Are Warriors better without David Lee?

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:34 pm
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 10:48 pm
I'm not sure you can really call David Lee overrated. The guy averaged 18 and 11 for a playoff team while making $13M. Yes, thats a lot of money, but its far from being a huge contract or even max. $2M more than what they were paying Ellis and we all know where that went. Blake Griffin will make $16M a year with an 18 and 8 average. Thats overrated, overhyped AND overpaid. Chris Bosh makes $19M with a 16 and 6 average. So what is so overrated about Lee's game? He's not your typical back-to-basket power forward but how many are those are out there these days? He's a better passer than most PFs in the league. He's a tough player that isn't afraid to stick his nose in to grab rebounds. Its not like Kevin Love is this awesome defender, who is a player that many people seem to want on this team. We're so focused on how well they did without Lee in the playoffs that we're forgetting to take into consideration that their lack of size really hurt them during the San Antonio series and that Lee might of helped them win that series. Oh yeah, did we forget that he still managed to be a leader and play with a torn hip flexor while other guys are missing games with sprained ankles? His toughness and leadership in the playoffs was well overlooked. I'm not saying David Lee is the best PF in the league, but he's certainly not overrated.
Last edited by BayAreaHoopz on Thu Jul 04, 2013 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 11:23 pm
Agree. They are so hung up on how well the Warriors did against Denver without Lee. I think that says more about how deep the warriors were and how they matched up vs Denver as opposed to what Lee cannot do. Lee can do more things than most power forwards. If they let him go for nothing, trust me, they will regret it later. It's not as easy as they thing it is to find a power forward like Lee. They are taking him for granted big time.

All Star
Posts: 2806
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:46 pm
Poster Credit: 7
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:00 pm
Stairway Man wrote:It's not as easy as they thing it is to find a power forward like Lee. They are taking him for granted big time.


The Warriors are not taking him for granted. David Lee is a scorer and rebounder; however, he is not a help defender, play well defensively on the block nor in the paint, and in all honesty, does not have the skill set to make his teammates better around him. Also, the Warriors are paying him top dollars, too much money for a guy who has severe limitations in his game.

All that being said, David Lee, if he were to be traded, should be traded only if the trade improves the Warriors roster and gets the team closer to a championship.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:17 pm
uptempo wrote:
Stairway Man wrote:It's not as easy as they thing it is to find a power forward like Lee. They are taking him for granted big time.


The Warriors are not taking him for granted. David Lee is a scorer and rebounder; however, he is not a help defender, play well defensively on the block nor in the paint, and in all honesty, does not have the skill set to make his teammates better around him. Also, the Warriors are paying him top dollars, too much money for a guy who has severe limitations in his game.

All that being said, David Lee, if he were to be traded, should be traded only if the trade improves the Warriors roster and gets the team closer to a championship.

Gonna have to disagree with you on the bolded part, bro. David Lee ABSOLUTELY makes his teammates better. Particularly, with his high and low block passing.

I also fear his defense is being overblown in the offseason to justify potential trade talk, when the reality is that Lee's defense wasn't a major problem for the team all year long... In fact, Lee made a marked improvement in defensive rating as compared to previous years. By most accounts, Lee's defense last year was slightly below average. It's an exaggeration to say he was a horrible defender last year. I dunno why people are making such a huge deal about it now. Why wasn't any of this being said over the course of the season? Answer: because there lacked substantial examples to prove Lee was hindering the team by playing piss poor defense.

Totally agree with Stairway: this fan base is completely taking David Lee for granted.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Rookie
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:19 pm
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:46 pm
David Lee's defense will improve as a whole next season if he gets to play beside Bogut all year, which wasn't the case last season. They barely played together all season.
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 683
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:29 am
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:58 pm
BayAreaHoopz wrote:I'm not sure you can really call David Lee overrated. The guy averaged 18 and 11 for a playoff team while making $13M. Yes, thats a lot of money, but its far from being a huge contract or even max. $2M more than what they were paying Ellis and we all know where that went. Blake Griffin will make $16M a year with an 18 and 8 average. Thats overrated, overhyped AND overpaid. Chris Bosh makes $19M with a 16 and 6 average. So what is so overrated about Lee's game? He's not your typical back-to-basket power forward but how many are those are out there these days? He's a better passer than most PFs in the league. He's a tough player that isn't afraid to stick his nose in to grab rebounds. Its not like Kevin Love is this awesome defender, who is a player that many people seem to want on this team. We're so focused on how well they did without Lee in the playoffs that we're forgetting to take into consideration that their lack of size really hurt them during the San Antonio series and that Lee might of helped them win that series. Oh yeah, did we forget that he still managed to be a leader and play with a torn labrum while other guys are missing games with sprained ankles? His toughness and leadership in the playoffs was well overlooked. I'm not saying David Lee is the best PF in the league, but he's certainly not overrated.



+100000000

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:55 am
I am in the middle of this debate.

I don't think Lee's defensive shortcomings are that big of a deal because our defensive system hides his bad defense. In fact, you can't tell because the wings allow the fourth least amount of penetration in the league.

It's how Lee was able to get stuff in DWS. Not because he is playing outstanding defense, but because they are crediting him for not giving up shots at the basket. So Lee's bad defense is overstated.

However, I think Lee's impact on the board is overstated.

Overall. We are five points better with Lee on the floor. And five points is nothing to scoff at. It's quite high. Lee absolutely makes us better.

Now, I am going to evaluate Lee or Jack and Landry.

Jack and Landry give us more depth, but less individual talent. Which has value (depth.)

David Lee himself has 9.1 WS. That means he is worth about nine extra wins a season.

Landry and Jack have a WS combined of 11.8. Which means they are worth about a win or two more than Lee.

Lee is by far more individually talented. I like the idea of having a great back up for Curry. Honestly, I think it's just preference. Do you want depth and maybe two extra wins, or a player that brings almost as much value by himself?

I think Lee would be more important for the playoffs and Jack and Landry would be more important for the regular season. Depth is always more important in the regular season.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21414
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:29 am
Lee did great last season and he is a keeper unless he is traded for a better player. I don't even pay much attention to statements of him being overrated because that's picking on anything and never being happy with what's worked well already.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 10:21 am
Blackfoot wrote:I am in the middle of this debate.

I don't think Lee's defensive shortcomings are that big of a deal because our defensive system hides his bad defense. In fact, you can't tell because the wings allow the fourth least amount of penetration in the league.

It's how Lee was able to get stuff in DWS. Not because he is playing outstanding defense, but because they are crediting him for not giving up shots at the basket. So Lee's bad defense is overstated.

However, I think Lee's impact on the board is overstated.

Overall. We are five points better with Lee on the floor. And five points is nothing to scoff at. It's quite high. Lee absolutely makes us better.

Now, I am going to evaluate Lee or Jack and Landry.

Jack and Landry give us more depth, but less individual talent. Which has value (depth.)

David Lee himself has 9.1 WS. That means he is worth about nine extra wins a season.

Landry and Jack have a WS combined of 11.8. Which means they are worth about a win or two more than Lee.

Lee is by far more individually talented. I like the idea of having a great back up for Curry. Honestly, I think it's just preference. Do you want depth and maybe two extra wins, or a player that brings almost as much value by himself?

I think Lee would be more important for the playoffs and Jack and Landry would be more important for the regular season. Depth is always more important in the regular season.

But see, to me, it's not Lee OR Jack and Landry.

It's Jack or Landry PLUS Lee. They have enough cash to sign one of them.

So this dilemma about losing all our bench depth if we keep Lee is a red herring, straw man argument.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 10:52 am
32 wrote:
Blackfoot wrote:I am in the middle of this debate.

I don't think Lee's defensive shortcomings are that big of a deal because our defensive system hides his bad defense. In fact, you can't tell because the wings allow the fourth least amount of penetration in the league.

It's how Lee was able to get stuff in DWS. Not because he is playing outstanding defense, but because they are crediting him for not giving up shots at the basket. So Lee's bad defense is overstated.

However, I think Lee's impact on the board is overstated.

Overall. We are five points better with Lee on the floor. And five points is nothing to scoff at. It's quite high. Lee absolutely makes us better.

Now, I am going to evaluate Lee or Jack and Landry.

Jack and Landry give us more depth, but less individual talent. Which has value (depth.)

David Lee himself has 9.1 WS. That means he is worth about nine extra wins a season.

Landry and Jack have a WS combined of 11.8. Which means they are worth about a win or two more than Lee.

Lee is by far more individually talented. I like the idea of having a great back up for Curry. Honestly, I think it's just preference. Do you want depth and maybe two extra wins, or a player that brings almost as much value by himself?

I think Lee would be more important for the playoffs and Jack and Landry would be more important for the regular season. Depth is always more important in the regular season.

But see, to me, it's not Lee OR Jack and Landry.

It's Jack or Landry PLUS Lee. They have enough cash to sign one of them.

So this dilemma about losing all our bench depth if we keep Lee is a red herring, straw man argument.



No it's not. It's reported that we tried to trade Lee to keep Jack and Landry.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21414
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:59 pm
You can replace bench players much easier than a starter, let alone an allstar one. Pretty ridiculous the talk of getting rid of Lee.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:44 pm
Blackfoot wrote:
32 wrote:
Blackfoot wrote:I am in the middle of this debate.

