Jax to Charlotte: Warriors financial implications
by jae on Nov 16, 2009 11:51 AM PST
in News
Email
Print
[editor's note: our own illustrious Dubs Fan in Boston does his own fine job of breaking down the numbers here. If you've read it, you may have heard it there first. If you haven't, you should.]
You heard it hear first. SBNation is reporting that Stephen Jackson is bound for the Charlotte, NC along with Acie Law for guard Raja Bell and forward Vladimir Radmanovic. Having once lived in the Queen City for all of four weeks before I came to my senses and returned to the Bay, I can't say I envy him. In sending last season's team-leading scorer on his merry way, the Warriors reshape both the on-court product for 09-10 and open up new possibilities going forward, both in this season and beyond.
And like most deals in the NBA, it's all about money.
The short answer is "no, we cannot go out and use the money we've saved on Jax to get another big man"; It's best to not even ask the question.
And in terms of the immediate impact to the team, we could leave it at that. But the deal is not without implications for years to come and for the long term, may have some real impact on how the Warriors can proceed in the future, both this season and in the not-too far future.
The end result is that this erases some, but not all of the misguided extension that Rowell (apparently) handed to Jackson a year ago. Prior to the extension, Jax was going to be an expiring deal at the end of this season valued at $7.65mil. While that alone wasn't going to make the Warriors players in the off season free agent market, it was large enough that it could have been a significant piece of a package to acquire a player under contract from a team looking to shed salary for cap or tax purposes. After the extension, Jax lost that potential value, which is why he brought back Vlad and Raja, two players who do not figure to be signifcant pieces in righting the sinking ship. They might help, but don't count on it.
In terms of immediate impact, Radmanovic and Bell both possess above average long range shots. Vlad, despite standing 6-10, is limited as a big man due to his Bargnani-esque rebounding, but he can provide some contribution as a "3". Bell carried a reputation as a solid perimeter defender to complement his sharp shooting, though at 33, one has to wonder if those skills haven't declined significantly.
What has certainly declined is the Warriors financial commitment for future years. Bell's $5.25mil expires at the end of the season. Radmanovic is due ~$6.47 mil this year with a player option for $6.8838 for 2010-11 that, given market realities he will most likely pick up. And in short, this means that the Warriors will only clear an additional $1.57 million off the books for next year versus retaining Jax and letting Acie Law walk. That alone makes will make virtually no difference in the Warriors purchasing power or shopping habits for the coming year.
However, two years down the line when Radmanovic comes off the books, the Warriors are on the hook for about $9.3 million less than had they stuck with what would then be a 33 year-old Jackson. Forecasting the overall cap situation two years out is difficult as there will be many decisions vis a vis retaining players whose contracts come due in that period, but the savings will not hurt and gets the Warriors out of the inflated back end of Jackson's contract when his declining skills would overshadow the inflating salary, if that had not already happened.
Perhaps more significant though is the potential to make another move this year. In terms of the fabled "package of expiring deals to land a superstar", the Warriors will soon posses $14.36 million in contracts that come off the books next year. While that package would require wrapping up Raja with Mikki Moore, Speedy Claxton, Devean George and CJ Watson, sending out these players would allow the Warriors to pick up a player priced at up to $18million. (CBA rules prevent a team utilizing the traded player exception to make trades while over the cap from taking back more than 125% +$100k in salary than the combined players being traded away. Such a deal cannot happen for two month until Bell can be re-packaged in another trade. And as our illustrious and eloquent ONLXN has quite accurately stated, deals involving that many players out for far fewer coming back are exceptionally rare during the season. As such, it's less likely that the full purchasing power could be used on a single player though the ability to take back minimum salary players without regard to the cap means that it would be theoretically possible to use the biggest chunk of this for a single player. Solely in terms of cap implications, this makes it theoretically possible to construct a deal for all but 9 players in the association without the trading partner taking on a single contract that will extend into next season.
Also see:
- BREAKING NEWS: Golden State Warriors trade Stephen Jackson + Acie Law to Charlotte Bobcats for Raja Bell + Vladimir Radmanovic
- 5 Questions for Stephen Jackson's Agent Mark Stevens
- RUMOR: 76ers Contacted Warriors about Samuel Dalembert + Warriors trying to trade Stephen Jackson + Cavaliers still interested in Jackson
- RUMOR: Charlotte Bobcats (+ Cleveland Cavaliers and Denver Nuggets) Interested in Stephen Jackson- Boris Diaw anyone?
- Q&A: Matt Steinmetz (AOL FanHouse + Comcast Sports Net Bay Area)- Part 1 of 3: Making Sense of Stephen Jackson
- Macro-Warriornomics - WE BELIEVE WE SUCK :: GSoM's 2009-2010 Golden State Warriors Preview (Part 2 of 2)
- Micro-Warriornomics :: GSoM's 2009-2010 Golden State Warriors Preview (Part 1 of 2)
- Stephen Jackson - O Captain, My Captain No More
- Stephen "Captain Technical" Jackson- 2 technical fouls in 3 PRESEASON games?
- RUMOR: Stephen Jackson for Zydrunas Ilgauskas ($11.5 million expiring)
- Stephen Jackson - O Captain, My Captain :: 2009-2010 Golden State Warriors Player Recaps and Previews
223 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
you always have to take a swipe at bargnani don't you jae
Can’t you admit he’s good!!!
When it comes to scoring points, Bargnani is a pretty decent player. When it comes to anything else that helps a team win…he doesn’t do much…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 2:33 PM PST up reply actions
C- Biedrins
PF- Randolph
SF-Radmanovic
SG-Monta
PG-Curry
Key Backups- Buike,Bell,Morrow, and Maggette.
Yes!
"Lisa, Vampires are make-believe, like elves, gremlins, and eskimos." - Homer Simpson
"Aren't we forgeting the true meaning of Christmas? You know, the birth of Santa?" - Bart Simpson
"Make crime pay. Become a Lawyer." - Will Rogers.
Good point on expirings for trade
but what is possible is perhaps. 1 talent (biedrins for ex.) could be packaged with a couple expirings to get a player unattainable regularly
From Hoopsworld
The word is Jackson will be in uniform tonight in Orlando, so fans won’t have to wait long to see what kind of impact their new player will hav
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)
I like Larry Riley
And I feel like he knows what he’s doing, but it’s hard to have faith they’re going to make a big, talent acquisition move. We’ll see, though.
Don't worry about me Thurgood, I'll be fine. The robbery is what's important now.
Here is the official word...
http://www.nba.com/warriors/news/warriors_acquire_bell_radmanovic_111609.html
I have to say…well done Riley… gets rid of a very nasty problem in Stephen Jackson…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 12:58 PM PST reply actions
Too bad he wasn't THE problem
One of the few to have appreciated Cap'n Jax. Do well in NC, get that 8th seed!
Conductor of the "We're Back!" Bandwagon!
THE = COHAN
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
Yea his defense and 0.0 Rebounds per game
Can really help this team that gives up 113 points a game and has the lowest amount of rebounds in the league.
One of the few to have appreciated Cap'n Jax. Do well in NC, get that 8th seed!
Conductor of the "We're Back!" Bandwagon!
Some one please confirm/ eplain. I'm no expert but.....
I’m starting to think there is more to this than we see. I thought for sure they would’ve waited until the trade deadline but I think doing this trade now allows the Warriors to make another move before the trade deadline if they wanted to. You have to hold a player something like 2 months after acquiring him(?), and the other FA’s that signed this summer will be tradable in December (base year contract clause or something?). This will allow them to trade Rad and Bell before the trade deadline if they want.
I’m just wondering if they are gearing up for a big swap. If they got a guy like Bosh, gave out Ellis or Beidrins (as rumored to be discussed multiple times) before the trade deadline they would be able to pull a “Miami” next year. Basically you can resign a player on your team with out being penalized by the salary cap restrictions. So…..if we took our 10 million that is currently scheduled to be available this summer to sign a guy like Joe Johnson, we would be capped out, BUT we could resign Bosh for over the cap because he’s already on our team. Does that make any sense?
The problem is, I don’t know that the Warrior front office is smart enough to do something like this.
if we took our 10 million that is currently scheduled to be available this summer to sign a guy like Joe Johnson,
I do not see where you get that we’ll have $10mil available. Presently, if Vlad comes back which he most likely will, we’ll stand at ~$53mil owed assuming all free agents are allowed to leave. Add in a draft pick and we’re up a few more mil. The cap will not be at $65million next year. If we’re under it at all, we won’t be $10 mil under.
His point still stands, though, right? Not that I think it’s a good idea, but if we do trade for someone who’s contract expires – a player we couldn’t afford under the cap in free agency, we do have the ability to pay him whatever we want, correct?
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 2:35 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, we could pay him whatever but we couldn’t go out shopping and then pay whomever we traded for, even if we were under the cap. Anyone we’d trade for would almost certainly have a bit “cap hold” (an estimate of what he’ll get) to prevent exactly that Balance proposed vis a vis signing Johnson, then re-sign Bosh. That would not be possible under any reasonable scenario.
Why would JJohnson,
turn down 12 million per from Atlanta in the offseason, to come play power forward for Nellie and the Warriors? On a side note its not even possiable unless we shed more salary, which is probably only possiable if we give up some of our young ‘talent’.
Thing B
by warriorsscore110 on Nov 16, 2009 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
Don’t get hung up on Johnson, maybe a bad example. Maybe a guy like Rudy gay or some other player (FA) of intrest).
Maybe Miami is under a different scenario but this is the exact theory i’ve read they may try to impliment. Please further clarify if possible.
We indeed would have to “gamble” with our young talent. We may indeed lose Ellis and Biedrins in do so. It’s a high risk, high reward type of move but at this point, i’m thinking, “man, we already suck anyways”.
Looks like we are aimed for a lottery pick, maybe a nice one at that and IMO there’s a good draft class brewing for 2010. A top draft pick on top of a startegy like this, assuming we can retain the pick may be our best chance to push this team to the next level.
BTW, Nellie should be gone next year, Johnson wouldn’t be playing for him.
Johnson, Gay or whatever overpriced free agent that will echo back to the Maggette “we spent how much?” signing when all is said and done, we are not on track to have cap room.
Howabout (one word) a buy-out of Raddy’s contract at the end of this year? …come one how about it?
- covering all angels.
There is no way to simply erase the salary as you seem to be suggesting. Buying out Radmanovic’s contract doesn’t take him off the books. It only reduces the hit by the difference between what he agrees to in buyout and what he was due. Further, with a single year left, VladRad has very very little incentive to agree to a buyout for much less than he’s due. It’s not like a buyout can be forced on a guy. He has to agree.
This cap room you’re imagining is fantasy. Let it die.
wouldn’t his being in the last year of his contract have some value as a trade asset that season as well?
jae, another of your good posts – thanks
Expiring money and cap space are not the same thing
If a team is over the cap (as the Warriors are and will be), the money they have expiring is not enough to put them under the cap in a meaningful way.
The Warriors will not be able to sign a free agent in 2010 for more than the MLE barring something absolutely insane, and that’s just the way it is.
Got it. Although can’t the MLE possibly aquire a significant player? what’s the MLE, 5mill? And if we get lucky in the draft will the rookie contract effect our MLE money?
The MLE is about 5.6m right now
It can be split between multiple guys, and rookies count completely separately.
The only times that the MLE gets a significant guy are when the market for him is strangely bad (Ariza, Trevor) or he’s willing to take a pay cut per season for a longer deal or to play with a contender (Artest, Ron).
ONE downside...
Did we honestly have to trade Acie Law?
I actually really started to like his play in recent games and I tink he started to understand a little more the GSW style of play. If the Bobcats dont take up his option, I believe he comes free again…if so, would we bring him back into the lineup for a minimum?
GSOM Blog Beast!
We may never know...
But Law might have been a big part in this trade for Charlotte. He’s a physical PG, good for small chunks of minutes, and the Bobcats have a struggling backcourt right now.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
If Law was a ‘big part of the trade’ they’re not operating wisely. They’ll be hard pressed to work him into their long term plans given that at end of the year, he’s an unrestricted FA without Bird rights.
Maybe not long-term, but DJ Augustine is struggling mightly as their backup PG, and it’s still early in the season, so they may be looking for someone who can come in and help them get wins as a solid backup PG.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 4:59 PM PST up reply actions
They did
To make the trade work under the CBA, they had to add a guy making over $2.05 mill.
Sadly, that made Law the only reasonable option for both parties.
I love Acie Law too
Too bad it was short lived, Radmanovic, is he problem with the Lakers that’s why they traded him? Raja Bell well at least we got someone to guard Kobe, I remember when Lakers lost to Phoenix in 2007 1st round playoffs. Raja was all over Kobe.
Win Or Lose Warriors For Life.........
Also a seperate point....
If we are not done…. if we put Biedrins and Monta together with say Claxton and George… could we go for a player like Bosh?
Curry
Morrow
Randolph
Turiaf
Bosh
With
CJ
Magette
Bell
Buike
Wright
Moore
Radmanovic
That to me looks like a very promising line-up…but I am not sure if it is possible? or whether we should?
GSOM Blog Beast!
I'd love to see
Bosh for Speedy+Wright+Ellis….or Ellis + Turiaf for Bosh
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
I prefer Turiafs shot
To Biedrins… :) I also believe he’s Captain for a reason, he can unite this team. I think his work ethic is superb and he has real passion for this club and the game, something I have never really seen from Biedrins, who strikes me as slightly lazy. My personal opinion is that Biedrins should be playing at a much higher level now than he was two years ago and unfortunately I just dont see it.
I think Baron made Beans look a lot better than he actually is.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions
And yet Biedrins is still a much better player than Turiaf. Funny how that works…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 2:37 PM PST up reply actions
much better?
care to quantify?
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions
No problem. Biedrins has averaged 12.1 rebounds per 36 minutes over his career. This is a number that improved for the last 4 straight years, ending at 13.4 last year. Rebounds are incredibly important. Ronny Turiaf has averaged 7.9 rebounds per 36 minutes over his career – I don’t see any trends to go with, so I think that’s a fair assessment of his ability. If you see a trend in his numbers you’d like to point out, be my guest. So Biedrins averages somewhere between 4-5.5 more rebounds per 36 minutes than Turiaf. Basically, by himself, Biedrins does more to rebound the basketball than Turiaf and Stephen Jackson combined. I don’t know exactly how much a rebound is worth towards winning a game, but I’ve been told (mostly by jae) that it is a lot, and a very important part of the game. Biedrins is more than 50% better at this than Turiaf!
Offensively, Biedrins doesn’t have much of an arsenal, but he knows his role. He has great hands, he’s a great finisher, and this is all he does on offense. This has lead to him being one of the most efficient players in the entire NBA offensively. When Biedrins shoots the ball, it helps the team immensely. Now, Turiaf is an efficient player himself, I gotta give him credit for that (I do like Turiaf, don’t get me wrong). He’s not in Biedrins class, though. If each player takes a given amount of shots (counting shots they get fouled on), Biedrins is going to score more points. Biedrins scores somewhere between 1-3 more points per 36 minutes than Turiaf, suggesting from a volume standpoint he’s equal to or greater than Turiaf. Turiaf is a better passer than Biedrins, that much is true. He gets about 1-2 assists more per 36 minutes, with a similar number of turnovers.
Defensively, I’m comfortable calling them a wash on the ball. Neither of them are great post defenders against capable post scorers. Off the ball, Turiaf blocks about a shot more per 36. Blocked shots are good, but pretty overrated, as they don’t lead to a change of possession as often as we like to think. Biedrins gets more steals, but the difference is very small.
Overall, Biedrins is the better offensive player, a pretty comparable (maybe slightly worse, but I wouldn’t call it much of a difference at all) defensively player, and the kicker? Biedrins is a much, much, much, much, much better rebounder than Turiaf. I cannot emphasize enough how big the difference here is, and how important of a feature this is. Biedrins has a huge advantage here, which makes him a much better player.
I don’t know much about win shares, I won’t even call them meaningful, but because more facts is generally better I’ll throw out that Biedrins was worth 5.4 wins last year in 1863 minutes by their calculations, whereas Turiaf was worth 3.6 wins in 1696 minutes. I assume this is a rate stat (that is, more minutes will lead to a higher win total), so when breaking it down to per minute numbers, Biedrins production is 37% greater than Turiaf’s.
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions
Ta for that
But personally I wouldnt call 37% much better. Better yes, but not quite the same level.
Also you have to bear in mind…Biedrins is on a team where NO ONE rebounds and so it is pretty much all on him. Ronny has had supporting players at the Lakers that helped in that sense.
So on a career comparison I would expect Biedrins to rebound more if he is the only one rebounding…whereas RT always had help..
Just something that affects your conclusion somewhat..
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 6:55 PM PST up reply actions
Ronny’s never done better than 8.6 per 36 under any circumstances. That doesn’t change the result a whole lot. This 8.6 number would also have been the number used for that 37% calculation. Also, rebound rates supposedly are one of the most steady statistics that exist, there just rarely is much teammate affect present, and players natural abilities at it rarely change very much over time.
As for the 37%, that’s a pretty big difference in production, I don’t know how you can say it isn’t. The difference (according to this same stat) between Kobe and Biedrins is 48%, to put things in some perspective…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
Also, one more point. 33% is the difference between 30 wins and 40 wins. That’s a pretty big difference if you ask me…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:09 PM PST up reply actions
WHAT?
Rebounding has little teammate affect?
Dont be daft…. of course it does. If you have three great rebounders in your front court they share the load… if you have one..nearly all the responsibility is on him…
A players rebounding per will change considerably depending on the players around him…
Completely disagree with your logic on this..
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:10 PM PST up reply actions
Rebounding has little teammate affect?
Yes. That’s what the evidence says. The impact of teammates has some, but on the whole very, very little impact on a player’s rebound rate. Not basing this on opinion, but basing this on statistical observation.
Dont be daft…. of course it does.
You are presenting your "conventional wisdom" where real data has been analyzed. No matter how reasonable you feel your opinion is here, data, real measured and analyzed data suggests otherwise.
A players rebounding per will change considerably depending on the players around him
This is false.
Completely disagree with your logic on this..
The issue is not one of logic. It’s one of measured evidence. No matter how logical you believe it to be, in the vast number of cases, the impact of teammates on a player’s rebound rate is very small.
What jae said. This wasn’t logic, this was based on actual evidence and results (basically I’ve had all this information and more from jae directed at me multiple times). I just repeat what the facts are…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:22 PM PST up reply actions
No I amsorry JAE...I am not taking a lesson from you here ...
This is not ALL about stats. This cannot be completely explained by stats.. This is my personal opinion based on watching and PLAYING the game to college level.
When you have 3 guys on court that are all brilliant at rebounding…are your seriously trying to suggest that statistically… the centre will get exactly the same number of rebounds to when the same centre has two small guys next to him that dont rebound?
Of course not…
If the Centre has no help he gets moe rebounds if he has lots of help h wont get as many as there is another big guy taking some away from him…. you dont need stats for that…its basic common sense, otherwise..prove it to me…
We’ll go to a basketball court and put three great rebounders on the floor and then we’ll put you and missing barry on the floor either side of Biedrins..who do you think is going to get more rebounds????
Not everything in life can be argued with a statistic…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:30 PM PST up reply actions
So basically you’re arguing that you refuse to believe the facts because they don’t agree with you? I haven’t seen the numbers myself, who knows, maybe Jae lies, but if you believe he’s telling the truth, I honestly don’t know how the evidence can possibly be any more clear an factual. If you find teammate rebounding effects at the NBA level are small and mostly inconsequential…well, I don’t even know what to say at that point, because the facts make the exact point I’m trying to say as clearly as possible. You’re arguing that teammates have a meaningful effect on rebounding when they do not have a meaningful effect on rebounding. Ugh, I want to keep going, because this kind of ridiculous ignorance angers me, but I just don’t know how many more ways to say the facts directly contradict your point….
By the way, it’s not very meaningful that you played at the college level. Many other people have played basketball, too…the point we’re talking about right now, though, is the NBA, and nobody here has played at that level, so nobody here has any special first hand knowledge of the subject. Using your example or your first hand knowledge is not representative of the NBA game.
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:37 PM PST up reply actions
what facts?
I personally dont believe them based on my own experiences. As in that great show Mythbusters..I am more than happy to take this to a Bball court one day…and I’ll show you WHY the stats dont always tell the whole story…
As to the college thing, it wasmerely referene to my own personal experiences which is what I based my opinion on as I saw our centre get infinitely more rebounds whenever we played small ball. Its got bugger all to do with showing off, it was merely an experience from a reasonable level, rather some armchair bball viewer as some may have thought I am.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:42 PM PST up reply actions
And I wasn’t trying to call you out for showing off, just making the point that we normal people are not representative of the population of elite athletes. It just might be there’s a huge effect any place we’ve played, but the NBA is such a different game and the players are so refined that it just doesn’t show up.
I’m more knowledgeable about baseball, so I’m going to switch the conversation to that for a bit to give an example to highlight the point I’m trying to make. Clutch hitting, for all intensive purposes, doesn’t exist at the MLB level (that’s not technically true but we’re best off assuming it is). Why is this? I don’t know exactly, surely there are people that would get nervous on such a big stage with people watching and what not. One of the reasons – I don’t know how big a factor but certainly a factor – is that these people will never make it to a clutch MLB situation. If they can’t handle the pressure, or people watching them, they will not succeed in the minors, they will not succeed in their MLB debut, they will not succeed with 40,000 Giants fans yelling at them because they’re a scum of the earth Dodger. It’s survivor bias – these people get weeded out. What we’re left with is a population that doesn’t accurate measure up to the normal population of people. So that’s the point I’m trying to make – that the NBA is full of survivor bias, the elite athletes that make it at that level aren’t like the rest of us. Our experiences don’t necessarily translate to the NBA.
As for the facts, well, jae is more knowledgeable than me, I’ll let him answer that if he so chooses…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:49 PM PST up reply actions
Unfortunately..
even professional athletes can falter in different environments. For example a great football player for his club can be hopeless for his country…?
Why no one knows, but there have been hundreds of examples over the years. But this is OT…and its 4am and I am staying up to discussand justify my personal opinion…..I must be mad…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:58 PM PST up reply actions
For example a great football player for his club can be hopeless for his country…?
Mere chance. :)
Though I’m not much of a soccer fan nor do I follow it, so maybe there’s more to it than that (like the player being put into a different role with teammates who may not complement him as well or something)….
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 8:02 PM PST up reply actions
This is not ALL about stats. This cannot be completely explained by stats.. This is my personal opinion based on watching and PLAYING the game to college level.
Either your experience is not universal or you have deceived yourself to some degree.
It is about stats in that rebounds are counted and tracked. Save for very, very few errors by the official scorers, there are not phantom rebounds that happen but are not tracked. While you may have felt that you were aided or hindered by teammates in terms of rebound totals, in analysis of many players across the NBA that suggests that either those situations where there are enough “brilliant” rebounders to make a difference happen too infrequently to matter or that they don’t really matter. Again, you can try to argue this with “logic”, but the numbers have been counted and we can see who really got the rebounds and it indicates that your conjecture is simply false.
I cannot speak for this at the college level. There are differences between the college and pro game, both in the rules and the level of play that may make it different. But at the NBA level, your feeling based on your experience at a different level, is simply not true.
the centre will get exactly the same number of rebounds to when the same centre has two small guys next to him that dont rebound?
Exactly the same? We don’t know. But there’s enough evidence to suggest that the numbers don’t change that much, not enough to show the sort of appreciable difference you seem to be suggesting. Very good rebounders rebound very well even alongside very good rebounders and poor rebounders are aided, if at all, only to a very marginal degree at least in terms of what matters: the actual number of rebounds that they pull down.
Your opinion, your experience, your logic don’t matter here. What matters is the number of rebounds actually recorded as this reflects the number of rebounds actually gathered. I’m sorry if you’re offended by this, but it’s reality and you’re thus taking issue with reality.
its basic common sense
“Common sense” doesn’t make something correct. It simply means that you’ve found a common way to arrive at an answer. It doesn’t make the answer correct. When the answer does not actually mesh with what has been observed, then the value of common sense is rather insignificant.
prove it to me…
This summer I presented a post showing just how consistent rebound rates were across players’ careers further indicating that changing teams did not change this reality to any appreciable bit. Dave Berri has looked at this and published on this as well. I’m not sure what you consider “proof” as you seem to be ready to reject actual numbers, but inasmuch as the numbers indicate that rebound rates don’t change that much, it’s been proven. Your assertion otherwise has no impact on this.
Not everything in life can be argued with a statistic…
An argument about something that is measured statistically, like rebound rates can be argued with a statistic. Arguing about it with “common sense” is irrelevant. It just says that you believe something and don’t care about evidence. Your loss.
OK...explain this for me..
1: If you take 1 man at 7 foot tall and two guys at 6 foot tall who are not good at rebounding yet the 7 foot tall person is pretty good at rebounding….if you throw a basketball at the backboard… would you not agree that the 7 foot guy is statistically more likely to get the rebound?
2: Do the exact same excercise except put three 7 foot guys on the court (one of which is the guy from above) all hustling to grab the exact same throw off the backboard… do you think…statistically speakig the original guy is going to now grab exactly the same number of rebounds?
Seriously… take the nose away from the stat lists for a second and answer me with a straight face that you genuinely believe in the 2nd scenario above…the original centre is going to get the exact same number of rebounds and having those guys competing does not affect his numbers per game? versus being the only one who is consistantly rebounding.
If you say yes…..there really is no point ever trying to have a rational discussion with you as I could ACTUALLY prove this to you IN REAL LIFE, rather than reading a bunch of stat lines that cannot possibly quantify the effect of better rebounding players in any given situation. I am more than happy to be proven wrong, but instead of using your usual method of preaching the stats and then telling people they are wrong for not believing it, let’s try my way and see what the outcome is?
Now, the fact neither of you mentioned other than “well the stats say otherwise” is WHY do the stats state as such?…mainly because most teams agree who their primary rebounder is and if he is near the ball the others will allow him to take it. THIS in itself sets the reason why the rebounding stats dont change much.. HE IS the centre after all…
NOT as was claimed and what I disagreed with, that other players have little/no impact whatsoever.
But the point I am making is… I can prove my arguement to you on a basketball court. You can only recite things you have read and you are using such data which does not include variables to give a definitive view. I could prove it with some college kids or I could prove it with some NBA players if we could get some….
Offers there…anytime you wish to pit your statistical reasoning against my offer of actual practical excercise, you let me know. But I tell you now… I know for a fact that 3 big guys all fighting for the ball of equal ability is going to reveal equal numbers across all three, versus the individual with significant rebounding skill advantage over two smaller/less able players…
So here’s some numbers which you so dearly love…
The 3 guys battling over 10 rebounds will probably grab roughly 3 each, “IF” they are all of equal capability and height.
The one big guy versus two incompetent rebounders….will probably get nearer a 9 to 1 ratio…. which was my point with regards to Biedrins. Just to remind you…I never said anywhere that I thought Ronny was better than Biedrins!
So no, I personally dont believe your explanation fly’s in THIS instance. Every now and then Jae, you will be wrong….majority of times you are pretty spot on with your statistical analysis…but on this one.. I can prove you wrong.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 12:49 PM PST up reply actions
Brit, you are presenting a hypothetical situation that runs outside of the realm
Do the exact same excercise except put three 7 foot guys on the court (one of which is the guy from above) all hustling to grab the exact same throw off the backboard… do you think…statistically speakig the original guy is going to now grab exactly the same number of rebounds?
No, he wouldn’t. Yet that sort of scenario doesn’t appear to happen enough to make a big difference when all is said and done. The way most teams construct lineups in the NBA tends not to present your hypothetical often enough to matter. Yes, you can construct scenarios where a players rebounding totals will change substantially. No, it doesn’t appear that in real NBA games these scenarios happen enough to change players’ rebound totals.
THIS in itself sets the reason why the rebounding stats dont change much.. HE IS the centre after all…
Do try to recall why this ‘conversation’ began. You suggested that Biedrins rebounding was somehow inflated because no one else on the team was going to get them, and then said that Turiaf wasn’t as good because on the Lakers other people on his team could rebound as well. You completely and flatly ignored that Turiaf saw no such improvement when he came to the Warriors, though by your reasoning he should have.
Turiaf and Biedrins are both centers. But only one seems to be a very good rebounder and the other seems to be no better when he plays center alongside 4 guys who aren’t good rebounders as he did when he played on a team where he was complemented with other good rebounders. This is a fundamental issue that you’ve glossed over, completely. I really have no urge to say anything more about it if you cannot address this. You haven’t, and none of your college experience or ‘common sense’ or hypotheticals makes a rodent’s behind of difference to this end.
The repeated call to avoid using stats just suggests to me that you’re intimidated by data and analysis. Sorry, but a measured value like a rebound is an ideal place to apply a statistical analysis.
I don’t believe anything can convince you otherwise. You seem impervious to data, but perhaps others who are not so adamantly against analyzing beyond their gut feeling find it interesting.
then show me the data?
You have talked a lot…but I yet to see any proof that the very specific arguement that teammates cannot affect rebounding stats…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
Honestly, this is as straightforward a scenario as could possibly exist. In the NBA, do teammates have an effect on each others rebounding numbers? Research has been done that looks at the number of rebounds players collect, comparing different scenarios, and finding it doesn’t really make much of a difference. It is so clear I can’t possibly see what you’re arguing against.
It’s basically like walking out to a pickup court, you claiming the hoop is 10’ tall because all basketball hoops are 10’ tall, someone taking out a tape measure in front of you and measuring it and finding it is only 9’9" tall, and you saying they’re wrong because you believed it was 10’ tall before measuring it. Then you tell them they’re wrong because, if they went to Oracle Arena and measured a hoop’s height, they’ll see this it’s 10’ tall, so this hoop must be 10’ tall. That’s honestly how clear and ridiculous this scenario is. The results have been measured, and say the exact opposite of what you’re saying, and you simply refuse to accept them.
by Missing Barry on Nov 17, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
WHERE????????????
Instead of talking…simply point out where does one find such data? as to the second example?
Please…try and keep it sensible.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 7:18 PM PST up reply actions
It’s not clear what you want. Are you calling me a liar? I cannot post the entirety of my 3.5GB dataset.
On a specific vis a vis Turiaf: His overall rebounds per36 was 7.6. When he was in the game without either Randolph or Biedrins in the lineup (1021 minutes out of 1696 for the year — he played about 60% of his minutes as the lone “Big”) it did go up to 8.3/36. An effect? Yes. A big effect? No, not really. It’s fairly inseparable from random noise at that point, though it may indicate that less than a rebound a game that Turiaf otherwise would have had is taken down by a better rebounding teammate when such teammate is in the lineup. It’s not enough to make a bad rebounder look good and it isn’t what makes a good rebounder look good.
You should take a look at the work that David Berri has done. He’s covered the issue quite a bit. His findings indicate that a players’ rebound rate has near statistical independence from teammates.
it did go up to 8.3/36. An effect? Yes. A big effect? No, not really
That’s about 10% which is pretty big in terms of game outcome.
I know the point brit is trying to make and I know the stats don’t support it but there’s a reason for it, we just don’t know why. Maybe the smaller players are better shooters or something so the rebound stats balance 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 18, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
That’s about 10% which is pretty big in terms of game outcome.
10% before you take the concept of random variation/sample error into account. Stat 101 – just because there’s a difference in the samples doesn’t mean you can conclude the two numbers come from different populations, and even if they do, it doesn’t necessarily mean the difference is as large as the difference between the two sample results.
by Missing Barry on Nov 18, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
Barry..
Equally….the stats “may” be wrong by variable against your arguement. For example The number of 7.6 for Turiaf above MAY in fact have been 7.2… and if the other number was 8.6…suddenly the increase is even larger…so the “variable” arguement swings both ways.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 18, 2009 12:35 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks. I’m well aware of that. That’s why we do 2-tailed tests. It changes the details of the calculation some, sure, but it doesn’t change the basic concept that to find out if results are statistically significant or not, you have to do a statistical test…
by Missing Barry on Nov 18, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
Appreciated...
Someone able to reflect another point of view and try to understand the point I was making and hell yes…to call a 10% increase “noise” is laughable… That noise…might just win you or lose you a game…
In short… whether its “noise” or not, the stat DOES change in that example depending on who is on the floor around Turiaf…so the pont I was making is actually correct! proven by your own stats.
Irrespective of how you want to spin it Jae…. my point was correct.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 18, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
and....
You have NO IDEA how happy it makes me to have your own stats work against your own arguement…no matter how small the effect may have been it was there and I was correct a player CAN be affected by those around him…. Ahhhhh… I’m going to enjoy this for a while..
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 18, 2009 12:48 PM PST up reply actions
to call a 10% increase "noise" is laughable… That noise…might just win you or lose you a game…
…really? Please, take a stat class. Just one. Just so you have some basic understanding of the principles of statistics. Just so you understand what the term “sample error” means…
Also, the basic point of this topic has been, to quote Jae:
Yes. That’s what the evidence says. The impact of teammates has some, but on the whole very, very little impact on a player’s rebound rate.blockquote>
That’s the very first thing Jae said in this conversation…
by Missing Barry on Nov 18, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions
As an attempt to explain why we might see less variation than Brit expects, remember that the other team is usually fielding at least one quality rebounder. I have always found that the quality of rebounder I am playing against has a significantly larger impact on my rebounding than the quality of rebounder I am playing with. This happens because my opponent deliberately negatively effects the number of rebounds I can get to, whereas my team mates generally get rebounds I wouldn’t be getting to anyway. I think it is unlikely that the quality of rebounder I am playing with has no effect on my rebounding, but I am not at all surprised if that effect is dwarfed by the effects of my own rebounding ability and that of my opponent. I feel fairly safe extrapolating this concept to NBA players as well.
Also you have to bear in mind…Biedrins is on a team where NO ONE rebounds and so it is pretty much all on him. Ronny has had supporting players at the Lakers that helped in that sense.
That explanation doesn’t fly. If this was responsible for as much as you seem to suggest, why didn’t Ronny become a better rebounder on the Warriors when faced with no competition (save Biedrins, with whom he seldom played)? When Ronny’s played, it’s been “pretty much all on him” too, but he’s still not very good.
well then I guess because you have a different opinion...
I am not allowed to prefer Turiaf over Biedrins….
Damn…silly me.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:32 PM PST up reply actions
As a fan, nobody’s going to stop you for rooting for which player you like more. That’s your right and I have no problem with it. If you’re not going to recognize that Biedrins is the better player, though…then you’re just living in your own little fantasy world, because he isn’t. It’s not particularly close between them, either. If you substituted Biedrins for Turiaf the Warriors would do worse in a meaningful way.
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:39 PM PST up reply actions
again.....yooohoo calling Barry...
“To Biedrins… :) I also believe he’s Captain for a reason, he can unite this team. I think his work ethic is superb and he has real passion for this club and the game, something I have never really seen from Biedrins, who strikes me as slightly lazy. My personal opinion is that Biedrins should be playing at a much higher level now than he was two years ago and unfortunately I just dont see it.I think Baron made Beans look a lot better than he actually is.”
Could you stop making stuff up for one post…..WHERE did I say Turiaf was better than Biedrins?? I simply said I would prefer to keep him over Biedrins….all of which was only if we could get a player like Bosh in a trade…
May I suggest that you step out of YOUR fantasy world where you put words into peoples mouths and simply answer what they might say rather than create stuff that makes your argument sound better?
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:47 PM PST up reply actions
I was simply going back to our earlier conversation about the two. I also tried to avoid saying you called Turiaf a better player, I just pointed out that Biedrins is better and you’d be wrong (keyword coming up) if (there it is) you argued otherwise. :)
Also, a little unclear on “I would prefer to keep him over Biedrins”. I work in econ, forgive me for assuming “ceteris paribus” when people make statements like this, it’s kind of ingrained in my thought process at this point. If you mean you’d rather keep Turiaf and trade Biedrins, knowing Biedrins will bring more back than Turiaf, then I misinterpreted, though I don’t think it’s necessarily clear that that’s the point you’re making. It looked to me like you were saying if I had to choose between one or the other I’d choose Turiaf…which would result in a worse team…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:56 PM PST up reply actions
OK well that nots what you said..
“If you’re not going to recognize that Biedrins is the better player, though…then you’re just living in your own little fantasy world”…forgive me…but that sounds like “my way or the highway to me”
I see Turiaf bringing in MANY more things to the team right now…more than just rebounding….but its way to late for me to have to sit and thrash these all out because ultimately…it is my personal opinion and if you dont like it…you dont have to agree…but equally you dont have to try and convince me otherwise….
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 8:03 PM PST up reply actions
more than just rebounding
Most that “just rebounding” implies that he brings rebounding. Compared to the level of rebounding expected of the average NBA 4 or 5, he doesn’t bring much. He is a good shot blocker and he’s a better than average passer. But he does not bring much offensive production for whatever reason and he not only does not bring rebounding, he’s a detriment in this regard.
It isn’t about convincing but let’s be honest with the evidence. In terms of raw production, Biedrins brings a whole lot more.
Misquote
I stated that he brings more than rebounding as I have tried to explain to you MANY times before… its not ALL about what he does on the floor…it also includes, In my opinion if I am allowed to have that, hi being able to teach the youngsters around him how to play as part of a team, how to work together, how to handle themselves, etc, etc etc.
THIS is what “I” mean by bringing more than rebounding to the team….
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
BritWarrior. I did not misquote you. It’s above in the thread for everyone to read. I cut and paste your exact words. Don’t speak falsely and accuse me of misquoting you. Perhaps you misspoke, but the quote I attributed to you was what you actually wrote.
no I am sorry
But if you want to use words to state that I implied something..you can bloody well take it back that your misquoting or better still taking out of context… thats even better…
So no I didnt misspeak…. so try not to fabricate stuff of what you “think” I implied….
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 6:59 PM PST up reply actions
Seriously?
try harder and for once just accept that your wrong. I dont think I have EVER seen you apologis once on this board… the arrogance is mind blowing.
HERE is what you wrote:
“Most that "just rebounding" implies that he brings rebounding. Compared to the level of rebounding expected of the average NBA 4 or 5, " WHO the hell…are yo to state what I may or may have not “implied”?? So yes , you are misquoting and definitely using that statement out of context. I mad it very clear by my statement what I meant by bringing more than rebounding…I also dont see “everyone” making any comments on this at all… so again..save me your snied digs.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 18, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
If you honestly believe that this stuff really wins basketball games more than having talented players does, I don’t even know what to say. Maybe it has a small effect, I don’t know that it doesn’t – but there’s a reason the Lakers, Nuggets, Cavs and Magic were the last 4 teams left at the end of last season, and I’ll give you a hint: it’s not because their 8th man had a great personality.
by Missing Barry on Nov 17, 2009 4:57 PM PST up reply actions
Whether or not you prefer Turiaf over Biedrins isn’t an issue. That’s a matter of personal choice. However, your explanation that Biedrins is a good rebounder because he has no competition fails to explain why Turiaf, who you said had competition from teammates while with the Lakers, was not at all better with the Warriors when he was put in the same situation that Biedrins was in. The explanation breaks down because it fails in any way shape or form to account for why Turiaf didn’t benefit from exactly the same the situation that you claim Biedrins benefited from.
Ok, that’s not entirely true. It’s only almost entirely true. Turiaf was marginally better, less than a half a rebound per 36 minutes played, in games where he started, which were predominantly ones where Biedrins didn’t play at all. But that half rebound is pretty much statistical noise.
Very simple....
