Shaun Livingston?

by dprodigy19 on Dec 12, 2007 9:58 AM PST Comment 61 comments

It's abundantly clear that the Warriors need a back-up PG and ideally someone who they can develop into the starter long-term (especially if Monta stays on the team and becomes a SG like I think he should be). Naturally, the best place to look would be the draft. I think that Darren Collison, DJ Augustin, and Ty Lawson would be fantastic options for the Dubs should they be available at that time. However, there is a distinct chance that none of them will be on the board (drafted or stay in school).

What I'm thinking is that taking a flier on Shaun Livingston would be a fascinating option for this. Yes the guy is starcrossed like no one's business, but the fact remains that he has amazing size and court vision for his position. What's more, he'd provide a compelling back-court foil to both Monta and Baron, bringing a size and skill that could complement both of them.

Of course there is a risk involved with a guy like him, but the Warriors also have the benefit of having Bird Rights on the multitude of FA's on the slate this year, so fitting in a guy like Livvy would be possible, even without going into Lux Tax range.

Another possibility is that if Nellie takes a stronger liking to any of the young guys (POB, BWright, Marco), it would lessen the need to have Pietrus around, so Mullin could trade him to the Clippers for Livingston at the deadline, essentially working in a 2 month or so tryout.

Thoughts/Comments/Flames appreciated.

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

0 recs | Comment 61 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

PGs

Very interesting idea. The only drawback is that Livingston's gonna be worthless this year- I'm not even sure if he's cleared to play yet? It would be a move that doens't pan out till next year.

The other issue is what will it take to get him. Obviously I wouldn't trade any big assets (draft pick, ellis, wright, etc) for him. He's a FA with a team option IIRC. On one hand, what would LAC want back for him? They know his value is virtually nil, but holding onto him for the chance he bounces back might be more th an they could net in return for a trade.

On the other hand, they also want maximum cap space (presumably), and that means ditching unncessary contracts.

Something definitely to keep an eye on.

As for the PGs in the draft, everyone outside of Mayo and Rose looks worthless to me: too small, can't shoot, or isn't a PG.

Guys that DO interest me are swing men with awesome handles and the ability to get to the bucket. Shooting the 3P would be nice. Hence, names i'm looking at:

Kyle Weaver

Chris Douglas-Richards

Courtney lee

These guys would take Pietrus' spot and help give us some diversity off the bench, instead of just 3P gunners we'd have some dribble penetration. It would hopefully also allow us to get Jack off the floor more.

Added bonus, all of these guys have at least 2 years of college ball.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 6:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It depends alot on what the Dubs want in a PG

Collison, Augustin, and Lawson are all undersized, but fast as hell (I can vouch for DC's speed as a recent UCLA alum who has seen all of his game up to this point). That serves one element of the PG puzzle to me. Also, DC and Augustin at the least and probably Lawson as well, are underrated at running a team. DJ Augustin has what I've heard described as an obsession with Steve Nash, and actually likes to be unselfish.

Also, Livingston is a RFA this year, not a team option- he was in the same draft class as Dwight and Iggy. Also, his cap # is significant enough ($5.8m is the QO- I think the cap hold is higher than that if I remember from the Darko in Orlando situation) that it's possible to get him away without too much of a fuss from Sterling.

My ideal scenario:
Trade MP for Livingston at the deadline if he's healthy enough to play
Draft either Nicolas Batum or Kyle Weaver (I'm a huge fan of Weaver having seen him in person)
Enjoy.

Otherwise, just use some cap room for Livvy, try to S+T Pietrus this offseason, and draft one of those guys regardless.

by dprodigy19 on Dec 10, 2007 6:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Livingston would be great

Trading MP straight up for Livingston would be even greater.

The thing I like most about that is we can pair Monta and Livingston in the backcourt and we don't have to worry about our defensive size mismatch against other backcourts anymore. Monta can guard the PG, and Livingston hopefully has the length and ability to guard the SG.

by jlagace on Dec 10, 2007 6:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the clips

Does anyone honestly think the Clips are short on swingmen?

Quinton Ross
Cuttino Mobley
Corey Maggette
Al Thornton
Ruben Patterson

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 6:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

With both

Brand and Maggette being UFA's i think there's a real good chance Livingston can be had if he doesn't want to take a QO in which i assume the clips might offer him.

I'm not saying the warriors would sign him, but some team probably would.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 10, 2007 8:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

note

Aiding our cause is the Clips' suckitude- they'll likely have a top 10, maybe top 5 pick (lots of competition with MIN, SEA, POR, MIA, SAC).

If they think they can draft OJ Mayo (or Rose)...Livingston can be had for free I bet.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 9:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If

You hadn't noticed, that injury was pretty bad... If this wasn't a family oriented site, I would provide a link to the video. But yea, the chances of Livingston fully recovering from that are slim.

The J-RICH show is on his way out...=(

by dajrichshow on Dec 10, 2007 7:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Well

Not that I don't respect your medical opinion -- it was one of the more gruesome injuries I've witnessed -- but he was only 21 when it happened, and is apparently already healing fast:

Slowly but surely the prognosis for injured point guard Shaun Livingston keeps getting better.

Livingston, recovering from a serious knee injury sustained nine months ago, has been cleared to move on to the strength portion of his rehabilitation after a recent visit with orthopedic surgeon James Andrews.

Livingston is accompanying the team on trips with a target date of February 2008 to resume full-on practices.

"That's the goal," Livingston said. "Is it for sure? No. But definitely February is the target goal and that's what we are using December and January to push for."

"Everything has been on a steady rise," Coach Mike Dunleavy said. "Everything has checked out with the doctors. The healing process has gone really well. Now he's on to the strengthening process."

LA Times link.

To me he seems like exactly the type of guy that a team trapped in perpetual mid-first-round hell should take a flier on: young, huge upside, has already shown glimmers of rare "true PG" ability. As others have said, if he panned out, his size would make him an ideal backcourt mate for Monta. He'd allow us to build around a super-solid young nucleus of Monta/Livingston/Wright/Biedrins after Baron's deal expires, rather than hitching our fortunes for the next 5-6 years to the health of Baron's creaky knees.

Of course it depends on price, availability, etc. But I'd love to see us make an aggressive move now, while his value is depressed. Even if we had to wait a year or two for him to be 100%, I'd risk it. Heck, I'd wager that even now, in his rehab phase, he's already a more effective backup PG than Elmer THUD...

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 10, 2007 7:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

PS

D-Prod, I love that you have us dealing Air France for Livingston and then picking up Batum in the draft. Whatever we do, we gotta keep up our Frenchman quota...

Allez Les Guerriers!

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 10, 2007 7:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't you think

Batum's stock would have to seriously fall for us to be able to get him? I do. But then again the draft is 190 days away, anything can happen but i do know he is a highly touted prospect overseas. I wouldn't mind the warriors taking Danillo Gallinari or Earl Clark.

IF we could trade up i'd love to see:

Jerryd Bayless, Eric Gordon (if we somehow lose Monta), DeAndre Jordan (slim to nill' chance), Blake Griffin (interesting player but iv'e only seen once), Donte Greene (He'd be real fun to watch in a warrior uni), Darrell Arthur, Chris Douglas-Roberts, Darren Collison, JJ Hickson (probably an 09'er), or Augustin.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 10, 2007 8:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

Either Batum's stock will have to fall, or the Dubs draft positon will have to rise. Right now DraftExpress have at #6 on their big board. They recently scouted him on a blog through Europe and came away pretty impressed:

What's scary is that a player like Batum can warrant so much criticism after producing such an excellent stat-line (he also added 5 assists to go along with his 25 points and 9 rebounds). That might give you a hint as to how much potential he still has at his disposal to tap into. His ball-handling and perimeter shooting skills are still very much improvable, but he's already an excellent player as it is.

He really does remind quite a bit of Rudy Gay, although he probably possesses an even better feel for the game...

But yeah, our chances of snagging him are slim to none, especially with the lame-ass Rockets basically conceding the #8 playoff spot to us. Damn Rockets... ;-(

It's OK Kenntoe, if you want to secretly root for Baron to get hurt so we can get Rose, Mayo, Beasley, or Batum, I won't hate you. But what's great about the Livingston plan is it allows us to remain a solid, exciting 40-45 win team built around Baron-Jack-Harrington, while at the same time grooming more-than-adequate young replacement troops for 2009 and beyond. Even without Batum, you gotta like the balance and promise of this "22 and under" crew:

Livingston
Monta
Belinelli
Azubuike
Wright
Biedrins
POB (if we keep him)

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 10, 2007 8:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

AHh the rockets screw us again! First Gay now this

...Just kidding. No i'm actually rooting for Baron to have a healthy season for once. But i do like the 22' crew. I think its solid for years to come if they all improve their games. It probably won't groom any superstars, which is what we lack, but at least we'll have our options open.

I am actually trying to curb my negative feelings towards the warriors. But of course it's like quitting smoking, it won't happen over night and it'll probably take 5-6 times before you quit.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 10, 2007 8:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

CREAKY DEEKY

It's highly possible that LIVINGSTON will have creaky knees himself! After an injury like that he's definitely going to have arthritis in his joints! I had to go through knee surgery for a torn ACL myself, and although I'm still active in sports, my knee tightens up!

I don't really doubt that he'll ever recover, but the fact is most likely he's going to have knee probs himself for the rest of his NBA career.

It'd be an interesting thing though to see if he can be had and for what price.

"S.C. gooooo hooooome!!!"

by scottiepimppen on Dec 11, 2007 7:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh how i love draft and trade talk.

Just as much fun as watching basketball.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 10, 2007 8:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

i like livingston

but that kid is just as injury prone as Baron.. if not more.. and although his knee is recovering, its just a matter of time for his next injury..

remember his rookie season? he dislocated his RIGHT knee and missed 39 games. And everybody remembers February when he missed that lay-up, leading to a damn near broken LEFT knee.. ouch

In my opinion, he's too skinny for his height(6'7" / 180 lbs?) and unless he bulks up, he's askin for another serious injury.. That kid can play though

is latrell sprewell gonna have to choke a b*tch?

by Spree4Threee on Dec 10, 2007 9:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

while that sorta makes sense,

Baron was also an all-star before he got injured. Livingston hasn't come close to being that good. All he has is potential at this point.

straight g

by RC650 on Dec 11, 2007 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ayte

i never compared him to Baron- I only pointed out that he is MORE injury prone than Baron is.

Shaun Livingston DOES have potential, but i doubt that his weak knees will ever let him reach it. Its rare that any player can comeback from an injury that serious (especially with two messed up knees)
and reach his potential.
that's why i dont think goin after him will be a good idea for the W's..to have an injury prone PG backed up by an even more injury prone PG.

is latrell sprewell gonna have to choke a b*tch?

by Spree4Threee on Dec 12, 2007 3:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

For the record...

I don't see the Warriors being near close enough to getting Batum, though I would trade a whole lot to get him. Since there isn't a 4 who's a great fit in this draft (I hate Beasley because he's a whiny 4 who doesn't play D), getting a great 3 long-term would be fantastic. He could play behind Jackson for now, then take over eventually.

That said, unless something crazy happens (and I don't want there to be a reason for the Dubs to crash and burn or for Batum to fall), it's for naught.

Thinking about it in terms of who could actually be around potentially, I'd love to see the Dubs look at Ryan Anderson, Richard Hendrix, and Brandon Costner at the 4, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute as a 3/4 compliment to Jackson, Eric Maynor at the 1, or Chris Lofton as the Monta replacement should he fly the coup.

by dprodigy19 on Dec 10, 2007 9:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

pf's

i don't see how anyone can have us drafting another PF.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 9:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

especially

with the one's you've mentioned, none of those guys seem to fit the warriors system.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 10, 2007 9:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The logic behind another 4

The logic to me is based on this simple truth: It's a whole hell of a lot easier to get a swingman than a big. As such, when you get an opportunity to get a big who is solid (as all of the ones I mentioned are), it is reasonable to go after them.

Are they perfect? No, but they'd be solid players that should be good pro's, and when you're picking in the 20's (which the Dubs hopefully will be), you get what you get.

Even so, I'd love to see a decent C come this way, since there are more serious depth issues there, but getting a 4 who is a solid rebounder and has a good face-up game (like Ryan Anderson) would have a part to play in 2008-2009 and beyond, even if Brandon Wright becomes what we all want him to be.

by dprodigy19 on Dec 10, 2007 9:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

assets

Assuming the goal is to maximize our assets, taking a PF for the sake of getting a PF because they're "harder" to get the logic that lead to Todd Fuller and Adonal Foyle.

