PF targets

[Laimbeer]

Just googling a little I see Hauser mentioned as a decent defender who is improving on that end. The contract is solid assuming he doesn't regress from his 40% plus three point shooting. But why do I feel like that shooting will fall off a cliff when he gets here?

[Canadafan]

Just googling a little I see Hauser mentioned as a decent defender who is improving on that end. The contract is solid assuming he doesn't regress from his 40% plus three point shooting. But why do I feel like that shooting will fall off a cliff when he gets here?

No no, that's the old Pistons. With the new Pistons, players remain just as good or get better. Look at Beasley. And Tobias.
There will be no negative talk allowed, shhhh

[tmorgan]

Just googling a little I see Hauser mentioned as a decent defender who is improving on that end. The contract is solid assuming he doesn't regress from his 40% plus three point shooting. But why do I feel like that shooting will fall off a cliff when he gets here?

On one hand, Boston runs a five out offense that takes as many threes as possible. On the other hand, they don’t have an elite distributor and get by with a conbination of point forward Tatum, White, Jrue, and Pritchard off the bench.

The Pistons don’t shoot as many threes as a team, but they do have a better passer and just showed the ability to force-feed a shooter shots leading to a career year. We can use Hauser correctly.

[Mr Peanut]

Fontecchio is likely to be on the outside of the rotation himself.

Indeed, but if our FO wanted to sign LaRavia as well as keeping Beasley/Schroder then we will need to get Fontecchio off the books.

The Pistons didn't draft Holland to let him rot outside of the rotation for the sake of a player like Jake LaRavia. We also don't know whether or not Holland or Ausar will be able to shoot next season. And notwithstanding what Lord Voldemort did two seasons ago, full bench units are not a common sight on the floor.

He's not going to rot. There are 96 forward minutes to go around. If you give 30 of those to Harris (averaged 31.6 last season and will be a year older), 30 to Ausar (averaged 22.5 last season after returning from his blood clot) and 20 to LaRavia then you still have 16 for Holland. And that's not even taking into account the inevitable minutes that various players will lose to injuries which would then lead to guys like Holland playing more.

Stew is hugely unlikely to play at PF ever again.

In my bench lineup and JBB's projected rotation he is purely a backup C.

My question to you - if next season a 33 year Tobias Harris goes down with an injury then who do we start at PF if we don't actually have a suitable backup?

[catari11]

just for the record I didn't mean to imply that MPJ is the ideal PF or that Trajan would be inclined to pursue him. I think folks are underestimating his rebounding and D. Still, I conceded it's highly unlikely Pistons inquire with Denver. Hauser doesn't move the needle IMO. He doesn't offer the rebounding nor the paint D (i.e shotblocking) this team desperately needs. The Knicks exposed both of these deficiencies (and I'm not sure how much Stew would have mitigated these problems).

[Crymson]

Fontecchio is likely to be on the outside of the rotation himself.

Indeed, but if our FO wanted to sign LaRavia as well as keeping Beasley/Schroder then we will need to get Fontecchio off the books.

Only if the Pistons aim to operate as a cap space team, which would make re-signing Schroder difficult.

He's not going to rot. There are 96 forward minutes to go around. If you give 30 of those to Harris (averaged 31.6 last season and will be a year older), 30 to Ausar (averaged 22.5 last season after returning from his blood clot) and 20 to LaRavia then you still have 16 for Holland. And that's not even taking into account the inevitable minutes that various players will lose to injuries which would then lead to guys like Holland playing more.

You're forgetting the presence of Schroder and Ivey, who, along with Cade, would eat up the vast majority of the minutes at guard. Beasley, as he has in times past, would end up playing a significant portion of his minutes at small forward. That would leave Holland with very, very few minutes, and the organization is plainly high on him. He's not going to play behind the likes of 24-year-old LaRavia either way.

My question to you - if next season a 33 year Tobias Harris goes down with an injury then who do we start at PF if we don't actually have a suitable backup?

I suspect Ausar or Ron would end up playing those minutes, though perhaps Fontecchio will have recovered some of his 2023-2024 form by next season.

[Mr Peanut]

You're forgetting the presence of Schroder and Ivey, who, along with Cade, would eat up the vast majority of the minutes at guard. Beasley, as he has in times past, would end up playing a significant portion of his minutes at small forward. That would leave Holland with very, very few minutes, and the organization is plainly high on him. He's not going to play behind the likes of 24-year-old LaRavia either way.

Beasley actually only played 10% of his minutes at SF last season. 5% and 4% for the two respective seasons prior, so not really a significant portion. If last season is any indicator then it would be around 3 minutes per game at SF which is fairly negligible. Even having the four guard rotation of Cade/Ivey/Beasley/Schroder, the probability that they are all healthy for all 82 games is fairly low so we shouldn't be expecting Beasley's minutes to encroach into the forward minutes too much. And we also need to factor in that it's very possible that both Beasley and Schroder won't be re-signed.

I suspect Ausar or Ron would end up playing those minutes, though perhaps Fontecchio will have recovered some of his 2023-2024 form by next season.

You've been a big advocate for spacing in the past - doesn't starting either Ausar or Holland alongside Duren negate that? Even worse if Ausar is the starting PF and then Holland is expected to be the starting SF due to the lack of forwards we have available. LaRavia shoots over 37% from three at over 5 attempts per game per 36 so does help to negate that spacing problem if Harris goes down.

I'm not necessarily saying he's the ultimate solution or should be the first signature we chase this off-season. But the idea that there will be no or limited minutes available for him is a clear fallacy.

[the_l_train]

You're forgetting the presence of Schroder and Ivey, who, along with Cade, would eat up the vast majority of the minutes at guard. Beasley, as he has in times past, would end up playing a significant portion of his minutes at small forward. That would leave Holland with very, very few minutes, and the organization is plainly high on him. He's not going to play behind the likes of 24-year-old LaRavia either way.

Beasley actually only played 10% of his minutes at SF last season. 5% and 4% for the two respective seasons prior, so not really a significant portion. If last season is any indicator then it would be around 3 minutes per game at SF which is fairly negligible. Even having the four guard rotation of Cade/Ivey/Beasley/Schroder, the probability that they are all healthy for all 82 games is fairly low so we shouldn't be expecting Beasley's minutes to encroach into the forward minutes too much. And we also need to factor in that it's very possible that both Beasley and Schroder won't be re-signed.

I suspect Ausar or Ron would end up playing those minutes, though perhaps Fontecchio will have recovered some of his 2023-2024 form by next season.

You've been a big advocate for spacing in the past - doesn't starting either Ausar or Holland alongside Duren negate that? Even worse if Ausar is the starting PF and then Holland is expected to be the starting SF due to the lack of forwards we have available. LaRavia shoots over 37% from three at over 5 attempts per game per 36 so does help to negate that spacing problem if Harris goes down.

I'm not necessarily saying he's the ultimate solution or should be the first signature we chase this off-season. But the idea that there will be no or limited minutes available for him is a clear fallacy.

Not sure why the minutes distribution is a huge concern in this thread once we bring up Laravia.

No matter what PF target we go for, the rotation will need adjusting. We are really splitting hairs here...this is more of a discussion for once something has actually happened...

[Crymson]

Beasley actually only played 10% of his minutes at SF last season. 5% and 4% for the two respective seasons prior, so not really a significant portion. If last season is any indicator then it would be around 3 minutes per game at SF which is fairly negligible.

Say even 34 minutes for Cade, 30 minutes for Ivey, and 20 minutes for Schroder, and you're looking at 12 left over for Beasley at guard. He'd end up playing a significant number at SF. The situation, not his past -- though he played about one-third of his minutes at small forward two seasons ago -- would determine his positional distribution.

And we also need to factor in that it's very possible that both Beasley and Schroder won't be re-signed.

If the Pistons end up replacing Schroder or Beasley with the likes of LaRavia, who has all of one season to his name as a decent NBA bench player (in which he averaged 7 PPG), then something is likely to have gone very wrong.

Even having the four guard rotation of Cade/Ivey/Beasley/Schroder, the probability that they are all healthy for all 82 games is fairly low so we shouldn't be expecting Beasley's minutes to encroach into the forward minutes too much.

"You'll get more minutes if somebody is injured" is not the most attractive pitch for a free agent.

You've been a big advocate for spacing in the past - doesn't starting either Ausar or Holland alongside Duren negate that? Even worse if Ausar is the starting PF and then Holland is expected to be the starting SF due to the lack of forwards we have available. LaRavia shoots over 37% from three at over 5 attempts per game per 36 so does help to negate that spacing problem if Harris goes down.

Barring the front office finding a better option at starting center or Ausar making a magical leap from three, the Pistons seem overwhelmingly likely to start Ausar and Duren together in any case. If Ausar moves up to power forward AND Holland cannot shoot AND Fontecchio has not recovered any of his previous form AND the Pistons have acquired no further depth at the position, then I suspect Beasley would end up in the starting lineup. That's a lot of "ands".

In any case, I'm still struggling to understand your point. This is a matter of whether or not the roster would be an attractive destination for a player who's trying to establish himself in the NBA and could get more opportunity elsewhere. Why would he join a roster on which in the normal course of things, he'd be fighting for minutes?

I'm not necessarily saying he's the ultimate solution or should be the first signature we chase this off-season. But the idea that there will be no or limited minutes available for him is a clear fallacy.

If Schroder and Beasley are back and no other major changes are made, the scarcity of minutes in the event of a fully healthy roster will be a numerical fact.

[Crymson]

Not sure why the minutes distribution is a huge concern in this thread once we bring up Laravia.

No matter what PF target we go for, the rotation will need adjusting. We are really splitting hairs here...this is more of a discussion for once something has actually happened...

Because in order for a team to acquire a player in free agency, he needs to sign a contract with that team. An interest in playing for that team is a prerequisite for the signing of that contract.

There's also an odd notion that the organization is guaranteed to seek out a rotation-caliber backup power forward, and that's an unfounded notion given the current realities of the roster. The front office could very easily just go with Fontecchio as 10th man and hope that he rediscovers his shooting when he's called upon to play. Given his long history as a high-percentage shooter prior to his arrival in the NBA, it's not unlikely that he'd make a comeback.

As for the notion that we're "splitting hairs," I don't see how so. This is a basketball discussion forum. We're discussing offseason scenarios.

[the_l_train]

In any case, I'm still struggling to understand your point. This is a matter of whether or not the roster would be an attractive destination for a player who's trying to establish himself in the NBA and could get more opportunity elsewhere. Why would he join a roster on which in the normal course of things, he'd be fighting for minutes?

For the third time, Laravia already mentioned us as a possible "attractive" destination.

Look at our PF depth at the moment:

Tobias Harris - 32 years old, played better than expected last year but is not getting any younger, safe to say he is on the down slope if anything
Simone Fontechio - 29 years old, put up a dud last year, didn't get playoff minutes
Bobi Klintman - Young guy fighting for a roster spot if anything

Ausar is listed as a guard-forward --- he may get PF minutes, but it all depends on how the rest of the roster shakes out.

If I am a young up and coming PF who is only 23 years old, I would look at this roster and see a clear path to earn playing time...joining a team to be part of a young core with a clear hole in this position...not sure how else to explain this. Having a guy like Cade alone should make us an attractive destination right now.

[Invictus88]

Just googling a little I see Hauser mentioned as a decent defender who is improving on that end. The contract is solid assuming he doesn't regress from his 40% plus three point shooting. But why do I feel like that shooting will fall off a cliff when he gets here?

His 4 years in the league across 256 games he has shot:
43% on 1.7 attempts
42% on 4.2 attempts
42% on 5.9 attempts
42% on 5.6 attempts

We've shown time and time again the ability to drive and kick out to perimeter players. Beasley is living proof that snipers can thrive here.

Like a lot of the conclusions / statements you make I just don't see logic lining up.

P.S. I'm not saying we need to go get this guy necessarily.

[the_l_train]

Just googling a little I see Hauser mentioned as a decent defender who is improving on that end. The contract is solid assuming he doesn't regress from his 40% plus three point shooting. But why do I feel like that shooting will fall off a cliff when he gets here?

His 4 years in the league across 256 games he has shot:
43% on 1.7 attempts
42% on 4.2 attempts
42% on 5.9 attempts
42% on 5.6 attempts

We've shown time and time again the ability to drive and kick out to perimeter players. Beasley is living proof that snipers can thrive here.

Like a lot of the conclusions / statements you make I just don't see logic lining up.

P.S. I'm not saying we need to go get this guy necessarily.

Shooters coming to Detroit and falling off a cliff used to be a thing, and hopefully that curse is over.

Ben Gordon, Charlie V, Jodie Meeks, & Maurice Evans come to mind.

New era though, and Hauser seems pretty damn consistent so far.

[Mr Peanut]

If the Pistons end up replacing Schroder or Beasley with the likes of LaRavia, who has all of one season to his name as a decent NBA bench player (in which he averaged 7 PPG), then something is likely to have gone very wrong.

He's not replacing Schroder or Beasley though. In this scenario he would be replacing Fontecchio. And the reason why he has a limited number of seasons in which he has been a decent NBA bench player is because he is 23 years old and drafted in 2022. He aligns with our young core and his trajectory is to get better (unlike Fontecchio and some of the other PF options that have been mentioned in this thread).

"You'll get more minutes if somebody is injured" is not the most attractive pitch for a free agent.

That's not part of the pitch. That's just the reality of a 82 game NBA season where it's quite common, especially in the later parts of the year, for 2-3 key rotation guys to be in street clothes and significant minutes opening up for bench players.

In any case, I'm still struggling to understand your point. This is a matter of whether or not the roster would be an attractive destination for a player who's trying to establish himself in the NBA and could get more opportunity elsewhere. Why would he join a roster on which in the normal course of things, he'd be fighting for minutes?

The point is that LaRavia has already come out and said that we are a destination that he would be interested in. Which tells us that he (or his agent) are mindful of our rotation minutes and where players are needed, and recognize that there will be minutes available to him. Fontecchio played 75 games at 16.5 MPG last season. LaRavia would take those at a minimum and potentially more if he proves himself an effective contributor.

Unless we end up in the unlikely scenario of landing a Naz Reid or Bobby Portis level player, our FO should be jumping on a 23 year old 3+D PF that would come at a fairly reasonable price. But if we want to go into next season with a PF rotation of a 33 year old Tobias Harris, Fontecchio (our worst player logging significant minutes last season), Ausar who is actually a F-G and Bobi Klintman, then we aren't a team that is serious about taking another step forward.

[Mr Peanut]

You're forgetting the presence of Schroder and Ivey, who, along with Cade, would eat up the vast majority of the minutes at guard. Beasley, as he has in times past, would end up playing a significant portion of his minutes at small forward. That would leave Holland with very, very few minutes, and the organization is plainly high on him. He's not going to play behind the likes of 24-year-old LaRavia either way.

Beasley actually only played 10% of his minutes at SF last season. 5% and 4% for the two respective seasons prior, so not really a significant portion. If last season is any indicator then it would be around 3 minutes per game at SF which is fairly negligible. Even having the four guard rotation of Cade/Ivey/Beasley/Schroder, the probability that they are all healthy for all 82 games is fairly low so we shouldn't be expecting Beasley's minutes to encroach into the forward minutes too much. And we also need to factor in that it's very possible that both Beasley and Schroder won't be re-signed.

I suspect Ausar or Ron would end up playing those minutes, though perhaps Fontecchio will have recovered some of his 2023-2024 form by next season.

You've been a big advocate for spacing in the past - doesn't starting either Ausar or Holland alongside Duren negate that? Even worse if Ausar is the starting PF and then Holland is expected to be the starting SF due to the lack of forwards we have available. LaRavia shoots over 37% from three at over 5 attempts per game per 36 so does help to negate that spacing problem if Harris goes down.

I'm not necessarily saying he's the ultimate solution or should be the first signature we chase this off-season. But the idea that there will be no or limited minutes available for him is a clear fallacy.

Not sure why the minutes distribution is a huge concern in this thread once we bring up Laravia.

No matter what PF target we go for, the rotation will need adjusting. We are really splitting hairs here...this is more of a discussion for once something has actually happened...

The minutes distribution was never my concern, I'm just trying to justify it to others for which it is a concern. I think if a 23 year old 3+D PF shows interest in signing with your team, and would come at a reasonable cost-controlled price, you jump on that and figure out the minutes later. If Fontecchio is able to be dumped somewhere with minimal salary coming back then our available cap space is preserved and we can still bring back guys like Beasley and Schroder if that is our FO's intention.

The interesting thing to me is that those who are shooting down the ideas proposed are actually unwilling (or incapable) of providing a superior and realistic alternative. Even though it's clear that continuing with the status quo of Fontecchio as the backup PF is not viable.

[Crymson]

For the third time, Laravia already mentioned us as a possible "attractive" destination.

Look at our PF depth at the moment:

Tobias Harris - 32 years old, played better than expected last year but is not getting any younger, safe to say he is on the down slope if anything
Simone Fontechio - 29 years old, put up a dud last year, didn't get playoff minutes
Bobi Klintman - Young guy fighting for a roster spot if anything

Ausar is listed as a guard-forward --- he may get PF minutes, but it all depends on how the rest of the roster shakes out.

If I am a young up and coming PF who is only 23 years old, I would look at this roster and see a clear path to earn playing time...joining a team to be part of a young core with a clear hole in this position...not sure how else to explain this. Having a guy like Cade alone should make us an attractive destination right now.

Something tells me that his thought process wasn't, "Oh, I could go there and try to fight my way into the rotation."

He's not replacing Schroder or Beasley though. In this scenario he would be replacing Fontecchio. And the reason why he has a limited number of seasons in which he has been a decent NBA bench player is because he is 23 years old and drafted in 2022. He aligns with our young core and his trajectory is to get better (unlike Fontecchio and some of the other PF options that have been mentioned in this thread).

That's not part of the pitch. That's just the reality of a 82 game NBA season where it's quite common, especially in the later parts of the year, for 2-3 key rotation guys to be in street clothes and significant minutes opening up for bench players.

If he's willing to come here on the BAE to play 10th man without guaranteed minutes, great! What I'm pointing out is that it seems rather unlikely.

The point is that LaRavia has already come out and said that we are a destination that he would be interested in. Which tells us that he (or his agent) are mindful of our rotation minutes and where players are needed, and recognize that there will be minutes available to him.

Unless the FO is risking tampering penalties for the sake of being in close contact with bench role player who holds a minuscule NBA pedigree, I doubt he or his agent know any such thing.

Fontecchio played 75 games at 16.5 MPG last season. LaRavia would take those at a minimum and potentially more if he proves himself an effective contributor.

First Ausar was out, then Ivey was out. Ivey will be back, Ausar will presumably be averaging more minutes, and -- in this scenario -- Schroder will be taking up minutes at guard as well, thereby pushing some minutes up the lineup. Fontecchio's minutes are more or less gone already if Schroder and Beasley are back. Math, my man.

Unless we end up in the unlikely scenario of landing a Naz Reid or Bobby Portis level player, our FO should be jumping on a 23 year old 3+D PF that would come at a fairly reasonable price. But if we want to go into next season with a PF rotation of a 33 year old Tobias Harris, Fontecchio (our worst player logging significant minutes last season), Ausar who is actually a F-G and Bobi Klintman, then we aren't a team that is serious about taking another step forward.

I dispute the notion that any team not prioritizing the question of backup power forward means it is unserious about taking another step forward, especially a team which is wanting to invest substantial minutes and focus into a pair of 6'7" and 6'8" prospect forwards.

As for Fontecchio, this season was a blip in terms of his shooting. I'd say he stands a solid chance of finding his way back -- particularly with a less difficult shot diet -- though the minutes probably won't be there for him to claim unless someone gets injured.

Finally, as for your characterization of LaRavia, he just finished his only season as a reliable shooter and he's more just respectable than good defender. A player fitting your characterization -- a 23-year-old three-and-D power forward -- would be highly sought after, and there would be no prospect whatsoever of such a player signing a modest contract to fight for minutes rather than just accepting a guaranteed rotation role for good pay somewhere else.

[Mr Peanut]

Unless the FO is risking tampering penalties for the sake of being in close contact with bench role player who holds a minuscule NBA pedigree, I doubt he or his agent know any such thing.

What? No one mentioned anything about tampering or communication between agents and our front office. Part of an agent's job is to look at teams' needs and figure out if their player is likely to get minutes/opportunities. Beyond the positives of us being a team with cap space and on an upward trajectory record wise, it's not a stretch to believe LaRavia and/or his agent are mindful of the fact that we are thin at the PF spot and so have identified us a landing spot.

First Ausar was out, then Ivey was out. Ivey will be back, Ausar will presumably be averaging more minutes, and -- in this scenario -- Schroder will be taking up minutes at guard as well, thereby pushing some minutes up the lineup. Fontecchio's minutes are more or less gone already if Schroder and Beasley are back. Math, my man.

None of those players are adept at playing the 4 apart from spot minutes for Ausar. And if we have any injuries to key players (like we did last season and almost certainly will happen at some point during the upcoming season) then we will be grateful for having a rotation level PF readily available. Maths is important, but so is contingency.

Finally, as for your characterization of LaRavia, he just finished his only season as a reliable shooter and he's more just respectable than good defender. A player fitting your characterization -- a 23-year-old three-and-D power forward -- would be highly sought after, and there would be no prospect whatsoever of such a player signing a modest contract to fight for minutes rather than just accepting a guaranteed rotation role for good pay somewhere else.

Last season he shot over 42% from three on almost 4 attempts per game per 36, and his defensive EPM places him in the 67th percentile in the entire league. So he's not elite in either of those categories, but good enough that calling him a 3 and D player is reasonable. He's unlikely to get "good pay" anywhere due to the lack of cap space in the league and the nature of the new CBA where mid-level players don't get significant contracts due to fear of the aprons. We at least project as a team that can offer a reasonable contract. The characterization of having to "fight for minutes" is just your perception, but in reality he would walk into our backup PF spot.

I'm not even strongly advocating for LaRavia. I'm just saying I can see why him/his agent have interest in Detroit, and I can see why there would be mutual interest from our end. Time will tell whether this comes to pass. What I do believe is that our current PF rotation is not sustainable moving forward into next season. it's not about making change for the sake of change, it's upgrading weaknesses in your roster to continue to move forward.

[the_l_train]

Finally, as for your characterization of LaRavia, he just finished his only season as a reliable shooter and he's more just respectable than good defender. A player fitting your characterization -- a 23-year-old three-and-D power forward -- would be highly sought after, and there would be no prospect whatsoever of such a player signing a modest contract to fight for minutes rather than just accepting a guaranteed rotation role for good pay somewhere else.

Dude, put down the feather pen. Orlando or Denver are not just going to hand this guy a massive contract and minutes on day one either.

Trajan, for the love of God, please sign Laravia so we can put this one to bed.

[Crymson]

Unless the FO is risking tampering penalties for the sake of being in close contact with bench role player who holds a minuscule NBA pedigree, I doubt he or his agent know any such thing.

What? No one mentioned anything about tampering or communication between agents and our front office. Part of an agent's job is to look at teams' needs and figure out if their player is likely to get minutes/opportunities. Beyond the positives of us being a team with cap space and on an upward trajectory record wise, it's not a stretch to believe LaRavia and/or his agent are mindful of the fact that we are thin at the PF spot and so have identified us a landing spot.

None of those players are adept at playing the 4 apart from spot minutes for Ausar. And if we have any injuries to key players (like we did last season and almost certainly will happen at some point during the upcoming season) then we will be grateful for having a rotation level PF readily available. Maths is important, but so is contingency.

I think you're reading a lot into a little. But like I said, if he's willing to come here as 10th man on the BAE with the knowledge that he might not play many minutes, yay! But I'd caution that Fontecchio is probably at least as likely to progress back to his mean as LaRavia is to repeat how he played this season.

Last season he shot over 42% from three on almost 4 attempts per game per 36, and his defensive EPM places him in the 67th percentile in the entire league. So he's not elite in either of those categories, but good enough that calling him a 3 and D player is reasonable.

So was Fontecchio last season, then, and he had a far greater shooting pedigree -- from his time playing in Europe -- than LaRavia does. It's a one-season sample size, and we've seen what can happen.

He's unlikely to get "good pay" anywhere due to the lack of cap space in the league and the nature of the new CBA where mid-level players don't get significant contracts due to fear of the aprons. We at least project as a team that can offer a reasonable contract.

You're arguing things both ways here: he's a genuine three-and-D PF, yet he can be had for cheap and would be cool with possibly not playing many minutes when he could get better opportunity elsewhere.

Plenty of teams will have the NTP-MLE or the TP-MLE. In the scenario we're discussing -- Beasley and Schroder stay -- the Pistons would operate as an above-the-cap team and wouldn't have the MLE available at all. The best they could offer would be the BAE or an S&T, and a large number of other teams have access to those as well.

The characterization of having to "fight for minutes" is just your perception, but in reality he would walk into our backup PF spot.

Simply having a backup PF spot on paper does not inherently create minutes for him. The Pistons will play guys up the lineup if necessary to get all the minutes they feel are required for Ausar and Ron. I feel very confident saying that neither one will be marginalized so that the Pistons can prioritize a 23-year-old bench-caliber role player who averaged 7 PPG last season.

I think you're also drastically overestimating the size of the average NBA power forward. Yeah, there are guys like Giannis, Mobley, and so on who are big. There are also a large number who are not, and being a highly athletic 6'7"/6'8" does not make one dreadfully undersized for the position. Even if we limit it strictly to starters from this season, Siakam, Collins, Eason, Gordon, Grant, Kawhi, DJJ, Washington, Butler, Barnes, Tatum, and PG are all 6'8" or shorter. Some are beefier, but Ausar got up to 215 last season and still has room to add more weight, Ron is still filling out, and athleticism can compensate to a degree for a disadvantage in weight or height in any case. It's not like there's a huge, gaping hole at the position that simply needs a LaRavia-sized guy in it.

I'm not even strongly advocating for LaRavia. I'm just saying I can see why him/his agent have interest in Detroit, and I can see why there would be mutual interest from our end. Time will tell whether this comes to pass. What I do believe is that our current PF rotation is not sustainable moving forward into next season. it's not about making change for the sake of change, it's upgrading weaknesses in your roster to continue to move forward.

How did you feel last offseason about Fontecchio -- with only a single season of NBA data -- slotting in as the team's primary backup forward?

Dude, put down the feather pen. Orlando or Denver are not just going to hand this guy a massive contract and minutes on day one either.

Do we have anything here that could stand in as a strawman emoji?

Trajan, for the love of God, please sign Laravia so we can put this one to bed.

It's offseason discussion, mate. Get used to it. Or just don't participate -- nobody's forcing you to do so.

[Canadafan]

Random thought on a Friday afternoon....

Tobias Fontecchio Sasser whatever draft picks needed(within reason)
For....
Durant!

We use the Room Exception($8.8mil with5%raises) on Beasley(sorry Bease)

Comparison to our 9man rotation playoff team;
Instead of Paul Reed we have Beef Stew
Shröder and THJr replaced by Ivey
Tobias upgraded to Durant

Boom! I luv it