Why it makes so much sense to trade....

[HeroicKennedy]

82games.com bases position on who they guard, not where they're truly playing.

[7r5ur]

I must have missed the memo that stated your assist numbers told the whole story on how the PG orchestrates the offense. People will give you Stuckey's assist stats and qualify it by saying he is still only a 3rd year player, has been playing with less talent around him, and playing multiple positions. However, here is one assist angle they won't tell you:

2009 season to date:

Rodney Stuckey: 1150 minutes played, 132 assists
Will Bynum: 737 minutes played, 116 assists

Here's another stat they won't tell you:

http://www.82games.com/0910/09DET4.HTM#bypos

Stuckey has played 7% of the team's PG minutes.
Bynum has played 50% of the team's PG minutes.

Bynum does not play off the ball at all when he's in the game. He should be out-assisting Rodney in those minutes, but he's not.

7% of minutes @ PG huh?
You also forgot to report that it has BG with 19% of the PG minutes

Sorry dude I don't see these stats holding water. I don't know how they calculate that formula, but its quite obvious Rodney plays much more than 7%, and BG far less than 19% of Detroit's PG minutes.

Yes, the Ben Gordon midget factor does seem to skew the stats away from Rodney. However, the point is still the same. Rodney may have more minutes played than Bynum, but he has actually played fewer as the PG.

Here is a more simple way to look at it:
Bynum: 737 minutes played
Atkins: 326 minutes played
Total: 1063

31 (Total Games) x 48 (Total minutes available at the PG spot per game) = 1584

1584 (Total PG Minutes available) - 1063 (Bynum+Atkin minutes) = 521 (~16mpg) (Stuckey's minutes with no other PG on the floor)

Obviously the rare Atkins/Bynum combo could throw this off a bit as well, but I've watched every game so far, and can only recall seeing it briefly maybe 1 or 2 times.

All that really matters: You can't expect Rodney to put up Chris Paul assist numbers when he's playing a ton of his minutes off-the-ball. No, he's not a true PG, but people expecting big numbers are just unrealistic. I wouldn't bring this up , but you specifically brought up stats, so it needs to be considered in that argument.

[313 Professor]

OK, this myth that Rip's "Off-the-ball" game doesn't bog down an offense like pick and roll scorers needs to end here. If anything it is worse. You get 3 dudes standing around setting picks, one guy at the top of the key (Rodney) pounding the ball away, while Rip runs in circles hoping to get open for a 20 foot shot. 75% of the time, he'll be covered and the PG will be forced to scramble late in the clock, or they'll get the pass to Rip, and he'll have to force something. There is no cutting, the defense isn't moving (no easy putbacks as defenders move to help out), and the likelihood of getting to the FT line is slim.

And +1 on Cow's post. Rodney is not the only player we're building on. We're not asking him to be Lebron James. Just because he's not Lebron/Kobe, doesn't mean he can't be a big piece to our puzzle. Make no mistake, a guard who is a mismatch most nights, attacks the rack relentlessly, rebounds like a SF, scores in bunches, can defend 3 positions effectively, and get you 4-5 assists is definitely a piece that will help a championship-caliber team as a major contributer. Not to mention the kid is 23, and only has a little over 2 years of NBA game experience.

You do realize that we won a championship with Rip as our primary source of offense right? It really doesn't work like that...

Players like Stuckey are 6th men on elite teams not centerpieces or cornerstones. He is a scorer who needs the ball to have any positive impact on the game, and he doesn't even score at an elite level. It makes much more sense to trade him now and get some nice pieces (no stars) in return, rather than keep him and hope an elite player to pair with Stuckey will fall into our laps so we'll be able to compete at a championship level.

Choob, The only thing redundant about our team is the fact that when Bynum, Stuckey, CV, or Gordon (4 of our main scorers) have the ball in their hands, nobody else we have on the floor has much value unless they can offensive rebound. There is nothing wrong with having 2 guys with value w/o the basketball. In fact... that's a good thing. If all your players need to "dominate the ball" to be effective offensively what are they gonna do when someone else has the ball? This is kinda where we are now with the league low in assists and a whole bunch of talented scorers. Believe it or not Rip is actually the best playmaker (as in setting up other guys) we have on our roster.

[7r5ur]

You do realize that we won a championship with Rip as our primary source of offense right? It really doesn't work like that...

Yes, and our offense was brutal then too. We won by playing a level of defense that is not physically possible in todays NBA not to mention one of the most well-rounded starting lineups of all-time, with all of them in the their prime. Rip is now beyond his prime, and by the time this team is even thinking about contending, he will barely be hanging on in this league.

I won't bother with the rest of your copy-paste post, since you just write the same things over-and-over again regardless of how many people explain that your logic is flawed in assuming that a player is useless if they aren't either an elite level scorer, pure passer, or simply a spot-up shooter. Rodney does enough things well off-the-ball (Defend, rebound), to make him an effective player even if you factor out that he can give up 20ppg and 4-5apg. Balance out this roster a bit (Can we get a big, PLEASE?), and we're in business.

[PS&E G.S.]

I would be against trading Stuckey unless we get a VERY good deal. We really don't know what we have got in him yet. He has some things he needs to work on that is obvious. He needs to learn when to pass out of a double team and really needs to develop a three point shot. Either one of those would improve his game immensely. Passing out of the double team will come with experience. Three point shooting is something that he would have to work on in the off season. In college he could get by purely on his athletic talent alone. He was probably the most talented guy on the court due to the conference his school is in, and could do what ever he wanted because no one could stop him. Now, he is playing with guys that are as talented or more talented than himself. We need to be patient, those skills will take time to learn. By necessity the coaching staff has not been able to work with him like they would normally do with a young player. He had to play, just too many injuries to pull him out and explain his mistakes. I don't feel there is any one to teach him those skills, Ben Gordon is the only player that comes close to having that skill set and he has been hurt. You can learn only so much from coaches, sometimes you have to see someone else do it (and beat you with it) until it clicks.

That being said I think he is more of a shooting guard than a point. I think he is playing the one out of need not because it fits him best. If he develops those skills maybe he could become a decent point guard, but why force it. He could be a decent point, a very good two, or a great combo guard.

As far as Will Bynum goes, he is great coming off the bench but as a starter he has too many weaknesses. He is just as much a shoot first look for his own shot guy as Stuckey. But he is just too small to cover most of the starting guards in the league. He would get posted up over and over again. Just like we used to do with Billups when he faced a small guard. His stats are good but most of them are against the other teams second unit. I am not saying he is a bad player but just that he is not starting material.

[Chaosmonger]

As much as I love Bynum, I think it would be better to trade him and try to find a young Atkins/Billups type to play with Stuck at the 2 for about half of his minutes (as well as trading Rip).
PG: Stuckey (20-24 mins), Billkins/Atllups (20-24 mins)
SG: Gordon (32-34 mins), Stuckey (14-16 mins)

[Warspite]

OK, this myth that Rip's "Off-the-ball" game doesn't bog down an offense like pick and roll scorers needs to end here. If anything it is worse. You get 3 dudes standing around setting picks, one guy at the top of the key (Rodney) pounding the ball away, while Rip runs in circles hoping to get open for a 20 foot shot. 75% of the time, he'll be covered and the PG will be forced to scramble late in the clock, or they'll get the pass to Rip, and he'll have to force something. There is no cutting, the defense isn't moving (no easy putbacks as defenders move to help out), and the likelihood of getting to the FT line is slim.

And +1 on Cow's post. Rodney is not the only player we're building on. We're not asking him to be Lebron James. Just because he's not Lebron/Kobe, doesn't mean he can't be a big piece to our puzzle. Make no mistake, a guard who is a mismatch most nights, attacks the rack relentlessly, rebounds like a SF, scores in bunches, can defend 3 positions effectively, and get you 4-5 assists is definitely a piece that will help a championship-caliber team as a major contributer. Not to mention the kid is 23, and only has a little over 2 years of NBA game experience.

You do realize that we won a championship with Rip as our primary source of offense right? It really doesn't work like that...

Players like Stuckey are 6th men on elite teams not centerpieces or cornerstones. He is a scorer who needs the ball to have any positive impact on the game, and he doesn't even score at an elite level. It makes much more sense to trade him now and get some nice pieces (no stars) in return, rather than keep him and hope an elite player to pair with Stuckey will fall into our laps so we'll be able to compete at a championship level.

Choob, The only thing redundant about our team is the fact that when Bynum, Stuckey, CV, or Gordon (4 of our main scorers) have the ball in their hands, nobody else we have on the floor has much value unless they can offensive rebound. There is nothing wrong with having 2 guys with value w/o the basketball. In fact... that's a good thing. If all your players need to "dominate the ball" to be effective offensively what are they gonna do when someone else has the ball? This is kinda where we are now with the league low in assists and a whole bunch of talented scorers. Believe it or not Rip is actually the best playmaker (as in setting up other guys) we have on our roster.

I would agree with you if we are trying to contend for a title in 2010 and beyond. However I think you didnt get the memo that we are in rebuild and that we are adding players based on there potential and there 2012-2015 ability not what they can do today.

Your correct in that Stuckey has faults and limitations today and that he currently is not a at the allstar level that will be needed to contend. I however disagree with you that Stuckey has already hit his prime and that he has peaked and cant get any better.

Also your argument about Stuckey could be applied to to about 20 HoFers and over 50 allstars who didnt reach there prime and become a finished product before they turned 23 yrs old. Clyde Drexler didnt even start untill he was in his mid 20s and that was only because of an injury. Im sure you would have given up on him espeicaly with a allstar SG and SF already on the roster and traded him for some assets.
Your agument makes sense if its 2004 or 2005 but this team is no longer in win now mode.

[313 Professor]

You do realize that we won a championship with Rip as our primary source of offense right? It really doesn't work like that...

Yes, and our offense was brutal then too. We won by playing a level of defense that is not physically possible in todays NBA not to mention one of the most well-rounded starting lineups of all-time, with all of them in the their prime. Rip is now beyond his prime, and by the time this team is even thinking about contending, he will barely be hanging on in this league.

I won't bother with the rest of your copy-paste post, since you just write the same things over-and-over again regardless of how many people explain that your logic is flawed in assuming that a player is useless if they aren't either an elite level scorer, pure passer, or simply a spot-up shooter. Rodney does enough things well off-the-ball (Defend, rebound), to make him an effective player even if you factor out that he can give up 20ppg and 4-5apg. Balance out this roster a bit (Can we get a big, PLEASE?), and we're in business.

You're 100% right about the defense thing, but to suggest we were brutal on offense is a little much I think. And while I know we probably won't be able to replicate the level of defense we played, all I'm saying is that Rip is a solid piece to have with his ability off-ball. I hate to be redundant but the more players you have who can have impact without the ball in their hands the better. There are numerous examples of this all around the NBA, and the best teams have players that are good pick & pop players, 3pt shooters, rebounders, screen setters, etc. Or they have Kobe, Lebron, or Melo as superstar players can make up for bad pieces.

As far as Rip hanging on by the time we should be thinking about contending, I disagree. His style of play should enable him to have a good 5 more years as those jumpshooters like the Reggie Miller's, Ray Allen's, etc, tend to last longer than guys who rely on their athleticism. If Rip stays in good shape (which he probably will) he'll be around and rather effective for a while I think. If you don't think we should be thinking about contending within 5 years though... I hope you're wrong.

Warspite, I don't think Stuckey has reached his prime, but his ceiling really isn't that high I don't think. He'll never just become an elite ball-handler overnight, and the ability to finish above the rim won't come to him with age. He doesn't have that natural touch on his jumpshot either, so he isn't going to become an elite shooter, but the J is really the only thing he'll be able to improve on in his game.

[Choob]

Choob, The only thing redundant about our team is the fact that when Bynum, Stuckey, CV, or Gordon (4 of our main scorers) have the ball in their hands, nobody else we have on the floor has much value unless they can offensive rebound. There is nothing wrong with having 2 guys with value w/o the basketball. In fact... that's a good thing. If all your players need to "dominate the ball" to be effective offensively what are they gonna do when someone else has the ball? This is kinda where we are now with the league low in assists and a whole bunch of talented scorers. Believe it or not Rip is actually the best playmaker (as in setting up other guys) we have on our roster.

Please, this is ridiculous and as BDM has said, you just rehash the same old things without considering what others have said...

Out of Rip, BG, Stuck and Will, Rip is 3rd (ahead of BG) or 4th in setting up ppl. Dude is a turnover machine when he dominates the ball.... Bynum can actually drive and shoot as evidenced earlier before his driving ability got limited by having both sprains on both ankles. Stuck wihile being a combo still has played PG well and while not as effective as we'd all like is still much better than Rip in that respect. Rip either shoots it off the curl, tries to do a pseudo post up against smaller guys or faces up to his man and takes a contested jumper. Rarely will he look to dump it down as he used to do in earlier seasons... however not all the blame is on him as our bigs either have stone hands, butter fingers or are never in position to collect a dump down pass in scoring position

All you are fixated on is that BG/CV can create their offense which you obviously equate to dominating the ball. This is not true, they can create in the flow of the offense with BG getting free off screens and then either dumping it down for a big in the paint, hitting a cutting teammate, elevating and shooting the open jumper or passing it out if there's nothing there. Also, CV is damn effective in the post and it would be silly to not run plays for him when in position.