Draft philosophy:

You get draft picks for 4 years for dirt cheap, make those years count by getting production asap
rank picks into tiers by talent
sort within tiers by positional need

Those swingmen that I mentioned, for example, fill a need: bench distribution and attacking from the wings

We have absolutely no need for a PF; Harrington is our PF of the present, Wright is the PF of the future, Barnes (if re-signed) slides in as your small ball backup, Croshere (if re-signed, is your token veteran. It's not like any of those guys have sucked, they've done pretty much what we'd thought they'd do, and none is drastically overpaid or so problematic you need to ditch or replace them.

Moreover, none of the #20-ish PF's are an upgrade over our existing PF's. Taking one would therefore be a wasted pick...and a wasted pick is one of the biggest sins around.

This offseason Barnes, Ellis, and Azubuike are all FA's; Belinelli has shown nothing, and Hudson is garbage.

That means outside of Baron and Jack, you better find some perimeter talent if you wanna play small ball.

Ellis is going to be the most expensive one

Barnes is unrestricted

Azubuike is the easiest to keep (for anyone that missed it, RFA + Early Bird RIghts + Gilbert Arenas rule, look them up).

Keeping all 3 would be possible, but difficult and detrimental to long-term flexibility.

Keeping 2 out of 3 is easy if the odd man out is Ellis, harder if the odd man out is Azubuike (he doesn't require use of the MLE).

The best possible course, to me, then, is:

spin Ellis at the deadline for future assets (PICKS) or s/t in the offseason for backup PG to replace Hudson + expiring contract token big man
Snag Azubuike because we can and no one else can
draft an athletic swing with a polished offensive repoitoire (handles, attacks the bucket, distrbutes the rock)
leverage the above 2 + our perfectly suited system on the bargaining table with Barnes and re-sign him for just below the MLE

Thats all theoretical with no names locked in on what we get back for Ellis or take in the draft, but that's my philosophy for the offseason, assuming nothing drastic happens.

Presumably we would still retain space under the lux tax so we could make have some breathing room for additional moves in the offseason/during the season, plus whatever assets we get in return for Ellis, plus Foyle coming off the books next offseason.

Better team now + flexibility later + young talent = win

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed to a point

But the issue is that in my eyes, this draft has alot of quality PF's. If I was going straight on need, I'd be advocating a C or possibly a PG, not a PF.

Guys like Ryan don't come around that often in a place that a playoff team can get them. Of course, it comes down to a personal opinion- I see a guy like Ryan as a depth guy who can contribute, and if you don't, then we agree to disagree and that's totally fine with me. That's how talent evaluation goes.

I love your hypothetical- swinging a guy like Monta could bring big dividends in the long-term. Kelenna and Barnes can be kept on the cheap, though if the Dubs have the means to get the right swingman (like Batum), Barnes may be superfluous (not that that's a problem).

For Monta, the most interesting trade partner in my eyes is the Clippers, especially if they keep sliding. They'll have the cap space to sign him to a deal, and they could swing a deal that'd be compelling to say the least (Livvy + Pick for Monta + ????).

by dprodigy19 on Dec 10, 2007 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Monta

I'm not really ready to speculate on destinations for Monta- it's too early to talk trade deadline; it's ridiculous to talk about s/t scenarios now.

Off the top of my head, though...it seems like no team is an idea trading partner. It's been far too easy to come up with reasons why another team wouldn't trade for him, whether it's fit or money or some combination of both.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 11:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

Not many teams in the league have a need for an undersized shooting guard that scores 17ppg but can't shoot the 3 well nor defend shooting guards, especially one that's looking to get paid the big bucks next year.

At this point, Monta's worth alot more to us in our system than he is as a trading chip to other teams.

Still if we could somehow package Pietrus, Monta, and/or POB for an impact player at the deadline.. then I'm all for it.

Random Side Note: Maybe it's a good idea that Belinelli and Wright aren't getting that much PT early on this year. Many times, a rookie's production level drops off in the second half of the season due to the wear and tear and adjustment to the NBA schedule. If Wright and Belinelli are fresh for the second half of the season and can step up as contributors, then we can say Nelly played his cards right. Maybe I'm speculating too much though.

by jlagace on Dec 10, 2007 11:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Did you get that idea from me?

I said almost the same thing a few days ago.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/comments/2007/12/6/145213/052/19#19

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Dec 10, 2007 11:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

oh hey

I do remember reading that now, maybe I did pick up on that idea from you and it got absrobed into my memory.

by jlagace on Dec 11, 2007 12:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The one hiccup about that is

Ryan Anderson is not a center. He's a PF even in college with DeVon Hardin playing the 5. As you stated above. I just don't see him getting minutes in Nellie's system with Wright (hopefully) cracking that rotation.

I would only do the Clips deal if:

A. Livvy proved his knee is healthy. This doesn't seem likely because he won't be back by the deadline and if he is he sure won't be healthy enough.
B. The Clips include a first round pick this year. Highly unlikely but maybe they bite if we add more to the deal. They'd probably at least protect the pick top 3.

So in all reality, this all seems highly unlikely. But it does solve our offseason problems and gives LA another scorer if Maggette leaves. Then next year they'd boast: Knight, Monta, Thornton, Brand, Kaman. Easily competitive for the 08' season.

We'd end up with a mid to late lottery pick + our own 18-22 pick.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 10, 2007 11:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The other high draft possibility

I'm insanely high on Brook Lopez, and he'd be a great fit as a C/PF on this squad. Can't argue that he's a C at a legit 7-footer. :D

Given his troubles at Stanford, it's exceedingly likely he'd be around at the point of the Clippers pick.

So Mullin could roll Monta for Livingston and the right to swap picks (Top-3 protected)

And the Warriors could end up with:
PG: Baron / Livingston
SG: Kelenna / Marco / Combo guard for depth or MP
SF: Jackson / Barnes
PF: Harrington / BWright
C: Beans / Lopez / POB?!
Inactive/IR: Kosta, 2nd Round pick
And that doesn't even include any use MP in a sign and trade....now I just wish we'd taken Dominic McGuire in the 2nd.

by dprodigy19 on Dec 11, 2007 12:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

that lineup

is pretty sad

none of the perimeter players has 3P range

none of them can defend on the perimeter

there is no way in hell the Clippers give up Livingston if he "proves his knee is healthy"- the whole point of us getting him is that he hasn't prove that, otherwise the Clips don't decline his option and enjoy having a stud PG prospect again

then they draft for BPA and go on their merry way

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 11, 2007 1:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

HA you're right

i was just inserting BPA at each position without thinking too hard about it.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 11, 2007 2:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah your right

neither baron nor jax ever shoot threes

///sarcasm

straight g

by RC650 on Dec 11, 2007 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

i think

OZ was talking about my theoritical Clipper lineup RC.

Knight/Monta/Thornton/Brand/Kaman = no 3pt shooting threats.

At least that's what i thought.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 11, 2007 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yes

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 11, 2007 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

agree, but

i agree with you as well, but the only critique i would make is that none of our future 4s (harrington, barnes, wright and croshere) are particularly tough.

I know that we don't necessarily need a prototypical tough guy at the 4 to run our system, but against the teams that have quick and capable bigs (utah, spurs, sunday night's lakers) i think having a tough 4 who can also at least keep his head above water on offense would be really useful. I guess one example of who im talking about would be paul millsap, but he's out of the question. By the way, a backup 5 who could fill that role would also be great, it just seems even less likely.

Anyways, if we can get someone like that to use against teams like the spurs and jazz i think it would help us out a lot.

http://veganfishtacos.blogsavy.com

by radiorahim on Dec 12, 2007 1:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

PG & PFs

honestly, I think we are at least a year away from addressing the PG in the long term because we will not let Ellis get away, we have Baron and he's not going anywhere, and we have Buke who has shown he's the SG of the future. I'd like to keep both Ellis and Buke and replace Baron when the time comes which is, like I said, at least a year away ... as for backup PG, as long as Nelson and Jackson are here, you know who the real backup PG is ...

Meanwhile, the PF is a whole nuther issue entirely - ironically Nelson had his perrrrrrrfect PF last time he coached here but he screwed that up (yes, Nelson-defender and lover that I am I blame him for the CWebb fiasco). However we will not be in position to draft one high enough to help us soon enough for the NelsonII era so I'm gonna take the easy way out - unless Mullin gets lucky and another team gets desperate we aren't getting a stud PF via trade = this is our team, learn to love it the way it is ...

in Nelson we trust

by hardcore on Dec 10, 2007 10:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Monta Ellis as PG

I don't think the question is whether or not Ellis CAN be a decent PG in the league, it's whether or not he's happy and most effective with a PG mentality.

