In honor of a nice win...

by bradyk2 on Feb 29, 2008 11:59 PM PST Comment 17 comments

I've posted very rarely this season, but the W's are really getting fun to watch, and i thought I'd post a few things.

The W's don't generally get much love from the rest of the league/media. At a TV break, I switched to the Nuggets/PaperClips game, just in time to hear them discussing whether the Nuggets or Rockets would grab the 8th seed. They seemed rather confident the Warriors would be #7.
This has probably already been posted, but was perusing NBA.Com today, and saw a little love for GSoM....go to the entry on Feb. 27

http://my.nba.com/forum.jspa?forumID=300012410&start=0

3) Also, I thought of a question today. Can a team win a championship with a true upper-echelon PG? It sounds like a ridiculous question, but bear with me. Every team in the NBA has talent. Enough ball movement generally leaves a guy open for a shot, or an open lane. When teams have a great PG (the likes of Kidd, Nash, BDiddy, etc.), he tends to try and control the game. He tries to make a great pass instead of simply making the easy pass that leads to the easy pass that leads to the easy pass that leads to the high-percentage 15 footer. While that style of ball (San Antonio, anyone?) is very boring compared to the Warriors, I can't help but wonder if it's the key to winning, in this entertainment obsessed league. Looking back at the teams in the finals the past few years, none have had a stellar PG. The Spurs had Parker (who has become great, but is really just a small SG), the Pistons had Billups (a very good PG, but not a great passer), the Heat had Jason Williams, the Mavericks Jason Terry, and the Cavs Daniel Gibson. Meanwhile, Kidd, Nash, Baron, and the other great passers in the league go ringless.

I wouldn't trade Baron for the world, but the strange question begs to be asked. do you think the Warriors can win a title eventually, with such a magnificent passer running the show?

Until next time, peace.
-Brady

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 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

hmmm..interesting post.

When I think of NBA champions I think of great basketball players not necessarily great individual skilled players: passers, scorers, rebounders etc..although those teams seem to have both. For instance the Spurs had Robert Horry. Big shot Bob could drain the three whenever they needed it. Or Bowen their lock down defender that gave nightmares to opposing shooting guards.
It seems the great players have multiple skill sets and provide their team with what they need most. Scoring, big defensive set, rebounding ...When I think of dominant players I think of Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Lebron James, and I hate to admit it Kobe Bryant. They seem to be able to beat you in so many different ways. I didn't include Jason Kidd, because as great a player as he is, he doesn't seem to be able to score at will like the rest..maybe this hurt the nets in the finals, but that leads us back to your question.
Well first I don't think having a great passer is a detriment or precludes your team from winning. Championship teams in the past have had great passing point guards. I just think it takes a great scorer to recieve the passes from. For us contrary to what some may feel, we really, really do need a dominant post prescence. That is one thing many of the recent champs have had which we don't..because as we know when the jumpers stop falling the game comes down to percentages: the closer you are the more you'll make versus farther away; thus a post oriented team will try to get as many point blank shots as possible..
back to the warriors. I'd really like to see the warriors try to get a Gasol/Brand/Jefferson type to play with..I think it would put them in the upper echelon..

by 11allstar on Mar 1, 2008 12:47 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Upper-echelon PG

Can a team win a championship with a true upper-echelon PG?

Yes.
Lakers and Magic Johnson.
New York and Walt Frazier.
Pistons and Isiah Thomas.
to name a few.

by soem on Mar 1, 2008 1:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

i get ur point

but isiah and magic...

by latvianlegendflex on Mar 1, 2008 1:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

In Today's NBA

the issue is not so much ball-movement, but the salary cap. Top PGs that can score and set up their teammates typically earn a large hunk of money & strain the payroll of their respective team, and its chances of winning a championship.

Steve Nash does earn less than some top PGs, but his lack of defense hurts his team more than people generally admit...

Baron's special because he's just as effective scoring (and playing D for that matter) as he is setting up teammates, though he didn't show that tonight. Surrounding Baron with talent will only create more options and opportunities on the offensive end, and Baron's defense is good by NBA standards. He needs to be brought back for a few years while Monta, Biedrins, and Wright grow; the warriors window is longer than the Mav's or Suns' and they'll have the talent to compete with the Spurs, Hornets, Lakers and Jazz.

by BingBluNT on Mar 1, 2008 3:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

well, can you win without one?

Although the Warriors & Bulls seem to be exception to the rule, if it's not always the PG, it's the Center that delivers a ring.

1974-75        Golden State Warriors def Bullets    4-0    behind MVP Rick Barry who also had Phil Smith & Silk Wilkes
1975-76        Boston Celtics def Phoenix Suns: Bos PG Jo Jo White was the MVP.
1976-77        Portland Trail Blazers def Philadelphia 76ers behind the big annunciator Bill Walton (who was Jack Ramsey's PG?)
1977-78        Washington Bullets def Seattle SuperSonics: Wes Unseld, MVP.
1978-79        Seattle SuperSonics def Washington Bullets & PG Dennis Johnson was MVP in his pre-green career.
1979-80        Los Angeles Lakers def Philadelphia 76ers and a young PG Magic was MVP.
1980-81        Boston Celtics def Houston Rockets. MVP? Cedric Maxwell (that might win you some trivia points)
1981-82        Los Angeles Lakers def Philadelphia 76ers: Magic MVP
1982-83        Philadelphia 76ers def Los Angeles Lakers, MVP Moses Malone with Mo Cheeks & Andrew Toney at the guards, and some other guy ...
1983-84        Boston Celtics def Los Angeles Lakers - Bird = MVP, but former Finals MVP DJ, Parrish, & McHale were part of the mix too in the 80s.
1984-85        Los Angeles Lakers def Boston Celtics, this time Kareem was MVP
1985-86        Boston Celtics def Houston Rockets - see `83-`84
1986-87        Los Angeles Lakers def Boston Celtics, Magic was MVP.
1987-88        Los Angeles Lakers def Detroit Pistons, Worthy MVP
1988-89        Detroit Pistons def. Los Angeles Lakers, Dumars MVP (only guy on the team without a nickname back then)
1989-90        Detroit Pistons def Portland Trail Blazers, Isiah MVP.
1990-91        Chicago Bulls def Los Angeles Lakers, Jordan
1991-92        Chicago Bulls def Portland Trail Blazers, MJ
1992-93        Chicago Bulls def Phoenix Suns, one guess?
1993-94        Houston Rockets    def New York Knicks with Clyde the Glide & MVP going to Dream.
1994-95        Houston Rockets    def Orlando Magic - wasn't that Kenny Smith feeding Hakeem Olajuwon?
1995-96        Chicago Bulls def Seattle SuperSonics, Jordan
1996-97        Chicago Bulls def Utah Jazz, MJ
1997-98        Chicago Bulls def Utah Jazz: Michael Jordan was the de facto PG for all the great Bulls teams when it mattered, unless you want to count Steve Kerr as a PG. Pippen was also handling the PG duties a lot later in their run.
1998-99        San Antonio Spurs def New York Knicks, Dumars MVP of the Bad Boyz
1999-00        Los Angeles Lakers def Indiana Pacers. In the triangle, a solid if unspectacular PG next to Shaq & Kobe is all that is required, such as ...
2000-01        Los Angeles Lakers def Philadelphia 76ers: PG Iverson & curmudgeon Brown got 76ers there though
2001-02        Los Angeles Lakers def New Jersey Nets: Kobe & Shaq - how could they have aborted a dynasty so early?
2002-03        San Antonio Spurs def New Jersey Nets, Duncan MVP, but Parker's joined the elite PGs in the league by any measure & Manu is rising to the top of his game.

Anyway, Heat with Shaq & DWade, Spurs again and again, etc.

This season, if healthy come playoffs, the Celtics and Spurs would make a great final matchup

by hardcore on Mar 1, 2008 8:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

and the Championship -- goes to ...

1) Dominant Player(s) -- they arive on a team (usually by Lottery) and at some point the best get their teams into the Championship game. Duncan is still paying dividends.

2) Dominant Market -- market size realates to extra financial opportunities available to team owners and players. They can play comfortably over the Cap. LA Lakers show up over and over again across the decades with championship titles.

by soem on Mar 1, 2008 8:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Basically agree

I'd say the most common threads among championship teams are:

Having a top 2-3 big man
Having a 2-3 player who isn't a big man (point guard or otherwise)

"Big market" is probably tertiary at best. San Antonio's a tiny market; Boston wasn't really a big market when the Cs were winning 11 championships in 13 years; and Chicago was kind of a hoops wasteland before Jordan showed up.

Meanwhile, the Knicks' big market hasn't helped them win a championship in my conscious lifetime. The Lakers have been there so often because they've had two #2s (Kobe and Magic) and two #1s (Shaq and Kareem), with possibly a 3rd #1 in the making in Bynum. Grrr...

Basically, if we had picked Bynum instead of Diogu, Oakland could easily have become the next capital of the basketball universe. Bynum/Biedrins/Monta/Brandan, all 22 and under? Sign me up. Sigh...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 1, 2008 9:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

true..

but if landing bynum instead of getting diogu was the case. i say our hope of getting harrington, jackson would of been real slim. all in all, im happy we kinda didnt get bynum, because we wouldnt have gotten jax n harrington, and then bet worldwide publicity with the playoff [ush we had last year.

by GSwarrior on Mar 1, 2008 10:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

interesting.... and what makes you think we woulda gotten Brandon? What makes you think Bynum will still be as good without Kobe badmouthing him? And where would Dunleavy and Murphy be if Larry Bird didn't get his gem in Ike.

by saintdee on Mar 1, 2008 11:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You're right

It's not fair to point to one event in the past and say "if only we had done X, we could be Y now," since you never know how that change might have affected subsequent events. A butterfly flaps its wings ... You're right that we might not have been able to foist Murphleavy on Indiana without Diogu as "sweetener."

Still, you have to think that if we had drafted Bynum, there would have been even more urgency to dump Dunmurphy's and JRich's salaries, for whatever we could get in the way of shorter and/or cheaper contracts. The Charlotte deal would still presumably have been there for us; and there's no reason to think that with a core of Ellis/AB/Bynum, we still wouldn't have picked the most talented player available, i.e. Wright.

As for Bynum's somehow developing into a different player without Kobe and Kareem to guide and yell at him: I don't buy that at all. I'm guessing Nellie and Baron can yell just as loud as Kareem and Kobe.

I guess the question might come down to: would I trade the joy of last year -- and the breaking of a 13-year hex -- for a young core of Bynum/Biedrins/Monta/BWright? Answer: possibly...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 2, 2008 6:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

NB

The point of that tangent is simply that you don't really need to be located a big market to become a championship team: all you need to do is luck into a Russell or a Bird or a Magic or a Jordan or Shaq or a Duncan. (Shaq is the only guy in that bunch for whom you might say the market-size of his championship team mattered). Is Bynum talented and committed enough to become that level of player? The early returns -- 16.4 pts, 63.6% fg, 12.7 rebs, 2.6 blk per 36 mins at age 20 -- are pretty encouraging. I mean, terrifying...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 2, 2008 6:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

trivia answers below

76-77 Blazers PG was Lionel Hollins. Did you remember that Bill Walton held out the entire 1978-79 season?

the other guy on the 82-83 Philly team was Dr. J.

Yes, Kenny Smith was the third wheel on the Houston Rockets, and holds the franchise record with a career 3pt FG 41%

99-00 LAL PG was Derek Fisher

From 00-02, Shaq won three straight Final's MVPs; Kobe couldn't live with playing 2nd banana and Buss was forced to choose between them

by hardcore on Mar 1, 2008 8:37 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I think

The trend either points to an outstanding point guard surrounded by good-great players (Magic and Isiah), or a good point guard with either a) a dominant big man (Smith & Hakeem, Parker & Duncan/Robinson) or b) a guy like Jordan, or Kobe, who create their own shots. Like he said, Jordan functioned as a PG on those teams, or Kobe with those Laker teams, and obviously there's overlap, which makes for great teams: the Lakers in the late 90's and early 00's, Magic and Kareem, Isiah and Dumars. But those Spurs teams won convincingly with a young and inconsistent Tony Parker, before his ascendancy to a top PG. Defense matters too, Nash is a top offensive PG but his defense is mediocre (at best). A great PG isn't sufficient, but a good one is probably necessary for a team to go all the way unless blessed with an elite all- time player like Jordan, Kobe (maybe LeBron one day?)

My girlfriend hates that I'm into basketball again, and that I yell at the TV during games.

by sfwarriorcvg on Mar 1, 2008 12:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I think that

the best teams have a dominant force down low and a dominant 2-3 swingman.

by travisl212 on Mar 1, 2008 1:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Brady

Good to see you posting again, I have missed your Mike&Ike Webpin. On a somewhat related note, I have not missed Mike or Ike.

by olympicmike on Mar 1, 2008 1:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

x2!

Always nice to hear from one of the "old-timers" (even if, IIRC, you're still in high school...)

Totally share OM's lack of nostalgia for Mike and Ike, the players. Actually, this year, for the first time in recent memory, I can honestly say there are no ex-Warriors around the league whom I particularly miss. Agent Zero was the last, but Monta's pretty much erased his memory with his recent play. Would anyone on this board trade Monta for Gilbert, straight up?

p.s. -- bk2, assuming you still have that webpin, can you make a brief reply in this thread? That Mike-n-Ike logo would be almost as nostalgic for me as the old Dwight-Schrute "GSoM police" avatar...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 1, 2008 4:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Sleepy and olympic...

Means a lot that you guys remember/missed me! Sleepy, you do recall correctly, and that's really been the reason I haven't had time to post much recently....however, college apps and whatnot are done so hopefully I can get back to my posting ways! I've missed chatting with all of you guys...

Anyway, here's a post so you can see the infamous Mike and Ike, who, I agree, are not worth missing! I apologize that I got to this thread late enough that you guys might not return to it, but hopefully I'll get back to posting in other threads....

On a related note, I've missed your awesome Monta pin, sleepy, and your "Wii Believe" cracks me up, olympic!