With the season down to its final three weeks and 11 games, some of the focus of Pistons fans has shifted to the NBA draft and another round of free agency.  On with Mailbag ...

Walter (Boca Raton, Fla.): I checked the draft position of players from this year's All-Star game and they were as follows: No.  1 pick, six players; No.  2, 2; No.  3, 4; No.  4, 3; No.  5, 2; one player each for picks 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 19, 24 and 30 and three from the second round.  So 60 percent of All-Stars were top-five picks.  Your chances of getting an All-Star with the sixth, seventh or eighth pick are about the same.  The only difference is you have a slightly better chance in the lottery of moving into the top three.  Free agency "should" be more accurate.  Atlanta let Josh Smith walk and signed Paul Millsap, who has made the All-Star team twice for them.  Could the Pistons have signed Millsap, who would have been a much better fit?  I'm a native Detroiter who retired to Florida and went to the first Pistons game ever played at old Olympia Stadium – a fan ever since. 

Langlois: Standing ovation for your Pistons roots and loyalty, Walter.  That's a lot of history you've witnessed.  Your research on draft picks and All-Star results is not surprising.  When the Goin' to Work Pistons won the 2004 NBA title, consider that their starting five included a No.  3 overall pick (Chauncey Billups), a No.  4 (Rasheed Wallace), a No.  7 (Rip Hamilton), a No.  23 (Tayshaun Prince) and the anomaly, undrafted Ben Wallace.  The Pistons appear headed for a pick somewhere in the 6-10 range this season, though their recent 4-1 spurt and a somewhat more forgiving schedule in April than March could fuel a nice closing kick.  That will give them the same long odds or worse than they had in the 2010-13 drafts that saw them get bumped down one spot twice and stay where they were on the other two occasions.  So it's unlikely they'll have a top-five pick this season, but you never know.  They're due for a bit of luck.  As for the Smith-Millsap hypothetical, sure, in hindsight Millsap – and especially considering the terms of their contracts – would have been a better fit.  Even at the time Millsap signed with Atlanta, it seemed like he was the one player from that summer's free-agent class who got less than expected, though there are rumblings Atlanta tried to tie him up for longer than two years at the time.  It seems likely Millsap is due for a bigger payday this time around, although he's nearing that age where teams might be reluctant to go for the full four-year term. 

Ann Marie (Riverview, Mich.): Is there a possibility Stan Van Gundy can let Reggie Jackson walk if he wants a big contract?  His offensive ability is at best erratic, but the part that scares me the most is the number of times he is getting blown by defensively.  The ability to stay in front of your man defensively does not change with time.  The franchise has been destroyed by bad signings – Rip's last contract, Ben Gordon, Charlie V, Josh Smith, et al. 

Langlois: Is there a possibility that Reggie Jackson gets an offer sheet as an unrestricted free agent that the Pistons would choose not to match?  Sure.  That's the inherent nature of restricted free agency, though history is firmly on the side of the home team.  The Pistons have a dozen games left.  When the season ends, Van Gundy and general manager Jeff Bower and their inner circle will hold exhaustive meetings to formulate their game plan for the off-season.  Everything Van Gundy has said publicly to this point indicates that Jackson is firmly in their plans.  I think the odds are strong – if you'd ask me to put a number on it, I'd say 80 percent-plus – that Jackson is back next season with the Pistons.  There's a smaller chance that he's back on a qualifying offer, just as Greg Monroe came back this season.  But that's very unlikely, as well.  I think it's fair to assume the Pistons had more than just a ballpark idea of what it would take to retain Jackson – and, further, that they were comfortable with that number – when they made the trade.  As for your critique of his defense, I think that's an exaggeration.  Van Gundy has said his defense needs improvement, but he's said that about everyone on the roster.  Here's what he said just Tuesday when I asked him about Jackson's defense in his first month with the Pistons: "He's got to do a better job getting over picks, staying in front of his man, that kind of thing.  He's pretty good off the ball defensively and he's very, very tough on the boards.  There's some good things, but there's some work to be done.  He's certainly strong enough and quick enough.  It's just really applying himself at that end." 

Inge (Taipei, Taiwan): I feel Tayshaun Prince can still play at a high level.  His defense, especially, is still solid most times and he also brings leadership.  Will he play one or two more years?  I hope he will. 

