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

3-on-3: Trading Tayshaun Prince

Modeled after ESPN’s 5-on-5, Patrick and I will answer three questions about a Pistons-related topic. We’re going to use 3-on-3s to assess the tradability of each Piston leading up to the March 15 trade deadline.

For each 3-on-3, we’ll be joined by a guest contributor. Today, that’s Kevin Arnovitz of ESPN.

Please add your responses in the comments.

1. How motivated are the Pistons to trade Tayshaun Prince?

Dan Feldman: When the Pistons re-signed Prince, I argued it was mostly done because of Joe Dumars’ comfort with Prince. If that was the case and still is the case, the odds are extremely low. Since then, Prince has played very poorly and improved his attitude. I suspect that makes him even more likely to remain in Detroit.

Patrick Hayes: Pistons fans are extremely motivated. I’m less convinced the Pistons are actively trying to move Prince. I don’t know that he was signed long-term so he could retire a Piston, but you also don’t bring back a guy touting his leadership then trade him a couple months later. Prince has seemed to be more accepting of this team’s rebuilding plight, and he’s actually talking to young players fairly often without flailing his arms at them in frustration. That’s an improvement over the last two years. I’m not saying the Pistons will never trade him, but I’d be shocked if it happened this season.

Kevin Arnovitz: Fair to middlin’. They’re aware that Prince’s best skills will diminish before the Pistons ever become good, but he’s still giving them some production at the small forward position – and it’s clear they don’t trust Austin Daye to fill those shoes.

2. How motivated are other teams to trade for Tayshaun Prince?

Dan Feldman: Prince has maintained a great reputation around the league, despite his declining play. Whether that carries over to NBA general managers, I’m not sure. Prince might have value to a contender, and his contract is far from untradeable. There’s probably at least a little interest.

Patrick Hayes: Not very. It’s not that his contract is extraordinarily bad. It’s not that Prince is obviously declining. But he’s having a poor season statistically at 31, and he has three years left on his contract after this at significant money. I’m sure contending teams would be interested in a player like Prince, but I also think his contract puts him down on their wish list some, and I don’t think the return would be much – he was worth only a late first rounder to the Mavs last year, and that was when he was having a better season and his contract was expiring. I can’t imagine his trade value is exceeding that level now.

Kevin Arnovitz: That fourth year on Prince’s new deal isn’t helping matters, but if the Pistons are willing to take back a little flotsam, he’d be a nice piece for a team in need of a little defense on the wing.

3. How likely are the Pistons to trade Tayshaun Prince?

Dan Feldman: I’d say Prince’s trade value has only declined since he signed. That shouldn’t necessarily make the Pistons more reluctant to trade him, but I suspect they’d rather stick with Prince than cut their losses – especially if trade offers don’t live up to their expectations.

Patrick Hayes: Not very. I’m just not convinced the teams that Prince could help will be motivated buyers at the deadline. Also, the Pistons don’t exactly have a solution at small forward just yet. Austin Daye has not proven he can be a reliable rotation player, let alone a starter, and Jonas Jerebko might be best suited to the multi-positional role he’s currently playing off the bench. If the Pistons are in position to pick a small forward prospect in the lottery, they might be more inclined to deal Prince in the offseason.

Kevin Arnovitz: Not terribly likely. His average annual salary isn’t horrible, but any trading partner for Prince is still committing to pay $7.7 million in 2014-15 for a player who will be 35 just after the All-Star break and is already in decline.

54 Comments

  • Mar 9, 20124:09 pm
    by frankie d

    Reply

    unfortunately, i think pistons’ fans are going to have to suffer through 4 more years of tay moping up and down the court.
    joe should have traded him at the deadline last year.  a first round draft choice and the cap space from caron butler’s contract would have been nice.  a perfect way to jumpstart the rebuilding process.  
    i was not entierly opposed to resigning him…if it was with the intention of keeping an asset so that it could be turned into a player or a pick.
    unfortunately, every sign from joe screams that he plans on keeping tay around for the long haul.  until that point – realizing how joe seems to plan on keeping tay around, rather than signing and trading him – i’d been willing to give joe a chance to fix the mess he’s made.
    however, the manner in which he’s handling tay says clearly that he just doesn’t get it.  there are other things – not prioritizing the acquiring of young talent, signing old players like wilkins and russell – but the tay situation is the last straw.  
    with tay on the team, sucking up PT and shots, any rebuild – absent a lucky lottery trip that ends with anthony davis – is going to take 4-5 more years.  until tay leaves the scene, the team is always going to tread water.  i’d expect at least 2, probably 3 more trips to the lottery, with tay in his current role. 
    joe d is right about one thing…tay does provide veteran leadership.  unfortunately, it’s the wrong type of leadership.

  • Mar 9, 20124:20 pm
    by rick77

    Reply

    Cmon man ARE U FAIR WEATHER OR WHAT? I think most of your anger is directed at the wrong individual. Tell me what other small forward was coming in witha positive attitude and help the Pistons with what they are doing now. Leadership is a quality that often goes unnoticed in games,practice, and film sessions. Just cause he does not go and score 25-30 you hate him, but after looking at the majority of wings in this league Im satisfied because he knows what is expected of him. Anybody else inthis league would come here completely for the money not to help in any rebuilding efforts. I mean guys want Kaman around here but wanna rebuild. How do you rebuild with a slow plodding center?Thats the wack $hit I am talking about I hear from fans. This is not NBA Live or 2K so plugging players that you think might fit because you have watched a small sample of games doesnt quantify. Tay is better than Artest, Maggette, Dunleavy Jr etc with teh exception of the All Stars who would you rather have. The way this team is set up is very reminiscent to the one that went 32-50 only we have more young talent. The key to it is a smart move here and there and then the right draft pick and we in business. Give it some time man. These rants dont change anything other than maybe providing a ulcer. I feel you on a few things but the Tay thing is a bit blown out of proportion.

    • Mar 9, 20124:34 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      “Anybody else inthis league would come here completely for the money not to help in any rebuilding efforts.”

      Whoa whoa whoa … are you saying that Prince isn’t here because of money? I mean, he probably wants to be here and I don’t question his intelligence. He’s also been better working with young players, as was mentioned in the post, as he has in the past.

      But Prince got a very good contract for a player his age. He’ll be making almost $8 million when he’s 35 years old man. Prince is NOT still with the Pistons out of charity. He got a really, really good contract offer. I would be shocked if there would’ve been another team who gave him four years at that price. He might have got three elsewhere, maybe, but not four.

      • Mar 9, 20124:35 pm
        by Max

        Reply

        I’m sure the Clippers would have given him what they have Butler at least.

        • Mar 9, 20124:35 pm
          by Max

          Reply

          gave

        • Mar 9, 20124:41 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          They gave Butler three years.

          Like I said, there was not a team other than the Pistons who would’ve given Prince four years. The fourth year is the part of the deal that makes no sense. It last a year longer than when the Pistons two other price contracts (Gordon and Villanueva) expire and Prince will be 35 and making nearly $8 million in the final year of it. I’m sorry, but it’s a stretch to think that Prince will be producing at a level that is worth $8 million in the final year of that deal.

          • Mar 9, 20124:48 pm
            by Max

            You could be right although Prince boasts one of the most consistent year to year stats you’re likely to find.   However, teams usually pay more to sign their own player and as often as not don’t expect much from the final year of a deal.  When the 76s signed Elton Brand and people went crazy about the size and length of the deal, I agreed somewhat, but made the point that they probably knew they couldn’t depend on much from the final year or two.  Most deals are mostly about the present no matter how many years are tacked on.   The final year is often moveable whether the player is producing or not as well and becomes something of a trade chip as an expiring contract.

        • Mar 9, 20126:21 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          No reason to believe that. The Clippers specifically targeted Butler because Paul wanted him. And in the off season, I’d struggle to give you a pair of names that were closer to identically valuable as Butler and Prince. Some would prefer one, some the other. But the Clippers had extra incentive to sign Butler.

          • Mar 9, 20126:58 pm
            by Max

            I heard the Clippers tried to sign Prince first and went after Butler after being rebuffed.

          • Mar 9, 201211:15 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            The rumor is they were targeting Prince before the Paul trade. Once it became clear they would get Paul, Paul let them know he wanted Butler, so they went after Butler to keep Paul happy and to try and help convince him to sign an extension there, as tarsier mentioned.