It feels like both Nelson and Ellis have given up on Ellis trying to capture a point guard mentality. Troy Hudson gets more PT at PG than Ellis does. Lately, Nelson has let Ellis free to play his way as a SG, and we've seen the increase of production that Ellis has shown.

Whether it's better for the team or not and whether we like it or not, I think the Warriors have given up and moved on past the Ellis at Point Guard experiment.

by jlagace on Dec 10, 2007 10:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Zeke, Dumars, Microwave

When Detroit had Thomas, Joe Dumars and Johnson with the Bad Boys, Dumars swung between the PG & SG positions pretty effectively - I think Davis, Ellis, and Buke can do similarly and Ellis could be the one to swing back and forth, particularly since Nelson uses Jackson as the defacto backup PG now anyway. I may be in the minority, but I think our depth in bigs is a greater cause for concern than the backup PG position. Yes if Baron goes down we're in trouble and will miss the playoffs, but imo it won't matter much who the backup PG is if that happens. Nelson should be able to limit BD's minutes even now and even without relying on Hudson for meaningful minutes (please Nelly).

If we are choosing between upgrading the PF or PG depth, I'd put my resources in the frontcourt, development be damned (in other words, I'm not concerned with bringing along Wright at the expense of winning now).

in Nelson we trust

by hardcore on Dec 15, 2007 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

seattle

what about taking luke ridnour from the sonics? they have a clog at pg, and it seems they're gonna stick with west and watson.

from what i remember he was pretty good at running the offense, and had some flashes of jason williams when he was younger.

not sure how he'd do on the defensive end though

by davidR on Dec 10, 2007 10:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

ridnour

his contract is prohibitive, something like 3 years, $20M left

and he's hurtin'

otherwise i would not be adverse to taking a flier on him

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 10, 2007 10:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Chris Quinn

Maybe the ship has already sailed on this one.. but I've always been pushing to trade for Miami's third string PG: Chris Quinn. He was rarely used before, and up until now he's spent most of the year on the inactive list in a suit and tie. But now that he's gotten the opportunity to play, he's started and played 40+ mpg for a hopeless Miami Heat team that's now won two in a row and beat the Suns tonight. I'm telling you, he's a solid point guard who's an efficient shooter and doesn't turn the ball over. It's a shame that Pat Riley's finally noticed it before anyone in the Warriors front office did. He's not spectactular, but we don't need someone to be spectacular.. we need someone to be a solid distributive backup PG for cheap.. someone's who's not a liability on both ends of the floor like Hudson is.

by jlagace on Dec 10, 2007 11:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

whoops

Maybe he's not the most efficient shooter.. but has had alot of games where he goes 0-1 and 0-2. When he gets alot of PT he's usually more reliable, but the biggest pro about his game is that he doesn't shoot alot and he doesn't turn the ball over alot (he has 0 turnovers in the last two games and ~80 minutes played)

by jlagace on Dec 10, 2007 11:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Livingston/2008 Draft

Firstly, I like the idea of getting Livingston as he would be a good fit here and might be able to be acquired for a relatively small package or as a free agent next year.

As for next year's draft, if we do get Livingston (which I hope we do) or another back-up PG, we could draft someone at the 3,4 or 5. I would like us to draft Danilo Gallinari, below is some of his NBADraft.net profile.

Very good athlete. PG skills in a 6-8 forward body, can play all the back-court spots. Has great fundamentals for his age, drives well and know how to create his own shot or pass the ball. Offensively he can do almost everything at the best level possible for a 16 year old. Great 3p shot, has shooting range of more than 24 feet and likes to show it off. Even if Gallinari seems a streak shooter sometimes, he is definitely a true shooter who doesn't miss twice if left open and is able to shoot even from the dribble. His ball-handling is very strong for a man of his height. He can drive to the basket from left and right with a good first step and often tryes finishing with a dunk in traffic. Plays decently in the low post. Above average rebounder for the role. Good ball-hawk thanks to his quick hands. Reads the defense well so he's able to receive a lot of fouls and go to the FT line many times per game. Plays with intensity and heart. Natural born talent with intriguing upside: at 6-8 probably hasn't finished growing (has long legs not proportioned to the rest of body).

It also doesn't mention there that he shoots near 80% at the free-throw line although it mentions that he gets there a lot. His main weakness is shot selection but there is so much upside there, I think we should draft him although we might need to move up a few picks in the draft to do that. Also, he has played with Belinelli before for the Italian national team and they would like being on the same team.

Here are some highlights: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbYS_kLyPfc

by zaki on Dec 11, 2007 6:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

pg situation

obviously t-hud cannot play at the warriors pace and spell baron's minutes the way we need him too. Why not bring back the former warrior, and currently unsigned, earl boykins? Instant offense off the bench and between him and monta can probably get boom's minutes down to about 32. Only drawback is i think earl would want too much $ and he never passes

by jducsb05 on Dec 11, 2007 3:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

lol

earl boykins

yeah, a guy that 30 teams passed on is the solution

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 11, 2007 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

pg

earl is an effective scorer off the bench and can push the pace. id much rather put my trust in him than hudson and his 25 fg%. the offense suffers with t-hud in there, it would suffer less with earl. i don't know why anyone else has posted about this

by jducsb05 on Dec 11, 2007 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the problem

The problem with Hudson isn't that he can't shoot- it's that he's just not a PG.

Boykins isn't a PG either, which again makes him a horrible idea.

Seriously, if all we needed was scoring, ...just play Ellis.

Obviously a scorer isn't the problem, it's someone who will create. Hudson and Boykins aren't creators- they can barely create shots for themselves, much less consistently create open looks for others.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 11, 2007 5:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

pg

lets just sign mateen cleaves

by jducsb05 on Dec 11, 2007 5:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

problem

basically, the problem with t-hud is that he is just simply not good enough to be on the court anymore, scoring/creating ability aside. Hes too old and has missed to much time as result of his ankles. what little feel he had for the game is now gone.
also, when boykins was a warrior he averaged 3.3 assists over 19 minutes, or almost 7 over 40 minutes. so it would be a hard, hard argument to convince anyone that he can not ever create. he is a shoot first pg, but he knows how to pass. i dont think he would solve all the warriors problems but could definately lower baron's minutes enough to lower the risk of injury. boykins game would also thrive in the warriors style of play.

by jducsb05 on Dec 11, 2007 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

boykins

It's been four years since he was a Warrior, and he's 32. He is worthless defensively.

Assists alone do not a pointguard make.

He shoots under 42%.

If he were never a Warrior, no one on the site would give a crap about him, but apparently anyone that used to be a Warrior is remembered for being great.

24 > 23

WE NEED A BACKUP POINT GUARD

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 11, 2007 5:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I hear Bimbo Coles is still looking for a job...

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Dec 11, 2007 5:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know why

Anyone has posted about this, either. ;-P

Seriously, pretty much every player in the NBA has been posted about on this board as a potential acquisition target for the Ws. Of those 500 or so players, Earl Boykins is probably in the Top 10 most discussed -- right there in the mix with Garnett, Kirilenko, Noah, and Yi.

I agree that he'd be a marginally better backup PG than Hudson ... but very, very marginally. And part of that is just my lingering affection for him as a former Warrior. And that he has less annoying hair.

What I like about the Livingston idea is that it's more than just a "stopgap" solution. Unless a move has some potential to take us from our current situation to a legit 50-win perennial playoff lock, I'd just as soon not make it.

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 11, 2007 5:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

i dont know why

livingston's knee is ruined though. he literally ripped every important ligament in his knee and does not possess the body that will respond well to rehab (ie one that adds muscle easily) i wouldnt give this guy more than the vetarans minimum until he could prove that his knee can last.

by jducsb05 on Dec 11, 2007 5:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, Doc

Again, not that I don't trust the medical opinion of you and the other orthopedic surgeon in this thread, but the LA Times article I linked to upthread said the knee had basically healed, on schedule and without complication, and that he was aiming to begin practicing with team in February.

Obviously there may setbacks and delays, and he may never be 100% what he was. Then again, he's only 22, and his game was never centered around his explosiveness. He's wannabe-Magic, not wannabe-Michael.

Nobody's saying we should offer him a max deal, or give up Monta and Wright for him. But he is a very intriguing potential answer to a problem to which the best previous answers have been names like Boykins, Ridnour, Watson, Brevin, Chris Quinn, White Chocolate, Pierre Pierce, and Gary Payton.

