Marcus Williams is coming (qouted)

Wow

so much for a big trade.

i hope we win a championship soon

by Da Jrich tribute on Jul 22, 2008 9:27 AM PDT 0 recs

It was a good trade.

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 23, 2008 10:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

Weird terms

Trading a draft pick 3 years ahead of time. At least we’re never giving up a top 10 pick. We’ve got that going for it. I like the trade. I’ve liked Marcus since his college days.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 22, 2008 9:44 AM PDT 0 recs

maybe

the years of the pick reflect when mullin believes the team will be competitive again at least? as in 2011 is when he expects the warriors to make the playoffs again. sad if its true

by llamalimbo1 on Jul 22, 2008 1:48 PM PDT up 0 recs

seems to be that thats when we could/should be legitimate contenders. With such a young core I wouldnt argue that. I’m hoping the young guys can learn quite a bit this year and we land a top 10 pick, next year we make the playoffs as a bottom 4 seed and then in 2011, as Beans, Monta, Wiliams, Wright, Randolph and whoever we land next draft enter their primes, we contend for a top 4 spot in the west.

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 5:25 PM PDT up 0 recs

I'm confused

you think it is good thinking or bad thinking? Because you say you wouldn’t argue it, but your reasoning sounds like you would.

I don’t really know what to make of the deal because I don’t know what kind of player Williams is, and I don’t know the terms of his contract.

by belilaugh on Jul 22, 2008 6:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

no I dont argue with the reasoning

I think we could have a very good team in 3 years…. a team that could be picking in the 20’s rather than in the teens. If that happens its a good trade.

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 7:42 PM PDT up 0 recs

next year we make the playoffs as a bottom 4 seed and then in 2011, as Beans, Monta, Wiliams, Wright, Randolph and whoever we land next draft enter their primes, we contend for a top 4 spot in the west.

You forget that if they do ever make the playoffs the management will send rudolf to the bobcats to shed salary, Montay to the clips, and sign a rebuilding core of 8th graders.

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 6:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

no

Billy Beane doesnt run the Warriors.

NO ‘Y’ IN MONTA!

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 7:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

you're right

the warriors don’t make the playoffs often enough to be a billy beane run team.

god, it hurt to write that, but the remark had to be made.

and can we get a “spell monta’s name right” movement? come on people. i bet no one in denver botches the spelling on carmelo.

by cap'n hack on Jul 24, 2008 2:41 AM PDT up 0 recs

yeah its a good trade for us

but im not sure if this is going to help us….what are we gonna do with CJ Watson? i think he might be a better/if not just as good option as a backup PG

by 3Kings650 on Jul 22, 2008 9:47 AM PDT 0 recs

We sort of have Watson. He isn’t actually signed at this point.

Watson may or may not be better than Williams. Williams shot the long ball better last year, rebounded much better and is reported to be more of a “true point guard”. He also turned the ball over a bunch and his overall FG% stunk. Watson was the more efficient scorer, but never really showed that he was a point guard and he’s pretty small. I don’t know how accurate the height/weight listings are, but Marcus Williams is a solid, strong player. He was considered a late lottery talent coming out of UConn who slipped because of character issues. I’d have rather had him than the POB then and the same is true now.

Will it help? Doubtful it will make a big difference, but if we find out that Monta is much more effective next to a real point guard, we’ve got the insurance policy to give it a try. With Watson, no such option was available.

by jae on Jul 22, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up 0 recs

Clarification

Watson has limited salary protection. If we renounce in the next 2 days, he’s just gone. After that, he’s got 100k coming to him if waived, else the Warriors keep him on a min salary. No official decision has been made as far as I’m aware though.

by jae on Jul 22, 2008 10:30 AM PDT up 0 recs

THANK YOU

Guess what! I knew Marcus Williams would fit into the Warriors perfectly who remembers me saying Marcus Williams!

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 22, 2008 4:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

I think

quite a few people mentioned him, dating all the way back to the Devin Harris trade.

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 5:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

You're right...

I just wanted to feel special for a little bit… Thanks for bringing me back to reality… lol hahahaha

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 22, 2008 9:23 PM PDT up 0 recs

well you were probably

the first to dedicate a post to the subject if that makes you feel special

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 10:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

With this trade...

... I have a feeling we’re gonna let go of CJ.

copy & paste: geocities.com/nellieballtee

by JonDoe on Jul 22, 2008 10:45 AM PDT up 0 recs

worry more about

KAz – he’s more likely the one out of the picture now

CJ & Williams are cheaper and can swing between pg/sg + we are stuck paying Bellinelli, which is three guards backing up Ellis, SJax, and Maggs and that doesn’t include Randolph if he’s really a SF

Ellis- CJ- Williams
SJax- CJ/Williams/Bellinelli
Maggette- Randolph

cannot imagine Ellis & CJ playing together much but could imagine Williams (who’s a good 30 lb thicker than Monta) guarding bigger guards.

IMO KAz is more valueable than any of the three of them.

damn, wanted to see KAz re-signed too

at least we’re not making a foolish trade, like moving Harrington for a backup PG …

by hardcore on Jul 22, 2008 11:03 AM PDT up 0 recs

I’d think this actually makes it more likely than we re-sign Buike.

Mullin hasn’t commented on Buike one way or another, which would make you think that the decision was contingent on how they added a backup PG salary-wise. This Williams addition is much cheaper than many of the rumored alternatives, so the numbers for Buike are more likely to add up now.

by onlxn on Jul 22, 2008 11:06 AM PDT up 0 recs

hope y'r right ...

by hardcore on Jul 22, 2008 11:53 AM PDT up 0 recs

I don't like this trade at all...

We allready have a backup point guard in CJ that is just as good as this kid, and we’ve now pretty much given up on matching Kelenna which sucks, because he’s going to be a solid player in the league for years to come. Oh well I’m not the GM.

It's all about the killer cross-over baby!

by warriorsfiend on Jul 22, 2008 9:50 AM PDT 0 recs

What?

Warriors already stated they wanted to carry 3 point guards this season.
Why do you say the Warriors have givin up on matching Kelenna?
Pree said the warriors were waiting to see what happned this week before they match Kelenna or not. With this trade its more likely they do match now. Because speculation, was they were waiting to see if they got Louis, who would have cost alot more. Below you said he is not free, True. But he is not that much.

by The Golden One on Jul 22, 2008 11:34 AM PDT up 0 recs

not that i'm disagreeing with you

but the roster is currently at 13 players and depending on how much Monta & Andris sign for and what the specific # ’s are on KAz’s and Magg’s contracts, Kelenna could put us over the luxury tax.

either way we should know what the plan is with CJ in the coming days. since

A partial contract guarantee kicks in for Watson on July 25, and another kicks in if he’s on the roster at the beginning of the season. If he’s on the roster in January, his deal becomes guaranteed for the year at the league minimum for a second-year player ($711,517)

http://www.insidebayarea.com/warriors/ci_9903531

by the evil monkey on Jul 22, 2008 11:47 AM PDT up 0 recs

Isnt the roster at 12?

who am I missing
1. Marco Belinelli 2. Andris Biedrins 3. Monta Ellis 4. Al Harrington 5. Richard Hendrix
6. Stephen Jackson 7. Corey Maggette 8. Kosta Perovic 9. Anthony Randolph 10. C.J. Watson 11. Brandan Wright 12. Marcus Williams
or were you counting Kaz as #13

I still think there is a good chance Kosta goes back to Europe.

by The Golden One on Jul 22, 2008 12:17 PM PDT up 0 recs

turiaf

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Jul 22, 2008 12:32 PM PDT up 0 recs

ahhh yes, Thank You.

by The Golden One on Jul 22, 2008 12:35 PM PDT up 0 recs

not much room

for roster hopefuls like Demarcus Nelson, Jamont Gordon, Louis Amundson, or Anthony Morrow. Too bad I kinda liked each of those guys, and would especially like to see Gordon, even if it means releasing Watson.

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 5:36 PM PDT up 0 recs

They can still make the team

the NBA season allows 15 players on a team but only 12 active on roster… so we still could take some in.

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 22, 2008 9:30 PM PDT up 0 recs

From what Marcus Thompson just said on KNBR...

Dubs still have a chance to keep Kaz because they have a lil change left. I hope this is true and I hope the Warrior organization’s intentions is too keep him. Even though Barnes had a bad season last year, I would have liked to see him return and see what he could do next year. Oh well, its done and over it.

Romes Mac Mojous

by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jul 22, 2008 1:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

With this trade, the Warriors sit about 3.2 million under the cap if they do not match Azubuike. If they match, they’re essentially at the cap. Getting rid of Azubuike and CJ would clear about 4 mil for next season. That’s enough to do something with, and if there’s a reasonable player who fits a need, I could see spending the change to do it, but I suspect strongly that they won’t find a guy who is both as productive and young as Azubuike.

Assuming that the money under the cap is spent (e.g. Azubuike is matched or that money gets spent elsewhere) this leaves 21million under the TAX threshold for next year’s contracts to Ellis and Biedrins. That’s sort of the price tag that I’d seen them averaging (combined) going into the off season, but figures go up, so it will probably take that to keep them happy. Still, it’s probably enough.

That doesn’t leave the team as a contender, but they could stay in the playoff hunt, provided the ball bounces their way a few times.

by jae on Jul 22, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

That’s about how I see it. It’s a team that’ll go as far as Monta can take them, essentially. If he can hang at point guard decently enough and everything breaks our way, I could see maybe a 47-win season. If the experiment bombs, a 47-loss season wouldn’t surprise me.

Cheering for a team in the middle of the pack isn’t the most fun thing, but I feel strangely good about this season. The team is Monta’s… it’ll be fascinating to see how he handles being The Guy.

by onlxn on Jul 22, 2008 3:04 PM PDT up 0 recs

I can’t see 47 losses without some significant injury issues.

I’ve done some win estimates based on who we have and what they did last year and their injury history over the last three years and see this team’s 50th percentile for wins at about 43. Note: this does not at all include any changes to strength of schedule, but that rarely impacts win totals as much as people think. Since we’re in the west, it’s probably more like a 42 over-under. This includes the likelihood that Maggs will only be available for mid 60 games, but it also includes Azubuike coming back and performing at the level he did last year in the replacement minutes at the 2 and 3.

The prediction has upper and lower quartiles of 47 and 38 wins, meaning that there’s no better than a 1 in 4 chance of being better or worse than those figures. A 47 win season means being in the total bomb out space and no production from the Azubuike spot. Of course, if we’re depending on Belinelli, that could happen, as his “production” last year was actually a drag on win probability. Every minute he plays at the level he did last year increases the likelihood that we lose.

by jae on Jul 22, 2008 3:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

That sounds about right to me… on talent, we seem like a .500 team, maybe even a bit better than that. I just don’t know how to quantify the Monta-as-PG experiment in terms of our expected record… how bad would the worst-case scenarios be in terms of wins and losses? I assume we wouldn’t lose that many games before they decided to shift things around - maybe 35-47 is excessive - but I just can’t tell how damaging the lack of a capable point guard would be in this league.

by onlxn on Jul 22, 2008 3:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

The prediction has upper and lower quartiles of 47 and 38 wins, meaning that there’s no better than a 1 in 4 chance of being better or worse than those figures.

Hi Jae, Did you run a similar evaluation of last years team? How did it compare to the forecast?

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 5:42 PM PDT up 0 recs

Last year, I had the 50th at 40 wins. I didn’t compute the upper and lower quartiles. Clearly, they exceeded that. They exceeded based on two important things. #1: Monta improved significantly, more or less doubling his productivity from the year before. But more important: Baron was healthy for 82 games. Actually, the whole team stayed very, very healthy. Since I based the projections on the previous 3 seasons being a good indicator of how someone’s health would run, they exceeded what I had predicted largely by being able to play for the whole season.

by jae on Jul 22, 2008 6:23 PM PDT up 0 recs

eskf

warriors dont fish they hunt!

by VonteegoCummings on Jul 22, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up 0 recs

pessimist

I dont really see this team making a serious run at the playoffs this season with Utah, New Orleans, San Antonio, and LA as virutal locks for the top 4 seeds. That leaves Houston, Phoenix, Dallas, Portland, Sacramento, Denver, and the Clips all battling the Warriors for the last 4 spots if your rule out the TWolves, OKC, or Memphis making huge jumps. All those teams have serious question marks, but, as much as I’d love to see it I dont see the Dubs beating out 4 of them. I’d love to hear an argument for how it could happen though, I want to believe!

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 5:47 PM PDT up 0 recs

I’d love to hear an argument for how it could happen though, I want to believe!

Yao breaks his leg, Shaq has a heart attack, On a double travel day the Denver and portland teams planes have a mid air collision?

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 5:52 PM PDT up 0 recs

yea thats what I was afraid of

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 6:12 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yao breaking (or injuring) his leg is likely, because he puts so much pressure on it being 7’6.

Shaq may not have a heart attack, but will he really be that effective over an entire season? And Phoenix no longer has Marion since they gambled last year, and they no longer have D’Antoni. Nash is getting up there, though he’ll likely still be elite in the near future.

Denver just gave away Camby, who according to some following the team was the only guy playing defense sometimes. They have Carmelo Anthony’s issues over their head, Iverson is getting up in age, and they lost Najera, a guy who last year hit all sorts of clutch shots he’s never hit in his career before that (I still couldn’t believe his play last year).

Portland is still very young. There are no guarantees that Oden or Bayless or Fernandez will be anything. Oden is injury prone. Bayless looked good in summer league, but so do a lot of players. Fernandez is coming from Europe, and a lot of the European transplants (one we know very well in particular) struggle to play NBA level defense. They lost James Jones too. This may be the year where they all learn to play together (all of them, unlike last year).

San Antonio may be relying on Ginobili, who got hurt yet is still participating in the Olympics. And it’s never been wise to bet against Duncan before, but eventually he will have to slow down due to his age.

Dallas has Jason Kidd, who is getting up in age as well.

Sacramento has the Artest situation. In addition to that, Brad Miller may be done for, and quite honestly we are just better overall than Sacramento. They aren’t a team that concerns us.

The Clippers don’t have Elton Brand. What they do have are two players that play the same position (Camby and Kaman), an injury prone point guard who burned out last year and is getting up there as well, a rookie who did not look particularly good in summer league, and of course, a starting lineup that includes Cuttino Mobley. Unless Thornton makes a big leap, I think we are better than them too. Kaman at the four?

Utah, New Orleans, and LA have to stay healthy. But hey, if LA gets a significant injury Memphis has a good little farm system to choose from.

We are flawed, but so are a lot of teams.

by belilaugh on Jul 22, 2008 6:45 PM PDT up 0 recs

Skeptic you a lame

Lkaer fan who gived a shi* whether you beleive.

by smearthebeard on Jul 22, 2008 7:26 PM PDT up 0 recs

Hey man ease up

he’s a big contributor to this blog respect him.

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 22, 2008 9:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

Remember...

Back in the days when there were only like 8 people blogging on GSoM?! I don’t! hahaha!

by Tony.psd on Jul 22, 2008 11:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yeah lol HAHAHHA

and I was one of the dummie ones lol hahahaha i remember that and people would always try and kill me… you gotta admit though these new people are waaay worse than i was and plus like all the dudes back before were waaaay more harsh man lol hahaha

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 22, 2008 11:43 PM PDT up 0 recs

MAN!

You a Jive Turkey aka Lakers fan!

I kid! I kid!

by Tony.psd on Jul 22, 2008 11:54 PM PDT up 0 recs

OH NO!

personally I think the penalty should be like… getting kicked off the site for that lol hahahahaha

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 23, 2008 12:10 AM PDT up 0 recs

I remember when

I was the only besides two others that would post fanposts as there called now. Things are definately alot diff around here now.

by The Golden One on Jul 22, 2008 11:57 PM PDT up 0 recs

yeah not the same as before....

lots of Bandwagoners!

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 23, 2008 12:10 AM PDT up 0 recs

I miss Web Pins!

Like my Ike Diogu Webpin! LOL

by Tony.psd on Jul 23, 2008 12:12 AM PDT up 0 recs

Wow I never got to see that one...

LOL HAHAHAHAHA and yeah I definitely miss my 1965 Warriors Logo…

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 23, 2008 12:19 AM PDT up 0 recs

a classic

I still remember the contest for the warrior wonder logo, only 4 images were submitted and two of them were by me. And I still lost… Doh.
Or who all remembers the essay contest way back?
These days if they did those they would get so many entires and so much garbage to go through, they would have to pull their hair out.

by The Golden One on Jul 23, 2008 12:23 AM PDT up 0 recs

Lol hahahaha

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 23, 2008 12:36 AM PDT up 0 recs

You want old school?

I remember bulletin boards before there was a World Wide Web and you didn’t need five citations to back up any crazy assertion you felt like making.

"[Greg] Vaughn is in a funk so deep, George Clinton wearing a miner's helmet couldn't find him."
- Jim Baker, ESPN.com, May 2002

by achiappanza on Jul 23, 2008 11:51 AM PDT up 0 recs

lol GSoM is that old? lol I think were talking about OLD Skool GSoM

Stop crying about it alright?!?! GO MULLIN.

by jeppalepala on Jul 23, 2008 2:09 PM PDT up 0 recs

yeah

but you can add picture easy to every post

build a team & destroy the roof

by Lat We N Trash on Jul 23, 2008 12:27 AM PDT up 0 recs

Come on

You know you love the unrealistic trades, the impossible trades or blaming Mullin for every free agent that doesn’t choose to sign with the warriors at the league min.

by The Golden One on Jul 23, 2008 12:20 AM PDT up 0 recs

you a lame Lkaer fan?

You do know that the Lakers were in the finals while we went fishing?

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 10:27 PM PDT up 0 recs

Dang thats the new thing here on GSoM!

Calling someone a laker fan here on GSoM!

Did you see Semi Pro- Peeps would be mad for callin’ folks JIVE TURKEYS!

by Tony.psd on Jul 22, 2008 11:30 PM PDT up 0 recs

foyles deal

Dont forget to add foyles deal, so thats like 10 million we’ll have under the cap if buike and watson arent around. Thats pretty significant… I hope we have that much free space in the next two years, we’ll have even more FA’s to talk about.

by q00pster on Jul 22, 2008 5:04 PM PDT up 0 recs

Good trade. If we don’t have to dump Al to get a credible backup, we shouldn’t. This trade will literally never cost us a truly valuable pick… pretty impressive.

I’m not convinced that this spells the end of Buike, either. We shall see…

by onlxn on Jul 22, 2008 9:53 AM PDT 0 recs

correct me if im wrong...

Was Monta picked in the second round?

by sarangc on Jul 22, 2008 12:16 PM PDT up 0 recs

How many

people were picked at 2nd round that were as good as Monta? By your logic lets trade all of our first rounds and only pick in the second round.

by ferask1 on Jul 22, 2008 1:42 PM PDT up 0 recs

Randolph

was picked at 14, I think we are all at least hoping he will be a very valuable pick

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 5:50 PM PDT up 0 recs

This trade will literally never cost us a truly valuable pick

How can you say that? Randolph was picked at 14, are you saying he’ll never be valuable? Nobody picked after the top 10 is ever valuable?

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 5:52 PM PDT up 0 recs

Randolph was picked at 14, are you saying he’ll never be valuable

That’s not the point, it was that a decent backup now is worth more to this team than a 14 pick somewhere down the road cause usually the only easy decisions are the Odens and Roses that go right away , by 14 it’s a more difficult guess . We had to get someone cause all we had was a 2 guard and small backup.

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 6:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

thats a fine argument

but you cant say we gave up a pick that will “literally never have any value.”

by sam23 on Jul 22, 2008 7:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

Key is the word “truly”... that may sound like hair-splitting, but I elaborated in a post a little farther down.

Yes, #14 picks have some value. You can sometimes get a good player at 14. You can get a good player in the second round sometimes… you can even get a good player from the D-League, occasionally.

The point is that mid-round picks are fairly unlikely to net real stars. You can get pieces to add to your team, maybe you luck into somebody every once in a while, but the really intriguing talents are generally gone by then. You’ll never hear a team say, “Awesome, we got the 11th pick in the draft.” It’s a somewhat mediocre position to be in… I think we’re all worried that the Warriors are headed there.

That’s not to say that the picks are worthless. You can get solid rotation guys at 14, you can draft a project, you can trade the pick… the pick has some value.

In my opinion, Marcus Williams equals or exceeds the maximum value of this pick. This pick can be no higher than 11th, and it’s more than likely going to be lower than that. There are no nightmare scenarios here. At 11th or lower, you’re not likely to find a star. You’re hoping to find one, sure, but you’re just hoping. Marcus Williams has at least as good of a chance to be a star as the 11-15 picks in most drafts.

Incidentally, I’m certainly intrigued by Randolph, but I still think the safest bet is that he doesn’t amount to anything. He’s skinny, he’s raw, and his teams haven’t won… there are very big, very real question marks around him. Those question marks are why he was available at 14.

by onlxn on Jul 23, 2008 12:25 AM PDT up 0 recs

.what are we gonna do with CJ Watson?

Trade CJ and Montay for one good point guard, then re-sign KaBuki!

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 9:54 AM PDT 0 recs

helllll no

by 3Kings650 on Jul 22, 2008 10:05 AM PDT up 0 recs

Never trade Monte...

....unless you getting Kobe or D-How in return.

copy & paste: geocities.com/nellieballtee

by JonDoe on Jul 22, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up 0 recs

Never trade Monte...

If we could trade Montay for a top flight point guard we’d never have to worry about covering for Montay’s lack of size or lack of defense. We could play a more balanced game with a distributing point and a full size 2 guard. We were a lot better with Boom and JRich at 1 and 2 than with Montay at 1 and Belinelli or Rudeolf at 2.

Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol stalkin me

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2008 11:00 AM PDT up 0 recs