ImageImageImage

LockerRoom Issues

Moderators: dVs33, Cowology, theBigLip, Snakebites

User avatar
Blkbrd671
RealGM
Posts: 30,862
And1: 4,819
Joined: Oct 05, 2010
Location: Guam,USA
       

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#41 » by Blkbrd671 » Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:43 pm

princeofpalace wrote:Exactly. I doubt he will have many offers. I think we should waive him.



i agree, but here's the thing, we lose 4 mil and save 4 mil to sign a player with less talent. so we'll be paying 8 mil technically for a worst player. if he's not a locker room issue, keep him until the deadline , see if there's offers, if not let him expire or send him home
gusman
Analyst
Posts: 3,721
And1: 373
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#42 » by gusman » Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:09 pm

Rodney Stuckey was a waste of time in my life. I have always hated him. He is a baby on the court and off. He is not a good leader. He is not a PG or a SG, he is pure trash.

I hate Rodney Stuckey
ChipButty
Senior
Posts: 739
And1: 89
Joined: Jun 01, 2008

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#43 » by ChipButty » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:30 pm

Blkbrd671 wrote:
princeofpalace wrote:Exactly. I doubt he will have many offers. I think we should waive him.



i agree, but here's the thing, we lose 4 mil and save 4 mil to sign a player with less talent. so we'll be paying 8 mil technically for a worst player. if he's not a locker room issue, keep him until the deadline , see if there's offers, if not let him expire or send him home


We should try and trade him to the Kings for Tyreke. I don't think Tyreke is going to stay with the Kings and Rodney would be a low risk replacement. Plus, the Seattle group may like the idea of trading for a home town kid. I'm guessing Stuckey would like the chance to play in Seattle. Could be a good thing for everybody.
Goldtop
Banned User
Posts: 4,941
And1: 165
Joined: Dec 18, 2011

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#44 » by Goldtop » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:40 pm

princeofpalace wrote:
Blkbrd671 wrote:
Kilo wrote:When does his contract have to be guaranteed? Will the trade window have opened up before then? If so, he's an instant $4M saving for a team, assuming we take a equal contract back - and that contract we take back could be expiring after the 2014 season. Could be a pretty valuable trade chip actually.



4 million savings but also a 4 million bill for a player that they won't play for them. His contract is only attractive to teams 3-5mil over the cap and need to shed just a little more. Number of those teams is probably minimal and the talent we'd receive from those teams at that cost is probably even worst


Exactly. I doubt he will have many offers. I think we should waive him.


That would be my choice too. But knowing Joe, he won't conceed to just waive Stuckey and end up getting nothing for him, and instead think by keeping him, his 8 mil exp contract will be a trade asset next year. Essentially sacrificing any chance at a winning season again next year, as we carry a player who doesn't fit and everyone knows is only there to be traded., and becomes a distraction. Not to mention we'll be forced to play him big min for showcasing, and his poor play will cost us games.

Then the trade deadline will come and go, and after all that Joe won't trade him anyways, and just let him expire for nothing. lol

He needs to be waived this summer. Joe can look at it like he's not getting nothing for him - he's getting an extra 4 mil in capspace to get someone better in FA
joseph mamah
Starter
Posts: 2,073
And1: 180
Joined: Jul 06, 2012

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#45 » by joseph mamah » Sun Mar 10, 2013 5:02 pm

If Joe wanted to get something for him he should have benched Bynum and played Stuck to his strengths, which is combo, post trade deadline to build his value. now its probably too late, we should just buy him out and consider it addition by subtraction. if Gores doesnt peel out the 4 mil to make this guy go away, ill really have to start questioning his commitment to winning.
Goldtop
Banned User
Posts: 4,941
And1: 165
Joined: Dec 18, 2011

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#46 » by Goldtop » Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:44 pm

The numbers don't lie on Stuckey

We went 5-1 without him this year. Thats lke 18-40 with him I think

Not to mention during this whole post-"GoinToWork" era of bad basketball, he's been the one constant through all of it. We've changed coach's, players, and even owners, but Stuckey's the only one thats been here the whole time. (Besides Maxiell, but he's actually earned his contract).

Stuckey is like the Pistons' Jeff Backus.
User avatar
Blkbrd671
RealGM
Posts: 30,862
And1: 4,819
Joined: Oct 05, 2010
Location: Guam,USA
       

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#47 » by Blkbrd671 » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:15 am

ChipButty wrote:
Blkbrd671 wrote:
princeofpalace wrote:Exactly. I doubt he will have many offers. I think we should waive him.



i agree, but here's the thing, we lose 4 mil and save 4 mil to sign a player with less talent. so we'll be paying 8 mil technically for a worst player. if he's not a locker room issue, keep him until the deadline , see if there's offers, if not let him expire or send him home


We should try and trade him to the Kings for Tyreke. I don't think Tyreke is going to stay with the Kings and Rodney would be a low risk replacement. Plus, the Seattle group may like the idea of trading for a home town kid. I'm guessing Stuckey would like the chance to play in Seattle. Could be a good thing for everybody.



that's highly optimistic. at least Tyreke does something on the court, Stuckey is invisible the majority of the time
User avatar
Blkbrd671
RealGM
Posts: 30,862
And1: 4,819
Joined: Oct 05, 2010
Location: Guam,USA
       

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#48 » by Blkbrd671 » Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:57 pm

“If you don’t want to play, you should say it. This is unacceptable. It’s gone on too long. If you don’t want to be on the court, if you aren’t going to give 100% on the court, then just don’t play.”


Wonder who's he referring too. boys have looked entirely disinterested since losing to NOL. My guess, Stuckey!
qm22
General Manager
Posts: 8,317
And1: 1,902
Joined: Dec 29, 2009

Re: LockerRoom Issues 

Post#49 » by qm22 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:35 am

Goldtop wrote:The numbers don't lie on Stuckey

We went 5-1 without him this year. Thats lke 18-40 with him I think

Not to mention during this whole post-"GoinToWork" era of bad basketball, he's been the one constant through all of it. We've changed coach's, players, and even owners, but Stuckey's the only one thats been here the whole time. (Besides Maxiell, but he's actually earned his contract).

Stuckey is like the Pistons' Jeff Backus.


It's hard to believe this analysis. 5-1, not to mention being a tiny sample size, should stand out as being an abberation when it corresponds to a 68 win pace. Then the 18-40 part. I would imagine most of the responsibility falls on someone who is one of: a) a team leader, b) a FGA leader, or USG leader, c) a key defensive liability, d) other large role on the team. Stuckey spent the season as Kyle Singler's backup. I hesitate to assign a large portion of our success and failure to someone in that role. I'm sure once we dump Kyle's backup we're going to be much better.

He's been about the same as Brandon Knight in PER this season while averaging career lows. His career is mostly far better than the guy people want to throw money at in the off-season, OJ Mayo. Something about this scapegoating seems awfully delusional. He should be traded at this rate, though. Too bad even his trade value has been ruined by playing small forward and as a spot-up shooting SG.

Return to Detroit Pistons