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

Which player belongs No. 13 on the Pistons’ draft board?

Read this before voting

1. Ben McLemore

2. Victor Oladipo

3. Otto Porter

4. Trey Burke

5. Nerlens Noel

6. Anthony Bennett

7. Kentavious Caldwell-Pope

8. C.J. McCollum

9. Michael Carter-Williams

10. Shabazz Muhammad

11. Cody Zeller

12. Alex Len

51 Comments

  • Jun 26, 201311:11 pm
    by Fennis

    Reply

    I think we’re going to take Shabazz Muhammed. I hated the idea a week ago but after watching footage from his games (not highlights/lowlights), I’m realizing that this guy is exactly what the Pistons need. He has arguable the best motor of any perimeter player in the draft, an excellent 3-point shot, gets to the line, and wants to be great. 

    This will sound odd but his game reminds me of Jerry Stackhouse. Stackhouse had a good three point shot and was hyper agressive on the break and in straight-line drives in the half-court offense. Jerry Stackhouse wasn’t built to take a team to the promised land, but he was a damn good asset in his prime. I think Muhammed can be a slightly less explosive Stackhouse, a 20pt scorer at the 2 in two years, but with below average passing skills and average defensive awareness.

    In this draft I’ll take that in a heartbeat. 

    He’s a better prospect that KCP simply because he is more versatile offensive. KCP took about half of his shots from three and struggled inside the three point line. Muhammed doesn’t have a good dribble game but he’s very good on curls and nifty offensive moves outside of eight feet. And his three point shot might reach the elite level. 

    Also keep in mind that Shabazz stepped onto the UCLA hardwood midseason without having practiced much with the team and immediately following a shoulder injury, from what I understand. (His “bad body” during the UCLA year has to do with the injury and the late start to the season.) He had a pretty serious ankle injury midseason, which also took away from his explosiveness. Add all of this to the Ben Howland effect (low production in a slow offense) and it makes me think whoever lands Sha-mu will be rewarded for overcoming the group-think.  

    - Burke
    - Sha-Mu
    - Zeller
    - KCP 

    • Jun 27, 201312:02 am
      by oats

      Reply

      I find it really unlikely that Shabazz scores 20 points a game that soon. Do you realize how many 20 point scorers there were this year? Only 11 guys did it this year. We’ve kind of moved out of the era of the gunner, and instead teams are focusing on more diverse scoring. I really don’t see Shabazz breaking the trend and making it to 20 points a game in the next few years. Even if he does, I’m also not sold on the value of scoring 20 points a game if the player is inefficient. Muhammad was pretty average as far as scoring efficiency, so to expect him to extend his scoring all the way up to 20 points a game in the NBA and still stay at least average in efficiency just seems like asking way too much from him.
       
      UCLA was faster than average this year, and Shabazz scored a pretty high percentage of his points in transition. Draft Express had him as the SF in the top 20 in their rankings that used the most possessions per game in transition situations. I’m really not buying the Ben Howland thing with Muhammad. Most of the guys that underperformed for Howland did so because they didn’t get up shots, but Shabazz did get them up. I just don’t see where UCLA’s system was holding him back all that much.
       
      I’m not trying to argue that Muhammad is a bad choice. He’s not who I’d pick, but chances are decent that I’d be fine with it. I’d prefer it if Burke, Bennett, or McLemore slid. Barring that, Muhammad is an acceptable choice. I just think your expectations for him are way too high. I think that 2 years from now he is closer to 15 points a game, but does little outside of that and is maybe a bit below average at shooting efficiency. That’s still a solid player, just no where near the kind of guy you are describing. 
       
      Also, KCP shot 50.5% on 2s while Muhammad shot 46.3%. It’s really not accurate to say that KCP struggled inside of the 3 point line.

      • Jun 27, 20139:39 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        Wait, who were 10 and 11. I only know of nine 20 ppg players this season.

        • Jun 27, 20139:56 am
          by oats

          Reply

          Here.
           

          • Jun 27, 201310:20 am
            by Sop

            ESPN’s stats/ppg page doesn’t include Kyrie or Parker I guess because they played less than 67 games. I’m not sure why that would be a cut off, but apparently it is.

