OT: Recent moves of the Detroit Pistons
Here's a CBS Sports take on the recent NBA activities (trades and FA signings).
This guy is not a fan of what Pistons did:
"Look, maybe the Pistons are playing chess and we're all stuck here trying to maintain the sanctity of our back row while playing checkers, but what they did on Friday was ... odd."
Any hot takes? I don't follow the NBA too closely but as a SE Michigan native I usually have a rough idea of what's going on with the Pistons.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:30 PM ^
What they’ve done up to this point makes little sense to me. However, I’ve paid attention to the Pistons more in the last week than the last decade combined so that’s something. I’m willing to see what Weaver does through free agency, but so far I’m a little puzzled.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:37 PM ^
Signing 5 centers so 4 can foul out every game?
November 21st, 2020 at 1:00 PM ^
Someone tell the Pistons, that’s not what 5 out basketball means.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:42 PM ^
Jackson was actually ok in Memphis last year. When he started playing he was solid. Even though his points weren’t impressive, he was typically the 4th-5th option after some combination of Ja/Jaren/Jonas/Brooks/Clarke.
At worst, he’s a solid bench player who can start in a pinch and be semi-reliable.
The rest of those moves are pretty weird though. Pistons at least look like they are no longer committed to being in purgatory and are finally embracing a tank.
If they can rank for 2-3 years, they might be great.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:44 PM ^
I thought Weaver had a good day on draft day but the FA moves seem odd to me.not sure why they didn't go after someone like Ibaka?
November 21st, 2020 at 1:26 PM ^
He's more expensive and limited in what he can do compared to someone like Jerami Grant.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:47 PM ^
Pistons have stacked their roster with moveable contracts while ensuring they still suck enough to land lottery picks. It is a roster that is not designed to win.
It may seem like overpays now, but I suspect Weaver's plan is to flip some of these guys to contenders in win-now mode for picks and/or young assets near trade deadlines.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:57 PM ^
This person gets it.
November 21st, 2020 at 2:39 PM ^
The last line of the CBS Pistons comments: "We shall have to wait and see if there is a method to Detroit's madness."
Indeed. None of these contracts is unmovable. A three year $25 million contract is chicken feed in today's NBA. As with every GM we will have to wait and see if they know what they are doing. Initial returns often change with subsequent events. Al Avila is looking like a better GM than he did two winters ago.
November 21st, 2020 at 2:44 PM ^
yeah but we traded away our first round next year, right?
November 21st, 2020 at 3:28 PM ^
Great take.
Stockpile young players while Blake shoots us out of every game until his contract is off the books.
November 21st, 2020 at 3:45 PM ^
I hope that’s right. Seems like a very complicated strategy.
November 21st, 2020 at 4:49 PM ^
COK gets it. It's all about maneuverability going forward. Blake, Rose, Plumlee, and Grant could be enticing to teams competing at the deadline, or the next.
November 21st, 2020 at 4:58 PM ^
Ed Stefanski deserves a ton of credit for assembling a roster that enabled all of Weaver's wheeling and dealing. This literally would not have been possible two years ago.
Whether Weaver can turn all of this into a title contender isn't clear yet. But if he does we should all thank Stefanski.
November 21st, 2020 at 5:39 PM ^
Was coming here to say that.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:48 PM ^
I'm stuck trying to figure out who we've got now, and who isn't here.
November 21st, 2020 at 12:53 PM ^
The Pistons are my secondary NBA interest, and let's just say I'm happy Rob Pelinka is the GM of primary NBA rooting interest.
Detroit paid $10+ mill per year for combo of Plumlee and Okafor. Both of which are best served as backup bigs in the NBA.
Then overpaid for Jeremi Grant on a 3year/60mill deal.
Unless the Pistons have a S+T in place this makes little sense when looking at this in the aggregate.
Slight overpays at the C position, and then you massively overpay for Grant on a long term deal, all while the making the team marginally better and losing future cap flexibility with the Grant signing.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:10 PM ^
It tells me that Blake Griffin is not long for this team, one way or another.
November 21st, 2020 at 3:29 PM ^
How much of that asinine contract will they get someone to swallow?
