RealGM

When you look at our players under contract and picks, were we in better shape in the summer of 2014 or now? Has SVG moved us forward or backward?

The Pistons have got a better roster now, without question; it isn't a particularly good roster, but the opening 2014 roster was a disaster. That said, the 2014 roster had a better long-term outlook. Drummond was a future star, and the team was in perfect position for a rebuild: Jennings and Smith were the only multi-year contracts of significant size on the books. Smith could verifiably have been moved to Sacramento in that offseason in exchange for spare parts (SVG said no), and Monroe could've been moved for value in return. The current roster has no particularly promising prospects and--barring the removal of Blake Griffin--no prospect of a viable rebuild in the near future.

All things considered, I'd rather be back in 2014---preferably with a better GM and a different owner. A real, honest rebuild under competent management would've almost undoubtedly had the Pistons in hugely better position.

If you actually want to win some games in the current year, the current roster is clearly better. the 2014 roster is full of borderline NBA players or bench guys. The talent level was really, really low.

The problem is that our current ceiling is still pretty low and we don't have a viable way to add additional talent.

Well that's the whole basis of my argument. We've NEVER had this much talent in the last 10 years. On paper we are really good but on the floor we look like crap. I'm not worried about this team. We have talent, just need luck.

Now. There are two tradeable assets in Drummond and Griffin. Back then SVG was jockeying C players for B players.

ByeByeDre wrote:Now. There are two tradeable assets in Drummond and Griffin. Back then SVG was jockeying C players for B players.

Drummond hasn't got as much trade value as you think. There will be many quality big men in free agency and in the draft this summer, so his value won't be particularly high; other teams can have a good center without paying any assets. No good team will trade an elite wing---what the Pistons need---for Drummond, and no bottom-feeder is going to trade a high pick for him when they aren't aiming to win now and can simply grab a rookie on a minimum contract in the draft. Furthermore, centers simply aren't that valuable right now compared to the elite points, wings, and stretch fours of the league. If the Pistons sell on him, they'll need to sell low.

Griffin is not very tradeable at all. He's paid a max contract, he's extremely injury-prone, he doesn't fit well at his position in the modern NBA, and he's very difficult to build around. Even the Clippers front office--including Jerry West, that visionary team-builder--did not want to give him the contract he has now, but Steve Ballmer ordered that it be done. And when he realized his error and allowed the front office to trade Griffin, only the Pistons were interested in paying any significant price for him. It's questionable if the Pistons could trade him at all. If they do, they'd get very little in return.

Now; cap hell, no draft assets.

2014; Maneuverable cap, some assets.

Neither one was good. But we'll need at least 2 years to dig out of this mess. And that will be delayed, because as bad as it sounds to me for the long term, we are better off trying to compete. Otherwise are "assets" lose even more value.

Crymson wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:Now. There are two tradeable assets in Drummond and Griffin. Back then SVG was jockeying C players for B players.

Drummond hasn't got as much trade value as you think. There will be many quality big men in free agency and in the draft this summer, so his value won't be particularly high; other teams can have a good center without paying any assets. No good team will trade an elite wing---what the Pistons need---for Drummond, and no bottom-feeder is going to trade a high pick for him when they aren't aiming to win now and can simply grab a rookie on a minimum contract in the draft. Furthermore, centers simply aren't that valuable right now compared to the elite points, wings, and stretch fours of the league. If the Pistons sell on him, they'll need to sell low.

Griffin is not very tradeable at all. He's paid a max contract, he's extremely injury-prone, he doesn't fit well at his position in the modern NBA, and he's very difficult to build around. Even the Clippers front office--including Jerry West, that visionary team-builder--did not want to give him the contract he has now, but Steve Ballmer ordered that it be done. And when he realized his error and allowed the front office to trade Griffin, only the Pistons were interested in paying any significant price for him. It's questionable if the Pistons could trade him at all. If they do, they'd get very little in return.

They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

ByeByeDre wrote:They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

Suns could give up the expirings of Chandler/Dudley along with a nice young piece on a great contract in TJ Warren. We would like to include Knight (Expires in 2020), but i think that could end up being a sticking point with you guys. Maybe a young Chriss and the #16 pick as well?

This is a valid question, which makes the last 4 years a failure.

Kerrsed wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

Suns could give up the expirings of Chandler/Dudley along with a nice young piece on a great contract in TJ Warren. We would like to include Knight (Expires in 2020), but i think that could end up being a sticking point with you guys. Maybe a young Chriss and the #16 pick as well?

Knight, Dudley and two first round picks - line it up!

ByeByeDre wrote:

Kerrsed wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

Suns could give up the expirings of Chandler/Dudley along with a nice young piece on a great contract in TJ Warren. We would like to include Knight (Expires in 2020), but i think that could end up being a sticking point with you guys. Maybe a young Chriss and the #16 pick as well?

Knight, Dudley and two first round picks - line it up!

If you think a team will give up 2 1st round picks for them, go for it, but you are not getting that from the Suns. I think my offer was more than fair, if you think otherwise well then i have nothing more to discuss.

Kerrsed wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:

Kerrsed wrote:
Suns could give up the expirings of Chandler/Dudley along with a nice young piece on a great contract in TJ Warren. We would like to include Knight (Expires in 2020), but i think that could end up being a sticking point with you guys. Maybe a young Chriss and the #16 pick as well?

Knight, Dudley and two first round picks - line it up!

If you think a team will give up 2 1st round picks for them, go for it, but you are not getting that from the Suns. I think my offer was more than fair, if you think otherwise well then i have nothing more to discuss.

So you think an extra first round pick is more valuable than Chriss and Warren?

And by the way, the Suns have done much dumber things over the years than two firsts for an all star.

Being better then 2014 is such a low bar to set. Just hitting on one draft pick in the pass years while tanking would of easily put us in better shape then we are now. We've got one of the 5 worst futures in the nba. A maxed out salary cap and outside the playoffs.

Good to see SVG gone!

Kerrsed wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:

Kerrsed wrote:
Suns could give up the expirings of Chandler/Dudley along with a nice young piece on a great contract in TJ Warren. We would like to include Knight (Expires in 2020), but i think that could end up being a sticking point with you guys. Maybe a young Chriss and the #16 pick as well?

Knight, Dudley and two first round picks - line it up!

If you think a team will give up 2 1st round picks for them, go for it, but you are not getting that from the Suns. I think my offer was more than fair, if you think otherwise well then i have nothing more to discuss.

I could be wrong, but I read that as him just using shorthand to basically call Chriss one of the 1st rounders. Anyway, I had no idea that something like this could be on the table. If we could swing a deal like this, I'd be all-in on the rebuild plan.

ByeByeDre wrote:They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

That's an extremely simplistic way of looking at it. They're both extremely fit-dependent, and it doesn't make sense for many teams to trade for them unless the price is low. You want crappy contracts and high draft picks in exchange for the two of them. The former can be done. The latter almost undoubtedly cannot.

Crymson wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

That's an extremely simplistic way of looking at it. They're both extremely fit-dependent, and it doesn't make sense for many teams to trade for them unless the price is low. You want crappy contracts and high draft picks in exchange for the two of them. The former can be done. The latter almost undoubtedly cannot.

We just gave the Clippers a lottery pick for Griffin three months ago. Other GM's will give up picks too, no doubt.

ByeByeDre wrote:We just gave the Clippers a lottery pick for Griffin three months ago. Other GM's will give up picks too, no doubt.

Yes, the Pistons gave up a lottery pick in a completely senseless, likely ownership-motivated offer that no other team was willing to make. By all reports, nobody else was interested in paying the Clippers for Griffin's bad contract.

Crymson wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:We just gave the Clippers a lottery pick for Griffin three months ago. Other GM's will give up picks too, no doubt.

Yes, the Pistons gave up a lottery pick in a completely senseless, likely ownership-motivated offer that no other team was willing to make. By all reports, nobody else was interested in paying the Clippers for Griffin's bad contract.

There are lots of stupid organizations out there. Someone will flinch

ByeByeDre wrote:

Crymson wrote:

ByeByeDre wrote:They're both tradeable, and they're both upgrades at their positions for 20 of 29 teams minimum. All I want is crappy contracts that expire in 2020 and draft picks. That can happen easily. Just no more contracts after 2020, please.

That's an extremely simplistic way of looking at it. They're both extremely fit-dependent, and it doesn't make sense for many teams to trade for them unless the price is low. You want crappy contracts and high draft picks in exchange for the two of them. The former can be done. The latter almost undoubtedly cannot.

We just gave the Clippers a lottery pick for Griffin three months ago. Other GM's will give up picks too, no doubt.

The pistons were reported to be bidding against themselves on that deal. Blake had some interest in free agency last season from a couple teams. Since then hes been hurt TWO more times. Dudes a injury waiting to happen if we trade him were looking at a Triston Thompson/Clarkson or Melo salary dump style deal.