Warriors Preview: Development of Youngsters Will Make or Break Season
by diehardoaklandfan22 on Oct 20, 2009 2:39 PM PDT
78 comments
The Golden State Warriors are the Oakland Raiders of the NBA. The similarities are eerie. And for any self-respecting Bay Area sports fan, that isn’t a good thing.
Train-wrecked front offices, apathetic coaching, and the love for a certain type of player that does nothing but look sexy in a uniform; I could continue, but I’m sure Warrior fans are well aware of the situation.
After languishing through 12 seasons wherein the team did not even get within sniffing distance of the playoffs, Warrior fans were repaid with arguably the most exciting month in franchise history.
Of course, the next season, Golden State went on to a set a record only to be expected by the most pessimistic of fan bases—compiling the most wins in the regular season, 48, without making the playoffs.
So now, after the obligatory front office dismantling of anything reminiscent of success, the Warriors are once again starting at ground zero. Or maybe lower.
Despite the curious offseason moves, the conclusion of last season left a lot for Warrior fans to get excited about. Monta Ellis started flashing his pre-moped quickness, Anthony Randolph and Brandon Wright emerged as legitimate frontcourt players, and Corey Maggette took the sixth man role to heart.
But once again, the Warriors managed to disturb the good will they had created when aptly named Captain Jack threatened to go all Al Harrington on Don Nelson. Jackson made a public request to be traded in August and later asked to relinquish his captaincy—Nelson obliged.
And if that weren’t enough, Jackson has been "taking it easy," to say the least, during the preseason.
Jackson picked up five fouls and a technical in less than 10 minutes in a matchup against the Lakers earlier this month, and was sent to the locker room by Nelson following a testy exchange.
Jackson never returned and a two-game suspension that cost the ex-captain roughly $139,000 followed.
So where does all this leave the Warriors for the 2009-2010 season? They certainly have the talent to be a threat in the Western Conference, especially with the Pacific Division looking remarkably weak—aside from the Lakers.
Ellis, Stephen Curry, Jackson, Randolph, and Biedrins form an explosive fivesome. And with Maggette, Turiaf, Kelenna Azubuike, Anthony Morrow, and eventually Wright coming off the bench, the team even has nice depth to boot.
But Golden State is still facing the same problems they encounter every season: lack of size, lack of leadership, and too many guys who play the same position.
Once again, the Warriors will try to win by forcing the opposition into a fast-breaking score-a-thon, a strategy that has been sparingly successful in the NBA.
But if any team could do it, this might be the one. Biedrins and Turiaf are nice players, don’t get me wrong, but they’re no match for legitimate scoring big men like Tim Duncan or Amare Staudamire; especially if they find themselves playing Jackson, Randolph, and Biedrins at the three-four-five.
Last season, the Warriors were the youngest team in the league. So what did they do to rectify the situation? They added a rookie to the starting lineup and took the fire out of the only person in the entire organization who offered any semblance of direction—including the head coach.
Who are the Warriors expecting to emerge as guides to the youngsters? Speedy Claxton? Mikki Moore? Not a good strategy.
The Warriors are on their third GM of the decade—Garry St. Jean, Chris Mullin, and now Larry Riley—and it seems like each one tries to outdo his predecessor in adding more swingmen to the team. Imagine this possible scenario in the front office:
Chris Cohan: Larry, Mullin has the franchise record with six. I don’t think you can beat that. A steak dinner on me if you do.
Larry Riley: I was hoping you would ask me about that. I’ve been spending the entire season thinking about it.
Chris Cohan : Great! I never bought into the idea of landing a legitimate star like Amare or Chris Bosh anyway. What are your ideas?
Larry Riley : Here’s an easy one. You know how Jamal Crawford can create a lot of points by himself? Well, we can trade him for two overpaid, below-average guards who can’t do anything.
Chris Cohan : Oh! I like it.
Larry Riley : Hold on, you haven’t even heard the best one. We can trade Belinelli, who emerged last season as a clutch shooter and a solid defender, for Devean George. That guy is in the playoffs every year!
Chris Cohan : And then I can draft another two-guard instead of big guy like Jordan Hill, meanwhile making Monta unhappy at the same time!
Larry Riley and Chris Cohan in unison: Excellent (evil laughing).
