Warriors shouln't stand pat, Dave Del Grande

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32


All Star
Posts: 2261
» Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:04 pm
Article Last Updated: 06/03/2006 02:47:09 AM PDT

Warriors shouldn't stand pat
Column by Dave Del Grande

I'M GOING TO be very disappointed if the Warriors don't swing a major deal this off-season. But the NBA playoffs bring to light three reasons why standing pat might not be such a bad thing ...
DATELINE: Amid the big boys. The Warriors played this year's NBA semifinalists — the Mavericks, Suns, Heat and Pistons — a total of 12 times this past season and came away with a respectable 5-7 record, winning three times on the road.

Other than a 101-86 blowout in Phoenix early in the year on the night after they had exhausted themselves to beat the Knicks, the Warriors stood toe-to-toe with the heavyweights on each and every occasion. You beat Dallas three times — no other team did that — and you're obviously a pretty talented crew.

The problem was: Four teams the Warriors hoped to outrun in the playoff race — Clippers, Lakers, Grizzlies and Jazz — combined to beat Golden State 13 times in 15 tries.

Bottom line: It makes no sense. Welcome to Warriors basketball.

DATELINE: In the presence of a ghost. I look at emerging Suns star Boris Diaw, and I can't help but think of Mike Dunleavy and Mickael Pietrus.

Offensively, Diaw and Dunleavy are the same guy — a point guard in a small forward's body. They're a mismatch waiting to happen ... or a potential liability if you don't play to their strengths.

Diaw's first two seasons in Atlanta were even more disappointing than Dunleavy's first three for the Warriors.

Nonetheless, the Suns insisted upon receiving him as part of the Joe Johnson sign-and-trade, and now we see why. He gives them a second point guard on the floor, which is critical to their running game.

Put Dunleavy on the Suns and you'd see the same results.

Pietrus, meanwhile, was Diaw's teammate in France immediately prior to each getting selected in the first round of the 2003 NBA draft. Pietrus was considered the better prospect because he had advantages over his mate in several areas — athleticism, long-range shooting, ability to get to the hoop and defense.

For two years, Pietrus justified the Warriors' decision to take him 10 spots before the Hawks tabbed Diaw.

But this season was a complete reversal, with Diaw bursting forward while Pietrus was in a free fall.

Don't look now but it's decision time on Pietrus. He's in the same situation contractually that resulted in Jason Richardson, Troy Murphy and Dunleavy getting huge extensions the past two off-seasons.

The Warriors, who almost assuredly can't afford to tie up Pietrus long-term without selling off a big contract, probably will allow their fourth-year player to become a free agent next April. It's scary imagining him running up and down the court with the Suns.

Bottom line: Chris Mullin better fully understand what he's got before dealing either guy this summer.

DATELINE: A Warriors reunion. No franchise has had more ex-employees prominently displayed this postseason than the Warriors. Even Mavericks star Jason Terry was thrown away when Warriors management thought Mookie Blaylock offered more upside.

Imagine Adonal Foyle as someone the Suns could bring off the bench to give them a fighting chance against Shaquille O'Neal ... Murphy as a 3-point-shooting complement to Shaq that drew potential double-teamers away from the hoop ... Derek Fisher providing the clutch, final-seconds shooter the Pistons lack ... Dunleavy and Pietrus ...

Yes, Warriors fans, the nightmare could get worse before it gets better.

Bottom line: Maybe it's time the Warriors stop being a Developmental League farm club for NBA title contenders. You can only do that by nurturing your own and keeping what you've got.

DATELINE: The real bottom line. The heck with it, I'd still make a trade. A big one.


Will you be disappointed if the Warriors stand pat this off-season? E-mail your thoughts (with full name and city) to dave@angnewspapers.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Sun Jun 04, 2006 3:07 am
Pretty pointless article. It ain't easy to strike a big deal in the NBA nowadays. It's easy to say that the Warriors shouldn't stay pat (we all agree with that), but it's a lot harder to make moves to improve the team, and I think it would be better not making a move than just dealing for the sake of it.

Funny thing is.. the columnist doesn't say anything besides taking cheap shots at the front office. If you're going to point all the flaws of the front office (and he has the right to do so), you could at least say what you would do to fix the team. And saying that we shouldn't stand pat is not enough.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22003
» Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:13 am
This article just states what we all should already know and that is that this organisation is not that organised!

Murphy seemingly has to go unless he can become a great Center that has some defense (unlikely). Other than that, the team could stay the same and hopefully either dun or Pietrus (or both even) can become effective.

It is organisation that this organisation needs!
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:40 am
migya wrote:It is organisation that this organisation needs!


It's what every team seems to need.

Look at the Clippers, perennial laughingstock of the NBA due to Sterling's unwillingness to pay his "top players". He only decided to pay for Maggette and Brand (and Mags is not a really big deal), and now they're one of the teams with the brightes future of the whole leage. I don't hear those laughs anymore.

My point is that financial responsibility is better than just making moves when you're not sure how they'll pan out.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22003
» Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:43 am
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:It is organisation that this organisation needs!


It's what every team seems to need.

Look at the Clippers, perennial laughingstock of the NBA due to Sterling's unwillingness to pay his "top players". He only decided to pay for Maggette and Brand (and Mags is not a really big deal), and now they're one of the teams with the brightes future of the whole leage. I don't hear those laughs anymore.

My point is that financial responsibility is better than just making moves when you're not sure how they'll pan out.



You're right but the Warriors are really the only team I really care about and organisation has been lacking always it seems!
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:55 am
migya wrote:You're right but the Warriors are really the only team I really care about and organisation has been lacking always it seems!


Yeah, well, I meant it comparing with our front office giving enormous extensions to players that do not deserve them. It has a positive side, as free agents view our team as willing to spend money, but if you make the wrong moves, you're stucked with those players and no chance to spend money on free agents.

In other words, the only player we should have re-signed is J-Rich. The other extensions were reaches.
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:20 am
Dave Del Grande wrote:Other than a 101-86 blowout in Phoenix early in the year on the night after they had exhausted themselves to beat the Knicks, the Warriors stood toe-to-toe with the heavyweights on each and every occasion. You beat Dallas three times — no other team did that — and you're obviously a pretty talented crew.

The problem was: Four teams the Warriors hoped to outrun in the playoff race — Clippers, Lakers, Grizzlies and Jazz — combined to beat Golden State 13 times in 15 tries.

Bottom line: It makes no sense. Welcome to Warriors basketball.

This part pretty much sums up the whole season...
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3040
» Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:07 am
While I am sure Dunleavy, like virtually every non-Shaq player in the league would benefit by playing with Steve Nash, I have never seen him remotely with the moves Diaw displayed. Diaw consistently created his own shot in the low block, bcoming unstoppable against Dallas. Dunleavy is a weak finisher at the rim. That part of the article seemed odd to me...
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22003
» Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:24 am
coltraning wrote:While I am sure Dunleavy, like virtually every non-Shaq player in the league would benefit by playing with Steve Nash, I have never seen him remotely with the moves Diaw displayed. Diaw consistently created his own shot in the low block, bcoming unstoppable against Dallas. Dunleavy is a weak finisher at the rim. That part of the article seemed odd to me...




Well said!

Diaw had an amazing season and deserves lots of credit. Maybe Pietrus can look at his countryman well and get some of his moves!
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3040
» Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:24 pm
migya wrote:
coltraning wrote:While I am sure Dunleavy, like virtually every non-Shaq player in the league would benefit by playing with Steve Nash, I have never seen him remotely with the moves Diaw displayed. Diaw consistently created his own shot in the low block, bcoming unstoppable against Dallas. Dunleavy is a weak finisher at the rim. That part of the article seemed odd to me...




Well said!

Diaw had an amazing season and deserves lots of credit. Maybe Pietrus can look at his countryman well and get some of his moves!


thanks, migya. I see only upside for Diaw. He looks absurdly smooth in the post, and even started demoing some nasty dunks in thr Dallas series. Migod, can you imagine a Phoenix team next year with this line-up
PG - Nash
SG - Raja
SF - Diaw
PF ( a healthy) - Marion
C -Stoudamire
with Barbosa, Jones, K and T Thomas and House coming off the bench?
Yikes - could threaten the all-time scoring average of 123 or so...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest