RealGM

what do you think, Is it fair?
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/ ... 0923/16-20

The Pistons jumped up three spots in this edition of the rankings as their "Players" score rose dramatically for a second straight edition from 17th to 11th. The summer acquisitions of Josh Smith and Brandon Jennings are fueling the rise. Both of them have elite physical skills and, when focused, can be dangerous two-way players. However, neither player has a reputation as a team player and legitimate questions remain about how Smith and Jennings will fit in with the Pistons' two young cornerstones -- Greg Monroe and Andre Drummond.

The Pistons also picked up a pair of promising rookies in Kentavious Caldwell-Pope and Luigi Datome. The team badly needs to improve its perimeter shooting and the Pistons are hoping Caldwell-Pope and Datome can provide some much-needed spacing.

The rest of the numbers for the team remain pretty steady. Their money ranking went down after the team committed to long-term deals for Jennings and Smith. Interestingly, their management score also dropped four spots despite the fact that the panel felt the Pistons had actually made another positive step forward this summer.

If the Pistons' starting five can click, they'll move up dramatically in the rankings next time around. There is a lot of talent in Detroit. But until Smith and Jennings can prove that they're willing to play team basketball, the pessimism about Detroit's rise remains.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/ ... 0923/16-20

It's ESPN, so I don't hold anything they say as something of value.

I think the Smith signing is going to be a continual knock against Dumars and the Pistons until/if he can prove it will work. He's a solid talent, but he isn't an immediate fit, for better or worse (I'm still happier with him than Igoudala being on the roster).

All the pre-season garbage is just fluff. I'm excited to see how this season unfolds for the Pistons. I don't care what the nay-sayers write.

I fully expect that we'll see those Power Rankings for us go up a ton by mid-season and over the next couple of seasons.

We've got as high an upside (mid and long-range) as any team in the league, because of Drummond and Monroe - but not just them. Jennings, KCP, Smith is in his prime, all those guys could turn out to be perfect for us. And I don't buy for one minute the idea that the Pistons organization and management is anything other than stellar. The team's rep has taken a hit because we were on top for so long, and that just isn't sustainable. Every team takes a dive when their talent ages (except S.A., who have maintained unreal staying power at or near the top). It takes years to get back to the top, and you've got to have luck in doing so -- you have to get lucky enough to draft a Drummond.

ImHeisenberg wrote:It's ESPN, so I don't hold anything they say as something of value.

Every team says this about ESPN, every team thinks the media hates them. lol

On topic, its hard for me to not see Det at least top 10 off Monroe & Drummond alone.

Seems fair to me. You have to look at how the rankings are actually calculated. It's a lot more than just "we have Drummond and Monroe, therefore we have a bright future." It's still somewhat arbitrary, but it is more than just preseason power ranking fluff, since its something they calculate every so often throughout the year, dating back at least to 2009.

From the article:

HOW FUTURE POWER RATING IS DETERMINED
PLAYERS (worth 50 percent of score): Current players and their potential for the future, factoring in expected departures
MANAGEMENT (worth 16.7 percent of score): Quality and stability of front office, ownership, coaching
MONEY (worth 16.7 percent of score): Projected salary-cap situation; ability and willingness to exceed cap and pay luxury tax
MARKET (worth 8.3 percent of score): Appeal to future acquisitions based on team quality, franchise reputation, city's desirability as a destination, market size, taxes, business and entertainment opportunities, arena quality, fans
DRAFT (worth 8.3 percent of score): Future draft picks; draft positioning
CATEGORY RANKINGS: See how each team ranked in each category

So here's how we scored in each category (mods feel free to edit, if that's too much paywalled info)

This just makes me want the season to hurry up and get here. I care less about projections and more about actual product on the floor. The Pistons get under rated even when they're contending. Why should it change after significant upgrades?

Thanks, and that's where I call b.s. on these rankings.

In another season, I expect we'll be WAY UP there in the Players ranking.

The management rating is massive manure: Joe D is one of the best, and his ranking will go WAY UP when the pundits out there wake up to how good the player ranking (e.g., player accumulation) has been. It's beyond stupid, IMO, to criticize an organization that had to deal with the handicap of coming off 6 straight ECF's - which is a ridiculously great accomplishment.

And the Market rating is the stupidest of all. Everyone knows the Palace will be filled again as the team becomes more competitive.

Really, very little thinking goes into these rankings given the moronic-ness of how they ranked us. That will become obvious in the next couple seasons as our Future Ranking goes way up near the top. Same organization, same player base - way greater ranking = stupid current evalutation.

Clarity wrote:

ImHeisenberg wrote:It's ESPN, so I don't hold anything they say as something of value.

Every team says this about ESPN, every team thinks the media hates them. lol

On topic, its hard for me to not see Det at least top 10 off Monroe & Drummond alone.

Unless "your team" is the Lakers, Knicks or Heat, ESPN pretty much doesn't care about your team. They can't be bothered to stop blathering about football otherwise.

Also, I like how ESPN ranks Detroit as a less desirable city to allure free agents than Indiana, Salt Lake City and Cleveland. I guess they figured Andrew Bynum was a bigger 'get' for Cleveland than Smith was for Detroit. I don't know, one of those guys figures to play an entire season, the other guy can't go bowling without further injuring himself. Just sayin'.

LOL - yeah, that's the thing.

Players in the league have huge respect for Joe D. Smith WAS a better get than Bynum. And for pete's sake, every player in the league will be lining up to play with Drummond - he's that awesome.

Players will come here. Detroit isn't L.A. or Miami - we get it. But players want to win. they'll come here because of we're going to win.

ImHeisenberg wrote:

Clarity wrote:

ImHeisenberg wrote:It's ESPN, so I don't hold anything they say as something of value.

Every team says this about ESPN, every team thinks the media hates them. lol.

Unless "your team" is the Lakers, Knicks or Heat, ESPN pretty much doesn't care about your team. They can't be bothered to stop blathering about football otherwise.

Don't confuse the headlines with the writers, guys. It's true that ESPN runs too many stories on the Heat, Knicks, etc, but the guys that wrote that are good, smart writers who generally follow the stats and their own eyes, not hype or buzz. Ford, Haberstroh, and Elahassan, you know they don't really care about where a team is located. Sometimes they might have to write puff pieces about hot teams--their editors probably give them assignments--but they're never biased in their actual writing.

I wouldn't be surprised if they're a little biased against the pistons now because of how miserably boring we've been for five years, but these guys don't hate little teams and love big teams. And they certainly don't love the Lakers or Knicks.

Langlois says the full coaching staff will be announced tomorrow.

HotelVitale wrote:

ImHeisenberg wrote:

Clarity wrote:Every team says this about ESPN, every team thinks the media hates them. lol.

Unless "your team" is the Lakers, Knicks or Heat, ESPN pretty much doesn't care about your team. They can't be bothered to stop blathering about football otherwise.

Don't confuse the headlines with the writers, guys. It's true that ESPN runs too many stories on the Heat, Knicks, etc, but the guys that wrote that are good, smart writers who generally follow the stats and their own eyes, not hype or buzz. Ford, Haberstroh, and Elahassan, you know they don't really care about where a team is located. Sometimes they might have to write puff pieces about hot teams--their editors probably give them assignments--but they're never biased in their actual writing.

I wouldn't be surprised if they're a little biased against the pistons now because of how miserably boring we've been for five years, but these guys don't hate little teams and love big teams. And they certainly don't love the Lakers or Knicks.

I guess I wouldn't know. 99% of their content is hidden behind a pay wall.

I was speaking more towards the tv channel, than the more comprehensive website.

bballnmike wrote:Seems fair to me. You have to look at how the rankings are actually calculated. It's a lot more than just "we have Drummond and Monroe, therefore we have a bright future." It's still somewhat arbitrary, but it is more than just preseason power ranking fluff, since its something they calculate every so often throughout the year, dating back at least to 2009.

From the article:

HOW FUTURE POWER RATING IS DETERMINED
PLAYERS (worth 50 percent of score): Current players and their potential for the future, factoring in expected departures
MANAGEMENT (worth 16.7 percent of score): Quality and stability of front office, ownership, coaching
MONEY (worth 16.7 percent of score): Projected salary-cap situation; ability and willingness to exceed cap and pay luxury tax
MARKET (worth 8.3 percent of score): Appeal to future acquisitions based on team quality, franchise reputation, city's desirability as a destination, market size, taxes, business and entertainment opportunities, arena quality, fans
DRAFT (worth 8.3 percent of score): Future draft picks; draft positioning
CATEGORY RANKINGS: See how each team ranked in each category

So here's how we scored in each category (mods feel free to edit, if that's too much paywalled info)

How does management get such a bad rating when the Player ranking is so high? Doesn't management acquire the players? Our Draft ranking is looks pretty good too, again, isn't management responsible for this?

Personally I think they have us ranked too high in the "Money" category and to low in the Management category. Does anyone know for certain if Gores will pay the luxury tax?

One could argue we have a top 10 or top 15 future but at the end of the day we have several new key pieces and the core group is unproven together.

Pharaoh wrote:How does management get such a bad rating when the Player ranking is so high? Doesn't management acquire the players? Our Draft ranking is looks pretty good too, again, isn't management responsible for this?

Personally I think they have us ranked too high in the "Money" category and to low in the Management category. Does anyone know for certain if Gores will pay the luxury tax?

One could argue we have a top 10 or top 15 future but at the end of the day we have several new key pieces and the core group is unproven together.

Well since management includes quality and stability of front office, ownership, and coaching, I'd guess stability is what brought us down. Coaches revolve here basically every two years, so thats very unstable. Hopefully that will change. Gores recently bought the team, and he's known to flip companies for a quick profit, so maybe that's seen as unstable too. And although it seems Joe D had a good offseason, it's a make or break year for him so he could be considered on the hot seat and unstable too.

The article mentioned it was strange that voters said our management went down even though the players score went up, so you definitely have a point.

ImHeisenberg wrote:Unless "your team" is the Lakers, Knicks or Heat, ESPN pretty much doesn't care about your team. They can't be bothered to stop blathering about football otherwise.

Also, I like how ESPN ranks Detroit as a less desirable city to allure free agents than Indiana, Salt Lake City and Cleveland. I guess they figured Andrew Bynum was a bigger 'get' for Cleveland than Smith was for Detroit. I don't know, one of those guys figures to play an entire season, the other guy can't go bowling without further injuring himself. Just sayin'.

National media has always been reactive, 7 years ago all you saw was Pistons. Every Sunday we were the featured National game on ABC. The Knicks & Lakers are the in markets 1 & 2 so thats understandable but even in the Knicks case, National Media didnt touch them until they started winning again.

I dont think any of those cities are desirable FA destinations but I dont know aside from LA or Miami that there would be "desirable" cities. We have proven if we win, we can get FA's.

if healthy its definitely not a reach to say Bynum was a much better get than Josh but as you said, Bynums been a walking injury.

Clarity wrote:I dont think any of those cities are desirable FA destinations but I dont know aside from LA or Miami that there would be "desirable" cities. We have proven if we win, we can get FA's.

if healthy its definitely not a reach to say Bynum was a much better get than Josh but as you said, Bynums been a walking injury.

That's my point, from a strictly quality of life stand point, those other cities have similar attributes to Detroit. They have good and bad areas, and cold winters. I can't see a benefit in the area beyond those significant cities, like LA, NY, or Chicago where there's a busy city life that's unique. For Miami, there's the beach QOL, but also a state-tax free team. Orlando qualifies there too, but it's not as appealing a destination. Texas could be lumped in for their state-tax free status, but I really don't believe it's a huge issue in the players' thought process.

As for Bynum, when he was mostly healthy, he was an all-star caliber 2-way big man. But, his knee issues have been persistent since coming into the NBA, and may have hit the wall already. Smith, not nearly as imposing as a healthy Bynum, will at least be suited up and ready to play. Point is- Detroit signed the next biggest free agent behind Houston landing D12.

ImHeisenberg wrote:
That's my point, from a strictly quality of life stand point, those other cities have similar attributes to Detroit. They have good and bad areas, and cold winters. I can't see a benefit in the area beyond those significant cities, like LA, NY, or Chicago where there's a busy city life that's unique. For Miami, there's the beach QOL, but also a state-tax free team. Orlando qualifies there too, but it's not as appealing a destination. Texas could be lumped in for their state-tax free status, but I really don't believe it's a huge issue in the players' thought process.

As for Bynum, when he was mostly healthy, he was an all-star caliber 2-way big man. But, his knee issues have been persistent since coming into the NBA, and may have hit the wall already. Smith, not nearly as imposing as a healthy Bynum, will at least be suited up and ready to play. Point is- Detroit signed the next biggest free agent behind Houston landing D12.

Yeah I wouldnt worry about that whole topic man, like I said if we win, most will be interested.

I hear you, but I always prefaced my Bynum comments with "if healthy". "If healthy" Cleveland might have signed the #1 FA if were being honest, Howard hasnt been the same since his back injury.

Bynum's knees are permanently shot - this is way beyond a persistent issue.

Howard had back surgery - and once that happens, the back is never 100% again - at least that's my understanding. So while he might still have most of his athleticism, it seems likely that it's permanently degraded at least by a little.

Clarity wrote:I hear you, but I always prefaced my Bynum comments with "if healthy". "If healthy" Cleveland might have signed the #1 FA if were being honest, Howard hasnt been the same since his back injury.

But, Bynum isn't healthy. He's missed an entire season, and said he's still not cleared to play. How long does a knee injury take to recover from, if it can honestly recover?

Sure, there's been players with bad knees like Bynum, who needed a couple years to recover. When they came back, in some cases, they could still play. But, they were never as good as they were pre-injury.