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 11, 2007 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Great Point

Athletic explosiveness is the one area that the warriors have in abundance. So that wouldn't be a problem. He's never been guilty of selfishness and has always shown good playmaking vision. He'd be an excellent addition, even with only half his physical attributes to work with.

I always thought the warriors needed a Ron Harper type player as a back up pg, much as he did as a 90's Bull. A post injury Livingston fits that bill.

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Dec 11, 2007 7:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Livingston

It goes both ways though.

If he really does make a full recovery, I don't see the Clippers willing to part ways with him so easily. He's still the Clippers' PG of the future.

Still, Baron / Livingston / Monta is the backcourt of dreams for us.

by jlagace on Dec 11, 2007 10:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Boykins wasn't the answer, nor is Thud. I shuddered at the thought of Pierre Pierce or Keith McCloud.

I think this is an interesting discussion and something i didn't think of. But I just don't see it being realistic. Either Livvy's knee is healthy and he returns to the clips, or his knee isn't healthy and unfortunatley go the route of a DaJuan Wagner. I hope for the former because i hate seeing players with so much potential have their careers cut down by injury (Grant Hill Cough Cough).

But yea, Maybe he comes back healthy and the Clips still choose to not give him a contract extension and offer only the QO. Sterling is a penny pincher and maybe he puts his eggs in Brand's and Maggette's basket. Then the warriors swoop him up without having to give up Ellis or whomever.

I'd give him a two year, incentive laden contract similar to Azuibuke's but maybe a little more up front to make it worth his while.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 11, 2007 10:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

boykins

just an aside about his defense, and not an endorsement by any means:

whenever I watched boykins play, I thought that there was an intangible quality to his utter lack of defensive ability. that is, he's so damn short and such an obvious liability, that it seemed teams would often abandon their set plays and established game plan in order to post up the little guy with their own pg. as many pgs don't really have much post up game, this free-lanced strategy didn't work as often as it seemed it should. thus, in a weird sort of way, his lack of defensive was a great defensive asset. get me?

its kind of like when me, a skinny white boy, gets out on a thugged-out bay area court, and immediately whoever I'm guarding decides they are gonna go at me every single time, regardless of anything else. before long, the joker's chucking bricks, and all his teammates are standing around watching.

all of that being said, no way in hell should we bring back boykins. he's an oddity and a fan favorite by virtue of slight stature, but nothing more.
I think you've all covered the livingston idea pretty well; we'd have to gamble now, because if it looks like his knee will be healthy, than he becomes blue-chip again pretty quick.

I like collison (6'1 isn't that short, considering some of the other guys in the league at that height) and really like the kid from memphis, douglas-roberts. he's a junior, and a professional, the type of rook who could come in and contribute right away.

the dubs are looking NICE right now, but I am concerned about beans' lack of minutes. it seems like nelson has decided to just go small every game now, with al at center. Its working, but seems like we're a more potent playoff-type team with biedrins in there.

by panhandlelegend on Dec 12, 2007 12:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Beans' minutes

Off-topic, but I wonder if it's crossed Mulson's mind that by limiting AB's minutes, they might keep him "under the radar" for potential suitors in the off-season. Dude's averaging a double/double (11 and 10) playing 29 minutes a game. If you pro-rate that to 39 minutes (what Kaman and Howard are getting), his numbers shot up to 15 pts and 13.5 boards -- and we're suddenly looking a 21 year-old who's leading the the NBA in FG%, Top 5 in rebounds, and Top 15 in blocks.

I'd guess this has at least crossed Nellie's mind, though I'm sure matchups, motivational mind games, and other mysteries are kicking around in that giant dome as well.

As always, though, guessing at Nellie's motivation for stuff is probably a fool's errand...

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 12, 2007 12:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Never thought of it that way

But if he keeps runnin beans off the bench, with bean's efficient production, he might give ginobli a run for his money for the 6th man award. Nothin ups a playa's $$$ mo' than a lil hardware.

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Dec 12, 2007 6:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yea

But Howard and Kaman are offensive focal points for their teams.

I'm saying i wish Beans was looked at more on the offensive end. We still haven't seen a vast improvement in his offensive game. But he is still 21 years old. I like the progression in the free throw line. Maybe in time he'll develop a nice 15 foot jump shot, which would thoroughly help his game.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Dec 12, 2007 1:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs