Problem with that is that Joe Dumars built the exception to this. He built a championship team with very good players and a balanced starting line-up. That's where this point gets lost
It's my opinion that it's not likely. That's why I argued this point.I never said it was a guarantee that the Pistons would be able to sign someone better, just likely given the fact they would have almost more cap space than anyone else.
You said you don't care what Pistons fans say, that it was a massive failure. You asserted your opinion as fact.You double talk and then act like what I say is the assertion of fact, when I clearly have said it is not. Is it a strong opinion, yes, did I say I was 100% right, no. It is opinion, just like yours.
Do you think there's any way that these two signings end up being great signings for the Pistons? Be honest. If you don't, then you asserted your opinion as fact.
You've also commented on things that may or may not happen, like the Pistons signings better players in 2010. Most of your argument is based on what the Pistons "might" be able to do in 2010 and what your opinion is as to how Gordon and Villanueva will perform under their contracts. You haven't commented only on things that have happened. Come on now.I am commenting on things that have happened (signing CV+Ben) you are arguing things that may or may not happen (CV being a 3 time all-star, Ben having scoring les, Pistons making trades...).
I already apologized for thinking that was you.I never said the Pistons should have traded Sheed,
And I pointed out how the two things you say are contradictory aren't.I said the logic you used back then, is not the same as now, but you are copping out and saying "it became evident" after the fact.
Saying it became clear later in the season that the Pistons were going to rebuild after the season does not contradict the belief in February before the trade deadline that the Pistons could challenge any team in the Eastern Conference other than the Boston Celtics.
They don't contradict. They just don't.
Right, I argued that Dumars would not trade Sheed because he and the Pistons felt they could still challenge in the East. Careful with how you quote people. Could "challenge" in the East. You are trying to slightly twist arguments to make them appear what they aren't.1)Pistons made a bad coaching decision
2) Made a bad basketball trade with Iverson
3) Acted like they would not trade Sheed because they though they can win last year (which you argued)
4) Have made questionable signings that have to work out perfectly in order to legitimately contend in the up coming years.
5) Have given up a large chunk of cap space when there is more talent available next year
No it's not. That's absolutely how it is. We won't really know if they were good signings until much later. At the very least, not before they even sign the contracts.You saying: "We won't know whether they turn out to be good signings for another 2-3 years at the earliest, and really not until these contracts end. That's when we can really evaluate whether they were good signings or not. You seem to make the determination now even before Gordon and Villanueva even actually signed the contracts." is ridiculous.
Orlando Magic trading Ben Wallace and Chucky Atkins for Grant Hill said it was a great trade for the Magic. Scouts and GMs overwhelming agreed with Darko being the #2 pick of the 2003 NBA Draft (yes, the majority felt that way, even over Carmelo). The Pistons giving the full MLE on a long term contract to Antonio McDyess who had surgery to both knees and played less than 20% of the games in his previous three seasons was viewed as a bad risk. The overwhelming majority of Detroit sports fans hated the Jerry Stackhouse/Rip Hamilton trade.So you cannot say you have to wait until their contracts are over. NBA does not work like that. People signing Kwame to a large contract was judged a failure before his contract ended, were they wrong? Spurs trading Scola to the Rockets was considered a mistake but his career with the Rockets is not over, so how can we judge?
See how being a Pistons fan gives me perspective and allows me to realize you can't judge these types of things until they play themselves out.
At some point before the contract is over, sure. Before the contract is even signed? Not so much.
I didn't say don't have an opinion. But, look at your first post. Don't tell me you weren't asserting your opinion as fact. "I don't care how any Piston fan paints it, this is a massive failure." That's pretty harsh and adamant for an opinion that can't even be proven for a few years.But I am predicting, not fortune telling.
So from now on, I do not want to hear you comment on anything player or talent related until the contract has completely played out. No trades can be judged by you, good or bad. No FA signings can be judged. We can pick up this convo in 5 years.
And since when are NBA teams in the business of saving the economy? So all of the 20 win teams are screwing their cities over? They should sign players that will "keep them compe ive" but imo hinder their chances to win down the road so the local economy does not fail?
Do you think this leads to a le? Be honest? If you say yes, you are stating your opinion as fact.
But you will give the Jamstone special answers and say "maybe". That way you are never wrong, just like your statement that you said "the Pistons could challenge anyone but the Celtics, I did not say they would." How can you ever be wrong?
I will say the same thing then in response. I do not like the signings and I do not think it will lead to anything, but it could. Happy?
And that would be your prerogative. Only you could wait and still not get Heidi Klum and then you're ass out. So, after you don't get Heidi Klum, you regret not bagging Clarkson. Again, there isn't a right or wrong answer. Dumars bagged Clarkson because he wasn't confident he could get Klum.
Point is to wait until later to evaluate.MJ was a rookie, CV and Ben have had time to show thier stuff. Not to mention the Bucks, who salary dumped RJ to make cap space, who are also rebuilding, did not even make the QO to CV. Why is that?
Absolutely does not. I would have an opinion about it, but I wouldn't be asserting it as fact. Have you not been reading what I've been saying. I wouldn't have said the Bonner signing was a "massive failure" no matter what anyone said. I would have given my opinion that it wasn't a good signing. I wouldn't declare it like it was a universal truth. That's the distinction I've been making this whole time.Proving that you are a hypocriteYou saying that you would have likely said it was a bad signing even though the contract had not played itself out? How could you?
I clearly said that is what I'm "hoping" he morphs into. Never said that's what I expect or what I think will happen. And, I clearly said after that "realistically," Arenas.Wow. I have never heard that before. You think Ben can turn into Billups with more scoring? What has lead you to believe he can be a true point guard the will be a finals MVP?
What has led me to believe Gordon can be a true point guard that will be a finals MVP?
First of all, I never said he will be a Finals MVP. Again, I said I "hope" he could morph into a player like Billups, not that he will. Again, you don't read thoroughly enough. And, what makes me think he could be? Well, because in his first four seasons in the league, Chauncey Billups was a combo guard in the bad way, a short shooting guard with some point guard skills. He didn't become a consistently good player until his fifth season in the league in Minnesota. He didn't become a true point guard until his 7th season in the league under Larry Brown. Gordon is kind of similar to Billups when Billups became a Piston. A good scorer and a tweener combo guard, but unrefined as a point guard and undersized for a shooting guard. Now, again, I'm not expecting Gordon to become a true point guard. But, it's something I hope he can improve and that's what I hope he morphs into, which is why I stated he still can grow as a player, because if he does make those improvements, he could very well live up to his contract.
In all honesty, what I think is likely is that Ben Gordon does not live up to his contract and remains a close to 20 ppg scorer and undersized shooting guard who puts up decent numbers, but doesn't develop into a superstar. In all honesty, I think Charlie Villanueva outperforms his contract and becomes a solid power forward in the Eastern Conference. Not an all star, but maybe have a couple seasons where he's considered a borderline all star, putting up maybe 18/8 type numbers. Maybe similar to someone like Antawn Jamison.Yes there are a lot of variables that go into it, but what do you think is likely. Do these moves lead to a legit shot a le in your opinion? Is it likely? If so, when?
What I also expect is that Dumars makes a few more changes over the next 2 years to upgrade the center position and to replace either Rip or Tayshaun or maybe both in trades or with draft picks and that by the fourth and fifth years of Gordon's and Villanueva's contracts, the Pistons are a top 3 team in the Eastern Conference. That's what I expect. And, I'd be cool with that.
Who are you? Why do I have to say ? It is my opinion and that is it so STFU. Just because he has a beef with what I say does not change my stance.
lol your avatar.
Just like you said you apologized for saying I said trade Sheed, I said even though I said "no matter what Piston fans say", that it was not fact, so why do you keep bringing that up?
Also, I know you did not say it was likely on a bunch of things, but that you hoped. So what is the point? This is the entire point I am trying to make, what do you think will happen based on what you have seen? You finally answered that with some kind of concrete stance.
Not every city has the same economic situation as Metropolitan Detroit. A 20 win team will result in empty home games. An around .500 team that has young and exciting players won't have empty home games.
Probably not. I don't know. I'd like to see what other moves the Pistons make over the next two or so years first. That's my honest opinion.
Not so I'm never wrong. But so I'm not a ing ass who is claiming something that has five years to be evaluated is a massive failure before it even happens.But you will give the Jamstone special answers and say "maybe". That way you are never wrong, just like your statement that you said "the Pistons could challenge anyone but the Celtics, I did not say they would." How can you ever be wrong?
Hey, a post you're going to make Saturday morning will be a massive failure. I don't care what anyone says.
See. I wouldn't have a gripe with that at all. And, I wouldn't argue it.I will say the same thing then in response. I do not like the signings and I do not think it will lead to anything, but it could. Happy?
Just bc Jamstone would agree and not argue does not make it right. You are the most on the fence person on the site. Good poster, but a fence rider. You are like Yoda.
You could say that and I would not cry about it. I would simply say you could not evaluate my post on Saturday, especially because it has not even been posted yet. We would have to wait 5 years to see if the post was or was not good.
1) You do not have to read the thread. That is your own fault.
2) It was a discussion between two big boy posters.
3) Shhhh.
Read your first post in this thread and you decide how you come across.
All of this, your posts, my posts, all just opinions and all have ended up becoming gibberish and senseless arguing anyway. It's fine for you to think whatever you want to think.
Things is I don't even like the signings all that much. But, I'm not going to slam them with the argument that they "possibly could have done better" next off season. That's one of the more relevant points I should have emphasized instead of responding to every little point you and I made back and forth to each other. It's tough to argue that the signings are bad using a comparison of what they "might" have been able to have gotten in 2010.
That's really the only point I'd like to make or discuss at this point. The rest of the stuff was arguing for arguing sake for both of us.
I agree. Even through all of the other stuff, I knew the fundamental difference lay in our thoughts about 2010.
You are a bird in the hand type guy, and I just think CV+Ben are not worth it. They are not terrible and could be nice, but I am thinking only about chips. Who knows?
He's great talent no doubt but in all honesty he's simply AI 2.0. It might be tough to replace his offense but in reality the Bulls got as far as they could've hoped with Ben Gordon and I think it's best he's moved on. Also don't forget that Hinrich is still very servicable and Rose is only going to get better. It might take a few more years but the Bulls have a pretty good future imo.
I just still don't understand how the OP still doesn't have an epic Arnold avatar from Kindergarten Cop.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote