Q&A: Tim Kawakmi from the San Jose Mercury 1/13/08 (Part 1 of 5)

by Atma Brother ONE on Jan 14, 2008 4:08 PM PST in Interviews Comment 10 comments

Can you believe we're this far into the Warriors season and we still haven't had our friend Tim Kawakami on the show? You all know Tim from the San Jose Mercury and his blog Talking Points. If you don't read Talking Points daily and you call yourself a Bay Area sports fan there's seriously something wrong with you. It's the Mecca of Bay Area sports insights and it's ALWAYS, ALWAYS a wildly entertaining read. I'm not even kidding.

Make the jump for Tim's thoughts on whether the Warriors are going to be active at this year's trading deadline and why they've really improved their road record this season.

**********

Golden State of Mind: With a little over a month left before the trading deadline, other than Mickael Pietrus the Warriors haven't really been involved in many rumors. Usually Mullin has the rumor mill working overtime with all of the possible players he could be acquiring and dealing. Is he content with the current roster and will only make minor changes such as calling up CJ Watson or is he going to make a deal to bring in some significant talent to help the team? Which players are most likely to get traded if a big deal does happen? Monta? Biedrins? Harrington?

Tim Kawakami: The thing with Mullin, I think we've all learned, is that there is no connection between bubbling trade rumors and what he might actually do. Zero. None. He's just not one of those execs who discusses his trade thoughts with agents or other GMs and everything he does is usually out of the blue. Baron: Out of the blue. Mega-Indy trade: Out of the blue. Richardson to Charlotte: Blue, blue, blue. KG: not out of blue, no trade. So it really doesn't matter what we're hearing or not hearing about Mullin leading up to late-February. He loves it that way.

That being said, I don't see a major move coming, which, of course, I'm sure causes Mullin to explode in laughter. The moves he has made have all been to re-shape the roster... to look like it is now. Well, Chris also wanted to set up for a Garnett deal, but he wanted to do that AND reduce his long-term salary commitments, get younger and get faster. All of that is in place. Anything he does now, I think, would be a tweak or two around that.

Charlie Villanueva is a guy I've liked since his UConn days, though I'm not sure Mullin or Nelson are big fans. I know Rod Higgins wasn't--of course, he's not the Warriors' GM anymore. I'd predict that Villanueva won't be part of any deal to Charlotte.

I'd guess the Warriors are happy to listen to offers on Pietrus, who remains a commodity around the league--as I've said often, I don't understand why Miami, Toronto and other teams like him so much, but maybe that's what's makes them Miami and Toronto.

Harrington is always a trade possibility, especially with Brandan Wright behind him. But that's a big piece of chemistry with Baron and Jackson, so I don't know that the Warriors can get enough for Al to make up for pissing off Baron and SJax. Don't see Mullin trading Monta Ellis, who does have value. No way on Biedrins.

Plus, any move like that might bump up the salary structure, especially if you add in one of their two trade exceptions, and I don't see the Warriors going into luxury tax for anything short of KG. Who won't be traded, sources close to sanity tell me.

Basically... What the Warriors need is of maximum value on the trade market--an active, rebounding and scoring big man. Easy! No problem! Three for a nickel! Oops: Not many of those out there. Very difficult to get. And what Mullin has to trade is... not that much. So I'm not expecting any massive moves. If C.J. Watson can handle the back-up point--and I think he's already better than old Gary Payton--then maybe not much to do at all.

Golden State of Mind: The Warriors went from one of the League's worst road teams to one of the best in under a year. Who gets the credit?

Tim Kawakami: OK, first off, it was just pathetic that they were so bad on the road before March last season. They lost at Atlanta, at Charlotte, at the Clippers all the time. A team with Baron Davis playing and Don Nelson coaching ought not to do that... Just terrible. So I don't know if they deserve kudos for turning that around (so far) this season as much as Warriors fans should be wondering what the hell was happening last year.

But to be fair, the Warriors (so far) have turned into one of the six or seven best road teams in the NBA--and really, from the end of last season, maybe they're one of the three or four best road teams.

Why? Stephen Jackson. That's my fast answer. He's your perfect player for NBA road success--usually plays great defense, which means the home team's best offensive player usually doesn't go off (that's gigantic for road teams); he takes and makes huge shots in the fourth quarter; and he instills his teammates--mostly Baron--with the fire to keep fighting through most difficult situations, up to and including Jackson's frequent horrid shooting starts. OK, that last Portland game wouldn't be a part of my argument, I realize.

Dunleavy and Murphy would be my two best examples for road collapse--they like it when things are easy and often go away when things are tough. Jackson, in my view, is the opposite. The Warriors are better being the opposite.

**********

Here's a look back at some of the other Q&A's we've done with Tim:

Pre-2007 NBA Draft Q&A w/ Tim Kawakami (6/26/07)
Round 2 Playoff Q&A w/ Tim Kawakami 5/7/07: Part I | Part II
GSoM Playoff Q&A with Tim Kawakami 04/20/07: Part I | Part II
GSoM Q&A with Tim Kawakami 11/15/06: Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V
Golden State of Mind Q&A with Tim Kawakami: Part I | Part II

Stay tuned for the rest of our interview with Tim!

Do you think the Warriors are done dealing this season? Who do you give the credit to for the Warriors road record turnaround?

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

ok i don't mean to come off as mean

I've been a full-time GSOM reader and part-time poster from practically the beginning...like when there were less than 10 comments on game threads... and maybe 5 regular posters (besides the admins) amidst a bunch of random drop ins that would come in and say something completely ridiculous before leaving forever. I've seen this site grow so much and it's really neat to regularly have cool interviews like this one. My only problem is how they are broken up into a million parts.

I don't know much about how all this works, but I'm guessing that breaking interviews and such up makes it more likely for a reader to return for parts 2 and 3 and 9 and 12, which then means the site gets more hits and gets more recognition and therefore can interview cool warriors people more often.

If that's how it has to be done, then I understand that you guys are just trying your best to have GSOM be the best that it can be. I just wanted to let my frustration out a little. It's great having an interview like this, but it gets annoying having to "read more" only to read 2 questions and answers at a time.

OK, I'm done... Actually one last thing-- is there a way to see the order people registered an account with the site? I bet I'm near the top of active posters ;) -- not that I contribute anything anyway.. </bragpost>

RIP mAC dRE aka aNDrE mACAsSi aka MuHaMMeD I-E aka pILL cLinToN

by jmefrisco on Jan 14, 2008 5:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the feedback

Really appreciate it man. A major reason we break up the lengthy interviews is to give people more digestible chunks to read which hopefully results in more focused and specific discussion in the comments.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I know people dig and appreciate our guests coming on our show, but I really do wish the community used it to spark more intelligent discussion. There's a lot of good stuff in these interviews and it's my favorite GSoM segment.

Oh and you're GSoMer #84. That's old school!

by Atma Brother ONE on Jan 14, 2008 5:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

hah..

#84, that's great! I bet the majority of the ones ahead of me aren't even active!

thanks for the response, atma.

RIP mAC dRE aka aNDrE mACAsSi aka MuHaMMeD I-E aka pILL cLinToN

by jmefrisco on Jan 14, 2008 6:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm active!

Sorta. Don't even remember what my id is, but it's something old-school.

by sarchasmic on Jan 14, 2008 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Questions I would like asked

I really appreciate what folks like Tim and Pree bring to this portion (the Q/A) of GSoM.

I don't know if you've already asked all the questions for the interview, but I'm still wondering why in the world we signed Kosta. From an expert's perspective, why have we drafted so badly over the last three years: Ike, POB, Lasme, Kosta with the jury out on Belinelli and even Wright. Of course AB and Monta are the exceptions and we have to give Mully credit for them. Perhaps my perspective is limited and we have done as well as other teams with similar drafting positions. And although it is easy to see things though 20-20 hindsight,doesn't it seem we could have done so much better to address the needs we still haven't adequately addressed in the last three drafts?

And specifically, does Tim think Wright and especially Belinelli will ever significantly contribute?

Thanks for getting Tim to the forum.

You call me ancient, I say "oldguysrule"

by commish on Jan 14, 2008 6:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Too early to quit on rooks

The only draft pick that its okay to give up on is Pietrus. Dunleavy apparently needed a summer with Bird in order to finally improve his game and approach. You have to wait 3-4 years for your 18-20 year old draft picks to reach their potential. So, by that metric, its too early to write off Marco, POB, Wright or Kosta. I guess Kosta is kindofa Croshere insurance if that is even possible to underwrite. Let's hope Coach Russ can work his magic with the cadre of young bigs Mullin has given him.

by eshock on Jan 14, 2008 7:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I wasn't giving up per se

but wondering what Tim thought of our past and current drafts. I agree it is too early to give up on Marco and Brandon if for no other reason Nellie doesn't like to play rookies.

You call me ancient, I say "oldguysrule"

by commish on Jan 14, 2008 7:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Draft strategies...

There are two schools of thought when drafting. Address need and Draft best possible player regardless of position. The warriors have did the 1st option, for the most part. I tend to lean a bit more toward option two. Even if you draft to a log jam, if you have multiple gifted players playing the same position, you could always trade to fill a need with a more known commodity. Well, in theory, that's how its supposed to work.

Best duo since...

by Tim N Chris Burger on Jan 14, 2008 7:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Tim tells the friggins truth-and he gets hated on.

I love TK. His columns were great back in the day and now his blog is the ish. He tells it like it is (like Whitlock in KC) and he doesn't give a d**n if players, teams and readers hate on him because of it. Half the comments on his blog post are cracking back on him and the other half totally love his fire.

But the difference between him and hacks like Jay Mariotti at the Chicago Sun Times(who got called out be White Sox skipper Ozzie Guillen for being a loud mouth know-it-all who couldn't come into the locker room to do his hating err..reporting) is that Tim actually TALKS to the fools that he skewers in his blog. Like John York and his clueless spawn, Jed, Mike Dunleavy, Alex Smith...Tim talks and walks man. I got to respect anyone in sports media today that does what he does.

Back on topic, what he says about Mullin and trade talk is true. Dude is running his team like its a freaking black hole-not even light can escape it. Think about if we got a whiff here last year about the Dunleavy/Murphy trade? This place would have went ape-sh@t. Your webhost would have had to ban GSOM because of the simultaneous users typing in HELL YEAH over and over again. Agents must hate Mullin because he never gives them nuggets to 'leak' to the media. Think about that for a second. Every month we hear news from around sports about 'this dude is unhappy' or 'so and so is on the trading block' I can't remember the if that has happened on Mullies watch, can you?

by CallMeKang on Jan 14, 2008 7:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

Enjoy the Q&A with Kawakami. Don't mind the break up of the segments either. As someone above notes, TK tells it like it is and I appreciate that. (I know him a bit personally and he's like that in person and fun to be around even though I do not ask him much about work).

Nothing better than "The City".