Golden State Of Mind: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: BTB's Final Preseason NCAA Hoops Bracket

2005- 2006 REPORT CARD: Andris Biedrins

Year 2 of the Biedrins experiment pretty much went like Year 1, lots of fouls and missed free throws. He did have a stretch of about 10-15 games where he played well and his hustle paid off, but the rest of the time he struggled. Let's see how his third year turns out and if he breaks the "project" label.


(Photo: eur.news1.yimg.com)


(Photo: www.shanghaidaily.com)

Airballing Free Throw by lebronjamesfo3

Maybe Biendrins should shoot free throws with 60 year old Bob (soccoolbob)

Overall Grade: D-

Atma Brother #1 (Grade: D)
Back to back seasons of 4 points and 4 rebounds? The only part of Andris' game that has improved is his free throws... if you're rooting for the other team that is. I know 5th graders who have better form on their free throws and jump shots. Biedrins is on pace to be the next Adonal Foyle... and not for the community work.

DJ Fuzzylogic (Grade: F)
Am I the only one who thinks Biedrins is Jeff Foster at best--a rebounding machine @ best?  Is that all we expect and what we consider to be "star potential" now for skinny 6'10 and taller dudes in the league?  His great hands and agility in the post are a great asset to this team, yet he is still incredibly unpolished and has absolutely no finesse 3 feet beyond the basket.

Fantasy Junkie (Grade: D)
I think you know how I feel about this guy, the one minute man. While he improved slightly, he still has shown me nothing. He played well in a few games but never kept it going consistently.

Hash (Grade: D-)
Terrible free throw shooting and a fouling machine. At least there's room for improvement! He would get chewed up and spit out in the postseason. (Assuming we ever get there.)

YaoButtaMing (Grade: C) Heart. This guy can bring it. Maybe one of the only members of the warriors willing to dive for a ball or do the dirty work. Gotta love a guy for that! Not as good as the Janitor, but not getting paid like one either!

What did you think of Biedrins last year?



2005-2006 Report Card Archives:


0 recs  |  Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

D- WTF?
D- ?!? Come on folks!  

That rating is not normalized to the NBA let alone bad to NBA teams (GWS are one of the elite bad franchises in the NBA).

The kid is 20 as of April 2.  

# Was the youngest player in the NBA in 2004-05
# Became the youngest player ever to appear in a game for Golden State when he made his NBA debut as an 18-year-old.
# In 11 games during the FIBA European League, averaged 18.6 points, 8.2 rebounds and 1.82 blocks.

He pays attention and is coachable.  He plays with high energy and effort when he's on the floor. He fouls to often but he defends. He cares and fights for the ball. That's a D- ?. On the GSW?

GSW lack big men so this kid is put out on the floor when he should be developing.  He plays too agressive and picks up bad fouls -- he's not a natural scorer but many useful big men are not nor are all NBA centers good free throw shooters.

At 20 as of April 2, he is right where you expect a 20 year old center to be for a young kid drafted #11 and playing at 18.

He's 3 years younger than Nenad Krstic who the Nets let develop in Europe. FT% is terrible but other stats (minutes rebounds and points) compare well to Jackie Butler who SA Spurs signed for 7M over 3 years.

C-

His negatives: Free throw below 60%, making stupid fouls, not progressing as needed last year (to unrealistic expectations) and playing poorly in the '06 summer league -- a bad sign.

by joe sez on Aug 12, 2006 2:21 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

agree
i agree the d's were too harsh

by travisl212 on Aug 13, 2006 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Much better than a D.
C+

4 points and 4 rebounds needs to be taken in context and some of that context is < 15 minutes per game. Per game stats are somewhat misleading in this regard.  While part of this is his doing because his high foul rate meant that he had to go to the bench quickly, some of it was a lack of opportunity.  

Monty didn't play him much, though when he did, the Warriors were generally better off than when he sat.  This says something about the alternatives in an out of position defensive liability at center in Murphy and Hands of Tin Foyle, but it also says something about Monty and his shortcomings.  This team didn't shoot well.  If a team doesn't shoot well, one of the things it has to do is rebound the damn ball and Biedrins is a very good rebounder.  Offensive rebounds mean that a possession hasn't ended because of a missed shot.  Defensive rebounds mean that the opponents possession ended without a basket.  

The FT shooting was abysmal, but the FG% was stellar, and with the ratio of FG attempts to FT attempts he had, the latter more than compensated for the former.  Yes, it's all short shots, putbacks and dunks, but those shots count just as much. And if it were so easy to hit 63% of your shots by getting putback and dunks, why do most no-jump-shot big men still come far, far short of that.  For some reason, people seem to discount this but if were so easy to convert putback and dunks at that rate, why doens't anyone else do it? I'll take a guy who hits 60% from the floor and 30% from the line over a guy who hits 50% from the floor (which is still considered good) and 70% from the line because he's going to produce more.  This is simple math.  Biedrins doesn't put up bad shots from the floor, something that it seems most players--especially those with little skill--just can't seem to do and that's worth a ton.  

If Foyle had shot as well as Biedrins but as poorly as Biedrins did from the line, the Warriors would have scored about 60 more points on the season.  May not sound like too much, but that usually equates to 2 or 3 wins over the course of a season.

If we get rebounding and high-percentage 2nd chance conversions from Biedrins, he's an asset and a valuable one.  If he adds any improvement to his FT shooting, he's going to be a significant plus.

His big minus is really the fouls because that's what keeps him off the floor.  If he can cut down on those, he could average double digit rebounds and clos to it in points.  The points come on very few shots so while he wouldn't add a whole lot of total offense, what he would bring wouldn't take away from other players.

by jae on Aug 12, 2006 3:41 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

if if if
look at the per game stats in a different view. if you don't deserve to be on the floor, especially over foyle, then you don't deserve a good grade. if he's only playing 15 minutes there's a reason for that. just because you have a high per 48 minute average, doesn't mean you're a good player. there's a reason that certain guys only play 15 minutes.

let's look at the FG%. Foyle clearly is as inept on offense as AB. Tell me what you think of this. If AB was a more skilled offensive player who could shoot from 7 feet, does that not change his effectiveness on offense? that means he can pick and roll more, he can bring the opposing center out a step or two farther from the paint opening it up for more players, and gets him more involved in the flow of the game. having a better offensive repetoire affects the game greatly. if i only take high percentage shots, then i'm going to have a high FG%.

His big minus is really the fouls because that's what keeps him off the floor.  If he can cut down on those, he could average double digit rebounds and clos to it in points.

If he can't stay on the floor, due to the high foul rate, why give him a good grade? If he did all of those things, cut down the fouls, average double digit rebounds, he'd get a much higher grade.

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 13, 2006 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Monta was graded on ifs, why not Biedrins?
Actually, Foyle is more inept at offense than Biedrins. While neither have any range, Biedrins doesn't try to extend it only to miss and makes more of the short stuff.  While not pretty perhaps, making the easy shots and passing up the ones you cannot make is a valuable skill.  Those putbacks really count and making more of them makes your team better than making fewer of them.  Perhaps neither player will extend the defense, command double-teams, or force an opposing coach to alter their strategy on D, but that doesn't mean that they're equal.  

I'd rather have a big man that can extend his range and hit a reasonable percentage from the floor.  But those are dodo-bird rare and in absence of that, I'll take the guy who knows his range and doesn't try to extend it only to start missing shots over the guy who thinks he can hit the 10 footer and sees his FG% drop. We've got two guys who can't hit the shot from further out.  The guy who takes fewer of those and makes more of the short ones is worth more on offense.  I find this a hard position for a reasonable person to take issue with.

But more importantly, you seem to be arguing against me for something I did not do.  You seem to imply that I gave Biedrins a "high grade."  Please check a bit more carefully.  I thought him a C-.  If a C is average, this is not a high grade.  It's below average.  

My basic issue was not as much with Biedrins getting a bad grade--though I thought that most were way too harsh and don't seem to notice that he was a productive player and did many things that will help teams win--but that the rationale for giving these grades isn't rational.  Ellis got A's, Biedrins got D's though in terms of what they did on the court, Biedrins was probably a more valuable player.  The rationale seems to be that Ellis (though older than Andris) is straight out of high school and no one expected anything.  No expectations is as lousy a rationale for someone getting stellar marks as an "IF" that points to specific things that someone can do to stay on the court.  The flip flop rationale is that these are grades about what someone did, not their potential.  If that's the case, then there's STILL no justifying Ellis getting an A for production that wasn't any better than what the younger Biedrins did.  

by jae on Aug 14, 2006 9:11 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

correction
Sorry, meant to say that I give Biedrins a C+--slightly above average.

by jae on Aug 14, 2006 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed
I work with a bunch of morons =)

thats why i put a C. i think he'll improve!

by YaoButtaMing on Aug 12, 2006 5:14 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

C+
I agree with JAE. I give him a C+ too. Such great energy and is ready to score inside points (dunks/putbacks - unlike Foyle) without taking offense away from the rest of the team. He does foul alot, but also gets some of the most bogus foul calls of any player. It seemed like almost every game he had 1-2 fouls where he had clean blocks or never even touched the other player. He is so young that I think he wll improve alot. I also think he should be starting instead of Foyle - but I also like him off the bench for the burst of energy.

by bol on Aug 12, 2006 5:21 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Off the bench
Andris is similar to Tyson Chandler, a 10M/year guy who came off the bench for Chicago.  Both can play well of the bench.  Both are motivated, defensive oriented and high energy guys who score off put-backs.  Both lack an outside shot, pick-up quick fouls and can have mental lapses.  

I look at Tyson Chander who has been playing two years longer and think Andris will develop like he has to date but with better scoring and rebounding stats.  Andris has good hands and is quick while Tyson has small hands for his size and that makes him bounce the ball to get a better handle on it. That slows him down and defenses can react.

One other difference, Tyson worked on his own in offseason and I question how hard he worked.  I believe Andris works out at GSW facilities under coaching supervision.

by joe sez on Aug 12, 2006 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

All good points
I'm really liking this discussion. Biendrins seems like a good guy and I really like his energy, but I'm shocked how little he improved from his rookie season. Not that I expected him to come back as Jermaine O'Neal (by the way, they look like the have similar frames) or anything, but man- did he work on his game at all last season?

It's true that he's young (only recently turned 20), but come on. I had more refined post moves than him when I was 13. I could shoot better than him when I was in high school.

Hahaha and I AM NOT NBA material.

He's young, but so what? He's not 5 years old or anything. Biedrins should be way more advanced than he is. Being young is not an excuse for being that raw or not working on your game. How many of you could shoot your free throws at a higher rate than him when you were 19?

Also, he should glue himself to the TV set and watch a bunch of film. He has very little understanding of the game.

So far he's shown me nothing. He can't even beat out Adonal Foyle for the starting spot. And before everyone jumps on Monty for that one, remember that in Monty's 1st year of coaching he started Uncle Cliffy at center over Foyle.

I hope he comes back next season strong. Let's hope he's committed to working hard this offseason. Like Janny Hu noted in our interview, Biedrins is a little scared about the Warriors drafting Project O'Bryant and he should be.


93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 12, 2006 6:29 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Big men take longer
Age and size matter but less say it doesn't, logic dictates a F or D- player should be dumped to open up a roster slot and clear salary cap.  

Is that the concensus?  Dump him ASAP?  Since he is a D- player -- maybe get another guard.

Ben Wallace FT% was 27.3% in the 06 playoffs and 41.8% lifetime with low scoring.  Another guy to rank low along with Shaq who shot 37.4% in the 06 playoffs and lifetime 52%.  Give Ben a D- and give Shaq a D+ and another ring.

The player grades are skewed towards flashy play and making highlight reels.  

by joe sez on Aug 12, 2006 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

please
  1. No we do not dump him, but if a better player was there, I'd get replace Biedrins. His salary is still on the rookie salary scale sohe's not expensive and he's still got a ton of room for his game to grow.
  2. nobody said biedrins got a D solely because of his free throws. and to compare him to shaq and ben wallace, you must be joking. yes the free throw percentage's are similar, in fact they all deserve F's for those. please don't compare biedrins' grade to a grade we'd give shaq and big ben.
  3. Grades are skewed towards good play and making the team better. neither of which, in my opinion, biedrins does.

