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

New York Times: Greg Monroe one of five ‘players to watch’ this season

It has been a long time since national media outlets have been this interested in the Pistons before a season has started. Most aren’t predicting the Pistons to be a playoff team just yet, but the young talent on the roster at least has generated some interest in a team that desperately needs it. Jim Cavan of the New York Times included Greg Monroe on his list of five rapidly developing young players to watch this season:

Greg Monroe – PF/C, Detroit: Throwback. In the N.B.A. lexicon, it’s a term that can be either pejorative or complimentary, depending on the player in question. In the case of third-year man Greg Monroe it’s decidedly the former. In a full 66-game schedule a season ago (Monroe has missed but two games in two years), Monroe showed progress in nearly every statistical category, and finished averaging a double-double (17.6 points, 11 rebounds) per 36 minutes. Perhaps most impressive, however, was Monroe’s increase in assists, which rose from 1.7 to 2.6.

In a league transitioning more and more to floor-spacing offenses and “small ball lineups,” the Pistons’ hoped-for frontline core of Monroe and recent first-round pick Andre Drummond might seem against the grain. Assuming Monroe can effectively operate and broaden his mid-range shooting while still maintaining his imposing presence in paint and on glass, Detroit’s latest youth movement could have old-school-style success.

Other players on the list were DeMarcus Cousins, Kyrie Irving, Eric Gordon and Ty Lawson. I will refrain from commenting on the fact that the Pistons could have two of those players if they’d just taken Lawson instead of Austin Daye. But hey, 6-foot-11 guys who have no natural position or role don’t grow on trees.

30 Comments

  • Oct 16, 20122:03 pm
    by vic

    Reply

    Right, and we took 3 small forwards that year. Daye, Jerebko, and Dajuan Summers. Imagine if it was Ty Lawson, Jerebko, and Dejuan Blair. The simple technique of drafting different positions and skillsets, and letting them compete with veterans would have started our turnaround 3 years ago.

    I think Dumars was in a daze for a few years – thinking that somehow the game had changed into a positionless defenseless offensive show. He had a lot of drama and it clouded his thinking for a while.

    But I’m so glad he’s snapped out of it. 

    • Oct 16, 20123:10 pm
      by Chabvis

      Reply

      Well in reality you could argue that the success of Miami is somewhat proving the “positionless” theory correct, although their success is in large (almost entirely) part due to the completeness of Lebron as a player. Miami trots out 1 PF 2 SF 1 SG and 1 combo guard in their crunch time lineup typically and they just won the championship.
      Now I completely agree that at least one of those PGs in that draft should have been taken and Blair was a gimme at the stage in the draft that he went, but the supposed “logic” behind his decisions could be argued for based on the past season and the direction the league is moving.

      • Oct 16, 20123:41 pm
        by vic

        Reply

        that’s not positionless, that’s just adjusting your game around the greatest player since Michael Jordan. Not everyone has that luxury, obviously we don’t.

        • Oct 16, 20123:48 pm
          by Chabvis

          Reply

          Yeah I agree, but it seems like the majority of the league is starting to move towards a “small ball” lineup. Where it is not really positionless, but based around multiple long athletic not necessarily big or bulky players.
          In the draft that we are discussing (I agree that the picks turned out to be terrible and could easily be argued to have been bad at the time, other than JJ) Joe D took 3 long SF type players. Did he see that the league was moving in that direction? I have no idea. I think that it is more likely that he just liked those players, but if he saw the direction that the league was headed and was looking to make the adjustment early on the logic was not bad.

    • Oct 16, 20124:36 pm
      by labatts

      Reply

      They actually drafted four.  They traded away the red-headed kid (you know, WHatshisname)

    • Oct 17, 20121:28 am
      by Scott Free

      Reply

      Had that happened we may never have got Monroe, Knight, or Drummond.

  • Oct 16, 20122:29 pm
    by danny

    Reply

    Everyone knew about blair and knew he has no acl’s.  The spurs took a chance on him because he fell so far.  Daye is 6-11 and has a lot of skill sets.  He can put the ball on the floor and can shoot.  It’s a poor poor mans kd.  I would take that over lawson at that point in time.  Now with experience we know who we should of picked.  I just love how ppl always talk about who we could of got but never heard of them before they started doing well in the nba.  There are hundreds of teams and thousands of players its difficult to judge who will make the transition and who will fit in our team. 
    PS the main reason a lot of ppl get passed up on our team is cause they are horrible on defense.  Ex: melo, bosh

    • Oct 16, 20122:39 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      So wait … you’re arguing that Austin Daye, like the third most productive starter on the Gonzaga team he played on in college, was more of a known quantity to fans than Ty Lawson, arguably the best player on a national championship team?

      Sorry, but plenty of people thought Lawson was better than Daye at the time. No hindsight needed for that one.

      And it’s pretty funny that you talk about players getting passed in the draft for being terrible defensively while at the same time defending drafting Austin Daye. 

    • Oct 16, 20124:34 pm
      by XstreamINsanity

      Reply

      If Daye is a poor man’s KD and you’d take him, you must be EXTREMELY poor.  :)

      • Oct 17, 20124:06 pm
        by G

        Reply

        The term is “homeless man’s KD”, per the Sports Guy.

  • Oct 16, 20123:02 pm
    by jake

    Reply

    if you don’t take austin daye, you probably don’t get monroe, knight, and drummond. maybe one, but not all 3. i’d rather make a mistake, learn a lesson, and get lucky 3 years in a row.

    • Oct 16, 20123:17 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      I’d rather have Lawson than Knight.

    • Oct 16, 20124:39 pm
      by labatts

      Reply

      I hear ya, but what that really means is:  if you took a good player, you wouldn’t get this other good player.  Better to draft the bad player so we can get the good player.
       
      You still only get one good player, just later.

    • Oct 16, 20124:40 pm
      by XstreamINsanity

      Reply

      Please explain your logic.  The only thing I could think you’re referring to is Lawson would make us a better team and we wouldn’t have been in the lottery that year, but that’s a stretch to me.  That team that got us in the lottery to get Monroe was a complete and utter mess.  With Lawson instead of Daye, Stuckey still would have more than likely been the starting PG because we still had Rip and Gordon at the time, and I doubt they’d have sit Rodney in favor of Lawson.  So I still think we would have ended up in the Lottery.  Would we have sucked the following year to get Knight, I don’t know, maybe.  And the jury is still out on Drummond yet, so we’ll see.  But if we could have Lawson instead of Daye, I’d have gone for it then and now.

  • Oct 16, 20123:09 pm
    by Mel

    Reply

    I agree with Jake.

  • Oct 16, 20123:17 pm
    by Chabvis

    Reply

    I like the overall list and think that all 5 are very intriguing players in a key year for all of them. I am really interested to watch Gordon more closely this season. He is one of those players that when I watch play I don’t get especially excited about, but everybody seems to love the guy. I just have not really seen what all the hype has been about thus far. Of the players on this list I would say that this year is most important for Gordon and Cousins. Gordon to see if he can stay healthy and contribute consistently and Cousins to see if he can get “it”.
    I was a huge fan of Cousins coming out of college and thought that he was going to end up being the best player in that class, and he has shown flashes, but he has to put it all together sooner rather than later.

  • Oct 16, 20123:27 pm
    by Mark

    Reply

    “Throwback. In the N.B.A. lexicon, it’s a term that can be either pejorative or complimentary, depending on the player in question. In the case of third-year man Greg Monroe it’s decidedly the former.”

    Maybe he meant to say “latter” at the end, but doesn’t pejorative mean insulting? So is he saying throwback is a decidingly insulting description of Monroe?

     

    • Oct 16, 20123:49 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      Yeah, I think that was a typo.

    • Oct 16, 20123:50 pm
      by Chabvis

      Reply

      I think he meant latter, otherwise it wouldn’t make sense to have him on the list.

  • Oct 16, 20123:39 pm
    by RyanK

    Reply

    I’m as disappointed as anyone with Daye.  It was a mistake and that’s clear to see today…  Maybe Patrick thought so back then as well…I don’t remember what was posted on this site about him back then. 
     
    Ty Lawson…  The offensive numbers look great, but the other end of the floor is always going to be a concern.  As a trade chip, he obviously would have worked out…but as a championship point guard, I don’t think he’d cut it.  I’m not convinced Knight will cut it either, but at least there’s hope he can develop into a player who’s not the defensive liability Lawson always will be.
     
     
     

    • Oct 16, 20123:52 pm
      by Chabvis

      Reply

      I think with the right set of defenders Lawson could definitely cut it as a championship winning point guard. There is almost always one wing on the court that you can “hide” a weak defender on and Lawson is good enough offensively to make up for his defensive short comings. It obviously helps to have 5 good defenders on the court, but you don’t necessarily need it to win.

    • Oct 16, 20123:57 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      I believe the site was around then, but I didn’t start writing for it until the season after. I was writing for MLive then. Can’t find the specific draft stuff I did for them, but I was high on Blair (he was still projected as a mid-first rounder by Chad Ford and DraftExpress even with the knee issues, so I never considered he’d be around in the second too), Earl Clark (went one spot before Daye though) and Taj Gibson (though Taj would’ve been a reach there considering most had him going in the 20s). I liked Lawson too, but I won’t lie … I liked Eric Maynor better. I never really though much about Daye simply because he wasn’t that great a college player and I really thought they’d either go big or go PG in that draft.

      • Oct 16, 20125:08 pm
        by danny

        Reply

        I was not defending it I’m just saying its easy to say something else after we know what they are capable of in the nba.  didnt adam morrison do amazing things in college?  Just because they played good in college doesnt mean much in the nba.  JJ reddick that is who I was thinking about.
        PS calm down patrick you dont have to try to argue with every comment.

        • Oct 16, 20125:13 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          There are 25 comments on this thread as I type this. I’ve responded to three, and only one of those responses has been argumentative. 

  • Oct 16, 20124:03 pm
    by adam

    Reply

    As far as Melo is concerned, face it, he’s just not that good. I am thankful we don’t have him. tanked on two teams with all the help in the world. Lawson still hasn’t made the jump that everyone has predicted for years with or without Melo. So, I’ll take what the last 3 years have gave us in the draft because of those “misses”, like the other guy said.

    • Oct 16, 20124:35 pm
      by Desolation Row

      Reply

      Given his draft position that year in what was supposed to be a pretty weak draft class overall (if I remember correctly), I think Lawson has way exceeded expectations.. not sure what you mean by “still hasn’t made the jump that everyone has predicted for years”. As far as Melo goes.. he’s a really good (read: great) player, but his ego has just gotten in the way. I would’ve been fine with drafting Melo :)

      • Oct 17, 201212:06 am
        by adam

        Reply

        how has lawson exceeded expectations exactly?

  • Oct 16, 20124:07 pm
    by adam

    Reply

    I would have taken Wade in a heartbeat, however, no matter of need. I kind of wished Stuckey would be a poor man’s Wade but it never quite worked out that way. Still young, though. If Monroe makes another leap this year, I can see the playoffs. Zach Lowe on Grantland gives them a shot, too. It’s awesome seeing national media start to notice what’s growing. whole article here, good read for NBA nerds. http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8478267/who-nba-top-title-contenders-season-trailing-pack

  • Oct 16, 20124:43 pm
    by labatts

    Reply

    “I will refrain from commenting on the fact that the Pistons could have two of those players if they’d just taken Lawson instead of Austin Daye.”
     
    Thanks for refraining. =)

  • Oct 16, 20127:01 pm
    by ryan

    Reply

    I was happy when we ended up with Austin Daye because at least we didn’t end up with BJ Mullens. But I would’ve been much happier with Eric Maynor, Jrue Holiday, Ty Lawson, Darren Collison or Taj Gibson. Taking Daye was an obvious reach even at the time and now it appears to be a gamble that hasn’t paid off.
     

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here