Golden State Of Mind: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

RECAP: Indiana Pacers 108, Golden State Warriors 94- Hijacked

Editor's Note: The bad news: the Warriors kicked off their ROAD TRIP just straight up trippin'.

The good news: Feltbot of the mighty Feltbot's Warriors Blog has a super fly guest recap for all you fine golden folks!

I'll pass the mic to my astute colleague for some razor sharp insights on the Dub Drama tonight in Indy.

-- Atma Brother #1

**********

19508d14985b5219f3be5e451316f94f-getty-90040808rh001_warriors_pacers_medium

Preview/ Game Thread (960+ comments)

Final Box Score

Pacers 108, Warriors 94: Granger Piles Up The Numbers As Pacers Trample Warriors [Indy Cornrows]

One game after Canis Hoopus, the SB Nation Wolves blogger, disgustedly began his recap in the third quarter, I was tempted to begin mine in the first.  Because this game was over the moment Private Stephen Jackson set foot on the court.  Gone was the player who got 15 assists in the Wolves game looking to get his teammates involved. In his place was the Stephen Jackson that drives Warriors fans batty, the Jackson who pounds the ball interminably before hoisting long jumpers, and who takes the ball to trouble.  

Even more disturbing was Jack's defense.  When I saw him give a matador Ole to TJ Ford on a drive to the basket, I sensed something was up. Nellie gave him a quick hook after 6 minutes, and left him on the bench the rest of the half.  And that finished the Warriors.  They were already being forced to double-team Roy Hibbert in the paint, leaving open threes for the Pacers' perimeter players.  When Danny Granger became unguardable as well, this game was hopeless.

Star-divide

Jack did return in the second half, and did play better, looking to set up his teammates, but by that point the damage had been done.  When the Pacers relaxed in the fourth quarter and let the Warriors' second unit close the gap to single digits, Nellie brought Monta back but left Jack planted on the pine. Granger went for 31 points and 16 rebounds in a game that was never really close.

I have been one of Jack's more vocal defenders over the years.  Less so this year, of course, but even this year I felt he was still making positive contributions on the court.  Until this game.  This is the first game I've seen where Jack simply didn't show up.  Don Nelson actually stood up for him after the game, stating that he had a back injury, and that he wasn't able to move well as a result.  Hmm... would that be a Harringtoniliac strain or a slipped Harringtonisc, Don?  I have a feeling the Bay Area sportswriters are going to be probing Jack's sore back with sharp pens.

There are of course a few more things to blame for this loss:

  • No Biedrins, no Turiaf:  Obviously, the Warriors got killed on the boards tonight, 57-42. But their problems at center went deeper than that. The biggest benefit to the Warriors of their front-line centers is their ability to match up man-to-man with their opponents on defense. Anthony Randolph had a terrific game overall, but both he and Mikki Moore needed help from double-teams to contain Roy Hibbert.  That left Pacers' shooters Brandon Rush, Earl Watson and Granger wide open for threes.
  • Monta Ellis at point guard:  Ellis shares responsibililty with Jackson for the Warriors' terrible ball movement in the first quarter. One game after the Warriors had great success sharing the ball, he came out looking for his own shot, to the exclusion of his teammates.  Two very telling points: Anthony Morrow, who started alongside Ellis in the backcourt, got a total of 2 shots in the first half. And when Anthony Randolph came into the game, Don Nelson ran a pick and roll for him to get him started. But Monta elected to shoot, rather than pass. I thought that was a terrible decision, and emblematic of Monta's play at the point so far this season. Monta needs to look to get his teammates involved each and every game. All the more so, because...
  • Monta Ellis is not Monta Ellis anymore:  Not in my opinion.  He has been body-snatched by a very slow pod-person. The Monta Ellis we are seeing now appears unable to beat his man off the dribble.  The evidence of this was everywhere tonight.  He attempted very few drives out of half court sets, and I'm pretty sure he didn't complete any. The Warriors ran end of the quarter isolations for him twice, and he couldn't beat his man either time. He got picked clean at least once at the start of his move. He also picked up an offensive foul... on his first step. Does that happen to guards with quick first steps? He got to the line only once, and had his shot blocked twice. After one of those blocks, Jim Barnett said, "That was a play that Monta thought he could finish, and the Warriors' bench expected him to finish." Is that Barnett-speak for Monta isn't Monta anymore? Monta did give a strong effort this game.  He played good defense, and rebounded well.  And his jumper dropped a few times, which is a positive step.  But it's not enough.  For the Warriors to be a winning team, Monta Ellis needs to be a star. So far this season, he doesn't appear to be one.  Not anymore.
  • Anthony Morrow and Kelenna Azubuike couldn't hit a shot.  Combined they shot 4-17, and 1-6 from three.  A lot of this has to do with the fact that Ellis and Jackson weren't looking for them.  Some of it has to do with the Pacers' defense, which was quite good. But they missed a lot of open looks as well.
  • Stephen Curry is struggling.  I expected Curry to play well this game.  I thought coming off the bench would give him more opportunities to create both for himself and his teammates, as we saw in the preseason.  But for whatever reason, Curry is playing poorly and seems to have lost his confidence.
  • The Pacers' defense. OK, after finding six reasons why the Warriors lost this game, I'm now willing to give the Pacers some credit.  By virtue of a complete accident, namely the injuries to Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy, as well as the freak back injury to TJ Ford (on a shot fake) in this game, the Pacers are actually a very good defensive team.  Nothing came easy for the Warriors tonight.  The Pacers' frontline of Hibbert, Granger and defensive-stopper Dahntay Jones played great defense, blocking 8 shots, and destroyed the Warriors on the boards.  And their backcourt of Watson and Rush did a great job keeping our guards out of the lane.  The Pacers have now won three straight, and their defensive chemistry has played a large part in that.  In their two previous games, they held the Knicks to 89 in New York, and then held the Wizards to 86 at home.

Anything positive to take away from this game? I find two things: the play of Corey Maggette and Anthony Randolph.

  • Corey Maggette: After a sour start to the season, during which he too often settled for his jumper, Maggette has really grown into his role. In this game, he immediately drove the lane and got Hibbert out of the game with his second foul. He kept at it, getting three quick fouls on Tyler Hansbrough.  His jumper is also starting to fall, largely because Nellie is getting him shots closer to the basket by running him around screens.  And he's really competing at power forward at the defensive end.  He won the physical battle with the bigger Hansbrough, and finished with 6 rebounds in 22 minutes.  Maggette is not very popular with the fans, but in my mind he is a winning basketball player in the role Don Nelson has designed for him.  He is the least of the Warriors' problems.
  • Anthony Randolph:  Defensively, Randolph was overpowered by Roy Hibbert, and required help guarding him.  But he managed to give Hibbert some problems as well, and severely outplayed Hibbert's backup Solomon Jones, which is what Nellie is looking for him to do off the bench.  Randolph was active on defense and on the boards, picking up 13 rebounds, 3 steals and 2 blocked shots in 31 minutes. On offense, the Warriors went away from the pick and roll plays that were successful for Randolph in the last game.  Instead, they set up simple isolation plays for him, where he could face up and use the triple-threat position against his opponent.  He perhaps settled too often for the jump shot, but he hit a decent percentage of them, which was nice to see.  Nellie indicated after the game that he has confidence in Randolph's 16 foot jumper, and expects him to use it against opposing centers.  It is nice to see Randolph getting his confidence back and expanding his offensive repertoire after his slow start to the season.  But what I really love about Randolph is his heart.  His fearlessness, his will to compete, his ferocious edge. We saw it frequently at the end of last season, and it was on display again tonight.  Particularly in his fourth quarter confrontation with Danny Granger. While fighting for a rebound, Randolph delivered a friendly elbow to Granger's face. Granger came at him, and Randolph met him chest to chest. The end result was a Granger shove and a double technical.  Watching all of this with delight, I was moved to invent a new defensive statistic for Anthony Randolph: The Melted Brain.  Randolph picked up two Melted Brains as a 19 year old last year, one each from Lamar Odom and Tyrus Thomas, both of whom he forced off the floor after technical fouls.  He picked up his first MB of the season tonight.  I don't think it will be his last.  

This kind of heart is one of the things that has made Stephen Jackson so invaluable to the Warriors in the past.  It is inspiring. But now that Private Jackson has a foot and three toes out the door, the Warriors are desperately lacking for it. Its good to know that they have at least one player on the roster who is willing to step into that void.

-- Feltbot

Feltbot's Warriors Blog

 

Yahoo! Sports + NBA

 

CSN Bay Area

Poll
Who is your Warrior Wonder for tonight's game?

  562 votes | Results

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!

4 recs  |  Comment 112 comments  |  Add comment |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Hey bro

Don’t talk anti-Ellis in these parts, these folk don’t like it…

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 Nov 11, 2009 11:16 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Lol

My honest opinion of him is that he’s not being used to his strengths. He’s stuck between looking for people (which he has been better then expected at) and scoring. If he concentrates on scoring he will get 25 points with 2 assists or something like that. If he looks for other people he will 18 and 6. Can’t blame him though, he’s playing good D, rebounding very well and is still very good offensively but is not being used the same way he used to so it’s understandable that he is not the “same”. Maggs is playing less and less which is very good and he touches the ball rarely unless it’s off a screen or going to the rim so he seems to be getting better but I’m just warning you guys. It’s him or Buike next year. Either dump Maggs for contracts ( Blount and Cardinal to Minn? Jones and Wright to Mia?) or l;et Buike walk in free agency. One will have to go which is sad but true. AR loos great, Ammo needs more shots, Steph looks shell shocked out there and we miss Beans and Ronny A LOT.

Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "You're a rookie"

by dubzfan on Nov 11, 2009 11:34 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

looks*, let*, he will get*

Brain farts.

Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "You're a rookie"

by dubzfan on Nov 11, 2009 11:46 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Don’t talk anti-Ellis in these parts, these folk don’t like it…

Indeed, you are the only poster on this board who thinks Monta’s game has flaws. You get a cookie.

Actually, outside of the crappy shooting and a highish TOV rate, Monta has been having a pretty interesting / impressive season.

Per 36 minutes
18.0 points (.471 TS%)
5.7 rebounds
5.6 assists
1.9 steals
0.4 blocks
3,3 tov

There aren’t that many other guys in the league, beyond the superstars, capable of those kind point/rebound/assist/steal numbers. By way of comparison: Jamal Crawford in his so-called “great start” has managed 2.4 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 0.5 steals, and 0.0 blocks per 36.

I mean, yeah: Monta doesn’t have “true PG” court vision and leadership abilities. We knew that already. I’ve been pleasantly impressed with his defensive intensity, and the overall maturity with which he’s been carrying himself. As far as his lost explosiveness: could be a problem, I guess … but then if he’s rebounding like a fiend and forcing a ton turnovers and getting himself to the line, I wouldn’t be too worried. Main concern now is bringing the turnover rate and scoring efficiency back closer to it was in ’07/08.

Of course, if a bigger fish (Bosh, e.g.) came available, I wouldn’t hesitate to trade him, but let’s not act like he’s even in the top ten things that ail this team right now.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 7:28 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

The improving assist and rebound numbers are nice but:
18.0 points (.471 TS%)

The year before his injury, Monta’s TS% was .580 – 100 points higher.

When he says that Monta isn’t the player he was offensively, in terms of getting to the hole, he’s right. Monta was one of the most unstoppable players in the game at getting to the hole. RIght now, he’s not. Awesome if he can expand his game and find other ways to compensate for that, but without the ability to do that one thing at a great level, we may end up regretting that contract.

by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 8:02 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Actually this is more about not generating fast break points. Contrary to Monta was not unstoppable in the half court either. He did not get to the hoop at will or have an automatic jump shot.

Monta’s shooting ’s are around the same (he shot 43 in 07-08). The reason behind his high FG% in 07-08 was that he got a mind-boggling 1/3 of his points in the fast-break. if you were to adjust his stats accordingly, he’d be shooting around the same %.

by homer simpson on Nov 12, 2009 8:56 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Good point. I suspect some of the drop-off is his staying home / crashing the glass more and leaking out less in the absence of big men; and some is obviously the absence of our an elite “drink-stirrer” like Baron (when he’s feeling healthy and motivated).

Looking on the bright side … one could surmise that the rapid development of Curry at PG, and the permanent installation of properly sized, plus rebounding frontcourt (Randolph at 4, Biedrins at 5, Ronny backing up both spots) could bring Monta’s game closer to what it was in 07/08. That is, assuming the lost explosiveness isn’t a major issue…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 9:22 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

and the permanent installation of properly sized, plus rebounding frontcourt (Randolph at 4, Biedrins at 5, Ronny backing up both spots)

One can only dream. Randolph is right now our 4th string center. I loved seeing Ronny/Andris out here as a tandem at the start of the season. When Randolph gets some minutes and can calm down, it would be great to see him with Beidrins. Monta looks fine out there, but he really is like a good third option. We just don’t have enough (developed) talent around him. Curry looks like he has been slowing down, but I feel good that he will put it back toghether sooner than later.

If Cleveland would accept a Jackson/Turiaf/Wright trade for Z/Hickson, we should do and move on. This constant off court distractions combined with horrid play on the court is becoming very depressing.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Nov 12, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

You just claimed Ellis was having a good year because he’s better than Jamal Crawford? Bizarre, but nevertheless made me laugh.

If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.

by cybermaldonado on Nov 12, 2009 8:41 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Haha, point taken. There have been several recent posts on this board extolling Jamal’s amazing start to this season, but obviously he’s a bit of a strawman in this discussion. Point is that even when Monta’s shots aren’t falling and Jamal’s are, Monta helps you in a lot of ways Jamal doesn’t. He’s just in a different category from the selfish chuckers of the world, imho.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 9:10 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

“bringing the turnover rate … back closer to it was in ’07/08.”

easy. have him initiate less and finish more. someone who only catches and shoots has an awesome TOV rate b/c that counts as usage without a TOV. that’s why Anthony Morrow’s rate is so low.

the formula is 100 * TOV / (FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV). Turnover percentage is an estimate of turnovers per 100 plays.

if you spend 80 of those plays just dribbling up & shooting or catching & shooting or at the FT line, your TOV rate will probably be fairly low.

usually you can look at Asst to TOV ratio for consistency. Monta is still around his career ~1.7 in this regard.

by homer simpson on Nov 12, 2009 9:07 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

O sweet you won the Recap!

And I rec’d it btw.

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 Nov 11, 2009 11:29 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Oh and Nellie

AR is a 4, just cause a 4 can’t shoot 3’s does not mean center is his natural spot….

Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "You're a rookie"

by dubzfan on Nov 11, 2009 11:50 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

You’re talking about a guy who claimed Charmin soft Mike Dunleavy is a “natural power forward” and 6’2" Acie Law is a “natrural small forward.” But then again, there’s a stronger argument to support Randolph playing center than hoisting jumpers from the wing as a 3.

by WYK on Nov 12, 2009 12:00 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

and mikki moore is a benchwarmer. sometimes injuries force guys out of position.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Nov 12, 2009 12:22 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Randolph is getting to be among the top rebounders and shot blockers in the game. The distinction between C and PF is so often artificial that it seems pointless to make as much of it as he does. Sure, there’s a bit of a difference in how much time a player will spend with his back to the basket, but there’s as much difference between a high-post and low-post center as there is between a PF and C who spend most of their time on the low blocks.

I’m rather annoyed at Randolph’s comments about how he isn’t a center. He isn’t a Dwight Howard center, certainly. But the correct answer no matter what he feels is “I’m all about winning and I’ll do whatever we have to do”. I think of Magic subbing for Kareem in the nba finals or Willis Reed hobbling out of the tunnel and juxtapose it to the “I’m not a” statements that so many players make today I see the difference between superstar champion and “real good athlete who will never make the impression his talent should allow.”

Yeah. It’s one of those days.

by jae on Nov 12, 2009 11:47 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

All true, but to be fair, a lot of the guys who say the right thing in situations like this probably actually feel the same way AR does. It may be that he’s uncommonly bad at PR, not uncommonly selfish. It would be helpful if he’d learn to at least say the right thing, though.

And I do think his future might be brightest at the five. Some guys will bully him there, but some guys will bully him at the four, as well. In general, the closer he gets to the rim, the better off we are.

by onlxn on Nov 12, 2009 11:52 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

And...

This is not backed up with any data but just a hunch that if he’s interested in bigger money, putting up the exact same numbers as a C rather than a PF = more money. Centers who produce are less common than PF’s that produce.

Golden State of Mind: Unstoppable Baby!

by Fantasy Junkie on Nov 12, 2009 12:14 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Good point.

by onlxn on Nov 12, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

If watching too much basketball has done anything for me,

it’s that size does matter. There’s no way we can win consistently by losing the height/weight battles every night. Bob always insinuates the referees calls when the opposing team is in the bonus and we have none. Well Bob, maybe it’s because the other team is more aggressive than ours are. Maybe it’s because we love taking jumpshots. Maybe its because we don’t consistently take it inside. Hmm, it’s really not that hard to see.

Back to my point I wanted to make before I digressed. Randolph is a power forward. It’s fine that he’s playing center now. We have no other option. But going forward AR needs to play the 4 because he simply doesn’t have the body to bang with Oden, Bynum, Duncan, Dwight…

What we should be doing is try and get bigger and ditch small ball. At least Riley knows that he needs more “beef”. But I fail to have optimism that we’d acquire anything but another Mikey Moore retread.

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 Nov 12, 2009 8:59 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Eh

I don’t think whether the guy is officially listed as a 4 or a 5 really makes any difference on most teams. The truth is that 4s and 5s, in most offenses, are completely interchangeable. The only difference is that the 5 usually guards the tallest guy on the other team.

When a player says that he is a 4, not a 5, what he’s really saying is that he doesn’t want to be consistently going up against the biggest (and often strongest) guy on the other team. There’s no shame in this: Tim Duncan wants to be called a 4 for the same reason, even though he’s often the biggest guy on the floor for his team.

But calling a guy a C isn’t going to change what people offer him. His ability to match up effectively defensively against other team’s biggest guys might, but not the title they put on him.

by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 10:49 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

While I agree with everything you say,

I can still see AR’s point of veiw. Everybody knows that Randolph is far from a finished product and he is being jerked around and being insulted by Nelson quite a bit his first 2 seasons. Obviously the right thing to do is to suck it up, play your hardest. After 4 years and the QO, he would be an unrestricted free agent at the age of 24. But I can understand the kid’s fustration.

My thing is, let the guy go out there and play through some of his mistakes. We are losing games regardless. He has shown flashes, lets see if he can go out there and develop a bit.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Nov 12, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I’m rather annoyed at Randolph’s comments about how he isn’t a center.

 He is the only one smart enough to read the scales? Does the team not have a trainer to weigh these guys?

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 12, 2009 3:38 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Skep, your act is getting real, real old.

by jae on Nov 12, 2009 4:58 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

your act is getting real, real old.

 your lack of understanding physics is real young?

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 12, 2009 9:44 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Skep, I don’t think you read very carefully, else you’ve just decided that it’s more fun (and probably easier) to be a troll than to think. You seem to have completely and totally glossed over my point, namely that the issue is with Randolph’s attitude more than anything else. You post enough that I figure you must be able to read, but your near non-sequitur reponses don’t indicate that you care to understand much.

Is Randolph an ideal prototype center? No, and if you note I implied as much saying he wasn’t a “He isn’t a Dwight Howard center, certainly” (my actual words). But on a team where the two closest things to centers are down with injuries and you’re forced into the Mikki Moore emergency backup plan, the issue is whether he’d do better in the job or whether the team is better off with Moore. I doubt he thinks so little of himself as to believe Moore should play instead, leaving me to believe that he’d rather see himself playing the position he has decided to describe himself with rather than doing what’s best for the team. So whining that he’s not a center (and your ridiculous seeming justification that this whining is acceptable because he doesn’t weigh much) bothers me.

by jae on Nov 13, 2009 9:14 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

So whining that he’s not a center (and your ridiculous seeming justification that this whining is acceptable because he doesn’t weigh much) bothers me.

 I want to hear the truth not some pr crap from a player so I’m glad that Rudolf speaks out with what he thinks. He’s a lightweight so it makes sense that he doesn’t think of himself as a center. If every player and coach would just be truthful it would be a lot easier to appreciate what’s happening with a team.
    The debate should be about how management got us into a roster of so many small players? Din’t they realize we might have injuries? Were they just trying to build the smallball hype to impress the offensive minded fans?

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 13, 2009 11:37 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I want to hear the truth not some pr crap from a player so I’m glad that Rudolf speaks out with what he thinks.

Yawn.

You.just.don’t.get.it.

It’s not “pr crap” to have the attitude that you can and will go out there and do your absolute best. No one has asked him to shout from the highest tower that he’s a center. But why he feels the need to go out and say what he isn’t rather than go out there and play the game? I’d rather he just shut up and did his best. It does “speak the truth” to say that he doesn’t think he’s a center, but the truth it speaks includes that he’s overly concerned with himself, doesn’t seem to recognize the reality of the situation of the team or have the drive to want to excel above that.

Did management realize that we’d have injuries? Sure. But how many bigs are you supposed to carry? Of their pre-season top 12 players (the number on a roster on any given night) they had 5 players who could reasonably be considered “bigs”. That’s about 40% of the roster for 40% of the positions. Do you expect 3 to be hurt simultaneously? Should they have stacked the lineup with a greater percentage of “bigs”?

by jae on Nov 13, 2009 12:08 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

They should have

1) gotten a better fifth big than Mikki Moore;
2) traded CJ for the best big sixth guy they could find;
3) traded Devean George for another big once Wright went down.

The 40%-40% split sounds good, but it just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Bigs get in foul trouble a lot. Of the 35 highest foul rates in the league last season, 33 were held by power forwards or centers… Maggette, who played a lot of four for us, was one of the two non-bigs (the other was Andres Nocioni).

Moreover, our big guys really get in foul trouble a lot. Andris Biedrins, Ronny Turiaf, Corey Maggette and Mikki Moore all had foul rates in the top 35 last season, and Randolph would have as well if he’d qualified. That was our entire front line once Wright went down. All of our bigs are decent bets to pick up two quick fouls a bunch of times a year… you need to account for that.

You know how many other teams have only five big men? One… only the Lakers. And they have 1) a top tier center with a freakishly low foul rate (Biedrins, Turiaf, Randolph, Mikki and Maggette all foul more than twice as often than Pau does), 2) two other top big men who also don’t foul often (Lamar and Bynum both foul less often than our five guys), and 3) in Ron Artest, a three who genuinely has the skill and bulk to defend the four (and outweighs everyone on our roster by at least fifteen pounds). Every other team in the league has at least six big men… most have seven. Several have eight

Big guys are going to rack up three fouls in nine minutes sometimes. As such, you’re generally going to need more than five guys you can play down there, and you’re really going to need more than four. We’ve been down to four for six weeks now, with one of those four being completely useless. Biedrins missing some games here and there can’t be a surprise at this point. What did we expect to happen, exactly?

I never thought I’d agree with Skep over you, jae, but there it is. Coming into this season with five bigs was indefensibly stupid, and the team’s refusal to address the problem is even more so. I’m surprised that you don’t see it as a mistake.

by onlxn on Nov 13, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

1+3) I do agree with most of what you’re saying. I never thought the that Moore was much of a pick-up and did think that someone (someone not named Devean George) should have been brought in once Wright went down. Expecting someone to hand over a serviceable (read anything even approaching Mikki Moore) for George? Somewhat of a stretch.

On point 2 though, CJ wasn’t really a trade commodity. Before he was signed, we couldn’t trade him except in a sign-and-trade which requires his approval and the will of another team. Fitting in yet another qualification that we get a big back for that? That’s a big stretch. Once signed, CJ couldn’t be immediately traded.

The 40%-40% split sounds good, but it just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Bigs get in foul trouble a lot. Of the 35 highest foul rates in the league last season, 33 were held by power forwards or centers… Maggette, who played a lot of four for us, was one of the two non-bigs (the other was Andres Nocioni).

Of course, players listed as centers and power forwards log fewer minutes guards and small forwards across the league, so in general, all teams tend to “play small” for a bit. This may be a result of bigs picking up fouls more quickly, but it’s rare that any team has 96 minutes manned by PFs and Cs.

Every other team in the league has at least six big men… most have seven. Several have eight

Do note that your count isn’t out of 12, but out of 15. VERY few teams carry 8 active bigs on any given night.
 


I’m surprised that you don’t see it as a mistake.

I see the problem. The solutions though aren’t quite as easy as the “they should have gotten another big” like you seem to be suggesting. Your trade solutions are either a stretch (George, assuming that someone wants to give a big for him isn’t a given) or near-impossible (again, suggesting that we traded Watson for a big shows no appreciation for the rules concerning trading free agents - I’m surprised you made that mistake).

Management made several mistakes. Your solutions aren’t solutions.

by jae on Nov 13, 2009 4:55 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Expecting someone to hand over a serviceable (read anything even approaching Mikki Moore) for George? Somewhat of a stretch.

A stretch?

We plucked Jermareo Davidson out of the D-League last year. Are you suggesting that Jermareo Davidson was a brilliant, one-of-a-kind league that you can’t expect to find in the D-League again, or are you suggesting that Mikki Moore is better than Jermareo Davidson was last year?

You know better. I’m not suggesting that we’re going to find a good player. I’m suggesting that a big that does one thing well would be an asset to us right now. And whether it’s through the D-League or through paying another team for the privilege, we can find a big that does one thing well.

On point 2 though, CJ wasn’t really a trade commodity. Before he was signed, we couldn’t trade him except in a sign-and-trade which requires his approval and the will of another team.

Well aware of that.

Fitting in yet another qualification that we get a big back for that? That’s a big stretch.

A stretch?

From Adam Lauridsen this summer: “The Magic’s preferred offer for Watson is a chunk of the Turkoglu trade exception, a second round pick and the rights to Milovan Rakovic.” Rakovic is a 6’ 10" 270-pound center, a somewhat promising rebounding/dirty work guy. He plays in Russia but is more than ready to come to the NBA… Otis Smith hasn’t brought him over because they don’t have a roster spot for him.

You’re telling me it’s a stretch that someone would’ve offered a big man in a sign-and-trade for CJ Watson. I’m telling you someone did offer a big man in a sign-and-trade for CJ Watson. And we made a mistake when we didn’t take it. We didn’t need an overqualified fourth point guard… we needed beef.

Of course, players listed as centers and power forwards log fewer minutes guards and small forwards across the league, so in general, all teams tend to "play small" for a bit. This may be a result of bigs picking up fouls more quickly, but it’s rare that any team has 96 minutes manned by PFs and Cs.

True… only a couple of teams logged 96 minutes from their listed bigs last year. However:

1) While 96 big minutes is a celing very few teams reach, 80 minutes is a floor very few teams fall below. And the difference in the foul rate between bigs and smalls is much bigger than 6:5… it’s even bigger for us.

2) Many other teams have threes that are physical enough to play the four for stretches, or good enough overall rebounding and help defense to cover for an undersized guy somewhere. We don’t. We are, in fact, uniquely poorly suited for smallball.

Do note that your count isn’t out of 12, but out of 15. VERY few teams carry 8 active bigs on any given night.

Irrelevant. The question isn’t whether other teams dress eight bigs on a given night… the question is whether other teams put themselves in a position to be shorthanded up front, as we have. The answer is no. Other teams have end-of-the-bench bigs they can go to in a pinch.

I see the problem. The solutions though aren’t quite as easy as the "they should have gotten another big" like you seem to be suggesting.

You’re wrong.

by onlxn on Nov 14, 2009 3:52 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

By far our best road effort of the year. I really don’t ever expect us to win a road game, so when we at least show a little pluck, I’m satisfied. There was some pluck tonight. Guys generally hustled and passed and tried. And really, the Pacers did us a big favor tonight. There’s been a lot of debate about what our biggest problem is… I think this game made it more than clear.

It’s been said that our main problem is selfishness. That wasn’t our problem tonight. Everyone passed willingly except for Jack and Maggette, and on a night like tonight you’d be crazy if you complained about Maggette’s tunnel vision. Selfishness is not our main problem.

It’s been said that our main problem is Stephen Jackson. Jack’s presence certainly isn’t a positive, and he played like a boner tonight, but we got outscored and outplayed when he was off the floor, too. Stephen Jackson is not our main problem.

It’s been said that our main problem is youth. There are certainly some youth-related issues on this team… you see a lot of rookie-ish mistakes from guys like Curry and Randolph and Morrow and even Monta. Having said all that, all four of those guys have played fairly well thus far. Youth is not our main problem.

Our main problem is, quite clearly, size. The Pacers are a below-average team, but they were smart enough to realize that if they went to the rim, we probably wouldn’t have the size to stop them. The result? Danny Granger got a career-high 16 rebounds as a smallball four, Dahntay Jones got a career-high 4 blocks as a smallball three, Solomon Jones and Tyler Hansbrough combined for 15 and 17 in 36 bench minutes, we got outrebounded by 15, and we shot ten fewer free throws than the Pacers. A bad team realized it was big enough to beat us, and it did. Pure and simple.

Nellie’s hands are somewhat tied right now, of course, as he’s only got two bigs to use. But it’s hard to defend the fact that he used a lineup featuring Curry, CJ and Law for a good chunk of the fourth quarter. I think CJ’s underrated, and Law’s played well… still, you can’t do that. Those smalls aren’t good enough to merit punting on any hope of getting rebounds or affecting shots. Nellie has won hundreds of games and millions of hearts with smallball over the years, but right now, this strategy is a runaway train. There is no reason whatsoever why we should use Acie Law as our small forward in a competitive situation, when Morrow and ’Buike are available.

We are too damn small. The front office needs to address that problem, and Nellie needs to address that problem. Because this was a good-faith effort put in by the players. They deserve to be put in situations where they have a chance of succeeding. They weren’t tonight. And shame on the franchise for leaving them hanging in the wind.

by onlxn on Nov 11, 2009 11:56 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Ha

In my fantasy league, we have an award called “Bonner of the Week” named after Matt Bonner. Jackson is the Bonner of the Night for sure.

by Reverend_Randy on Nov 12, 2009 1:00 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Onixn I think you're my new favorite poster.

First it was Sleepy, then Sam23. Now you.

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:04 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

But it’s hard to defend the fact that he used a lineup featuring Curry, CJ and Law for a good chunk of the fourth quarter.

True, but didn’t we cut into the lead there?

You have been DFiBrillated.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 12, 2009 10:30 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

We did, yes. With 8:41 left, Law replaced ’Buike. For the remainder of the game, we played a hyper-small lineup: Randolph, Maggette, and three of Monta, Curry, CJ and Law. In that time, we outscored the Pacers 19-16, opening with a 16-6 run before the Pacers went on a 10-3 run to end it. The Curry/CJ/Law/Maggette/Randolph lineup I referenced outscored the Pacers 8-4 in their brief time together.

Thing is, you’d be hard-pressed to say smallball was what was working here. Randolph and Maggette led the way here, and in ways that didn’t have much to do with smallball. Randolph had five points, five rebounds, two blocks and a steal; Maggette had six points, a board and an assist. They were both generally operated in their usual fashions, not succeeding through smallball schemes. Maggette got one nice dish from Curry, but otherwise created for himself; Randolph created his own opportunities, though one of his buckets was assisted by… Corey Maggette.

Our smalls? In 26 combined minutes, they scored eight points on 4-for-9 shooting, with three rebounds, two assists, a turnover and four fouls. They were active — Monta blocked a jumper, CJ grabbed a steal — but really, they didn’t do much at all. This was the Randolph & Maggette Show. And they would’ve had more chances to execute if we hadn’t gotten outrebounded 14-8.

I’m not saying we would’ve won the game if ‘Buike and Morrow had been in there for CJ and Law. We probably would’ve lost no matter what, and that’s fine. But I really, really, really don’t think the hyper-small lineup was the one that gave us the best chance to win. I don’t buy the idea that the smallness was worth benching the best three-pointer in the game and our most effective swingman thus far, especially since they’re significantly better rebounders than CJ and Law. Yes, ‘Builke and Morrow had poor games. That doesn’t mean you just punt on them as soon as they start struggling. If you want to make a quick comeback, you’re going to need to grab every rebound and hit a bunch of threes. Instead, Nellie opted for a smaller, worse-shooting lineup, because… they were supposed to get a bunch of steals? I guess? I really don’t get it.

Point is, Randolph’s strong quarter obscured the fact that hyper-smallball did absolutely nothing for us. There is no reason to believe that making a small lineup even smaller is a good idea. I don’t know if it was out of unblinking belief in smallball, or ego, or boredom, or apathy, or what, but I think Nellie made a stupid mistake with that lineup. And yes, I know he’s a legendary genius and I’m some guy on a couch.

by onlxn on Nov 12, 2009 11:42 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree completely

Riley went to the market this summer to get some “Beef” as he claimed they were looking for, and came back with some beef jerky (Mikki Moore), who is just terrible. Put Biedrins and Turiaf back on the floor and I think this is a definite win for the Warriors. Lets just hope when they come back that Randolph gets consistent minutes and Moore rides the pine where he belongs.

by Pearlsofwisdom on Nov 12, 2009 12:10 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

We were looking to head into the season with BW, AB, AR, Ronny, and Mikki

that’s some legit size. We just didn’t expect BW to get injured befor the season started, and be out for half the year, or more. We also didn’t expect are starting center and backup center to be out for the first few weeks. Once again injuries are to blame more so than the front office or coaching. We could’ve kept Pruitt or Simpson and cut George, but when those cuts were made, we still had 5 set big men to roll with. Just unfortunate Warriors luck.

by myk on Nov 12, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

who're we kidding

He came back with a carrot stick.

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:04 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Great Recap!

Not being able to watch a lot of the games, I love the detailed recaps that all the GSoMers and guest writers bring.

I do get the feeling that if this fiasco with Jack didn’t happen, and if Monta had the heart of Randolph, things could start to turn around….if only, if only….

by bradyk2 on Nov 12, 2009 12:25 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Can we get some fat D-Leaguer to replace Mikki Less?

He’s murdering us. Also, why is he starting? To alienate Randolph. Chris, I can’t wait till Nellie’s gone.

ES

by Free Zarko on Nov 12, 2009 12:40 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

He's starting so he can go out and play hard without worrying about picking up fouls.

When it’s all said and done, AR plays more minutes. Nellie just wants to play him against backup centers so he builds his confidence, then he usually starts the second half once his confidence is established in the game. I’d say that is a really intelligent way to coach the team, given the situation and the players he has.

by myk on Nov 12, 2009 1:33 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Anyone check up on Stephane Lasme or Bubba?

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:05 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I meant Christ

As in, ‘Christ, a real owner would fire this guy!’

ES

by Free Zarko on Nov 12, 2009 12:47 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

this recap is hilarious

According to this recap, the Warriors are a bad team and will not make the playoffs strictly because of Monta. Lol, I guess Elton Brand made the Clippers a winning team, and Garnett made the t’wolves a great franchise. One player cannot make an entire team a winning team. This team has no inside game, and until then, this team will be lottery bound every year. Is it really that hard to understand?

by illmaticwarrior on Nov 12, 2009 12:50 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

forgot

let’s blame this season on a couple of players only, and let’s not hold the other “great” players on this team accountable. That’s pretty much what this recap says. You know, since the veteran players are just hogging the ball. When guys like azubuike are always looking to pass the ball right?

by illmaticwarrior on Nov 12, 2009 1:06 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Dude, he listed like 8 things that went wrong tonight.
Buike isn’t being forced to play the 1, so the ball isn’t in his hands all night.

by Reverend_Randy on Nov 12, 2009 1:25 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

good thing or he’d wind up with 40 shot attempts.

If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.

by cybermaldonado on Nov 12, 2009 9:11 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Actually, I agree with you that the loss of Biedrins and Turiaf is the Warriors’ biggest and most immediate problem. The team is not going to beat anyone without them. I probably should have made that clearer. But even if they return healthy, I don’t think the Warriors will be much of a factor unless Monta Ellis is a star. And he doesn’t look like one to me at the moment.

by feltb0t on Nov 12, 2009 6:38 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Was the “We Believe” phase a mirage? How can a team go from promising to suck so fast? Amazingness.

Blow this team up. I don’t give a shi- who they trade. Bring in a PROVEN STAR player. Enough of these “what if” players. At least they can have someone who they could definitely build around. I’m sick of waiting for this shi-. Either start and play Curry/Randolph 40 minutes a game or trade their asses. And trade Morrow if all he’s going to be is a forever backup. This team needs to be proactive. The Warriors have some pieces, what they need is a game plan.

1) Youth Movement – go all in
2) Trade several pieces for a star (like the Celtics did for KG)

Make a friggin decision already. Is Curry the future? Is Morrow? Is Randolph? IF they are, then let them take all the lumps NOW. It’s not like “vets” like Maggette or Ellis are doing much better. Trust these flavor of the week overHyped players you have or get ’em the hell out.

Potential Stars available:

Chris Paul
Carlos Boozer
Chris Bosh
David West
Joe Johnson

Get the proven star, then build around. Ellis and Biedrins are not stars. I am more inclined to keep Biedrins because good centers are hard to comeby in the NBA. Scoring guards are a dime a dozen.

by RowellMustGo on Nov 12, 2009 2:58 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I don’t disagree with this in general, but c’mon: Boozer, West, and Joe Johnson? Are you really willing to trade, say, Randolph, Monta and Curry for one of those “stars”? If not, I’m going to assume your big rant is kinda full of it.

Now Bosh is probably a different story. And Paul … well, yeah, he’s the type of guy you don’t hesitate to sell the farm for. Of course, there are only 3 or 4 other players in the league his category.

More importantly: we can whine and stamp our feet and gnash our teeth all we want, but it doesn’t mean Toronto and New Orleans are willing to give up Bosh and Paul. Suppose they politely hang up on us. Then what? Kill ourselves?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 5:12 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Chris Paul
Carlos Boozer
Chris Bosh
David West
Joe Johnson

The only one of those guys who is a “star” in the sense of truly having the ability to carry a team to the next level is Paul.

Bosh is a distant second. (Again, we’ve seen exactly what a team led by Bosh can do. And it’s not much).

Those other guys? They shouldn’t even enter the discussion of “guys you gut your team for.”

by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 8:04 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Don’t forget West and Paul play on the same team and they are almost as bad as the Wariors.
Boozer is worthless.

If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.

by cybermaldonado on Nov 12, 2009 9:13 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

David West...

…and Carlos Boozer, I’d both consider to not be worth our time. Chris Bosh or Chris Paul would be the big prizes on that list… I don’t know much about Johnson’s game besides his shooting acumen, truthfully.

by Zack Vank on Nov 12, 2009 10:11 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Was the "We Believe" phase a mirage? How can a team go from promising to suck so fast?

 Easy, trade the heart of the team and kill the chemistry.Basic basketball 101.

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 12, 2009 11:27 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Basic basketball Trolling 101.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 11:45 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

+1,

the argument is tired. Getting rid of JRich and Baron didnt put us in this posistion, its the flood of idiotic moves (the only ‘good’ moves since then have been: signing Biedrins to his current contract, signing Turiaf, and matching Azuibuike’s offer sheet) following Baron’s departure that did. Every other move varies from questionable/medriocre to disasterous.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Nov 12, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Your two points contradict each other in my mind.

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:07 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I think I misread.

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:07 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

You've got my respect

for the Invasion of the Body Snatchers reference.

This game was just painful. When the Warriors finally made a run in he 4th, it seemed like every time they were going to make a major breakthrough, something silly just held them back.

And wow, talk about bad shooting. The Thunder might have nights like this, but it usually involves a lot of free throws. Here, it’s just a lot of missed shots. But man, am I excited about Anthony Randolph. This roster is just so full of wasted talent….Now I’m rambling. I’ve been up for too long. But this team is definitely looking like bottom of the barrel unless they can pull it together. And agreed about terrible ball movement. That’s plagued this team for eons, as had bad free throw shooting.

Tony.psd = Da Man
Manger of Welcome to Loud City
#1 Warriors, Thunder, and Adonal Foyle Fan

by Zorgon on Nov 12, 2009 3:17 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

But man, am I excited about Anthony Randolph.

  Hi Z, I’m more worried about him, rudolf looks like he’s in pain out there. If he’s not physically hurt then he is not enjoying the game and maybe should look for more fulfilling work?

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 12, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

he can join your mentor program and grow from your endless wisdom!

by crab dribble cocktail on Nov 12, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

he can join your mentor program

  probably easier for him to get professional help, I’m out 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 Nov 12, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

If he’s not physically hurt then he is not enjoying the game and maybe should look for more fulfilling work?

While he is getting paid millions, his team is losing and is complete disaray. I am glad that he is not having a blast out there.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Nov 12, 2009 1:20 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I am glad that he is not having a blast out there.

 You can be happy if you want but we won’t get the best out of the players if they are injured or unhappy with the coaching or team. That’s why the Jrich trade was stupid, they traded the guy that made the team chemistry work and made all the other players start wondering if the same thing was gonna happen to them next..Suddenly they went from a building team to a dismantling 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 12, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Right Now The Main Problems Are Jack and Monta

I absolutely agree with how Nellie handled Jack last night. If he’s positive and playing good ball let him play, when he sucks sit him down. However, his energy needs to be removed from the team, and quickly.

I agree with this recap on Monta. He has become a little Diva. In fact maybe he always has been. His play is selfish, he doesn’t move the ball. He is not mentally tough. Every single quarter we end with the ball is a one on one move with everyone else standing around and no points to show for it. About the only compliment I can give him is he seems to be working harder on the defensive end. Fact is Monta is not a PG, and he needs to be removed of his duties, and put back at SG. He and Morrow don’t work as a backcourt at all. His role needs to be reduced.

I would add the other positive besides Randolph and Maggette was Acie Law. He has played well. I think it is time to see how he could work with Monta in the backcourt as a starter, with Buke at the 3. He has the handles and the vision, and I think he has the size to defend 2’s. I would like to see him in the Baron Davis role of 2 years ago. Let him run the offense and get Monta off of screens. Post him up on smaller twos and play inside out. He can run on the break and it gives the backcourt more size.

Let Curry come off the bench with Morrow. They also seem to have a nice rapport. Let Jax while he’s here do the same.

by On The Block on Nov 12, 2009 6:55 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Monta...

…is a player who’s primary skill is scoring. It’s clear that when he’s doing things fluidly as an offensive weapon, that he’s not averse to ball distribution; though his assist numbers wouldn’t be impressive for a passing point, they’re more or less in line with (or even better) than I think most would expect given his dire reputation. At this juncture, his offensive struggles are the problem, but I don’t think it’s necessarily the time to assume he’s toast, or to disdain him the mid-range jumpers that he so thoroughly cemented his reputation on. The team has been a mess in totality so far, and as such I would expect each player is bringing certain different pressures or distractions to the court, and I don’t see that ending until the Jackson situation is resolved.

Suffice to say, anyways, that my memory does stretch back enough to remember Monta’s 07-08 season. During his dominant stretch near the end of the season, he was being lauded for having one of the most impressive midrange games in the whole league. Given the discord in Oakland, even if he has a bad next few months and we all decide we’d rather he be traded, I doubt it would be any harder than it would be now. Despite the fact that he’s looked out of sorts on that midrange game, he still looks like a thoroughly desirable piece for a team. The fact that the Warriors habitually seem to screw up their prime talent and then watch them have success elsewhere may work to our favor, in a way; I’m sure any GM interested in Ellis would believe that the old “change of scenery” resurrective would apply to him as much as any talented Warrior.

by Zack Vank on Nov 12, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I think Monta can't be the primary ball-handler

It’s not that he can’t distribute the ball, it’s that his handles are bad. Does anyone else notice how many times he loses the ball, not even counting when he drives and loses it without getting touched by a defender? When he dribbles the ball around the perimeter he just can’t seem to hold onto it all the time. He’s much more successful off the ball, or catching it and making one move then passing or shooting.

by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 12, 2009 11:51 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

No mention of the last few minutes

Free throws and smart shots could have put the game within reach. If Curry would have hit his 3pter and the layup that was blocked, he could have been the hero of the night. Then the Dubs went something like 2 for six on free throws with four minutes left. They would have been within like 3 in an unlikely comeback.

Big props to Acie Law. The guy is doing what should be done on the court. He has great vision as he runs around the court like a gazelle, and has the confidence to shoot when he needs to.

How many people just wanted Monta to drop a couple 3’s. His defenders plan on him driving, so they give him the extra space because he won’t take the shot. That’s why he wasn’t getting to the rim as well: They knew what he wanted to do. If he’s getting paid over 10mil as a 2 guard, he should be able to shoot the 3 in his fourth year. DO IT!!!!!

Anthony Randoph for Most Improved Player

by danielholl on Nov 12, 2009 10:38 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I agree~

Man, i’ve been an Anti-Ellis for a while, last time i posted something about getting rid of Monta, all the Monta Homers got all pissy and riled up about it.

I rather have Brandon Jennings be out PG, Curry…he looks like a bust so far…SHAKY DRIBBLING, Short on his 3’s.. i know he’s a rookie, but Brandon Jennings.. looks like the over seas experience gave him even MORE of a swagger.

Sick lineup would be;
PG Jennings – if we drafted him
SG Morrow
SF Azabuike
PF Wright
C Biedrins

IDK who’s gona be that back up PG, someone we trade with ellis/jackson, maybe even AC law
SG backup could be from that trade too.
SF is maggette of course.
PF obviously Randolph
and C Turiaf.

Yeah, about Monta, that Pacers game, they scouted him well and did EXACTLY what needed to be done, take away his drives.
Now if that was Chris paul(i hate to compare Monta with an All-star) but CP3 would’ve taken advantage of that space they gave and knocked down 3’s.

7

by AlbinoWhale on Nov 12, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I also like what T Evans is doing for the Kings, dude seems legit.

Waaaarroirs

by puffylove on Nov 12, 2009 2:17 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yup, because less than 10% of the season is enough time to figure out a bust.

by Reverend_Randy on Nov 12, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Would have won the game if bigs weren't hurt

I thought that the Pacers looked extremely vulnurable and weak. Last year Granger impressed me, this year he looks weak and against a better defense team easily could have shut him down.

I’ve been ragging on Randolph lately and he deserves credit. In my mind this was the first game where he showed improvement. It was clear, even to Nelson that he couldn’t keep AR out of the game.

AM needs more shots, what else is new. He’s not the quickest player, I think that’s why he doesn’t get more shots. I love it when Ellis drives and dishes, the problem is he mostly drives and doesn’t dish.

No problem of letting Jax sit the bench for extended minutes. He doesn’t add anything, Buke and Morrow are much more productive.

Note to Maggette: Stop shooting jumpers (although he did make that three gj)

by brewitt on Nov 12, 2009 10:52 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I’ve been ragging on Randolph lately and he deserves credit. In my mind this was the first game where he showed improvement. It was clear, even to Nelson that he couldn’t keep AR out of the game.

I thought he showed improvement against Minnesota as well, but yeah, he’s coming along. Still making loads of mistakes, but they’re more of the “well, he’s young” variety than the “is this guy insane?” variety.

AM needs more shots, what else is new. He’s not the quickest player, I think that’s why he doesn’t get more shots.

The non-shooting parts of Morrow’s game aren’t looking great right now… his rebounding’s worse, his passing’s worse, and he’s making even more defensive mistakes than he was last year. I think a consistent role as a starter would help him. He seems to have his head screwed on straight, so I wouldn’t worry about him learning bad habits with extended playing time. And if he’s on the court to start each time, he’ll have an easier time focusing on all aspects of the game, rather than just being the SHOOTSHOOTSHOOT guy off the bench.

I love it when Ellis drives and dishes, the problem is he mostly drives and doesn’t dish.

I think he’s making as many plays as he’s capable of, really. He has a score-first mentality and always will, and he’s not a great think-two-passes-ahead guy, but really he’s doing a lot better than I would have expected at making plays. His passing numbers thus far are a bit better than Jack’s were last year… I don’t know how many of us expected that.

Monta’s not going to be a real asset until he starts scoring efficiently again. Beyond that, though, I don’t see how we could ask for any more from him. He’s passing well, he’s rebounding, he’s playing energetic defense… in every non-shooting aspect of the game, I think he’s playing about as well as he’s able. I’m as eager to see some 12-for-17 shooting nights from him as the next guy, but it’s odd to me that people are down on Monta right now. He’s playing his heart out.

No problem of letting Jax sit the bench for extended minutes. He doesn’t add anything, Buke and Morrow are much more productive

Preacher, choir. Couldn’t agree more.

Note to Maggette: Stop shooting jumpers (although he did make that three gj)

His making that three was a mixed blessing. I’m not sure we want him to keep taking those. I don’t have a problem with him taking a couple jumpers a night, though… I think they do help set up his drives a bit, by keeping defenders honest. The problems come when he starts regarding the jumpers as an end in and of themselves. He didn’t do that last night.

by onlxn on Nov 12, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Nice recap.

Maggette had his best game of the year. I am starting to realize that equating him with Jack is a mistake. Many on here do it because of their similarly bad contracts, but Maggette is a much bigger help to us than he gets credit for. His defensive intensity has really improved, as has his rebounding. Also, for team thin up front, his ability to draw fouls at the bucket is clutch. Once Jack is gone, Maggs will be the default veteran leader of the team. It would be nice if he could embrace that role.

Speaking of the corporal…I have completely given up trying to understand Jackson. One game after setting his career high in assists and facilitating the teams’ best game of the year, he comes out and looks like he is INTENTIONALLY trying to kill the ball movement. He really needs to go. Monta has a tendency to defer to Jack on offense when they are both in the game and also play more selfishly himself at those times (probably because he knows Jack isn’t going to pass it back to him). When Jack went out last night, the game flow improved 100%.

Randolph: all the points you made are pretty much right on. He needs to trust his ability to take bigger, slower guys off the dribble more, but his swag on offense looks great. His teamates also need to understand that if you get him the ball in the paint on a pick and roll, it’s getting thrown down. One more thing that really was great to see last night was his exhorting his teammates on defense, clapping and wratchetting up the intensity when the game got tighter down the stretch and they needed some stops. Very KG-like.

All in all this was a great effort. The fact that we were even in the game considering Beans and Predator were out speaks volumes. In the end, until we are healthy and Jack is gone we won’t have a clear picture of where we are at.

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Maggette had his best game of the year. I am starting to realize that equating him with Jack is a mistake. Many on here do it because of their similarly bad contracts, but Maggette is a much bigger help to us than he gets credit for. His defensive intensity has really improved, as has his rebounding. Also, for team thin up front, his ability to draw fouls at the bucket is clutch. Once Jack is gone, Maggs will be the default veteran leader of the team. It would be nice if he could embrace that role.

Agreed on all counts… Maggette is an asset, and will be even more of one if and when we can get him back to his natural position. He’s exerting some effort on defense so far.

He doesn’t give off much of a “leader” vibe… he ‘s always seemed like kind of a mercenary, happy to do his thing on any team, never particularly attached to that team. But really I’d take that over Jack’s leadership style. If a veteran’s not going to provide leadership, it’s better that they don’t pretend that they’re going to.

by onlxn on Nov 12, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I'll agree with that description of Maggette

I don’t see him as a leader. He’ll do whatever task he’s assigned to, whether it be coming off the bench or banging with power forwards, and he’s not a trouble maker.

by IQofaWarrior on Nov 12, 2009 12:00 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Keep in mind that Maggette has never really been asked to be a leader either. He played all those years in LaLaLand for Dunleavy the Nazi Field Commander. Maggs might never be a “Leader of Men” but I think he has a generally upbeat attitude (50mil over 5 years will do that), seems to get along with his younger teammates, and could exert a positive influence once Jack is out.

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

yep, i'll agree with that too

boy, things always seem to revolve around Jack, doesn’t it?

by IQofaWarrior on Nov 12, 2009 12:13 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Therein lies our problem

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 12:21 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

agree,

Maggette is a great asset. You could even say he deserves to be on a Championship contender team more than Jackson.
Man, he would be amazing being a Spur. Their style of play fits great and since the Spurs already have a Leader in Duncan,.

On a side note, we on the other hand need a leader..no it can’t and won’t be Monta, or Jack.. don’t know about Curry either.. We won’t be a contender ’till we get one of those “true leaders” such as Duncan, Paul, Garnett..

7

by AlbinoWhale on Nov 12, 2009 12:01 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

While I agree Maggette played well last night...

He must play that well every night to justify his spot and salary. If he has a bad offensive game, he becomes the complete black hole many of us are used to seeing.

A few questions:
1. If Maggette was playing as well as everyone is saying, then why did he get 0 Mins in the 3rd quarter? Seems like an important time to get him some minutes, right?

2. Did Randolph and Moore ever see the court together? If not, why not?

3. Since it was clear that the W’s were getting killed because of their lack of size, did we ever get the ‘Biggest 5 Guys I’ve got’ approach from Nellie? That is, a lineup of Jackson, Azubuike, Maggette, Randolph, and Moore. If not, why not?

Why are these obvious questions never posed to the Genius Coach?

by UncleCliffy on Nov 12, 2009 12:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

1. So he would be fresh for the 4th

2. They are the only two bigs in uniform. If they both get in foul trouble, it’s Acie Law at the 5-spot time.

3. Oh. My. God. (remain calm, remain calm)

For what’s it worth, I think Nellie did a very good job coaching last night. His personelle decisions seemed spot-on to me. He is playing solitaire with a deck of 51, so don’t let the end result cloud your vision.

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 12:48 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

"is this guy insane?" variety

Last guy to make me do that was Pietrus.

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:11 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Funny how,

a couple seasons before, when we had Baron and them, I remembered how in the start of the season they were on a 7 game losing streak. Then when Jack’ came back from his suspension, they started winning again.

Funny how things change so fast, now we’re losing ’cause of of him ON the team.
Hopefully, when he LEAVES, we will start winning again.

But on aside to Jackson’s bad vibes and stuff relating to losing, if not the biggest problem, the 2nd biggest problem would be our only two TRUE CENTERS, Biedrins and Turiaf.

I don’t even count Mikki Moore as a center for us, that’s how bad his defense is. I rather have Dampier.

So without Biedrins and Turiaf playing center, how can we expect to win more games?

I’ll put it like this, it’s like your a Gladiator and you go against other Gladiators with their Armor(Centers), and you have to fight them with worn out, fragile armor(Bigs out).
Most likely, you’re gonna lose the fight and you can barely win.

Can we say 5 game road losing streak or maybe more?

7

by AlbinoWhale on Nov 12, 2009 11:21 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Physco T, I hate that dude!

He’s one of those guys who plays defense or calls a “shooting foul” when your just playing around with your friends

by 123707THIZZ on Nov 12, 2009 11:34 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

LOL

He’s the guy in the pickup game that I try to stay away from because he’s going to hurt someone on accident.

Golden State of Mind: Unstoppable Baby!

by Fantasy Junkie on Nov 12, 2009 12:18 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

ha exactly

“it’s contact sport bro! Our ball”

by 123707THIZZ on Nov 12, 2009 1:27 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Did you listen to Nellie's comments?

If he sees that they arent moving the ball well, why cant he turn that around? He benched JAX, but the team still didnt move the ball which is what created all the offense against the TWolves.
I see this game as evidence that Nellie cannot coach this team. I’m sure he could coach a great team, but this one needs a lot of help and he hasnt delivered.
Yeas we are small, but that game was in reach if we hit our shots. how do you hit shots? By being open. How do you get open? Move off the ball and pass because passes travel faster than defenses can move.

by warriorsvictim on Nov 12, 2009 11:42 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

The ball movement was much better once Jack left the game. Still not where it needed to be, but much better.

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Nellie's system requires players with a high bball IQ.

That’s part of the problem, we don’t have very many of those guys on our team, that’s why Curry gets more minutes than he probably should.

As far as yesterday’s game, I was cursing like no other when we were going with 3-pg lineups. But after the game, I began to understand his logic,

The ballmovement was very poor, we were making stupid plays, so he plays Acie and Steph with Monta. This resulted in better ball movement and better offfense. Our defense wasn’t any worse, what was awful though was the rebounding, That’s the one part of Nellie’s logic that I really can’t stand. “We’re going to get out rebounded anyway, so why does it matter who I play?”

I hate that. With a little less than 5 mins left he put in the 3pg lineup, which is great for ball movement, plus Steph and CJ were shooting more efficiently than anyone else, and Acie seemed unstoppable going to the hoop. AR should’ve stayed in. But I also would’ve liked to see Mikki play center with AR, instead of having Maggs or Morrow on the court. I think we could’ve grabbed enough rebounds to have won this one. Plus it was the end of the game so foul trouble was a non factor.

by myk on Nov 12, 2009 2:14 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

that's a good point

When you are down by 20 it is impossible to come back without rebounding unless you are shooting 70% or greater.

by warriorsvictim on Nov 12, 2009 4:38 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Byron Scott available now?

Scott is available? Sign him up now… like right now. Fire Rowell and Nellie and bring in Mullin and Byron Scott. Trade Jackson and Law to Chicago for Hinrich. Watch the wins pour in.

by jclay09 on Nov 12, 2009 12:14 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

-1

Byron Scott is garbage. He never did anything until CP3 came along, and even with one of the top-5 players in the league he still never did much.

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 12:23 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

plus one for that minus one . Nellie is ok, but Byron Scott is not ok.

7

by AlbinoWhale on Nov 12, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Hinrich.

 hey this is a family site, no profanity allowed, use tarter sauce instead of hinrich

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 12, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Not worth a fanshot

Thursday practice note from Marcus Thompson:

Note: The Warriors prepared for New York’s a zone defense despite having just nine players available. Big man Ronny Turiaf (sprained left knee) did not practice and Maggette sat out with a hurting hamstring. Assistant Rico Hines was pressed into action so the Warriors could have enough for five-on-five.

by IQofaWarrior on Nov 12, 2009 2:10 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Oh dear God…

by onlxn on Nov 12, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Get Rid of Ellis and Jackson

Forget this season, we are below average as a team. The only way we can be a good team is if we can get rid of Ellis and Jackson before the trading deadline. Ellis is not the solution for this team in fact he is part of the problem. He is a shooting guard who can score but lacks any other skills, no court vision, IQ, or even defensive skills. We dont even have a true PG who can implement Nellie’s scheme. We paying three players half the salary cap of this team, we need to get rid of Ellis and Jackson plus Maggette clear the $28 mill in cap space. I dont care who we get in return as long as they don’t carry a max contract like Brand, it is not like we going to win 40 games, start rebuilding from scratch. I said it this summer, Ellis is not worth $66 mill for 6 years.
-————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
 Ellis sucks

Warriors fans always over hype their players. Ellis is better than Nate but not to the level that he is worth 66 m for 6 yrs. I compare Ellis to Ben Gorden but without a 3 pt shooting can he develop it yes but that doesn’t mean he will ever be T Parker. He is undersized will never be the pg we are looking for and can never guard even if he is playing the two. Therefore, I personally would rather have jjack or Nate for less then what we are paying Ellis. Such money should be reserved to players who really elevate their team in the winning column.

Waaaarroirs

by puffylove on Aug 7, 2009 11:29 AM PDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs

Waaaarroirs

by puffylove on Nov 12, 2009 2:37 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Waaaarroirs

You keep writing this … like, how exactly do you pronounce it? It looks French. Does it rhyme with boudoirs and film noirs?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

actually trying to vocalize that sound is surprisingly difficult

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Nov 12, 2009 10:45 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I told you so

I also said the following

 Ellis

For those who will say Ellis had gr8 year when we went to the playoff. This was Baron’s team and baron was running the show. Compare biedrins number when baron was here and when he left you will notice my point. Baron made everyone look better because really when baron is healthy he is top 10 pg in the game maybe top 5. Therefore, I personally think our beloved team needs to trade some players and get rid of contracts bad contracts. Here is a good trade scenerio if it plays out with Houston, I believe TMac gets 23 m this year and has claimed he will be ready when season starts. Houston don’t want him and would love to get something good in return. How abt Ellis, Maggette and Wright for Tmac and any other bump included. We get a motivated Tmac on a contract year and if healthy can avg 30 pts in our system. Worst case he comes back gets injured but next year we will have close to 30 m in cap space to go after the best players while still having solid players to play with a superstar that deserves big money. Here our lineup if such trade gets pulled up
Watson (assuming he stays) or Curry
Tmac Morrow reserve
Jackson. Buike
AR. Devan George or whomever
Biedrins. Turiaf

Next year, we can get Chris Bosh or big time player to replace Tmac

Waaaarroirs

by puffylove on Nov 12, 2009 2:38 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Compare biedrins number when baron was here and when he left you will notice my point.

I believe he was #15 before and after… ;-)

His statistics, overall, have been slightly better since Baron left than they were with Baron.

What was your point?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 2:57 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Loved Randolph not backing down from Granger

Randolphs all like “You want some? YOU WANT SOME?” Then Granger started walking backwards then Randolph said “Keep talking” haha

I LOVE IT! He gave us a massive spark when we made that run in the 4th. Too bad we couldn’t rebound and shoot free throws, otherwise the game would have been equal most likely…

Maggs also is becoming more of a leader, becoming a lot more vocal on the court. I’m love it. He has stepped it up big time the last few games.

Formally known as PFortyy.

http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt

Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!

by Xero on Nov 12, 2009 3:20 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

You know what else I liked? Randolph looked WAY bigger than Granger. Like a good four inches taller, and not much skinnier. And Granger is 6’8" 230…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, Randolph’s definitely added some bulk that’s for sure.
Next step: Trash talk to DWIGHT!!

Formally known as PFortyy.

http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt

Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!

by Xero on Nov 12, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I loved AR's box out technique:

Hit Granger in the face.

Golden State of Mind: Unstoppable Baby!

by Fantasy Junkie on Nov 12, 2009 4:23 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Haha. Well, he got the “boxing” part down…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Nov 12, 2009 4:35 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Haha. Well, he got the "boxing" Muay Thai part down…

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 Nov 12, 2009 9:15 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Until there is a "MAJOR" shake up...

I got 2 words for this team (and trust me – i’m a die-hard fan) — WARRIORS SUCK!!
Cohen – sell this team already
Rowel – learn basketball operation
Nellie – stop going after your $$
Jackson – start passing like you did during the T-Wolves game – or get traded already
Ellis – stop getting more tattoo’s and start teaching young Curry some skills
Maggs – not surprised your “injured” again
Buike – your the best!!
Morrow – keep shooting
Randolph – your a stud – way to stand firm again Granger

Lets make some trades – lets fire some personnel and lets bring real NBA basketball back to the bay – its been way overdue

by Razzmataz on Nov 12, 2009 5:04 PM PST reply actions   0 recs


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)

Start posting about the Warriors »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Matt Steinmetz reports Warriors sign Chris Hunter from D-League
Small
The Thing About Randolph...
76968623_small
Very realistic Monta Ellis trade
484214594_82b6b3554a_small
Stack Jax for Radman: The Numbers
Small
Thank You, Jack

Recent FanPosts

Act_marco_belinelli_small
Was Jackson holding Monta back from his full potential?
Follett_small
Monta Ellis and the Warriors Frustrated Brandon Roy and the Trail Blazers
Small
Time Will Tell (and Curry > Jennings)
Dscn0324_small
The TK Challenge
Follett_small
Further Cap Relief for the Warriors, But the Bottom Line is Who Cares?
Small
The Inevitable Trade of Ellis... Proposal
Small
Monta Trade that Makes Sense

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Ads

SPONSORS

2009-2010 Around the Association

2009-2010 Golden State Warriors Preview

Golden State Warriors 2k9-2k10 Super Preview Blowout Special!


GSoM Crew -------------------------

Atma-160_small Atma Brother ONE

Gw090_small Fantasy Junkie

--------------------------------------------------------

Small Hash

Small dj fuzzylogic

--------------------------------------------------------

We_still_believe_small R Dizzle

Small Adam Lauridsen

Chef_randolph_gs_small Tony.psd

Japan_by_miaumi_small YaoButtaMing

Small jae