Official Detroit Pistons thread

[Futureshock]

Isiah was a superstar in the day. He was an All Star every season.

I agree. But if you talk to people from other parts of the country, they will say he wasn't. IMHO, superstars are universally known and aren't really arguable. Even if you hate em.

My point was that K Stat was saying people didn't believe in the Pistons in 2002 because they didn't have a superstar. Heck, I could make an argument that their worst years (prior to Gores ownership) was when they had a superstar. Like the Hill era. So why would Piston fans have that mentality when it's never worked for us?

[froot loops]

Not many would say that, he was a clear superstar in the 80's. That isn't a question at all. When the NBA came out with the top 50 at 50, he was ranked #26. He checks off all of the boxes.

[kreton]

Not only that the Tigers were just plain terrible in 2002. It seemed utterly hopeless back then for the Tigers and in 2003 they nearly had the worst season ever.

The Pistons won the Central in the 2001-2002 season and the 2002-2003 season. They hadn't done that in the dreaded Teal era, the best they did in the Grant Hill years was 96-97 when they finished 3rd with 54 wins and lost in the first round. By 2002 Joe D had been in charge for a year, he brought back the old colors and they were pretty successful right after he shed those contracts in 2001. There was excitement, nobody was claiming they were going to win a championship but the Eastern champs were the Nets. We aren't talking huge world beaters.

The point of my posts in regards to the current Pistons is things can change quickly in ways you cannot anticipate. You can look at the contract situation and despair that they are just in a holding pattern until all of these contracts fall off, but it isn't necessarily a guarantee. The biggest problem the Pistons have since they traded Chauncey Billups is really bad free agent decisions.

(replying to bold)

With our current handcuffs I don't see things changing for the better quickly. Granted you stated in ways I cannot anticipate but no one is taking these contracts off our hands.

We don't want to lose Drummond. Griffin and Jackson are almost untradable. NOONE would ever touch Leuer right now. Galloway would be hard to move. Kennard and Robinson III aren't moving at all.

So our best options for trade pieces are Ish Smith and Stanley Johnson. I don't see much coming in return for them.

Maybe someone will offer us a solid starting SF on a cheap salary for Ellenson and Leuer but I doubt it.

[Kstat]

[froot loops]

Plenty of bad looking contracts have been traded over the years. Things change quickly.

Lauer is an expiring contract next year.
Smith is an expiring contract this year.
Galloway is an expiring contract next year.
Reggie Jackson is an expiring contract next year and if he is healthy he is a good player this year.


They just signed Robinson, I think they are looking for him to help the team.

[jaadam4]

Isiah was a superstar in the day. He was an All Star every season.

Most definitely

[jaadam4]

What would you consider the worst deal in the league?

[Kstat]

What would you consider the worst deal in the league?

John Wall. Not even a close second.

[kreton]

John Wall. Not even a close second.

Jon Leuer. I'd take Wall and his contract in a heartbeat over Leuer who gets 10 mil to make a team worse. And Wall is a better contract that Griffin right now IMO.

Not really - Leuer isn't the worst. His contract just aggravates me the most. I think either Holliday or Gallinari.

Does Smith count since we are still paying him?

[Kstat]

[kreton]

He'll be getting about the same $$$ per year as Griffin, with less injury history and more production recently. I'm not saying his is a good deal because it isn't but it isn't any worse and Blake's. And we gave up a lot of assets to get Blakes bad contract which makes it worse IMO. His contract balloons right at the end so they have him for 1 more year longer than we have griff and that is a big year but for the next 4 years they are making the same money almost.

They may both be equally as good but again we gave up 2 draft picks and 2 good players for his $170 mil contract. Washington gave up nothing for Walls $170 mil contract.

[Kstat]

He'll be getting about the same $$$ per year as Griffin, with less injury history and more production recently. I'm not saying his is a good deal because it isn't but it isn't any worse and Blake's. And we gave up a lot of assets to get Blakes bad contract which makes it worse IMO. His contract balloons right at the end so they have him for 1 more year longer than we have griff and that is a big year but for the next 4 years they are making the same money almost.

They may both be equally as good but again we gave up 2 draft picks and 2 good players for his $170 mil contract. Washington gave up nothing for Walls $170 mil contract.

[kreton]

I already said Wall has an extra year. But go look at year by year. They are within 3 mil of each other every year for the next 4 years. Walls just has that one extra year.

Exactly as I said.

There is nothing inaccurate about what I said - you are ducking out because you know you are wrong.

[Kstat]

[Cody_Russell]

Are they not going to bench him in the playoffs this time? 20 minutes per game vs the Warriors and hardly any playing time in the 4th quarter.
Just like Tristan Thompson. Benched.