Cade Cunningham

[logic]

I'm looking to the general board here for opinions on Cade Cunningham. I am on some Pistons boards and the vast majority are convinced that Cade is 'him' (I personally hate this term) and will be an All-Star and All-NBA, if not this season then very soon. I do understand that most will not have seen much of him as the Pistons, well, suck so they get few televised games and even when they are playing your team it is a scheduled win and you may turn it off early unless you are really interested in how the end of your bench looks. Additionally, he has missed a lot of time; almost his entire second of three seasons and even the other two he has yet to crack 65 games. So, I get you may not have much material to base your opinion on, but I am interested in perception outside the Pistons homers.

My take is that there is no doubt that Cade is currently the best player on the Pistons. But is that just being the tallest midget? Not really, he is actually very good, but I don't think the is the #1 on a team that will compete for a championship. He has yet to show that he makes players around him better or has an impact on winning despite putting up flashy stats. Last year the Pistons win percentage was actually better when he was out, but, yeah, okay that is a tremendously small sample size since they only won 14 games. Cade prefers to play the point in a slow, methodical manner, kind of like Luka. The problem is Luka is a serious outlier and the NBA is generally much faster and Cade is not Luka. The homers all say this is because his surrounding cast has been so bad, and there is merit to that. And last season Monty had no plays and no plan. But when Cade is out the team plays much faster with better ball movement as a team with freak athletes like Ivey, Ausar, Duren, and now Holland should.

Cade did have a breakout year last year with good scoring and top 10 assists. His stats are very similar to Banchero who was an All Star and in the playoffs. So, is this where Cade is if he has better running mates? His stats were also similar to RJ Barrett's who looks good on paper, but really has little impact on the W column. I like Cade and think he will be very good player for the Pistons, but I don't yet see him leading this team to anything further than a mid-level playoff team if he is our best player. What are your thoughts?

 

[Gman]

The Celtics will trade you Jordan Walsh, the rights to Al Horford after this season, and a 2nd round pick for him.

 

[logic]

The Celtics will trade you Jordan Walsh, the rights to Al Horford after this season, and a 2nd round pick for him.

As crazy as that trade is the Pistons homes would insist he is worth Brown and Tatum, but you may have to throw in some picks too since they are older.

 

[Wamu]

The Celtics will trade you Jordan Walsh, the rights to Al Horford after this season, and a 2nd round pick for him.

 

[logic]

The Celtics will trade you Jordan Walsh, the rights to Al Horford after this season, and a 2nd round pick for him.

If we made that trade and the Celtics won the championship the Detroit homers would also say that they won because of Cade and you can now see it was just the awful team that was holding him back. They've done it with Stafford. Great on the fantasy team, but does he get the team the W?

 

[Mebert]

If we made that trade and the Celtics won the championship the Detroit homers would also say that they won because of Cade and you can now see it was just the awful team that was holding him back. They've done it with Stafford. Great on the fantasy team, but does he get the team the W?

You mean the Stafford that won the Superbowl after he left? Crazy that people might think the Lions had been holding him back.

 

[logic]

You mean the Stafford that won the Superbowl after he left? Crazy that people might think the Lions had been holding him back.

No, I mean the Stafford that went to a team that had just been to the superbowl and gets the credit for the team being good. Like if Cade went to the Celtics, Miami, or Bucks and won a title and got credit for them being good. Yes, they are both very good players and put up fantasy numbers, but do they really make guys around them better and impact winning?

 

[Mebert]

No, I mean the Stafford that went to a team that had just been to the superbowl and gets the credit for the team being good. Like if Cade went to the Celtics, Miami, or Bucks and won a title and got credit for them being good. Yes, they are both very good players and put up fantasy numbers, but do they really make guys around them better and impact winning?

So the guy that in the Superbowl lost 4 of his top 6 receivers and had a team put up less than 50 rushing yards on 23 attempts, Yet still kept the offense alive and threw a no look pass for 25 yards that maybe 2 other qbs could have thrown?

Feels like we may be talking about the same guy here.

 

[logic]

So the guy that in the Superbowl lost 4 of his top 6 receivers and had a team put up less than 50 rushing yards on 23 attempts, Yet still kept the offense alive and threw a no look pass for 25 yards that maybe 2 other qbs could have thrown?

Feels like we may be talking about the same guy here.

Yes, just like if Cade went to the Celtics I'm sure he would make a play that looks amazing on the way to winning a ring, even if 'Zinger was out.

 

[Mebert]

Yes, just like if Cade went to the Celtics I'm sure he would make a play that looks amazing on the way to winning a ring, even if 'Zinger was out.

Celtics are a poor comp, they won it without him already. For a similar comparison he would need to go to the Mavericks or Heat and then win it.

 

[Shanemansj13]

It seems he improved quite a bit last season and took a nice step. The next step is an All-Star and play-in IMO. That's what those types of players do, takeover the team. Not saying they need to get 50 wins but a play-in would be a nice step.