November 21st, 2020 at 1:11 PM ^
This assumes they are in a win-now phase. They are not. They are stockpiling movable assets to trade later. This a strategic tankathon. They want assets they can unload for future high draft picks or trades. It’s all about flexibility down the road. The team’s old strategy of winning just enough to maybe get the 8th spot was insanity, in part because that’s pointless and in part because that scenario leaves you with no high draft picks. This is a more ambitious and forward-thinking plan, at least.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:18 PM ^
Grant was barely an overpay, he is a solid player and Denver reportedly offered him the same contract but Grant wanted an opportunity for a bigger role. He will still be a very tradeable asset in the future and is a stop gap for a couple years while younger players develop while not being TOO good that he makes the Pistons a playoff team. Pretty much the same situation with Plumlee.
Josh Johnson and Jahlil Okafor are both coming off of bounce back seasons in limited roles, they should be given bigger roles with Detroit and if they have truly matured would be cheap trade chips or guys to keep for the long term. Delon Wright and Tony Bradley are also solid players that could be flipped to contending teams seeking depth.
Even with Griffin and Rose around this roster right now is not a playoff team, if one or both are injured/traded, which is very likely, the Pistons will be near the top of the lottery.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:31 PM ^
Exactly. Let's face it: the Pistons aren't going to be signing any star FA's unless they're on the cusp of playing for titles. Until then, they have to figure out a way to build the team through draft picks and trades. All these moves are setting them up to have a shot at doing that.
The best GMs in basketball know how to play chess with contracts and the salary cap so they can get needs in an indirect way when it is nearly impossible to do so in a direct way, which is where the Pistons are at. That is the intent here.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:44 PM ^
Guess I just disagree with the sentiment that 20mill per year for Grant over 3 years is only a slight overpay. That isn't a tradeable contract in any sense, simply mandates that a potential trade partner give up too much in return to make his contract enticing IMO.
Definitely a solid wing, but 20 mill per year is definitely a huge overpay for a guy that is a fourth option type on a legit contender that isn't easily moveable. A one year overpay to punt would've been ideal, but 3 years just kills flexibility. Just my two cent.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:50 PM ^
Word on the street is Denver offered to match that salary, and he wanted the bigger role in Detroit, so how much of an overpay is it really? Grant will absolutely be moveable to a team searching for that "final piece" to make a run.
Also, let's not forget how huge the NBA cap is these days. High level roleplayers have been getting PAID like this for a while.
November 21st, 2020 at 2:10 PM ^
I think you really have to look at market value for similar players in order to really measure the extent of an overpay.
When you have Jae Crowder getting a 3 year deal at half the price of Grant, JaMychal Green and Bobby Portis at 2yrs/15mill and then you get guys like Wes Matthews and Mo Harkless on a one year deal for literally 3.5 million...........the Grant contract looks absolutely insane IMO.
You don't give defensive specialists that are solid shooters (as opposed to great/elite) 20 mill per year IMO.
November 21st, 2020 at 6:29 PM ^
Stick to HS-NCAA projections. The NBA is about production for those guys. You're embarrassing yourself.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:51 PM ^
I get the Lakers are your first team and you like what Pelinka has done, but it’s not apples to apples.
Should the Pistons just get Luka Doncic to join them next year and then force a trade for an Anthony Davis type player? Oh wait, only LA can do that for reasons outside of Pelinka.
Unfortunately, not all teams play by the same rules.
November 21st, 2020 at 2:15 PM ^
Well, why can't the Pistons pull off a trade or obtain players FA? Just 2 years ago the Lakers were laughed at by small-market fans...........not so much anymore. Now it's "not all teams play by the same rules".
Every team has the same cap/salary restrictions. The Pistons made horrible trades/signings in the last few years. If the goal is to tank, then you have to commit to signing young players on the cheap for short deals in hopes that they outperform their contract value as an individual while the team record is able to net a high lotto pick and maintain cap flexibility.
Instead the Pistons overpay a young player that can only live up to his contract worth in the best-case scenario IMO. More likely though, he doesn't play at a 20 million dollar level.
November 21st, 2020 at 2:41 PM ^
Yes, because cap space/salary restrictions is the only variable that effects where players sign...smh. Imagine thinking the Detroit Pistons have the same draw to multi-million dollar athletes that the LA Lakers do.
November 21st, 2020 at 2:54 PM ^
Ask yourself why that is. Most casuals will respond with weather..........but the Clippers/Warriors/Magic have those same type of perceived advantages and generally aren't able to sign FAs or pull-off big trades.
