential more seriously. again, his refusal to use the d-league speaks to his stated refusal to develop and ultimately depend on young players.
the idea of signing a crippled mcgrady and having him steal minutes away from young players is crazy.
setting the team up so that hamilton and prince and ben wallace are all playing major minutes is also crazy if the idea is to have a team that will compete for a title in the near future.
continuing to accumulate combo guards and small forwards – while your team screams for size and a distributor – like some senile old lady collects cats is also crazy.
and his response to any criticism – check out his local interviews – is defensive and unresponsive and extraordinarily arrogant.
it is like he just doesn’t get it, and that he is just going to stubbornly keep doing things his way no matter what.
(the whole stuckey-as-point-guard thing is a prime example. i like stuckey a lot as a player. i think he is an all-star caliber talent, a kind of jumbo-sized jason terry-type player who would excell off the bench as a third guard. or even as a starter at SG. but he is not a point guard. plain and simple. i completely understand why joe is so enamored of him as a potential point guard, but trying to make stuckey into a point guad is just severely misguided, as the last few years have shown. but because of many reasons, joe insists on continuing down that path, no matter how poorly it works out on the court.)
sometimes it is just time for a player/executive to go.
jerry west, imho, has been the best nba gm of the last generation. he’s mr. laker, the logo, for crying sake. but there was a time when he realized that it was time for him to leave LA. time for him to go.
joe’s at that point. for his sake and for the sake of the team.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 20:35:01 +0000

I'm not going to keep going back and forth here, but this was the very first line you posted in response to Dan's post:

"sorry, but this is just juvenile BS."

So yeah, you did set the tone poorly from the get. Agree with the sentiments of his post or not, you didn't engage in a "respectful but hearty disagreement" kind of way. You acted in the typical, overly-critical, stereotypical internet d-bag kind of way. And now you want to play Mr. Innocent, "Whoa man, I was just here to have some good conversation and you're acting like a jerk and a bully"? Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

As for my refusal to back up a claim that the primary responsibility of any GM is to make money for the organization, I won't be able to find a link to something substantiating it. Joe Dumars has never said, "My No. 1 goal is to make lots of money so the rich people running this team can get even richer." It's not a good look to say things like that. It's a much more acceptable thing to say "We just want to win." I read between the lines though and I have a basic understanding of the function of businesses. Bill Davidson was never a fanboy who got into the biz to to rub elbows with athletes, like some owners are. He was a successful businessman who ran the Pistons as a successful business. So saying that he wants a GM in charge who will help the team continue to be a successful business goes without saying. They wanted to win, I have no doubts, and they did win. In eight of the last 10 years, they've been in the playoffs in fact. That's a track record that only teams like LA, Dallas, San Antonio can compete with.

Throughout this whole thread, the main problem I have with your comments is that I don't understand the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that Dumars should be fired? And if so, what would the reasoning be? That he traded Corliss Williamson and didn't re-sign Mike James to try and have enough cap space to sign Okur and Rasheed Wallace, it didn't work out b/c Okur left anyway, and then the team still came within one game of winning a title anyway?

I think everyone who is a Dumars supporter is at least realistic enough to admit that he's made mistakes that have led to the team being in the poor position its in now. But on what planet can someone have a track record like he has and get fired for two straight poor seasons while he tries to rebuild?

Billy King did a terrible job in Philly and still stayed there for 9 years and got another GM job in NJ now. Billy Knight was terrible as Atlanta's GM and still lasted six years. McHale was terrible in Boston and was there over 10 years. Ainge had a terrible run in Boston before McHale gave them Garnett in one of the most lopsided trades in recent history. Danny Ferry stayed in Cleveland six years despite major playoff failings every year and an inability to land any talent to put around James. Colangelo is going on six years in Toronto, they've never won anything there and he never put any pieces in place around Bosh. Bird has been in Indiana for seven years and that team went from title contender to lottery overnight, yet he's still employed.

I'm sorry, but if your case is that two poor years are going to cost Dumars his job or should cost him his job, that just really goes against NBA logic. GMs who have won and who have proven track records are rare. Dumars comes with flaws, but there's no arguing his track record. He built a championship team. There are guys who have been long-term GMs who haven't built playoff teams, let alone championship teams.

