547 GSoMers have spoken and... there is a problem in Warriors land. The 114 who voted Nellie was the biggest problem don't seem to be ready to admit that this just isn't a very good roster right now. To those 114- name a coach who you realistically believe can take this team to the playoffs or mythically develop all this raw, untapped talent. 87 of you thought the players weren't playing hard enough. Newsflash- it isn't a lack of effort, it's a lack of talent and experience.
It starts at the top (Lawsuit Cohan) and with the incompetent people making decisions they aren't qualified to make (Mullin/ Rowell). Immature liars who would rather go joyriding on The Golden State Tricycle than be out there helping their teammates aren't helping the situation either.
7 months ago
Atma Brother ONE
27 comments
1 recs |
Comments
You forgot...
MONTA ELLIS. I’d hold him as our biggest problem for several reasons.
1) He’s our highest paid player and he isn’t playing (due to injury).
2) The conflict over his suspension and potential double-jeopardy punishment has cause made public an interal riff between Mullen, Nellie and Rowell.
3) The suspension has also put a black eye on franchise and could set the team back when trying to lure FA’s once we finally decided to blow this team up.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Dec 2, 2008 10:12 AM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
No read again, I think you'll find "Immature Liar" is reference to Moped Ellis!
It's about heart, It's about fight, It's about being a Warrior!
by BritWarriorGSW on
Dec 2, 2008 10:27 AM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Could any coach take this team, especially this Monta-less version of the team, to the playoffs? I’m not sure. It’s not a great roster.
Are there coaches who could have the Warriors currently doing better than Nellie is? I’ll go so far as to say that almost anybody who’s qualified to be an NBA coach would have them doing better than Nellie. Mike Montgomery could’ve gotten 7-11 out of this team and this schedule so far.
Nellie’s bells and whistles don’t amount to much if he does a very simple thing wrong, and that’s exactly what he’s doing. Geoff Lepper has the numbers…
Large 103.2 90.4 +12.8
Turiaf-Biedrins 113.9 103.2 +10.7
Medium 99.7 105.3 -5.6
Small 107.5 116.1 -8.6
When we play with three bigs, we’re an extremely effective team. Not decent-ish, not mediocre… we consistently outplay teams. When we have two bigs out there but they’re Biedrins and Turiaf, same things — we win. With any other combo of two bigs — Wright/Biedrins, Wright/Turiaf, Randolph Biedrins — we’re not as good, but still significantly better than when we play smallball.
Nellie gets talent from unlikely sources like Morrow, he draws up great plays out of timeouts, and he does some creative stuff with zones. But he can’t seem to realize Corey Maggette isn’t a power forward, and for that reason alone, he deserves an F for his coaching so far. The front office definitely sucks, but in practical terms, Nellie is the problem.
by onlxn on
Dec 2, 2008 10:18 AM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
The team was going to have a hard time replacing Davis. He was the best player on the squad, playing a key position and he left. The plan to stay competitive was that Monta would take over the point, Maggs would come in and pick up the scoring load and Maggs, Jax and Azubuike would rotate through the 2/3 positions in the manner that Jax, Azubuike, Barnes and Pietrus had. Knowing Nellie, you have to figure he was going to use Maggs as a “4” in the way that Barnes had been at times, but the team would get more regular "4"minutes from Wright and Turiaf, who could also spell Biedrins at the center spot. The plan expanded a bit by adding Williams to the mix to spell Monta at the point and probably to give him some time back at the 2 The hope was that Monta would be able to take over the point duties sufficiently, that Williams would be able to contribute some, that Azubuike would grow into the role of backup 2/3 and expand to take the minutes Barnes and Pietrus had vacated, that Wright would take on a bigger role, that Maggs would give enough offensive punch to make up for other deficiencies and that Jax’s performance last year continued to be as valuable as it seemed, despite showing little signs earlier in his career that he would do this, but he would be the Jack of all Trades again, and provide whatever, whenever (so long as whatever wasn’t rebounding or shooting for high efficiency). Any contribution from Harrington, Randolph, Belinelli or the rest of the bench would be gravy, but it wasn’t necessary for the mid-level (mid 40s win) that such a plan could produce. Nellie would keep it all together because he can find the combinations to draw the most out of his players, using the versatility of his lineup to his advantage.
