If Ben Wallace is the “better” player, than everyone should expect to see him as the starting center and playing 25+ minutes a game, yes?

I think not. Kwame and Chris will be doing that.

35 year old Ben Wallace with no spring and still no offense to speak of, I just don’t see the fascination.

But make no mistake about it, I hope he can provide something other than warming the bench, but as I’ve watched over the past two seasons, Ben should not be a part of a NBA rotation.

If the numbers suggest that Ben Wallace is “still one of the top-tier defensive and rebounding big men in the league” then the Pistons should win 50+ games and challenge the Cavs, Celtics and Magic in the East.

You’re cherry picking both my comments and the statistics.

The statistics I posted are either 1) per-minute production or 2) per 36 minute totals. In order for Ben to bring the Pistons from a .500 team to a contender, he’d need to play 35+ minutes per game and increase his productivity to pre-Chicago levels.

I’ve never argued for either of those. Ben won’t play that many minutes, and his production won’t increase; in fact, it will probably decrease a little more.

I certainly don’t. The statistics/numbers fail to paint an accurate picture and Pistons fans will just have to be satisfied with a 34-41 win team (at best) for the next few seasons.

BS. You’re reading the wrong statistics. Try these on for size. Try these on for size. Or perhaps these.. And one more time for good measure. We lost our biggest producer of wins in McDyess; Big Ben won’t produce that much, but neither will Wilcox, CV, or Gordon. I’ve been saying that since we signed them.

About the only statistical metric I can think of that suggests the Pistons will be better off than they were last season is PER, and I don’t put a whole lot of stock in PER.

So, although I don’t agree with your comment about statistics, I think you’re probably right about next season’s team: our ceiling is at or just above the .500 mark.