It’s ok to have a comment.

Excellent post. This isn’t AI’s fault, and although Curry is less than perfect, it’s not really mostly his fault either. We would have the same problems if we had traded Chauncey for, say, Ray Allen: three of our best five players would be guards; Tayshaun would still be our only good SF and he would still not be a good PF; we would lack a a big with a consistent post offensive game; and more specifically we would have two good but aging bigs we don’t want to kill with minutes and 2-3 young bigs who show flashes of excellent play along with flashes of much-less than excellent play. This all creates the temptation to play too much small ball and to have constantly shifting lineups and rotations.

The magic bullet for this year could be trading one of the really good guards and probably somebody and/or something else for a big with a consistent post game. I honestly believe that this team minus Rip or AI (and maybe a decent bench player) but plus somebody like Bosh or maybe even a Kamen or Jermaine O (if healthy) could compete with any team in the NBA.

But I don’t know if Joe can make a good deal, or whether he’s really focusing on AI’s salary coming off next year. If the latter, it’s going to be rough watching ‘Sheed and ’Dyess try to convince themselves to give extra effort in their declining years for a team that’s clearly not going anywhere, and rough watching Rip come off the bench for the sake of . . . ?

If Detroit doesn’t make a move this year, I hope they will at least do two things: (i) pick a semi-regular rotation that doesn’t have much small ball and stick with it, so Stuckey can learn the PG position in a normal offense; and (ii) play Maxiell, Amir and maybe even Kwame significant minutes to see whether or not one or more can be developed to be regular contributors in the future.

“One player who has competed against him for years said Iverson should be playing point guard for Detroit”

OK. As the site’s resident Iverson-ologist, here’s the deal:

Playing Iverson as a ‘2’ guard was always kinda nutso. Larry Brown was enough of a mad scientist to make it (sorta) work, but again, it was always kinda nutso.

Then in the ‘04-’05 season, Jim O’Brien took over as coach, and realized that to maximize the benefits Iverson could provide, he needed to play point. And it all worked! Iverson’s assists shot up, AND his TS% shot up. A team of true stiffs managed to win 43 games, despite almost being destroyed by the mid-season acquisition of the corpse of Chris Webber.

Of course, O’Brien was fired after that one season, due to his inability to get along with Webber and Sammy Dalembert, and that was the end of Iverson as PG.

But, actually, it really wasn’t. Take last year in Denver, for example. Despite being billed as the team’s ‘2’ guard, Iverson actually played about half the possessions at the point. The other half of the possessions were with Anthony Carter at point.

Using a bit of forensic accounting, you can see that the Nuggets were +7 per 48 minutes when Iverson was at point, and +0 when he wasn’t. George Karl was unwilling to admit that he was running Iverson at point at all, or to allow him to run point more often for some complex reasons all about George Karl, but it doesn’t change the fact of what was happening on the court.

If the Pistons were interested in actually maximizing their chances this year, here’s how they’d do it.

- Play Iverson at point with Afflalo at the ‘’2’ around 15 – 20 mpg.
- Play Iverson and Stuckey as “shared responsibility point” around 15 – 20 mpg.

If you limit Iverson to 34 – 37 mpg, and if you use Rip to back up Prince at the ‘3’, there would be enough minutes to go around between Iverson, Stuckey, and Hamilton.

It won’t be done, but you can’t say you haven’t been told.

At the end of the day, Iverson’s strength is what he can do when HE HAS THE BALL ON THE DRIBBLE EARLY IN THE SHOT CLOCK.

I capitalize because it’s important. His handle is incredibly powerful.

Playing Iverson off the ball on the weak side of the offense, as Curry is doing, is the single most perverse thing I have ever seen in NBA basketball.

“His handle is incredibly powerful.”

Just to add before I go make coffee:

Did folks enjoy that 3rd quarter of the Pistons/Cavs game? It was fun, wasn’t it?

Did you notice what was happening on the floor?

Iverson had the ball early in the shot clock, the Cavs were forced to send a big man out to the top of the key to chase Iverson as he switched sides of the floor.

What is that? That is deforming the defense.

The opposition, now has the guard chasing Iverson out of position, a big coming out ‘to show’ out of position. Now you have an entire defense out of position, and the offense should be designed to take advantage of the advantage generated as the defense struggles to get back to their positions.

That’s how an Iverson as PG offense can create an imbalance that can beat elite teams.

Iverson is not worth $21 million a year except as cap space.

He used to be a great offensive guard, but that is all he has ever been.

He has always been a midget by NBA standards and along with that comes all sorts of liabilities.

Many young players are now as quick as he is with the ball so there is no great advantage there.

He is a lousy point guard.

He has never won an NBA title and only got to the NBA Finals once when Brown coached his team and that was despite being a gigantic headache for Brown.

Denver never got out of the first round of playoffs with him.

As much as Pistons grew to hate Billups, Iverson is no where near the PG that Billups is. That is evidenced by the significant improvement in Denver’s record despite the loss of Camby.

Iverson is in my opinion the total problem.

I keep hoping that Joe D. trades him before the deadline.

corr:

It should have said

As much as Pistons fans grew to hate Billups

Mike, I’m sorry to say this but you seem to hate Iverson so much you fail to see the reality. As Joe and a lot of other people have pointed out, the problem is Chauncey’s leadership. Stuckey has a bright future but is far from being the leader on and off court Chauncey was plus he is a score-first-PG which is something Rip and the other veterans are not used to.

It’ll take a year or before Stuckey can really replace Chauncey but until then, the Pistons could trade AI for any other SG in the game and wouldn’t make an impact in these year’s playoffs anyways.

The truth hurts, but blaming it on the new guy is neither fair nor helpful or correct. But you don’t seem to care or get it, judging from your posts over the last few weeks.

“At the end of the day, Iverson’s strength is what he can do when HE HAS THE BALL ON THE DRIBBLE EARLY IN THE SHOT CLOCK.”

I completely agree that’s Iversons strength, but it’s not going to make us a better team. We don’t have the proper components to fit AI’s game unless it’s the second unit guys and they can only play so much time on the court together. Our core guys are at their best when they execute our offense, go through all the options, and swing the ball around the court.

When AI gets the ball early in the shot clock and dribbles and tries to create some times it will result in wide open shots for teammates or himself, but the majority of the time he just kicks it to some one who’s covered…so we are left with 10-15 seconds on the shot clock, usually with the ball in some ones hands who isn’t very good at creating their own shot. The end result is this player tries to create on their own or we rush to get into an offensive set, but we can only go through the 1st option b/c the shot clock is about to expire. Over the long haul it’s led to our offense being less efficient compared to previous years.

Unfortunately the pieces just don’t fit well…I thought when the trade was made we’d have a chance to improve, but obviously that’s not the case. I still agree with the trade though…I’m more convinced then ever that we weren’t getting out of the East this year if we didn’t make the trade. I’d rather suffer a down a year (even though it’s really painful to watch now) with a very good chance to rebuild on the fly then slowly get worse over the next couple years with no cap flexibility.

“Playing Iverson as a ‘2′ guard was always kinda nutso.”

Why is that? He’s a TERRIBLE PG… TERRIBLE…. AWFUL… HORRENDOUS. A PG’s job is to manage the game, get his teammates involved, figure out where the mismatch is and exploit it, and score when the opportunity presents itself. Iverson doesn’t know how to do any of this stuff…. and Larry Brown knew this. It’s not nutso… it’s called having no other choice if you want to win. You paint yourself into a corner when you bring Iverson on board. All your options dwindle down to: “Well, I guess we gotta let AI dribble around alot until he jumps in the air, then decides if he wants to shoot or not, then makes a bad pass or tries a bad shot attempt.” Wonderful skillset… not exactly what you’re looking for in a PG.

@Matt Watson

Good article. I enjoyed the read.

I wonder, does advocating that we make a trade mean you’ve given up on our coaching staff figuring out a rotation that works?

Also, I have been impressed with AI’s optimism… he seems to be the only one on the roster (expect Dyess) who think this can still work. I wish the team still believed… or at least let their faces know if they do believe.

Petey said:
If the Pistons were interested in actually maximizing their chances this year, here’s how they’d do it.

- Play Iverson at point with Afflalo at the "2′ around 15 – 20 mpg.
- Play Iverson and Stuckey as "shared responsibility point" around 15 – 20 mpg.

If you limit Iverson to 34 – 37 mpg, and if you use Rip to back up Prince at the ‘3′, there would be enough minutes to go around between Iverson, Stuckey, and Hamilton.

That makes about as much sense as anything I’ve heard concerning our roster.

It makes sense for the present, because it maximizes AI’s strengths. Clearly, you have been right all along; AI is most successful with the ball in his hands early in the shot clock. I wish our coaching staff would see that. So often, he gets the ball coming off a screen with <10 seconds on the shot clock. I don’t think it’s fair to blame him when that doesn’t work.

Pairing him with AA helps shore up the defense, by putting him on the 1 instead of the 2.

The only amendment I would make is bringing that backcourt in off the bench. Let AI dominate the ball and lead the second unit. Not only does not allow him to play his game, it also keeps what little team chemistry we have intact.

Like it or lump it, Rip, Tay and Stuckey have the contracts that keep them Pistons beyond this season. And that’s a talented core group of players. If we’re going to build around them, then for heaven’s sake play them together.

(And with Steven A Smith’s report about Bosh wanting out? Who knows, AI for Bosh? I’d take it)

In short, AI off the bench with AA makes the best sense in the short term by preserving team chemistry and giving us what could be the most potent scoring 6th man in the league. Moreover, it makes best sense in the long-term because it builds chemistry for the future among Tay, Rip, and Stuckey.

Why is my name blue?

“Curry tried Iverson at the point for 14 games; the Pistons were 6-8.”

Curry “tried Iverson at the point for 14 games” while giving him the responsibility of a stand-still Chancey-like PG. That’s not anything like what a successful ‘Iverson at point’ offense would look like.

Were the Pistons serious about winning, they’d review film of Iverson games from recent seasons, especially the Jim O’Brien Sixers team and last year’s Nuggets. It’s not the simplest offense to run, but the Pistons have the personnel to make it all work highly successfully.

When the trade was announced, I had dreams of watching Sheed, Dice, and Amir roll to the basket for easy hoops when the opposition big came out ‘to show’ on Iverson. We haven’t seen any of that of that.

When Iverson switches sides of the floor with the dribble, three of the Pistons need to be in motion, with one Piston camped out behind the arc for the wide open three pointer. It’s a motion offense designed to take advantage of the scrambling defense, and it’s not anything like what Curry was running during the 14 games where Iverson was officially running the point.

The power of that offense is why 29 teams have had to develop specific defenses that they play to try to ‘wall off’ Iverson from switching sides with the dribble. (And of course, if you force teams to play that kind of weird ‘wall off’ defense, it opens up other things in your offense…)

“And with Steven A Smith’s report about Bosh wanting out?”

See here…

@Petey:
Not to be too much of a hater… but AI also played point guard for almost the entire 4th quarter as well (‘cause Stuck got injured), and that quarter didn’t go quite as well: http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20090201&game=CLEDET
I’m assuming you’ll answer that part of the problem in the 4th was the pairing of AI and Rip, and I would agree. But in that situation, if Curry brings AA in to play with AI, instead of Rip, then he would almost definitely have a mutiny on his hands (Rip had only played about 14 minutes going into the 4th, while AI had played about 33 mins).

“I completely agree that’s Iversons strength, but it’s not going to make us a better team. We don’t have the proper components to fit AI’s game”

Assuming AI’s game is using him at point with a motion offense on his penetrations, then:

- Sheed, Dice, Amir, and Max are all bigs with good hands who can roll to the basket, which is perfect for Iverson’s game.

- Sheed and Dice are great catch and shoot bigs, which is perfect for Iverson’s game.

- Afflalo camping out behind the arc is perfect for Iverson’s game.

- Stuckey in motion on the weak side ready to drive or shoot against an out-of-position defense is perfect for Iverson’s game.

- Stuckey at point to offer a change of pace on certain possession is perfect for Iverson’s game.

- Tay is versatile enough to be perfect for anyone’s game. (Though he needs to concentrate on his three point shot in practice to be best for this offense.) And he’s actually a crucial part of Iverson at PG because if Iverson gets stuck on a drive early in the shot clock, he can kick the ball out to Tay, who can act as a ‘secondary point’ and reset the offense to get a good shot with 10 seconds left on the shot clock.

