Quick player thoughts from opening night
by dubzfan on Oct 29, 2009 12:28 AM PDT
42 comments
I think were better then Houston. Poor refs, Dumb plays (Jackson cough cough) and an injured Anthony Randolph held us back. I feel good about this year so far and I'm not too concerned about the loss.
Monta Ellis - Ok, Nelly was right he is not a point but wow he looked like his old self. Despite 2 missed layups he played great. He was quick, had a great crossover, broke out the spin, great jumper, decent defense and LEADERSHIP. He rallied players on the court and plays followed suit. I expect an outstanding year from him
Stephen Curry- Wow. He played great at point. Great passer, good shooter, GREAT defender and despite a few rookie mistakes he did just fine. I would like to see him more aggresive but it was only his first game. Him and Monta can work sometimes but not all the time. Overall he was very impressive.
Stephen Jackson - He just did not care. He walked out during intros on opening night and the guy behind me said it perfectly. He said he does not care cause he's out of here in a month. He played bad defense, threw a few good passes and made some shots but still did not care. He's doing just enough that teams would want to trade for him.
Ronny Turiaf - He got in foul trouble cause of these awful refs but overall he played alright. He blocked 3 shots but was awful in the end of the game. Must I say more?
Andris Biedrins - What happened to him on the boards? He looked very average at points but still, foul trouble killed him. He also looked confused at times when guarded buy Hayes or Scola.
Anthony Morrow - Can someone pass him the ball please?
Kelenna Azebuike - The guy was great, he just needs to be in more. Same as Morrow, PASS HIM THE BALL!
Corey Maggette - Other than some bad shot selection in the 4th he was ok. Great on the boards, but he can't be in late in the game cause he will just hog the ball and try to be the hero every time. His defense was average. Just stop shooting jumpers and he will be fine.
Anthony Randolph - Looked great in his limited action. When he comes back we will be so much better. He grabbed 5 boards real quick and brought great energy. Just wait until he's healthy.
Food stands - $12 dollar beer? Really?
Overall if the team stays the same I say 35 - 40 wins. If Jack leaves and we get Z, Wallace etc. we could be 42+ easy. Monta and Curry were great, AR will be great and with a good supporting cast we should be fine.
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
0 recs |
42 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
It’s noticeable that when Curry and Morrow are both in the game, Curry tries to get Morrow the ball as often as possible. Nobody else seems to want to pass it to Morrow. The real problem then is: when will they actually be on the floor at the same time because Monta will play a ton of minutes.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Oct 29, 2009 1:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
monta is better than both of them...i like how people suddenly look at monta as if he is a liability...
take him off the team tonight and your looking at a blowout
"so much losers" - hiero
by montamazing on Oct 29, 2009 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
monta is better than both of them...i like how people suddenly look at monta as if he is a liability...
take him off the team tonight and your looking at a blowout
"so much losers" - hiero
by montamazing on Oct 29, 2009 2:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Monta is not a point, and how many open looks did Monta give Arizia and Battier?
Monta, Jax, and Mags on court together absolutely DEVASTATES ball movement.
by Badly Browned on Oct 29, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oop,s meant Brooks, I knew it started with a B hehe
by Badly Browned on Oct 29, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Monta was fine with ball movement
And we know he’s not a point… That’s why Curry played 36 minutes at point guard. Don’t put Maggs’ and Jacks’ bad play on him.
Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "You're a rookie"
by dubzfan on Oct 29, 2009 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
take him off the team tonight and your [sic -] looking at a blowout
The plus-minus suggests otherwise. The team was -12 with Monta on the court, +10 with Curry on the floor. Since they overlapped quite a bit, it suggests that the 10 minutes with Monta running the show but Curry on the bench went very, very poorly. That’s how it appeared to me watching as well.
Monta is a very good scorer and overall, I actually thought that the Monta/Curry backcourt was reasonable and can work provided the team has some means to play solid defense at the other end. They didn’t last night. As last year, the opposition had little problem getting corner threes or pushing the ball into the hands of their bigs uncontested. The star-less Rockets are rather underrated and shouldn’t be thought too lightly of, but Scola shouldn’t have had that easy a time with things. Why did they allow him such easy access to the ball?
by jae on Oct 29, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+/- means very little in the NBA as compared to the NHL
I was at last nights game, I would say that Randolph, despite only seeing 10 mins of action, played better than Maggette. The boxscore said otherwise as Maggette was a 5, which I still don’t get, AR was a -8. Maggette didn’t appear to play a whole 13 better than AR.
Just the same, it’s obvious that Curry is the best facilitator on the team, the team runs more smoothly with him on the court. I don’t think having Maggette and Jack on the floor with Monta is helping ME8 grow as a PG. Both of them, particularly the latter, tend to encourage, and play, a 2 man game with Monta where they simply pass back and forth between one another. This exact problem was what lead to our offensive breakdown in the 3rd.
I would’ve liked to see a lineup of Monta with Ammo, Buike, AR, and AB. This at first would lead Monta to take many drives to the rim and pull up J’s. Houston, or any decent defensive team, would then focus their defensive efforts to containing Monta. Monta, being forced into double teams, would be forced to pass the ball off to one of the other 4 players on the court. Which would consist of our two best shooters from betond the arc, our two best low post scorers, and all of them move the ball extremely well. This would result in Monta picking up assists, and also he would build trust in his teammates. I can’t imagine a better lineup to run for Monta to learn the point positions in games. Plus that lineup is skilled defensively, and it would clean up on the glass.
Unfortunately, Nellie feels that Jack is the best person to be on the floor with Monta as PG, because Nellie sees him as the second best facilitator on the team. Too bad he is also a blackhole, which rubs off on Monta.
by myk on Oct 29, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Curious, why do you think +/- in hockey is significantly different than in basketball? I don’t follow hockey at all, but it seems like it’s basically the same concept – how well the team does with that player on the court/ice. It’s a team effort in either case…so why do you perceive such a difference?
AR was a -8. Maggette didn’t appear to play a whole 13 better than AR.
As +/- suggests, the Warriors outscored their opponents by 5 with Maggette and got outscored by -8 with Randolph on the court. It’s not a direct comparison of “Randolph was 13 worse than Maggette”….
Monta is helping ME8
Oh god. Stop this. Curry has one of the easiest names in all of basketball to come up with a nickname for. ME8? Really? These nicknames need to die.
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, I just realized I’m really confused. The context suggested you were talking about Curry, but upon looking at the initials and number, it’s Monta, who’s already spoken for in the sentence…..
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To clarify: I think that plus minus has shortcomings, numerous ones especially in a limited sample like one game. However, I do think that even the small sample was enough to put serious doubt in “montamazing’s” pronouncement that without Monta, “your looking at a blowout”. The team performed well without Monta. I knew this watching the game, without any numbers at all, and saw nothing that suggested that Monta was the reason we weren’t blown out.
by jae on Oct 29, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Corey Maggette was shooting awful shots the entire night, and shot us out of the game.
by slapchop on Oct 29, 2009 1:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok, I have to get this off my chest. WTF Monta. Did nobody else notice he looks like a third grader when he dribbles with his left hand? How has Monta, a guard his whole life, never learned to adequately use his left hand for more than 1 dribble? I also figured out what bothers me about Jack’s handles. He dribbles too close to his body. A lot of times this is good – it helps protect the ball, but when you’re pushing it up court on a fast break or secondary break, or driving to the hoop – you need to push the ball out in front. This is basketball 101, the types of drills you do in grade school CYO. It’s like Jack has never once done a drill that taught him to push the ball out in front (which makes you go faster).
I’m not sure exactly why, I think it’s because these things are such basic things that should have been learned at least 10 years ago for these two, but these ballhandling issues really, really, annoyed me when I was watching last night…
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 7:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Monta hater alert!
Wow, why can’t you just say that he played really well? Lets trade him cause he can’t dribble with his left hand as well as his right! He looked fine to me. Great crossovers, that spin move etc. Without him we get blown out.
Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "You're a rookie"
by dubzfan on Oct 29, 2009 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He didn’t play really well, dude. He played beyond mediocre.
by slapchop on Oct 29, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I address how he played in my post? No. I brought up one point – that he looked half retarded dribbling with his left hand last night (two plays in particular stood out to me, though the end result was good on both plays). That was the only thing I was addressing.
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I address how he played in my post? No. I brought up one point – that he looked half retarded dribbling with his left hand l
So this is a game of dribbling and not of points? Does the league know your new rules?
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 29, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t understand why people are bringing up unrelated points? Monta looked horrible dribbling with his left hand last night. This is a very basic skill I expect him to be very adept at. Seeing him look bad doing it yesterday annoyed me. How is anything about that statement disagreeable?
