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

Andre Drummond dominates glass, banged up Pistons hang tough in loss to Bulls

Detroit Pistons 94 Final

Recap | Box Score

95 Chicago Bulls
Greg Monroe, C 32 MIN | 7-12 FG | 4-6 FT | 10 REB | 4 AST | 2 STL | 2 BLK | 4 TO | 18 PTS | +8Monroe had a productive all-around game and was pretty sound defensively. It helped that Joakim Noah was out, but Carlos Boozer and Taj Gibson routinely brutalize the Pistons’ frontcourt and both were quiet tonight.
Andre Drummond, C 23 MIN | 4-7 FG | 0-3 FT | 14 REB | 2 AST | 0 STL | 1 BLK | 0 TO | 8 PTS | +11When Drummond is on the court, the Pistons are at least competitive with the middle-tier teams in the league. Tonight, they built leads every time Drummond was in the game, including into double figures in the first half. When Drummond left the game, those leads evaporated quickly. Drummond’s had better statistical performances in his young career, and he did pick up three fairly quickly first half fouls that caused an early exit, but he was a game-changer for all 23 of his minutes. I do have to mark him down slightly for this though. Ouch.
Jose Calderon, PG 34 MIN | 4-8 FG | 2-2 FT | 0 REB | 5 AST | 0 STL | 0 BLK | 1 TO | 11 PTS | 0Calderon didn’t rack up a large number of assists (Drummond cost him one by botching a perfect lob that should’ve been a dunk, although Drummond did get his own rebound and convert), but he ran Detroit’s offense perfectly. Calderon does a lot of things well offensively, but I love watching him watch for the right moment to hit players coming off of curls to quickly catch and launch. He does it perfectly nearly every time.
Brandon Knight, PG 37 MIN | 2-6 FG | 0-0 FT | 1 REB | 4 AST | 2 STL | 0 BLK | 4 TO | 5 PTS | +6Credit where it’s due for Knight — after re-injuring his ankle and breaking his nose in Friday’s game, he came back two days later and played 37 minutes. Unfortunately, they were pretty unproductive minutes.
Kyle Singler, SG 27 MIN | 3-4 FG | 1-1 FT | 6 REB | 1 AST | 0 STL | 0 BLK | 1 TO | 8 PTS | -2Singler, once again, was remarkably average. He hit open shots, he helped on the glass and he was overmatched trying to guard Chicago’s quicker wings. As has been written relentlessly this season, Singler was a great find for the Pistons in the second round who will be a valuable rotation player once he’s playing in the right role in that rotation. Starting and playing big minutes at the two or three isn’t the right role at this point, but he’s doing an admirable job competing at that spot.
Jonas Jerebko, PF 18 MIN | 2-3 FG | 1-2 FT | 3 REB | 1 AST | 1 STL | 0 BLK | 2 TO | 5 PTS | -11After Jerebko was one of very few bright spots on Friday, it was disappointing to not see him get more minutes tonight. But I’ve long ago given up on trying to figure out how minutes are distributed/justified on this team.
Charlie Villanueva, PF 24 MIN | 4-13 FG | 4-4 FT | 5 REB | 1 AST | 0 STL | 2 BLK | 2 TO | 14 PTS | -10It was nice to see Villanueva playing aggressively and looking to drive when Chicago was closing hard on him when he caught at the 3-point line. His shots were falling and he had a few tough misses on floaters that were good looks that he’d normally hit.
Khris Middleton, SF 6 MIN | 0-0 FG | 0-0 FT | 1 REB | 1 AST | 0 STL | 0 BLK | 0 TO | 0 PTS | +1Middleton played a few forgettable minutes and is still struggling to find the confidence and aggressiveness he had for a handful of games a few weeks ago.
Rodney Stuckey, PG 29 MIN | 10-19 FG | 3-4 FT | 2 REB | 2 AST | 0 STL | 0 BLK | 1 TO | 25 PTS | -8And the Stuckey madness continues. Before the comments start harping on this — yes, Stuckey had the ball in his hands more tonight. But no, he was not exclusively used in a scoring point guard type role. He actually was finding success as an off-the-ball wing playing with Calderon, something his defenders firmly say is all Lawrence Franks’ fault for asking him to do in the first place. Stuckey can be successful working off of screens, not dribbling the air out of the ball and working at times as a catch and shoot player in the mid-range. He just doesn’t do it all the time, which makes the times that he plays has well and as tough (he took a shot to the head that had him blinking an eye most of the game) as he did tonight all the more frustrating.
Kim English, SG 12 MIN | 0-0 FG | 0-0 FT | 3 REB | 1 AST | 0 STL | 0 BLK | 1 TO | 0 PTS | 0Twelve minutes is decent burn for English, but he looked a little tentative. He did manage to help out on the glass, but didn’t attempt a three. I’d still love to see him flash a little acumen for that corner three by the end of the season.
Lawrence FrankI’m not sure how much Frank planned to play Drummond, but the fact that he couldn’t use him more in the first half was Drummond’s fault for getting into foul trouble, not Frank’s, so I’m willing to give a pass for that. I think the Pistons could’ve used Jerebko more and I thought 37 minutes were way too many for Knight considering both his health and the fact that he wasn’t playing well.

107 Comments

  • Mar 31, 201311:20 pm
    by bball4224

    Reply

    Sooo, how bout them Wolverines?

    Actually that has been slightly eclipsed by Kevin Ware.

    • Mar 31, 201311:41 pm
      by gmehl

      Reply

      Yeah i think i vomited in my mouth a little after watching that. terrible thing to happen to anyone. So which injury do you think is worse Ware’s or Livingston’s? Speaking of Livingston he might be worth a look in the off season.

      • Mar 31, 201311:50 pm
        by Vince

        Reply

        Oh god that injury was absolutely horrible. Too early to tell really, but I’d lean towards Livingston.

        I wouldn’t mind picking up Livingston in the offseason, one of my favorite players even after injury.

      • Apr 1, 201312:16 am
        by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!!)

        Reply

        I actually watched both games as the injuries happened to them both. I have to also go with Livingston for now. I thought his career was over but he’s actually playing pretty decent. Glad he was able to get back out there after a scary fall like that and hopefully Ware can do the same in the future.

        • Apr 1, 20133:25 am
          by gmehl

          Reply

          Yeah even though it was gruesome broken bones will heal whereas when you rip every ligament in your knee you’ll never be the same again. That was such a shame because Livingston at the time was just starting to put it together.

  • Apr 1, 201312:30 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    If Calderon leaves…I hope we (magically, don’t know how it’s going to happen) draft Trey Burke. Not sure if BK can play the 2, but Burke you simply cannot pass on, especially in this draft. 

    Tough to see at times, but don’t really mind Pistons competing, leading the entire game, and then losing. Mclemore would be a steal (lots of luck in the lottery), Oladipo would provide good defense, Porter would blend in perfectly at the 3 and be a force with Monroe and Drummond.

    If we could somehow get another pick in this draft and be in a position to get burke, somewhere between 10-15 (although after this tournament, I think he goes up to 6 or 7), Pistons would be fun to watch. Just not sure if I would select him over Porter, Oladipo, or Mclemore. As a Michigan fan I would blindly do it, but as Pistons fan, not sure if our biggest need is at the Point Guard. But the possibility of him with Monroe, Drummond, and BK, plus money to get free agents seems tempting. 

    Would anyone else draft Burke ahead of Oladipo, Porter, Shabazz? Considering we have money to sign a free agent to fulfill our other needs…

    • Apr 1, 201312:43 am
      by Vince

      Reply

      Burke ahead of Shabazz and Oladipo I can imagine, ahead of Porter? A bit harder I think.

      Dream offseason (for me) would be to draft Burke, trade Knight to Utah for the 10th pick, draft Robinson III, draft two bigs in the second round, amnesty Stuckey, sign Corey Brewer, Jose Calderon and Timofey Mozgov. I’d be the happiest man of earth if those sequences of events happened.

