Tiebreaker scenarios for the playoffs, how to judge the Pistons season and what the off-season might entail are on the menu in this week’s edition of Pistons Mailbag.

Steven (@steven_welling): Can you go over the tiebreaker scenarios the Pistons have with Indiana, Chicago and Washington in case there ends up some form of tie?

Langlois: Indiana and Washington have clinched the season series with the Pistons, the Pacers 3-1 and Washington 3-0 with one game remaining between the teams, April 8, at The Palace. The Pistons lead Chicago 2-1 with one game left, April 2, at Chicago. Should the Bulls win that game and the teams end the regular season with the same records, they’d go to the next tiebreaker. Because they’re in the same division, that would be divisional record. As of today, the Pistons are 8-6 against Central Division teams and the Bulls are 7-5. The Pistons have two divisional games remaining – the one at Chicago and the regular-season finale at Cleveland April 13. The Bulls have four games left against divisional teams – one against each of the four others. In addition to the April 2 game with the Pistons at Chicago, the Bulls host Cleveland April 9; they travel to Indiana on Tuesday and to Milwaukee April 3. Should the Pistons and Bulls split their season series and wind up with the same divisional record, the next step would be conference record. Going into tonight’s games, the Pistons are 23-20 in Eastern Conference games, the Bulls 21-21. The Pistons would do themselves a world of good by winning on April 2. But it’s not going to be easy. They host Dallas the previous night while Chicago, after playing at Houston on March 31, will be off and back in Chicago waiting on the Pistons.

Pistons 37-34 (@DETsports_): Do you think we will make a splash in free agency besides re-signing Andre Drummond? Any other names on our radar?

Langlois: It won’t be a tidal wave. It might not even get you wet. They’re going to add players to the roster this summer via some fashion. Their needs are a backup point guard and a power forward to fit into the mix so they’ll have lineup flexibility against teams that play big – or what not so long ago was a conventional lineup. I think Stan Van Gundy is A-OK starting Marcus Morris and Tobias Harris at the two forward spots, but if he can land a player in their ballpark – and I’m not talking about similar skill set, but a player of relatively similar impact or close enough to it – then he’d have the ability to mix and match depending on matchups or need. He thought he’d solved that with the trade that brought in Donatas Motiejunas from Houston before the Pistons rescinded the deal due to health concerns. Motiejunas checked off a lot of boxes: his age, 25, fit the timeline of the Pistons core; he was a 7-footer who could play power forward but also play center and give the Pistons a lineup with five perimeter threats; and Van Gundy saw him as a solid or better team defender. They might not find another player who fits all of those categories. But finding someone who can defend bigger power forwards will be high on the list. And if that player can step away from the basket and offer floor spacing, too, that’s a bonus. If I had to speculate, based on Van Gundy saying the past two off-seasons have taught the Pistons they’re more likely to find their solution in the trade market, I’d guess they try to meet their needs through trade more likely than free agency.

Posa (@insp3CT0rb4c0n1): It’s wrong to consider this season a failure even without the playoffs, barring a Pistons meltdown. A 42-40 record hasn’t missed the postseason since 2005.

Langlois: I reject most black-and-white assessments, so calling the season a “failure” if the Pistons don’t make the playoffs would be absurd. Disappointing? Of course. If ever you’re not disappointed by falling short of the playoffs, you’re not fully engaged. But the Pistons have 37 wins with 11 games to play. Last year, Brooklyn was a playoff team with 38 wins; the year before, Atlanta was a playoff team with 38 wins; the year before, Milwaukee was a playoff team with 38 wins. There have been five seasons since 2006 when three teams with .500 or worse records made the playoffs from the Eastern Conference. They’ve increased last season’s win total by five already – with 11 more opportunities to better it still – and have gotten younger in the process. They have one of the five youngest starting units in the NBA and only one of them, Reggie Jackson, has ever played in a postseason game. They’re experiencing a playoff race for the first time and that surely will benefit them in some capacity in seasons ahead. So, yeah, someone trying to stir things up on talk radio or looking to generate internet clicks can stomp their feet and proclaim the season a failure if they miss the playoffs because black-or-white arguments are encouraged these days. I run from those who play that game. It’s a nuanced world. It helps to cope with living in it if you start with that acknowledgement.

Steve (Grand Rapids, Mich.): Hack-a-Drummond was very effective when the Pistons lost to Atlanta. Andre doesn’t seem to be improving at the free-throw line. It’s frustrating to watch an 11-point lead dissolve. Shouldn’t Stan go with Aron Baynes when opposing teams do this?

Langlois: He often does. Drummond treaded water against Atlanta. He hit 8 of 17 for the game, better than his season average. During the most intense stretch of intentional fouling, the fourth quarter, he hit 50 percent – 6 of 12. That’s right at the edge of what Van Gundy wants from him in those situations. If you can score just a little more than one point per possession, which equates to maybe 55 percent foul shooting, you effectively foil the strategy. The real problem in that game was defense. The Pistons scored 114 points. They lost because they gave up 118. Atlanta was scoring well more than a point per possession. Van Gundy ultimately couldn’t afford to keep Drummond in the game even as he was making 50 percent of his foul shots. As it was, Van Gundy did bring Baynes in for the last 3:51 of that game with the Pistons trailing 106-104. Atlanta scored the game’s next seven points. So the game effectively was decided while Drummond was on the bench. That’s the tightrope Van Gundy has to walk. You can’t both play your only All-Star and sit your worst foul shooter. It’s a dilemma that – unless the NBA enacts meaningful rules change – can only be solved by Drummond improving at the line.

Tony (Warren, Mich.): I was putting some thought into what stretch four or five players around the league would fit Detroit best. Then I thought of Kelly Olynyk. Of course, we would have to give up something of substance in a trade. Might Boston be open to offers?

Langlois: Danny Ainge, like Stan Van Gundy and Jeff Bower with the Pistons, has shown a willingness to deal. The best guess as to what Boston’s next move will look like, though, is combining assets from a deep bench and a trove of draft choices to land a big fish. Unless the Pistons are putting Andre Drummond on the table, I don’t know that there’d be a fit with these teams. Boston could wind up with a top-three draft pick – Brooklyn’s – and also owns Brooklyn’s 2018 unprotected No. 1 pick plus the right to swap picks with the Nets in 2017. So it’s not so much an issue of Olynyk being available as it is the difficulty in seeing how the Celtics and Pistons would match needs. But it’s interesting to ponder how the Pistons might be approaching the point where they’re about to shift gears, too. Read on.

Alex (Center Line, Mich.): Stan Van Gundy said recently that the first two summers of free agency have taught him that the Pistons probably are better off going the trade route to build the roster. What do you expect them to do this off-season?

Langlois: The nearly two years of the Van Gundy administration have taught us that his front office acts swiftly. Look at last July 1. The Pistons, by Van Gundy’s admission, targeted two unrestricted free agents at small forward, presumably Danny Green and DeMarre Carroll, but when both struck deals in the opening hours of free agency, the Pistons moved before the day was over to add Marcus Morris in a deal that was consummated within hours of proposal. That speaks to their processes. They’re confident that they have their homework done on every player in the NBA. When something comes to them, they put their heads together – a group of about 10 that includes Van Gundy, Jeff Bower, the three assistant GMs, four pro scouts and a few other key front-office employees – and debate the merits. Van Gundy inherited two core assets (Andre Drummond, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, though the latter has really become that under Van Gundy more so than being one at the time) and a few others (Brandon Jennings, Josh Smith, Greg Monroe) that were in wait-and-see mode to gauge how the roster fit. Monroe dictated his future and left as a free agent. Jennings was playing his way into the long-term future when injury struck him down. Smith was bought out before the 30-game mark. Now, in a series of moves that should have Van Gundy in consideration for Executive of the Year, he’s added four other core pieces – Reggie Jackson, Stanley Johnson, Morris and Tobias Harris – at the cost of three future second-round picks, two players (Jennings, Ilyasova) who did not have long-term deals and the exercising of the only first-round pick Van Gundy has had since taking the reins of the franchise. It’s possible – I wouldn’t predict it for this off-season yet, but it’s possible – that Van Gundy will begin to combine some of those assets now to make a bold move for a player he sees as an upgrade. The Pistons, in reality, have already put their cards on the table in one respect by sending a protected first-round pick to Houston in the aborted trade for Donatas Motiejunas. It shouldn’t surprise anyone if they wind up trading their first-round pick this summer for a player who Van Gundy sees as completing the roster in the way he envisioned Motiejunas doing so.

Nicholas (Novi, Mich.): I was hoping to get your take on whom you believe the Pistons should take with their first-round draft pick. This question obviously depends on where they fall on draft night, but let’s assume they make the playoffs and don’t get a lottery pick. I currently attend Michigan State so am admittedly biased to some degree, but I truly believe Denzel Valentine would be a perfect fit. Haven’t NBA minds learned their lesson with Draymond Green? His lack of foot speed and athleticism made it tough for experts to believe he could play small forward. The main similarity between the two is they just know how to play basketball. They both spent four years developing and learning under the best coach in the nation and understand how to utilize their “questionable” size to create matchup advantages over opponents.

Langlois: I got asked whom the Pistons would draft in 2016 within a few days of their selection of Stanley Johnson last season and played along, picking out Gonzaga’s Domantas Sabonis. I’d seen about three minutes of him in action at that point, but based it on a few things. Among them, the fact power forward was the only position where the Pistons didn’t have a young player slotted for the future – they had yet to trade for Marcus Morris or Tobias Harris – and he was projected to be somewhere in the latter half of the first round. You know what? He’d probably be on my short list, top 10 most likely, of Pistons draft prospects now should he decide to leave Gonzaga after his sophomore season. The Pistons traded for Donatas Motiejunas; Sabonis is a similar type of player, though more than 5 years younger which makes the projection a little tricky. The knock on him is lack of athleticism, but Stan Van Gundy has taken a lot of players who fall under that heading and won with them. As I wrote in response to Alex above, I think there’s a reasonable chance the Pistons wind up trading the pick for someone who can contribute more immediately rather than add another 19- or 20-year-old to a lineup that’s already among the very youngest in the league. As for Valentine, he’d probably be on that top 10 list, too. The Pistons are going to take the player they feel has the best chance at the most productive NBA career. Drafting eighth, as they did last year, you can perhaps afford to look at positional needs. Drafting in the middle of the first round, you have to take someone who can see the court someday. But they’ll have to really like Valentine because the roster is already loaded with shooting guards – Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Jodie Meeks, Darrun Hilliard and Reggie Bullock all under contract for next season, plus Johnson, who has in effect been the No. 2 shooting guard most of the season. I’d be careful carrying the Valentine-Green analogy too far. Michigan State has had a bunch of very good college players who haven’t made it in the NBA despite playing for “the best coach in the nation,” as you write. That’s no knock on Valentine and certainly not on Izzo. There are great college players every season who never make a dent in the NBA. Green exceeded all expectations. (And, as an aside, you say “his lack of foot speed and athleticism made it tough for experts to believe he could play small forward.” That’s very true. But his success in the NBA has come as a power forward and even as a center. That’s a measure of how much the NBA game has evolved since he came into the league – and, in fact, he’s been a big part of hastening that change. Everybody’s looking for a power forward like him now – somebody who can facilitate the offense, not just hit perimeter shots, and at the same time be flexible enough defensively to allow switching along the perimeter.) And scouts, being human, might be influenced slightly as they evaluate Valentine. But they’re also smart enough to know that all situations are different. Valentine, of course, helped his draft status with his play this season. But each team will evaluate him on his merits and for their needs. The physical limitations that made him a questionable take for some teams going into the season aren’t going to disappear, but the innate basketball intelligence that is among his best attributes is going to make him even more attractive to teams that already have a surplus of athleticism but have a need for his blend of complementary skills. If Valentine finds a situation as ideal for him as Green did in Golden State, he can have a successful NBA career. Predicting for him the level of success Green has enjoyed … well, nobody would dare go that far.

Coach McGuirk (@DtownDgen): How has Marcus Morris been so white hot and yet taken so few shots over the last three games?

Langlois: He’s averaged 10 shots over his last three games, down a little from the 11.8 he averages. That’s an awfully small sample size and not all that big a drop. But it is interesting that he’s shooting so well, especially from the 3-point line – 16 of 21 over his last six games and 11 of 13 over the last three. If it’s a trend that continues – fewer shots, greater accuracy – there might be something to it. For now, I’ll chalk it up to a hot streak that was somewhat predictable – he’s a 36 percent career 3-point shooter and the hot streak has pulled his 3-point average for the season up from .310 to .348, closer to his norm. Is there a cause-and-effect dynamic at work with his accuracy going up as his attempts have gone down? I doubt it. Again, it’s simply not a big enough sample size or a notable enough decline in attempts to draw meaningful conclusions from it. But if he keeps shooting at that clip, it’s fair to say Stan Van Gundy will look for more ways to free him for 3-point attempts – and also that opponents will game plan accordingly.