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because he looked fine and is not our most pressing need
I don’t see why this should be an issue.
Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "You're a rookie"
by dubzfan on Oct 29, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are making it an issue. I’m not so sure Missing Barry even meant to be anything other than a comment in passing.
by slapchop on Oct 29, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How is anything about that statement disagreeable?
cause they don’t award style points in the NBA , maybe you are thinking about figure skating?
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 29, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
When did I say they did. It annoyed me. I cannot state it any clearer than that. Do you disagree that I was annoyed?
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you disagree that I was annoyed?
not so annoyed that you couldn’t type.
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 29, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don’t know that. Maybe that was the reason I waited until today to post about it. ;)
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe that was the reason I waited until today
If it was as bad as you claim you still be too pissed to type
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 29, 2009 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Monta and Curry
The only reason this wont work as a viable backcourt is simply because Monta lacks the will not the skill to defend the 2 slot. He’s used to leaning on someone else to defend the best player, whom is more than likely the 2 guard. Monta had some bright spots last night where he “attempted” to play defense like he should. He’s too concerned about running on the fastbreak that he lets his man score.
Oh and don’t worry Missing Barry some members only read what they want to read.
It’s sad to see that Monta’s speed is only a one way tool, offensive.
Overall I think we played well against a team with great defensive players, I was especially surprised with Curry, seems like he’s starting to find his stroke again. He’s also shown that he’s a very unselfish (perhaps a little too much?). He passed on some shots that he should’ve taken.
- iBall, do you?
by iBallGSW on Oct 29, 2009 10:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Enjoyed the game...
Curry, Monta, and Azubuike played well. Curry had 1 assist and 1 steal in the first 20 seconds of the game. Monta’s baseline hammer brings back memories of MJ. I love the midrange shots by Curry and Monta. The midrange game is a lost art. The Curry/Monta backcourt works for me. Those positions are set. Now trade Jack so Morrow can start.
by bick on Oct 29, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Curry/Monta backcourt works for me. Those positions are set.
then our defense id doomed?
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 29, 2009 11:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So the solution is..
Trade Monta?
Trade Curry?
That seems about the extent of the answers. Monta needs to play a lot because you need to be in the game to score, and that’s what he does. Curry needs to play a lot because without him, we’re last years’ team all over again with no ball movement and tons of turnovers.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Oct 29, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trade Monta? Trade Curry?
Probably but they didn’t pull the string on that Amare trade so apparently they don’t get it? Maybe they think Curr-bury will sell more tickets for a year or two then they can trade him later? Maybe they think the fans are gonna be off the Montay wagon and they can trade him without losing sales? They get themselves into these situations so they gotta get themselves out.
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 29, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wait, so you want to talk about a lack of defense and then bring up the amare trade as a solution to that problem? amare is one of the worst defensive bigs in the NBA. adding him to the team doesn’t not make the defense better.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Oct 29, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so you want to talk about a lack of defense and then bring up the amare trade as a solution to that problem?
No, That’s the solution to a different problem.
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 29, 2009 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Being at the game I have to say this
Monta was instant offense and was not the sole issue on defense. Our defensive woes happen because of our defensive scheme in general. Stop saying monta is the issue on defense when the defense has him helping off of three point shooters that already have 3-4 inches on him. Sorry but Ariza was spot on and with Monta playing help defense he did not have enough length to put a good hand up.
The real issues with this game were the poor (crappy, horrendous) shot selection of Maggette. Not to mention the 10-12 missed layups we had as a team. It was pretty bad and we could have easily won if we finish the easy baskets.
But I will end by sticking up for Monta one more time. He held us up tonight when everyone was having issues finishing. Curry and him played well tonight and we just needed to capitalize on the easy buckets. Still though. This game should have been a win, even with Randolph quasi out.
Anybody know if there is a petition about the refs (were these still the replacements) if not can we get them back. Horrible officiating. One sided calls a rampant
by shooter1525 on Oct 29, 2009 11:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
my section
once had a “Go Back on Strike” chant going LOL
I liked Monta reasonably well all game, until Curry went out. Then all I could see was a ballhog. OTOH, I had no issue with the Warrior’s game when Monta was on the bench. If Monta can’t learn to find his teammates when he is point, I’m afraid all his high flying skills (that I love so much) are expendable.
Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.
by fotd on Oct 29, 2009 9:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A few observations...