Signing FAs can only be controlled by FOs to a certain extent, but pulling off trades provide the same level of accessibility for all franchises. There is simply no objective reason the Pistons, or any other franchise, cannot pull off trades that benefit the team if the FO makes smart moves.
November 21st, 2020 at 3:05 PM ^
Cap space, weather, franchise history, city you play in, coach you play for, teammates, fan engagement, ownership. Just a few things that FAs take into account when deciding where to play. LA beats Detroit in each one of those area besides cap space. Yes, the Pistons have the ability to make trades. But making trades is much more difficult than saying “Hey Lebron, do you want to come play for the Lakers?”
November 21st, 2020 at 3:17 PM ^
Bingo........franchise/teammates/ownership. And that is because the Lakers have the best track record of treating superstars well. Kobe Bryant over the hill his - no problem let's give 2yrs/50mill. Steve Nash over the hill - who cares let's trade for him and compensate him despite the fact that he has a bad back and won't play the season.
Additionally, the Lakers have superb scouting/draft department that is VERY undervalued. And THAT is a big reason the Lakers are able to fill out the roster with young guys that FAR outplay their contracts. A look at some of the Lakers recent picks in the last 5 years:
Alex Caruso/UDFA - 2.8 mill when nobody else wanted him
Kyle Kuzma - late first rd pick that Schmitz/DX literally laughed at, FAR outplayed his 2.8 mill contract
Josh Hart - late 1st rd pick that FAR outplayed his 3.5 mill salary
Larry Nance - late first rd pick that outplayed his contract and is now a solid rotational player in the league
Jordan Clarkson - second round pick that FAR outplayed his contract and is among the best bench guards in the world
So I think its disingenous to imply its a matter of asking Lebron "do you want to play here". The Lakers scouting dept. is absolutely elite and Magic/Pelinka did a tremendous job in putting the Lakers in position to have the cap space to obtain Lebron and have the tradeable assets to make a trade appealing to the Pelicans for AD.
Perception is a lot different than reality here IMO.
November 21st, 2020 at 3:38 PM ^
Do you think Kobe Bryant was leaving the Lakers at that point in his career if the Pistons had offered him a 2yr/60mil contract? What about paying more for Nash? The answer is hell no. Players have no interest in coming to Detroit at that stage in the career.
If you honestly think that teams like Detroit/Cleveland/Memphis/Sacramento/Indianapolis have the same opportunity to pull in big name free agents as Los Angeles/New York/Boston, we're just going to have to disagree. More goes into it than "draft well and have a good front office".
November 21st, 2020 at 3:54 PM ^
The fact that that there was no other market was exactly my point - over the hill Bryant/Nash and the Lakers STILL compensated them extremely well. That is a factor in why the Lakers have the type of success they enjoy. Treat superstars well, period. It sets the tone for future Free Agency.
Seems like a lifetime ago that Danny Ainge was considered the premier GM in the league. He treated Isaiah Thomas like shit and now he's a joke that the Celtic fanbase wants gone ASAP.
I never claimed some of the teams your reference above have the same opportunity in FA, but the gap isn't as large as some small market fans imply. I remember just 3-4 years ago small market fans mocking the Lakers FO for free-agent chasing because "those days are over, the Warriors model is the way to go with the luxury tax salary cap".
And it's not just about drafting, it's about adding key FA acquisitions that outperform contracts. Pelinka was mocked non-stopped for signing Dwight Howard and Rondo. Guess what, Rob was absolutely correct. Both of those guys were easily worth 10+ mill last year and the Lakers got both for pennies and Pelinka was the mastermind behind it all.
So yes, there is more to winning than drafting well, but having a good FO is a HUGE component.
November 21st, 2020 at 5:34 PM ^
My guy...The Lakers and Pistons are not equal. This isnt 1988 or 2004. Pistons HAVE to overpay for useful pieces, when LAL gets Howard for crumbs last year. LeBron recruits guys to play for less to get a ring. We have a broken Blake Griffin that couldn't take he, CP3, and Jordan to a title.
November 21st, 2020 at 5:56 PM ^
So I checked out of this thread because it was going nowhere. The reality is for most here, there is a Piston bias, and perhaps even more, a "it just isn't fair for small market teams" bias. So this will be my last comment on this thread.
You are absolutely right, this isn't 1988 or 2004...........David Stern literally vetoed a Chris Paul trade to LA because the Lakers were playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers and this was his way of essentially precluding the Lakers from winning 4-5 straight rings. The NBA tried to "level the playing field" with this and implementation of the luxury tax.
So while the Lakers could outspend the competition in 88 and 04, that's not the case any more.
The Lakers got Dwight Howard for crumbs, but why? Because NO OTHER team wanted him or offered him a contract. Same thing with Rondo. Rob Pelinka is simply a great evaluator of talent that fits his team needs.
It's not as simple as "the Lakers get whatever they want just because", and that line of thinking is simply outdated and not realistic. I laid out all the value signings and key FA acquisitions above. If you don't agree, I respect that.
November 21st, 2020 at 6:11 PM ^
Because CP to the Lakers was blatent tampering.
November 21st, 2020 at 6:21 PM ^
"They don't get who they want..." they signed Harell from the Clips to do the same job he already had.
November 21st, 2020 at 7:03 PM ^
Nobody's saying different. But the Lakers a.d Pistons are in different modes. Pistons would have taken Lamelo or Killian Hayes. Lakers would have taken Haliburton.
November 21st, 2020 at 5:53 PM ^
Matt - I love your Player evals and takes, but you sound deranged here. Love ya, but you’re making no sense whatsoever
November 21st, 2020 at 6:00 PM ^
Just don't know how much more objective I can get than laying out the draft picks and FA signings that were clearly great moves that no other team would fathom.
But I understand the bias, so it's sort of pointless to debate from that standpoint. The response from small market fans will always be "Yeah, but they're the Lakers". And my response will always be look at the recent draft picks/FA acquisitions. Hard to refute the Lakers FO has been anything but great in the last 5 years. Also hard to refute the desirability of being a Laker. But there's MUCH more to it and some just don't want to admit it because that's the easy way out.
November 21st, 2020 at 6:17 PM ^
Bruh.... You were a dead franchise until Lebron signed there and forced out their future. Ingram, Russell, Lonzo. Then he punted a season so he could assemble a super team. AD deaerves better than being second fiddle to Shark Tank James. Your credibility is waning.
November 21st, 2020 at 6:25 PM ^
Clips or Warriors can't pull FA? Paul George or Kevin Durant ring any bells?
November 21st, 2020 at 4:01 PM ^
You're suggesting that, if both the Pistons and the Lakers have similar rosters and cap numbers, they both have equal prospects? Um, no. LA is destination no matter what. The Lakers are the Lakers. They're in a primo location in terms of weather, media exposure, marketing opportunities, real estate, nightlife, etc. Everyone wants to play for them. Detroit, if you haven't noticed, is not FA-bait. Unless it's a contender.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:25 PM ^
The thing is that contenders are willing to give up picks and young assets for overpriced role players down the stretch for a playoff run. Almost every single contract on the Pistons roster will have value to teams trying to win. The Pistons can either take on inflated expiring contracts or gain picks/young assets in return.
If that doesn't work out, they will be moveable in two years to teams willing to offload assets to clear cap space for the coming off season.
In the meantime, the Pistons will suck (as intended) to stay in the lottery and let the younger guys develop.
If we are trying to look at this roster as if it's in its final state, of course it doesn't make sense because it so far from it right now. Griffin and Rose will be traded out before their contracts are up, and so will some of these guys they just signed.
November 21st, 2020 at 3:37 PM ^
Three years is not long term I mean we aren’t going to be good for three years and won’t have to pay rookies. We weren’t gonna be able to sign any star in next years FA anyway so cap space is whatever, although taking on salary dumps would have been nice. We trade him n Plumlee as expirings in two years and hope in the meantime Grant takes his value up by cranking up his usage on a bad team making him look better than he is like Lavine.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:20 PM ^
I don't know about the rest of the moves but I can vouch for Plumlee..... that dude can play, watched him with the Blazers.
November 21st, 2020 at 1:24 PM ^
Plumlee is solid. He doesn't hurt you anywhere, runs the court well, and is a good passer for a big man.
November 21st, 2020 at 3:44 PM ^
But he went to Duke, so booooo.
November 21st, 2020 at 5:41 PM ^
As did Okafor! Fuck Dook!