Comments on: Will Joakim Noah’s absence help the Pistons be more competitive on the boards vs. Chicago?

By: jk281

jk281 — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 12:05:26 +0000

gmehl – gotta disagree, I’m not seeing anybody changing their shots because of Ben’s defense anymore. Fear the Fro is gone. Nobody is intimidated by hid defense or even his presence anymore. Thats no knock on him, just that age has caught up and his freakish athleticism is gone. Add that to the fact that he was undersized to begin with, and without that athleticism to defend, and no offense, what is he providing? I love Big Ben, but realistically if it werent for his all-world defense in his prime, he would not have even been a starter because of the lack of offense. So if he’s now just an average defender with no offense thats a huge weakness in the middle. I’m all for rookie’s earning PT on winning teams with better veterans ahead of them, but not on losing teams where the veterans ahead of them aren’t any better than the rookie.

By: Laser

Laser — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 05:10:08 +0000

@hayes: i’m with you on the arbitrary nature of this roster and lineup. not sure we’re really disagreeing there, but this team looks like it’s got all the same problems as before. rip to the bench solves nothing, because gordon still played sub 20 minutes and took 6 shots. no sense picking on any individual players besides stuckey.

roster needs an obvious shakeup, but if we’re keeping this awful band together, i’d like to see big ben and monroe start for a while. if one struggles early, put villa in. shorten the rotation by one, no matter who it is. nine is a good number. bring stuckey and villa and maybe bg off the bench. start t-mac and rip. insert bynum and daye into the rotation once we’ve made some trades. no excuse for daye to continue to sit on such a bad team.

By: gmehl1977

gmehl1977 — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 04:45:54 +0000

jk281 you look way too much at final stats. There is another 30% of things that just don’t show up in the stats column like altered shots or fear of taking shots. Big Ben commands respect down low that Monroe doesn’t. Monroe will get there but let the kid earn it and i am once he puts on a bit of beef Ben will be long retired sitting on the couch.

@Vic
your clutching at straws on who should be starting or left in games. Kuester as bad a coach as he is (and he sucks pretty bad) is really in a lose lose scenario. If he does the wrong thing then everyone is on his case and if he does the right thing then he is just doing his job and no one gives him props. I wonder how he would go if he was allowed to coach the Lakers, Celtics, Magic or Heat.

By: vic

vic — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 04:25:36 +0000

This game would have been won easily if we kept Monroe in the starting lineup.

Boozer beasted the offensive boards in the 1st quarter when the rest of their team basically handed us the keys to the game.

I still think a big first front court with Monroe and Ben is the way to go against the front courts of the rest of the league. Ben had his hands full with guarding Boozer. If Monroe was there to rebound in the 1st quarter, we would have been up by 15 or so.

I think Charlie’s role is to provide offense off the bench at the 4, and Maxiells role is to provide defense off the bench at the 4 or 5. In the first quarter its important to set the tone of interior rebounding and defense with Monroe and Wallace.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 04:23:12 +0000

@Laser:
“one area where you seem to be stuck is this idea that it’s a good thing to catch lucky breaks en route to wins.”
It’s not really a good thing for me, someone who is rooting for the long-term health of the franchise. I’d prefer they get as many lottery balls as possible. But the team is clearly playing for wins/playoffs. Kuester is clearly coaching because he wants to win games/save his job. So from that perspective, yeah, I do look for when they can catch lucky breaks and win games.
“maybe he played harder than usual, but it’s not like ben gordon did ANYTHING to justify his promotion last time out.”
Turn about is fair play maybe? Gordon didn’t do anything to lose his job and Rip didn’t do anything to earn it early in the season when Hamilton was automatically given the starting job either.

By: jk281

jk281 — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 04:05:59 +0000

btw Monroe deserves to get his starting spot back in place of Ben.

0 pts and 2 rebs in 22 min for Ben tonight.

4 pts, 7 rebs in 22 min for Monroe .

Not that much better, but better nonetheless.

By: jk281

jk281 — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 03:57:33 +0000

I guess the answer to the question posed in the title was an emphatic NO, lol.

55-39 on the boards w/o Noah even playing. Still a good game though. We would’ve won had he gotten just 1 or 2 of all those rebounds that resulted in 2nd chance pts.

By: gmehl1977

gmehl1977 — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:32:29 +0000

Ok its the end of the 4th and McGrady has played the Pistons back into the game and they have managed to send it into OT. It will be interesting to see if Q puts Gordon back into the game cold. This is one of those issues with having too many options at SG.

By: Laser

Laser — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:21:35 +0000

in the long term, nobdy’s going to play well in this system. charlie v has a chance to be big since all we run are isos, but nobody else. it’s not a coincidence that the starters stumbled out of the gate twice, all stuckey did was power layups, and the bench came in with some life and actually played with a flow. bynum and/or t-mac needs to start. rondey stuckey is the worst point guard in the league and gives us no chance of winning. SG or bust!

By: Vince

Vince — Sun, 26 Dec 2010 22:32:59 +0000

Hey, on the brightside, the Bulls are rumoured to be looking for an extra SG, if Hamilton plays well then maybe they might consider a trade, and looking at the Bulls’ roster I can only see good things coming out of that, before anyone tears this post to shreds I am aware that this is quite the longshot, but trades like the one that went down between Orlando and Washington give you hope for moving players’ whose contracts are deemed ‘unmovable’