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

Should the Pistons let Rodney Stuckey go as a free agent and give the point guard reins to Brandon Knight?

A few days ago, we discussed who we thought should start at point guard for the Pistons, Brandon Knight or Rodney Stuckey. Based on the comments, there were a variety of opinions, but the two most popular options seemed to be starting Knight at PG and Stuckey at SG or starting Stuckey at PG and bringing Knight off the bench.

Well, in an interesting post looking at the positional battles of Pistons rookies, Omaha Sun of Ridiculous Upside asks a simple question: what if Stuckey, a restricted free agent, is not in the point or shooting guard mix at all?

Three years ago, Detroit had to decide whether they were going to keep the veteran Chauncey Billups or move forward with the young Rodney Stuckey. They chose youth over experience and Stuckeybecame the man at point guard. After a less-than-stellar three years, Detroit again faces a similar decision as Stuckey is a restricted free agent. Stuckey’s potential could lure in a couple teams, and if a team offers him a long-term contract worth starter money, Detroit would be wise to let him go …

My expectation is that Stuckey departs and Knight is named the opening-day starter. However, he will be splitting time with Will Bynum as he grows into his role. 12-14 ppg, 3-5 apg, and 2-3 topg in 28-30 mpg.

I think most Pistons followers assume it’s a foregone conclusion that Stuckey will be back, but it definitely changes things drastically if he gets a big offer elsewhere and the Pistons decide not to match. At that point, they will no longer have the luxury of deciding whether or not to bring Knight along slowly. I would love to see Knight play, but I’m not convinced big minutes and a starting role early on would be the best way for him to develop. I’d prefer Stuckey comes back on a reasonable deal and Knight simply beats him out for the point guard job.

68 Comments

  • Aug 27, 201111:07 pm
    by Jeff Rauschert

    Reply

    I say hand it to Knight. Stuckey hasn’t been the player Dumars thought he could be. I say Knight, Gordon, Daye and Monroe are in the starting lineup. Additionally, they should try to make a move for Nene on the front line.

    • Aug 29, 20115:10 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      How do you suggest they make a play for Nene? The Pistons have too much money committed elsewhere to land him.

  • Aug 27, 201111:16 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    1) didn’t we extend his broke ass a qualifying offer?
     
    2) i disagree with you and feldman on the reg, and a big part of my gripe with your brand(s) of sports analysis stems from absurd questions like this. the pistons have made enough mistakes with this kid; letting him walk away for nothing (after destroying the team in an effort to make him your franchise player) is out of the question. team’s got like four assets on the books, and stuckey’s one of them. joe dumars has done such a miserable job of rolling over assets from last decade’s heyday (to date: basically everything’s either been squandered outright or converted into liabilities), he absolutely can not afford to lose the last asset he’s got from when the team had respectability. (incidentally, every other asset the team has are the products of us being awful.) so… no. no, they should not let stuckey go as a free agent… you guessed it: objectively.

    • Aug 28, 201112:17 am
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      “1) didn’t we extend his broke ass a qualifying offer?”

      That’s irrelevant to the premise of the post I linked to. Them extending a qualifying offer doesn’t mean he has to accept it. And qualifying offer or not, Stuckey could still conceivably get a big offer sheet somewhere else that the Pistons don’t want to match. The person who wrote that post believes that could happen.

      “i disagree with you and feldman on the reg, and a big part of my gripe with your brand(s) of sports analysis stems from absurd questions like this.”

      There is no greater compliment to me than you disagreeing with me. Seriously, you are wrong-headed in how you approach and argue things so often it makes my brain hurt. Someone on a site that is respected wrote a post about the Pistons. I linked to that post because this is a Pistons blog. Part of the function of this site is to point people in the direction of content that is Pistons-related.

      “the pistons have made enough mistakes with this kid; letting him walk away for nothing (after destroying the team in an effort to make him your franchise player) is out of the question.”

      Again, you didn’t read closely enough. The premise is what happens if Stuckey gets a huge offer from another team. I think that’s unlikely, but as a RFA, it’s possible. In the unlikely event that it happens, do the Pistons match and possibly get locked into another huge long-term contract for someone who might be playing a lot of minutes at SG this season?

      “team’s got like four assets on the books, and stuckey’s one of them.”

      He’s not on the books. He will be a restricted FA when the lockout ends.

      “so… no. no, they should not let stuckey go as a free agent… you guessed it: objectively.”

      I suggest you read closer and look at the context. Or don’t. I don’t care either way. But for you to strongly argue as if I’ve taken some position is ridiculous. I didn’t take any position in the post. The post said, “Hey, another writer wrote this. What do you think the team would do if this scenario presented itself?”

      Obviously, Stuckey doesn’t have the freedom to just leave as a free agent, which is good for the Pistons. Obviously, it makes sense to keep him at a competitive price. But if you’re arguing that it makes sense to keep him at any cost, you’re wrong. He’s an asset now because he’s productive relative to his salary. If his salary increases significantly and his production stays relatively the same, he’s no longer that valuable an asset, and if he really gets overpaid, he becomes a negative asset ala Gordon.

       

      • Aug 28, 201112:48 am
        by Laser

        Reply

        i’ll chalk this up to the headlines. i think readers take a lot more from your headlines than you seem to figure. a headline is a mission statement of sorts. i know you want to write grabby headlines to get people reading and talking, so you just have to deal with people who read your entries through the prism of whatever the headline is advertising. i didn’t follow the link, and i’m not responding to anything but but the blog entry.
         
        if stuckey walks for nothing i’ll puke.

        • Aug 28, 20119:22 am
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          Noted. From now on, I will write 150 word headlines that are so descriptive that you never have to actually read what is in the post.

          • Aug 28, 20113:35 pm
            by City of Klompton

            Haha!  Patrick, I love your responses to readers!  Objectivity often seems scarce among the reader comments.  Have you ever thought about being a lawyer?

          • Aug 28, 20114:05 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            “Have you ever thought about being a lawyer?”

            I’m way too dumb and lazy for that.

    • Aug 29, 20115:12 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      Laser, sorry Patrick didn’t write something more clear like, “I’d prefer Stuckey comes back on a reasonable deal and Knight simply beats him out for the point guard job.”

  • Aug 27, 201111:19 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    o shit, yes, as for part two: yes, hand the reins to knight. also objectively. time to stop being terrible already, and this is a logical step in that direction. this warrants exactly as much discussion as the stuckey component of the question. they’re no-brainers. we must move on already, while getting value for stuckey.

    • Aug 28, 201112:20 am
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      You’ve frequently talked about the mistakes the team has made with Stuckey, prematurely giving him too much responsibility, handing him a starting position too early at a position he was not ready to handle and now you are advocating taking the same exact tact with Knight. Bravo, sir.

      If Knight wins the starting job by being the best player at the position, that’s great for everyone. If he’s simply given the starting job because he’s young and it would be nice if he becomes a star, that won’t do any good for his development.

      • Aug 28, 201112:43 am
        by Laser

        Reply

        There’s a major difference between the Chauncey/Stuckey and Stuckey/Knight situations. It’s not even close. For one thing, the biggest problem with Stuckey was in Joe Dumars’s misguided attempt at reshaping the roster around him (by blasting it into the stone age). This time around, the roster is pretty set AND we know at least one guard must be moved for this roster to make any sense at all.
         
        In Chauncey’s case we: (1) dumped our leader, best player, former Finals MVP, etc. for cap space; (2) committed at the point to a guy who can’t shoot and won’t pass and doesn’t have much else but his physical strength; (3) handed out rich, long-term contracts in an attempt to complement this de-facto point guard.
         
        In Knight’s case we: (1) need to get rid of a guard anyways for this roster to make a lick of sense; (2) replace our de-facto point guard who has failed miserably at the position for a guy who displays potential for the position and can at least shoot; (3) probably can’t do much to rebuild the roster anyways, so Knight gets an audition period before we go moving any pieces. Stuckey is not the answer.

    • Aug 29, 20115:17 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      Laser, do I understand this right?

      1. You’re  set on re-signing Stuckey.
      2. You’re set on making Knight the day-one starter.

      • Aug 29, 20119:41 pm
        by Laser

        Reply

        1) naw. i’d be happy to sign-and-trade stuckey. but as with prince, it would simply gall me to see him walk for absolutely nothing. these guys are our two remaining assets from long, long ago when this team had assets instead of liabilities. i just don’t think we can afford to let them walk. that’s all. and if we can’t execute a sign-and-trade, i think matching a competitive offer and trying to trade stuckey and/or prince is the best option we’re left with. but shit, i would have traded both of these guys already if it were up to me, so i’m just trying to make the best of a horrendous situation.
         
        2) more or less. in the alternative, i’d be alright with bynum getting an honest shot at landing the starting PG spot (i just made myself LOL there). i’ve seen WAY more than enough of stuckey’s version of running an NBA offense for ten lifetimes. he’s had enough chances, and he’s a dead end at that spot. he makes better decisions with the basketball when he plays off the ball anyways. i’d much rather let knight start from day one and learn on the job. team isn’t going to be any good no matter what we do.

  • Aug 28, 20116:47 am
    by neutes

    Reply

    I’ll disagree that Stuckey ‘failed miserably’ at the position. He’s been average, and showed both flashes of putrid play and flashes of all-star level play. The problem is that he’s still an enigma. His contract is up and after 4 years in the league we still have no idea if he’ll put it together, then again maybe 4 years of evidence would point towards no. I’m slightly nervous he’ll leave and then suddenly play consistently well for another team. I’m not sure this is all that good of a reason to pay him however. It could be a trap, and one this team isn’t very well equipped to handle.
     
    The Stuckey/Knight situation is a tough one. If Stuckey returns he should start at PG no question imo. Ideally Stuckey comes in plays the rest of his career like the last part of last season and never lets the PG spot go. The other route would be if Stuckey leaves, in which case throw Knight out there and let him take his lumps. The team would be beyond miserable with Knight getting 30+ minutes per game. We could be contending for a top 3 pick easily. So either Stuckey re-signs and tears it up, or he doesn’t and we suck hardcore while attempting to develop Knight. Anything in between is so far from ideal I don’t like thinking about it.
     
    Someone might say ideally Knight starts at PG and Stuckey at SG, which is fine, but I think in this case you’re starting a rookie PG, and not playing Stuckey at his best position, and I’m not sure I can support not trying to individually maximize the little talent we do have. The thought of Knight’s outside game combined with Stuckey’s slashing ability seems intriguing, but this opens up a huge can of worms at a position with a can of worms already overflowing. If I either thought or knew Knight was going to be any good I’d be all for it, but based on what I’ve seen I can’t say that I think Knight is going to be very good, and letting Stuckey go to roll with Knight is either taking a step back (arguably forward in the long-run) or running in place at best.
     
    My whole point of view on this is based on how little I expect out of Knight, which is kind of disappointing. I want so bad to be excited about a young lottery pick, but I just don’t see anything either visually or statistically that gives me a ton of hope. All said we’re probably screwed. We’ll resign Stuckey, he’ll continue to play inconsistently and average, Knight won’t ever beat him out, and we’ll keep on trucking on the mediocrity treadmill.

  • Aug 28, 20118:41 am
    by detroitpcb

    Reply

    you must be nuts. i cannot think of a stupider personel move than letting Stuckey go and relying on a 20 year old player who had difficulty running a half court offense in college.

    I like Knight, think he will be a solid pro, believe he can play the point, and hope that he gets regular minutes. But you don’t release the best player on your team just because of the way the draft played out and forced the Pistons to take another guard.

    Last season proved that Stuckey can play the two. In fact, it proved that he is the best two guard on the roster. Last year also proved that Ben Gordon is a scrub. With an expensive contract. Why don’t we talk about getting rid of the player who did not perform all season rather than the player who performed well, even if he had a few run ins with his incompetent coach

    • Aug 28, 20119:23 am
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      So, you’re saying then, if Stuckey gets a $10-$12 million per year offer from another team the Pistons should match?

      • Aug 28, 201111:23 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        I think the real question there is what team would give Stuckey that kind of money? There are precious few teams with much cap space without a solid PG on the roster.

      • Aug 28, 20111:18 pm
        by detroitpcb

        Reply

        Stuckey is not going to get an offer over $8 mil a year. I would be surprised if he gets that.

        • Aug 28, 20111:46 pm
          by neutes

          Reply

          I think it depends on a lot of factors. If the season is cancelled next season’s free agency period is going to be so chaotic it’s hard to even fathom. Paul, Williams, and Howard will all be hitting the market. We’ll still have no cash to spend. Does Stuckey keep his restricted status? I have no idea how any of that works. It’s going to be a mess. Two years worth of free agents on the market. A bunch of teams will have cap space if that is the case.
           
          If the lockout gets resolved you have to wonder how enamored the Clippers are with Bledsoe or the Pacers with Collison. Those two teams probably have the cash to out price the market for Stuckey. Toronto has Calderon and Bayless. Not sure there either. If the MLE exists I think you can all but guarantee some team will throw the thing at Stuckey, so his price starts there, but hopefully that’s where it ends.

          • Aug 29, 201111:51 am
            by brgulker

            Under the previous CBA, RFA status would not apply to Stuckey next summer, season or no season. If he signs a qualifying offer with us this year, he becomes UFA next year. If the season’s cancelled, he’d be a UFA next summer.

            Of course, none of that applies right now. The new CBA could make all that a moot point, and if the entire season is cancelled, surely there will be all sorts of provisions for next summer that allow teams to hold onto the rights of their players.

          • Aug 29, 201112:37 pm
            by tarsier

            Yeah but if he signs the QO, he becomes a decent young player on a reasonable contract that Detroit has the rights to for a year. In other words, he is a valuable trade asset. Probably not worth hanging on to though. I’m guessing most of the time when a player signs the QO, they sign elsewhere the next summer.

        • Aug 28, 20113:22 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          Stuckey at $8 million per year is even pressing it value-wise. If he’s at about his peak as a player now — rotation guard who wouldn’t be a top 15 or so starter at either PG or SG — he’s most certainly not worth $8 million.

          Again, as I’ve said above, if Detroit lost him for nothing, considering what they’ve invested in him, that would be bad. But he’s also not a player you have to get back at any price. I think $8 millionish is about the absolute max Detroit should consider re-signing him for, and even then, I’m not sure it’s a lock that you match that kind of money. And if by some stroke of luck on his part a team like the Clips, Pacers or Raptors takes a gamble and gives him a deal at more than that, it really makes little sense to match. Losing him for nothing is almost assuredly better than matching a big offer to him, watching him fight for time in a crowded backcourt and seeing his value decline the way Hamilton’s and Gordon’s has with big money and limited production. If the team moves Hamilton and/or Gordon, then that changes things a bit with Stuckey, but with the roster as is, they can’t afford another big money deal for a guy who they might consider a shooting guard.

        • Aug 29, 20112:08 pm
          by Sebastian

          Reply

          I am in agreement with detroitpsc, when he states that Stuckey was our best player, last season. If anyone, honestly reviewed our roster from the previous two seasons, it can clearly be discerned that Stuckey is the only player on the roster who can even dribble.

          I would like it very much if we are able to retain the services of Rodney Stuckey. I personally would like to have Stuckey start at the Point with Knight coming off. (I would like it very much to see Knight receive the requisite minutes at the PG with the hope that he could develop into a steady PG on our roster.) I say keep Rip, where his salary will provide relief the following season.

          I then would package Ben G. and  Charlie V. to the Grizzlies for Rudy Gay.

          I would also make a hard play for DeAndre Jordan (C), Clippers UFA.
           

          • Aug 29, 20112:12 pm
            by tarsier

            And why would the Grizzlies even consider that deal? Gay is so much better than Gordon plus Villanueva. While we are at it, why don’t we trade Rip and Max for Dwight Howard?

  • Aug 28, 20119:13 am
    by JT's Hoops Blog

    Reply

    Knight over Stuckey anyday.  Stucky has had his chance and all he has proven to be is nothing than a ball hog. and a terrible offensive facilitator.  However, I don’t thing they should give him up for nothing.  Try to package him for a future first round pick.  The kid has size and can power into the lane. If he actually passed the ball, he would be quite decent.

  • Aug 28, 20119:38 am
    by Shane

    Reply

    Hand it to Knight. Unless you sign and trade Stuckey for some picks or for some really young players let him go. Knight will grow fast if he is handed the reins immediately

  • Aug 28, 201111:29 am
    by Jack

    Reply

    Really Stuckey has been horrible and knight can’t play.  Neither is true.  Stuckey has been mediocre at worst and that is primarily a function of the dysfunction we have had at coaching the last 3 years.  For Gods sake it can be argued that John Kuster held back Greg Monroe’s development and as far as bad accomplishments go that is hard to achieve.  And seriously whoever thinks Knight is going to suck is retarded.  He scored more points in Kentucky than Derek Rose, Tyreke Evans, or John Wall did, and had similar assists and rebounding numbers. But add to that the fact that he took them to the final 4 single-hand, something John Wall could not do with DeMarcus Cousins and 3 other 1st round picks at his side speaks volumes of his talent.  I for one am looking forward to what a Knight/Stuckey back court can do next season.

  • Aug 28, 201111:43 am
    by Druhouse

    Reply

    This all sounds magical and promising for Knight in a vacuum, but he is a young kid and should earn it like you have said.

    Plus, what team(s) need/want a long term starter level contract for Stuckey: Toronto is the only one I can think of. Do they even have the money for it?

    A reasonable contract for Stuckey to create some competition at the 1 for Knight to work his way into the starting spot and to allow Stuckey to fill-in when RIP/BG leave is a good idea.

    I definetly assumed Stuck was returning, but it is an interesting idea that he might not.

  • Aug 28, 20113:55 pm
    by Jodi Jezz

    Reply

    Heck no, we better not let a 25yr old talented combo guard go!! I think Dumars will start Stuckey in the higher 8 mil range, somewhere in between 8.5 to 8.8 in the first year of his contract…In addition can we all get out of fantasy land, Kinght isn’t going to start at PG this season…Realistically its going to be Stuckey/Gordon starting, with Knight getting plenty of minutes off the bench…Eventually the Knight/Stuckey line-up will start with Gordon playing 6th man…Sometimes I think these writers don’t know the game of basketball at all!

    • Aug 28, 20114:04 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      No one is advocating letting him go for nothing. The problem, as many have pointed out above, is that the Pistons have a lot of money invested long-term in their guards already. Depending on the new CBA, the salary cap could go down significantly. If Stuckey as a restricted free agent gets a huge offer elsewhere and the Pistons match, that could severely limit the money they have to upgrade other spots on the roster.

      As far as your last sentence, as I said to someone else above, if you are questioning my knowledge, then I am doing my job. If I am on the opposite side of an issue as Jodi Jezz, whoever the hell that is, than I am on the right side of the issue.

      • Aug 28, 20114:11 pm
        by Jack

        Reply

        hahahahaha!!!! agree 100% this time.

  • Aug 28, 20114:28 pm
    by rob

    Reply

    I say keep Stuckey but only as a SG (when starting), who can play backup PG in a 3 guard rotation. If we dont resign him as our SG, then all of a sudden we have a major whole at that position that was once overstocked. Gordon is not a starter, and Rip could traded a any moment. So we need to keep Stuckey as a SG. BUT, only at the right price. That should go for every player though from now on. No more overpaying players who aren’t at least bonafide superstars. $7 mil/yr tops for Stuckey is my limit. Thats more than generous for a player that has proven absolutely nothing thus far in his career.

  • Aug 28, 20116:21 pm
    by Hardy

    Reply

    I think the bigger picture here is stabliity at you guard point or shooting. The thing I see with Stuckey is he has the size but doesn’t have vision. Hamilton has suffered because of this and there never was any type of chemistry that was formed for them to become a duo. Stuckey still is a good player but if Joe has to sign and trade so the log jam at the guard opens up for Terrico White or Will Bynum I think you have to make that trade and hope that a possible Knight Gordon duo emerges or a Knight Stuckey duo. I do envision the three guard play of Knight, Stuckey and Gordon just as a Thomas,  Dumars and Johnson rotation with Prince at the 4 and Monroe or Maxeill at the 5. First thing first though, and that is a need for a new CBA so there can be a season.

    • Aug 28, 20117:02 pm
      by Jack

      Reply

      HAHAHA Joe would have to be retarded to keep prince and let Max start over Monroe at the 5. That is a horrible lineup.  Small lineups never contend or even make the playoffs.  Yea if you want to aim for the 1st pick in the lotto, by all means go for it.

    • Aug 29, 20119:05 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Any time a three guard rotation on the Pistons is suggested, it is compared to Thomas, Dumars, and Johnson. Don’t you think it’s a bit disrespectful to those three to compare them to Stuckey, Knight, and Gordon. I mean, Stuckey has yet to be an above average starter. Gordon hasn’t been one for a couple years. And Knight, while he has potential, is unlikely to be one for at least a couple years. It would be like comparing Devin Harris and Al Jefferson to Stockton and Malone just because they happen to be at the same position for the same franchise.

  • Aug 29, 20111:42 am
    by Mike Payne

    Reply

    Screw those clowns, we should figure out a way to get a real point guard.

  • Aug 29, 20117:31 am
    by kagiso

    Reply

    IF Stuckey can be signed for a reasonable salary … 6.6 million for 3 seasons .. lets say … Then who is to say that new head coach …. wont be able to help develop Stuckey at SG or PG? .. that is .. what held back Stuckey the most has been having less than stellar coaching … If this Frank guy is what Pistonpowered claims he is .. a good head coach .. then expect Stuckey to improve substantially over the next 2 to 3 seasons .. But certainly Stuckey wont and shouldnt be signed for more than 8 million a season for 3 seasons at most .. I would go even lower .. 7 million at most .. .

    • Aug 29, 20119:16 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      7M at most and 6.6M is reasonable? Those are awfully close numbers to be the maximum and a good example of a reasonable salary. I’m still on board with the idea of a long contract at a low salary (maybe 6 years-33M). Because it is the only way Detroit has a shot at getting a really good deal. Those kinds of contracts are how they won in 2004. Billups and Wallace were both signed fro fair amounts but while most teams would rather give uncertain guys short term contracts, Dumars handed out long deals. That made for a very cost-efficient team in their heyday.

  • Aug 29, 20117:32 am
    by kagiso

    Reply

    .. and that means 6.6 M per season …

  • Aug 29, 20118:31 am
    by jayg108

    Reply

    Rating Stuckey’s performance for his first few years is equivalent to rating Billups’ performance while he played for the C’s and Wolves.  I would like to see him start at point for at least one year with a supporting cast (no Rip, no Prince) and a decent coach.  I think he can be an all-star one day with the right team and coach.

    • Aug 29, 20118:55 am
      by Marvin Jones

      Reply

      Finally an intelligent voice in the crowd, no one would have said anything good about Chauncey after his first 4 yrs in the league, but with some maturity and in the hands of a good coach he blossomed. I think Stuckey is maturing, as evidenced by how he finished the season, and under the tuteledge of a point guard friendly coach like Frank who will put in a system that is condusive to his talents, we will see a borderline All Star at PG in Stuckey.

    • Aug 29, 20119:09 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Sure but you can say that about tons of crappy PGs. There are a whole lot who haven’t accomplished much in their first several years but could go all Billups on the NBA. It’s just that they would be exceptions. Having one such example does not mean you should expect it from just anyone. That reasoning got a lot of teams into trouble when there were a few huge success stories in the form of players drafted from Europe or high school. After a period of stupid drafting, though, teams figured out that one example does not make a trend.

      • Aug 29, 20119:11 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        If you are going to gauge what to expect from Stuckey, do it on his merits (he has shown some great potential and an agonizingly slow process at realizing it), not on the history of Billups. Because a lot more cases could be found of players who started off as strong as Stuckey and got nowhere than ones who started off that strong and became all-stars.

    • Aug 29, 20119:20 am
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      Man, I love the turns these conversations take.

      Jay, Marvin, I just want to pose a simple question. No one has debated whether Stuckey still has unrealized potential that could possibly be brought out by different circumstances. But, back to the central question in the post, is that possibility that he might still improve enough to justify matching an offer to him of $8 million or more per season if a team signs him to that kind of offer sheet in free agency?

      I don’t think either of you guys would argue that it’s an absolute lock that Stuckey realizes all of the potential his physical attributes suggest he has. The post is simply asking, what would or should the Pistons do in that situation? Lock themselves into another huge contract for a guard just because there’s a possibility he could go elsewhere and get better? What if he stays for that kind of money and doesn’t get better?

      • Aug 29, 201111:47 am
        by Marvin Jones

        Reply

        Patrick, I don’t think anyone is going to offer Stuckey anything over 8 mil and if they do then you have to consider matching it and moving some other overpaid assets. To me the big unknown is what kind of player Stuckey can be in a stable environment with positive influences around him. The past 4 yrs with the coaching situation and all the disgruntled vets around it’s no wonder Stuckey’s done some of the things he’s done. Let’s get rid of the negative(Prince, Rip) and see if Stuckey can become the leader and PG this team needs.  You just don’t let a 25 yr old player with his talents go and hand the reins over to a 19 yr old with questionable PG skills.

        • Aug 29, 20112:46 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          See, I would have less of a problem with Stuckey getting a contract for more than he’s worth now if Hamilton and/or Gordon were moved. But the problem is I don’t think it’s going to be particularly easy to move those guys immediately.

      • Aug 29, 20112:20 pm
        by jayg108

        Reply

        Sorry Patrick, i wasn’t trying to hijack the convo.  Yes, the Pistons should take a chance on him.  I know I previously said only one year, but I’m guessing that is impossible.  Can restricted f/a sign for only one year? does the contract get extended?  If not one year, then 2.
         
        Like Marvin said, a stable environment with positive influences will be an interesting variable to Stuckey’s play.  After the next year with Stuckey at point and Knight backing up, the Pistons will be able to see which way to go and who to trade.  Knight might be a really good trade chip to offer to a team heavy with bigs.

        • Aug 29, 20112:31 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          Oh, I didn’t take it as you hijacking. I just meant that it’s almost impossible to have separate conversations about Stuckey’s potential and about what he is now. I, too, think he could still become a really good player, but if I was a team owner, I’m not sure a hope that things start to click with him would be enough for me to invest in the kind of contract he’ll likely want.

          Stuckey could come back on a one-year deal if he accepts the qualifying offer. I’ve always thought that would be in Stuckey’s best interest. He would have a chance to have a big contract year, then hit unrestricted free agency and potentially be in line for a bigger payday. Of course, that’s a bad scenario for the Pistons. I think the best case for them is locking him up to a deal in the $5-$6 million per year range. I think that’s fair value for Stuckey right now. If he gets better, it turns into a bad deal for him. But if he’s at or near his peak as a player right now, that’s still not a bad contract for the Pistons whereas a deal in the $7-$10 million range wouldn’t be great for the Pistons if Stuckey doesn’t improve much.

  • Aug 29, 201112:05 pm
    by brgulker

    Reply

    I don’t see how handing the team to Knight makes any sense. It would be ridiculously premature. Coupled with the fact that his numbers as a college freshman were very suspect in key areas, I’m super reluctant about giving him any meaningful minutes until he’s earned them, let alone the starting job.

    Knight is going to struggle early. He’s going to look and play like a man among boys. 

    • Aug 29, 201112:39 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Even if Stuckey were gone, there would be a serviceable PG on the roster in Bynum. Knight could come off the bench but hopefully get decent minutes until he proves he deserves more.

      • Aug 29, 20115:10 pm
        by brgulker

        Reply

        I agree. Bang for the buck, I’ll take Bynum over Stuckey (assuming he gets north of $6-$7 million per). If we’re going to rebuild, let’s go young and cheap. I’ll take Bynum/Knight/White for less than Stuckey combined.

