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

John Loyer brings welcome passion, more-welcome victory to Pistons in debut

San Antonio Spurs 100 Final
Recap | Box Score
109 Detroit Pistons
Greg Monroe, PF Shot Chart 37 MIN | 7-10 FG | 1-2 FT | 10 REB | 3 AST | 2 STL | 0 BLK | 1 TO | 15 PTS | +15

Just an all-around strong game on both ends of the floor. Remember when Monroe looked engaged offensively and defensively early in the season? That two-way enthusiasm returned tonight. It almost seemed as if Monroe has a fresh start.

Josh Smith, SF Shot Chart 38 MIN | 4-12 FG | 4-4 FT | 6 REB | 2 AST | 2 STL | 1 BLK | 2 TO | 12 PTS | +9

Smith had a very impressive fastbreak dunk, but otherwise, he settled for too many jumpers. On a night so many of his teammates played passionately, Smith, who generally plays hard, faded into the background a bit. His defense was strong, though.

Kyle Singler, SF Shot Chart 32 MIN | 3-11 FG | 2-4 FT | 6 REB | 0 AST | 2 STL | 0 BLK | 2 TO | 10 PTS | +16

It’s not Singler’s fault, but he’s a step slow defending shooting guards, and the Spurs took advantage. A cold shooting night doesn’t help either.

Andre Drummond, C Shot Chart 26 MIN | 7-10 FG | 0-2 FT | 9 REB | 0 AST | 1 STL | 3 BLK | 1 TO | 14 PTS | +5

Drummond was blocking shots with such ease, he was directing his rejections toward his teammates – even off the backboard once – to start fastbreaks. That’s some next-level defense (and offense).

Brandon Jennings, PG Shot Chart 32 MIN | 8-18 FG | 3-3 FT | 4 REB | 6 AST | 2 STL | 0 BLK | 0 TO | 21 PTS | +15

Jennings tuned cold in the fourth quarter, shooting 0-for-4, as the offense stalled. But before that, he played with great flare. Jennings took some wild shots – and made them – while still keeping his teammates involved.

Jonas Jerebko, PF Shot Chart 10 MIN | 0-1 FG | 0-0 FT | 2 REB | 0 AST | 0 STL | 0 BLK | 0 TO | 0 PTS | 0

Jerebko, to his credit, played within himself. He’s getting comfortable in the rotation and not pressing. But if Jerebko playing within himself means so little production, maybe Luigi Datome deserves another chance at playing time.

Will Bynum, PG Shot Chart 16 MIN | 4-8 FG | 0-0 FT | 0 REB | 2 AST | 2 STL | 0 BLK | 0 TO | 8 PTS | -6

John Loyer’s most notable change was Bynum’s return to the rotation. Bynum and Maurice Cheeks feuded against the Magic, and then Cheeks benched Bynum for the last two games. Well, Cheeks is gone now, so Bynum is back.

Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, SG Shot Chart 21 MIN | 3-7 FG | 2-3 FT | 1 REB | 0 AST | 1 STL | 0 BLK | 2 TO | 9 PTS | -3

The Spurs’ sophisticated offense challenged Caldwell-Pope defensively, and he shot a woeful 1-for-5 on 3-pointers. Yet, Caldwell-Pope still salvaged a decent game. That’s no easy feat for a rookie who’s skillset has been limited for most of the season and a real credit to Caldwell-Pope’s competitiveness.

Rodney Stuckey, SG Shot Chart 28 MIN | 7-13 FG | 6-8 FT | 4 REB | 3 AST | 1 STL | 0 BLK | 3 TO | 20 PTS | -6

Stuckey was especially aggressive with the ball in his hands tonight. At times, he he definitely veered over the line of remaining in control, but that mindset helped him much more than it hurt him.

John Loyer

I have little idea what to make of Loyer after only one game, but I quite enjoyed watching him coach. I wrote about him at ESPN. An excerpt:

Loyer — whose last multigame head-coaching stint was at Wabash Valley College — jumped into his new post with aplomb and a refreshing passion. He roamed the sideline, encouraging his players to run offensively and demanding they close on shooters defensively.

The Pistons responded, playing with extra bounce while building a lead that peaked at 23 points over one of the NBA’s top teams.

the Pistons have run through failed coaches: Flip Saunders (too offensively minded), Michael Curry (too inexperienced), John Kuester (too meek), Lawrence Frank (too rigid) and Cheeks (too terrible).

Could Loyer be the just-right porridge?

Despite Monday’s result, it’s doubtful. He hasn’t been a hot commodity on the coaching market and got this chance mostly by being in the right place at the right time.

He came to Detroit with Frank in 2011 and, as a former Cheeks assistant in Philadelphia and Portland, stayed through the transition last summer. The Pistons reportedly also offered Lionel Hollins a spot on Cheeks’ staff, but the former Memphis Grizzlies coach turned them down, and they failed to add a logical successor for Cheeks.

So Loyer, who’s respected for passion toward coaching, got the big opportunity in a season in which the playoffs are still realistic. In fact, the Pistons are now tied with the Charlotte Bobcats for the No. 8 seed.

Wouldn’t it be something if Loyer, the byproduct of two failed regimes, becomes the coach who finally succeeds in Detroit?

We can’t know what his future holds, but Loyer should feel good on his first night as an active head coach.

104 Comments

  • Feb 11, 20144:27 am
    by jg22

    Reply

    hey, ya never know what Loyer could end up being. Just because he was never a hot commodity doesn’t mean much. How many teams were after Popovich when he took over the Spurs? You just never know. Spoelstra wasn’t a hot commodity either before Riley saw something in him and gave him a chance. Same with Phil Jackson. In fact, it seems like its the “hot commodities” that end up failing more than not, and the ones you least expect who end up being the greats.
     
    I’m not predicting that for Loyer, but ya never know. Sometimes a good coach with potential in the right situation can become a great coach. All these players seem to love playing for him and that sometimes can be the most important factor to coaching. If you can get the guys to go to war for you, and you have a good IQ/feel for the game and know the right gameplans to use, that’s the winning formula. We’ll have to wait and see, but the Pistons could’ve found something here.
     
    He probably won’t be the next Popovich, but could he be the next Lionel Hollins? I don’t think that’s out of the realm of possibility, and if they already have him and its working and the players like him, I’m not sure you risk messing with that after all this team has been through with coach’s

    • Feb 11, 20144:28 am
      by jg22

      Reply

      Still a long ways from that, but its an encouraging start at least.

      • Feb 11, 201412:51 pm
        by sebastian

        Reply

        jg22, may be right. It is early (only one game) and I don’t want to get wet too early, but Loyer is far more alive on the bench than Mo’ Cheeks ever was.
        There is a precedence of assistant coaches having success as head head coaches; Thibbs, Budenholzer (Hawks) and Joerger (Memphis), both of which have over achieved in my opinion to this point of the season, Stotts, and of course Spolestra and Vogel.

    • Feb 11, 20148:38 am
      by oats

      Reply

      Pop was the GM and appointed himself. He wasn’t a hot commodity because he wasn’t a coaching candidate at all. Before that he was a lead assistant for Larry Brown and then an assistant under Don Nelson. That’s exactly the kind of resume that hot commodity coaches have and is why he managed to become a GM in the first place. I’ll give you the other two, but there was some speculation that Jackson had a hard time initially cracking into the NBA coaching ranks because he had a reputation of being a hippie.

      • Feb 11, 20148:49 am
        by gmehl

        Reply

        You do as much acid as what I’ve read that Jackson did then you’re a hippy with a capital H. Dude did so much he sees triangles in his sleep.

      • Feb 11, 20144:29 pm
        by jg22

        Reply

        Like you said he was assistants for two elite coach’s,, the type of resume that would usually draws a lot of interest from other teams, but was he actively pursued to be a HC before he took over as GM?
         