      • Jun 27, 201310:22 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        “”UCLA was faster than average this year, and Shabazz scored a pretty high percentage of his points in transition.Draft Express had him as the SF in the top 20 in their rankings that used the most possessions per game in transition situations. I’m really not buying the Ben Howland thing with Muhammad. Most of the guys that underperformed for Howland did so because they didn’t get up shots but Shabazz did get them up. I just don’t see where UCLA’s system was holding him back all that much”"

        1. Listen, Howland system made him a better player, because the biggest knock against his game coming into college was that he needed a perimeter game, he was dominate left in high school when everyone had him ranked number 1, but said he he needed a jumper. In College, Howland system taught him to be a scorer off the ball ( that an NBA Skill). where the system hurt him is that it didnt allow him to display his talents overall talents in ISO. Also, Shabazz was suspended, injuried, and overweight, played out of his natural position and never really was in his best condition through the season.

        Jay Bilas said it best, “If another 20 year old freshman had the season Shabazz had, leading his team, hitting big shots, the work-ethic” without the scrutiny, he’d be a lock for the top 10″ They also said “no one has seen the best he has to offer”

        “”Also, KCP shot 50.5% on 2s while Muhammad shot 46.3%. It’s really not accurate to say that KCP struggled inside of the 3 point line.”"

        2. About Pope, you use to argue that if Shabazz took more 3′s his shooting percent would be lower, thats my same arguement for Pope.

        he only averaged 6 attempts inside the arc, 50.5% shooting = 3.03 made = basically 6.06 points per-game

        Shabazz averaged 11 attempts inside the acr, 46.3 shooting = 5.09 made = basically 10.18 ppg

        Through in the fact that shabazz number dropped off in the Pac-12 tournament, and NCAA tournament . If you just look at what he did in the first 28 regular season game, his shooting is even more impressive.

        I will say this, if Pope gets on the right up tempo team, where he has the green light he can be deadly.

        • Jun 27, 201311:10 am
          by G

          Reply

          Couple of things:

          First, you keep talking about Howland’s system… The reason why Muhammad didn’t ISO that much is because HE’S BAD AT ISO. At least on the perimeter. He doesn’t have a blow-by move or a great handle, and he doesn’t have a good right hand so he lacks the counter-moves he needs. What he does have are some decent post moves, which I recall he used in ISOLATION CIRCUMSTANCES. 

          Your second point makes no sense whatsoever. Pope shot better from 2 than Muhammad did. If Muhammad shot more 3′s, his FG% would be LOWER. Muhammad doesn’t enjoy much of a 3P% advantage over Pope (only 0.4% better), but Pope’s 2P% is significantly higher (by 3.5%). There really isn’t a way to tweak those numbers to favor Muhammad.

          Again, you’re ready to throw out legitimate stats because they represent a slump & you think can be discredited. If you throw out Muhammad’s bad stretches, yeah, he looks pretty good. But last I checked, bad stretches count just like good stretches do. There are ups & downs in a season, and if you think Muhammad is more likely to sustain his peak performance instead of an ebb and flow, you’re kidding yourself.

          • Jun 27, 201312:01 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            “”First, you keep talking about Howland’s system… The reason why Muhammad didn’t ISO that much is because HE’S BAD AT ISO. At least on the perimeter. He doesn’t have a blow-by move or a great handle, and he doesn’t have a good right hand so he lacks the counter-moves he needs. What he does have are some decent post moves, which I recall he used in ISOLATION CIRCUMSTANCES. ”"

            1. first off I said Ben Howland system made him better, because it taught him to operate off the ball. 2ndly, I said the system only hurt him (Speaking about Draft Stock) because it didnt allow him to display his OVERALL talent in ISO. I also point out several reasons why, suspension, injuries, playing off the ball more. Once again, Im not the only person that has pointed this out, several experts have compared shabazz experience to other NBA players experience in the same system from the same coach…

            “”Your second point makes no sense whatsoever. Pope shot better from 2 than Muhammad did. If Muhammad shot more 3?s, his FG% would be LOWER. Muhammad doesn’t enjoy much of a 3P% advantage over Pope (only 0.4% better), but Pope’s 2P% is significantly higher (by 3.5%). There really isn’t a way to tweak those numbers to favor Muhammad.”"

            2.

            OATS – Also, KCP shot 50.5% on 2s while Muhammad shot 46.3%. It’s really not accurate to say that KCP struggled inside of the 3 point line.””

            ME – About Pope, you use to argue that if Shabazz took more 3?s his shooting percent would be lower, thats my same arguement for Pope.

            1. Shabazz took almost 150 2 point attempts than Pope… almost 5 more 2 point attempts than Pope per-game… So based of his logic that the more attempts you take, the lower your shot percentage is likely to become, its rational to believe that if POPE took more 2 point attempts his percentage would drop, especially when people says he has trouble playing in traffic and finishing at the rim.

            “”Again, you’re ready to throw out legitimate stats because they represent a slump & you think can be discredited. If you throw out Muhammad’s bad stretches, yeah, he looks pretty good. But last I checked, bad stretches count just like good stretches do. There are ups & downs in a season, and if you think Muhammad is more likely to sustain his peak performance instead of an ebb and flow, you’re kidding yourself.”"

            CHERRY PICKING TIME!!!!! (well not really)

            Both of their regular seasons end on 3/9/13

            At that point in the season Shabazz(28 games) was shooting 42% for 3′s / Pope(31 games) was shooting 37% for 3′s …. Because shabazz (40/96) doesnt take as many 3 as Pope (78/210) does, when he went 0-10 3′s in the Pac-12 and NCAA tourament it reflected on his percentage…But OVER the LARGE sample of the season he averaged 3.4 attempts from behind the arc shooting over 40% consistently over 28 games…  While Pope took twice many attempts shooting around 36-37%…Just saying

            But lets throw out the large sample of work! No one looks at the large sample…

          • Jun 27, 20131:28 pm
            by G

            I lack the energy to argue your first point, and it’s probably a matter of opinion anyway.

            Your second point, however, is completely wrong. You take the facts (2PT & 3PT FG% numbers), make an assumption (that KCP’s FG% would drop if he took more 2′s), and base your evaluation off of that assumption. That ISN’T logic, it’s an assumption that has no basis in reality. If you assume that Muhammad’s 3P% is real despite lower attempts, you must do the same thing with KCP’s 2P%. Just assuming that KCP’s 2P% would drop with more attempts without any data to support you (and there is none) makes the entire basis of your argument INVALID.

            Lastly, you ARE cherry picking. The larger sample size comes from looking at all 32 games Muhammad played in. The smaller sample size (cherry picking) would be refusing to look at his last 4 games, looking ONLY at the first half of his season, or only at the last half. You’re discounting 12.5% of the games he played as irrelevant. I’m looking at 100% of the games he played in. Here’s a clue: MORE DATA = BETTER ANALYSIS.

          • Jun 27, 20131:49 pm
            by oats

            I’m with G. Shooting more isos is bad for Muhammad because he is bad in iso situations. If anything, limiting those touches improves things for him.
             
            You also really don’t seem to understand how stats work. We’re already dealing with pretty small sample sizes because the college season is so short, so you don’t just throw out the bad games because they were so called post season games. His terrible shooting in those games should count exactly as much as his good shooting to start the season. The larger sample is the full season, not the part of the season you feel like counting.
             
            Anyways, I personally will concede that taking more 2s would likely cause Pope’s 2 point shooting percentages to drop some. The odds are that he would not drop significantly though. Pope took over 205 of them, so we can assume that 50% is pretty close to how well he shoots in that range because it’s a decent sample size. Shabazz took only 106 shots from 3, which is a much smaller sample size. That means that it has much more room for it to be off. Considering the trend of his season was that he was getting worse, and given the fact that he was never thought of as a good outside shooter, it seems reasonable to expect that number to fall off with more attempts. Yes, Muhammad would be expected to have more of a drop off by doubling his 3s than Pope would from doubling his 2 point attempts because the 2 point attempts is a more reliable sample size to base the projection on.

