Comments on: Chad Ford grades the Pistons’ offseason: B-minus

By: tarsier

tarsier — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:02:53 +0000

Conspiracy theories, like that the lottery isn’t left to chance are ludicrous. If Stern was rigging it, someone else would know (since he isn’t even in the room when the lottery is drawn). If multiple people knew, the story would get out, it would just be a matter of time. And the losses associated with the public learning the lottery was rigged would be much worse than any gains obtainable by rigging the lottery.

By: dd3

dd3 — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:50:18 +0000

The Pistons will NOT get bailed out & win the 1st pick in the draft, even if we tank the entire season. How many times has detroit had the # pick in their history? David Stern controls this league, including who gets the 1st pick. Orlando, Cleveland & the Clippers have each had it twice the last 20 years. When each team needed it most, mainly after losing a big time player & money maker for that team. DO NOT be surprised if N.O. Wins the #1 or 2 pick or both if they tank the season. They have their own pick plus Minnesotas pick after the Paul trade. That team needs to be sold & what better way to sell it than with a franchise player beinging grabbed in the draft. Stern loves the drama & a good story. A home town kid getting picked for his local team, like D Rose, a team loses their superstar or has a terrible tragedy only to get the #1 pick in the draft the very next year, IE Cleveland this year & Washington the year before. The Pistons will never be that lucky, unless they hit rock bottom.

By: frankie d

frankie d — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:34:55 +0000

i certainly understand the dynamics involved with reporting. i’ve done a bit of it myself and i’ve also acted as a source for reporters. it’s a symbiotic relationship that hopefully benefits both.
chad ford is dumars’ boy and dumars is ford’s guy. no problem. it probably works out for the both of them. when detroit was an elite team, ford got all sorts of goodies tossed his way by dumars and ford would benefit from nice long interviews from one of the league’s most highly regarded execs.
again, that is the way it works.
it does, however, explain why ford consistently views whatever dumars and detroit does in the most optimistic light possible. i’ve read probably everything he’s written about the pistons over the last 8 years or so, and he never takes joe to task for anything. he always explains the most inexplicable dumars move in a way that clearly reflects joe’s thinking and always gives joe the benefit of the doubt.
when the team was doing well, such patience was justified. over the last few years, it shows a lack of integrity on ford’s part. he is, after all, supposedly a reporter.
so when he gives the pistons a ridiculous B- grade for essentially doing nothing but hiring another coach – to replace the bad ones he just fired – he loses credibility.
and he gives a team like portland a “D” even though portland made several moves to specifically address their particular team holes.
jamal crawford, raymond felton, kurt thomas, craig smith, using amnesty on brandon roy to free up lots of cap room… crawford, thomas and smith are all coming cheap also.
again, portland addressed their team needs with moves that will make them a better team. off the bench scorer in crawofrd, a more uptempo guard in felton to replace the slower andre miller. bulk, intimidation in thomas and smith. a big guy who can play 12-15 minutes a game in thomas, and hit a 12 foot jumper. a low post scorer in smith who is one of the best values in all of basketball.
while joe hires a coach, brings in a high draft choice and finally resolves a problem of his own making in hamilton.
the idea that portland gets a D, while joe’s moves merit a B- is ridiculous. and it only makes sense if you understand the dumars/ford connection.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:34:22 +0000

I don't think that step is necessary yet. When Dumars was at his most successful, there were multiple people with sway in the room. Dumars was in charge, but you had John Hammond's voice in there and Bill Davidson always figured prominently into personnel decisions because he refused to pay tax. I think Dumars had obvious respect for those guys and they, in turn, were able to challenge Dumars, which made him better.

But as with any successful executive, Dumars eventually got more and more unilateral power. When GMs win, they often get more authority, and that doesn't always end up being a good thing. Hammond left, Davidson died and I think, based on the structure of Detroit's front office, there has been less dissenting opinion/challenging going on the last four or five years. Hopefully, with Frank and the front office hires they've made since Gores took over, there are opportunities for other intelligent voices to give input into personnel decisions. I'm willing to see how things play out with the more subtle changes this season before fully endorsing that some drastic front office reshaping needs to happen.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:16:20 +0000

Yep. Knight-Walker were very close. The general consensus was that Knight had more potential, Walker was the better player right now. Charlotte and a few other teams would’ve taken Walker over Knight if they had the choice. Toronto also reportedly liked Walker more than Knight if they would’ve taken a PG with their pick had Valanciunas not fallen to them. Knight, like Monroe the year before, fell because he had some poor workouts that scared teams off.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:12:35 +0000

Every exec in the league has relationships like that with a reporter or two. I think the grade is too high, but Ford’s analysis on the Knight pick and the buyout is fair. When you consider that the Pistons almost gave up a first round pick last year just to get Cleveland to take Hamilton, getting rid of him could’ve been much worse than it ultimately was.

By: tarsier

tarsier — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 13:39:00 +0000

Given that the only thing Dumars has done well in years is draft, what are the odds Gores gets a new GM but makes Dumars head of the scouting department? Probably not good, but that seems like a perfect win-win for Pistons fans, both the Dumars supporters and haters.

By: tarsier

tarsier — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 13:37:08 +0000

Wait, what have Daye, Singler, and JJ done? JJ was definitely good value for a second rounder but he has yet to show that he is better than a decent sub on a good team. That helps Joe’s draft record, but such players are readily available every free agency. So who cares if Dumars drafted JJ or someone else did. He paid full market price for the guy in free agency. Singler has looked promising in Spain. But for some reason, how well success in international ball translates to the NBA is still a total crapshoot. And Daye is a good shooter. That is all we know about him so far. Hopefully he will turn out to be a solid rotation player, but that is not guaranteed. And he is a real long shot to ever be an all-star. So yeah, all decent picks (definitely above average) but hardly A+ material.

Monroe turned out real well. But Knight is still a complete unknown, btw.

By: tarsier

tarsier — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 13:30:20 +0000

It doesn’t assure you of anything and I never said it did. But it makes your odds of getting a superstar much better. That’s all I said and there is no reasonable argument against that. Yeah, Monroe and Knight are nice pieces. But I’d rather have Wall and Williams. Or Cousins and Irving. And this last draft in particular was often characterized as one in which picking early wasn’t nearly as big a deal. Most years it really does matter.

Also, the Prince contract is still not a bad deal. But it most likely will be before it runs out. And as a fair deal, he still isn’t doing anything to help the Pistons contend.

Now it seems your philosophy is different than mine. It appears that you do significantly prefer rooting for a 30 win team than a 20 win team (for an 82 game schedule). If that is the case, yeah, I can’t argue that Dumars’ choices were particularly bad this offseason. Personally, I find the fun of rooting for a team is almost all dependent on their having a chance at winning a championship–even if they are a darkhorse like Memphis. If they don’t have a chance at all, like Detroit, I can only enjoy watching the development of young players, hoping for shrewd moves to get back into contention at some point, and any award race that a player from the team is legitimately in.

Also, the notion of a culture of winning or losing is bull$hit. Winning and losing does carry over from one season to the next largely because most of the time teams don’t change super rapidly. When they do, you get things like Boston (2nd worst in the league to champions) or Detroit (perennial contender to swept out in the first round to mid-lottery). As players get better, they win more, whether they won or lost in the past is irrelevant. Ask OKC who were 3-29 not so very long ago. They rebuilt right. They crashed to the bottom, dealt all their veterans with value for picks, got more good picks cuz they sucked at first, and surged as their young guys improved together.

By: detroitpcb

detroitpcb — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 13:23:39 +0000

if Joe finds a way to dump CV andf Ben Gordon all will be well in Piston land.

those two contracts are the only real mistakes left on the roster. he got out of the bad extension he gave rip. he may have overpaid for Prince but anyone who thinks he overpaid for Stuckey is stupid. That 3 year deal is a perfect fit for both parties.

and Joe has been drafting great. Laser says that Knight and Monroe fell into his lap. so what? he still had to pick them. and don’t forget Daye and JJ and Singler. Joe’s recent record in the draft is an A+