        You’re right that he appointed himself coach of the Spurs, but I’m saying before that, I don’t remember him being that hot commodity assistant that every team was fawning over to get, and he turned it down to become GM instead. (Maybe I’m wrong though, I took a little hiatus from the NBA around that time after the Bad Boys run ended.)

        • Feb 11, 20145:35 pm
          by JYD for Life

          Reply

          To a certain extent, a coach really can only be as good as the players on his team…much like the employees of any corporation or a restaurant or a movie theater…
           
          All of those guys you mentioned – Phil (only coached Hall of Famers), Spoelstra had Wade and then added LeBron and Bosh.  Vogel has one of the best teams in the NBA, top to bottom.   Pop has had Duncan and Parker…you could argue Manu will be a hall-of-famer.  
           
          There are system guys that work no matter who’s on the team (Thibbs is probably the best example of this…Hornacek (although that roster isn’t as terrible as everyone thought early on).  
           
          Then there are guys like McHale and Mark Jackson who have all of the talent in the world on the roster, yet their teams are not elite.  It’s not a perfect science, but when you have elite-level coaches, they always tend to be aligned with elite-level players.  
           
          Loyer could be an average to below-average HC in the league…with the talent on this roster, that should be enough to grab an 8 seed in a conference where 4 teams are throwing in the towel.  Cheeks was beyond a below-average coach and that’s why they’re sitting with the record they are.  

  • Feb 11, 20145:11 am
    by Georgio

    Reply

    To me the Piston’s problems, defensively and offensively, have been more system oriented than talent oriented. If Zach Randolph, Carlos Boozer and David West can be parts of a top 5 defensive team then why can’t Greg Monroe do the same. It’s all in your defensive schemes. The same is true on the offensive end, Greg, Josh and Andre are all unselfish players, the coach has to devise the right system for that group that minimizes the spacing issues. It can be done with a little creativity. Cheeks was not known as an innovative coach and that’s what is needed. The big lineup can work, it’s up to the coach to make it so.

    • Feb 11, 20148:43 am
      by Vic

      Reply

      THIS MAN IS TRUE

    • Feb 11, 20145:36 pm
      by JYD for Life

      Reply

      You’re exactly right Georgio…now it’s just finding the guy who can implement that system.  

  • Feb 11, 20146:56 am
    by Zeke

    Reply

    Zero TO for our starting PG. Swag

    • Feb 11, 20142:52 pm
      by pablum

      Reply

      Most all-around talented Piston PG since you, Zeke. Though obviously has mammoth shoes to fill with Chauncey’s Piston greatness. But I don’t know how anyone can watch Jennings and not see scary talent. ESPN showed the Drummond’s Hulk-Smash Block as a top play today, but it was the Jenning’s finish and the way our warriors rallied around the kid after, that said it all about how talented he is. The team was in awe of him.
      BTW: For all the Joe D haters — suddenly quiet(?) — here’s a nice little article to chew on (posted on MLIVE, where some folks were dancing after our noble victory over the Spurs):
      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1944517-who-killed-the-detroit-pistons
      And Tim, you think going 22-9 the rest of the year is nuts for this team?! We got a real coach now and anything less than 22-9 would be a disappointment. We have a core 5 (Jennings/Smith/Moose/Drum/Stuckey) that can cause havoc with its speed and/or power. A core 5 that if paired with a legit jump-shooter is flat out scary. I’m tellin’ ya. If Singler or KCP gets hot in the playoffs…Get out of our way!

      • Feb 11, 20143:52 pm
        by Tim Thielke

        Reply

        A) You think Loyer is a good coach based on one game? I have hopes, but that is really jumping to conclusions.

        B) Anything less than 22-9 would be a disappointment? So you legitimately think this team is as good as the Heat with Loyer running the show?

        • Feb 11, 20145:40 pm
          by KaBa

          Reply

          You know what, I think they could be (in an ideal world), just not right now and not after all that has happened. Just look at the talented the Pistons, they are underachieving. And when you look at the wins against higher ranked teams you get a feeling that there is something in this team. But keeping that energy high seems to be a problem.

        • Feb 11, 20147:25 pm
          by grizz3741

          Reply

          Being 22-9 is not as good as the Heat, is it?  Maybe 24-7 for this season … 26-5 for the past 2.  One game is enough when it is against the Spurs to tell if Loyer is better than Cheeks.  Read the players’ glowing  comments about Loyer. We all  saw an enthusiatic, driven  HC, a smart HC, and a HC who never stopped communicating. Cheeks is classsy but none of the above. Nevertheless .. another great article by you Tim..  

          • Feb 12, 201411:25 am
            by oats

            Cheeks beat the Pacers and Heat on their home courts. Those are more impressive single games than beating the Spurs in Detroit. Teams also tend to play better right after canning a bad coach even if the replacement is bad. Last but certainly not least, Frank could b described as enthusiastic, driven, smart, and a guy that never stopped communicating. After one game we can say that he has a different demeanor than Cheeks, but it’s way too soon to decide that he is definitely better. I’m open to the possibility that he is better than Cheeks because Cheeks is terrible, but I can’t claim to know it.

        • Feb 11, 20147:44 pm
          by pablum

          Reply

          (1) Loyer has to know his shit if he succeeded working with Lawrence Frank, who was a coaching prodigy who never slept and was as anal as a volcano when it came to preparation. And what we saw last night was startling. Is there anyone here who didn’t feel like some crushing unseen weight of incompetence had been lifted in simply watching Loyer on the sidelines? It was a zeitgeist. And Tim, do you think you were off when you made that observation that Mo wasn’t even on the bench during a game? Then the move to start Singler out of the blue. Then Mayo’s claim Mo didn’t even know his own bloody inactive list (to say nothing of that Billy King calamity in Philly?). Very, very fair to speculate Mo wasn’t even really coaching this team and his assistants were trying to manage it as best they could..And Gores found out. And fired his fucking ass. So, yes, Loyer came in and the team played immensely better, in every phase of the game, under triage circumstances, so yes, I’d say he more than passed the test.
          (2) 22-9 is a gimmie for this team, now that Loyer’s at the helm (and barring injury). We have top 10′s in 3 positions: PG, PF, and C. And I’ll put Jennings at#5, with Drummond close behind. So 22-19 is the real deal. And fucking fuck the Miami Heat ad their insta-championship ass. I bow to the King, greatest player I ever saw since the the vile genius of#23, but he will forever be a punk for what he did and the Heat Championships should carry an asterisk that says, “We Bought This Shit.”

        • Feb 11, 201410:46 pm
          by Tim Thielke

          Reply

          grizz, 22-9 is a win% of .710 whereas the Heat are at .714 (pending the result of tonight’s game). So, no, it’s not technically quite as good as the Heat, but it’s virtually identical.

          pablum, I wasn’t trying to make any point about how much we should or shouldn’t love the Heat. Just that they are better than the Pistons. But since you want that asterisk on the Heat’s championships for “buying them”, you should know that the Heat have had the 22nd, 5th, 3rd, and 3rd highest payrolls in their big three era. So they have certainly been spending a lot, but they have hardly been blowing away the competition by simply paying more money.

        • Feb 11, 201410:50 pm
          by Tim Thielke

          Reply

          Also, pablum, if you have the best roster in the league, 22-9 isn’t a gimme. So even if your assertion of three players top 10 at their position was accurate, that would be far from enough to make going 22-9 easy. And it’s not an accurate assertion. Monroe and Jennings have not been close to top 10 players at their positions.

          • Feb 12, 201411:35 am
            by pablum

            (1) Playing at a .710 clip over 40 or 50 games (or more) is a big deal, Tim. Playing at a .710 clip over 31 games is not if you have a a talented roster.
            (2) SLAM had Moose at#9 as C in 2012:(And the vast majority of hoops media accorded similar accolades that year — now suddenly in 2013 he’s “not been close”?!. Bow wow, I say.) http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2012/01/nba-best-centers-andrew-bynum-dwight-howard-marc-gasol/
            (3) Jennings. Are you kidding me? I don’t even have to look at what pro-scribes say. Now I respect the hell out of you guys, but if you don’t think he’s close to being merely a top 10 PG in the NBA then you know nothing about the game. BTW DIME had him at # 14 BEFORE this season and if you don’t think he’s jumped at least 4-5 spots since then…well, bow wow, I say. I’m certain his teammates would laugh their asses off at you for saying he’s not close to top 10 pg. Yes, they would.
            (4) You’re going to defend the Heat and their insta-championships and gamed payroll, where players take huge pay cuts just to play for them? Bow-wow-wowie-wow I say. In my day, you EARNED your championships through growing pains and the organic development of your team! You didn’t have 3 superstars collude in the off-season to form a mega-super team that in its 1st year goes to the championship! It absolutely cheapens the game on every level.

          • Feb 12, 20141:02 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            1) Playing at a .710 clip is a bigger deal for 50 games than 30. But by the same token, it’s less of a given for 30 games than for 50 even if you are really good. Because smaller samples increases the degree of randomness.

            In other words, if a reasonable projection for a team was to win 55-65% of its games over an 82-game season, over the first 41, a reasonable prediction would be more like 50-70%. So you would have to be more conservative with your “anything less than a X-Y record would be a disappointment”, not less conservative.

            2) Yes, if Monroe was playing C, he may well be a top 10 player at his position. But he plays PF these days. And the PF field in the NBA is way deeper.

            3) Better PGs than Jennings:
            Paul, Curry, Westbrook, Parker, Conley, Lowry, Dragic, Bledsoe, Rondo, Williams, Irving, Wall, Lillard, Lawson, Rose

            Now if you mean top-10 non-injured PG, that pushes him up a bit. And there are a couple there that are debatable: Lawson, Irving, Williams, and Dragic. But there are even more debatable calls I’m not including: Rubio, Teague, Thomas, Calderon, and Walker.

            So obviously we could make individual arguments between virtually any PGs from 10-20. In my books, you’ll always have a hard time being top 10 at any position if you shoot 16 times per game at a 38% clip. But bottom line, if it was clearly true that Jennings was a top 10 PG, or even close to being one, he would not have struggled so mightily to get a contract.

            4) In your day, people had a problem with putting trying to win over making more money? And you have a problem with the competitive spirit of today? I think you got something backwards.

            You know who had more of an insta-championship than the Heat? The 2004 Pistons or the 2008 Celtics. The Heat tried to replicate that instant success, fell short, went through some “growing pains”, and then prevailed twice in a row. Both of those teams threw together big time talent, won a championship at the first opportunity, and then never did so again. Personally, I think either route is equally legitimate, but your argument takes away from many other teams more than it does from the Heat.

          • Feb 12, 20141:41 pm
            by pablum

            okay, okay, I”ll take my just licks, oh pro-scribe, but not without these final words and I’ll gladly give you, the true pro-scribe, the last word:
            (1) I can’t compete with your analytics here, which now apparently include statistics for “random probability.” All I can give you is old school analysis. And in old school analysis a good team can easily get hot for 20/25 games, easily go 16-4, or 20-5, in that stretch or higher, so pegging a 22-9 record over 31 games — just 13 games over.500 mind you — is not such a superlative feat. Not in old school math.
            (2) Moose. You’re going for the he isn’t a Center now route?? Really? Like there’s never an established gray area on this (when Dirk/Duncan played C/PF, etc., etc.??). But I’ll just go old school again here and refer to Dan’s just post article on Moose. To wit: Hmm, Tim, guess GM’s routinely think about offering max contracts to players who aren’t even close to being top 10 at their position (and I though I was the pot head).
            (3) Jennings: Now you say Jennings isn’t “even close to being” a top 10 pg in the league?! This isn’t a serious statement. And I’ll take Jennings over “Conley, Lowry, Dragic, Bledsoe, Rondo, and Lawson any damn day. And when you dared to say it was “debatable” whether Jennings was better than “Calderon”?! Good god man, you lost all credibility.
             
            (4) Tim, with all due respect, what the fuck are you talking about that our 2004 Pistons, regaled throughout the league as the first team in history to win an NBA title without a superstar, is anything even remotely like the insta-champion Heat? WTF I mutter! That’s patently garbage. I’ll give you the 2008 Celtics, but KG and Ray Allen were old and had paid their goddamn dues, which is why unlike Miami, the Celts never won another ring. Shit the Heat could well win 2 or 3 more rings, legitimately, but I’m not going to try to convince you when 3 superstars in their prime (Wade was still 29 when it all happened) collude to play on the same team that that’s bullshit and totally unfair to the vast majority of NBA teams. If that’s your style, okay then.

          • Feb 12, 20142:40 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            We have a new contender for most incompetent regular commenter. Here’s what you’re missing:

            1) You don’t understand stats at all. It’s easier to compile a fantastic win% over a small sample but it’s also easier to compile an awful one. But it hardly matters as 31 games is actually a fairly significant number. Your idea that it would be disappointing if the Pistons didn’t go 22-9 will leave you disappointed almost every time. So maybe I’m just misunderstanding your use of the word disappointing. I use the term to mean, in regard to sports, significantly underperforming reasonable expectations. You apparently use it to mean coming anything short of miraculously high expectations.

            2) Monroe may or may not get a max deal. But if he does, it’s not because someone thinks he’s worth it right now. It’s because they expect him to keep improving. As for the C vs PF thing, you were the one claiming the Pistons have a top 10 player at three positions, not me.

            3) Lowry and Conley are comparable to Jennings on offense and wipe the floor with him on D. Dragic is the catalyst behind the Suns–who were supposed to be vying with the Sixers for worst team in the league–being in the playoff picture in the stacked West. Also, his stats are nearly identical to Jennings’ apart from splits where he dominates 51/41/78 to 38/35/79. Bledsoe and Rondo are injured or just returning but both have been outrageously better than Jennings when healthy.

            As for Calderon, if it’s a joke to compare him to Jennings, why did they get comparable contracts (Calderon is a tiny bit cheaper per year and a year longer) even though Calderon is way more likely to get worse over the life of his while Jennings is likely to only improve? And why is it working out so much better for the Mavs than for the Pistons?

            The difference in PER between any of Lawson, Conley, Dragic, or Lowry and Jennings is greater than that between Jennings and Calderon. You might take Jennings over any of those four in a heartbeat, but that’s because you’re very bad at assessing basketball players. So your comment about your preference is equivalent to saying “my daughter likes this player’s haircut more than that player’s”. It may be true, but it’s completely irrelevant.

            4) People like to throw around the word collusion. I don’t think you know what it means. First, it’s a secret. That was not the case for the Heat. They decided to play together and announced it to everyone. Second, the connotation you’re using has to do with the illegality of collusion. It’s not illegal for players to decide to play together or to decide to take a little less money to do so. You may as well call every move in the history of the NBA collusion. Two ro more parties agreed to do something. See the word you want to describe how the Heat came together is unorthodox or unconventional.

            Your term of “insta-championship” made the comparison to the Pistons very natural. If your complaint is that Riley did his job too well in putting together too much talent on a team, just come out and say it. But no, your complaint was a lack of “growing pains”. The 2004 Pistons had way less. They got their last major piece just a couple months before winning it all. Yeah, it’s awesome that they did it without an offensive superstar because that too was unconventional, but they were an “insta-championship” if there ever was one.

          • Feb 12, 20143:19 pm
            by pablum

            Yes I’m incompetent because:
            1. I believe Brandon Jennings is much better than Jose Calderon. Only an idiot would believe that. 
            2. I believe Brandon Jennings is a top 10 PG in the league. While you believe he isn’t close to it. A millions bucks says you do a poll on this with NBA players/pro-writers the vast majority will agree that Jenings is far far closer — if not already — to being a top 10 PG talent than he isn’t, which is why SLAM had him at #14 this year Tim — before the season, before his stunning play of late. But clearly I’m “incompetent” for even saying this.
            2. I believe Moose is a top 10 C in the league (even though this one year he’s playing C only half the time, and PF the other when Drummond’s on the floor). You on the other hand admit Monore is a top C, but not if he’s paired with Drummond and playing PF, then, according to you, Monroe isn’t even close to being a top 10 player anymore. (And I’m incompetent).
            3. “Collusion” in the LEGAL sense? Are you fucking kidding me? This is a forum. I’m a fan. I can say “collusion” in a general sense and not be called incompetent for saying it. I can’t help you if you want to make a stupendous ass of yourself to the world and claim that the 2004 Pistons were anything like today’s championship Miami Heat. It’s like saying 2+2 = 5. No one of any merit would agree with you. Ask Dan, Patrick, etc., Ask them –if you dare.
            Thanks for your time and the ad hominem critiques by the way…

          • Feb 12, 20144:13 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            So you don’t think there are way more good PFs in the league than Cs? Which league have you been watching.

            And I wasn’t comparing the 2004 Pistons to today’s Heat. I was contrasting them (and comparing them to your description of today’s Heat). I was saying that these Heat were not an “insta-championship” that avoided “growing pains” en route to a championship because they weren’t. The 2004 Pistons were.

            “Jenings is far far closer — if not already — to being a top 10 PG talent than he isn’t”

            WTF is that even supposed to mean? The only meaning I can suss out is one I actually agree with. If Jennings is close to being a top ten player, then he isn’t one by definition. If Jennings is close to not being a top ten player, then he is one. So if he’s far closer, what does that mean? That he’s definitely not top 10? Ok, welcome to a rational perspective, even if it required tripping over your tongue for you to get here.

            Anyway, I know this is probably folly to ask, but what is your rationale for why a player who is dead last in the league in FG% (min 500 attempts), turns the ball over more than three times per game, is 26th amongst PGs in assist rate, and doesn’t play a lick of defense–explain how that guy is a top ten PG. And then, since you didn’t answer this before, explain why a guy who is obviously top ten gets basically no interest in free agency.

          • Feb 12, 20145:37 pm
            by pablum

            (1) Tim, please own your words. You claim Monroe is a top 10 center in the NBA, but if he’s asked to play the 4, he’s “not even being close to top 10.” How does that make any sense, when he’s consistently being used as a center (i.e, not paired with Andre) on this team? I’ll simplify for you: Monroe is a top 10 big in the league, does that work for you? We have a top 10 big in the league in Monore. We have a top 10 Center in the league in Drummond. We have a top 10 PG in the league in Jennings. All of these statements can be REASONABLY argued with facts and analysis. You blithely called me grossly incompetent for suggesting this.
            (2) Brandon Jennings: Clear top 10 pg talent. Period. That’s what I have said. You say he’s “not even close to that.” No need for gymnastic-semantics, Tim. This is the argument. And like I said, a million bucks says most pros/pro-writers agree with my view and arguing that B. Jennings isn’t “even close to being a top 10 pg” is ridiculous.
            (3) 2004 Pistons v. Present day Miami Heat: That Piston took three seasons to put together, gel, and flourish into champions with the last profound addition of Sheed. That team was heralded by the league and writers alike for, as mark Cuban said,  creating a new blueprint for winning in the NBA. That team, again, heralded as being the only team in NBA history for winning a title without a true superstar. And you want to say that team was equivalent to Wade/Bosh/and LeBron deciding over a summer to form a team of superstars, a superteam, in order to win multiple championships, which they did almost instantly. That’s your position? It’s ludicrous.
            (4) I’ve been to NBA games at Cobo when I imagine you were in diapers and if you can’t see the obvious, scary, talent that Jennings possesses because it doesn’t show up in your stats, I can’t help you. He has marvelous ball-handling skills, incredible speed, beuatiful passing ability, and can go off for 50 — and you pawn him off like he’s “joe-ass-average.” I’m going to enjoy watching you eat plate fulls of Jenning’s crow. You bet I am. (Oh, yeah, and I suppose Joe got taken, when he traded Knight, Middleton, and Krvestov for Jennings because clearly Joe’s incompetent).

      • Feb 11, 20146:07 pm
        by JYD for Life

        Reply

        Pablum – That is actually an awesome article and I wish we had that Sharp piece a few days ago when everyone talked about how terrible Joe is.  
        That explains a ton.  It doesn’t explain why they didn’t keep Curry around for one more year if the plan was to trade Rip.  I’m not sure that means things would have been much different…we probably would have put up a ton of points, but would have been even more middling and might not have Drummond or Monroe…Maybe Karen did us a favor.  
         
        We also need to keep in mind that yes, Karen had the team for two years, but things were tighter even the year prior during the demise of Mr. D’s health.  They wanted to keep the core together for him more than anything.    
        So when people bash Joe for not having a plan (I still hammer him for firing Hammer after the season of hell he put him through – MC is a great, great guy and probably would have figured it out – look at who worked with Amir and Aaron here and the young guys on Philly – he would work at 6 a.m. with Afflalo multiple times a week).  Those years were fuzzy and now we don’t know if Cheeks was a Gores guy, so Joe might stick around.    
         
        This team has the talent to end up finishing .500, but we have a long way to go before that can happen.  I still say that Smith is a really bad fit…and Jennings is a work in progress (we just need more Jekyll and less Hyde).  
        This squad is still lacking guys like my boy, JYD or Curry…or even Dumars, himself.  
        It’s like I’ve been saying all season long – make a move for a few solid vets.  This team desperately needs a actual backup PG and a legit backup big.  
        Whether they move Monroe (I don’t want them to) or Smith or Stuckey or CV to do it, it needs to be done.  Trying to snag Afflalo if Orlando can’t track down a first rounder for him by absorbing Nelson or Big Baby is not a bad strategy (they have one year left on their respective deals).  Humphries from Boston would be a great fit as well.  We have all of the talent in the world…they just need to mesh it with a few “Goin’ To Work” guys…particularly one who will beat the snot out of Jennings in practice and push him to be better (Chauncey should have been this, but is clearly unable to physically).   

        • Feb 11, 20146:16 pm
          by JYD for Life

          Reply

          oh…and they need a 3-pt. specialist off the bench…their SF and SG don’t need to be Kyle Korver-esque, but closer to average 3-pt shooters to make a more complete team.  It would be nice to have a shooter off the bench who could take the minutes of one of stuckey or bynum (essentially the same player).   At this point, why not take a chance on Jimmer?  He can shoot…they’ve just tried to make him a backup PG in sacto…not what the guy is destined for…He’s a 10-15 minute per night specialist.  

          • Feb 11, 20148:07 pm
            by pablum

            The savages of Dumars have their brilliant savants, no doubt, they compete in prose to see who can most effectively eviscerate him, but Joe appears to have in fact put together a legit contender. We’re only a steady 2 away from being a legit round 2 playoff team. And, good god, everybody knows if Drummond develops any steady jump shot or bread&butter drives to the hoop, bow wow I say! Bow wow! To anyone who thinks we aren’t legit contenders.

          • Feb 12, 20142:44 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            And WTF is “bow wow” supposed to mean. Are you trying to bark at people?

      • Feb 11, 20147:21 pm
        by bonerici

        Reply

        http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1944517-who-killed-the-detroit-pistons

        let me go over the reasoning of this guy.  first of all it’s not dumar’s fault that he signed allen iverson because he is not dumb, he would never draft too many shooting guards.  It is Karen’s fault because she didnt let Joe get rid of Rip for boozer <– chicago is all lol at this trade by the way.
        Second of all it’s not Joe’s fault that he drafted Josh Smith because he is not a small forward.  it is Gores fault.  The reasoning?  Joe Dumars is not that stupid.  So it must have been Gores.  Never mind gores dont know a thing about basketball he’s a business man that that has been at one or two games the entire time he has owned the team.  He didnt even know who Josh Smith is other than Dumars signed him when it happened.
         
