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

Darrell Walker a candidate for Pistons coaching vacancy

Chris Mannix ?of Sports Illustrated:

Knicks assistant coach Darrell Walker is a candidate for the Pistons coaching job, sources say. Walker was a Pistons assistant from ’08-’11

Walker was a head coach for parts of three seasons between 1996 and 2000. In his best season, he went 15-23, and his career record is 56-113. It’s unfair to pin the losses of bad Raptors and Wizards teams entirely on him, but Walker hasn’t done enough to prove himself otherwise.

He served as an assistant in Detroit under John Kuester and Michael Curry, and if Walker impressed Joe Dumars during that time, I worry it was due only to the comparative level of the coaches he was working under.

The Pistons might be doing their due diligence by talking to Walker, and that’s great. But I’d be surprised if this is anything more than courtesy and shocked if Walker is a top-five candidate.

63 Comments

  • May 6, 20131:06 pm
    by frankie d

    Reply

    this brings to mind our 5 year old’s favorite line from his favorite movie,  bolt:
    now i’m concerned on a number of levels…
    mittens, a cat has just seen one too many wacky things coming from bolt.  all of a sudden, it strikes her that her canine companion just might be seriously nuts.
    that is how i feel upon hearing that joe d is interviewing walker.
    walker?  are you freaking kidding me?
    now, i understand that joe probably wants to do his guys, guys like lindsay hunter and walker a favor by including their names in his search.  i guess it doesn’t hurt an assistant’s career to be interviewed and at least “considered” for various vacancies, no matter how many times you ultimately end up not getting the job.  i can only guess that that is true.
    but this is getting ridiculous.  
    i can see doing lindsay that favor, because of his long pistons’ history.  but walker?  
    cause he was an assistant here for a while?  and had a cup of coffee at the tail end of his career as a piston?
    any one thing…the phil jackson issue…the hunter interview…interviewing a guy who has said that he aint leaving SA…any of those things alone would not be cause for concern.
    but together, they indicate a process that is clearly veering off the tracks, if it is not off the rails already.  and this is an extremely important off-season.
    joe should be spending his time with his college scouts, and with players’ reps and with any other people who are going to be instrumental in moving the franchise forward.
    f–king around with guys who are definitely not a part of the team’s future at this point is truly disturbing.
    as mittens says, now i really am concerned on a number of levels. 

    • May 6, 20131:33 pm
      by G

      Reply

      If Budenholzer is definitely not leaving SA, why didn’t he decline the interview? The fact that he’s even interviewing says to me he’s at least considering leaving. He certainly hasn’t said “I’m not leaving,” it’s all speculation.

      As far as Walker goes, the Pistons are probably doing their due diligence (like Feldman said) and checking all their options. So why does Walker get a look? He’s a coach with playing and HC experience, and he’s currently an assistant with a team that finished the season more wins than they should’ve, given their personnel & injury problems. I doubt Walker ranks high on their wish list, but he deserves a look.

      • May 6, 20131:49 pm
        by frankie d

        Reply

        of course budenholzer could always change his mind and leave, as unlikely as it is.
        i don’t have a real problem with interviewing him.  spending/wasting a few hours with him is not that egregious.
        (it does bring to mind this thought, however.  i’d always thought that there was a league rule about coaches on teams that were still involved with the playoffs.  i’d always thought that they could not interview with other teams about other jobs.  i guess that is not the case.  and if it is not the case, why hasn’t he talked to guys like malone and shaw?  and other assistants who should be considered for a head coaches seat?)
        but hunter and walker?  as 2 of your first 4 interviews?
        as i wrote, what executive has the kind of time to run around setting up interviews, conducting them and doing everything else associated with doing a serious interview?
        especially when you have almost 30 million in cap space, a bunch of your own free agents and 3 draft choices, one of which is a lottery pick in an iffy year?
        this just strikes me as truly bizarre, especially when looked at in the context of everything else that is going on with the team.
        how do i think it should be done?
        easy…a set of 8-12 interviews with a bunch of serious candidates.  candidates like budenholzer and malone and mcmillan and even some guys no one has even seriously considered.
        joe has been around the league longer than 90% of the front office people in the league.  i am sure he knows everybody who is worth knowing.   i just cannot fathom that a guy like walker – one of those assistant coaches who seems to act as a buffer between a head coach and his players – or a guy like hunter is considered to be one of the best possible coaching candidates in the nba or the world, for that matter.  
        and the fact that joe d is fiddling around with that kind of nonsense, while his team is in serious need of attention is really disturbing as a pistons’ fan.   if he truly thinks that darryl walker is the guy to lead his team at this point, well, it just seems to confirm the idea that joe d has lost it and just doesn’t have the judgment to lead a franchise anymore.
         

        • May 6, 20131:58 pm
          by G

          Reply

          Could’ve said the same stuff about Chuck Daly that you’re saying about Walker. Not saying Walker will do what Daly did, just that it’s stupid to rule someone out because they have a bad record in limited games with a bad team.

          The order of the interviews isn’t really that important. Often the guy that gets the job interviews later. There isn’t a league rule about interviewing assistants who are still in the playoffs, but some teams don’t like it & refuse permission until after their season is over (like the Pacers). 

          • May 6, 20132:18 pm
            by frankie d

            ok.  if darryl walker is the next chuck daly i will duly note that i was egregiously wrong about him.  i just don’t see it.
            regarding daly, i just don’t see any basis for comparison to walker.
            daly had been an extremely successful college coach.  he’d taken his ivy league penn teams into the ncaa tourney and his teams dominated his league.  he had a overwhelming record of success as a college coach.  
            then he was an interim head coach in cleveland, the 3rd coach that year, a crazy year, and it is, imho, impossible to determine anything about a coach under those circumstances.  
            walker, on the other hand, had a shot with a team for almost two seasons, and as interim coach for another half season.  not the best indication, i will acknowledge, but certainly a better indicator than being the 3rd head coach in one half disastrous season for one of the league’s worst franchises.
            if walker had had the kind of success that daly’d had at the college level, as a head coach, i’d absolutely look at him differently.  but there is no evidence, anywhere that he has shown that he can be a successful head coach, unlike daly. 
            tell you what, let him go somewhere – college, d-league, anywhere – ring up a bunch of wins and show that he can be a head coach and i’ll look at him differently.  until then, he seems to be nothing more than another clipholder who makes sure the players to go latrell sprewell on their head coach. 