By: frankie d

frankie d — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 20:03:48 +0000

“jerk off…ass…”
“500 words to rip it as some slappy, homer garbage…”
where did i ever use those words or anything similar to those words?
i can take it as well as give it and i really wasn’t offended or angered by your “petulance”. i was being a bit facetious, actually. i was amused by it.
frankly, i don’t take any of this personally.
apparently, you do, as you cannot stop yourself from using profanity to engage in a discourse…something i never did.
now, if you don’t want to act like a jerk off or an ass, i’d suggest that you stop using profanity.
it is truly the last resort of someone who doesn’t have anything else to say.
now… unfortunately, detroit sportswriters have a long history of being suckups and homers, in the sorry tradition of joe falls and mitch albom.
i don’t know exactly why it happens, but it is the state of the market in detroit.
as a fan, i want to read writers who provide objective, straightforward information.
that is sadly lacking in the detroit market, which is why i supplement my reading about the pistons with national writers.
the best articles on the pistons this year have all been written by national writers, many of whom you’ve referenced here on your blog. the tripe that is served up locally never touches on the real issues that are confronting the team.
and i find your assertion that you don’t need evidence to support your assertions to be laughable.
it is like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears saying,
“nah…nah…nah…i can’t hear you.”
i’d expect that most people would be reasonable enough to offer evidence for the things they assert as being true. otherwise, you are telling people that they should accept you as some sort of religious figure and take what you say on faith.
common sense matters are matters of common sense because they are based on evidence that is accepted universally and rarely if ever contradicted.
joe d says his number one priority is winning.
other owners are very open about the fact that they have to make money while having a team that is good enough to win.
lots of gms and owners show and prove that their priority is winning, not making money.
paul allen, the blazers owner spends money on his hobby, the blazers and making money is obviously not the priority. even though the team has not won a title during his ownership, he spends his fortune to help the team win, not make money. and he spends his money very freely, with cap considerations never really factoring into decisions, at least not the way they factor in with other owners.
mark cuban spends his money to win. winning is definitely his priority.
the knicks, cleveland, orlando…all of those teams spend, and while i’m sure they make money, the bottom line is obviously not the obsessive bright line that it always was with detroit.
in fact, dumars and the pistons – along with the spurs – were really an anomaly in that they won while making money. there are plenty of owners, in the nba or in other sports – jerry jones - some who come and go, whose teams are their hobby, their playthings and they may care a bit about the bottom line, but their main concern is making sure their plaything is fun to watch.
paul allen is exhibit A of that species of owner and it make your categorical, unqualified statement, that EVERY gm is judged by whether he makes money, out to be untrue.
mostly true, sure. sports is a business. but by no means universally true.

By: Rodman4Life

Rodman4Life — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 19:45:24 +0000

It seems that peoples’ views regarding Dumars seem to be more about optimisim and pessimism rather than a set truth. Those detractors make very compelling arguments, but so do the supporters.
I support Dumars, although I will admit he is in a valley right now, and needs to find his way out. He is willing to take gambles, and when they work out, it’s great. But it was about time that he found some poorer results. That comes with his style of GM-ing. It’s ironic that he was so quick with axing coaches, because I actually forgive him on that one. The one time I support a GM making those kind of decisions is when the team is truly close to a championship, which we were. Did we really need to tinker so much? I think so, just because we weren’t the prototypical contending team (no major superstar). He gambled, and he got only one championship. I love that roster from ’04, but compare it to average NBA champions and it is definitely atypical.
Winning a championship every year is not realistic. Aspiring toward a contending-level team, ok that is more fair. And how about a minimum expectation that you should be in contention for a playoff seed until at least April? But I want more than that, and I think Dumars has normally answered the bell. He has an expectation of defense, and until recently we have always been a solid defensive squad. He drafts long-armed athletes, and his draft track record is actually pretty good sans the Darko pick.
But recently, I feel he broke from his own rules by acquiring CV AND Ben Gordon. Both are defensive liabilities, and that just doesn’t mesh with what our teams had always been about. I could see getting one or the other to boost the offense. Getting both has not worked out well so far.
And finally, Dumars doesn’t bad-mouth his players. He has a positive rapport with NBA players. Additionally, he sometimes overpays players nearing the end of their prime as some sort of tribute. Players know the signs of decline, and they know it is an unwritten rule not to pay a player big money on a contract that will extend into the early to mid 30′s age-wise. But maybe that’s Dumars way of keeping Detroit in the mix in the minds of high-caliber free agents. Just a thought.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 19:35:38 +0000

Sorry, but I don't need evidence to back up a claim that is common sense. The No. 1 job of a GM is to make money. It's why Chris Wallace is still employed. The owner of Memphis is a noted cheapskate. Wallace every couple years is very good at shipping off high priced talent for nothing. That keeps the team making money and keeps him employed.

It's very basic. The Pistons are committed to winning and making money, which is nice for fans. But if Dumars' primary objective was not to make money, he wouldn't have had to tap dance every year of the playoff runs to avoid the luxury tax.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 19:21:08 +0000

"according to joe’s own criteria, the guys you denigrate, laugh at, assert joe is much better than, they all have performed much better."

Not denigrating any of them. I'm just pointing out that even great GMs have blemishes. Yes, they have all built good or great teams, either by drafting well or making good trades. The point is, none of them (other than Kupchak, Buford, Riley) have built championship teams. The best Presti's team did was lose in six in the first round last year. And if you look at the Thunder this season, they have some shortcomings, namely Jeff Green is getting exposed a bit and they have no big who is a legit presence defensively. Also, Harden is a fine player, but they passed on Tyreke Evans and Steph Curry. Both of those guys are significantly better than Harden.

Pritchard made some great trades (landing Roy and Aldridge in lopsided draft-day deals for Thomas and Foye respectively was amazing). But again, did he ever get out of the first round? He took Oden over Durant, which unless Oden gets healthy, will be the second worst draft blunder of the decade behind Darko. And on top of that, he was fired in Portland because he was a pain in the ass to work with, according to the reports that surfaced before he was ousted. Also, he made a huge blunder in how he handled the Darius Miles contract situation.

Hammond has had great draft picks late in drafts (Ilyasova/Mbah a Moute), but he also missed huge on Joe Alexander, who was the first lottery pick not to have his option picked up after his second year in the league. He had Brandon Jennings fall to him at 10 last year, which was a huge help. And he handed out two potentially bad contracts this offseason to Gooden and Salmons. Again, never been out of the first round of the playoffs. Also, Milwaukee's best player is Andrew Bogut, who was in place before Hammond ever got there.

Morey everyone loves b/c he's the king of the stat-heads. I think he's great. But what significant move has he made? His big signing last year was Trevor Ariza, who had a really bad season and was traded already. He made a good trade with McGrady, turning him into Kevin Martin, Jordan Hill and a first rounder, and he pulled off a heist getting Scola from the Spurs for nothing. He's drafted well with Landry and Brooks late in drafts, but he's also made poor moves -- swapping picks with Portland, which ended up giving the Blazers Nic Batum for Joey Dorsey. Not great. He's been to the second round once, and like Hammond, his best player (Yao) was in place before he took over.

Those guys all look like they'll have great careers as GMs and build really fun to watch teams. I hope they do. But Dumars has already accomplished what they are trying to accomplish. He's had one offseason to rebuild this team. I don't count this offseason because he hasn't been able to add longterm pieces as the ownership situation gets sorted out.

"i’ll take joe d at his word, despite your assertion. when he says that his only goal is to win as many games as possible, i’ll assume that he is telling the truth."

I'm not saying he's lying. But those quotes are fan-speak. There's much more to running a NBA team than the aspects that fans care about. Dumars wants to win, but he has to do it within a budget (not pay luxury tax), he has to make determinations about young players who will need to be considered for extensions soon (Stuckey, Jerebko) and he's been forced to put a team on the floor this year that, at best, is not complete because he hasn't been able to make a significant trade with his best trade chip, Prince's expiring contract.

As far as me being "petulant", don't give me that. Don't go on a post and, in your first comment, use 500 words to rip it as some slappy, homer garbage that's not as good as your beloved national writers, and then when someone checks you for being an ass, throw your hands and go, "Whoa ... what would you get bent out of shape about?"

If you want the civil, healthy back and forth you crave, then don't be a jerk-off in your original comment. Set the tone better, and the discourse will be better.