Langlois: He isn't talking or acting like someone who believes he's on his last contract, Inge.  Pretty sure he will go into free agency anticipating offers and playing at least another season or two.  He'll be 35 when free agency hits, so the question will be if there are teams willing to commit to more than one season.  That could be a deciding factor.  There's no question the Pistons are going to be in the market for a small forward, perhaps two, depending on what they do with Caron Butler's contract option.  Cartier Martin has a player option for next season.  The Pistons are going to want to get a look at Quincy Miller in Summer League, as well.  Stan Van Gundy regards him as more of a stretch four today, but he wants to see if Miller has the ball skills to play some small forward, as well. 

Philip (Fort Myers Beach, Fla.): What happens if Reggie Jackson wants to sign a contract with the Pistons that gives him an "out" after one season so he can then be a free agent again next season when the salary cap is expected to go way up?  Can he do that? 

Langlois: Yes.  But is it likely?  Probably not.  Options in contracts can only extend a contract by one season.  So Jackson, a restricted free agent at season's end, can't get a four-year offer sheet from another team or a five-year contract from the Pistons (who will hold his Bird rights) that contains an option after the first season.  LeBron James last season is the perfect example.  He signed a free-agent contract with Cleveland that gave him the right to exercise a player option for the 2015-16 season.  But it was a two-year contract, not a four-year deal.  When you're LeBron James, the downside is pretty minimal.  Only a serious injury is going to prevent him from getting another massive contract and the timing means he will be a free agent (assuming he exercises his player option for 2015-16) again in July 2016 when the cap is expected to rise to perhaps $90 million.  Most players, though, are going to want the security of a four- or five-year contract. 

Namer (Wolverine Lake, Mich.): I was reading an article about how Stan Van Gundy might have to choose between Reggie Jackson or Greg Monroe.  I would rather have Jackson.  Monroe, while talented and great in the post, is a very old-school type of power forward.  Today's power forwards tend to not only have a dominant post presence but also a mid-range jump shot that makes them more formidable.  Almost every legitimate power forward I can think of in this league now possesses some sort of jump shot.  With our style of play I feel like Monroe being in the paint all the time clogs up the paint and does not allow great spacing.  I think a stretch power forward is the best thing to complement Drummond rather than the old-school type of player like Monroe.  What are your thoughts? 

Langlois: If you were building a team in the lab, Namer, I might well agree.  But the Pistons have to deal in the theater of reality.  If they choose not to attempt to re-sign Monroe based on the belief that a stretch four is the better complement to Drummond, fine – but unless that stretch four is as good at what he does as Monroe is at what he does, are the Pistons really better?  A ground-ball dominant pitching staff would be better served by having a shortstop with great fielding range in theory, right?  Except there's always a tipping point.  What if the shortstop with great range bats .150, doesn't get on base much and produces no extra-base hits?  Wouldn't you be better off with a Jhonny Peralta type who mashes but gives up maybe 1½ more outs a week in the field?  I'll take issue with two other things you said.  One, it's not so much Van Gundy having to choose.  Monroe, as an unrestricted free agent, has the hammer this summer.  The Pistons have the wherewithal to sign both players and still get other things done in free agency.  Everything Van Gundy has said indicates that would be his preference, not choosing one over the other.  Two, "today's power forwards tend to not only have a dominant post presence but also a mid-range jump shot" – really?  I would have a few fingers left over on one hand if I were to use them to count the number of power forwards today who have a "dominant" post game and an effective mid-range jump shot.  Zach Randolph, OK.  Pau Gasol, Mmm, I suppose.  LaMarcus Aldrige ... I wouldn't call his post game dominant, but there's no debating his overall scoring efficiency.  Anthony Davis is phenomenal, obviously, but it's his versatility – runs the floor, great mid-range game, offensive rebounding prowess, pick-and-roll dunk threat – more than being a post-up behemoth.  Chris Bosh almost never plays in the post these days.  Blake Griffin, great player, not really a dominant post player.  Tim Duncan was that guy in the league's golden era of power forwards (Chris Webber, Kevin Garnett, Amare Stoudemire, et al.)  There aren't five better post scorers in the NBA than Monroe, in my view.  Van Gundy is a really nimble coach and I think the Pistons will have a decisive plan of action if Monroe leaves as a free agent.  But it won't be quite as easy as you make it sound to plug in any random stretch four and be better off for the improved fit. 

Steven (West Bloomfield, Mich.): Just because the Pistons are (predictably) better the more floor cloggers you take away doesn't mean they can afford to (predictably) lose Greg Monroe for nothing.  He should have been traded for the best available return as soon as contract negotiations stalled without regard to equal value.  Whatever they could have gotten for Monroe would go a long way toward whatever Stan Van Gundy is trying to build. 