    • Jun 27, 20134:16 am
      by Filo Putz

      Reply

      You make a convincing argument. I’ve had similar thoughts about Muhammad myself. The glaring need for the Pistons is at the scoring positions not point guard as everyone on this board seems to think. If Knight had a shooting guard who could knock down an open shot consistently and a small forward that could get baskets on his own and would be constantly cutting to get open to score it would relieve pressure on him and his assists would go up. He was thrown into a tough situation with the Pistons who really had sub par talent at both the 2 and the 3

      • Jun 27, 201310:42 am
        by oats

        Reply

        I hate this argument. Prince and Singler were at least average shooters. It shouldn’t require significantly above average shooters to make a point guard look vaguely competent. More than that, he had good big men that should have allowed him to have solid assist numbers if he was actually good. He wasn’t. The guy is bad at throwing inlet passers to the big men, and he stinks at operating the pick and roll. That should completely rule him out as a potential starter for this team at that position. Then throw in his turnover problem that wouldn’t magically disappear because of better teammates and it starts becoming really obvious that Knight is not a starting point guard right now.

        • Jun 27, 201312:26 pm
          by Filo Putz

          Reply

          How can I argue with you if you think that Prince and Singler were good enough offensive players to help out their pg in not just the set but also in transition.

          • Jun 27, 201312:33 pm
            by Filo Putz

            Oh, and are you including Stuckey as an “average shooter” who helped relieve the pressure on Knight.

          • Jun 27, 201312:36 pm
            by oats

            Well, you could try using facts if they actually backed up your claim. They are on my side though. I didn’t say those two helped per se, I said they were perfectly average shooters. That’s just factually accurate. Singler shot 43% from the field and 35% on 3s, and Prince shot 44% from the field and 43% on 3s while in Detroit. Prince shot very few 3 point attempts so they actually had pretty similar true shooting percentages, but they were both over .500, (.506 and .517 if you want specifics), which is pretty average.  Drummond meanwhile was fantastic in the pick and roll and at finishing lobs. Monroe is an above average player in the pick and roll and scored at a solid rate on all shot attempts. There was plenty there for a good point guard to get his assists. Knight just wasn’t good. It shouldn’t take guys that are well above average as shooters to make a point guard look vaguely competent. If that is what it takes then that point guard just isn’t good enough and the team should look for an upgrade. That makes point guard a big position of need.

          • Jun 27, 20131:33 pm
            by G

            And if you watched the games as you say, you probably remember all those entry passes Knight (& Stuckey) threw that failed to reach their intended targets. Not a good passer, lots of turnovers, not a great ball handler, NOT A PG. And Knight had better shooters on his team than, say, Kemba Walker.

        • Jun 27, 201312:55 pm
          by Filo Putz

          Reply

          I probably saw about 40 games. I go by what I see. They only ran pick and roll 4-6 times a game. i’m laughing at your argument that Prince and Singler were adequate offensive players.

          • Jun 27, 20131:09 pm
            by oats

            I’m not saying they were good. I’m saying they were good enough to make a judgement on Knight’s play. Detroit was 22nd in scoring this year. That’s not that far below the league average to think that Knight’s only problem was the lack of scorers around him. Even factoring in how bad Detroit was, Knight was still a bad point guard. That means it is position of need.

          • Jun 27, 20131:28 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            @ Filo Putz… Dude I Promise you are wasting your energy typing

            There minds are made up….

            I dont even debate with them about Knight anymore…. Pistons had the worst wing player combination in the league…

            I like Singler, but he played SG …for most of the season even when he was clearly tired and slumping…. Stuckey was horrible shooting, And Yes “ISO” Prince he shot 44% ….43% for 3′s …but he only took 53 attempts in 45 games, that little over 1 per game” ….and I love Greg, but he was horrible in pick and pop situations….when he wasnt hesitating, he was shooting 20% from 15 feet and out…. and we cant forget Maxiell the offensive force he was….and dont get me started on the systen frank ran…

            Knight never stop a chance, and its also the same season Calderon ast numbers declined…Calderon just ended up shooting ball…..

          • Jun 27, 20131:50 pm
            by G

            @ FRANK – Calderon had worse outside shooting support than Knight had when Knight ran PG, and Kemba Walker had worse outside shooting support as well.

            My mind is made up at this point, but I asked you a couple days ago what (if anything) Knight had ever done to suggest he’d be a decent PG in this league. You didn’t respond.

            Here’s why I think Knight is basically a lost cause as a PG:
            - Despite ample opportunity to learn the position, he still shows poor decision making
            - Practically no improvement from his rookie season
            - Rookie & 2nd year AST/TOV numbers compare unfavorably to the R/2ndY numbers of successful PG’s in the NBA
            - Shows poor passing ability for a PG
            - Shows limited ball-handling for a PG (gets his pocket picked WAY too much) 

            Again, I offer you the opportunity to make your case. What has Knight done to suggest he can be a successful PG in the NBA? Don’t give me “his team sucks”, that’s an excuse for incompetence. 

          • Jun 27, 20132:02 pm
            by oats

            @ Frank. I might be open to a good argument that favors Knight as a point guard. I’ve yet to see one though.
             
            You can get assists without it being a pick and pop you know. There’s no hard set rule on when they give it to you, but they do usually count it after a few dribbles. That applies to both Prince and Monroe. I feel like I should mention that I acknowledged that Prince didn’t shoot the 3 much, which is why I said that he is pretty similar to Singler in terms of shooting despite it looking much better on paper.
             
            By the way, Calderon dropped from 7.4 to 6.6 assists. That’s not exactly a big decline, especially since he was learning how to play with a new set of teammates. This isn’t a good argument for Knight secretly being a good point guard but being held back by his teammates. Even if give him the benefit of the doubt that the team cost him 1 assist a game then he still stunk.

  • Jun 27, 201312:23 am
    by Blocks by Dre

    Reply

    Guys I just did my own mock draft to kind of toy around with the idea of Burke/McLemore falling to us and it goes like this:

    Cavs- Noel
    Magic- Olidipo
    Wizards- Porter
    Bobcats- Bennette
    Suns (where it gets interesting) – Zeller
    Pelicans- Len
    Kings- McCullom
    PISTONS- McLemore (!!!)

    in this scenario,I choose to pair Zeller up with the Suns because I hear/see they’re interested in him and MCW and can see them maybe going in that direction.

    Pelicans will be the floor for Alex Len

    Sacramento really loves CJ…the front office and their fan base

    base unfortunately if this happens for Burke he could slide down to maybe the Jazz because Timberwolves have Rubio and Trailblazers have Lillard

    • Jun 27, 201310:31 am
      by Sop

      Reply

      Higher likelihood dream scenario:
      1. CLE: Len
      2. ORL: Noel
      3. WAS: Porter
      4. CHA: Zeller (Bobcats GM Rich Cho really wants Zeller)
      5. PHX: Oladipo
      6. NO: Bennett/Burke
      7. SAC: MCW
      8: DET: McLemore!!!

      • Jun 27, 201310:58 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        I wish this site had a better archives system…

        Back in April/May …I said that its likely that Bennet, Mcelmore,or Oladipo could be available In the mid lottery…

        If you look at team need, or recent draft history…

        I said only 3 players would need to move up for it to happen….

        Originally i said Len, Burke and Cj McCullom would need to go in the top 7…now we replace McCullom with Zeller.

        I actually still think the Suns might Take CJ McCullom, over McLemore, Burke and Oladipo…. He is way ahead of Olapido offensively, He’s bigger than Burke , and he is more of a alpha dog than Mclemore and play maker.

        Suns still have Wesley Johnson who came on real strong as a starter last year, and he is every bit the athlete than Olapido is, they dont have a pressing need at PG with Dragic, and they just drafted Kendall Marshall, So McCullom can play the combo guard role, Mclemore lack of ball handling and play making skills.

        Jeff Hornecek, said he was more shooting and offense… CJ seems to make since…

         

  • Jun 27, 201312:43 am
    by Fennis

    Reply

    Oats:

    All fair points. My main argument is that Shabazz isnt the train wreck that most pistons fans perceive, and he may be the best value at 8 in a less than stellar draft class. Id love to have ben m or Bennett, but that’s  a hope and a prayer at 8.  

    • Jun 27, 20139:49 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      but there is a rel shot at burke

    • Jun 27, 201310:21 am
      by oats

      Reply

      Fair enough. McLemore, Burke, and Bennett would all be clearly preferable for me, but only Burke seems all that likely to be there to me. After that I’m leaning towards Caldwell Pope, but I get the argument for Muhammad. It’s not like I see a significant difference in the talent, I just like the way Pope fits better. I think the team is desperate for shooting and defense, and I worry that Muhammad wants to play too close to the basket to be an effective floor spreader for Drummond and Monroe. That said, Muhammad is the better catch and shoot guy that gets the ball out of his hands quicker than Pope does. That’s going to be useful for any team that is playing out of the post the way Detroit should. I should also add that the close range stuff that worries me when paired with both starters becomes more of an asset when one of them is on the bench because it gives the team another way to get points down there. My preference is for Pope’s game, but I get liking Muhammad’s better or thinking Muhammad has a little more upside left on him.

      • Jun 27, 201310:28 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        Very Fair, and balanced comment…im proud of you

        • Jun 27, 201310:44 am
          by oats

          Reply

          I’ve been saying basically that for the past 4 weeks or so…

          • Jun 27, 201311:11 am
            by I HATE FRANK

            I’ve only recently read where both you and “G” have softened up to the Idea of Shabazz…

            kinda makes me feel validated, only if I can get Tarseir on board….

            I just think he’s a fit…. Im not a Analaytic type of guy, Im nore a scratch a paper, and numbers cruncher based on whatI see.

            With Shabazz whether we draft him or not, he is a scorer in a scorers league. Just love as the play-off, The 2nd and 3rd options always determined the series.

            The Pistons for years have not been a balanced team, Shabazz gives us balance, even Bennet if he can play SF effective give us balance.

             

          • Jun 27, 201311:25 am
            by G

            I softened on Shabazz mainly due to the P3 study which eased 3 of my main concerns – lateral quickness, inconsistent shooting, and a dearth of NBA scoring moves.

          • Jun 27, 201311:38 am
            by oats

            First of all, tarsier has made comments about thinking Shabazz might be the best player after his top 6 are gone. I don’t know if that is still his pick, but he’s more accepting of the Shabazz thing than not.
             
            Secondly, it’s not you convincing me. My stance on him isn’t that different than it used to be really. It’s because the more I looked over the draft the more I realized I was looking too hard to find someone I like. Realizing I was falling into that trap, I decided to go back and reassess. Some guys had their rating drop a bit for me. Muhammad also got the slight bump that I afford to guys for strong workouts. Both of those things together narrowed the gap between Muhammad and Pope. I now have Pope as the top of a big list of players with very similar ratings. I don’t see a big talent difference between the 7th guy and 16th guy in this draft. Coming to that conclusion made it pretty hard for me to be upset with the idea of going with someone that I wouldn’t take. Only the worst possible fit from that group would really upset me if he was the pick (Steven Adams if you are wondering). It’s much more about me disliking what happens after the top 6 are gone than me liking Muhammad though.

          • Jun 27, 201312:55 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            Look at you both… LOL

            I never said it was because of me you softened on Shabazz, I said i feel validated…

            Meaning I stop my ground…. @ “G” I said what I said about Shabazz and his lateral quickness, shooting and scoring moves based on watching the GAMES! I didnt need P3. That why when people said thing about his game, i always said did you watch him play…. The guy said Shabazz lateral quickness coming in was a tick below aeverage, but saying his wingspan made up for it. I said from the start he isnt a bad defender, he just doesnt know how to play defense…

            @ Oats from the start, I said my biggest thing for shabazz was that he was a FIT! PERIOD

            We debated and Debated over who better…but my main arguement was he fits the best….

            He fits better than Bennett but Bennett upside and potential is to high to pass over…

            I wasnt looking for Kudos…because I knew what i was talking about from the start…Shabazz could go 20 in this draft..but it still doesnt mean he wouldnt have been a great fit in Detroit

          • Jun 27, 20132:00 pm
            by G

            First off, P3 said Muhammad had POOR lateral quickness but his ability to get in the air quickly suggested the POTENTIAL for him to work on it & get it up to average. So, game tape wouldn’t have shown you lateral quickness because it wasn’t there.

            It’s basically the same for the other things, his flaws appear to be easily correctable. Which means they were still there, and still are to some extent. I think IF he’s able to actually correct those things then he’ll be a good pickup at #8, whereas BEFORE I thought he was in the mix at #8 and was less happy about that. It’s not like I’ve done a complete 180, I’ve just moved him one slot up my draft board from where he was & I feel a little better about him, that’s all.

  • Jun 27, 201312:45 am
    by Terrell

    Reply

    I think detroit will pull off a trade to move up to get mclemore or sit and wait fir kcp. Both pg and sg is a problem because nobody knows which branden knight will play. I wouldn’t get mad if they take muhammad. Other trades will be the key to shaping the roster

    • Jun 27, 201311:12 am
      by oats

      Reply

      I’d say the fact that KCP claims to not have worked out for Detroit strongly suggests that he won’t be the pick. My assumption is that the team is hoping one of McLemore or Bennett slides. If neither of them do, then I think they are leaning towards Burke, MCW, McCollum, Muhammad, or Zeller. I’m thinking that the odds are good that KCP is not really in the running for the Pistons pick.

  • Jun 27, 20131:09 am
    by jacob

    Reply

    Expect the unexpected tomorrow.

    • Jun 27, 201311:18 am
      by G

      Reply

      Isn’t it then, by definition at least, expected?

  • Jun 27, 20133:58 am
    by ffz

    Reply

    whoever runs nbadraft.net is so dumb. He/They are saying Ben Mclemore is going to fall all the way to the Pistons check it out : http://nbadraft.net/2013mock_draft

  • Jun 27, 20137:29 am
    by Sop

    Reply

    Karasev is a much better player right now than Schroeder. He has produced in the Second most competitive league in the world at 19 whereas Schroeder has been on-and-off in the German equivalent of college DIII. Karasev has the pedigree, shooting touch, and size to be Tony Kucoc, whereas Schroeder does not have the ball-skills or court-vision to be Rondo, rather he’s more like Collison.

  • Jun 27, 20139:37 am
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    More and more Mock Drafts have Bennett falling to us…..thats exciting

    • Jun 27, 201310:50 am
      by Sop

      Reply

      Ford’s 7.0 have Bennett in Detroit as well. I’m ok with that pick. If he can transition to the 3 he would be more useful to us but even if he stays a stretch 4 maybe that would be enough to make sure we amnesty Villanueva.

      • Jun 27, 201311:01 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        I think his weight and desire is scaring teams a little…reported to be over 260 right now…and they said he showed poor conditioning habits during the season.

        He needs to be around 230 IMO

        • Jun 27, 201311:20 am
          by G

          Reply

          I’d like to see him get on the Kevin Love weight loss program and get down to 220 by his sophomore season. Maybe then he can legitimately play the 3.

          • Jun 27, 201312:08 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            I think he can shed 15-20 lbs in a month, …but I think maintaining a 230 frame is very reasonable to ask for a guy that has always been around 235-240…but it depends on Muscle mass

          • Jun 27, 201312:26 pm
            by oats

            I think that his value is higher at the 4. I actually think he’s better off being primarily the 3rd big man who gets spot minutes at the 3 than he is trying to become a full time SF. I think at 220 he loses most of that ability to play the 4, and I really don’t like that idea. 230-240 is where I want him. If he looks really good at the 4, he might make Monroe expendable. In that case I wouldn’t mind him getting close to 250, so long as he does it with good weight. I definitely want him looking more like Paul Mllsap than Jason Maxiell.

          • Jun 27, 20131:09 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            from what I’ve seen, I dont like those comparisons… But I agree with everything else you said…

            He does things I’ve never seen Milsap do, and things that Maxiell cant even start to do

          • Jun 27, 20131:13 pm
            by oats

            I’m not comparing him as a player to those guys. I’m just talking physique there. If he was to become a starting PF down the road, I’d want him around 250 and looking like Millsap physically. His game should still be more perimeter oriented than Millsap’s though.

  • Jun 27, 20131:17 pm
    by Filo Putz

    Reply

    I still say getting a rotational 4-5 is a crucial upgrade component needed besides an upgrade to the woeful guys at the scoring positions currently on the roster. 

    • Jun 27, 20131:36 pm
      by I HATE FRANK

      Reply

      I wish Zeller could play the 3..

      • Jun 27, 20137:12 pm
        by Filo Putz

        Reply

        What kind of comment is that??????

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here