I'm not hopeless. Just hopeful in a sometimes negative way. I do consider myself a fan. I'll be seeing their next game at the MetraPark here in Billings.
I'm definitely not arguing they should have kept those guys per se. Getting rid of CB for cap space is OK in itself. Letting Sheed go and Dyess go is OK because of their age and our need to rebuild. Aflalo and Amir bugged me because they were such good values for the money, but I could also tolerate losing them if it were for a reason. The part that bugs me is that Joe is blowing the wad on guys who are KNOWN as weak defenders throughout the league. I never thought that would happen. These are the guys that he typically passes on and laughs at other teams for wasting their money on them. There was a quote from Skiles(?) that said something like "the NBA has not yet seen a player that Gordon could guard." Gordon has been coming off the bench for Chicago, and he has never had good +/- numbers, PER, net production, or any other stat that takes into account his overall game. The Bulls always scored more when he was in the game, but gave up even more than that on the other end of the court. He's a one dimensional weapon that doesn't pay off. The Bulls reportedly didn't make him an offer in the off season, which is a red flag. And we were the one-man. He's a serious offensive talent, but as Detroit fans, we should know that is only half the game. Having a one-way offensive player is worse than having a defensive specialist with no offensive skills. The reason is that if you have a Ben Wallace type, he can hide or set picks on offense. If you have a defensive liability, the other team can exploit it on every single possession. I'm not that bent out of shape, just trying to articulate my frustration with the direction. I'm gettin league pass just like the next guy. I'll watch all 82 games once again and probably buy some more merchandise. My overall thoughts can best be summarized as "Joe has inexplicably veered from his blueprint for unknown reasons."
Hell no. I was just listing players on those teams (good or bad defenders) and I forgot KG... just about the best defensive player in the league.
When you think about what type of players Dumars looks for it was not necessarily about bringing in any given type. When he traded Stack for Rip I am sure defense was not the reason. Same with signing Billups back in 03 who was known for his scoring. His 1st big trade was for Corliss Williamson - a known poor defender. Seems like his main criteria has simply been players willing to work hard who want to be here. Valid concerns about Gordon and it has to leave even the most die hard Dumars fan wondering why he would spend so much money for essentially a backup guard. The Bulls have made some pretty wacky moves over the years so I don't know if they are the best example to follow. I thought Gordon kept them in the Celtics series last Spring and almost won it for them. He is one of the best shooters in the league right now and is not too bad handling the ball. I never thought he was that bad of a defender to actually hurt his team but I will be watching more of him than I ever have before pretty soon so we will see. I have to admit that it will be fun watching such of a good long range shooter. We have not had someone that good probably since Dumars when he played.
this league has changed from back to basket league to 3pt contest league. JD made conclusions and hired "new league" guys. Those comparisons with top contenders are useless: according to this logic 25 GMs in this league suck and do it royally. I agree with max that this "bad defenders" talk is here overblown fanmyth. Please, TaS, you are suffering under strong "grass is greener in the other side" mentality now.
And how many teams win all the Championships? About 5. Celtics Lakers Pistons Spurs Bulls 26 Championships since 1980
4 out of 5 used the superstar model. The other team used defense and the league changed the rules the next year to make it more difficult for them. Maybe Dumars got tired of going against the grain.
MJ/Pippen/Rodman? That's one of the best defensive threesomes of all time. The Bulls were the top defensive team in the league. The Spurs were the top defensive team when they won the titles. When the Rockets won the title, they were #2 in the league in defense. The Celtics were tops when they won. Even the Larry Bird Celtics were 3rd in the league in defense. '88 Pistons were #2 in D '89 Pistons were #3 '90 Pistons were #2 '04 Pistons were #1
They were highly ranked in a different type of league, a league Stern wants to get back to. The Spurs went out and got Richard Jefferson, why, surely not to be a better defensive team, but to score more points. This is almost an IMPOSSIBLILITY for us Piston fans to grasp, the only champions we've ever known won it with defense and toughness, Stern closed the book on that in the early nineties and when it reared it's ugly head again (when we went back to back finals) he shut it down again.
It's OK to go get an offensive player when you're 2nd in the league in points allowed (even with multiple injuries last year). Roger Mason and Michael Finley were 3rd and 4th in minutes last year for them. They also added Dyess and Ratliff.
Solid TaShawn. Your post makes a lot of sense. I'm guessing I will probably agree with you, but I'll reserve judgment until I actually see these boys in action.
Defensive basketball is our heritage. It's been around for a long time in Detroit. Having the changes made to our roster is like a French-Canadian boy marrying a Jewish girl in the 19-fifties. Families will squabble, but change needs to be met with an open mind.