The reality has been that Monta got hurt so we haven’t seen how he can do at the point, Azubuike has been inconsistent, Jax has tried to do too much, Maggs hasn’t clicked with the lineup or played defense (not a surprise—he last did that his lone year at Dook) and Williams was fat and out of shape and wound up in Nellie’s doghouse leaving the point situation to Watson and Jax. Jax has had to do too much, including playing a position he’s really only ready to take on for short emergency and ‘change of pace’ situations; he’s , pressed and has been run into the ground and has shown that he’s closer to the good player he was for most of his career than the savior some saw him when his return correlated closely with a change in team performance last year. For whatever reason, Nellie has been reluctant to use Turiaf and Wright resulting in Biedrins wearing down. Nellie has been seen as a master of versatility, but has shown himself to be rather inflexible, not seeming to notice that his personnel is not as good a ‘small ball’ lineup as he had a year ago with a dynamite point guard in charge, yet he keeps going back to it despite clear signs that the ‘big’ lineups are more effective. Meanwhile, we’ve seen almost none of the ’gravy from Randolph, Harrington or the rest of the bench and perhaps have seen a Harrington feud producing bad blood on the team resulting in his departure for a guy who does not seem to address the pressing needs or unanswered questions of the team.
Short of Watson showing himself to be an adequate backup as a shooting point guard, Nothing has gone right. On the plus side, it suggests that things can get better since it’s tough to see how things could depart much more from the plan at this point.
by jae on
Dec 2, 2008 11:10 AM PST
up
reply
actions
1 recs
Short of Watson showing himself to be an adequate backup as a shooting point guard, nothing has gone right.
Man, sad to say, but that’s about right. Two weeks ago we would’ve said that Biedrins’ further improvement was another big bright spot, but he’s taken a bit of a step back since. Guy’s still great and we’re lucky to have him, but he’s not getting back to 17/15 without some adjustments.
I’d say Wright’s continued good play has been a positive sign… he’s playing even better than last year in increased minutes, putting the lie to the idea that he’ll be exposed with playing time. Turiaf has also been more of a shot-blocking force than we could’ve expected. Morrow, if nothing else, has proven himself to be a better end-of-the-bench option than Marco. That’s really about it.
Like you, I can only see things getting better from here. Maggette is now settling in offensively, and while he’s a bad defender, he looked game when defending 3s again last night… I’m not too worried about him. The light seemed to go back on in Jack’s head yesterday, and hopefully that’ll continue. And Monta’s a month away at most, barring complications.
But the biggest variable is the simplest one: Nellie’s playing too small. Corey Maggette can’t fake being a 4 the way Matt Barnes sometimes could (not that that really worked brilliantly over time either), and without a game-changing scorer to bail us out, we just become a tiny, ineffectual team with one big in the lineup. Yesterday was a positive step towards playing bigger… let’s hope Nellie realizes the biggest stretches were our best ones.
by onlxn on
Dec 2, 2008 12:46 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The plan...
for this season was ill concieved even before Monta got hurt. Not even Nelson was willing to say he thought Monta was really ready to play the point position. He was forced into that situation when Rowell let Baron walk.
But even if Monta was ready, it just seems like a silly idea to take a natural scoring phenom and put him in an un-natural position that forces him to focus on something other than scoring. I still can’t understand that logic… They have been forced into it, but I’m just tired of hearing that this season would have been so great had Monta simply not gotten injured. People need to face it, losing Baron was a major mistake at best and closer to total ignorance ( = Rowell).
by in for life on
Dec 2, 2008 8:33 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I wouldn’t worry too much about what Nellie says or doesn’t say. According to him, remember, both Belinelli and Webber were going to drastically brighten our fortunes last season. Nellie likes giving entertaining interviews… they don’t necessarily have much to do with what’s actually happening.
