Driving to the Basket: A Detroit Pistons Podcast - Episode 231: A Random Mix of Topics

Episode Date: June 10, 2025

This episode visits a variety of Pistons and NBA-related topics that the host himself, posting this episode four days after recording it, cannot remember in their totality.   Recorded on Friday, June 6.

Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. You are listening to another episode of Drive into the Basket. I'm Mike, and thank you for being here again to listen to me ramble about NBA basketball. So another, I don't know, what I think is two weeks down, just to clarify. If things in last episode sounded very outdated, it's because I posted the episode, I think, five days, five or six days after I actually recorded it. I'm not 100% sure why. probably because I'm just not a huge fan of the actual editing phase of the whole podcasting thing, which can get a little bit tedious.

Anyway, I digress. So, I've been a couple of weeks since I actually recorded, and we're in the finals now. And, man, what's to say about game one? I mean, about this matchup in general, I still believe that Oklahoma City is going to come away with it. I said five originally. I don't know if I said that last episode, but that's been my feeling. was OKC in five games just because I think they're the much more talented team. And because generally, even if one team is much more talented than the other,

you'll see just because of the variances and vagaries of today's NBA where just the team can get super hot from three at the same time as another team gets very cold from three. I thought that the Pacers would at least steal one. And got a hand to the Pacers last night's game, they battled back. Tyrese Halliburton is, man, the guy has been incredibly clutch. It's kind of funny looking at the NBA player survey where he was listed. He was voted most overrated. Here's the thing that I think should always be kept in mind about NBA players in general

when it comes to surveys, whom they say is good, whom they say is bad, just things NBA players say. It's kind of like, yeah, these guys are some of the best basketball players in the world. They are other, just outstandingly, incredibly, like almost unbelievably talented at basketball. like you even look at, I don't know why this comes up and occasionally comes to mind for me, not just Scalibarini, for those of you who haven't seen the Skellenge, where, you know, Scalabrini was this really, really fringe NBA player who rarely even got to play all that much. Some of you might remember him from, if you're watching basketball a long time ago,

from, I think he was in both series that the Pistons played against the Nets in 2003 in 2003, in 2003, in 2003. if I'm remembering, I believe they played the Nets in 2003. So, but yeah, the guy didn't play all that much. He was on the 2008 Celtics championship team, and I think he played maybe a few minutes in those playoffs. But like in the post-game press conference after the Celtics won the championship, he's like, oh, man, you know, like something like this.

Like, oh, yeah, in 20 years, I'm going to tell my kids that I started, something like that. So it came to be that, you know, as you would expect from the Boston sports crowd, people talked a lot of trash about him. And some people got to saying, oh, well, I could beat you in basketball. And so a local radio station held something called a scallenge where people could come and play one-on-one. I think it was first one to ten against Brian Scalabrini, who had been retired for some time at that stage, and destroyed everyone. because even to play in the NBA back then, when the standard of talent was significantly lower than it is today, because the standard of talent in today's NBA just keeps rising and rising,

it's amazing, the skill creep is incredible. I'll talk about that a little bit later just because I think that's just something that's very interesting. But yeah, even back then, I mean, the minimum standard to play multiple years in the NBA, even as kind of like an end-of-rotation player for bad teams, which is generally what Scalabrini was when he was getting playing time. though not always. You know, he got, he got some minutes for decent teams as well. It was incredibly high.

He said something to the effect of, you know, I'm closer to LeBron than you are to me. And certainly true. I mean, Killing-Hay is for all that we pillory him rightly so, because the guy was terrible in the NBA, though, you know, the reason I disliked him so much is because he was a wuss who just refused to attack into contact. But you put him on the floor with 99.9999% of,

of basketball players and he's going to destroy them. The NBA is just that good. So in any case, after that long digression, so, yeah, back to talking about NBA player surveys. Just because these guys are insanely good at the game of basketball, doesn't necessarily mean that they are good analysts of the game of basketball. I mean, you look at players like, you know, I hate to call anybody out, but like Lou Williams, for example, who, yeah, I mean, didn't always be,

provide the greatest value, but was still a very skilled NBA score, you know, especially later in in his career that season with the Clippers, for example. It doesn't really, it's just a terrible mind for example, you know, for example, NBA management. It's kind of like, and sure, that you get to, you know, gets more into management, the management side of things. Like, yeah, you can kind of analogize it to, all right, you want to be like the best truck driver in the world doesn't necessarily qualify you to, you know, build a trucking conglomerate. You're just a very good truck driver or say what you will, but bring that up to, like, a NASCAR driver. You're an incredible NASCAR driver.

It doesn't necessarily mean you're going to be able to run. I can't claim to actually be familiar with how NASCAR works. So in any case, just because these guys are basketball players, necessarily mean that they're going to have the most informed opinions. Like, you look back, for example, at, like the mid-2010s when you had guys saying that Avery Bradley was, you know, just, oh, yeah, the guy's an incredible defender. And he was pretty good for a while there.

But the thing was that he was a much better just individual defender. I mean, Avery Bradley back then was a very talented ISO defender. But on, and that's what a lot of people, a lot of players are going to think about. Like this guy is guarding me individually. The trouble with Bradley is that on a team defense side of things, he was significantly weak. which is something that the Pistons found out, unfortunately, when he was on the team, though it was more his injury that year. That's funny.

Avery Bradley actually had a pretty darn good first quarter of his season with the Pistons before getting injured as he had a groin injury, which seems to have pretty much derailed his career. That 2017-2018 team, that is still the best opening night lineup. The Pistons have fielded since 2008, and it's the best start they've had since the going to work Pistons, a team that went 14 and 6th through a very difficult quality of competition. Anyway, this is just all to say that, okay, NBA player surveys aren't necessarily going to give you good answers,

and I'm sure Halliburton is taking great pleasure in stuffing this, you know, how well he's done in the postseason, and he's done very well. Clutch situations and otherwise into the faces of those who voted him most overrated. Halliburton will always be a what-if for the Pistons. I mean, of course, Pistons ended up with Cade, and there's absolutely no guarantee that changing anything at all, including drafting Killian, who did miss the majority of his rookie season in any case. you know, if you change anything at all, you know, what happens next could be very, very different.

So, yeah, I'm, of course, thrilled to have Cade, you know, an interesting what if is if the business had drafted Halliburton and then been in position to draft Mobley, for example. How would things have been then? Of course, time only moves in one direction, we'll never know. But back to the matchup itself. Yeah, I just think that OKC is the more talented team, like by a significant margin, the most talented team in a much more difficult conference. I believe the two best teams in the East went out in the second rounds, largely because of

injuries. But man, OKC, just an extremely well-coached and extremely well-constructed team. They have a spectacular defense. I mean, this is a team that can, yeah, I mean, a bunch of plus defenders, athletic plus defenders on the floor with two strong rim protectors and Hartnstein and Holmgren in the starting lineup. and there's not really an offense you can throw at them that's going to give them trouble on the vast majority of occasions.

They did struggle a little bit uncharacteristically last night. And on the other side, you have Shea. Say whatever you will about him being a free throw merchant. Yeah, he does. It's not really like on Trey Young's level, for example, or old James Hardin. Though Hardin, I think, gets more criticism like Hewson-Hara Hardin than he deserved. I mean, the guy once put it well, he said what he would do is, He would go off to, I mean, he would deliberately extend his arm, for example, when he was trying to score at the rim.

And he put it pretty well himself. That's, you know, you can tip my arm to try to keep him scoring, but that's a foul. So certain things he was doing, you know, just were good practice, you know, put yourself, you know, in the pains, attacking the rim, and just put yourself in good position to draw fouls. You know, if somebody wants to whack you on the weight of the rim, then great, you end up with the free throw line. Some of the other foul baiting was a little bit of different story. I'd say Trey Young is the ultimate foulbator right now. Yeah, Shea does do things to draw fouls. I don't think he's necessarily foulbator, so to speak.

Whatever the case, you look at him, the guy is an incredible score, like an absolutely incredible score. Jalen Williams is very good. Chet is good. You know, they've got just a plethora of three-point shooters. The offense is very well run. It works very well, despite the fact that they don't really have, like, a traditional point guard out there.

Like, even Shea is more of a score-first guy. And it's all brought together by an exceptional coach and Daniel. So, yeah, Bravo to the Thunder. They're not always necessarily super interesting to watch. On offense, at least, on defense, I think they're really something to behold. Absolutely one of the best defenses of the spacing era. And this is a team that is still very young for the most part and has a boatload of draft assets. Granted, they were very fortunate in getting to cash in on Westbrook and particularly

Paul George, though I continue to think that trade made sense for the Sixers at the time, because the Clippers were basically paying those assets for not just Paul George, who was an excellent player at the time, but also Kauai, who would not have come without a running mate. But, I mean, yeah, Presti, of course, has just done a great job. And, yeah, cashing in on Westbrook, not once but twice. I mean, that was something, fleecing the rockets to the extent that he did for Westbrook, who was not really a winning player by that stage.

And I think he demonstrated that. getting Chris Paul out of it and having Chris Paul around to help the Thunder make the postseason and also probably to impart some good wisdom to Shea, who was on the team at the time, and started alongside Chris Paul. And then flipping Chris Paul to the sons for more assets. Yeah, it's just kind of unfair the war chest they have. They've already begun kicking the can down the road. Like two drafts ago, they traded a first to Denver for like a far future.

first and I think a second or two. I can't remember. But yeah, just excellent team. Like I said, I don't really enjoy watching them on offense all that much because, you know, while their game plan is very mechanically sound, much like the Celtics, it's just, I don't think it's all that interesting to watch. On defense, a different story. I mean, they're just so good. Now, you move to the Pacers. Certainly, I'll start from wherever. Rick Carlisle, exceptionally talented offensive coach. Not so great on the defensive side of things. But on offense, Yeah, I mean, I think we've seen plenty so far to indicate why it was very good that the Pistons did not run into the Pacers in round one.

Instead, you get the relatively shallow Knicks with a very indifferent offensive coach at the helm. And for the record, with Tibido, I think it was absolutely the right decision for the Knicks to fire him. I do not think he was scapegoated at all. I think he's a dinosaur who, to his credit, managed to update himself a bit in terms of coaching in the modern NBA, but is going to always have a ceiling, particularly in just in how inflexible he is and how deeply mediocre at best he is at coaching an offense.

So I think right move for the Knicks, possibly not so great for the Pistons if the Knicks end up with a better coach. Because, you know, you're playing the same conference. Maybe you'll meet again in the postseason. I would guess it's going to be Michael Malone, but who knows? Michael Malone himself not perfect. And yes, has had the benefit of coaching the greatest offensive big in the history of the NBA for a long time. But I'd say still an upgrade on Tibado. But as for the Pacers, yeah, very dynamic offensive coach, extremely smart point guard.

Some good defenders out there, too, especially on the wing in Neesmith and Nemhard. Nemhard, who is in really very, very much a playoff riser. But yeah, just back to Halliburton, great floor general. It has been insanely clutch in this postseason. They can play with five shooters at all times. That's definitely a benefit that Carlyle really makes the most out of a bunch of really hard work. Parker, Seacom has been really good. Seacom, who abruptly became a good shooter this season, which is huge because he used to

just kind of have to run things through him because he lost a lot when he was off the ball, but that's definitely not the case anymore when he becomes like a 39% three-point shooter. And has been much better than I expected with the Pacers. I mean, for a long time, really what made him an all-MBA player in Toronto was one of the very important parts of it was that he could shoot threes. And then he lost that again. And now he's become quite a bit better than he was. was in Toronto with the Pacers.

And even down to the bench, though, the team isn't necessarily, well, actually, they play a very deep rotation. But a talented team on offense, they can always make you hurt. On defense, they're not really quite so good. And I think that's ultimately where the series is going to be decided. But exciting first game, that said, the Pacers really needed a collapse by the Thunder in order to win that game. And I just don't think that's something you're going to see the Thunder do three more

times. But nonetheless, I will say it's fantastic to see a couple of teams that are new to the scene. This is going to be first championship for either of these teams. And even in the conference finals, the Knicks were the only team that had ever won a championship out of the four conference finalists. And fun fact, there were only two players left in the entirety of the conference finals who had won a championship, only three who had even played. a championship. I think last week I said this, and I completely somehow forgot about Alex Caruso winning in 2020 with the Lakers when he actually played a significant rotation role. It's funny thinking back that the Lakers, they offered the Pistons Caruso and a couple of

seconds, I believe in exchange with Derek Rose, and of course that was laughed off because back then Caruso was considered a little bit of a joke, has gone on to become a pretty darn good player. But anyway, yeah, it's just he and Ciacom were the only two guys. And, like, you count, Tucker, who obviously isn't playing. Cameron Payne was the only other guy even to be the finals. So either way, yeah, we're going to see a new team win. And it's refreshing because, I mean, it's just refreshing to not have it be the same, you know, parade of teams winning, you know, regularly.

And it's been a lot better from 2019 onward. Like in the 2010s, you know, Spurs, Pete, Warriors. that was a lot of your championships. So in any case, yeah, it's a breath of fresh air. It's a couple of young dynamic teams and should be a fun watch. So from here, I'm just going to kind of go into a variety of topics, I suppose. It strikes me that this would be a good time probably to get started on a player review series, which would usually be later in the off season because, you know, we're coming up in the draft.

And like I said, part of me is a little bit sad that the Pistons, well, I'm sad that there is nothing to talk about in the draft for the Pistons. You know, if they had number 17, then cool, you know, there would still be something to talk about. But there really isn't. So there was a little bit of excitement. I'm very glad the Pistons are not, you know, high in the water again. And to have been spare of the race to the bottom and instead get, you know, race to the playoffs instead was wonderful. But, you know, and, rather, as my mother would say, you know, and not.

But it is always interesting to look at the draft. you know, and get excited about which new player the Pistons might pick. And, yeah, you got number 37 now, and they could conceivably trade into the first round. But the NBA draft in the late first and into the second round is just getting weaker because of N&L. Excuse me. Because if players can stay in the NBA and be guaranteed a pretty good paycheck, rather than go into the second rounds and, you know, well, what was I saying? Not necessarily going to the second round. But yeah, I mean, there's an incentive to stay in the NCAA for a guaranteed paycheck and try to, you know, just improve in that time and maybe increase your chances of being driving into the NBA.

Especially if you're going into the second rounds when you might end up on a two-way contract, which probably, you know, which pays significantly less than some of these guys are getting in the NCAA. I believe the salary is $50,000 if you're in the G League. If you play in the NBA, then you get, you know, pro-rated. You get paid basically by the game against the NBA minimum salary. but there are just more incentives for guys who are not going in the beginning mid-first round, especially into the second round, to just stay in college. So whoever they get in the second round, or if they trade under the end of the first round, I mean, there are two factors here.

Number one, unlikely, I mean, just the strength of the draft at that point is going to be considerably even less than it used to be. Late first, you're pretty happy with walking away with a role player, like a guy who's going to be able to be a genuine part of your rotation. In the second, I mean, it gets significantly worse. in terms of, you know, your probability of landing an actual honest, to goodness, NBA player. And now that talent pool, and that was the case before NIL, and now the talent pool is even worse. Fact number two is that the Pistons just don't really have room in the rotation for another young player at this point.

Anybody who gets drafted is overwhelmingly likely to be a project. You know, Clintman was a project. This guy was a lot more raw than I think a lot of people came away from Summer League, you know, believing. I mean, Summer League is Summer League, but, you know, consistency on both ends is really the big thing for him. He went into the G League and shot very badly. Even in Summer League, he had his issues on defense. He's a project player, very smart, but with a lot of flaws. And I don't think the Pistons are really going to be looking for, you know, a rotation player out of the draft this year.

Plus, it's kind of difficult to find that in the late, you know, late first round and certainly into the second round. So, curious to see what they do. But I continue to think that running it back is the likeliest scenario here. You just do what you have to do to operate isn't above the cap team in terms of resigning guys over bird rights. Or, you know, sign and trade, which is pretty similar mechanism there. And then use the non-tax pyramid level exception to resign Beasley. And, yeah, at that point, you have a nine-man rotation. This is another thing that, you know, I have to feel as fitting to talk about.

in terms of, you know, a lot of the questions I've seen. Sorry, just realized I did not silence my phone. In any case, the questions I've seen about, well, is this trade idea viable? Like, I'm not meaning to call anybody out here. I'm just going to use this as an example. But I saw, you know, oh, we could, you know, conceivably do a sign and trade for Nikale Alexander Walker. And I don't remember exactly what it was, but it was,

It was, you know, a scenario that I saw the Pistons picking up, you know, Bobby Portis and Nikol Alexander Walker into what would end up being a 10-man rotation. And it's like, well, these are guys who are accustomed to playing 30 minutes. I don't know if Beasley was, yeah, that would replace Beasley, but it was 10-man rotation in that case. And in that situation, you end up bringing on two guys who are accustomed to playing about 30 minutes a game for Walker, 30 minutes a game. and for Portis about 25. And suddenly they're playing like 15. And either that, you're drastically reducing the minutes of Schroeder.

It's just you can't make it work. I mean, guys need to want to sign with you. I would say that, you know, you can't just, and it's not just that. It's like another one. Just talk of like, oh, we'll bring in whether it's, you know, whoever it is, basically. It's just like 10-man rotations are very rare

because it's difficult to get all these guys' minutes. And yes, getting guys' minutes is a factor for the pistons, especially you certainly want Ivy. K's obviously going to get big minutes. You want Ivy to get significant minutes. You want Assar to get significant minutes. You want Holland to get significant minutes. So it's just tough to find minutes for all these guys.

And it's like notable free agents. I mean, maybe players want to play. They want to play both because it's what they love and because, you know, unless you're a veteran on a minimum deal, you are fighting for your next contract. So guys, especially guys who are accustomed to significant rotation roles, but also just players who are kind of promising, but still trying to establish themselves. I mean, these guys want minutes.

So you can try to smush as much talent together as you can, sure, but the reality of the matter is that guys don't want to come here to just not play or not have guaranteed minutes. I would say that this doesn't work even in 2K, but it doesn't work in 2K either. admittedly my experience is a little bit outdated because I haven't played it in a while, but back when I did, I mean, yeah, players would come in and based on their player rating and the role that you had promised them, they would get pissed off if they didn't get a certain number of minutes. And that was kind of arbitrary. Like in 2K13, it's like, oh, you know, if the guy were at 81 or above, I think it was, then he would demand at least the sixth man rule and would

get upset if he didn't play like a, you know, a certain number of minutes, you know, dictated by whatever was coded into that rule. So, but, yeah, it's, it's a lot of, it's, it's, just it's the reason why like adding two guys to the rotation or even adding like one on top of Beasley is going to be difficult because that guy is not going to get many minutes. If you bring back Schroeder, which I think is essential because you want to have that backup handler, you do not want to be in last year's situation where you had, you know, Ivy is the backup handler, which in my opinion is not a role that he is best accustomed to. It's one in which he seemed kind of uncomfortable. Though Baker staff at that point was kind of treating it a little

bit weirdly and not really letting him handle the ball that much. But yeah, I just don't think it's a role he's ideal for. It comes with two additional disadvantages. Number one, you have to stagger Cade and Ivy when really you want to be playing them together a lot because if things go as hoped, I mean, these are going to be your back court of the future and probably the two best scores in your lineup. But also it leaves you one injury to either of them away from having only one real viable handler on the team. And that's exactly what happened last season. The Pistons were stuck with Sasser leading the second lineup, you know, the second unit and Sasser fell flat in his face because the guy can't break down defenses.

And then, of course, Schroeder came in and was a big deal. He didn't do great in the regular season, but just having a guy who could just handle the ball, who was a viable handler, was a big deal. And then, of course, he was huge for the pistons in the postseason, both in terms of his play and in terms of just being a very solid veteran presence. Also, I think, was a seamless culture fit. The guy's a pest and kind of a troll, and I love it. So I think you have to bring Schroeder back.

your only other options on the free agent market are probably not going to be affordable where the pistons can resign Trotter using, well, they'd be signing him over his cap hold, but they wouldn't need to use, they wouldn't need to become a Calfpace team to do it, put it that way, which will preserve the non-taxpayer mid-level, which again is about 14 million versus eight and a half for the room mid-level, which is what you have access to if you're a Capspace team, because you have to renounce the standard mid-level in that case, because it levies the Cappold.

Cap-hold counts against Capspace. So it's either him or, you know, or your only really other viable guys in the market are Gangel or Russell. And I don't think, even if he wants to play backup point guard, I don't think any of us would particularly want Russell on the team. The guy just isn't really the smartest or the best team player. Tyos Jones, who's a good point guard, but, you know, these guys would have to sign for relatively cheap. He'd be looking at $8.5 million in year one for any of them. And then the corpse of Chris Paul, who, of course, understandably is very much in decline. is 40 years old, could just stick with the spurs who seem really poised to take a leap,

especially if they make a trade. Though if they draft Harper number two, maybe Chris Ball doesn't stay there. But in that case, you could easily just go and join a contender on a minimum contract to chase a ring, which I think the pissens will probably not be doing next season in what will, I think, very possibly be his last season. The guy's 40 years old, and not everybody ages like LeBron. So, yeah, your options in the free agent market, and your base. basically looking at a trade. You know, whether it's a sign-in-trade, and bear a mind sign-in-trades

are pretty rare, or a straight-out trade. Why just keep Schroeder. And Beasily, I think, who knows if we'd be able to replicate this season, but was himself an extremely important veteran presence and was the second most important player offensively, and I'd argue overall in terms of the success of the season. I don't think you want to lose him. You know, who you're going to replace him with in terms, for example, in terms of play action, the guy who draws so much gravity and it brings you so many more options on offense, both in terms of just getting him shots or making the defense track him in a way that opens up other guys. Like, you know, there was the Nikale Alexander Walker example and the other guys better on defense, but on offense,

there's a difference between being in a very high-level motion shooter versus just the spot-up guy. Spot-up guy does not provide you with the same options. And any team wants to have, you know, high percentage perimeter shooting specialist who can hit tough shots and attract a ton of gravity. You don't necessarily need it, depending on who else you have on your roster, but it's very nice to have. I'd also look at Ivy. This is random, but Ivy, I'd say, is, you know, Mike, he's not, I don't think he'll ever be an elite motion shooter,

but the guys in very aggressive, quick and willing off-ball mover who improved a great deal as a catch-and-shoe guy last season. So I think you'll see him sometimes play that role a bit, assuming Bickerstaff is willing to get more creative. And I could talk more about Ivy. I mean, I'd continue to see questions about his fit with K. Ivy, I think, is a very willing and an able offball player, both in having improved his shooting, a great deal. And also, again, great offball mover, who, if you use him that way, it attracts a ton of gravity.

And if you get him the ball when he's moving at full speed toward the rim, he's very likely to get there before any help can arrive. And if the help does arrive, he's capable of finding the open man. So I think really Ivy is being tremendously slept on at the moment. And again, I'm just, I'm just jumping from topic to topic here. But I got a question, would you rather pay Ivy like, I don't know, like $35 million a year now or $30 million a year now and have him be a $20 to $25 million player or wait until next offseason and I'd have to possibly pay him the max, you know, because he's, I don't remember exactly how the question was phrased. But it's like if Ivy next, and I'm talking in the context of an extension, I would bet on Ivy at like, you know, $25 to $30 million over, I don't know, maybe three seasons.

But, you know, if we get to next summer and end up having to pay IVMAX because he's improved that much, it's like awesome. Like, sure, you don't want to have to pay him the max. You know, it's ideal to preserve more salary flexibility than that in the context. I mean, the pistons are going to be above the cap. They're likely to be an above the cap team for a long time at this point. But you're still operating within, you know, you want to stay below the first apron for as long as you can to preserve that flexibility. You want to stay below the second apron as long as you can to preserve that flexibility. again second apron is not penalties it's just more restrictions on adding talent but if ivy next summer

you know comes along in a restricted free agency then the guy's a max caliber player it's like like sure you don't you wish you would have locked him down under a lesser rate but it's like awesome like ivy is a max caliber player that solves such a huge need for the pistons like to have another star caliber score you know that would be huge and in that case i'm you know you got to think that's that uh Traytram Langdon would be rushing to give him that contract, be very happy about it, and that Tom Gores would be thrilled, you know, to be releasing the money for that. And I think we would all be very happy to. So in any case, though, yeah, I think you're just going back with the same rotation.

Maybe you add somebody for depth. I know there are questions about the back of power forward situation. I think that Asar and in Holland can play, you know, Holland has to be able to shoot. and Asar, you know, his issues are what they are. But I think they can both plug into backup power forward minutes. Power forwards, I think, are not on average quite as large as, you know, popular perception believes. You have a lot of guys in the NBA these days who are playing power forward at 6-8 or 6-7. And having, you know, well-above average athleticism can help you compensate even more for, can help you compensate rather, for kind of lacking in size,

to an extent lacking in weight as well. So, yeah, Holland, of course, is, like Asar is going I think start no matter what, and I made my thoughts on his shooting clear. Like, if he can shoot sweet, you know, that's enormous for the pistons. And the guy just continues to make a little bit, you know, make some more progress as an offball player. I think that's a max caliber player there. But if he doesn't shoot, yeah. I mean, I was doing some digging through the stats on cleaning the glass. It's just a great stats website. So check it out.

I think it's $5 a month. So Assar scored very efficiently against bottom 10 offenses. He scored, you know, with decent efficiency, given that you want Assar to be highly efficient, given that his shot diet, given that he can't shoot and that his shot diet is, you know, mostly shots around the rim. he did decently against middle 10 defenses. He took a dump, an absolute dump, like into the high 40s and effective field goal percentage against top 10 defenses.

I mean, defenses that are able to punish Assar are his shooting's problem, a significant problem, because, you know, not only is he, not only are they able to punish the offense at large better than other defenses, and that's a big deal for Assar not being able to shoot, but also they shut down his ability to shoot. He is, you know, you just pack the paint. And you've got a good defense. You're likely to be able to stop him from scoring in a half court.

Or do, you know, not stop him scoring altogether, but make it not worthwhile at all for him to be trying or just to be, you know, getting bad possessions out of it for the pistons. You also have the question of Fontechio. Who had a rough season. But Fontechio has a long pedigree as a good shooter. He wasn't great as a shooter in his rookie season in the NBA. at like the age of 27.

He, of course, you know, was a definitely solid rotation player as an NBA sophomore, so last season. He came into this season just didn't really look right. He did have toe surgery in the offseason, which you wouldn't think would cause this sort of problem, but the guy just looked off the whole season. He was just less athletic and slower than he had been the season before. You could see it especially in transition where he was really a get-out-and-run guy. I'm sure all of us remember it with the pit-es. And he couldn't really do that. He couldn't really attack closeouts too well.

Even his lateral mobility on defense was pretty compromised. I think that with a toe surgery, that wouldn't be a long-term thing. I don't know what's up with that. But even a shooting was poor, which is unusual. Like Fontecchio, you know, jazz Fontecchio from 2023, 2024, would have been, you know, very solid guy for the Pistons to have. And if he can get back to that, you know, not, you know, one quarter-ish of a season, Fonecchio with the Pistons after he was traded.

excuse me, after he was acquired when he was actually like a guy who could have been like fifth starter for a good team. But even just jazz Fontecchio from his second year, it would be more than capable as a backup power forward. But again, the guy's already on the team. You want to go out there and get a guy who's going to be able to, you know, just occupy that backup powered forward niche. But you're like, well, we can't guarantee you any minutes because we've already got nine guys we want to get minutes to. and, you know, at least two of them, you know, two of the guys in the forward rotation are guys who are very important in the future of the team. We want to get them a lot of minutes. So, you know, sorry, especially because in that situation, Malik Beasley is going to be playing, you know, up to small forward, you know, a significant amount with Schroeder and Ivey and K in the mix.

Not really easy to go out there and, you know, like I've seen, oh, why don't we just signed Torre and Prince? And it's like, yeah, he's a definitely solid backup power forward, limited on offense. But, you know, he's a solid enough defender. strong catch and shoot guy. It's like, well, if you're Tori and Prince, you have two options. You're going to be coming someplace to play on a minimum, probably no matter what. Would you rather play significant minutes or much less significant minutes? And the answer is very clear. You know, go out there and have a significant rotation role in a minimum contract. Pretty easy. And contenders also tend to be shallow. So you are going to have a greater chance.

So basically you have more of a role on, you know, a team that's quite, to winning a championship, but even if it just comes down to minutes versus no, you know, significant minutes versus insignificant minutes, it's pretty easy choice. So the fact that Fontecchio is already on the team is a significant boon because you don't have to go out there and find a guy who might be able to play that role when it's going to be difficult to attract anybody. So, all right, having spoken quite a bit about the rotation space question, and I'm just going to keep randomly talking until I, until this episode becomes too long.

So NBA skill creep. So this, in my opinion, is just a very interesting topic. By skill creep, I mean just that the minimum standard for any given position is just continuing to rise and rise and rise. And I thought about this not only because of Jalen Duren, you know, talk about his passing. Also about guys like Luke Kinnard, who is, you know, by many standards, one of the greatest NBA shooters of all time but won't really be sought after this season. And you can even think about guys like Isaiah Stewart at Power Forward last year, like just

how limited he was on offense. So you go back to 10 years ago, even five years ago, you know, Isaiah's issue on all offensive power forward was he very, very little to offer. He could just kind of stand still at the perimeter and shoot wide open threes. And five years ago, it's like, okay, you know, whatever, 10 years ago, most power forwards won't even shooting. But five years ago, it's like, all right, well, that's not ideal. We'd like more. But it's fine, you know, I don't feel too concerned, you know, too terribly concerned about it. It's not necessarily going to be a minus there because Isaiah is also just not very much.

mobile, so it's very easy to track him. You know, you can be reasonably sure you can leave him and come back, and he's still going to be roughly in the same position you left him. Again, what he can't do is do anything off the dribble, like exploit, you know, exploit matchups against guys who are smaller than he is, you know, attack anybody off the dribble at all, even attack closeouts, even when he's, you know, or attack closeouts and even necessarily make the right pass. The issue with Isaiah is that his handle is very poor. He's not getting past anybody. He runs into anybody is likely to lose his handle or just knock them over and get a charge and he's never going to make it to the rim before some help comes. Even if he does make it

to the rim, his touch there off the drive is just not good. So, yeah, five years ago, it's like, okay, whatever. Be nice to have a guy who can do more, but that's fine. Now it's like the minimum standard for guys, you know, for just shooting specialists, guys who are just going to hang out in the perimeter is substantially higher. Like if you were just a guy who's largely shooting threes, you'd better be able to at least shoot difficult threes. And if you can't do that, you'd vary at the very, at least need to be able to do stuff like it's at close-outs. And if you can't, then you're a minus player. So that's why Isaiah came out there and it's like, yeah, he has his immobility,

which is an additional strike against him and also cannot do anything, but just take standstill threes. And because of how much the skill floor has risen in the NBA and continues to rise, what was just kind of not preferable five years ago is now an outright weakness, where it's like, okay, you're not providing negative value on offense, just because the skill floor continues to. to rise and you've now fallen below it. And then we have a guy like Lou Kinnard, who is, I'd say pretty much indisputably, one of the greatest parameter shooters of all time.

If you look at his career percentage and his career volume, I mean, I believe he's third in career percentage at this point behind Steve Kerr and the name that comes to mind is Hubert Davis or something like that. But both of them shot on drastically lesser volume than he did, and the degree of difficulty if his average opportunity is just a great deal higher. So you'd think that Kennard would be highly sought after. Unfortunately, while he does provide excellent perimeter shooting, he doesn't really, at this point in his career, provide much else. I thought when he was a piston, that he would actually be a decent backup handler, like maybe

a sort of Lou Williams sort. He'd give him the ball, he could attack and the pick and roll. He had to be guarded closely because. he was a pull-up mid-range threat. That really hasn't materialized. But also, just because the value floor is so high, even though he's a spectacular perimeter shooter, the fact that he's limited and the fact that he plays bad defense

really just wreck his value. Again, this is a guy five years ago who would be able to find value anywhere. But because the minimum standard is just getting higher and higher on the NBA, just in terms of the overall value that you, provide. He's, I mean, he'll find a bench roll. He won't get paid very much. Part of that is that the second apron has really squeezed things, but part of it is just that despite his shooting, his value just isn't really that great. Like skill creep, and I'm not trying to make this a discussion about Jalen Duren, but Duren's another example in terms of skill creep. Like you look at

Duren, it's like, yeah, he's a traditional big, but he can do some attacking off the dribble against other bigs. He can do some passing out of the short roll. He can, you know, he can do some passing from a stationary position. He's pretty good at that. for a traditional big. But even amongst traditional bigs, those skills are becoming increasingly more common. Like it's, you know, for a starting big, it's a traditional big. The ability to make just solid passes out of a stationary position in the interior is becoming increasingly more common. The ability to just, you know, attack off the dribble in varying niche situations becoming more common. Even short roll passing, though Duran for a traditional big is genuinely good at that.

Again, for a traditional big. But even there, the skill floor is, you know, is just going up substantially, and it's just up and up and up, even like over a short, you know, even kind of over a relatively short term basis. Like you saw with the Toronto Raptors in 2019, who really made sort of a change, like a significant change, in that all of them were capable drive-and-kick passers. So pretty much in the 2019 postseason, I mean, they still probably wouldn't have won the championship unless, you know, if not for the Warriors injuries. but nonetheless, I think they're just a good example of this.

A bunch of them averaged, including Kauai, averaged a solid number of assists because they were just really able as a team to reliably make the driving kick. Like Kauai these days does it too, but basically just the fact that he's such a threat to score and it's just his ability to get past guys and get into the interior and draw help

means that guys get open. He just needs to be able to. to make the right pass and you can do that. And that's, that was a big, you know, that was not a common thing back then, you know, to have a unit full of guys who are able to just make the right pass off the driving kick. But even these days, like you have guys like Derek Jones Jr. is able to make the right pass off the driving kick. And now it's, now it's less that, oh, well, you know, that's a useful skill.

And more that, well, if you don't have this skill, then it really actively counts against you. I just find this an interesting topic because it's just an example of, Well, not just how the MBA's minimum standard continues to rise, and the minimum standard was very high in the first place, and it's just higher and higher and higher. But it's also just a way in which the game continues to get increasingly scientific. The game is already very scientific, but it continues to become even more so.

There are already a set of requirements that you need to be able to fulfill as a player in order to provide value for a team, and as a team overall in order to provide, you know, sufficient value on the court to win games. And, you know, those requirements just continue to become, you know, larger and larger in terms of skills and stricter and stricter. And, you know, if you're a role player, it's just incredibly easy to flunk out of the NBA. And just because, you know, one, you know, suddenly you don't have like one of these things

that you need to be able to do. And there are thousands of guys trying to come from your job, you know, jobs that role player jobs in the NBA are inherently unsafe. A lot of guys just end up out of the league in any given season. Of course, shooting is the most important of those for a perimeter player. And you see a guy like Bruce Brown, for example, who was, you know, really a minus role player in Detroit and went on to be, you know, really unimportant role player in Brooklyn, who could only really exist there as pretty much a non-shooter, because he was playing next to multiple superstars, you know, superstar creators, Durant Irving, Hardin, Mully was there,

and who went to Denver and suddenly became a valuable role player, not just because he was in a good position, you know, playing alongside Yokic and that offense was good for him. But the key to that was that for that one season, he became a reliable shooter. And that allowed him to become a valuable role player because, you know, Brown, aside from that, you know, aside from his shooting, I mean, he's got the skills that you would want. I mean, he's able to do some handling. he's a solid passer. He's a, you know, he's a plus defender. He's, you know, he's a really hard worker. He's a

good Swiss Army knife kind of guy. But you take away the shooting, which is just such an essential thing for a perimeter player. And suddenly, just his value on offense isn't good enough for him to, you know, provide solid value overall as a player because he inherently limits the offense while he's out there. And you're also paying the opportunity cost of not having a guy who would be able to do far more. So Brown got paid, I mean, the reason he didn't go back to the Nuggets is that they only had what's called non-bird rights on him and they were far over the cap. So they would only have been able to give him, I believe, 120% increase in his salary. He was 140%. I can't remember at the moment.

But basically, they would have only been able to pay him like $7 million in that realm. And the Pacers had cap space and they offered him 20 on a one-in-one, one-plus team option, which, you know, they were hoping he would contribute. But also, in a worst-case scenario, I mean, they got to the CAFOR. and which I think, I mean, yeah, they were going to have to get to the cap floor either way. Sorry, I'm tying myself up a little bit knots mentally at the moment. But at the very worst, they would be off the contract the next season, and also they could use it a salary matching, which in the event they did in the past Kelsey Seacum trade.

But by the time Brown was traded, I mean, he had, what you can call it, forgotten how to shoot, but really he was no longer a reliable shooter. And therefore, his value of the Pacers that season was drastically less than it had been to the nuggets the season before. And he went on to, you know, after his traded to the Raptors, still couldn't shoot and was dumped his salary matching to the Pelicans. So, you know, the science also isn't just limited to the qualities that you have. It's also the way in which you need to play. I mean, this is more well-worn territory in terms of you have to play in an efficient way to, you know, to keep up on offense. I mean, you can't just freewheel on

offense like Stan Van Gundy like to do, you know, during, it's just shots, selection for a long time he did not coach it, which was, you know, kiss of death, even in the early stages of the spacing era. And even when he began coaching it more in his final season with the Pistons, I mean, just his offense, just it's stressed very inefficient forms of offense. And when things weren't working, he kept doing them anyway. Like my favorite, and I say this facetiously, it's Stan Van Gundy play in that final season there, like at the beginning of it, was he would have Tobias Harris, the best score on the team, set an offball screen in the corner so that he Avery Bradley could curl around, get a handoff from Drummond, and take a pull-up jumper from, like, three feet inside the three-point line.

And, you know, the Bradley did have a strong start to the season. I mean, that was never going to be a good shot for pretty much anybody. It was a terrible shot to be taking, like one of the worst shots in basketball. But Van Gogh just didn't get that. And I think he just disdained analytics overall. And obviously, you can't do that today. I mean, you have to keep up in the league. and it's just the margins are razor, razor, razor thin.

And so as players continue to get more skilled, you know, if you're a player, you have to keep up, you have to continue adding more skills, you have to come into the NBA with more skills, you know, in order to make it in order to even get drafted. So the NBA, I feel like, is kind of unique in that respect because it's far more scientific than any of the other major sports. Hockey has seen its own share of changes, like you now have to be a good skater to play in the NHL more or less. I mean, being slow is, you know, the kiss of death there.

The speed of the game is very fast. The Red Wings were actually really maybe the single team, you know, that did the most to bring about that change because the Reblings were, you know, always in the 2000s on kind of the leading edge in terms of playing fast-paced finesse hockey, which is really what the NHL is these days. In a way, it's almost a little bit of a shame because the slap shot no longer exists pretty much because guys are such good skaters that it's very difficult to get yourself open for a slap shot now. It makes more sense to just take a wrist shot. So, I mean, the NHL has

kind of gone sort of in the same direction, but the NBA is just, it, there's just much more complexity to it, to, you know, the requirements for playing in it and for how you have to play. I know, it's just interesting to me. I know I've gotten on a major A side here, but, you know, the NBA continues to be a very fast evolving thing. And whether you're the Pistons or any other team, you know, you have to keep up with, you know, with the needs that are facing you. So that'll be it for this episode. Like I said, probably be back next time with the first episode of a player review series.

But in any event, as always, I want to thank you so much for listening. Hope you're all doing great. I'll catch you in the next episode.