I don't think Lee's defensive shortcomings are that big of a deal because our defensive system hides his bad defense. In fact, you can't tell because the wings allow the fourth least amount of penetration in the league.

It's how Lee was able to get stuff in DWS. Not because he is playing outstanding defense, but because they are crediting him for not giving up shots at the basket. So Lee's bad defense is overstated.

However, I think Lee's impact on the board is overstated.

Overall. We are five points better with Lee on the floor. And five points is nothing to scoff at. It's quite high. Lee absolutely makes us better.

Now, I am going to evaluate Lee or Jack and Landry.

Jack and Landry give us more depth, but less individual talent. Which has value (depth.)

David Lee himself has 9.1 WS. That means he is worth about nine extra wins a season.

Landry and Jack have a WS combined of 11.8. Which means they are worth about a win or two more than Lee.

Lee is by far more individually talented. I like the idea of having a great back up for Curry. Honestly, I think it's just preference. Do you want depth and maybe two extra wins, or a player that brings almost as much value by himself?

I think Lee would be more important for the playoffs and Jack and Landry would be more important for the regular season. Depth is always more important in the regular season.

But see, to me, it's not Lee OR Jack and Landry.

It's Jack or Landry PLUS Lee. They have enough cash to sign one of them.

So this dilemma about losing all our bench depth if we keep Lee is a red herring, straw man argument.



No it's not. It's reported that we tried to trade Lee to keep Jack and Landry.

Hows Iguodala and Lee versus Jack and Landry, as far as win share? :wink:
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:15 pm
32 wrote:
Blackfoot wrote:
32 wrote:
Blackfoot wrote:I am in the middle of this debate.

I don't think Lee's defensive shortcomings are that big of a deal because our defensive system hides his bad defense. In fact, you can't tell because the wings allow the fourth least amount of penetration in the league.

It's how Lee was able to get stuff in DWS. Not because he is playing outstanding defense, but because they are crediting him for not giving up shots at the basket. So Lee's bad defense is overstated.

However, I think Lee's impact on the board is overstated.

Overall. We are five points better with Lee on the floor. And five points is nothing to scoff at. It's quite high. Lee absolutely makes us better.

Now, I am going to evaluate Lee or Jack and Landry.

Jack and Landry give us more depth, but less individual talent. Which has value (depth.)

David Lee himself has 9.1 WS. That means he is worth about nine extra wins a season.

Landry and Jack have a WS combined of 11.8. Which means they are worth about a win or two more than Lee.

Lee is by far more individually talented. I like the idea of having a great back up for Curry. Honestly, I think it's just preference. Do you want depth and maybe two extra wins, or a player that brings almost as much value by himself?

I think Lee would be more important for the playoffs and Jack and Landry would be more important for the regular season. Depth is always more important in the regular season.

But see, to me, it's not Lee OR Jack and Landry.

It's Jack or Landry PLUS Lee. They have enough cash to sign one of them.

So this dilemma about losing all our bench depth if we keep Lee is a red herring, straw man argument.



No it's not. It's reported that we tried to trade Lee to keep Jack and Landry.

Hows Iguodala and Lee versus Jack and Landry, as far as win share? :wink:


Without looking, I am pretty sure they are worth three more wins. It doesn't sound like a lot, but it is.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:23 pm
I'm thinking the Warriors are more versatile and unpredictable with Lee than without. Yes, the Warriors caught fire against Denver playing smaller. But during the season, the Warriors were also very decent with Lee. Let's not forget about all those match ups he won against guys like Griffin, Aldridge, and Chris Bosh. He dominated Duncan in that game where he had 20 rebounds. The Warriors beat all of the elite teams with Lee in the lineup. But I think because the Denver series was in the playoffs and he got hurt, people will always look to that. Remember game 1? We lost with Lee, but that game was also ours. If Miller doesn't hit, who knows.

But here is the thing. Without Lee, we are just relying on small ball. Why not get the best of both worlds? With Lee, they have a little bit of both. I'm thinking Iggy might actually make Lee better. Or vice versa. They surely will have to spend time guarding guys like Iggy and/or Thompson/Barnes when they play together, so Lee just adds a whole new threat. When Lee is open, he doesn't miss. In fact Lee might thrive in this style of offense.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21414
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 28
PostPosted: Tue Jul 16, 2013 6:22 am
Lee is a very good offensive player and adds a dimension the team hasn't had in a long time. He at least needs to stay another season and we see what effect he has on the team, which can be seen if he misses any games or during times where he sits for long periods. I don't think he is easily replaceable.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

cron