WolvinLA2

February 18th, 2016 at 2:51 PM ^

Sure, a low pick could be Kahwi Leonard, but they're probably a totally replaceable guy or someone who takes 3 years until they're ready for prime time. Might as well get a couple proven commodities instead. Who is the last

Take a look and who was drafted 17-24 or so the last few years and tell me how many of those guys you'd rather have than these two.

WolvinLA2

February 18th, 2016 at 3:08 PM ^

Extremely unlikely it was 12. If the season ended today it would be 16 (last lottery pick) but we just added Harris and record-wise we're much closer to the teams ahead of us than the team's behind us. The Pistons will almost certainly make the playoffs and they'll have a better record than 2-3 other teams who do. That puts us right around 20.

Michigan4Life

February 18th, 2016 at 3:06 PM ^

I don't think it's that bad since its top 8 protected and the Pistons should be in the playoff. The fact that 5 core players are 25 and under which means they really don't need another young player. It's a good move considering DMo is solid and is a RFA after this season. They're upgrading the middle of the roster which is a good thing. They have potential to be one of the top team in the ECF.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

WolvinLA2

February 18th, 2016 at 2:32 PM ^

Right, which might last forever or might not. About as risky as the 20th or so pick ending up being any good. Worst case scenario you get Thornton who is at least as good as the pick, I think. That's if DM totally doesn't work out.

That's a whole lot bet eye than worst case scenario if you don't make the trade - you don't have Thornton and your pick is a bust. I say take Thornton and roll the dice that DM gets healthy.

ijohnb

February 18th, 2016 at 2:31 PM ^

he thinks they can make a run at the ECF this year.  They are not beating Cleveland but if they make a push here and get a decent seed they could beat anybody else.  Toronto, Atlanta, Chicago, blah.  If the Pistons get this thing clicking they have the talent to beat any of those teams in a 7 game series.  One moderately deep playoff run and this entire State will go Pistons crazy again.  We are fareweather when it comes to the Stones but when we are board we are REALLY on board.

ijohnb

February 18th, 2016 at 2:49 PM ^

think that has anything to do with it.  Yeah, I think attendance would be a little better in Detroit when they sucked because people would just make it part of a "night out" on the town but it would not make the actual fan base any stronger.  You Tube some of the games from the 04 and 05 Finals.  That place was absolutely electric.  The Pistons should play in the Palace of Auburn Hills.
 

jmblue

February 18th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^

Historically, the Pistons were one of the worst-supported franchises in the league when they were in the city of Detroit.  Their attendance spiked up once they moved to the Silverdome and remained very high for a long time when they moved to the Palace.

I think things are different now and fans will come downtown to see them, if they're good.  But if they're mediocre, I don't think it matters if they're in Detroit or Auburn Hills.  

NBA franchises in general tend to have more bandwagon fans than the other leagues.  Baseball can sell the experience of going to a game in the nice weather.  NFL home games are relatively rare events, happening only eight times.  The NHL seems able to form a hard core fanbase in each (non-Sun Belt) city that shows up to all the games.  But the NBA seems to have a harder time motivating fans to come to 41 home games a year if the team isn't good.  

 

 

mgofro

February 18th, 2016 at 3:18 PM ^

Historically, the Pistons were one of the worst-supported franchises in the league when they were in the city of Detroit. Their attendance spiked up once they moved to the Silverdome and remained very high for a long time when they moved to the Palace.

That's because they played at Cobo Hall and were a very bad team (in their first 27 years in Detroit, they only had three winning seasons). Plus you can't really compare the NBA of the 70's to now. 

Pepto Bismol

February 18th, 2016 at 3:55 PM ^

But don't oversell the rabid hockey fanbase.  The Red Wings have been great for so long, it's hard to know what we have here.  Before drafting Yzerman and shooting up the standings, the Wings were crap and NOBODY went to hockey games. 

If Detroit goes in the tank for few years, I think you'd find the same fair-weather attitude out of our hockey fans.

Pepto Bismol

February 18th, 2016 at 4:21 PM ^

But I remember NHL powers Chicago Blackhawks and Boston Bruins playing in front of empty seats as recently as 06-07.  These are Original 6 franchises and top US sports markets and they coudn't draw fans if their life depended on it.  New owner and a couple cups and now they're top-5 in attendance.

Everything is peachy right now in Detroit, but look at those two.  Bad owner, bad team, lots of losses and nobody cared anymore. 

We've had Ilitch and Playoffs for a quarter century.  How could we have any idea?  But look around the league and you'll see - American sports fans don't much care for losing hockey.

 

mgofro

February 18th, 2016 at 3:59 PM ^

And I'm telling you that Detroit is more centrally located and would do a better job at supporting the Pistons even when they are not winning.

It would never be this bad (the team is actually playing well this year) if they played in Detroit.

ijohnb

February 18th, 2016 at 4:05 PM ^

actually think it would be.  You have to remember, when the Pistons are bad they don't even get the benefit of the one star player that signed here for the money that people will just come to see play even if the team stinks.  When the Pistons are bad they are very bad.

jmblue

February 18th, 2016 at 4:06 PM ^

Your claim is impossible to prove.  I submit that NBA fans in general tend not to support mediocre teams (and the Pistons, at 27-27, qualify as mediocre), so it's not surprising that the Palace isn't full.  The fact that the Palace is also larger than a typical arena (22.076) doesn't help matters.

 

 

 

snarling wolverine

February 18th, 2016 at 5:51 PM ^

Downtown Detroit is the historic core and all, but it's not really that centrally located, as far as the ticketbuying public is concerned.  The best location in that regard would probably be around Royal Oak or Ferndale.

The best argument for building an arena downtown is to help the city.  While the impact of sports teams on urban development is overstated, in the case of Detroit I do think it would bring some important business downtown.

 

 

mgofro

February 18th, 2016 at 3:13 PM ^

They are the DETROIT Pistons not Auburn Hills Pistons. The new arena going up in Detroit is gonna be the best in the country when its finished (the unique deconstructed design is already being copied by LA for their new stadium). Basketball is an urban game, which is why most teams (Milwaukee, Sacramento and San Francisco) are building their new arenas close to downtown. Fans (especially the millennial crowd) want an urban setting for pre and post game activities. The Palace is still a good building, but the location sucks. Making the trip for a weekday game is huge pain in the ass for anyone in Washtenaw and SE Michigan.

WolvinLA2

February 18th, 2016 at 3:18 PM ^

Basketball may be an urban game in terms of who plays it, but not in terms of who attends. Most attendees are corporate season ticket holders and families taking their kids. And even many millennials, which don't account for as many ticket holders as you think, live in Oakland county (RO, Ferndale, etc). I would guess more than half of the people at any given Pistons game live in Oakland of Macomb county. And for people coming in from Flint, Saginaw, or Lansing, Auburn Hills is easier as well.

ijohnb

February 18th, 2016 at 4:10 PM ^

2.  The Tigers have been good for the last four years

3.  The Lions play in the NFL, the most popular sports league on the planet.

The Pistons have been terrible, like the worst franchise in the league-terrible for like 5 years before Van Gundy.  If you want to say they would have gotten, on balance, 1,500 more fans on any given Tuesday for a game I would buy it but moving to Detroit would not completely change the entire dynamic of the organization and the fan base.  The owner of the team owns the building and it is a great venue that has history and has been the home of legendary teams.  Why move?

WolvinLA2

February 18th, 2016 at 5:02 PM ^

I agree with ijohnb. The Wings are the Wings, the Tigers are good and the Lions play in the NFL. I'll also add that the Lions play almost exclusively on Sundays, making it much easier to travel a little more if you need to. For a game that is played on a Tuesday night and ends pretty late, you want something closer to home, especially if you have kids. Most of the people going to the Pistons games live north of 8 mile, so Auburn Hills is more convenient.

snarling wolverine

February 18th, 2016 at 6:06 PM ^

Making the trip for a weekday game is huge pain in the ass for anyone in Washtenaw and SE Michigan.

How are you defining "SE Michigan"? For people in Oakland and Macomb counties (which have a combined population of 2 million), the Palace's location is pretty good.  I'm guessing the majority of ticketholders for all the Detroit teams come from those two counties.  

I think it might be nice for the city of Detroit to have another pro sports team, but I'm not sure it'd make a huge difference in terms of attendance.  As others have said, basketball fans in general tend to be more fairweather.

 

Last of the Me…

February 18th, 2016 at 7:26 PM ^

I do think you miss out on the Toledo market with the Palace. I know plenty of people from Toledo with season tickets to the Red Wings, Tigers and Lions. That being said, it’s not worth moving them for that market but I think would add at least some season ticket holders.