      • Apr 1, 20131:01 am
        by Mark

        Reply

        Really? Whats so great about Porter?

        He’s Tayshaun pt 2, imo. Definitely not worth a top 5 pick. Whoever we deaft needs to have star potential. I don’t see it from Porter.

        Burke, Shabazz, Mclemore, and Noel are the only guys in this draft I see have a chance to be stars. The other top prospects will be a really good players, but not capable of the being “the man” on a team. idk if those 4 will ever either, but they at least have potential to be.

        • Apr 1, 20131:45 am
          by oats

          Reply

          Prince couldn’t shoot the 3 like Porter. Prince started knocking them down a little better the last two years, but he is crazy selective with his 3 point attempts. Despite the fact that the college season is way shorter, Porter has actually attempted 20 more 3 pointers than Prince. The fact that he does that and hits 42% of them means he is probably going to be a better 3 point shooter on the next level. That extra range gives him a dimension Prince lacked, and I think it will allow him to be as much of a star as the other guys you listed. By that I mean he could be the second best player for a contender, which is at least as good as I’d rate the other guys you mentioned.
           
          I still don’t get why people like Shabazz. His shooting numbers have been dropping all year. While he’s definitely athletic, he’s not a stud athlete. He scores with roughly average efficiency right now and I’m assuming that will drop when he gets to the NBA. He also doesn’t give much of anything outside of scoring. If a guy does nothing but score he has to be a truly elite scorer to be a star, but Shabazz looks like a guy who only puts up points because he takes tons of shots. That isn’t a star player, not even close.

          • Apr 1, 20132:03 am
            by Jordan

            Not to mention that Shabazz lied about his age…

        • Apr 1, 20131:47 am
          by Jon

          Reply

          i agree porter is definitely prince v2 with maybe a little more potential. but i really don’t think any of those players have star potential except mclemore as a ray allen comp which really at his best wasn’t even the third best player on a championship team. pistons would almost be better off packaging the pick this year for one next year that’ll probably be top 10. any package that we could get away with to get into the top 10 next year would probably also guarantee that the pistons’ pick would be top 8 and therefore not go to the bobcats. 2 top 10 picks next year on top of what is already in place minus knight or whoever the pistons would have to include in a trade for next years 1st rounder would put detroit near the top of the eastern conference in 3 years and near the top of the league in 5

          • Apr 1, 20132:04 am
            by Jordan

            Are you so young that you think Ray was at his best in Boston?

          • Apr 1, 20132:14 am
            by Jon

            apparently so. my bad, didn’t realize how old he was. still think straight shooters have to be elite to be stars so mclemore would have to be in reggie miller/ ray allen territory unless he could be more aggressive going to the rim

          • Apr 1, 20133:24 am
            by oats

            If star is defined as capable of being the best player on a contending team, then I don’t see a star here. If star is defined as playing at roughly All Star caliber, then there are some guys with that as their ceiling.

      • Apr 1, 20132:49 am
        by oats

        Reply

        @ Vince.  First of all, Stuckey can’t be amnestied. He signed his contract after the CBA, he is not eligible. He can be bought out, but $4 million will be left on the cap. Charlie Villanueva could be amnestied though.
         
        Robinson at 10? What? Why is he a top 10 pick? I don’t understand this line of thinking. 11 points, 5 rebounds, 1 assist, and only 34.4% 3 point shooting is enough to be a top 10 pick? He plays a ton too. He’s on one of the youngest teams in the country, if he can’t assert himself more than that at Michigan how long will it take until he is ready to assert himself in the NBA? This is sort of like taking Marvin Williams with the second pick, except Robinson actually gets enough minutes that he doesn’t have a good excuse to not be productive. Luckily Utah is currently not a lottery pick, and if they do end up with one it will likely be 14. I kind of get taking Robinson at 14 or lower, just not in the top 10.
         
        I get why Robinson goes in the first round. He’s a tremendous athlete, he’s got a solid pedigree, and he shoots a really great percentage from the field. His strong field goal percentage is based largely on his ability to finish at the rim, he’s just great there. That said, if I could pick a player that I thought absolutely should stay in school and try to prove he can handle a bigger role I’d pick Robinson. I like to think he’ll stay, but you never know.
         
        I’m not entirely certain if you are viewing Robinson as a shooting guard or small forward. Most people peg him as a 3, but he’s only listed at 6’6″. Based on trading Knight, cutting Stuckey, and not picking up a SG I’m guessing you want him at the 2. That’s fine, he seems like a wing player that would be fine at either spot. The problem is that the Pistons really seem to need some wings that can shoot the 3 to space the floor for their big men. Brewer might be better than Singler, but I think Singler would get pressed in to the starting lineup again just to get an average 3 point shooter on the wing. Also, Mozgov has no range at all.  I’m seeing some serious problems with spacing. The defense would look much better, but the offense will be ugly and that seems like a big problem for a dream scenario. I can live with a defense first philosophy, but that one sounds like it’s crappy offense could make it a pretty mediocre team.

        • Apr 1, 20133:39 am
          by oats

          Reply

          I forgot a point. Is Robinson clearly an upgrade on Knight? The team gets a little taller, but I suspect he’s a worse defender for the short term at least. Knight’s progressing pretty well on that side of the ball while Robinson is much more raw. Robinson’s also a more limited shooter, and he’s not as good of a passer either. The only real upgrade for Robinson is his ability to finish at the rim, but the team already has Monroe and Drummond in that area. You also have the team picking up Brewer, and that’s his skill too. I get liking Robinson’s upside more, but this trade is a clear downgrade in the short term and there is no guarantee we would be backing the right guy in the long term. I think the Pistons need to do better for Knight than just getting Robinson.

          • Apr 1, 20136:03 am
            by Vince

            I know there are a few inconsistencies here and there but here is my logic:

            I want to bring back what Detroit used to be known for: Defense (Signing Brewer and Mozgov + Drummond)

            I want to turn the current Pistons into the current Denver Nuggets (I really like what the franchise did there) – Run a high tempo offense with athletic players who can slash and finish at the hoop. (Drafting Burke, signing Brewer, Drummond, Middleton – who I think would do well in such an offense)

            Concerning Robinson, I think he is a 2, no way he can play the NBA 3. I think the Jazz have the 10th pick, it might be in the low teens, but either way I think Robinson could be a sleeper in the draft and taking him between 10-15 would be his range. I’m trading Knight for the pick because 1. Utah are looking for a guard 2. Knight is better than any other guard in the Jazz’s draft range 3. I’m not sold on him. I am taking a gamble by taking Robinson but I think he could do well in an uptempo offense ala Denver. 

            Floor Spacing. Needless to say Drummond will be on the block, Monroe will be at the high post/opposite block, Burke/Calderon will be playing a Ty Lawson role – penetrating, finishing at the rim or hitting either wings for open jumpshots or for cuts to the baskets. Regarding Singler – he is a bonified role player, nothing less, I’d rather have someone like Brewer starting at SF, that being said the SG spot is up for grabs between Robinson, Middleton and English – the latter two being put in a situation where they need to sink or swim, either they show premise/play well or they won’t be resigned in the 2014 offseason and we’ll go hunting for a FA SG. Mozgov will never play alongside Drummond – if he does it would be at the end of quarters to ensure we finish well defensively – this means he’ll take Dre’s role alongside Moose. 

            This makes sense to me, maybe it actually doesn’t but it works in my head.

            Starting lineup:

            Drummond – Monroe – Brewer – English/Robinson/Middleton – Burke/Calderon

            Second Unit:

            Mozgov –  Maxiell – Jerebko – English/Robinson/Middleton – Burke/Calderon

            Defense:

            Mozgov – Drummond – Brewer – English/Robinson/Middleton – Burke

            In my plan Stuckey and Villanueva are gone – bought out or amnestied. Preferably we draft Patric Young and Solomon Hill or some other big in the Second round.

            I honestly think this framework could work. 

          • Apr 1, 201310:30 am
            by Huddy

            I like Brewer and not so much Mozgov, but the Utah trade seems like quite a stretch.  Knight is far from polished and is still an uncertainty as far as his best position.  Idk if you are thinking the Jazz need a PG or a SG, but in the range of #10 they still have a shot a Trey Burke and are almost certainly able to get Gary Harris, or Michael Carter Williams.  Depending on the position they most value I’m not sure why bringing in Brandon Knight is a better option for them.  If we were to trade to around the 10th pick I would hope the Pistons would pick up Gary Harris before Glen Robinson, probably  even MCW over Robinson.  I am also someone who things Robinson shouldn’t come out this year though.

          • Apr 1, 20133:29 pm
            by oats

            Again, I get the defense first approach. Like Huddy, I’d take Gary Harris to spur it in that kind of situation. He’s both a better shooter and a better defender than Robinson. I just don’t think 10-15 is Robinson’s range, I think 15-25 is his range. I’d be willing to do it at 14 if Harris was already gone, but if I’m closer to 10 then he just isn’t worth that pick.
             
            By the way, even Denver can shoot better than two of Robinson, Middleton, and Brewer on the wing. That’s why I’d expect Singler to win the job as a poor impersonation of Gallinari. Unless one of Robinsion and Middleton can prove they can hit a shot I’m going to assume they can’t. That’s actually a large part of why Brewer doesn’t play more, and Mozgov’s limitations athletically and as an offensive player is why he doesn’t play more. I just don’t get the point of trying to emulate Denver by picking up the guys that can’t actually get play time in Denver. That makes you sort of like Denver but much worse. No thanks. I actually think the roster you are suggesting is as bad as the one we just watched, it just will be ugly in a different way.

    • Apr 1, 20138:36 am
      by vic

      Reply

      I’d draft Burke over Oladipo but not over Porter and probably not McLemore.
      Porter is best in the draft.
      Burke as a pg is more valuable than Mclemore but Mclemore is more needed and would make the guards bigger overall defensively. 

    • Apr 1, 201311:53 am
      by Herman Neutic

      Reply

      Pistons compete, get the experience of a close game with a tight finish, play the young guys, Drummond starts and plays with Monroe… and… the Pistons lose. What more does anyone want at this point of the season? Frank gets an “A+”. 

  • Apr 1, 201312:52 am
    by Mrshourite

    Reply

    I like that scenario Vince, but it just makes too much since so it probably won’t happen. 

  • Apr 1, 201312:58 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    If we landed Burke and Robinson III, I’d be the happiest man on this planet!

    • Apr 1, 201310:41 am
      by T Casey

      Reply

      I don’t pay attention to any college teams but MSU until the big tournament, but so far Burke has impressed me a lot with his shooting and savy at the point already. He’s a really clever and fairly polished pg already. As much as I like Knight, I’d be ecstatic if we managed to draft him. He looks like he’s the most nba ready pg out there to me.

    • Apr 1, 201311:20 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      IF the Pistons end up in the top 3 and want Burke, they should try to trade down and pick up another pick that turns into Poythress.

      What’s the big deal about Robinson? He is as meh as a player can be. 

      • Apr 1, 20133:51 pm
        by oats

        Reply

        I’d put Robinson at about the same level as Poythress. Poythress shoots a higher percentage at 3, but takes so few of them that they might not be the most reliable numbers. Poythress is a little bigger and a little better on the boards, but he isn’t as athletic and he might be a small 4. Then again, the team could use a stretch 4 who is either better or at least cheaper than CV. Of course, as I’ve already noted, it’s hard to project him as a stretch 4 off of 33 attempts from beyond the arc. Neither of them have managed to assert themselves on young teams, and if they really were that good they probably should have. For both of them you are hoping they can be much better pros than college players.
         
        I have to be honest, I’ve been all over the place on Poythress. I think I’ve settled on him now as being a nice player that probably shouldn’t be in the lottery. He might sneak in at 13 or 14 because he is part of a group of guys that don’t really belong in the lottery but someone from that group has to make it anyways. I have him and Robinson as virtual coin flips though.

        • Apr 1, 20139:09 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          That’s fair. But Robinson is projected significantly higher.

  • Apr 1, 20131:13 am
    by Jodi Jezz

    Reply

    lol, Singler with a C??? That guy is horrible…

  • Apr 1, 20131:42 am
    by piston moribund

    Reply

    Been following UM all season.  Happy they made it but still dont think Burke is NBA material.  No shame in being a great college player but too slow and too small to be a great NBA player.  Seems like he is padding his stats especially on the break when he had the chance to dish to a trailer but took his chance going to the basket and got rejected a couple of times.  His shot is streaky at best and gets easily overpowered by bigger guards.  Also puts up bad shots and cannot get around even the average defender in college.  Would rather draft little dog, he has a much bigger upside and is just a pup.  He would be great at the two with that stroke, just needs to get stronger and more assertive.  Burke is not a lottery pick, maybe a late first, or second rounder, still, no shame in that.  Combine will be the test and I reckon he is not going to measure up.  Its only because he has had a great run and we all know that success in the tourney does not always translate into a good pro player.

    • Apr 1, 20132:07 am
      by Jon

      Reply

      http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9070121/nba-gms-go-mad-breakout-stars-ncaa-tournament-espn-magazine
      obviously, you’ve been judging him critically for the entire tournament which is fair as all players should be judged critically. but yesterdays game is not a good indicator of his jump shot as he was sick with the flu and the first thing to go when you’re tired is the jump shot. his success in the tourney does seem to indicate that he rises to the challenge in big situations which is definitely sought after by gm’s. at this point his measureables will have to be really, really bad to keep him out of the lottery. 

    • Apr 1, 20133:18 am
      by oats

      Reply

      I disagree with most everything you’ve said. There are plenty of short players that are effective in the NBA, and Burke most definitely is not slow. He’s not crazy fast like Ty Lawson, but he is still definitely fast. People keep saying he has to be really fast to be a short NBA player, but even after losing his quickness due to injury Chris Paul has continued to be the best point guard on the planet. The little guy doesn’t have to be the fastest player on the court, that is nonsense. What he has to do is be crafty enough to still be effective. Despite your claims of his struggling against bigger defenders, there really isn’t much evidence to back that up. He’s just been good too consistently for that claim to hold up.
       
      Burke’s shot is a little streaky, I’ll give you that. The thing is that even when it isn’t falling he is quite capable of being productive. Take this past game. His shot wasn’t falling, but he had 8 rebounds, 7 assists, 3 steals, and only 1 turnover. His scoring was inefficient, but that still adds up to a good game. He has good shooting numbers and a killer assist to turnover ratio. That’s why he is a lottery pick, he’s the most efficient point guard in the country.
       
      The NBA puts very little weight on the combine other than for the height, weight, and wingspan measurements. At the LeBron James Academy in the summer he was listed as 6′ in shoes, and having a 6’5″ wingspan. If those numbers hold up, the combine won’t mean much for Burke.
       
      Robinson meanwhile is a below average shooter. I hate when people fawn over a guy’s stroke if he can’t actually hit the shots. If he was a good shooter he’d be in a pretty great situation to show it, in a college offense with a great point guard and 2 other players that are better 3 point shooters than him to take the pressure off. Add to that how unproductive he was. Then throw in the fact that Michigan is a really young team, so if he was really that good he should have been able to assert himself more than this. His ceiling might be higher I guess, but he is so insanely far from his ceiling that it makes no sense to take him in the top 10.

      • Apr 1, 201310:40 am
        by Huddy

        Reply

        I agree and think Burke is definitely able to shine in the NBA.  I keep reading comparisons to CP3 and even Allen Iverson, but I even look for him to be a player like Nash.  Nash never really ran by everyone, he had a step back like Burke and shot a lot of fall away shots because he is smaller.  Nash has never been a great defender or the most athletic guy, but he has excellent court vision and like you said is crafty.  When he plays it is less like he is dominating and more like he knows something that the other guys on the court don’t in a way. 

