Mosi Platt – from Miami Heat Index – sent me the following e-mail this weekend:
I don’t know if you saw/heard but they ran a graphic on NBATV showing the starting lineup for the ’80-’81 Pistons because that was the last time Detroit started the season 7-17.
The lineup was:
G: Keith Herron
G: Larry Wright
F: Phil Hubbard
F: Terry Tyler
C: Paul Mokeski
I’d love to read a post comparing the two teams!
As readers know, I was born in Detroit (hence I have spent a lifetime as a disappointed Lions fan). So I don’t need much encouragement to discuss the Pistons.
Let’s start the conversation with where the Pistons are today. As fans of the Pistons know (and as documented at Pistons by the Numbers earlier this month), this has gotten ugly.
This Pistons collapse against the Toronto Raptors in Saturday dropped the team’s record to 7-18. And unfortunately, this outcome is not a surprise. The Pistons only won 27 games last year; and after such a disaster of a season, Detroit (specifically, Joe Dumars) made the odd choice of retaining eleven players from the 2009-10 team. Given what happened last year, and the fact that the team only added rookie Greg Monroe and Tracy McGrady (each has only started one game), we should not be surprised that this team is on pace to win only 24 games in 2010-11.
The following table reveals where these wins will come from. Leading the way is Ben Wallace, who is once again posting a WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] mark that is well above average. Beyond Big Ben, though, only Rodney Stuckey and McGrady have been above average.
And that means that Ben Gordon and Charlie Villanueva are both below average. This is consistent with what we saw from each player before these two were signed by the Pistons in the summer of 2009. In other words, no one should be surprised that the investment in Gordon and Villanueva hasn’t paid off.
Okay, the Pistons today are not good. Let’s now look back thirty years and see if we can uncover some hope in a review of history.
Before we get to the 1980-81 season, let’s take a quick look at two seasons earlier.
Back in 1978-79 the Pistons won only 30 games. When we look at efficiency differential and Wins Produced, we see a team that should have won 34 games. The 34 wins were produced primarily produced by Kevin Porter (13.1 wins), M.L. Carr (9.9 wins), and Terry Tyler (7.7 wins). And since Bob Lanier missed 29 games due to injury, and produced less than what one should expect when he did take the court, one might think the Pistons in 1978-79 were not far removed from a spot in the playoffs (the Nets made the playoffs with a record of 37-45 that season).
After the 78-79 season, though, the Pistons made a number of moves that were supposed to make the team better (like signing Gordon and Villanueva today), but that ultimately didn’t work out (like signing Gordon and Villanueva today).
- The Pistons drafted Greg Kelser with the 4th pick in the 1979 draft, passing on Sidney Moncrief. As I noted in August of 2009, Moncrief went on to produce 126.8 wins while Kelser finished his career with 6.5 Wins Produced. Kelser, though, did win an NCAA title at Michigan State – a team led by Magic Johnson – so who can blame Dick Vitale for drafting him? (yes, that is sarcasm).
- In July of 1979 Kevin Porter signs with Washington and the Pistons receive a 1980 first round pick.
- In September of 1979, the Pistons sent two first round picks (their own and the pick acquired from Washington) to the Boston Celtics (which turned out to be the 1st and 13th pick in the 1980 draft) for Bob McAdoo. As noted last August, that move didn’t quite work out.
- In February of 1980 the Pistons sent Bob Lanier (who is in the Hall-of-Fame) to the Milwaukee Bucks for Kent Benson (the number one pick in the 1977 draft and someone who is not in the Hall-of-Fame) and a number one pick in the 1980 draft (who became Larry Drew).
Just to review… from the summer of 1979 until early 1980 – or across about eight or nine months – the Pistons lost Kevin Porter, M.L. Carr, and Bob Lanier (and ultimately the first pick in the NBA draft). The team added Greg Kelser, Bob McAdoo, and Kent Benson. This trio combined to produced 1.3 wins in 1979-80. And in 1980-81 – as the following table reveals – Larry Drew and this trio combined to produce -1.0 wins.
In sum, the Pistons saw a number of productive players depart in a very short period of time. When the team failed to replace these players with productive talent, the fortunes of the team declined considerably. In 1979-80, the Pistons were the worst team in the NBA with a mark of 16-66. The team’s number one pick (along with the pick from Washington), though, was sent to the Boston Celtics in 1980. These picks were transformed into Robert Parish and Kevin McHale (and the rest – as they say – is history).
Denied the top pick in the draft – and unable to add any other talent that was able to produce wins in large quantities –the Pistons in 1980-81 only won 21 games. Of the team’s 23.9 Wins Produced, about half can be tied to the play of Terry Tyler. Tyler – like Ben Wallace – was a productive second round draft pick who could produce wins in large quantities without scoring in large quantities.