          • May 6, 20132:35 pm
            by G

            Walker’s history is he’s coached 3 crappy teams. He doesn’t have Daly’s success on the college level, but he coached 2 crappy Raptors teams & was an interim coach for a crappier Washington team. His last shot at a HC job was over 10 years ago. That stuff is old news. 

            Like I said, Walker shouldn’t be high on the Pistons wish list, but I don’t think they’re fools for giving him a interview. They can’t interview Shaw yet, they’ve already talked to Budenholzer & McMillan… The only other guys I want them to talk to are Sloan & SVG. If they want to talk to Walker, why is that a problem? 

          • May 6, 20132:52 pm
            by Huddy

            There should be 12 people interviewed and somehow a couple of them aren’t going to seem like long shots?  Factoring in other teams interviewing, guys that don’t want to come out of retirement/switch teams/no interest in detroit, what 12 5 star candidates are we interviewing?  With as long as Joe has been in the league he may very well know more about Hunter and Walker’s abilities than us and since guys like Shaw aren’t available to interview mid playoffs because of their own team’s policy this is the time to get these interviews done.  A couple of head scratcher interviews and Joe is wasting time that could be spent working on FA and the Draft?  Thats a stretch.  I doubt he was running around wasting a huge amount of time to interview 2 guys he knows well like Hunter and Walker.  I would be as surprised to hear our draft choice was changed by interviewing these guys as I would be to see Walker become the next Chuck Daly.

          • May 6, 20133:13 pm
            by frankie d

            i’m not saying that walker has had the best shot at an nba job.  in fact, i don’t think he has had a true shot as an nba head coach.
            in fact, i think he’s been shafted, to a degree.  he was in the first real wave of relatively young african-american coaches in the nba – there’d been others previously, but ridiculously few considering how black the league had become, and i always thought he’d never been given a legit shot, considering everything.  i recall his first toronto team being pretty gritty, a team that battled and played hard, even if they weren’t the most talented.
            then they seemed to shift gears and morph into a totally different squad, which i always thought was a result of isiiah fiddling with the roster too much.
            it was a weird situation for him, it seemed and to a large degree he seemed a victim of circumstance.   it seemed he was a certain kind of coach, but zeke started bringing in players who just didn’t fit what he was doing.
            he seemed the typical black coach who was working on a much shorter leash than other guys.
            so, yea, i am not totally against walker as a possible head coach.   i just don’t want the team i root for to be a proving ground for a guy like that.  let another franchise redeem his value.
            imho, however, i’d hope that joe d had a list of guys who:
            a) had proven success on some level;
            b) was new and potentially great, on someone’s bench, now  (a la thibedeau), or,
            c) just came out of nowhere, but who turn into a great nba coach ( as d’antoni had appeared to be in phoenix).
            the idea of mining the retread pile, in hopes that one of those guys is really a diamond in the rough is just totally unappealing.  and maybe that is unfair to darryl walker and guys like him, who never got a legit shot, imho, but that is just my view, at this point.
             

          • May 6, 20137:11 pm
            by sebastian

            If Daryl Walker gets an interview, then surely Isiah deserves the opportunity to interview for the position.

          • May 7, 20138:05 am
            by G

            The difference being Darrell Walker did poorly coaching 2 really bad teams, while Isiah did poorly coaching a really good team & a mediocre team. The fact that he could even do something with FIU says something, at least Walker is having some success right now as an assistant with the Knicks.

          • May 7, 20138:27 am
            by G

            *couldn’t even do something with FIU

  • May 6, 20131:09 pm
    by sebastian

    Reply

    Darrell Walker a candidate for Pistons coaching vacancy: Be for dam(n) real. I wonder, if Walker was invited to apply by Joe or Phil. If it is Phil, then I see why Gores ain’t paying him sh(i)t. If it was Joe, who recommended Walker, then Gores needs to show Joe’s azz the door, right now!
    Darrell Walker, now that’s some funny stuff.

  • May 6, 20131:30 pm
    by MIKEYDE248

    Reply

    Without knowing the whole story you can’t really say anything yet.  It could be that Darrel and Joe got along great while he was here and he called up Joe and ask if he could interview for the job.

  • May 6, 20131:31 pm
    by frankie d

    Reply

    of course, the most frightening thing of all is that there is at least the possibility that he is seriously considering walker as his next coach.
    that possibility alone should be enough for gores to fire him right now. 

    • May 6, 20132:13 pm
      by patrick the troll

      Reply

      Many teams in the Nba have a GM and President of Basketball. Maybe Phil could fill the gm role, and hire/interview the coach while joe worries about the draft. The Pistons were at one point and may still be known for running a small front office, it has expanded with the new cap manager dude (not sure if that is his officail title or not) but i do think it is still one of if not the smallest front office teams in the game.

      • May 6, 20132:18 pm
        by patrick the troll

        Reply

        official*

  • May 6, 20132:21 pm
    by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!!)

    Reply

    “Did you guys here? I’m getting interviewed next!”

    -Random bum on street 

  • May 6, 20133:01 pm
    by Lorenzo

    Reply

    I can’t believe people are getting hot and bothered by interviews. The team looks like its doing an extremely comprehensive search and has an extremely large pool they are looking at. The glamour candidates are well established but what’s wrong with looking at non-glamour candidates? As  mentioned by a poster Daly was hardly a glamour guy coming off his Cleveland job…nor was Phil coming off coaching jobs in P.Rico and the CBA. So there certainly are viable candidates out side of non-established names. Concurrently there are false idols in the arena of the vogue names….let’s not forget the Iavaronis and Terry Porters of this world. As Feldman said, nothing wrong with due diligence, interviewing and hiring someone are totally different issues.

