OT: Joe Dumars worst move as Pistons GM? Darko or J. Smith

Submitted by Drew_Silver on

Sorry to go off topic, but I had this bar stool argument last night

Joe D's worst GM move

Drafting Darko or Signing Josh Smith

 

Pistons are 12-3 since they dumped Josh Smith, the guy was just not right for the team in any way.  He jacked so many bad 3's last year (a historic rate).  Josh Smith had a strong track history of being mediocre and a bad shooter.

 

Darko was widely considered to be the #2 guy.  The conventional wisdom in the NBA is to take the Big Guy if 2 guys are about equal.  Darko didn't have any screaming red flags around him.  I know it turned out to be a terrible move, but at the time it seemed at least defendable.

Wolverine In Exile

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:37 PM ^

Drafting Darko killed the transition from a post-Ben Wallace team to a consistent contender for antoher 5-10 years. If we get any of the other big men in that draft, we transition Wallace out, don't have to sign a broken down C-Webb, and we probably keep contending with a #2 pick/Tayshawn/Chauncey core. We don't make the Chanucey for Iverson trade, we don't make the Gordon / Charlie V signings, and we're probably attractive enough to go get a quality free agent to replace Rip and / or Rasheed.

FormAFarkingWall

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:22 PM ^

Smith, by far. As you mentioned Milicic was the consensus #2 in that draft. If the Heat were in the 2 slot, they would have taken him too and the stones would have "settled" for Wade. Smith was a last gasp move to save Dumars job. There was neveraany reason to think it would work,yet Joe did it anyway out of pure selfishness,not considering the future of the team. The Gordon and Villanueva deals were also worse than theDarko pick.

JHendo

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:23 PM ^

My vote for worst Joey D move (by a mile) is trading for Allen Iverson.  That signaled the end of a golden era, and having to watch Iverson play some embarrasingly terrible basketball and flush that team's identity down the toilet made me dry heave at times.  But anyways, between your two options, I'd say Smith was worse.

Here's always been my argument about drafting Darko:  Had we drafted Carmelo, or any other player that hindsight experts say we should have, that team wouldn't have had the same chemistry it had.  As that team's chemistry was incredible and no one was playing with the mindset that they needed to take their shots every game, that chemistry had nowhere to go but down.

While Darko himself was a complete bust, it was pretty much the perfect draft pick for that team at that moment.

jmblue

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:26 PM ^

Trading for Iverson made some sense - he had a $20 million expiring contract.  It was tough to give up Billups for him but was logical if you felt the team had plateaued.  What was really bad was using all that cap room to sign Ben Gordon and Charlie Villanueva.

 

I Like Burgers

January 23rd, 2015 at 2:08 PM ^

Iverson was on the downside of his career too and was the opposite type of PG that the Pistons had success with.  Joe D just had a massive hard on for Iverson (after coming very close to getting him earlier in his career) and couldn't resist.  Chauncey actually had better stats in his final year with the Pistons than Iverson did in his first and only year.  

Another thing here is that Chauncey and Rip were very close.  Joe D traded Chauncey at the same time he resigned Rip to a longer deal, which pissed Rip off and made him more of a malcontent.  And then in the following offseason, Joe D went and signed Ben Gordon to play the same damn positiion as Rip and also signed Charlie V.  So he essentially traded away Chauncey for a redundant SG and a worthless PF.  And they still didn't have a PG because he completely overestimated Stuckey's capabilities as a PG.  Those moves killed their cap and flexibility for years.

It wasn't the Darko move or the Josh Smith move that killed the Pistons.  It was the snowball effect created by trading Chauncey that killed the team.

JHendo

January 23rd, 2015 at 2:39 PM ^

This what I'm talking about it right here.  Regardless of whether it freed up cap space as a one year contract we had to take on, and regardless of the fact the Iverson was considered the better player at time, it was bad move because it knowlingly infected the team with a chemistry killing parasite.  The Pistons were the most team oriented offense in the league during that time, and they brought in a player who is universally known as one of the most "me first" players in the NBA, and his skills were degrading exponentially to boot.

To top if off, the money we saved by dealing with AI  for a bit was wasted on more poor decisions.  Trading for Iverson signaled the end of the Pistons, and only now are we starting emerge again as a competent team.  That's why it was Dumars' worst move.

jmblue

January 23rd, 2015 at 3:00 PM ^

But the trade wasn't about getting Iverson.  He was never going to be in their long-term plans.  It was about getting Iverson's expiring contract, which could be used to sign some star players and retool on the fly.  The problem was that the $20 million ended up being badly used.

 

Drew_Silver

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:32 PM ^

he should have traded RIP instead, but no one would take

Iverson was a star, if you get the better player you win the trade in my opinion,  Thats just a gamble that didn't work.

Smith was not a gamble in that it was never going to work.  You can't have 3 guys for 2 spots

Monroe, Drummond, Smith was never going to work

yourmom_is_hot

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:24 PM ^

trading chauncey billups, giving all that money to ben gordon and Charlie V were way worse IMO.  He stuck out with Darko, but he also drafted KCP ahead of Michael Carter Williams & the greek freak.  How's Brandon Knight working out for the pistons?

True Blue Grit

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:24 PM ^

By passing up Anthony/Wade, it's extremely easy to believe it cost the Pistons one, maybe two NBA titles.  That team was just one player away from achieving great things and that stupid draft pick torpedoed it. 

jmblue

January 23rd, 2015 at 3:38 PM ^

I would argue that they landed that one guy in Rasheed Wallace. His five years in Detroit brought five trips to the conference finals, two to the NBA Finals and one championship.  If the Pistons had drafted Carmelo, who was considered the only other option (no one was talking about Wade or Bosh), there is no guarantee that the Rasheed trade would have still happened.

The Darko draft was a missed opportunity for the franchise to prepare for the eventuality when the Ben Wallace/Rip/Chauncey group aged, but I don't know if they could have ever done that much better in the 2004-08 window than they did.   There were a lot of title contenders in that timeframe - San Antonio, Indiana (with O'Neal/Artest), Dallas, Miami, Cleveland, and later Boston/L.A.  We can't complain too much about winning "only" one title.  

 

 

 

 

mackbru

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:24 PM ^

Josh Smith was by far the worse of the two. Retrospect is easy. At the time, though, everybody wanted Darko. Drafting him was a reasonable bet, especially given how few draft picks are sure things. Smith, by contrast, was widely known to be selfish, overrated, and generally not a good egg. The team didn't revolt against Darko. And his contract wasn't nearly as crippling as Smith's. This isn't a close call.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

January 23rd, 2015 at 5:52 PM ^

Exactly.  The Smith signing went down exactly like people said it would before the ink was dry: he couldn't play the four because Monroe and Drummond and he makes a horrible three so this is stupid.  And lo, it was stupid.  There wasn't a pundit or GM or scout anywhere who didn't absolutely drool over Darko.  There's no debate about this.  Drafting Darko wasn't even one of the top-five worst moves Dumars made.

bronxblue

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:26 PM ^

Smith was a bad signing, and people questioned it immediately. Darko was the right selection based on conventional wisdom, and nobody thought Wade or Bosh would be this good at the time. Smith in a walk was the worst

snarling wolverine

January 23rd, 2015 at 4:18 PM ^

From that article:

 

Cornstein: We don't live in a vacuum. We know what has happened since. You have to remember, he was as impressive-looking physically and what he could do in a workout as anyone I've ever seen. I'm sure now if you asked everyone in the lottery that year, all 13 would tell you they'd have taken Melo second. Not only is that not true, more would've take Darko at No. 2 than not. I know that for a fact. He was 17, had an incredible body for his age. He was very mature for his age, which I know may sound odd now that you look back. Look, you can have lightning in a bottle.

treetown

January 23rd, 2015 at 7:56 PM ^

Were there some great prospect on the horizon and the draft position were the same, the temptation is great even though the game has changed and having a monster big man is no longer a necessity. But remember a lot of people didn't think Yao Ming could play - he was never the best center in the league but was a credible center. Career started late and cut down by injuries but that is what a lot of teams are hoping for when they take a big guy from abroad - quality minutes, few liabilities.

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/m/yao_ming_vs_shaquil…

 

trueblue262

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:30 PM ^

 73 playoff wins, six Eastern Conference Finals appearances (2003–08), six Central Division titles, two Eastern Conference Championships (2004, 2005), and the 2004 NBA Championship

I agree that Darko & Smith were bad ideas, but seriously? This resume is pretty damn good.

Hindsight says he should have retired or walked away after 2009

Blueverine

January 23rd, 2015 at 1:47 PM ^

Which one could you see coming? Or, which one was the higher risk? Can't fault a GM for taking risk, but taking a more proven player like Wade, Anthony or Bosh would have solidified the team with some scoring in subsequent years. And not sure how many GMs were sold on Darko. Hell, all they had to go on was half-games in Europe and a couple solo workouts. Couldn't gauge his toughness which was his true deficiency.

Smith is a proven player, but Dumars tried to jam him into the wrong lineup. Still, it was fixable, albeit expensively.  A better pick than Darko would have provided bench offense, maybe a starter at worst, good trade material.

MGoChippewa

January 23rd, 2015 at 2:05 PM ^

Signing Smith was only horrendous because he was convinced the guy could play SF.  He would've been worth every penny of his deal if they could have wrung ATL-level production out of him.  I'll take the Darko pick, but it's close.  

More subtle moves that I don't think get enough attention for their atrocity: Arron Afflalo (and Walter Sharpe) for a 2nd round pick (which turned into THE Vernon Macklin).  Also, Amir Johnson for Fabricio Oberto.  This is a stretch for a comparison and I realize that, but both of those moves are like if Golden State had traded Draymond Green for cap relief or a late 2nd round pick.

Don

January 23rd, 2015 at 2:07 PM ^

Darko's pre-NBA stats: 48 games, no starts against European competition: i.e., didn't face many big men with athletic abilities the way he would in the US. in college and in the NBA.

On top of that, he was only 18 years old, for fuck's sake. He was a high school kid, basically.

http://www.nba.com/draft2003/profiles/MilicicDarko.html

As far as the fact that he was widely regarded as a worthy high pick goes, one of the reasons good franchises prosper and troubled ones flounder is that the former tend to avoid the herd mentality when it's based on hype, while the latter are gullible.

 

treetown

January 23rd, 2015 at 3:09 PM ^

Darko was taking a shot - the team they were returning that year was a top notch veteran team. Darko if he panned out might have made them a dynasty. Adding Carmelo would have added one more guy who needs to have the ball a lot and needs to shoot a lot - they had that type covered.

Josh Smith was just a desparate move - had to make a move that seems on paper to be OK but everyone else knew it was a gamble.

Joe was a great player but only a good GM - but I'll always like him because he was always very professional in his conduct and demeanor despite often drawing the tough assignments like shadowing Michael Jordan.

copacetic

January 23rd, 2015 at 2:11 PM ^

No question. The Darko thing has been beaten to death, but he was pretty much the consensus number 2. 

Hindsight is 20/20, but based on what everyone saw it didn't seem like that big of a risk. Look at a lot of these quotes from scouts, analysts, and executives back in 2003. Read about his workout in New York. 

 

http://www.detroitbadboys.com/2014/9/24/6841293/rip-hamilton-reaction-darko-milicic-2003-nba-draft

 

The Pistons were also already a contender so they could afford to take a risk with the number 2 pick. And if the Pistons don't draft Darko, but instead Bosh or Melo, do they still make the trade for Rasheed? Maybe, maybe not, but he unquestionably put them over the humph to win the championship. And having Larry Brown didn't do Darko any favors developing.

Josh Smith was historically bad shooting, crammed into the wrong position, when our two best players were both big men, expensive, and how the team is playing after he's gone  speaks for itself. We pretty much were the only ones bidding for Josh when he hit free agency.

The Ben Gordon and CV contracts we're really bad, made even worse that Joe gave up a 1st round pick to get rid of Gordon too!