Playing Our Rookies

by tangel29 on Feb 22, 2008 5:50 AM PST Comment 5 comments

The passing of the NBA trade deadline with no action by our beloved Warriors only begs the question, Why doesn't Nelson play the Rookies and POB?
Every trade scenario proposed, except for some of the more fanciful, were for players who had similar skills to those at the end of the bench or in suits. We have a sharp shooter and three interior players who, in brief stints, have shown the ability to contribute at this level.
I also get the feeling that those around the team, such as broadcasters and beat writers have asked the same question. The only person who is not sold is the only one that matters, Nelson.
With Biedrins now out for a week or two and a little break in the schedule, why not give these guys some time on the floor to show what they can contribute down the stretch.
So to those who have followed the Warriors closely all season, which of our four interchanging inactives do you see being able to add depth to our ever shortening rotation?

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 5 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

well

i think everyone feels the same way, and it has been gone over many times. The timing of Biedrins injury couldn't have been better, because we are playing easier teams, although we are really going to have to crash the boards. Of course the bench will get more burn now. This is their opportunity. You have to look at it from Nellie's prospective though. He has been playing with basically no bench, and you have to say he has been successful. Also, it's not like this is something new. Nellie doesn't play rookies unless he has to, or it's garbage time. There have been tough losses, but we are 12 games over 500. I know we're in the West and 12 games over 500 doesn't mean playoffs, but I never thought we would have the record we have after the start to the season.

CJ Watson. From San Andreas to the Bay!

by tadams1080 on Feb 22, 2008 6:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Agreed with everything

End of discussion. Close thread now.

"Monta is the MAN." -Bob Fitzgerald

by WarriorForLife on Feb 22, 2008 7:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

last time I looked

I thought this was an interactive blog where differing opinions could be expressed. If I see a topic I feel I've read enough about I just scroll past it. It's pretty painless. The fabric of opinions is what (in my opinion) makes blogs interesting and fun to read. So forgive me, but I don't agree with everything posted and so I don't think this diary needs to be closed.

That being said, I'm not one to oooze Nellie like most on here. The quality of his predessors inflates his value in my opinion. I'm not saying he's a bad coach, I just don't think he's the "end all" when it comes to coaches, and his "rookieitis" is one of his shortcomings. He's a good coach for a team in transition but I don't, nor have I ever, seen him as a good long-term coach for a team. He was a great coach to turn things around for the team last season and the Jax/Harrington trade was a stroke of genius and the critical factor in the team's big turn-around mid-season, it's too bad the JRich trade had to come and cast a giant cloud over what looked like blue skies ahead. And if there were any patches of blue sky left, they definitely clouded up when the older, out of shape, CWebb returned. I guess that was our "really big" roster shakeup for the year??

Players don't develop sitting on the bench and/or playing in garbage time. So if you're going to have a coach that has issues playing his rookies, for heaven's sake, don't trade a veteran starter for a rookie only to have him sit on the bench and add more wear and tear on the starting veterans that are left. Is it any wonder the Warriors have been plagued with slow starts all season resulting in big deficits to overcome in the 2nd half of the game.

I honestly don't think the POB issues come down to anything more than Nellie simply not taking a liking to the kid. Maybe he resents the fact that HE didn't bring him on the team and inherited him. It wouldn't surprise me. I feel bad for him because his prime career years are going down the drain because of the team he's on.

Nellie was very wise to negotiate his big fat contract during the off season.

by centerre on Feb 22, 2008 12:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

i agree

I don't think this should be a closed topic, I like discussing ig. I agree with you on some points. But who said Nellie is a long term coach? I don't think he, or Mullie sees it that way. The young core will be around a long time after Nellie is gone. If you have good veteran players, why would you not play them? Of course I would like us to be like Detroit where we have a Jason Maxiel. But, we don't have that coming off the bench. We have unpolished rookies who need time. Nellie has his faults, but he wants to win. He puts the guys out there who give him the best chance to win. I'm not saying he's the best coach in the league, but we're better than we have been in 13 years.

CJ Watson. From San Andreas to the Bay!

by tadams1080 on Feb 22, 2008 1:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Nellie

I don't see him as a long term guy as well. In fact, I'm surprised he returned especially since the make up of our team got a whole lot younger this offseason.
It has been very confusing on how the Warriors have operated after experiencing some success in the playoffs. CJ Watson, for example, played more when he was on the 10-day contracts. Why sign him the rest of the season if he is just going to rot on the bench.
Now I think we all agree here that the rookies and POB need to play. The question is who do you think could have the most impact on the team?

by tangel29 on Feb 22, 2008 1:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs