no knock on gordon, but we dont even have anybody to get these guys the ball. and i doubt we will unless he, rip or stuckey is shown the door
the more i watch this team, the more it seems we had our priorities screwed up this offseason. im hoping its just a matter of getting used to the coaching though
Only four times? That's an incredibly small sample size. You have no knowledge of whether you just witnessed the teams best game of all season, their worst, or something in-between. Really to early to start saying guys need to go.
Posts: 1390 | Location: Detroit, MI | Registered: November 05, 2008
believe it or not - stuckey, gordon and rip's careers didn't start six games ago, and it's no secret that they aren't among the league's best playmakers. if your reading comprehension were up to par, you'd see that i'm merely expressing doubt over this team's current personnel in the realm of playmaking and saying that it doesn't look good so far. which is a fact. and if it keeps up, it will most likely result in someone being moved. end of story. obviously i'm not a fortune teller. nor have i called for anyone's head.
I love Ben Gordon!! He's doing exactly what was planned: scoring off the bench and utilizing his 3-point shooting. He's scoring 15 points a game and shooting over 40% from the 3! I agree we still obviously haven't seen enough of the 'Stuns to get a great idea of what's to come, but Ben Gordon is definitely NOT the issue in my opinion.
Posts: 55 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: October 14, 2009
I dont agree that ben gordon is the problem. Get rid of Stuckey. I know he's big for his supposed position but the guy is not a Pg. We lost again tonite to another up and coming team. We should have defintiely been on the uphill of tonite's battle with all the beef between Allen Iverson and Detroit, we should have took it personal. 2 games in a row getting our a**es kicked. Get with it and get a true Pg. Pick up Jamal Tinsley or somebody and get rid of stuckey.
Originally posted by tetris: No. No. Don't backtrack now.
what’s there to backtrack from? this team does not have a particularly competent playmaker, which is evident to anyone who’s seen the guys play their past 6 games or their past 60 games. should the pg situation adjusted right now? probably not. will it be adjusted? who knows. does it NEED to be adjusted? yes. and the same could be said about other aspects of the team, as well. i haven’t even expanded far enough for me to have called for anyone’s head in particular. just pointing out obvious holes. believe it or not, this team has quite a few things that NEED to be done to it, preseason or not
i don't think ben gordon's a problem. i like him, and i think he brings back that clutch play we missed from chauncey.
i'm just not sure we have what we need to get the most out of what we have. and if it's gonna be like that, then the pistons are likely gonna have to get their priorities straight
Originally posted by tetris: No. No. Don't backtrack now.
what’s there to backtrack from?
What are you backtracking from? The sentences you typed in this very thread of course. You originally said that after watching this team play only FOUR times you're starting to think Dumars had his priorities mixed up this off-season. Now you're using a broader sample size to support your opinion. Blatant backtracking.
I guess when you said someone NEEDS to go so we can acquire a PG you didn't really mean that? I can't tell because the bolded sentences clearly contradict each other:
quote:
should the pg situation adjusted right now? probably not. will it be adjusted? who knows. does it NEED to be adjusted? yes.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: tetris,
Posts: 1390 | Location: Detroit, MI | Registered: November 05, 2008
He is not backtracking. You need to read things a little more carfully.
Should the Pg situation be adjusted now? Probably not.
He said that because the pre season started already and tthe time to fix it has passed. Remember how we traded our Pg away last year after 4 games?
Does it need to be adjusted? yes.
That is not a contradiction at all. Sometime in the very near future the PG situation will become a very bad pg situation if it is not one already.
Look it doesn't take that much comprehension to understand his point. and it's not even something you can rip apart because the point is very valid. I don't understand how you can question his reasoning one bit, and I would like to hear from you why you think the situation is fine.
Don't mistake legibility for communication - David Carson-
Posts: 4799 | Location: Michigan | Registered: June 09, 2004
There's no secret to the PG position on this team. I can care less when they decide to fix the problem whether it be tomorrow or by the trade deadline, but something needs to give and Stuckey is not the answer. He will never be a good PG if he's only out to get his and can't create for others.
Posts: 1694 | Location: Born and Raised in The D Now Richmond, VA | Registered: August 05, 2005
Originally posted by edwaudo: He is not backtracking. You need to read things a little more carfully.
Should the Pg situation be adjusted now? Probably not.
He said that because the pre season started already and tthe time to fix it has passed. Remember how we traded our Pg away last year after 4 games?
Does it need to be adjusted? yes.
That is not a contradiction at all. Sometime in the very near future the PG situation will become a very bad pg situation if it is not one already.
Look it doesn't take that much comprehension to understand his point. and it's not even something you can rip apart because the point is very valid. I don't understand how you can question his reasoning one bit, and I would like to hear from you why you think the situation is fine.
It is backtracking. When a claim is refuted and you add additional factors which restrict an argument in which those specific factors are irrelevant, that is without a doubt backtracking. I mean, I guess anyone can just say it's not backtracking, but I can't understand why if you don't explain it. Not to mention he's mistaken anyway; Hamilton is one of the better passing two guards in the NBA.
I don't see anything terribly wrong with the PG situation. Why? The team has put points on the board. Simple as that. You remarked that the teams hasn't been scoring efficiently, that's not true. The Pistons are shooting 46.6 percent from the field through games. They're averaging 97 points on 73 shots. Also, Gordon is second on the team in field goal attempts while scoring his points on good efficiency, so the claims that we have no one to get him the ball are ridiculous and based on nothing but speculation.
I question his reasoning because it makes no sense. Stuckey is holding back our best scorer? So we should trade him? But probably not right now? Because it's too late? How does that make sense?
I'm also interested in hearing the name of this point guard we should pursue.
Posts: 1390 | Location: Detroit, MI | Registered: November 05, 2008
Still not backtracking. He merly brought clarification to the point so you can at least argue effectively against his main point. Which is we need a PG! And I think the one we should persue is Rondo.
Don't mistake legibility for communication - David Carson-
Posts: 4799 | Location: Michigan | Registered: June 09, 2004
Copyright 2005 NBA Media Ventures, LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of NBA.com may be
duplicated, redistributed or manipulated in any form. By accessing any information beyond this page, you agree to abide by
the NBA.com Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Employment
opportunities
