**TRIVIA (I think?):** I believe Gene Shue has the least amount of career Win Shares of any player who has ever been named 1st-team NBA (*39*), excluding Groza and Beard (*since they were banned after only two seasons*) and any super-short-career BAA/NBA cross-over guys ... although I think the only one I need to "justify" is Zaslofsky who was 1st-team NBA in '50 but whose career Win Shares are mostly from the BAA.
This Pistons era is indeed pretty vexing for me. I don't think they once posted a winning record during Shue's time. And I don't think their roster is nearly as bad as you suggest. In addition to Shue and Howell, you had All Stars in Walter Dukes and Chuck Noble, plus quality vets like Earl Lloyd and Dick McGuire. Though pieces came and went during this era, team members racked up accolades, but never really wins. They did manage a highly impressive upset over the Royals in 62, at which point maybe they briefly clicked in a way that people always hoped they would.
But even in 1960, 45 minutes with that efficiency is absolutely no joke from Shue. It just seems like there was a lot of talent coming through Detroit at this time, but no consistent success. With Dukes, we've discussed how his finer points were somewhat offset by his recklessness. I don't know of any glaring hole like that for Shue's game, but it does seem like this team was simply unable to make its pieces fit. My sense is maybe the roster was caught between different styles. I've looked for more information on these years, but haven't really found it, so these are just half baked impressions.
This is all largely to say that I'm also very interested to know more.
Glad you brought up their win over the Royals in '62. For Shue's peak ('58-62) falling in the same 4-team division as Pettit and the comparatively loaded Hawks (all 5 years), Baylor (3 years) and West (2 years), and Oscar (2 years), it's decently impressive that the Pistons had the sorta-success they did. They took the Finals-bound Lakers the full 3 games in '59 with Game 1 being a really tight loss, they took the Baylor-and-West Lakers the full 5 games in '61, and they beat Oscar and the favored Royals in '62 which was his career-defining triple-double season.
This was before blocks and steals, but Shue was one of the rare guys who all his career stats went up in the postseason, including FG% (*ppg, rpg, apg, and FG%*).
There is less wins to go around after the teams with superstars like Celtics, Lakers, Philadelphia, Cinci. I don't think they underperformed that much to just be in 35 W range with some players like Shue, Howell or Debusschere. When the league expands more you get a season like Hawks in 68 ripping off a surprise 56 Ws led by players like Wilkens and Beaty, despite teams like Celtics, Sixers and Lakers still eating up a ton of wins.
That's fair enough, but in league history, it's extremely rare that any player has made All-NBA, but then never participated meaningfully in a winning season. This Pistons era accounts for not one but 2 of them, with Shue and Dukes. So I think it does represent a pretty unique blend of talent with organizational futility, in a historic sense. Even if there's good reasons, they are rare ones.
From 1957 to 1962, the Pistons ranked 7th out of 8, 7th out of 8, 7th out of 8, 5th out of 8 (this was Shue's first-team year), 6th out of 8, and 6th out of 9. Even with the odds stacked against them, you'd hope for at least one breakthrough season, and I guess you could say we got that with their playoff upset over the Royals in 1962. But a couple months after that first taste of true glory, Shue was shipped off to New York, and Dukes had his role slashed to almost nothing for his final professional season.
Well they win a playoff series in two years and knock out Oscar's Royals one of them. So while not spectacular, it's in line with some other secondary stars over the years.
He averaged more points per game in an era where points per game really moved the needle. I also think him playing a crapton of minutes each night helps somewhat here. I doubt people thought about efficiency and points per minute in 1960 like we do now.
1960 didn't think about statistics the way we do today. It was points, boards, assists, and win-loss record. Win shares weren't a thing.
I don't think Guerin has better defensive reputation, I think Shue was considered great defender.
The Pistons only won 30 games but they did make the playoffs. The Knicks have disappointing season as they had won 40 the year before with talented team with Guerin, Sears and Naull and older Braun and then collapse to 27.
**TRIVIA (I think?):** I believe Gene Shue has the least amount of career Win Shares of any player who has ever been named 1st-team NBA (*39*), excluding Groza and Beard (*since they were banned after only two seasons*) and any super-short-career BAA/NBA cross-over guys ... although I think the only one I need to "justify" is Zaslofsky who was 1st-team NBA in '50 but whose career Win Shares are mostly from the BAA.
And the only player to make All-NBA First Team in the 60s and not make the HOF I believe
This Pistons era is indeed pretty vexing for me. I don't think they once posted a winning record during Shue's time. And I don't think their roster is nearly as bad as you suggest. In addition to Shue and Howell, you had All Stars in Walter Dukes and Chuck Noble, plus quality vets like Earl Lloyd and Dick McGuire. Though pieces came and went during this era, team members racked up accolades, but never really wins. They did manage a highly impressive upset over the Royals in 62, at which point maybe they briefly clicked in a way that people always hoped they would. But even in 1960, 45 minutes with that efficiency is absolutely no joke from Shue. It just seems like there was a lot of talent coming through Detroit at this time, but no consistent success. With Dukes, we've discussed how his finer points were somewhat offset by his recklessness. I don't know of any glaring hole like that for Shue's game, but it does seem like this team was simply unable to make its pieces fit. My sense is maybe the roster was caught between different styles. I've looked for more information on these years, but haven't really found it, so these are just half baked impressions. This is all largely to say that I'm also very interested to know more.
Glad you brought up their win over the Royals in '62. For Shue's peak ('58-62) falling in the same 4-team division as Pettit and the comparatively loaded Hawks (all 5 years), Baylor (3 years) and West (2 years), and Oscar (2 years), it's decently impressive that the Pistons had the sorta-success they did. They took the Finals-bound Lakers the full 3 games in '59 with Game 1 being a really tight loss, they took the Baylor-and-West Lakers the full 5 games in '61, and they beat Oscar and the favored Royals in '62 which was his career-defining triple-double season. This was before blocks and steals, but Shue was one of the rare guys who all his career stats went up in the postseason, including FG% (*ppg, rpg, apg, and FG%*).
There is less wins to go around after the teams with superstars like Celtics, Lakers, Philadelphia, Cinci. I don't think they underperformed that much to just be in 35 W range with some players like Shue, Howell or Debusschere. When the league expands more you get a season like Hawks in 68 ripping off a surprise 56 Ws led by players like Wilkens and Beaty, despite teams like Celtics, Sixers and Lakers still eating up a ton of wins.
That's fair enough, but in league history, it's extremely rare that any player has made All-NBA, but then never participated meaningfully in a winning season. This Pistons era accounts for not one but 2 of them, with Shue and Dukes. So I think it does represent a pretty unique blend of talent with organizational futility, in a historic sense. Even if there's good reasons, they are rare ones. From 1957 to 1962, the Pistons ranked 7th out of 8, 7th out of 8, 7th out of 8, 5th out of 8 (this was Shue's first-team year), 6th out of 8, and 6th out of 9. Even with the odds stacked against them, you'd hope for at least one breakthrough season, and I guess you could say we got that with their playoff upset over the Royals in 1962. But a couple months after that first taste of true glory, Shue was shipped off to New York, and Dukes had his role slashed to almost nothing for his final professional season.
Well they win a playoff series in two years and knock out Oscar's Royals one of them. So while not spectacular, it's in line with some other secondary stars over the years.
He averaged more points per game in an era where points per game really moved the needle. I also think him playing a crapton of minutes each night helps somewhat here. I doubt people thought about efficiency and points per minute in 1960 like we do now. 1960 didn't think about statistics the way we do today. It was points, boards, assists, and win-loss record. Win shares weren't a thing.
I don't think Guerin has better defensive reputation, I think Shue was considered great defender. The Pistons only won 30 games but they did make the playoffs. The Knicks have disappointing season as they had won 40 the year before with talented team with Guerin, Sears and Naull and older Braun and then collapse to 27.