A report from the Palace of Auburn Hills, where the Pistons faced the Magic on Dec. 29. Integrating Allen Iverson into Detroit's offense is an ongoing process that hasn't been easy, and Michael Curry isn't done trying new things. Earlier this month he seemed to settle on a "smallball" lineup featuring three guards and Tayshaun Prince playing out of position at power forward, but that's left the Pistons exposed on the defensive end.
More recently, injuries to both Iverson (who missed the second half on Dec. 23) and Rip Hamilton (who's sat out the last two games completely) have forced the team back to a more traditional lineup, and considering the Pistons have responded with four straight wins, including Monday night against the Magic, Curry seems ready to explore moving one of his established perimeter players to the bench.
"The big lineup makes us better defensively," Curry said. "And at the end of the day, we're going to have to make sure we're good enough defensively."
The "big lineup" Detroit started Monday's game with featured Amir Johnson at power forward, allowing Prince to slide back to his natural small forward position. Despite foul trouble, Johnson was productive with seven rebounds, two blocked shots and several hustle plays that created extra possessions for Detroit.
When asked if he anticipated going back to his smallball lineup once Hamilton was ready to return, Curry refused to commit, saying he'd "look at it game-by-game" and make a decision based on how well he thought a lineup would match up on defense. And as he's now ready to admit, the idea of bringing one of your best players off the bench for the sake of a balanced rotation is hardly foreign."We've looked at our lineup at different times and we've thought about different guys possibly coming off the bench, but we haven't made a decision on that," Curry said. "That's kind of a tough decision.
"But we look around and ... we look at teams that have done it and it's pretty effective. I think the Lakers with Lamar Odom it's effective for them, Kirilenko in Utah has been really effective, and same thing with Ginobili in San Antonio. So it can be effective, and whether it is any of our perimeter guys, one of them coming off the bench, maybe we'll have to look at it. But we'll just cross that bridge when we get to it."
Just when will the Pistons cross that bridge? The fact that he's openly talking about it as a possibility leads me to think it'll happen as soon as Hamilton is ready to return.
Earlier this month I asked Curry if he'd thought about benching Iverson for Stuckey (which, to be honest, seemed more plausible than simply starting three guards and playing four players out of position) and he looked at me like I was crazy. But last night? He admitted in front of a dozen reporters and a couple of television cameras that it's not only a possibility but perhaps inevitable, at least so long as defense is a priority.
Curry was careful not to specify which player might head to the bench, but if a move is made, I'd be shocked if it were any player but Iverson. Hamilton struggles to create his own shot, so it'd be pointless to ask him to anchor the second-unit. Plus, Stuckey and Iverson each thrive at getting to the rim, so it makes sense to separate those two.
Wouldn't Iverson balk at moving to the bench? It's tough to say (and he managed to avoid being asked that question Monday night by speaking to the media before Curry opened this can of worms). Iverson, who was Detroit's fourth-leading scorer last night with 15 points, commented after the game how his current situation was so unlike any other he's been in during his career, but that he enjoys winning more than being the top scoring option. "Usually when I have a game and I have 15, or even 20 points, I felt like that, that's a bad game for me," Iverson said. "So this is different. It's a different feeling. But it's a good feeling. It says a lot about the personnel that we have on the squad."
"I feel good right now. I feel good now," he said while smiling when asked if he was comfortable not carrying the load. "It's just looking at the bigger picture. I've had four scoring titles and I've scored over 23,000 points, I've had 50 point games, a 60 point game. I've [done] a lot of things when it comes to scoring the basketball, but you know, I just have a bigger goal. Those things don't mean much to me like they used to. Early in my career, you score 50 point games, you can't sleep at night because you're so happy you're able to accomplish something like that. That stuff don't, I don't get up for that stuff anymore. I'd rather have five points, 10 points or even no points and win the basketball game and it's still the same feeling I get when I score 50 points."
If you take his comments at face value, it seems like he'd welcome a move to the bench if it benefited the team as a whole ... but if he's visibly agitated not playing the fourth quarter, would he really be happy sitting out the first?
That's what Curry needs to find out, and it's what Curry seemed to be laying the groundwork for in Monday's post-game comments.
Comments (Page 1 of 1)
I think Iverson can buy into being the 6th man if Detroit is winning. I can see Curry and Dumars selling it to AI as a challenge, lead the second unit, be a team leader, that kind of thing. I saw the press conference with AI tonight and he looked a bit in shock, like he didn't know how to feel, only getting 15 points but still playing well (6 reb, 4 ast, 3 stl, 0 to) in a win.
I'm starting to feel good about Curry, like he's been adjusting as well. Afflalo and Amir are getting minutes, Maxiell is effective in spots, the team is winning. All of a sudden all of the things that Curry was getting criticized for are disappearing and all that is left is good basketball. If a coach can subtract all the bad things from his team, that's a good coach.
Look, I've been watching Allen play since he came into the league. And, he's made one thing certain. He'd rather retire than to come off the bench. He's one of the elite scorers in NBA history. I don't care if he says he's happy with not scoring, because he's not. Obviously, he would like to score 25+ points and have his team win, than rather score 15-18 points and win. I can't see him coming off the bench. He's one of the greatest players ever, and the Pistons want him coming off the bench? I thought they traded for him because they wanted him to play like himself. Well, if he's coming off the bench, that's not Allen Iverson esque. If anybody shoot sit, it should be Richard Hamilton. The Pistons have played fine without him. In fact, they might have even played better without him in the line-up. If Michael Curry is smart he'll keep Allen in the starting lineup, and give Hamilton the sixth man role.
I agree, it has to be Rip. The Pistons have played better without Rip. And when you look at the games they won, it's because sheed and iverson played well not Rip. I like Rip, but stuckey and Ai give the pistons attacking guards, which was the whole point of the trade.
Natalie, sounds like you think AI should be a starter purely based on previous accomplishments, as opposed to what's best for the team? Actually, I think he would thrive in a 6th-man role if only his ego would allow it. I remember several years ago where AI came off the bench returning from injury and threw a huge tantrum about it, and about how an all-star like himself should never come off the bench. The next day, Popovich brought Tim Duncan off the bench for the Spurs as he was returning from injury as well. Not a single complaint.... guess which player has 4 rings?
No, he deserves to be a starter. I see no reason as to why he should be coming off the bench. The Pistons traded FOR HIM, did they not? If they don't want him starting, then they should have just kept Chauncey Billups. Allen Iverson gives the Pistons a lot of advantages, because he draws a lot of attention. The best thing for the Pistons, is for him to start. They've played better defensively and have won games with this lineup. So, why change it?
The way it's looking now, AI will be gone once his contract expires. He was "the answer" elsewhere . . . but not in Detroit. If he comes to Detroit, he plays for Detroit. I don't care what numbers he's racked up in his career and neither does the Pistons organization. The contract is in Dumars' hands - not Iverson's. He needs the Pistons far more than the Pistons need him.
I want Rip to start.
I think you missed the point of the article. True, Iverson was traded for Billups, but the team was loosing with him at the point. Hence the necessity to insert Stuckey in the starting lineup, move AI to the two, and go small-ball. So the question now is when Rip comes back from injury, should they A) bring Rip off the bench? B) bring AI off the bench? or C) go back to small-ball? As the article states, Rip's game is ill-suited for a bench role, unlike Iverson who can create his own offense. Now, if you believe they should go back to small-ball because they were playing well and it's good basketball strategy for this team, then fine-- go ahead and make that point. But you keep saying that he should start because "he deserves it" and "why else did they trade for him" and "he'd rather retire than to come off the bench". None of those are basketball arguments. Those are all Iverson-humongous-ego reasons, and that's what I have a problem with.
Matt, Iverson is not coming off the bench. I think you're reasoning is flawed on this subject. Curry has already said that Iverson needs to play 38-40 minutes per game, what sense does it make to not start him, have him come in at the 4 minute mark of the 1st quarter or so and then play him the rest of the game?
There is no chance that Iverson is going to the bench and playing 30 mpg. In order for him to be effective he has to be in the flow of the game. He's a dribble-drive player, an isolation player, not a shooter that can come in and start jacking up shots.
If anyone is going to come off the bench it would have to be Rip. And he would be playing both the SG and SF positions, in order to get his 32 mpg. Stuckey has to start and get his 36 mpg. He can't go back to getting 25-28 mpg.
I would be extremely surprised and disappointed if Curry decided to bring AI off the bench. It just doesn't make any sense at all.
And let's be clear, since Curry decided to try small ball, the Pistons offense has clicked and the team looks a lot better. Sure, it's not going to work in the playoffs by itself, but it can be honed as a potent weapon.The stats don't lie, and the small ball lineup has been the most effective 5-man unit the Pistons have played this season.
Still, no matter what you say, I'm right. You can't convince me, so quit trying. Allen Iverson is not coming off the bench. Period. The end. Move on. He will start, AND should start, because of recent results. Richard Hamilton's game has been hurt the most since Iverson was traded to the Pistons, so I'm sure HE wouldn't mind coming off the bench for more production.
Haha, Natalie, a bit touchy for someone posting on comment boards? I don't care if you're convinced or not, but was hoping you might counter with some basketball reasoning other than he-must-start-because-he's-AI-period-final-nyah. That's OK, I saw some good arguments from Dave.
Dave, I disagree that AI can't be effective coming off the bench. See Iverson's line from the Milwaukee game where he came off the bench. Played only 27+ minutes but let the team in scoring and assists. (Small sample size, but at least it shows the possibility, no?)
The point I am trying to make with all my comments on this thread is that the BIGGEST obstacle with Iverson coming off the bench are not basketball reasons. It's his ego.
If it's some basketball reasoning, then fine. The Pistons are winning with AI in the starting lineup, and Hamilton not in the starting line-up. The most important thing in this league is playing good defense and winning. It seems to me as if the Pistons have accomplished this in the past few games without Hamilton. It's not my fault that you can't see clearly. Allen is a winner, and he helps this team win by starting. He's not taking too many shots. He's leading the Pistons in assists, steals and points. You want him coming off the bench? Are you serious?
Seems to me outstanding basketball players can score in any quarter; 1-4 whether he starts or comes off the bench. The only thing limiting their offensive abilities, besides having off nights which they all do, is their mindset. If the mindset is bathed in ego 'i'm too good to come off the bench' or it's an insult, he pretty much will be useless. However, if he says 'every moment that i'm on the court i'm going to play my game within the team concept', if that's possible, this will greatly benefit the team. Some players who adjusted from being starters were Bill Walton in Boston, Gary Payton in Miami, Tim Duncan when he was hurt, and Ginobli is still coming off the bench. Oh yes, they all have championships.
I'm not saying A I should come off the bench (so far this current lineup seems to be the best; maybe it should stay the same for now) but the Pistons have more than half a season to work out the kinks and get back to championship caliber. Both he and Rip are starters. However, one of them definetly needs to anchor that second unit. Rip already has a championship; A I is still seeking one. If Allen wants that ring, he needs to be on board if the coach wants him to come of the bench. This may be his final chance to get the gold. A I's future with Detroit depends on his mindset and his play in the postseason. However, his contract is in Joe D's hands.