      • Mar 9, 20125:45 pm
        by rick77

        Reply

        My point is this why would Dumars go out and sign someone else to the money that he could have signed one of his veterans to and then watch that said veteran not live up to potential on contract? So this board can bash him and say he does not kow what he is doing. I feel like damn if you damned if you dont. Nobody on here is gonna tell me if he went out and did that and it didnt work that they would give him a pass. Thats my point not essentially about whether he is buying in or not but what would the overall outcome be and the attitude of the people if that move did not work out. This move is ok in the sense that it gives flexibility and I am willing to bet that if Detroit somehow got better that Prince would if he had to take a reserve role and play it to his part. Not to many guys would come in here and do that. Btw having a 57-104 record the last two years would have you disgruntled as well especially when you are not used to it.

        • Mar 9, 20127:01 pm
          by Max

          Reply

          Exactly, the record produces the complaints and there is no easy fix.   The complainers look at the salaries and pick on all of the player’s making anything and take turns saying Dumars should make moves to get better or that they should tank.   He’s better off ignoring all of those people because nothing will satisfy them but winning and they don’t have the map or patience to say anything worthwhile to get there,

          • Mar 9, 20128:24 pm
            by D_S_V

            I just don’t get this undying defense of Prince? The smart commenters on here who disagree with Prince being on the Pistons largely cite his contract as the main reason they don’t want them (I include myself). No reason to defend his leadership/abilities AD NAUSEUM and ignore the fact that the Pistons are a just plain awful pair for Prince’s abilities and potential. We have Wallace for veteran leadership. Prince on the team does nothing for any immediate hopes for contending (in case you haven’t watched these last few season), so parting ways last summer or trading last year for draft pick/expiring were the best possible options. The Detroit Pistons just aren’t good enough this year, and won’t be next year and likely the year after to maximize what they can get from an inevitably declining Tayshaun Prince. ADMIT IT PLEASE THIS IS SO ANNOYING!

          • Mar 9, 201211:19 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            D_S_V is on point here. I’ve never once written on here that Prince isn’t smart, can’t have a positive effect on young players, etc. Just that the Pistons essentially out-bid themselves to keep him. If he’s the guy you want, fine, sign him, whatever. But adding a fourth year to that contract at that kind of money when the non-All-Star caliber player you are signing is going to be 35 at the end of it is not a prudent investment. There’s nothing that can convince me it is.

    • Mar 9, 20124:34 pm
      by Max

      Reply

      I like where you are going.  Prince is still a better small forward than about half the league’s starting players at the position and brings more intangibles and versatility than some one of the ones who are better than him.  This is simply a case of his being taken for granted since Pistons fans watched him and his team have so much success.
      BTW: I love how people think they know which players are being good leaders or not.  It’s such nonsense as the majority of what makes a good leader would occur entirely behind the scenes unless the player is a point guard.  Stories are printed about the leadership Prince and Ben conduct off the court but instead people harp on the moments where young players screw up and Prince throws his hand up in frustration.  Isn’t that often the way a coaches act too?  Isn’t Prince communicating that the player has done something wrong?  Just because it’s an unattractive gesture doesn’t mean it’s the opposite of leadership.

      • Mar 9, 20124:38 pm
        by Patrick Hayes

        Reply

        Listen dude, I know you’re a huge Prince fan and that’s fine. We disagree on his on-court production and that’s fine too.

        But if you’re telling me that his demeanor was not much different, including with young players, under Kuester than it has been this season, you’re crazy. I’m not saying he was a cancer or anything like that, but he clearly wasn’t interested in being a part of a rebuilding team and he was clearly frustrated that good, veteran players were gone and replaced by raw young players.

        Just go back and read some of his comments in stories the last two years and then compare them to his comments after re-signing. The guy changed his tune. I’m glad he did, I’m glad he wanted to be here (even if I think that is not a good contract from Detroit’s perspective), but it’s nonsense to say that he’s been thrilled and on-board with this rebuilding process all along. It ignores two years worth of coverage of this team.

        • Mar 9, 20124:44 pm
          by Max

          Reply

          I didn’t sat anything about him being thrilled about anything.  Being thrilled is not Prince’s way.  During their great run, they’d often blow a team out and if Prince was interviewed as the player of the game, he’d harp on their errors and lack of consistency.   I was only addressing whether he takes time to help young players–not whether he was happy about it.

          • Mar 9, 20124:49 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            OK, well, my point is that his attitude is different this year. I think most evidence suggests that it is. The last two years, he’s been miserable, and he’s insinuated as much. He’s also had comments that suggest he wasn’t on board with the rebuilding process. This year, he has preached being patient on several occasions. That’s in stark contrast to his demeanor the two previous seasons.