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 12, 2006 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Raise the grade
If he's worth keeping then acknowledge he's doing some things right and up the D- grade.

There's not that much statistically different from Monta and AB but grades are A and D-.  AB rebounds better than average and plays center.  He shoots over 60% on mostly garbage posessions where he rebounds and scores without needing a play/posession called for him. That's all helpful.

The fouls are a problem but to be expected for a then 19 year old playing center in the NBA.  Fix that problem (adding size and strength) and you have a servicable NBA center at 20. The many things you can't teach are there.

I'm puzzled over his rotten FT% shooting -- or any NBA players poor FT% but facts are facts: Players can win an NBA def player of the year award and still be a sub 50% FT shooter or NBA MVP with a 50% average.  

by joe sez on Aug 13, 2006 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Raise the grade?
It's an average of 5 different people's grade for Biedrins.

And I don't think he's worth keeping. I'd trade him in a heartbeat as a throw-in as part of a package for a better player. If he develops into a solid player, then good for him. I'd be happy to get him back when he's good, but I don't feel like watching him develop on our clock. It's been 12 years and we already have enough projects. After showing no progress last year and very little understanding of the game, Biedrins has his work cut out for him.


93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 13, 2006 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ridiculous grading scale
Biedrins is 20 years old, averages 4 and 4 in 15 minutes, more PT at the end of the season where he does somewhat better than this.  He hit more than 60% of his shots from the field, meaning that when he shot the ball, he scored more often than not and he didn't hand the ball back to the opponent by missing a shot.  More often than not, when he's on the court, the Warriors outscored their opponents. He gets a no-pass for being young and the rather important basketball things he does well that help teams win games --rebounding and hitting a high percentage of his shots-- get overlooked in favor of Montgomery's poor personnel decisions.

He gets a "D."  

Montay Ellis is also 20 years old.  Ellis averages a bit under 7 in 18 minutes, doesn't appreciably rebound, got assists that are strictly pedestrian for a guard.  He hit 41.5% of his shots--a figure that is frankly not very good, 34% from beyond the arc (a figure that is adequate, but not stellar).   Though widely acknowledged that it's not really in line with the numbers he put up, he get rave reviews from the folk here, largely because he's young and has "potential" and no one expected anything from him prior to the season.

He gets an A.

Y'all have a whacked grading curve.  

by jae on Aug 12, 2006 7:24 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I agree wholeheartedly
For a 20 year old, still developing center to hold his own against NBA big men both inside offensively and defensively too is a fantastic feat. Can he shoot? Not at all. Can he hit free throws? Not in this lifetime. But he can catch the ball swiftly down low and get it into the basket and he has an underrated hook-ish shot that he can get in if he gets pushed a few feet out from under the basket. He can block shots and rebound under the hoop as well. Yes, he's a project, but he's got a lot of positives so far. He just needs to discipline himself with the fouling and with playing the game in general.

by jonathan on Aug 12, 2006 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

based on expectations
tell me that you expected biedrins to end up with averages of 4 and 4. did you really expect him to end up with the same averages as last year? tell me what you expected him to produce at the beginning of the year. then we can compare that to the end result.

you want to compare monta ellis to biedrins? who made more game changing plays? who was a 2nd round draft pick that nobody even expected to contribute? like i've said before, my grades are based on my exectations of a player. i'm not going to grade jrich, monta, and biedrins on the same scale. it would be unfair.

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 12, 2006 11:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"more game changing plays?"
Who made more game changing plays?  What definition is that?  A rebound changes the game positively because it prevents the other team from getting the ball and gives your team an opportunity to score.  Rarely though is a rebound particularly impressive looking, but they change games more than just about anything other than high fg%.  Missed shots likewise change the game because more often than not they mean a possession where you didn't score and the opponents get the ball back.  They change games for the worse.  In terms of correlation with wins, Biedrins hands down had more of a positive statistical impact on the Warriors this season.

Monta's a more impressive athlete, more graceful, more entertaining to watch certainly and he may become a better (or at least more marketable) player.  But don't confuse that with results and impact on games. This isn't a dance contest.  The key to basketball is to win and there are things that help a basketball team win and things that don't.  For the time they were on the court, Andris did more to help the team than Monta did, even if he didn't wow people with athleticism, even if he didn't charm people in the process.  

Expectations?  I thought based on what he did at the end of his first season that Biedrins should have played more early this last season.  Monty didn't agree, but based on some other questionable decisions on his part (perhaps influenced by management trying to justify Foyle's salary) he didn't.  Andris played pretty much exactly like he did at the end of season 1 when he was put in, which didn't indicate improvement, but was by-and-large productive in an unspectacular way.  Should he have improved?  Probably.  But what he did was way, way, way better than "D" performance and had he been put in games more often, the Warriors would have won more often.

Expectations for grading make it sound like they're riding in on the short bus.  I guess if the Warriors played a team full of undrafted free agents they could all get As while the team challenged the '73 Sixers.  Grading the players based on "expectations" where a second round pick gets an A for performance similar (or worse) to a second year player's D isn't really evaluating the players, it's evaluating the team's management for where they decided to get their talent.

by jae on Aug 13, 2006 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed
A rebound changes the game positively because it prevents the other team from getting the ball and gives your team an opportunity to score.  Rarely though is a rebound particularly impressive looking, but they change games more than just about anything other than high fg%.  Missed shots likewise change the game because more often than not they mean a possession where you didn't score and the opponents get the ball back.  They change games for the worse.

I agree with you 100% on the impact of rebounding.

Exactly why at 4 rebounds a game Biendrins had very little impact. 48 minute extrapolations rarely apply and they especially don't make any sense for Biedrins because he can't stay on the floor for more than a few minutes without fouling himself out of the game. So, 4 rebounds a game and 4 points is all he really brought to the table last season.

Remember these aren't grades of the player; they're grades of how they performed in the 2005-2006 season. During the 2005-2006 season the Warriors would have had the same record if they didn't have Biedrins. He had zero impact on the season as a whole.


93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 13, 2006 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Biedrins
had 4.2 rebounds a game in 14.7 minutes a game, .29 rebounds/minute. Foyle registered at .23, "rebounding machine" Troy Murphy registered at .29, Diogu at .22. (And Ben Wallace? .32.) Also Biedrins was 20 years old.

I understand that these are not grades of the player per se, but rather grades of their impact. But while Biedrins didn't set the world on fire in his playing time, he DID play a very serviceable center and give us an actual scoring option inside for once. He had a lot of flaws, too, though. I get that. But a D is harsh. He was a great shot blocker inside, and he RARELY turned the ball over. (.034 TO/minute, for comparison's sake Ellis had .065, Foyle .044, Baron .081, Richardson .058,  Diogu .076, Murphy .043.)

I think we can indict him for being a little clumsy and unpolished, but I don't think it's fair to indict him for not getting the playing time that, with really only Foyle in front of him, he deserved. His played to at least a C/C+ level when he was out on the court, which for a team so weak at center was actually pretty valuable. What I'm saying is that you justify the grade by saying "he had zero impact on the season as a whole" and I think that's just unfair to indict him for not getting playing time. Because no, he didnt really make a big impact, but the point is that he would've if given more of Foyle's wasted minutes.

by jonathan on Aug 13, 2006 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

extrapolation
Per minute extrapolations work well for some stats, not well for others.  Scoring does not scale well, but rebounds DO scale well.  Guys who grab 4 boards in 15 minutes are likely to grab 8 in 30.  

He was productive when he was on the floor, but fouled too often and has a dunce for a head coach so he didn't get more time.  If you are considering only his total numbers though, you're giving him a D on the basis of his fouls, considing him to be a detriment to the team.  If you're giving Monta an A when he managed about 3 mpg more, but didn't actually produce more for the team in that time, you've basically declaring your grades to be popularity contests not at all consistent with an evaluation of what they players actually did.

I am remembering that these are grades for how they performed in 05-06. That's why I can't understand how anyone can give Monta an A and Biedrins a D.  Biedrins and Monta both did some things well, but are far from finished products.  One of them was more productive in the similar time they had on the court, yet the other seems to be getting ridiculous high grades from people here, the other got tossed in the Doghouse.

by jae on Aug 13, 2006 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't worry- It's not a popularity contest
For the record I like Biedrins, Monta, and MP2. I gave Monta a high grade because for a rookie he really came through. Biedrins and MP2 (who I love watching when he's on) earned some poor grades from me because they didn't progress. And also for the record, I expect Monta to have a little bit of a sophomore slump. The expectations for him are ridiculous.

Regardless of the grades, remember that I was rooting for MP2 and Biedrins just as hard as anyone last season.

I think the main reason I don't buy the rebound extrapolation particularly for Biedrins (though you make a good case why extrapolating rebounds make sense for other players) is that there's no way he'd stay on for close to 48 minutes with his dumb fouls.

One more thing. Last year he was an awful defender. Not because he didn't try or because he didn't swat a few shots, but because of all those fouls. Almost every time he fouled a player it put them on the line for an 70% shot attempt, rather than a 45% shot attempt (gross estimates). That's just making it easy for the other team and making it hard for your teammates who have to play with the added pressure of worrying about putting the other team in the bonus or on the line.

Personally I'd try to move him because he probably still has the P word (potential) in the minds of some GM's. I'm also terrified that Mullin is going to give him Foyle money. Hahaha, never thought I'd see the day when I said "Foyle money"!

Anyhow, great discussion. I think we're in more agreement than it seems. Fantasy Junkie and I gave Biedrins a D, you gave him a C-. Those are poor grades. He had a poor season.


93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 13, 2006 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Biedrins and fouls
His fouls were ridiculous, but it's the thing he has to work on first and foremost.  He cuts down on the fouls and he stays in the game, then he gets more rebounds.  He cuts down on the fouls and he's a reasonable post defender.  That's a step above players who need to pick up the basic basketball skill of grabbing the damn ball (Adonal, I'm looking in your direction) and think that hyperactively bouncing around the lane trying to swat every shot is the same thing as playing defense (Adonal, still looking).

I'm not projecting out to a "per 48" stat with Biedrins.  Don't believe that I presented that anywhere.  But if he got 2.8 in 14+ minutes, he can stay on the court for 28+ before fouling out.  Then he's pulling in 8 and 8 which is better than what we'd get from our big dollar center who didn't get that many minutes (still looking in your direction, Adonal).  It doesn't seem like much, but 8 and 8 centers aren't common.  Seems like they should be, but they aren't.

I'd keep Andris in a heartbeat over Foyle. Granted, the former is easier to move, but if it's about winning games, they'll accomplish this more readily if they can play AB more.  He's an actual valuable player.  The trades that consider him fill-in and get us back garbage like an overpaid Al Harrington are wastes.

by jae on Aug 13, 2006 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fouls per 48
Also, here's a (sad) calculation for the per 48 minute angle since we're extrapolating rebounds/ points:

Biedrins had 2.8 fouls for 14.7 minutes of playing time.

That works out to 2.8 fouls/ 14.7 min= 0.19 fouls/min

0.19 fouls/min X 48min = 9.12 fouls per game

There's no way he would ever last 48 minutes, so 48 minute rebound calculations just don't apply.

Just call Biedrins BONUS (from the eyes of the other squad)

Again, I hope Biedrins watches some film of the greats like Hakeem and Ewing this offseason. Those guys blocked/ defended shots with their hands/arms and avoided dumb fouls.


93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 13, 2006 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

game changing plays & expectations
by game changing plays, i don't mean a rebound that's all in the flow of a game. i mean a key defensive stop, a big shot when it really counts. a rebound can be a game changing play if it's made on a key possession and you need a stop. i'm not saying andris didn't make any, i'm just saying i felt monta had a bigger impact on the game with his defense and athletic ability.

expectations. you're blowing it out of proportion. if you grade JRich and Monta on the same scale then you're doing an injustice to Monta. he would flunk everytime and he doesn't deserve an F. so putting them on a different scale makes sense because there are differences in what is expected of them.

but let's do it your way and not base it on expectations. tell me what your grades are based on? how do you conclude that a center who plays 15 minutes and records 4 and 4 deserves a C? what center in the nba plays 15 minutes and is considered average? what is your grading scale? what gets an A?

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 13, 2006 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

leave a grade
it's perfectly fine to disagree with our grades, that's what makes this fun. But leave your grade so we can have a discussion about this. if we're giving him a D and you're giving him a C-, well there's not that much difference. but if you're giving him a B or an A, then I want to know why.

and honestly i didn't think there was so much pro-Andris sentiment around here. glad to see that people have more faith in him than i do.

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 12, 2006 11:43 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

my grade
These grades are based on what he did last year vs my expectations, they aren't based on potential. My grade for him was based on the fact that he did improved very little from the end of year 1 to the end of year 2. I love his hustle and the fact that he plays hard but he makes poor decisions, looks lost on the court, and can't even start over foyle. He fouls a lot and not all of his fouls are "imaginary". The fouls hurt the team whether it's putting the other team in the bonus early in the quarter, bailing a team out late in the shot clock, or not being able to keep foyle off the court. fouls are fouls. whether he deserves them or not we can debate, but when your fouls per game is almost equal to your points per game, you have a loooooong way to go.

Question: If he played so well and has such a bright future, then why did Mullin draft another project center? POB was the best player available? I don't think so. Mullin felt there was a need at center, coincidentally, Biedrins plays there.

Basically, i'm waiting to see if he improves from last year to this year (summer league was a disappointment). i hope he can take the starting center spot from foyle and play 25-30 minutes a game. i hope he blossoms into a strong defensive force. i hope he learns the game. i hope he learns how to position himself to play better defense and not pick up ticky tack fouls. i hope he keeps working hard and hustles. i hope you guys are right about his future and i hope i'm wrong about him.

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 12, 2006 11:57 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

your question
is an astute one ... another possible reason: Mully might have been thinking he was going to move Murphy or Foyle (or both) and wanted to accumulate (relatively cheap) depth in the post ...  there was talk of using Beedy at the 4 more this year but if we start the season with Ike and Murphy that isn't gonna be the case I wouldn't think

by hardcore on Aug 13, 2006 2:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

A question to your question
We're talking about the same Mullin:

That signed Adonal Foyle to an overpriced long term contract?

That signed Derek Fisher to an overpriced long term contract and then, with his value at it's highest, flipped him to Utah for some trash?

That signed Dunleavy to an overpriced long term contract because he was so sold on his potential to improve?

Right?

So forgive me if I'm not sold on Biedrin's ineptitude simply because Mullin's showing signs of doubt. Because quite frankly, Mullin's a dunce when it comes to a lot of decisions.

by jonathan on Aug 13, 2006 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

haha
ok true, mullin makes questionable, actually horrible, decisions, but i don't think he's an idiot. he knows where the most glaring weaknesses are, in the post and at small forward. so what does he do with the draft? try to fill in the weakest parts of the team. i question his decision making, but it's clear where the biggest weaknesses on the team are.

also i don't think biedrins will be a bad player, i'm just grading him out on the past year.

what do you think will become of biedrins when it's all said and done? will he become an all-star? average a double double? ride the bench?

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 13, 2006 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think he'll be an above average
starting center. That's at least how I think he'll pan out. Think Brad Miller but without the ability to shoot and a bit better defensively and on the boards. I don't think he'll ever be an all star, but I think he'll have some solid seasons on contending teams if they so choose to play him.

by jonathan on Aug 14, 2006 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

B-Rad
One of the great things about Brad Miller's game is his passing. I don't think Biedrins will have ever be on his level in that facet of the game, but who knows? No one thought Brad Miller could pass when he was on the Pacers, but look at him now.

93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 14, 2006 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

why did Mullin draft another center
Mullin's an idiot.  I didn't ever think he sounded that bright when he was a player and don't think him too bright now.   Hell, he extended Murphy when he didn't have to and probably overpaid for him.  He extended Dunleavy when he shouldn't have.  These were poor pieces of talent evaluation.  Why should I consider him thinking that POB was a good idea to suddenly be worth a damn?

I thought POB was an uninspired, unimaginative and in all likelihood wasted pick.  Mullin was a really good player, but I suspect that when it comes down to it, he doesn't know how to put together a team and gets as wowed with scoring average to the detriment of other statistics as many fans do.  It could be that he realizes that you can rarely have too many able bodied bigmen, but it's just as likely that Mullin is a fool.

But your original question is specious.  You said "if he played so well," arguing falsely that I said he played so well.  Biedrins didn't play so well.  I thought he was under average (hence a C-, with C being average) but just slightly under average.  The reason he was under average though wasn't because he only managed 4 and 4 or even that he hit an abysmal 30% from the line, but because he fouled at an excessive rate bordering on the ridiculous (though down 20% from the year before so at least moving in the right direction--and yes, there's sarcasm in that analysis).  My thought is that if we can keep Biedrins on the court by getting him to cut down on the fouls, then we've got a rather productive center.  Since centers who can score are a huge premium and hard to come by, and #9 picks become productive centers very rarely, it's puzzling what Mullin was doing or thinking, though perhaps attributing thought to him is premature.

by jae on Aug 13, 2006 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

agreed
i agree, if he could stay on the floor for an extended period of time not only would he be more productive, but he'd also grow and learn the game a lot more. then yes he would have received a higher grade. but the fact is, he didn't or couldn't stay on the floor, thus the very low grade. let's not get caught up in what if or extrapolations since this grade is based on what AB did last year, not what we expect him to do this year or what we expect him to become in his career. if you cannot stay on the floor and contribute, then you don't deserve an average or close to average grade.

maybe we agree, but either my grading scale is more harsh than yours or i expected more out of him.

by Fantasy Junkie on Aug 13, 2006 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ouch
Maybe it's Chris Mullin's Brooklyn accent. They don't voice over documentaries using a Brooklyn accent.

Mullin is no Dumars or Paxson, contemporaries who have done well as GMs. All three guys gave 100% and used their gifts to the maximum.  Dumars and Paxson were better defenders and played on teams that fed off of playing tenacious defense.  Mullin was a shooter and passer and this GSW team was built to shoot first.  Implementing that shooter's philosophy is where he's made his mistakes with the GSW.

I'm impressed that Chris hasn't made a bad trade or FS signing -- yet.  Maybe he's tried but couldn't swing anything so my confidence is misplaced.

Getting rid of an unhappy Fisher was a good move -- he'll clear cap space and has a serviceable guard as a replacement.

His 04 and 05 draft picks have been good:
His #11 2004 pick Andris who was slated to go mid-late 1st round in 2004 and in hindsight I'd do that one again.
2005 #9 Ike Diogu was a mild surprise, not a reach, and probably the best PF/C just after Fry was taken by Zeke.
Monta was a steal in the 2nd round but he had a knee problem that scared folks off.  Mullin took a chance.

2006 is where I am disappointed -- both centers are unimaginative projects with flaws.  POB scares me -- too critical of himself.

GMs have 3 assets:
Mullin has no cap space.  He did dump Fisher's contract.
He has few tradable assets.  Bad contracts and weak play in 2005 make may guys hard to move.
He has not accumulated extra (nor given away) draft picks.

Team chemistry -- to borrow from Zeke -- is poor.
Bad coaching - Picking Monty to coach younger players reeks of 1999 thinking when Jerry Kraus' signed Iowa St's Tim Floyd to coach the young Bulls.  It does not work.

by joe sez on Aug 13, 2006 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

mullin
Mullin is at least partly to blame for his cap space problem.  He extended Murphy and Dunleavy and re-signed Foyle.  He is the reason that the team has bad contracts. I haven't had problems with his draft choices in the past, but neither have they been inspired.  POB was radically uninspired.  He had tunnel vision on a center so he got one, all probability that he'll be a stiff be damned.

Interesting take that Mullin as a scorer/passer looks for the same in building a team.  I do think that his moves indicate that he over-values scoring average and seems to undervalue everything else.  His big target this off-season that thankfully he's been unable to acquire fits the mold of a scorer who doesn't really do anything else too.  

by jae on Aug 14, 2006 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Over estimated player commitment
Mullin was a hard working player who made serious personal mistakes early in his career but turned it around and made the most of his limited talent.

As a GM, I think he has been deeply offended by way this team and specific players have underprepared and performed given the "opportunity" he provided including resigning players to good contracts so they could focus on preparing and not worrying about a contract.  

He was asked recently on 680 what would it take to help the players' shooting confidence.  His reply was "You get your confidence by making your shots."  Mullin was unsympathetic.

I suspect Mullin is wiser now and has called guys out at the end of last season. What this means for 06-07 is questionable. Does it matter?  Can he fix what he broke?  Should I subscribe to FSN to find out?

His tenure reminds me a bit of MJ's stint with the Wizards.  The new NBA attitude confounded Jordan who badly misjudged how players mixed but did clear cap space before he was fired.  I think Cohan will be more patient.

I'm looking at Mullins next trade for a sign of hope or resignation that he's in waaay over his head.  I think the guy can learn and his Brooklyn accent is misleading.  The Fisher trade was a good recovery.  He's probably getting lowball offers all summer and is waiting it out until he can make the team better.

If he lands Al Harrington, I'm getting NBA TV to follow the Bulls.

by joe sez on Aug 14, 2006 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

my opinions
i thought that andris hustled and played with a lot of energy and heart.  He rebounded well especially on the offensive end getting extra possesions and he did a great job catching the ball and dunking it or laying it in.  He is a lot more athletic then i thought he was.  I didnt see very many post moves from him, but i saw a few and  in his first year, i didnt see anything in the post from him.  He got  too many quick fouls, but to me, it seemed like right when he got  in the game someone would drive at him and he would be called for a ticky tac foul alot of the time.  In some of the games i watched he blocked and contested some shots and that looked nice.  his freethrows were pathetic.  that is the one aspect of his game that i thought he definately should have been able to make a dramatic improvement from his first year.  I thought he improved but i didnt think much of him in his first year and didnt really expect much from him.  He hardly played at all in his first year and he came back the next year and was able to be in my mind a reliable backup.  I do have one question though.  When andris comes in gets a quick foul or two, why do they bench him?    are they saving him for the end of the game or what?

C+    

by travisl212 on Aug 13, 2006 12:43 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Free throws
For the record -On the radio listening to Mullin - I hear that AB sometime hits 45/50 FTs in practice. JRich hits reguarly over 80%. Dun shoots the lights out. Not for lack of practice, but they all have trouble translating their shooting into game situations.

by bol on Aug 13, 2006 7:03 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

C-
I'd give him a C-.  He's not that good of a player, but it's still too early to judge.  He may very well be great when he's 23.

I do think you need to keep him around until he's 23-24 years old and see where he ends up.  Right now he's at least Andrew DeClerqc, and that's a valuable piece to have.  The Warriors have all the quality depth at back up but lack one more star in the front court.  Andris will not be that star.  Not without some kind of outside shot.

In two years I'd expect him to be better than Foyle, but only slightly.  He will score and rebound better because of his hands, and he can run the floor pretty well, so he can play on a running team.  He's worth keeping, but pay him like a true back up center and don't sign him to a big contract.  He's just a piece, and not a huge one.  He could be a key rebounder to replace Murphy's rebounds if Murphy's traded.

And, Baron could feed him the ball more often and his scoring could rise to the 12 points a game average on it's topside.

So, at age 23 we might have a center who can average 10-8 a night in about 25 minutes and defend pretty well.  If POB or any other center can do similar in 20-25mins a night then we will be getting 20pts-16reb from the center position or better and that's an improvement from current conditions.  But not by a huge margin.

He's a keeper as long as he's cheap.  He might be really valuable to a running team that needed 15 minutes from him a night as a back up.  Right now, the Warriors need a front court star, so he's expendable for the right player.  Mullin must turn his many capable players into fewer capable back ups and more stars.

