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

Pistons sale could drag on until February

A process that was once reportedly supposed to be resolved by the end of November might now linger until February. Via the Detroit News:

Citibank, which was hired by the widow of the late owner of the Pistons Bill Davidson to represent the franchise for the sale, informed potential buyers last week that the deal is unlikely to be completed until the NBA All-Star Game. The advisory to the potential buyers was confirmed by sources close to the deal.

12 Comments

  • Dec 6, 20101:32 pm
    by Patrick Hayes

    Reply

    This is probably bad news for people hoping for trades involving Prince’s expiring deal. If the sale drags until February, the Pistons probably won’t be able to add long-term salary at the deadline, meaning Prince might stay and play out his contract.

  • [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by PistonPowered Feed, Detroit Pistons. Detroit Pistons said: TrueHoop.com – Pistons sale could drag on until February: http://bit.ly/fWMMDw [...]

  • Dec 6, 20102:31 pm
    by Alan

    Reply

    I thought for sure the sale would be done by year-end as the capital gains rate was expected to go up (in other words, Mrs D and all the other Ds would lose some of the gain to the government in taxes).  As the capital gains rate is expected to stick around for awhile, the Ds can take their time and continue to try and force the hand of a would-be buyer to up their ante.

    And I agree with Patrick. 

  • Dec 6, 20102:54 pm
    by nuetes

    Reply

    I just don’t buy the ownership in flux argument for everything being quiet on the trade front. Never bought it. Seems kind of accepted these days by most fans because I think it helps cope with the fact we have a team full of undesirable players, and instead of trying to rationalize nobody wanting any of them it’s better to assume it’s all because of ownership.
     
    I’m a firm believer that if there was a beneficial trade sitting on Dumars desk he would take it and not even think twice about it. I don’t think he’s under any financial restraints other than avoiding the luxury tax, like he’s always been. It’s about weighing whether the return on a trade, say via Prince where you commit to some long-term salary, is worth letting Stuckey go in the offseason. I think it would be very difficult to take on a big salary with Prince’s contract and resign Stuckey without going into the luxury tax (if it exists next year and not a hard cap), and I’m not sure any owner other than Cuban willingly enters the luxury tax for the fun of it. And any speculation assumes some teams wants one of these scrubs, and would be willing to give up something good to acquire them.

  • Dec 6, 20103:16 pm
    by Patrick Hayes

    Reply

    @nuetes:

    What don’t you buy about it? I mean, I think if he were able to trade someone like Hamilton for a shorter term contract, he’d do it in a second.

    But under what team for sale situation has a GM ever been given the green light to make a type of deal that would add years/salary onto the longterm books? I get that Dumars has had a lot of freedom as GM, but I think it’s crazy to think he or any GM could make that type of move.

  • Dec 6, 20104:11 pm
    by nuetes

    Reply

    well New Orleans added Ariza and Jack, both long-term contracts, and nobody wants to buy them. just because your team is for sale doesn’t mean the GM shouldn’t be allowed to improve the team. if dumars found a deal that improved the team i think he would take it, as in i think he’s allowed to take it. he’s even said as much awhile back.
     
    he’s always been under some constraints. he had to let the championship team fall apart to avoid the luxury tax. he’s a frugal GM that most owners probably love. it’s hard to do what he did, in fact maybe impossible to repeat. the point is i think as long as he avoids the luxury and has a long-term goal of remaining under the luxury he should be able to make moves. like i said if they add a long-term salary via Prince then they aren’t going to be able to resign Stuckey, but that’s more of a trade-off than it is added salary. even if new ownership comes in there is virtually no guarantee they are going to allow dumars to enter the luxury, so saying that the ownership situation is a factor doesn’t fly with me. no owner wants to pay the luxury, so even a new owner wouldn’t change the present hand he’s dealt too much.

  • Dec 6, 20104:44 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    i’m mostly with nuetes on this one. there are a few issues here, i think.
     
    for one, bad contracts are a much bigger problem than ownership. i want to take dumars at his word that he didn’t pull the trigger on a trade because he didn’t have any presented that “blew him away.” and he never will, as long as he has guys like villa, gordon and rip under those kinds of contracts. he said he was reluctant to make any “lateral” moves, and god knows those are the only kinds of moves that would be available to a GM with this roster. (heck, how often are GMs presented with a move that BLOWS THEM AWAY? i’d say “almost never,” since GMs generally prefer to keep their jobs rather than dump assets for liabilities in lopsided deals.) so if his hands are indeed cuffed, it’s nowhere near as big a problem as the initial problem of having a terrible team loaded with undesirable contracts.
     
    also, moving tayshaun doesn’t necessarily mean taking back a long-term contract. we could get a WORSE expiring deal plus picks, we could package him with someone like max and trade them to the jazz for kirilenko’s bigger expiring deal. we have options. i don’t buy this “woe is me,” throw your hands in the air bullsh*t that we’re just stuck with tayshaun and we can either let him walk, extend him to a contract we can’t afford or sign-and-trade him for peanuts. he’s a desirable expiring contract. he can be moved. and regardless of the ownership situation, moving him is the best thing for the team.
     
    it’s hard to speculate as to what options the pistons have, but what kind of long-term money do you suppose we’d be taking back if we traded tayshaun? i can’t think of any deals that would really net us a serious building block on a very long deal, since most teams don’t sign someone to a long deal and immediately flip them for someone like tayshaun. maybe i’m wrong. i tend to think picks and/or a young project with an additional expiring deal makes sense. maybe memphis decides they like tayshaun and don’t want to see z-bo walk for nothing, so they make that swap if they’re outside of the playoff race. i’m just guessing here…
     
    if joe isn’t allowed to do ANYTHING, he should resign. if you went to work for a FULL year and were not allowed to do your job, what are you getting paid for? i mean, i’m gone in february if nothing gets done, regardless of the reasons (which are largely bogus), and y’all can wake me when the team isn’t an embarrassment anymore. when it makes ONE OUNCE of sense on paper or otherwise. but let’s not make excuses and pretend joe’s the victim here.

  • Dec 6, 20106:11 pm
    by nuetes

    Reply

    The thing is I just don’t get why the ownership thing matters. It doesn’t. Let’s say Dumars is just itching to pull the trigger on some trade involving Prince but he’s waiting to get the go ahead because it’s going to commit long-term salary to the team – say just for instance Prince for Kaman (horrible).
     
    Well a new owner comes in looks at the attendance, looks at the revenue, looks at the economy, looks at the umpteen millions this team has committed for the next 3 seasons in salary, looks at the roster, looks at the record, and then looks at Dumars and just laughs because only a fool would commit more money to this ridiculous team.
     
    It’s not a present ownership thing is my argument. It might be an ownership thing, but it’s not brought on by the team being in limbo. It’s brought on by ownership not being that stupid. Maybe we’ll get lucky and get an absolute moron for an owner, but I find that unlikely as I don’t know how many morons find themselves with enough money to buy and NBA team. I like Laser’s idea of trading Prince for a fellow expiring and a pick or prospect or something along those lines. Getting something out of him is better than nothing.

  • Dec 6, 20106:31 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    wow and i thought i was negative. what’s this team doing to you, buddy? maybe you should take a break or something.
     
    i’d do prince-for-kaman. (heck, the guy’s only got one extra year, so what kind of commitment is that?) then we’re as little as one move away from being good, provided that move involves trading any one of our shooting guards for a starting caliber point guard. not that the clippers would make the trade. i think we have three MAJOR problems with the team (no post scoring threat, no point play, too many shooting guards), and i doubt we’ll achieve “good”ness until we address all three. until those moves get made, we’re going to stink, but all it takes is for someone to GET THEM DONE.
     
    but no matter what happens, come hell or high water, there is no excuse for not trading tayshaun somewhere.

  • Dec 7, 20109:20 am
    by Patrick Hayes

    Reply

    @nuetes:
    “I don’t know how many morons find themselves with enough money to buy and NBA team”
    Don Sterling, George Shinn, Robert Sarver for starters, seem pretty dim. And Jim Dolan I realize didn’t technically buy the Knicks himself (his dad did), but Jim is still technically the owner. Maybe not an abundance, but it’s certainly not unheard of to have an eccentric weirdo as team owner.
     

  • Dec 7, 20109:24 am
    by Patrick Hayes

    Reply

    @Laser:
    Kaman isn’t much of a long term investment, but dude has only been healthy like twice in the last five years.
    He’s good when healthy, buy paying him big money to play 52 games probably isn’t worth the risk.
    And I think the Clippers would definitely do a Prince for Kaman trade at this point. Their record is horrible, they’re going to get another high draft pick, Griffin is a legit franchise player, Gordon is a really good complimentary player and guys like Aminu, Jordan and Bledsoe are all really solid. If they could shed Kaman and Davis’s contracts for cap space, they’d be in great shape, minus the fact that their owner is still Sterling.

  • Dec 7, 20103:56 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    wellp… i’d do it. 52 games of kaman beats the alternative. not saying this would be my first choice for prince (picks, young guns), but i’d do it.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here