Rip is the odd man out, but if Iverson is sitting on the bench for 11 – 14 mpg to give him the energy to attack and be effective in the fourth quarter, then Rip will have enough time with Stuckey to get his touches. And frankly, some creative coaching minds could find ways for Rip to be effective with Iverson – it would just involve him finding different roles than he had with Chauncey.

I don’t think we have the OPTIMAL roster to make an Iverson penetration motion offense work, but I do think we have a roster that can make it work at a high enough level to be able to compete with the elite. And isn’t that the goal, to be in position to maybe catch a break and steal a title before Rasheed’s legs expire?

And frankly, I don’t see the downside of trying. I don’t think it would retard the growth of Stuckey, Amir, Afflalo, and Max. If anything, I think it would HELP them grow as players.

We’re not going to get a high draft pick, so let’s try to win.

“I’m assuming you’ll answer that part of the problem in the 4th was…”

…too many minutes for Iverson, above everything else.

You simply can’t play Iverson 44 minutes against high level opposition and expect him to be effective in the fourth quarter. He’s waaaay too old for that, especially when he’s being expected to expend energy playing real defense.

Iverson got burnt in the fourth by a guy (Boobie) who played 19 minutes. No surprise.

I’ve long been advocating limiting Iverson’s minutes not because I don’t want to see him on the floor. I’ve been advocating it because I know what he needs to be effective late in games. You need to either rest him on the bench, or rest him on the defensive end. And I think we all agree on which of those options is preferable…

Were the Pistons serious about winning, they’d review film of Iverson games from recent seasons, especially the Jim O’Brien Sixers team and last year’s Nuggets. It’s not the simplest offense to run, but the Pistons have the personnel to make it all work highly successfully.

2007-08 NBA Denver Nuggets* 50 32 .610 2 3.74 110.0 106.3 Lost Western Conference First Round Karl (50-32)
2006-07 NBA Denver Nuggets* 45 37 .549 2 1.69 107.6 105.9 Lost Western Conference First Round Karl (45-37)
2005-06 NBA Philadelphia 76ers 38 44 .463 2 -2.11 106.0 108.1 Cheeks (38-44)
2004-05 NBA Philadelphia 76ers* 43 39 .524 2 -1.08 103.5 104.3 Lost Eastern Conference First Round O’Brien (43-39)
2003-04 NBA Philadelphia 76ers 33 49 .402 5 -2.95 99.1 101.9 Ayers (21-31), Ford (12-18)
2002-03 NBA Philadelphia 76ers* 48 34 .585 2 1.76 105.0 102.5 Lost Eastern Conference Semifinals Brown (48-34)
2001-02 NBA Philadelphia 76ers* 43 39 .524 4 1.27 102.1 100.3 Lost Eastern Conference First Round Brown (43-39)

… by your standards… our team is ALREADY “highly successful.”

I’m not gonna jump on the “it’s all AI’s fault” bandwagon. Clearly, he doesn’t win or lose games by himself- he always gets help. I do agree with Jeff Van Gundy though- Stuckey should be brought off the bench, not Rip. I’m not gonna bloat my post with stats and numbers (the only two stats I care about are W and L), but as someone who’s approaching 50 years old, I can say 10 years makes a lot of difference on your legs- so bring the young guy off the bench- he doesn’t have to worry so much about getting warmed up. Stuckey would still get his minutes, AI can still play his version of point, and Tay can still find Rip in his spots.

Honestly, I’m not sure there’s much we can do to get through Cleveland and Boston this year anyway. They’re both clicking, and we’re playing catch-up.

And for the record, I never hated Chauncey-

Why do people keep on insisting that Afflalo should be in the rotation of guards?? This is one of the most insane things… At best he is the 4th best guard on the roster and for a team that has three really good guards fighting for minutes, there is no way he should be getting anything more than garbage time minutes.

The problem isn’t Iverson, or Stuckey, or Rip. Its Joe D for making this trade in the first place and Curry for not having a clue as to how he could manage the situation better.

Great post Matt. Thoughtful and fair, as usual.

• I’m not too worried about Joe D. admitting a roster decision mistake, I’m more worried about him pulling through and admitting his coaching decision mistake. He’s got a long history with MC and played alongside the guy. I’d love to get a coach who can stick, but what is there to say that once MC gets through his growing pains he will be a guy who patrols our sidelines for the next 10 years? For that matter, can anyone see any roster moves that we could make that MC couldn’t screw up? I hope he comes into his own as a coach, and before everyone has turned against him, but he’s running out of time.

• Petey, actually Iverson is the odd man out. Our team doesn’t revolve around him. He needs the ball in his hands, he needs the ball early in the shot clock? Well Rip is a half court offense guy. Same with Sheed. Same with Tay. We’re building Stuck to be as well. That means in that lineup we’re going to be setting up well into the clock. However the zoo crew can run, they can work with AI’s game, and they allow AI to dominate the rock. By that calculation, who’s the odd man out, Rip or AI?

• brgulker, because you love the Pistons so much. No, actually it’s because your name is a link – you have the “website” field entered in your name area.

• I’m super-excited to see who we draft this year. Seems like the raw players are all craze for the lottery this year while the more polished players who will be able to contribute will be around for the Pistons: Lawson, Collison, Hansbrough, Budinger. And of course Robert Vaden. We’ve got to get Robert Vaden.

I think Detroit should draft DeVon Hardin

he is the answer in the post

I guess channel 4 (Local Detroit) will have an interview with Joe Dumars today. He’s supposed to be talking about the future of this team and possible trades. They had a quick look at the interview last night but all Joe D. was asked is if *"the Pistons still have the same swagger they used to have?" And he replied, “No. Because ‘swagger’ comes with winning. And if you are not winning, you there’s no room for ‘swagger’.”

Also, from a couple articles I’ve been reading. It seems like MC is taking shots from players but reporters refuse to give names. And basically told them to keep their mouths shut if they aren’t going to source who said what. And if there is anyone complaining about the situation they are in he replied, “The reality is, what does that have to do with getting stops? What does that have to do with making buckets?”

Remember when this team used to go whole seasons with having any drama? I blame Iverson and Curry. I’ve heard that Bosh has already annouced that he doesn’t want to play for the Raptors maybe we could trade both of them for him.

*Tried to quote it to the best of my ability. But what he said is basically what I have down.

Once Detroit acquires Brandon Bass, we’ll be saved.

“Some people think Joe Dumars won’t trade Iverson this early because it’d be akin to admitting a mistake; to that I say, since when has Dumars been too proud to admit failure?”
-Matt Watson

I agree with basically everything in your post, but looking at this quote, I think there’s a distinction to be made between the AI/Billups trade and Joe’s past mistakes. Of course it’s 100% true that Joe D has been incredible at salvaging value from even his worst mistakes, without letting pride get in the way. But, with the AI/Billups trade, I think he made a type of mistake which he has never made before. He traded the wrong player. IMO, Joe’s mistake wasn’t trading for AI, it was trading away Billups.

Joe has been amazing at turning less into more, turning nothing into something- look at all the moves cited up top: Darko=Stuck, Cleaves=Barry/Delfino, etc… But, with The Trade: he already had “something”, and he traded it for something less. I don’t think that has ever happened with any past Joe trade. My personal suspicion is that Joe, for all his brilliance, might have underestimated how good of a player Billups is, and how hard his contributions would be to replace (both in production and in leadership).

Still, maybe Joe can again turn it around with another trade, or we sign someone with the cap space, and it all turns out okay… but, a side-note: with giving Billups jersey number to AI, it did seem like Joe had made it a little more personal than he ever had before, like he blamed mostly just Billups for us not winning more ‘ships. Who knows… but the jersey # thing still doesn’t sit well with me at all (and I can’t imagine it sits well with the vet’s on the team either).

One more note on Iverson in motion at the point: the one season we have of Iverson “officially” playing point is the Jim O’Brien ‘04-’05 Sixers:

The three guys scoring the most points on that team other than Iverson were Kyle Korver, Andre Iguodala, and Marc Jackson.

That season was the highest TS% of Korver’s and Jackson’s entire careers, and the second highest TS% of Iguodala’s entire career.

Or to translate into non-stat language, the Iverson at point offense was generating higher percentage scoring opportunities for Iverson’s teammates than they’ve seen before or since.

Similarly, last year with Iverson playing point half the time, the four guys scoring the most points on the team other than Iverson were Carmelo Anthony, J.R. Smith, Linas Kleiza, and Kenyon Martin.

That season was the highest TS% of Anthony’s, Smith’s, and Martin’s entire careers, and the second highest TS% of Kleiza’s entire career.

Again, to translate into non-stat language, the Iverson at point offense was generating higher percentage scoring opportunities for Iverson’s teammates than they’ve seen before or since.

That’s the distillation of what I’m trying to convey when I babble on about ‘deforming the defense’. When the defense has to scramble to cope with Iverson on the move, Iverson’s teammates end left up left unguarded, and are thus able put the ball in the hoop at higher than usual efficiency…

Iverson at the point = turnovers out the ass.

“However the zoo crew can run, they can work with AI’s game”

It has nothing to do with running. This is about the halfcourt game.
2) Do you want the “zoo crew” playing the final eight minutes of the game?

“Our team doesn’t revolve around (Iverson).”

I agree. That’s why we’re not competitive. Iverson is, despite the obvious body size differences, a lot like Shaq. To get the unique benefits those players offer, you need to tailor your halfcourt game around their talents in some very specific ways.

Again, if playing Iverson at point would retard the growth of Detroit’s young players, I’d understand why it’s not being done. But I don’t think that is the situation here.

I honestly don’t see the downside.

I’ve said before and I’ll say again that playing Iverson off the ball on the weak side is as perverse as having Shaq spot up outside the three point arc. You’d be better off just waiving those players if that’s how you intend to use them, because they won’t help you win like that.

“Iverson at the point = turnovers out the ass.”

Iverson at point = lots of Iverson turnovers, but not lots of total team turnovers.

‘04-’05 Sixers:
Team – 1274 TO’s
Opp – 1394 TO’s

‘07-’08 Nuggets:
Team – 1203 TO’s
Opp – 1343 TO’s

The whole rationale of Iverson at point is that it makes the game significantly easier for the other four players on the court with him, which is why total team turnovers are held to a reasonable level.

That’s interesting that you picked THAT season to analyze. If we look at the pistons that season(http://www.82games.com/0405DET.HTM) we can see both Rip AND Teyshaun having +/-‘s of +11.9 and +12.8, respectively. And that was in a traditional share-the-ball offense with a true PG. Not to mention we went to the finals that year, and lost a nail-biter where Sheed blew a play against Horry. Otherwise we’re probably talking 4 time world champs.

I guess the point is that you can look at +/-‘s all you want and try and isolate players, but in reality that doesn’t tell the whole story because what matters is how that player fits in with the rest of the players on the court. Look at the 04-05 Pistons again: Ben Wallace +7.1, Billups +7.4, Rasheed +8.7… it’s no coincidence they’re all so high. It’s team work. Everyone fills a role. It wasn’t built around 1 player, but all of them together. AI will never be on a team where he makes his teammates better… unless they’re perennial cellar-dwellers.

Pistons Prince doesn’t deny team has thrown in the towel

When I asked Tayshaun Prince if there was any sense that the team had thrown in the towel, he never once said no. “We’re a .500 team right now,” he said. “Over the past 20 games we’ve been talking about getting it right, and we haven’t gotten it right yet. It’s like an old record.” — Detroit News

Was he referencing Sheed’s comment?

Pistons star Allen Iverson shorts cabbie

After flashing a wad of cash at the Canterbury Card Club, millionaire NBA player Allen Iverson couldn’t pony up $4 to cover a taxi ride? To say nothing of a tipping the cabbie? “The meter read $54,” said Randy Busch, owner of Southwest Metro Transportation. But driver Nick Spooner got paid only $50. After looking at his records Monday, Spooner told me he picked up Iverson plus two male companions and one female companion at 12:50 a.m. on Wednesday and drove them from the Shakopee card club to downtown Minneapolis’ Graves Hotel. The hotel is across the street from Target Center, where the Pistons beat the Timberwolves Wednesday night.

I think this explains alot. 12:50 a.m. Wed is Tuesday nite. I’m not their mother and not saying this is completely wrong, but I think it explains what is a priority to some. Just sets a bad example, win on Wed or no win. Combined with what Tay is saying, I think there is some obvious dissention in how Curry is handling this ballclub. Can anyone imagine Joe D. being out this late? Even as a GM the nite before the game?

