Very Good Question Sparma

[WTF]

for you,Wise and anyone else who might want to jump in.  No doubt Monroe has weaknesses.  I think where we differ is more in weighing the strengths against the weaknesses, rather than about whether Monroe's a defensive liability and whether he's got much of a mid-range shot.  I think Oracle made a great point recently about us accepting grave weaknesses in Detroit defensive stars, but evidently not the other way around.  We all know that Wallace and Rodman had severe limitations, yet they were beloved as Pistons, whereas Monroe is subject to ongoing criticism for his obvious weakness.  Note that I'm not putting Monroe's strengths at the same level as those two, but then his mid-range shooting isn't nearly as pitiful as Wallace's FT shooting.

Okay, here's the question, motivated in part by us having little sense of what might really be going on with Monroe, having little hard news to discuss.  In the summer of 2006, Wallace signed a 4 year, 15 mil a contract with Chicago.  If we could somehow transport the identical Wallace from that summer of 2006 to the present day, would you find Wallace, going on 32 (in September), or Monroe, just turned 24, more worthy of a 4 year, 60 mil contract?  

I'd rather sign Monroe to that deal, even though I think he's now a lesser player than Wallace was when he signed the Chicago deal.  And I love Wallace.  Part of my reason would be that I'd like Monroe's trade value better going forward.  Unavoidably, part of my reason is that I can't altogether bracket my knowledge of what Wallace did the next four years.  Part of my preferance -- controversy ahead -- is that I feel Monroe could well grow into a team leadership role, whereas Wallace -- the pivot of a championship team -- started showing some sourness.

I'd be curious what choice you might make, because it makes this ongoing discussion which is bereft of fresh facts more concrete.

I'm not sure if Wallace was worth 60M/4yr at the time Chicago offered it. I don't think we should have tried to match it or offer anything remotely close to it so Joe did right in not offering it. Clearly Big Ben was a pivotal piece but he didn't have an offensive impact to warrant the Pistons paying him that much.

I honestly don't think either Wallace or Monroe is worth it but I could make a better case to give it to Wallace before I could Monroe. Big Ben impacted and dominated the game with his defense and Monroe offense doesn't quite do that and that's what made Wallace and Rodman exceptions that we tolerated their lack of offense. If Monroe was putting up Kevin Love type numbers nightly then we could or would in all likelihood be more forgiving about his lack of defense.

[deusXango]

for you,Wise and anyone else who might want to jump in.  No doubt Monroe has weaknesses.  I think where we differ is more in weighing the strengths against the weaknesses, rather than about whether Monroe's a defensive liability and whether he's got much of a mid-range shot.  I think Oracle made a great point recently about us accepting grave weaknesses in Detroit defensive stars, but evidently not the other way around.  We all know that Wallace and Rodman had severe limitations, yet they were beloved as Pistons, whereas Monroe is subject to ongoing criticism for his obvious weakness.  Note that I'm not putting Monroe's strengths at the same level as those two, but then his mid-range shooting isn't nearly as pitiful as Wallace's FT shooting.

Okay, here's the question, motivated in part by us having little sense of what might really be going on with Monroe, having little hard news to discuss.  In the summer of 2006, Wallace signed a 4 year, 15 mil a contract with Chicago.  If we could somehow transport the identical Wallace from that summer of 2006 to the present day, would you find Wallace, going on 32 (in September), or Monroe, just turned 24, more worthy of a 4 year, 60 mil contract?  

I'd rather sign Monroe to that deal, even though I think he's now a lesser player than Wallace was when he signed the Chicago deal.  And I love Wallace.  Part of my reason would be that I'd like Monroe's trade value better going forward.  Unavoidably, part of my reason is that I can't altogether bracket my knowledge of what Wallace did the next four years.  Part of my preferance -- controversy ahead -- is that I feel Monroe could well grow into a team leadership role, whereas Wallace -- the pivot of a championship team -- started showing some sourness.

I'd be curious what choice you might make, because it makes this ongoing discussion which is bereft of fresh facts more concrete.

Sparma, my friend, I offer for your consideration that defense and team play wins championships and Monroe has demonstrated neither one of those qualities to any great extent. Heck, he's not even an offensive star! His career numbers don't scream offensive wizard to me, like apparently they do to some. We talk about Josh's lack of leadership often but, when was Monroe ever a leader before Smith got here? Just like there's no leadership shown, I haven't witnessed any real team play either. No, he shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Big Ben and the Worm.

For years Ben Wallace was the face of the organization and their biggest marketing tool, who labored for peanuts; he did things (without an offensive game) that Monroe can only dream of and, quite honestly, I wonder how long we're going to use the age argument to continuing tolerating his lackadaisical play....Wallace should never have been offered more by any team than the Pistons were willing to play! Look at the salary dumps Joe did in the name of "getting Ben's money together" only to low-ball him when his contract was up! IMHO Wallace, at age 32, would be a better deal than Monroe at 24; look at what Ben did for our defense when he returned to Detroit after that $60 million contract was up. Ben took pride in being a Piston; not a Bull or a Cavalier but, a Piston! Monroe is not sending those signals to me.

There's no guarantee that Monroe will have the value many think he will if we sign him to an outrageous contract; we think he's worth a max (I personally don't) but, it's obvious no team with the CAP space thinks/thought so. If he signs a one year contract with another team, regardless of the amount, it's a one year rental for us to match and that one year he'd be here would only serve to poison the waters of progress. He's a center and to play out of position as a starting PF, for the sake of starting, says he's not a team player, only a self-centered player with flawed skills; SVG can't coach his way past that. If this is not resolved in our favor, it's a shot in the foot.

[Sparma]

says: "however it is more like a comparison of lemons and limes." Alas, yes. You make good points. Of course, Falk/ Monroe want to get back to Monroe being a center (almost?) exclusively, what with his sad defensive numbers at PF. Also, context makes a big difference. If you made the comparison backwards in time, to 2006, I'd rather give Wallace that contract than Monroe, because of teammate fit. And I wouldn't really want to give either one of them that contract, unless context dictated it, as it arguably should have for Dumars negotiating with Wallace or as might happen if we need to choose to match.

Still, I'm glad you thought there was something valid about asking the question. I was trying to bring a fresh perspective to the now tired Monroe debate. Also, I was trying to counter the extreme downgrading of Monroe's (future) value that we sometimes hear. If there's some, admittedly contrived, scenario in which the much maligned Monroe carries more long term value than an all time Piston great at the edge of his prime, that's worth noting, or at least debating.

[Sebastian]

for you,Wise and anyone else who might want to jump in.  No doubt Monroe has weaknesses.  I think where we differ is more in weighing the strengths against the weaknesses, rather than about whether Monroe's a defensive liability and whether he's got much of a mid-range shot.  I think Oracle made a great point recently about us accepting grave weaknesses in Detroit defensive stars, but evidently not the other way around.  We all know that Wallace and Rodman had severe limitations, yet they were beloved as Pistons, whereas Monroe is subject to ongoing criticism for his obvious weakness.  Note that I'm not putting Monroe's strengths at the same level as those two, but then his mid-range shooting isn't nearly as pitiful as Wallace's FT shooting.

Okay, here's the question, motivated in part by us having little sense of what might really be going on with Monroe, having little hard news to discuss.  In the summer of 2006, Wallace signed a 4 year, 15 mil a contract with Chicago.  If we could somehow transport the identical Wallace from that summer of 2006 to the present day, would you find Wallace, going on 32 (in September), or Monroe, just turned 24, more worthy of a 4 year, 60 mil contract?  

I'd rather sign Monroe to that deal, even though I think he's now a lesser player than Wallace was when he signed the Chicago deal.  And I love Wallace.  Part of my reason would be that I'd like Monroe's trade value better going forward.  Unavoidably, part of my reason is that I can't altogether bracket my knowledge of what Wallace did the next four years.  Part of my preferance -- controversy ahead -- is that I feel Monroe could well grow into a team leadership role, whereas Wallace -- the pivot of a championship team -- started showing some sourness.

I'd be curious what choice you might make, because it makes this ongoing discussion which is bereft of fresh facts more concrete.

Sparma, your question is a good and valid question, however it is more like a comparison of lemons and limes. The two are fruits, as both Big Ben and Moose were and are basketball players, but where they differ is in their usage and taste.

Big Ben was a Center and was only used as a Center. He only guarded Centers and did all of his work in the paint with dignity and pride.

Moose on the other hand, or really on the same hand, is a Center, too, and he knows this and so does his agent, David Falk, but he is unfortunately required to play minutes as a PF. He can't guard PFs nor can he play as a PF, when on the offensive side of the floor.

So, yes lemons can enhance the flavor of seafood and ice tea, but you would never put a lemon in a cold glass of Corona.

Moose must be exchanged for a quality player or players that WE can use for the 2014-2015 season. My first choice would be Moose for Goran Dragic and T.J. Warren. But, I would settle for Jeff Green and Jared Sullinger if the Suns wouldn't come off Dragic and Warren.

[Sparma]

for you,Wise and anyone else who might want to jump in. No doubt Monroe has weaknesses. I think where we differ is more in weighing the strengths against the weaknesses, rather than about whether Monroe's a defensive liability and whether he's got much of a mid-range shot. I think Oracle made a great point recently about us accepting grave weaknesses in Detroit defensive stars, but evidently not the other way around. We all know that Wallace and Rodman had severe limitations, yet they were beloved as Pistons, whereas Monroe is subject to ongoing criticism for his obvious weakness. Note that I'm not putting Monroe's strengths at the same level as those two, but then his mid-range shooting isn't nearly as pitiful as Wallace's FT shooting.

Okay, here's the question, motivated in part by us having little sense of what might really be going on with Monroe, having little hard news to discuss. In the summer of 2006, Wallace signed a 4 year, 15 mil a contract with Chicago. If we could somehow transport the identical Wallace from that summer of 2006 to the present day, would you find Wallace, going on 32 (in September), or Monroe, just turned 24, more worthy of a 4 year, 60 mil contract?

I'd rather sign Monroe to that deal, even though I think he's now a lesser player than Wallace was when he signed the Chicago deal. And I love Wallace. Part of my reason would be that I'd like Monroe's trade value better going forward. Unavoidably, part of my reason is that I can't altogether bracket my knowledge of what Wallace did the next four years. Part of my preferance -- controversy ahead -- is that I feel Monroe could well grow into a team leadership role, whereas Wallace -- the pivot of a championship team -- started showing some sourness.

I'd be curious what choice you might make, because it makes this ongoing discussion which is bereft of fresh facts more concrete.

[WTF]

Not sure how to interpret the silence concerning Monroe, excepting Phoenix and Portland. I think there's something fishy about the whole RTA system, partly because there is/ should be strong interest in a 24 y.o. 16/9 big guy of high character, but it's not manifested. Probably also means his camp overvalues him. - Sparma

I'm sure the RTA leans towards teams and not the player but I don't think there's anything fishy going on with Moose. IMO other GM's and coaches are looking at a lot of the things that both myself and Don have brought up in our thousand of postings concerning Moose. No doubt his camp has overvalue him I think if a lot of these team could land him for 10M on a short deal they would all be over him but SVG threw that 60M/5yr on the table and teams are not going to match that offer.

Some GM's think Moose has already peaked offensively IMO I think he has as well, but then when you factor in all the other things like his defense and lack of a mid-range teams aren't that excited about that 16/9 and offering up max money. Don't get me wrong there are teams that could used Moose and where he could be a perfect fit (OKC, Portland, Atlanta) all come to mind but how do we get there?

[WTF]

People please get a life and move on beyond this non-issue. Nobody knows what happen on that elevator for all you dumbass know she could have knocked herself out. Obviously there was enough on the video the judge and prosecutor that no charges was required and the NFL 2 game suspension is more than enough.

People please get a life because Stephen A. Smith spoke the truth rather you liked it or not. Him saying that women need to stop putting themselves in certain position for potential domestic violence is correct. He's not advocating violence on women or saying that a man should hit a woman he's saying that dumb ass women need to stop provoking it. No this isn't always the case there are just abusive asses that hit women that are out there and they're cowards.

Imagine this assholes since we don't know what's on the tape maybe she attacked him and he pushed her away and she bumped her head and knocked herself out. All you asses need to take freakin chill pill.

[Sparma]

If Monroe ends up with a longterm max deal with us, that certainly could cause a problem in trying to move him in a trade. My sense is that it could be done. Our different valuing of Monroe makes a difference in how we see possible trades in the future, but you might be making a great point.

Not sure how to interpret the silence concerning Monroe, excepting Phoenix and Portland. I think there's something fishy about the whole RTA system, partly because there is/ should be strong interest in a 24 y.o. 16/9 big guy of high character, but it's not manifested. Probably also means his camp overvalues him. I think we'll have a better sense of how he's valued if he makes it to UFA next summer, with teams knowing that in advance and being able to spend early and without money being tied up for three days. I've become convinced he shouldn't be a max player, but if he makes it to unrestricted free agency in one piece, he'll get a ton of money.

Wise: "The reason why I'm so against the scenario of a long term deal is that we could end up speaking about that deal the same way some have viewed other signings in past if Monroe doesn't live up to it. Then we're stuck with a contract we can't move even with the projected cap space 2 seasons from now then we're stuck with him.

I hear the talking heads giving numerous reasoning why the inactivity of teams offering deals hang out there, but I think there is 2 that seem to get very little acknowledgement in discussions 1. He's not as valued as many thought and 2. He's not a perfect fit. If a player is truly highly valued, restricted or otherwise many team will make an offer in hopes that the Pistons don't match or be forced to work a sign and trade. To date no team has done so and I conclude this based on that nothing is ever kept secret so I don't believe Monroe has received much interest beyond the Portland and Phoenix rumored interest."

[WTF]

If it came to matching a max 1 year deal, I'm not sure the Pistons should match that.  But I'd feel fairly confident they would.  I do think they should match a long term max contract offer, or at least slightly lower 15 mil offer,  to Monroe, if that comes up, which likely goes against your position.  The long term contract would give them plenty of time to line up a fair trade or to see if things might work out in Detroit, especially once the cap goes up in a couple of years.  Matching a 1 year brings some serious disadvantages, I agree with you, along with some disadvantages.

David Mayo provides a good update at mlive, which I imagine you've seen.  It does get old, Wise, as you've said.  At the same time, it seems like I can't get enough about it.  A frustrating dual experience.

Mayo: "My best guess -- and I can't emphasize enough that this is merely a guess -- is the Pistons and Monroe reach terms on a contract that allows for termination after two seasons, before the 2016-17 television contract takes effect.

My second guess (but not by much, sort of Guess 1-A) is there's a sign and trade.

Third guess, Monroe signs the qualifying offer. Fourth guess, the Pistons sign Monroe to a long-term contract that binds both parties in 2016-17. I really don't think Monroe wants either one of those last two, unless the latter involves maximum terms. But they aren't out of the realm of possibility.

Fifth guess, Monroe actually signs an offer sheet and brings it to the Pistons to match.

With all that said, if you're Monroe and you're convinced the money is out there, which it probably is, and you really want out of Detroit at the earliest possibility, but you also want control over where you go next, then you have to push for a sign and trade or else sign the qualifying offer, in that order. If you sign a multi-year contract with the Pistons, you do so knowing that you may not serve it all and could be traded before it expires. And you've lost control of your next destination."

The reason why I'm so against the scenario of a long term deal is that we could end up speaking about that deal the same way some have viewed other signings in past if Monroe doesn't live up to it. Then we're stuck with a contract we can't move even with the projected cap space 2 seasons from now then we're stuck with him.

I hear the talking heads giving numerous reasoning why the inactivity of teams offering deals hang out there, but I think there is 2 that seem to get very little acknowledgement in discussions 1. He's not as valued as many thought and 2. He's not a perfect fit. If a player is truly highly valued, restricted or otherwise many team will make an offer in hopes that the Pistons don't match or be forced to work a sign and trade. To date no team has done so and I conclude this based on that nothing is ever kept secret so I don't believe Monroe has received much interest beyond the Portland and Phoenix rumored interest.

[Sparma]

If it came to matching a max 1 year deal, I'm not sure the Pistons should match that. But I'd feel fairly confident they would. I do think they should match a long term max contract offer, or at least slightly lower 15 mil offer, to Monroe, if that comes up, which likely goes against your position. The long term contract would give them plenty of time to line up a fair trade or to see if things might work out in Detroit, especially once the cap goes up in a couple of years. Matching a 1 year brings some serious disadvantages, I agree with you, along with some disadvantages.

David Mayo provides a good update at mlive, which I imagine you've seen. It does get old, Wise, as you've said. At the same time, it seems like I can't get enough about it. A frustrating dual experience.

Mayo: "My best guess -- and I can't emphasize enough that this is merely a guess -- is the Pistons and Monroe reach terms on a contract that allows for termination after two seasons, before the 2016-17 television contract takes effect.

My second guess (but not by much, sort of Guess 1-A) is there's a sign and trade.

Third guess, Monroe signs the qualifying offer. Fourth guess, the Pistons sign Monroe to a long-term contract that binds both parties in 2016-17. I really don't think Monroe wants either one of those last two, unless the latter involves maximum terms. But they aren't out of the realm of possibility.

Fifth guess, Monroe actually signs an offer sheet and brings it to the Pistons to match.

With all that said, if you're Monroe and you're convinced the money is out there, which it probably is, and you really want out of Detroit at the earliest possibility, but you also want control over where you go next, then you have to push for a sign and trade or else sign the qualifying offer, in that order. If you sign a multi-year contract with the Pistons, you do so knowing that you may not serve it all and could be traded before it expires. And you've lost control of your next destination."

[WTF]

Would signing a one year deal other than the q.o. mean that Monroe would not be an unrestricted free agent next summer?  No, not if Dan Feldman's right, in his PP column at the freep.  This issue came up in discussing the possibility of a one year max contract for Monroe, which I raised as a strategy to contemplate.  For whatever reason, that doesn't look like a a strategy teams adopt.  But that's not because the possibility is rendered moot by some regulation that delays unrestricted free agency if Monroe were to sign a one year deal other than the q.o.  I do agree with Feldman that the Pistons would match even a max offer, but I think there would be some serious questions for the Pistons (should you pay an unhappy guy the max when he's about to leave, while you could avail yourself of the 10 mil cap hold straightaway if he left, without a year of major media distraction) that would justify a rival team (Phoenix?) trying the strategy of offering the max deal for a year, hoping that Monroe would sign a reasonable longterm deal starting next summer.  If Phoenix did it and got Monroe, there'd be the added benefit of finding out whether Monroe fit their up tempo system, a concern that's been raised.  If Phoenix thought they could arrange a favorable sign-and-trade, they should delay on making such a 1 y. max offer until that the sign-and-trade prospect vanished, given the likelihood that Detroit would match.  Still, at some point, for some team, with some player, there doesn't seem to be much of a downside to trying such a strategy, apart from the collective anger by most other teams it would evoke for threatening the oridinary way of conducting RTA business, which is generally favorable to teams rather.  It doesn't look to be in the offing, so there's not much point discussing it, other than as a theoretical possibility.

Feldman writes: "Monroe shouldn’t actually sign the qualifying offer, though. He easily could find a team to sign him for one year and $6 million — probably more. If he really wants to go the one-year route and become an unrestricted free agent in 2015, he shouldn’t settle for just the $5,479,934 salary. The Pistons should, and I think would, match any such offer, making the result similar to a qualifying offer — just with a higher salary for Monroe."

But why should they match it? If Moose signs such an offer it's a clearer indication he doesn't want to be here. IMO the Pistons should be openly active in trying to get a sign and trade done and I would hope that's what SVG is doing instead of sitting on his hands waiting for Monroe to make a decision on rather he should sign the 60M/5yr deal they proposed. SVG needs to pull that deal from the table if for no other reason than to limit Monroe's option and force them back to negotiating a new deal.

SVG needs to face it there's no happy outcome to this unless a sign and trade is done period and the Pistons keep playing this waiting game chances are they'll likely end up settling for far less then they think. No way they should have let Portland walk away from a sign and trade when they were willing to give up Batum.

[Sparma]

Would signing a one year deal other than the q.o. mean that Monroe would not be an unrestricted free agent next summer?  No, not if Dan Feldman's right, in his PP column at the freep.  This issue came up in discussing the possibility of a one year max contract for Monroe, which I raised as a strategy to contemplate.  For whatever reason, that doesn't look like a a strategy teams adopt.  But that's not because the possibility is rendered moot by some regulation that delays unrestricted free agency if Monroe were to sign a one year deal other than the q.o.  I do agree with Feldman that the Pistons would match even a max offer, but I think there would be some serious questions for the Pistons (should you pay an unhappy guy the max when he's about to leave, while you could avail yourself of the 10 mil cap hold straightaway if he left, without a year of major media distraction) that would justify a rival team (Phoenix?) trying the strategy of offering the max deal for a year, hoping that Monroe would sign a reasonable longterm deal starting next summer.  If Phoenix did it and got Monroe, there'd be the added benefit of finding out whether Monroe fit their up tempo system, a concern that's been raised. If Phoenix thought they could arrange a favorable sign-and-trade, they should delay on making such a 1 y. max offer until that the sign-and-trade prospect vanished, given the likelihood that Detroit would match. Still, at some point, for some team, with some player, there doesn't seem to be much of a downside to trying such a strategy, apart from the collective anger by most other teams it would evoke for threatening the oridinary way of conducting RTA business, which is generally favorable to teams rather. It doesn't look to be in the offing, so there's not much point discussing it, other than as a theoretical possibility.

Feldman writes: "Monroe shouldn’t actually sign the qualifying offer, though. He easily could find a team to sign him for one year and $6 million — probably more. If he really wants to go the one-year route and become an unrestricted free agent in 2015, he shouldn’t settle for just the $5,479,934 salary. The Pistons should, and I think would, match any such offer, making the result similar to a qualifying offer — just with a higher salary for Monroe."

[WTF]

Message: Sour Pee Boy stop hating!  As we said before for every miss jump shot you post the Josh Smith Fan Club can post 30 good plays to your posted propaganda and false claims.  We at the Josh Smith Fan Club are sure you along with others enjoyed the provided video and made you ask this question "Do we really need Moose?"

BTW in that same game clip you posted I think Josh finished with something like 25pt, 8rebs, 5ast, 4blks, and a couple of stl. Josh had quite a few games like this last season   

Sour Pee Boy your application into the Josh Smith Fan Club is denied!

But, Wise have you heard the opinions (in favor or Phillip) on the Detroit Bad Boys podcast (Sean Corp and Matt Watson) - http://www.detroitbadboys.com/2014/7/24/5933933/josh-smith-trade-rumors-kings-stan-van-gundy.

For the record, I disagree with these bozos about Josh Smith.

Sebastian I rarely pay real attention to a lot of the things they criticize Josh on because the first thing they want to jump on is his 3pt shooting a lot of it was the result of being in a bad system and playing out of position. They really have nothing else beyond complaining about that and no one really touted Josh to be a great 3pt shooter to begin with. He sucks at it!

All these Pistons rag suck with the exception of Mlive because they're the only ones that look at Josh beyond one season, all these other rags are the same clowns that think the Pistons should be giving Monroe a Max Contract to play out of position. My guess is that SVG already got this figured out which ways he will use Josh and I doubt if he will be jacking up 3's this coming season and in fact I think Josh makes his first All-Star this season.

[Sebastian]

Message: Sour Pee Boy stop hating!  As we said before for every miss jump shot you post the Josh Smith Fan Club can post 30 good plays to your posted propaganda and false claims.  We at the Josh Smith Fan Club are sure you along with others enjoyed the provided video and made you ask this question "Do we really need Moose?"

BTW in that same game clip you posted I think Josh finished with something like 25pt, 8rebs, 5ast, 4blks, and a couple of stl. Josh had quite a few games like this last season   

Sour Pee Boy your application into the Josh Smith Fan Club is denied!

But, Wise have you heard the opinions (in favor or Phillip) on the Detroit Bad Boys podcast (Sean Corp and Matt Watson) - http://www.detroitbadboys.com/2014/7/24/5933933/josh-smith-trade-rumors-kings-stan-van-gundy.

For the record, I disagree with these bozos about Josh Smith.

[WTF]

Message: Sour Pee Boy stop hating! As we said before for every miss jump shot you post the Josh Smith Fan Club can post 30 good plays to your posted propaganda and false claims. We at the Josh Smith Fan Club are sure you along with others enjoyed the provided video and made you ask this question "Do we really need Moose?"

BTW in that same game clip you posted I think Josh finished with something like 25pt, 8rebs, 5ast, 4blks, and a couple of stl. Josh had quite a few games like this last season   

Sour Pee Boy your application into the Josh Smith Fan Club is denied!

[Phil-Good]

I just stop in to see what the real Pistons fans are talking about to day and all I see is Sour Cynic and this new Josh Smith fan club he starting up.



Anybody want to sign up for the dumb boys club hit Sour Cynic up. He goes by the Un-Wise-One.    

[Sparma]

I'd put Ben in my top five players over Dumars, in agreement with Merc, but if the task is to build a conventional starting five, I can't start him (over Lanier, Rodman).  Not sure Ben cracks the best five ever if Bing's starting as second guard.  Interesting point that Rip may deserve a spot over Dumars, Wise.  I like Dumars better defensively and probably also as passer.  Interesting choice of 6th man with Bellamy, Merc.  By ranking, Ben would need to be my 6th man.  If I were really trying to build a team, I'd put in Sheed as my frontcourt back up man, although his Piston numbers probably don't justify such a high status.  Drummond's the only current Piston who might justify consideration someday.  If I were building a 15 man roster of all time Pistons, I'd already want him on.

Think we all could come up with a different best five M-Live didn't provide a gauge to make the termination.  Zeke seems to be the only automatic selection on any list but I guess after that it's a preference.  

I could include Laimbeer over Big Ben and Lanier, and when I think about SF Tripucka wasn't a slouch so who you choose Hill, Tripucka, Rodman, Prince?  As short lived as it was with Houston, is it Rip, Dumars, Long or Houston?  Man I use to love Terry Tyler so maybe they should have said your favorite five instead of best.   If it's favorite PG Zeke, SG Houston, SF Tyler, F Rodman, C Laimbeer.

I kind of lost all love for Lanier once he became a Buck,  Tyler was like Rodman before there was a Rodman,  Rip had better stats than any SG we had including Dumars,.  Kelly shot lights out, Grant was a triple double waiting to happen and Rodman was Rodman.

[WTF]

If his foot is completely heal and he can be productive why not but the Bucks can keep Mayo and include Pachulia and a 1st round pick and they can have Monroe. Then we can proceed to starting Andre and Josh with two very serviceable backups at PF and C.

But I really don't think the Bucks would want/need Monroe when they already have Henson, Sanders

[WTF]

Think we all could come up with a different best five M-Live didn't provide a gauge to make the termination. Zeke seems to be the only automatic selection on any list but I guess after that it's a preference.

I could include Laimbeer over Big Ben and Lanier, and when I think about SF Tripucka wasn't a slouch so who you choose Hill, Tripucka, Rodman, Prince? As short lived as it was with Houston, is it Rip, Dumars, Long or Houston? Man I use to love Terry Tyler so maybe they should have said your favorite five instead of best. If it's favorite PG Zeke, SG Houston, SF Tyler, F Rodman, C Laimbeer.

I kind of lost all love for Lanier once he became a Buck, Tyler was like Rodman before there was a Rodman, Rip had better stats than any SG we had including Dumars,. Kelly shot lights out, Grant was a triple double waiting to happen and Rodman was Rodman.

[Oracle]

Tough choices, but Big Ben has to be in that top 5, and even if picking by position, it's a tough task... I PUNT   

On to easier stuff... the flopping DWade gets called out by a kid!!

[merc]

MLive asked about the 5 best Piston starters ever (rather than simply the best five without regard to position).  I'd go Lanier, Rodman, Hill, Bing, Thomas.  Back in the day, they didn't break guards down into PGs and SGs as we do now, but if Bing were to count only as PG, I'd need to move him behind Thomas, making my starting five: Lanier, Rodman, Hill, Dumars, and Thomas.

Sparma, It's hard to argue with your choices... I might be inclined to swap Dumars with Ben... sixth man = Walt Bellamy.

[Sparma]

MLive asked about the 5 best Piston starters ever (rather than simply the best five without regard to position). I'd go Lanier, Rodman, Hill, Bing, Thomas. Back in the day, they didn't break guards down into PGs and SGs as we do now, but if Bing were to count only as PG, I'd need to move him behind Thomas, making my starting five: Lanier, Rodman, Hill, Dumars, and Thomas.

[Sebastian]

Pistons Pals: Have you'll recently visited the PistonsPowered.com website? They've changed their server and are now with Fansided, who I believe is a subsidiary to Sports Illustrated (SI.com).

Can I say that I just hate this new presentation/broadcast? It is a whole lot of nothing; too damn much crap, with a lot of old articles dressed up with photos. Yes, lipstick on a pig is what it is.

[Oracle]

Vincent Goodwill  
Follow
RT @GwashburnGlobe: NBA source tells Globe that Ray Allen is leaning toward returning for 19th season and joining LeBron with #cavaliers

[Oracle]

This was interesting,

A little-known clause of the collective bargaining agreement gives any team that matches an offer sheet — Phoenix in this Bledsoe scenario — two days beyond that 72-hour window to administer the player in question a physical. The amount of the offer sheet stays on the rival team’s books during those two days, meaning a team in Phoenix’s position could lock a rival out of free agency for longer than 72 hours.

Full article: NBA salary cap change hurts Eric Bledsoe’s free agency

[Sponsored content]