I’m not going to really try to defend the loss of Baron. I don’t think he was worth keeping at any price, and I think he was going to be a bit less motivated and play worse once he got paid (seems like the case, though who knows what’s going on Clipperland)… but the current version of the story, that Rowell nixed a $39M/3Y extension, is pretty indefensible. We should’ve kept Baron at those numbers if it actually was possible.
Having said that, I think it makes good sense to try Monta at the point. There are all types of point guards… not all of them sacrifice their own offense to run the show. Look at Tony Parker. Less than six assists per game for his career, an assist/turnover ration that’s not far above two, and he makes it work.
Monta will still be focusing primarily on his own scoring when he returns. He’ll have to pass more than he did when Baron was around, but Monta is a decent passer. More importantly, Monta will now only have to defend point guards, something he’s got a much better shot of doing. It’s easy to forget how brutal the Baron/Monta backcourt was defensively last season. Given his size, Monta’s best chance at being a truly elite NBA player is at the point.
Will our offense grind to a halt if Monta can’t put up eight assists a game? I don’t think so. Whenever we’ve gone away from half-hearted isolation, our offense has actually flowed okay. If you put Monta, Jack, Maggette, Wright and Biedrins on the floor, and everybody’s moving around, I definitely think it could work. Both the Celtics and Lakers lacked a six-assist player last year. I’m not saying we’re on the verge of reaching the Finals, but I’m saying you can succeed without a high-assist point guard. We may have forgotten that in the fun of the Baron era. In Monta, Jack, Crawford and Watson, we’ll have four rotation players who can do some playmaking.
It might not work. Next summer, we may well decide that it’s not worth distracting Monta from his scoring, and we may go shopping for a point guard. But trying Monta at the point is a good idea. And while I’m not happy about the way we lost Baron, the fact that we’re going to get to try Monta at the point is a cool opportunity. I’m excited to see how he handles it.
by onlxn on
Dec 2, 2008 8:55 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Newsflash Houston last year won how many games in a row
without Yao? How can you say the players are trying enough but they are just bad? If you try your best at defence everything will fall into place since we know good defence comes from determination not so many from skills or knowledge.
by buky on
Dec 2, 2008 10:26 AM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
What's the biggest problem facing the warriors right now?
Time. time is the problem and also the solution. We need time for the kids to grow up which will happen, we need time for montay to heal which should happen, we need time for nelson to get bored and hit the links which might happen after he out lasts wilkens in the wins total.
Right now don’t sweat it. We are entertaining, we made wade work for his money, we gave david lee a career night, we can play with boston but not the wizz . We’re giving lots of sportswriters something to talk about…we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory…We retreat with unmatched conviction . We might actually play bad enough to get a decent draft spot so this could be a productive year?
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on
Dec 2, 2008 10:40 AM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
Time..
Time for the team to mesh with Jamal Crawford. Many underestimate the importance of chemistry, but it’s the reason why superstars like Terrell Owens and Stephon Marbury get ousted. One bad seed can affect an entire team, but when the team can coincide and play together to their fullest, they have the capability to play with the synergy they had at the end of 2007.
Time and patience are the key to this teams success. Noone expected the dubs to make playoffs this year with the losses of Boom and Monta. Now that they’re actually losing, everyone’s pointing the fingers at nellie or the front office. Last year, peeps complained because nellie wouldn’t play the younger guys and now that he is this year, everyone’s still giving him static.
Nellie is sacrificing wins this season to develop his younger players. Next season at this time with monta healthy, the young guys experienced, another draft pick showing glimpses of superstar potential, and the team fully meshed we’ll have a better understanding of today’s suffering.
by MAZarate21 on
Dec 2, 2008 2:27 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Some underestimate the importance of chemistry. Many overestimate it. Nothing in Crawford’s past suggests that he’ll gel into becoming even a moderately high efficiency scorer or a front line point guard. Chemistry is unlikely to make him shoot better, to be a better distributor, to play defense or rebound. It’s not something he’s done before.
Marbury is a superstar in his own mind and by paycheck, but he’s never been as valuable as he thinks he is or the hype machine that once surrounded him made him to be.
Basketball and football are very different. The importance of “chemistry” for lack of a better word, does seem to be more important in football, where one individual has less impact on a team for if no other reason than that there’s 21 other guys out there at the same time. Football performances swing much more from season to season. Maybe this is “chemistry” or maybe the nature of the game. Far less seems to affect basketball players’ performance as it’s more constant from year to year.
The key to this team’s success is going to be luck, luck that some improbable events occur, like several players getting much better than they have been or project to be. Not many expected the playoff, but few expected complete directionless implosion. Nellie doesn’t seem to be sacrificing wins to bring on the younger players. He seems to be overplaying older guys and plays Wright in a totally haphazard manner. It’s not at all clear what is going on as the model doesn’t seem to be effectively developing the young guys OR winning games.
by jae on
Dec 2, 2008 6:08 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Chemistry is unlikely to make him shoot better
It made Barry bat better so who knows?
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on
Dec 2, 2008 7:48 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Atma you are taking votes out of context.........
Those of us (87) who voted on the players were doing so not on effort, but Defense. This has nothing to do with effort as they have that in abundance, but their ball movement and DEFENSE is terrible and for that they CAN improve.
I also dont agree that Mullin is in the same bag as Rowell. It is becoming clear that certain offers made or NOT made over he summer came from the desk of Rowell. As far as I am concerned, I actually like many of the transactions that Mullin seems to have made.
I would get rid of that snake Rowell and someone does need to either go have a VERY HARD conversation with either Moped Ellis or his agent and I suspect it’s his agent sterring that whining pathetic boat, when what he should be doing is supporting his team and quite whining about whatever money he THINKS he should have. YOU LIED you little scroat….now suck it up and try to be a man instead of some pathetic snot nosed kid throwing his toys out of the pram.
DEFENSE right now is the key and whoever is responsible for that currently on the coaching staff NEEDS to go.
I did a whole thread on this subject and so far I have not heard a single person define what “all the suits” on the bench do, other than Moncrief? So for those of you supposedly ‘connected’ with the Warriors front office, try and give us the answer as to who out of the coaching staff is primarily responsible for defensive work????
It’s then THIS person that we need to focus our attention on firing as right now, THAT is the single area most important that we have to improve.
It's about heart, It's about fight, It's about being a Warrior!
by BritWarriorGSW on
Dec 2, 2008 10:42 AM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
didn't vote, but would've pointed the finger at nellie...
imo, nelson and rowell should actually be one option. mullin is now out of the mix, from all accounts.
everything we see in terms of transactions and contracts is being approved by nelson, and he coaches the team. he’s the one who decides who plays. he’s the one (for the most part) who decides who stays. how can he not be the focal point of responsibility?
by g8tgod on
Dec 2, 2008 12:28 PM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
did you see the chicago game?
i would constitute that as not playing hard enough.
but imo the biggest dissapointment is our play at PG. no one has been able to get this team to play like a “team” … what Baron did well. Instead, our offense is mostly individual plays and until we can play like a team … we won’t get any better.
by YaoButtaMing on
Dec 2, 2008 1:46 PM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
It's not about "team" it's about talent
Just look up the Lakers back-back-back earlier this decade. You can play like a cohesive team as best as you can and still suck if you don’t have enough talent. Talent trumps a lot of things.
Sure they looked especially sorry against the Bulls. Any basketball squad has lapses where the effort is missing. That’s normal.
I think you nailed it:
what Baron did well
Well, BD’s gone because Rowell didn’t want to pay the man. J-Rich being gone ain’t helping the situation either.
There are 0 All-Stars on this team. You won’t find too many winning teams in this league in that silly position.
by Atma Brother ONE on
Dec 2, 2008 2:38 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No all stars...
…is true, just as there were none last year with Baron, or any other year since Sprewell. Richardson ain’t an all star either… Biedrins might prove to be the best shot we’ll have for some time, but with Yao the guaranteed start… here’s hoping the Western coaches respect Andris’ game.
As far as Nelson is concerned, I would agree with you from a historical standpoint that the man is a good coach, and he should be a Hall of Famer. I want to emphasize, also, that I’m not a bandwagon fan, I’ve been a Warriors fan my whole life (I’m 22, so maybe I haven’t yet maximized my suffering). I know I’ve disagreed with an enormous amount of the vocal positions you’ve taken the past year, the Richardson trade and your assessments of Mullin in particular, but I’m legitimately interested to hear your full take on what the situation is with Nelson and this year’s squad.
Here’s my feeling. I think that for all the good Don Nelson has done us these past two years, 2008-2009 is shaping up to be the year in which his style begins to have negative ramifications for the franchise. I probably wouldn’t consider him the biggest problem (Rowell), but I think we basically saw the apex of what Don Nelson could make our team last year. We didn’t make the playoffs, but that was as much due to a hyper-competitive western conference as anything, so I don’t fault the man. His decision to sit Davis for the entire second half against Phoenix is something I think I’ll never be able to reconcile or feel quite comfortable with, not so much because it cost us a game (Davis may well have continued that day’s abysmal play), but because he must’ve known what that would do to a man of Baron’s pride. I also would’ve liked to see more minutes for Wright, or a the very least less public statements as to his unreadiness. I don’t feel like that’s helpful. But on the whole, he coached the hell out of last year’s team, and we fell just short in such an improbable fashion.
I also think, though, that even as you give a coach credit for the good they’ve done in the past, there’s nothing insincere or disloyal about being honest about a situation. Namely, I worry that Nelson is, as has been said to death on arguments around GSOM, trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the roster lacks the talent to win even without Monta (as evidenced by how well we’ve seen them play for individual quarters and halves even throughout this L streak), but I think it requires a coach who is willing to take a backseat to the skills of his players. And as much as I like Nelson as a personality, and find his style of play exhilarating, he isn’t doing that, and it’s hurting us. Last night’s game was a pretty stark example, and it might seem overzealous to bring up coaching when inbounds passes are being stolen and Corey Maggette doesn’t care enough to put a hand up in Quinn’s face, but it probably wouldn’t have come to that if we’d had a proper lineup.
The adage “you are what you are when the chips are down” proved true last night, as no matter how well Nellie resisted the urge for the first three and a half quarters, when it was the climatic moments he went back to the same old strategy that hasn’t won us games, hinders our development, and at least by one account seems to finally be pissing off Brandan Wright. I guess it didn’t piss of Turiaf, but I’m not entirely sold that he has any mindset except goofy exuberance. Now, I know somebody here broke down the numbers of our big vs. small lineups, as predictably the bigs were giving us better play. Barnett kept saying, any combination of one or two positive basketball plays would’ve won us that game. I’m wagering Brandan and Ronny would’ve been good for an extra two or three boards, and good for a win.
I’m worried about Nelson continuing to make that decision in spite of mounting evidence that Corey Maggette at the 4 is a dumb idea. It seems empirically clear enough to me that it’s not a winning strategy that his reasons for employing it aren’t really important to me. If he’s got too much pride to admit the smallball isn’t working, that’s a personality problem that a coach of a young team can’t afford to have. But presuming he isn’t an egomaniac, which I will presume, it means he just thinks, in spite of evidence both visual and statistical, that Maggette at the 4 gives them the best chance to win. I’m not sure which scenario makes me more worried.
The most terrible thing about this situation is that I have shaky faith in Nelson’s coaching (again, this year- I’m not indicting the guy’s career), but no faith in the front office. In spite of his early mistakes, I will readily admit that I’m a fan of Mullin, and even you, Atma, I imagine would concur that you’re a little more comfortable with a basketball guy like Mullin signing the papers than a guy like Rowell who’s basically the extended arm of one of the worst sports owners working today. I’m worried (as I am with the Crawford trade early) that Rowell is going to continue to glut us with albatross contracts, and Nelson will play those guys in spite of the talent (and in my opinion, the greater chance to win) that would come with playing Brandan starter’s minutes at the 4.
by Zack Vank on
Dec 2, 2008 3:50 PM PST
up
reply
actions
2 recs
Well said. With you on all of this.
Coaches are variable commodities… they change with time, with the style of the league, with the nature of their talent. To say that Nellie’s coaching poorly this year is not to say that he’s been a bad coach for us in previous seasons, or a bad coach over the course of his career. But this season, with these players, he’s done a terrible job.
by onlxn on
Dec 2, 2008 5:21 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Agree with all of this (other than the idea that J-Rich’s continued absence is a problem).
Our offense hasn’t been particularly cohesive so far, but our offense wasn’t all that cohesive last year either… we had the same miscommunications, the same terrible sequences, the same lazy reliance on isolation. The difference was that Baron was really, really good — good enough to win us a bunch of games despite our (and his) bad habits.
I’ve never quite bought the idea that Baron’s leadership is what we’re missing. He didn’t make us better because he made everyone play like a team… he made us better because he played like Baron Davis. We miss his talent, not his leadership.
by onlxn on
Dec 2, 2008 5:26 PM PST
up
reply
actions
2 recs
Rec!
"...OlympicMike is clearly the Barack Obama of GSoM"-Sleepy
by olympicmike on
Dec 2, 2008 11:40 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
All I have to say is
I couldn’t agree with you more. People need to get off Nellie’s back and people need to get off the players’ backs. That’s it.
by goldenstatelove on
Dec 2, 2008 6:55 PM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
my 2 cents on the problem
Lack. of. experience.
We lack the experience of having Monta.
We lack the experience of having Crawford playing with our team.
We lack the experience of having our first and second year players playing.
There is only one thing that can fix our problem, and it is time.
I feel the front office is Ok (shouldn’t fire Mullin, but that’s just me), the coaching is good (if they played more D it’d be great, but I will never diss Nellie), and the players are playing great and hard. We need time and experience. it will come. I just pray that the FO doesn’t see us losing and try to do something drastic which will just take us a huge notch backwards.
by bradyk2 on
Dec 2, 2008 9:23 PM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
Could you not tell me the reason I am voting for Nelson? Do you guys want opinions or do you want similar opinions? I mean, why put a poll up if you are just going to tell the respondents they are misguided if they disagree with you.
Do I care about the playoffs this year? No. Do I blame Don Nelson for not being able to put us there? Hell no. Do I blame Don Nelson for playing his players like he thinks we can get there? Definitely. In particular, Brandan Wright has been screwed over many times. It would be one thing if he didn’t perform, but he is consistently doing his thing and not getting playing time. Last night, he gets playing time, except Nelson doesn’t play him for the entire fourth quarter and overtime except for a token 2 second appearance.
I wonder why so many players demand trades from GS? I wonder why Pietrus and Barnes suck ass here but then play pivotal roles on their new teams? I wonder why Nelson is adding Wright to his list of misused big men? I wonder why Belinelli hasn’t even got an opportunity (and I am really effing sick of people telling me I’m wrong for thinking he should get a chance, I’m not saying he will be good or bad, I’m saying we need to find out don’t we?)? Or why people like Marcus Williams can’t get off the bench, so we can’t even see what type of player he is, we just assume he is bad? Or why Morrow can explode out the gates and not even get plays called for him the next games? Or why Turiaf and Biedrins don’t play on the court together nearly enough? Or why we continue to hold back our young players even though the season is clearly a lost cause and it seems like they actually play BETTER than the veterans we rely on? Or why we can’t begin working towards next season, or give our young players consistent minutes?
Probably the front office.
by belilaugh on
Dec 2, 2008 10:31 PM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
Its both
funny and frustrating that some people say Nelson is rigid, stubborn, doesn’t develope young players, needs to play our latest batch of untested/unlikely rooks… and still others complain that he plays a different lineup every night, mixes up the group too much, the team is too young etc. He can’t win for losing…
Also, aside from Harrington who are the other players that have recently demanded trades??
And your comment about Pietrus and Barnes sucking here and then playing pivotal roles on new teams is the most rediculous.. Both those guys had more opportunities here given what they showed, then they would have had anywhere else… Both peaked during We Believe and both laid eggs last year despite being given every chance to come around. Do you really not remember that Nellie was the one who brought Barned to the team when he was literally out of the league after being left for dead by countless teams??
This all just getting obsurd. We have young team and a new team that needs to get used to eachother.. And a front office that is making moves that indicate an all too familiar lack of vision.
by in for life on
Dec 2, 2008 11:09 PM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don’t know, maybe if Pietrus and Barnes weren’t playing the 4 (add Maggette playing the 4 to the list of complaints) they may have played better, don’t you think?
Marcus Williams recently asked for a trade I believe.
I’m not defending the front office, they suck too, which makes it more depressing. But the question asked for the Warriors biggest problem. The funny thing is, I think that despite all the mishaps, despite all the attempts to entrench our franchise in mediocrity, the team is still promising. If utilized effectively.
“and still others complain that he plays a different lineup every night, mixes up the group too much, the team is too young etc. He can’t win for losing”
Not sure how this is relevant to my point.
“Do you really not remember that Nellie was the one who brought Barned to the team when he was literally out of the league after being left for dead by countless teams??”
I think that players fresh into the system will thrive, because they will love the freedom. But as one plays more and more games with this do whatever the hell you want on offense, occasionally play defense, they will develop more and more bad habits that balloon and really hurt their level of play. They got comfortable unless a fire was lit into their ass. Remember all those comeback wins last year? Why did we continually go down ten points in the first place? (By the way, terrible job by Nelson last year, exhausting the veterans to increase the win total, but costing the Warriors any chance of advancing in the playoffs even if they got there. If he develops the bench early in the season, he does a couple things. He keeps his stars fresher, and he gives game experience to more players who will be able to contribute later in the season. You think Phil Jackson wants to sit Kobe for Ariza or Vujacic or whoever in the second quarter? Hell no, he does it to keep Kobe fresh. Obviously, playing the young players could have cost us some games, but that was a risk we needed to take, because if it were to pay off then we would have had a chance to advance in the playoffs rather than barely reach them before running out of gas. But I digress…).There are obvious exceptions like Biedrins, and possibly Brandan Wright (how would we know though, am I right?)
I mean, come on, it seemed pretty obvious that a player like Pietrus needed discipline. Barnes too, he started out with a chip on his shoulder but when he lost them he was a chicken with his head cut off out there. He needed direction. Nelson never provided that.
by belilaugh on
Dec 3, 2008 12:15 AM PST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Hate to tell you guys
Monta’s return (if he does return this season) is not going to make one bit of difference. You have a diminished player returning near the middle of the season, playing a new position with an almost completely different roster. That’s not a great scenario for success, so let’s not keep kidding ourselves. Has anyone heard even one word about the progress of his rehab? That’s not a good sign.
by Jeffo on
Dec 2, 2008 10:41 PM PST
reply
actions
0 recs
















