Comments on: Detroit rookies Andre Drummond, Kim English and Khris Middleton give hope for bench production this season in loss to Bucks

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:21:29 +0000

I’m talking about pre-draft. What Drummond or Milicic did after they were drafted is irrelevant to this discussion. As draft prospects, I think Milicic’s upside was considered every bit as high, if not higher, than Drummond’s, and the fact that Milicic was picked at No. 3 while Drummond slid seems to back that up.

We can obviously use the benefit of hindsight to look back and say that Milicic sucked and the team certainly should’ve done more homework, but at the time he was picked, he was considered a can’t-miss star by many respected basketball people.

By: James Jones

James Jones — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:26:41 +0000

I’m not sure about all the other stuff you had going on in your post but this one comment caught my attention.

“Milicic went second overall in one of the greatest drafts in NBA history. Drummond went No. 9 in what consensus opinion seems to be was a pretty average draft. Elite athleticism or no, I think people thought of Milicic’s upside more highly than Drummond’s.”

In just 3 summer league games and 3 preseason games Drummond already looks twice as good as Dorko did. I’m not saying Drummond is going to be a stud because of this, but I was skeptical of Darko after watching him struggle with simple fundamentals and looking lost every time his number was called. While Drummond’s fundamentals need some serious work, he doesn’t look lost when he’s on the floor and from game to game you can see some progression on mistakes that were made in previous games. For those two reasons alone I think Dummand has a far better chance at becoming a contributer then Dorko ever did.

By: bugsygod

bugsygod — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:05:05 +0000

I DO NOT THINK DRUMMOND WILL BE A BUST. Based on his high school/aau performances. Based on his size and athletic ability. Based on his SHOWN work ethic with the pistons(not rumors he doesnt work hard). Based on his Summer League play again showing his talents in matching up with differenct yound players. Based on what every coach and player has said about Drummond, that he works hard, listens and has been completely focused. Oh and yes based on 2 preseason games.

By: bugsygod

bugsygod — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:00:34 +0000

“Of course, that comes with no gurantees – and if forced to make a binary success-or-failure call to day, i’d bet on Drummond busting.” That is the direct quote from Dan on the article, if he was betting he would say Drummond would bust. Again i took the article as negative and like crispus said it was almost ”gleefully dismissive”. I consitently state the bad and the good with the pistons. I was ECSTACTIC when we got Drummond, so to read that type of article was a big downer in my opinion. Also i know the pistons have made mistakes high in the draft and what i stated was that it is usually Character that makes a guy bust. In the cases of Rodney and darko it was there charcter why they didnt succeed. If you look at cleaves, it was his physical ability that held him back. So i stated if the player has the physical tools, which Drummond has, the only way to bust(outside of injury) is because of the players character. I studied drummond alot before the draft and during the college season and i just saw a young kid that needed direction. Comes from good family background and has never been in trouble. So i thought the Pistons would be able to provide that direction as he has zero character issues. But we have gone over this before, so i will just leave it alone. I guess both you and Dan hope Drummond succeeds and becomes an all star player.

By: Keith

Keith — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 17:37:46 +0000

I have to agree with your assessment of the Pistons and Drummond. While it would be great to look at those two games and predict stardom (or at least no chance of busting) for Drummond, it’s at least a year premature.

You can do a quick breakdown of Piston first rounders just to see how inconsistent to bad we’ve been. Looking at raw players with upside, Rodney White, Darko, and Daye have all failed spectacularly to develop. And if we want to get into it, it’s difficult to say we’ve done a good job of developing Knight, who was often asked to play off the ball alongside non PG Rodney Stuckey. From a pure developmental standpoint, Stuckey never became the player he was drafted to be. He is a pure slashing SG, not a passer, defender, or Chauncey’s heir apparent. He’s still a solid player, but never developed beyond the combo guard he came out as.

The only players that the Pistons tend to hit on with solid success are player with considerable college experience (Tayshaun, Maxiell, Afflalo, Monroe) or professional international experience (Delfion, Jerebko). So historically, the team has very little track record of success with developing anyone. Our entire last decade of prominence and the championship were built on already developed players (FAs – including Ben/Rip, whom we did not draft – and Tay). Every time the Pistons have been forced to rely on development, we’ve seen significant drops in win totals. There’s no way I see us doing what OKC did with Westbrook, Harden, and Ibaka (Durant was going to be great anyway, the other all needed specific nurturing and environment).

Drummond still can be great. I don’t think the team actively sabotages young guys, but it does feel like they don’t create roles that players can fill. They put a player where they can play, if they can play, but simply don’t know what to do with players that are still working on creating their own identity. We force players then to sit (Darko, White) and learn nothing, or throw them into roles we need, even if they don’t fit what the player can/should do (Stuckey, Knight). Part of this may be the coaching carousel for years, part of it may be a real lack of identity and vision from the front office. But I feel if Drummond does turn out great, it will have a lot more to do with him and his own mentality than anything the team to nurture him.

By: rick77

rick77 — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:53:35 +0000

If you read it dully then you’ll understand that I am saying that when he does have a stat line similar to that then don’t get all huffy puffy about as if it can’t happen. Listen. I don’t have to make shit up when all I have to do is read derogatory statements about one player vs another. It baffles me when people fail to mention the $hit that was going around here and throw blame on players. Let the coach coach and the players play. If Charlie V does not perform this year I will be the first in line to say “he needs to go”. I’m saying temper expectations for unproven players versus a proven player. If proven player is getting it then that means unproven player is learning while on the job. So don’t tell me I am making stuff up when in fact it was a preseason game that oh yeah we lost. Like I said be happy when the stat line is unfavorable as he is still learning.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:15:45 +0000

@Crispus:

I think your criticism is entirely, 100 percent fair. I would never object to what you just said above.

My issues revolved around people drawing conclusions that weren’t actually in Dan’s post and supporting those faulty conclusions with even faultier logic in an annoying way.

By: Crispus

Crispus — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:10:37 +0000

I just reread the post. It wasn’t as cold as I remembered, but the sunglasses thing caused quite the brouhaha. It was the back and forth, negative-positive tone of the article that bothered me. I guess the article couldn’t possibly be wrong – it can only be 50% wrong because it took both sides. Either way it’s wonderful that “Andre the Giant” had a good offseason and is having a really good preseason too.

By: Crispus

Crispus — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:03:29 +0000

I remember this turned into a huge fight, but in my opinion the original post/article was a little snarky, and almost gleefully dismissive. If I remember correctly, Dan went to the draft and may have even talked to Drummond himself (I can’t recall) then wrote about him like some doomed statistic with no agency, and only a measure of humanity. You don’t have to write lies to be optimistic, and I didn’t see the point of being super-neutral to the point of a lack of reasonable empathy. It didn’t have to be a puff piece, but the distinct impression I got was that Dan knew the odds were against Drummond, and was more excited about the stats proving it, than the prospect of Drummond overcoming said stats and becoming great.

Then again that’s just my opinion. Some of the commenters on here were taking things too far and getting under Patrick’s skin. However I think Drummond is a much greater force, “raw” as he is, than most of us expected. I say let optimism abound – we’ve already been prepared extensively for a letdown, at least on this blog.

By: Patrick Hayes

Patrick Hayes — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:09:01 +0000

@koz:

“Maybe you should get payed for working on your site here”

I’m not complaining. I have a job. This is a hobby. I do it for fun. My point was just that as someone who cares about what I write and what is written here, I will defend it. So don’t complain if you post a criticism and I respond with a criticism of your criticism. I have no problem rejecting weak arguments like I’m Andre Drummond if you’re coming into my lane.

I could get paid a million dollars a post here and I’d still react the same way if I feel someone is framing their argument wrong, if their criticism is taking something out of context or if they are just generally unpleasant.

“what seems to be reasonable criticism by the so called “troller” “Bugsygod””

I didn’t say he’s a ‘troller.’ Most of his comments aren’t. His off-topic post bringing up a post from months ago, framing the subject of that post out of context and posting it in this game recap thread? That’s trolling. That’s purposely posting something off-topic to get a reaction. Unless you agree with him that two preseason games against average or slightly below teams is enough to say that Drummond is definitely destined to be a great player? Personally, I’m excited by his performance. I think bugsygod’s conclusion that Drummond will definitely not be a bust is a little premature though.

“It also seems clear that Milicic never had the elite athleticism that Drummond appears to possess which would put him at least in my mind as better able to avoid the bust scenario layed out by Feldman.”

Milicic went second overall in one of the greatest drafts in NBA history. Drummond went No. 9 in what consensus opinion seems to be was a pretty average draft. Elite athleticism or no, I think people thought of Milicic’s upside more highly than Drummond’s. Will Robinson, the Detroit legend and one of the most respected scouts/coaches in basketball history, compared a 19-year-old Milicic to Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt Chamberlain!

And regardless, my point was not a comparison of the two. It was simply pointing out that the Pistons have had raw, highly regarded upside prospects in the past who haven’t developed. So to say that Drummond definitely got to the right organization who knows what it’s doing developing raw prospects, I disagree with that. The Pistons have had success with some young players, no success with others. It’s all about Drummond, really. Most any organization (with the exception of a few really dysfunctional ones) would put the time and resources into helping a player like Drummond succeed. At the end of the day, Drummond’s success in Detroit will be about how motivated he is, how hard he works, to realize his potential.