Crymson wrote:DBB was once a source of reliable, cerebral analysis. It is now, in the main, a source for "EVERYTHING IS FINE! NOTHING IS WRONG!" agenda-based writing on the Pistons. Were a casual fan to read through and believe the material of the last month, he or she would emerge with the impression that the organization is in great shape headed into next season. It's really a big shame what's happened over there, as a once-reputable blog is no longer so reputable.
The community is also absolutely toxic, largely in the form of a roving bunch of posters who see it as their duty to police any criticism of the organization, but that's another story.
As for the piece itself, it's a joke. Nearly every facet of it is without foundation. I'll leave aside his rather odd claims about Tobias Harris and about the proper building of a good team, and focus on what he's said about Griffin. First off, he searches out an arbitrary 20/5/5 threshold and uses this as justification to plop Griffin among the league's superstars. Mmm, OK. He leaves aside the fact that all of them are better scorers, all of them are more versatile scorers, all of them aside from the notoriously inefficient Westbrook--who provides a great deal else--were hugely more efficient than he was, all of them (again, sans Westbrook) are substantially better shooters, and anybody would take any of them (assuming we're talking about pre-injury DeMarcus) over Griffin any day of the week and without any forethought necessary.
Said arbitrary threshold is, by the way, pretty hilarious. If we refine that 20 points a tinge downward, to 19.4, then Tyreke Evans joins that grouping with 19.4/5.1/5.2. Is Evans a superstar? Is he part of a select group? Is he comparable to any of the players to whom the author compared Griffin? Is he worth $32 million? $25 million? $20 million? The answer to all of those questions is NO, and with that no flies out the window any notion that Griffin's 20/5/5 puts him into any particular company whatsoever.
How about this claim?
(Griffin is a league-average three point shooter, btw)
Except that's completely false. Griffin averaged 34.5% on 5.6 three-point attempts per game last season, making him one of the least-efficient high-volume three-point shooters in the NBA. The overall NBA league average for the regular season was 36.2%. That 1.7% may not seem like a big difference, but it is assuredly a big difference.
And this?
Yes, this is a league that is obsessed with spacing, but you also have to let Blake do what he’s good at.but you also have to let Blake do what he’s good at
Except Blake is good at a lot of the things that Andre also focuses upon, notably scoring in the paint. This guy criticizes Tobias as a means by which to pump up Griffin, but the reality is that Tobias was a massively better fit next to the organization's (former) franchise player.
And this?
Huh. All those bully-ball postups that look ugly (but go in) really do wonders for a guy’s percentages around the rim.
Except he's not scoring those percentages on bully-ball post-ups. He averaged .93 PPP on post-ups last season. For reference, even the Suns, the league's least-efficient offense, averaged above 1.0 PPP in overall offense. .93 is the equivalent of 46.5% from the field, in a league that averaged an EFG% of 52.2%. Not good.
Then he references a video that he calls "TOBIAS HARRIS COULD NEVER." It features Griffin exploiting a mismatch on Harden to dish the ball to Drummond under the net, which he strangely cites as even more impressive (a single play) given that it came against the Rockets. Mmkay. That's a cherry-picked play. How about we put together a Tobias highlight reel called "BLAKE GRIFFIN COULD NEVER"? It'll be simple collection of Tobias shooting off the dribble, shooting while covered, or nailing quick-trigger threes. Efficient perimeter shooting and versatile offense off the dribble are hugely important in today's NBA. Griffin doesn't have it, and he probably never will.
He then cites clips of Jackson, Drummond, and Griffin operating against the Nets and the Lakers, two teams that finished well out of the playoff hunt, as evidence of Van Gundy's supposed vision for the three reaching fruition. Okay.
This is a pump piece. Nothing more.
Let's see what Blake can do with this group. He is a special talent, and he might be heady enough to adapt himself to the roster and play a different role? If he's more the 'anchor vet' he might stay healthier? Should determine that it can't work before tearing things down, since, like it or not, we've come this far.
He's a very good player. Not a superstar, arguably not even a star anymore, a poor fit at his own position, a bad defender, a lackluster shooter, a terrible fit on this team, injury-prone and horribly overpaid.
Seeing how hard he plays on the floor solidifies his value in my eyes. Only thing people are hating on is his contract. But I'd rather be paying him that kind of money than Tobias that plays no defense and certainly can't play close to Blake's abilities and some average players like Galloway and Leuer just filling up the cap and warming the bench and they play maybe 20% of how hard Blake plays. At the end of the day, who's out there putting it all on the court? Contracts are relative. His contract is big but not the worst. There's plenty of other overpaid players on the team that don't deserve their contracts. Those contracts and the drafting were the mistake not Blake. You tell me the last star we got to come to Detroit and I'll remind you of Rodney Stuckey's days. We're a good talented team. Our pg just can't stay on the court and our coach had a pg run offense. It happens.