    • Aug 29, 20112:32 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      @Ben:

      It doesn’t make sense, but I know very well that if, by some stroke of luck, Stuckey gets himself an offer at $8 million or more per year, there’s no way you’d advocate matching that (at least I don’t think you would). If that were the case, they wouldn’t have much choice but to hand the PG spot to Knight, ready or not.

      • Aug 29, 20115:06 pm
        by brgulker

        Reply

        I wouldn’t advocate matching that if the long-term goal is to keep Stuckey. However, Stuckey at $8 million is tradeable. The question becomes, what’s more valuable as an asset? A few extra million in free agency next summer as the result of Stuckey walking? Or Stuckey at $8million per as trade bait?

        I don’t know the answer to that. I just don’t want Stuck on my team for that price given the rest of the salary and personnel profile.

  • Aug 29, 20111:51 pm
    by Jack

    Reply

    Calling Bynum a serviceable pg is like calling max a serviceable center.  Neither is true.  They can do 1 or 2 things well, play good in short bursts but are too inconsistent to be serviceable because they lack size in both cases and skill in max’s case.  With a good coach and a stable environment I can see stuckey thriving at either one of the guard positions.  For God’s sake Derek Rose plays pg, but he is not a true pg yet he won MVP and took the bulls to the EC finals.  Now please don’t say I am comparing stuckey to rose but it just shows you don’t need a true pg to be have a successful team.  Even Chauncey was not a true pg and the Pistons won a championship with him leading the way.  Stuckey has the potential to be that type of player.  I would say for 5 or 6 mil keep him but if some joker offers him 7-10 mil sadly we would have to let him walk and fill the holes another way.  Lets face it at best the pistons are a 7 or 8 seed with Stuckey next season, more likely not even that so if the price is too high let him walk give knight a chance, who knows he might surprise, and if not the Pistons hopefully tank and strike gold in next years lotto.  Hows bout them apples PHizzy.  That’s right Patrick I called you PHizzy.

    • Aug 29, 20112:16 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      I would take Bynum well over Maxiell. But I’m not saying that Bynum would be a good starting PG. Just that he could hold down the fort for a while and that if Stuck were gone, he would be my choice to start the year at the point. hopefully Knight would win the job from him. But Knight is really, really raw. Also, no way Bynum should be a starting PG on a good team. But the Pistons won’t be good for a while yet. And he deserves better than he has gotten thus far.

    • Aug 29, 20112:36 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      Dang, that’s my first nickname I believe.

      I would echo tarsier that, although flawed, the skills Bynum has are much better than the few skills Maxiell has at this point. I don’t think they’d win much with Bynum as the starting PG, but I do think he plays hard and works hard, and I wouldn’t mind Knight learning under him (that’s what she said?) in that regard.

      And as for next year’s draft, there should be enough talent in it that the Pistons could end up with an impact player even in the bottom of the lottery. But you’re right, Stuckey not being back could certainly be the difference between picking near the top of the lottery or the bottom.

  • Aug 29, 20114:39 pm
    by Laser

    Reply

    i agree that an $8 million annual salary is probably the red zone we should be worried about. he probably gets that offer from somebody, and it’s probably a very marginal decision whether or not to match it. i still think we probably match it. it’s probably roughly what he’s objectively worth (even if his value here is less than somewhere with a void he would fill), and simply having a player on the roster who’s on a reasonably fair contract is a step in the right direction for us. at $8 m/yr, stuckey can probably be moved easily. perhaps even for value.
     
    we just can’t afford to let assets like prince and stuckey simply expire. (though i’m sure somehow joe dumars will get another free pass if that happens.) it may be throwing good money after bad, but this is the bed dumars made. and if this team is going to dig itself out of the gutter, we need to look at the big picture and operate with an eye towards when we’ll have the chance to be competitive again. that means no band-aids, and positioning ourselves to be respectable in 2014 or something.

    • Aug 29, 20117:37 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      Are you familiar with the concept of a sunk cost?

      • Aug 29, 20119:53 pm
        by Laser

        Reply

        just looked it up, and i get it. like i said, i’m not a fan of throwing good money after bad, but the notion of having stuckey and prince walk away for nothing makes me puke. joe dumars has put us in such an unenviable position here that there are no “good” options left. i happen to think that having prince and/or stuckey at fair market value would be better than losing them outright. i consider both of them to be capable of contributing significantly to a contending team, and i think either one would be tradable as long as we didn’t spend out the nose for them. again, i would have traded both of these guys before we were left in this position. it’s all marginal decisions at this point; i just happen to think the worst case scenario would be to lose these guys for nothing.
         
        i admit i’d also feel somewhat different if there was a chance joe dumars would ever get his comeuppance should this worst case scenario come to pass. if he became a pariah around here for what’s happened on his watch, rather than getting a free pass, i’d put up with a lot more. but to have him roll over ZERO (0) of his assets from when this team was elite and face no consequences would gall me to no end. if joe was treated in accordance with his recent performance, i’d care a little less about that last little tumble into the bowels of obscurity and disgrace. i just can’t stand to see this man throw literally everything he built here into the garbage and be viewed as a hero.

  • Aug 29, 20114:42 pm
    by Marvin Jones

    Reply

    What intrigues me the most is not a Stuckey/Knight backcourt but a Stuckey/White backcourt, two 6’5 players, both of whom can run the point or play off the ball, White’s athleticism and Stuckey’s strength, White can shoot the three and the mid-range, while Stuckey can take smaller PGs down low, each also has the size to guard SG on occasion. That’s what I’m looking forward to seeing. 

  • Aug 30, 20115:17 am
    by Jakob Eich

    Reply

    I’m all for giving Knight the opportunity as soon as he deserves it and starting Bynum in the meantime in order to develop Knight! Also, Dumars should really hire a veteran PG! Maybe in a sign-and-trade with Tayshaun Prince! I’m not saying a starting caliber PG, but one with a lot of experience and knowledge like Andre Miller for instance. I think it’d be a reasonable deal if you trade Tay for Miller and maybe a wing player or big man. Either way we could use a guy who can teach Knight how to run an NBA offense, I truly believe this is what made Stuckey go the wrong way. Dumars forced his mentor out too early before Billups was done teaching. There has to be a reason why Stuckey developed greatly in his first two years and then just stopped after Billups left. Re-introducing a veteran presence would really help in my mind. Trading Stuckey is the only option we have right now. I’d take Knight, Bynum, Gordon and Hamilton over Stuckey right now. I don’t say this out of loyalty to Hamilton and Bynum, Bynum is just a great player off the bench and Hamilton is still a great player with a better offensive game than Stuckey even at this stage of his career.

  • Aug 30, 20117:52 am
    by neutes

    Reply

    Let’s just package Knight with Gordon and see if Indiana wants them. Then go after Nene. Sounds good. If no Nene then keep the money and go after Howard the following season. Why not? Go big or go home. Monroe and Howard. Looks good.

  • Aug 30, 20118:10 pm
    by Gregoire

    Reply

    Why should Howard want to come to a lottery-team?

  • Aug 30, 201110:07 pm
    by Saul

    Reply

    Gregoire you do realize that the very minute Dwight Howard signs with Detroit then we are a playoff team in the East. No way our roster is worse than Orlando’s this last half of the season and he got them to the playoffs.

  • Aug 31, 20115:59 am
    by Jack

    Reply

    Wow will wonders never seize.  Pistons deal a potential all star in Knight, and a horrible contract to Indiana for nothing, and hope to land Howard in 2012.  Yea but what do they get in return from Indiana in that deal.  The only way that works is if we get expiring contracts.  And loosing Knight for a Nene is not worth it.  Sure if we get Howard.  But why would he come here to make us a playoff team when he can make the Lakers/Celtics/Kincks sure fire contenders?

  • Aug 31, 20116:34 am
    by Gregoire

    Reply

    Yeah sure you are right, but does Dwight Howard want to go to another team just to get to the Playoffs? Even with Dwight the Pistons aren´t a Contender, so he never would join them. At which Spot do you think the Pistons are better suited than the Magic? Point Guard? Nelson vs. ??? Brandon Knight? The Pistons don´t even know who their PG is –> Do you think Howard wants his Team to be dictated by a Rookie, who has yet to explore whether he is a PG or not? No way… Small Forward? Hedo vs. ??? Austin Daye? 2:0 Magic…Power Forward? The Pistons have Greg Monroe but would he be a nice fit next to Howard? Like with Brandon Bass it would not function. That would leave a comparison between Ryan Anderson vs. Villanueva. Both are Stretch 4s, but there is no worse defensive PF than CV in this League + it would mean that Monroe would have to come off the Bench. Split the Points if you want to but at the moment Monroe + CV are not better than Bass + Anderson, maybe in the future, but if Howard gets a Piston that would´t be good for Monroe…Shooting Guard? Ok, that one goes to the Pistons because Arenas is crap and doesn´t fit next to Nelson, but what about the Pistons? Is Stuckey the answer? No, he´s very good defensively, but on offense to me he´s one dimensional, just penetrating, no serious Jumper and no 3-point range…They have to get rid of Hamilton and give Gordon the Chance to play Starter Minutes for a whole hopefully healthy Season. We need 3-Point Shooter and it would be ridiculous to trade the only one we have. Thats 3:2 Magic!!! Never will Howard join this Pistons Team which is at the beginning of rebuilding…

  • Sep 4, 20113:06 am
    by i feel like blowing my fucking brains out each time rodney stuckey jumps to fucking pass, while he is already in the goddamn paint.

    Reply

    mce_bogus=”1″>
     
    i

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here