    • May 6, 20133:38 pm
      by frankie d

      Reply

      let me repeat…simply interviewing one guy who doesn’t seem to fit is not a bad thing.  
      no biggie.
      the problem, imho, is that it fits a pattern of f-king around with extraneous stuff while not tending to really important stuff.  a pattern that has been going on for years.
      like his disturbing habit of not interviewing or working out as many draft choices as he possibly could.  
      one of the things that is obvious, if you look at joe’s statements and news about his draft preparation is that he targets a few guys he thinks he will have a chance at drafting and he works those guys out and interviews them and basically just relies on other information – other than first hand info – on guys who may just unexpectedly be available.
      it is my understanding that he’d not worked out monroe prior to the draft, and they ended  up having an 11th hour, last second workout with drummond when they found that he might drop to them. the league has mass workouts for some prospects and often i’ll scrutinize the list of teams attending the workouts and the pistons are almost always missing.
      that work pattern, in my estimation, is one reason joe never moves up or down the draft board, even in years – like the year he drafted knight – when it seems like it might be in the team’s best interest to do so.  he’s just not ready or prepared to do anything but draft in exactly the spots he’s anticipated drafting in.  the draft day moves i can recall were really bad: trading the budinger pick and drafting sleepy sharpe in ’08.  i can’t think of a good draft day move he’s made, and i attribute that fact to joe not putting in the preparation to be flexible on draft day.
      so while other teams and gms are wheeling and dealing and getting the best value for their pick and their team, joe is sitting there with his thumb up his a@@ because he hasn’t done the homework that would allow him to…say trade down 5 spots, and pick up a player he might not have anticipated looking at seriously, while pocketing another valuable draft pick.
      interviewing a bunch of guys who are not going to be serious candidates – hopefully – is just another indication of that pattern.  
      he should have a target list of guys who could be the next head coach, he should interview those guys, make his decision, and spend the rest of the time looking at college players and free agent video.
      his record over the last 5-6 years clearly indicates that something very basic is lacking in his ability to discern whether certain players will mesh with the team he is trying to build.  even though he’s brought in talented players, those players often don’t really fit the team’s needs or mesh with players already on the roster.
      interviewing a guy like walker is just the latest example of that type of scattered thinking and work. 

      • May 6, 20139:34 pm
        by Lorenzo

        Reply

        lol…buddyyyyyyyy seriously?? It seems like you’er griping for the sake of griping. I was just talking about coaches you went on a whole other tangent. All the same you come off as a huge hypocrite…on one hand you criticize Dumars for not spending enough time on prospects/workouts (no matter where the player is projected to go) yet on the other hand you criticize him for ‘wasting time’ going through coaching candidates… no matter how unlikely the hire may be. Hypocrisy.  

        Furthermore you are making some grossly sweeping statements in too matter fact of a manner. None of us know/have first hand information of the draft, scouting, managerial, schematics of an every day GM left alone what happens in the whirlwind of the draft. To comment on ‘missed opportunities’  in such a matter of fact way is just callous, as is asserting that a said GM is not ‘putting in the time,’ so to speak. And nitpicking on the Budinger transaction as a sign of ‘poor preparation’ is just selective amnesia…it completely ignores/discounts any other late picks that he has made….i.e. Delfino, Okur, Rebraca, Singler, etc. 

        Bottom line, your long winded statement/rant comes off as heave of frustration resulting from Dumars ‘not doing what you want him to do’ rather than an exploration of attributes that espouse or repudiate actions of the executive body. You have the right to dislike someone’s work (by all means) but your attempt at rationalizing the ‘contempt’ flounders badly.  

        • May 6, 201310:40 pm
          by frankie d

          Reply

          you clearly don’t understand the easy and basic difference between draft preparation and a coaching search.
          let me explain it to you, cause you obviously dont understand the simple difference.
          in any coaching search, a gm can be in control of his process and who he considers and ultimately who he hires.  this is obviously tempered by the fact that a single candidate may get several offers and a gm may have to outbid other clubs to get his preferred candidate.  but a coaching search involves a process that is completely and totally controlled by the club doing the hiring.
          a draft?
          in any draft, by its very nature, no one knows what the heck is going to happen.  no one knows who the first choice will be or who the second choice will be or what trades will be made or, until the lottery is held, even what order the clubs will choose in.
          by definition, a draft does not allow a team/club to control its own choices and its own process.
          necessarily, then, a team has to prepare for many more contingencies with a draft.
          necessarily, that means that a team should put a lot more work into draft preparation, in order to account for all of the contingencies.
          which means, practically, that any gm who is picking…say…in the 6th or 7th or 9th spot should probably work out and interview and prepare to draft any player who is expected to go in say, the top ten or top 15.  to fail to do so, as joe d has done by his own admission at least a couple of times is amazingly incompetent and, imho, inexcusable.  wtf else does he have to do other than look at draftees?  how much effort does it take to schedule 10-15 players  so that you can look at them first hand?  what is the excuse for not sending a team scout/rep to one of the mass workouts so that someone on your team can take a first hand look at guys who may be available outside of the lottery.
          in a coaching search, the only real contingencies are whether a candidate will accept a particular offer for whatever reason.  (it is not good enough, he has other options.)
          preparation for each is extremely dissimilar.
          and why is this relevant?   it is relevant because joe d sits his butt in the same spot every year without any hint or intention of doing anything that might move him out of his draft spot, and, imho, it is obviously because he is not prepared to deal with any complications that might arise because of any draft day trades. 
          and the budinger trade is an example of an instance when he did make a draft day move, a move that was demonstrably and certifiably bad, when he got fleeced by houston.  
          why did it happen?
          i really don’t have the inside story, but his history of poor preparation is as logical a reason as any.
          and just to refresh your memory, houston gave detroit a second round pick for that budinger pick, which was eventually turned into a mid-first round pick by houston.
          obviously, someone had done their homework.
          and i defy anyone to cite a draft day trade by dumars that actually turned out well.  it may have occurred sometime, somewhere.  i simply cannot think of a single one. 

  • May 6, 20135:43 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    Theres nothing that excites me about Phil Jackson becoming our GM…he has won with 2 ready made teams…

    • May 7, 20139:49 am
      by MIKEYDE248

      Reply

      Finally someone else who isn’t infatuated with Phil.  I think everyone just looks at his record and thinks he is the greatest coach ever.  I think I could have won almost as many championships with most of the teams he had.  If the current Miami team wins 10 championships with Erik Spoelstra as their coach, would that make him a great coach too?

      • May 7, 201310:52 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        I’m not knocking their ability to manage superstars, and I’m not even saying they are not good or great coaches but my goodness.

        Example : Heat down 3-2 against Boston, Lebron channels his inner Serial Killer goes off…how the hell is that Coaching?

        Jordan makes 6 3′s smiling and shrugging his shoulder…is that really coaching?

        I would love Phil as a coach just to see what he could do with this team, but A coach like Doug Collins, Rick Carisle, Coach Thib, Pop … Would probably all get more out of this team than Phil or Erick

        But nothing proves that Phil is a capable GM, who has he drafted? Or has he signed? What team did he put together? 

        • May 7, 201311:11 am
          by G

          Reply

          Wow. You guys are out of control.

          @ FRANK (I still think you should change your name to NOT A MCMILLAN FACE btw, that was some funny stuff) –  questioning Phil’s potential as a GM is at least legitimate. Phil is actually a lot like Riley, except Phil’s had a bit more success at the coaching level. I think both guys understand the game on a larger scale than most coaches do.

          When it comes to GM’s, usually a team will grab up a promising but inexperienced candidate. If he’s good, he stays on. If he’s not, they fire him. Presti had some front office experience but was never a GM before Seattle/OKC got him. Dumars had ZERO front office experience before the Pistons brought him on. Daryl Morey was a stat guy for the Celtics before Houston hired him. 

  • May 6, 20137:13 pm
    by sebastian

    Reply

    I meant: Darrell Walker.

  • May 7, 20135:35 am
    by Saul

    Reply

    I don’t see why this is a problem. I always liked Walker when he was with Detroit. There is nothing wrong with Joe giving him the chance at an interview.

  • May 7, 20139:36 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

      This is an important hire.  That is why it is very important they interview as many people as possible.  Im against a retread hire for the reason that the majority of them perfer to play vets.  Whoever they hire it is crucial they work on player development so giving major minutes to dre english middleton etc.  Part of the reason the nets fired P.J was because he refused to play younger players same with Frank.  He played Max WAY TOOO MUCH!  Dre and Slava should of been playing more from the jump of the season.  Slava didnt see the court until Dre got hurt.  With all that being said I’d rather see a hungry no name coach than a retread like McMillan Avery Johnson, the Van Gundys, etc, etc.  Even if it seems to be an unconviential choice.  Mark Jackson tried for years to get a job and when he did he played his younger guys.  Thompson is a 2nd yr player Barnes Green and Ezeli are all rookies playing major roles on a Playoff team.  By saying that I’am not saying yank Chris Webber out of the booth and give him the job.  Im saying be patient and thorough,  this hire will make or break this team.

     

  • May 7, 201310:16 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

    As a life long Pistons Fan and a HUGE Isiah Fan (player)  He has proven time and time again he should not be in the Front office or even as coach he did well with the Pacers but they were a vetran team.  What I never understood about Zeke is in Bill Simmon’s BOB,  Isiah thomas said the secret of winning he understood it as a player he never applied it to running a team.

  • May 7, 201310:57 am
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    Bulls and Pacers give me hope.

    We already have two good bigs, we also have a nice group of bench players, all we need is Wing player and Coach….

    Everyone talks up True PGs …. Only PGs left are known for being able to score the ball or shoot the ball … Lebron is a special case 

    • May 7, 201311:24 am
      by G

      Reply

      Yep, LeBron, the only true PG in the playoffs… What? 

      Conley, Parker, Jack, Felton, Hinrich, Hill, Westbrook (if he were healthy), even Chalmers all do a better job of running the point than Stuckey or Knight. Sure, there are a couple of non-traditional PGs out there like Westbrook, but even those guys are expected to make plays & take care of the ball. Make no mistake, PG is a need.

  • May 7, 201312:10 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    “Yep, LeBron, the only true PG in the playoffs… What?”

    No I said Lebron is a special case 
    “Conley , Parker, Jack, Felton, Hinrich, Hill, Westbrook (if he were healthy), even Chalmers all do a better job of running the point than Stuckey or Knight. Sure, there are a couple of non-traditional PGs out there like Westbrook, but even those guys are expected to make plays & take care of the ball. Make no mistake, PG is a need.”

    Conley is the truest PG left

    Parler is a scoring PG
    Jack Scoring PG
    Felton Scoring PG
    Hill Shooting PG
    Westbrook Scoring PG
    Hinrich game manager /Nate Scoring PG
    Chamler shooting PG

    The day of the tradional PG is nearly Dead… If they are not a scoring threat or can stretch the floor with shooting they are not as effective.

    Knight never played with guys like Wade, James who made the game easy for Chalmers…but its not about Knight or Stuckey.

    My point is we are not that far away from being a play-off contender, with the right wing player and a good coach
     

     

    • May 7, 201312:20 pm
      by G

      Reply

      And a PG… Dude, come on. You’re labeling all these guys as “scoring PG” when they all handle & distribute the ball better than Knight does (or Stuckey, who’s actually better than Knight at it). Yes, Parker scores a lot, but he also averaged 5 more assists than turnovers. Isn’t calling Hinrich a “game manager” essentially saying “true PG”?

      What the Pistons need is a guy that can handle the ball & pass it without turning it over a ton. I’m not saying they need Tiny Archibald or something, but they DO need something better than what Knight & Stuckey provide.

      • May 7, 20131:30 pm
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        we are truly night and day

        “”And a PG… Dude, come on. You’re labeling all these guys as “scoring PG” when they all handle & distribute the ball better than Knight does (or Stuckey, who’s actually better than Knight at it). Yes, Parker scores a lot, but he also averaged 5 more assists than turnovers. Isn’t calling Hinrich a “game manager” essentially saying “true PG”?”"
        1. fine, in your opinion we need a PG as well, in mines We are just a good wing player and a good coach away from being a Play-off contender. Yes, Hinrich is a true PG in the sense that he has low to’s, but he doesnt make plays nor does he create offense He is the Trent Dilfer of PGs aka a Game Manager is he the reason that they are in the 2nd rd? is he the reason they beat the Heat Last night?  Nate Robinson a scoring PG made the difference, and we’ve seen it through the play-offs.

        “”What the Pistons need is a guy that can handle the ball & pass it without turning it over a ton. I’m not saying they need Tiny Archibald or something, but they DO need something better than what Knight & Stuckey provide.”"

        2. we’ll never agree most times and im fine with that along as it stays fun and respectful. so i know you wont agree. Knight has been misused since day one under Frank, we have yet to see what Knight can truely provide outside of shooting the 3 ball. Pistons played a yucky and ugly style of offense.

        now if the next coach puts Knight in a real position to suceed and he fails, i”ll be in full support or benching him and finding a nice NON-Traditional PG…

        • May 7, 20132:24 pm
          by G

          Reply

          You’ll have to explain to me someday how exactly Knight was misused, other than being miscast as a PG. 

          Sure, Hinrich is a “game manager”. I’ll take that over Knight running the point any day. Interesting that you bring up Robinson – he had 9 assists and 3 turnovers last night. I’m not opposed to a non-traditional PG, I even said as much. In fact, what the hell is a “traditional PG” anyway? All I want is a guy that can bring the ball up & make an entry pass without bouncing it off the defender’s arms. If he can shoot the 3, bonus.

  • May 7, 20134:24 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    LOL first off i think we need our owe debate section, I’ll save the Knight misused debate for another day….
    “”Sure, Hinrich is a “game manager”. I’ll take that over Knight running the point any day.”"
    1,start knight on the same team with the same talent as Hinrich Knight wins more games.
    “”Interesting that you bring up Robinson – he had 9 assists and 3 turnovers last night. I’m not opposed to a non-traditional PG, I even said as much.”"
     
    2. But he averages 4 ast and 2to’s for the play-offs,,, but 18ppg
     
    “”In fact, what the hell is a “traditional PG” anyway? All I want is a guy that can bring the ball up & make an entry pass without bouncing it off the defender’s arms. If he can shoot the 3, bonus.”"
    3. Calderon did wonders for our win lose record

    • May 7, 20135:28 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      1) No, that seems highly unlikely. Knight’s best skill is his defense, but Hinrich is actually much better than Knight there. Knight’s next best skill is 3 point shooting, but Hinrich actually shot a higher percentage from 3. Knight does take more, and that is part of why he scores more, I just don’t think it makes up for the other thing. The entire reason Chicago is effective is that they don’t turn it over much. Hinrich doesn’t just get more assists than Knight, he also turns it over way less. Despite his lower scoring totals, Hinrich also does more to help Chicago’s offense than Knight does. I really can’t come up with any team that benefits from an inability to pass and a propensity for turning it over as the starting point guard.
       
      2) A 2 to 1 assist to turnover ratio is still a heck of a lot better than what Knight can put up. Plus, Chicago is a really bizarre situation anyways. If your goal is to mimic injury depleted Chicago then your plan is dumb.
       
      3) This crap again? Drummond’s injury had way, way more to do with with the win loss record than anything else. This is just not a reasonable defense of the stance you are taking.

      • May 8, 20138:56 am
        by G

        Reply

        Agree, that argument against Calderon because the Pistons didn’t win with him is tired & really a bad argument. Plus, I don’t see how it has anything to do with the merits of a PG who can pass.

        Really we can talk about turnovers all day with Stuckey and Knight, but that’s only half the story. Neither guy can pass! For every turnover they have, there are about 2 or 3 failed entry passes that they manage to recover. I went to one game this year where Stuckey & Knight were sharing PG duties… They could barely get the ball in to Monroe! 2 out of 3 attempts hit a defender (and it wasn’t like they were playing against some defensive masterminds). Some of those show up on the stat sheet at turnovers, but many of them don’t because the Pistons were able to corral the loose ball. This wastes time, bogs down the offense & forces the team to take bad shots.

  • May 7, 20136:35 pm
    by Aaron

    Reply

    Everything you guys are saying are valid and it brings back to my pervious point of why this coach hire is so important.  The player development is SO important,  not only has Knight, Drummond Kratsov Middelton and English have been misused.  Stuckey’s whole carrer has been misused.  What are his strengths?  His size and strength being able to attack rim and get to line, a poor man’s D-Wade.  So at first they decide hes gonna be the replaceemnt for Chauncey which they both clearly have 2 dif skill sets.  This was all extremely obvious and in the 2009 draft Ty Lawson was setting there and instead of drafting him and putting him on a team that had players who needed the ball fed to them (Rip, Tay etc).  They Draft an undersized project Austin Daye (How well did that work?  They couldnt decide if he was a 3 or a stretch 4 and talks about him playing the 2 at 6’11). Dumars seems to love the undersized PF just cuz they got lucky with Ben and to a lesser degree Max.  Anyhoo Lawson ends up in Denver where he replaced Chauncey. After drafting Knight and hiring Frank they were having him try to be a spot up jump shooter like Ray Allen or something.  I have no problem with stuck bringing up the ball at times cuz it allows him to max his skills but he cant run an offense like Chauncey did and hes not a catch and shoot guy like Rip was. 

    I think with the right coach who allows the players to play the their strengths and not just HIS system the Pistons can be succesful.  If they start next season with the young guys playing major mins they may fall into the 7th or 8th playoff spot get some playoff experience. Then build of it.  Like how the Thunder were built and like what the Rockets and GSW’s are doing.  This stuff isnt that hard,  IDK why a fans like us see this but ppl who have been around bball their whole life and forgotten more than we’ll ever know cant figure it out.

    • May 7, 20138:35 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      I don’t think things were quite as bad as it sounds like you think it is. The team made some mistakes, no doubt about it, but some of the mistakes you highlight are pretty understandable.
       
      The Stuckey at point guard experiment made sense, and he handled it much better than Knight has handled his time at the point. I’d honestly prefer to turn things over to Stuckey at point than Knight, and I don’t want Stuckey as Detroit’s point guard. That whole experiment probably represented his highest potential value if he could turn in to a poor man’s Russell Westbrook. The team probably stayed with it a little too long, and not picking Lawson was a terrible decision, but the theory behind trying to make him a point guard did make sense. I also don’t think the team made Stuckey in to a spot up shooter this year, I think Stuckey just thinks that is what shooting guards do. Frank made plenty of comments that suggested he wanted Stuckey to continue attacking the hoop, but Stuckey wasn’t doing it. What Stuckey chooses to do with the ball in his hands is his decision, and if he was smart he would have come off screens and drove straight to the hoop like what Monta Ellis does all the time while playing shooting guard.
       
      I agree the way the team used Austin Daye was quite baffling, as is the team not getting Drummond and Monroe on the court at the same time, and the team’s burying of Middleton for too long is also likely a mistake. English I have no problem with since his 3 point shot wasn’t falling and his defense was atrocious this year. Kravstov similarly looked lost when on the court and I’d have used him exactly how the team did this year if I was running things. Neither of those guys played well enough to deserve a better look than they got.
       
      I also think the team used Knight as well as could reasonably be expected. They gave him a chance at point guard because, like Stuckey, his value is higher if he could develop in to a point guard than if he becomes a shooting guard. After a year and a half of failing to show a basic level of competence they moved him to shooting guard, a move I would consider a smart decision and a sign they might have learned from the way the screwed up with Stuckey. In my opinion the only potential criticism of the way Knight has been used is not focusing on getting Knight into an attacking mindset, but I don’t know if that is on Frank or if Knight just has a really hard time getting in to that mindset. In addition to that, Knight’s not an efficient enough scorer for it to be obvious that putting him in that kind of role even makes sense anyways. He’s already a pretty average efficiency scorer, and increasing his shot attempts could easily cause that efficiency to drop since most guys become less efficient when they start trying to do too much. I really don’t see where Knight has been mismanaged.

  • May 7, 20137:31 pm
    by Big Rick

    Reply

    We’re all over the place with this coaching search! J.B Bickerstaff???

    • May 8, 20138:22 am
      by G

      Reply

      JB is a LOT better than Bernie. He should still be about 8th on the wish list though.

  • May 7, 201311:47 pm
    by Reaction

    Reply

    They should honestly focus on the main prospects.. Budenholzer, Shaw, Van Gundy(if he is even in contention), etc..

  • May 8, 20137:29 am
    by Grizz

    Reply

    Frankie and Sebastian .. 10,000% agreement .. You all wondering why Phil Jackson got invited in by our Pistons owner Tom Gores?!  TWO NAMESS: D. Walker and L. Hunter .. 2 chums of Joe D that have no business being invited .. other than they are on friendly terms … Complete waste of time .. Ridiculous beyond belief .. I would fire Dumars for just inviting those 2 clowns for interviews .. Nothing to be gained except confusion … BTW .. Daley was a successful college coach … When did I. Thomas ever do a bad job with a good team?!  Thomas and especially Laimbeer are far more qualifed and would create a far greater positive impact for the Pistons than these 2 loser friends of Joe Dumars, Walker and Hunter .. Just really annoying because it reminds one of the disaser that was Curry (especially) and Kuester and Frank ..Brian Shaw .. McMillan …Mike Buden Holzer .. relatively legit interviewees for the position of head coach ..  BUT is it beyond ludricous for posters or writers to say .. oh what the hey .. these goofs like Hunter and Walker are just there for whatever .. not a serious interview .. who cares .. Anyone who believes that believes in wasting time and sending the wrong message to the team .. and believes that more interviews means a better head coach will be found .. WRONG .. more interviews with GOOD CANDIDATES means a better head coach will be found .. POINT SET MATCH ..

    • May 8, 20138:37 am
      by G

      Reply

      Talk about an overreaction… 

      You asked when did Isiah ever do a bad job with a good team? How about Indiana? Bird had the team for 3 years, losing in the ECF twice and the NBA Finals his last year. He handed the team off to Isiah and their record dropped by 15 wins and they got knocked out in the first round 3 straight years. Carlisle came in, improved their record by 13 wins and took them to the ECF again.

      If you’ve ever been to a job interview before, you should know that often they interview 10, 20, 50, maybe 100 people for only a couple positions. This is common sense, casting a wider net increases the chances of getting the right hire. Having preconceptions about someone going into the interview only blinds you to the hidden gem. I think if Dumars invites a guy for an interview, that guy could be considered. The interview process is extremely important, especially for assistant coaches you don’t know a whole lot about. Do I think Darrell Walker is high on Dumars’ wish list? No, but I think he’s got a shot if he nails the interview. 

  • May 8, 20138:25 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

    With Hollinger being succesful in Memphis,  Gores should fire Dumars and hire Zach Lowe and Tom Penn to run the team.  That was mostly a joke but weith that being said maybe they should go a dif route and if “mathkestball” works why not try it!  With Westbrook going down Durant is reminding me of LeBron with the Cavs.  With the Salary cap rules just paying for a talent isnt a way to build a team.  Thats why the draft is so important as Frankie D said Joe’s mostly been asleep at the wheel at the draft.

  • May 8, 20139:07 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

    This will be my last rant on why Dumars should either be fired or forced to hire a real gm under him.  For Sh*ts n Giggles I looked up 2009 Draft.  At the time we needed a PG this is who were available after Dumars picked Daye.  Ty Lawson Jrue Holiday Jeff Teague Darren Collison.  All 4 of them were more sucessful in college. In that group all 4 have started for playoff teams DC being weakest link.  Holiday has been an all star Lawson could have been and may still will be.  In 2008 at the end of the 1st rnd he drafted DJ white then traded him for sleepy sharpe,  with Mario Chalmers DeAndre Jordan Omer Asik and Luc Mbah a Moute all being there.  So thats 2 wasted drafts,  not draft picks WASTED DRAFTS!!!  i know this is an inexact science and I know even teams that draft well (Rockets Spurs Thunder) all have misses to,  but the Draft is the most cost effective way to build a team and Dumars have fumbled it many times.  I know recently they drafted better but alot of that was luck with having top 10 picks and having players fall to them.  They DID NOT work out Moose and BK.  I understand Dumars has  a tough job with a lot of responsibilties but thats why you have a team around you to delegate jobs. 

    I dont mean to sound completly disrespectful to Dumars my mom always reminds me he was my fav player as a kid.  He has had a good run I think its run its course.  Everyone has a shelf life his expired 4 years ago!

    • May 8, 20139:45 am
      by G

      Reply

      In defense of Dumars (and believe me, this is half-hearted because I wanted Dumars to go after Jordan & Lawson too), the organization was still under the impression Stuckey could be made into a legit PG. He had improved his shooting, and his assists/to ratio was over 2. That 2009 team was a crappy team to get assists with, and Stuckey averaged nearly 5 per game.

      That said, he didn’t really pass the eye test as a PG. He always did better as a ball-dominant scorer off the bench. I always thought Lawson looked like he would be a better pro than Daye (I really wanted them to take Lawson or Taj Gibson…). The Pistons really needed a big, and Daye (despite being 6’10″) would never be a big. I think the excuse for not drafting Jordan had to do with concerns about his attitude & production out of college. I wanted the Pistons to draft him mainly because he was an athletic big (which they needed), and instead they went after SF’s.

  • May 8, 20139:18 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

      Here is a classic example on why a thorough coach search is important.  After Bill Cowher left the Steelers the Rooneys were gonna promote within I believe Wisenhunt maybe Grimm IDR,  but because of the Rooney Rule they hired an unknown dc from Min Mike Tomlin,  he blew them away became head coach and won a SB and went to another.  I know dif sport and a mandated rule but it just shows on how a thorough coaching search is important.  Are Walker and Hunter the answer?  No ideally i like to see Shaw I think with our bigs fits his Defense can’t you see Dre succeding in Hibbert’s Role?  I can he is more athletic!  I doubt the guy from the Spurs in gna leave SA.  Pop has made it clear when Tim retires he retires and Budenholzer likely to take over.

  • May 8, 20139:27 am
    by Grizz

    Reply

    G … talk about being wrong . Thomas did not do a bad job with the Indiana Pacers .. How so? He took young players and made them better .. His teams won more every season …. He got fired for winning 48 games? He got fired because Dumars fired Carlisle and L. Bird could not handle that .. And here you are addressing the most MINOR POINT which you cannot win because Thomas was NOT bad  .. and being hypocritical at the same time . You will attack Thomas for doing a decent / good job but you will say nothing against Hunter or Walker .. head coaches who did far worse than Thomas .. So .. Can you even see what you are writing? Blind keyboard hammering while misrepresenting and ignoring the past and then jumping to totally wrong conclusions .. Probably said OKIDOKI when Curry, Kuester and Frank were hired but were deadset against Laimbeer because he only won 3 professional championships as a head coach while Curry at least played tennis with Dumars a couple times a week .. HA ..

    • May 8, 201310:09 am
      by G

      Reply

      How exactly did Thomas not suck as a coach? He took a NBA Finals runner up and turned them into a 1st round exit. I think they could’ve finished with similar results with no one coaching. Thomas was NOT a good coach. Bird fired him because he was less than average during the regular season & absolutely moronic in the playoffs. It’s not like this should be a revelation to you, this was common knowledge among those covering the games. And your assertion that he developed the younger players? Not true

      How is liking Walker better than Thomas hypocritical? It’s not like I’m in love with the idea of hiring Walker, I just think offering him an interview is defensible. Walker never coached a good team, his last HC job was 10 years ago, and he’s an assistant on a team that won a playoff series this year. I REALLY don’t like the idea of hiring Hunter, so you’ve got no traction there. I think the most damning case against Isiah is his record at FIU. He was unable to get ANY improvement out of that team, despite being a high profile coach.

      • May 8, 201310:55 am
        by G

        Reply

        Actually, I didn’t give Isiah full credit for the absolute disaster he is as a coach. FIU won 13 games the year before Isiah came, then 7, 11 and 8 games with Isiah, then 18 games after firing him.

        So the Pacers were about 15 games better with Bird and Finals runner up, 13 games better with Carlisle and made the ECF, and FIU was better before AND after Isiah. Really looking at that early-2000′s Pacers team, they should’ve won a championship somewhere in there. Isiah was a 3-year setback (never won 50 games, never won a playoff series), and then the Artest melee happened and the team fell apart.

    • May 8, 201310:15 am
      by G

      Reply

      Btw, I hated the Kuester & Curry hirings, and preferred Woodson over Frank. I’ve never been crazy about the idea of hiring Laimbeer mainly because his only experience as an NBA assistant was 1 year in Minnesota, and I don’t think his WNBA success is THAT translatable to the NBA. I think it’s much closer to men’s college ball.

      I’m not “blind keyboard hammering” (although YOU might be, with your lack of understanding on how to use an ellipsis), out of the 2 of us I’m the one showing the ability for critical thought.

  • May 8, 201310:00 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

    I think Laimbeer would have a hard time having the players buy in with being a women’s coach its not fair but I can see players tuning him out.  A larger issue hes an aggressive in your face old school coach.  I rememeber when the shock was still here and real sports did a profile on him the women had a F–k Bill jar,  everytime they said F-u they had to put $ in the jar.  Than on top of being a former great player for the Pistons I see too much against him and not in his favor.  As far as Isiah its more of the same and because of his track record and that mess with the NYK’s and that sexual harrasment suit I dont think he is worth the baggage.

    Start fresh with no ties as a former player or assistant I know theres a comfort level with ppl yaou know,  but if they wanna be sucessful you gotta shake things up and start fresh

  • May 8, 201310:04 am
    by Grizz

    Reply

    Aaron .. please .. So Laimbeer can be sensitive enough to mold 3 championship teams and MVP players .. coaching women mind you .. and yet you will stand there and say he is too in your face to coach NBA players .. Does that make any sense at all?

    • May 8, 201310:17 am
      by G

      Reply

      Uh, yeah, it makes sense. Laimbeer said himself, WNBA players are more coachable than NBA players.

  • May 8, 201311:47 am
    by Aaron

    Reply

    Iam not saying the men are senistive.  The mens and womens games are worlds apart.  The womens game is more fundamentally sound,  they generally stay in college longer.  With the influx of aau ball most sucessful hs coaches coach aau teams. where they let the star players play more 1 on 1 and iso’s.  Then in college coaches try to break those habits the plyer usually tunes him out cuz they are on the way to the nba.  Alot of the times they tune coaches out and do what they want.  Remeber when Wall was at Ky and him and cal got into it a few times.  He wasnt used to a coach being anything else than an enabler.  This is more of a genralization and I know they are exceptions to everything.  Im not saying Laimbeer couldnt be a nba coach  with the right team he may have instant sucess then after 2-4 yrs until everyone gets tired of his act.  It happens alot with coaches like that think Larry Brown both Van Gundy’s as a more recent example was Collins in Philly.  They had a mix of youth and vets and some say over acheievd for 2 years then when adversity hit with injuries and the bynum mess the team tuned him out.  The three reasons I said in my previous post is why I DONT THINK he would be a good fit here.  Can anyone give me an example where a succesful womens coach had similar sucess with men?  I cant think of any.  What I was saying I cant see any young man from 19-24ish who has been told how great he is his whole life taking a women’s coach seriously.  Iam not saying it fair it has alot to do with ignorance and immaturity.

