Comments on: Joe Dumars Week

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:54:37 +0000

“You have to look at Joe in 2 ways: Joe from 2000 to 2006 and Joe from 2006 to 2012. To me they are like 2 very different people and needed to be treated that way.”

I think this is a flawed way of evaluating Dumars. It’s easy to separate those periods, but he is the same guy. It’s difficult, but merging the two is necessary to determining whether he should continue on the job. The Pistons can’t keep one Dumars and fire another. There’s just one Dumars.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:45:00 +0000

On a simple level, acquiring quality players is difficult. Typically, letting quality players go for nothing is a poor choice.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:36:53 +0000

“when a beat writer writes the type of article where those things might be issues, or that attempts to explain or even justify why the team cannot take certain actions, or has little flexibility, i think it is only fair that they really explain why that circumstance exists.”

With space limits, it’s just not feasible to address every reason behind everything.

The Pistons have no cap room
…because Dumars signed Villanueva and Gordon
…because he cleared cap room by trading Billups for Iverson
…because Dumars saw his core as stale
…because they hadn’t made the Finals in a few years
…because they became complacent after a championship
…because Dumars put together a championship team
…because Bill Davidson hired Dumars
…because Dumars played for the Pistons
…because Jack McClosky drafted Dumars

…and on and on. There’s a limit somewhere, and I don’t think the beat writers really fall on the wrong side of it.

By: Max

Max — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:57:16 +0000

He drafted Greg Monroe lately which is the luckiest thing he ever did and the best transaction he has ever made.

By: gmehl

gmehl — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 08:33:56 +0000

Max the point i was trying to make (timeline aside) is that Joe from 2006 to now he seems to be a totally different person to the one that took over in 2000. I know we all change with time but thought that it was appropriate to point out that it might be in part due to the people who are no longer surround him in the front office. I remember the good old days where everything Joe touched turned to gold. He was like a gambler on a winning streak holding all the aces and then i guess he must of lost that lucky rabbit foot because as we have all seen since 06 he hasn’t had much luck. Also when i said patch over problems maybe i should of said rebuild on the fly. By that i mean’t the way he wasted the Billups money on CV & BG. Joe is a guy that could make a fire without match but if you give him a match he couldn’t start one to save his life. He had all that money and wasted it but you give him a couple of 2nd round picks and the guy will find you a decent rotation player or even a fringe all-star. Tom Gores is a smart guy and i assume that is why he hired all those advisers at then end of last year. I suppose it still doesn’t explain the money doled out to Prince but it makes me feel happier believing that.

By: Max

Max — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:03:11 +0000

What has Joe done since the terrible signings of BG and CV that shows any lack of patience on Dumars’ part? Where has he tried to patch over problems since then? Personally, I can thinking of nothing I really approve of between the trading of Stuckey and those signings other than the drafting of Jerebko, but since then, I approve of his last two drafts and haven’t wanted him to make anything other than forward thinking moves and there hasn’t been one move I would consider that significant or would warrant placement on a timeline of this franchise’s history.

By: gmehl

gmehl — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 03:28:15 +0000

I have mentioned this before and i will so again. You have to look at Joe in 2 ways: Joe from 2000 to 2006 and Joe from 2006 to 2012. To me they are like 2 very different people and needed to be treated that way. Joe from 2000 to 2006 took over a team that needed to rebuilt from the ground up which he did rather quickly that included a lot of savvy moves and also a lot of luck. Then Bill Davidson died, assistant coaches (Hammond) and scouts around Joe left. I am not saying Hammond was the brains behind all the success but rather just a sounding board to Joe. Then of coarse the sale which i feel made Joe rush and panic into a lot of decisions i am sure he wouldn't of made if he had Davidson and Hammond surrounding him. Moving onto Joe from 2006 to 2012 we have a GM who lives in his own shadow and is constantly making the same mistakes by trying to patch over problems by either reaching for upside in drafts or handing out silly extensions to players so they can become Piston lifers. I loved Joe Dumars the player and i loved Joe from 2000 to 2006 but i am not so fond of Joe from 2006 to 2012. So it leaves the question of whether i think Joe should be fired or not. Part of me says yes and part of me says no but i am starting to lean towards that maybe its in his best interests that he has a year or 2 off and then find another position as a GM elsewhere. He has not been thinking clearly ever since his mentor and father figure Mr Davidson died and maybe he just needs some time away from the game. Maybe he could stay on as a scout for the pistons which i would assume would be less taxing for him and then in a couple of years revisit the option to be GM again.

By: frankie d

frankie d — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:53:32 +0000

i don’t even want the writers to rip dumars. i just want them to objectively report on why certain circumstances exist.
for instance, when discussion about a couple of young players – spaights and mullens – happened, the beat writers did not truly explain why the pistons could not pursue those players. one writer, i think it was vince ellis, did a cursory bit of reporting that read like a press release from the team, as to why they could not pursue those players.
no cap room, other teams not wanting our young talent, etc, but no real explanation of why the team was in it’s current salary cap bind. a fan has to search the internet for basic salary cap information that explains the team’s circumstances. how many fans know that the team has almost 6.5 million tied up in the salaries of two guards who are not on the team?
when a beat writer writes the type of article where those things might be issues, or that attempts to explain or even justify why the team cannot take certain actions, or has little flexibility, i think it is only fair that they really explain why that circumstance exists.
what typically happens with detroit writers is that they state the fact without telling a reader why that fact exists or the background that may have cause that fact to exist.
they could even have a boilerplate paragraph that they insert into such stories, cutting and pasting it, from article to article, to fully inform fans as to why things do or don’t happen. state objectively that 5.5 million is owed to rip and that 788,000 is owed to terrico white and that those salaries impact on the team’s ability to pursue certain actions. not reporting that information is unfair to fans.
just some simple, basic reporting is all i expect. and if that reflects badly on dumars, then that is just the way it is.
this is what i think happens. the older guys like foster and sharpe are friends and unfortunately will do any and everything to avoid criticizing dumars, even if it compromises them professionally. they’ll lfigure that no one will notice that much and if they do, so what.
and the younger guys, ones without that personal relationship, are not secure enough to step out and write stuff that might generate negative feedback from a guy like dumars, who is rightfully a legendary figure in the city.
i think there is a reasonable space, where professional reporters can do their jobs and fans can get the information they need and want.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:24:55 +0000

Couple of thoughts on the media covering the team:

- All of the major beat writers covering the Pistons are newer to the beat (i believe Vince Ellis is the most senior of them, and he's only been the Freep beat guy for a few seasons), and therefore, don't have a history/relationship that some long-term beat writers would have.

- Dumars, as I mentioned, has always been reclusive. He didn't talk when the team was great and everyone thought he was a genius and he doesn't talk now when the team is terrible and most people blame him. It's not like he's shirking responsibility. The guy just rarely talks to the media.

- The columnists don't ever write about the Pistons b/c this is a huge pro and college sports town and the Pistons are terrible. It's hard to have that perspective in this little corner here where we all think the Pistons are the greatest and watch them even when they're using every Tom, Dick and Morris Day and the Time washed up celebrity to distract us from how brutal the team actually is. Dan and I write about the Pistons because we're always interested in them. But columnists have to write about what their audience wants. With the Lions, Tigers and Red Wings all good and with UM and MSU football and basketball programs all performing well, the Pistons can't even be called a back-burner team. They're on no burner in local media.

I would suspect you'd see Dumars getting ripped occasionally be columnists if they remembered the Pistons existed. Hell, Dumars getting ripped by a columnist would actually be a good thing in some ways. At least it would be coverage in the state's major news outlets. The audience just, overall, isn't there for Pistons news because of the success of other teams and media outlets have adjusted accordingly.

- Beat writers rarely rip a source in an opinion piece unless it is unbelievably necessary. Their job is a grind (albeit a fun one, since they get to watch ball every night), especially when the team is losing. When you have a source like Dumars who is rarely available, it would make little strategic sense to rip him when you might need him for access down the line. It's one thing if you have a long relationship where you can do it in a fair way that doesn't erode some trust. But with newer beat writers who probably don't know Dumars all that well yet, it's tough to expect that they're going to write something critical.

- You gotta stop using Portland media as a comparison. The Blazers basically own the Pacific Northeast. There is little pro and college sports competition there. They have a history of a rabid, college-like fanbase. And, on top of that, some of the absolute best beat writers in any NBA city cover the Blazers. The Pistons don't have any of those things going for them.

By: apa8ren9

apa8ren9 — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:57:43 +0000

I think he isnt mentioned a lot because opinions are all across the board. Usually the papers like to hone in on some type of theme or trend that’s happening. Just like on this board opinions run the entire spectrum so he cant necessarily be pinned down in a short narrative. Also, I think its pretty hard to sway people from those opinions since he actually two championships and GM’ed a 3rd and we have been competitive most of the time. Fans that critique basketball are very territorial. They defend the guys they like to the end. With that being said. I dont think the writers can pin him down and that is why you dont see him written about much. From the looks of things Gores has given him the green light so there isnt really anything to talk about, he is safe for now. If the off-season is a disaster though – look for him to catch more heat in the papers, but it looks like that is 2 years away from getting to that point.