          • Mar 9, 20124:54 pm
            by Max

            Well, I’m not going to blame RIP but he no longer has a wrong RIP to feel bad about and defend,

          • Mar 9, 20124:54 pm
            by Max

            wronged

          • Mar 9, 201211:21 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            That’s the other part of this issue that is slightly annoying: the notion that Hamilton had to go because he influenced Prince to have a poorer attitude, yet Prince was brought back because he’s a leader? Something is not adding up there.

          • Mar 9, 201211:35 pm
            by Max

            I think RIP’s fiery personality and Prince’s calm, logical demeanor are what separates them as well as the fact that RIP couldn’t handle being challenged for minutes and shots.   You’ve been pretty consistent in your criticism towards Prince for taking too many shots but it’s speculation to say how Prince would handle teammates pushing him for minutes and shots because it has never happened yet.  I think it would be a lot easier in Dumars’ position to sign off on subtracting RIP when you have Stuckey and Gordon who are established NBA players to fill the spot than when you consider losing Prince and have only an unproven Daye and 2nd year player who just missed an entire season due to injury with Jerebko to fill the void.

    • Mar 9, 20125:41 pm
      by frankie d

      Reply

      imho tay is an impediment to rebuilding, not a help.
      everything – contract, taking PT and shots from young players, style of play, ties to old title team – helps keep the team tied to an older era that needs to be swept away. 
      the team needs to turn the page, rely on a new generation of young, energized players and old tay shuffling up and down the court like he’s carrying a piano on his back does not help.
      he needs to go for the team to move on.
      funny, there is almost universal condemnation of the move.  no one seems to understand the logic in bringing him back.  i guess you and dumars are the only geniuses who understand the value of having him around at almost 8 million for the next 4 years.

      • Mar 9, 20126:39 pm
        by Max

        Reply

        Universal condemnation is a gross exaggeration.   I’m not the only one who has been supportive of the move and I think a lot of Pistons fans have been blinded in general by the franchise’s general level of success.  The Pistons haven’t had a real rebuilding period since Isiah Thomas was drafted and so many Piston fans have an ignorant and narrow notion of what the concept entails.  As far as I can tell, most Pistons fan’s prescriptions would turn the team into the Wizards and prevent them from ever becoming good again unless they had the great luck to draft a Jordan or Chamberlain.  The Pistons have not been the worst team in the league this year or any of the past few but I feel like a lot of Pistons fans are clamoring for them to be the worst.  I fully understand why Prince was a bad signing if you were hoping they’d be worse than they are this year but I don’t believe in that kind of thinking.
        Shawn Marion is older than Prince and plays like a shadow of the player he used to be, but relevant question to me is whether he helped the Mavs win the title last year as a starter and he did.   The notion that Prince is a bad fit because the Pistons are bad is just about the most pessimistic attitude someone could take to the team.  Turnarounds happen a lot faster than people think who say it will take 3 or 4 more drafts to be good again.  Give me any two of the top 30 players in the league and the team will probably be very good regardless of the rest of the roster.  Monroe will likely be a top 30 player next year which means the Pistons are only one player away from at least being good and I have realistic hopes they will get that player in this upcoming draft.  Some eastern conference teams are likely to fall apart as well so making the playoffs next year doesn’t seem at all crazy to me, but it could be much more difficult if they had an absolute gaping hole at small forward.
        I’d also like to throw out the question of whether Prince will have lived up to his contract if he starts this year and next but becomes the team’s top reserve and sixth man to finish out the last two years.  I for one would be happy if things were to play out this way because it would mean the Pistons acquired a player who could beat him out or that Daye and Jerebko made great improvements.   I do think in such a scenario that Prince would have lived up to his contract and I prefer when a starter becomes a starter because he beat out the previous one based upon pure basketball reasoning in the present.  No one should just be handed a starter’s job unless it is obvious they are better than the incumbent and that dynamic is yet to occur here.

        • Mar 9, 20128:29 pm
          by D_S_V

          Reply

          Your continued references to Washington are becoming annoying too and are equalled by the strategic majesty that is the Oklahoma City Thunder.

