Are Warriors better without David Lee?

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes


Rookie
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:29 pm
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 1:23 pm
Hey guys just registered, ergo this is my first post.

I am excited about where the Dubs are now and where they are going given their potential.

As I see it now, Lee is clearly expendable. We are dominating the Spurs, albeit they are old, without him. Also when Lee was in, he didn't really play the post. He is clearly a face up 5, when he is at the 5. But his natural position is more of a 4. In any case, as others have said in the thread, I think Bogut is really the game changer for the W's. He wasn't at full strength the whole year, and its only now that he's playing up to his true potential. His defense is suspect, but he rebounds the ball so I'm a fan of his. Ezeli at the 5 will only improve as well.

I think we need a traditional 4 post-up player who will demand a double team in order to keep defenses honest. Think Zach Randolph. If Curry and co. have a post player demanding double teams, it will create all sorts of open looks with Klay and Curry and Barnes able to spot up as the ball rotates out of the double team.

Obviously there is no way Memphis is letting go of Zach, but perhaps Utah, who is loaded at the 4 spot with Milsap and Al Jefferson and Derrick Favors, would be willing to part with either Millsap or Favors. They are both true 4s IMO.

ANyways, I'm not hating on David, think he's a great player, with a great 18 ft shot, but think that the Dubs with our spread it out offense and great shooting backcourt, need a solid pure rebounder or post player who can eat up some of the space inside. Even a Reggie Evans/ Kenneth Faried type high energy rebounder would be a great addition.

just my 2 cents...

All Star
Posts: 3072
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 17
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:19 pm
Excellent first post. JebronLame (needed a double take on the name) lol.

We have had different views concerning how the team needs to be run, some view there is not much need for a low post in/out game since we have such great shooters, myself and others feel we can maximize the shooting talents a low post game that commands a double will benefit the shooters, and our overall play.

At the end I think we stay put with David Lee, he does command doubles, although he is more of face the basket player. It is not out the question that Lee is untouchable, I think we can only say Curry is, possibly Bogut since has become such a difference maker in post defense and players on their rookie contracts since they are playing above it.

All Star
Posts: 3072
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 17
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 3:36 pm
And another thing to add, its playoffs, everyone has stepped up major, Lee carried us to this record. I am not doubting one bit he would've done the same.

Good thing to take out of this, Barnes, Green, Ezeli, all rookies really brought it these playoffs in Lee absences.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 4:11 pm
David Lee should come off the bench.

Bill Simmons on the B.S Report has been talking about how good Harrison Barnes is starting at 4.

Can you imagine David Lee getting 30-35 minutes against 2nd units.

David Lee is ultra efficient but a defensive liability maybe if we alligned his minutes more with the weaker offensive opponent on the opposition bench. Maybe then we might just hide David Lee lack of D.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 4:15 pm
Welcome to the board. Let's get started

JebronLames wrote:
As I see it now, Lee is clearly expendable. We are dominating the Spurs, albeit they are old, without him. Also when Lee was in, he didn't really play the post. He is clearly a face up 5, when he is at the 5. But his natural position is more of a 4


David Lee has not played the 5 all year. There might have been some cases where he was the biggest player on the court, but that's when opposing teams go small as well. For the most part, whenever Landry and Lee played together at the same time, Landry took the task of guarding the bigger and stronger opposing player. This is a much different case than what he experienced in New York where he played out of position the entire year.

I think Bogut is really the game changer for the W's. He wasn't at full strength the whole year, and its only now that he's playing up to his true potential. His defense is suspect, but he rebounds the ball so I'm a fan of his


You must have Bogut mistaken for someone else. When Bogut is in the game, he anchors the defense. He protects the paint, alters MANY shots, and gives great weak side help. He is light weight gettin tore up by Duncan, but it's Duncan. We'll give him whatever he earns. The biggest thing is that we don't have to double up on him which limits San Antonio's execution prowess. The spurs made a living all year by passing out of Duncan double teams and turning them into Neal, Bonner, Ginobli, and Green 3's.

I think we need a traditional 4 post-up player who will demand a double team in order to keep defenses honest.


