Darth Tater has a new contest for the forum
Check it out!
Discussion in 'Pistons and NBA' started by blueadams, Jan 30, 2014.
He has looked completely awful. I'm probably higher on Mitchell at this point.
Exactly. Bennet's stock is on the toilet.
He's looking like a homeless man's Marcus Fizer. Do we really need another PF? Besides, Bennet couldn't even crack out rotation.
Right, people think he stinks.
Wall has already signed his extension, so unless you are talking about free agency 6 years from now, I think we can safely say he isn't on the market. Otto Porter. I agree. He looks like a solid defender, good on the ball. For me, he is just a more athletic, better version of Kyle Singler. Apparently a better scorer too. Can't really go wrong I guess. Lance. I'm not really buying into the hype. Do we really want to overpay a role player just because he looks good in Indiana? They made Luis Scola look good. I don't know a whole lot about Marcus Smart so I'll take your word for it. But here is the kicker - I'm happy with KCP. He is very quickly getting better. That means Jennings really has to go or become a back up guard, which he isn't going to like. I have said it before. Gay isn't a premier wing scorer. He was forced into that role in Memphis because they had nobody else. But he is doing so well in Sacramento. I'm actually enjoying watching him play. It is the wrong decision for him to come to Detroit to be the #1 guy again, and it's the wrong decision for us. If you keep the cap space you can offer teams like Miami/Brooklyn (tax payers) huge trade exceptions and get nice players out of it. Golden State has a really nice team. They won't give up one of their best guys (Curry/Thompson/Iggy/Bogut/Lee) for anything. He really does stink.
I'm watching the OKC and I can't help but think that while Westbrook makes OKC better he isn't the most ideal complement to Durant and even without him they're pretty good AND they have some young players who are getting better and better (Jackson, Jones, Lamb). I like Westbrook, I think he's a stud- a true Alpha Dog! So I propose the following: NBA Trade Machine - ESPN Imagine THIS OKC team with Moose, and Jennings coming off the bench.....because IMO that's what he essentially is, a backup PG. This deal gives us the superstar we need to become respectable and it allows Westbrook to play without worrying about getting Durant shots, although it's not like he does that right now anyway. I mean would any of us be worried that Westbrook is taking shots away from Josh Smith? This deal also leaves us with some pretty good cap space this summer; Evan Turner? Or.....enough to offer Lance "I'm Mad I'm not an All-Star" Stephenson a contract that would really put Indy in a difficult place, or go after Evan Turner. Thoughts?
Its a difficult trade for OKC to make - Westbrook is locked up for 4 years, Monroe is not. Also, its just so hard to split up Durant and Russ for OKC. Their fanbase would feel utterly betrayed. So they would probably want more than just Moose and Jennings. Its probably going end up looking like this NBA Trade Machine - ESPN + every draft pick we own. Westbrook is a legit superstar in his own right. We are going to have to take back the only awful contract they have (Perkins) and give them guys which contribute back. Jennings/Stuckey would provide a strong scoring punch when Durant/RJ sit. Moose could cover Perkins + Ibaka sitting. It kind of makes sense. But we lose a lot of assets and I want Dumars to be damn sure he want Westbrook before he did it.
Got to disagree with you. One, I find point guards not nearly as important to who wins a game, as compared to who is playing at the bigs position. For instance, lets look at Washington. If Nene is not playing, the Wiz lose. Plain and simple. The fact they got Wall at point, does not generate any wins at all. None, at all. Wall is one heck of a point, but the points job is not to win the game, but to orchestrate a win. Without good bigs, a point has not enough to work with.Cleveland is another example. As bad as Bynum was due to coming off of injury, they were a better team with him involved. And a lot more fun to watch too. Irving, as good as he is, can get no wins for his team. The Pistons are truly set at the bigs position, as far as the starters. Starting guard is just fine too. Its our bench that is rancid. Not because we do not have good bench players, but because we have a couple of really, really bad bench players, who the coach mistakes as NBA players. You get rid of the likes of Bynum and Singler, and this team all the sudden is way, way better. Back to Monroe, the guy you are thinking about trading. He does have his faults. But he is one fine inside scorer. Even though Druns has the potential to be as good as inside as Monroe, that is the future. The now, is Monroe.
As the interim commissioner acting on behalf of the departing Stern, I approve this trade. As you say we can get Turner or Stephenson to join the crew, we have would have most the pieces in place except for a decent coach to make it all work.
Not necessarily....Cheeks and Rus have good history.
True I'm not so sure of that. I think consensus among most people (even OKC fans) isthat the Westbrook holds Durant back That's actually not that bad of a trade. Perkins falls off the books before we have to re-up Dre so we could still sign a free agent next summer. I'm telling you, the trade actually makes pretty good sense for both teams.
How come it says -4 wins for us?
So did John Kuester and LeBron James.
Had LeBron brought his talents to Auburn Hills Kuester might still be here.
I miss Kuester.
I personally think that is not true, but apparently the geeks back it. I get the feeling that OKC have had multiple chances to get rid of Perkins but haven't for a reason. I have no idea what that reason is but I'm sure it exists. I agree. In fact I would almost go so far to say that OKC get's more out of it than we do, but that is the price you pay for a star. We can only give up second rounders because of the stupid structure of the Maggette trade (because we don't know when we will actually give up the pick and you can't trade two in a row), which has really hamstrung our ability to make strong moves in the trade market. I think with a first rounder in the 15-20 range would make your original trade work - which I would consider a smarter move.
It's not unreasonable to think that OKC would go for a "future" first rounder. Presti likes to stack assets that pay off down the road.
When does the first round pick we gave away become unrestricted? Because that's the year we can start trading with first rounders.
Top 8 protected this draft, top 1 the next draft, then unrestricted.
Well that's good, we can offer up that delicious 2017 first round pick
Separate names with a comma.