Your grade on Detroit's Off season?

[ImHeisenberg]

Voted B.

I think an A would be bringing in a star that would be trans-formative. SVG and Co made solid deals that won't dramatically alter the finances of the team if things don't work out, with exception to Reggie Jackson pulling a Ben Gordon on us.

I felt like C would have been too low, as they really did address their needs and did so in a shrewd and effective way.

[Pharaoh]

Voted B.

I think an A would be bringing in a star that would be trans-formative. SVG and Co made solid deals that won't dramatically alter the finances of the team if things don't work out, with exception to Reggie Jackson pulling a Ben Gordon on us.

I felt like C would have been too low, as they really did address their needs and did so in a shrewd and effective way.

I'll go B+ cause I think SJ is the transformative player you wanted.

Every move was solid and if SJ can be what I think he will be....SVG nailed this off-season

[Brapman]

A- (A is Johnson develops into an all-star in time, which I expect he will).

I like the roster moves a lot, and Johnson was a least a triple as a draft pick, and maybe a HR.

We know the shooting surrounding our dynamic PG/C two man action has improved a lot. When forced to make the trade we'd experienced pre-Jennings injury how great it worked to spread the offense with 3 pt shooting. We malign Singler - but that guy hit his 3's at a high clip, Tolliver was going well, KCP played his best BB and Jennings was on fire. We're better with Jackson than with Jennings - that was a fantastic trade. (And maybe we'll get lucky and Brandon will make it back this season. Not counting on that.)

The roster is not just back to being a fine group of shooters - so the fit is there, we're enormously tougher, bigger and stronger. Find me a more physical or stronger group of C's and F's in the NBA than Drummond, Baynes, Jo-El, Morris, Jackson, Ilyasova and Tolliver. There's a ton of versatility in that group, and a lot of strong shooting surrounding Drummond.

Baynes is going to be a hell of good fit for us - a very underrated signing. He's coming from SA where he earned his way to being a good rotation player.

Morris is going to be busting it all season to keep his minutes up with Stanley charging. Johnson's just going to be a winner in this league - and we might see signs of stardom in year one. But let's be honest - no 19 year old rookie is going to rule the NBA. Hell, even LeBron struggled a lot his first season. In time though, I see all-star games in this kid's future.

Ilyasova and Tolliver are each very good fits for us. Of course, in years to come, we'll be looking to upgrade this position. But these are both hardworking guys. As to "hardworking" the players in this rotation know that if they are dogging it in any way that there is a deep bench of hungry guys for SVG to replace them with. Competition will keep them playing hungry and hard.

Jackson, and whoever emerges as our backup PG's are going to give us very good play at that position. We know Blake is a quality backup in this league - so if he's the one who gets backup minutes, fine. But if Jennings recovers enough to win those minutes, then that means we're in better hands at backup PG than Blake. Same for Dinwiddie, a guy I have a lot of hope for: if he develops enough to beat Blake out, again we're in better shape than we'd be in Blake's capable hands.

SG? KCP is going to be better in year 3 than he was in year 2, where he made important leaps from his rookie season. He's one of my favs: I think he can become one of the better SGs in the league. And Meeks won't be coming off a broken back this time - and we know he's a very good scoring SG.

The question for this team is that it's most important guys are very young, and the roster itself has had a ton of turnover. So, how fast does the team come together on defense, and how fast do they come together on offense. Young teams are by definition, inexperienced teams that make a lot of mistakes on the court. I expect we'll see flashes of brilliance, flashes of bad breakdowns on the court, and flashes of solid enough play to win more games than last season. We're in year two of SVG putting in his system and coaching guys up. Great teams don't become great that fast - it takes years of seasoning.

The other thing is the team has a lot of really good assets outside of Drummond, Jackson and Johnson who are on very reasonable team controlled contracts. I'd put KCP in that 3 man, now 4 man core. To me, that portends roster moves a couple years from now to add some outstanding NBA players as our guy get closer to their prime years. I love the roster fit now, think I see the plan and am glad there IS a plan to believe in now.

We need luck with health over time, but I think we're seeing the beginnings of a future championship contender.

[whitehops]

I'd give it a B, i guess.

I've never really been a fan of grades right after something happens, it usually takes time to evaluate the moves before you can accurately grade them. for example, it takes 2-3 to reasonably assess how good a player will be/how good a pick they were. if you didn't like stanley johnson in the predraft process you're likely giving the pick a low grade, even if he turns out to be a future MVP. you could give it a high grade and he completely busts...

my initial reaction is that we addressed our biggest issues, we have good depth at all five positions now (imo) and we have a roster that really fits our offensive and defensive schemes. that alone is enough to call a successful offseason in my opinion, even if we didn't get a huge influx of raw talent.

[ImHeisenberg]

Voted B.

I think an A would be bringing in a star that would be trans-formative. SVG and Co made solid deals that won't dramatically alter the finances of the team if things don't work out, with exception to Reggie Jackson pulling a Ben Gordon on us.

I felt like C would have been too low, as they really did address their needs and did so in a shrewd and effective way.

I'll go B+ cause I think SJ is the transformative player you wanted.

Every move was solid and if SJ can be what I think he will be....SVG nailed this off-season

We all hope Stanimal is that player, but it may take time for him to reach that level of production. I expect to see flashes next season, but it takes time to learn how to play in the NBA, much less to excel in it.

[Pharaoh]

[quote="Pharaoh"][quote="ImHeisenberg"]Voted B.

I think an A would be bringing in a star that would be trans-formative. SVG and Co made solid deals that won't dramatically alter the finances of the team if things don't work out, with exception to Reggie Jackson pulling a Ben Gordon on us.

I felt like C would have been too low, as they really did address their needs and did so in a shrewd and effective way.

I'll go B+ cause I think SJ is the transformative player you wanted.

Every move was solid and if SJ can be what I think he will be....SVG nailed this off-season[/quote]
We all hope Stanimal is that player, but it may take time for him to reach that level of production. I expect to see flashes next season, but it takes time to learn how to play in the NBA, much less to excel in it.[/quote]

His work ethic, determination and attitude translate immediately though and those qualities more than anything else is exactly what the doctor ordered

[zeebneeb]

A- (A is Johnson develops into an all-star in time, which I expect he will).

I like the roster moves a lot, and Johnson was a least a triple as a draft pick, and maybe a HR.

We know the shooting surrounding our dynamic PG/C two man action has improved a lot. When forced to make the trade we'd experienced pre-Jennings injury how great it worked to spread the offense with 3 pt shooting. We malign Singler - but that guy hit his 3's at a high clip, Tolliver was going well, KCP played his best BB and Jennings was on fire. We're better with Jackson than with Jennings - that was a fantastic trade. (And maybe we'll get lucky and Brandon will make it back this season. Not counting on that.)

The roster is not just back to being a fine group of shooters - so the fit is there, we're enormously tougher, bigger and stronger. Find me a more physical or stronger group of C's and F's in the NBA than Drummond, Baynes, Jo-El, Morris, Jackson, Ilyasova and Tolliver. There's a ton of versatility in that group, and a lot of strong shooting surrounding Drummond.

Baynes is going to be a hell of good fit for us - a very underrated signing. He's coming from SA where he earned his way to being a good rotation player.

Morris is going to be busting it all season to keep his minutes up with Stanley charging. Johnson's just going to be a winner in this league - and we might see signs of stardom in year one. But let's be honest - no 19 year old rookie is going to rule the NBA. Hell, even LeBron struggled a lot his first season. In time though, I see all-star games in this kid's future.

Ilyasova and Tolliver are each very good fits for us. Of course, in years to come, we'll be looking to upgrade this position. But these are both hardworking guys. As to "hardworking" the players in this rotation know that if they are dogging it in any way that there is a deep bench of hungry guys for SVG to replace them with. Competition will keep them playing hungry and hard.

Jackson, and whoever emerges as our backup PG's are going to give us very good play at that position. We know Blake is a quality backup in this league - so if he's the one who gets backup minutes, fine. But if Jennings recovers enough to win those minutes, then that means we're in better hands at backup PG than Blake. Same for Dinwiddie, a guy I have a lot of hope for: if he develops enough to beat Blake out, again we're in better shape than we'd be in Blake's capable hands.

SG? KCP is going to be better in year 3 than he was in year 2, where he made important leaps from his rookie season. He's one of my favs: I think he can become one of the better SGs in the league. And Meeks won't be coming off a broken back this time - and we know he's a very good scoring SG.

The question for this team is that it's most important guys are very young, and the roster itself has had a ton of turnover. So, how fast does the team come together on defense, and how fast do they come together on offense. Young teams are by definition, inexperienced teams that make a lot of mistakes on the court. I expect we'll see flashes of brilliance, flashes of bad breakdowns on the court, and flashes of solid enough play to win more games than last season. We're in year two of SVG putting in his system and coaching guys up. Great teams don't become great that fast - it takes years of seasoning.

The other thing is the team has a lot of really good assets outside of Drummond, Jackson and Johnson who are on very reasonable team controlled contracts. I'd put KCP in that 3 man, now 4 man core. To me, that portends roster moves a couple years from now to add some outstanding NBA players as our guy get closer to their prime years. I love the roster fit now, think I see the plan and am glad there IS a plan to believe in now.

We need luck with health over time, but I think we're seeing the beginnings of a future championship contender.

Excellent breakdown, very good read. One thing I would say though;

I'm not to worried about mistakes because even though this team is young, they just don't turn the ball over the way you would think a young team would. They only averaged 13.6 turns a game, good for 8th in the league.

It's only a mistake if it leads to a turnover I say. Bad shots is another thing but we don't have anyone in the starting group who can actually take a bad shot with those percentages.

