Warriors Chemistry and Leadership
Two nights. Two different Dubs. What happened? The way fans have been talking, it would seem that our best players had all died in a plane crash, and the season was officially over. It was off to a terrible start, for sure. But it's not over.
On paper, we should be a pretty good ball club. Last year, we only had 26 wins but without Monta Ellis and with a myriad of injuries and considering some of the promise we showed, this season should have been, at a minimum, fun. Randolph had turned the corner, and one of our glaring weaknesses was made strong; an up and comer, Anthony Morrow, had left his mark on the league by becoming the three-point champ. This preseason showed even greater promise, despite even Brandan Wright's "broken wing."
Then it all fell apart.
What happened? Lack of direction, lack of focus and lack of caring. We can't discount a lack of camaraderie, either. All of this lead to stupid and selfish play on the part of our adrift Warriors. Last year, a terrible year by all objective measures, we were far better than we have been this year...
These two showed us what they could do, when they have the will and direction.
via lottobound.files.wordpress.com
But that all changed in Minnesota on Nov. 9, 2009, a date which may be looked back on as the sign of things to come. That's not to say we won't have bad games anymore. But the team proved to itself what it takes and now knows how to win again. On that date, no one exemplified how to win better, in my opinion, than Stephen Jackson. No one played more unselfishly than him, and he reminded me and hopefully others, why he deserved to be a captain.
While he wasn't technically Captain Jack last night, he was still the leader of whom Baron said after the greatest upset in NBA history over the Mavericks:
I told [Stephen Jackson] I'll give it all I got and I didn't want to be the hardest worker out there. He had to carry me. He is the leader of this team and if you ask anyone on this team, he is the heart and soul of this team. He is a big-game performer and he knew just how important this game was. He is the only one on our team to have won a championship, so we had to feed off of him.
What makes Jackson so special is not only his strong will but that his will can be, at times, completely and 100% focused on winning. He loses himself in the goal of winning and nothing else matters. Combine his heart and his drive to conquer, and teammates can't seem to help but be pulled up with him in the wake of his fiercely competitive spirit. Despite Jack's obviously excessive pride and immaturity, the man is a leader, whether for the good of the team or the detriment.
Against the T-Wolves, he proved once again that when it comes to basketball, he'll always be a captain. I thought he might be taking his crew down with the ship, but it appears he steered us to safety, instead. A blowout like that doesn't come without leadership, and I know of no one else on the team nor any coach that could have turned the team around, most especially Monta Ellis, in such dramatic fashion. He will be very hard to replace; if he continues to lead the way he did last night, perhaps we ought to think twice about doing so.
Don Nelson
On Stephen Jackson:
“I thought he set the tone for the game by moving the ball as everybody else did as well. I thought he did an excellent job on (Ryan) Gomes, who’s their leading scorer.”Stephen Jackson
On Having 15 Assists:
"I just wanted to make plays. I know I’m one of the guys that has to make plays for other guys and not worry about my shot that much. So I just wanted to come out and be aggressive and make plays and try and get us going, and for the most part it worked.
On Playing Well vs. Sub-.500 Teams:
“I think being a young team the guys feel more confident against teams that they feel they have the same record, but we have to have that confidence. I know me, personally, I have that confidence against any team, but as a team we have to have the confidence whether we’re playing Boston or Minnesota.”
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 |
30 comments
Comments
Jackson
OK, I have not been a Jackson fan. But if he will play the rest of the season, or as long as he’s a Warrior, like he played tonight, I can become one. I have no idea what happened in the few hours between the Kings game and the T’Wolves game, but whatever it was worked. Sure, it was against a bad team, but this is the way the Warriors can become at least competitive against better teams. If you can’t rebound, then run. If you’re going to run, then move the ball around. If you can’t run because of a made basket, then still move the ball around. I hope this game proves to the W’s that teamwork pays off and that the 1-on-1 game gets you embarassing losses. 15 assists for Jax, 22 steals, 146 points, balanced scoring. Are you kidding? Did the whole team finally say, “Alright then, let’s do it Nelson’s way”?
Based on tonight’s game, Acie and CJ need more minutes. We know what CJ can do, but Acie has had two really good games in a row. I hope Nelson gives him a chance to see if he can keep it up.
by ancient b'baller on Nov 10, 2009 4:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Backup sf right?
Marco Belinelli's Biggest Fan
by montadaboss on Nov 10, 2009 8:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To put it simply, the Warriors played great team basketball last night. They were making the proper reads, moving without the ball, hitting cutters, all the stuff you look for a team to do. The first 5 games, this wasn’t the case. Sometimes it just takes some time to get into the flow of things, and I think this should be a good starting point to improved play (though the Wolves being bad was a big factor last night, so don’t expect this team to look like a championship contender – rather, they’re just a better team from the 29 win team last year).
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 7:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
SOrry to rain on the parade but I just don’t see it. I was at the game last night and saw some things that still really concern me.
First we beat up on a bad team, with bad players and missing there 2nd best guy. Yes I know we were missing Biedres and Turiaf, etc. But do you think if we played the same style same unselfish ball we can really compete with the good teams?
Also, I don’t know if anyone else paid attention, but did you notice in the 3rd quarter when Nelson took Ellis out of the game with a 30+ point lead, he was pouting? He walked off with his head down, threw his little finger covering off at the scorers table, barely gave high fives, and slumped on the bench with his head down. Russell Turner went over there and sat talking to him for about 5 minutes while Ellis stared into space.
No granted later on Ellis went back in the game and came out happy with a 40+ point lead, but that was only after his #1 man Jack had talked to him for a bit.
As to your original point I both agree and disagree. Jackson is a very good player with a lot of talent and ability. He unfortunately has way too much influnce on the mentality of the team. He is gone, at some point, so I feel it’d be best if there was a way to make it happen sooner than later so we can figure out what we’ve really got. Ellis is by far the most influenced player on this team and I think it is hurting him.
by WarriorSth on Nov 10, 2009 8:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Also, I don’t know if anyone else paid attention, but did you notice in the 3rd quarter when Nelson took Ellis out of the game with a 30+ point lead, he was pouting? He walked off with his head down, threw his little finger covering off at the scorers table, barely gave high fives, and slumped on the bench with his head down. Russell Turner went over there and sat talking to him for about 5 minutes while Ellis stared into space.
Do you know why Ellis was taken out? Do you know what Turner said? The answers to these questions may be any number of things, but it seems like you’re insinuating that there’s some internal rift there. Maybe Monta made a few mistakes in a row on defense, maybe he was pissed that the garbage man tossed his layup like last week’s moldy pot roast, maybe he was taken out for not moving the ball or missing yet another mid range jumper off the front iron…
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or maybe he was taken out cause we had a 30+ point lead and if you could rest your star player, you would? Or maybe its cause running up the score and keeping your starters in the game with such a huge lead is very disrespectful and unprofessional. Remember what happened with Knicks/Nuggets when the Nuggets were (accused of) running up the score?
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Nov 10, 2009 10:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When I read that paragraph I saw confirmation bias all over the place…
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think its cuz he got blocked by the Janitor.
by dong4ce on Nov 10, 2009 1:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mixed up my nicknames there...
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll be willing to think of Jackson as a leader when he shows a willingness to make personal sacrifices for the benefit of his team on a regular basis. Last night’s game was good – great even – but he has to show me that he understands that this sort of effort is what the Warriors need every night; not just hustle, but smart hustle.
The things he says and the things others are saying regarding bad chemistry, etc. indicate that he doesn’t really get this. Even the BD quote regarding Jackson being the “heart and soul” of the team does more to indicate Davis’ leadership than it does Jackson’s; it was Davis who came to him and told him that he needed Jackson to step up. Davis, at first glance at least, put himself in a subordinate position to appeal to what is best in Jackson, making a small sacrifice to get the most out of his team. Jackson’s willingness last night to be the passer rather than the shooter seems to represent such a sacrifice. I have to wonder what prompted it; who spoke with him? what motivated the change? will we see more of it regularly?
I would not be surprised to hear that Monta, Turiaf, Beidrins, or even Maggette had something to do with it. Jackson is charismatic and influential, but almost every other player on the team is a better leader in my estimation.
by toddaverth on Nov 10, 2009 11:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Baron was rather convincing in what he said, particular with… “ask anyone.” I know Baron was a leader, but I think Jackson really is the big game performer Baron said he was. Once he gets on the basketball court and puts his mind to it, he can set the tone for practically every game.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
by Naticus2 on Nov 10, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
WOW
we beat the T-Wolves….
ITS THE T-WOLVES. BIG DEAL.
WE STILL 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
by LostHawkGSW on Nov 10, 2009 11:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
We didn’t just beat them. We beat them by 40. We played team basketball. There were a lot of good things to be taken from this game, even if it was just a win against one of the worst teams (maybe the worst?) in the NBA…
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 11:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Right now, they’re almost certainly the worst. No Kevin Love, and they were bad without him. Apparently, even without Biedrins who is > than Kevin, we’re better than they are… apparently much better.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
by Naticus2 on Nov 10, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We’re not as bad as everyone thought after 5 games. Not nearly that bad…
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We beat them by 40.
Haha, which really means we are so insecure we have to pile it on a beaten team?
Once it’s 20 points it don’t matter if it’s 30 or 40. I watched about the first 2/3rds of the game then got bored when it became obvious the Twolves were gonna roll over and what I saw was us beating a team that wasn’t getting the breaks or the coaching it needed, they apparently didn’t watch the tapes of how to handle maggette or our gambling defense?. When we get to .500 then we can say we are average but till then we are below average despite this blow 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 Nov 10, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Point differential tends to be a pretty good predictor of future success. Better than W-L record, for instance. All I’m saying is winning by 40 does mean more than winning by 20. I don’t know how much more, but it’s definitely indicative of a better performance. If by “pile it on” you mean, play the subs and have guys like CJ Watson outplay the T’Wolves, sure. We weren’t trying to run up the score, though.
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 8:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 8:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We weren’t trying to run up the score, though.
Then we failed at keeping it low. Once it’s a big lead the classy thing to do is run the whole 24 seconds out and do something that’s not disrespectful to the poor guys on the other team.
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 Nov 10, 2009 9:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, these are professionals, they can handle getting destroyed like that. It’s still a good thing for a team to let their backups get some PT trying to actually play basketball. We kept playing basketball, as we should, so we weren’t trying to keep the score down, but we were playing with the end of our bench. If Minnesota gets run over by our bench, that’s their fault.
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly thought the officiating went our way for the first time all season, which is absolutely key
When the foul calls go our way, we can play actual defense, get steals without being whistled for fouls. This allows us to get on the fast break for easy layups and dunks. Those type of baskets seem to get everybody clicking, the overall offense runs smoother. Need evidence this is true? Look at the previous game at Sac.
Everything changed in the second quarter, when we had somewhere near 14 fouls called against us and the kings only had 2 or 3. The team couldn’t defend, get blocks, steals, or any stops at all. The kings lived at the line, this killed our ability to run the game at our tempo. When we are forced to play slow, or in the halfcourt, Monta, Maggette, and Jack become black holes, ball movement dies. All bad!!
Honestly, the refs have really played a huge role in our season thus far. If AR’s block on Ariza was called properly, we would’ve had a 4point swing, and won. The calls will not go our way on this road trip, the only possible win I see is against the Knicks who will try to run with us.
by myk on Nov 10, 2009 12:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, how this relates to your post?
This team is nearly the perfect squad to play fastbreak Nellieball, the officiating has prevented us from doing this. They allowed us to play defense tonight, look what happened, tons of fastbreak points.
That said, Minnesota is a horrible defensive squad, particularly against a running team, absolutely terrible transition defense, so that was to our advantage.
I’m not trying to ignore the fact that the Warriors do indeed play poor defense and do foul a lot, but I felt tonight was the most balanced game in terms of officiating.
by myk on Nov 10, 2009 12:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As much as I loved last night’s game, I’d be leery of regarding it as a real turning point. We’ve had two other decently and unselfishly played games, against Houston and Memphis; both were followed by horrible, listless performances. And we may not face another team all season as weak as Minnesota last night… next time we play them, they should have Love back, and Big Al will probably be more up to speed.
I see no reason why this team shouldn’t be somewhat competitive in Oracle. Even if Nellie’s coaching stays this absurdly hands-off (the politest way to phrase I can think of), it’s possible that the players will be sufficiently fired up by the home crowd to hustle and share and hit some shots and win some games. Even in the nightmare that was last season, we somehow scraped out a winning record in Oracle last year. Good vibes were in abundance yesterday, and that can’t hurt. But the road is not kind to a team whose only strategy is “tiny happy people”. Nor are bigger teams, and we’ll be facing a bunch of those in the near future. Even if we play better from here on in, with better teamwork and energy, this team is still too small and too defensively undercoached to succeed. With this roster and this coach, 35 wins seems like a pretty firm ceiling.
by onlxn on Nov 10, 2009 3:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know that calling 35 wins a “ceiling” is fair. It might be true that our talent level is 35 or a little less wins per season, so we shouldn’t expect more than 35 wins, but all it takes is 2-3 lucky shots at the end of a few games and you’re looking at 38 wins. Obviously we shouldn’t expect to get lucky, but it could happen, which is why I don’t like saying 35 is a ceiling…
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or 2 blowout losses to teams that we should have beaten to drop it down to 33...
Wait, that already happened. So 35 is the new ceiling, only if they drop a few buzzer beaters.
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 4:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I mean, needless to say, I’d be happy to be wrong… new fire from Nellie, a shocking 44-38 record and an eighth seed would suit me just fine. But I just don’t know where the wins are going to come from, unless & until we can play full-sized lineups with Randolph at the four. That’s contingent on Randolph playing smartly (hopefully starting to happen, but who knows), better health (not looking great in terms of Biedrins), Nellie committing to a full-sized lineup (who the hell knows) and possibly an acquisition (who the hell knows). And while full-sized lineups would do a lot for us, they wouldn’t be any sort of magic bullet.
It’d be great if we could keep playing like yesterday, but even if we do, we’re still going to lose a helluva lot. There are a lot of teams with tough front lines, competent transition defense and nuanced strategy that’ll beat us down no matter how unselfish we are. The energy and teamwork we showed yesterday is enough to make us scrappy and likeable, but it won’t get us all that far down the road. We need size and a plan, to boot.
by onlxn on Nov 10, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We did start out badly, which has to lower our expected end record, I’ll admit that. That said, I’m still expecting ~35 wins at the end of the season (barring any major moves or injuries)…
by Missing Barry on Nov 10, 2009 8:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think 35 sounds reasonable. There are plenty of bad teams in the league, and we’re going to have some good games, like the one we just had, against some not so bad teams.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
by Naticus2 on Nov 10, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FWIW, I think we have a pretty solid floor around 28 wins, as well… there’s too much scoring talent on this team for it to be an outright bottom feeder.
That’s presuming some baseline competence on the coaching front and the GM front. If we insist on playing the next couple weeks with Ronny, Randolph and Mikki as our only bigs, for example, our record could be dragged lower than it should plausibly go given our talent level. But if management is that stupid, the calls for their dismissals will be so loud that something may actually happen along those lines. I’m guessing they’ll make at least some correctives before too long.
by onlxn on Nov 11, 2009 12:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 



