I wouldn't expect Beidrins to ever be a star.  He might be a 15-10 guy at his peak.  Maybe when he's around 26 or so.  But then again, that's a long ways away.  I don't expect to ever see a dramatic off season improvement from him.  I just rated him a C- because that's what kind of player he is, and it's not from a bad attitude or anything, it's just that I don't see him ever getting above a B grade even at his peak.

by Gain on 10 on Aug 13, 2006 10:07 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Already better than Foyle
I think that Andris is already better than Foyle.  He rebounds better--much better--and converts more of his shots.  Since neither of them actually extend the defense, that Andris actually possesses hands of flesh and blood rather than stone digits useful only for blocking shots makes him more valuable because he converts a higher percentage of those putbacks and grabs a higher percentage of the misses.  Neither looks spectacular, but over the course of a game, it helps.  

Andris isn't going to be a big scorer.  I don't think a 'per game' scoring average is as meaningful as what it will take for him to get that average. There are a limited number of shots to go around in a game.   A guy who scores 15 points but takes 15 shots to do so is less valuable than the guy who turns 5 shots into 8 points.  He's not blowing possessions trying to score when someone else on the team can do it better.  Those missed shots are likely going to end possessions and mean that the team didn't score. Because of this, it's more important to see how players get their stats than just adding up their scoring totals and concluding that 20 points from the center position did or didn't help or hurt the team.

While the Warriors do need some offensive impact from the front court, getting it from the center position has historically (for all teams--not just the Warriors) been tough.  Undervaluing a center who converts the slop and grabs rebounds over a scoring center who requires shot after shot to get more points would be a mistake.  A power forward who wasn't struggling to hit 44% from the floor would help every bit as much as a center who tried to score more often.

by jae on Aug 13, 2006 10:42 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

He may be better
The fact of the matter is that the guy CAN NOT stay on the floor.  The rate that he picks up fouls is ridiculous.  Part of being a good defender is being in good position to play defense and not pick up fouls.  And he will never be able to play in the 4th quarter because his FT shooting is such a liability.  I also think his FG% is being over valued.  It's easier to make 2-3 shots than it is to make 6-9.  

So yes, the guy maybe better than Foyle, and definitely will be with time, but right now he prevents himself from contributing more.  To me, he also seems to be lost on the offensive and defensive end a lot.  With minimal to no improvement since the previous season I'd give him a:

C-

by LancerEvoV on Aug 13, 2006 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

D+
He improved none whatsoever at all.

But, he's still the youngest millionaire in Latvia (to earn all of the money himself), and if he fails here he can still make millions in the Euroleagues! Why should he care?

JK, but I hope he improves more next season.

by Zorgon on Aug 13, 2006 3:20 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

mix
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uEBnVkzUjik"></param></object>

by namjagerungbengi on Aug 13, 2006 9:49 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Beedy's Fouls
are also partially a product of the Woes perimeter defense - when they get beat and the post has to stop penetration it's got the potential to be ugly ... allowing for the fact that his foul numbers are high, improving the team's defense would improve Beedy's - but is that enough? What part of his game is strong? His rebounding isn't enough to warrant starting, even over Foyle. He's trade bait, and no one's biting.

by hardcore on Aug 14, 2006 2:28 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Rebounding, shot selection
Biedrins hits his shots, even if they are all close in. People dismiss this as if it's easy.  It ain't.  The number of guys who actually know their range and only take good shots is very small.

by jae on Aug 14, 2006 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good passing = easy shots
After watching the vid posted below, Biedrins high lights are mostly a testament to the passing abilities of his teammates.  A lot of his "good shots" are created by somebody else.  Yes, he knows he can't and shouldn't shoot from outside of 5 feet, but so does everybody else, including his defender who doesn't have to pay attention to him until he's right under the hoop.  He has a long ways to go to get a passing grade.

by LancerEvoV on Aug 14, 2006 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly
After watching the vid posted below, Biedrins high lights are mostly a testament to the passing abilities of his teammates.  A lot of his "good shots" are created by somebody else.

Yup.


93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 14, 2006 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yet strangely...
The good passing of his teammates didn't translate to as good a fg% for Foyle, who likewise has the shooting range of a dead platypus.  I'm not saying he's Ewing or Olajuwon, but don't underestimate the value of a guy knowing his range and sticking with it.  Most NBA centers are stiffs who shouldn't shoot from outside 5 feet, yet many more take the shot than can make the shot.  In baseball guys who know the strike zone are an asset and it seems ridiculously hard for a free swinger to ever learn the strike zone.  I wonder if knowing your own shooting range and what shots you can and cannot make is similarly something that happens with winning lottery ticket frequency.

by jae on Aug 15, 2006 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Some truth...
Yes, Foyle didn't have as high of a shooting %.  Yes, Andris has infinitely better hands than Foyle.  Foyle has arguably the worst hands in the NBA.  Yes, having Foyle on the court is playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end.  But it's not like Adonal takes a lot of poor shots.  He just sucks and misses dunks.

But Andris isn't THAT much better.  He can catch and finish, but it's not like he has a post move or anything.  The W's can't and won't run a play for him because he has no offensive game.  A lot of people have been posting that Andris should start or play more.  If he started, every team would be in the bonus half way through the first period.  If he played 10 minutes more a game, he'd foul out of every game.  If he had shown ANY improvement throughout last season, he should have been the starting center by the end of the season.  But he didn't improve.

by LancerEvoV on Aug 15, 2006 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

incremental improvement
THAT much better is a subjective assessment.  Objectively, Biedrins is a more effective scorer for his time on the court, and that's despite his, uh, "problems" at the charity stripe.  Objectively, he rebounds more and scores more for his time on the court and objectively the Warriors were able to outscore their opponents when Biedrins was in the game, but did not do the same when Foyle was in the game.  Scoring more points than the opposition is the objective of basketball, however this is accomplished.  

The fouls were an issue, a very significant one, but he did show improvement in the last couple of months of the season, cutting down on the fouls. In this time he played more minutes without picking up more fouls. Didn't show ANY improvement?  Your definition of 'any' differs from mine.

by jae on Aug 15, 2006 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

a lot of good shots are created by somebody else
but then again, a lot of nice assists are finished by someone else. Biedrins catches the ball very well--check out some of the up-close broken play passes that he fielded and converted. He also follows plays well, meaning that he's in position to tip in or flip in when someone else throws it up or throws it in.

