Game 49: Pistons (11-37) vs. Cavaliers (30-19) Jan. 30 6:00 PM EST

[Manocad]

I love seeing that out of the team and love feeling like we're assembling a roster with a real chance to compete in the future. I think Cade and Bey could be the two main pieces of that and we at least have solid rotational players in Frank, Haimi (loved that drive and dunk), Hayes, and Beef Stew.

Wait--you mean the team SHOULDN'T replace every player who doesn't project to be an All Star right out of the chute?

Yay, Mr. Straw Man's back. Who's this one misdirected at?

I don’t communicate using crayons and poster board.

[ComboGuardCity]

The way Killian has been playing reminds me of Rookie/Soph Rondo before he got the big 3.

That's the kind of unit Hayes would be fine starting with. Give him 3 elite offensive players that want their touches and can score in a variety of ways.

Hayes would have zero problem starting for.

C: Embiid
PF: Tobias Harris
SF: DeMar
SG: Seth Curry
PG: Hayes

Because he doesn't need to do anything offensively in that group. That group is so good they can afford to have a non factor on offense running the point spot and setting them up.

The problem is when you put Hayes out there with Cade, and put the ball in Cade's hands, and you have other guys who don't shoot well from outside like Diallo/Stewart... he just doesn't work in that setup. Hayes has a role in the NBA if he keeps working hard on his game and improving his skill set but he doesn't fit with what we tried to put out there as starters right now. Let me run the bench unit and get comfortable in that role for now.

100% agree. A dream scenario would be to get either a 3&D defensive center (Turner) or an mismatch nightmare (Collins) for Grant. Little lotto luck and we get Jabari Smith…and Killian fits in with the starters like a glove.

Cade
Hayes
Bey
Smith
Turner or Collins

[bstein14]

Interesting comments from Garland's post game press conference on this one.

1. "We thought tonight was going to be a cakewalk" ... which pretty much makes sense they blew us out last time and then jumped out 15-0.

2. Pretty much said Detroit out hustled them, and they struggled to keep Detroit out of the paint. Said that when Allen and Mobley would help side on Penetration, Detroit's guards made the right plays to get the ball either to the big in the paint, or to the guy who's defender rotated down from the 3 point line to help cover the big in the paint. Pretty much that we tore apart their interior defense.

Pretty great things to hear from Garland, as far as how their team is built around defending the paint and our guards were able to make all the right reads and find the open guys on them all night.

[Kalamazoo317]

I think we're starting to see players get comfortable enough with each other and Casey's offense at this point that we're starting to run a functional offense. Casey is starting to look better as a coach, IMO, and I think he's figuring out some things about how to best manage rotations here. Helps a lot to have Frank back.

[Piston Pete]

I’d like to see this lineup more:

Cade
FrankJax
Bey
Grant
Stewart

[Manocad]

I think we're starting to see players get comfortable enough with each other and Casey's offense at this point that we're starting to run a functional offense. Casey is starting to look better as a coach, IMO, and I think he's figuring out some things about how to best manage rotations here. Helps a lot to have Frank back.

No doubt about that. In the month of January there have been very few "WTF is Casey doing with this lineup?" complaints. Relatively speaking, anyway. Which speaks to the point of either A) figuring it out, or B) he decided that yep, we've tanked enough to guarantee ourselves a nice pick, time to start winning some games.

[Manocad]

I’d like to see this lineup more:

Cade
FrankJax
Bey
Grant
Stewart

Yeah, I've moved into the start Frank camp. Clearly Hayes is functioning better off the bench so keep him there. And Frank can get his own points without needing a threaded needle pass to catch him at just the right time. Diallo however IMO may fit better with Hayes in that sense--he's always moving around and is more likely to be the guy who finds that quick window and needs that quick pass at just the right time. And not that Hayes is a master at that yet, but he doesn't have the scoring responsibility Cade has so he's going to have more opportunities to make that pass and have it be the right pass.

[bstein14]

I’d like to see this lineup more:

Cade
FrankJax
Bey
Grant
Stewart

Yeah, I've moved into the start Frank camp. Clearly Hayes is functioning better off the bench so keep him there. And Frank can get his own points without needing a threaded needle pass to catch him at just the right time. Diallo however IMO may fit better with Hayes in that sense--he's always moving around and is more likely to be the guy who finds that quick window and needs that quick pass at just the right time. And not that Hayes is a master at that yet, but he doesn't have the scoring responsibility Cade has so he's going to have more opportunities to make that pass and have it be the right pass.

As a starter next to Cade the last four games Joseph is shooting 50% from three (5 of 10) and has given Cade more space to operate compared to Killian. Frank Jackson likely has a similar positive effect in the starting lineup next to Cade. That said, the one thing I like about a Hayes/Frank pairing more is that Frank gets to be a higher usage player (above 20% usage rate) than he does next to Cade. Whatever guard you pair with Hayes in the bench unit needs to be an aggressive scorer/shooter and I'd rather have Frank in that role than CoJo.

[Kalamazoo317]

Players aren't going to be silo'ed off from each other or anything. I suspect even if Frank starts, he can still get plenty of run with Hayes and Hayes can still get plenty of run with Cade. Not to mention, we're clearly going to run out three guard line ups plenty. I wouldn't be disappointed if those three get the priority minutes at guard, though, with Cojo and McGruder more spot duty. Though some nights you just gotta ride the hot hand regardless. I'm cool if Lee just chills in the G-League unless injuries have us call him up again.

[Manocad]

I’d like to see this lineup more:

Cade
FrankJax
Bey
Grant
Stewart

Yeah, I've moved into the start Frank camp. Clearly Hayes is functioning better off the bench so keep him there. And Frank can get his own points without needing a threaded needle pass to catch him at just the right time. Diallo however IMO may fit better with Hayes in that sense--he's always moving around and is more likely to be the guy who finds that quick window and needs that quick pass at just the right time. And not that Hayes is a master at that yet, but he doesn't have the scoring responsibility Cade has so he's going to have more opportunities to make that pass and have it be the right pass.

As a starter next to Cade the last four games Joseph is shooting 50% from three (5 of 10) and has given Cade more space to operate compared to Killian. Frank Jackson likely has a similar positive effect in the starting lineup next to Cade. That said, the one thing I like about a Hayes/Frank pairing more is that Frank gets to be a higher usage player (above 20% usage rate) than he does next to Cade. Whatever guard you pair with Hayes in the bench unit needs to be an aggressive scorer/shooter and I'd rather have Frank in that role than CoJo.

Totally fair. Diallo can certainly play SF in a second unit.

And although we hate the thought of it, if Cojo can continue playing as a starter, playing well and keeping the motor running, maybe he continues in that role. He's 30 so it's not like he's ancient and he's already under contract through next season anyway. That at least allows for the starting unit to establish some consistency to aid in their development rather than having to go through not only their own personal growing pains but a guard carousel too.

[zeebneeb]

I honestly would like to see the best starting unit the team has to offer;

Cade
Diallo
Bey
Grant
Olynyk

I think that's a great blend of shooting, passing, and athleticism.

The only position I could waver on is SG. I like Diallo more for his defense, and ability to catch lobs, and driving ability, but Jax shooting is much better.

[Cowology]

Wait--you mean the team SHOULDN'T replace every player who doesn't project to be an All Star right out of the chute?

Yay, Mr. Straw Man's back. Who's this one misdirected at?

I don’t communicate using crayons and poster board.

This is exactly what I was talking about the other day.

You are smart. You make good arguments. But we don't need this.

[Manocad]

Yay, Mr. Straw Man's back. Who's this one misdirected at?

I don’t communicate using crayons and poster board.

This is exactly what I was talking about the other day.

You are smart. You make good arguments. But we don't need this.

Ah, so basically what you're saying is that it's ok to address me with a sarcastic and insulting remark, only that I shouldn't reply in the same manner.

Got it.

Ok, I'll make this easy:

I agree with the idea that the time is right for the Pistons to start establishing a semblance of a somewhat permanent short term roster, i.e. don't start thinking that every single player short of "bona fide NBA starter or better" should be replaced at the earliest opportunity. Start thinking about letting the team grow together.

Now, anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence could have picked that up from my original response, which you'll notice the poster I responded to had no issue with. So someone else comes along, reads it, and delivers an insulting and sarcastic response. So I'll translate THAT response to make it easy:

It's not that hard to figure out what my point was.

I could have criticized the poor use of strawman--OF COURSE it's a straw man when absolutely intentional sarcasm is being used, that's the point--and the equally poor use of misdirection. That question was like asking "Who are you not pointing the gun at?"

Anything else?

[flow]

I don’t communicate using crayons and poster board.

This is exactly what I was talking about the other day.

You are smart. You make good arguments. But we don't need this.

Ah, so basically what you're saying is that it's ok to address me with a sarcastic and insulting remark, only that I shouldn't reply in the same manner.

Got it.

Ok, I'll make this easy:

I agree with the idea that the time is right for the Pistons to start establishing a semblance of a somewhat permanent short term roster, i.e. don't start thinking that every single player short of "bona fide NBA starter or better" should be replaced at the earliest opportunity. Start thinking about letting the team grow together.

Now, anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence could have picked that up from my original response, which you'll notice the poster I responded to had no issue with. So someone else comes along, reads it, and delivers an insulting and sarcastic response. So I'll translate THAT response to make it easy:

It's not that hard to figure out what my point was.

I could have criticized the poor use of strawman--OF COURSE it's a straw man when absolutely intentional sarcasm is being used, that's the point--and the equally poor use of misdirection. That question was like asking "Who are you not pointing the gun at?"

Anything else?

Why would he? Your response wasn't directed at him. You liked his post and were using it to launch one of your snarky rhetorical questions in the direction of whomever you were in disagreement with (but challenging a position that no one had ever asserted).

[Manocad]

This is exactly what I was talking about the other day.

You are smart. You make good arguments. But we don't need this.

Ah, so basically what you're saying is that it's ok to address me with a sarcastic and insulting remark, only that I shouldn't reply in the same manner.

Got it.

Ok, I'll make this easy:

I agree with the idea that the time is right for the Pistons to start establishing a semblance of a somewhat permanent short term roster, i.e. don't start thinking that every single player short of "bona fide NBA starter or better" should be replaced at the earliest opportunity. Start thinking about letting the team grow together.

Now, anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence could have picked that up from my original response, which you'll notice the poster I responded to had no issue with. So someone else comes along, reads it, and delivers an insulting and sarcastic response. So I'll translate THAT response to make it easy:

It's not that hard to figure out what my point was.

I could have criticized the poor use of strawman--OF COURSE it's a straw man when absolutely intentional sarcasm is being used, that's the point--and the equally poor use of misdirection. That question was like asking "Who are you not pointing the gun at?"

Anything else?

Why would he? Your response wasn't directed at him. You liked his post and were using it to launch one of your snarky rhetorical questions in the direction of whomever you were in disagreement with (but challenging a position that no one had ever asserted).

So no one has asserted any time recently that anyone on the roster except Cade and Bey should be made available for trades?


And you guys wonder why I get sarcastic with you.

[Pharaoh]

Ah, so basically what you're saying is that it's ok to address me with a sarcastic and insulting remark, only that I shouldn't reply in the same manner.

Got it.

Ok, I'll make this easy:

I agree with the idea that the time is right for the Pistons to start establishing a semblance of a somewhat permanent short term roster, i.e. don't start thinking that every single player short of "bona fide NBA starter or better" should be replaced at the earliest opportunity. Start thinking about letting the team grow together.

Now, anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence could have picked that up from my original response, which you'll notice the poster I responded to had no issue with. So someone else comes along, reads it, and delivers an insulting and sarcastic response. So I'll translate THAT response to make it easy:

It's not that hard to figure out what my point was.

I could have criticized the poor use of strawman--OF COURSE it's a straw man when absolutely intentional sarcasm is being used, that's the point--and the equally poor use of misdirection. That question was like asking "Who are you not pointing the gun at?"

Anything else?

Why would he? Your response wasn't directed at him. You liked his post and were using it to launch one of your snarky rhetorical questions in the direction of whomever you were in disagreement with (but challenging a position that no one had ever asserted).

So no one has asserted any time recently that anyone on the roster except Cade and Bey should be made available for trades?


And you guys wonder why I get sarcastic with you.

There's a reason I don't post much Mano.

Impatience annoys me, especially after all these years of being a late Lotto treadmill team.

We finally obviously have a plan and all some want is to get back to being mediocre

No point responding to some

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Manocad]

Why would he? Your response wasn't directed at him. You liked his post and were using it to launch one of your snarky rhetorical questions in the direction of whomever you were in disagreement with (but challenging a position that no one had ever asserted).

So no one has asserted any time recently that anyone on the roster except Cade and Bey should be made available for trades?


And you guys wonder why I get sarcastic with you.

There's a reason I don't post much Mano.

Impatience annoys me, especially after all these years of being a late Lotto treadmill team.

We finally obviously have a plan and all some want is to get back to being mediocre

No point responding to some

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

It's pretty simple in my mind. A young team not only has to be given time for the players themselves to develop, but for an effective team dynamic to develop. And both can take time. There seem to be a lot of people out there with the mindset that if neither happen immediately they'll never happen thus make quick changes and that's not necessarily 100% wrong. But the chances at winning a championship are better through building and developing a team rather than trying to catch lightning in a bottle; history has proved that.