“No one with the Pistons is giving up on this season. The struggle to adjust to Iverson has exceeded most expectations, but there’s still enough talent and pride in that locker room to believe that a potent playoff team remains a possibility, if not an inevitability.”

Somebody slap Keith Langlois.

I’m Quick Darshan and I approve everything that Toledo Joe said at the top of the thread.

Great post Matt. I agree that this situation isn’t Iverson’s fault at all. I’m actually very pleased to see how positive he is about the situation, whether he’s had the same success as the other guys who have been here before or not. I’m not worried about his late-night antics or whatever was mentioned above. We’re all human, we’ve all stayed out late when we’ve had to work the next day. I’d have a bigger problem with the club-hopping if it was our president (Obama, not Joe D) living it up into the early morning.

That being said, this team needs to get out and RUN. They’re thin on the front line (as far as big 7 footers go), but most of their bigs are athletic guys that can run the floor (Max, Amir, even Sheed to a point). Iverson would thrive in the chaos that a fast pace brings (just look at his numbers in Denver, especially the assist/turnover ratio) and I think Stuckey would do well too. I hate to say it, but this Pistons team isn’t the defensive force they once were. We need to start outscoring teams instead of relying on our defense so much, and the best way to do that is to speed up the pace of the game.

@Petey:
What you never seem to acknowledge is: WHAT IF AI ISN"T GOOD ENOUGH ANYMORE TO BASE THE WHOLE TEAM AROUND?
I capitalize because it’s important.

Seriously, I think there’s pretty strong evidence from his sharply declining PER that his game has eroded to the point where it no longer makes sense to make him the focal point of the team. I suspect you’re going to say we’re screwed if that is the case, but if we’re screwed, then it makes sense to start preparing for next year- which means more Stuck and Rip, because they’re both signed long-term and AI isn’t.

Another thing- you keep citing Shaq as a somewhat equally unique player. Okay, fine… But Shaq is similar in another way- he’s past his prime to the point where his team can no longer base their entire team around him. PHX gives him games off, for crying out loud! At this point, he can still be effective, but he is now most effective in a very limited role. You have said that AI needs his minutes cut, but at the same time you also argue that we need to structure our entire team around him (in terms of rotations/minutes, and putting the ball in his hands more)… So while you want his minutes decreased, in a sense you are arguing that his role (or usage) actually be increased! That is the exact opposite of what has proven effective in Shaq’s case, where a more limited role, and lower usage then in his prime years, has helped him remain an above average player.

Petey, I love AI’s talents and hope there’s a way to integrate them. But, what I saw yesterday, was not AI breaking down the defense. I saw a great defense forcing a great scorer wherever they wanted him to go.

A great defense will ALWAYS be able to do this to a great ballhandler.

If AI has the ball, I don’t want to see him trying to break down his defender. I want to see pick and roll. That way, the offense is forcing the defense to react. The other way, it’s the defense that’s dictating things.

“If we look at the pistons that season … in a traditional share-the-ball offense with a true PG.”

You guys have long been an offense designed around Chauncey’s talents. Chauncey was an unusually good stand-still PG in large part because his elite outside shot allowed the floor spacing for Rip to play his mid-range game.

You no longer have Chauncey. The offense you have grown deeply accustomed to will not be effective against elite competition with either Stuckey or Iverson running the point.

Chauncey is a rather unique talent (stand-still PG with elite outside touch) and if you think you can simply plug Stuckey’s quite different abilities into Chauncey’s role, you’re in for a rude surprise.

Joey D essentially assassinated Rip when he made that trade. There is not another PG currently established in the league who can enable the kind of game Rip has been running with an elite level of team effectiveness. (Well, perhaps Calderon could, but he doesn’t have Chauncey’s defense, and he seems unlikely to ever be able to survive heavy minutes in this league.)

Your offense is going to have to dramatically change to be an elite team whether Iverson runs the point or disappears into the ether. Since I don’t think playing Iverson at point will retard Stuckey’s growth, I don’t see why not to give it a serious try.

I’d take Brandon Bass’ 8.3 ppg in 19 minutes over 0 ppg in 0 mins in the NBA from DeVon Hardin anyday!

Not to mention Bass is a more prolific free throw shooter than Allen Iverson.

It has nothing to do with running. This is about the halfcourt game.
2) Do you want the "zoo crew" playing the final eight minutes of the game?

1. If you want Iverson to get the ball early in the shot clock, then it has everything to do with running. We always get into our sets deeper into the clock, which is why we always have one of the slowest teams in the league. If you want Iverson playing with Rip, Tay, and Sheed, then he’s NOT going to get the ball early in the clock.

2. The question isn’t whether I want the zoo crew playing in the final eight minutes, I don’t want Iverson playing in the final eight minutes. As much as I’d love to rely on AI’s 40 percent shooting down the stretch, Stuckey is our new Mr. Big Shot. Everytime we ignore him and let AI dominate the ball in the final eight minutes, we collapse. I’d like to see us stop collapsing.

“Joey D essentially assassinated Rip when he made that trade. There is not another PG currently established in the league who can enable the kind of game Rip has been running with an elite level of team effectiveness.”
-Petey:

sigh
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200805100ORL.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200805130DET.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200811030CHA.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200811050TOR.html

Rip looked fine against Cleveland. The best the offense looked that whole game was when Rip was running around and forcing Pavlovic to make decision on whether to trail or go around the screens.

Talk about deforming the defense.

I don’t think Joe D is trying to make Stuck into CB pt 2. I look at stuck along the same lines as Isiah. A guy who can probably get to the hole anytime he wants but also has a decent #2 to set up. take Sheed’s outside abilities compared to Laimbeer’s and you’ve got decent spacing for Rip to succeed on curls/screens.

Petey: I don’t think you can be a stand-still PG in this league without a good long ball. The two are combo not mutually exclusive. In short, if you can’t beat guys off the dribble, you better be able to drill it from afar.

QD: “what I saw yesterday, was not AI breaking down the defense. I saw a great defense forcing a great scorer wherever they wanted him to go.” That’s known as deforming the offense.

“Petey, I love AI’s talents and hope there’s a way to integrate them. But, what I saw yesterday, was not AI breaking down the defense. I saw a great defense forcing a great scorer wherever they wanted him to go.”

Most definitely.

“A great defense will ALWAYS be able to do this to a great ballhandler.”

Most definitely, again.

The trick is taking advantage of the fact that it takes (at least) two defenders to force Iverson where they want him to go.

That means there is a LONG moment where the other Pistons are playing 4 on 3. Basketball is easy when you play 4 on 3.

That’s why you need to have three Pistons in motion looking for a pass at that moment, and one Piston camped out for an open three at that moment.

Curry thinks of Iverson as a scorer, which is why we have all the quotes from him about wanting Iverson to shoot rather than pass on the drive. But that’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the advantage Iverson brings to the game.

Iverson’s nothing more than an overpaid hair model. Send him to the bench and forget about his past accomplishments. He’s a defensive liability and a turnover machine. It kills me to hear things like “Allen Iverson’s Detroit Pistons…”

“Petey: I don’t think you can be a stand-still PG in this league without a good long ball.”

Andre Miller.

But I basically agree with your point. The only stand-still PG’s in the league that could potentially lead an elite team are Chauncey and Caledron.

“Joey D essentially assassinated Rip when he made that trade. There is not another PG currently established in the league who can enable the kind of game Rip has been running with an elite level of team effectiveness.”
-Petey

Games 4&5 last year against Orlando, without Billups (he was injuted, Stuck started in his place):
#4: Rip= 32 pts, 6 rebs, 3 asts, 2 stl’s on 12 for 24 fga’s, with 8/9 ft’s
#5: Rip= 31 pts, 2 rebs, 3 asts, 4 stl’s on 7 for 20 fga’s, with 16/16 ft’s

We eliminated the Magic with Stuckey and Rip sharing the backcourt, and with Rip playing “his game.”

"Joey D essentially assassinated Rip when he made that trade. There is not another PG currently established in the league who can enable the kind of game Rip has been running with an elite level of team effectiveness."
-Petey

If it were true that an off-screens guy can’t perform without a true point guard, then Reggie Miller downgrading from Mark Jackson to Travis Best musta killed him, right? Right? Reggie put up 18.9 ppg the year after Jackson left and 16.5 the following year. And he was 35 and 36 years old respectively. Rip will be better than fine with Stuckey.

“Petey, I love AI’s talents and hope there’s a way to integrate them. But, what I saw yesterday, was not AI breaking down the defense. I saw a great defense forcing a great scorer wherever they wanted him to go.”

For example, in the third quarter against Cleveland, the Cavs were able to send Iverson where they wanted him to go. Iverson still made shots, but that’s not the important part.

The important part is that the Cavs’ efforts to send Iverson where they wanted him to go meant that they couldn’t account for everyone on the Pistons, and they chose not to account for Amir. Did you check out Amir’s line in that quarter?

FG 3-5 FT 2-2 Reb 6 Off Reb 4

Basketball is easy when you play 4 on 3. Can you imagine if we actually had an offense actually DESIGNED to take advantage of the fact that we’re playing 4 on 3 when the opposition sends Iverson where they want him to go?

I think everyone gets pushed to extremes in these Petey vs. Everyone debates. Just like Petey thinks we overvalue Stuckey, I think he overvalues AI. For instance, he does frequently “deform the defense” but his passes are sometime of poor quality which allows defenders to recover. Nevertheless, we are stuck with AI for the rest of the season and our current utilization of him hasn’t exactly yielded stellar results. Therefore, it might make sense to let AI handle the ball more in early offense situations. I’m definitely not as confident as petey that it’s magically gonna make us better, but it’s worth a try. The worse that could happen is that we keep losing.

“You guys have long been an offense designed around Chauncey’s talents.”

That’s really complete hogwash. If anything, our offense was designed around Rip’s ability’s and maybe one could say it was designed to mitigate Ben’s weaknesses. Rip needs a setup man, CB understood that and implemented that role because he’s a good PG.

“You no longer have Chauncey. The offense you have grown deeply accustomed to will not be effective against elite competition with either Stuckey or Iverson running the point.”

Um, how would ANYBODY know that… Curry refuses to start Stuckey, Rip, and Tey and run the old offense. That offense, btw, was one of the most efficient offense in the league for years.

“Chauncey is a rather unique talent (stand-still PG with elite outside touch) and if you think you can simply plug Stuckey’s quite different abilities into Chauncey’s role, you’re in for a rude surprise.”

Well, I agree, Stuckey isn’t Chauncey and you can’t just slap him in there and expect him to do exactly what Chauncey used to do. But what Stuckey provides is the ability to drive and finish… something Billups really never had. Leverage that instead of Billups bombs and there’s no reason Stuckey, Rip, and Teyshaun playing the majority of minutes, running our old offense, couldn’t improve our offensive efficiency… right now it’s really atrocious.

Brandon Bass the difference maker!!!

Been reading this site for 2 years great site , thought i would weigh in on a couple of points . whether A.I. should be point or not is irrelevent he won’t be here next year , at this point we have to look to the future and play stukey at point, also more mins for Amir ,Max ,and Afflalo to see what we have . we got to face it guys were not going anywhere this year best thing that could happen is we win 38 to 39 games hit the lottery. then do whatever it takes to get a inside scoring big man .

Petey: Yeah, I heard Bosh’s retort… but what is he supposed to say? If SASs report was accurate or inaccurate, Bosh would, of course, say the same thing. I guess it comes down to whose word you think is better.

Petey:
“Basketball is easy when you play 4 on 3. Can you imagine if we actually had an offense actually DESIGNED to take advantage of the fact that we’re playing 4 on 3 when the opposition sends Iverson where they want him to go?”

(PS how does everyone get text in italics on this site?)

I agree with Petey more and more as I watch AI play. I should have listened to him sooner.

Because I agree with Petey — in that AI needs the ball early (in the shot clock) and often; and that AI should play PG, but not in a traditional sense (like CB) — I think we should bring AI off the bench, pairing him with AA at shooting guard.

Let’s face it, AI and Rip don’t mesh well, mostly because they are accustomed to being the centerpieces of their respective offenses. Rip needs lots of motion and big men to set screens for him without the ball to be effective. AI needs the ball, space to maneuver, and spot-up shooters.

It’s hard to get those two contrasting styles to get well together. The only way it might works is if Rip becomes a spot-up shooter for 5-10 minutes / game. I think he’s capable of this, as long as it’s not his only role, btw.

Finally, Stuckey, for all his promise, has not yet learned to be a floor general, and he’s not a spot-up shooter. Like AI, he needs the ball to score effectively. For all these reasons, it makes sense to limit his minutes with AI as well. Or, at the very least, let AI run the show while AI and Stuck are in the backcourt together.

For all those reasons, it makes sense to let AI be AI. Let him play the PG and pair him with defensive players, like AA, Tay, and Max. At the five, insert Sheed or Dyess (not both at once) for pick-and-pop options.

And finally, if we are ever going to let AI be AI, then it makes best sense to bring him off the bench, for the the present and future success of the team.

In the present, it makes sense because he can dominate the ball and create offense with an otherwise impotent second unit.

For the future, it makes sense because we are building chemistry with what appears to be the future of the franchise (Rip, Tay, Stuck, Amir?).

Thanks Quick Darshan. Also, like others, I don’t think this should devolve into a Rip vs. AI vs. Stuckey debate. All three would start for at least most NBA teams and get 35+ minutes regularly. The problem is, NBA teams, for good reasons, only start two guards only play guards a total of 96 minutes.

But I wanted to make a different point, which is that this thread has been pretty much all about offense, not defense, and in past years, Detroit won more with defense than offense. Let’s not over-romanticize the offense in the “Chauncey years.” Yes, CB had an excellent assist-TO ration, and a good three-point shot. Yes, he was smart. Yes, he could nail FTs with the best of them.

Still, Detroit in this era NEVER had a great offense, not under the great Larry Brown or “offensive genius” Flip Saunders. And that was mostly because of problems Detroit still has: no consistent post offense from big men, and generally too much reliance on jump-shooting that could go depressingly cold for agonizing stretches. That wasn’t Chauncey’s fault, and Detroit also had a weaker bench in past years than this year. But Detroit never won by out-gunning the other team. And remember our problem of having no “go to” guy in the closing minutes?

Detroit won by playing clamp-down defense when it needed to, at least most of the time. Now sure, AI isn’t a great defensive player, but weren’t we complaining about fast PGs blowing by Chauncey last year? More generally, Detroit’s great D started having more holes over the past few years: partly because Ben left, partly because of new rules, maybe a feeling of being able to turn it off and turn it on. . . .

Anyway, whatever tweaks or changes Detroit makes should keep defense in mind.

@TJ – Still, Detroit in this era NEVER had a great offense, not under the great Larry Brown or "offensive genius" Flip Saunders.

Not true. Here’s an excerpt from Hollinger’s forcast this season(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/trainingcamp08/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PistonsForecast0809)

"Inevitably, Detroit has been misunderstood because of its slow pace. The Pistons have been viewed as a tough, defensive team for the past few years because they’re always among the top three teams in points allowed; conversely, their offense hasn’t been valued as highly because of its middling status in the league tables. But look at things on a per-possession basis, and the Pistons’ offense has been nearly as effective as the defense in the three seasons under Flip Saunders — a key difference between this Detroit era and the Larry Brown teams.

In 2007-08, Detroit finished eighth in the league in offensive efficiency, with a game-plan predicated on taking more shots than opponents. It might not seem that way given their methodical offense, but the Pistons were a low-mistake offensive team that took lots of midrange jumpers and made a concerted effort to rebound the misses.

The Pistons actually were a hair below the league average in TS% at 53.9, so just relying on their shooting wasn’t the ticket. The entire reason they were able to succeed was that, per possession, they took more shots than any team in the league. Detroit had the league’s third-lowest turnover rate, making miscues on 12.9 percent of their trips, and the sixth-best offensive rebound rate at 29.4 percent.

Add those two items together and the Pistons were the league’s only team to average more than one shot per possession (counting a free-throw attempt as 0.44 of a “shot”); in turn, that advantage alone was the reason their offense was so effective."

I still don’t think this trade was a mistake. Everybody agrees that the Pistons needed a change. As much as I liked Billups, the change would not have come without trading him. The goals for this trade were:

1- Change Pistons game by trading Billups.
2- Generate cap space for 09/10 FA market.
3- Get a decent player in return that can help the team in 08-09.

1. didn’t quite work out, but the first two goals are met. And I believe those were the primary reasons for this trade anyways.

Throughout this whole thing the one guy I feel the most sorry for is McDyess. He is the one Piston that showed the most passion and commitment since the 04 championship and it’s looking like he’s going to end his career without a ring because of the timing.

@Toledo Joe:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2008.html
Last year, if you adjust for pace, we had the 6th best offense in the NBA and the 4th best defense (that is in points per 100 possessions). The year before: 6th offense, 7th defense. The year before that (the 64 win year): 4th offense, 5th defense.

This season: 23rd offense, 11th defense.

We do not have a very good offense this year, but to say we “never” had a great offense is absolutely NOT true. We had a very, very good one.

Heh, Toledo Joe got pwned, but he’s not the only one… I would have agreed with him, until I read the stats the rest of you posted.

Very, very interesting stuff. And humbling, quite honestly.

Walter: “He is the one Piston that showed the most passion and commitment since the 04 championship and it’s looking like he’s going to end his career without a ring because of the timing.”

Couldn’t agree more. A very class act. He’d have a ring if Sheed had stayed with Horry in 05.

brgulker: you’re saying exactly what most of have said from day one of this trade: AI should come off the bench where he can dominate the ball against back-up PGs and set everyone else up. On the second unit, who can get their shot when they want to? Really no-one except Bynum to the hole that I see. Stuck, Tay, Sheed can get a shot whenever they feel like it thru taking it to the hole or posting up.

The trade was made for the reasons Walter says, + 1 of getting Stuck on the floor. Why change that for just one year for a guy who won’t be around next year? And then take into account this horrendous small ball BS for a month. What’s that going to do for Stuck and the coming years?

Ben Maller rumors (Fox Sports I believe) has a story about how AI was playing for a contract for next year and now because of the pistons struggles he will be lucky for someone to offer him the full MLE. It’s not all his fault, but I’ve said before he could increase that amount if he “willingly” came off the bench and lit up the 2nd unit. He could score 15-18 pts a nite (which is where he is now) and he could play another 4-5 years as a sixth man, probably win a couple of awards and make 8-10M/year. Swallowing pride is a hard thing to do, but he’s looking at taking a 15M pay cut. OUCH!! (I mean, from his POV)

PETEY WROTE:

“"Petey, I love AI’s talents and hope there’s a way to integrate them. But, what I saw yesterday, was not AI breaking down the defense. I saw a great defense forcing a great scorer wherever they wanted him to go."

Most definitely.

"A great defense will ALWAYS be able to do this to a great ballhandler."

Most definitely, again.

The trick is taking advantage of the fact that it takes (at least) two defenders to force Iverson where they want him to go.

That means there is a LONG moment where the other Pistons are playing 4 on 3. Basketball is easy when you play 4 on 3.

That’s why you need to have three Pistons in motion looking for a pass at that moment, and one Piston camped out for an open three at that moment."

The problem with this is that the other players have no idea where AI’s going to go (especially if it’s the defense that dictating where he goes).

How many times did we see AI dribble into the lane and then out the other side to NO ADVANTAGE?

At least with a pick-and-roll/pop, the offense is deciding where and who sets the pick. The let AI break down his man approach plays will get crushed by a great defense the same way the JORDAN RULES crushed the pre-triangle offense Bulls.

Wow, thanks for the folks posting the stats that show that my naked eye didn’t tell me anything like the whole story.

I still say Detroit could be agonizing to watch on offense in previous years, and that we didn’t score a ton of points in previous years, but the “offensive efficiency” numbers do seem significant.

Let me put it this way: this era of Detroit basketball never won by “outgunning” the other team, so we have to think about defense too. But it is depressing to see how our offense has declined.

This season has really sapped me of a lot of energy, even in everyday life. Pistons basketball was one of those things where, for at least six months of the year, I could be happy about at least something, no matter what else was going on. I don’t have that anymore. I’m not even watching anymore.

And Petey still sucks.

/Seacrest out

I think a big point is being missed here: Who the crap cares about how we get AI his shot, surround him with the right mix, get out of his way, let him dominate the ball, or WTF-ever.

The season is half over, it ain’t working and he’s not back next year (barring a miracle). Let’s get on with it. I’m not saying throw in the towel, but our time can be better spent finding out what guys we have can or can’t do, how they integrate and at the end of the day, do we want to be a player for Sheed’s services next year given his game and how HE and IT will fit in for what we want to do.

It was AI’s job to fit in, not the other way around. And the bulk of that cluster-screw rests in Curry’s lap. I kinda figure he’s auditioning just as much as some of the players are. Let’s find out rather than wasting time on stuff that won’t matter in 42 games (excl’g post season).

The Pistons are 10-2 (4-0 w/ Rip, 6-2 w/ AI)when either AI or Rip doesn’t play and 15-19 when they are both playing. This isn’t a coincidence because it was too many games to be by “accident”. It’s obvious one of the two must go for this team to be competitive, and they’re clearly sacrificing more than just their own minutes and points by attempting to play together. A move must be made now, because this is way too frustrating to watch. Everything else is actually irrelevant

@Joel:
I’m with you. Pistons Basketball was always the warmest part of these cold winters. Not so this year.

“The problem with this is that the other players have no idea where AI’s going to go”

I agree that the Pistons players have no idea where AI is going on the drive, but that’s because Curry’s gameplan is for Iverson to shoot off the drive, rather than giving him the option to option to pass off the drive if the opposition sends a second man.

I’ve watched Iverson enough to know where he’s going to go on the drive. It’s not rocket science. Coaches can gameplan where players should go when Iverson drives and convey instructions to players. It’s not the simplest offense in the book, but it’s far from the most complicated.

For example, when Ilgauskus comes out to the top of the circle ‘to show’ on Iverson when Iverson shifts from strong side to weak side, The man Ilgauskus is covering should roll to the hoop for a pass leading to an open layup. Another Cav will likely come over to cover him, and the Piston that other Cav was originally covering should move to a spot where he can knock down a wide open 12ft jumper. And so on, and so on. Playing 4 on 3 really does make basketball easy. Someone will always be wide open.

“Wow, thanks for the folks posting the stats that show that my naked eye didn’t tell me anything like the whole story.”

Hoops is fascinating in that just eyeballing it will always give you the wrong impression, and just looking at stats will always give you the wrong impression.

The only way you can even start to figure out what is going on is to combine the two…

“If it were true that an off-screens guy can’t perform without a true point guard, then Reggie Miller downgrading from Mark Jackson to Travis Best musta killed him, right? Right?”

Reggie Miller and Rip have fundamentally different toolkits, despite the fact that they both run around screens to receive the ball. Rip’s uniqueness is that he thrives in the mid-range area. And Chauncey’s elite long-range touch created the floor spacing that enabled the specifics of Rip’s game.

Rip will be fine, and will continue to be a valuable player in this league for several more years, (and if ‘assassinated’ implied otherwise, I’ll take back the word), but he’ll never again be the leading scorer on a team that goes deep into the playoffs.

OK, Random trade scenario with Bosh rumors floating…

Bosh and Kopono for Rip and Teyshaun

The numbers work.

I’m with MarkButter — the season is HALF OVER. Bring Iverson off the bench and just work on building “The Detroit Pistons” for the rest of the season. Iverson leaves and we’ll have some continuity going into next season because Rip, Stuckey, and Tay will have more chemistry and playing time together. They are our core.

And Chauncey’s elite long-range touch created the floor spacing that enabled the specifics of Rip’s game.

Yep, and Sheed and Tay never stretched the floor. They’re such horrible shooters. Their defenders would have just cheated off of them to cover Rip, but fortunately Super-Chauncey kept them at bay. Now, since Stuckey (or Suckey is more like it!! Haha, get it?? He sure does suck!) is such an abysmal offensive player, Rip is screwed and won’t ever be able to lead our team in scoring again.

@Brad: that would be a very great trade :)

I’ll throw out a more inconsequential trade idea, but it’s one that I think would be mutually beneficial (now that Jameer Nelson is out for a while):
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=2816~2758&teams=19~8&te=&cash=

It would take away Curry’s option to play super tiny ball with AI and Bynum in the backcourt (he’s actually done it before), and we get another decent big, but one with standard center size.

“but he’ll never again be the leading scorer on a team that goes deep into the playoffs.”