          • Mar 9, 20128:48 pm
            by Max

            Oklahoma City had nearly the luck of the Bulls when they drafted Durant 2nd–he quickly became the youngest player ever to lead the league in scoring.   He is the foundation of their success though they have built very well around him.    I don’t know why their model is particular relevant unless you have an upper tier all time great on your team though.
            They also will be paying Perkins over 9 million in 2015 when his knees may or may not be holding up.  The Celtics didn’t think his knees were going to hold up for one thing.
            Further, Oklahoma City never allowed themselves to devolve to the point where there were no veterans who were capable of providing leadership as is the case with how Washington has operated for years.
            And let’s not forget.  Oklahoma is the Sonics and they were pretty bad and only intermittently in the playoffs for about a decade.   They actually gave out the Rashard Lewis contract that is still paying him 25 million a year.

          • Mar 9, 20129:29 pm
            by D_S_V

            Look I wasn’t saying that the OKC is a very defendable proposition to any sort of tanking. But adding players that have value is a smart thing that OKC has done and garners a lot of respect. Of course to forego the fact that luck was involved in acquiring the talent that Kevin Durant is, well, it’s dumb. My point though, is you keep referencing Washington, and I don’t see how not adding Tayshaun to a lengthy contract that at this point isn’t much of an asset spirals us into a Washington esque funk of immaturity.

          • Mar 9, 20129:33 pm
            by D_S_V

            Slightly necessary addition: I think using Washington as your reason for keeping Tayshaun no more justifiable than citing OKC as a reason to bottom out and hope for high draft picks. But again, Sam Presti made some shrewd moves (including moving Ray Allen, the last and best veteran on that team), so luck wasn’t all that was involved.

          • Mar 9, 20129:42 pm
            by Max

            My reason for keeping Tayshaun is simple: he’s a good player who has been to the top.  My reason for bringing up Washington is to combat the notion that a team should only emphasize its young players when they are bad.

          • Mar 9, 20129:56 pm
            by D_S_V

            And here, we agree. I have no problem with keeping Tayshaun, but my opinion is that this contract is too long and thus not an asset that we can use in building a contender that (again in my opinion) is at least 2 seasons from now. I would’ve preferred a shorter term, tradeable contract that could’ve netted us at least a first rounder from a contending team that could use Tay right now. It seems that my use of “smart” in an earlier comment was misunderstood and I apologize for that. I meant to say that in the camp on here that doesn’t like the resigning, there seems to be folks who think that Tayshaun offers absolutely NO value to the Pistons, which I don’t see as smart. I think he is the prototypical “veteran that a contender trades for” that could benefit the Pistons – again, IMO, I don’t see that happening anymore with his long term contract that will only lead to him being more overpaid. I apologize for that misunderstanding, and moreso for my more inflammatory comment at the bottom (of the likes that I usually despise). 

          • Mar 9, 201211:15 pm
            by Max

            No problem.  Let me ask you though.  If the Pistons are two years away, isn’t it possible Prince is still the starter at that point or a very valuable bench contributor.  Shawn Marion is older than Tayshaun and he started for the Mavs when they won last year and I think he’s a comparable player.

        • Mar 9, 201211:22 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          “The Pistons haven’t had a real rebuilding period since Isiah Thomas was drafted”

          Wait what? What happened in the 1990s/early 2000s then? Because for not having a rebuilding period, those teams were rebuilding quite a bit.

          • Mar 9, 201211:48 pm
            by Max

            Those weren’t rebuilding periods in that they each only included very short stretches towards the bottom before the Pistons had plenty of reasons for excitement.   In the 90s, they were awful one season and then they had Grant Hill.  Rebuilding accomplished.  His rookie year was exciting and by his 2nd year, the Pistons were good.   In the 2000s, I and everyone else expected them to fall off of a cliff when they traded Grant Hill, but instead they won 36 games and after that one terrible year of rebuilding the Pistons were back in the playoffs and wouldn’t stop going until their most recent appearance.   If you put all of the years the Pistons missed the playoffs between the drafting of Isiah and the hiring of Coach Q, you probably don’t equal the pain and suffering of the average rebuilding period.

          • Mar 10, 201212:06 am
            by Patrick Hayes

            Since Isiah’s rookie year, six teams have won multiple championships, including the Pistons. Of those, the Pistons have missed the playoffs eight times. Here are the rest:

            - Spurs have missed four times

            - Rockets have missed ten times

            - Lakers have missed two times

            - Celtics have missed nine times

            - Bulls have missed nine times

            Basically, other than the Lakers and Spurs, who are head and shoulders above everyone, the Pistons are right in line with other multi-champions when it comes to rebuilding/reloading periods.

            Seriously, the Pistons are one of the league’s flagship franchises and one of the most successful in modern NBA history. Teams like that don’t go through long, painful rebuilds like the dregs of the league go through. This will be Detroit’s fourth straight losing season and third straight season not in the playoffs. I don’t see anything unfair at all about fans saying enough is enough when it comes to the “rebuild” process. Other franchises of Detroit’s caliber have shown an ability to retool or rebuild and at least get back to the playoffs in a reasonable amount of time.

          • Mar 10, 201212:18 am
            by Max

            I like putting the Pistons in that group, but how many years did the Bulls, Celtics and Rockets miss the playoffs after losing Jordan and Bird and Olajuwon?   I’m thinking the number for all three is bigger than three and the Pistons haven’t gotten their third lottery pick yet from their upcoming third year out of the playoffs.
            Also, the Lakers are in their own universe.

          • Mar 10, 20121:40 pm
            by frankie d

            and the pistons are the only team that made moves that resulted in a “rebuild” being necessary.
            the other teams all fell prey to something – catastrophic injury, retirement, age – that caused the collapse of their title teams.
            detroit is the only team where you can point to specific actions by management, that were within their control, that caused the destruction of their title/playoff teams.
            detroit fans really have gone through something unprecedented.

  • Mar 9, 20124:24 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    I hope he retires a Piston and the reports of his decline are greatly exaggerated.  Here’s a prediction: Prince will be better at 35 than Daye is at 27.  Bank it.

  • Mar 9, 20124:40 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    Well, you and others seem to be acting like he’ll be washed up.  I wouldn’t be surprised if he has better EFF or PER numbers that year than this year because the schedule and leading the team in minutes is one of the roots of his field goal woes in my view.  The other is that they run less stuff then ever that’s gets him easy buckets.

    • Mar 9, 20124:44 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      OK, fine. You think that Prince will defy the aging process. I don’t. Players who have played as many games/minutes as him just don’t often maintain their production levels into their mid 30s. It just rarely ever happens.

  • Mar 9, 20125:02 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    He’s not an average player though but one with an iron man attendance record (which you say is a negative for his future, but ok, we’ll disagree) and a player who has been an Olympian and all defensive player.   Don’t ask how long the average player maintains his skills but rather how long the average Olympian and all defensive member does.    I haven’t looked, but it seems to me that players who make an all defensive team or two tend to have much longer careers than the average player whether they are still earning such distinctions or not into their dotage.   Also, I never felt like people thought 31 was old in the NBA until I started spending so much time on these boards.   In fact, I used to often hear the idea that 28-31 was considered a player’s prime.   The hand checking rule has changed things a bit but I still think 31 is often a player’s prime and some players are even better afterwards.

  • Mar 9, 20125:08 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    Ben Wallace had a great year at 35 and played better than he did the previous couple.  Nevertheless, Big Ben’s career is an example of a player who still very good throughout his mid thirties.

    • Mar 9, 20125:15 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      Yeah … they also were paying him the league minimum that season. And I think the folks in Chicago would take issue with you calling him “very good” throughout his mid-30s, since he seriously under-performed based on the contract they gave him.

      • Mar 9, 20125:23 pm
        by Max

        Reply

        The contract is the only measure whereby you could say he didn’t play well though and that contract was in the neighborhood of twice as rich as Prince’s.

        • Mar 9, 20126:24 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Because Wallace in his prime is worth at least twice as much as Prince in his prime.

          • Mar 9, 20126:44 pm
            by Max

            I disagree and I take what you say as more of an insult directed at Prince than I do as an opinion anyone could really have but Wallace wasn’t in his prime and my point was that Bulls fans could only view him in light of their unrealistic expectations and the value of his contract.

          • Mar 9, 201211:27 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            That’s certainly not an insult directed at Prince. I take your comment as not fully understanding the impact of Wallace in his prime. He was a legitimate franchise player and MVP candidate. He was the cornerstone of that championship team, even if people want to pretend that every player on that starting was as valuable as the next. There was a clear tier. It was Wallace way up here, then everyone else in some order behind him. Wallace in his prime might have been worth three Princes. That’s not to say Prince was bad. But he’s always just been a valuable, competent complimentary player.

      • Mar 9, 20126:56 pm
        by Max

        Reply

        @Patrick  A player is not good or bad based on his contract but relative to the other players in the league.  If Ben Wallace was better than the average center or power forward when he played that spot for Chicago and Cleveland than he was uncontroversially a very good player throughout his mid thirties and his salary should be considered totally irrelevant to the question.

        • Mar 9, 201211:31 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          Wallace was a solid player into his 30s. But if you don’t think he regressed significantly during that time, you’re crazy. He was nowhere near the same player he was at 32, 33, 34, etc. that he was in his prime years. This happened because all players regress in their 30s. Some more rapidly than others and occasionally there’s someone like Steve Nash who defies all logic and plays at an all-star level into his late 30s. That’s so exceedingly rare though and I don’t get why you treat it as a foregone conclusion that Prince won’t experience this kind of decline. Maybe he won’t and if he doesn’t, I’ll probably still be here writing posts about how crazy it is that 35 year old Tayshaun Prince is producing and defending like 27 year old Tayshaun Prince was. But that’s so highly, highly unlikely based on the history of how players age/decline.

  • Mar 9, 20128:33 pm
    by D_S_V

    Reply

    “@Patrick  A player is not good or bad based on his contract but relative to the other players in the league.”

    I will no longer read any of your comments.

    • Mar 9, 20128:56 pm
      by Max

      Reply

      The conversation and context was about whether players could maintain being good players into their mid thirties in general.  Patrick’s bringing up what Chicago fans would think of a comment about Ben Wallace based on his contract needlessly conflated the issue.  Go call yourself “smart” again or stare at salaries and stats and reference “smart” opinions to come up with your own.

      • Mar 9, 201211:37 pm
        by Patrick Hayes

        Reply

        The Bulls overpaid a productive player who was at the age players are when they typically start to show signs of slowing down. It was a gamble and it didn’t pay off, because Wallace very clearly wasn’t the same player in Chicago he was in Detroit, even if he was still a decent player. In fact, his last season in Detroit showed some signs that he was nearing the end of his prime. They paid him big betting that he had at least a couple more vintage seasons in him and they turned out to be wrong. It happens. Atlanta is going to find out the same thing with Joe Johnson. They maxed him out when he was at the tail end of his prime and he’s going to spend most of the life of that contract severely under-performing it.

        It’s always risky to sign guys who are 30 or older long-term. There are countless examples of those contracts not being wise investments. Jermaine O’Neal was a good one, Shaquille O’Neal was a good one, Rasheed Wallace didn’t even make it the life of his contract before retiring, Ron Artest is another. It happens all the time, so Prince’s contract isn’t a total shock. I still don’t think that it will ultimately be a great investment. The Pistons have certainly handed out worse contracts to worse players in recent years, but I’m not going to pretend that I think Prince’s deal was a good one for the team just because it wasn’t as terrible as Ben Gordon’s deal.

        • Mar 9, 201211:58 pm
          by Max

          Reply

          I think the Bulls were also being spiteful and allowed themselves to knowingly overpay because they were also injuring the Pistons by signing Wallace.   I also think Dumars should have matched because the Pistons weren’t going to get under the cap anyway.
          There is a basic fault when discussing contracts in not considering that these players aren’t all in a store somewhere as available for purchase which gives customers the right to pick and choose as they will.   Usually, the options are extremely limited.  Joe Johnson’s contract was about his leverage.   He would have walked and joined the Knicks if they didn’t overpay and if they had not, they would probably have missed the playoffs last year and this year so the team felt like they had to bite the bullet.  I’m quite sure the Hawks never thought they were making a great deal and were probably gritting their teeth the whole time.   I think they made a mistake but I guess if you are the Hawks, having a streak of making the playoffs is a big deal.  They haven’t won a title since Bob Pettit was there and for most of my life have more often than not missed the playoffs.

  • Mar 10, 201211:34 am
    by apa8ren9

    Reply

    Great stuff guys, as for Prince it comes down to disagreeing on the value of leadership, 2 million dollars per year and a fourth year on contract for a 31 yr old competent avg to slightly above average SF in the NBA.   I think that about sums that up all of the arguments (myself included) about Prince seem to be in this bubble.   Its the type of stuff to get you through a terrible season.  I believe Prince will be here for the duration or at least as long as Joe is there and will play a critical role in helping us become competitive again over the next 2 years.  The only way Prince will be gone is if we are in on a sweetheart deal.   Like the Gasol one for the Lakers, that is the only way I see Prince leaving Detroit.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here