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

Pistons to interview Nate McMillan on Tuesday

Marc Stein of ESPN:

NBA coaching sources say Pistons interviewing Nate McMillan on Tuesday.

Nate McMillan had already been reported the front-runner for the job, and this is even more evidence. At this point, I consider McMillan, though just slightly, more likely than not to become the Pistons’ next coach.

175 Comments

  • Apr 29, 20139:00 pm
    by Detroit P

    Reply

    Yes! Love it come on Joe get him

  • Apr 29, 201310:14 pm
    by anthony

    Reply

    Hey Does anyone know what ever happened with that Obradovich guy? I liked what he brought to the table. I think He would fit great with this team.

    • Apr 29, 201311:04 pm
      by gmehl

      Reply

      So you can barely remember his name but you want him to coach the pistons. I assume that if you don’t even know his name then you don’t even know what kind of offensive/defensive sets he runs but hey I like the sound of him so tets make him the coach…pleeeeease! Nate McMillan is without a doubt IMO the best/safest pick as the new coach of the Detroit Pistons. He is defensive minded and runs a slow offense and that right there is Pistons basketball. If we can sign Nate then the next thing Joe has to do is work the phones and get some Tony Allen/Trevor Ariza type wing players. We also need a Carl Landry type forward that can come off the bench and spell Monroe and Drummond. Jarret jack might even be a chance due to Nate coaching him when he was with the Blazers especially if the two had a good player/coach relationship.

      • Apr 30, 201310:05 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        Defensive minded? I don’t really care if he is offensive minded or defensive minded, but virtually all of his teams have been better at scoring than stopping. So don’t call others out for not knowing what they’re talking about and then spout nonsense like that.

        • May 1, 201312:02 am
          by gmehl

          Reply

          “So don’t call others out for not knowing what they’re talking about and then spout nonsense like that”
          Tasier, McMillan’s teams have been above average defensive team and yes a lot of that has to do with the slow paced offense he runs. I get the distinct feeling that when McMillan is named our new head coach you’re not gonna like it.

          • May 1, 20131:39 am
            by oats

            On a per possession basis McMillan’s teams have not been great defensively. They’ve actually been pretty average. His bad teams have been pretty awful. Offensively it’s a bit more of mixed bag. His bad teams stunk, but that is to be expected of teams with no talent. His good teams have usually been top 10 in scoring on a per possession basis. More often than not, his teams rank higher as an offense than as a defense. Playing slow keeps both of the scoring totals down, but the fact of the matter is that his teams have been better offensively than defensively. The reason is simple, Nate does everything in his power to limit turnovers. Combining fewer possessions with fewer mistakes on offense has been a pretty effective way for his teams to win games, but I wouldn’t consider that a defensive mindset.
             

          • May 1, 20133:13 am
            by gmehl

            “The reason is simple, Nate does everything in his power to limit turnovers”

            @Oats Is there any chance of Knight maybe excelling under McMillan due to this slow paced offense?? Also I am not sold on people saying because we have so called athletes on our team so we have to run and gun. Who are these so called athletes?? I count one and that is Drummond so IMO I have no problem whatsoever hiring Nate and slowing things down to a snail pace. Also Oats I know it wasn’t you that said we have a team full of athletes so I thought i’d just get that out of the way.

          • May 1, 20135:13 am
            by oats

            Well, if Knight is moved off ball and really just focuses on being a shooting guard and not a facilitator he might get those turnovers down. That said, it is a major concern how Knight would fit in McMillan’s offense. Maybe he figures it out, but I think it’s more likely that he ends up in Nate’s doghouse. I don’t know if he would have the say needed to do this, but I kind of hope McMillan could convince Joe to move Knight either for a player that fits better or for a draft pick. I like Knight just fine as a player, but the potential problems with him and McMillan seems awfully risky. McMillan will figure out how to live with Monroe’s turnover problems because he really wouldn’t have a choice in that, but tossing Knight in on top of that might be too much to ask of Nate.
             
            I happen to agree that the team doesn’t need to go fast paced. Monroe obviously can work in a half court set. Drummond is excellent in pick and rolls. Knight could learn to come off screens and be more of a spot up shooter. Middleton and Singler both seem pretty good moving without the ball. The team needs a point guard who can handle the slower game and run some pick and rolls, but Dumars is rumored to be really interested in retaining Calderon. If not Calderon, then Teague or Jack could also do fine in that kind of offense. The team would also need to find some shooters along the wings, but that is a problem that can be fixed. Both pick 7 and pick 38 have a decent chance of finding a shooter, so I’d assume at least one will be picked up on draft day. I’d say free agency has a decent chance of adding a 3 point shooter as well. Scouts seem to think Middleton can shoot the 3, and maybe next year he can prove them right. There are definitely some holes to fill if the team wants to play grind it out McMillan style basketball, but they also have a decent opportunity to fill those holes this off season.
             
            I would also say the team doesn’t need to play slow. Greg Monroe actually does run the court pretty well despite his reputation for being slow. I know the NBA combine numbers don’t carry a ton of weight, but Monroe actually had a better time in the sprint than Drummond. Obviously watching them play makes it apparent that Dummond is the faster guy, but I really do think Monroe is faster than people realize. He’s really bad at change of direction and he doesn’t accelerate that well, and that contributes to his perception as a plodder. In short, the types of movements big guys spend most of their time doing is the type of movement where Monroe is much slower than a typical power forward and even a lot of centers. Still, when it comes to just running the length of the court I think Monroe would hold up better than most people think. Monroe’s strong passing ability could also be an asset if he really learns to throw outlet passes. That’s worth pointing out since a lot of the people who want a slow system point at Monroe like he’d be a waste in a faster offense, and I really think they are wrong on that. He won’t morph in to Kenneth Faried or anything, but Monroe would find a place in that faster offense.
             
            Drummond is also definitely an athlete. Knight isn’t a superb athlete, but he is a good one and can run the floor pretty well. Stuckey can run the court, although I do think it would be weird to base a decision on how the team plays off of Stuckey when he doesn’t seem like a part of the team’s long term plan. Similarly, JJ, Singler, and Middleton all run the court pretty well but aren’t guys a team should base that kind of decision on due to being role players. There are some athletes in Detroit to work with though. A few more guys that fit that mold would have to be added over the summer, but once again this is a good time to make that decision.
             
            Personally I’m not that strongly attached to a pace. I’m actually more concerned with the system around the pace. Iit’s important to keep a focus on the post play of Monroe and his passing from the post, finding easy opportunities for Drummond to throw down some dunks, movement without the ball, and 3 point shooting. Obviously the team needs to add shooters for that to work, but I really don’t see a system that doesn’t emphasize shooting that would work with Detroit’s bigs. The Spurs are 6th in pace, and the way they play would be great around Monroe and Drummond. 3 years ago the Spurs were pretty average in pace, and 5 years ago they were really slow. That said, the entire time they were running an offensive system that I’d like to see Detroit implement. That’s part of why I’m so high on Budenholzer, he could set up a system that makes sense and then just scale the pace to the talent on the team the way his mentor Popovich has done. This year the Spurs are 6th in pace, 7th in offense per possession, and 3rd in defense per possession. Just truly amazing work that Pop is doing, and I’d like to turn it over to Budenholzer to see if some of that magic rubbed off on him. SVG tends to prefer an average pace, and his teams tend to be quite solid defensively while using a scheme that I think could be tweaked to incorporate both of Detroit’s bigs. McMillan’s slow it down offense would also fit nicely if the team can get it’s turnovers under control. Those are my 3 favorite coaching candidates for a reason, they are the 3 I most trust to set up an offense that will get the most out of Detroit’s big men, and they also care about defense even if it might not be the first priority.

          • May 1, 20138:31 am
            by gmehl

            I was reading recently that Popavich will be retiring once Duncan does and that’s when Budenholzer will be taking over so i guess that counts him out. I guess money and more control doesn’t do it for everybody. I am sure we will find out in the next few weeks who the new coach will be but I am assuming McMillan is odds on atm of being that guy.

      • Apr 30, 20132:06 pm
        by anthony

        Reply

        Just because I can barely remember his name doesn’t mean that I don’t know about him as a coach.. I’m sorry that I cannot properly pronounce his name, therefore I have a hard time remembering it. I’ve seen his teams play, and they get out and run fastbreak, similar to Mark Jackson’s offense. When plays break down, they run heavy pick and roll, which would benefit with Dre and Moose down low. I know that McMillan runs a heavy set half court set offense, which in this case, isn’t a great fit. We don’t have shooters or solid playmakers, but we have young athletes that can run. IMO Obradovich is a better fit, and also IMO, you need to back off. Its people like you that ruin sites like this one.

        • Apr 30, 20137:07 pm
          by Scott Free

          Reply

          Not to wade into all the Obradovich stuff… I share anthony’s concern about mcmillan’s coaching philosophy.  while i personally feel a half-court methodical style is the best for winning a title… i don’t think its a good fit for an unbalanced younger squad without proven wings.

          the pistons have young legs and drummond is TOO good in transition to avoid running.  this squad should focus on easy baskets first and foremost. 

          • Apr 30, 201311:52 pm
            by Anthony

            Yea, exactly. Now if we can get some shooters and a playmaking pg in the draft or free agency, then I’d be all for McMillan because well have the peices in place To succeed. But if we have the pieces we have now, and say we draft Oladipo, then I would be opposed to Nate and be hoping for a run n gun coach. 
            On a side note, I think oladipod would be a great fit for this team because 1) he can run and is extremely athletic. 2) he can knock down the open shot if need be. And 3) he’s a great defender and personality and I think BK can still succeed at pg similar to Eric Bledsoe. 

          • May 1, 20132:51 pm
            by G

            I wouldn’t say Bledsoe’s exactly “succeeding” as a PG. And Knight is already doing what Bledsoe does, only Knight plays more minutes.

        • Apr 30, 201311:56 pm
          by gmehl

          Reply

          “Its people like you that ruin sites like this one”
          @Anthony Firstly I would just like to say that I’ve never had anyone complain about what I’ve to say here at pistonpowered let alone ruin there blogging experience. Point I was trying make was that you are willing to hand the pistons coaching job to a guy you barely know anything about. If you take offence to that then you won’t really last long around here as most of the other commenters will shoot you down pretty quick.

      • May 1, 20138:47 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        Look, I’mnot saying McMillan would do a poor job. I

        • May 1, 20139:23 am
          by tarsier

          Reply

          I have no idea why that posted. I had written:

          “Look, I’m not saying McMillan would do a poor job. I’m saying if anything, you should look forward more to his offense than his defense; I don’t know which he emphasized more, but it doesn’t take much digging into the numbers to see that he is a n above average coach for regular season offense but an average at best coach on D. I’m not particularly excited about Nate as coach, but he is a decent albeit meh choice.”

  • Apr 29, 201311:01 pm
    by Lorenzo

    Reply

    Good news. If they can sign him it would be great news.

  • Apr 29, 201311:02 pm
    by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!)

    Reply

    He was my first choice, but shouldn’t we look around a little more before settling for a coach this early? I mean, I guess this way he could help decide who we draft based on how he coaches and who fits his system. Either way, with our position, we’re likely getting Shabazz anyways

    • Apr 29, 201311:14 pm
      by gmehl

      Reply

      Yeah I am also coming to terms with the fact that Shabazz is going to likely be our best available pick. If we don’t move up then I’m really hoping one over Oladipo, Porter, Burke or even Bennett slide down to us. I was kind of thinking that depending on how the draft plays out that if was a choice between shelling out big money to bring Josh Smith here then it would be much smarter money wise to rather just draft Bennett. Yes Smith is a better defender but if we wanted to go with a tweener forward then Bennett will obviously be way cheaper. This way come the trade deadline next season Joe can then swing some deals for some better players that wont be available in the offseason. Teams will be looking to offload players to get under the cap and this is where I feel we can get players we need rather than just settling for scraps.

      • Apr 29, 201311:29 pm
        by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!)

        Reply

        Bennett would be a better option than Shabazz, so i would hope that he (among others) falls to us. He has the likely chance of falling because if we stay at 7. I think it’s a lock that Burke, Noel, Porter, McLemore, Oladipo are not going to fall, but I could see a team maybe reaching for Len and if that happens it might be at the expense of Bennett. But then the question would be: Does he fit a need? Can he play SF? Those questions could be asked about Smith too so saving money and going that route would be a viable option. I haven’t seen enough games from Bennett to know whether or not he can play SF…Smith on the other hand I have seen plenty of his games and I think he could, but he would have to work on his jump shot, which actually from what I’ve seen is improving.

        • Apr 30, 201312:27 am
          by frankie d

          Reply

          smith is a horrible 3 point shooter.  the numbers say that, and he just looks like a guy who can’t shoot from distance.  his 3 point shot is basically a set shot that he needs lots of time to get off.
          any SF detroit uses must shoot 3′s well in order to spread the floor for drummond/monroe.
          bennett, on the other hand, shot 38% as a freshman.  he has a smooth, solid stroke from the outside.   he looks like a shooter.  he looks like  a bigger larry johnson, with a legitimate 3 point stroke.  
          had not watched him much, but saw a couple of his late games and,imho, he can play the 3.  he handles the ball well, he has the shot, and he can punish guys down low.  he is not the fastest or quickest guy, but he has lots of plusses that make up for his minuses.  
          if bennett falls to detroit, we should celebrate. 

          • Apr 30, 201312:39 am
            by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!)

            College 3′s and NBA 3′s are different, but yes Smith is no Curry when it comes to making three’s. He’s only 30% on the season but it’s 2 percent better than where he is career wise in that category. The problem with Smith that I just now put into consideration is the fact that he is a horrible free throw shooter and that would be bad since Drummond is no Nash when it comes to hitting free throws. It would be hack-a-piston because Monroe and Knight aren’t good free throw shooters either so Smith doesn’t fit here. Bennett, if he falls here, would be a blessing but that’s a big IF because I don’t see how he gets past Charlotte, Sacramento, and Phoenix. If he does then great, if not, embrace in Shabazz and hope for the best

          • Apr 30, 201312:50 am
            by frankie d

            the problem with smith is that he doesn’t seem to understand that he is not a 3 point shooter, and he insists on shooting that shot.
            just plain dumb, imho.
            a player has to know who he is, what he does well, and if josh smith had a friggin brain he’d realize that shooting 3′s was one of the dumbest things he could do on a basketball court. 

          • Apr 30, 20132:23 am
            by oats

            @ frankie d. I really don’t think Bennet is a small forward. I watched him quite a few times, and his lateral quickness is pretty lacking. His length could help hide that some, but it’s still a problem. He only took 2.8 threes a game in college, and I think asking him to shoot more of them would result in that number dropping. He really did get good looks for many of those shots. At small forward that becomes a bit of a liability, but at power forward it means he can line up out there and create space even if he doesn’t use that shot that often. More than that, it just doesn’t seem like an ideal use of his skill set to play him at small forward. He’s 6’7″, but has a 7’1″ wingspan and weighs 240 lbs. He also is ok on the boards and is really good finishing at the rim. It just seems obvious he’s better off as an undersized 4 that can stretch the court. Considering the team has two big man that can help with his relatively average rebounding ability for a power forward, it just makes more sense to me to use him primarily as the 3rd big man. Drummond and Monroe can largely stagger their minutes to make certain one of them is usually on the court at center as much as possible, and Bennett could be a floor spacing power forward next to either of them. Depending on match ups Bennett could also get some play time at small forward, but I think making him a small forward full time would lead to him getting exposed.
             
            @ Blocks by Dre. The problem isn’t just that Smith can’t shoot 3s, and that is definitely a problem. He can’t shoot mid range shots either. Outside of 10′ he shoots 30%, and that’s not acceptable from a small forward. That’s also close to half his shot attempts, and if he was a small forward that would just encourage him to take even more of them. He just doesn’t have the range necessary to play the 3 unless one of the big guys he is playing with can shoot the 3. Playing him there when the team has someone like Ryan Anderson or Kevin Love makes sense, but outside of that kind of scenario I’m just not buying it. Then throw in Detroit’s added need for those wing players to extend all the way out the 3 point line, and Smith is a really bad fit. I’d actually consider his awful free throw shooting a tertiary concern behind not hitting mid range jumpers or 3 pointers, but it’s just another mark against him joining this roster.

          • Apr 30, 20133:08 am
            by oats

            *that percentage dropping. I wrote number which is dumb because it sounds like if he took more than 2.8 shots then he’d take less than 2.8 shots. If I’d used that 38% that frankie d used and I was referring to, then it would have worked. I didn’t do that, so that sentence was needlessly confusing. Anyone else kind of wish there was an edit function or something?

          • Apr 30, 20131:26 pm
            by frankie d

            @oats i actually don’t disagree with your basic analysis of bennett.
            i do think that his outside shooting will not only hold up over time, but will actually improve.  he just seems to have a really solid stroke, with good fundamentals and he shoots with a great deal of confidence.  he looks like a guy who is a shooter.
            i do agree about his lateral quickness, though i wonder if some of that is just laziness, defensively.  i have to admit, that he did not put out a lot of effort defensively, whenever i saw his games.  on the other hand, his length and athleticism may help mask that lack of mobility, to some degree.
            ideally, yes, he’d probably be better off as more of a stretch 4 – sort of a charlie v with a better body and better rebounding – but i think he has just enough skill to play the 3.  (offensively, i think he can play the 3, the issue would be whether he could adequately defend most 3′s in the league.) i was impressed by his ballhandling and his decision-making. he seems to see the floor well and despite his willingness to chuck shots from distance,, i think that is more the design of UNLV’s offense than selfishness on his part.
            i’d ignored him for a long time because i just thought detroit would never need another young big guy, but then took a look at him and thought that maybe, just maybe they could slot him in as a 3, primarily, and then slide him over to the 4, on occasion, a true hybrid forward. 
            while a guy like porter is more of a natural fit at the 3, i do think that bennett is probably the second or third most talented player in this draft, behind noel and possibly mclemore.
            because of his talent, i’d be happy to draft him and get him out on the court at some position and then let the opponent worry about defending him.
            have to admit that i am just a fan of bennett, as a player, and think that he’s going to make some team very happy they drafted him.  exactly where he plays – 3? 4? both? – it is hard to say right now. i just think that he’s going to play a lot next year and score a lot of points.

        • Apr 30, 201310:08 am
          by tarsier

          Reply

          How is Oladipo a lock not to be available at 7? Heck, the only reason I’m confident Burke won’t be is because if somebody wants a PG, there’s him and no one else.

          • Apr 30, 201310:16 am
            by G

            Yeah, I think there are 4 or 5 different scenarios where Oladipo could be available at 7. Probably more.

          • Apr 30, 20133:17 pm
            by oats

            I also think Victor has pretty good odds to slide. Orlando could take him if they slide, but they have more pressing needs since they already have Afflalo and likely will get one of the guys they have targeted ahead of him. Charlotte could use a SG, but pairing him on the wing with MKG would leave them pretty limited offensively. Phoenix has similar issues with tossing him out next to Dudley. New Orleans has Gordon in his spot and holes elsewhere. Sacramento has Thornton and really needs a SF. Cleveland just took Waiters last year. All 6 teams ahead of Detroit have a compelling reason to pass on Oladipo, but any of them could take him if the guys they are targeting are gone. That makes him hardly a lock to be off the board at 7.

      • Apr 30, 201312:48 am
        by deusXango

        Reply

        Ever hear the statement “strike while the iron is hot?” Do you know what that means? We all know that Dumars doesn’t have a clue, based on his past practice of allowing deadlines to pass, and generally putting off making moves to improve the team, all while making excuses for not doing. The new CBA states that a team must spend up to 90% of it’s available CAP money, and on top of that, with the record the Pistons have I don’t think it’s wise to be penny pinching right now. Josh Smith can develop an outside shot before  Bennett grows 3″ at this point, and he’s a veteran presence, not a rookie; Drummond and Monroe need a stabilizing veteran on the frontline with them IMHO. Right now we all know where we are in the draft order, so I’m not going to etch it in stone before the facts play out…we may move up!

        I’m all for signing the best FA available and that’s Josh Smith; after the big signing I would look at the possibility of signing Allen and/or Hickson/Blatche.

        First things first, interview McMillan and then Shaw, and after those two are interviewed in depth, make a choice for the long run.   

        • Apr 30, 20131:11 am
          by oats

          Reply

          Bennett is one inch shorter than Smith, so why does he need to grow 3 inches? Well, Smith is sometimes listed at 6’9″ despite being 6’8.25 inches in shoes while Bennett is listed at 6’7″. Bennett also has an extra inch on his wingspan if you buy in to the measurements from the LeBron James Skills Academy over last summer. I’d also put the odds of him getting an inch taller higher than the odds of Smith developing an outside shot. Smith is 8 years in and hitting his athletic peak, it is highly unlikely that he’s going to add that shot now. Also, the idea of Josh Smith being a stabilizing presence is kind of hilarious. He’s a known head case and has terrible shot selection. The shot selection is partially that he is a terrible shooter, but he also takes way too many shots that aren’t in the paint. Using his numbers from this past season, inside 10′ he shot 60.4% and outside of 10′ he shot 30.5%. The problem is he took 662 shots inside 10′ and 558 shots outside of it. That’s a problem.
           
          I honestly don’t agree with the no penny pinching stance. If the team can’t get a player who is both good and actually fits they should just just go cheap. Spending money just to spend money is how they ended up with Gordon and Villanueva. Smith doesn’t fit and the team should avoid him unless he can be had on the cheap. I’d add Iggy and Tyreke Evans as guys who could be good players but have skill sets that don’t mesh well in Detroit. I’d rather the team make a move on Redick if they really felt they had to spend money, but even so it makes sense to be relatively frugal. If they maintain cap room the team can attempt to bring on salary via trade, and teams will be maneuvering either to avoid the tax line or to make a run at free agents next season. Worst case scenario is Detroit rolls that money in to next year’s stronger free agent class, which still sounds better than over paying just spend the money.

          • Apr 30, 20139:54 am
            by Jeremy

            They should penny pinch to an extent, but they have to hit salaries that are at least 90% of the salary cap so they still have to spend some of what is available. Otherwise, the remaining amount is surcharged and paid back to the players that are on the team at the end of the year. Do you really want to pad the pockets of most of these under performers any more than they already have been?
             
            Assuming the salary cap for 2013-14 is the same as 2012-13 ($58.044 mil), they are going to have to spend at least $52.239 mil to not be penalized. Spotrac.com (http://www.spotrac.com/nba/detroit-pistons/cap-hit/2013/) projects them to have $35.045 mil in cap obligations when the new league year starts. That leaves them with 10 players under contract. They have 3 draft picks this year (1 first and 2 second rounders) and assuming both the second rounders make the team and there first round pick is where they are projected to be , they will still have room for 2 players and not be close to hitting their 90% threshold. You’re looking at a scaled salary of $2.4 mil for the 2013 #7 pick plus the several hundred thousand dollar deals the second rounders are given.
             
            The best business move would be to hit the $52.239 mil threshold to not be penalized and sit on the remaining 10% of your cap for next season. You’re looking at needing to drop $14.79 mil on players [Cap Threshold - Minus salary obligations (including 1st round pick scaled salary)]. You then go into the 2014 off season with the 10% of the cap you saved plus the salary of Charlie and Rodney coming off the books. The best business move does not always equate to the best basketball move.
             
            Many will call for using the amnesty clause on Charlie. The little talked about option would be moving Charlie and Rodney’s expiring contracts to a team looking to get under the salary cap/luxury cap in 2014. That may require holding out until the trade deadline, but could reap reward. I’m not sure what team that would be looking to do this at the moment, but I think Charlie, Rodney, and multiple 2nds or a future 1st for Granger sounds nice. We need a 3, they need a 2, and Charlie provides them with a stretch 4. All 3 players have expiring deals.
             
             

          • Apr 30, 20132:28 pm
            by oats

            The best way around that minimum expense thing I can think of is to front load deals. That way they can easily get themselves up to that minimum while also preserving cap room later. I’d much rather do that then overspend on someone like Josh Smith despite him not fitting. For example, give Calderon like $10 million for the first year, and then around $4 million after that for the next two years. He won’t hurt the long term salary situation, and after over paying for a single year when the team can afford to over pay him they will have him on a reasonable deal from there on out. That makes way more sense than spending just to spend.

      • Apr 30, 20132:00 am
        by oats

        Reply

        @gmehl. I really like the odds of someone slipping. Every draft seems to have a confusing choice in it, and often that pick comes in the top 10. Last year featured the slightly surprising Waiters at 4 choice, and the truly bizarre Terrence Ross at 8 selection. 2011 featured Vesely being rated too high and going 6, as well as the surprising Tristan Thompson going 4th ahead of Valanciunas. 2010 featured Wes Johnson being rated too high and going ahead of Monroe and Cousins, and then the stupefying decision to take Udoh over Monroe. A lot of people seem to think this is actually a 7 player draft with Muhammad being included in that group. Some have Zeller or Len there as well and that would make it an 8 player draft in their estimation. I see it as a 6 player draft, but it just needs one team to disagree with that stance for someone to slip. The 6 for me are the same as most people. Noel, McLemore, Porter, Burke, Oladipo, and Bennett. I’m thinking the chances someone from that group slides to Detroit is pretty good.
         
        This draft seems like a potentially wild and unpredictable one. Cleveland has surprised me with that Thompson pick, and to a lesser extent with the Waiters pick. Sacramento made that baffling move to trade down and get Fredette, and then just throw in their general incompetence on top of that. New Orleans took Austin Rivers at 10 and he’s been a disaster. Phoenix also adds a level of general incompetence that needs to be noted. Charlotte’s new GM seems to be decent, but if Jordan puts in his two cents it could go any direction. Orlando seems to have been kind of clever starting with the Dwight trade, but that’s still 5 of the 6 teams picking before Detroit’s likely pick that have reasons to question their decision making.
         
        Areas of need has to also be mentioned. Orlando needs a bit of everything, with only center and small forward seemingly filled for the long haul, so they won’t fall to the point where they can’t just make a smart pick. Charlotte could be screwed if the miss on Noel and McLemore. Burke does a lot of what Walker does, Oladipo is awfully similar to MKG, and Porter plays the same position as MKG. I guess they would be slotted for Bennett, but I could see Zeller or Len, and they might go with Muhammad as a shooting guard. Cleveland would be similarly screwed if they were to miss on both Noel and Porter. They’d probably want to go center or small forward which puts the Muhammad, Zeller, and Len group all up for consideration. Phoenix wants a power forward or a wing player, but they have a preference for a scoring wing. If Noel, McLemore, and Porter are gone they will have to consider taking Muhammad over a wing that doesn’t score in Oladipo or an undersized power forward. New Orleans wants a small forward or point guard. The assumption is the point guard would be Burke, but the reason they want to dump Vasquez has to do with his terrible defense and they might actually decide that Michael Carter Williams better fits their needs. At small forward Shabazz comes in to play if they missed on Porter. Sacramento is also in need of a small forward. I personally am really fond of the Sacramento takes Muhammad idea. 
         
        All of that adds up to Detroit having decent odds of getting someone good. I’d say the odds of slipping go Bennett, Oladipo, and Burke. I could actually see weird scenarios where two of those guys dropped, but I really doubt it happens. I only think one of the Muhammad, Len, Zeller, or MCW group has a realistic chance of causing someone to slip. Honestly, I hope it’s Muhammad going top 6. I could see Bennett sliding to 6 because of Len, only to have Dumars pass on him for Muhammad. Muhammad really does check a lot boxes for Dumars. Long, not a great athlete, might not have a defined position, smooth shooter, and he scores a lot. Luckily Bennett checks those boxes too, although if he is an undersized 4 as I suspect then the not a great athlete can be removed. Considering I don’t have Muhammad in my top 8 guys, I am legitimately worried about Dumars being the sucker who falls in love with him.

        • Apr 30, 201310:08 pm
          by frankie d

          Reply

          i have a feeling that zeller is going to start moving back up teams’ draft boards.
          just thinking about him further, i think it is clear that he’s going to play in the nba and he’ll probably have a ten year career.  
          part of the question is whether he is going to be an all star, near all star who is worthy of a top 5 pick or whether he is going to simply be a jerebko-type rotation player who is more worthy of a top 20 pick, like his brother.
          but just looking at his skills, his motor and his size, there is almost always a place in the league for guys like him.
          the weird thing about him is that his game in college was almost totally based on low post moves and easy stuff right around the basket and it is hard to believe that he can make a living doing the same things in the nba.  he’s just not long enough or explosive enough and all those blocks that guys put on him in college will become an epidemic in the nba. 
          no, the only way he survives – and i think he absolutely will – is by totally changing his game and becoming a guy like spencer hawes, a seven footer who stretches the floor with his face-up shooting.  unfortunately, teams will have to simply believe, project, that he can make that kind of transition, and draft him based on that projection.  watching him shoot, he definitely looks like a guy with mechanics solid enough to become a good shooter, with range.
          as the draft gets closer and as he goes through his workouts and the combine, i think teams will get a bit more comfortable with the idea that he can make that transition, and if they get back to that comfort level with him, i think it is very possible that he’ll shoot back up draft boards and end up being the guy who causes one of the truly top tier guys to slip down to detroit.
          maybe cleveland will entertain the idea of having him join his brother in their frontcourt? 

          • May 1, 20138:45 am
            by G

            Some teams could talk themselves into Zeller, but it won’t be Cleveland. They need a 3 badly, and somebody to inherit Sideshow Bob’s rebounding/defense/flopping responsibilities. If they don’t get the #1 pick & take Noel, they’ll take Porter, McLemore, or Len. Len has the edge on Zeller when it comes to defense & rebounding.

  • Apr 29, 201311:21 pm
    by gmehl

    Reply

    The only other guy I want them to interview is Brian Shaw.

  • Apr 29, 201311:38 pm
    by Mark

    Reply

    Just say NO to Shabazz

    • Apr 29, 201311:58 pm
      by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!)

      Reply

      And draft who? If we stay at 7, who do we draft over Shabazz? I’m not his biggest fan, but I also realize this draft is mediocre at best from where we pick on down. Shabazz will be better than whoever’s left

      • Apr 30, 201312:06 am
        by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!)

        Reply

        unless, of course, someone shows the team otherwise during workouts in the next few months…doubt it’ll happen in this weak draft class but it’s possible 

      • Apr 30, 201312:52 am
        by oats

        Reply

        Well, if one of the top 6 guys slides take them. That’s Noel, McLemore, Porter, Burke, Oladipo or Bennett. After that I’d say Kentavious Caldwell Pope and CJ McCollum should be thought of as clearly ahead of Muhammad. I’d bet on the team taking Muhammad, I just think that’s a big mistake. Honestly, if I was doing it I’d add Reggie Bullock and Glen Rice Jr. over Muhammad too. I’m aware Bullock and Rice are not even vaguely considered potential lottery guys, but that’s kind of my point. If I was at 9 and the top 8 guys were gone I’d trade down and get one of those guys a bit later than take Muhammad.

    • Apr 30, 20136:05 pm
      by Lorenzo

      Reply

      Shabazz would actually fit in quite well in a half court offense (a la something McMillan might run). I don’t doubt the kid’s skill set and his work ethic, just his attitude, that’s something the scouts, coaches (who ever they turn out to be), and GM have to evaluate quite closely. Though I’m hoping for ping-pong luck and McLemore. 

  • Apr 30, 20131:34 am
    by gmehl

    Reply

    Guys I have got good news. Apparently Marcus Smart is having second thoughts and might be entering the draft after all. Fingers crossed that he does cause it could save us a world of pain. Here’s the story:
    http://www.orlandopinstripedpost.com/2013/4/26/4271506/2013-nba-draft-rumor-marcus-smart-enter-oklahoma-state-orlando-e 

  • Apr 30, 20137:35 am
    by Corey

    Reply

    I’m usually a pessimist, and agree it’s a six player draft for the pistons. But it’s highly likely someone wanting a big man will take either Zeller or Len in the top 6. *crossing my fingers*

  • Apr 30, 20138:04 am
    by Giles

    Reply

    personally if take cj McCollum …. I think he might turn out to one of the top 5 in this draft, his handles and quirky movements make for an intrigueing type of nba guard….sort of a young billups.

  • Apr 30, 20138:05 am
    by Giles

    Reply

    ………….and if shabazz is our pic I’d rather take alex len.

     

  • Apr 30, 20138:41 am
    by Vic

    Reply

    I’d take Tony Mitchell or CJ McCollum if the 6 don’t drop 

  • Apr 30, 20132:17 pm
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    I hope Indiana is eliminated in the first round, and we can interview Brian Shaw quicker, as their owner mentioned that no Assistant Coaches will be able to interview for other jobs until after the playoffs/season is over. Go Hawks! Although Indy vs Knicks will be more interesting…
    I just hope Shaw considers the Pistons over the Sixers. I like Nate McMillian but hopefully Shaw also gets a chance to interview.
    And yeah C.J. McCollum over Shabazz any day!

    • Apr 30, 20132:33 pm
      by G

      Reply

      What’s the big deal with Shaw? What does he bring? Genuinely curious.

  • Apr 30, 20132:33 pm
    by Mark

    Reply

    To blocks on dre:
    unless Shabazz has a serious attitude adjustment and /or interviews well, I stand by my original thought regarding him.  The last thing this team needs is a potential cancer in the locker room..
     

    • Apr 30, 20133:44 pm
      by I HATE FRANK

      Reply

      here’s my email hdrmedley@gmail.com

      Please email me all these attitude problems? And potential cancer?

       

      • Apr 30, 20134:04 pm
        by G

        Reply

        The easy one to point out was his reaction to his teammate hitting a game-winner, but there’s also the issues with his dad, and the fact that he’s a terrible team player (i.e., not passing out of double, triple and quadruple teams). I also got the feeling that his teammates were happy to see him go.

        • Apr 30, 20134:32 pm
          by I HATE FRANK

          Reply

          Thats the best you got?  a moment of immaturity, and that moment will shape his career?

          Pippen refused to go back into a game because it wasn’t drawn up for him…
          Kobe had immaturity problems also

          Probably half of the NBA have players with poor or no relationship with there fathers…

          Most plays was drawn up for him in catch and shoot situations or scoring situation …how is that selfish? 

          • Apr 30, 20134:43 pm
            by G

            Like I said, that was the easy one to point out.

            Coaches don’t draw up every single play, I hope you know that. They work on sets & a system, but they rely a lot on decisions the players make on the court. Muhamad often ignores better options to take heavily contested shots

            Other than the fact that he doesn’t pass or try hard on defense, that his teammates don’t like him, that he cares more about his own success than team success, and that he lied about his age, <yeah, sounds like a great guy & every organization would be happy to have him> 

          • Apr 30, 20134:52 pm
            by oats

            By the way, the biggest difference between Pippen and Kobe with Shabazz is talent. They are way better basketball players and kind of earned their egos. Shabazz is a pretty mediocre prospect and feels entitled to his. That’s why it’s a significantly bigger issue for Muhammad than for Pippen or Kobe.

          • Apr 30, 20135:13 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            so if he was more talented to your liking if would okay that he had an attitude? think about what you are saying

            And because he don’t pass or pass well doesn’t mean he has an attiude problem nor does it mean that he is a cancer…if means he has a weakness.. 

            So now his teammates don’t like him? How you know he didn’t go into practice the next day and apologized? How you know they didn’t get along after that game?

            I respect it more when u say, I think he will be average or below player, but when you add stuff to subtract from the total its pointless and silly.

            Never said Shabazz is gonna be Kobe or Pippen I said he IMO is the best offensive player scoring player in his draft…

            We clearly have different opinions on his skill-set at the NBA level
             

          • Apr 30, 20135:17 pm
            by G

            You asked why we thought he might be a cancer. I said because he ignores his teammates and has shown on several occasions that he cares more about his own success than team success, that’s an indication he might be a cancer. Then you say “so what”, essentially. Ok…

          • Apr 30, 20135:50 pm
            by oats

            @ I HATE FRANK. I would definitely say that star players can get away with having a bit of an ego problem, yeah. When an average to below average player has that same kind of attitude it is problematic. He will want guys to defer to him like he is a star, but they won’t because he hasn’t earned that. When a star demands his team mates defer to him, they get it because that guy really is that good. Those are two very different scenarios. One you can live with, the other leads to problems. Muhammad clearly does not project as the kind of stud that guys defer to. I’d argue he wasn’t the clear cut star of his college team. Jordan Adams was pretty equivalent to him, and Larry Drew was the steady junior that made the decisions for the team. Even Kyle Anderson has a claim to being nearly as good. Anderson isn’t the shooter Muhammad is, but his presence on the boards and as a passer are really valuable. Given that, Muhammad doesn’t have a strong case for being that way. Even Pippen, who earned the right to his ego, would defer when he was partnered with a better player in MJ. He always knew when to take a back seat. I have serious doubts Muhammad will understand that dynamic.

          • Apr 30, 20136:09 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

             im not defending Shabazz because if 
            I wanted to pick him apart I would use that to…

            He’s a scorer and a freshman … I love his intensity …not gonna get into a long debate about it

            Either like them or you don’t… 

          • May 1, 20138:02 am
            by G

            You asked why he was a cancer. I gave you 2 and a half legitimate reasons. Obviously your mind is already made up, so why even ask?

          • May 1, 201312:41 pm
            by frankie d

            i just don’t think there is anything particularly special about shabazz and his game.  imho, just a classic  case of buzz and hype not matched by the product.  and don’t forget that the hype and buzz was very deliberately put out there by his family, or rather his dad, for his benefit.
            what you see on the court just doesn’t match the hype.
            the most surprising thing about him – when i actually watched his games –  was that he was so awkward, not very explosive at all.  he had no explosiveness, no real ability to just go up over defenders.  he just looked like an average player, with a little bit of hops, who had been used to bullying guys on the court. 
            i think he’s the kind of player you can definitely get later in the draft, if you do your homework and get lucky with a guy.
            one guy who comes to mind, with a very similar game is tony snell from new mexico.  he’s taller, just as long, it appears, and he appears to be a better athlete.  he looks quicker and smoother.  
            his shooting numbers are all better than shabazz’s also.  he plays like a skinnier danny granger.  
            if i’m looking to get a SG to catch and shoot and possibly grow into a decent defender, i’d pass on shabazz and instead look at drafting a guy like snell in the second round.  
            shabazz may not be a stiff, but he doesn’t appear to be anything particularly special either.  why waste a lottery pick on a guy like that?
             

      • Apr 30, 20136:25 pm
        by Lorenzo

        Reply

        I actually like Shabazz’s skill set, I think he is a talented (albeit unorthodox) player who works hard at his craft. Though lacking athletic flash the guy is a pure scorer. The biggest knock on him has been his attitude and the negative circus that has surrounded him since his high school days; its well documented, a quick internet search should give you ample material to pour over.

        I think on talent alone you draft him, but scouts, coaches, and management will have to flesh out a lot of his intangibles and off the court headlines to establish him as a legit/draft-able prospect. Will that happen? I dunno, I think he got a bad rap (un-fairly so) for not being able to turn around an impossible situation at UCLA…on the other hand there are some eye brow raising issues that will have to be studied very diligently by personnel departments across the association. On talent alone I would want him drafted as a Piston….but those other red flags are a worry.

        • May 1, 20138:07 am
          by G

          Reply

          To be honest, my concerns about his attitude are secondary to my concerns about his game. His shooting fell off significantly at the end of the year. If you break the season into thirds, he was phenomenal in the first third, then pretty average in the second third, and then his shooting fell off a cliff in the final third. He was absolutely terrible. That concerns me. It’ll also be harder for him to get his shot in the NBA, so I think that final third is more indicative of what kind of success he’ll have.

          Obviously I could be wrong, he could’ve just been in a bad situation at UCLA and needed to get out. But so far I haven’t seen much that makes me like him.

      • May 1, 20139:29 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        Look if Shabazz had Kobe or Pippen level upside, nobody would care about a little immaturity. As it is, no one much cares. It’s just the poor icing on the blah cake that is his game.

        He is a pure scorer. Understand, that is a negative thing. It says nothing about his scoring ability. It just says he doesn’t do anything else. But people can get away with that flaw when they are excellent scorers. That is the second knock on Muhammad. He’s not an excellent scorer. As numerous people have pointed out, he is probably not the best scorer in this draft. He is a slightly above average scorer.

        That’s a recipe for a poor man’s Kevin Martin. Because Martin can at least score more efficiently. I do not want to use a top ten pick on a poor man’s Kevin Martin. 

        • May 1, 20133:44 pm
          by I HATE FRANK

          Reply

          Poor comparison, but i agree i wouldnt spend a top ten pick on a poor mans Kevin Martin either

          Nor would i be excited about drafting a player that many people compare to Tayshaun Prince

          Its all about how you value talent…

          • May 1, 20134:20 pm
            by G

            Except Porter is viewed as a rich man’s Tayshaun, which is definitely more valuable than a poor man’s Kevin Martin. In most drafts I wouldn’t take a rich man’s Tay in the top 5 (but probably top 10). In this draft, he’s a top 5 pick. Easy.

          • May 1, 20134:41 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            No they talk about Porters potential, and they say he is the best SF in this draft…and in this weak draft he be

            Porter is not explosive, he is not strong, he is not physical, not very athletic… You might love his skill-set, but once again I just don’t know if it translate to the NBA game.

            I’d much rather Michael-Carter Williams 

          • May 1, 20134:56 pm
            by G

            Really? MCW? He can’t shoot! He played in that amoeba 2-3 zone that made his D look better than it was, and his shooting percentages were .393/.292/.694. Porter shot .480/.422/.777, and DEFINITELY plays good D.

        • May 2, 20139:03 am
          by I HATE FRANK

          Reply

          If we plan to keep Knight at the 2, and Sign a starting SF…

          Then he MCW makes since, even if we re-sign Calderon for a 2-3 year deal MCW makes sense.

          Shooting can improve, and the Cuse 2-3 zone still require alot of foot speed,quickness, and instictive reaction.

          NO one say Porter will be a big time scorer, no one says he will dominate at the NBA level, everyone just says he’ll be solid.

          Carter-Williams is a better athlete, has an great first step, and in the more wide open NBA game his change of speed ability would make a huge impact. Also, him playing P&R with Drummond and Monroe. His Upside and his skill-set is more desireable.
          He has been called a gifted ball-handler and passer

          Shooting can be coached, and it can improve in a year.

          Example: Porter shot 22% for 3′s as a freshman he improved to 42% the following year, Carter barely played as a freshman, so it silly to think he cant get better

          • May 2, 20131:53 pm
            by G

            Going back to the age-thing, Porter was an 18 year-old freshman, MCW was 20. I think it’s unreasonable to expect any significant jump in MCW’s shooting numbers, since he shoots poorly in all aspects of the game (FG, 3PT & FT).

            IF Detroit picks up a wing that can shoot the lights out, MCW might fit, but I’m not crazy about PG’s that can’t at least shoot a 3. 

          • May 2, 20136:19 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            You are backward with your thinking… Experience trumps age everytime

          • May 3, 20138:28 am
            by G

            You are backward in your understanding of what I’m saying. Porter was 18 and developed into a better 3PT shooter between 18 & 19. MCW was 20 and was already less developed than Porter while being older. If you assume a constant rate of improvement, Porter’s ahead of MCW already and will remain ahead of him. The only way MCW catches up is if he makes a leap and Porter makes no such leap.

            The guy with the greatest potential for improvement is the younger guy because he has more time to improve, while the older guy has already missed on chances to improve that the younger guy hasn’t had yet. MCW is 21, Porter is 19.

  • Apr 30, 20132:45 pm
    by Carl

    Reply

    Nate McMillan would be a good choice considering the options available.  Next Joe D needs to sign Corey Brewer to go along with either Nate Robinson, JR Smith, Jarrett Jack, or a trade for Eric Bledsoe.  The Pistons need young, tough, hungry, and experienced players that fly under the radar, similar to when he acquired Chauncey, Rip, etc. 

    • Apr 30, 20132:51 pm
      by G

      Reply

      Nate Robinson & JR Smith? Pass. Don’t think either follow your idea of what the Pistons need.

      • Apr 30, 20133:08 pm
        by Carl

        Reply

        3 pt shooting, displays passion/toughness, both can somewhat hit clutch shots.  All 3 areas we sorely need.  Not much else in the FA market.   

        • Apr 30, 20133:20 pm
          by oats

          Reply

          They also are very much not under the radar. Dorell Wright is under the radar, Smith and Robinson are big ole blips.

        • Apr 30, 20133:27 pm
          by G

          Reply

          There’s plenty in the FA market. And both Nate & JR Smith have SERIOUS downsides – neither plays D particularly well, both are…tricky guys to deal with, and neither has a history of converting buckets at a high rate. I think on the right team in the right circumstances, either guy could be a positive contributor. The Pistons don’t really fit.

          • May 1, 201312:01 am
            by Crispus

            JR Smith is an underrated defender and passer. He gets a good amount of steals and can pass the ball. I think NY just liked his scoring better than his more mature style of play and Woodson let him loose down the stretch this season.

          • May 1, 20138:17 am
            by G

            Steals aren’t exactly a measure of how good a defender you are. Iverson always got a ton of steals, terrible defender. JR Smith is CRAZY, and like oats said, not exactly under the radar. The Pistons would be paying for a career year for a guy that was actually a below-average shooter from 3 and from 2.

          • May 1, 20138:36 am
            by gmehl

            “The Pistons would be paying for a career year”
            Sounds like Ben Gordon all over again 

          • May 1, 20139:28 am
            by Crispus

            I think JR can play more disciplined than we’ve seen. I think the way the Knicks are structured they just kinda need his volume shooting when Melo is injured or having an off night, or even when he is playing normally. 

            But that’s beside the point, given the year he had he’d be too expensive. He’s like a not quite as good OJ Mayo, but we should definitely consider other options. 

          • May 1, 20139:34 am
            by G

            You think JR can play more disciplined than we’ve seen? Based on WHAT? This is probably the most disciplined he’s ever played. Smith and Mayo are pretty close, but I’d give the edge to Mayo for slightly better defense and less crazy.

    • Apr 30, 20136:27 pm
      by Lorenzo

      Reply

      Yeah I would shy away from JR and Nate as well….Brewer and Bledsoe I think could fit nicely here. And don’t forget Wilson Chandler, would be a great fit if we can swing a trade for him.

      • May 1, 20132:37 pm
        by Carl

        Reply

        G – Rasheed Wallace was crazy.  Didn’t seem to hurt us any. 

        • May 1, 20132:44 pm
          by G

          Reply

          It certainly did in 2008 & 2009. And when the Pistons added Sheed, they already had solid veteran leadership in place which kept him somewhat in check. This team SERIOUSLY lacks veteran leadership, and it definitely couldn’t keep a guy like that in check.

      • May 1, 20133:35 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        I don’t really see what people like about Brewer. His shooting splits are awful and while his D is solid on smaller guys, he just can’t handle someone beefier. I would way rather give any minutes he might get to Knight.

        • May 1, 20134:22 pm
          by G

          Reply

          I was originally stumping for Brewer, but now I’m halfway out on him. He shoots the corner 3 pretty well, but not the other 3′s. I think he looks a lot better in Denver than he’s look here. 

  • Apr 30, 20133:19 pm
    by Big Rick

    Reply

    John “Spider” Salley recommended Shaw. Nuff said. 

    • Apr 30, 20133:25 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      Salley isn’t a GM, front office guy, or coach of any sort. I don’t get why his opinion carries that much weight. It obviously carries some, but I don’t see him as a top authority in judging coaching prospects. He knows basketball and probably knows Shaw personally, but that doesn’t mean Salley is right about this. Isiah Thomas would meet those qualifications too, and I wouldn’t trust his opinion either.

      • Apr 30, 20133:36 pm
        by G

        Reply

        He should know Shaw personally, they were on the same team. I rarely take what players & former players say to the media at face value. Maybe Salley honestly thinks Shaw would be a good get for the Pistons, maybe not, but I bet he DOES think it’s a shame that Shaw hasn’t been hired to a HC position yet. 

        My original question was more “what does Shaw provide?” 

    • Apr 30, 20135:21 pm
      by Reaction

      Reply

      Shaw has been highly recommended by several players as a brilliant assistant that is ready to make the jump to being a head coach. The list of players include: Roy Hibbert, Kobe Bryant, Fisher, etc etc etc. Virtually anyone who has received any coaching under him agrees that he would make a great coach.

      • May 1, 20138:20 am
        by G

        Reply

        Again, WHY? Does he draw up sweet plays, does he have a good defensive system, is he extra good working with players? What does he do? I know what Budenholzer does, I know what Ron Adams does, what does Shaw do?

  • Apr 30, 20133:21 pm
    by Wolverines23

    Reply

    Most interesting thing I’ve read all day – Pistons interested in 6’10 Greek Point Guard Giannis Adtokunbo: http://www.freep.com/article/20130429/SPORTS03/304290154/giannis-adetokunbo-nba-draft-lottery-pistons
     
    @G: The most obvious and intriguing thing that Brian Shaw brings to the table is his experience working under Phil Jackson and now under Frank Vogel, who are both exceptional coaches. Again, he only has experience working as an Assistant coach, versus Nate McMillian’s experience as a fairly successful Head Coach. 

    Why I think he should be considered as a possible candidate and what he brings to the table? First of all his experience as a player is definitely valuable, and the opportunity to be able to grow with our young core as he doesn’t have a past associated with him. Every head coach with past experiences, always bring in examples from what they learned from other teams they coached and sometimes as a result carry certain baggage, or always live in the past. You saw that with Frank and the bad starts, he had history that plays with his mind psychologically (0-16 start NJ fired, in DET 0-8 start, plus collapse after all star weekend). Not saying Shaw won’t bring in what he learned from past experiences, but he doesn’t have a history to be judged by the media, players, and the management. Also, feel that both him and McMillian will not struggle to form a positive relationship with his players as Frank, Kuester, and Michael Curry did.
     
    Lastly, I think he deserves to be interviewed because of all the great things that people within the league say about him: John Salley when asked who the ideal candidate for the Pistons should be mentioned Shaw as head coach (http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/detroit/index.ssf/2013/04/detroit_pistons_bad_boy_john_s.html).
     
    There are many articles about Frank Vogel and Phil Jackson praising Shaw for his hard work. But I think this article describes his character, drive to become a good head coach, and struggle in life well: http://www.indystar.com/article/20130426/SPORTS04/304260060/Pacers-assistant-coach-Brian-Shaw-lost-his-dad-mom-sister-blink-an-eye-gained-daughter-
     
    I’m not saying the Pistons should hire him, I’m saying they should interview him and see what the buzz is about, and if he’s a good fit, and during the interview has a well prepared plan for how he sees Detroit moving forward with their current roster, the draft, free agency, he really feel that he could be the right fit in Detroit. It’s more of an intuition as of now from me, but hopefully he’s interviewed/interested, and if McMillian is the better option then we go with him.
     

    • May 2, 20132:02 pm
      by G

      Reply

      One thing that’s hard to project is how a guy’s persona & the perception of him changes when he becomes a HC. That guy who’s everyone’s favorite assistant suddenly becomes a pariah when he starts benching guys or screwing with their minutes.

      I don’t think Shaw is likely to fall into that, but how “Willy Loman” a guy is would not be my #1 requirement for a HC. Still, you’re right, Shaw has put in his time. I like him better as a candidate than Lindsey Hunter. We just don’t have a good handle on what kind of system he would run, offensively or defensively. 

    • May 1, 201312:03 am
      by Crispus

      Reply

      That is good news. Does the store sell post defense as well?

      • May 1, 20133:16 am
        by gmehl

        Reply

        Maybe he means whilst playing NBA2K13. If so he might want to up his defence as well :-)

      • May 1, 20138:47 am
        by G

        Reply

        Did you read the article or what?

        • May 1, 20132:20 pm
          by I HATE FRANK

          Reply

          “I could definitely say I hesitated a lot this year,” he said. “That’s something I have to get out of. I’m very confident in making that shot. I worked on it a whole lot. I just have to shoot it. That’s how it is. The whole season, teammates, coaches – everybody – was just telling me to shoot it.”

          I was yelling at the TV, when he just didnt take that shot. im not sure what his jump shot percentage was but i believe this upcoming season he’ll be better for just not hesitating alone

          • May 1, 20132:25 pm
            by G

            His jump shot % is something like 35%, but it probably would’ve been higher if he had more confidence & pulled the trigger sooner. I think there’s a good chance he can get it up into the +40% range.

          • May 1, 20132:32 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            I agree, Greg is a 19-20ppg player waiting to happen.

      • May 1, 201311:14 am
        by Crispus

        Reply

        Yes, he only talked about offense. It’s great Monroe knows he needs to shoot more, but his horrible defense is the elephant in the room that’s blowing past him on a backdoor cut.

        • May 1, 201311:37 am
          by G

          Reply

          It’s not really an elephant in the room, since everybody’s talking about it. Monroe’s defensive problems aren’t something he can go into a gym and fix though, except maybe by doing shuffles & backpedaling to add foot speed. He needs game situations & coaching to fix his ball-watching tendencies.

  • Apr 30, 20135:17 pm
    by Reaction

    Reply

    Coachwise I would look a McMillan, Shaw, and Budholzer (w/e his name is from SA). Draftwise if Burke is gone, I would really look into McCollum. His game reminds me a lot of Stephen Curry and I think he’s going to be one of those players if you look back on the draft that should have gone higher.

  • May 1, 20132:14 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    @G …

    Its a slow day…Let Go

    when I hear “Cancer” – I think of a player that destorys a team, and causes the team to slide or get worse. Im not saying they all loved Shabazz, Pippen did Love Jordan

    Could Shabazz have handled some situations better? of course! However, reports are he explained himself to Drew after the game and congratulated him…Was it genuine? Who knows but he did it…

    Did the team suffer or play worse after that game? Nope UCLA Won 8 of their last 11 games,including two wins over Arizona

    Carmelo was called a “Cancer” because of perception from fans and media…without knowning the whole situation.

    if you dont like his game im cool with that, but everything else is pure fabrication unless you have access to that locker room.

    • May 1, 20132:16 pm
      by G

      Reply

      Like I said, you already made up your mind so why are we talking about this?

      • May 1, 20132:24 pm
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        Bored!

        my mind is made up that if we have the 6th-7th pick in this draft Shabazz is the best player on the board (as of now)

        If we had a top 3 pick, I’d Hope we get Bennett….

        I just feel that there is very little seperation when it comes to talent from 1-7

        • May 1, 20132:32 pm
          by G

          Reply

          Meh… I like McLemore & Porter a LOT better than Bennett. At 7 or 8 I think there’s still a decent shot at Oladipo, or if he’s not there then Bennett. Some guys are advocating McCollum over Shabazz & I don’t get that, but the KCP vs. Shabazz argument is an interesting one… I’d probably call it a draw.

          Full disclosure (and this probably won’t surprise you) – I just DON’T LIKE Shabazz. As a person or a player. I think he’s a dick. He comes off like one, and I’m not looking forward to the prospect of rooting for him should the Pistons draft him. It’s a lot like when the rumors were flying around about the Lions getting Haynesworth. While talented, I thought he was over-hyped & sort of a jerk. I just didn’t want to root for the guy.

          • May 1, 20133:09 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            “”Meh…I like McLemore & Porter a LOT better than Bennett. At 7 or 8I think there’s still a decent shot at Oladipo, orif he’s not there then Bennett. Some guys are advocating McCollum over Shabazz &I don’t get that, but the KCP vs. Shabazz argumentis aninteresting one…I’d probably callit a draw.”"

            Mclemore has the most upside, kind of reminds me of Beal, but I think Beal has more desire to win the game than Mclemore.

            Porter, just does not impress me i saw alot of him in college, he has some really good college games. out of all of the better scoring prospects, i feel he will struggle the most to get his own shot. And i know he does more than score, but I just dont know if his game is a NBA (my prediction is you might be a happy man on Draft Day, after the Chicago combine he could fall into the Pistons lap)

            Oladipo because of his explosiveness i would be upsset, because your banking on upside

            I like Bennett because he just seems like a guy that is going to win games for you…

            “”Full disclosure (and this probably won’t surprise you) –I just DON’T LIKE Shabazz. As a person or a player.I think he’s a dick. He comes off like one, andI’m not looking forward to the prospect of rooting for him should the Pistons draft him.It’s a lot like when the rumors were flying around about the Lions getting Haynesworth. While talented,I thought he was over-hyped & sort of a jerk.I just didn’t want to root for the guy”"

            he might be everything that you say he is, but i believe he is more

          • May 1, 20133:34 pm
            by oats

            @ G. I have KCP rated clearly ahead of Muhammad. He has just played basketball better than Muhammad. He scores more efficiently, he rebounds better, passes better, and defends better. Then throw in that he doesn’t have the head case issues of Muhammad and it becomes even more of a no thought required decision for me.
             
            I’m higher on McCollum than Muhammad, but only if he really shoots the ball well in workouts. This season he put up 24 points a game 49.5% shooting and 51.6% shooting on 3s, leaving him with a really impressive 63% true shooting percentage. I get it, it was only 12 games and that’s a crappy sample size, but man is it impressive. He was a pretty average shooter before this year, so teams really need to watch him to see if he’s made some actual progress or if that was just a 12 game hot streak. I suspect it might be a bit of both. I also would say he has a bit of Damian Lillard potential. His passing numbers stink, but his team also really needed him trying to score. There’s an outside chance there could be a point guard buried in there, but I’m going to guess there isn’t. Still, if he is up to a Brandon Knight level 3 point shooter (not a given), you combine that with him being good at getting to the rim and the line, a bit of passing ability, and the fact that he has been a better rebounder than Muhammad and you have a prospect that I prefer to Shabazz. If you are wondering about the rebounding, his sophomore year he put up 7.8 rebounds and his junior year he put up 6.5, so yeah he has rebounded better than Muhammad. He could be a better version of Knight, adding a bit of athleticism and an ability to get the hoop and the line. That is a good player.
             
            @ I HATE FRANK. Bennett’s a nice player, but I think he’s primarily a backup power forward. He’s got value if he slides to 7, but at 3 there are better players. Then again, I really, really disagree with you on Porter. I don’t get why he is the guy you think will struggle to score. He’s as athletic as Muhammad is, has a longer wingspan, and is taller than Shabazz. He might get pushed around some by bigger small forwards, but his game isn’t predicated on out muscling people anyways. Shabazz does rely on that and his advantage there will be mostly gone on the next level, so he’s the one I have pegged struggling to get his shot off. Muhammad won’t be the significantly stronger than his defender anymore, and he won’t be able to just camp out under the hoop with all the shot blockers waiting on him down. Conversely, Porter is a perimeter oriented players, and there isn’t exactly a history of tall wing players struggling to get off shots if they play like actual perimeter players. Kevin Martin can get his shot off, so Porter can definitely get his off. Don’t get me wrong, I like Bennett quite a bit, I just like Porter much better.

          • May 1, 20133:44 pm
            by G

            I don’t know, I think Oladipo’s floor is a version of Tony Allen that converts layups at a better rate. I think Oladipo’s ceiling is a 6’5″ version of Pippen.

            I agree with McLemore/Beal, but then again Beal would probably be the #1 pick in this draft.  

          • May 1, 20133:46 pm
            by G

            @ oats – What does McCollum give you that Knight doesn’t already?

          • May 1, 20134:01 pm
            by oats

            He gets to the rim and the line. He’s better at getting rebounds and steals, two stats that also tend to relate well to athleticism. I think he’s a better athlete, and he’s much more aggressive than Knight. I agree they are similar, I just think McCollum is a better version of Knight. Of course, that’s assuming he has progressed a bit from the 34% 3 point shooting as a junior. If he can’t shoot it at the 37% that Knight hits it at they become pretty even, but I suspect he can. He shot it at 51.6% this season and 42.1% as a freshman. I’m assuming after his freshman season teams started focusing him and that caused him to drop for his sophomore and junior years, but on a roster like Detroit’s I’d expect him to be slightly above league average like Knight is. If I’m right, that makes him Knight plus extra stuff. If he is an average 3 point shooter or worse he ends up being basically Knight’s production just in a different manner of getting it. That’s why I said teams have to really watch how he shoots in workouts. He’s a tough guy to evaluate, but from what I’ve seen of him I think he’s a more athletic, attacking version of Knight. That ability to get the line will make him a more efficient scorer and a guy you don’t mind taking more shots than Knight has so far.

          • May 1, 20134:03 pm
            by G

            Btw, McCollum’s 12 game sample size should REALLY concern you. He racked up those stats against seriously inferior competition. If all we knew about Shabazz was his first 12 games, he’d be a top 3 pick & you’d be praying the Pistons landed him in the lotto.

            McCollum shot below average 3′s & FG% his soph & junior seasons, so if you’re wondering if Oladipo’s shot is real, you should also wonder about McCollum’s shot. 

          • May 1, 20134:19 pm
            by tarsier

            @I HATE FRANK,
            Is there anything at all that Shabazz does better than Porter? Heck, are there very many things Shabazz does almost as well as Porter?

            @oats,
            I just don’t know what the answer is if the top 6 are off the board when the Pistons pick. I’d probably advocate taking Len. Not a huge fan but at least he is a big with a midrange game, he has Ilgauskas upside, and I’m betting someone would be willing to trade for him.

            I’m just not a big Pope fan. he put up solid numbers against bad teams, but in his only 5 games against ranked teams, he averaged 14 points, 5 boards, 2 TOs, and shot 37%. I just don’t think he has what it takes to play against NBA level competition.

            Shabazz, in 6 such games, was at least a lot more efficient. He average 15 points, 4 rebounds, 1 TO, and 47% shooting.

            Len really stepped up against better competition. In 5 games against ranked teams, he averaged 14 points, 9 rebounds, 2 TOs, and 56% shooting.

            Obviously, these are all small sample sizes. But I’m not sold on Pope who got his numbers by destroying LSU, Tennessee, and Youngstown State. 

          • May 1, 20134:43 pm
            by oats

            First of all, Oladipo took exactly 4 more 3s than McCollum despite playing an extra 24 games, so it seems safe to guess he didn’t take many tough shots. That needs to be noted as it’s the biggest reason I don’t trust Oladipo’s shooting numbers.
             
            I think I’ve been pretty clear that I’m not sold on McCollum’s shooting ability. His really strong freshman year leads me to think it might not have just been a fluke this time around though. I think his shooting numbers dropped because he was the only player on his team guys focused on trying to stop, and if he was in Detroit he just wouldn’t get that kind of attention. Similar to how Calderon’s shooting jumped after getting to Detroit, I think the focus on the big men opens up room and allows Detroit’s players to shoot the 3 a bit better than they would other wise. I don’t think he’ll be a really good shooter, just a slightly above average one. It’s about where I’d project Oladipo too. If I had to guess I’d peg both of them in that 34-37% range if they were in Detroit, and maybe in the 32-35% range in a less shooter friendly environment. I’m worried that neither will actually do it, but that’s my best guess for where they are. I also think McCollum’s numbers reflect a hot start, but I think it was a hot start on top of some small jumps in his actual shooting ability.
             
            That type of shooting also puts them both in Brandon Knight territory as shooters. As I’ve explained, if McCollum can match Knight as a 3 point shooter he then adds some other things and becomes a better player. Oladipo similarly adds a whole new level of athletic ability and defense to separate him from Knight. McCollum projects as worse than Oladipo, but I’d still take him over Knight or over Muhammad. If Detroit added a starting caliber small forward I remain unconvinced Muhammad could take Knight’s job as the starting shooting guard based solely on his ability. Knight might be moved to the bench so he can get some minutes at the point as well, but I don’t see Muhammad as a clear upgrade on Knight. McCollum would start over Knight if I’m right about him. Again, McCollum needs to go in those workouts and shoot well or he should drop significantly, but as of now my grade on McCollum is slightly higher than my grade on Muhammad.

          • May 1, 20134:51 pm
            by G

            You don’t think Shabazz would be an upgrade over Knight at the 2? I do, although I think it would be a negligible upgrade. Muhammad finished his freshman season with better shooting numbers than Knight, he’s 6’6″ & stronger, and Knight & Muhammad both had similar declines over their last 12 games.

          • May 1, 20135:14 pm
            by oats

            @tarsier. It seems really unfair to throw out the fact that Muhammad was much worse against his weaker opponents than Pope was, especially considering that was the bulk of the year for both of them. It’s not like Muhammad wasn’t playing stinkers either. He beat up on Prairie View St. and Stanford, and Stanford was worse than Tennessee. I think you have to go with the sample size, and the stronger sample size is how they played the whole year and not just cherry picking a handful of games. Muhammad put up worse numbers across the board, and his production dropped from great the first 1/3 of the season, to mediocre the second 1/3, and downright bad the last 1/3. KCP was mediocre the first 1/3, really good the middle 1/3, and still pretty good the final 1/3. Combining that with better numbers and getting less help makes it pretty clear to me that he belongs ahead of Muhammad on a draft board. Muhammad had a second scorer in Addams who put up 15 points a game, a big man who can bass in Kyle Anderson, and a point guard who put up 7 assists a game. The second leading scoring on Georgia was under 8 points, and the third was under 7. Georgia’s point guard had less than 3 assists a game. Even if you argue that the SEC is weaker than the Pac 12, and I agree it is, you have to take in to account that his team was just drastically worse.
             
            As for Len, it might just be that I’ve seen to many of his games and was really unimpressed. He disappears for long stretches at a time. It might be that I have a brother that went to Virginia and another that went to Virginia Tech. Virginia gave him problems in both games, and in that second game Virginia Tech’s tiny team with 8 scholarship players they shut him down. That scares the crap out of me because that Tech team was terrible and he should have crushed them. I honestly don’t know what to think of him. In the NIT he no showed Niagara and Denver, then he turned around played well against Alabama and Iowa. I don’t know if I’m right, but I’m more alarmed by a guy not being able to get things done against bad teams than I am impressed with them playing well against good teams. If he is so maddeningly inconsistent that he can’t produce against the bottom of the barrel college teams, what will he do when he has off games in the pros? If his averages were better I might be less concerned, but they are decidedly pedestrian.

          • May 1, 20135:37 pm
            by oats

            @ G. Knight’s also had two years to improve his defense, and he’s made serious progress there. That said, it was more of a short term thing that I don’t know if Muhammad will pass Knight. Long term I like Muhammad better, but not by a lot. McCollum’s already better than Knight, and while I like Muhammad’s odds of passing Knight I don’t like his odds of surpassing McCollum too. It’s not a ton separating those two either, but I think Muhammad falls in that gap. I get the higher ceiling argument for Muhammad over McCollum. I just think the most likely player for Muhammad is not as good as the most likely player for McCollum. The odds of Muhammad reaching that higher ceiling just seem too slim to me to be worth taking him and hoping. I get taking the other side on this one, I really do, but that’s where I’m at. 
             
            I feel like I should say I have both Reggie Bullock, Glen Rice Jr., and Sergey Karasev ahead of McCollum, and I’m also leaning towards Len ahead of McCollum too. For those keeping score, yeah, I have Muhammad at 12 on my board and I also have Karasev as my favorite foreigner because he’s the productive one. If I knew how to evaluate the Russian league and their shooting numbers Karasev might jump up to that 7th spot ahead of Pope. From what I’ve seen of Karasev, he reminds me a lot of Klay Thompson or Kevin Martin. Bullock and Rice have quite a bit of Afflalo to them. Len looks like Meyers Leonard redux, McCollum looks like an improved Knight, and Muhammad is a less productive and less efficient Alec Burks. I know it’s hard to properly evaluate Leonard or Burks because they got buried, but I think either Len or Muhammad should be buried too. It might seem like I’m grabbing best case scenarios for the guys I like and worst case for the ones I don’t care for, but those are the guys who seem to legitimately be the closest comparisons to those players.

  • May 1, 20133:17 pm
    by frankie d

    Reply

    mclemore and porter are both better players than bennett right now.  however, i think that teams will start coveting bennett for his skill and potential and after the combine and workouts, some team will get seduced and take him in the top 5.  imho, he’s the type of guy who could either be a perennial all star or another antoine walker, with an up and down, but mostly inconsistent career.
    i do think that caldwell pope is another guy who will move up draft boards, after workouts and the combine, because he presents such a nice physical profile.  i think that teams will start to conclude, rightly or wrongly, that the distance between mclemore and caldwell pope is not that great and a team that misses out on mclemore, may go with caldwell pope rather than oladipo. i would be surprised if caldwell pope was not drafted somewhere in the lottery, as a team that needs a scoring wing will probably  gamble on him. 

    • May 1, 20133:49 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      KCP clearly belongs in the lottery, at least in my opinion. He can play. Taking him over Oladipo would be a mistake, but I could see a team hungry for scoring make that mistake. That said, I have KCP as the clear cut 7th guy in the draft and ahead of Muhammad. I have a board that goes Noel, McLemore, Porter, Burke, Oladipo, Bennett, and then Kentavious. I really do think Noel is above the rest of the pack and I’d take him first despite his poor fit. I’d also want to trade Noel immediately, but I’d make the pick if nothing pops up with the knowledge eventually a trade will come up. I’d gamble on McLemore’s higher upside since him and Porter are pretty similar players. Porter is just clearly the guy after the first two are gone. Oladipo’s entire offensive game is a concern. His shooting numbers are likely inflated by playing with a scoring big man and two really good shooters and he turns it over a lot for a guy with such a small role in the offense, so I have him rated after Burke. Bennett I think is a power forward primarily and is a lazy defender, so I have him just behind Oladipo. After Bennett there is a drop off, but I really do think KCP is the best of what’s rest. He’s got a solid combination of shooting efficiency, defense, and athleticism. There are some older players that are better players right now, but KCP is only 20 and still has a lot of upside. If none of those top 6 guys slide, Caldwell Pope is the guy I want.

      • May 1, 20134:22 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        I won’t repeat my entire comment above, but what do you make of KCP’s poor play against decent competition?

        I figure it’s easier to have the discussion down here where you don’t have to scroll up every time to hit reply. 

        • May 1, 20135:47 pm
          by oats

          Reply

          I actually already replied up there since I had been up there for awhile and didn’t notice this down here. My argument is mostly sample size, and to pick those games and ignore the fact that Muhammad was far less productive against lesser talent when that was the bulk of the schedule seems to be a bad way of looking at it. In any stretch of 10 games KCP played pretty well on average, while the final 10 games of Muhammad’s season were awful. That says more to me than cherry picked games spread through out the season. You also have to consider just how bad Georgia was. Muhammad had a 15 point scorer, a point guard with 7 assists a game, and a big that could rebound and pass. Georgia’s second leading scorer was under 8 a game and their point guard was under 3 assists. Teams focused on Pope to the exclusion of everyone else, but UCLA had guys who could keep defenses honest.

          • May 1, 201311:12 pm
            by tarsier

            I’m not saying I’d necessarily take Muhammad over Pope. I’m saying that I don’t much care for Pope.

          • May 1, 201311:26 pm
            by tarsier

            It’s hardly cherry picking to reference the top competition they played. In a large part because I didn’t choose those games to illustrate a point. I looked at those games with no idea how the numbers would look and they helped me form a conclusion.

            This is not arbitrary like “after the all star break but before the ensuing injury”.

            And my point was never that Shabazz was amazing, it was only that Pope looked really bad any time he met decent competition. In the NBA, he’d be facing stiffer every single game. I’d way rather have McCollum and I’m not at all bullish on him.

          • May 2, 201312:08 am
            by oats

            I’m still going back to my original answer. Those games don’t represent a strong sample size, and he has such a bad cast of players around him that he can get forced in trying to do way too much when playing a good team. If his team wasn’t just really awful I might buy in to this argument more, but he had absolutely no on to take pressure on him. He would start trying to do too much because that was still the best option for the team. Georgia was just that badly out matched against good teams. I’d say those games he was doing basically what Afflalo has been doing this past year in Orlando, trying to do much more than he has any business doing to try to make up for his team’s deficiencies.
             
            Look, I don’t love KCP or anything. I really don’t like what happens after 7 in this draft. In a normal draft I’d say Kentavious Caldwell Pope would be a fringe lottery prospect, but this one is so thin up top that he really looks like the 7th best player in it to me. This draft just happens to be loaded with guys that should go just outside the lottery in a normal year, and given that a late lottery grade should go in the top 8 or so. 
             
            As for McCollum, I like him better than Muhammad, but G already covered most all of the problems with him. His shooting numbers this season are unreliable due to playing only 12 games against bad teams. Before this season he was a below average 3 point shooter. Before this season he also had a lower true shooting percentage than KCP. I know it’s only a year and a half, but he’s also older than KCP and that hurts his room to grow. He’s never shown the ability to play point guard, and at 6’3″ that makes him a combo guard. I’d rather gamble on the younger player, the bigger player, and the one who shot better at this stage of his career.

          • May 2, 201312:11 am
            by oats

            What happens after 6*. That 7 was a typo. There are 6 guys I like and after that this draft gets ugly.

      • May 1, 20134:24 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        But right now, I think my 7 and 8 are Len and MCW in some order. It may be a long shot, but there is some Rondo in MCW.

        • May 1, 20134:27 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          I may also consider Saric. I just don’t know enough about him yet.

        • May 1, 20134:42 pm
          by G

          Reply

          Disagree about the Rondo/MCW comp, unless you’re referring to the fact that they both have a bad jumper. MCW’s D is nowhere near Rondo’s, and neither is his play-making ability. Len is really iffy (I actually like Muhammad better, and I DON’T like Muhammad), and Saric looks more like a late-1st round pick. He’s basically Jerebko with a better handle and a worse shot.

          • May 1, 201311:19 pm
            by tarsier

            I don’t really life any of them either, but there is seriously nobody beyond the top 6 who is exciting. A couple guys will turn out to be pretty good, but it’s a total crap shoot.

          • May 1, 201311:34 pm
            by tarsier

            MCW’s D may not be on Rondo’s level yet. Nor his playmaking. But both are ahead of where Rondo’s were coming into the league. It’s not fair to expect him to develop as much as Rondo did, but he has the tools to be just as skilled. And he’s so much bigger.

            Quite frankly, once you get past the top 6, there’s so little available, I’d like a guy with some upside even if he is unlikely to realize it. The same holds for Len. Yeah, he could be Leonard, but he could be Ilgauskas. I’d take that over most of the remaining board whose projected ceilings are not starters for good teams.

            Who do you like past 6, G? You can dump on everyone else’s choices, but ultimately, someone has to be 7th on the draft board. 

          • May 2, 20138:20 am
            by G

            Noel’s probably best but I’m not crazy about the Pistons taking him. McLemore, Porter, Oladipo, Burke, Bennett… I think we all agree on those 6 in some order. After that I think you have to say screw fit, just get the best player.

            I probably go KCP closely followed by Muhammad, then McCollum, Dieng, MCW, Len, Rice, Franklin, Plumlee, Olynyk, Zeller, Crabbe, and Karasev.

            I really think Dieng will be a better pro than either Len or Zeller. He’s a great shot blocker, and he can hit that elbow jumper. I don’t like the prospect of taking any of those 7-20 guys, and I’m really hoping the Pistons either win a top 3 pick or someone reaches for a guy like Len.

        • May 1, 20136:09 pm
          by oats

          Reply

          My 7-10 are currently Pope, Reggie Bullock, Glen Rice Jr., and Sergey Karasev. Pope has been a decent shooter considering how little there is on his team in the way of help, finishing 7th in true shooting percentage among draft eligible SG’s. He combines that with athleticism, pretty good defense, and quite a bit of room to grow. Bullock and Rice are good shooters, defenders, and passers that just remind me a lot of Afflalo.
           
          Karasev is my favorite foreign guy because he’s the productive one, and he’s the one that can shoot. He reminds me of Klay Thompson or Kevin Martin both athletically and as a shooter. Over the course of his 3 leagues he’s played in this year he is shooting 36.6% on 3s. In Eurocup, the toughest place he’s played, Karasev has settled in as a spot up shooter and has hit 25 of 51 3s. I know those 51 shots aren’t much, but that 36.6% is on 202 attempts. The thing is, I don’t really know how well shooting numbers translate from Europe so I have a really hard time evaluating that information. I’ve also only seen some highlight videos, 1 Eurocup game and the hoops summit. He didn’t shoot all that well in the hoops summit either. I might be really over rating the Eurocup performances, but I have a really hard time evaluating Euros in general due to limited exposure and will admit I might be way off base on this one.
           
          I agree with G on Len, MCW, and Saric. Saric really hasn’t done anything, and if we’re going on wild speculation then why not that Giannis Adetocunbo kid. Len is identical to Myers Leonard who is buried on a Portland team that could really use a center so they can get Aldridge back to power forward. Len just disappears too often for my liking. MCW’s defense is questionable against point guards, and I think the Syracuse zone just hid that fact. I’m honestly not even certain I have Williams as my second point guard because I don’t care for point guards that don’t shoot, and I am really tempted to put Shane Larkin over him.

  • May 1, 20133:28 pm
    by Russell C

    Reply

    Sign McMillan, Josh Smith, Tony Allen, and a shooter, unless Iquodala opts out. Only problem is the draft is before free agency begins and if you were sure about Iguodala then that would impact who you draft

  • May 1, 20134:52 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    @Tarseir – “is there anything at all that Shabazz does better than Porter? Heck, are there very many things Shabazz does almost as well as Porter?”

    Nope, and I agree Porter who is a sophmore was better than Freshman Shabazz as a college player. Before you say anything about AGE! It a matter of experience, and having time to adjust and develop your game. Shabazz is just a better pure scorer, and can do it in a larger variety of ways. I feel like you guy believe Shabazz can get better and that concerns me

    But it does not mean Porter is going to be a better Pro. 

    • May 1, 20135:05 pm
      by G

      Reply

      Studies show age is more important that college experience when projecting upside, so the age issue is relevant.

      Again, how is Muhammad a “better pure scorer”? Muhammad shot .443/.377/.711, Porter shot .480/.422/.777. Muhammad took more shots but converted at a worse rate. Porter took fewer shots but was more efficient & did a better job of creating for his teammates and defending.

      So, Porter has a better shot, plays better D, and is a better & more willing passer. Why is Shabazz better? 

      • May 1, 20136:00 pm
        by danny

        Reply

        Do you really just name stats every time you try and make a point.  The different between porter and muhammad is who is expected to score.  Now hold your tongue I’d rather have porter any day.  But you always just list certain stats and think its the only thing that matter.

        People that play in a system and play the way porter does never takes the last second shot.  They hardly every get doubled and make smart plays.  This does not mean he is a better shooter.  He has a better shooting percentage but that doesnt mean he is a better shooter.
        I’d never want him on my team.  I agree with you on his personality and his style of play is not something suitable for the pistons.  As far as people like CJ i dont understand your view point.  having two guards capabale of creating and shooting opens the floor wide up.  This will allow moose to operate on the elbow and drummond to bully ppl down low.  
        One last thing people are ready to throw knight under the bus already.  Dude give it sometime my god.  All i hear is what he cant do give him room to operate with a real coach and then judge him. 

        • May 1, 20136:24 pm
          by oats

          Reply

          First of all, he uses stats to back up his point. The stats aren’t the point themselves, they are supporting evidence for it. For example, Porter is a better shooter is the point, the supporting evidence is the shooting numbers. There is nothing wrong with that presentation.
           
          This system argument for Muhammad seems goofy. He had a nice team around him, and the system wasn’t designed to have him take contested shots. They would have no problem with him swinging it around to Addams, Drew, or Anderson and getting them better looks. Essentially your arguing that Muhammad’s bad decision making makes him a better shooter, and that makes no logical sense. He wasn’t told to take those shots, and he had team mates who could take pressure off him if he was getting doubled. Porter had the ability and inclination to use those team mates, Muhammad didn’t. Part of being a better scorer is knowing your limitations and knowing when not to force a bad shot. Porter clearly wins that hands down.
           
          On the Knight point. There are virtually zero players who have been this bad at running an offense at this stage of their careers that turn into competent point guards. There’s exactly one example that everyone names, but Billups was a truly unusual case. He was on his 3rd team in 2 years and converted to shooting guard before that second season even started. Knight got a long look this year and didn’t have it yet, so unless we’re gambling on him being all of the second guy to do it we should probably not think of him as the answer at point guard anymore. He can be a good shooting guard in time, but the odds of him turning in to a point guard at this point are just too slim to be worth banking on.
           
          Finally, Frank isn’t a good coach but his track record with point guards is pretty solid. He worked with Kidd as an assistant, then had Harris in Devin’s best years, and this year he even had Will Bynum looking like a good passer. I don’t see a lot of reason to think Frank was really holding Knight back that much.

          • May 2, 201311:43 am
            by danny

            Im not saying that.  I’m saying that sometimes stats are misleading.  Shabazz takes horrible shots but that doesnt mean he is not a great shooter.  he just need to learn to take better shot aka porter.  Certain systems are designed to have players shot from certain parts of the floor.  Look at ariza when he played for la.  His stats were pretty impressive now when he changed systems and was encouraged to shot freely it changed.  This is all im saying.  I think you both have the tendency to ride things off without thinking about it. 
             
            The glove had a similar stat line just give it more than two years.   He turned into a hall of famer.  Not saying knight will be that way but if you wanna bring up stats into then he had the same numbers.  Use facts to back up your argument but just because someone has a better true shooting percentage doesnt mean he is a better shooter. 

          • May 2, 20134:33 pm
            by oats

            I’m really not unwilling to look at this another way. I thought about what you said, and I just really think you are wrong. Muhammad’s  rep was always that he was a poor outside shooter. I think he got a bit better, but I’d say just a bit. He started out red hot on 3s, but over time had his shooting numbers steadily decline all year. I think that is indicative of his actual shooting ability, and given another 20 games it would have been obvious that he was just an average to below average shooter. That matches what the scouts have always said about him, it is backed by what I saw when I watched him, and the stats support that analysis.
             
            See, I can look past just the stats, and I do it all the time. I think Muhammad is worse than his 3 point shooting percentages suggest. Just because I use stats a lot doesn’t mean I let them do all the thinking for me. If the stats don’t agree with what I’m seeing with a player, I try to see if I can figure out what is missing. In this specific case what I think is missing is that Muhammad’s shooting numbers are actually inflated by hot 3 point shooting in his first 10 games while Porter’s are close to right because they were far more consistent. I also think Muhammad often camps out down by the rim and takes advantage of smaller and weaker defenders. That physical advantage will disappear on the next level. Any team that thinks he is too much for their SG to handle will just flip their SF on him, and then Muhammad will be at a size disadvantage. I think he will struggle adjusting to that, and as a result he will continue to take a lot of bad shots for the majority of his career. Yeah, Muhammad could learn some better shot selection, but that skill is notoriously difficult for chuckers like Muhammad to really learn and few of them actually do it. Even if he does, I don’t think he can catch up to Porter because I just don’t think he has the 3 point shot required to do it. I would be seriously surprised if Muhammad turned into the better shooter of the two, because as of now it is way in Porter’s favor.
             
            By the way, the purpose of stats is to try to remove bias from the assessment. That’s why I use them. They aren’t the only metric on which I make my decisions, but they are a major one for that reason. Yeah, they can be taken too far, or used incorrectly, but the guy who uses only stats is more likely to be right than the guy who never uses them unless that second guy is some kind of basketball savant who also watches everyone play. It’s impossible to watch everyone play a significant number of games, so the stat guy has the advantage. Things aren’t that binary and I happen to use both, but I lean towards the stats because they are unbiased and based on more information than I have to work with. I will say this, having a better true shooting percentage doesn’t guarantee a guy is a better shooter, but more often than not it does. What’s more, in this specific instance I feel very good concluding that it does.
             
            Also, no Payton is not remotely comparable to Knight stat wise. As a rookie Payton had 6.4 assists and 2.2 turnovers. Brandon Knight is at 4 assists and 2.7 turnovers. Payton displayed a basic ability to run an offense without being a turnover machine, and Knight hasn’t. This comparison is not even close to accurate.
             

        • May 2, 20139:22 am
          by G

          Reply

          Darn you and your stats and your facts!

          What am I supposed to use to make my point? I sometimes link youtube clips, but it’s actually hard to find good ones for Porter. How about some other FACTS that back up my point & rip up yours?

          Otto Porter scored 16.2 ppg in an offense that scored 64.6 ppg, so he was responsible for 25.1% of the scoring. Muhammad scored 17.9 ppg in an offense that scored 74.7 ppg, so he was responsible for 24.0% of the scoring. G’town’s 2nd best scorer had 12.8 ppg for 19.8%. UCLA’s 2nd best guy had 15.3 ppg for 20.5%. G’town had 9 or so games that either went into OT or where the score was within 5 points with 2 minutes to go. In 5 of those games, Porter took shots for either the tie or the win. UCLA had 11 such games, but Muhammad’s number was called in only 2 of them.

          I think the reason people are ready to throw Knight under the bus (and justifiably so) is because he’s shown no improvement in any aspect of the game except for a little on defense. Regardless of the coaching situation or any external factors, there should have been something for him to hang his hat on this season. The best he can say is his D got a little better. Not encouraging. I’m holding out hope, but the guy has NOT been good. 

          • May 2, 20139:29 am
            by tarsier

            <No, I think you’re just supposed to make up anecdotal evidence, i.e. Bazz is big and strong and has nice shooting form and is the best pure scorer in the draft. Never mind if the evidence backs those statements up, you’re not allowed to use stats.>

          • May 2, 201312:06 pm
            by danny

            I’m not saying dont use stats.  But they are misleading at time and are not the only thing you need to look at when making assessments on players.  Just because someone has a better true shooting percentage doesnt always mean they are a better shooter.  They take shots closer to the rim, not doubled, or taking buzzer beaters every game. 

          • May 2, 201312:30 pm
            by G

            And I’m saying a) Porter took more buzzer beaters than Muhammad, b) he was responsible for a SLIGHTLY larger chunk of his team’s scoring, and c) it was Muhammad’s choice to take crappy shots. Often you’ll find that shooters with poor FG %’s have poor shot selection. Ray Allen largely takes great shots, Kobe takes any shot. Who’s known as the better shooter? Allen.

            When Porter drives the lane & the defense collapses on him, he dumps it off to an open guy for a bunny. In the same situation, Muhammad takes an off-balance floater that misses badly. Am I supposed to somehow factor in Muhammad’s unwillingness to pass into his FG%?

          • May 2, 201312:36 pm
            by G

            By the way, Porter took fewer total shots than Muhammad but almost the same number of 3′s, so it’s not like he was padding his stats with layups.

          • May 2, 20133:55 pm
            by oats

            G missed pointing out that Muhammad is the one who likes playing near the rim. Porter is the more perimeter oriented player of the two. The reason Porter’s true shooting percentage is higher is that he is better at hitting 3s, and 2s, and free throws…

      • May 2, 201310:11 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        “”Studies show age is more important that college experience when projecting upside, so the age issue is relevant.”"
        1. 5-6 months age difference projects more upside? Vs one full year of being in a system, being on a college campus, a full summer to develop your game? C’mon “G” Porter improved as player not because he 5 months younger than Shabazz, its because he played more competive college basketball.

        “”Again, how is Muhammad a “better pure scorer”? Muhammad shot .443/.377/.711, Porter shot .480/.422/.777. Muhammad took more shots but converted at a worse rate. Porter took fewer shots but was more efficient & did a better job of creating for his teammates and defending.”"

        2. Because Shabazz has a larger arsenal of ways to score and he is simpley more aggressive. Once again Porter in his 2nd year, improved his efficency. However,Shabazz lead all Freshmen in scoring, Per-40 minutes he ranked in the top 16 in the country in scoring, People questioned his Range for three’s he shot 37%, he shot 40% in catch and shoot situations (so he can score off the ball), he can score in the post, and he can finish in the lane. Porter is not a better scorer, in his 2nd year he became a more efficient player.

        Compare Porter Freshman/sophmore year to Shabazz Freshman year,

        Shabazz 30.8 mins 14 attempts 17.9ppg 44%FG 37% 3′s
        Porter 29.7mins  7.2 attempts 9.7ppg 52% FG 22% 3′s – Freshmans

        “”So, Porter has a better shot, plays better D, and is a better & more willing passer. Why is Shabazz better? ”"

        3.  I never said Porter right now isnt a better all-around players. But Shabazz is the better scoring offensive player, and Physically he is more gifted than Porter is across the board.

        • May 2, 201310:30 am
          by G

          Reply

          Again, comparing 18 year-old freshman Porter to 20 year-old freshman Muhammad. 

          • May 2, 20132:08 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            Porter is 6 months younger not 2 years…

            Porter had a full year of experince and a summer to improve…

            Shabazz was playing in HS or AAU at 19 …its not unheard of…

          • May 2, 20132:17 pm
            by G

            In Porter’s freshman year he was 18. In Muhammad’s freshman year he was 20. You were comparing an 18 year-old to a 20 year-old.

             

          • May 2, 20132:56 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            no i’m comparing One year of College experience… to No college experience…

            However, if even tho they are 6 months apart, you still want to calculate 2 years difference be my guest…

            BTW: Mclemore is 20 , Bennett is 20, …..

          • May 2, 20133:04 pm
            by G

            What is so freaking hard about this? You put up Porter’s freshman stats (when he was 18) against Muhammad’s freshman stats (when he was 20).

            Btw, I like McLemore’s game and Bennett’s game MUCH more than I like Muhammad’s game. No projections, nothing. Based on what they did THIS YEAR. The age thing becomes an issue when you start saying “well, he can improve…” What you’re doing is projecting Muhammad to improve at a greater rate than guys who are younger than him. 

          • May 2, 20136:45 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            So basically if was in a Kickbocking class with people younger than me, and not more physically developed and I dominated …. it better prepares me for guys with more experience and just as physically developed?

            And when you say he played against underdeveloped kids, it let’s me know that you know little about AAU …  

          • May 2, 20137:28 pm
            by oats

            Not even close to a sound analogy. I honestly don’t really get what you are trying to get at with it, so I’m just going to throw it out completely because it also happens to be pretty pointless.
             
            When projecting how a player will develop, years in college doesn’t mean squat. By looking over past players they have found no correlation between time in college and successful development outside of age. A 20 year old with 2 years in college tends to progress the same way from there on out as one with one year. There is no sound basis for thinking otherwise. Considering Porter is the better player now and is actually the younger player, the only sound conclusion you can come to from that is that Porter will continue to be the better player. Even if going to college earlier gave Porter a leg up in developing, that doesn’t actually matter. Muhammad can’t go back in time and regain that development, he missed it. As two guys roughly the same age they should be expected to develop at the same basic rate, assuming they are equivalent talents. That’s the point. Muhammad won’t progress faster from here on out than Porter, so he won’t catch up to Porter.
             
            By they way, AAU kids are underdeveloped by virtue of being younger. A 19 year old has a physical advantage over an 18 year because he has had an extra year to develop. That was his point by calling them under developed. Compared to Muhammad, or to college players those guys are underdeveloped because they are just younger.

          • May 3, 20138:19 am
            by G

            Also, it’s not like the first time Shabazz played collegiate level players was when he committed to UCLA. These guys start playing vs. college players when they’re 14. There was a McDonalds All American who went to my school while I was there, and I remember he played against college players all the time, basically since he was 12. I think he even got in on some of MSU’s practices on a regular basis. 

        • May 2, 201310:41 am
          by G

          Reply

          Muhammad had a bigger arsenal? Please. His weapons are running off screens, that post game, and a lefty floater. Otto Porter also runs off screens, and he has a post game but relies more on a face-up game & is more likely to take it to the rack.

          • May 2, 20132:41 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            your making Porter better than what he is…

            everything you say he is, goes against what everyone who has watched him play say he is…

            All of sudden he is Scorer? because he averaged 16ppg…

            You questioned Shabazz speed, and athletism..but you dont think its a concern for Porter?

            Everyone says he’ll struggle playing in the post and defending the Post because of his body, but you think he has a post game..

            Face -up game? of course he’s a SF, but they question can he create his own offense.

            He’s a nice jump shooter with a all around game that looked good in college…

            shabazz has 14 games where he scored 20 or more points … Porter has 8 games…

            Just little things like that gets looked over…

          • May 2, 20132:58 pm
            by G

            Same concerns about Muhammad creating his own offense. Porter has more of a face up game, hence, creates more of his offense. Concerns about Muhammad’s post game have to do with his height. Concerns with Porter’s post game have to do with muscle. Porter can add muscle, Muhammad isn’t getting taller. 

            I don’t question Muhammad’s athleticism, I question people who think he has “elite athleticism” and say “based on what?” Steal rate is the main stat scouts look at that translates directly to athleticism in the NBA. Muhammad’s steal rate is SUPER low, Porter’s is nearly triple Muhammad’s. I actually think they’re similarly athletic, and you don’t see me going around calling Porter an elite athlete, do you?

            16 ppg is pretty good scoring on a team that only gets 64 pts a night & focuses on defense. Porter and Muhammad were responsible for a similar portion of their team’s offense. Porter got his points more effectively while also creating for teammates. If you assume that every assist he got was worth 2 points, then Porter contributed to 21.6 of G’town’s points per game and Muhammad contributed to 19.5 of UCLA’s (while using more possessions).

          • May 2, 20134:50 pm
            by oats

            Muhammad is labeled a pure scorer because he doesn’t bring anything else to the table. Most scouts think he will either struggle to score a bunch of points in the pros, or if he does it will be by shooting a ton of shots inefficiently. Muhammad probably projects as somewhere between 15-20 points per game eventually, but while taking a ton of shots. Porter is a more rounded player and won’t hunt for his points the way Muhammad is likely to do. That said, he is likely to be a 15-18 point per game guy who scores rather efficiently. We’re saying Porter’s projection makes him the better scorer despite putting up fewer points because efficiency matters. We don’t think he’ll be the leading scorer for a good team, unless of course that team is built like the Pacers. Muhammad might be the leading scorer, but he’ll do it in a manner that is less helpful.

          • May 2, 20134:57 pm
            by G

            Right. Think Paul George vs. Monta Ellis.

          • May 2, 20136:36 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            Get out of here, about Shabazz post out game….he is 6’6 with a 6’11 wingspan… and he is 220-225 …who called him Elite? I said outstanding, and then said you wanted a clearer explanation said he was a good athlete. convinced you have not watched enough of Shabazz talk about his game. Draft express videos is not enough. There are 20 min footage on him vs different teams on Youtube watch those for a starter, and then let’s talk.

            However, I respect that you just don’t like him and his game, but your arguement about what he can and can do holds no water.

            @Oats there plenty guys in the NBA or Been  known for Scoring, and being a Pure scorer. Its Not a bad thing  

        • May 2, 201311:59 am
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Comparing freshman Porter to freshman Muhammad is pointless. If Porter had declared for the draft after his freshman year, he would not have been a first round prospect. Now he is almost unanimously considered a top 5 prospect.

          That should tell you he took way more than a reasonably expected step forward. So even if you ignore age, you can hope for guys to improve from year to year, but Porter did a lot more than you can expect Shabazz to.

          And yeah, I don’t expect Porter to be a superstar. But a Danny Granger/Paul George/Rudy Gay type is totally a reasonable expectation. And even if he is just a rich man’s Prince (since people like to compare him to Prince, but at every step along the way, he’s been at least slightly better at everything), that’d be a huge addition to the team. 

          • May 2, 20133:10 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            “”If Porter had declared for the draft after his freshman year, he would not have been a first round prospect. Now he is almost unanimously considered a top 5 prospect.”"

            1. EXACTLY! Shabazz is going to go in the top 6,7,8 Picks …Porter wasnt considered a lottery or first rd pick… until he improved his game after one year…

            People here talk as though Shabazz can not improve, and when people question him as a scorer I question the games you’ve watch.

          • May 2, 20133:15 pm
            by G

            You totally missed the point of what tarsier said. He said Porter improved beyond what you could reasonably expect him to do. It’s not that people don’t think Shabazz can improve, we just doubt he’s likely to make that kind of a leap.

          • May 3, 20137:24 am
            by tarsier

            Players improving at a normal rate does not increase their draft stock. because that was how much they were expected to improve anyway.

            Clearly, it would be a shock is Muhammad took a comparable leap forward to what Porter did. 

  • May 2, 20136:55 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    Nevermind you are no different than when you guys get on the commentor Brandon Knight, for only seeing the great thing about Bk…

    You guys only see Negatives about Shabazz…

    You think a 20 year has peaked out after one year of college basketball…because you like him

    All of you probably were the ones saying Drummond is a long term project and will take years to produce… 

    • May 2, 20138:35 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      We do tend to jump on people that ignore all the negatives when the negatives are pretty blatantly obvious, yeah.
       
      No one has said anything to suggest Muhammad has peaked. Stop making things up. We’re saying there is no reason to think he will progress more from here on out than Porter. If I thought he wasn’t going to make some progress I’d peg him as a 9 points a game player because that’s what I’d project for his rookie year. Maybe it’ll be closer to 12 inefficient points if the team has few other scoring options, but that’s the range I’d project for rookie Shabazz. That’s not what I’ve been saying though. I think he will likely be at least a 15 points a game guy some time, just not a particularly efficient one. The reason is simple, inefficient players rarely learn how to become efficient. They often get better, but they usually top off at around average efficiency. I’d say if Muhammad learns to be a role player he could become a 15 points a game guy with average efficiency, and contributing relatively little outside of scoring. The far more likely scenario is that he turns into an inefficient gunner, who hunts for his shot and hurts his team with selfish play.
       
      I will say this, I thought Drummond was a long term project. Sure, I was definitely wrong on that. The thing is, Drummond made a leap that is so improbable that you should never project anyone to make it. I really can’t come up with any reason to suspect Muhammad is any more likely to make that kind of a leap than any other player so it just doesn’t factor in to my grading. So, assuming Muhammad progresses the way most every player does leads me to the conclusion that he is a relatively pedestrian prospect who projects similarly to guys that could be had later in the draft.

  • May 2, 20139:17 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    Just wanna say I enjoy these fun debates…

    I really do, its refreshing and its cool we don’t agree..

    At the end of the day, if we draft Porter I’d except it … But I just like other players more …

    Just wanted to be clear, I feel like this will go on forever. 

    Can’t wait for the draft 

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here