Harrington

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:30 am
Poster Credit: 1
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:38 am
tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:Read 'em and weep - he has outperformed his opponent at almost every facet of the game
http://www.82games.com/0607/06GSW17C.HTM


Alright, you want it by stats, here we go.

Look at the performances of Harrington's counterpart, since his start for the W's. I've gone through every game since the trade, and looked for the largest forward that played at least 25 minutes. Sometimes, that is not a typical PF, like Varrajao in Cleveland.

I am comparing their season average in PPG/RPG and their performance against the W's (and Harrington). The trend is for those that play against the W's PF to have better than average games.
12/20 scored higher than their average
11/20 had more rebounds than their average
12/20 had more rebounds than Harrington's 7.1 average w the W's

The numbers are not insanely bad, though not good for Harrinton. Yes, he outscores most PF's, and most player, in the league, and he often outscores his counterpart on the other team. But, their counterpart also tends to perform better when playig agianst him.

Varrejao: Ave. 7/7 Jan 20 14/11
Cook: Ave 7/3.6 Jan 22 13/3
Nachbar: Ave 8/3 Jan 24 14/8
Wallace: Ave 16/6.5 Jan 27 19/5
Gooden: Ave 11/8 Jan 30 11/5
M Williams: Ave 12/5 Jan 31 17/4
J Smith: Ave 8/5.5 Feb 2 13/3
Wallace: Ave 16/6.5 Feb 3 21/16
Feb 5 (INDY--likely did not paly against O'Neil; platoon of players at the position)
Garnett: Ave 23/13 Feb 7 17/15
Deng: Ave 19/7 Feb 9 23/9
M. Williams 12/5 Feb 11 9/6
Nene: Ave 11/6 Feb 12 24/6
Lee: Ave 11/10 Feb 14 13/10
Warrick: Ave 12.5/4.5 Feb 21 13/9
Brand: Ave 20/9 Feb 24 31/14
Odom: Ave 16/9 Feb 25 8/8
Villanueva: Ave 12/6 Feb 27 6/8
Deng: Ave 19/7 Feb 28 13/6
Frye: Ave 10/5 March 2 6/8
Jamison: Ave 19/8 March 4 18/11

The only stat that really matters:
With Harrington: 7W-14L (33.3% wins)
Before Harrinton: 19W-21L (47.5% wins)

If the W's only continued at their previous win rate, they'd have 29 wins now, and less than 1/2 a game out of 8.

I'm totally not saying that Harrington is THE problem on the team. But, he was supposed to help WIN games. I love his points, and his rebounds are actually decent, I'd just like to get them from him at the 3, not the 4.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3086
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:51 pm
Location: Redwood City, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:17 pm
So I assume you're a fan of drafting Horford, who will let Harrington slide to the 3 spot.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:30 am
Poster Credit: 1
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:32 pm
I'm a big fan of finding another big. We have plenty of ways to do so:

--Free Agency. There will be at least a couple PF's available. Melvin Ely (currently overpriced at 3.3 mil, seems unmotivated), Malik Allen (currently 1.3 mil, 3 rebs in 10min), Anderson Varejao (total bargin now, will draw at least 3 mil nest year), Mikki More (1 mil; 9/5 in 20min with Nets). Not a lot to work with here.

--Trade. Some names that sound nice, and MIGHT be available, but could take a significant amount of trade. Gasol (already asked out and shown for trade), maybe Deng or Thomas from Chicago (they are still missing a couple of scorers from making a good impression in the playoffs), David Lee (Doubtful, but Knick need help), and of course the usual rumor of Garnett.

--Draft. One of the best draft classes of recent years. But, to get a top big, looks like the W's will have to drop to about the 7th choice. Not sure we'll be that low.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3042
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:42 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:59 pm
drazz wrote:
tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:Read 'em and weep - he has outperformed his opponent at almost every facet of the game
http://www.82games.com/0607/06GSW17C.HTM



The only stat that really matters:
With Harrington: 7W-14L (33.3% wins)
Before Harrinton: 19W-21L (47.5% wins)

If the W's only continued at their previous win rate, they'd have 29 wins now, and less than 1/2 a game out of 8.


and with a healthy baron they would be there right now. dude, the slide coincides with Baron getting hurt. Pretty simple. Trade Dungmurphy to Indy and have O"neal not play and see what happens. As it is, they are worse than prior to the trade, and that is with a completely healthy Jermaine. Harrington is not remotely the problem. I like your idea of sliding Harrington to the 3, though.
To Live is A Value Judgment - Albert Camus
3 reasons for living: Jazz, Hoops and women

President Barack Hussein Obama - America chose Hope over Fear
ImageImage
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 2558
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 8:53 am
Location: where you aren't
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:59 pm
The numbers are not insanely bad, though not good for Harrinton. Yes, he outscores most PF's, and most player, in the league, and he often outscores his counterpart on the other team. But, their counterpart also tends to perform better when playig agianst him.

Yes, but you originally said
But, those stats don't show the problem--he's overmatched as a PF. I don't have the number of his opponents, but I can;t imagine he has stopped a single PF of talent. Duncan, Brand, Garnett, Diaw--these are the guys s he called on the defend, and there is no way he can compare.

which is what I proved to be false. He is not overmatched if he outplays them on average. Period. He may be a bad defender, but not overmatched.

Also, the numbers you stated fall into a normal range of standard deviation and don't lead to any conclusion

The only stat that really matters:
With Harrington: 7W-14L (33.3% wins)
Before Harrinton: 19W-21L (47.5% wins)

Don't you think that Baron Davis' injury has something to do with this? Harrington came to our team in a trade that involved many players and out of the first four games we were robbed three times (IE we should have won but refs or injuries got in the way). Very soon after that BD went down and that is why we've done badly with harrington besides small sample size.

I'm totally not saying that Harrington is THE problem on the team. But, he was supposed to help WIN games. I love his points, and his rebounds are actually decent, I'd just like to get them from him at the 3, not the 4.

So many people still don't realize that Harrington is incapable of playing the three and has never done so with any success. When he plays the three his numbers drop significantly in every category and his defense gets worse. So you can't get those numbers from him at the three
ImageImage
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21443
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:47 pm
tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:So many people still don't realize that Harrington is incapable of playing the three and has never done so with any success. When he plays the three his numbers drop significantly in every category and his defense gets worse. So you can't get those numbers from him at the three



He is not the answer at PF so if he can't play SF successfuly, he has to be traded. Too high of a salary as well for relative ineffectiveness
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3086
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:51 pm
Location: Redwood City, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:48 pm
Relative ineffectiveness? Harrington has been playing quality basketball lately, we are not at full strength so that is why we are losing!! Harrington IS the answer at PF! You can't expect your whole starting five to be perfect!
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21443
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:29 pm
JayPat wrote:Relative ineffectiveness? Harrington has been playing quality basketball lately, we are not at full strength so that is why we are losing!! Harrington IS the answer at PF! You can't expect your whole starting five to be perfect!



Harrington certainly is not the answer at PF! There are enough guys that can shoot threes and score on the team! The PF has to be a rebounder and defender and Harrington is neither! He is a decent rebounder only and a nondefender that just does not make a team win more at all!

Like I've said, he has to be traded in a package, maybe with Baron and this draft's lottery pick for a great PF, that would be the best thing
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3086
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:51 pm
Location: Redwood City, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:04 pm
I'm sorry, but Al is a good rebounder, not great but good, and he is a good scorer who can take his man back to the basket. His fadeaway is like no other on this team (besides J-Rich) and he gets over a steal per game (so his defense isn't obviously that bad).
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21443
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:10 pm
JayPat wrote:I'm sorry, but Al is a good rebounder, not great but good, and he is a good scorer who can take his man back to the basket. His fadeaway is like no other on this team (besides J-Rich) and he gets over a steal per game (so his defense isn't obviously that bad).



He scores pretty well and his rebounding for a PF is average, nothing more. Stats don't show how ineffective towards making the team better Harrington is and averaging 1 steal a game doesn't mean shiit because he is a BAD defender! Better than Murphy (only just) but still BAD
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 575
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:52 am
Location: Oakland
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:13 pm
JayPat wrote:I'm sorry, but Al is a good rebounder, not great but good, and he is a good scorer who can take his man back to the basket. His fadeaway is like no other on this team (besides J-Rich) and he gets over a steal per game (so his defense isn't obviously that bad).


Al really manned up against the Pistons. He was getting tough and physical inside and he was hustling for loose balls. He upped his stock in my mind. That being said, my only beef with him this year
is that he just doesn't seem to finish strong around the hoop when fed
good dishes off drives by our guards. With the quickness of our 3 guard
lineup, it would be very nice to have a guy who can really clean up the garbage.
Too often BD or Monta will drive to the hole, draw the double team and drop it down low to Al, and he fumbles the pass, throws up 2 or 3 pump fakes, and takes an offbalance fadeaway hook. It would be nice to have a PF who could finish with authority but I realize we can't have our cake and eat it too. I expect Biedrins to contribute more in this department every year.

I think Al get's a lot of the blame for rebounding when it's really a TEAM problem. If you go with a small, quick lineup, you have to understand that you won't win the boards unless everyone is hustling and crashing them. If a team is undersized AND lazy, then you have a problem. I realize it's hard to keep that up for 48 minutes, but luckily we now have this magic thing called depth which can prevent our players from wearing out. Al has decent length, I feel he could act more as a PF on D, he could also boxout alot stronger. With J-Rich in the lineup again, I believe team rebounding wil improve greatly.

As for next year, I think Al should be given a shot to prove he can be our PF. With this lineup, we need all the spacing we can get, and with a deadly 3pt shooter like Al, we soften up the middle to let Monta and BD do their thing. Also his speed allows J-Rich to roam the offensive glass without worrying about fastbreaks the other way. It is really up to the players how good they want to be next year. If they play their asses off, there will not be a team in the league that can hold them under 100.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21443
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:27 pm
David Wood wrote:Al really manned up against the Pistons. He was getting tough and physical inside and he was hustling for loose balls.



Be good if he did that all the time. He is paid more than most players on the team and will be a hinderance for the team to move forward as he is a good player but just doesn't fit the need of the team. If the PF isn't helping out the Center rebound, who will? This team is built for speed and more than just Biedrins need to rebound and defend. If there was just one more big that could do that, with the rest of the guys scoring well, this team would be much better but the story is always the same - Fall just short every season
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3042
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:42 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:31 pm
Harrington is a good player, not great, but good. He receives a ludicrous amount of criticism. The guy is averaging 17 points and 7 boards for us, and is top 5 in 3s. Is he Garnett or Duncan or Brand? No, but he sure as hell ain't Murphy, either. Does he have trouble finishing? yes, but he gets to the line when he does. Let's see what this line-up looks like with Baron, Jrich, Harrington, Ellis, Biedrins, jackson, barnes, Azu and Pietrus (and Powell). Tonight was a great example of what this team could be.
To Live is A Value Judgment - Albert Camus
3 reasons for living: Jazz, Hoops and women

President Barack Hussein Obama - America chose Hope over Fear
ImageImage
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 575
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:52 am
Location: Oakland
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:53 pm
migya wrote:
David Wood wrote:Al really manned up against the Pistons. He was getting tough and physical inside and he was hustling for loose balls.



Be good if he did that all the time. He is paid more than most players on the team and will be a hinderance for the team to move forward as he is a good player but just doesn't fit the need of the team. If the PF isn't helping out the Center rebound, who will? This team is built for speed and more than just Biedrins need to rebound and defend. If there was just one more big that could do that, with the rest of the guys scoring well, this team would be much better but the story is always the same - Fall just short every season


Exactly. Harrington has to do his part, but people also need to pay attention and box out when they can. We know he can run the floor, but it seems like he wants to run out as soon as a shot is fired. The problem is he can't play small forward. That would be a step backward as he just is not quick enough and we already have 5 Sf's. He's a fluid athlete but he cannot hang with the likes of Lebron, Melo, Andre Iguodala or Vince Carter.

He gives us the most advantage by forcing the d to soften up in the middle to stop the 3 pointer. If it's a small forward guarding him, they won't mind locking him down on the perimeter, but when it's a power forward, who no way in hell can guard anyone else on the team, they are forced to step out and guard him, leaving room for our bandits to come down the lane.

Starting Lineup
Posts: 913
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 9:01 am
Poster Credit: -3
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:02 pm
You are right, Al is no Murphy, Murphy gets more rebounds and is an equally lousy defender. Any GM would take a much cheaper David Lee over Al Harrington and his bad shooting, bad free throw and inconsistent rebounding for a forward. We played a lousy Detroit squad who are vulnerable and average without Rasheed in the lineup and our shots went in (always a 50/50 proposition). Besides grabbing a couple more boards than normal Al didn't win the game, the high shooting percentage of the fan fav three (Biedrins, Ellis and Barnes) is what saved the day. Why should we celebrate the 21 for 47 brick display of our big scorers when we should wonder why did Biedrins only get 6 shots?
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron