Where do we get the Elite Big Man?
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 12:39 AM PST
76 comments
Let's try this again. My previous post on Duncan seemed to implode on itself with little constructive discussion because most people took the trade at face value as an improbable and dreamy proposal and failed to see my underlying point: If we are going to win a championship we need a dominant big man (apart from Detroit what's the last team to win a championship without an elite big man?). There are three ways to obtain players: 1. Draft 2. Free Agency 3. Trade. Getting a dominant big man through the draft is unlikely given the fact that we have too much talent to ever draft high enough for that. As for free agency, we already known no one wants to come here unless we pay them at least 10 % more money as everyone else (eg Maggette) so that is out of the question. So we are left with the option of trade. If we think realistically, it is obvious that big men are highly coveted and teams are not going to let go of them easily. The two situations where getting such a player is possible are a.) losing teams who are looking to cut costs to rebuild and b.) big men leaving their prime (but still dominant) on teams not contending for championships. In both these cases, the teams will probably looking for cheap young talent and expiring contracts, both of which we happen to have. Considering all this with the current state of affairs, making a shot at a big man would probably be better than anything else we can do at this point: Wright and Randolph may be decent starters at best but they are never going to have the dominance necessary for a championship. Hopefully this post is more conducive to constructive discussion than the last one. Some questions for discussion:
Do we need an elite big man for a championship? If not, what about our team makes you think that we can win it all without such a player when so few teams in the past have succeeded in doing so?
If you agree that such a player is neccessary, can you conceive of any that we can obtain this player through a means other than trade? Do you actually think that Randolph and Wright will be dominant enough to one day fill this role? Are we bad enough this year and possibly next year to obtain such a player to draft? Is there any way besides money that we would be able to entice someone to come to the bay?
If you agree that trade is necessary, do you agree that using our young cheap talent and expiring contracts as bait for teams looking to 2010 FA is the best way to obtain this big man or do you have some other idea? Boston, Miami, and LA all went from average or below average to champions and finalists after obtaining their elite big men with the same type of trade bait (young talent and expiring contracts). What can we do to be next?
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 |
76 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Celtics
just one without an Elite BIG man. Unless kendrick Perkins is now considered ELITE. No thanks I think AB is much better
garnett?
is he not a big man?
someone who forces defenses to change their strategy, commands double teams and plays tight man-to-man defense against anybody
(all of which are things biedrins cannot do by the way)
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 1:00 AM PST up reply actions
6'12"=7'0"
Member of the "Stop calling him Beans" movement
True
Garnett is tall. That doesnt mean he’s a BIG man in the game of Bball. He doesnt anchor the paint for offense. Dwight Howard is a BIG man. We need a Power forward cause beans can anchor the paint ala Kendrick perkins
big
changes shots
rebounds
scores tough shots in tight situations
makes his team better by force of will
changes opponents’ strategy all game long
Garnett is BIG in every sense of what a big man does for a basketball team
now, if you want the incredible hulk on the floor you can look for Darryl Dawkins, who didn’t have nearly the impact KG does
Even Karl Malone didn’t have the impact KG does
All true
Though I’d still say “scores tough shots in tight situations” and “makes his team better by force of will” is much more Paul Pierce’s domain. For a superstar, KG really does come up bashful on offense quite often (though he’s an absolute beast on D). I’m not sure KG’s capable of what Pierce did last night, for example: 22 points in the 4th quarter to lead his team back from the dead against a Raptors team that smelled blood.
OBAMA AMABO
by Sleepy Freud on Nov 11, 2008 3:43 AM PST up reply actions
Scores tough shots in tight situations and makes his team better by force of will are not "big man" duties
Those are star duties. Main big man duties are:
Rebound
Box out
Rebound
Defend the paint
Rebound
Layups
Putbacks
Rebound
OK… I may have been a little excessive with the rebound thing…
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 11, 2008 3:49 AM PST up reply actions
to be a championhip contender...
we need a solid 6 guys, and 2-3 great supporting cast kinda players. sounds obvious….but that’s what playoff contention is all about. talent, defense, and depth.
right now we have 3-4 “talent” players…on good days…but neither of the other two mandatory factors.
warriors fans, don’t get distracted by our overabundance of rooks and presence of a few new (eh) players (ronny and corey). we are not a playoff team. period. done. not a chance. youngest team in the league and a third of our players haven’t even played more than 20 minutes in nba TOTAL.
it’s not our year, kiddos.
I think other than the Pistons
what you really need is three AllStars or one superstar and one allstar
Its amazing when you have that how suddenly others around them suddenly become “talent” and “solid” who otherwise might not be
we don’t have even one AllStar caliber player
cause
he been mopeding!
honestly, we might be much better off trying to emulate the Pistons than make the magic trade for the mythical big man to come save the day …
btw, lots of folks around the NBA would argue that Wallace was a dominant (top 5-6) big man at the time the Pistons peaked
lots of folks around the NBA would argue that Wallace was a dominant (top 5-6) big man at the time the Pistons peaked
That was my impression, not based on any stats but on watching them actually play.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Nov 10, 2008 10:30 PM PST up reply actions
difficult with Monta's defense.
his lack of size is always going to make him a suspect defender for post ups and handling picks. like Tony Parker, he probably needs a great defensive big man in the duncan mold to cover for his inherent weaknesses.
it’s also rare to see 3 legitimate all NBA defenders (sheed, prince, billups) anchored by a legitimate multiple defensive player of the year (big ben). even off the bench they had good defenders in lindsey hunter and elden campbell.
by the evil monkey on Nov 11, 2008 12:14 AM PST up reply actions
Trying to emulate a successful strategy more often than not produces a poor copy that highlights just how much ‘luck’ is involved in any strategy. That the Pistons won without the perceived all-stars doesn’t mean that someone else can attempt to do this and win. 30 teams, one champion each year. 2 teams will not win in any year even if both have identically ‘good’ plans.
It’s also important to note that the “Pistons won without stars” is itself a comment on what makes a player in the NBA a “star” as much as it is an indication that the Pistons had a different strategy. The All-Star selection is in itself a popularity contest. Being a good player helps a ton in the popularity, but it’s a flawed system that over-rewards some things that have lower levels of importance in improving your chances of winning (high ppg scoring) and ignores other things that have more impact on win probability. There’s also a phenomenon that once someone is perceived as “not a star” overcoming that perception is very, very hard even if the player becomes immensely valuable.
Trying to emulate a successful strategy more often than not produces a poor copy that highlights just how much ‘luck’ is involved in any strategy.
Yeah, We came close in 2007 without a star studded lineup. If we’d just had a Ben Wallace or some other big tough guy we might have beaten utah and then on to a ring?
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Nov 11, 2008 9:16 AM PST up reply actions
Not **that** close
Stomped by Utah, who was in turn stomped by SA, who has since been totally eclipsed by the Gasol-amplified Lakers, who were overrun by the championship-possessed Celtics.
Not that the Ws could have afforded Big Ben anyway, or that an aging one-dimensional 6’9" center who hits 42% of his FTs was our missing championship piece.
Basically agree with JAE’s points, though I would also add that the guys people tend to think of as world-beating champion-making superstars — Magic, Bird, MJ, Shaq, Duncan, LeBron, CP3 — are, more often than not, just that. Iverson is one of the few perceived superstars I can think of who was/is more of a garden variety “good player.”
OBAMA AMABO
by Sleepy Freud on Nov 11, 2008 9:34 AM PST up reply actions
So the real strategy seems to be: have a player (or two) who is among the elite of the elite.
If there’s more strategy to follow, here’s a rule that I think almost always holds. Do not depend on your ‘good’ players ‘developing’ into stars. It happens, but it’s not common. Superstars, those guys who really are so much better than their peers that they carry teams to championships, tend to show that they’re of that type very quickly. “Potential” is rarely realized and more often than not means “bad investment”. It’s real rare to see top level teams led by guys who didn’t reveal that they were at least “very good” not too long after getting to the league. It’s real, real rare to see guys who struggle to get into games in their first year ever achieve this.
I don't think
there’s a real outline for a championship team. If we have 1 superstar and one allstar does that guarantee us a championship? What about 3 allstars? What about 5 really good but not all star players. It’s impossible to put a real formula to it. Just because the league is starting to think that a “Big 3” is what is needed to win a championship doesn’t mean its true.
And I think at least 2 of our young players could easily be allstars within the next couple years.
+ 1 million
No formula. You just need to score more points than your opponents and be better on offense and defense than they are. Having a dominant center certainly helps. Having a guard/forward that can score at will helps, having a great lock down team defense helps. But no formula.
And if Beans continues what he’s doing and isn’t an All Star this year, it’ll be a worse travesty than BD not making it last year. It’s contingent on Beans putting up 17/14/2/1 though… no easy task.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 11, 2008 3:53 AM PST up reply actions
Just because the league is starting to think that a "Big 3"
sheesh even though i don’t go back this far, even i know:
magic, kareem, worthy
bird, mchale, parrish
it’s hardly a new concept that the league is starting to think
by the evil monkey on Nov 11, 2008 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
magic, kareem, worthy? bird, mchale, parrish?
don’t forget Rick Barry, Keith Wilkes, Phil Smith?
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Nov 11, 2008 9:45 AM PST up reply actions
Parrish and Worthy and McHale were all very good players. But I suspect that without their superior teammates, they’d not have been as highly regarded.
I think “big three” is more an accident (and with the Lakers when Byron Scott was their top scorer for a season, it was as much “big four”) of the fact that a team only has 5 guys on the court and with talent spread out, it’s tough to fill more than that. Hakeem’s first championship was a “big one” (Drexler wasn’t on the team that year). The first Duncan championship was a “big two” or “one point five”, as Parker hadn’t really hit stride, Ginobili wasn’t a huge factor and Robinson was in his decline. The last Lakers championships were “big two”, but those two were so much superior to the rest of the league that it was enough. In this way, they were similar to the Jordan champs—I doubt Rodman or Grant get elevated to their perceived stardom as much if not for their superior teammates.
.............
I add Sh*&t on a reply of a post and I get this>>>>>>>
WTF oppps!!!!
404: The page you were looking for doesn’t exist. This page may have moved, or you may have mistyped the address or followed a bad link. If you think an error has occurred, please contact us at bugreport@sbnation.com. Sorry for the trubba!
You have been issued a warning. GSoM is a family show. Profanity is not allowed. Next time you will be banned. In order to continue participating on Golden State Of Mind you must acknowledge your warning by pressing the OK button below.
Two post deleted million more to go…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
by goldenstatewarriors on Nov 10, 2008 1:08 AM PST reply actions
If you want people to see a point, make it a point...
Underlying doesn’t count. We’re not artists trying to see the deeper meaning behind a Jackson & co. for an old as balls Tim Duncan trade proposal.
On this post:
Do you really think we have all that much talent? Our starting PG from day 1 has been either an undrafted rookie or 2nd year player straight out of the D-League. I’m sorry… we don’t have too much talent to make bottom 5.
Through the draft, yeah… we got one. His name is Beans, and he’s currently running the longest double-double streak in the league, with an 18 and a 22 rebound game in the last 5.
The only “cheap young talent” we have is Buke, Beans is not going anywhere, neither is Monta (unless he’s really injured and then he’s not cheap), the rookies/sophomores can’t be considered “talent” yet. They’re just past draft picks.
I agree with ballerbaggins, I’d say you need 7 solid contributors so you don’t run out of gas in the playoffs and you need another 2-3 guys who’ll contribute in the regular season and see spot game in the post season. We’ve got 4 guys (Monta/Jax/Maggs/Beans) for the playoff team and 3 guys for the regular season (Beans/Turiaf/Al). We need another quality big man, you’re right. But they don’t grow on trees, nor does anybody give them away for free.
How can the Warriors get to the promised land? Hope Beans keeps developing, hope Monta comes back, and hope one of Wright/Randolph develops into Chris Bosh… oh, and hope Monta turns into a quality PG. Other than that, play the youngsters and hope we win the lotto!
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 1:10 AM PST reply actions
on beans
Do you really see him being able to defend the Dwight Howards and Amares of the league one on one and consistently commanding double teams. I hope I am proved wrong but I really don’t think Biedrins will ever be anything more than someone who rebounds and gets garbage points. He will probably be the most efficient center in the league but efficiency and Duncan or Garnett type dominance are two different things. Nonetheless, Biedrins is obviously extremely skilled at what he does and that makes me even more hopeful about our frontcourt if he is paired with a conventional type of dominant PF.
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 1:27 AM PST up reply actions
The Duncans and Amares of the NBA don't function by themselves either
And we don’t need a Duncan or an Amare. We just need somebody solid who can defend, grab rebounds, score efficiently, and play at the frenetic GSW pace. That person is Beans. He’s built for the run & gun, like the efficient, more defensive version of Amare. Does anybody in the league shut down Amare? Or Duncan? Or KG? These guys all average 20/10 for a reason, they’re unstoppable. They don’t get guarded 1-1 ever. If they get the ball in the low post against each other, there’s help defense.
Now, Beans could certainly continue to develop his offensive game and be the offensive post presence we need when the shots aren’t falling, but we definitely still need to put another PF around. If Wright turns into a solid contributor, we’ll have Beans/Turiaf/Wright down low, we’d need somebody to step in between Beans & Turiaf, for when we play bigger teams and need to match up.
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 3:03 AM PST up reply actions
but I really don’t think Biedrins will ever be anything more than someone who rebounds and gets garbage points.
I’m perplexed by the way you seem to disregard rebounds. Rebounds are vitally important and one of the principle ways a big helps his team. Most defensive stops require a rebound at the end. Big men who rebound well but don’t score much can and do help their teams. It is far, far easier for the scoring load to be picked up by another player than for the rebound load to be picked up by someone else. Big men who score but cannot rebound do not tend to help their teams.
The notion that Biedrins only gets “garbage points” is growing somewhat stale as well. Those “garbage points” count, and somehow he seems to get them, game after game after game. If they were so easy to come by, I’m curious why the league isn’t littered with double digit scoring centers who collect these easy to get ‘garbage points’.
biedrins is definitely a valuable player
I did not mean to imply that biedrins’ skills at rebounding and getting garbage points should in any way be overlooked. But I am not convinced that a team can ever win the championship with Biedrins as the sole frontcourt threat. Unlike Duncan, Shaq, and Garnett, Biedrins cannot consistently create points for himself or command double teams nor is he a lockdown defender. History has shown that these qualities are necessary for a championship big man. Is there a reason why history won’t apply to us?
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
Not sure Bill Russell -- 11 rings --
could consistently create points for himself or command double teams: career 15.1 ppg / 44% fg / 56% ft.
On the other hand, he could “lock down” all comers — even a freak who had 5 inches and 60 lbs. on him like Wilt…
OBAMA AMABO
by Sleepy Freud on Nov 10, 2008 11:39 AM PST up reply actions
Rebounder vs. Shot blocker
A lot of people would think a great shot blocker is a better defender than a great rebounder but think about it…..
You can block 5 shots in succession but if the other team kept getting the ball back and eventually scored, your team still failed to stop the opposing team defensively.
If you secure a rebound after a miss, you’re on your way to play offense.
Sure but
the guy who gets the rebound didn’t necessarily make the good defensive play. The guy who caused the shot to be missed made the good play, and there is no stat for that.
The guy who gets the rebound DEFINITELY makes a good play
If he doesn’t make the rebound somebody else will, there are 5 opponents there to grab it and only 4 teammates. Don’t discount rebounds. They are vital, incredibly vital.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 11, 2008 3:54 AM PST up reply actions
by the way
Do you really live in Boston? What are you doing on GSOM at 4:10 in the morning?
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 1:34 AM PST up reply actions
I do live in Boston, but it's 8PM where I'm at right now.
Figure it out.
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 3:04 AM PST up reply actions
Dubs fan in Japan?
That has a nice ring to it. I see you’ve been working the GSOM night shift while we were sleeping. I can’t believe this post has gotten 23 comments from 1 am – 6 am. GSOM>sleep?
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 6:17 AM PST up reply actions
i don't
understand why people doubt the potential of brandon wright? it’s his second year and he’s FINALLY getting play time! of course he’s still going to need more time to mature and develop, so all we can do is wait and see.
do you remember back in 1995 when minnesota drafted that one 6’11 skinny kid straight out of high school? and in his rookie season, he had somewhat decent stats with 10 points and 6 boards per game. and eventually over the years with more experience and playing time on the court, his game flourished and developed into a beast right in front of our eyes? i think his name was kevin?
well now we finally have a chance to develop brandon and who knows, in a couple years, he may show signs of turning into an elite big man. he could be the next garnett/bosh for all we know.
and as for championship talk, imagine the core of ellis/randolph/wright/biedrins 5 years from now. that squad would be so nasty if they kept them together and they are fully developed and ready to compete. and the best part about it is that the oldest of the 4 would be only 28 years old at that time!
by LETS GO WARRIORS on Nov 10, 2008 2:08 AM PST reply actions
If by eventually....
You mean in his second year in the league he was throwing down 17points, 8 boards, 3 assists, 2 blocks, and 1.5 steals per game while starting every one of the 77 games he played…
Brandan Wright has one or two good games and you’re ready to compare him to KG? Homer. Truest exhibition of homerism I’ve seen in a long time.
If Ellis/Beans/Randolph/Wright are gonna be awesome, imagine Roy/Rodriguez/Oden/Aldridge/Bayless/Fernandez/Batum. They’re all going to be younger than 25 and all going to be awesome. Or what about Kobe/Bynum/Gasol/Farmar lighting it up! How about Gay/Mayo/Conley/Gasol/Arthur with Critt & Lowry coming off the bench? They’re all going to be so awesome! None of them is going to fail to live up to the hype! Definitely not Randolph or Wright! Woo!!!!
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 3:11 AM PST up reply actions
Oh snap!
And Durant/Green & co. down in OKC!
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 5:06 AM PST up reply actions
who knows
There is as much as positive question marks as there is negative. Sure, maybe he’ll be a beast, maybe he’ll develop a killer turnaround jumper, maybe he’ll turn out to be one of the 50 greatest players by his career’s end.
But then you can also stop and say maybe he won’t reach his potential, maybe his skinny frame will cause him to have an injury prone career.
In reality, there’s really no choice but to wait and let Wright grow into whatever player he’s capable of turning into. That seems like the best option for us at the moment. But I don’t see why many people would not agree to a hypothetical idea of trading Wright for, say, Tim Duncan.
Just look at that core… Ellis/Randolph/Wright/Biedrins. What are the odds all of them develop into superstars especially while playing all on one team?
But I don’t see why many people would not agree to a hypothetical idea of trading Wright for, say, Tim Duncan.
Cause hypothetically we could trade him for Michael Jordon in his prime and really get off.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Nov 10, 2008 8:33 PM PST up reply actions
The suggestion was not to go back in time and kidnap MJ
Sure, as it seems, there’s no way the Spurs would trade Duncan but it’s not like the poster is suggesting we should hop on a time machine and do that deal.
Well, I hope people voted No because of the ridiculous nature of the deal and not because they think we’d be better off hoping Wright and Randolph will both become future Hall of Famers.
Casual Male XL
That’s where big men go to dress ELITE!
The bases were drunk, and I painted the black with my best yakker. But blue squeezed me, and I went full. I came back with my heater, but the stick flares one the other way and the chalk flies for two bases. Three earnies! Next thing I know, skipper hooks me and I'm sipping suds with the clubby.
Let compare Wright to AR
For Wright to be good, he need to bulk up to 240, just to be a decent/solid pf. AR could plays both sf and pf because he got some ballhandling skills. He could rebounds already, and get himself to the line too. AR was more prepare than Wright was. and for the final time, Wright isn’t going to be the next KG/CB4. the dood cant shoot or has scoring abilities like them. He is going to like Prince or Dale Davis at best.
by warriorfan4life on Nov 10, 2008 3:00 AM PST reply actions
Prince has been to the ECFs 6 times in 6 NBA seasons
I’ll take that. Dude can ball. And he has a ring. I think it’s a good hope.
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 3:13 AM PST up reply actions
huh bro
I meant on Defenese, not his offenese. Wright won’t put up the offenese like Prince could.
by warriorfan4life on Nov 10, 2008 3:17 AM PST up reply actions
I said nothing about offense either
If he can play D like Prince, I’ll be happy he’s on my team.
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 5:07 AM PST up reply actions
kg
coulnt really do those in his first season
Member of the "Stop calling him Beans" movement
how about 275?
I think Wright should bulk up to AT LEAST 275. Then he would be very big and strong.
by annoyingtradeproposal on Nov 10, 2008 3:44 AM PST reply actions
That might not be enough
If can hit 400, he can really start pushing people around. What’s with the “bulk” obsession?
I hate Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Dave Chappelle, and Russel Peters because they make fun of white people like me. They also make fun of other kinds of people, which hurts me deep down because my ancestry is so mixed that I don't know what my official "race" is... so I get offended for all races!
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2008 5:08 AM PST up reply actions
We can always just go hit up the Elite Big Man Tree
coz dats where they grow u know
I pray i never have to use a gun again...
...unless i'm at a strip club parking lot...
...and somebody tries to run me over with their car...
...But how often does that happen??
Where do we get the Elite Big Man?
At Bigmen-R-Us ?
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Nov 10, 2008 9:52 AM PST reply actions
He is the 2009 draft.
Hasheem “The beat” Thabeet
7’3"
270 Lbs
Great runner, the most mobile big man in Collegiate probably, will be one of the best in the NBA. Huge upside. Shot blocking monster, Averages 4.5 Blocks a game (To only 2.5 Fouls/Game). Career High of 10 Blocks. Shoots 60% with a currently small (and improving) repertoire of moves such as a good hook and jumpers from within 15 feet. Competent FT shooter at 70%.
Hasheem “The Beat” Thabeet for 2009. I is the Campaign Manager.
Hasheem "The Beat" Thabeet or Brandon Jennings. A Warrior in 09.
Not to mention.
This will move Andris to his more natural position at PF. Give the twins two years to develop and we will have one of the better front courts in the league:
C: Thabeet/Turiaf
PF: Biedrins/Wright/(Trade via Al Harrington?)
SF: Randolph
Hasheem "The Beat" Thabeet or Brandon Jennings. A Warrior in 09.
What position do you suspect he will be drafted?
Do we suck enough as it is to get him or is some tanking in order?
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 10:04 AM PST up reply actions
Well it is hard to predict.
This years class is relatively weak. There is no doubt in my mind that he is a lottery pick, a high to mid lottery pick. There are alot of good freshmen coming in and it is hard to determine if they will declare for the draft or not (Thabeet as well) as well as a couple good Upperclassmen (ie Griffin (Bruising PF) and a lot of Swingmen). It also depends on who and if anyone drafts ahead of us and what their needs are.
Too early to tell but the key elements are if the recruits declare, the draft order, and our end of season needs (we will draft a PG or C).
Hasheem "The Beat" Thabeet or Brandon Jennings. A Warrior in 09.
ThaBEET!
my pick! alas, he didn’t come out in the draft … my guess is he’s not gonna be available at mid 1st this time around AND now that we have Turiaf backing up AB he is not as integral – we need a scoring, rebounding PF and Thabeet is a defensive rebounding C
still, if he’s bpa then take him
I didn't read all the posts, but...
I think we have makings of an elite front court with Biedrins and Wright, don’t you think? Add to the mix Randolph in a few years and we’re good to go. Why the need to add an elite big man now? I don’t think our team is structured good enough to make a run in the playoffs, let alone make the playoffs. Maybe if we added an elite PF last year, yeah, but not this year and years to come.
-No Signature
first 2 players you need is a dominant big and a do it all player
do it all player is most likely a shooting guard type but there are other players like that. the big and the do it all player examples( magic/kareem, bird/parish, MJ/pippin,kobe/shaq etc) and there are teams when 2 players can make up for the one do it all player (parker/ ginibilli, rip/chauncey). then a play maker is needed and a solid player off the bench
I didn't even read your post but
ANDRIS IS FUCKING SICK. we really need elite other players.
I am in awe at your command of the English language.
If only one day I could be as eloquent as you.
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 2:14 PM PST up reply actions
Dominant big men are in short supply. The ‘we need to get one" is a charge that at any time most NBA clubs can make. The allure of the “dominant big man” is why teams make idiotic draft decisions, hoping against all sense that an O’Bryant or a Dampier taken late in the lottery is somehow a Shaq with just a little polish missing. Look! Center! Shiny Shiny! If you happen to get one, to luck into the long shot that pans out, either by winning the lottery in the right season or by hitting the zillion to one on the late pick, you’re doing good. If not, well, join the ranks of the rest of the NBA. Sure, it may be that having a dominant big makes you more likely to win a championship than not having one, BUT this argument doesn’t help you get one in any way.
Few teams have centers as productive as Andris has been. Odds of finding one better are low. If it happens, great. If not, the next best alternative for improving a team is pretty simple:
step 1: get better players
step 2: repeat step 1 as necessary.
That’s it. There’s no magic formula.
Thanks
That addresses the point quite well. My question though is what you make of the Garnett and Gasol trades that completely turned around those two teams. Can these be attributed to luck or is there a strategy behind this that the Warriors could emulate?
by wheregobacktosocalhappens on Nov 10, 2008 2:21 PM PST up reply actions
yea
1)develop a bonafide legit all star like paul pierce who can defend and drive to the bucket.
2) Become a franchise with history aka Lakers, Celtics
we can’t fulfill any of these two so trading for someone like garnett is impossible.
don’t forget we also have a front office that takes no risks…. we dump everyone WHO HAS THE POTENTIAL to be injured.
Right now, no such move exists. Such moves require some opportunistic exploitation of the situation when they present themselves. We’ve rehashed the history of the Garnett trade many times here (short answer: Boston had a better offer because they had expiring contracts to send).
The Warriors did take advantage of one such situation a few years ago when we got Baron for a broken toaster, er. Speedy Claxton and an expiring Dale Davis contract. It wasn’t for a big man, but it was a trade that was extremely lopsided in talent, with the caveat that we assumed the risk of a chronically injured player.
So the strategy is still what I laid out: get better players, repeat as necessary. If an opportunity comes to get better players, take it. I don’t think long term planning to land the dominant bigman works terribly often. When the Lakers geared to get Shaq perhaps, but other than that, it’s been holding the right cards at the right time.
Get better players
With your argument, I would like to pick your brains about the rumored Gerald Wallace trade.
Are you for it or against it? Will getting him for Al Harrington fulfill step 1?
I do not think much of Harrington, so I’d not be the least bit hesitant to trade him based on that. However, there are some negatives to Wallace that limit his “better”. The big one is that he doesn’t stay healthy. Since he plays a position that’s easier to field and he’s under contract for quite some time. The “get better players” part of acquiring could, as such, be a bigger roadblock to the “repeat as necessary” part, as I doubt very much that his acquisition would make it unnecessary to improve further.
.....
I see your point. On one hand, I don’t want to lose Harrington for nothing especially when an opportunity to get something for him arise. But then again, Wallace could very well turn out to be just another contract we’d need to get rid of a year or two from now.
I guess the ideal scenario is wait it out a bit more and hope for a disgruntled star or the like and dangle him along with either Wright or Randolph. It seems like it’ll be a really really hard find this year though.
It seems like it’ll be a really really hard find this year though.
ah, but it’s so early yet – we didn’t fleece Baron until late in the season
patience padwan ;-P
Wait more, expiring contract becomes Harrington
Valuable commodity Harrington will be.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 11, 2008 3:58 AM PST up reply actions
Can these be attributed to luck or is there a strategy behind this that the Warriors could emulate?
Yeah, Spend money. Don’t throw away a Jrich. Keep the best players and trade the worst ones. When you’re knocking on the playoffs door don’t go freaking running away cause you got scared of what’s inside.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Nov 10, 2008 2:43 PM PST reply actions
nice
after reading that I realized the Warriors organization is run just like a TV drama. They get you all on the edge of your seat(playoffs) and then BLAMO!! commercial(blowin it up). I feel bad for all the season ticket holders. You guys are getting bamboozled by the brass
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
