POV

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes


All Star
Posts: 3078
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 17
PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 8:28 am
It is always good to access opposite point of views. In this case this sports illustrated article went ham on the dubs, a negative spin as they call it. The point of this article is to really question the warriors and blow up any thought of them being a good team. This dude went the wrong way of creating any type of credibility because he comes right of the back and says “This is a bad team” really ? First sentence really though ?

The progression of the team depends on the health of Bogut and Curry, the warriors have come along ways from bottom cellars of D-League put togethers. Think about it, where are the D-Leaguers now, Tollivor ? Morrow ? CJ Watson ? DeMarcus Nelson ? So the point is we now have legitimate players, although there are certain question marks we need answered there is way, I mean way more optimism than this article creates.

I am aware that the warriors don’t have that top tier athletic team that runs like gazelles, but again this is a different team. This is a team with skilled assassins, the idea is isolation for the bigs, including Bogut and Lee, and they will be looked on to score in the post, that is fact. The purpose of that is if any team even thinks about doubling either of our post players then Curry, Thompson, Barnes, Rush will be busting it like low budget porn stars, referring to 3 pointers and outside shooting in general.

Optimism is relative to what a team is dealt with as far as roster, and different possibilities, in this case we have a roster that doesn’t come close to the past, and established roles, now if we are stay healthy am saying playoffs. So expectations depends on certain variables coaching and health, other things like slashing and creating shots the warriors will have to work through.

All Star
Posts: 2320
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:40 pm
Location: lithuania, gargzdai
Poster Credit: 10
PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 8:40 am
warriorsstepup wrote:It is always good to access opposite point of views. In this case this sports illustrated article went ham on the dubs, a negative spin as they call it. The point of this article is to really question the warriors and blow up any thought of them being a good team. This dude went the wrong way of creating any type of credibility because he comes right of the back and says “This is a bad team” really ? First sentence really though ?

The progression of the team depends on the health of Bogut and Curry, the warriors have come along ways from bottom cellars of D-League put togethers. Think about it, where are the D-Leaguers now, Tollivor ? Morrow ? CJ Watson ? DeMarcus Nelson ? So the point is we now have legitimate players, although there are certain question marks we need answered there is way, I mean way more optimism than this article creates.

I am aware that the warriors don’t have that top tier athletic team that runs like gazelles, but again this is a different team. This is a team with skilled assassins, the idea is isolation for the bigs, including Bogut and Lee, and they will be looked on to score in the post, that is fact. The purpose of that is if any team even thinks about doubling either of our post players then Curry, Thompson, Barnes, Rush will be busting it like low budget porn stars, referring to 3 pointers and outside shooting in general.

Optimism is relative to what a team is dealt with as far as roster, and different possibilities, in this case we have a roster that doesn’t come close to the past, and established roles, now if we are stay healthy am saying playoffs. So expectations depends on certain variables coaching and health, other things like slashing and creating shots the warriors will have to work through.


Good and reasonable post. I'm hoping for the playoffs, but instead of years past, I will hold myself in realist camp (42-40 if healthy for most of the games, and 36-46 if both our cornerstones missing about a third of the games).
We'll see soon how it all transpires on the floor.

p.s. our starters +/- was negative in all first quarters during preseason. Granted Curry played little and Bogut none, and I wouldn't want to overanalyze it, but let's say we don't get to a quick start in games, and need reserves to pick the slack for our starting unit. Thus, I totally agree that depth is crucial, but I have yet to see our starters come out and establish some sort of dominance.
"i wish i was a little bit taller" skee lo
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:07 am
I'm not gonna machete through every single thing I find wrong with this thread, but a couple major points I'd like to address are:

(1) The author isn't that far off when he says "Bogut is nothing special," though it stings to admit it. That's not a knock on Bogut so much as a blanket statement about the current crop of NBA centers. Dwight Howard - the clear-cut best 5 today - wouldn't even be a top 6 center in '94. And Bogut, a top 5 center when healthy, wouldn't even be in the conversation. Back in the day, I'd take O'Neal, Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, Mourning, Mutumbo, Daugherty, Smits, and possibly even Divac ahead of anyone in the league today. For all his intangible gifts, Bogut is a career 13 and 9 player. Unfortunately, the low tide of current NBA centers waters down his competition and the mere fact that he's 7-feet, intelligent, and somewhat mobile make him a precious commodity these days. He's nothing special as in he'll never make the Hall of Fame, but in a generation where true centers have been gone for damn near 10 years now, Bogut is above-average and plenty of other teams would swap us their 5 in a heartbeat to get him. The author needs to give him his dues, but as many have already pointed out, he seems to be a New York City Warrior hater.

(2) martin, I understand your tendency to play devil's advocate, but arguing that David Lee is a center is like arguing that Zach Randolph is a center. Just because you can offensively hang with 5's and your team continually sticks you in the paint for lack of any other option doesn't make you a center. Lee is a prototypical power forward and identifies himself at that position: 6'9" with a jumper and a post game. You're right; Lee doesn't have Andrew Bynum's post game and he's definitely more comfortable out of the face-up position where he can use his excellent big man handles, but to say he has no back-to-the-basket skills leads me to believe we're watching different games. 8th brilliantly detailed Lee's ability to finish over either should with either hand. Against Kevin Love last year, it was drop steps and power dribbles all game. Against Blake Griffin, it was a face-up pump fake (cause leapers like to leap). He plays the matchup. Saying Lee cant back down is like saying Curry can't move without the ball. It may not happen very often, but when it does, it's extremely clever and skillfully done.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 2320
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:40 pm
Location: lithuania, gargzdai
Poster Credit: 10
PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:22 am
32, my credit eating man, your first point is not necessarily true in its conclusion: the fact that there are no great centers anymore might be due not to lack of big men (as a whole humanity grows up due to evolution), but the change of the game.It might be that big dominant centers are no longer produced since the whole basketball has gone a different way, the skill set of back to the basket scoring beast was counter forced by, yes, playing nellie ball, that is stretching the floor with faster, better shooting players. There was nice article on that. Now, whether you or I am right we can't know for sure. But the way things have been going centers seem to be the second thought in organizing modern offenses.
Yes they are needed for defense, and hopefully Bogut will be as good as advertized.

On your second point. Lee had a step forward over centers to begin with. He was quicker. He took them to the basket. The thing with Lee is, he's not a banger. No wonder he couldn't defend centers, though he could over smart them on offense.
Will he become a banger against PFs? I highly doubt, yes he had one nice game defending Kevin Love two years ago. His help defense is non existent. All the forwards you mention (who themselves are terrible defenders) had his numbers most of the time. And the position he'll have to defend now is quicker. Louis Scola seems to eat him alive as well. They pretty much cancel each other.
I watched David Lee being fed the ball in low post and fumbling some ugly tries at shots. It might have been under Smart. Hell, he wanted Biedrins to be post player as well.
And with Bogut, Lee will have less space for his nice dribble and pump fakes game, because Bogut's man can leave him far from basket, Bogut is not a good shooter. Yes, passing will be this teams main weapon to create shots. I don't think iso's in low post is the thing I want to see. It might look ugly, Keith Smart offense ugly.
"i wish i was a little bit taller" skee lo

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:11 pm
32 wrote:I'm not gonna machete through every single thing I find wrong with this thread, but a couple major points I'd like to address are:

(1) The author isn't that far off when he says "Bogut is nothing special," though it stings to admit it. That's not a knock on Bogut so much as a blanket statement about the current crop of NBA centers. Dwight Howard - the clear-cut best 5 today - wouldn't even be a top 6 center in '94. And Bogut, a top 5 center when healthy, wouldn't even be in the conversation. Back in the day, I'd take O'Neal, Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, Mourning, Mutumbo, Daugherty, Smits, and possibly even Divac ahead of anyone in the league today. For all his intangible gifts, Bogut is a career 13 and 9 player. Unfortunately, the low tide of current NBA centers waters down his competition and the mere fact that he's 7-feet, intelligent, and somewhat mobile make him a precious commodity these days. He's nothing special as in he'll never make the Hall of Fame, but in a generation where true centers have been gone for damn near 10 years now, Bogut is above-average and plenty of other teams would swap us their 5 in a heartbeat to get him. The author needs to give him his dues, but as many have already pointed out, he seems to be a New York City Warrior hater.

(2) martin, I understand your tendency to play devil's advocate, but arguing that David Lee is a center is like arguing that Zach Randolph is a center. Just because you can offensively hang with 5's and your team continually sticks you in the paint for lack of any other option doesn't make you a center. Lee is a prototypical power forward and identifies himself at that position: 6'9" with a jumper and a post game. You're right; Lee doesn't have Andrew Bynum's post game and he's definitely more comfortable out of the face-up position where he can use his excellent big man handles, but to say he has no back-to-the-basket skills leads me to believe we're watching different games. 8th brilliantly detailed Lee's ability to finish over either should with either hand. Against Kevin Love last year, it was drop steps and power dribbles all game. Against Blake Griffin, it was a face-up pump fake (cause leapers like to leap). He plays the matchup. Saying Lee cant back down is like saying Curry can't move without the ball. It may not happen very often, but when it does, it's extremely clever and skillfully done.


I don't think anyone claimed Bogut was a hall of famer. When the writer said Bogut is nothing special he was making the claim Bogut will not be very impactful. Also, it doesn't matter about the golden ages of center, because we are talking about now. If a position is weaker than a good player at that position is even more valuable. Just like Harden deserves the max contract because SG is a weak position.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:22 am
All I'm saying is a hill in a dried up lake wouldn't necessarily be above water in ideal conditions. Bogut has the size and the ability to clog the paint. Thankfully, in this current NBA, that's enough to be a commodity. I think when the author claims Bogut is nothing special, he's referring largely to his offensive game. He cites Bogut as a guy who will disappear on occasion. I can't really disagree, seeing as my own scouting report (posted 2 weeks ago) says exactly that under Bogut's weaknesses. And even most games, when Bogut DOES show up, he's not much more than a finisher on offense. Very rarely (I'm gonna say less than 15 games) are we going to see Bogut look anything close to dominant on the offensive end.

His trade is defense (which is less attractive right off the bat) and even then, he's not gonna get you the sexy BPG numbers that a shallow, one-size-fits-all NBA talking head at Sports Illustrated is gonna give love to. Little known fact: Andrew Bogut led the NBA in blocks per game 2 seasons ago. Lesser known fact: his 2.6 BPG average was the lowest mark to ever lead the league. I understand that he's an advanced statistic guy who contributes more to things like +/-, defensive rating, efficiency, and rebounding rate... But you can't fault an uninformed media minion for shrugging off Bogut due to his traditional numbers. Like I said, hes a career 13 and 9. That's not gonna get you any love from Shaquille O'Neal or anybody else valuing traditional stats over new age ones. Hell, after listening to the lack of respect a guy like Baron got averaging 25 and 10 before the ASG, or Monta's season of 24, 8 dimes, and leading the league in steals... Man, I guess I'm just completely numb to the Warrior hate by now. None of this ragging on Bogut, Lee, or Curry surprises me at all.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:31 am
And for the record, Houston is insane. Max contract for the 6th Man of the Year? Poison pill deals for Asik and Jeremy Lin?? They're demolishing their cap space for mediocre career bench scrubs... And James Harden. Personally, I don't see Harden as a franchise player at all. I dunno what the Rockets are thinking, but serving up Toronto and Dallas' picks, plus a stud in Jeremy Lamb, is freaking crazy. OKC with another brilliant move.
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: Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:42 pm
I wonder if we could've gotten Harden for Thompson + Harrison or something. That would make us an instant playoff team. We should probably start another thread for this though.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:44 pm
It would **** us in the future. We would not have the cap to re-sign Harden.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21381
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:25 pm
8th ave wrote:I wonder if we could've gotten Harden for Thompson + Harrison or something. That would make us an instant playoff team. We should probably start another thread for this though.



Such a move would only work if Harden indeed showed he is an allstar and a top 5 SG currently in the nba AND the team could either add one or two other allstar type players around him, by trading current players for those players or current players here, like Curry, Klay, Lee and Bogut fit well with Harden.

Chances of those two things would be pretty small, though a possibility.

Also, Klay and Barnes would not cost much more in a few years on their new contracts, unless either or both become near allstar types in the next two or three years. Harden is going to get a max contract for nonmaximum contract performace, at least he hasn't performed to that level regularly yet. He showed he has the ability to be near Westbrook effective, but he hasn't shown that and he'll get a chance to on a bad Houston team.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:44 pm
I agree with migya. From where I stand, dudes look a whooooole lot better when the defense is keying into Durant or Westbrook before even thinking about you. Harden is a stud outside shooter and capable while handling the rock, but I doubt his addition in exchange for Thompson changes anything - let alone throwing in another stud prospect to get him. I thought Harden on the Olympic team was a straight up joke, like Boozer and Tayshaun Prince in '08. Don't get me twisted though; he's a good player and he's gonna put up numbers as a first option in Houston, but I'd love to see him drag that dead ass team to the playoffs cause I sincerely doubt that he, Lin, and Asik are anything more than a C+ in terms of combine talent, but they've effectively hamstrung the Rockets' finances for the foreseeable future.

This is reminiscent of when Zeke was stockpiling big contracts on the Knicks with no real plan. I think, if anything, the Rockets are playing themselves outta contention before the season even starts.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:39 pm
Harden is really, really good, and arguably already a top three shooting guard. His TS percentage is .660, that's really good, like really good.

Rockets also have a plan. Their GM is very smart. He also did an AMA on reddit. I can't find it right now, but the dude is smart.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21381
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:24 am
I hope for the Rockets that Harden does turn into a superstar, but even if he does, the rest of their roster looks undertalented and unorganised. Alot has to right for Houston to not look rather stupid with this offseason's roster moves. Best thing for them is to trade any of their players, excluding Harden for now, who are pretty highly valued and somewhat hyped, for players that are proven producers.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:48 am
Blackfoot wrote:Harden is really, really good, and arguably already a top three shooting guard. His TS percentage is .660, that's really good, like really good.

Rockets also have a plan. Their GM is very smart. He also did an AMA on reddit. I can't find it right now, but the dude is smart.

I think you mean his TS% was .660 last year. The year before that, it was .598 and in 2010 it was .551.

I'm merely suggesting that without the safety net of KD/RW taking all the defense's attention, those #'s will go down. Harden's TS% fluctuates quite a bit. Steph Curry, for instance, never had the huge year that Harden did last year, but his TS% for the past 3 seasons have been .605, .595, and .568. Basically, the fact that Harden's percentage has grown by 109 points in the past 3 years, compared to someone like Curry whose TS% only has a 37 point spectrum, leads me to believe that Harden's numbers might dip because they've been traditionally more erratic than a shooter like Curry, who is elite without the aid of 2 superstars to draw the defense.

Also, back loading player's contracts in the form of poison pills, like Jeremy Lin, is dangerous. That's what Mullin did with Dunleavy when he was here and it made him infinitely harder to move. In 2014, Lin and Omer Asik will jump in salary to both make $14.9 million a piece. And now they'll be paying Harden at least $20 million as well. That's $50 million out of your salary cap on 3 players that, quite frankly, might not even get you to the playoffs. That's insane to me. They're running out of cap space but they haven't really added a whole lot of talent and now they just traded perhaps their best rookie to OKC in order to acquire Harden. I dunno how one quantifies knowledge in the NBA, but I take a huge stake in how a GM doles out money and so far I'm not extremely impressed.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:36 pm
Yes, I agree, his efficiency will go down. But their plan is pretty simple. To get a superstar next year or just a really good player. They will have the cap space next year to fit one more max under their contract list. And Lin and Asik's contracts give them flexibility. They can't move them in these two years, but they like what they have. In the third year they will have bird rights to keep rookies and they can move Lin and Asik's expiring contracts if they need to.
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests

cron