Stanley Johnson is bad.
Moderators: Snakebites, dVs33, Cowology, theBigLip
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
DBC10
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,963
- And1: 2,829
- Joined: Jun 01, 2013
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
I honestly thought he was going to develop his offensive capabilities a lot better than where he is at now. As it stands, he literally cannot drive to the basket without being soft and or turning it over. The guy had a red flag coming in from even his college years where he couldn't finish at the rim despite his hulking size. He's just bad inside which is a red flag in general for a big physical guy like him.
On top of that, he can't really shoot so it's further exacerbated which makes you question, what the hell is he really great at?
On top of that, he can't really shoot so it's further exacerbated which makes you question, what the hell is he really great at?
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
DetroitPistons
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,113
- And1: 3,441
- Joined: Apr 19, 2010
- Location: Michigan
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
He is an absolute scrub and should be shipped out before this deadline. I'll be disappointed if he isn't. Bullock is miles better than him and provides very good defense too, which was the only thing SJ brought to the table. Bullock is our backup SF of the future. SJ is done here hopefully.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
PistonsSince85
- Junior
- Posts: 343
- And1: 124
- Joined: Oct 13, 2016
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
DetroitPistons wrote:He is an absolute scrub and should be shipped out before this deadline. I'll be disappointed if he isn't. Bullock is miles better than him and provides very good defense too, which was the only thing SJ brought to the table. Bullock is our backup SF of the future. SJ is done here hopefully.
I completely agree. He is atrocious on offense. Better to move him while some perceived upside still exists.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
PistonsSince85
- Junior
- Posts: 343
- And1: 124
- Joined: Oct 13, 2016
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
DBC10 wrote:I honestly thought he was going to develop his offensive capabilities a lot better than where he is at now. As it stands, he literally cannot drive to the basket without being soft and or turning it over. The guy had a red flag coming in from even his college years where he couldn't finish at the rim despite his hulking size. He's just bad inside which is a red flag in general for a big physical guy like him.
On top of that, he can't really shoot so it's further exacerbated which makes you question, what the hell is he really great at?
He can’t jump. His shooting mechanics are also jacked.
He should play like Corless Williamson, but plays offense like a WNBA player.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
afroxnas
- Junior
- Posts: 328
- And1: 167
- Joined: Feb 17, 2016
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
PistonsSince85 wrote:DBC10 wrote:I honestly thought he was going to develop his offensive capabilities a lot better than where he is at now. As it stands, he literally cannot drive to the basket without being soft and or turning it over. The guy had a red flag coming in from even his college years where he couldn't finish at the rim despite his hulking size. He's just bad inside which is a red flag in general for a big physical guy like him.
On top of that, he can't really shoot so it's further exacerbated which makes you question, what the hell is he really great at?
He can’t jump. His shooting mechanics are also jacked.
He should play like Corless Williamson, but plays offense like a WNBA player.
He has absolutely zero lift which is strange since he was draft for his athleticism.... He is way to heavy for his frame which does not help his biomechanics. he needs to drop 20 pounds but I’m not sure if it is still fixable. He could still develop a decent jumper but I see his ceiling as a poor mans Bruce Bowen
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
- GimmeDat
- Forum Mod - Bulls

- Posts: 23,930
- And1: 16,927
- Joined: Sep 27, 2013
- Location: Australia
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
Moses ShamMoses wrote:SJ + filler + 2nd rounder for Mirotic
Was just lurking to see if you guys were discussing Mirotic at all.
Just saying this from an outsiders perspective, given the premise of this thread, I think it's a bit disingenuous to simultaneously acknowledge that SJ sucks in his 3rd year, but still expect him to bring in a return like Mirotic.
Johnson has interested me not as a core piece to a deal, but a guy worth taking a flyer on, and I went and watched footage and read opinions on him, and I was surprised at just how bad he was offensively.
In theory, he has tools - he's quick and strong, and he can handle and pass decently it seems to me for a wing, and of course he's already an established defensive asset. But for a guy of a raw, physical SF archetype, not having lift and not being a good finisher, with no improvements after 3 years, is a pretty big red flag. Combine that with abysmal shooting numbers and it's just too much of a liability on the floor, though because of your roster needs I imagine what he does bring to the table is well appreciated. At least other struggling young players like Hezonja, whose recently improved, had the lack of confidence/needs a change of scenery/no opportunity sort of asterix to inspire some hope.
He's a bigger name than our other SF's, but honestly, I'm not sure he'd get minutes for us.
Just my two cents, maybe I'm wrong, you guys have watched more than me, but just as a general comment and not as a biased Bulls fan trying to convince you we deserve more in a deal, I look around at the league and other struggling young players who have shown more have not returned much on the market.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
MotownMadness
- RealGM
- Posts: 38,808
- And1: 22,864
- Joined: Oct 08, 2013
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
GimmeDat wrote:Moses ShamMoses wrote:SJ + filler + 2nd rounder for Mirotic
Was just lurking to see if you guys were discussing Mirotic at all.
Just saying this from an outsiders perspective, given the premise of this thread, I think it's a bit disingenuous to simultaneously acknowledge that SJ sucks in his 3rd year, but still expect him to bring in a return like Mirotic.
Johnson has interested me not as a core piece to a deal, but a guy worth taking a flyer on, and I went and watched footage and read opinions on him, and I was surprised at just how bad he was offensively.
In theory, he has tools - he's quick and strong, and he can handle and pass decently it seems to me for a wing, and of course he's already an established defensive asset. But for a guy of a raw, physical SF archetype, not having lift and not being a good finisher, with no improvements after 3 years, is a pretty big red flag. Combine that with abysmal shooting numbers and it's just too much of a liability on the floor, though because of your roster needs I imagine what he does bring to the table is well appreciated. At least other struggling young players like Hezonja, whose recently improved, had the lack of confidence/needs a change of scenery/no opportunity sort of asterix to inspire some hope.
He's a bigger name than our other SF's, but honestly, I'm not sure he'd get minutes for us.
Just my two cents, maybe I'm wrong, you guys have watched more than me, but just as a general comment and not as a biased Bulls fan trying to convince you we deserve more in a deal, I look around at the league and other struggling young players who have shown more have not returned much on the market.
Agree, How much does your FO value Grant? Say if there were a swap between the two in a Mirotic package.
Mirotic, Grant
For
Leuer, Johnson, Protected 1st
Is that fair?
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
thesack12
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,270
- And1: 2,712
- Joined: Jun 06, 2008
- Location: N DA NAP
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
Pugz wrote:he plays them, yes. however, they have a short leash and even when playing well, he takes them out.thesack12 wrote:Stanley played 23.1 MPG as a rook, Luke is playing 17.3
The notion that SVG doesn't play rookies is a myth
If anything Stan is trying to get Luke more minutes by playing him at the 3, which is definitely not his ideal position.
In the postgame interview last night, Stan mentioned Luke's energy level not staying consistent. Not wanting Luke to run head on into the rookie wall early on is probably a factor in allocating Luke's minutes.
The last 7 games Kennard's minutes are at 21 a game.
Also, since Bradley came back Galloway has been eliminated from the rotation (outside of garbage time.)
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
MotownMadness
- RealGM
- Posts: 38,808
- And1: 22,864
- Joined: Oct 08, 2013
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
Forward Stanley Johnson is one name that has come up in the Pistons’ conversations with other teams, per ESPN sources. Opposing teams have come away with the impression that Johnson is available for the right return. – via ESPN
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
- GimmeDat
- Forum Mod - Bulls

- Posts: 23,930
- And1: 16,927
- Joined: Sep 27, 2013
- Location: Australia
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
MotownMadness wrote:GimmeDat wrote:Moses ShamMoses wrote:SJ + filler + 2nd rounder for Mirotic
Was just lurking to see if you guys were discussing Mirotic at all.
Just saying this from an outsiders perspective, given the premise of this thread, I think it's a bit disingenuous to simultaneously acknowledge that SJ sucks in his 3rd year, but still expect him to bring in a return like Mirotic.
Johnson has interested me not as a core piece to a deal, but a guy worth taking a flyer on, and I went and watched footage and read opinions on him, and I was surprised at just how bad he was offensively.
In theory, he has tools - he's quick and strong, and he can handle and pass decently it seems to me for a wing, and of course he's already an established defensive asset. But for a guy of a raw, physical SF archetype, not having lift and not being a good finisher, with no improvements after 3 years, is a pretty big red flag. Combine that with abysmal shooting numbers and it's just too much of a liability on the floor, though because of your roster needs I imagine what he does bring to the table is well appreciated. At least other struggling young players like Hezonja, whose recently improved, had the lack of confidence/needs a change of scenery/no opportunity sort of asterix to inspire some hope.
He's a bigger name than our other SF's, but honestly, I'm not sure he'd get minutes for us.
Just my two cents, maybe I'm wrong, you guys have watched more than me, but just as a general comment and not as a biased Bulls fan trying to convince you we deserve more in a deal, I look around at the league and other struggling young players who have shown more have not returned much on the market.
Agree, How much does your FO value Grant? Say if there were a swap between the two in a Mirotic package.
Mirotic, Grant
For
Leuer, Johnson, Protected 1st
Is that fair?
I think we do like him but he's definitely available if it helps push a deal over the line. He's a good backup.
I think this is a fair deal, as long as the protections are pretty light. But whether it's a starter for the Bulls depends on how insistent they are on no long term salary. I'm not too sure what they're thinking, but I think if there's a deal with you guys, this is it.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
thesack12
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,270
- And1: 2,712
- Joined: Jun 06, 2008
- Location: N DA NAP
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
MotownMadness wrote:Forward Stanley Johnson is one name that has come up in the Pistons’ conversations with other teams, per ESPN sources. Opposing teams have come away with the impression that Johnson is available for the right return. – via ESPN
At this point, I can't imagine it would take much of a return to ship Stanley out.
That said, I do like that it mentions "teams" plural. Obviously the more bids being made, the better the potential return should be.
I imagine, the best course is to use Stanley in a larger deal. Whether that be use him to help dump Leuer or even Galloway, or to add him as *cough* sweetener *cough* for a more expensive player.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
- Kilo
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,283
- And1: 5,259
- Joined: Jun 18, 2011
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
thesack12 wrote:MotownMadness wrote:Forward Stanley Johnson is one name that has come up in the Pistons’ conversations with other teams, per ESPN sources. Opposing teams have come away with the impression that Johnson is available for the right return. – via ESPN
At this point, I can't imagine it would take much of a return to ship Stanley out.
That said, I do like that it mentions "teams" plural. Obviously the more bids being made, the better the potential return should be.
I imagine, the best course is to use Stanley in a larger deal. Whether that be use him to help dump Leuer or even Galloway, or to add him as *cough* sweetener *cough* for a more expensive player.
Teams I think rightly see him as a reclamation project - get him away from SVG and see what he could be. I wouldn't trade him as a throw in flyer - he's still 21 yrs old and can dominate defensively. I think it's in his best interest to be traded though - anywhere really but ideally to a rebuilding team who could give him all the minutes in the world and live with his mistakes. If he stays in Detroit I'd task him with becoming a better rebounder, outside of Dre none of our guys rebound well at all, Stanley has the size and physicality to be able to get his nose dirty going after some. Hang his hat on tough, physical defense and rebounding - given he's a back-up he wouldn't have to worry about fouls so much right now either.
Weaver = Hinkie
VW to Portland
VW to Portland

Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
MotownMadness
- RealGM
- Posts: 38,808
- And1: 22,864
- Joined: Oct 08, 2013
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
Kilo wrote:thesack12 wrote:MotownMadness wrote:
At this point, I can't imagine it would take much of a return to ship Stanley out.
That said, I do like that it mentions "teams" plural. Obviously the more bids being made, the better the potential return should be.
I imagine, the best course is to use Stanley in a larger deal. Whether that be use him to help dump Leuer or even Galloway, or to add him as *cough* sweetener *cough* for a more expensive player.
Teams I think rightly see him as a reclamation project - get him away from SVG and see what he could be. I wouldn't trade him as a throw in flyer - he's still 21 yrs old and can dominate defensively. I think it's in his best interest to be traded though - anywhere really but ideally to a rebuilding team who could give him all the minutes in the world and live with his mistakes. If he stays in Detroit I'd task him with becoming a better rebounder, outside of Dre none of our guys rebound well at all, Stanley has the size and physicality to be able to get his nose dirty going after some. Hang his hat on tough, physical defense and rebounding - given he's a back-up he wouldn't have to worry about fouls so much right now either.
At the rate he's going here whether that's on SVG or not we only have a year left to have to pay him anyways. I'm willing to sell on whatever high is with him cause my faith in his time here is not gonna work out.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
thesack12
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,270
- And1: 2,712
- Joined: Jun 06, 2008
- Location: N DA NAP
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
MotownMadness wrote:Kilo wrote:thesack12 wrote:
At this point, I can't imagine it would take much of a return to ship Stanley out.
That said, I do like that it mentions "teams" plural. Obviously the more bids being made, the better the potential return should be.
I imagine, the best course is to use Stanley in a larger deal. Whether that be use him to help dump Leuer or even Galloway, or to add him as *cough* sweetener *cough* for a more expensive player.
Teams I think rightly see him as a reclamation project - get him away from SVG and see what he could be. I wouldn't trade him as a throw in flyer - he's still 21 yrs old and can dominate defensively. I think it's in his best interest to be traded though - anywhere really but ideally to a rebuilding team who could give him all the minutes in the world and live with his mistakes. If he stays in Detroit I'd task him with becoming a better rebounder, outside of Dre none of our guys rebound well at all, Stanley has the size and physicality to be able to get his nose dirty going after some. Hang his hat on tough, physical defense and rebounding - given he's a back-up he wouldn't have to worry about fouls so much right now either.
At the rate he's going here whether that's on SVG or not we only have a year left to have to pay him anyways. I'm willing to sell on whatever high is with him cause my faith in his time here is not gonna work out.
Yeah, its obviously not working out for Stanley or the team and it seems its actually getting worse.
It makes sense to move him and get whatever u can for him, even the best he can fetch is an opportunity to dump salary and open up roster spot(s).
If Stanley advances his game and improves elsewhere, more power to him. But it sure seems its not going to work here.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
Jcrawfordcross
- Freshman
- Posts: 86
- And1: 32
- Joined: May 16, 2013
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
thesack12 wrote:MotownMadness wrote:Forward Stanley Johnson is one name that has come up in the Pistons’ conversations with other teams, per ESPN sources. Opposing teams have come away with the impression that Johnson is available for the right return. – via ESPN
At this point, I can't imagine it would take much of a return to ship Stanley out.
That said, I do like that it mentions "teams" plural. Obviously the more bids being made, the better the potential return should be.
I imagine, the best course is to use Stanley in a larger deal. Whether that be use him to help dump Leuer or even Galloway, or to add him as *cough* sweetener *cough* for a more expensive player.
Would definitely be better suited in a high tempo offense. I remember after SJ was drafted or maybe the year after, he was on the Team USA select team that scrimmaged vs our guys before they went to Rio (?) and Popovich was really high on him. I wonder if he'd be interested considering Kawhi's been in and out of the lineup and Rudy Gay reaggrevating his achilles.
I doubt they part with Dejounte Murray.
Danny Green has struggled since his crazy NBA Finals vs Miami. Wondering if he could be had. Bryn Forbes? Love me some Bryn despite him being undersized, the guy can shoot. Slo Mo?
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
thesack12
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,270
- And1: 2,712
- Joined: Jun 06, 2008
- Location: N DA NAP
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
Jcrawfordcross wrote:thesack12 wrote:MotownMadness wrote:
At this point, I can't imagine it would take much of a return to ship Stanley out.
That said, I do like that it mentions "teams" plural. Obviously the more bids being made, the better the potential return should be.
I imagine, the best course is to use Stanley in a larger deal. Whether that be use him to help dump Leuer or even Galloway, or to add him as *cough* sweetener *cough* for a more expensive player.
Would definitely be better suited in a high tempo offense. I remember after SJ was drafted or maybe the year after, he was on the Team USA select team that scrimmaged vs our guys before they went to Rio (?) and Popovich was really high on him. I wonder if he'd be interested considering Kawhi's been in and out of the lineup and Rudy Gay reaggrevating his achilles.
I doubt they part with Dejounte Murray.
Danny Green has struggled since his crazy NBA Finals vs Miami. Wondering if he could be had. Bryn Forbes? Love me some Bryn despite him being undersized, the guy can shoot. Slo Mo?
SA does make a lot of sense for Stanley. I also think they may have some degree of interest in bringing Boban back as they don't have a lot of size over there.
However, IMO Detroit and SA don't match up real well as partners. Green doesn't make much sense here, unless Stan plans for sure to let Bradley walk (or traded before the deadline). I think a 3rd team would need to be involved to get something going with the Spurs.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
bstein14
- RealGM
- Posts: 32,971
- And1: 9,773
- Joined: Jun 22, 2001
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
Boban + Stanley for Danny Green makes a lot of sense for both teams on multiple levels. Green has under performed since getting that contract and Pop tried to trade for Stanley previously while SVG tried to sign Green as a FA. Boban wanted to stay in SA but Pop told him he'd be a fool to turn down the money from Detroit.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
afroxnas
- Junior
- Posts: 328
- And1: 167
- Joined: Feb 17, 2016
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
GimmeDat wrote:MotownMadness wrote:GimmeDat wrote:
Was just lurking to see if you guys were discussing Mirotic at all.
Just saying this from an outsiders perspective, given the premise of this thread, I think it's a bit disingenuous to simultaneously acknowledge that SJ sucks in his 3rd year, but still expect him to bring in a return like Mirotic.
Johnson has interested me not as a core piece to a deal, but a guy worth taking a flyer on, and I went and watched footage and read opinions on him, and I was surprised at just how bad he was offensively.
In theory, he has tools - he's quick and strong, and he can handle and pass decently it seems to me for a wing, and of course he's already an established defensive asset. But for a guy of a raw, physical SF archetype, not having lift and not being a good finisher, with no improvements after 3 years, is a pretty big red flag. Combine that with abysmal shooting numbers and it's just too much of a liability on the floor, though because of your roster needs I imagine what he does bring to the table is well appreciated. At least other struggling young players like Hezonja, whose recently improved, had the lack of confidence/needs a change of scenery/no opportunity sort of asterix to inspire some hope.
He's a bigger name than our other SF's, but honestly, I'm not sure he'd get minutes for us.
Just my two cents, maybe I'm wrong, you guys have watched more than me, but just as a general comment and not as a biased Bulls fan trying to convince you we deserve more in a deal, I look around at the league and other struggling young players who have shown more have not returned much on the market.
Agree, How much does your FO value Grant? Say if there were a swap between the two in a Mirotic package.
Mirotic, Grant
For
Leuer, Johnson, Protected 1st
Is that fair?
I think we do like him but he's definitely available if it helps push a deal over the line. He's a good backup.
I think this is a fair deal, as long as the protections are pretty light. But whether it's a starter for the Bulls depends on how insistent they are on no long term salary. I'm not too sure what they're thinking, but I think if there's a deal with you guys, this is it.
there’s no way the Bulls will get a former lottery pick on a rookie deal and a future 1 first round for Mirotic, a guys that spent most of the season out because he was knocked out in the teeth by a team mate. That’s a horrible deal for the Pistons and SVG should be fired if he gives it the green light. Giv m Mirotic defense skills I’m doubtful he would even see the floor...
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
- GimmeDat
- Forum Mod - Bulls

- Posts: 23,930
- And1: 16,927
- Joined: Sep 27, 2013
- Location: Australia
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
afroxnas wrote:GimmeDat wrote:MotownMadness wrote: Agree, How much does your FO value Grant? Say if there were a swap between the two in a Mirotic package.
Mirotic, Grant
For
Leuer, Johnson, Protected 1st
Is that fair?
I think we do like him but he's definitely available if it helps push a deal over the line. He's a good backup.
I think this is a fair deal, as long as the protections are pretty light. But whether it's a starter for the Bulls depends on how insistent they are on no long term salary. I'm not too sure what they're thinking, but I think if there's a deal with you guys, this is it.
there’s no way the Bulls will get a former lottery pick on a rookie deal and a future 1 first round for Mirotic, a guys that spent most of the season out because he was knocked out in the teeth by a team mate. That’s a horrible deal for the Pistons and SVG should be fired if he gives it the green light. Giv m Mirotic defense skills I’m doubtful he would even see the floor...
I'd watch some more Mirotic before making such strong judgements. He's our best front-court defender and I think he'd be yours as well. That's just a misnomer because he's European.
Also, having to label him a 'former lottery pick' seems a bit disingenuous given the title of this thread.. draft position doesn't mean much when you're averaging 9 points per 36 on a TS% of 47 in your 3rd year in the league.
I'm not trying to be rude or biased, the same goes the other way - Cameron Payne is a former lottery pick but I wouldn't be asking for much if he was on the market.
I'm also not sure why getting punched in the face is supposed to be an argument against trading for a guy.
You could argue upfront that a protected 1st is what it would take to dump a contract like Leuer's, but you'd also be getting a big man playing at an All-Star level this year for the next 1.5 years and then his bird rights, as well as upgrading Johnson to Grant. Worth noting the pick is noted as being protected in MoTown's proposition as well.
Non-lottery 1st's really aren't that valuable, and this trade would make a big boost to your team. That's my honest 2 cents on it.
I'm fine with people feeling one way or another about a deal but I think you're going out of your way here to distort the facts of the deal.
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
-
Moses ShamMoses
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,553
- And1: 1,463
- Joined: Nov 28, 2012
-
Re: Stanley Johnson is bad.
If we can dump Leuer and pick up a good young player like Mirotic for our 1st rounder...you do it. Even if we have to include Stanley Johnson as the carrot. Bulls fans have a good point on him. Nobody cares he was a lottery pick 3 years ago. Dudes been a bust in Detroit.
Jeff Van Gundy on his brother's Pistons: 'He took over the Titanic and it's sinking even quicker'