Biedrins shoots 50% from the line in practice sometimes--the other guys, Richardson and Dunleavy, show a drop=off from practice because pressure is pressure and it's rare for players to shoot as well in games as in practice.  But a player who shoots "45 to 50 percent sometimes" in practice simply doesn't have a reliable shot. Biedrins will never rise above 50% FT without someone teaching him the mechanics of the shot. His current method involves flinging the ball before he's aligned it in his field of vision, a la Manute Bol. No one can shoot consistently that way. There are blindfold free throw shooters who don't miss, but they got that way by bringing the ball to a balanced released point high and in front, not low and at their ear.

So: the Warriors owe it to themselves and to Biedrins to pay someone to teach him. Period. Teach him to shoot, not throw. Completely undo his current shot and start over, even if it's underhand, even if it means he shoots 25% while he's getting the hang of it. Biedrins doesn't have a physical defect, like Shaq, that prevents him from releasing the ball correctly: he simply doesn't know how to bring the ball to a balanced, aligned, consistent release point, and that's something that he certainly could learn. It ain't rocket science, but if you never learned, someone's got to teach you and guide you and overcome your fear of even greater failure while you go back to being a complete beginner for a while.

Here's my new proposal for the Warriors: write in Adonal Foyle for President, launching him on a whole new career. Have him voluntarily, in the service of peace and democracy, forgo the rest of his contract while he runs the free world. Let Troy Murphy be his, um, Secret Service agent. (Please no Cabinet level position for Troy.) Let Andris and POB and Ike do their best and worst.  Have Troy, in his new security-gadget career, secretly install an electroshock device on Mike Dunleavy's frontal lobes to wipe out self-consciousness during games.

How about it? Universal health care, better schools, more respect for the US abroad, and the W's finish 7th in the West!

by mikej on Aug 14, 2006 11:24 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

2 things...
  1. ALL assists are finished by somebody else.  You can't pass it to yourself for an assist.
  2. Foyle can't be President of the US.  He wasn't born here.
But I agree about Biedrins' shooting.  Somebody needs to un-teach him his current technique and start from scratch.  

by LancerEvoV on Aug 15, 2006 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

we're talking about Biedrins
"I know Biedrins is important, I honestly do but we're talking about Biedrins. We're talking about Biedrins man. (laughter from the media crowd) We're talking about Biedrins. We're talking about Biedrins. We're not talking about the game. We're talking about Biedrins. When you come to the arena, and you see Biedrins play, you've seen Biedrins play right, you've seen Biedrins give everything he's got, but we're talking about Biedrins right now. (more laughter)

Reporter: "But he's a player your GSoM continues to raise?"

"Hey I hear you, it's funny to me to, hey it's strange to me too but we're talking about Biedrins man, we're not even talking about the game, when it actually matters, we're talking about Biedrins."

by hardcore on Aug 16, 2006 12:20 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Funniest!
That was the funniest thing I've read in months. Thanks for the perspective.

by jae on Aug 16, 2006 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Word...
That was awesome.  I freakin laughed out loud at my desk.

by LancerEvoV on Aug 16, 2006 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It was...
A funny period to the Biedrins discussion

93 'til Infinity: The Warriors' playoff drought?

by Atma Brother ONE on Aug 16, 2006 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Better than a D, surely
Yes, most of his shots were set up by a teammate...but that's because he's ALWAYS MOVING off the ball and gets the first step often on his defender.  As many have said, if it were so easy to get 63% on just putbacks, all the stiffs would be doing it.  They didn't.  No one came close.

INARGUABLY the Warriors as a team played better with AB on the floor.  On court and off court stats prove that.  Opposing teams scored less and were scored upon more.  The team rebounded better AS A TEAM when AB was out there.  While the W's team fouls went up when AB was out there, SO DID OPPOSING TEAMS'.

To those who say "well, he didn't get the playing time, so that proves he's no good." let me remind you that we're talking about Monty's decision-making abilities there.  Monty is an idiot when it comes to trusting his younger players.  We all know it.

Finally, to the person who said "well, if he makes 45-50% FT during practice..., it's 45 of 50.  AB's FT shooting problems are clearly mental.  His form goes to hell in games.  Luckily he's only 20, so it is possible for him to get more mentally strong/confident.

He did hit his FTs at 59% in the Latvian league over an entire year with more playing time than.

by Atillathepun on Aug 19, 2006 12:38 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"

Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)

Start posting about the Warriors »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Help Fire Don Nelson By Signing Petition
We_re_back__small
Terms of Service and Moderation on GSoM...
Small
Five Good Things So Far
484214594_82b6b3554a_small
The Warriors as Simpsons
Drmlg_logo-gmail_small
Live-Tweeting from Row 8!!! (GSoM's Charity Auction seats)

Recent FanPosts

Small
Don't trade Stephen Jackson
Pitofdespairguy_small
Warriors Chemistry and Leadership
Drmlg_logo-gmail_small
Jonny Flynn, Wayne Ellington, Corey Brewer: Summer Glimpse to Fall For-Real
Sp_baron_edited_small
Could the Warriors run the triangle offense?
Small
Would you be opposed to trading Ellis?
Australian_flag_reduced_small
Miami Interested in Stephen Jackson Trade
Small
Who is your starting 5 if you ran the team?
Follett_small
The Golden State Warriors players have already given up on Don Nelson
Photo-225x300_small
On Mikki Moore, Anthony Randolph, and 'Done' Nelson

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

GSoM Motto

"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"

Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)

Ads

SPONSORS

2009-2010 Around the Association

2009-2010 Golden State Warriors Preview

Golden State Warriors 2k9-2k10 Super Preview Blowout Special!


GSoM Crew -------------------------

Atma-160_small Atma Brother ONE

Gw090_small Fantasy Junkie

--------------------------------------------------------

Small Hash

Small dj fuzzylogic

--------------------------------------------------------

We_still_believe_small R Dizzle

Small Adam Lauridsen

Chef_randolph_gs_small Tony.psd

Japan_by_miaumi_small YaoButtaMing

Small jae