Monta/Curry backcourt seems to work pretty good in its beta form, a little more work on it and it should look real good by midseason
Monta really does work better off the ball as a 2 guard.
Curry was passing well and it’s good to see that his shot is starting to fall after his abysmal shooting in summer league and preseason.
Jackson: old habits die hard, still ball hogging, still shooting low percentages, and still complaining to refs instead of hustling back on D.
Morrow needs to see more shots and get more utilized in the offense.
Azubuike needs more minutes out there. I think he should start over curry sometimes depending on matchups, he looked really good out there even though he was listed as questionable and has a sore ankle.
Biedrins and Turiaf looked like a couple of nonfactors last night, but its still only 1 game into an 82 game season.
Maggs, despite looking real good in the preseason had a really off night, and i couldnt stress that word off anymore…
And one more thing, as a TEAM we need to learn how to BOX THE F*CUK OUT! I was watching the game last night and that seemed to be our undoing, not being able to secure the rebound, I remember one play where the rockets got what seemed to be like 3 offensive boards in one play, the defense looked (reliatively) better than last season, but we need to focus on TWO areas, defense AND boxing out/rebounding as a team, I think if we can do that, we could be another Cinderella team and start We Believe 2.0,…and consequently slow the Cohan-Sells-The-Team process, so basically a double edged sword…
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Oct 29, 2009 12:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
WHAT?
Food stands – $12 dollar beer? Really?
WHAT?
by tafkasam on Oct 29, 2009 4:21 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I really liked how Curry played. 1st half I think he was 1-6 then in the 2nd half he was 6-6; 7-12 from the field at the end. He had some mistakes but man did he look like a PG. Even though the Warriors played sloppy in the 2nd half and lost their 10 point lead, Curry and Ellis came through at the end, but couldn’t pull off a victory which was okay. I think Azubuike should get some more playing time because he looked great with limited playing time. Biedrins could have been a bit better, Turiaf did his job, Maggette couldn’t score but grabbed boards, etc.. Can’t wait until Randolph gets better, then we’ll see what the Dubs can do.
by DubsFan408 on Oct 29, 2009 5:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I really liked how Curry played.
He had some mistakes but man did he look like a PG.
Definitely agree. Curry looked like a rookie out there for sure, he has a long way to go before he’s a really good PG, but he sure looks like he belongs at 1 out there on the floor. I like the way the kid plays.
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Curry looked like a rookie out there for sure, he has a long way to go before he’s a really good PG,
Then why is everyone so giddy over him playin now? Why not wait till he earns the time with his play?
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 29, 2009 7:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Because our PG options outside of Curry are limited? Because we’re not winning the championship this year, so we might as well give time to someone that we think may be a big piece of our future? Because even though he has a lot more polishing up on his game to do, he was still useful/productive (at least if he keeps playing like last night)? Playing time is not earned – that is a flawed strategy. Playing time needs to be given out based on expected future performance,
by Missing Barry on Oct 29, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Playing time is not earned – that is a flawed strategy.
I think playing time should be earned, but the currency necessary for it is different from player to player. Young guys with promise get it by continuing to do what the coaching staff wants to polish their games. The youngsters earn it by not interfering with their own progress. Production is to some degree secondary so long as the curve towards being productive still seems to be working forward. Vets earn it by sticking with the program, providing effort worthy of their paychecks and by producing.
by jae on Oct 30, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I think it can be earned, too – but as far as that “earning PT” is a reflection of the future. A guy working really hard in practice is earning PT because he’s getting better and putting in the effort and likely will put in the effort in a game – so he’s hopefully showing you things to come. Likewise, generally a vet has “earned” PT through his past production because you know what he’s capable of and thus expect him to play at that level. So the end result is a lot of the PT is earned, but again, I think it has to be within the framework of what future production you expect out of them.
Though I will say there is some room to give guys a chance to “earn” PT simply as s motivational tool beyond future expectations. I can see an argument in some cases playing a lesser player in front of a better one for a little while to burn a fire under the better player being a good idea.
Just the general idea of simply “earning PT” reminds me too much of the Giants philosophy. The end result is old, overpaid piece of crap players playing over more talented younger ones simply because they’re being paid and they’ve “earned” their PT, even though their expected future production is lower. One of many things that reflect how poorly Brian Sabean runs the Giants…
by Missing Barry on Oct 30, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
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.