Although I absolutely love Curry, it will take him time to adjust to running the point, as he’s only spent one season playing the position in his career.
But there is no question that Curry is already the best point guard the Warriors have—not that he has much competition. Expect rookie struggles and slumps, but it will be worth the growing pains, however, because if Ellis and Curry make nice, that is one dangerous backcourt.
Overall, I think it will take a minor miracle for the Warriors to return to the playoffs, but if things break right—lots and lots of things—there is a possibility.
It’s a good thing Golden State fans care more about Randolph winning the Rookie Challenge MVP award than the Warriors playing meaningful basketball in April. Oh well, maybe next year.
If you like this article, please check out the UO Sports Dude blog for more of the same!
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
3 recs |
78 comments
Email
Print
Comments
You lost me at Bellinelli emerging as a solid defender
Who only looked decent because he actually tried, as opposed to the rest of our team being spectators. Also I think taking Jordan Hill would have been a reach. The Warriors have tried for years to draft for need, failing miserably every time. The best thing to do in a draft IMO is take the best available and sort everything out later. We have too many guards, but at least we can sort a couple ones out as being the keepers instead of having a balanced collection of duds (I’m thinking POB, Fuller,etc.) Maybe the Warriors won’t be great this year, but I expect to see a lot of promise out of Randolph, Curry, Morrow, Ellis, Buike, Turiaf, and Biedrins for the future.
by Pearlsofwisdom on Oct 20, 2009 3:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In the POB case...
POB really was the BPA. Hard to believe huh? I remember being okay drafting him, but I also wanted to see Ronnie Brewer or Rodney Carney drafted as well.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
by kenntoe on Oct 20, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the POB case
POB wasn’t really that much of a reach it was just a crappy draft with a huge drop of after Roy, Gay, et al. He was a bust but a chance worth taking bc you can get guys like Brewer and Carney thru free agency or d-league. You don’t need to waste a 9th pick on them. For example later that year the Ws essentially got their “Brewer” in Azubuike. So arguably given what was available they didn’t lose that much taking a chance on POB given what was available. Good gamble, didn’t work. It worked in the case of Beidrins and Randolph.
With Curry it was different bc Curry has way more potential than Brewer, Carney or the crap available in the 06 draft. Hill was more of a reach bc he was the best big available in a draft with a lot of talented guards (Derozan, Jennings, Holiday were still available to name 3)
by gsfool on Oct 21, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been watching POB’s stats. He’s been improving, actually. He may become a decent backup. He’s a very big dude who gets a few blocks and is an OK rebounder, the last several games. Also, his FG% is usually a’right. He fouls a lot, though. Still, his stats were solid in D-league.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
by Naticus2 on Oct 22, 2009 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
eh
I don’t see any gain in th devean george trade though. We traded a solid young player for what. The fattest wing player in the nba?
by tafkasam on Oct 20, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The idea that Belinelli is a “solid” player is debatable. He appeared to have a nice outside shot. He could put the ball on the floor. His passes looked good when he actually passed, but he didn’t seem to be able to find open men that often, hence pretty anemic assist numbers. The notion that he was somehow going to be a point guard seemed to ignore this. He didn’t rebound well at all.
We traded for a free contract. We traded for an equal dollar contract, expiring this year, while his old team picked up the bill. George is a placeholder, nothing more. His appearances in the preseason don’t indicate that Nellie considers him anything more than that.
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nice piece of writing
if your intention was to recirculate superficial impressions representative of those held by casual fans [as in your closing lines, when you refer to “Golden State fans”, it should be followed by the phrase “like me”], and to provoke disagreement with you. Your scattershot style is perhaps a symptom of youthful exuberance?
In re. to the most exciting month in franchise history, nothing has come close to the post season of 1975. To whom do you refer with “…took the fire out of the only person in the entire organization who offered any semblance of direction..”?? [Mullin, Ellis, Jackson?] Which rookie has been added to the starting line up? Curry hasn’t started any regular season games, and if you refer to him that would obviously be post-Mullin, but I won’t go further in over-analyzing what seems to me a combination of muddled thinking and jumbled writing.
Hope it made you feel better to vent.
by the.monk on Oct 20, 2009 3:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I've read this same Warriors season preview at least 3 different places
I quit reading part way through the first few times to, because it shows very little insight into who the Warriors actually are and what is going on, positive or negative.
Someone appears to have done a cut-n-paste job of some very generic “write a preview of every NBA team to generate hits on my website” text.
By the way, I actually liked the previews GSoM did; they didn’t pretend to be unbiased and instead offered their own honest insight into what each team was doing. I expect that they were “wrong” on all sorts of things, but they were worth reading.
by toddaverth on Oct 21, 2009 2:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was one of the few people who didnt really like Curry at all
but I would have slapped Nelson in the face, if he took Jordan Hill over Curry
by 123707THIZZ on Oct 20, 2009 3:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I was one of the few people who did kinda like Jordan Hill and I would’ve been similarly upset if they had passed on Curry for Hill. The pick seemed like a no-brainer on draft day and it still seems that way to me.
Thing A
by sam23 on Oct 22, 2009 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was one of the few people who didnt really like Curry at all
but I would have slapped Nelson in the face, if he took Jordan Hill over Curry
by 123707THIZZ on Oct 20, 2009 3:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
is it a joke?
Hill over Curry?
Randolph, Wright, Biedrins and Turiaf are better players than him
by Spaniard on Oct 20, 2009 3:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Does anyone else see Morrow as a starter? Let Morrow start and bring Curry off the bench…..this way Ellis doesnt scream like a little girl about playing with Curry. Morrow is a sick shooter and will put up numbers in this system….
Curry/Azubuike/Maggette/Turiaf from the bench
by Bellringer21 on Oct 20, 2009 4:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Morrow can shoot......
that’s is. He’s not a starter, not yet. I really hope he develops but he’s not someone who should get starter minutes.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 20, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morrow is a reasonably good rebounder for his position. The difference between a guy whose lone weapon is a deadly outside shot and the guy with the deadly outside shot who isn’t a rebounding liability is rather substantial.
by jae on Oct 20, 2009 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure who you are referring to
but if its curry or jackson, both can handle the ball and advance it past half court, something morrow cannot
by tafkasam on Oct 20, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the distinction is between
Morrow as VERY VERY BUSY sees him vs. Morrow as Jae sees him. Neither Curry, nor Jackson, nor Azubukie are being referenced (yet.) Maggette, Law, Claxton, and George are also not part of this conversation. Ellis’ only role is as a supporting actor, setting up the scene. This is specifically about Morrow.
Also, this is not the first time V. V. Busy and Jae have had this conversation. I do not expect it will be the last either. I’m hoping Morrow’s performance continues to make it increasingly difficult for Mr. Busy to maintain his currently expressed views.
by toddaverth on Oct 21, 2009 2:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Got it
Thanx for Clarification. Sadly, if we could upgrade Jack (at the 3) for a true point forward, i think our permiter play would be ideal. Monta is more of a scoring point, then morrow is a deadly outside shooter but you cannot count on him to do much else offensively (ball handle, pass etc) so having a 3 who can initiate the offense, take pressure of monta for true distribution ability would be ideal. Lebron would be nice, lol, but you see where I’m going.
It’s also a large reason I do not want to dump Jack for nothing (unless he goes even more haywire than he already has). He may be flawed, but he can do this miles better than anyone we have. We should have made an attempt for mike miller :-/
by tafkasam on Oct 21, 2009 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m hoping Morrow’s performance continues to make it increasingly difficult for Mr. Busy to maintain his currently expressed views.
I’m right there with you, I REALLY REALLY REALLY hope Morrow proves me wrong, but what I’ve seen so far does not. I’m all for anything that helps the Warriors and Morrow expanding his game by any margin at all will help us win.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 21, 2009 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Theree seems to be really unrealistic expectations on Morrow
I’ve heard he’s worked hardest in offseason, and I’m happy about that. There is still a reason he went undrafted, and couldn’t see consistent minutes in the rotation last year. He may be a great shooter, but he is extremely limited still….
The fact people consider him a player who can lead us, is a reason I am pessimistic about any sort of playoff potential
by tafkasam on Oct 21, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is still a reason he went undrafted
Because drafting is an imprecise pseudo-science?
Is there “still a reason” Bargnani went #1, Milicic went #2, Adam Morrison (the original Ammo) went #3, Chris Paul went #4, etc.?
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Oct 21, 2009 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he went undrafted
because he’s an incredibly limited player (at time of draft) that excelled in warriors system. Couldn’t see him playing on 2/3rd of nba teams
by tafkasam on Oct 21, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He went undrafted because drafting is a gamble based on scouting that misses some guys. The notion that he’s limited, ergo he didn’t deserve to be drafted seems to ignore other players who are as limited or more limited who have been drafted.
Kapono was drafted at the top of the 2nd round. He’s taller, but nothing he did in college suggested he’d be a better player than Morrow and indeed his NBA career suggests as much. If Morrow doesn’t regress, he’s better since he can rebound better. Korver was drafted in the 2nd round. Wesley Person (late first rounder) managed to play for 7 different teams over a bit more than a decade without appreciably better skills and Dell Curry lasted 15 seasons as a designated gunner doing more or less nothing else. There aren’t a whole lot of guys who have ever shot as well as Morrow did last year, some of whom do nothing other than shoot. There appears to be market for such guys.
Did his college career suggest that he was a 1st round talent? Did his play last year suggest this? Probably not. But this notion that he couldn’t play for 2/3rds of NBA teams is an opinion that doesn’t really mesh with the facts. (Actually, you suggest that you couldn’t see him playing for 2/3rds of the league, perhaps implying your lack of imagination rather than Morrow’s actual value around the league.)
And this notion that it’s the Warriors’ ‘system’ that is somehow responsible is another commonly stated, seldom if ever supported assertion. It gets paraded out as if players who do well here would flop elsewhere. Who are these flops? There should be some examples of such players if this were really the case, but generally, this doesn’t seem to be the case. Most guys play about as well elsewhere after leaving Don Nelson’s “system”. I’m curious if you can provide examples of these flops who were a product of the system. (I will take silence as admission that there are not many such examples and the assertion cannot be supported.)
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
off the top of my head....
Baron Davis
Jason Richardson
Matt Barnes
Let me think farther back and i’ll post more….
by tafkasam on Oct 21, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Richardson has performed more or less as he did when he was here, and didn’t really perform better in Nellie’s “system” than he had pre-Nellie. His scoring efficiency has been better after leaving than it ever was here and shooting across the board was worse his lone year under Nellie than it was the previous season under Monty’s “system”. Sorry. That one doesn’t fly.
Davis has performed poorer since leaving than he did for his time here, but his seasons with the Hornets before playing in “the system” included trips to the All Star game. Sorry, that’s a lousy example as well.
Barnes? His first season here was rather good, a “breakout season”, but his shooting his second year in the same “system” dropped off considerably. And then in Phoenix, he improved again, post “system”. Other than the 3pt shooting, his game was mighty similar across the three seasons under different coaches and with different teammates.
You should get back with some examples that support your case. You’re 0 for 3 so far.
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
whats all this talk about morrow...
hes a great shooter…off the bench..just one of those players
by blacksamurai33 on Oct 21, 2009 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
PLAYOFFS?
Don’t talk about Playoffs! You kidding me? Playoffs?!
"/>
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 21, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m just kidding by the way tafkasam. Of course I’m hoping for playoffs, but the season is still 1 week away.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 21, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morrow
once he learns to play within the team defense concept (and later, when he develops some man skills), I see no reason not to start him or at least give him 25-30 minutes per night.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 21, 2009 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"because he’s an incredibly limited player (at time of draft) that excelled in warriors system. Couldn’t see him playing on 2/3rd of nba teams"
SERIOUSLY? I guarantee every team in the league wishes they had him on their roster. He might not be a starter yet but come on man, get real.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 21, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hes a poor defender
his rebounding is not in question
Marco Belinelli's Biggest Fan
by montadaboss on Oct 21, 2009 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last news I heard Nellie was leaning towards starting Morrow. I see some merit to having Morrow come off the bench to infuse points into a game when needed. But, more important, I think Nellie needs Curry to come off the bench every time Monta has one of his frequent implosions.
chilibean_3 says: Cybermaldonado, "I don’t think you understand anything. Anything at all." Stay classy chilibean my friend.
by cybermaldonado on Oct 20, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He said Morrow edged out Buike
However, Buike really should start for his D. Morrow could start against weaker teams perhaps.
by mosdl on Oct 20, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think Morrow edged him out, I think it’s because Buik’s knee (or ankle i can’t remember) has been sore. Buike played very well at the 1 pre-season game I went to. If he was healthy there is no way Morrow could beat him out of the starting spot.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 20, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morrow has been
the best performer of preseason. It’d be a sin if Nelson didn’t try him as a starter. There will be shuffling as always
by tafkasam on Oct 20, 2009 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morrow has been the best performer of preseason
Yes on the offensive end. During the Kings game Nelly told him to concentrate more on D. What were his stats for that game? 5 points off nine shots, 2 rebounds and 0 FT attempts. Why can’t Morrow play both ends of the floor? Because he’s currently a 1 trick poney. Buike, IMO is not a player who deserves NBA starter minutes, but currently deserves it more than Morrow. Like you said theirs going to be a lot of shuffling anyways. Everyone on the roster is going to start at one point or another so the whole argument is moot.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 21, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
an Ideal rotation
at the moment with Bwright out would be
Monta: 38 mins
Buike: 28
Jack: 36
Randolph: 30
Biedrins: 32
-
Curry: 18
Morrow: 12
Maggette: 26
Turiaf: 20
Like it or not Jack is needed on the floor for all the other things he does besides shooting a low percentage.
by tafkasam on Oct 21, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like it or not Jack is needed on the floor for all the other things he does besides shooting a low percentage.
All the other things? He needs to be on the floor to rebound poorly and turn the ball over regularly?
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
teams best passer
(until curry proves me otherwise)
by tafkasam on Oct 21, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is 5 rebounds per game and 6/3 assits/ tunovers on a broken team convey someone who can’t rebound and turns the ball over a lot?
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 21, 2009 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is 5 rebounds per game and 6/3 assits/ tunovers on a broken team convey someone who can’t rebound and turns the ball over a lot?
#1: Paying attention to “per game” numbers over rate normalized will make players who are on the court as much as Jax was look superficially better, though their actual performance isn’t. 5 rebounds in 40 minutes on the court is reasonably good for a point guard, but we’ve seen what happens when he’s our point guard and it ain’t pretty. It’s pretty meh for an off guard and for a SF, it’s downright unacceptable. It’s well below average. You could say that the rebounds are a result of it being a “broken team”, but his rebound rate last year was actually a bit above his career mark, which has never been particularly good and does include more time at SF.
#2: Your numbers are wrong. Honestly, is it so hard to actually look things up?
You generously gave him a 2:1 A:TO ratio. His actual assist/turnover numbers per game were 6.5/3.9, which well short of 2:1. Yes, the guys with the most turnovers also tend to be the guys with the most assists. But of the top assist getters in the game last year, none had as poor a ratio as Jax. Think nearly a whole extra turnover isn’t significant? It is. It’s far, far more significant than the additional assists. When he hasn’t been the primary distributor, he has had more reasonable turnover numbers, but he hasn’t had nearly as many assists either. This has been true whether or not the team was ‘broken’.
In general, he’s a rebounding liability unless you’re evaluating him as a point guard, where he’s a turnover liability. That’s how he’s a guy who can’t rebound and turns the ball over a lot.
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
your annoying
your factual evidence sometimes doesn’t explain clutch defense or clutch shooting. You continue to defend the Belinelli trade(one that was mocked for over a month around the league), when he was a good scorer, shooter, defender, and ball handler. I know his ratio was not too good, but he has great creating ability for a shooting guard in my opinion. People who actually watch the games seem to notice things like that.
You don’t really have too much factual evidence to back up Curry, yet you do. Its been widely noted his shooting has been terrible in summer league and preseason. Marco shot around 40% from 3. He isn’t rebounding that well yet you don’t point that out. His assist ratio is pretty terrible and he is a much worse defender than Marco, however you will never point this out, because maybe it makes you look bad. I’m not angry with Curry, but I’m confused how Marco played alot better than him and wasn’t liked nearly as much as Curry. Oh well, i’ll let the stats speak for themselves.
Marco Belinelli's Biggest Fan
by montadaboss on Oct 21, 2009 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
You’re still carrying on about Marco?
Did you have something to say that related in any way to what jae was discussing, or did mommy just forget to fix you your PB&J on time?
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Oct 21, 2009 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
People who actually watch the games seem to notice things like that.
Are you implying I don’t watch games? You’re incorrect if that’s your claim. I watch games and evaluate them statistically. I don’t share your handicap in being limited to one or the other.
your annoying
Why is it that insults seem to more often than not come from people who don’t seem to have the ability to tell the difference between a contraction and a possessive. The contraction of you and are is ’you’re’. The 2nd person possessive is ‘your’. Here’s an example: Your prose and reasoning makes it appear that you’re unable to grasp the basics of elementary school grammar and math.
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
your annoying
your factual evidence sometimes doesn’t explain….
Thing A
by sam23 on Oct 22, 2009 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“You could use facts to prove anything that’s even remotely true! "
- H.Simpson
by jae on Oct 23, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he’s a guy who can’t rebound AND turns the ball over a lot?
That sounds more like he can’t rebound OR turns over the ball a lot
Standing on the moon
Where talk is cheap and vision true
Standing on the moon
But I would rather be with you
Somewhere in San Francisco
On a back porch in July
Just looking up to heaven
At this crescent in the sky
by Skeptic con Urquell on Oct 21, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He can’t rebound. His turnovers do seem to be dependent on his position. Sometimes he can’t rebound and he turns the ball over too much, other times, he simply just can’t rebound.
by jae on Oct 21, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ive had this argument b4..
at his position and height his rebounding is def a liability also his turnovers are way to high even for a pg
by blacksamurai33 on Oct 21, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are correct regarding assist/ TO
the numbers, they are actually 7/4, which is not good for a guard or an off guard at that. However being that Jackson was our best/ only option to play a mock PG position, I don’t feel he did such a bad job.
Reg rebounds, I don’t really understand what you mean by CAN’T rebound. Are you saying he sucks? Or is he physically incapable? Last season I remember Nelly addressing Jacks rebounding. He said something along the lines of we need Jack to rebound more, but he’s got a lot on his plate. Asking him to do more might be asking too much.
I realize these points are up for debate, you have your opinion and earlier in the year I would argue with you until my eyes bleed…. However now that Jack has come out to be such a douche, I really don’t care anymore, so say what you please about him.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 22, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reg rebounds, I don’t really understand what you mean by CAN’T rebound. Are you saying he sucks?
I am saying that his rebounding is subpar and is a liability. The excuse that he “has a lot on his plate” is bogus. Has he always had so much on his plate? He’s never been a good rebounder, even as a 3rd/4th option. Perhaps he lacks the ability to be a competent rebounder, perhaps he has the ability but has, for more or less the whole of his career, not chosen to actually use the ability. It matters little either way. He has been a sub-par rebounder for his career. One would expect that a guy with his size at the guard position would be able to grab more rebounds, but he doesn’t and never has.
Expecting it to change even if he had an empty plate is foolish. Players rarely substantially improve their rebounding, and when it happens, it’s usually early in their career that this shows up as they physically mature. Jax has had a long enough career to demonstrate that it’s not something he’s good at. It really doesn’t matter if Nellie (Nelly is a recording artist and a partial owner of the Bobcats) asks him to do more or not. He has shown that rebounding isn’t something he does. He’d be a very, very, very rare case of someone who, more than half-way through his career all of a sudden picked up his rebounding because a coach asked him to.
by jae on Oct 22, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look
Seriously, you have access to ESPN, NBA.com, CBS, Yahoo, etc. You do not have to round numbers to whatever you want just because it makes your analysis look better. He was 6.5/3.9 as jae and others have pointed out countless times. Please stop rounding it to integers because it supports your claims better. The numbers are what they are.
Jax does some good things, but “make plays” and rebound are not in that list. If it was as simple as the coach telling him to rebound more, everybody would instantly get better at rebounding.
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Oct 22, 2009 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nelson should start Morrow
It makes sense to start your best shooter. Ellis will need him to spread the floor and knock down shots to become a better PG. Hopefully, this will also help out in the 3rd quarter where we go cold for some DAMN reason?. Pisses me off!!! But, Morrow will have to prove to Nelson that he is better than Buike to stay a starter. Tough call because Morrow or Buike will have to be the 7th or 8th man.
Ellis/Morrow/Jackson/Randolph/Biedrins looks good to me.
Watson/Curry/Azubuike/Maggette/Moore/Turiaf off the bench
Law/Claxton/Pruitt good luck guys.
George you better not get hurt.
by NoLimitWarrior on Oct 20, 2009 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
george is free...
who cares if he gets hurt!
by blacksamurai33 on Oct 21, 2009 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
George might not enjoy being released, hence he “better not get hurt.”
by toddaverth on Oct 23, 2009 3:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
George won’t get released until the trade deadline in all likelihood. He’s an expiring contract. Can’t trade him if you release him. After the deadline, unless he’s really been pressed into service, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him get his walking papers.
by jae on Oct 23, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Every year for the last forever...
you could say this statement.
by djkidspinz on Oct 20, 2009 4:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
OT but don't know where to put this.
Tyreke Evans – Man I am intrigued with this guy. He looks like a beast in the making at the PG position. I know he doesn’t have much PG skills yet, but his dribble penetration is already unstoppable at times. I think Memphis made a big mistake taking Thabeet over this guy. What’s crazy is that I personally project him anywhere from a better Rajon Rondo, or smaller Anfernee Hardaway. I wish the Dubz could have him, but I’m more than satisfied with Curry, for now. Him over Hill is a no-brainer though.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
by kenntoe on Oct 20, 2009 5:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Tyreke would have been awesome, we really need someone who can post up. But his handles are showing to be something of concern, either way I’m sure he’s going to be a beast. Curry > Hill everyday of the week and twice on sundays.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 20, 2009 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He looks like a beast in the making at the PG position. I know he doesn’t have much PG skills yet
That kinda makes him… not a PG? Maybe a SG?
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Oct 21, 2009 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m kind of confused with a couple points on this post.
So now, after the obligatory front office dismantling of anything reminiscent of success, the Warriors are once again starting at ground zero. Or maybe lower.
How is it lower than ground zero? You need to look at the means to the past 2 seasons, not the end result. When we had a 48 win season we did so with little more than an 8 man rotation. Jackson and Davis were 1 and 2 in minutes played in the NBA. That is not a recipe for success. Our team just plain wasn’t that good, Don Nelson was just given lemons and made some damn good lemonade.
Last season everyone and their mom was injured. Seriously I think Rob Kurz’s mom was sitting on the bench in a suit that’s how bad it was.
This year is a new begining, everyone is healthy, Jack is being a douch but as long as he plays hard it fine with me. And we have a deep bench for the first time since Jesus walked the earth, how is it ground zero?
Larry Riley : Here’s an easy one. You know how Jamal Crawford can create a lot of points by himself? Well, we can trade him for two overpaid, below-average guards who can’t do anything.
Why is it confusing to trade one player who plays starter minutes for 2 players who are easy to keep on the bench, plus their contracts are exprining, all while trying to develop a young core?
It’s a good thing Golden State fans care more about Randolph winning the Rookie Challenge MVP award than the Warriors playing meaningful basketball in April. Oh well, maybe next year.
I’m hoping I just missed the sarcasim here.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 20, 2009 5:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
One thing I noticed about last nights game
While Jack is still on the team, I don’t think we are going to see the ball hogging, high turnover, constant complaining Jack that we saw last year. With Ellis and Curry both handling the PG duties, Jack already looks like more like the 2nd or 3rd option that he was and should be. I don’t want to be too optimistic, but if the Warriors somehow are able to be competitive, maybe he will quiet down and just play ball. I realized after watching the game last night that we still definitley need him. No matter what we get back, it won’t make up for his loss.
by Pearlsofwisdom on Oct 21, 2009 10:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Awesome, someone who watched the game. I have a question for you. It seems Nelson’s experiment was a bit of a fail. He said he was going to try playing Randolph, Turiaf and Biedrins at the same time. How did that go? Turiaf and Biedrins both looked like they had solid games, but Randolph’s stats were pretty bad. I know he went out for a while with a sore back, but how did he look when he was in the game playing the 3?
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 21, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how did he look when he was in the game playing the 3?
Don’t think we got a fair appraisal of the possibilities, the Mop tested the floor right near the start of the game and never got fully wrung out after that.
Standing on the moon
Where talk is cheap and vision true
Standing on the moon
But I would rather be with you
Somewhere in San Francisco
On a back porch in July
Just looking up to heaven
At this crescent in the sky
by Skeptic con Urquell on Oct 21, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I watched the game
That lineup got absolutely run in the opening minutes but that’s to be expected given they had never played together before. Randolph had a really, really bad game. I think he had one point and one rebound in 20 minutes. I actually don’t think he is ready to start at any position for us yet. I do like the Turiaf/Biedrins combo as they defend the post, rebound, and actually work well together in the 2-man game. I see Randolph as our backup four with Miki Moore at the 5, and maybe occasionally giving him some minutes at the 3 just to throw the other team off.
In the 3rd quarter our “big” lineup looked much better. We actually outplayed the Laker starters.
It was disheartening to not see our backups take the game over in the 4th. They played respectably but I wanted more. At least Curry played hard.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 21, 2009 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just so you guys know...
I am a Warriors fan. I truly would love to be excited about the season because the team really does have a lot of talent. But the atmosphere of the team, with the rifts between players, the ignorance of the front office and the apathetic coaching style Don Nelson has displayed the last few season, has made it very difficult to have any sort of expectations other than another 50 loss season.
The UO Sports Dude - www.keithabecker.wordpress.com
by diehardoaklandfan22 on Oct 21, 2009 1:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I love the Warriors too
but i feel if we don’t make the playoffs this year which i want really bad but we most likely won’t, i want to see the development of Curry at PG and Randolph, Morrow, ect. When your a Warrior fan you have to find different things to get excited about evn when there might not be anything. But when we have a guy like Randolph we always have something to be excited about.
Die Hard Golden State Warrior Fan 4 Life!!!
The Golden Future
Curry-20pts,4rbs,10ast,2stl
Randolph-22pts,11rbs,3ast, 2blk
Morrow-18pts,5rbs,2ast,48 3pt%
Can't wait until GS make it to the PLAYOFFS!!
Living 4 a GSW Championship!!!
by GSW9 on Oct 21, 2009 4:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’ll be excited if we can hold teams to less than 105 a game
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
I know fans are delusional before a season
but seriously contend for a playoff spot? You don’t even know who several of the starters will be and will get crushed inside.
Randolph’s summer league was a mirage, he’ll never be great unless he can add about 40 pounds. He added about 5.
There’s no Baron Davis to make sense of the chaos of Donnie, to make it work and Donnie is just looking like he’d trying get fired so he can retire and still keep those $$.
There’s absolutely no chance.
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Oct 21, 2009 5:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I really don't care if our Talent cupboard is barren or full
We will not get far without one word:
DEFENSE
If we keep surrendering a league “best” 112 points a game than we ain’t going nowhere.
Welcome to the Warriors, Stephen Curry, the 2009 NBA Rookie of the Year.
Panda's and Curry in the Bey Area. Who would've known?
Conductor of the "We're Back!" Bandwagon!
by ejdacanay on Oct 21, 2009 6:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
NO WAY!!
It’s nice to be optimistic about the season but the usual ppl here know that the dubs won’t make the playoffs…I don’t even think that’s a goal for the dubs this year..this year is %100 a rebuilding/development year
by blacksamurai33 on Oct 21, 2009 9:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re right. If Randolph isn’t going to be healthy, we’re completely lottery bound. Wahoo… >>cry<<
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
by Naticus2 on Oct 22, 2009 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Warriors CAN make the playoffs
I see no reason why not. All it takes to slip in to a 7 or 8 seed is one hot month and a .500 record the rest of the season. This is a team that is designed for playing hot in spurts (whether it be for a single game or for a series of games). If they can sustain one real hot stretch for 3 or 4 weeks during the season, they can position themselves to make the playoffs. A good example of this is Houston a few years ago. They were a .500 team that got crazy hot for a month, won 22 in a row or something like that, played .500 ball after the streak, and made the playoffs. While the Warriors won’t go on a 22 game win streak, they can get super hot and go about 16-4 or so in a month. Play .500 the rest of the way and you win 47 games. That’ll get you a 7 or 8 spot at least in this year’s West. And it’s definitely possible.
by LakerFan24 on Oct 23, 2009 4:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