Man our offense is going to be fierce. A fantastic pg who hits players in stride surrounded by a killer center who knows what to do with the ball, and shooters galore. He never has to worry about the kick out.

Cannot wait.

[Brapman]

mistakes can be a lot more subtle than turnovers that get a statistic.

They can be in failure to rotate quickly enough, not moving on time to the right spot in an offensive set, or not delivering the pass exactly on time. It can be in defending the pick and roll wrong - it just takes one breakdown with a guy being slightly out of position for an opposing offense to take advantage or for our offense to bog down. It can be in not making the pass that leads to the assist, or not moving the ball to the weak side to get defenders feet moving and staying moving.

[zeebneeb]

mistakes can be a lot more subtle than turnovers that get a statistic.

They can be in failure to rotate quickly enough, not moving on time to the right spot in an offensive set, or not delivering the pass exactly on time. It can be in defending the pick and roll wrong - it just takes one breakdown with a guy being slightly out of position for an opposing offense to take advantage or for our offense to bog down. It can be in not making the pass that leads to the assist, or not moving the ball to the weak side to get defenders feet moving and staying moving.

Poetic. You need to post more. I absolutely get what your saying, but we have reggie, pope, and drummond returning the starters, and a full camp, and preseason to tighten things up. It won't be fluid until about 15 games in, but unlike last season we will have enough talent, and depth to win games we just couldn't last year. Make a mistake with last year's team it was damn near fatal. This year is a whole different story.

People are going to be amazed at just how good this team is.

[princeofpalace]

My grading scale:

F- team actively got worse

D- team had serious needs that were not addressed

C- team addressed needs, but not as well as possible and things could have been done better

B- team addressed needs in a satisfactory way, improved significantly and meaningfully

A- home run offeseason. Only a couple of teams a year would have A's.

In that spirit I think we're a C+ or a B-. If we'd drafted differently or gotten Drummond to sign an extension I'd put it in B range.

I like these grading scales. I think 2009 is the only time our offseason has deserved an F in recent years- although at the time, most posters had it rated an A.

I'd say this offseason was a D. We had serious needs- acquiring starter caliber talent at the 2-4, and upgrading the defense. I do not beleive either those needs were addressed in a meaningful way. I will give KCP a pass since he has the potential to improve but we have acquired bench caliber players to start at the 3-4. And, of the players we acquired, only SJ has the potential to be a great defender.

Pistons were a lousy defensive team and they actually were a worse defensive team after the all star break than they were before the break. We didn't make any moves to address our defense so I'm expecting it to be horrible again next season.

[hoophabit]

My grading scale:

F- team actively got worse

D- team had serious needs that were not addressed

C- team addressed needs, but not as well as possible and things could have been done better

B- team addressed needs in a satisfactory way, improved significantly and meaningfully

A- home run offeseason. Only a couple of teams a year would have A's.

In that spirit I think we're a C+ or a B-. If we'd drafted differently or gotten Drummond to sign an extension I'd put it in B range.

I like these grading scales. I think 2009 is the only time our offseason has deserved an F in recent years- although at the time, most posters had it rated an A.

I'd say this offseason was a D. We had serious needs- acquiring starter caliber talent at the 2-4, and upgrading the defense. I do not beleive either those needs were addressed in a meaningful way. I will give KCP a pass since he has the potential to improve but we have acquired bench caliber players to start at the 3-4. And, of the players we acquired, only SJ has the potential to be a great defender.

Pistons were a lousy defensive team and they actually were a worse defensive team after the all star break than they were before the break. We didn't make any moves to address our defense so I'm expecting it to be horrible again next season.

I get being down on the team after all these years of no success. I think a D for this summer's efforts is too tough a grade as I don't think it takes into account what was actually possible. Even a C according to Snakebites' scale contains the qualification "but not as well as possible and things could have been done better." Neither of the first two FA 3s were actually available to us, and did you really want to see the team commit that much money to a 3 with SJ coming on board? At the 4, Ersan is as good a stopgap as they were likely to find. LMA wasn't coming here. He's happy at home with the Spurs. David west is chasing a ring at the same location. For where the Pistons are at in the rebuild they did about what they could. I expect team defense to be better this year. Not because we picked up great defenders, but because this is a better balanced roster even if the picked ups are journeymen players. If our young core continues to progress, and SJ continues so promising, this could be a more satisfying season for long suffering fans. Cheer up, this stuff is just for fun anyway!

[detroitKG]

In all honesty hoop your wasting your time on those two..

[Snakebites]

In all honesty hoop your wasting your time on those two..

Two?

Well, I guess grouping posters together is a lot easier than actually reading content.

[coordinator0]

I'm in that C+ to B- range as well. I think Detroit addressed their needs decently with players who should fit well, but didn't make a big overall talent upgrade. Most of the moves they made I liked but none of them were hugely impactful. Of course if Stanley Johnson ends up playing really well then that would make a significant difference. A lot depends on what you think/thought of Monroe too and how much losing him will hurt (or help) the team.