Comments on: Baffling lineup switches continue to be the story of the Pistons’ season in loss to Spurs

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:25:34 +0000

Nah, someone sent me the link. Here and Twitter are the only places online where I comment nowadays.

By: Scout Taron

Scout Taron — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 03:59:13 +0000

Hayes admits that he’s an ESPN poster through his knowledge of 2tough’s blog?

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:50:57 +0000

Stuckey was 2nd, 1st and 3rd in minutes played in the last three seasons respectively.

Stuckey is a better prospect still, I'm not doubting that. But better player right now? FG%: Stuckey 43, Bynum 45. 3-point %: Stuckey 27, Bynum 32. TS%: both are 53. EFG%: Stuckey 45, Bynum 47. Assist %: Stuckey 25, Bynum 29. Turnover %: Stuckey 13, Bynum 15.

The reality is, both guys are pretty average. Both guys have noticeable holes in their game. One guy, though, has played significantly more. One guy has been given a long audition as starting PG -- he had about 2 and a half full seasons to win that job and prove he was capable of being a quality starting PG in this league. While just about every other player on the roster except for Prince has been yanked in and out of the lineup and lost starting jobs for less, Stuckey kept his through it all. Bynum has never been given a shot at the starting job, and he really has produced comparable to what Stuckey has on per minute and advanced stat basis.

I'm not making the case that a team that starts Bynum at PG will be a good team. But obviously, Stuckey hasn't proven to be a PG who excels at setting up teammates consistently, running an offense consistently or playing defense consistently. I don't expect a guy who named his blog after Stuckey to take an objective view of things, but clearly Stuckey hasn't tapped into his vast potential. His physical tools suggest he should be better than a mediocre guard. Very few PGs in the league have his mix of size, strength and quickness.

By: 2Tough

2Tough — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:19:12 +0000

Also, I wasn’t aware that 30 minutes a night is considered “major”, considering about 80 or so players in the league play more minutes than that, or the fact that the 39 win 2009 Piston ball club was “good”.

Nice try though.

By: 2Tough

2Tough — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:17:06 +0000

Uh, Stuckey is significantly better than Will Bynum, and it’s absurd to think that Stuckey also hasn’t worked hard. Just because YOU don’t like the guy personally (for failing to live up to YOUR expectations of him) doesn’t make him a bust or a lazy player, like you’re claiming he is.

Stuckey has talked a big game? Is that a joke? All Stuckey did is say the right things… he wants to get better, he wants to lead, etc. Besides his comment about this team being one of the better teams in the league last summer, he hasn’t said anything that he shouldn’t have said. Your boy Bynum, however, stated that he was going to be the starter this year and he failed miserably to live up to that hype.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 02:29:27 +0000

By the standards of a 15 pick, Stuckey is a fine player. By the standards of a guy Joe Dumars felt would turn into a franchise point guard? Or a guy who said himself before the season that it was time for him to take over and lead the team? Stuckey has been a major disappointment on those two fronts.

The fact is, he has the physical tools to be one of the better point guards in the league, and he just isn't even close. He's not even a serviceable starting point guard right now. He's a poor decision maker, he's a poor passer and although I think his greatest asset is the ability to be a great defender, his effort at that end of the court comes and goes.

If Stuckey had been drafted by Detroit, not been anointed a the only "sacred cow" by Joe Dumars and not spent every offseason talking about taking "the next step" or acting like he's the second coming of Russell Westbrook, then I would have no problem with his level of production right now. But Stuckey has done all of those things. He and the organization have talked big and both have failed to deliver. So yeah, even if Stuckey has had some incremental improvements, his season is still a disappointment.

As for Bynum, Stuckey should be better than Bynum. He has every physical tool that Bynum doesn't. But you know what? He's not significantly better, and that says a lot about both guys. Bynum works his ass off. He's made himself into a rotation caliber player in the NBA. Stuckey, on the other hand, was handed a starting job on a good team, handed major minutes and he hasn't become the player that Dumars had the faith that he'd become.

By: 2Tough

2Tough — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 21:30:04 +0000

42% is actually an indication that he’s making less jumpers this year, because his finishing at the rim is around 58% this year (compared to under 50% the last couple years).

Haha, using per game numbers. Now that’s funny…

Yes, his per game numbers are down because he’s playing 4 minutes less than he did last year and even less minutes per game than his second year in the league. His per 36 numbers of 18/5.5/3.5 certainly don’t indicate a decline in play. His true shooting % is also up over 6 percent from last year.
Stuckey is sure as heck a lot better than Will Bynum, who you constantly slobber over in here. He may or may not have “lived up to expectations”, but that is more due to the expectations from fans being ridiculous in the first place. Stuckey, a 15th pick out of small Eastern Washington, has exceeded any reasonable expectations of him.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:45:25 +0000

Haha. Well, we already have Austin Daye, Ben Gordon and Will Bynum lovers around here. Might as well add a Stuckey apologist to the mix I guess.

By: wowzer

wowzer — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:26:03 +0000

Pat, you’ll never have an objective conversation with 2tough regarding Rodney. He is a huge Stuckey lover that it’s borderline sick.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:55:32 +0000

Well, let's see. He's shooting 42 pecent despite taking a large number of his shots from inside 15 feet. He's averaging his lowest number of assists per game since his rookie season. His rebounding, steals and scoring are all slightly down from last season. On top of that, he lost the point guard position to a man who is 30-years-old, has bad knees and had never played the position before this season. I'd say that qualifies as a bad season.

Is he a terrible player? No. Has he lived up to the expectations the organization had for him? Not by a long shot.

"He’s probably been the second most consistent player on the team"

Sorry, you don't get credit for being consistently mediocre on a bad team, especially when he was handed the starting PG job three seasons ago and hasn't really improved noticeably in that timespan.