        The Ben Gordon and Charlie V signings?  Karen’s fault why because Joe Dumars is not that stupid (see a pattern?).
         
        Now for the truth.  Joe is a great drafter, love his picks.  But when he has a little money in his pocket he is like a sailor on leave and has to spend it.
         
        How many seconds after midnight were Joe’s people at Josh Smith’s door to sign a deal?  ONE SECOND.  The man can not WAIT to spend money.
         
        This explains everything about the free agent signings.  And he has been in love with A.I.’s game for years wanted him on the team and could not resist a chance to pull the trigger when there was a chance.
         
        This is the real Joe Dumar’s he has problems controlling his emotions, can’t handle having cash, has to spend it, overpays his players, but has a real talent for basketball.
         
        he is a good second in command but is the guy that will run the ship into an iceberg.

        • Feb 11, 20148:32 pm
          by pablum

          Reply

          I asked my younger Piston compatriot to translate what you wrote here because I truly did not understand it and he mocked me and said just write this to the guy:
          “Oh, so you’re saying Joe Dumars is really “Joe Big Money.”
          Then he burst out in laughter for reasons i also do not comprehend.
          Can any of you explain?
          TX,
          Pablum

          • Feb 12, 201410:26 am
            by bonerici

            pab, my response dont make sense until you read this:
             
            http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1944517-who-killed-the-detroit-pistons
             
            The guy in that article says over and over again that Joe Dumars is a great GM.  The reason he gives is every single time, “Joe Dumars could not be responsible for XXXX because he’s not that stupid.”
             
            so he blames all the piston’s problems on variously Karen Davidson, Gores, Larry Brown, other GM’s.
             
            My point is that “It can’t be Joe Dumar’s fault because nobody can be that stupid” is not a good argument.  Maybe Joe is that stupid!
             
            Actually Joe D is not stupid he just has poor impulse control.  Joe “Money Bags” is a good description.  If Joe has no money in his pocket he tends to make good decisions as a GM.  But you let him have ANY money and save us from his free agent signings or ridiculous extensions he can’t wait to spend the money.
             
            That’s basically it.  Go read the link it’s ridiculous that someone actually thinks “NObody can be that stupid” is going to convince me that it can’t be Joe Dumars fault.

  • Feb 11, 20147:35 am
    by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

    Reply

    He was greeted with a lot of respect by coach Pop…i maybe Loyer is a best kept secret…..but it’s way to early….. I really want that win against the Cavs it would be just as big as the win we got against the spurs…
     
    Anyway, this is a very talented roster, that 50 games in are starting to put it together…I will argue that most of our wins came because of talent and skill alone….when LeBron went to Miami I think they looked real average for the 20 or so games….and the pistons don’t have anyone near that talent level of wade,james and bosh collectively…
    So my hope is that the team has started to gel, and a new voice selling them that this is a 30 game season is enough to give them a strong push

  • Feb 11, 20147:36 am
    by gmehl

    Reply

    I like that Loyer pointed this out before the game that the Pistons need improvement in fourth-quarter offense, free-throw shooting and three-point shooting. No point hiding from it and if those areas can be addressed then we might start creeping closer to .500

  • Feb 11, 20147:51 am
    by greg

    Reply

    the two games against the cavs will be crucial for the outcome of the season. we really need to be a top 6 seed in order to be conpetitive in the first round and maybe even advance to the second round. cavs up  next and then two wins against the cats and we are right there….now only if we hadn’t lost all of the home and home stands we had against the hawks and wizards….

  • Feb 11, 20148:22 am
    by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

    Reply

    I might be turning into a Loyer groupie….but when he said ” there gonna be nights the shots won’t fall and night your just gonna throw the ball away,but you can alway play hard…and playing is a skill that can be coached ”
    If he doesn’t win another game that powerful statement coming from a coach…because it’s taking full responsibility 

    • Feb 11, 20148:33 am
      by gmehl

      Reply

      Am I sensing a name (handle) change??
      ‘I LOVE LOYER’

      • Feb 11, 201411:39 am
        by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

        Reply

        If he gets us to the play off and out of the first ed…I sure will

    • Feb 11, 20149:02 am
      by Vic

      Reply

      I’m telling you, I believe in loyer.
      just from reading his bios on m live.com, Pistons.com, and Detroit bad boys.com I got a lot of information about him.
      - Hes a talented basketball mind whose career was thrown under the bus by the NCAA and a college program
      - He’s a good teacher of the game, he’s specialized in defense and offense
      - He keeps things simple, he communicates well, and he seems to have a good mix of strategizing and motivating
      - And he’s not political, that’s what Lawrence Frank said. I hope that’s true, and I hope that he just coaches for his own record, to win… Without regard to egos and contracts and politics.
      - He also mentioned he was going to tweak the systems defensively offense Avleigh which should be a very good thing
      - Also he coached in college which means he is better at basketball strategy because in college you can’t get by on just athleticism
      - He did not come in with a losing record
      - I think all signs point to him being a diamond in the rough, I’m hopeful it’s true

  • Feb 11, 20148:27 am
    by Windy

    Reply

    At the very least Loyer looked and acted the part of a head coach… He was up pointing things out to his young team, this is the type of team that needs that…they had a bit of jump in their step which was nice…winning solves a lot of problems and the Pistons are starting to out together a nice stretch of games, they need to figure out this bench rotation…Jerebko is just not the player I thought he once might be, that injury really slowed his career…I think it is time for GiGi to get out there and truly stretch the floor…I just have a gut feeling that he will be solidly in the rotation when we are going to that next gear…I wouldn’t mind having Bynum, Stuckey, GiGi, Smith, Dre out there for some stretches…nice to see some passion from a head coach though, nice win…

    • Feb 11, 20148:40 am
      by gmehl

      Reply

      Hopefully Loyer gets in Datome’s ear that when he gets in the game ‘just shoot’. He’s a shooter and you could see while playing under Cheeks he was totally out of whack. He needs to unconsciously shoot the rock and let his natural ability do the rest. The guy has such a sweet stroke that you’d think once he strings 2 or 3 together eventually the dam will burst and he can at least provide some floor spacing like he was brought in to do. One thing I do know is the sporadic garbage minutes he’s been getting will not leg him get the continuity to start hitting them. Hopefully things change under Loyer.

      • Feb 11, 20149:02 am
        by Rich

        Reply

        When he was getting into the game under Cheeks, that’s what he was doing – shooting, shooting, shooting.  The problem was he was missing, missing, missing.
         
        I’d like to see Gigi get another shot, but he has to make shots to make himself stick.  During his two brief forays in the rotation early in the season, he went 3 for 17 from downtown.

        • Feb 11, 20144:06 pm
          by gmehl

          Reply

          Man he guy got a couple of minutes here or there. When was the last time you saw him play 10-15 minutes. Your right though that he has been missing them but the guy clearly needs a bigger role to get going.

  • Feb 11, 20149:03 am
    by Gordbrown

    Reply

    I’m certainly willing to concede that Loyer is Cheeks equal, provided he wins the next three home games in a row.

    • Feb 11, 20149:57 am
      by Turns

      Reply

      You’ll concede him to be Cheeks equal only if he wins his first four games as a head coach?  He could lose the next three games and I’d still consider him to be Cheeks equal.  He just seemed so under prepared.

      • Feb 11, 201410:17 am
        by Gordbrown

        Reply

        Point was that this team seems to have turned the corner before Sunday. What I saw different was the team seemed to hustle, but all that hustle was offset some by running out of control. My worry is whether this is sustainable.

        • Feb 11, 201410:44 am
          by Huddy

          Reply

          I don’t think they turned the corner before Sunday.  Beating the Nets without Lopez, Garnett, 15 min for Pierce and a shaky WIlliams is hardly telling of anything.  Beating Denver with Lawson only out there less than 20 min and no back up PG on the team is an ok win (but they have underwhelmed this season as well).  The team looked better all around tonight.  There were some shots that I don’t think are going to go down every night, but the effort on both ends was much better.

          • Feb 11, 201411:35 am
            by Gordbrown

            As opposed to beating a team missing three starters and benched the other two early in the third? Apples to apples please.

          • Feb 11, 201411:48 am
            by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

            Hubby nets have been without Lopez for awhile, they were the league hottest team coming in against us…Lawson wasn’t not killing us and he wasn’t stopping Jennings either that game….NBA the No Break Association…..no one cares when we lost Stuckey for a few games…no cares…its all about the wins…
            No one looks back at these games…for who played and who didn’t because if we lost those games….no one would care either

          • Feb 11, 201411:56 am
            by Huddy

            If you want to get technical, yes.  Beating the #2 team in the west #3 overall in the NBA missing some key players is a better win than beating the #10 team in the West with almost nothing at the PG position, without their starting SF, and missing MCgee.  It is also a better win than beating the #7 team in the East (that would be out of the play off picture in the west) with what they were missing.  In addition, the Spurs have frequently played missing or resting various key players the last few seasons because of their age and maintained a great record and beating good teams, but the previous points are more important.
             
            IMO they looked considerably better last night especially on Defense/the break.  In reality I wouldn’t even say that is a turning point for the season.  Personally for a sport with an 82 game season a considerable streak or stretch of games with only 1-2 losses would be needed to really prove anything was really turning around.  This team on a single game basis beat Indiana and Miami, but inconsistency is their biggest issue.
             
             

          • Feb 11, 201412:05 pm
            by Huddy

            @IHateLosing what does losing Lopez for a long stretch have to do with not having him available to play?  The Nets are a better team with him and worse without him.  
             
            On a whole I agree that we don’t go back and nit pick which games were legit wins.  I wouldn’t look at the teams final record and say “yeah but these 7 games don’t count because of who was out and these 4 should be considered loses because of who the other team was missing”.  Those things even out on the big scale.  I only mention the difference in the quality of wins because we are specifically discussing how important those 3 specific games are.  I don’t consider them a turn around because of all those missing players and how small of a sample it is.  At the end of the year they will all be Ws, but I find it even harder to put much stock in those wins specifically when looking at the direction the team is going because of what those teams were missing.  Some wins are definitely better than others in terms of individual analysis.

          • Feb 11, 201412:28 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            Inconsistency is most certainly not Detroit’s biggest issue. They’ve actually been pretty consistent, at least as far as NBA teams go. Every team beats some superior squads and loses to some inferior ones. The Pistons have not done either with egregious frequency.

            No, their problem has been being bad, consistently. They consistently have poor defense, poor outside shooting, poor free throw shooting, strong interior scoring, and very strong rebounding. But the pros haven’t outweighed the cons.

            People love to talk about sports players and teams getting “more consistent”. But when they do, they mean consistently performing like the best version of themselves, not the average one. If that happens, the primary difference isn’t increased consistency, it’s improvement.

          • Feb 11, 201412:46 pm
            by Huddy

            @Tim I may have overstated how much of an issue consistency is, but I think the Pistons issues have more to do with consistently playing better than needing to improve their ability.  They have talent and need to utilize it better.  I don’t think it is wrong to say Josh Smith played consistently well in his 2009 season.  He didn’t acquire skill that he lacked (as he showed dropping right back into bad habits after that season.)  Improvement and increased consistency could be considered one in the same in many cases.  Increasing is improving.  I don’t think there is much of a difference.  It is definitely true that people use consistency in terms of positive results, which isn’t technically correct, but if this team could be in a better position this year with a better scheme I see that as needing to consistently play better with their current skills than needing to improve.

          • Feb 11, 20141:01 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            Improved schemes, rotations, familiarity, etc are all things that could help the Pistons to win more games. I hate the term consistency though, because increased consistency does not mean improvement. It means being closer to your “average self” more often, not closer to your “good self”.

            Also, if what people mean is improvement, they should just come out and say their profound bits of wisdom:
            “In order for this team to win more games, they need to play better.”

        • Feb 11, 201411:42 am
          by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

          Reply

          Explaining running out of control? 

          • Feb 11, 201412:07 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            When the Pistons tried to push the ball hard, they had several instances in which someone just threw the ball away. That’ll happen sometimes when you try to beat other teams by pushing the pace.

      • Feb 11, 201412:39 pm
        by Gordbrown

        Reply

        As opposed to the always super-prepared Lawrence Frank who had all the same issues as Cheeks and a worse record? Right.

  • Feb 11, 20149:54 am
    by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

    Reply

    I think we will be seeing some Datome in place of Jonas or they will share time depending on match ups…
    3 point shot is the great equalizer and once teams have to respect that shot it opens up everything else in the fourth qrt…the ability to make that shot was missed…
    Btw: would the Bucks for Charlie V for a disgruntled OJ Mayo? 

    • Feb 11, 201412:17 pm
      by zdh

      Reply

      I dont think Mayo helps the team short term or long term. He has been awful this season, too.

  • Feb 11, 201410:29 am
    by Windy

    Reply

    The whole CV for Mayo I think falls short because the pistons don’t want to add anymore money…that CV contract expiring is a great asset, I don’t think I want to take on Mayo and his new money…we gotta be smart with the money we will have remaining…with Stuckey and CV expiring we will have 17million…Greg Monroe will eat up a big chuck of that when his salary goes from basically 5million to 14million…the money that remains will have to be spent wisely as we dont have much coming off the books there after besides Jerebko…Spread the money out and find a FEW pieces that could help this team, also consider the fact that we won’t get a first round pick…we will have to fill out this roster.. 

    • Feb 11, 201410:53 am
      by Scott

      Reply

      Monroe is NOT worth $14 million.  we have too many holes to pay monroe that much.

      • Feb 11, 201411:21 am
        by Huddy

        Reply

        They are lacking a legit starter at one position (SG) and could use some floor spacing.  Where is all their money supposed to be going?  Over paying role players?  If you think they should change their make up all together that is one thing, but saying they simply need to acquire a lot more to fill holes that exist on the current team doesn’t make sense.  There are only so many roster spots.  Even with a max contract for Monroe the team will have around 8 mil to spend in FA or to use in addition to a trade to upgrade the roster.

    • Feb 11, 20145:36 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      @ Windy. The team will have about $10 million to spend this summer before paying Monroe. There is no real point in splitting that up too much. By and large a single $10 million player has a bigger impact than a pair of $5 million players since the $5 million players are likely to be only bench players while the more expensive player is likely to be enough to land a starter. Besides that, $5 million players can be added most any year due to the MLE.

  • Feb 11, 201411:06 am
    by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

    Reply

    Question for our advance analytics guys…is a stats for blocks that leads to pts?
    Drummond last night had three blocks that led directly to pts….sometimes I think blocks are overrated…some guys block shot out of bounds and teams don’t lose positions or they block it and the opposing team gets the ball back and they still score…
    Just wondering 

    • Feb 11, 201412:12 pm
      by Tim Thielke

      Reply

      I have yet to encounter one.

      But yes, blocks can be overrated. All they really do is turn a shot attempt (that may have been a make or a miss) into a miss. The rebound, next possession, etc are still up for grabs.

      The value of a shot blocker is less for his blocks and more for the fact that opponents have to adjust their shots in order to avoid the block.

  • Feb 11, 201411:16 am
    by starlight0997

    Reply

    Now, all of a sudden, the Pistons could get very close to .500 by winning all three games (with two against the Bobcats). That will certainly vault the Pistons into the eight seed. If they just get consistent (win against the teams they are supposed to), then getting to .500 and perhaps a sixth to third seed is possible.

    • Feb 11, 201412:22 pm
      by Tim Thielke

      Reply

      No team consistently beats the teams “they are supposed to”. The Spurs are the closest we have to the epitome of consistency, and they just lost to Detroit. The Pistons would definitely qualify as a team “they should beat”.

      Let’s assume the Eastern Conference stays just as pitiful as it has been thus far (even though it has been steadily improving as the season has gone along). The 6th seed would require a .500 record. That means the Pistons would have to finish the season 19-12. That’s a better rate than Phoenix, Dallas, or Golden State have won at so far. A 3rd seed would mean finishing with a .530 record right now (this number will almost certainly go up, given all the teams right around .500). But even if that’s all it would take, that would mean finishing the season 22-9. That would involve winning the rest of the way at a rate comparable to those thus far of Portland, San Antonio, and Miami.

      Long story short, the 6th seed is a long shot, but vaguely plausible. If the Pistons get the 3rd seed, though, Loyer should be a COY candidate. That’s not going to happen.

      • Feb 11, 201412:31 pm
        by Huddy

        Reply

        With the 19-12 mark and the comparison to GS etc. that aren’t winning at that rate, do you think the end of season is a somewhat different story?  It seems like tanking teams and good teams with established play off position might garner teams that are still pushing for better position a better chance at winning.  I don’t know if anything supports that it just seems like if the Pistons are near the end of the season and are playing needing their wins more than their opponents that might positively influence their record.

        • Feb 11, 201412:37 pm
          by Tim Thielke

          Reply

          What the top teams and bottom teams do is irrelevant because it will affect the other teams the Pistons are jockeying with for the playoffs just as much as it will affect the Pistons.

          So unless you’re suggesting that one or more of the teams seeded 3-9 in the East is going to suddenly up and decide to tank, hitting the playoffs won’t be made any easier by the play of other teams.

          Also, there are several teams that have been tanking all year, so that part of the equation ain’t changing much. And I wouldn’t expect the top teams to let off the gas down the stretch either, because they’re jockeying for seeding and home court advantage in the playoffs.

          • Feb 11, 201412:49 pm
            by Huddy

            Yeah that makes sense.  I guess I forgot every other team would be playing in the same scenario…might be time for afternoon coffee.

      • Feb 11, 20141:07 pm
        by starlight0997

        Reply

        @ Tim
        Yeah, I forgot to add quotation marks to abbreviate “consistency” or “beat who you are supposed to beat.” I was just putting it as a theory rather than truth. When I said “perhaps sixth to third seed,” I was also just putting it out there as a possibility (not necessarily in the sense of high chance versus low chance). So while a sixth seed may be slim at best, it is not entirely out of the realm (who knows what will happen to the East aside from Miami and Indiana).
        I must say, if Loyer somehow gets this team to a third seed, give him a deal.

  • Feb 11, 201411:25 am
    by Vic

    Reply

    Atlanta is the 4th seed and they only have 25 wins, have their best player injured, and have lost 3 in a row. The Pistons have 22 wins and have won 3 in a row. 
    With a better coach now there is literally nothing between the Pistons and the 4th seed.

    • Feb 11, 20141:14 pm
      by starlight0997

      Reply

      Considering there are only 31 games left (for the Pistons), it will still be a pretty steep climb up (even when considering Atlanta has their best player out). And you have to consider the other teams in the East that will also benefit in the pecking order. You have to beat the other teams’ win rates and then some.

  • Feb 11, 201411:29 am
    by pablum

    Reply

    Where is the Victory Dance due to our rejuvenated warriors!?! Why, I jumped from my Feng Shui Lazy-Boy, ripped off my giant Elvis-belt-buckled back supporter, and frenetically strobed my old ass flabby legs in blinding rhythms that caused my Piston compatriots to pass-out in shock at the vision of me — so IMPRESSIVE was this victory!
    And it’s only the star. This game was not just a typical regular season game given the historic circumstances (I can’t even recall the Piston’s firing a coach in mid-season..). We just whupped Pop and a legit Spurs squad. And it was NOT a fluke! It was our YOUTH, SPEED, and POWER. And the Spurs had no answer for it. There is no answer for it, for the AGED (like me). In the NBA, as we see in the pathos of our once great Chauncey Billlups, Mother Time is a Mother-Fucker.
    Behold what an actually knowledgeable and prepared can do with this team! This was not just some jolt of energy produced by a coaching change that we see with teams who fire their coaches. Nay! This was Cheeks being exposed as the naked disaster that he was. And woe to those who doubt this! (Have to calm down, my flabby old legs are starting to tremor).
    No one’s going to want to play us in the first round. No one is going to think we’re a walk-over. To quote Chris Bosh,”WE ARE ON EVERYBODY’S RADAR.” Yes. We. Are. And I will be the first to praise our great Lord Dumars for his intrepid moves in assembling this soon to be contender! (And if KCP can just give us 15-17pts a night on a steady J — we are already there!).
    Dan, I have two issues with your game summary:
    (1) Almost all your grades should have been higher in this obvious turning point victory.
    (2) I struggled with the word, “aplomb,” in your sentence: “[Loyer] jumped into his new post with aplomb and a refreshing passion.” “Aplomb?” It sounds like Loyer was eating a plum while he was coaching. Nay to “aplomb” when describing a coach, I say. Other than that, thanks for the excellent work — all of the pro-scribes here — over the last few stunning days in Pistonland! Onward Warriors!

  • Feb 11, 201411:33 am
    by Marvin Madison

    Reply

    YYou never know it happen with Indiana coach Frank Vogel 

  • Feb 11, 201411:34 am
    by PistonManiac

    Reply

    Joe is a dead man walking. Can’t believe he wanted to keep Butt Cheeks! I suspect Joe will not be retain. I don’t understand why Joe wouldn’t want to resign and be with his lovely wife. Unless Joe doesn’t want to be home? I personally want to thank Joe for all his contributions to the Pistons. Good Luck Joe!!!

  • Feb 11, 201411:40 am
    by Pistons Moribund

    Reply

    Addition by subtraction.  No Mo, Spurs missing three of their best players.  ++++, Gift wrapped and served up on a platter.  Any team is better off without Mo but still the same old team.  Free lithium for everyone.

    • Feb 11, 20144:36 pm
      by jg22

      Reply

      Yay! Have you taken your prozac yet today?

      • Feb 11, 20144:39 pm
        by jg22

        Reply

        It sounds like some people here (hint, hint) prefer to wallow in misery than be happy.

  • Feb 11, 201411:44 am
    by Huddy

    Reply

    Cheek’s firing is getting national attention and is really the first thing about the Pistons that is being featured (in a major way) nationally this year.  I always wish that there would be better coverage of teams like the Pistons on sites like ESPN instead of spending so much time with articles about somebody stealing Kobe Bryant’s shoes from high school or speculation about Lebron’s choice of what direction to wear his head band.  I get that contending teams and big markets garner more interest, but I just would like a larger base of info to go to regarding my team.  The coverage of the Mo Cheeks firing makes me regret ever wishing for coverage.  It is painfully obvious that the majority of people at ESPN spent 15 minutes on google deciding what to say about the Pistons.  Bill Simmons accused Dumars of throwing Cheeks under the bus instead of taking the time to read that the owner did the firing and by all account Dumars would have given him more time, everyone’s analysis of the coaching carousel in Detroit lacks any information about the ownership issues from the past, there is no analysis about how poorly Cheeks performed in those 50 games or his lack of awareness (not evening knowing who was inactive for games) or how poorly his scheme was effecting the outcomes.
     
     
    All anyone says is, it is unfortunate that Cheeks got fired and 50 games isn’t enough time.  No analysis, no reasoning or proper defense, just reporting “breaking news” because they are obligated. 

    • Feb 11, 201411:52 am
      by @GPMasters

      Reply

      So, so true. That’s why I stick to PP and DBB for Pistons news and opinion…

    • Feb 11, 201411:55 am
      by I HATE LOSING (Predicting A Strong Finish)

      Reply

      I always hope for the best….Cheeks just didn’t seem to have it in him….maybe if he was philly coach or the Bucks coach with no expectations to win right now would have been a perfect situation for him to develop relationship and a culture..everyone says the pistons are young…but when you think about it…Smith, Jennings, Greg, Stuckey, GiGi,Bynum, Jonas, and even Singler these guys have been professionals for awhile they didn’t need a father figure or beat friend they had that they needed a coach that can make them better….i hope Loyer is that guy…

  • Feb 11, 201412:03 pm
    by Smitty

    Reply

    I think with a couple moves, this team could get to the 4th seed.

    • Feb 11, 201412:40 pm
      by Tim Thielke

      Reply

      They could do it with just one: trade Smith for Durant.

      • Feb 11, 201412:52 pm
        by Smitty

        Reply

        Okc would probably have to throw in a draft pick for me to even consider that.

  • Feb 11, 201412:13 pm
    by Corey

    Reply

    Trading CV for Mayo makes sense, actually. I think we have 12 under contract for next season, assuming we res-sign Monroe, and drop Chauncey, and keep all the rookies. If we don’t keep Stuckey, we need another guard- preferably one that can shoot well, play the 2, and maybe back up the 1 as well. Someone like OJ Mayo is a good candidate for that role.  
    I’d have Mayo than pay Stuckey. The only reason not to do it would be if we thunk that around $10m in cap space this summer can get someone much better.

    • Feb 11, 201412:24 pm
      by Huddy

      Reply

      If they don’t have Stuckey there are not a lot of good options this year to fill that hole at SG.  No names really stand out that are UFA so they would have to do something.  I don’t love Mayo, but he might be a decent option by comparison and he will only have 2 years left on his deal.

    • Feb 11, 201412:57 pm
      by sebastian

      Reply

      Corey, Stuckey is a far better player than Mayo.

      • Feb 11, 20141:19 pm
        by Tim Thielke

        Reply

        How so? Statistically, they’re incredibly similar players. The main difference is that Stuckey is much better at getting to the line while Mayo is much better at shooting from deep. Neither provides defense good or bad enough to be considered noteworthy. Both are basically pure scorers. Stuckey is in the middle of a better (contract year) season right now, but he’s also the older of the two. Stuckey is more efficient with his minutes, Mayo is more efficient with his shots.

        Stuckey (career):
        14 ppg, 3 rpg, 4 apg, 1 spg, 2 topg, 0.38 fta/fga, 42/29/83, 15.6 PER, 51.6 ts%

        Mayo (career):
        15 ppg, 3 rpg, 3 apg, 1 spg, 2 topg, 0.21 fta/fga, 43/38/82, 13.8 PER, 53.3 ts%

        I could be convinced that either is the better player of the two. But if you think either is the “far better player”, that is a position worth reconsidering.

        • Feb 11, 20141:39 pm
          by Huddy

          Reply

          Agree with that,  I see them as similar and that leads me to prefer another option because I would rather upgrade than move laterally.  The difference in fit swings me towards Mayo though.  I think that skill set is more useful on this team and in the 4th quarter especially the team could do with less bull dog ball from Stuckey while everyone stands around IMO. 

        • Feb 11, 20143:58 pm
          by sebastian

          Reply

          Tim, your argument is strongly supported by the career statistics of both players, no doubt. The two, Mayo and Stuckey are statistically the same player, except for career assists, Mayo (1279) and Stuckey (1823).
          Now, it is true that Stuckey has more assists because of the minutes that he has logged as PG, but here is why I think that Stuckey is a far better player. Rodney’s PG tendencies and abilities are a commodity on a roster where Brandon Jennings is the starting PG.
          I think that Interim Head Coach Loyer would wise to allow Stuckey to play more PG minutes in the 4th quarter of games, as B. Jennings’ decision making and tendency to shoot early in the shot clock is a detriment, during the 4th quarters of games and is the primary reason for the 4th quarter collapses that OUR Pistons have experienced, thus far this season.
          Also, Stuckey is a more aggressive player, as he has gone to the line 707 more times than Mayo (both shoot a career 82% from the strip).
          I still would rather have Rodney Norvell Stuckey on my roster than Ovinton J’Anthony Mayo.

          • Feb 11, 20144:07 pm
            by sebastian

            Oh, and you are right Mayo is younger than Stuckey, approximately 6 1/2 months younger; which is roughly a full NBA season, as Mayo’s date of birth is November 5, 1987 and Stuckey’s date of birth is April 21, 1986.

          • Feb 11, 20144:31 pm
            by Tim Thielke

            They’re closer in age than I realized, but those dates make Stuckey about 18 months Mayo’s senior, not 6.

          • Feb 11, 20144:33 pm
            by sebastian

            Tim, my bust on chronology. You’re right.

  • Feb 11, 20141:42 pm
    by MIKEYDE248

    Reply

    I think the Pistons deserve a little luck.  Wouldn’t it be nice if they lucked into the next diamond in the rough.  I loved watching his passion yesterday.  It sure was refreshing seeing how engaged he was all game.  Sure is a big change from seeing their coach sitting in the 5th row looking like a bystander.

    • Feb 11, 20143:01 pm
      by Dave

      Reply

      This! It might be tough to maintain that passion and enthusiasm for 82 games and it may even wear thin on some of the players after a while, but for the next 30 games I hope we see the same level of enthusiasm from the bench.

      • Feb 11, 20143:47 pm
        by MIKEYDE248

        Reply

        You may be right, but for right now he looked like a kid who was out there enjoying himself and all the players did too.

  • Feb 11, 20148:53 pm
    by Marvin Madison

    Reply

    He Has to be the first coach since larry Brown  that i seen with that much emotion nice W

  • Feb 11, 20149:54 pm
    by T Casey

    Reply

    Can’t make too much of one game, but, echoing other posts on here, I liked what I saw from him on the sideline. He looked much more active and engaged, instructing the players on where to be and how he wanted the team to operate. Only time will tell how well he fits as a head coach, but I’m looking forward to how his tenure shapes up.

  • Feb 12, 20143:55 am
    by @GPMasters

    Reply

    It was actually nice / interesting being able to hear some of his instructions, eg when to switch the pick and roll defense…

  • Feb 12, 20147:42 am
    by gmehl

    Reply

    So here’s a quote from Billups latest story that I on Detroit News atm:
    “Billups believes he could coach in this league. But he is interested in becoming the next Joe Dumars and not Larry Brown”
     
    So is this Chauncey pretty much putting his hand up for next seasons vacant GM position??
     
    Here’s the article http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140212/SPORTS0102/302120029/1127/rss13

    • Feb 12, 201410:17 am
      by Parsons

      Reply

      I hope not. He’s inexperienced and unqualified at either head coach or GM which leaves us in the same position of hiring only the inexperienced and unqualified. Chauncey needs to be an assistant and learn for a few years first or we’ll still be in this giant hole. My science teacher gave me the best advice “if your already in a hole stop digging.” We need to stop digging. I love Chauncey but this notion we need to retire him and hire him at GM or head coach the same day is insane. I have no doubt in my mind he’ll excel at either but he needs to learn first. Groom him to take over don’t just toss him in or he’ll only be set up to fail.

      • Feb 12, 201410:23 am
        by gmehl

        Reply

        Parsons I totally agree with you. I just thought I’d share the article. I guess I’m putting words in Billups mouth but with what he said its clear he wants a role in the head office.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here