I hate it, but Weaver absolutely has to be fired.

Moses ShamMoses · Post #401 » by **Moses ShamMoses** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 7:09 pm

Its funny that one different decision, such as drafting Haliburton over Hayes, can totally change the perception on a GM...If he goes with the "safe pick" at #7 and drafts Haliburton he'd be regarded as some draft savant. Same goes for SVG, if he picked Booker or D Mitchell, which he was considering both, he'd probably still be our GM.

7r5ur · Post #402 » by **7r5ur** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 7:28 pm

Moses ShamMoses wrote:Its funny that one different decision, such as drafting Haliburton over Hayes, can totally change the perception on a GM...If he goes with the "safe pick" at #7 and drafts Haliburton he'd be regarded as some draft savant. Same goes for SVG, if he picked Booker or D Mitchell, which he was considering both, he'd probably still be our GM.

Or if we lucked into Wemby... No one would be questioning Weaver. He'd be the 4D-chess mastermind with all that tanking lol.

Can't imagine how badly Monty would be botching Wemby's rookie year in that alternate universe.

MortSahlfan · Post #403 » by **MortSahlfan** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 7:51 pm

Bring in Isiah Thomas. Jerry West and others of his ilk do not want to come to Detroit. This has never been a destination even when the Pistons were winning titles. It's obvious, but it's akin to Weaver not trading Killian. Ego. Governments do this, too.

Isiah drafted T-Mac out of high school. He drafted an all-star in the 2nd round. He's drafted a lot of fine players. Weaver hasn't drafted anyone proven. And he's had the #1 pick, so I don't even count that.

MotownMadness · Post #404 » by **MotownMadness** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 8:32 pm

Moses ShamMoses wrote:Its funny that one different decision, such as drafting Haliburton over Hayes, can totally change the perception on a GM...If he goes with the "safe pick" at #7 and drafts Haliburton he'd be regarded as some draft savant. Same goes for SVG, if he picked Booker or D Mitchell, which he was considering both, he'd probably still be our GM.

Drafting is the one thing we cant afford to F up so bad and we've done it continuously.

Post #405 » by **theBigLip** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 8:45 pm

MotownMadness wrote:
Moses ShamMoses wrote:Its funny that one different decision, such as drafting Haliburton over Hayes, can totally change the perception on a GM...If he goes with the "safe pick" at #7 and drafts Haliburton he'd be regarded as some draft savant. Same goes for SVG, if he picked Booker or D Mitchell, which he was considering both, he'd probably still be our GM.

Drafting is the one thing we cant afford to F up so bad and we've done it continuously.

That’s just not true.

First round picks:
2023: Thompson, Sassar (trade)
2022: Ivey, Duren (trade)
2021: Cade
2020: Hayes, Bey (trade), Stewart (trade)

Sure, Hayes over Halliburton was bad. But that was 2020. He’s done well since then.

Bad luck in the lottery is more of a problem. We could have Wemby or Miller instead of Thompson, and Paolo, Chet or Jabari instead of Ivey. That’s not Weaver’s fault.

MotownMadness · Post #406 » by **MotownMadness** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 8:55 pm

theBigLip wrote:
MotownMadness wrote:
Moses ShamMoses wrote:Its funny that one different decision, such as drafting Haliburton over Hayes, can totally change the perception on a GM...If he goes with the "safe pick" at #7 and drafts Haliburton he'd be regarded as some draft savant. Same goes for SVG, if he picked Booker or D Mitchell, which he was considering both, he'd probably still be our GM.

Drafting is the one thing we cant afford to F up so bad and we've done it continuously.

That’s just not true.

First round picks:
2023: Thompson, Sassar (trade)
2022: Ivey, Duren (trade)
2021: Cade
2020: Hayes, Bey (trade), Stewart (trade)

Sure, Hayes over Halliburton was bad. But that was 2020. He’s done well since then.

Bad luck in the lottery is more of a problem. We could have Wemby or Miller instead of Thompson, and Paolo, Chet or Jabari instead of Ivey. That’s not Weaver’s fault.

Not just during Weavers tenure but we've been in the lottery along time with nothing to show for it. Weaver took pretty much everyone I wanted as BPA but that still hasn't worked.

Kalamazoo317 · Post #407 » by **Kalamazoo317** » Wed Feb 21, 2024 6:28 pm

He's continuously passed up the chance to draft 3 and D wings in favor of so-called better value players. As a result, we have fit issues up and down our young core.

mattao313 · Post #408 » by **mattao313** » Wed Feb 21, 2024 8:43 pm

Kalamazoo317 wrote:He's continuously passed up the chance to draft 3 and D wings in favor of so-called better value players. As a result, we have fit issues up and down our young core.

We didn't have to draft them either but Weaver never tried trading for good players. Wiseman, Bagley, Knoxs where all complete failures

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

Uncle Mxy · Post #409 » by **Uncle Mxy** » Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:54 pm

Knox wasn't a complete failure. For what we paid for him, relative to what he produced, he worked out.

Bagley was overpaid for what he was. If we had him for what comparable Cs that year were signed up for, and didn't bring in Wiseman for some crazy reason, he'd probably still be here and there would't be that much complaining.

mattao313 · Post #410 » by **mattao313** » Wed Feb 21, 2024 10:26 pm

Uncle Mxy wrote:Knox wasn't a complete failure. For what we paid for him, relative to what he produced, he worked out.

Bagley was overpaid for what he was. If we had him for what comparable Cs that year were signed up for, and didn't bring in Wiseman for some crazy reason, he'd probably still be here and there would't be that much complaining.

They were all failures we need actual good players not projects. Why go after projects when we already have a bunch of 1st round picks on the team.

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

Uncle Mxy · Post #411 » by **Uncle Mxy** » Thu Feb 22, 2024 12:26 am

mattao313 wrote:
Uncle Mxy wrote:Knox wasn't a complete failure. For what we paid for him, relative to what he produced, he worked out.

Bagley was overpaid for what he was. If we had him for what comparable Cs that year were signed up for, and didn't bring in Wiseman for some crazy reason, he'd probably still be here and there would't be that much complaining.
They were all failures we need actual good players not projects. Why go after projects when we already have a bunch of 1st round picks on the team.

Because you can't have all superstars, and you can't just draft your way to success. You need player development. If you haven't noticed, our first round picks (like most first round picks) are projects at the NBA level, The problem isn't with Weaver's little development successes -- turning a turd into "less of a turd" here and there. There will be hits and misse theres. The problem is lack of big successes, and overpaying the little successes (a.k.a. making boat anchors).

Judging from who Weaver's tried to cast as a starting PG, he has no idea of what that looks like. That's criminal. Four years of Killian? Bah! I think the only two legit starting NBA PGs Weaver's had are Derrick Rose and maybe Cojo. (He might have had a hit here with Monte Morris, but he's damaged goods -- them's the breaks). Thinking of Cade and Ivey as legit PGs is bogus -- we don't have any first-ballot HOF unicorns. Oh, and we spent HOW much on Cs? FMGWAC!

mattao313 · Post #412 » by **mattao313** » Thu Feb 22, 2024 4:04 am

Uncle Mxy wrote:
mattao313 wrote:
Uncle Mxy wrote:Knox wasn't a complete failure. For what we paid for him, relative to what he produced, he worked out.

Bagley was overpaid for what he was. If we had him for what comparable Cs that year were signed up for, and didn't bring in Wiseman for some crazy reason, he'd probably still be here and there would't be that much complaining.
They were all failures we need actual good players not projects. Why go after projects when we already have a bunch of 1st round picks on the team.

Because you can't have all superstars, and you can't just draft your way to success. You need player development. If you haven't noticed, our first round picks (like most first round picks) are projects at the NBA level, The problem isn't with Weaver's little development successes -- turning a turd into "less of a turd" here and there. There will be hits and misse theres. The problem is lack of big successes, and overpaying the little successes (a.k.a. making boat anchors).

Judging from who Weaver's tried to cast as a starting PG, he has no idea of what that looks like. That's criminal. Four years of Killian? Bah! I think the only two legit starting NBA PGs Weaver's had are Derrick Rose and maybe Cojo. (He might have had a hit here with Monte Morris, but he's damaged goods -- them's the breaks). Thinking of Cade and Ivey as legit PGs is bogus -- we don't have any first-ballot HOF unicorns. Oh, and we spent HOW much on Cs? FMGWAC!

I never said we need only superstars. I'm saying you have a bunch of drafted talent on the team already go out and actually trade for established young/youngish talent. Don't go and trade for projects and hope they turn into decent players

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

Uncle Mxy · Post #413 » by **Uncle Mxy** » Thu Feb 22, 2024 11:56 am

Ahhh... I see what you mean. I don't begrudge Weaver having little projects and doing player development, because we need that -- we need player development in general. The moves for Knox and Bagley worked out as low-cost bench rotation, and what was stupid was what was done afterwards. Was anyone going to fight to give Bagley >MLE money long-term? After blowing a load on Bagley, why did we blow more load on Wiseman? THOSE are the dumb moves.

If you want to talk about Weaver's lack of trade savvy, not getting established young/youngish talent, Bojan and Burks for players who can't crack a rotation?? Really?! Grimes is a project at this point, somehow managing to regress big-time in a contract year. I'm just waiting for us to overpay on his contract extension or trade him mid-way next season. We made the Knicks look like geniuses with that move... thank you, Weave-boy.

Kalamazoo317 · Post #414 » by **Kalamazoo317** » Thu Feb 22, 2024 2:48 pm

You can only develop so many projects at once, though! It's why the team is better off for having moved on from Bagley, Livers, and Hayes. We were trying to develop them *and* Ivey, Cade, Sasser, Duren, Wiseman, Ausar. You can't have a full rotation of projects or what is the infrastructure that's going to help them develop? Even now we probably lean a bit too much on the developmental side.

flow · Post #415 » by **flow** » Thu Feb 22, 2024 3:42 pm

Kalamazoo317 wrote:You can only develop so many projects at once, though! It's why the team is better off for having moved on from Bagley, Livers, and Hayes. We were trying to develop them *and* Ivey, Cade, Sasser, Duren, Wiseman, Ausar. You can't have a full rotation of projects or what is the infrastructure that's going to help them develop? Even now we probably lean a bit too much on the developmental side.

Bagley shouldn't be lumped in with Livers and Hayes. There are deficiencies to his game, but Bagley is a double-double producer in this league, while Hayes and Livers are not nba basketball players. The project is Wiseman, not Bagley. And we still have him.

.

vege · Post #416 » by **vege** » Fri Feb 23, 2024 10:59 am

We could have signed Grant Williams this offseason. Weaver thought it was a better idea spend more money to acquire Joe Harris, or to trade for Monte Morris so he could donate him to Minny for less than what he paid to acquire him in the first place.

And some people still think Weaver is going to build a good team/roster this offseason. A dumbass even insulted me for pointing out how bad our situation around here is.

I mean, people think Fontecchio is a good defender, so I don't know what else need to happen for people to wake up and face reality. Weaver is the worst GM to ever run a franchise in the NBA, and there were some bad ones in NBA history.

Read on Twitter

Kalamazoo317 · Post #417 » by **Kalamazoo317** » Fri Feb 23, 2024 2:04 pm

Dallas added value to get rid of Grant Williams ... not sold that was a huge miss. I *do* think just punting on free agency money was pathetic, but not due to not signing Grant.

flow wrote:
Kalamazoo317 wrote:You can only develop so many projects at once, though! It's why the team is better off for having moved on from Bagley, Livers, and Hayes. We were trying to develop them *and* Ivey, Cade, Sasser, Duren, Wiseman, Ausar. You can't have a full rotation of projects or what is the infrastructure that's going to help them develop? Even now we probably lean a bit too much on the developmental side.

Bagley shouldn't be lumped in with Livers and Hayes. There are deficiencies to his game, but Bagley is a double-double producer in this league, while Hayes and Livers are not nba basketball players. The project is Wiseman, not Bagley. And we still have him.

.

I guess that depends on whether you think Bagley still has any potential to develop into a more well-rounded player. I think it felt like he did when we first traded for him but maybe it doesn't anymore. Maybe he just is what he is at this point (offensive-minded bench big man). I will say that the rebounding (and effort related to it) was inconsistent when Bags was here.

buzzkilloton · Post #418 » by **buzzkilloton** » Tue Feb 27, 2024 3:25 am

I've been one of if not the most vocal on firing Weaver. That said I'm gonna give him some well deserved props on the deadline scoops. Grimes and Tech are really useful players. Guys I could see sticking around for years to come.

Not saying Weaver should be fully in the clear or anything. Just what I'm seeing post ASB has me optimistic going forward.

Post #419 » by **theBigLip** » Tue Feb 27, 2024 3:51 am

mattao313 wrote:
Kalamazoo317 wrote:He's continuously passed up the chance to draft 3 and D wings in favor of so-called better value players. As a result, we have fit issues up and down our young core.
We didn't have to draft them either but Weaver never tried trading for good players. Wiseman, Bagley, Knoxs where all complete failures

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

How do you know Weaver never tried to get good players? I'm sure he's on the phone everyday. But good players are not easy to get.

Wiseman is not a complete failure. He likely never lives up to that #2 pick, but he's still young and a great athlete. He could certainly still be a rotational big.

Post #420 » by **theBigLip** » Tue Feb 27, 2024 3:53 am

Uncle Mxy wrote:Ahhh... I see what you mean. I don't begrudge Weaver having little projects and doing player development, because we need that -- we need player development in general. The moves for Knox and Bagley worked out as low-cost bench rotation, and what was stupid was what was done afterwards. Was anyone going to fight to give Bagley >MLE money long-term? After blowing a load on Bagley, why did we blow more load on Wiseman? THOSE are the dumb moves.

If you want to talk about Weaver's lack of trade savvy, not getting established young/youngish talent, Bojan and Burks for players who can't crack a rotation?? Really?! Grimes is a project at this point, somehow managing to regress big-time in a contract year. I'm just waiting for us to overpay on his contract extension or trade him mid-way next season. We made the Knicks look like geniuses with that move... thank you, Weave-boy.

So how much have you seen Grimes play? You are already complaining about Weaver overpaying him? WTF? I'm pretty sure he's a keeper.