Dwight Howard for Stephen Curry

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

Which player would be better for the Warriors longterm?

Dwight Howard
13
87%
Stephen Curry
2
13%
 
Total votes : 15

User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:34 pm
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 2:28 pm
Getting a legitimate center sounds like a nice plan, but how would they go about getting one. Quality centers usually make about $8-10M a year and the Warriors don't have that kind of cap space. If you're going to trade for one, then they'll be giving up a big piece like an Ellis, Curry or Lee. Sorry, but no team is going to take Biedrins just to give away their quality center. Do they scour the D-League? Draft one? Not a lot of options which is why centers are such a coveted position. Even Nazr Mohammed can make $7M a year.

They can win without a center. Maybe not a championship, but they could definitely be a much better team without one with some good moves.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2425
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Poster Credit: 34
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 3:00 pm
I don't see why Milwaukee would want Curry, when they have their franchise PG in Jennings...and he is more of a face of the franchise than Bogut. And I don't think Bogut would be that big of a difference maker.
Image
Image
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:33 pm
Location: Los Anyeles, CA
Poster Credit: 13
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 5:26 pm
Guybrush wrote:I don't see why Milwaukee would want Curry, when they have their franchise PG in Jennings...and he is more of a face of the franchise than Bogut. And I don't think Bogut would be that big of a difference maker.


Jennings is a solid PG, but I don't know if they are sold on him being a franchise guy yet. Jennings is probably a bit better defender, but Curry is the better offensive player by far seeing as neither is a pure distributor, and Curry scores more points and gets more possessions while at a faster pace, but shooting at much better percentages.

Bogut is probably the second best defensive C in the NBA, who is a double double machine. His scoring numbers were down this year because of injury, but he's capable of averaging between 15 ppg down low. If you don't think he'd make a big difference at C then we're screwed and might as well trade whatever it takes to get Howard.
Get Money. Get Paid.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2425
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Poster Credit: 34
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 6:32 pm
Dr. Spaceman wrote:
Guybrush wrote:I don't see why Milwaukee would want Curry, when they have their franchise PG in Jennings...and he is more of a face of the franchise than Bogut. And I don't think Bogut would be that big of a difference maker.


Jennings is a solid PG, but I don't know if they are sold on him being a franchise guy yet. Jennings is probably a bit better defender, but Curry is the better offensive player by far seeing as neither is a pure distributor, and Curry scores more points and gets more possessions while at a faster pace, but shooting at much better percentages.

Bogut is probably the second best defensive C in the NBA, who is a double double machine. His scoring numbers were down this year because of injury, but he's capable of averaging between 15 ppg down low. If you don't think he'd make a big difference at C then we're screwed and might as well trade whatever it takes to get Howard.

Neither Jennings nor Curry improved this season as much as I thought they would. In the next season we shall see which one is better. Let's say this was sophomore slump.

I forgot to write that I think Bogut is injury prone, and you never know what to expect of him. Heck, like I said, even Milicic in a good system and surrounding can be a double-double center, and he would cost much less, and we would give a lot less as well to get him. If you're basing the potential on defense, then they are both close when it comes to that segment.
When I said that Bogut wouldn't make that big of a difference I meant on the fact that we would give up either Curry or Monta and I think we would lose more than we would gain either way, especially if we give Ellis in return. I think both of our guards are more valuable than Bogut, maybe that's just me, but based solely on potential, Curry has more upside. So, we would lose a lot of scoring, leadership, star (or a potential star) and play making, and gain a potential double-double guy (which I won't he will be next to Lee) and a better defender below the basket.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't like it.
Image
Image
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2568
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:40 pm
Location: Eureka, CA - Humboldt
Poster Credit: 19
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 8:23 pm
LOL, I'm a little late on the this thread, but is this even a question? No way this happens.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21381
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 10:50 pm
Such a trade won't happen, but I'll play fantasy trade.

I'd rather do Curry, Lee and fillers for Dwight, but as Pawno said, he'd have to sign an extension or no go. I'd prefer to keep one of our current starting guards, so Monta stays and Lee goes to make salaries work, as Orlando won't want AB, unless it's for getting Arenas and his contract back, which I'd resist doing.

Dwight is something special, but you can see with the way Orlando is structured that you need good players around him, especially shooters. With Curry gone, you need a proper PG replacing him, as Monta is a shooting guard. Ray Felton is a free agent I think and he'd be real nice as the PG here. PF, you can get a free agent that is pretty good I think.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:33 pm
Location: Los Anyeles, CA
Poster Credit: 13
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2011 11:26 pm
Guybrush wrote:
Dr. Spaceman wrote:
Guybrush wrote:I don't see why Milwaukee would want Curry, when they have their franchise PG in Jennings...and he is more of a face of the franchise than Bogut. And I don't think Bogut would be that big of a difference maker.


Jennings is a solid PG, but I don't know if they are sold on him being a franchise guy yet. Jennings is probably a bit better defender, but Curry is the better offensive player by far seeing as neither is a pure distributor, and Curry scores more points and gets more possessions while at a faster pace, but shooting at much better percentages.

Bogut is probably the second best defensive C in the NBA, who is a double double machine. His scoring numbers were down this year because of injury, but he's capable of averaging between 15 ppg down low. If you don't think he'd make a big difference at C then we're screwed and might as well trade whatever it takes to get Howard.

Neither Jennings nor Curry improved this season as much as I thought they would. In the next season we shall see which one is better. Let's say this was sophomore slump.

I forgot to write that I think Bogut is injury prone, and you never know what to expect of him. Heck, like I said, even Milicic in a good system and surrounding can be a double-double center, and he would cost much less, and we would give a lot less as well to get him. If you're basing the potential on defense, then they are both close when it comes to that segment.
When I said that Bogut wouldn't make that big of a difference I meant on the fact that we would give up either Curry or Monta and I think we would lose more than we would gain either way, especially if we give Ellis in return. I think both of our guards are more valuable than Bogut, maybe that's just me, but based solely on potential, Curry has more upside. So, we would lose a lot of scoring, leadership, star (or a potential star) and play making, and gain a potential double-double guy (which I won't he will be next to Lee) and a better defender below the basket.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't like it.


Good post, and I actually agree now that you break it down. Although scoring isn't too hard to replace, finding someone as good at scoring getting into the lane and finishing as Monta is not easy. And he is in his prime.

Very true about both players regressing a bit, but that happens a lot to 2nd year players as teams make more adjustment and now it will be up to both Curry and Jennings to adjust their games. And it also isn't too surprising given that both players battled injuries this year. So that should be a good thing for Curry and us, which brings me to my next point which I meant to add onto my last post but forgot.

I don't think trading for a C, is a good move. I think drafting a SF like Leonard or one of the Morris twins and then using any capspace we can to get cheap big men. Maybe try for a solid young big off the bench like Darrell Arthur. Let NY and Miami overpay for some bigger name C's, and get a solid veteran like Nazr Mohammed. But I think trading one of Monta or Curry this offseason is a mistake. Let's surround them with some legitimate size that's not allergic to defense before we blow up our backcourt.
Get Money. Get Paid.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2425
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Poster Credit: 34
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:27 am
Dr. Spaceman wrote:
Guybrush wrote:
Dr. Spaceman wrote:
Guybrush wrote:I don't see why Milwaukee would want Curry, when they have their franchise PG in Jennings...and he is more of a face of the franchise than Bogut. And I don't think Bogut would be that big of a difference maker.


Jennings is a solid PG, but I don't know if they are sold on him being a franchise guy yet. Jennings is probably a bit better defender, but Curry is the better offensive player by far seeing as neither is a pure distributor, and Curry scores more points and gets more possessions while at a faster pace, but shooting at much better percentages.

Bogut is probably the second best defensive C in the NBA, who is a double double machine. His scoring numbers were down this year because of injury, but he's capable of averaging between 15 ppg down low. If you don't think he'd make a big difference at C then we're screwed and might as well trade whatever it takes to get Howard.

Neither Jennings nor Curry improved this season as much as I thought they would. In the next season we shall see which one is better. Let's say this was sophomore slump.

I forgot to write that I think Bogut is injury prone, and you never know what to expect of him. Heck, like I said, even Milicic in a good system and surrounding can be a double-double center, and he would cost much less, and we would give a lot less as well to get him. If you're basing the potential on defense, then they are both close when it comes to that segment.
When I said that Bogut wouldn't make that big of a difference I meant on the fact that we would give up either Curry or Monta and I think we would lose more than we would gain either way, especially if we give Ellis in return. I think both of our guards are more valuable than Bogut, maybe that's just me, but based solely on potential, Curry has more upside. So, we would lose a lot of scoring, leadership, star (or a potential star) and play making, and gain a potential double-double guy (which I won't he will be next to Lee) and a better defender below the basket.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't like it.


Good post, and I actually agree now that you break it down. Although scoring isn't too hard to replace, finding someone as good at scoring getting into the lane and finishing as Monta is not easy. And he is in his prime.

Very true about both players regressing a bit, but that happens a lot to 2nd year players as teams make more adjustment and now it will be up to both Curry and Jennings to adjust their games. And it also isn't too surprising given that both players battled injuries this year. So that should be a good thing for Curry and us, which brings me to my next point which I meant to add onto my last post but forgot.

I don't think trading for a C, is a good move. I think drafting a SF like Leonard or one of the Morris twins and then using any capspace we can to get cheap big men. Maybe try for a solid young big off the bench like Darrell Arthur. Let NY and Miami overpay for some bigger name C's, and get a solid veteran like Nazr Mohammed. But I think trading one of Monta or Curry this offseason is a mistake. Let's surround them with some legitimate size that's not allergic to defense before we blow up our backcourt.

Thanks, glad that you agree. :) I also agree with you that we should try to keep both Monta and Curry for the next season, and surround them with some better players, off the bench, and big bodies below the basket. The only trade I would consider trading Ellis or Curry would be this one, where we would get an impact player like Howard.
Image
Image
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:34 pm
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 10:09 am
Fans always tend to overvalue their own players and that holds true in whatever sport whether its basketball, baseball, hockey or football. I know many fans that thought Pablo Sandovol was going to be a big star for the Giants, yet all he has been is ..welll..is big. They see what a guy ,like Monta Ellis, does on the court, which is score, and assumes he's a star player. 6'3 shooting guards are a dime a dozen and are not that coveted throughout the league. If you look at those per 48 minute stats you'd see names like Lou Williams, Andrea Bargnani, Brook Lopez and Michael Beasley are all within the same points per game (28) of Monta. And the truth is, that he hasn't been able to make this team much better. Why? He's a one-dimensional player by most definitions. He's a scorer. He's not a great defender or even a good one. He's not a good rebounder, passer or ball handler. He's not a team player. He's a guy that rather take 22 shots a game and get his point than to win a game. As long as he gets his. That is why he was a second round pick and not a first rounder. Many scouts and coaches questioned his ability to play for someone other than himself. Eddie Jordan put a list of his top 25 players in the league for 2011 and Ellis wasn't on it. There aren't 25 stars in the league yet Warriors fans think of Ellis as a star player. Maybe fans are getting brainwashed by Bob Fitzgerald, but when watching Warriors on nationally televised games, you get a whole different, non-bias perspective on Ellis.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2425
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Poster Credit: 34
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 10:21 am
BayAreaHoopz wrote:Fans always tend to overvalue their own players and that holds true in whatever sport whether its basketball, baseball, hockey or football. I know many fans that thought Pablo Sandovol was going to be a big star for the Giants, yet all he has been is ..welll..is big. They see what a guy ,like Monta Ellis, does on the court, which is score, and assumes he's a star player. 6'3 shooting guards are a dime a dozen and are not that coveted throughout the league. If you look at those per 48 minute stats you'd see names like Lou Williams, Andrea Bargnani, Brook Lopez and Michael Beasley are all within the same points per game (28) of Monta. And the truth is, that he hasn't been able to make this team much better. Why? He's a one-dimensional player by most definitions. He's a scorer. He's not a great defender or even a good one. He's not a good rebounder, passer or ball handler. He's not a team player. He's a guy that rather take 22 shots a game and get his point than to win a game. As long as he gets his. That is why he was a second round pick and not a first rounder. Many scouts and coaches questioned his ability to play for someone other than himself. Eddie Jordan put a list of his top 25 players in the league for 2011 and Ellis wasn't on it. There aren't 25 stars in the league yet Warriors fans think of Ellis as a star player. Maybe fans are getting brainwashed by Bob Fitzgerald, but when watching Warriors on nationally televised games, you get a whole different, non-bias perspective on Ellis.

I have to go now, so I don't have time to respond how I would like to, so I'll leave it for my return. I'll just say now that it's not all black or white, as stats tend to show things. More on that when I come back.
Image
Image
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:33 pm
Location: Los Anyeles, CA
Poster Credit: 13
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 11:57 am
BayAreaHoopz wrote:Fans always tend to overvalue their own players and that holds true in whatever sport whether its basketball, baseball, hockey or football. I know many fans that thought Pablo Sandovol was going to be a big star for the Giants, yet all he has been is ..welll..is big. They see what a guy ,like Monta Ellis, does on the court, which is score, and assumes he's a star player. 6'3 shooting guards are a dime a dozen and are not that coveted throughout the league. If you look at those per 48 minute stats you'd see names like Lou Williams, Andrea Bargnani, Brook Lopez and Michael Beasley are all within the same points per game (28) of Monta. And the truth is, that he hasn't been able to make this team much better. Why? He's a one-dimensional player by most definitions. He's a scorer. He's not a great defender or even a good one. He's not a good rebounder, passer or ball handler. He's not a team player. He's a guy that rather take 22 shots a game and get his point than to win a game. As long as he gets his. That is why he was a second round pick and not a first rounder. Many scouts and coaches questioned his ability to play for someone other than himself. Eddie Jordan put a list of his top 25 players in the league for 2011 and Ellis wasn't on it. There aren't 25 stars in the league yet Warriors fans think of Ellis as a star player. Maybe fans are getting brainwashed by Bob Fitzgerald, but when watching Warriors on nationally televised games, you get a whole different, non-bias perspective on Ellis.


Taking stats and projecting them per 48 minutes is not an accurate measure of what a player brings to the table. Players like Lou Williams are supposed to score and that's it. Of course if you project their stats without taking into account things like how tired a player get, they'll be up there with the elite scorers in the game. None of these guys run a team like Monta has been forced to do much over the last 2 years. Yeah all those guys can score similar point totals to Monta, but if you honestly think you can use just those stats to measure how a player affects the overall game, then you don't know basketball. What Monta does that no one else on our team can do, is relentlessly attack the paint. He also finishes at the rim at a better % than any other guard in the league despite the fact that gets a ton of no calls. If you don't think that is huge in this day and age of the NBA then I question how much you know. Bulls Fans and Thunder fans if it sucks to have a guard that can break down defenses at will.

There are very few good low post scorers in the game anymore too. Most points in the paint come from guard penetration these days where they will finish themselves or dump it off. How many guys in the league are legitimate low post 20 ppg scorers and don't get a majority of their points from putbacks or jumpshots. Curry although a better shooter, and improving can not get into the lane like Monta. But he put up stats that only two HOF SGs named Kobe and Wade outperformed this year, and improved his overall game again. Oh and if he doesn't help the team and is such a cancer, why is he the undisputed leader of the team and you never see others getting in his face?

Also quit trying to make it seem like he is the worst defender in the league. He is at worst, average. Everyone looks like a terrible defender if you are a guard without a solid defensive system and array of bigs behind you. It's how the NBA works (again why he is important to us)! I'm sure some of the Magic players have better defensive ratings than Monta because they have Howard in the lane, but that doesn't mean they're better or more capable than Monta. Situation you're in is HUGE in the NBA. Lots of people said some of the same things you're saying about Zach Randolph for years, but now that he has a competent and balanced team around him he no longer has empty stats and is again one of the top PFs in the league.
Get Money. Get Paid.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2425
Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 4:21 pm
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Poster Credit: 34
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 3:32 pm
Ok, I won't write anything, Spaceman did all the work for me, lol.

He said all I intended to, if not more. Good job, mate.

Just to say one more time that the biggest mistake people make when they look at those stats per 48 minutes is that they tend to forget that players can get tired, and that not all of them are consistent as much as Monta is. They have ups and downs, so does Ellis, but not as much as others do. And he plays at the same level mostly throughout the season, game in, game out. That's the most important part.
Image
Image

Rookie
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:12 pm
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 6:16 pm
Dr. Spaceman wrote:
BayAreaHoopz wrote:Fans always tend to overvalue their own players and that holds true in whatever sport whether its basketball, baseball, hockey or football. I know many fans that thought Pablo Sandovol was going to be a big star for the Giants, yet all he has been is ..welll..is big. They see what a guy ,like Monta Ellis, does on the court, which is score, and assumes he's a star player. 6'3 shooting guards are a dime a dozen and are not that coveted throughout the league. If you look at those per 48 minute stats you'd see names like Lou Williams, Andrea Bargnani, Brook Lopez and Michael Beasley are all within the same points per game (28) of Monta. And the truth is, that he hasn't been able to make this team much better. Why? He's a one-dimensional player by most definitions. He's a scorer. He's not a great defender or even a good one. He's not a good rebounder, passer or ball handler. He's not a team player. He's a guy that rather take 22 shots a game and get his point than to win a game. As long as he gets his. That is why he was a second round pick and not a first rounder. Many scouts and coaches questioned his ability to play for someone other than himself. Eddie Jordan put a list of his top 25 players in the league for 2011 and Ellis wasn't on it. There aren't 25 stars in the league yet Warriors fans think of Ellis as a star player. Maybe fans are getting brainwashed by Bob Fitzgerald, but when watching Warriors on nationally televised games, you get a whole different, non-bias perspective on Ellis.


Taking stats and projecting them per 48 minutes is not an accurate measure of what a player brings to the table. Players like Lou Williams are supposed to score and that's it. Of course if you project their stats without taking into account things like how tired a player get, they'll be up there with the elite scorers in the game. None of these guys run a team like Monta has been forced to do much over the last 2 years. Yeah all those guys can score similar point totals to Monta, but if you honestly think you can use just those stats to measure how a player affects the overall game, then you don't know basketball. What Monta does that no one else on our team can do, is relentlessly attack the paint. He also finishes at the rim at a better % than any other guard in the league despite the fact that gets a ton of no calls. If you don't think that is huge in this day and age of the NBA then I question how much you know. Bulls Fans and Thunder fans if it sucks to have a guard that can break down defenses at will.

There are very few good low post scorers in the game anymore too. Most points in the paint come from guard penetration these days where they will finish themselves or dump it off. How many guys in the league are legitimate low post 20 ppg scorers and don't get a majority of their points from putbacks or jumpshots. Curry although a better shooter, and improving can not get into the lane like Monta. But he put up stats that only two HOF SGs named Kobe and Wade outperformed this year, and improved his overall game again. Oh and if he doesn't help the team and is such a cancer, why is he the undisputed leader of the team and you never see others getting in his face?

Also quit trying to make it seem like he is the worst defender in the league. He is at worst, average. Everyone looks like a terrible defender if you are a guard without a solid defensive system and array of bigs behind you. It's how the NBA works (again why he is important to us)! I'm sure some of the Magic players have better defensive ratings than Monta because they have Howard in the lane, but that doesn't mean they're better or more capable than Monta. Situation you're in is HUGE in the NBA. Lots of people said some of the same things you're saying about Zach Randolph for years, but now that he has a competent and balanced team around him he no longer has empty stats and is again one of the top PFs in the league.

The thing is the team has been losing and Monta a great player can score at will. Only problem is he not good enough to hide the team weakness in defense and rebounding. His partner AB check out for the pass two season already they were suppose to be the main pieces to push the team to the playoffs. Both players never played well together for a season when they were signed to those big contracts, and when the Owner traded for David Lee to solve that rebounding they still weren't good enough to win just stay at the mid 30 win like the past Warriors team. I think the Owner thought AB would be back and wanted to sure up the front court ASAP with David Lee sign and trade only problem is AB still hasn't recover from whatever issues he has on the court and they are hoping he gets better. David Lee good rebounder, but no defensive presence. Owner wanted to reach the playoff this season, but signed a project in Jeremy Lin and didn't sure up the bench from the guard position. Three of your highest player signed with no defensive presence what a way to build the team exciting with the 2 guards who can score, but no defensive presence at all.

Realistically I think they can get 2 backup guards, a SF, and a backup Center or two in FA, and get the best player available in the draft because I have my doubts Owner going to pay 10 mill or more per year for a good Center.
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 930
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:24 pm
Location: Rock Island, WA
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 9:28 pm
I just read that we should go after Bynum (as some of you have probably already seen). In the article it also says that the Lakers MIGHT go after D. Howard......all speculation I know but would you give up anything for Bynum? Not sure we have anything to give the Lakers salary cap-wise.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/6982 ... drew-bynum
The Hulk is a Warriors fan.
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 930
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:24 pm
Location: Rock Island, WA
Poster Credit: 14
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2011 9:30 pm
^ That article is assuming he's available..
The Hulk is a Warriors fan.
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest