I believe it. I get why you don’t. If Drew Sharp’s column was the only place I’d heard it, I wouldn’t either. I’m certainly not 100 percent, but between believing it and not, I believe it.  

“No one has inquired into Charlie Villanueva or Ben Gordon since we acquired them. No one.”

The Cavs offered Villanueva nearly as much as the Pistons did. Gordon was ranked as the No. 2 free agent by Sports Illustrated andYahoo. The year before, the Bulls offered him about $50 million, and that was before his series against the Celtics. 

Teams rarely trade free agents they just signed. By the time the honeymoon period ended and Gordon and Villanueva would have hit the market in normal circumstances, it’s pretty clear Karen Davidson shut things down.

“Dan, when Gordon was signed, you gave it a B:http://www.pistonpowered.com/2009/07/signing-review-ben-gordon/

Now, with the benefit of hindsight, you’re calling it a mistake.”

I had to hold down pg dn for a while in Google Reader to get this one, but the post you linked is based on an uncorrectly reported salary figure for Gordon. Here’s what I wrote when I learned his real salary:

Gordon seemed like a good value at $52.2 million. I don’t think he’s worth $58.8 million.

The Pistons haven’t had a single unmovable contract under Joe Dumars. If Thonus is right, Ben Gordon has a shot to become the first.

“He is vocally against the use of any type of statistical analysis.”

That seems to be changing.

“That’s why he’d draft Brandon Knight, Kyle Singler, and Vernon Macklin just one year after picking Monroe and two after picking Jerebko. All three of this year’s players had absolutely terrible statistical profiles at their position.”

I think it’s a big leap to say with such certainty that he drafted Knight because he’s against statistical analysis. Maybe he weighed both the stats and his qualitative assessment and, after careful consideration. determined that what he saw in those players outweighed their lackluster stats.

I know that’s what I did with Knight. I get that his numbers are poor, and it worries me. I still think he was the right pick.* I had enough questions about the other players with more favorable stats I would have chanced the pick on Knight and all his tools.

*I basically had him and Kawhi Leonard tied on my draft board.

The floor is essentially irrelevant here. Take either player off the roster, and the Pistons are still above the floor.

Probably not, but every GM in the league has guys on their team because they like them. That’s why there aren’t as many trade as fans want to see. If you randomly assigned every GM to a new team, trades would happen at a crazy pace.

Whoever the next GM is will have his guys, and in time, they’ll fill the roster.

Are we convinced Prince at $7 million per year is a bad value? Same with Stuckey at $8 million per? The biggest concern with signing them is that they’ll hurt the Pistons lottery odds. But if Dumars trades Prince and/or Stuckey, the Pistons could come out ahead. I believe those two still have value around the league, and letting them walk would have been shortsighted. The Pistons have few good players, and dumping two of them simply because they had been on the team during its down years wouldn’t have been prudent.

Besides a report that may or may not be reliable from Drew Sharp, there’s precisely zero evidence of this.

No one has inquired into Charlie Villanueva or Ben Gordon since we acquired them. No one.
If they were mistakes, then the remedy is trading them. Yet, there has been precisely zero movement around trading them.

We all have hunches, and if yours is that Dumars could have traded them sans ownership transition, that’s fine. But there’s nothing to support that factually. Nada.

Sale or no sale, extending Hamilton was a mistake. Sale or no sale, signing Gordon was a mistake. Sale or no sale, signing Villanueva was a mistake.
Dan, when Gordon was signed, you gave it a B: http://www.pistonpowered.com/2009/07/signing-review-ben-gordon/

Now, with the benefit of hindsight, you’re calling it a mistake.

Everyone makes mistakes in evaluating players. Lord knows I have. I was dead wrong about Greg Monroe, and in hindsight, I should have been much more optimistic. A very young big guy who puts up slightly better than average numbers has a chance to be good. I failed to recognize this. We all deserve mulligans.

Gordon, however,  was a massive mistake since Day One, and everyone who’s ever known me knows I’ve thought this since Day One.

This isn’t a “I’m right you were wrong comment.” I’ve been wrong as much if not more than anyone.

I just find your argument puzzling. You were in support of signing Gordon when it happened, for the most part. You’ve written that Wins Produced misses important things about Gordon’s value:  http://www.pistonpowered.com/2011/01/why-wins-produced-undervalues-both-ben-gordons-past-and-upside/
Now, you’re arguing it was a mistake, and in a tone that implies this should have been an obvious one.
I give Dumars credit for building the Going to Work Pistons. He got a lot right.
But was there method to the maddness, or was it some smarts with lots of luck?

I think there’s evidence to the contrary, and it lies squarely in the way Dumars evaluates players.

His eyeballs are just as likely to produce a Ben Gordon as they are a Chauncey Billups. Smart statistical analysis would have showed that Billups was good and getting better. Good statistical analysis would have showed that Gordon was useful, but very one-dimensional. He was a role player at his best.

He is vocally against the use of any type of statistical analysis. That’s why he’d draft Brandon Knight, Kyle Singler, and Vernon Macklin just one year after picking Monroe and two after picking Jerebko. All three of this year’s players had absolutely terrible statistical profiles at their position. But they all looked good to Joe.
I think we’re just lucky that Monroe and Jerebko are actually good and good looking to Dumars eyes.

Honestly, I think the evidence supports that Dumars’ success is as much luck as skill. Dumars knows basketball just enough that sometimes his eyeballs are right. But he’s overconfident to the point that he refuses any information and/or evidence that contradicts his eyeballs.

There’s no other field I’m aware of where that flies. It doesn’t work in finances. It doesn’t work with nonprofits. It doesn’t work in the public sector. It doesn’t work in real estate.

Why should we accept it in basketball personnel management?

Keep Dumars as a figurehead. Let him represent the franchise, manage player personalities, etc. He’s really good at all those things.

But strip him or at least limit his ability to manage personnel. He’s proven since the fall of 2008 that he is incompetent and incapable.