Langlois: Except that trade would have had to take place before last season's trade deadline, Steven.  The Pistons couldn't trade him last summer except for a sign-and-trade deal and it never got to that point because Monroe never signed an offer sheet with anyone that could have triggered such a deal.  Now, perhaps Monroe might have signed an offer sheet if the Pistons and his prospective new team had been able to agree on a trade – but there is no indication things ever advanced to that point.  Also, when you say they will lose Monroe "for nothing," that's not really the way to interpret it in the salary-cap era.  Remember when Stan Van Gundy was asked about why he hadn't accepted the reported offer Sacramento made for Josh Smith last summer when he explained the decision to waive him in December?  He said he'd rather have the situation as it stood – cap space rather than the contracts they would have had to take from the Kings in return.  Same deal here.  If Monroe leaves, the Pistons will have a lot of cap space at their disposal to address the void.  That doesn't necessarily mean they'll use it on a free agent; it could mean they execute a trade where they take back more money than they ship out and get a good player that way.  Van Gundy has made clear his desire to have Monroe return as his first preference.  But should he leave, they're going to have some arrows in their quiver to hunt for replacements. 

Josh (Ferndale, Mich.): Are you watching the NCAA tournament and who do you like most in a Pistons jersey next year?  I like D'Angelo Russell out of Ohio State, but I think he will go too high for us. 

Langlois: It almost certainly would require pulling a top-three pick to get a shot at Russell, Josh, at least by all credible draft projections.  Would the Pistons draft him even if they landed a top-three pick?  I don't believe the presence of Brandon Jennings, Reggie Jackson and Spencer Dinwiddie on the roster already would prevent them from doing exactly that, if they believed he was the best player available.  I think the "best player" strategy is going to be the one this front office employs regardless of roster fit or needs, at least until Stan Van Gundy has the roster largely where he wants it and then looks to fit needs more specifically.  When you draft that high – anywhere in the top 10, but especially near the top of the draft – you'd really be making a huge mistake to do otherwise.  You don't pass on a player you feel has a shot to be an All-Star, perhaps a rare franchise player, simply because you have a slightly greater need at a different position.  It's why I think if the Pistons were to somehow land the No.  1 pick, it would be unwise to rule out them taking Duke's Jahlil Okafor or Kentucky's Karl-Anthony Towns, two 7-footers, despite the presence of Andre Drummond. 

Byron (Detroit): Since the NBA salary cap is set to explode next season, could the Pistons go over the cap to sign Kevin Love and Tobias Harris or Khris Middleton while keeping Monroe and Reggie Jackson? 

Langlois: The cap holds for Monroe and Jackson are going to account for about $16 million of their cap space, Byron.  So they wouldn't be able to sign anybody for more than a starting salary of about $10 million or so, depending on what they do with some of the team options they hold on players. ( They could renounce Monroe's rights and get a little more than $10 million in additional cap space, but that doesn't fit your scenario.)  That rules out Love, for certain.  No idea where the market will come in for some of the restricted free agents.  The Pistons biggest area of need, it would appear, will be small forward – though power forward becomes another target area if Monroe departs, obviously – but the best players available in free agency will be restricted free agents: Jimmy Butler, Kawhi Leonard and Harris foremost, with Middleton in the mix if you consider him a small forward. ( Some teams probably prefer him as a shooting guard.)  Keeping both Monroe and Jackson would very likely put all of those players beyond the reach of the Pistons.  But it's unlikely that any of them leave their current teams. 

Groucho (Rochester Hills, Mich.): I was really surprised to see Reggie Jackson wearing No.  1 as a Piston.  Do you think we will ever see any player from the 2004 team get their number retired?  I thought Billups had a chance and I could see Ben Wallace get his original number retired, too.  Most of the retired numbers we have now are from the Bad Boys era.  Why no love for the 2004 team?  Do you think this has to do with ownership? 

Langlois: So many of these players are only recently retired, Groucho. ( Groucho!)  Tayshaun Prince is still playing.  I don't think there's anything particularly unusual about the fact that none of them have had a jersey retirement ceremony yet.  Do I think it will eventually happen?  Yes.  But I think it's prudent to take your time with this to make sure you get it right.  And allowing a little time to pass helps put their accomplishments into a little better perspective.  That might be especially important with that bunch because they were, rightfully, viewed as more of a five-man unit than a collection of players.  It was very hard to separate or rank their contributions to the whole in any definitive order.  It almost seems like if you retire one, it would be hard to draw the line anywhere.  It wouldn't shock me if by the time they hold the 20th reunion of the 2004 NBA championship, all five numbers are hanging in the rafters.