"jslater@NOutnet.utoledoSPAM.edu" <jslater.DeleteThis@utnet.utoledo.edu> wrote:
> It's not really all that obvious. Everyone is down on 'Sheed for his
> attitude/performance in most of the Boston series. But getting rid of
> him would leave a huge hole -- it's not as if Detroit has another
> plausible starting center: Johnson isn't ready, Maxiell isn't big
> enough, McDyess is too small and too old, Ratliff is old and was never
> really all that good, although he does try. And it's not like Detroit
> is going to get a young, healthy, problem-free center with a good post-
> up game and good defensive skills in exchange for 'Sheed and 'Sheed
> alone.
I don't think they'll come up with another player who can defend like him
or equal his low post skills. As a consolation, though, it shouldn't be
that hard to find a better rebounder and his outside shooting role can be
absorbed by other players without too much trouble.
> Beyond that, it's hard to know exactly what this team needs. All the
> starters, except arguably for McDyess, are in the upper echelon of
> their positions.
Upper middle echelon. I don't think the Pistons have a true superstar
anywhere, and one of the big keys to their success has been having a team
where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Dumars has the
luxury in one sense of not needing to replace any superstars, but he also
has the problem in another sense of needing to find one or more guys with
the right mix of basketball IQ, selflessness, and focus to make the machine
work.
> The silver lining is that, for the first time in a long time, we did
> see a couple of young guys on the bench this year who will almost
> certainly be better next year: Stuckey and Maxiell.
Johnson didn't show as much as those guys, but he also showed he's not
going to be a Milicic. He may be at Maxiell's current skill level by this
time next year, and hopefully Maxiell will continue to improve. Maxiell is
showing signs of being able to score against decent defense from outside of
4 feet from the basket, and may well be able to score consistent double
digits next year.
> This team might
> be able to stay more-or-less pat (keep the starters and those two) and
> maybe even make it back to the ECF again. And I don't think Joe D.
> should "blow up the team" or make some desperation Big Move (see
> Dallas and Pheonix) this year.
I can't see him trading for old, increasingly hurting guys on the fast
downslopes of their careers like O'Neal and Kidd, for sure.
> But to get back to the finals,
> something needs to happen. Nothing is immediately obvious to me, but
> I'm sure Joe D is thinking about it.-- Joe
Billups probably has the highest trade value, and Stuckey's emergence means
that he can be replaced, though I wouldn't expect the offense to run as
well for a while -- Stuckey still has a lot to learn. Partly it will
depend on how likely Dumars and Davidson think the Pistons will be to
contend next year.
Hamilton is probably next in terms of trade value -- he's a good shooting
guard, but the league has a lot of guys who are good shooting guards, and
some teams may be leery about signing a guy who needs a lot of teamwork to
get his points. I can't see Dumars being afraid to deal him though,
considering how he came here in the first place in the trade for
Stackhouse, who was at a similar stage in his career when Dumars shipped
him away.
Wallace has some trade value, and his contract is trade friendly. Who
knows, if history repeats itself maybe it will be another Otis Thorpe type
deal that ends up paying dividends many years later, like it finally did
with Stuckey.
I'd hope Dumars keeps Afflalo -- I think he has good potential, but
obviously for the right player.... Maybe somebody has their eye on Samb
and offers a good trade for him, but then I wouldn't be in a rush. At any
rate, there are a lot of options, and frankly I'd be fine with a two year
plan for getting back to the top level rather than freaking out and
grabbing some me-first 38% shooter who launches 27 shots a game.
>> Stay informed about: Moves Detroit should make?