After Tyler, the Pistons in 1980-81 had only two other players who were above average (just like this year). And they had three players who played more than 500 minutes who were producing in the negative range (that could also happen this year).
So there are substantial similarities between the Pistons today and what we saw 30 years ago. In each case, the Pistons saw productive talent depart (or simply age) and the team’s management failed to find adequate replacements.
If history continues to repeat itself, though, that will be good news for the Pistons. In 1981 the Pistons drafted Isiah Thomas. And in February of 1982 –two years after Bob Lanier left town – Bill Laimbeer arrived. As I noted in June of 2007, Laimbeer was a very productive center.
In 1983-84 – or a few years after Laimbeer and Thomas arrived — the Pistons received 30.6 wins from Thomas and Laimbeer as the team won 49 games (and eventually the team added Dennis Rodman, and the rest – as they say – is history).
So what is the lesson this history teaches?
If you lose productive talent and add less productive players, then your team will decline. If you wish for your team to get better, go find productive players.
All of this means the Pistons are going to have change their strategy. The current approach is to bring back the same talent and hope for different results. History teaches, though, that if you want different results, your best bet is to find different – and better – players. Until that happens in Detroit, though, look for the “ugliness” to continue.
– DJ
brgulker
December 13, 2010
Awesome post. Come on lottery balls!
fricktho
December 13, 2010
yup yup. every loss is a win. sad.
brgulker
December 14, 2010
Dr. Berri, I’m not sure how much you’ve had the chance to watch the Pistons — I’ve watched probably 80% or so of the total minutes played thus far, and I’m actually surprised by Stuckey’s numbers. Watching him play, he doesn’t really look “above average” most of the time, at least to me.
I suppose it is encouraging, though, because it would seem that Dumars is going to retain his services, and if that’s the case, at least he’s made an improvement relative to Wins Produced. Now if he could just develop a jump shot…
Italian Stallion
December 14, 2010
Depressed Pistons fans should look to Donnie Walsh and the NY Knicks for the blueprint to turning a team around. It’s actually quite simple. Serious Knicks fans have known the blueprint for 10 years, but Knicks management was unwilling to do it.
You have to blow up the team up and get worse before you get better.
You have to trade away overpaid players on long term contracts for worse players with shorter contracts (if you can do better than that by all means do so) while also trying to accumulate serviceable players on fair contracts and draft picks.
That can be a painful multi year process, but it’s the shortest path home.
IMO, right now the Knicks are a .500 team or better, have a very young squad with upside, and have an 11 million dollar contract coming off the books to add another high level player.
That only took Donnie 2 years to accomplish despite starting from salary cap hell and few assets to work with. Plus he did that despite a highly suspect deal with the Rockets to get rid of Jeffries 1 year earlier.
The only way he can screw this up is by giving up too much for Melo in a trade that would only improve the team marginally, put us back into salary cap hell, and take away some of the team’s upside.
If the Knicks can do it, so can the Pistons.
kevin
December 14, 2010
“Awesome post. Come on lottery balls!”
Ummm, I’m not sure a Pistons fan would be wishing on that. Leading up to the 80-81 season, Dick Vitale traded away what eventually became the 1st pick to t e Celtics for Bob McAdoo. That means Dumars would trade this year’s #1 for somebody like Tracy McGrady. Do you really want history to repeat itself again?
brgulker
December 14, 2010
IS, I don’t think many Pistons fans will disagree with this. The problem isn’t the fans. The problem appears to be that management refuses to admit what you just said — you have to get worse before you get better. This whole “retooling” experiement, which began with trading Billups and then signing BG/CV has gone even worse than expected. Now, we’re capped out with bad contracts and old players.
Yes, blowing it up is the solution. Finding takers for Rip’s contract, Maxiel’s contract, BG’s contract, Charlie V’s contract — of course, assuming management would even move them — is not that easy to do.
kevin
December 14, 2010
“Serious Knicks fans have known the blueprint for 10 years, but Knicks management was unwilling to do it. ”
The blueprint:
“Get rid of Isiah.”
brgulker
December 14, 2010
kevin,
Given that Dumars doesn’t have a history of trading high picks, yes, I’m hoping for luck in the lottery. Obviously, I wouldn’t want that part of history to repeat itself. That’s sort of self-evident, don’t you think?
kevin
December 14, 2010
YesI do think.
It was a tongue -in-cheek comment.
dberri
December 14, 2010
IS,
I know you are a happy Knick fan these days. I think the story you are telling is a bit off. If the Knicks don’t have Landry Fields, the Knicks look like they have for years. So it appears the Knick secret is “draft Fields in the second round”. It is not, you have to get worse to get better.
J. Scott
December 14, 2010
dberri, it must kill you to be in a position where your team sucks to such an extent that you have to suppress your, apparently, congenital dispostion to lob snark bombs at the Knicks. Right, it’s all Landry Fields. That bringing in Stoudemire and Felton was possible only by creating the cap room IS was discussing…well, just go right ahead and ignore that.
brgulker
December 14, 2010
J. Scott,
I don’t see anyone ignoring the contributions of Felton or Stoudamire. But relative to Fields, their contribution to wins isn’t as important as one might think.
The Knicks brilliantly created cap space to reinvent themselves, and they made some savvy moves. However, Amare wasn’t a good investment, and they have sort of lucked out that Fields is as good as he’s been.
In that context, Dr. Berri’s comment seems perfectly appropriate.
J. Scott
December 14, 2010
brgulker. I almost [emphasize “almost”] hate to do this, but have you actually watched Knicks games this year? Fields benefits enormously from all the defensive attention that Stoudemire receives. dberri utterly ignored the primary thrust of IS’s point. The Knicks tubed two seasons with the goal of creating a lot of cap room. Their “target” clearly was LeBron. As you might have heard, that didn’t work out. Still, the cap room enabled them to upgrade at two positions. The idea that the Knicks would be challenging for a playoff spot simply by adding Fields to last year’s team is, I think, ill-conceived.
brgulker
December 14, 2010
Yes, I have. No one is arguing it’s Fields alone though.
kevin
December 14, 2010
Can we hold off on all the Knicks euphoria for the moment, please? At least until we can examine the results of the next 5 games. The teams they have been beating have been pretty soft and they aren’t blowing anybody out, even bad teams.
Stoudamire is going up against Garnett Wednesday night, then LBJ the following night. We’ll see if he drops a 30/12 on Kevin and LeBron.
Man of Steele
December 14, 2010
J. Scott, how was Amare an upgrade? The Knicks had David Lee at Amare’s position. That seems like a downgrade.
Also, I think we should only change Dr. Berri’s comment to include Raymond Felton. So the plan is, sign Raymond Felton to a relatively cheap contract and draft Landry Fields in the 2nd round.
Adam C. Morrison
December 14, 2010
“No one is arguing it’s Fields alone though.”
um…
“If the Knicks don’t have Landry Fields, the Knicks look like they have for years.”
brgulker
December 14, 2010
I guess I’m not reading these two statements the same way others are.
The former seems to be intimating that Dr. Berri isn’t accounting for the significant contributions of players like Amare and Felton, which in my view he is.
The latter seems to be implying that without Fields, the Knicks would struggle to make the Playoffs.
Admittedly, I’m reading between the lines here and doing some interpretation. I may be wrong in what I’m inferring, and if so, I’ll retract my statement. Anyway, I don’t think it’s worth spending much time on. It’s probably just an instance of the medium of communication blurring the meaning.
marparker
December 14, 2010
The interesting thing is that Fields is very close to getting no shot at all in the NBA. IMO, their are other Fields out there that teams need to a)take a look at and b) be able to realize what they have once they get that guy
Italian Stallion
December 14, 2010
D Berri,
I realize drafting Fields created a huge upside surprise, but I think even without Fields the Knicks would still be competitive and in a lot better shape given the cap flexibility and youth going forward.
Gallinari, Chandler (who is much improved but playing more PF this year so it doesn’t show in the stats), and Douglas all still have upside and we haven’t even seen much of Anthony Randolph yet and he may have the most upside of all of them.
Blowing things up and getting worse puts you in a position to get better draft picks. That increases the probability of landing a guy like Landry Fields without being lucky/skilled enough to get him in the 2nd round.
Brgulker,
A critical part of getting rid of those bad long term contracts is a willingness to take back worse players with shorter contracts.
A few years ago Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford were considered practically unmovable (certainly Zach), but if you are willing to take back other overpaid and inferior players like Al Harrington, Tim Thomas, Cuttino Mobley (a heart condition and can’t even play) with shorter contracts it can be done.
That’s what makes you worse in the short term. You have to be willing sacrifice short term competitiveness to turn it around quicker otherwise you have to wait until all those bad contracts expire. No one is going to give you an equal value or better player on a shorter contract if the player is overpaid. The Pistons CAN move some of those players by finding teams that are convinced all they need to contend is another scorer (which the Pistons have). But they are going to have take back a turd to do it.
dberri
December 14, 2010
IS,
I think I will dedicate my next post to you. The numbers (at least, my numbers) say you are not quite right.
todd2
December 14, 2010
This post brings back bad memories for Cavs fans. Hubbard and Mokeski ended up being Cavs and Laimbeer and James Edwards ended up being Pistons.
reservoirgod
December 14, 2010
Great post. It’s fascinating how history is repeating itself, but didn’t the Pistons start picking productive players after they got rid of Vitale? Does this story implicitly foreshadow the demise of Joe Dumars?
Adam C. Morrison
December 14, 2010
“… and we haven’t even seen much of Anthony Randolph yet and he may have the most upside of all of them.”
The ‘Melo-to-NY rumors seem to hinge on trading Randolph for a 1st-round draft pick. Do you think the Knicks will be able to get a first-round pick for him or the equivalent (i.e. vital part in the trade for ‘Melo, assuming it occurs)?
Italian Stallion
December 14, 2010
dberri,
I already know that you are going to give Fields a lot of the credit for their improved performance because he’s a SG that rebounds exceptionally well for the position and is also a very efficient moderate usage scorer that makes very few mistake. But he’s really a SF playing SG. That’s “partly” why he rebounds so well for the position. D’Antoni uses his wings interchangeably.
I also think you are going underrate Amare’s contribution because Felton was horrible in the pick and roll during the first 10-11 games when they were getting used to each other and went 3-8. That’s going to distort Amare’s overall play. He kept getting the ball in terrible position, while double teamed etc… and that caused a lot of turnovers and bad shots.
Anyone that has been watching the games realizes that Amare has practically carried the team on his back at times with incredibly clutch play whenever the momentum of the game was about to change in a negative way. He always seems to come up with a big shot or block that swings things back into NY’s direction and settles down the young players that used to fold in the 4th quarter.
Without him, they wouldn’t have won nearly as many games. Watching him play nightly has been an eye opening experience for me. While the media may giving him too much credit for the turnaround and guys like Fields not enough, there’s is no way in hell they would be even close to as good with Amare and Felton – two free agent signings that were enabled by blowing up the team.
Italian Stallion
December 14, 2010
>>there’s is no way in hell they would be even close to as good with Amare and Felton – two free agent signings that were enabled by blowing up the team.<<
"without" Amare and Felton.
If anything ever proved to me that intangibles exist and matter it has been the play of Felton and Amare. Their leadership, clutch play, and sheer will to win has been instrumental in getting more out of the young players.
Italian Stallion
December 14, 2010
Adam,
I think the Kicks have probably damaged Randolph’s trade value by not using him.
If I have any criticism of the team it’s that they were willing to give Mozgov a chance play C despite being horribly inefficient, turnover prone, foul prone, not a good rebounder and 24 years old. That’s because they “see” some talent that they may be able to develop. In the mean time time he was killing the team.
On the flip side they haven’t been willing to gone Anthony Randolph any time even though he has an NBA record of being an excellent rebounder and shot blocker with mind boggling athletic ability that could lead to more efficient scoring if used properly just because he has some of the same shortcomings that just about every 21 year old not named Landry Fields has.
IMO the only thing that stands in the way of the Knicks becoming a serious team is Anthony Randolph putting on 25-30 pounds of muscle so he can defend most Cs, learning shot selection, and learning to relax, be confident, and play his game. He has all the God given tools. He just needs to mature physically and mentally and get plenty of playing time.
Scipio
December 14, 2010
A lot of people expected Anthony Randolph, a previously above-average player according to wp48, to take his game to the next level with the Knicks. Instead, he has been an abomination. Sometimes you get lucky (Fields) and sometimes you get unlucky (Randolph). All you can do is put yourself in the best possible position to win, which is what IS is arguing, and I agree that Knicks have done a pretty good job of that, particularly in relation to the Isiah Thomas years (shudder).
Also, Amare is coming on strong after a very shaky start. If he figures out a way to minimize TOs (currently averaging a career high in TOs), I suspect his wp48 will skyrocket, and this could very well happen if Felton and Amare continue to improve their two-man game. Amare is doing a bit too much on offense, which is why we see an increase in assists but also an increase in TOs.
Scipio
December 14, 2010
Also, we need a Toronto Raptors post. Claiming that Andrea Bargnani is not only a terrible player but has contributed negative wins to his team will bring a lot of traffic, I suspect.
Adam C. Morrison
December 15, 2010
“On the flip side they haven’t been willing to gone Anthony Randolph any time even though he has an NBA record of being an excellent rebounder and shot blocker with mind boggling athletic ability that could lead to more efficient scoring if used properly…”
Do productive NBA players earn their playing time or do they receive it