RECAP: Warriors 133 Kings 135 - UNSTOPPABLE BABY!
by R Dizzle on Jan 15, 2009 1:46 PM PST
in Recaps
Email
PrintFinal Boxscorere | Open Thread (1380+ Comments WOW)
This looks awkward.
JIMMY CRICKETS BATMAN!! That was one heck of a game!
Triple OT? That was the longest game I've witnessed in my life!
Since I'm a very creative man, the longest game deserves the shortest recap.
Ready? Here we go.
The Warriors lost.
They played a lot of basketball.
Triple OVERTIME.
Marcus Williams still didn't get any minutes.
Hooray!!
Just kidding...
Weren't you supposed to be a consistent All Star?
52 Minutes, 30 points, and 22 Boards
Gives you Brad Miller. Man, this guy destroyed us. Forget all, cause he managed to play through the whole game without fouling out. This guy was...well, unstoppable, for the Kings and added greatly to their victory. The tech at the end of the first overtime was costly, but not costly enough. If only he kept talking...he might have been ejected. Oh well...
Ladies and Gentlemen, introducing...Diddy's newest backup dancer!
Cisco
First of all, I can't believe the Kings announcers call him that. Cisco? Really? If it's in reference to Sisqo, the lead singer of Dru Hill, let me tell you, Francisco Garcia cannot move like him at all. Thong Song? Classic.
Anyway, 42 minutes and 19 points doesn't quite impress me for a shooter like Garcia. But, he made the 3s when they counted and made us look like we couldn't play Defense. Oh wait, we can't play defense.
I just made a 3 with 1 minute left in overtime! What..it's not over yet?
2-Morrow Comes 2-Day
Undrafted rookie - 32 minutes, 15 points, and 9 boards. What more can you ask from this guy? He played hard til the end and came off the bench with energy. I really enjoyed watching him hit those clutch shots at the end - he's starting to build confidence at his shots when they count. Dare I dream what he will be in a year or two? Oh, the possibilities!
Kinda wished he did the SJax pose.
KAZ
CLUTCH. Knocking down the 3s when we needed em which is all that really matters. Nevermind the 4-17 shooting cause he was 6-6 from the line. But wait, wasn't he injured or something? What happened to that sprained neck? I don't know how Kelenna did it but he came out and played hard for 51 minutes.
WHY AM I STILL PLAYING?!?!
JC
Now, now, before you go and blame this loss on Jamal Crawford, take a second to breathe and think.
Yes, I too was yelling at my TV screaming "STOP SHOOTING JAMAL!" but, let's look at this realistically. The boxscore says he played 60 minutes (I think it was actually 66) meaning he was running up and down the court for over an hour. AN HOUR.
Nothing went in for Crawford in overtime, but can you blame him? He must have been dead tired and drained. It wasn't like he was taking dumb shots (well, not any dumber than usual) and he was trying.
What's that? He played defense too? YES. He had a crucial block on K-Mart (Kevin Martin, not Kenyon) which brought it to another overtime.
I can't hate on JC, at least not for last night's game.
It looks like he's flying!
The Dagger
No it wasn't Corey Maggette. I'm sure we would all like to blame this game on Maggs as we usually do, but it wasn't his fault.
Well, only partially.
It really comes down to two things.
ONE
Here's our fatal flaw from last night - 25-41 from the free throw line.
What the heck happened? Is the loss of our free throw coach, really that devastating? Hey, I can understand that at the end of 3 overtimes, you'll get tired and miss easy shots. Fine.
But airballs from the free throw line?
Come on! Andris and Turiaf - I'm looking at you two.
TWO
We played a triple overtime game with 9 players. Sounds like a recipe for a guaranteed loss. They needed their rest and didn't get it - SJax, Belinelli, Monta - all out. Kurz didn't even get real minutes. Marcus Williams - still on the bench. Davidson - no minutes (I get that one).
There's no way they could have won this game without their key players.
Besides, look at the bright side - we were trailing for the majority of the game and still pulled out til 3 overtimes. Good enough for me.
Uh...what's with this awkward pictures?
This is a hard one to decide. Boo-ke had a clutch 3. CJ played hard. Andris had the most boards even though he fouled out in 4. Morrow played well. Turiaf airballed a few throw.
But this one's going to all Warriors fans. The Roarcle (even though I wasn't there) sounded off the hook and 1380+ comments at GSoM takes us to a whole new level. A three hour game and people were still cheering. Gotta love it.
They don't call us the best fans for nothing.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
how
can this loss be worse then the heat loss…
we lost the heat game cause we couldnt frickin inbound…
by saintdee on Jan 15, 2009 1:50 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
cuz…we were so close to beating a much better team than the kings…the kings suck
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
…the kings suck
Haha, Does that mean we sub-suck? Actually I think we got the best of them last night, afterall who came away with another loss for the lottery race?
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 15, 2009 2:45 PM PST up reply actions
when we got 9 players that can play...
we suck
when we have a full roster…we dont suck
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
THANK YOU WARRIORS
you returned me back to earth
i was too excited about riots in my city
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgKBP7Lp_fg&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHr0uTyvKTw&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6TNr1OVVrA&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbTGldJZ2fo&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8-TdP1OP0&feature=channel_page
that forgot there is another world where government stays corrupted and Warriors still lose -even in third OT -this was a sad sad sad game
4 injured
3 fouled out
1 starter 1 backup 3 undrafted
30 Y 197 cm 115 kg 0 IQ
I'm glad
They went for the 3 to try and win the game.
I know the saying is if you’re at home, you go for the tie but damn, after 3 OT’s, you gotta try to put it away.
I couldn’t believe how close Buike had it even though he was way behind the 3pt line. He has such a small arc to his jump shot, it’s crazy.
Great selection for Warrior Wonder...R-Diz
Warrior fans are the best. We are absolutely nuts. Continuing to support this team with the record we have so far, with all the drama going on, the injuries, etc.
It just continues to amaze me.
They really deserve the props because my cousin was at the game and told me there were hella Kings fans there. Plus all the crazy fans on the ongline thread. Big ups to you folks.
By the way R-Diz, are you happy that you don’t have to worry about giving Marco B the WW for the next 10 days?
LMFAOOOOO
Rocky Belinelli is a stud in the making! Get well for the Cavs!
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jan 15, 2009 2:14 PM PST reply actions
There were?
I didn’t see many Kings fans at all. My homeboy that was with me at the game is a die-hard Kings fans. He rocked a Martin jersey. I give props though. Martin will put Sac-town back on the NBA map.
Oh word?
My cousin is a liar. I hate him. I’m never speaking to him again.
Maybe it was just the section he was in.
Martin is dope. But Go Warriors still.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jan 15, 2009 2:21 PM PST up reply actions
yeah?
Was he the guy shouting 10 wins! 10 wins after the game?
by Ice Watter In His Veins! on Jan 15, 2009 4:17 PM PST up reply actions
Funny story
Next game I’m covering is the Cavs game…so if he DOES come back then..
We still believe!!
LOL perfect!
He is gonna get a triple double just for you and just for that one game on his return, he will be the only player rockin’ a GSoM 18 jersey with Marco R-Dizzle on the back.
Tight.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jan 15, 2009 2:27 PM PST up reply actions
Progress
Looking at the positive (rebuilding season) – we made 2 inbounds plays at the end and didn’t screw em up. The team didn’t give up being down 4 starters.
Hell even maggs – sucking from the ft line for probably the first time ever, kept going to the basket. Buike shot bad, but kept on shooting.
However – remember the turiaf/jc inbounding – where turiaf was supposed to inbound,but it ended up being jc and he had to take a timeout since turiaf was the only one behind? That annoyed me a bit.
And the fact that no one was giving the ball to morrow. That needs to stop. He is a shooter, so make him shoot. I think marco would have found him more, but jc can crowd the ball a bit.
+1 to pass the rock to morrow.
He was hot. Give it to the hot hand.
+1 to Marco woulda found him too.
Another thing. Wassup with the non-calls on the moving screens? It happened at least 3 times. Can’t remember if the Kings took advantage of those situations and scored.
Anyone remember?
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jan 15, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
It wasn't the first time ever maggs sucked from the line
I saw it last year against us. The Warriors went to Staples and it was shown on ESPN. Maggette kept going to the line, as usual. Me missed like 8 in a row. That’s why when he came on board and I was reading how he’s a dependable ft shooter, I was scratching my head.
81.9% career.
81.2% this season.
That should pretty much end the discussion of FT skills. If there’s one thing stats can describe to a tee, with no anecdotal observation necessary, it’s FT shooting ability. Maggette is an 82% FT shooter. He’s a very good FT shooter. Period.
I suppose it’s possible he’s marginally streakier at the FT line than you average dude … if someone were interested and motivated, I suppose they could look into that (JAE?). But why it would be any better to be unstreaky (say making 4 out of every 5 shots) than streaky (say, making 80 in a row and then missing 20 straight) is another question. Personally, I don’t see how it makes a whit of difference.
But by all means, continue to scratch your head and wonder how your league-leading .330 hitter can possibly go 0-for-5 in a game you watched. Random chance is a pretty cool thing, when you think about it.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jan 15, 2009 6:23 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Nailed it...
When you shoot that many free throws you are bound to see some interesting groupings. I really couldn’t believe my eyes last night, but I don’t complain when he shoots 95% for a week so I guess I can’t say much when he misses an unusual amount either. Though, for the record, I was voicing my displeasure at the game. =P
Thing 2
I don't know
how it’s any different from a streaky field goal shooter. How is it not worse to be streaky? You’d rather have consistency on the FT line just as you would from 3.
"Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?" - John Spartan after hearing Arnold became President, from Demolition Man
by 61st Amendment on Jan 16, 2009 1:09 AM PST up reply actions
Well...
It’s kind of a brain teaser but let me put it this way:
Is it better to have Player A or Player B?
Player A -
Make, Miss, Make, Miss, Make, Miss, Make, Miss, Make, Miss
5/10 shooting, a perfect %50 and by all means very consistent.
Player B-
Make, Make, Make, Make, Miss, Miss, Miss, Miss, Make, Miss
5/10 Shooting, a perfect %50 and by all means very streaky.
Did Player A help his team more than Player B? Was it actually worse to be streaky? If you think so then answer me this one:
Player A-
Make, Miss, Make, Miss, Make, Miss, Make, Miss, Make, Miss
5/10 shooting, a perfect %50 and by all means very consistent.
Player B-
Make, Make, Make, Make, Miss, Miss, Miss, Miss, Make, Make
6/10 shooting, a perfect %60 and by all means very streaky…
This may seem stupid, but obviously player B helped his team more. Now imagine the same concept over the course of a season.
Player A-
5/10
4/8
6/12
5/10
Over the course of a week Player A goes 20/40, %50 shooting.
Player B-
1/10
7/8
9/12
3/10
Over the course of a week Player B goes 20/40, %50 shooting.
Now did Player A help his team more than player B this particular week?
It really only matters what you shoot in the end right? The rest is left up to chance. If you are a career %80 FT shooter you are a good FT shooter. It doesn’t really matter if you shoot exactly %80 every week or you shoot %90 half the time and %70 half the time.
Thing 2
It really only matters what you shoot in the end right?
No, Cause a streaky player is a lot harder to play with, you never know what to expect so it makes you play worse. A consistent player is a lot more comforting to plan around. you can play with strategy and not rely on luck as much, with mr streaky it’s hard to plan for when he’ll get hot or not.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 17, 2009 10:43 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly.
+1
"Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?" - John Spartan after hearing Arnold became President, from Demolition Man
by 61st Amendment on Jan 18, 2009 10:35 PM PST up reply actions
parts of your argument,
such as the 6/10 vs. 5/10 comparison, are irrelevant because we’re supposed to assume the same percentage for both players.
If Maggette wasn’t streaky and shot 81.2% for THAT game, we would’ve won the game. Even if it meant being CERTAIN he would miss a couple shots, we’d take that over a chance he’d make all or the same chance he’d make none. It really isn’t any different from streakiness in FG%. You want to know what you’re getting, and you don’t want streaks to determine a win or loss.
Maybe you’ll get lucky and the 90% this game wins the game while the 70% that game wins the game, but going in you would rather have 80% because it gives you the best chance at winning both games.
"Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?" - John Spartan after hearing Arnold became President, from Demolition Man
by 61st Amendment on Jan 18, 2009 10:35 PM PST up reply actions
Missed my point, I think...
If you believe that being streaky is inherently bad then it calls for a few questions.
What increase in FG% would overcome this perceived handicap. 1% , 2% , 10%?
What level of inconsistency constitutes a “streaky” player?
What if said player had all of his “good” games on days the team needed (a close game) it and all of his “bad” games on days the team didn’t need it (blowout wins for instance)? Unlikely yes, but wouldn’t his streakiness undoubtedly have been a good thing in these extreme circumstances? Now is it so far fetched to think he could have a season when most (just a simple majority) of his “good” games came when the team needed them most? Then that particular year it would be a positive for his team that he was a streaky player, right? Taking chance into account couldn’t it just as soon be a good thing that he was streaky as it could be a bad thing?
I hope you see what I’m getting at. If there is really such a thing as a “streaky” player (someone who consistently groups his FG’s into larger clusters of makes and misses than the average player) does this really have a measurable impact on his team? Outside of basketball cliches, it seems (in my mind at least) like a pretty hard argument to make.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jan 19, 2009 12:16 AM PST up reply actions
Streaky vs. Consistent
Being consistent maintains the status quo, while being streaky breaks it up. If you’re a bad team likely to lose anyways, having a streaky guy might help you win more games than you otherwise would. On the other hand, if you’re a good team, having a streaky guy might make you lose games you otherwise would. Everybody wants to be a good team, and good teams aren’t really helped by streakiness, so people look down on streaky players.
Your points on “what defines streaky?” are spot on. If anyone as ever played basketball (or any sport for that matter), you know there are times when you’re in the zone and times when you’re in a funk. Everybody is streaky. The players who are not given the “streaky” moniker are usually just better (i.e. Ray Allen, he’s 80% from 3 when he’s hot and 35% when he’s not which still isn’t too shabby).
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jan 19, 2009 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
it was a solid game, i wasnt dissapointed with any one, other than the usuals (JC,Maggs)
I continue to be in awe of the lack of looks Morrow gets though! He was starting to heat up, and yet JC kept launching, and no one looked for him. Morrow can seriuosly help us, especially with out a lot of our scorers. And why the hell does Kurz keep getting to play!?
3XOT
I’m still tired. That’s the second triple OT game I’ve gone to since I think 1991 or so when they played the Clippers(sat 2 rows up from the floor). To my surprise, there were far less SacTown fans than ever before. Maybe they had too much butter to churn and cow sh*t to pick up at the barn.
Can’t even believe the Dubs were in it as long as they were considering they had maybe the dumpiest lineup…ever. I really can’t think of a less talented group of players that were on the floor for such a long time-even during the darkest years. Hopfully they gained some confidence from that and will help out more when the big guns return form the injury bug.
They don't even
show up at ARCO. I went to the Magic/Kings game the night before (Kinda weird seeing the Kings two nights in a row) and I would not be surprised if more of the seats were empty than filled. So why would they bother making the trip down?
"Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?" - John Spartan after hearing Arnold became President, from Demolition Man
by 61st Amendment on Jan 16, 2009 1:11 AM PST up reply actions
Three undrafted players and one second rounder playing in crunch time
All I gotta say is props to those these Dubs. They fought hard. Kaz’s three could have easily won this game for us, but it went half way in and came out.
Monta's
a second-rounder. Happens.
"Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?" - John Spartan after hearing Arnold became President, from Demolition Man
by 61st Amendment on Jan 16, 2009 1:13 AM PST up reply actions
3 OT's
This was a game of who wanted it less, I guess it was the Warriors.
Why the hell were we going with a four guard lineup in OT with a four point lead? How many times can you let the ball bounce without thinking “maybe I should try to get the rebound?” How do you blow a 5 point lead with 31 seconds? (I’ve asked this twice this year.. UGH) How many times can you give up wide open 3’s when you know the other team needs a 3? Why is Krunchtime Kurz on the floor instead of Randolph?
It really took a team effor to lose this one from terrible free throw shooting, to terrible rebounding, to terrible lineup calls, to terrible defense. The only thing they managed to do was inbounds the pass without turning it over, which the savy crowd applauded.
by Ice Watter In His Veins! on Jan 15, 2009 4:29 PM PST reply actions
I just "finished" the game on my Tivo
I’m in the eastern time zone, so I typically tape Ws home games and watch them the next day. My boyfriend had set the Tivo for an extra 30 minutes, and my recording ended with 1 minute left in the 2nd OT, right after Morrow made that awesome shot!!! I was all excited, then discovered the Warriors still lost. Still, it was a valiant effort.
I’ve got tickets for Warriors @ Pistons in March— Hope everyone is healthy by then— go dubs!!!!
Way to represent out there in the East Coast. Big ups to you and your BF.
Hella Fressshhh.
Go Warriors still! So what!
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jan 15, 2009 11:28 PM PST up reply actions
Sucks that we lost
But that has got to be the most enjoyable loss we’ve ever had. At least I think so. Granted that it was a loss to the kings we were without sjax, marco, monta, and brandon. because of that we were able to see some other players step it up and come through in the clutch – namely cj, buike, and morrow. great great game despite the outcome. i mean at least it wasn’t like that one loss against the lakers last year when the ref decided the game with that BS call.
by bogeydead4 on Jan 15, 2009 7:18 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Did anyone see Marcus Williams smile when CJ Watson fouled out?
…like he was subtly excited about the chance of playing…even jax looked like he was hyphy for Marcus…AND THEN…Nellie put in Kurz. Haha. Sucks for him!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
