WTF

[lemonpen]

"This is why tanking the past 2 or 3 seasons made since, this why a total rebuild is necessary.   I know I get killed for my old school traditional thinking but it work and it was successful.  I just think we need to stop looking at whatever trending and all the latest catch phrases." - Wise

Clearly my comment states we should have tanked the previous 2 or 3 seasons but I also stated this is why a current rebuild is necessary now all in that one sentence.  You grab that one word as if I'm saying tanking is viable moving forward.

For the record I don't want this team to tank what I want is a massive rebuilding period.  The Plan IMO should be to look for all options of moving all three players as I've stated for preferably picks and younger talent if possible and then proceed to coach them up properly.

There's not going to be any major changes with how these 3 players (BG, RJ, and AD) approach games they are all set in their ways and cemented in their bad habits.  Like someone stated that window is 2 years and I honestly don't think it's one poster here that think contending is possible yet alone winning a NBA Title.   Why on earth would you wait 2 years to do what you going to do anyway.

Oracle as far as patience goes how's 15 years and counting since this team raised a banner.  If projecting it be another 20 year before another title is likely then make that 35 years.   Since 2009 we all have watched this team screw up 5 or 6 lottery picks  by either trading away the pick, or trading away the players drafted.  Our strong wing is playing for the Bucks right now (Middleton) our starting PG was balling out in Brooklyn.   Blunder after blunder under 2 different but not so different regimes.  

Now I know everyone think what the FO plan is, but a lot of it is guessing what the FO is thinking.  My guess is that it's not about putting a contender of the floor.  Trading for BG really what was that truly all about? Was it about winning or having a box office show piece?   Analytics vs Eye Test, eye test say this team would have been just as good had we kept Harris, slightly better if we still had Morris and Dinwiddie.  Analytics say this is a bunch of BS...……..

The plan is simple and that plan is out with the old and bring the new then turn it into something worthwhile by teaching it developing and coaching it the way you should.  

I'm sure this will get twisted as well

What you describe as a "massive rebuild" IS the definition of tanking. It is pretty much what Philly did.

Trade everyone of value for 1st round picks and expiring contracts, even if the picks are 2-4 yrs out. The rest takes care of itself because the remaining roster is so poor it couldn't win 25 games, opening the door for internally generated high lottery picks. Employ low budget free agents assuring you remain awful, continuing the string of high picks. Understand that Philly absolutely sucked for 4 years while sifting though failed lottery selection after failed selection.

As a paying fan I can't imagine staying with them through that kind of crap. Selfishly speaking of course.

[WTF]

"This is why tanking the past 2 or 3 seasons made since, this why a total rebuild is necessary.   I know I get killed for my old school traditional thinking but it work and it was successful.  I just think we need to stop looking at whatever trending and all the latest catch phrases." - Wise

Clearly my comment states we should have tanked the previous 2 or 3 seasons but I also stated this is why a current rebuild is necessary now all in that one sentence.  You grab that one word as if I'm saying tanking is viable moving forward.

For the record I don't want this team to tank what I want is a massive rebuilding period.  The Plan IMO should be to look for all options of moving all three players as I've stated for preferably picks and younger talent if possible and then proceed to coach them up properly.

There's not going to be any major changes with how these 3 players (BG, RJ, and AD) approach games they are all set in their ways and cemented in their bad habits.  Like someone stated that window is 2 years and I honestly don't think it's one poster here that think contending is possible yet alone winning a NBA Title.   Why on earth would you wait 2 years to do what you going to do anyway.

Oracle as far as patience goes how's 15 years and counting since this team raised a banner.  If projecting it be another 20 year before another title is likely then make that 35 years.   Since 2009 we all have watched this team screw up 5 or 6 lottery picks  by either trading away the pick, or trading away the players drafted.  Our strong wing is playing for the Bucks right now (Middleton) our starting PG was balling out in Brooklyn.   Blunder after blunder under 2 different but not so different regimes.  

Now I know everyone think what the FO plan is, but a lot of it is guessing what the FO is thinking.  My guess is that it's not about putting a contender of the floor.  Trading for BG really what was that truly all about? Was it about winning or having a box office show piece?   Analytics vs Eye Test, eye test say this team would have been just as good had we kept Harris, slightly better if we still had Morris and Dinwiddie.  Analytics say this is a bunch of BS...……..

The plan is simple and that plan is out with the old and bring the new then turn it into something worthwhile by teaching it developing and coaching it the way you should.  

I'm sure this will get twisted as well

[lemonpen]

Plans don't matter one iota if they aren't building on top of this seasons goal.  The boss put it out there.   "Make the Playoffs".   Casey / Stephanski delivered.  Mission accomplished.  The first stake is now firmly planted.

A peek backward reminds how our former leadership team did the same thing, or believed they had, then came  slippage.  Bu-bye.  If this leadership team is worth its salt they will take note and NOT repeat the same mistakes.  

My Plan:
Going forward, every decision better be grounded in seeking incremental playoff improvement.  There is a lot of room for that.  As @Ballin mentioned, our roster is chocked full of shrinking violets.  Spruce them up then sell um off, something Gores specializes in.

The new rookie class ought to be fellas who were counted on by their teams, then delivered in conference tournaments and The Big Dance.  Two way players who are used to stepping up.

Find one FA in a position of need who stood tall in the playoffs.  Doesn't have to be a star, just accountable.

We're toast without internal growth.  Turn summer vacation into boot camp for Brown, Maker, Svi, & Kyri.  Try and instill a strong work ethic into this class of youngsters.  We surely failed the last group.

Concentrate on specific items with Kennard.  Ball handling, footwork, strength.  The kid is a special talent. Shore up some weaknesses, but make sure to help boost his strong suit.  His scoring will be needed on a more consistent basis.

Offer Drummond an opportunity to stick around by demonstrating improvment two areas.  Free throw shooting (alone in a gym) >75%, and put the finishing touches on his righty/lefty jump miss shot, er I mean jump hook shot.  He ought to knock down 80% against minor stiff resistance from a trainer.

[Murph]

Man...talk about maintaining the status quo.  Signing Derrick Rose to replace Ish Smith as Reggie's backup is pretty close to declaring complete satisfaction with the current roster and rotations.  Signing Rose represents a effort to improve the team at the very outward margin.

With Rose, we are not getting younger, much bigger, or better defensively.  We might get slightly better offensively in terms of shooting.  Rose is also very, very injury prone.

Just the fact that the Pistons would consider Rose is an indication of satisfaction with the current make-up of the team by the front office and owner, and indicates that no re-build will be forthcoming this summer.

[BallinD]

@Sparma. In showing a measured - - and risky - - approach at the deadline, the FO inspired confidence and you’re right, Stefanski may be the independent consigliere necessary to restore Deeeeetroit Basketball, or is that more likely the homer in me. Probably a little of both.

Those of us who remember Going To Work and even Bad Boys can dream.

I dream that he will be bold, others dream he will be prudent. I suppose Gores dreams of running onto the court and getting all sweaty with his boys as he wearies himself blathering about how “Great” they are.

[Sparma]

Much will be revealed, for sure.

For me, Ed Stefanski's the wild card (unlike SVG, Bower, or Casey). Of course, he needs to do Gores's bidding, but he also seems to have a strong commonsensical or pragmatic bent that may lead in directions not in lockstep with our shirt shooter. I've got some hope there, but if he gives up #15 for a mediocre return I'll be disappointed.

@Sparma, @Oracle I like the plans, and believe the FO has one as well.  The key for them IMHO is also to identify a specific identity for the team  as well organizational goal and milestones that will signal progress or the lack thereof.  

As for the identity, do they piggyback what we like to cite as Pistons tradition fueled by Pistons DNA, or strike a new direction.  Of course that is tied to the type and quality of personnel but which comes first the chicken or the egg.  With Point Blake that question is different than if our best player is a SF or PG.  

I think Gores would be happy to have the 8th seed for the next few years so he could toss T-shirts into the crowd and celebrate the success.  That is a problem cause the short window won’t allow for dawdling.

From here we have the draft on tap and Free agency and summer league.  The answers will be forthcoming...

[cool breeze]

As our Piston team is basically a joke compared to real playoff teams, maybe I shouldn't mention basic things that good coaches manage to do to get that extra edge. Kerr has some exceptionally talented ball handlers. Yet because he preached passing a sharing the basketball brings big rewards. Watching the Warriors in playoff situations you see that they are only focused on winning. While it might appear that they show off with their outside shooting, what they are doing is setting themselves up for getting easy baskets close to the hoop. They extend the defense and then every player is looking for the open teammate knows that if he gets open the ball will come his way. That doesn't happen with the Pistons. Players will dribble the length of the court to show off hoping to get a dunk. Usually they don't score and turn the ball over. Casey has not made any headway in getting the Pistons players to play the right way. That is why I am not happy with his effect. He is a players coach who allows his high contract players to play their way. When they make a huge mistake he turns his head the other way. We need a real coach who will show that he is in charge.

[BallinD]

@Sparma, @Oracle I like the plans, and believe the FO has one as well. The key for them IMHO is also to identify a specific identity for the team as well organizational goal and milestones that will signal progress or the lack thereof.

As for the identity, do they piggyback what we like to cite as Pistons tradition fueled by Pistons DNA, or strike a new direction. Of course that is tied to the type and quality of personnel but which comes first the chicken or the egg. With Point Blake that question is different than if our best player is a SF or PG.

I think Gores would be happy to have the 8th seed for the next few years so he could toss T-shirts into the crowd and celebrate the success. That is a problem cause the short window won’t allow for dawdling.

From here we have the draft on tap and Free agency and summer league. The answers will be forthcoming...

[Sparma]

Thanks for that, Oracle.

One clarification: it's with rookie contracts (as well as some vets and players coming off of injury) that I think you find a lot of performance above contracts, not necessarily with rookies per se. For instance, if Stanley had shown the progression in shooting that many have, he would have been outperforming his deal this past year.

We've already headed in the direction of specialization (eg Casey will sometime's swap out D for O on free throws, which makes sense to me), I'd just want to accelerate the process hoping to exploit an advantage (the only one?) over against teams very heavily invested in a few star players.

It's interesting that you've now resisted the cross-sports comparison a number of times, eg, in deflecting the importance of the tanking results in MLB. That experience strikes me as eminently relevant as a management strategy. If anything, I'm surprised that tanking worked as well as it has in MLB with two champions, as I would have expected it to work better in the NBA (at least when Philly first tried it). In the NBA, one transcendent talent can make all the difference, as Kareem and LeBron did. In baseball, there are many more far more moving parts, so that even the arrival of generational talent Mike Trout hasn't moved the needle much with the Angels. If a team drafted the greatest player of his generation in basketball (as Trout is in baseball), that would make a big difference, and probably at once as we saw with Kareem and LeBron. Hitting on one (healthy) Embiid (not nearly on par with those two) is likely to make a big difference to an NBA team. For me the lesson would be that if it worked in baseball (and's about to work in the NFL) it's yet more likely to work in the NBA (at least prior to anti-tanking rules and too many teams trying the same approach). The cross sports comparison strikes me as quite significant, even if some translation to the other sport is necessary.

I outlined my plan too, but to clarify it a bit, and make it really simple...

1. Keep players that maximize your projected window. Realistically, the Pistons need to be very competitive in 2-3 years.
2. We need stars or picks... PERIOD! That means that we stop talking about moving Blake or Drummond, our two best opportunities to get one of those, unless we can get either another star or a first round pick. Creativity here involves finding a bottom feeder that either has a potential star or is willing to give up a pick(s).
3. While we're looking for the picks or stars, find the best role players available because you're going to need them with any star to win games.

That's it, if they follow that, the rest takes care of itself because I have confidence in Casey playing youngsters more or less depending on the mission parameters. He's not perfect because I thought he missed an opportunity to play both Thomas & Svi, when they clearly fit major weaknesses we had, but perfection is something I hope for, but don't expect.

As the old saying goes: "Every hen thinks she's laid the best eggs" 

Note: Sparma, other sports don't compare well with basketball. In basketball, rookies rarely are able to contribute immediately. In other sports they can and do contribute from day 1, and that makes comparison very difficult.

[Oracle]

I outlined my plan too, but to clarify it a bit, and make it really simple...

1. Keep players that maximize your projected window. Realistically, the Pistons need to be very competitive in 2-3 years.
2. We need stars or picks... PERIOD! That means that we stop talking about moving Blake or Drummond, our two best opportunities to get one of those, unless we can get either another star or a first round pick. Creativity here involves finding a bottom feeder that either has a potential star or is willing to give up a pick(s).
3. While we're looking for the picks or stars, find the best role players available because you're going to need them with any star to win games.

That's it, if they follow that, the rest takes care of itself because I have confidence in Casey playing youngsters more or less depending on the mission parameters. He's not perfect because I thought he missed an opportunity to play both Thomas & Svi, when they clearly fit major weaknesses we had, but perfection is something I hope for, but don't expect.

As the old saying goes: "Every hen thinks she's laid the best eggs" 

Note: Sparma, other sports don't compare well with basketball. In basketball, rookies rarely are able to contribute immediately. In other sports they can and do contribute from day 1, and that makes comparison very difficult.

[Sparma]

In a nutshell, my plan's what I wrote, cited below, but I'll provide some elaboration.

First, I'd be happy to have a player's coach like Casey, but I'd try to hire as assistant the guy Phoenix just fired, hoping to be ahead of the strategic curve (like Toronto with Nurse as second) [I think BallinD mentioned this.]

Secondly, you need to find value in contracts or in what's given up in trade (bearing in mind that the max sets an artificial ceiling and can be a good deal). Clearly, Leuer and Galloway weren't the way to go, and I doubt that Rose would be now that he's had a really good season and will be paid. We did make out like bandits in the Phoenix deal for Morris and Bullock. Maybe a trade for Hayward could be had for good value. Maybe NO will look to deconstruct if Davis is traded this summer, and there will be good value there.

Thirdly, there are restrictions on pay, but not on scouting and coaching. I'd invest heavily there. Connecting this with the previous points, I would have given heavy minutes to Thomas and Svi this past season. Heavy scouting should result on find a really serviceable back up C on the cheap overseas, as others have done. And much as I've liked Calderon, surely a better young 3rd PG would have been available last year and, if not, a better vet PG on a minimum deal.

Fourthly, Gores seems to have gathered folks who agree with his outlook (SVG & Gores) of gain without pain. I'd pay heavily for a cutting edge team builder, as Houston did years ago in hiring Morey.

Fifthly, with genuine experts on hand I'd take a very hard look at the ceiling (low, I think) of the existing roster. Contra Gores, I believe such a deliberation would result in the conclusion that drastic changes are needed if there's to be dramatic improvement.

Sixthly, I'd look serious at trading Griffin, if a good return can be had. No one would be off limits, certainly not Drummond.

Seventh, knowing that it's difficult to compete to get the best players for the dominant strategy of the day (3 point heavy), I'd look for a niche with an alternative strategy as San Antonio has done in shooting long 2s.

Eighth, I'd want us to be creative with in game strategies. As I've argued before, I think NFL specialization and quick switching provides a model for something that would be innovative in the NBA. When we had Boban, maybe I'd play him heavily one game (vs Howard) but very little the next (vs Lopez). Transitioning from game to game depending on match ups would need to be part of it.

Ninth, I'd play the full roster, also giving guys who sit out one game a chance the next game if it made sense (taking a lead from the New England Patriots). That just make sense financially. If Thomas is lighting it up in the G league, and you need shooting, you've got to get him in there, without just saying the team likes him moving forward. Further, it may be your one chance to match up against superteams. GS has an incredible top 4 (or 5 when they had Cousins)? Ok, but then they shouldn't be able to match the Pistons 6-12 (even though vets sometimes sign weird deals to be on winners). There's a structural compensation for teams like us if you've got value contracts from 1-15 (granted there will be mistakes). With a market like ours, you've got to be able to counter star laden roster (with multiple max contracts) with a deep roster. If you've got a star who can play up to his contract, go for it, but I'm thinking all that money into the top 3 is preventing the very depth that may be your only means to truly compete.

Tenth, looking for value, I'd want to sign a transcendent star who might come along for a long term deal, BUT I'd aim for short deals for potentially valuable vets, for instance, by not luring Rose here above others by giving him that last 3 year contract.

I'd like to think that's a fairly realistic plan, actionable, IF there's the will to try to be creative while aiming high in taking some risks (like being willing to trade the face of your franchise). Also, I'd think there'd be some excitement if the Pistons were known as an innovative, realistic, organization willing to take measured risks given the current NBA landscape.

Sparma: "For me, the way to go, if you don't luck into that transcendent star, is to find value, from top to bottom on the roster, to play very deep, and in a versatile way, allowing you to compensate for the competitive advantages of other teams. Ordinarily, that value is chiefly found in players on rookie contracts or in older players (eg Rose as by Minnesota, but probably not the more expensive Rose who would come to us) or in players coming off of injury like Demarcus Cousins. Sometimes, a player on a big contract can be acquired for less player value in return due to injury and/or circumstances as might be the case with Gordon Hayward. That approach isn't really tanking then, but it would involve a deep rebuild, in part because only our young guys have a chance to outperform their contract (even if Dre's max is about right, currently).

The Tampa Rays might exemplify the relentless search for value, paired with the willingness to try radical new strategies, that I think the Pistons should emulate."

I don't think I equated or measure tanking into winning a championship in fact I don't think I initiated the word tanking into the conversation(you've been saying it for years, and there's nothing wrong with tanking, it's just slow if it's your ONLY strategy, like Philly until recently).  I said trade BG, AD, and start from scratch and I still strongly advocate such an idea.  

As I stated in my original posting that this team is 20 years out before it win another championship and that a massive immediate rebuild should be the path the team should be going.   I also stated that in a what if scenario what if we were working with 4 first round picks  oppose to just having our 1 the possibility of achieving a championship sooner.   

Miracles are about having faith and hope when all else is lost(yes, it's the hope of the hopeless) .  Not sure what you call believing in AD would be    I think it was you that brought up the word tanking.  When I think about the term tanking that means purposely losing and I never implied or suggested they lose games I said rebuild the team by trading away this alleged Big 3 hope for additional picks.

Also in defending this stance I use the words miracle can happen and used an Fab Five example, well **** who's to say that some 4 rookies couldn't pull off some similar **** on the pro level.  Right picks and right coach anything is possible.

Let I said rebuilding could happen now because it certainly going to happen 2 years(I already told you the rebuild is happening now, you just don't like it or don't see it).  So Oracle you tell me what's going to happen from now to then? If tanking came out of my mouth it wasn't intentional.  

Stop fighting and resisting the reality about team you know I'm right. It's you that's fighting and resisting, if you actually read my posts, it's impossible to make the statements you're making. Where do you get the idea that I believe anyone on the roster is the final solution. Stop fighting the fact that nothing changes overnight, whining about how bad things are without a clear plan to get from point A to point B makes no sense.

"This is why tanking the past 2 or 3 seasons made since, this why a total rebuild is necessary.   I know I get killed for my old school traditional thinking but it work and it was successful.  I just think we need to stop looking at whatever trending and all the latest catch phrases." - Wise

Wow, two amazing things there. You advocate for tanking, and you complain about us following trends in the same paragraph, when tanking is CLEARLY a trend you're asking us to follow. Wise, you couldn't be more confused 

It appears that faith and hope is only something to have if it's the things you want people to believe. If others want to have faith and hope in something else, they're out to lunch 

@Sparma: I don't know what getting creative and taking risks means until you define the plan. As I said to Wise you have to have a plan, and the only reason you deviate from that plan is when circumstances present themselves and identified risks are worth taking. The talk of being bold, taking risks, being creative are good thoughts if framed within a well thought plan. In a plan, one year may involve tanking if the playoffs are out of reach and youth development is more important. You aren't tanking to lose, if the youngsters can win, so be it.

The fact is that it's impossible to come up with a plan that you won't have to change to make it work, so yes, I expect to see risk taking and creativity going on, we just have to have patience.

[Oracle]

I don't think I equated or measure tanking into winning a championship in fact I don't think I initiated the word tanking into the conversation(you've been saying it for years, and there's nothing wrong with tanking, it's just slow if it's your ONLY strategy, like Philly until recently).  I said trade BG, AD, and start from scratch and I still strongly advocate such an idea.  

As I stated in my original posting that this team is 20 years out before it win another championship and that a massive immediate rebuild should be the path the team should be going.   I also stated that in a what if scenario what if we were working with 4 first round picks  oppose to just having our 1 the possibility of achieving a championship sooner.   

Miracles are about having faith and hope when all else is lost(yes, it's the hope of the hopeless) .  Not sure what you call believing in AD would be    I think it was you that brought up the word tanking.  When I think about the term tanking that means purposely losing and I never implied or suggested they lose games I said rebuild the team by trading away this alleged Big 3 hope for additional picks.

Also in defending this stance I use the words miracle can happen and used an Fab Five example, well **** who's to say that some 4 rookies couldn't pull off some similar **** on the pro level.  Right picks and right coach anything is possible.

Let I said rebuilding could happen now because it certainly going to happen 2 years(I already told you the rebuild is happening now, you just don't like it or don't see it).  So Oracle you tell me what's going to happen from now to then? If tanking came out of my mouth it wasn't intentional.  

Stop fighting and resisting the reality about team you know I'm right. It's you that's fighting and resisting, if you actually read my posts, it's impossible to make the statements you're making. Where do you get the idea that I believe anyone on the roster is the final solution. Stop fighting the fact that nothing changes overnight, whining about how bad things are without a clear plan to get from point A to point B makes no sense.

"This is why tanking the past 2 or 3 seasons made since, this why a total rebuild is necessary.   I know I get killed for my old school traditional thinking but it work and it was successful.  I just think we need to stop looking at whatever trending and all the latest catch phrases." - Wise

Wow, two amazing things there. You advocate for tanking, and you complain about us following trends in the same paragraph, when tanking is CLEARLY a trend you're asking us to follow. Wise, you couldn't be more confused 

It appears that faith and hope is only something to have if it's the things you want people to believe. If others want to have faith and hope in something else, they're out to lunch 

@Sparma: I don't know what getting creative and taking risks means until you define the plan. As I said to Wise you have to have a plan, and the only reason you deviate from that plan is when circumstances present themselves and identified risks are worth taking. The talk of being bold, taking risks, being creative are good thoughts if framed within a well thought plan. In a plan, one year may involve tanking if the playoffs are out of reach and youth development is more important. You aren't tanking to lose, if the youngsters can win, so be it.

The fact is that it's impossible to come up with a plan that you won't have to change to make it work, so yes, I expect to see risk taking and creativity going on, we just have to have patience.

[Sparma]

Good exchange.

Cbssports passes along early Vegas odds for the 2019-20 NBA championship. They have us tied for last in odds (evidently, the Knicks' odds are given inclusive of having Durant.) Gores, this isn't a bad time to get creative and to take some risks.

"GS 7/4
Mil 9/2
Bos 7/1
Phi, Hou 10/1
NY, LAC 16/1
Tor, LAL 20/1
Den, OKC 25/1
Bkn 30/1
Utah, Por 40/1
Dal 50/1
SA 60/1
Ind 80/1
Orl, Atl, Chi, Sac 100/1
Det, Char, Mia, Wsh, Cle, Min, Mem, NO, Phx 300/1"

[WTF]

Sparma makes yet another good point, however he missed the first part. He asked why a championship was the measure of tanking, it's not unless the person defining success to be a championship, which is what Wise did.

I don't think I equated or measure tanking into winning a championship in fact I don't think I initiated the word tanking into the conversation.  I said trade BG, AD, and start from scratch and I still strongly advocate such an idea.  

As I stated in my original posting that this team is 20 years out before it win another championship and that a massive immediate rebuild should be the path the team should be going.   I also stated that in a what if scenario what if we were working with 4 first round picks  oppose to just having our 1 the possibility of achieving a championship sooner.   

Miracles are about having faith and hope when all else is lost.  Not sure what you call believing in AD would be    I think it was you that brought up the word tanking.  When I think about the term tanking that means purposely losing and I never implied or suggested they lose games I said rebuild the team by trading away this alleged Big 3 hope for additional picks.

Also in defending this stance I use the words miracle can happen and used an Fab Five example, well **** who's to say that some 4 rookies couldn't pull off some similar **** on the pro level.  Right picks and right coach anything is possible.

Let I said rebuilding could happen now because it certainly going to happen 2 years.  So Oracle you tell me what's going to happen from now to then? If tanking came out of my mouth it wasn't intentional.  

Stop fighting and resisting the reality about team you know I'm right.

[Oracle]

@Wise - I don't believe in miracles, unless you count Smokey Robinson & the Miracles in there. Miracles are things that ignorant people don't understand & can't explain, however, I do believe in LUCK, so it's possible that we could tank and get lucky, but that's a fools errand.

@Ballin/@Sparma - I outlined what I think we should do, Ballin articulated a version of that same thing, but it's only a version, there are others, which was my point. The basic plan stays the same, you just maximize it by making smart moves.

I put forward that plan because I've seen versions of it bring championships in 1-2 years, as recently as the Boston Celtics.

Sparma makes yet another good point, however he missed the first part. He asked why a championship was the measure of tanking, it's not unless the person defining success to be a championship, which is what Wise did.

Where Sparma gets it wrong is that you can't compare other sports to the NBA for one very basic reason that invalidates the comparison. Where he gets it right is that almost all of the championships in recent history has had a #1 - #3 overall pick in the lineup. In short, you need to acquire high draft picks as early as possible, and the draft is the BEST way to do that.

So how do you get the high draft picks: You get 1st round picks either by being bad or being good and trading away talent for picks like Boston did.

My theory was that we do exactly that, when we move Blake or Drummond, we need players, but we also need picks. In this process we not only get better, we get younger as well.

It's not as risky as tanking and praying, but it's not without the risk that management makes bad moves. We complain about Joe Dumars, but Joe went out and got a #3 overall pick and a #4 overall pick to lead his team to a championship in Chauncey Billups and Rasheed Wallace. Remember that Zeke was a #2 overall pick! #1 overall picks aren't easily given up on, but 2,3,4,5, etc. are dumped all of the time, and one of them could be our new Zeke, Chauncey or Sheed... In short, we know the way, we've seen this movie before!

BTW: Ballin/Wise - We're about to LOSE all of our backup guards, so Wise conflating Rose with winning a championship is crazy. You don't expect a 2nd or 3rd guard to get you there, you just need timely contributions. There aren't any guards in the NBA that aren't ball dominant, it's the definition of the position, again, show me ONE! In order to run plays and switch when they're covered, the guard needs the ball. Vision, playmaking and shooting is WAY more important than if the PG has the ball most of the time.

The bottom line is that we're basically on the same page, only implementation differences remain and that makes me feel that we're on to something and management is likely thinking this way.

Notes: Ballin, I totally agree about Ish. I love Ish and what he brings and never understood the venom he got. Coach didn't have any other choice, Ish wes the best he had. However, even if Ish wants to come back, it's time we moved on. Rose is good, but I also like Seth Curry and the hyper aggressive Patrick Beverly as well. Beverly in particular would bring competitiveness and focus we lack at times.

[Sparma]

I've predicted that there's less than a 50% chance that the Pistons will win a championship in the next 20 years.  Naturally, you're free to say that we can't know.  Setting that response aside, is there anyone who says that the Pistons have better than a 50% chance to win a championship during the next two decades?  Hearing that assertion would help to crystallize the debate for me, even as we go into various topics.

I've argued that SVG should have tanked at the outset.  We'd be much better off now if he had.

But my prediction doesn't necessarily mean that I think we should tank now.  In fact, I'm torn regarding the direction of the team, but do currently advocate a deep rebuild, in the manner described at the end (and it sounds closest to what BallinD describes).

For the Pistons, last year at least, tanking didn't seem like a real option given the inflexible pieces, but now it's becoming one again.  In that way, I sympathize with Wise's position, because it still seems like the most likely way to make a big leap.  But since Philly, a number of teams appear to have joined the deliberately tanking program (arguably Atlanta, Dallas, the Knicks, and Phoenix), making it tougher to gain a competitive advantage and the league has changed (drafting probability) rules to make tanking tougher to pay off.  Hence my reluctance, that along with it seeming fanciful in relation to what I expect from the Pistons FO.

Oracle writes: "Tanking doesn't work!!! If it does, then show me the team it's worked for... Philly?"  I might argue, dramatically, that it's never not worked, thus far.  I think that, historically, there have been but four cases of systematic, philosophical tanking: the Chicago Cubs, the Houston Astros, the 76ers, and the Cleveland Browns.  I'd say that all four have worked, two to the tune of championships.  But maybe the retort is: but what what the NBA?  There, I think we've only had one fully developed example, so it's not much of a sample size.  But I think Philly's approach has "worked" quite well, certainly better than the Pistons' lackluster approach of the past decade.  Why does the advocate of tanking need to take on winning a championship as the standard of working?  I don't follow.  And in thinking specifically about the Pistons, I think the point of interest is what the best or better approach comparatively?  If so, then I think the standard of working already achieved by Philly (close to the final four, with good prospects for contending the next decade) is a high one.  Furthermore, I'd gladly trade the future prospects of the Pistons with those of current semi-tankers like Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, and even the Knicks if I had any confidence in that organization.

Given the paucity of historical examples, maybe we should broaden consideration to: for how many champions was the foundation of success established by being really bad?  For quite a few, I'd say.  In baseball, during my period of intense interest, I'd give the '69 Mets, the dynasty early 70s As, the '84 Tigers as examples, with AL league champions '67 Red Sox tossed in as an extra.  What about in basketball?  It's harder to come up with examples there, but I'd start with the two time champion New York Knicks, the Milwaukee Bucks with Kareem, and add a year of brilliant badness by the Spurs to get Duncan, and the Cavs landing LeBron (and getting to the finals the first time around), maybe OKC too, that made it to the finals, with very high picks in Westbrook, Hardin, and Durant.  Maybe the Bulls are the best example a championship (or six) being based fundamentally on being bad enough to acquire the star to build around.  And the team that was so bad as to land the number #1 pick Jordan's year built around that player to get to two championships.

In the current NBA, we're at a competitive disadvantage.  I think the existing NBA model most attainable to us now is to draft a superstar, then build around him.  We did that with the Bad Boys, drafting Isiah at #2.  That's still a realistic possibility, also without tanking: after all, GS drafted Step at #7 and built a super team around him (although I can't see Durant clamoring to come to the D), Portland drafted Lillard at #6 and built a very strong team around him, Milwaukee got Antetokounmpo at 15, and Denver drafted Jokic in the second round.

It can be done.  Of course, you help your odds of getting transcendent stars by tanking.  I think that was the biggest impetus to Hinkie's system.

Also, SVG thought, or dearly hoped, that Drummond would that that superstar you could build the entire franchise around.  And Gores, as Don has portrayed, was a true believer from the get go, still describing him as "great" recently.  I think much more higher of Andre than many do (and continue to think he's got a shot at the HoF) but clearly he's not that transcendent star those teams mentioned above located.

All that said, I've got some sympathy with the notion that we need to roughly stay the course for the time being, and even that the FO may be on a promising course given the chosen strategy.  

What if our position in the current NBA is roughly that of Everton in the Premier League, and that in spite of our glorious past, we in all likelihood will play the role of also runs for the foreseeable future?  If that's our lot, then making the most of what we've got going might be the way to go, enjoying our star throwback in Griffin, our occasional heroic games against sorta contenders (going 3-0 vs Toronto), maybe even hoping to get to a conference finals (a la Denver or Portland) if things fall our way in a given year.

For me, the way to go, if you don't luck into that transcendent star, is to find value, from top to bottom on the roster, to play very deep, and in a versatile way, allowing you to compensate for the competitive advantages of other teams.  Ordinarily, that value is chiefly found in players on rookie contracts or in older players (eg Rose as discovered by Minnesota, but probably not the more expensive Rose who would come to us) or in players coming off of injury like Demarcus Cousins.  Sometimes, a player on a big contract can be acquired for less player value in return due to injury and/or circumstances as might be the case with Gordon Hayward.  That approach isn't really tanking then, but it would involve a deep rebuild, in part because only our young guys have a chance to outperform their contract (even if Dre's max is about right, currently).

The Tampa Rays might exemplify the relentless search for value, paired with the willingness to try radical new strategies, that I think the Pistons should emulate.

That said, there I am advocating an approach that's never worked, at least in the NBA. It's a case of desperate times (circling back to my prediction of 20 years without championships) calling for desperate measures. If, alternatively, we simply accept being analogous to Everton as a perpetual also run with a glorious past, then there's no need for desperate measures. And the rebuild on the fly as described by BallinD might provide a somewhat realistic middle ground.

[BallinD]

FREEP: So they are wondering if we want Ish back, or will move on from Weggie or both? DBB wonders if we need to go Bold. I say go bold.

Love Ish but hard pass. Yes we need more pace. But If the playoffs were supposed to tell us what we really need, not what we think we need, then Ish is out cause he didn’t facilitate at all nor shoot nor defend, under great duress. Still love your heart Ish. Playoffs also taught us Dre is not ready for Prime Time.

Our window says the time is now (2-years for Blake and Dre). Many don’t seem to believe that but couple the window with Gores childlike idiocy and it is clear that we have to maximize Luke, Blake and MAYBE Dre right now, no waiting for reasonable measured steps toward higher-level mediocrity. We’re truly one good wing” and a 2-way pt guard from winning a playoff game/ maybe series. That’s as far forward as Gores little brain can imagine.

Beverly, like Blake plays hard with Pistons DNA, and with Blake as our best current facilitator, we don’t need a ball-dominant pg like Rose or Weggie. Beverly had the cajones to successfully guard KD for stretches and he plays like a demon. We need to get him. I’m open to Rubio or even Mudiay Curry, Rivers or Especially Collison. I wonder what anybody else thinks.

I think getting younger and swapping what does not work is different than tanking: Ish, Weggie, Ellington Gallows and Leuer (yes he can be traded...how many times has the corpse of Mosgov been traded after all) is a Clippers style on the fly rebuild as you get younger and better. Get Beverly and Weggie can back him up if you must have a butt buddy for Dre.

Even at our best last year, when our so-called Big Three were healthy, we were not close, on pace for a ceiling under 50 wins, so we need desperate measures (Casey says play desperate, I say desperately rebuild on the fly is just as key).

What will this strategic rebuild get us? 2nd round of the playoffs is the best we can get since Gores won’t trade Dre and go all in on Blake and swap a good center for a good wing. Twin Towers is so 80s in a perimeter driven league. The rules and officiating dictate we can’t wait for our seven year vet to play like an all star when it counts most, he has crawled toward good but not good enough and is still mostly a head case, even after his best season.

I’m sorry, but when your young (25) athletic center can’t make a freaking layup in the playoffs to save his life and gives the kind of defensive effort that even Chauncey calls him out on national television i can’t get behind that BS.

[WTF]

Well Oracle **** changes and I'm a believer now in starting from scratch for a variety of reasons. One thing for sure is that I have no belief in this current cast of clowns.  I believe two things you either be bold and daring enough and go all out to win now at all cost or you scrap what your doing and start the hell over with a fresh batch of potential stars. 

Stop with all this analytical BS and use the eye test, stop listening to ESPN and all the know it all's and go with what you see.  Start drafting character and players from winning programs.  Find a coach that actually coach players.

I have no belief in the slightest that the lights will turn on for AD or RJ it simply not going to happen no matter how hard you and others wish.  I'm not at odds on my belief that BG isn't just buying time cashing checks hoping he can get the hell on a contender before it's too late. Maybe you too should start believing in miracles sooner rather than later.

[Oracle]

You're into a space zone now! Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the guy that keeps saying we shouldn't wait on guys with "Potential"? But now we should wait on a miracle that's never happened and never will to save us?

And now you're believing in miracles? You astronomically LOSE an argument and your answer is that we need to start believing in miracles?

Hell if that's your answer, you shouldn't complain about anything going on because a miracle could be right around the corner.

This is RICH, the most nonsensical response in forum history 

[WTF]

Tanking doesn't work!!! If it does, then show me the team it's worked for... Philly? They haven won anything and likely never will with the current crew.

Tanking is not only the worse way to go if you want to get to the Finals, it's also the slowest(wake up Wise).

Where people get the thought that tanking works is beyond me... show me one example where it's worked, just ONE!

You won't, so why all the love for something that's proven to fail EVERY time, and is the absolutely slowest route to the Finals!

Back to your regularly scheduled hate fest 

BTW, I like the idea of Derrick Rose as a 2nd or 3rd guard.

I'm not going to show you an example because there isn't one, but that doesn't mean it's not possible.   It was neither a given that man would take flight and there we were flying to the moon some years after the Wright Brothers barely took flight.

Truth is we see impossible **** all the time so tanking can work if done properly, maybe it just that everyone else was doing it wrong.  You know they said we could never win a title without a super star and we did, we saw the Fab Five go to the NCAA twice once as freshmen they said that was never done, we saw the USA beat Russia to win GOLD.  I guess you don't believe in Miracles.

**** get experiment on all the time before there's an breakthrough.  Where people get the thought tanking works is that some of believe that if done properly it can work.   Simply draft correctly and coach properly yeah I think it could, the reason it hasn't work is that it's made more complicated than it needs to be.  

I could ask why all the love for this current group of players? When you all know this isn't working but many of you are convinced it something there and it's not.  And you all know this group won't be sniffing a title anytime soon,  a rebuild is coming whether regardless  3 or 4 from know if we keep this up so why not start now.  Trade BG to a contender,  trade AD while he still has value, trade RJ for whatever, dump any useless item on this roster that can be moved. 

Or we can add Derrick Rose as a 2nd or 3rd guard when we need to be looking for a freaking starting one    Yeah I guess this will get us to the final

[Oracle]

Tanking doesn't work!!! If it does, then show me the team it's worked for... Philly? They haven won anything and likely never will with the current crew.

Tanking is not only the worse way to go if you want to get to the Finals, it's also the slowest(wake up Wise).

Where people get the thought that tanking works is beyond me... show me one example where it's worked, just ONE!

You won't, so why all the love for something that's proven to fail EVERY time, and is the absolutely slowest route to the Finals!

Back to your regularly scheduled hate fest 

BTW, I like the idea of Derrick Rose as a 2nd or 3rd guard.

[cool breeze]

You have to wonder what planet this owner and it management team live on when they tell reporters that they are considering Derrick Rose as an option at point guard. How exciting that would be. Rose is a shell of his former self. To be effective he has to play like Reggie Jackson with the ball in his hands. But Rose cannot do any of the things now that made him a special player in another age. Does this management team watch the playoff games? Denver has the youngest team in the league and they are playing great basketball in the playoffs. What if the Pistons play Denver next season with Rose as the point guard? I think this owner, head coach and whoever is actually running the front office has no regard for how important it is to play defense if you make the playoffs. As the owner was bragging that the Pistons accomplished their mission this season, did he not compute that his players are too small, too slow, and have no ability to play the type of high energy defense required in playoff situations. Other owners know that they need to build a team through the draft and get taller, more athletic gifted players who possess high energy or great cardio ability.

PISTONS ARE TOO OLD AND TOO SMALL:
Wayne Ellington - Too old at age 31

Galloway - age 27 - too small at 6 feet 2 inches - plus extremely weak defender

Blake Griffin - makes $32 plus million and is too old at age 30 with a history of being injured - below average defender

Reggie Jackson - Makes $17 plus million and is both too old at 27 and too small at 6 feet 3 inches with a history of being injured plus being an extremely weak defender

Jon Leuer - Too old at age 29 who made $10 plus million - slow feet and weak defender and inept offensive player.

ZaZa - too old at age 35 but better defender than AD who is 25

Ish Smith - both too old at age 30 and too small at 6 foot.

Why did this head coach play all of those small players together and not have everyone wanting his head on a platter? Who is buying the cool aide? Add Rose to this group and i can't imagine any Piston fan buying a season ticket or attending one game next year. The Pistons got into the playoffs but they were not a playoff caliber team. Everyone but the owner knows that.

The Pistons need to get younger, taller and more athletic. Both the last Celtics-Bucks game revealed that the players on both teams have real athletes who have high motors and show real heart. They are the successful players and none of them play for the Pistons. How about that game between Portland and Denver? Wouldn't anyone want the former MSU star who fouled out in that game playing for the Pistons? He is a strong defender, play maker and shooter and he is young. Oh I forgot this owner doesn't believe in the draft. He believes in signing the aging BG and giving up his number one pick that he wouldn't have had to give up. The Clippers are still laughing at Mr. Gores. Being that this owner has screwed up the ability to do much of anything but sign a guy like Rose, what should happen that won't happen because this head coach plays the big contracts and likes small ball?

PLAY ALL OF THE YOUNG KIDS WHO ARE ON THE CURRENT ROSTER LOTS OF MINUTES AND TANK.

Bruce Brown is only 22 years old. This was a great draft pick. He plays with heart, has a good motor and made the starting lineup as a rookie. I see hope with Brown because he is also 6 foot 5 inches tall and is athletic. Brown could work his butt off this summer and come back playing offense at a much higher level.

Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk needs to get big minutes next year. he is really young being only 21 and he is tall at 6 foot 8 inches. Come on coach show us you give a crap. Stop the phony nonsense of playing contracts with your pet players, RJ, IS, and LG. It shows that you don't have a clue what the rest of the league is doing. Don't settle for being known as a players coach. Be a real coach and don't let the owner bully you.

Khyri Thomas might have potential but perhaps he doesn't fit the mold of the new NBA. He is only 6 foot 3 inches tall and plays shooting guard. I think this guy is athletic though but he will really need to work his butt off to improve in all areas to make a rotation next year. Perhaps the two players to be drafted with squeeze him out. Summer league will be big for him. The good thing is that he is only 22 years old.

Thon Maker has the size at 7 foot 1 inches tall and he is only 22 years old. He is another guy like Brown who really needs to put in the extra work this summer and for him it is to get a lot stronger and add weight. But Maker is quick and runs fast from baseline to baseline. Thon must identify how he can secure a lot of playing time. The Pistons are weak up front with AD and BG being inferior paint protectors. If Thon gets his conditioning to the elite level, adds weight and strength, he can steal playing time from the big money players next season and we fans will finally see a guy who shows heart on the defensive end. BG shows heart at times by taking charges. AD is so inept on defense that the Bucks actually targeted AD as the biggest weak link in the team. They created a game plan to make AD look really bad and it was successful. Brook Lopez, who makes $3.4 mil made a fool of AD along with their All Star big man who ate him up and spit him out. That was Tom Gores guy that they did that too. Carry too much weight and get tired easily and that is what you get. Your mind drifts and you get embarrassed but Tom didn't see any of that of course. So it will be up to Maker as to if he is up to doing the necessary work to steal playing time from AD and BG next season. Of course this coach might ignore hard work and effort in favor of big contracts.

Luke Kennard is the guy does fit the mold of a player who can become a deadly player if he plays in the right offensive system. Luke should not be playing small forward at all. He is 6 foot 5 inches tall and only 22 years old. He has the size to play either point or the 2. This coach cannot or should not hamper Luke's career by playing him at small forward so he can fit in his dysfunctional pets at the 2.

So management is looking to sign guy like Rose. We have seen Ersan Illyasova, Jerebco, Middleton, and Marcus Morris at 6 foot 9 inches being rejected in favor of the pint sized players in Casey's rotation system so why not add Rose. Also make sure to sign Smith as well. Then we will have 3 ball dominate point guards creating all of the offense while the other 4 players stand in their positions as if they are standing in cement. The good thing for me is that now I get to see some fantastic basketball instead of watching the Pistons. I feel this coach will not play those young guys and instead will repeat what he did this season. More of Galloway-Smith-Reggie.

[cool breeze]

How many rotation players are we seeing that SVG rejected? SVG knows best because he had been on television as an analyst since destroying the Pistons. He has company with that relating to Tom Gores who approved all of SVG's signings.

I always enjoyed watching Jonas Jerebco play basketball especially when he was a Piston. The guy was a 2nd round draft pick that took the NBA by storm in his rookie season. Jonas had a big fan base in the Detroit area even after he suffered a serious injury. What I like and other top NBA coaches still like about him is the fact that he is one of the few big men who has quick feet, a high basketball IQ and desire to play hard. Coaches create dysfunctional offensive systems. Not only did SVG like playing one side of the court while concentrating on shooting the 3 ball without 3 point shooters but he liked to push the basketball without have players who were very quick or were engaged enough to run hard from baseline to baseline. Jonas always did that one thing. He could play fast and he functioned will in a more complicated offense. He fit in well at Boston and now he might win a championship with the brilliant Steve Kerr at Golden State. Boston and Golden State have really smart coaches who selected Jonas for a rotation spot. The players Jonas plays with are exceptional. Meanwhile SVG had less than average players with limited motivation who also possessed low basketball IQs and Big Stan thought Jerebco was not a keeper or not good enough to hold down a rotation spot. Instead he hand picked Jon Leuer. What does that show you fans as to how smart both SVG and Tom Gores might be relating to making any critical decisions in any area of basketball. They need to find another game. God it is frustrating to sit back and watch what has happened with this mindless leadership we have had for the team we have loved so much. I have been a Piston fan since being a small kid. My Father loved basketball and knew a lot more than either of the two people that I have mentioned.

Oracle is practical. I liked his last post. But Oracle are you not a little bit pissed off at all relating to the type of players we have been forced to watch for the past 11 seasons? We now have some players who make play with more effort but we have had no top tier player selected in the draft in way too many years. This owner just doesn't seem to care about the draft now that he has his team leaders, AD and RJ under contract. Sure Blake is a real star player but I think the owner has a secret affection for AD and RJ that goes beyond anything that i have ever witnessed by an owner. I think the Pistons had a few chances of making some important trades two years ago. The owner would not approve. I think we fans are in store for more blundering in the next 3 seasons as well. We will never get a top 5 pick perhaps until the owner agrees to cash in and sell the team.

How about Embid in this last game. He reminds me of the players we had in the Bad Boys era. He kicks ass and takes names and gets opponents really pissed off while doing it. He has that mean streak that few big men possess in the modern NBA. A lot of Piston fans might hate him for embarrassing AD in every matchup but I loved it. Embid is a real basketball star much like Leonard.

[WTF]

It's reality check time, because where fans can say things and expect things that don't make sense, responsible parties must make reasoned decisions.

If you have BG, Dre & Reggie eating up your CAP space, blowing things up is not a wise decision.

Instead, the Pistons have a reasoned rebuild underway.
1. Ride Blake until he drops or they can move him, with moving him #1 on your wish list
2. Let Reggie walk after next season or come back at half the price and off the bench as a 2nd or 3rd guard.
3. When Drummond comes up for renewal, look at all options and if nothing appeals, let him walk or trade him next season
4. Draft well, if the position you need is not available, get the best player available and commit to playing them no matter what.
5. Don't just look for stop gap FA's, use all the money on one good player if available, otherwise get the best available
6. If you're going over the CAP, don't go over on the cheap, PAY big money for big talent.

No, they're not going to have silly fire sales or just start dumping guys and starting over like a high stakes craps game.

They're taking a reasoned rebuild strategy that maximizes our ability to compete while building to compete at a higher level. A mixture of vets and youngsters is good for both, and as long as Blake is around, the youngster will see how a star plays and what it takes to win. That's a great value in and of itself!

Blake started the process of getting Drummond, Brown, Kennard, Maker and Reggie getting to another level, and it's silly to think his effect was going to change Drummond in one season. It's taking hold and if he gets to laying it all on the line and leaving his heart on the court, then and only then should we resign him.

This is what(I think) DX is talking about when he says let's get on with Gores's dream. It's a legitimate way to go with a good probability of success, IMO.

Oracle this would be a smart route if ownership and management were smart enough to pull this off.  A fire sale is risky but only in the short term IMO and that in a worst case environment.   

Just because they might not want to dump everyone doesn't make it a smart or reasonable choice.  The reality is it's a risk regardless the route so why not be bold and daring in the process at least they can more honest about the bullshit they're feeding fans about this team.   I would rather watch 3 first round  picks struggling to learn than watching an overpaid 7 year vet still trying to figure out how to win yet alone wanting to win.  

Playing the route of safe only prolong the inevitable out come that it be 20 years before this team is relevant.  Sure it's high stakes crap but the reward won't be 20 years out.  

Lets say we were going into the draft with 3 or 4 first round picks, lets say we got those picks because we were able to dump those 3 players.  Let say not only did we get those picks but young talent came with each one.  Let say this was all possible just moving these 3 players then why not?  I think it can be done if attempted.

So if I could keep Kennard, Brown, and Maker and manage 3 additional 1st round picks and what young talent I picked up in those trades than this would make me happy.  The only thing after that would be getting a real coach

[Oracle]

It's reality check time, because where fans can say things and expect things that don't make sense, responsible parties must make reasoned decisions.

If you have BG, Dre & Reggie eating up your CAP space, blowing things up is not a wise decision.

Instead, the Pistons have a reasoned rebuild underway.
1. Ride Blake until he drops or they can move him, with moving him #1 on your wish list
2. Let Reggie walk after next season or come back at half the price and off the bench as a 2nd or 3rd guard.
3. When Drummond comes up for renewal, look at all options and if nothing appeals, let him walk or trade him next season
4. Draft well, if the position you need is not available, get the best player available and commit to playing them no matter what.
5. Don't just look for stop gap FA's, use all the money on one good player if available, otherwise get the best available
6. If you're going over the CAP, don't go over on the cheap, PAY big money for big talent.

No, they're not going to have silly fire sales or just start dumping guys and starting over like a high stakes craps game.

They're taking a reasoned rebuild strategy that maximizes our ability to compete while building to compete at a higher level. A mixture of vets and youngsters is good for both, and as long as Blake is around, the youngster will see how a star plays and what it takes to win. That's a great value in and of itself!

Blake started the process of getting Drummond, Brown, Kennard, Maker and Reggie getting to another level, and it's silly to think his effect was going to change Drummond in one season. It's taking hold and if he gets to laying it all on the line and leaving his heart on the court, then and only then should we resign him.

This is what(I think) DX is talking about when he says let's get on with Gores's dream. It's a legitimate way to go with a good probability of success, IMO.

[Sponsored content]