Comments on: Which player should the Pistons waive if there is an amnesty clause?

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:50:58 +0000

@hayes: you don’t need to explain to me what a darkhorse is, but “darkhorse” doesn’t come within five miles of how unlikely a candidate max is for this clause. i’d say he’s a “prohibitive long shot” at absolute best.

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:37:29 +0000

i am ALL FOR positioning ourselves to be competitive in a few years, since no matter what we do we’ll never be any good before then. but using an amnesty clause on rip won’t help us.

By: gmehl1977

gmehl1977 — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 03:24:03 +0000

This was just a fantasy trade idea Patrick. I wasn’t really expecting anyone to take it seriously so my bad on that as i should of stated so. I was just rather imagining how good it would be to have Bogut playing beside Monroe. Both are really good passers and solid defensively. Rumor has it Bogut is about to sign over here in the Australian League (NBL) for my local team the Sydney Kings so it will be good to get a close look at him for ever how long the lockout lasts.

I had to have a laugh to myself Patrick as i haven’t been on pistionpowered for a couple of months and the first article i read you and Laser are still at each other in the comments. Its like i was never gone :-)

By: tarsier

tarsier — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 03:09:35 +0000

A) Never underestimate the stupidity of some GMs.
B) The next couple seasons are worth giving up on in terms of how good a basketball team is out there, but not in terms of working moves to put the Pistons in a better spot once they do again have cap space.

By: Laser

Laser — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 01:53:18 +0000

Nobody will trade us a good player for a woefully undersized, turnover-prone shooting guard on a multi-year contract at $12-13 mil per season, no matter how much he improved his trade value. He is a colossal liability and a prohibitive long shot to earn the money he’s owed.

It’s probably best to face facts and consider Rip and him as total losses and take the swiftest action possible to abandon ship and move on without paying a “tax” that hinders the team’s future prospects (such as the pick Joe tried to unload with Rip last year). Rip is tradeable within the next year (a window where, according to your own words, it doesn’t matter how bad we are), so using an amnesty clause on him would be a complete waste AND leave us with our worst contract, which that clause is meant to rid us of.

And for that matter, if you’re conceding the next few seasons, throwing your hands in the air and doing nothing to improve it since it’s a lost cause, why even bother with an amnesty clause in the first place?? Literally all you’re doing is paying the guy the full amount he’s owed and surrendering the right to trade him when his contract is expiring, should a taker emerge. The point of this clause is to fix things.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:52:23 +0000

Bogut is signed for two more seasons after this one and his salary the next three is $12, $13 and $14 million — pretty reasonable for a guy who is possibly the second best defensive C in the league when healthy.

The first problem with that trade is the salaries don’t match — Pistons would have to take back about $6 or $7 million more in additional salary. The second problem is the Bucks know that Charlie V is really terrible (they didn’t even extend him a qualifying offer when they had him, and that was when he was coming off a reasonably decent season) and that Bogut is really good. My guess is that for the Pistons to have any shot at an enticing enough offer for Bogut any package would have to include Greg Monroe, something Detroit would obviously never do.

By: gmehl1977

gmehl1977 — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:26:14 +0000

I am leaning towards using the amnesty on Gordon. Everyone has already stated the many scenarios that can change who it should be used on so i would dive into that discussion any further. I just think it would be better used on Gordon as it will almost be like killing 2 birds with 1 stone, especially if the season is cancelled making Rip pretty much an expiring. Hayes mentioned that Gores might balk at having to pay out Gordon just so he can sign else where and i agree but i am more worried about Joe’s ego not choosing Gordon. Obviously by doing so this flags that signing him to the deal in the first place was a mistake.

Off topic but does anyone know when Andrew Bogut is out of contract? I say we give the Bucks back CV and throw in Gordon and a 1st rounder for him. Bogut and Monroe would make a very nice front court. I know it won’t happen but Bogut has Piston written all over him.

By: Laser

Laser — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 03:11:54 +0000

@saul: when rip was benched, gordon was still ineffective. troublingly so.

By: neutes

neutes — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 00:47:28 +0000

Oops 211th in PER. Even worse.

By: neutes

neutes — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 00:45:13 +0000

Here’s what I know about Gordon. He played the 18th most minutes of any SG in the NBA last year. He was 4th on the Pistons in minutes played. He played over 2100 lousy minutes. He was 159th in the league in PER. 293rd in the league in Win Shares. On a per 48 minutes basis he was better than only Maxiell and Summers last season on the Pistons.

In other words, Gordon was flat out terrible. A bad basketball player.

Do we really want to hope he can get back whatever it was he once had? Hoping doesn’t sound like a good plan when millions of dollars and the direction of a multi-hundred million dollar business are at stake. I’d feel much more comfortable with Rip because even if hope fails his contract can provide us with more soon thereafter.