  • May 8, 201312:02 pm
    by Aaron

    Reply

    Lastly, there are more oppurtunity for the male players. So if a male player is really talented but a pain in the ass there are more teams for him to go to. The WNBA has less than half the number of teams than NBA. By saying that I think women players are more likely to stay in line and be a team player and listen to the coach even if they dont want to. If they burn a bridge or 2 where are they gonna go? Nate Robinson has been on 5 teams in 10 yrs. Kyle Lowry has been on 3. Ron Artest 5. Steven Jackson atleast 5. In a roundabout way the point I was making Laimbeer’s coaching style works more in WNBA than the nba cuz the NBA is a players league. The NBA will roll the dice on a headache player where the WNBA may not. Is there any example of a female hot head player getting more than and 2nd chance? I really dont know of any thats why Iam asking.

    • May 8, 201312:10 pm
      by G

      Reply

      Plus, WNBA coaches make more than the players. Most NBA starters make more than their coach does.

  • May 8, 201312:05 pm
    by Aaron

    Reply

    Here is a more simple explanation to my last rants.  Women will put up with agressive coaching where the men dont have too.  Has any WNBA player  ever gotten a coach fired?

  • May 9, 20135:13 am
    by Grizz

    Reply

     
    G and Aarron .. uh . very misleading .. your original point was that Laimbeer will be in NBA players’ faces so much that there will BL be poor head coach player relationships .. I do not accept that as a given even if Laim was quite strong in his communications. EVER heard of Gregg Popovich?? Anyway .. aside from that, I countered by saying that if Laimbeer could be sensitive to handle women, to championship team levels, then obviously Laimbeer is more than capable of coaching a player without a major conflict. You never really addressed my point directly but bring up a different one that is almost nonsensical. You countered again by saying that Laimbeer said WNBA players are easier to coach. How is that relevant? There is a distinct difference between saying “A is more challenging than B” and saying “I cannot handle A.” You are exaggerating a statement into basically nonsense. So if you say playing basketball is more challenging than table tennis then necessarily means you cannot play basketball?! (I would accept your word on that one though)
     

    Aaron as far as your other argument that no women’s head coach has ever coached in the NBA and thus Laimbeer is unfit to be a head coach, you are being quite sexist, and irrelevant. It is not as if Laimbeer is so weak willed wall-flower who never played in the NBA. Laimbeer did. He understands the game quite well and his whole career was outthinking opponents and being tougher than them, because he did not have that much natural talent, though he improved his game to the point of being an all-star and a starting center on 2 NBA championship teams.  He played a modern version of the NBA too, a big man who shoots from the outside.  So those factors far exceed any doubt about the women’s game. Laimbeer excelled in the NBA on mental and on physical levels, and thus your point about WNBA coaches means preciousl little.
     
    Aaron and G, so NBA players can be more confrontational than WNBA players? So what? First Laimbeer is too strong to handle NBA players and now he is too frail? Make up your mind. I guess if that is true then players like Larry Brown should never have tried becoming an NBA head coach because they are not used to players who have nowhere else to go?! Oh, Larry Brown was a great NBA head coach? Silly argument of yours therefore isn’t it?
     
    Players make more money than Laimbeer and that means he cannot coach them? Grasping at more straws in desperation?! Hmmm .. You better tell all the head coaches in the NBA they are in the wrong profession because they are trying to coach players who make more money than them, and thus they cannot succeed. Did you tell Erik Spoelstra yet? He never coached anything before he started and he is coaching 3 very highly paid NBA players. I suppose it will be impossible for his team to ever win a championship .. or more likely .. Wade, LeBron, and Bosh will punk his butt .. Oh .. The Miami Heat won the title 2012?!  Oh sorry but I guess that means your argument about money is also worthless.
     

    • May 9, 20138:20 am
      by G

      Reply

      I’m making one argument, you’re just not understanding it or you’re mixing it up with Aaron’s argument. My argument is that coaching success in the WNBA is not that translatable to success in the NBA. Handling egos is MUCH more a factor in the NBA.

      Again, you bring up the sexism argument, and that holds no water at all. You can act like there’s no difference between the WNBA and the NBA, but the top players in the WNBA make in the $100,000 range while the coaches make something in the millions. If you think that makes no difference in a coach’s influence, you’re deluded. Would a team be more ready to dump a $4M investment or a $10M investment? The WNBA is more of a coaches league than the NBA is, that’s just a fact.

      Why do coaches fail in the NBA? Either their strategy is flawed, they can’t handle the players, or they can’t handle front office politics. I’ve got concerns with Laimbeer on all 3 fronts.
      1) NBA players are bigger, faster & stronger than WNBA players. Not sexist, factual. That means that offensive plays that worked in the WNBA won’t necessarily work in the NBA, and WNBA defensive systems might not work against NBA offenses. This is actually the least of my concerns, but it’s legit.
      2) Laimbeer did ok as an assistant for 1 year in Minnesota, but being an HC is a whole different ball of wax. He’s an abrasive MF, and he said himself that coaching in the WNBA is easier because the players listen to you more. If he gets a problem child, I have doubts that he would handle it the right way. I think he would be a good coach for guys like Monroe and Drummond, but there are other guys in the league that would make it a nightmare.
      3) Front office politics & handling the media is my biggest concern, to be honest. Laimbeer was the most hated player in the game when he played. I can’t stress that enough. Laimbeer is also a pretty blunt dude, so if he gets frustrated with a member of the press, how will he handle it? Will he start calling out different players, will he challenge the reporter to a fight?

      I have no doubt that a Laimbeer coaching tenure would be interesting, but I have doubts about whether it would be good. 

  • May 9, 20136:03 am
    by Grizz

    Reply

    Anyway . Aaron and G . I dont blame you for being down on Laimbeer .. I just am mad that so many argue against BL when they said NOTHING against Curry, Kuester or Frank, who were all less qualified than Laimbeer . that is 5 seasons of W T EFF .. I certainly did object wherever I could post.. to no avail .. If you did too . then .. good for you .. It should not take 5 seasons to find a good head coach ..

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here