Recap: Warriors 109, Bobcats 118- Bad Karma + The Trade Year 1 (so far)

by Atma Brother ONE on Mar 5, 2008 11:39 PM PST in Recaps

Tonight's Leastern Conference opponent sported a .350 winning record (or .650 losing record if you want to look at it that way), were without one of their best players, and were down by 13 after the first quarter in their own building. Well anything can happen in this league and that's why you play a full 48 minutes.

Preview/ Open Thread (209+ Comments)

Killer Warrior Becomes a Warrior Killer.

Final Boxscore

Make the jump for what went right, what went wrong, and yes, of course, few thoughts- make that a ton- about the JRich trade so far and how it's working out for the Dubs.

What Went Right
Not much, but real quick...s

Fantastic First
It really looked like the Warriors were going to put this one away easy after the first 12 minutes. They were were on fire dropping more hits than 106 & Park. 38 points and a 13 point lead to open up the game on the road is very impressive. People are quick to critique the Warriors when they come out half awake, so it's only fair to give them props when they come out firing. If they come out to play like that, more often than not they're going to get a nice W.

Offense from Boom Dizzle, 1 Man Fast Break, and Jack
Overall all 3 of these guys came out with some very nice offense output. They took a combined 57 shots between them to get 83 points, which probably isn't ideal. But when no other Warrior hits double digits in points I guess that's what has to be done. These 3 carried the Dubs on offense tonight. Defense? Well that's another story. Call it the Steve Nash rule. It's infinitely easier to put up impressive stats on offense if you aren't play the other half of the game.

What Went Wrong:
A lot actually, but here's the 3 biggest WWW's (what went wrong):

Gimme a D for Defense
No seriously, aside from Mickael Pietrus for a little bit here and there were these guys even trying? Baron Davis didn't look like he focused on D for more than a few seconds. Monta Ellis is continuing his campaign for LVP on D. Stephen Jackson just didn't bring it. Al Harrington seemed off. Brandan Wright was pushed around. Patrick O'Bryant should never be playing if he's going to be that soft. Kelenna gets beat off the dribble by the simplest fakes and slowest cuts to the basket.

Andris Biedrins or Chris Webber would definitely help on D. I'm not saying either are good defenders right now (Biedrins is pretty awful one on one and Webber can't rotate one bit), but at least Biedrins brings some okay to good weak side help (his blocks are actually down from last season) and CWebb can give give guys like Okafor trouble one-on-one down low with his quick hands and positioning. So maybe the Warriors aren't really this bad on D when healthy. I'd like to see those guys playing more together when healthy. They seem like a good pairing for both offense and more importantly defense, but we'll see.

This team needs some defensive help in the worst way possible. It's too late for a trade (Ron Artest or Kurt Thomas would've helped a ton), so it has to come internally. I have no idea how to make that happen aside from my seemingly foolish Biedrins and Webber pairing (but give me some points for being creative!), so I'll leave that to Nellie.

Foul Play
No, I'm not talking about the sloppy second quarter and the 8 Warrior turnovers in that period alone (although I probably should), I'm talking about the crazy rate at which the Warriors picked up fouls tonigh. It doesn't get any more foul than this:

Al Harrington- 5 in 23:38
Brandan Wright- 4 in 23:14
Mickael Pietrus- 6 in 23:44 (although nice work on that smart foul on Okafor in the final minutes of the game)
Kelenna Azubuike- 2 in 12:34
Austin Croshere- 3 in 10:40
Patrick O'Bryant- 2 in 5:34

The Dubs sent the Bobcats to the line an unsightly 41 times (although 3 of those were because of a silly flagrant foul on Okafor by Matt Barnes). Be thankful the BETcats are one of the worst free throw shooting teams in the league- in particular Okafor- or else this game would've been a blowout. That was super sloppy.

Where's the Windex?
Let's just say there's a problem when Matt Carroll grabs 11 against you. I can't seem to dig up the stat, but watching the game it really felt like what really helped the BETcats pull off this win, in spite of shooting 42.6% to the Warriors 48.8%, in addition to the trips to the line were the second chance points.

I'm fairly confident that a lot of smart GSoMers will outline more WWW's in the comments if you for some odd reason can't get enough of those. I think this exchange between Barnett and Fitz on the FSN Bay Area telecast towards the end of the 2nd quarter pretty much sums up the outing:

Barnett: Is Matt Carroll a good defender?

Fitz: No.

Barnett: He's got 4 steals!

Warrior Killers
It felt like there was a made for BET reality show special being filmed in Charlotte this evening in front of an audience of about 13 people (man, that arena looked empty on TV) titled "Warrior Killers". In addition to the 11 steals and 4 boards from Carroll, these BETcats went Petey Pablo and repped NORTH CAROLINA!!:

Jason Richardson: Look, I love JR. He's one of my favorite Warriors of all time, but even I'll be the first person to tell you he doesn't have the unworldly dribble drive and penetration skills that he put on full display tonight. Sure his handles and driving abilities aren't nearly as bad as some people make them out to be, but they aren't anything more than very average for a starting swingman in the NBA.

JRich is a great player. Near All-Star caliber 2-guard. He might even make an All-Star squad in the Leastern Conference if the Bobcats get a decent coach and play up to their potential when healthy. But he is not a superstar. I'm hoping this was some agreed upon gift that BD and the gang hooked Jason up with before the game or something. The only time they stopped him is when they triple teamed him up near half court. Unacceptable defense.

Smoove Reverse Finishes.
Emeka Okafor: I haven't seen Okafor enough in the NBA to know if that Al Harrington-like poor finishing ability near the rim tonight was just a bad outing or a real trend. Either way the Warriors are just lucky he couldn't finish around the rim tonight at all. He was just too big and strong for the Warriors down low, particularly Wright and POB. Emeka should've had a 30 point career game tonight. The Warriors escaped. Unacceptable defense.

Warriors got off easy.
Jared Dudley: If the 22nd pick in this past draft is going to torch the Warriors for a career night of 10 points, 18 REBOUNDS!, and 2 blocks while outplaying #8 pick Brandan Wright and #18 pick Marco Belinelli is warming the bench, there's some serious problems in Warriors land. Unacceptable defense.

At least Dudley got Funleavy'ed.

Can I give it to JR? I'll let you all golden folks decide in the comments who should get tonight's award.

********************

Warriors Losers in Year 1 (so far) of the Trade
I'm big on evaluating trades on a year by year basis. You don't get to say 4 years from now one player is putting up nice numbers as a starter and the other isn't as good, so one team automatically won. Each of those years in between matters. Look at the Lakers when they traded Shaq. For years 1-3 they lost big time (actually missed the playoffs entirely and were knocked out twice in the 1st round), but now the Lakers look amazing with Lamar Odom and Caron Butler > Kwame Brown > Pau Gasol, and Shaq well not being Shaq. Doesn't mean the Lakers won the trade one bit. They lost out on 3 years of contending for the lovely O'Brien trophy.

It hasn't been a full year yet since the Warriors and BETcats made their draft day deal, but through 60 games I think we're at a good enough point to check in at least. Some of my dearest friends and highly esteemed colleagues believe the Warriors made a great trade. I don't.

I've seen and heard it all since the Warriors traded JRich this past draft day including:

"Belinelli is going to be 10x better than JRich! He can shoot and handle much better."- Um, no.
"Kelenna Azubuike is an UPGRADE over JRich!"- Um, no.
"The Warriors are going to be better with Brandan Wright this year."- Um, no.

Hey while everyone is seemingly ooo-ing and aah-ing over these sorts of games from a rookie forward that Nellie just doesn't seem to want to play and will probably be banished to the bench when Andris Biedrins returns:

Brandan Wright
March 5 @ Bobcats: 6 points, 5 rebounds, 1 block, 4 fouls and outplayed by Jared Dudley!

March 4 @ Hawks: 5 points, 2 rebounds, and 1 block

March 2 vs Blazers: 13 points, 7 rebounds, 1 assist, and 1 block

February 29 vs 76ers: 12 points, 7 rebounds, 3 blocks

Season: 4.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 0.3 apg, 0.1 stl, 0.4 blk

I'm looking at what the Warriors are missing out on:

Jason Richardson
March 5 vs Warriors: 42 points, 7 boards, 7-7 FT's, and the best player on the floor tonight.

March 4 @ Timberwolves: 25 points, 8 rebounds, 6 assists, and 1 steal

March 2 vs Raptors: 30 points, 7 rebounds, 3 assists, and 1 steal

February 29 @ Celtics: 30 points, 6 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 steals

Season: 20.5 ppg (43.3% 3pt), 5.1 rpg, 3.0 apg, 1.2 stl, 0.7 blk

A lot of Warrior fans were eying Mike Miller at the deadline, thinking that would make a huge impact on their season. Well, how good would the Warriors be if they had JRich right now? Think they'd be closer to earning a first round bye in this year's playoffs and deadlier team with JR? I do.

Again, I'm not saying the Warriors had to keep Jason Richardson per say. They were loaded with swingmen and needed some bigs who could rebound and defend. It would've made perfect sense to trade JRich for a guy of Drew Gooden's caliber. But they didn't. Instead they made a bad trade for year 1. Think Nellie, BD, Jack, Monta, Biedrins, Webber, Barnes, Pietrus, Harrington, Azubuike, and Croshere want to hear about what might happen in year 3 or 4 of the trade in the middle of this fantastic playoff run and Warriors season? I doubt it and neither do I.

Also, I'm not saying this trade had to be a bad one in year 1. If they actually used that all-talk-but-no-action $10 million trade exception from the deal to get a stud like Ron Artest at the trade deadline, the Warriors would've been HUGE winners of this deal. I'd even go so far to say if they moved Brandan Wright + the exception for Artest (as long as there's somewhat of a commitment to stay with the Dubs from Ron-Ron) the JRich deal would've been a great move because they need a ton of help on the defensive end and Artest is near or at JR's level on offense. But they didn't.

We'll check back again in July on the trade. Hopefully Mully and Nellie work some miracle with that trade exception. Before people jump out of their seat to say that the Warriors couldn't afford extensions for Biedrins and Monta this offseason (I'll actually boldly predict that both probably won't get big deals this offseason and the Warriors will let the market decide their price in the summer of 2009- although it's late and I'll have to double check if that makes sense for Monta's second round situation) if they kept Richardson on the books or another $10 million+ deal, compare their payroll to the rest of the league. They've got nothing to complain about, especially when they're packing the house after 12 years of disaster and play in a large market.

********************

Also check out some of GSoM friend Tim Kawakami's thoughts on the game and more: Charlotte 118, Warriors 109: Did Jason Richardson crush the Warriors' shot at a 6 or 7 seed? [Talking Points]

Moving On
Sure, it's a bad loss to a bad team, but let's all take pride in the fact that the Warriors are a WHOPPING 14 GAMES OVER .500. If you would've told me that the Warriors would ever been double digit games over .500 in my lifetime at this point a year ago, I would've passed along some life long advice I thankfully picked up in my high school days: "Don't smoke crack. It's bad for you." Seriously though, 14 games over .500 and a .617 winning percentage 60 games into the season? I'll take it.

The Warriors have another back to back this Friday in the Southeast. They have to at least get a split. My boy FJ sees a W against the Heat and an L against the Magic (see Counting W's for Week 19). I will contend that that makes absolutely too much sense and this Warriors team makes absolutely no sense. I see a random loss against the Heat and then a surprise win in Disney World. Why? I really have no idea.

Photos: Kent Smith/NBAE via Getty Images + AP Photo/Rick Havner

Tweet Comment 86 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

sike.

Azubuike is better.

Everyone knew J-Rich would torch us one time or another. I'm glad he got it out of the way now.

Why bring up our 14 games over .500 right after you wrote some journoporn about J-Rich? It obviously doesn't dawn on you that we're a better team without him.

Were we 14 games over .500 last year at this point? No. I'd venture to say not only are we better, but we also actually have a future. One that isn't Dunmurphy and Foyle.

Seriously. Cry me a river. Build me a bridge, and get over it. He's gone, and we got rid of him right when we should have. 5 Decent games doesn't make me change my mind.

He gets about a dozen more shots without Wallace out there anyways.

by xcoma on Mar 5, 2008 11:52 PM PST reply actions

we're not better because of jrich's absence

we're better because dunleavy and murphy are not on the team. The simple act of replacing them with anybody has made us a great team. Nothing to do w/jrich. Altho the Monta Ellis revolution probly wouldn't have taken place if Jrich were still here. Revisionist history is too hard I give up

"We're all corrupt bastards." - Don Nelson

by GameSix on Mar 6, 2008 7:48 AM PST up reply actions

Er, say what?

The fact that we replaced the Dunmurphy twins with Jackson and Harrington -- who fit our team perfectly, both hoops-wise and personality-wise -- is kind of important, no? Stephen Jackson > "anybody."

As Nellie has said, Dunleavy and Murphy would have been great 7th or 8th men. The main reason it was a genius move to dump them was because they were getting paid like 2nd or 3rd men. Which, incidentally, was also the main reason it was a smart move to dump JRich.

We may not be better because of JRich's absence ... this year. But as you point out, thanks to the "Monta Ellis revolution" (which I doubt came as a huge surprise to Mulson) we're not much worse, either. And by next season, when Wright starts to blossom, and Monta and AB are 22-year-old borderline all-stars, very few people will question the wisdom of the move.

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 6, 2008 10:55 AM PST up reply actions

oh god you've got to be kidding me

azabuike better? if i were to say that statement is laughable, that would be an understatement. we're better this year for a whole lot of reasons, none of them are J Rich being gone.

by travisl212 on Mar 6, 2008 8:03 PM PST up reply actions

Your spelling is laughable.

Every single one is J-Rich being gone. He's ineffective. We've been over this shit before. Azubuike is everything J-Rich was, without the contract. In effect, he's better. Just because he's now a mainstay on the bench, instead of starting like he was, doesn't change anything.

by xcoma on Mar 6, 2008 8:27 PM PST up reply actions

yes..

it does change things. he's not even part of the regular rotation any more.. that is saying something.

by travisl212 on Mar 6, 2008 10:11 PM PST up reply actions

You mean

Other than the fact that over their careers, Kelenna has shot better from the line, the floor, and 3-pt land than JRich; rebounded better than JRich; and turned the ball over less than JRich?

FG: 45.0% > 43.3%
3FG: 40.0% > 36.1%
FT: 74.0% > 69.8%
REB/36: 6.0 > 5.4
TO/36: 1.6 < 2.2

I'm still waiting to hear a qualitative or quantitative argument for JRich's vast superiority. I'm not sure Kelenna's a better player, but I don't think the comparison is nearly as laughable as you make it out to be. Other than the fact that Kelenna isn't allowed to launch 73.9 shots a game (approximately), they're really pretty similar players.

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 6, 2008 8:44 PM PST up reply actions

the numbers are great

but it doesn't matter if he doesn't play. using those numbers, the garbage player who comes in and scores 2 points, grabs 1 board in 1 minute of playing time is an efficient player that equivalent to someone who plays 30+ minutes a game and puts up 18 pts, 6 boards.

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 6, 2008 9:04 PM PST up reply actions

OK then, Mr. Fuzzy Logic

How then would you suggest we make a meaningful comparison between the two players? Total career points? Sure: JRich has outscored 9,278 to Kelenna's 970, which must mean he's roughly 10 times better. Bravo.

I guess I'm not sure what you're arguing, and I'm not sure you're sure either (well, other than your usual "my friend Atma right, my enemy Sleepy wrong"). If you're concerned that Kelenna's overall sample size is too small: He's now played close to 2000 NBA minutes, or roughly 60 games of starters' PT. If you throw in his fabulous numbers in pre-seasons and in the CBA -- even downgrading hugely for the mediocre competition -- you have a pretty reasonable sample size to draw from.

If you're arguing that Kelenna has an advantage because he only plays for brief spurts, I'd suggest that the exact opposite might be true: anecdotally, Kelenna seems a lot less effective when he's playing sporadic minutes. The few stretches where he's gotten regular burn, he's basically kicked a**. Coming out of his fantastic pre-season, during Jackson's suspension, he dropped a 33 pts/8 reb game on the Clips and a 27/11 on Utah. When Jack came back, his minutes got less steady, and he seemed to regress slightly.

I can buy that the jury's still out on Kelenna, but to suggest based on what we've seen that any comparison between him and JRich is "laughable" is pretty laughable. And to argue that JRich must be better simply because he plays more is, ahem, fuzzy logic indeed.

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 6, 2008 10:01 PM PST up reply actions

PS--

As I haven't seen nearly as much of Kelenna as a lot of people on this site, I am sincerely looking for an answer to the non-rhetorical question: In what ways, other than getting his team to give him more PT, is Richardson a better player than Kelenna? Better shooter? Better ballhandler? Better defender? Better rebounder? From everything I've seen and read, they're extremely close on all these counts. What am I missing? Intangibles?

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 6, 2008 10:18 PM PST up reply actions

see below

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 6, 2008 10:41 PM PST up reply actions

also

my point isn't that kelenna sucks. i never said that. nor am i saying jrich is the best player in the world. im just suggesting that its difficult to claim that one is better than the other given the context by which each player is put into. i never EVER said jrich was flawless. i've even noted that kelenna is BETTER than jrich in certain respects. but how can you judge a few great games in the beginning of the season and, even as you mentioned, crap games in the summer league, to a few years of solid playing in the nba -- meaning jrich -- with far subpar teammates ... a similar situation again in charlotte. basically, if you read below, my point is that the comparisons are pointless because if you want "quantitative evidence" its nearly impossible. your numbers hide as much as they seemingly expose. that being, history.

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 6, 2008 10:47 PM PST up reply actions

Fair enough

I agree that there aren't enough numbers in KAz's resume to make the case he's better than JRich, or even as good. They certainly don't paint a full picture. I just kinda wanted to people to look at the numbers, think about their styles of play, their ages, and their salaries, and go "hmm..."

I just don't see the point in saying, "how dare you compare our former franchise to a d-leaguer??" Or, "how dare you compare our handsome JRich to poopyface Dunleavy?" If the case for JRich's on-court superiority is that strong, it should be pretty simple to make, no?

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 7, 2008 4:28 AM PST up reply actions

makes sense

but, dunleavy totally had a poopyface.

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 7, 2008 6:23 AM PST up reply actions

Werd

And still has one... ;-)

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 7, 2008 6:45 AM PST up reply actions

damn right!

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 7, 2008 7:07 AM PST up reply actions

Time to trot out

The oldie but goodie...?

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 7, 2008 7:46 AM PST up reply actions

his archive never gets old!

i'd love to see someone compile some greatest hits and misses of his young indy career.

plus, i want to just say i agree with some of said points mentioned above, but of course disagree--and that's cool. its not just a with you or against you type deal.

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 7, 2008 8:00 AM PST up reply actions

since when

JRich - for four or five years he has been a boarderline all-star (maybe not last year because of injuries) and is a guy that is good for 20 points night in and night out, he leads the league in three pointers, not to mention he just dominated us and dropped 42.

How does Kellenna compare to that? undrafted, D-leaguer, not even in the rotation, undersized, can't create his own shot. What has he done? he hit one game winner, he has had a few nice finishes in the open court, i think he dunked on someone like twice, he could shoot as much as he wanted! it doesn't matter, when he tries to create his own shot and do too much he's not effective. He shoots a high percentage cuz he has a good shot selection.

Look the kid is nice, but seriously, compared to JRich he has done nothing in this league. How can you forget about all those years when JRich was a warrior and say Kellenna is just as good? this is ridiculous.

JRICH WAS OUR BEST PLAYER FOR A LONG TIME!

kellenna hardly plays! are you kidding me?

by travisl212 on Mar 6, 2008 10:21 PM PST up reply actions

Let's see

undrafted

Not really relevant

D-leaguer

Not really relevant

not even in the rotation

Not that relevant, since Monta and Jackson, two borderline all-stars, eat up most of his available minutes.

undersized

J-Rich 6-6 220, Kelenna 6-5 220

can't create his own shot

Well, now, there you might have something. Therein lies the crux of whatever advantage JRich has, I think. I don't think KAz has the mentality or knack for scoring JRich has. At the same time, with Baron, Monta, Jax, and Harrington, how many more creators do we need? And if JRich's creative skills are so valuable, why is his team -- a pretty talented bunch, in a terrrible conference -- so awful? If you put Jordan on that exact team (Wallace, Felton, Carroll, Okafor, Mohammed et al.), they'd probably win 60 games...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 6, 2008 10:36 PM PST up reply actions

Er

I mean young Jordan. The old version clearly hasn't helped them much...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 6, 2008 10:41 PM PST up reply actions

well

he was an undrafted d-leaguer for a reason and him not being in the rotation is completely relevent because two years ago JRich was our first or second best player. Lol... no1 said he was Jordan, but if you put kellenna azubuike in jRich's shoes this season, that team would be way worse. he looks a lot smaller than 6-5 im not sure how accurate those heights are. ill admit that he can rebound, hit an open jumper after being spoon fed by Baron, and can finish in the open court, again after being spoon fed by Baron. When he averages 20 points per game then he can be in the discussion, until then he's just an average player.

by travisl212 on Mar 7, 2008 11:20 PM PST up reply actions

asdf

he was an undrafted d-leaguer for a reason

So then can we assume Monta, Arenas, Millsap, et al. are second round picks "for a reason"? And that Michael Olowokandi was a #1 pick "for a reason"? Or does your "reverse logic" game only work when you say so?

if you put kellenna azubuike in jRich's shoes this season, that team would be way worse

Pure conjecture, obviously. But OK, out of curiosity, how many games worse do you think they'd be with KAz instead of JRich? One? Three? As long as you're making stuff up, you might as well pick a number...

When he averages 20 points per game then he can be in the discussion, until then he's just an average player.

Aha, I didn't realize 20 was the magic number -- thanks for clearing that up. And speaking of Magic: it's too bad Magic Johnson was an average player till his 7th NBA season. And poor Bill Russell: he's still waiting to be considered better than average. Fortunately he has his 11 rings to console him.

Just to summarize:

JRich is probably slightly better than Azubuike, but the comparison is far from "laughable."
Dumping JRich's salary for a bag of balls would be a debatably good move for the franchise.
Dumping JRich's salary and getting a 6'9, 7'4" wingspanned freakishly athletic forward with obscene upside -- basically the exact type of player Warrior Nation has dreamt about since we shipped out Webber -- is an obscenely good move for the franchise.

Agreed?

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 8, 2008 9:02 PM PST up reply actions

ill agree

on the last two, but i still think that saying azabuike is better is laughable.

that russel and johnson arguement is ridiculous though.. come on.. azubuike doesn't dominate at anything really, he really is average. He is solid, he is nice, but he is an average to above average player. Russel and Majic dominated many aspects of the game. Seriously.. he hardly plays for a reason. He is very average. Of course that is my opinion and im sure you can give me all these statistics and twist them however you want to provide a stronger arguement, your just better at arguing than me.

by travisl212 on Mar 9, 2008 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions

Nah

I'm no numbers-twister. You make some good points. I agree that JRich is a better player, just not that the comparison to KAz is laughable. I guess it depends on your sense of humor. To me it's more laughable to think that JRich for Brandan Wright and $12M of salary relief to pay for Monta and AB was not a good move...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 10, 2008 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions

and while i love JRich

it was probably the right move. Wright is a stud, we keep our two young studs it works.

by travisl212 on Mar 10, 2008 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions

Does this makes sense?

In considering who is a better player, if they rae equal, etc, let's throw out their salaries for now and say that we hypotehtically swap out Kelenna for JRich. In this hypothetical situation, can't we measure whether JRich is the better player or not? He takes Kelenna's place on the roster, so now consider:

Would this team be better? Would he play the same role as Kelenna? Would JRich's numbers be better than Kelenna's?

Also, if you swap Kelenna with JRich on Charlotte, where does that put Charlotte? Does that make them a better team?

In a sense, isn't this what we're asking by comparing the two players since they play the same position?

by Fantasy Junkie on Mar 7, 2008 4:34 PM PST up reply actions

career numbers?

i don't care about career numbers.. i care about what they can do right now. and throwing in J-Rich's last few years with us when he was practically an all star.. check those stats.

by travisl212 on Mar 9, 2008 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions

how would we know

if we're better without jrich? because we're 14-15 off games above .500 isn't necessarily fair given that this team has had a year to mesh AND baron has never been this healthy. Jrich had 1/3 a season to bond with the Warriors. Most of his years here he had selfish teammates or no talent whatsoever. Baron was injured 1/3 of the season too. Numbers alone don't tell us a full story of how teamwork builds and chemistry and all that jazz seems to work. who knows how much better the Warriors record would have been last year when we had Jrich had baron not gone down. i'm not saying we are worse because of him, but there's no statistical conclusive evidence given that there is no "control" group where a healthy starting 5, with youngins' with 1 more year of experience under their belt with Jrich would necssarily show that we suck with him or would have won less games. and this isn't just addressing your comment, but how does kelenna do all the things that jrich provided for us now that he's glued to the bench? great per 40 min ratios don't mean anything when you play like uneven minutes game to game. tho i will give it to kelenna, he can hit a big shot. but so could jrich. and just a reminder, chew on some of the most contradictory things ever said on this blog in justifying the jrich trade. people claimed jrich was unclutch...how many big shots did he make? people claimed that dun was better than jrich because he was putting up better stats. well, if its just stats alone, wouldn't jrich be better now? then it was dun is a 'winner' verus the 'loser' jrich who just puts up big stats on losing teams. well, they're both on losing teams now. jrich won last nite, so is he now a winner? did people forget who was better on the warriors when they were BOTH on the team? anyway, i diverge from my colleague Atma in that i won't necessarily say that the JRich trade is majorly hurting us. i mean, we are 14 games over .500! but its funny because people think that the Warriors need to resign monta and biedrins, that it must come off dissing jrich.

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 6, 2008 9:01 PM PST up reply actions

mancrush?

Kelenna better than Jason Richardson?

Azubuike's 5 bad games from another D-League stint.

by Dubmanny on Mar 6, 2008 9:27 PM PST up reply actions

So...

I guess it'd be pretty easy to get a lottery pick and a $10 mil trade exception in return for Az, huh?

Dumb.

by BALLINelli on Mar 7, 2008 10:06 AM PST up reply actions

Again, circular logic

Both the "playing time" argument and the "trade return" argument for JRich's greatness are tautologies: essentially, "if people think JRich is a great player, he must be a great player..."

The counterargument to the "playing time" line is that (1) With Morrison out (or even with a healthy Morrison since Morrison sucks) the Cats are thin at JRich's position; and, more importantly, (2) they have to justify their 4 year/$50M investment. If they had Wade or Kobe at SG and Richardson were making a couple mil a year, Richardson would instantly become their Kelenna.

The counterargument to the "trade return" line is even simpler: not all NBA GMs are smart. I'm pretty sure most NBA GMs would rather have Kelenna at $690,000 per year than JRich at $12.5M.

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 7, 2008 10:28 AM PST up reply actions

hmm

I'm pretty sure most NBA GMs would rather have Kelenna at $690,000 per year than JRich at $12.5M

So, then you are saying that it would be pretty easy to get a lottery pick in exchange for Kelenna? To me that makes no sense.

The original comment that I was referring to was that Azubuike is better than JRich. Salaries aside, to me that sounds completely ridiculous. If Kelenna was a better player than JRich, he'd be getting minutes over Barnes, Pietrus, CJ, BWright, hell even probably Webber and Harrington. JRich was, and definitely still would be, better than the 8th or 9th scoring option on this team. That's how he's better.

by BALLINelli on Mar 7, 2008 10:44 AM PST up reply actions

I'm saying

exactly what I said: "most NBA GMs would rather have Kelenna at $690,000 per year than JRich at $12.5M." Further, most GMs would rather not have JRich at 4/$50M than have JRich at 4/$50M. Indeed, the Charlotte Bobcats may be the only team in the NBA who would want JRich at that price-tag. And given their current situation, even they probably have their doubts right now.

As for "JRich is better than Kelenna": I never said it, so you're either using a straw man, or perhaps responding to my son Coma...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 7, 2008 3:38 PM PST up reply actions

thank you

by travisl212 on Mar 7, 2008 11:22 PM PST up reply actions

wowowow

how can you claim us to be losers? your compartive methods are faulty; you say nothing about how much ellis has benefited from Jrich being gone. and even if JRich was here, where would you play him? over ellis? over stackjack? at the 4?

the BEST way to grade trades is by record. and unfortunately for you and your biases, our record makes proving your emotional attachment to JRich extremely hard to do. so you come up with a bunch of stupid fallacies and post them on your bully pulpit front page..

retarded. azu has done EVERYTHING we would want JRich to do for far less money and without having to play major minutes. stop sucking your thumb and grow up. no matter how much we ALL love JRich, we won out on the trade you freakin rehab.

by dso on Mar 6, 2008 12:03 AM PST reply actions

Look, even if this wasn't a mod...

you were speaking to, name-calling isn't the best way to speak to someone. Seriously. Tone it down. Would you want someone saying that last paragraph to you? Just because it's the internet doesn't give you a free pass to be rude.

by sarchasmic on Mar 6, 2008 7:45 AM PST up reply actions

i dunno

if azu is really doing everything we would want jrich to be doing.....all i know is that we lost a game because of jrich and the nuggets won against the suns....

by lowchi on Mar 6, 2008 12:17 AM PST reply actions

Okafor is

notoriously awful offensively. He could probably be a top 5 center if he had some semblance of an offensive game and didn't get injured all the time.

by Elcold on Mar 6, 2008 12:23 AM PST reply actions

Our

Bench SUCKED tonight..

by highflya on Mar 6, 2008 12:42 AM PST reply actions

I find myself wondering...

...and I don't mean this to be antagonistic, it's something I honestly wondered. It's no secret to anybody who reads this site that Atma doesn't like the Richardson trade (that and his desire to get Artest being the two biggest talking point of past months). My curiosity is, do you guys work out who does the recap ahead of time? By which I mean, if this game had been different, if the Warriors had just kept cruising after the 1st quarter and blown out the Cats, or if perhaps it was a close game but Richardson struggled mightily as he did in the 1st meeting, would Atma still have been the guy writing the recap?

The reason I wonder is because when I realized the Cats had won, one of the first things I thought was that I'd probably be reading a recap about how bad the J-Rich trade was/is for us. The question is, would I still be hearing this if the outcome had been different, or was this used as a "seized opportunity" of sorts? Perhaps a little rubbing it in?

by Zack Vank on Mar 6, 2008 1:12 AM PST reply actions

Interesting Question ...

.. Hope someone who knows answers it.

This has the sense to it of (gleeful?) piling on ... presenting this view after a loss.

Much more credibility if this analysis was presented the 1st time J-Rich played the Dubs. (But of course that was a win by Dubs.)

That said, the Dubs have another stinker (game) to add to the list.

by soem on Mar 6, 2008 12:36 PM PST up reply actions

No

We set up the previews and recaps before the game. I have the Miami game on Friday. I did the preview because Atma was busy and couldn't get to it. So he's doing the preview of the Friday game, I'll be doing the recap.

Each writer has his own style and opinions. Atma's recap just happened to fall on today. There's no backroom shuffling of recaps so we can push certain opinions or ideas - that's just ludicrous. These recaps take a long time to write so we have to plan ahead and clear our nighttime schedules to be able to write these recaps.

by Fantasy Junkie on Mar 6, 2008 1:54 PM PST up reply actions

Thanks for...

...the reply. It was something that popped into my head, but I'm glad to have it clear how it works, now. No disrespect intended.

by Zack Vank on Mar 6, 2008 2:06 PM PST up reply actions

None taken

Sorry, I think that came out a little more harsh than I intended.

by Fantasy Junkie on Mar 6, 2008 6:20 PM PST up reply actions

Trading Jrich last year

reminds me of us being Memphis sending Gasol to the Fakers.

Surely with Jrich's stats (Season: 20.5 ppg (43.3% 3pt), 5.1 rpg, 3.0 apg, 1.2 stl, 0.7 blk), they are worth more than a draft pick and a 10 mil trade exception.

If they got artest and some other big name who can play the 4 or the 5 wouldnt that be nicer?

Would u trade Jax this year for a 6th pick and a 10 mil trade exception?

TOTALLY BAD TRADE. I know we needed to trade Jrich, but we had a firesale on him...

by Delinquentsoul on Mar 6, 2008 1:19 AM PST reply actions

Try looking at it like this...

...Atma mentioned in the recap that when people say the trade improves the Warriors long term prospects, he likes to remind them that the results in those years prior to the maturation of the young players count as well. What I feel that fails to address, though, is that we could very well have a worse record right now with Richardson than if we didn't have him.

The problem is, you have three guys who due to their age and reputation on our team will absolutely not be long term bench players; Baron, Jackson, and hypothetically, Richardson. This would make Monta the odd man out. Now, while I don't think that Monta couldn't be a great 6th man, the truth is that it's absolutely imperative that he play with the first team, not only because his talent clearly justifies it, but because he's the only player in our starting lineup who consistently creates his own controlled, high percentage shot. His midrange jumper has at times been the only lifeline that's kept us afloat when Baron, Jackson and Harrington get too trigger happy from downtown. And the very possible scenario that I find myself imagining is this...

We keep Richardson, he pushes Ellis to the bench, Ellis doesn't have the light switch moment that he had in February, we all (as I admit I did) undervalue him, we don't (nor could we with Richardson's cash on the books) resign him, and ultimately, we give up a player who I feel makes us a better team than Richardson would. Even right now after being gut punched by the Bobcats, I will hold forth that Monta getting free reign of that position and getting big time minutes makes us better than if we had Richardson along for the ride as well.

by Zack Vank on Mar 6, 2008 1:45 AM PST up reply actions

Your analysis of the big 3...

(Jack, Baron, JRich) not going to come off the bench, therefore changing the dynamics of our team, specifically Monta's role is dead on. Not that those three couldn't be very effective starting together, though we really would have a different paced offense (not as many outlets to the "one-man fast-break") if Monta was playing with our second team.

JRich was clutch. JRich was well liked. JRich was loyal. JRich worked hard every year. JRich played little with the new squad due to injury and was not healthy last year. While the trade was sad for me to see him go, I don't believe the end result of the trade was intended on draft day. Remember, Garnett was still available then. However, the trade gave us some salary to work with and it looks like BWright will do well in this league. Monta has taken the available minutes and has performed nicely for us in JRich's absence. The trade has worked out just fine for us.

It's hard to say if our record would be different if JRich was still here (I'd like to think that a healthy JRich would be a great asset), but the bottom line is that we are a very good team this year and the trade has made us younger.

by onetwocross on Mar 6, 2008 9:46 PM PST up reply actions

TOTALLY DIFFERENT

Last time I checked we're 14 games over .500 on a very loaded West. While the Bobcats are 22-39 on a conference that has only 5 winning teams.

We traded a good stats player but our team is enjoying their best season in more than a decade. You're looking at it wrong... I think what you should look at is Monta and JRich. Who would you rather have?

by lightz0ut on Mar 6, 2008 1:54 AM PST up reply actions

Amen brother!

Exactly!!

by flaaron on Mar 6, 2008 7:21 AM PST up reply actions

Hells Yeah

I agree with that too.
I loved Jrich! He was our heart for a while.
We are Much better with Monta getting the minutes and our Future is Bwrighter with out him!

Proud Sponsor Of: The San Jose Giants Baseball Team 2008 is gonna be big! http://www.greenlightjerky.com

by GreenLightJerky on Mar 6, 2008 7:38 AM PST up reply actions

Bwrighter

How sweet that sounds! Our future will be Bwright!

by Psion on Mar 6, 2008 5:50 PM PST up reply actions

Not that easy...

Nelly plays talent. Nelly would definitely not sit a +40% 3pt shooter. Nelly also wouldn't sit a +50% shooting guard. JRich would take some of Pietrus' minutes, most of Buke's minutes, and probably some of Barnes'. Heck, he could even take 5 of Jack's and 5 of Monta's minutes too. We'd be a deeper team than we are now, we'd be better this year. The problem is the 40M/3 years left on his contract after this year when we have to resign EVERYBODY and still have Foyle on the books. It's still a good trade, but it doesn't take away what JRich can do. He's just not worth his contract.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 6, 2008 9:07 AM PST up reply actions

I think

you got this one right. Basically J-Rich payed the price for Mullin's bad Foyle contract. His expendability was a result of business economics and the fact that he was a marketable commodity coming off of knee surgery.

by triplesix on Mar 6, 2008 2:41 PM PST up reply actions

your exactly right

on this one.

by travisl212 on Mar 6, 2008 10:28 PM PST up reply actions

You're comparing two different things here

Gasol is a better and more valuable (league wise) player than Jrich.

Your Jrich Homerism affects your judgement in seeing Jrich for what he is: A good, not great scoring 2 guard. When his shot isn't falling he does next to nothing to get his team a win. Why else does he always find himself on losing teams? Bad luck?....Okay maybe that's justifiable.

Jrich has gotten further away from his midrange and slashing game (as evidence by his poor effort to get to the FT line), although he is having a career year 3pt% wise. However i really believe this makes him one dimensional in that he can't consistently create his own offense and manufacture points like other 2 guards can.

I maintain that the Jrich trade is a good trade basing it on our return (Wright + 9.9M TPE), our better record and offseason flexibility.

Don't forget guys, the TPE hasn't gone to waste yet. Believe Mully can pull something off during the draft.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Mar 6, 2008 12:44 PM PST up reply actions

TPE

I don't think we'll use it. The Warriors don't want to add to their salary.

by Psion on Mar 6, 2008 6:00 PM PST up reply actions

Only listened tonight

Was driving home from Fresno to Sonoma County and missed the game. I cant focus well listening to basketball games and driving, but from the radio descriptions the game felt mismanaged. I love the old man but Nellie seemed to be the one who had a hang over.
The box score confirmed my feelings. Pietrus with -18 in 23 mins. Why/how does Dudley go for 7 off rebs? Because he has nobody in his way. I do realize that Crawford was the official tonight and he seems to be a Warrior hater. But Barns, Azu, POB = 27 mins = -5.
I have the game recorded and hope that i can bring myself to watching it. Sometimes it is best to forget but WE cant afford to throw away games!!! I have been drinking tonight (since returning home) and will clarify my concerns about coach soon. Don is king but i have the Wright to question. Look forward to my diary...

Dear Don Nelson,

by Baron Swisher on Mar 6, 2008 1:55 AM PST reply actions

Crawford

I don't thank he has a problem with the Warriors. In fact Bob&Jim always have something good to say about him. They seem t consider him to be one of the better refs in the NBA.

by Psion on Mar 6, 2008 6:02 PM PST up reply actions

Our REAL return in the JRich deal...

Is Monta Ellis, the "pound-for-pound" most exciting player in the NBA this year. Even on JRich's career night, he needed 32 shots to score his 42. Monta scored 32 with only 17 shots and outperformed JRich in every other statistical category as well. Monta doesn't get to chuck up 32 shots like JRich, because our team has more options than CHA, but if he did, he'd score 50+...
Where would this kid be if JRich was still in the Bay? He would be playing 15 minutes a game. Where would the Warriors be without this kid? In the lottery.
Just BWright and the TPE would have been a fair trade for GSW, a team overstocked at the 2/3 positions. The fact that JRich's departure opened up a spot for #8 makes it a win/win for us...

by kitoko on Mar 6, 2008 4:55 AM PST reply actions

we did NOT lose tonight because of JRich anyway...

if CHA had Wallace or more offensive options, JRich's 32 shots and 42 points would've been spread around to 2 or 3 other players. ANYONE can score 40 in the NBA if he gets enough shots.

We lost the game because we gave up 40 rebounds to 3 guys, two of whom had career nights in that category. When our smallest, lightest player (Monta)leads the team in rebounding, we have a major problem. Perhaps it's because our biggest guy weighs about 210...we got CRUSHED inside, on the boards, and at the foul line. Nothing new, and NOTHING TO DO WITH JRICH!

by kitoko on Mar 6, 2008 5:05 AM PST reply actions

yea

and also not mentioned was the fact that the trade of jrich gave us more money to spend so we could keep monta ellis and andris biedrins. Who you rather have? Jrich for a couple more seasons, or monta biedrins and wright for at least the next half decade? you can tell in his recap of wright, even when wright does well he refrains from getting too excited over him.

by bigbenny11 on Mar 6, 2008 7:24 AM PST reply actions

Bench

We need Pietrus, Harrington, Barnes and Buke to contribute in order for us to win. We need defense and rebounding from them, if anything we need them to at least make their open shots if they don't rebound the ball and give up the easy put back. Monta vs. JRich, well if you switch uniforms last night, we win. Monta will be getting JRich money next season and has a higher shooting percentage but lacks size on defense. Monta has more upside and is younger that's why Mulllin made the trade.

by shootda3 on Mar 6, 2008 7:41 AM PST reply actions

If we switch their uniforms, CHA wins by 25...

JRich= 32 shots, 42 points. That's less than 1.3 points per shot.

Monta= 17 shots, 32 points. Almost 2 points per shot.

If they switch uniforms and Monta gets Jrich's 32 shots, he scores 58 with CHA, while JRich would be the 2nd or 3rd option with us and score 23 with the 17 shots that Monta gets.

CHA wins by 25+ if JRich is on our side...

by kitoko on Mar 6, 2008 7:15 PM PST up reply actions

That's ridiculous

By that logic, if you switch Kosta with JRich, Kosta scores 64 points, blocks 16 shots and grabs 16 rebounds (and since he'd be playing against the warriors that'd probably be more like 25 rebounds). So Charlotte wins by 40?

Switching two players changes the whole dynamic of the game. Who guards Monta? Who does he guard? Same for JRich... If you've got Monta on JRich, JRich owns him for 30 points off dunks and 15 points off open 3 pointers.

JRich would definitely get more open shots if he was running with BD and SJax, so he'd probably hit more open shots.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 7, 2008 9:07 AM PST up reply actions

Warrior Wonder

I hate picking one in a loss, but I'd probably go with Monta. Both Baron and Jax scored ok, but both missed plenty of ill-advised shots, and made some stupid turnovers that killed any momentum. We know about Monta's defense, but with his efficient offense, I'll take it hoping it gets better. The bench and Brandan Wright were useless in this game, and we were going to Pietrus too many times for that 3-ball, which he wasn't hitting. And I know you can't blame all the turnovers on him, and he can be terrific when playing in the flow of the game, but if he is off, yank him - he seems to infect the whole team with his sloppiness.

by Hoopachoo on Mar 6, 2008 8:06 AM PST reply actions

i blame

pietrash for not playin D nd the warriors passin it to him for points. he sits in the corner the whole time the warriors r on offense then wen he gets the ball he either air balls the 3 or steps out of bounds. we needed his decent defense on j-rich and he didnt perform. i say drop him and webber in a pit to die

by gswLLBatman on Mar 6, 2008 8:36 AM PST reply actions

Pietrus

Don't you know its since become taboo to hate on Pietrus around here? Some people might get offended..

But yeah lack of consistency from the bench. We all kind of knew Pietrus' streak of good games has to end sometime. But he wasn't the only one playing horrible. Barnes and the rest of the bench barely contributed anything either.

by nautica on Mar 6, 2008 10:15 AM PST up reply actions

Only the big 3

BD,SJax,& Monta came to play last night. Everybody else stunk it up.

by Psion on Mar 6, 2008 6:05 PM PST up reply actions

just to be clear

it's not the hate per se that people take offense on. It's saying ignorant things like he just steps out of bounds whenever someone passed it to him in the corner. On two games I've covered he hasn't stepped out of bounds (though I think someone mentioned about that in the Por/Hawks game).

It's also funny that he's blamed for JRich blowing up for 42 when I though SJax is our best defender.

by lightz0ut on Mar 7, 2008 1:48 AM PST up reply actions

it's a very well established phenomenon...

...that some players are notoriously great on bad teams. we lose sight of this because we used to be his bad team. add to that the ability to play in the lesser conference by a landslide. the JRich trade still makes sense from every angle.

Don't like the development of Monta Ellis?
wish we had another guy on the floor who can't D up at the 2/3?
don't like the potential to be able to shell out for Monta, Biedrins, Baron at the end of the year?
really think JRich would get enough shots in our line-up to put up anything close to those numbers?
really think it's fair to put his numbers next to Wright's for a 4-game sample, when the things JRich brings are in no way the things we're lacking, or the things Wright can bring?

yes he played inspired last night. yes we all loved JRich. but c'mon. what do you think Monta would be posting nightly as a Bobcat (imagine a scenario in which every time down the floor Baron just passes it to Monta rather than considering himself and Jax)?

by 321 IN n OUT on Mar 6, 2008 8:40 AM PST reply actions

Drama drama drama

We all know that the dubs normally play down to their opposition. When shots aren't falling, they crumble. Then they get lazy on defense, and foul like crazy. As always, there are good players that light us up and random warrior killers. Unfortunately, there were too many to count last night. Didnt Gomes drop like 30+ plus on us? Mason Jr. too. Last night that honor went to Richardson.

I don't understand why they don't give it to Monta more. I think it was the fourth where they set a high screen, and he dropped a 17-18 footer like it was nothing. Next play, they try the EXACT play but the ball gets knocked out of his hands. He gets it back but gives it up to Baron. Then they never come back to him! What is that about? He has the best FG% next to Beans, and Nellie isn't running any plays for him? We only scored 3 pts in the last 5 minutes....

by disguy on Mar 6, 2008 9:20 AM PST reply actions

J-Rich Trade

Get over it. GSOM made the biggest cry over it over all the boards. WE all love J-Rich, we really do. But his talent you can find every few drafts and we had Ellis who was more than ready to replace hm. We save money in the trade, we got Wright who will be a great post player for us, and we made money to sign Ellis and Biedrins back. And as for J-Rich's overall impact to the team, he got int the way of Monta's progress, and his ball handling skills weren't good enough for Nelly. The only thing that J-Rich provided that we could have used was rebounding.

by CABANGBANG on Mar 6, 2008 1:57 PM PST reply actions

Another Loss

Just looking at the updates on ESPN.com, our Warriors didn't play with a sense of urgency. I was really hoping for that stellar comeback after being down 7 or so points in the 4th quarter. I believe that we were scoreless for 2 or 3 minutes down the stretch. We cannot afford to lose anymore of these type of games. With this loss, we're now 1.5 games ahead of the Nuggets for the final spot. Let's hope we play better next game. Go Warriors!!!

by Phil T28 on Mar 6, 2008 2:15 PM PST reply actions

Bobkittens?

Loss deserved...Way to go GOSM...Please show a lil more respect for the league and the game, it's not as if we're flossing championships ourselves. Alot went wrong last night. Karma played a huge role. Moving on...

by NuestroOcho on Mar 6, 2008 2:15 PM PST reply actions

I want to take you seriously ATMA....

but then you go and say with J-rich we'd be closer to a first round bye. They give out bye's in the nba playoffs now?

by mikey J on Mar 6, 2008 3:13 PM PST reply actions

haha

Yea didn't you hear? They changed the playoff format so that if we have JRich and make the playoffs, we get a first round bye.

by Fantasy Junkie on Mar 6, 2008 6:22 PM PST up reply actions

Oooops

Wrong sport! I meant first round home court advantage.

by Atma Brother ONE on Mar 6, 2008 9:44 PM PST up reply actions

The Case for Mullin

I understand those of you who simply want this team to make the playoffs. The last decade and a half hasn't been kind to warriors fans, and to simply have a successful season followed by a first or second round exit would be enjoyable for a couple more seasons. But lets be clear about one thing: this team had zero chance to win the west as it was.

In the five games against the Jazz last May, the warriors got outrebounded by almost 100 boards in only five games! For those too lazy to do the math, thats 20 rebounds/game. If that was the warriors' only weakness, they might have been able to overcome it. But let's face it: this team was not a good free-throw shooting team, was poor defensively, and before Monta came on the scene, didn't have a player not named Baron who you could rely on every game to take care of the ball (and Monta's still learning in that regard).

Sooner or later, everyone on this site would be calling for a change to be made so that this team may take the next step. By that time, JR would be just leaving his prime years behind while our other top veterans would be on the wrong side of 30. Those are not tradeable pieces. Furthermore, keeping JRich did mean getting rid of someone else. Is the Bay Area a large market? Of course, but is it large enough to have a $80 million funded entirely by ticket, TV, and merchandise sales? No. The only teams that can support those payrolls must:

have a billionaire owner who simply doesn't worry about losing a couple million in a given season
be one of the three big markets: NY, LA, or Chicago. the Bay could very well be the fourth largest market in the league, but its way behind the top 3
have a superstar. You know: LeBron, KG, Wade, Shaq a few years ago, etc.
a combination of the above 3

It's as simple as this: if the warriors plan on contending for a Title, one of JRich or Jackson had to go. They are redundant as long-range sharp shooters and second options, and together they take up almost a third of the money the warriors could spend. We all know Jackson wasn't leaving: not after the palace incident and especially not after Baron appointed him his deputy in game 6 against Dallas. The warriors needed more help in the frontcourt. The warriors were not going to trade JRich or Harrington straight up for a player that would have given them that help. And lastly, the warriors couldn't wait around for deal that gave them not only cap space to resign Monta and Biedrins, but also a forward with potential.

In the NBA its a common saying that you don't trade big for small. So the warriors traded a "small" player for a draft pick that would allow them to go big. They had the opportunity to trade that big player for a veteran big that can help them win now. Phoenix and Dallas both made "win now" moves themselves, and the warriors weren't going to find a player to compete with LA, San Antonio, or Utah, so why sacrifice the future.

By the way, Artest is not a player that pushes the warriors over the top. warriors ownership probably rejected the idea of reuniting him with Jackson in the first place, but he's a poor 3-pt. shooter and not big enough to help the dubs on the boards so I'm happy that we didn't get him anyway.

To end on a happy note: if the warriors resign Biedrins and Monta and extend Baron, this team will have a window of 3-4 years while Wright develops in which it should contend. Let Shaq, Nash, Kidd, and Dampier age. New Orleans, LA, and Utah will still be tough to beat (portland too) but there's no telling what Monta, Biedrins, and Wright will add to Baron, Jackson, and Harrington even 12 months down the road.

by BingBluNT on Mar 6, 2008 6:05 PM PST reply actions

Pretty spot on...

You seem to have a good grasp on the "big picture" aspect of a GM's decision making process. It's easy for a fan to say "Hey, you traded away one of my favorite players! We might be worse this year because of it. I don't care about the financial aspects and the future of the team. Potential is for suckers. Cap space is for losers. I want to win now. I want to win at all costs. I want my binkie."

How many of us would be freaking out right now if we didn't make the J-Rich trade? Imagine the outlook of the team with that extra $10mil on the books. We'd be saying "Monta just shot 60% for a month and we don't have room under the luxury tax to re-sign him and Andris. Mullin should have seen this coming."

We would be looking at our front-court and saying "Webber will be gone next year, so will POB, Croshere can't stay healthy, Andris might leave (if we choose to re-sign Monta instead), that leaves us with Al and Zero Threat as our only big men. Dang I wish we had a young up and coming PF who could make an impact next year."

by olympicmike on Mar 6, 2008 11:13 PM PST up reply actions

You're giving the average fan too much credit

It's really more like "I WANT WIN! WIN NOW! LOST LAST GAME BAD! WIN WIN WIN!"

If we're going to become one of the over the cap, 80M payroll teams, we have to have a solid fanbase. No owner is going to pay so much unless they can recoup it via ticket/merchandise sales. To grow the fanbase, you have to have either a good team with a solid history or you have to have a few superstars that have global appeal. We're not going to just get a LBJ or a Kobe, so we have to develop a history of winning, which can only be done through smart usage of the limited money we have now.

I like what they're doing now, keep it moving, resign the good players. It's just a shame that JR was signed back in the old Mully days. If he was on the books for 8M/year and Foyle hadn't got his contract we'd be able to keep JR and resign these guys... sigh... That'd be some serious depth at the 2/3. But BWright is starting to look nice, so I'm happy with things worked out. I'm really excited for Foyle coming off the books. That's gonna be awesome.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 7, 2008 9:24 AM PST up reply actions

Wrong choice

The choice was between Davis and J-Rich.
Now, of course, I was against trading either one, but if one did have to go you expect more back in the trade.
Why trade away for a player that the coach is not likely to play? I think if we could not get an established big, don't make the trade before this season.
Look at how having J-rich changes our back court depth. Davis, Jax, Monta and Jason play 30 min. a game instead of having to play nearly every minute. We can trade Pietrus for some added front court depth and we still have the added advantage of a healthy, happy J-Rich as trade bait for a difference maker at the trade deadline.
Sure Wright will develop into a decent player, but why are we content to look to the future. This team made great strides last year and were probably one decent rebounding big away from moving past Utah. So instead of filling that whole by moving Richardson, we instead use it on a Rookie and a TPE we also didn't use to better our team.
Don't get me wrong, maybe Wright helps us this season, but knowing coach Nelson does not play rookies, why not leave the core together for one more season and see where it takes us.

by tangel29 on Mar 7, 2008 3:24 PM PST up reply actions

we need

somebody like a Maxiel(from pistons), Brandon Bass or Paul Millsap who can get those extra rebounds and give size. We all know that Beans can guard the rim so getting a player like those mentioned above will make us tough(physically).

brb, going to ORACLE

by warrior510 on Mar 6, 2008 9:37 PM PST reply actions

I do

understand Nelly's small ball strategy, but i doesn't work always against all the teams. Sometimes we have to go a little bigger to win some games....Give up size, get burned in some games..

brb, going to ORACLE

by warrior510 on Mar 6, 2008 9:40 PM PST reply actions

Let's face it

there's a reason why the bobcats are actually much worse this year w/ JRich than they were last year w/o him. It's not some bizarre coincidence that he's only made the playoffs as a 3 pt shooting role player. And lest we forget, Kelenna was putting up JRich #'s when the W's were 0-6.

I'm harsher than most on Monta's d, but he's more than filled the 2 spot. JR's a good rebounder for his position, but, w/ the W's, only makes a small team smaller. JR on the W's is like Zach Randolph on the Knicks, looks good on paper, but not necessarily on the court. Just like Randolph limits David Lee, JR would of likely limited Monta.

This past game was like JR's championship game for the season. Unfortunately, BD was trying to outdo him or something b/c 3 assists and 6 turnovers is inexcusable for a top 5 point guard.

by the evil monkey on Mar 6, 2008 9:56 PM PST reply actions

6 TO

I think part of it is because Baron is not used to playing with BWright yet. I thought he had him a couple of times (and really, just throw it high and you give him a chance to get it) but elected to kick the ball out. I think the more they play, the more we'll see those Biedrins like plays with Wright.

by lightz0ut on Mar 7, 2008 1:55 AM PST up reply actions