Comments on: Detroit Pistons #DraftDreams: Austin Rivers

By: websites

websites — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 22:22:13 +0000

Every person
has right to defence. Maybe we should ban fire
extinguisher too. Maybe only firefighters should be allowed to fight against
fire?

By: rick

rick — Mon, 07 May 2012 18:07:46 +0000

In the immortal words of Martin from the “Martin Show”, Cole you stupid!

By: sop

sop — Sat, 05 May 2012 14:56:23 +0000

There’s no way the Piston come away with Rivers and its probably a good thing.
Rivers has a nice cross-over but the question is will his ability to get to the basket be cancelled out by his lack of NBA level explosiveness/athleticism. He’s a small, score ONLY 2-guard who’s still developing his deep range shot. I do like his aggressive attitude, but he’s overrated because he got a lot of hype early on due to his who his dad is.

By: Josh

Josh — Sat, 05 May 2012 02:10:49 +0000

Assuming we do draft Rivers and we trade Stuckey, the problem I see now is that we will have little to no ball movement in a half-court style offense. If Frank decides to up the pace next season and go for a run and gun type of play, then yes, a backcourt pairing of Knight and Rivers could do wonders running the open floor.

But if we stick to the usual slow-paced half court offense, things won’t work out. Knight and Rivers are both scoring guards. Rivers averaged just 2 assists last season and turned it over just as much. Knight averaged just below 4 assists coughed it up almost thrice a game. Their both best utilized when you ask them to score, not to facilitate an offense. Stuckey, no matter how much you view him as a PG, was at least competent in doing that. Not if we’re talking Rivers + Marshall or Knight + Marshall, that’s a different story.

By: gmehl

gmehl — Sat, 05 May 2012 02:03:21 +0000

@patrick Yes full level is what i mean. My bad on that.

By: Rodman4Life

Rodman4Life — Fri, 04 May 2012 19:05:09 +0000

Not a single mention of his defensive ability. C’mon guys, this is Detroit we’re talking about. Stop drooling over the offense or next thing you know we’ll be wearing teal again!

By: Daye and Knight

Daye and Knight — Fri, 04 May 2012 17:04:45 +0000

I wouldn’t be opposed to drafting Rivers if we had a plan with getting a big through trade or free agency. If we have to trade one of our guards for this to work I would trade Stuckey only because of youth in the back court and visioning a Knight/Rivers back court with Monroe down low. I’m a big Stuckey fan…a Slappie even…but I can’t ignore the kind of potential of having a big three consisting Rivers, Knight and Monroe when all three are not even 22 years old yet. Add a caliber free agent in Beasly and our team would be very fun to watch. That being said, we would certainly need a front court mate for Monroe in order to be a serious competitor down the road. I’m not sold on Macklin yet but I think he has some upside. In free agency, because I have us using the mid on Beasly it would be difficult to find a Center we could bring in that would take less money: Hill, Randolph, Thompson maybe? Rivers would put some butts on the stands for sure, but I still think our first priority should be addressing our front court problem. If we had a plan to address that or if there’s a second round talent that could pan out as a nice player to have next to Monroe then I would be all for taking Rivers.

By: BIGMARV

BIGMARV — Fri, 04 May 2012 16:53:44 +0000

ill pass on kaman he was a steal a few years ago but now no thank you hes getting older and injuries are piling on.

By: frankie d

frankie d — Fri, 04 May 2012 16:36:17 +0000

“But that’s really the only way taking Rivers would make sense, if it were the first of two moves, the second being a trade that sends out one of their guards for a capable forward or center.”

and joe d last made a trade… when?
joe d is paralyzed with fear. he’s made so many bad moves over the last few years he appears to want to simply let things play out, make the easy, predictable moves – drafting talent that falls to him in the draft, resigning his own players, bringing in familiar scrubs – so that no one can criticize his moves.
taking a guy like rivers might be a great move. but predicating it on joe d making a trade in order to deal with a sudden surplus of talent at a spot is unrealistic, considering his recent conduct. his recent tendency has been to simply acquire that excess talent and then let his excess talent rot on the bench. unfortunately, he’s shown nothing to indicate he’s going to change his recent habits.
in fact, at his season-ending press conference, he made a revealing off-hand comment. he was talking about drafting in a certain position, and he essentially stated that you just have to wait in your spot and see what falls to you at your draft spot.
really?
what about trading down if you know you want a certain player and you think another team is looking at him also?
that is what happened, imho, last year with biyombo. charlotte swept down, made a trade and picked him just before detroit was probably going to grab him. so joe d was left sitting there with no choice other than to draft another combo guard, as the best player available.
the idea of aggressively making moves apparently does not occur to joe. he just said it, and his record confirms it. as best as i can recall, his only trade involving first rounders was the dj white/walter sharpe fiasco, where joe d traded out of the first round.
joe has lost it, and expecting him to suddenly start making astute moves in the draft, or as a result of drafting, is sadly not consistent with his recent conduct.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Fri, 04 May 2012 15:42:34 +0000

I'm sure the Celtics hope he lasts until they pick. I'd be shocked if Rivers makes it out of the lottery though.

And no way Kaman signs for the vet's minimum. He'll get full mid level or maybe even more. He won't deserve it, but that's the going rate for big men with half a pulse. Sincerely, Brendan Haywood.