I disagree. We do not need someone who will command a double team. We need a traditional 4 who can capitalize on 1-on-1 situations. With Curry and Thompson on the outside, teams will be very reluctant to help off of those 2. Commanding a double team will be a bonus, but the biggest thing is to find someone who can finish if a team decides not to double down on them. I do agree that Jefferson will fit the bill. There will be questions about his age and how much he'd want. I'd also doubt that Utah would want to do a sign and trade for Lee since they're making room for Favors and Kanter.

I'd do a Garnett trade. 32 mentioned that they're beefing, but they're grown men. Let them figure it out.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21380
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2013 10:03 pm
Correct me if I'm wrong, but David Lee is good in the post and does get double teamed sometimes. I' ve seen that in a few games that I've seen this season. He might be more than good enough to have the inside-outside play for the team.

The thing that to me is most important and exists well with the team right now is chemistry. The boys like each other. With a guy like ZRand that might not be as good, as though he has been good while in Memphis the last few seasons, he has been a headcase before.

I still want Love, for no more than Lee and either Rush or Green, but truth is that he isn't a traditional post player either, but it works as it is right now.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13533
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 1:39 pm
You're right, migs. Lee commands double-teams against most other squads in the NBA; the Spurs and Celtics can one-on-one him with Duncan or Garnett, but most NBA teams can't play him in single coverage.

And, 8th & JeBron, Lee commands double-teams BECAUSE he capitalizes in single-coverage. If he didn't, he wouldn't get doubled. Most teams can't play him one-on-one. Need I reiterate, the man led the NBA in 20-and-10 games. I don't want one good year of Garnett and 1 immobile, declining year in exchange for an all-star PF. Lee is much better than you're giving him credit for.

I'd take a Lee for Garnett trade in 2006 or 2008. Not now, though. It'd be a huge waste.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:29 am
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:00 pm
PAWNO wrote:
Bill Simmons on the B.S Report has been talking about how good Harrison Barnes is starting at 4.


Barnes is a SF. What is this fascination with small ball :banghead: , I thought GSW's were over that after Nelly and Ellis exited the Oracle.

Warriors have been successful this year because at every position, they were legit with size and skill.

The legit golden st warriors =

PG - Curry
SG - Klay
SF - Barnes
PF - David Lee
C - Andrew Bogut

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:12 pm
More and more teams play small ball. But it's not really small ball. Bogut playing center masks any disadvantages we have there. And Barnes is a better defender than Lee so going smaller doesn't actually hurt us defensively or rebounding (Barnes jumps ****ing high and Bogut gets most of the rebounds.) I'd say this small ball line up is the most viable line up of all the small ball line ups. Especially if it consists of Bogut.

All Star
Posts: 3072
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 17
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 10:11 pm
Basketball is about variations, different variables that can create the best outcome. Just because variable (XYZ) is working against (ABC) during a giving night does not mean it will continue against a different team, or during a different night.

Basketball is about adjustment, the more weapons the better, David Lee is a weapon, can be used with a different variables to create a win. Spurs made certain adjustments, so variables that worked before did not net the same result.

The more variables the better, as we saw last night, Curry was shadowed throughout and did not shoot too well, in-fact no one really showed up last night.

Implant Lee on the lineup, even for the few minutes he played he injected life into the team, he was a difference maker, and could've been that edge to defeat the Spurs.

The more elements and talents the better, and Lee is a talent helped carried us here to playoffs.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 1:06 am
Blackfoot wrote:More and more teams play small ball. But it's not really small ball. Bogut playing center masks any disadvantages we have there. And Barnes is a better defender than Lee so going smaller doesn't actually hurt us defensively or rebounding (Barnes jumps ****ing high and Bogut gets most of the rebounds.) I'd say this small ball line up is the most viable line up of all the small ball line ups. Especially if it consists of Bogut.


Plus 1.

Good Post.

Harrison Barnes is a little more versatile and better defender then David Lee at the 4.

You know we should maybe see how David Lee goes defending the 3!

All Star
Posts: 3072
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 17
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 10:38 am
Tim K admits.

Like i said previously in basketball there are many variables, many adustments, different matchups, its not like individual sports, or strength sports, or track were the strongest previal. Its about match-ups, its about the rotation of 8-9 players, so many things can be done with that. Truth is Dlee hustle, his offensive game, his rebounding, are all needed aspects for this team to be successful.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2 ... -equation/

If Lee plays like that–if his hip-flexor would’ve let him play in the second half last night–that’s a very good thing for the Warriors. I don’t know if more Lee in the second half would’ve saved Game 3, but it would’ve been a good thing.

So… I understand the blow back on me last night and today and probably for many weeks and years from now.

I’ll take it. That’s my job–to write what I believe and to take it when I don’t look so smart… whether it’s for a night, a series or forever.

One of those opinions: The Warriors are a better playoff team without Lee this postseason.

That was not true last night.

My further point is that they are a more dangerous playoff teamr without him IF Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson are playing well, IF Draymond Green and Harrison Barnes are explosive and IF Andrew Bogut is dominating inside…

And I think Lee’s absence sometimes helps all that–as it did in the Denver series–but last night none of those things were the case.

They could’ve used another mid-range offensive option. DLee is a very good mid-range offensive option. He played some important defense, too. He seemed to startle the Spurs last night, but then he had to leave the game.

If this is a sign of what Lee can bring the rest of this series, in larger and larger doses, that will be an enormously good thing for the Warriors.

Again: Said without qualification.

User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:29 am
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 12:58 pm
Blackfoot wrote:More and more teams play small ball. But it's not really small ball. Bogut playing center masks any disadvantages we have there. And Barnes is a better defender than Lee so going smaller doesn't actually hurt us defensively or rebounding (Barnes jumps ****ing high and Bogut gets most of the rebounds.) I'd say this small ball line up is the most viable line up of all the small ball line ups. Especially if it consists of Bogut.



That's a reach. I doubt Barnes can defend and rebound vs legitimate PF's. At the end of the day, he's still a SF trying to play PF. You put Lee on the block and you got multiple options. He can create for himself with a number of crafty post moves for a high percentage shot, or create for teammates. Can Barnes do that? Nope.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13533
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 1:34 pm
rockyBeli wrote:
Blackfoot wrote:More and more teams play small ball. But it's not really small ball. Bogut playing center masks any disadvantages we have there. And Barnes is a better defender than Lee so going smaller doesn't actually hurt us defensively or rebounding (Barnes jumps ****ing high and Bogut gets most of the rebounds.) I'd say this small ball line up is the most viable line up of all the small ball line ups. Especially if it consists of Bogut.



That's a reach. I doubt Barnes can defend and rebound vs legitimate PF's. At the end of the day, he's still a SF trying to play PF. You put Lee on the block and you got multiple options. He can create for himself with a number of crafty post moves for a high percentage shot, or create for teammates. Can Barnes do that? Nope.

Exactly. The myth that Nellieball works is just that: a myth.

Look at the playoffs. Whose winning in these series? The ground-and-pound squads or the small ball teams? So far, it's Grizzlies over Thunder, Pacers over Knicks, and Spurs over Warriors (both the Bulls and Heat run, so that's a wash). In a single game, Nellieball can luck out. In a series, the teams with the quality bigs come out on top.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 2:19 pm
32 wrote:
rockyBeli wrote:
Blackfoot wrote:More and more teams play small ball. But it's not really small ball. Bogut playing center masks any disadvantages we have there. And Barnes is a better defender than Lee so going smaller doesn't actually hurt us defensively or rebounding (Barnes jumps ****ing high and Bogut gets most of the rebounds.) I'd say this small ball line up is the most viable line up of all the small ball line ups. Especially if it consists of Bogut.



That's a reach. I doubt Barnes can defend and rebound vs legitimate PF's. At the end of the day, he's still a SF trying to play PF. You put Lee on the block and you got multiple options. He can create for himself with a number of crafty post moves for a high percentage shot, or create for teammates. Can Barnes do that? Nope.

Exactly. The myth that Nellieball works is just that: a myth.

Look at the playoffs. Whose winning in these series? The ground-and-pound squads or the small ball teams? So far, it's Grizzlies over Thunder, Pacers over Knicks, and Spurs over Warriors (both the Bulls and Heat run, so that's a wash). In a single game, Nellieball can luck out. In a series, the teams with the quality bigs come out on top.


Miami plays small ball, and they're the defending champions.

However, there's the rule, and then there's the exception. The Heat are an exception. They can get away with playing small ball because of LBJ.

There's been a lot of talk about Barnes and playing the 4. That was just a matchup thing with the Nuggets. Barnes playing the 4 is NOT an item. Stop trying to make it work. It isn't going to work.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron