Discussion in 'Pistons and NBA' started by Menace, Apr 3, 2009.
How hard have you looked?
True dat! I think the BIGGEST thing missing this year (aside from coaching, consistancy, effort, etc.) is chemistry. Guys haven't been on the same page all year. I REALLY liked this quote from Will Bynum last night. Right after dropping 26 on the B-Cats and breaking a Piston scoring record for a quarter, he says this: How about THAT Chuck!? You GET THAT Rip!?
The Truth!! During one of the Heat games I kept on thinking - why isn't our superstar doing things like that.
That is a pretty nice soundbite. Much better than saying something like "I knew it had it in me, but nobody would give me a chance. Finally, I got to show what I could do."
There is no secret kabal.
If it was secret, how would you know whether or not it exists?
It was a bit like AI jumping into Kwame's arms the other night to be honest.
Walter must have been in on it!
Indeed. His silence must be an admission of his guilt.
Bingo. I don't buy the "clique" conspiracy.
You do. You just don't understand it. (I'm not trying to start something) We've had waves of bench players. Sometimes they stink, sometimes they don't. If Mo Evans and Flip Murray can make it with Atlanta, why can't they make it with Detroit? There has been a pecking order that has held guys like Max, Amir and Kwame to a high standard or no minutes, but that same standard was never applied to Billups, Prince, Hamilton and Wallace. Joe is taking a wrecking ball to that. The days of "best starting 5" and "4 all-stars" are done. We need to get back to above average talent playing at best 30~32 minutes a game, not guys trending up to 40 MPG whether they suck or not on a given night. We need guys who go out and leave it all on the floor, ignoring talent, resume, contract and championship pedigree. Earn what you eat. That's the Pistons recession. Trim the fat and find some hunger again. Last night was amazing because for the first time in years, the coach went with the hot hand, and sat the anointed saviour because he was stinking. You can't go with the hot hand if Tay plays 38 minutes a night. You can't go with the hot hand if Rip or AI plays 38 or 40 minutes a night. Thank god Rip got thrown out, or Bynum might never have had a record setting night, and we might have lost down the stretch with the established order continuing to half-heartedly choke wins away, despite their obvious advantages in talent and experience.
No. I just disagree with you. ------ What you're stating is not in line with a clique amongst the players or them not wanting to let a "new" player like AI come in and have equal say on the court. You're saying that the coaches that we've had cling to the starters. Completely different thing IMO. I think Tashawn explained it pretty perfectly with this; And if you're looking for a reason that is IMO why Bynum can dominate the ball and AI couldn't. That and he was effective taking over. It wasn't forced. I don't buy the argument it's b/c Rip got thrown out. I've seen Bynum "take over" in stretches while the starters were still in the game. And if KB continues to look like Tim Duncan, the players seem to have no problem throwing the ball into him on the post on every possession. These half-hearted "chokes" in losses or collapses are due to bad coaching not some player A or B must play said minutes, and take 18 shots and all offense runs through him because he's been on the team this many years, and brings donuts before the game to the other 3 starters he likes. We run with what's effective. And the reason Flip Murray and Mo Evans can thrive (if you can even call it that) on ATL is b/c the Hawks are a running team that relies more on athleticism to win than anything else. The team plays to their strengths. You could also argue that Flip never got a fair chance here (although i disagree), but that was not due to a "player clique", it was due to the inability of Flip Saunders to play anyone else. The "pecking order" is not going to be destroyed until you have a coach that's capable of coaching. How many times have we heard that the coach asked Rip or Sheed to come back into the game and they were like "no, let the other guys play" ?.
No, because the only coach who could get away with it was LB. Because LB did everything his way, which is why Bill D wanted to fire him after one season but he screwed up and won a title. Flip was the rollover coach. He rolled over for whatever these guys wanted. He never imposed his will on this team, so this notion that it was him freezing out the bench, in retrospect, seems bizarre to me. As far as Curry, he's stretched things further, benching AI and Rip, but he's waited until the very end of the season, when winning is more important than anything else at this point, to sit Stuckey for sucking. I'm not a black and white guy. I don't run with "it's all coach's fault", "if they just play AA and Amir we will win" as absolutes. Trying to understand why Joe will trade Billups at the top of his game, one has to dig a little deeper, and go beyond the simple and absolute explanations. It's completely disingenuous to claim that the players win but only the coach can lose. Have you seen Bynum break Isiah Thomas' single quarter scoring record playing with the starters? Rip has been hogging the ball since he got put back in the SL. But Flip never had that problem in Minny. Why did he have that problem here? I have no idea. This is news to me. Although I wouldn't put it past Sheed. He's the one player in the league who would rather go on vacation than be in the All-Star game. It's not that he's a generous dude, it's that he's in his own world.
I remember in the past Sheed and Chauncey suggesting to Flip to leave the guys in when they are performing well. I do not remember Rip saying that though. I got to look at the game yesterday and it was one of the most enjoyable because everyone was playing hard. The All-Star game aint all of that, roscoe. I would prefer to be on vacation on a beach somewhere, too.
IMO Flip treated the starting five like his new toy and he wanted as many regular season wins as possible. In his mind, that meant playing the starters to death. Tay publicly asked for less minutes during Flip's tenure. Sheed wouldn't have cared. Rip i'll give you. Chauncey wouldn't shut-up about being tired. I don't think Flip was "freezing" out the bench. I think he didn't trust the bench and the "best starting 5" mantra that was drilled into our heads made it easy to justify the minutes. Which is fine, but you also blame the players far more than anyone else in regards to the team. You've stated that we didn't win X amount of titles b/c the team didn't "try hard enough". Or that we would have won X series if the players "played harder". I'm not saying that it's all the coaches fault, but i don't buy this whole clique conspiracy. Could the tenure/relationships have played a role in instances? Sure. But it's too far fetched for me to see the team "freezing" out AI or not wanting to let a new player step in and play a major role. IMO, there is a level of comfort in the familiarity, but when we went back to running our offense through Rip, it wasn't a "power play", it was because nothing else was working and that has proven to be effective. The players know how to win, and they can see what works. And the reason LB got away with pretty much doing whatever he wanted is because they believed in him as a coach. If Curry had introduced a sound (different) strategy/offense, i don't think that it would have been nearly as difficult to enforce. In fact the team still tried pretty much every idea Curry put out there. I don't think Will Bynum will ever do that again regardless of who he's playing with. Unfair question. Rip has hogged the ball throughout his entire career. This is not new. That's on him. Flip never had a starting unit as talented there as the one in DET. He had to play the bench. It's been said by a few people; CB in regards to Stuck,Rip,Sheed. I don't recall Tay; a few times during the Flip era. Once i think during the MC era. If you look at one of the articles in the paper today, Curry goes out of his way to specify that he's going to bring Stuckey when there's 6 min or so left in the 4th and make the Bynum thing seem like a rare occurrence. In a previous article, he goes out of his way to specify the offense in crunch time will always run through Rip (after i think another game someone went off in the 4th). Why would he need to placate Stuckey or even Rip for that matter ? It sounds more like what he wants than player's demands.
For the record, I'll put it out there that Flip Saunders was NOT the reason we lost last year. Sorry for tending to see Sheed's and Tay's suckiness as well. I tend to look at CB the year before. The coaches don't play the games, for one. They set the rotations and call the plays, and while Flip was far from perfect, I don't think he's worse than either Mike Brown or Doc Rivers. The ONLY reason we didn't represent the East these past two years, is because the players didn't want it as bad as the players on the other team. (so yeah, blow this ish up already. No more Rip %%%%%ing, no more Tay passive-aggressive whining, Sheed bull, etc.)
Why didn't anyone want Flip after we fired him? Why did Denver want Billups after he failed? The last 22 NBA championships were won by these coaches: Rivers (1) Popovich (4) Riley (3) Brown (1) Jackson (9) Rudy T (2) Daley (2) 7 coaches, 22 Championships. Only 1 coach on that board is not yet considered a great coach. Do you really think Flip Saunders' name could ever be added to that list? Give him CP3, Kobe, Lebron, KG, and Howard, and you'd hear excuses about how the egos couldn't mesh and it was a bad experiment by the GM. The coach matters.
On my opinion only true losers make excuses. How they love their precious excuses. Overplayed and tired even though no one player was ever in the top 10 MPG, etc.. One of Billups post-trade interviews was the most open and honest you will find on why the Pistons were a one and done team. I don't have the link but I know most of you have read it.
There are a lot of shades of gray here. I remember hearing Tom Izzo speaking about the distinction between player led teams as opposed to coach led teams. His opinion was that player led teams were more effective. The problem is that you have to have a coach that is good enough to work within those parameters. A player led team didn't work with Flip Saunders. He wasn't able to get the team ready for the playoffs. Winning in the regular season he can do..but who cares. Curry came in talking about holding players accountable through charting their defensive failings among aother things. We expected a coach led team anchored by an insider...someone who knew the players and knew how to motivate them. We need someone who can fill either role.
If the 2005 Spurs were coached by Flip Saunders and we still had LB, does anyone here think they would have beat us in the Finals? The answer is no because they wouldn't have even been there. They would have been knocked out in the WCF, game 6.
Separate names with a comma.