        • Apr 1, 20139:13 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Nash would also be in the conversation for best shooter in the history of the NBA. Also one of the flashiest distributors ever.

  • Apr 1, 20134:21 am
    by robert bayer

    Reply

    Another well done article by Patrick Hayes … the posts here  and the last 2 games have changed my mind .. Pistons should draft Burke if he is available with the 4th pick onwards … He is simply a great leader .. and winner .. It is also possible to draft players with a lot of talent who wont work hard and / or are not winners ..

  • Apr 1, 20134:56 am
    by pokerpro932

    Reply

    I would rank my dream drafts like this : Mclemore , Oladipo , Porter , Shabazz , Burke . The reason I put Burke 5th is simple.What do we do if we draft him? If he starts at PG we have a really small backcourt with Knight at the 2. I dont see that working. I just have a feel that Knights future is at the 1 , either that or out.And trading him would be a reaaaaally drastick measure, as he is still very young and suposedly a cornerstone for our future. I really like Burke and his leadership but I just can’t see the team clicking with him , we would just have to make a lot of move to build around him. 

    If we draft a 2 , however , like Mclemore or Oladipo , we could go back to the original plan and start Knight at the 1 , with the new guy starting right away at the 2. I know Knight hasnt been that good running the show,but my personal opinion is that we should let him stuggle it out and learn as much as he can.In this scenario I think it would be good if we signed Iggy to a reasonable deal , like for 3 years or something, to start at the 3 with Singler as his backup.Then we would only be left to fill some holes on the bench , like another scorer at the PF/C and at the 2 . 

    And the third scenario, drafting a young 3.Porter is a better prospect for me than Shabazz , but I wont be that mad if we end up with the latter also.We desperately need scoring from the wings and I think both of them could have a bright future in Detroit.Again, I would preffer Otto.

    All in all , the best case scenario for me is drafting Mclemore or Oladipo.Just imagine the defensive potential of a line up consisting of Knight,Oladipo,Iggy and Dre .Wait,I think I just got an orgasm…

    • Apr 1, 20138:57 am
      by G

      Reply

      I think short of some kind of miracle breakthrough, Brandon Knight will never be a legit PG. He’s never been much of a passer, not in HS, college, or the pros. He’s never been good at taking care of the ball either. Unless he wakes up one morning with Magic Johnson’s brain, he’s a 2 guard. Forever. We might as well get used to it.

      At this point I think the Pistons can draft a 1, 2 or a 3 without worrying about redundancy. I don’t really see Burke as a bad fit. He’s clearly got a 3pt shot, he’s got a better handle & is faster with the ball than anyone on the team, and he’s got that PG mentality. A Burke/Knight back court would be small, but less problematic since both are good defenders.

      • Apr 1, 20139:07 am
        by pokerpro932

        Reply

        Damn , I know you are right about Knight and I like him better at the 2 also , but ……. damn.Are we going to win with this backcourt , with Brandon at the 2? I really can’t imagine it.And I like Knight,I really do , but being the franchise’s SG of the future… shit

        • Apr 1, 20133:57 pm
          by oats

          Reply

          That didn’t mean Knight was the SG of the future, just the present. Actually, it might not even be that thanks to free agency. As far as I’m concerned Knight hasn’t done enough to justify worrying about how he fits with anyone, so I wouldn’t use that to knock down Burke. Take the best piece you can get now, worry about replacing Knight as the starter later.

      • Apr 1, 20139:53 am
        by Keith

        Reply

        Did you really just say Knight and Burke are good defenders to make up for their size? Knight maybe, he’s long, athletic, and can dig in on defense, but he does get pushed around by the bigger 2s in the league. Burke isn’t even a good defender in college. He’s not particularly agile and has trouble staying in front of opponents. He has pretty quick hands, but his quick hands are a lot like Greg Monroe’s. If he doesn’t get the strip, he gives up a wide open lane to the basket. 1.6 steals per game is not elite by college standards.
         
        Further, Burke isn’t just small, he’s not very athletic. He is going to get eaten alive by NBA players – the same way Stephen Curry and Steve Nash do, but without the elite shooting or vision.

        • Apr 1, 201310:33 am
          by G

          Reply

          Actually, I DIDN’T say that Knight & Burke are good enough defenders to make up for lack of size. What I SAID was that their lack of height would be LESS PROBLEMATIC because they’re good defenders.

          Burke isn’t Oladipo on D, but he’s quick enough to stay in front of his guy (and he DOES stay in front, not sure where you got that) and he gets steals because he’s a smart defender. This blog has already covered Knight’s D, so I’m not going to regurgitate old stuff. He needs to add about 10-15 lbs of muscle to improve his D, but he’s already pretty solid.

           

          • Apr 1, 201310:52 am
            by Keith

            I have a feeling we are going to agree to disagree on Burke’s defense. I don’t think he’s good even now, and I think his obvious athletic limitations are going to get him killed in the NBA. The only relatively equal sized PGs who play good defense that I can think of are CP3, Rondo, and Parker. All three are tremendous athletes for their size, and Rondo has go-go gadget arms.
             
            Moreover, rookies are almost always bad defenders in their first year because of the change in rules and the complexity of NBA defense/offense. Combine Burke as a rookie with his already limited defensive potential, and I think we’ll be looking at a defensive wreck. We already have Monroe in the frontcourt giving away baskets because he can’t/doesn’t rotate well in help D. We’re only going to exacerbate our problems with a tiny backcourt that can’t guard the point of attack.

          • Apr 1, 201311:29 am
            by G

            Parker and Paul aren’t really great athletes. Rondo is, but those two guys are similar to Burke in athleticism. Burke ISN’T that bad of an athlete either. He’s quick, not on Lawson’s or Teague’s level, but he’s quicker than anyone the Pistons currently have, other than Bynum.

            Definitely agree, rookies tend to struggle on defense their first year. First, Burke wouldn’t be drafted for his defense. Second, he would then come back his 2nd year and not be a rookie. I’d take a year of sub-par defense on the perimeter over THIS year, which has been a disaster.

        • Apr 1, 201310:47 am
          by G

          Reply

          Let me explain the difference between what you though I said & what I actually said. “Make up for lack of size” would imply that it doesn’t matter. “Less problematic” means it DOES matter, but their being good defenders makes it LESS OF A PROBLEM, hence “less problematic”.

          Plenty of bad defenders have mitigated their weak D by being tall (see “Nowitzki, Dirk”), and plenty of good defenders have handled larger opponents by playing good D (Rodman on Shaq, Pippen on Ewing, Lindsey Hunter on whoever…). Burke and Knight aren’t defenders of that caliber, but I’d prefer that defensive back court to, say, Calderon and Stuckey.

        • Apr 1, 201310:51 am
          by Huddy

          Reply

          When you look at a Burke/Knight back court I find it hard to believe that Burke is the bigger size issue of the two.  6 foot with a 6 5 wingspan isn’t crazy for a pg, hes not exactly nate robinson.  I see Knight as being more of a liability because the increased size at SG and the likely hood that the SG the team is facing has any kind of physical back down game compared to how many PGs do.  I agree Burke may be more like a Nash or Curry, but without the vision and scoring?  I think it is way to hard to assess his vision potential and be SURE he will be as good as Nash, but he isn’t exactly showing himself to be blind in his college game.  As far as scorning goes he does that well now and there is definitely a learning curve for that to translate to the NBA, but what more can you ask for him to prove in college.  He averages 20 pts and 7 ast a game, does he have to average 30 and 15 to prove he has potential?  It is also important to remember that with Drummond in the lane all of our guards will greatly benefit for help defense because it will be very difficult for PGs to have success driving the lane with our inside presence next year and beyond.

          • Apr 1, 201311:37 am
            by G

            I agree with most of this. The problem with the Nash/Curry comparison is those guys are almost oblivious on defense, and Burke is locked in. Burke’s strength comes mainly from playing in the passing lanes and picking his moments for that swipe move of his.

            As far as Knight is concerned, I think he just needs to add some muscle, as I said before. He has solid defensive technique. He’ll be able to handle that back-down game if he can push back a little. Most of the taller 2′s don’t have much muscle, so a lower center of gravity and some extra muscle would actually give Knight an advantage if a 6’6″ SG decides to post him up.

          • Apr 1, 201311:41 am
            by G

            Forgot to mention re: Burke’s D – his 2 main strengths (passing lanes, swipe move) won’t suffer by him giving up an inch or two in height.

          • Apr 1, 201312:15 pm
            by Huddy

            Yeah I personally don’t think Burke will be a horrible defender I was just saying it seems like people keep saying don’t draft Burke because he and Knight are two small together, but Knight is really smaller for his position than Burke is.  its not as if getting a 6-5 PG to play with Knight will make Knight match up better at his position.

  • Apr 1, 20139:04 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    @Pokerpro, if we draft Burke, then Knight comes off the bench. We upgrade the 2 spot in free agency, and go after OJ Mayo hard, or Brewer, Nick Young, etc.

    However, regardless of the draft and free agency, Pistons can take major steps by using the amnesty clause on CV, trading Stuckey, letting Will Bynum and Jason Maxiell go! Trying to resign Calderon, however he’s going to explore free agency, and as much as he wants to play with Monroe/Drummond, my gut feeling is he leaves for the sake of his family and a chance to play for a championship (or he goes back to Toronto).

    Trey Burke with an elite shooting guard (like Mayo), Andre Drummond, and Greg Monroe, would improve our chances of competing for a playoff spot over night. The reason why I like him so much is he doesn’t turn over the ball like Knight does. Our starting back court is already small with Calderon/Knight, so I don’t see why we couldn’t try Burke and Knight together, if Joe D is still around I bet he’d be happy to use the Isaiah and Dumars comparison (Dumars listed at 6’3, and Isiah 6’1). Brandon Knight is listed at 6’3, and Burke at 6’0. It can work if we commit ourselves to it, and we have a Front court of Drummond/Monroe. If we believe in a Burke/Knight backcourt, we should explore the free agent market and add a explosive 3 like Josh Smith (who can also play the 4, just in case Monroe or Drummond get hurt again). Defense improves big time.

  • Apr 1, 20139:08 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    I meant Knight could come off the bench as well, if the Pistons coaching staff doesn’t believe in the backcourt of Burke/Knight. I think it works. As long as we get the players that don’t belong in Detroit’s future out of her this offseason (see mentioned above).

  • Apr 1, 20139:12 am
    by pokerpro932

    Reply

    A random thought went through my mind. Kevin Love isn’t happy in Minesotta. What if we swing Moose and BK7 for him , draft Burke,sign a SG and SF through free agency.Would the T’wolves even consider this and will it be good for us.I think that would be better, as Love can really stretch the floor and is uhhhhm Kevin Love …. 

    Also : I’m sorry if I commit any glaring grammar mistaces , but I’m not a native speaker. That said,cheers from Bulgaria ;) 

  • Apr 1, 20139:15 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    Best case scenario:

    Calderon resigns with us, we draft Burke. Burke comes off the bench, learns under Calderon, and earns a starting role in a few seasons, when Calderon either leaves or decides to retire. As long as we don’t sign Will Bynum, Burke can run our bench, and would be equally as effective.

    However, I’d be just as happy with Porter, Mclemore, Oladipo. Don’t see Mclemore as the number one pick anymore though. I think he falls somewhere between 3-5, and Porter and Oladipo fall between 5-10. Which are both in our range. Burke is a winner and a great leader. Would love to see him in Detroit.

  • Apr 1, 20139:20 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    Good idea, but I wouldn’t give up Monroe and BK7 for him. Maybe Monroe and Kyle Singler (or Kim English, Middleton). 

    But why are people so unhappy with Moose? I think he’s our best player this season, and him and Drummond have the potential to become like Tim Duncan/David Robinson (crazy comparison, but can happen), maybe not as successful as them, but the potential is definitely visible. Now as long as Drummond improves his health/fitness, and consistently plays 30 plus minutes, and IMPROVES HIS FREE THROW SHOOTING (so he doesn’t have to sit out, in the last 4 to 5 minutes in the 4th quarter), were going to be good.

  • Apr 1, 20139:22 am
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    If Monroe can just expand his range like Chris Bosh, that would also be a huge boost. He’ll never have a three point shot like Sheed, but that mid range game would really help!

    • Apr 1, 201310:03 am
      by Keith

      Reply

      Easier said than done. I would hazard to guess that more non-shooters remained non-shooters throughout their career than suddenly became great shooters like Bosh.

      • Apr 1, 201310:37 am
        by G

        Reply

        And again you would be incorrect. Most post players add range to their game as they get older. Rasheed did, Karl Malone did, David Robinson did, Millsap is starting to, and there’s about 10 others off the top of my head that I could name.

        • Apr 1, 201311:20 am
          by Keith

          Reply

          Your examples themselves are wrong. Sheed always took threes, and ended up (34% career from three) about where he started (33% from three). Malone admittedly improved his jumper in year three (along with his free throw shooting), but was also generally very inconsistent further out throughout his career. Robinson was never a bad mid-range shooter to begin with, and never really developed three point range. Millsap is another one who always had a decent mid-range game (that’s how Utah ran its offense with he and Boozer) and only really managed to develop an inconsistent three point range on minimal attempts.
           
          Players DO tend to get better at shooting over time, but most often it is minimal. And the biggest problem is that Monroe is a TERRIBLE shooter. Not just bad or below average, something that could become a weapon with just a little more improvement. His last three years he’s hit between 25% and 33% on his jumpers. He actually got WORSE this year from last year. Fact is, unless he can significantly boost those numbers into at least the low 40% range, it’s a dead shot. And given his own history and the minimal gains from MOST players that start out that bad, it’s not likely.
           
          Also notice that you are naming some of the best players in the game. The average player does not start nor improve like the best. And there are a lot more average players, and average learning curves, than greats. Many greats became great precisely because they were able to eliminate what would otherwise be a glaring weakness in their game. If you can name 10 more players off the top of your head, there’s a good chance there were 20 more players out there that nobody remembers, in part because they never improved enough to matter. A better comparisons for Monroe would be Al Jefferson. He’s been an offense-killing jump shooter for his entire career, and even he is a better shooter than Monroe.

          • Apr 1, 201312:08 pm
            by G

            With Sheed I was referring to his 3′s, and he never shot 100 3′s in a season until  ’00-’01 and his 3PT% was all over the place before then. Millsap is actually a perfect example. His first 3 years he averaged less than 1 attempt per game from 10-15 ft and shot about 33%, and averaged just over 1 attempt from 16-23ft and shot about 40% from there. The last 3 years he’s doubled the attempts in both ranges and improved FG% by 5-10%.

            Other examples – Derrick Coleman, Horace Grant, Kemp…

            I think Monroe’s terrible jumper % is entirely correctable. He often shoots without being squared up and he doesn’t have a consistent motion, both of which can be corrected in the gym. I think it’s unlikely that he’ll ever be Dirk out there, but I think he could get that elbow jumper 5-10% better at least.

          • Apr 1, 201312:11 pm
            by Huddy

            Its had to compare Monroe and Bosh because right now Bosh is the 3rd option on the team and takes a lot of open shots while Monroe is pretty much the sole focus for opposing front courts.  Monroe takes the ball to the hoop and gets a lot of fouls, which on this team is probably the best option for now.  I don’t think he has a good mid range shot, but he has time and should benefit from getting better looks from 10-12 feet when there is someone else worth guarding playing next to him.
            There is some give and take with Monroe not spreading the floor.  Rasheed spread the floor, but was that why he worked so well on the team?  its not as if we needed him to make space for Ben Wallace offensively since Ben was not at all an offensive weapon.  The year that team won the championship Rasheed shot 31% from 3, a considerable lower FG% than Monroe, less ppg, considerably lower rebs than Monroe, he was not a passer…They just kind of did different things.  Rasheed was a better defender, but didn’t have to guard the best big men and was probably only the 4th best defender on the team anyway.  I always liked Rasheed, but thought he underperformed.  In other words I thought he was better than he played.  His turn around could have been taken 5 more times a game imo and he just seemed to defer a lot.  We payed him 12 mil a year for that production and people are worried about overpaying Monroe who is much earlier in his career than sheed was and with room to grow..  It seems to me that Monroe and Drummond can shine if they have 3 other guys on the team that can spot up, they can pass well, and their inside game draws defense freeing up the other one of them to get offensive boards and put backs. 

          • Apr 1, 201312:26 pm
            by Keith

            If Monroe could bump his % by 10 on those elbow jumpers (low 40% range) I would be ecstatic. I still wouldn’t want him taking many of those shots, but it would force teams to respect the jumper and open the offense. Everything is theoretically correctable, but I just don’t see it as likely. Historical trends skew a lot more towards players failing to significantly improve than otherwise. It CAN happen, but it’s not the norm.
             
            Monroe has a number of things he needs to improve, also. So how realistic is it for me to expect him to come back next year with a respectable mid-range shot and decent defense at the same time? Sure, we have time to let him continue developing, but he’s already available to sign an extension. The team is literally betting millions of dollars on him now. If he never becomes a threat to shoot, that hurts both our offense AND our ability to shore up weaknesses around him (with his new contract).

          • Apr 1, 201312:44 pm
            by G

            Going back to Millsap – the development of his mid-range game coincided with Utah getting Jefferson. I think Monroe has a better than average shot at improving his jumper (based on his improvements in FT shooting), and I’m less worried about his defense. Drummond will improve Monroe’s D more than any off-season work would.

  • Apr 1, 20139:27 am
    by pokerpro932

    Reply

    I don’t hate Moos , in fact I love him.But Kevin Love is better,would fit better alongside Drummond and we would be solving the problem with Knight,that is commiting our future in the backcourt to two undersized players for their posotions . And I’m just throwing out an idea, I mean thats not a set and done deal,ofcourse there are some other things to consider,like if we get someone else from Minesotta,not only Love.The main reason I threw Brandon’s name in it is because I’m not sure Minesotta will trade their star player for Moose and a scrub…

  • Apr 1, 201310:24 am
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    LOL! Its the part of the season when every conversation looks the same… Might as well juust have a continous Draft Blog ….. 

    LOL…its funny 

    • Apr 1, 201312:12 pm
      by G

      Reply

      Agree. I like arguing with people sometimes, but I get kind of tired of trying to find new ways to say the same stuff.

  • Apr 1, 201310:34 am
    by Venice

    Reply

    All of the lastest mock draft I had seen is telling that we would draft Smart. I will kill Joe D if he draft another combo guard here.

    • Apr 1, 201312:14 pm
      by Jodi Jezz

      Reply

      Well, we’re going to pick either McLemore, Muhammad, or Smart…Hopefully you don’t go crazy and start killing people…

      • Apr 1, 20134:13 pm
        by oats

        Reply

        I hope you’re wrong. Luckily you have a long history of being wrong.

        • Apr 1, 20135:19 pm
          by Jodi Jezz

          Reply

          Really??. Please name two statements of mine that’s been wrong…

  • Apr 1, 201310:36 am
    by Keith

    Reply

    Honest question for those around. If we land the #1 pick, who should we pick?
     
    On one hand, Noel was the best player when healthy, and had the best adjusted numbers to the NBA. On the other, he plays the same position as Monroe (I don’t see him as a center).
     
    We could pick McLemore, but that means we just picked a spot up shooter with little ball-handling skills – and are projecting a ton of improvement in the rest of his game (think Klay Thompson or Harrison Barnes).
     
    We could pick Marcus Smart, who looks like a a Dwyane Wade-type, but who can’t shoot a lick on an already shooting-starved team.
     
    We could pick Porter, who is probably the most well-rounded player available, but who may not be aggressive enough to lead the team.
     
    Do we take the best player (Noel), and just run with 3 elite big men? Do we use it to trade Monroe or Drummond for a haul of other players/picks? Or do we throw out hat in with one of the other flawed players in the draft?

    • Apr 1, 201311:02 am
      by I HATE FRANK

      Reply

      “”We could pick Porter, who is probably the most well-rounded player available, but who may not be aggressive enough to lead the team.”"

      Porter Reminds me of Luol Deng…. we dont need him to lead the Pistons,,,we just need a scoring wing that can create his own offense off the dribble….

      • Apr 1, 201311:18 am
        by Huddy

        Reply

        It is interesting that the argument against Porter is always that he won’t definitely be the best player on his team as if anyone else in the draft will.  Maclemore has more star potential, but doesn’t currently show himself to be well rounded.  Why are the pistons looking to get a guy that definitely will be their best player.  Obviously we want to get the best player we can, but that doesn’t mean its a wash if they don’t have the potential to be the best on the team.  Monroe is the best on the team currently and Drummond has the potential to be the best on the current team.  If we are anything like the last championship Pistons team there won’t be a consensus best player, we will just have guys who fit together and work well as a unit.

        • Apr 1, 201311:30 am
          by Keith

          Reply

          I think the problem is that the league is too stacked to win the way we did in 04. A team of all-stars with no superstars just isn’t going to beat the Heat in the short term, or the Thunder in the long term. At this point, we are kind of forced to hope Drummond becomes pre-injury Dwight Howard, as that’s the only player we have with superstar potential.
           
          And I agree we have to really look at the strength of this draft more deeply when picking a player. McLemore wouldn’t even be a top 5 pick in a lot of drafts. He’s a great shooter, but doesn’t add much else. I think if I was making the pick, I would go Noel, Porter, Smart, Oladipo. Noel was just far and away the most impactful player when healthy. Porter does everything really well, and even if he doesn’t become a star, I know he’ll have a long term place alongside any teammates I find for him. Smart is all about athleticism and potential – he could legitimately be the next D-Wade, and I expect to be about as good as Andre Iguodola in the end. Oladipo is just the ultimate role player. He hits his shots, he defends like crazy, and he doesn’t dominate the ball to the detriment of his better teammates.

          • Apr 1, 201312:21 pm
            by Huddy

            Yeah the league is different so I see where you are coming from.  We probably have a better potential for picking up all star talent by facilitating a trade with our cap space or by saving it for a big signing next year, so as far as the draft goes, i don’t see us getting over the hump with any one of these guys.  I think at 1 if Noel is projected there it might be in our best interest to trade with someone that more obviously needs a big man and see what kind of value we can get in addition to a draft pick that still leaves us able to get oladipo or someone a little further down. 

          • Apr 1, 201312:25 pm
            by G

            The ’04 team couldn’t have beaten this Heat team. I think it’s still possible to have a collection of good players beat a superstar, but not this year. The good thing for the “collective” teams is the Heat’s window is pretty small. They work well this year because of Battier and Allen, but those guys are on their last legs. Denver is going to be intriguing if they can keep their core together, and Memphis probably can’t contend this year but may go on a nice run.

            I think McLemore’s D gets overlooked, he’s pretty solid. I like him better than Smart, who’s an inefficient scorer and not really a PG. Also, I think Smart is more athletically limited than Burke, so I was surprised to see you talking about his athleticism. I think you make a good point about Noel & the Pistons shouldn’t write him off just because they already have 2 bigs.

          • Apr 1, 201312:35 pm
            by Keith

            I think Smart is arguably the most athletic guard in the draft, given his size. Keep in mind I utilize stats a lot and believe in their utility as a tool. Pretty much every measure out there says Smart is an elite athlete for his position. Being strong and able to bully defenders is just as good as being quick and running around them. Smart racks up steals and rebounds at such an inordinate rate that it’s impossible to say he’s not physically imposing his well.
             
            Obviously he’s inefficient as a scorer, but he compares very favorably to Dwyane Wade in college, and Wade was in a much stronger draft. Every player this year has significant weaknesses. In Smart’s case, we have to project taking smarter shots (which is something that tends to improve over time anyway). That’s not to say he’ll definitely be great, but I think projecting Smart to be more judicious with his shot selection is more likely than projecting McLemore to suddenly develop a strong dribble and decent passing game.

          • Apr 1, 20131:39 pm
            by G

            Smart the most athletic guard in the draft? Even factoring in size, Oladipo, McLemore, MCW, and Harris are ALL more athletic. Oladipo is probably the most athletic PLAYER in the draft. 

          • Apr 1, 20134:18 pm
            by oats

            Maybe Jamaal Franklin too. That guy is pretty freakish athletically.

  • Apr 1, 201311:28 am
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    I think Porter is cool, but Bennett is much better,

    Bennett is more explosive….has more potential to dominate a game

    • Apr 1, 201311:35 am
      by Keith

      Reply

      I’m really leery of tweener forwards. Bennett doesn’t seem quick enough to guard the three (and he’s a very lazy defender to begin with), and has struggled to score against big 4s in college. If we were using him like Millsap, as a 4 that can stretch the defense and put the ball on the floor, I would love him. But, I don’t like him as a 3, and I don’t see why we would pick another offense-only 4 when we already have Monroe.
       
      I think Porter fits our team better, and let’s not pretend he hasn’t taken over games and dominated just as thoroughly as Bennett.

      • Apr 1, 201311:43 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        I guess its a difference of opinion which is cool….

        Bennett Length and athletism alone… can make a him a very capable defender at the 3…. some stuff is coaching….

        People call him at Tweener because he’s 240 …..We need to realize the players arent the same anymore….

        He explosive from the Perimeter and he has a legit jumper… Jason Maxiell comparison is horrible…. 

        • Apr 1, 201312:09 pm
          by Keith

          Reply

          Actually, I call him a tweener because of his size/length. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think he measures out about the same size as Millsap, who for the longest time was considered to small for the 4 (and still gets beat up defensively). Now, if he becomes the next Millsap, that’s great, but Millsap is a 4. We don’t really have much use for a 4 right now. And maybe his weight affects his agility, but I hadn’t really considered it. He’s a strong driver, and can finish through contact, but he doesn’t move his feet well on the perimeter. NBA caliber 3s would blow by him (again, compounded by his being a lazy defender already – though this may be partly due to the offensive load he carries at UNLV).
           
          I think he would fit better on a different team is all. We aren’t good enough defensively to cover up for him. We need to draft players that can/will play both ends of the floor.

          • Apr 1, 201312:29 pm
            by G

            I agree with most of this, except your rationale for NOT grabbing Bennett contradicts your rationale for grabbing Noel first. I think Porter, McLemore and Oladipo would be better picks than Bennett OR Noel. If all 3 are gone by the time the Pistons pick, they should probably look at Burke, Bennett and Noel in some order.

          • Apr 1, 201312:39 pm
            by Keith

            In Noel’s case, I just think he’s the best player in the draft. I’m not going to pass on the best player in the draft for need (or lack thereof). After Noel, I think the rest of the players are a lot closer, with Porter being second. If Bennett was far an away more talented (like I think he is compared to Burke), I wouldn’t care that he plays the same position as Monroe. However, if everyone is pretty close anyway, I take need into account.

          • Apr 1, 20134:43 pm
            by G

            The torn ACL doesn’t give you pause?

            I tend to agree with the BPA strategy, especially in basketball, but only when there’s a significant talent gap between that player & the next guy. I don’t think that’s the case with Noel. He’s basically the same guy Drummond was last year, except less muscled.

            The other time I disagree with BPA is when they guy you’re drafting DOESN’T represent an upgrade over what you already have. Porter, Oladipo and McLemore all represent upgrades over the Pistons’ 2 & 3 spots. Noel would come off the bench until they either got rid of Drummond, Monroe, or Noel. The difference with Bennett is he gives you something you don’t already have – a big with inside-out game (it could be argued that Charlie V provides that, to which I would say “HAH”). 

  • Apr 1, 201311:34 am
    by frankie d

    Reply

    drafting the best player available is almost always the way to go in the lottery.  especially if you get one of the top 3-5 picks.  drafting for need almost always means that a team will reach for a player who probably is never going to be as good as the guys you passed up on.
    portland, where i live and watch the blazers, is a perfect example of that syndrome.
    they passed up on jordan because they had just drafteddrexler.   they passed up on durant because they already had brandon roy and webster and travis outlaw and seemed set at the wings, and they needed a center.
    the team should do their due dilligence and whoever they believe is the best player, especially in the top 3-5 area, they should draft him.  
    and if it is noel, draft him and then hold an auction for either noel or monroe, after you decide who fits best next to drummond.
    but assuming they don’t pick in the top 3-5, the guy i love is burke.  have always been a fan, but his tourney play solidifies the idea that he is just a clutch, primetime player who will do very well at the next level.
    is he a bit small?  sure.  but the league has a long, long history of guys his size being able to play for a long time.
    too many players throughout the decades to go through the list, but there is always a spot for a smaller PG with burke’s skills.
    he reminds me of a jacques vaughn and jameer nelson hybrid.  if vaughn had jameer’s shot, he would have been an all star.  if jameer had vaughn’s sense of the game, he would have been a great player.  the thing that usually prevents a smaller PG like burke from excelling in the nba is the lack of an outside shot.  but if you can knock down that 3 pointer, and run an offense the way burke can, you end up looking like steve nash.
    have to say that a guy i’d soured on, michael carter williams might also be worth a look.  i’d study him very closely and if it looked like he could develop a 3 point shot, ala jason kidd, i might draft him.  he would be the perfect mate for knight as he could defend the SG and knight could take the pG.  their perimeter defense would be awesome.  nice to see MCW finally playing the way everyone thought he could play.
     

    • Apr 1, 20134:40 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      Portland passed on Durant because Oden projected as one of the most dominant big men to enter the league since Duncan. They may have used having Roy as another justification for it, but they really liked Oden. He was just on another level defensively. We’re talking about a guy compared to Hakeem Olajuwon. Have you looked at his per 36 numbers when he did play in the league? 16.7 points, 12.8 rebounds, and 3.4 blocks per 36 minutes in his 21 games of 09-10. The year prior he put up worse per 36 numbers of 14.8 points, 11.6 rebounds, and 1.9 blocks, but considering that was his first year playing those numbers suggest a stud. This wasn’t a case where they ignored the general consensus to take a player that fit a bigger need. Oden and Durant had the same grade. They were both can’t miss stars, assuming they stay healthy. Durant stayed healthy and became the second best player in the league, Oden got hurt. That crap happens. In hindsight they should have said they have the same grade, so let’s take the guy with a cleaner bill of health. At the time they said they have the same grade but one of them is a center and that is the hardest position to fill. That’s not an unreasonable stance to take if their doctor’s cleared Oden. If they ignored warnings from their experts then shame on them, but it still isn’t a good example of taking need over talent because the talent was clearly there.
       
      Other than that one part I more or less agree with everything else you’ve said. If the grades are even you take the guy that fits better, but we’re talking a situation where you go back and forth on the guys every time you think about it when dealing with a pick that high.

      • Apr 1, 20135:47 pm
        by frankie d

        Reply

        well, one of the rumors in town is that kevin pritchard lost his job primarily because of the oden pick.
        and part of the owner’s dissatisfaction was that pritchard ignored the red flags regarding oden’s health. 
        you are correct, their grades were very similar, if not identical, but before the draft, there were all sorts of red flags regarding oden’s health.  oden’s legs are different lengths, which can certainly put a lot of stress on a highly performing athlete.  he had a history of injury.  one of the things that always disturbed me was that he just looked old.  like he had prematurely aged.  and considering the way his body broke down, i wonder if there may have been something to that.
        pritchard took the risk on him despite the red flags.  everyone always knew that durant was going to be a killer.  the real question was whether oden would stay healthy enough to realize his vast potential, which was truly amazing.  i’ve seen the guy live and i’ve also seen him out in the street and he is one of the biggest human beings i have ever seen.  he dwarfs guys who are 6’10″.  so yea, he was a very unique player who may have been worth gambling on.  
        however,  considering the difference in their physical profile and histories, i think oden can be regarded as a bit of a reach.  not much of one, obviously, but when a guy like durant is there for the taking, i think you have to take him, regardless.  oden was a huge gamble because of his physical history; durant was about as close to a sure thing as you can get.  and i think he could therefore be regarded as the “better” player at that position in the draft.
        there was plenty of talk on sports radio about the fact that roy and durant would not be able to play together.  that roy was such a ball dominant player that it just wouldn’t work to bring another offensive  player like durant on board.  
        but the thinking was always that you just have to take a big guy in that situation – i even think i heard pritcchard say something very similar to that – but, imho, more bad draft choices, especially in the lottery, have been made because GMs have followed that dictum.
        definitely understand your view and agree for the most part, and this is definitely hindsight – i wasn’t sure if i preferred oden or durant when the draft happened – but i just think that if you have a sure thing, and a guy with a questionable phyiscal history, the healthy guy moves to the top of the list. 

  • Apr 1, 201312:05 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    I think Immma ride with Team Bennett ….. just got finished watch videos of him, to suPport the my belief in him…. he will probably go top 3 in this draft…he is too young, too good and too much potential for a team to pass up….

     

  • Apr 1, 201312:07 pm
    by Sidewalkvendor

    Reply

    I am ok if we pick bennet since i consider him a top 5 talent. Drafting should be the best talent available and not by positional need. Noel smart mclemore porter and bennet are the top 5 in this order imo.

    • Apr 1, 201312:16 pm
      by Keith

      Reply

      Completely agree. We can argue about who we want until we are blue in the face, but the most important thing is to get the best player, regardless of position. I personally think Porter is better than Bennett. But if Porter is gone and Bennett is the best player left, I certainly wouldn’t want to pass him up.
       
      This, coincidentally, is my same issue with Burke. I wouldn’t mind picking him in a vaccuum. I think he’ll be a good, but not elite, PG. The problem is, I don’t think he is a top 5 talent and we are slated to pick 5th. Noel, Porter, and Bennett seem obviously more talented. McLemore, Smart, and Oladipo seem to have obviously greater potential. If we somehow dropped a few spots, sure, Burke could be a prime candidate. But, so long as we are picking in the top 5, I don’t see how we justify Burke over those other guys.

      • Apr 1, 201312:34 pm
        by G

        Reply

        Agree about everybody except Smart. Not sure what he brings – poor shooter, not any better at distributing than Knight (who’s not good), too slow to guard a PG, would have similar problems as Knight guarding the SG… I honestly don’t think he represents an upgrade over Brandon Knight in any area, other than leadership.

        • Apr 1, 201312:46 pm
          by Keith

          Reply

          I think most would disagree on your athletic assessment of Smart. Also, he’s also bigger and Stronger than Knight. I see Smart as a 2 guard the way Kobe and Wade are two guards (and to a lesser extend Stuckey). They are primary ball-handlers, but expected to score rather than pass. 
           
          We’ve been a bit ruined by the combo guard experience because Dumars has picked bad combo guards and tried to fit them like square pegs in round holes. Rather than taking a combo guard and trying to force them to be something else (PG), why not just roll with combo guards and surround them with fitting teammates? Put Smart at the 2, then put a facilitating shooter (just someone that will pass to an open player, not run the offense) at the 1, and a D and three player at the 3. We should be running our offense through the frontcourt anyway.

          • Apr 1, 20131:05 pm
            by G

            Everything I’ve read on him says something like “solid athlete, not spectacular”. The main knock on him is lack of quickness, and he doesn’t finish in the lane well, which suggests to me a lack of elevation. My point is – Knight is already a combo guard with more length & athleticism & he shoots better. Why draft Smart?

          • Apr 1, 20134:47 pm
            by oats

            Wade was better at finishing at the rim and he had better shot selection. Neither of them can shoot the 3, but Wade wasn’t taking 4 bad 3 point attempts a game and Smart is. The first part is obviously the bigger problem with projecting Smart as a Wade type of player, but the second part is important too. Wade also outperformed his expectations by a pretty wide margin, so it’s just not the most realistic comparison for Smart. I see Smart as somewhere in the Stuckey to Evans range.

      • Apr 1, 201312:42 pm
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        Im debating for fun…. but im not arguing….

        But Bennett is a Monster, and a game changer…Millsap is not the athlete Bennett is that a huge difference…. Bennett is 18? 19? years old..im not worried about the perception of a player be a lazy defender right now…. they said the same about Drummond…. but Game Changers are what you need….

        And he is a very skilled offensive player ….Comparison Porter shot…. 42% for 3′s …. Bennett shot 37.5% for 3′s …. Porter only made and took 7 more 3′s than Bennett…

        Bennett 54% from the field … Porter 48% from the field …biggest differnce Porter was more of a force on the offensive boards, and he already have a better face up game than Porter…

        Porter is better at creating for other players i will give him that…. but that about the only read edge id give him….

        • Apr 1, 201312:48 pm
          by I HATE FRANK

          Reply

          Bennett 54% from the field … Porter 48% from the field …biggest differnce Bennet was more of a force on the offensive boards, and he already have a better face up game than Porter…

        • Apr 1, 201312:54 pm
          by Keith

          Reply

          I think that’s a pretty big advantage. Bennett isn’t going to play on the Pistons the way he plays for UNLV. We aren’t going to just give him the ball and tell him to win the game. Porter is a better shooter and projects as a better defender at the 3. Those are both things that are more important to our team.
           
          And I wouldn’t so quickly dismiss the Millsap comparison. If you put Millsap in the draft today, and teams knew what he would become, they’d probably take him first overall. This is not a strong draft. Millsap is likely to outpace most of this year’s top 5 when comparing total careers.

        • Apr 1, 20133:39 pm
          by G

          Reply

          From Chad Forde:
          Mar 26 Update: Bennett tore through the Mountain West tournament — hitting 3s, grabbing boards, banging in the post — before slamming into wall in the first round of the NCAA tournament. Cal, which isn’t necessarily know for its interior defense, gave Bennett problems the whole game and made it look like he really struggled to score against length in the paint. That’s not the message you want to start sending to NBA scouts in late March when you are an undersized power forward.”

          Expect Bennett’s FG%’s to drop significantly in the NBA, Porter’s should stay pretty much the same.  

          • Apr 1, 20134:51 pm
            by oats

            You know they played Cal before the tourney too. 25 points, 13 rebounds, 53% from the field. Why does the tourney game against Cal mean so much more than the December game against Cal?

          • Apr 1, 20134:53 pm
            by oats

            He also played well against Oregon and Iowa St in out of conference games. He did have a terrible shooting game against UNC, but still put up a 15 and 13. I’m not seeing a guy that just beat up on the Mountain West.

          • Apr 1, 20135:06 pm
            by G

            People place more weight on the Tournament than on a given regular season game. More pressure, etc. I didn’t write the thing, Forde did. I’ll have to take a look later to see what (if anything) was different.

          • Apr 2, 20139:43 am
            by I HATE FRANK

            I could Careless about one game when he dominated the other game…Plus Porter didnt look good either when it mattered…

            Bennett just turned 20 like 2 week ago… his all-around game is more likely to dominate than Porter…

            Also Porter physical development is behind Bennett…

  • Apr 10, 201312:08 am
    by Stefani Turchi

    Reply

    Watch Sports Live On Your PC And Never Miss Another Game Again. No Contacts,No Hassles Just A One Off Payment For 24/7 Access To Your Favorite Sports. http://bit.ly/watch-sports-live

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here