At the start of the season….Nellie hardly played Randolph….advantage Biedrins…..when Turiaf took over more of the starting centre role….Randolph was being played more by Nellie…hence why Ronny also had more help…
Go crunch the numbers of when Randolph was playing with Ronny…versus Ronny on his own with no other big…versus Biedrins on his own with no other big…
I fully expect Biedrins to still grab a few more boards than Turiaf..I never questioned that.. but I did ask Barry to quantify how “Much better” Biedrins was…. bearing in mind the possibility that Ronny go more help… lets face it…our starters were usually:
Monta
Crawford
Jackson
Magette
Biedrins
versus
CJ
Marco
Randolph
Turiaf
Some Wright/Davidson…..
So yes normally when Ronny played he got less rebounds than when he was the one to start with the starting crew…when I suspect his rebound average went up?
But according to all of the above…it didnt change at all…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
Go crunch the numbers of when Randolph was playing with Ronny…versus Ronny on his own with no other big…versus Biedrins on his own with no other big…
I have. I’ve got a database that allows me to sort on every player combination for the entire league for the last 4 years. I doesn’t make Ronny much better. His rebounding doesn’t improve substantially when he’s playing alongside scrubs. or when he’s playing alongside good rebounders. You believe somehow you are contesting me. You are not. You are contesting real data. You are contesting reality. You are not going to fair well in that contest.
thats great...I am pleased for you...
but I am truly getting tired of this. I think I’ll head outside tomorrow and enjoy the sunshine! Again..you talk a good game…but to me personally.. basketball is more than just statistics in a machine….. statistics truly bore the crap out of me.
The statement was:
“The impact of teammates has some, but on the whole very, very little impact on a player’s rebound rate. Not basing this on opinion, but basing this on statistical observation.” That in itself is a FACTUALLY INCORRECT statement, as it generalises ALL basketball, as did Barry and not the NBA as you adjusted it later.
I’ll stick with my opinion based on my observations, experience and research of my own as I have no wish to instigate a meltdown.
I challenged statistics hypthetical or not to a challenge in a REAL (that means way from a PC) scenario… you have no interest in that..so I have no interest in your stats….
Simple and enjoy.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 7:14 PM PST up reply actions
Sigh, it’s not like the games are played on a PC. They’re real basketball games (NBA games to be more specific), played in real life…
by Missing Barry on Nov 17, 2009 8:13 PM PST up reply actions
Whooooosh.....
You hear that?….that was the whole point of what I meant above as it screamed over your head. The above paragraph has got bugger all to do with playing the game on a PC… I am stating that sometimes things can be proven in the real world that cannot be answered by statistics….
Thats all…… now before you go reach for another tree branch…I think the horse is well and truly dead by now and needs no further flogging!!!
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 18, 2009 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
basketball is more than just statistics in a machine
It’s more that that to me as well and I’ve never, ever, ever claimed otherwise. But when statistics are useful, I use them rather than disregarding them because they “bore the crap out of me.” You are the one who choses to keep your view narrow.
I HAPPILY use statstics every day and in Basketball
discussions….I just dont agree thatstatistics answer EVERY question posed as has now been proven above with Turiafs increased rebound numbers when not assisted by other players. Case closed, good night!
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 18, 2009 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
Nice Team-By-Team
I think getting CP3 while fielding a competitive team is all to unrealistic. This guy is putting up Hall Of Fame #‘s and is only what 24? It’s going to take a helluva lot to get him. Curry, Biedrins…hmm what else would they want that we could afford to give up after that? I just don’t think we make good trade partners that could realistically happen. As for Tayshaun Prince and Andrei Kirilenko, I’m not really impressed with acquiring either right now. The Warriors seem more than content with just letting all of their contracts expire in the summer. Plus I can’t expect Detroit or Utah wanting to give away long time players for absolutely nothing. It’s not like we’re giving them young, unproven players (at least Memphis got that in return in Marc Gasol, Javaris Crittendon and a 1st). Plus I would not want to give a first round pick in this draft for those contracts. I’m more than content with waiting until the summer of 2011 for when these guys hit the FA market. I think they’ll be had for less than the full MLE. But that’s just my hunch.
I think I like BritWarriorGirls idea of trying at the deadline for Monta + AB for Bosh + Amir Johnson. It’s worth a shot as both teams match up pretty well. It thins out the roster and gives it better balance. It’s looking more likely that Monta and Curry aren’t going to succeed. Might as well go all in at some point instead of dipping our toes in the water and chickening out at the last moment.
Now whether or not you believe in the Warriors that they can get an extension done, this is the kind of moves that shows the fanbase that “hey, we’re trying to get something going over here”. And then work like hell to get something agreed with Bosh. Surround him with a little toughness in Randolph and Turiaf and then Wright and Radmanovic then you have a pretty good frontcourt. Maggette and Kelena can go back to playing SF, with Raja and Morrow as the offense and defensive SG’s. Only question mark is putting our faith in Curry. For us to be a good playoff team he needs to be a starter. CJ once again becomes the insurance policy.
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)
oi...
Dont make me throttle you… ;)
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 5:01 PM PST up reply actions
Haha, I think it was an honest mistake. Though as new nickname, it could have legs… XD
Man, never a dull moment on this site … I take a seven-hour train trip from Tokyo to Oita, and when I log back on, Jack’s a Bobcat, Owen Ellickson’s our new Class President, and Brit’s gone and gotten in touch with his feminine side…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Nov 16, 2009 6:22 PM PST up reply actions
In which case..
In true Vinny Jones style… I will call you “Susan”….if it sticks! ;)
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
my fault. I was reading very quickly. This was not an attack to emasculate you. lol.
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)
hhehehe
No worries….there will be no Jones head butts tonight…
Oh wait….I must stop saying things like this in jest…otherwise I will be accused of having anger managemen issues again… :D
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:22 PM PST up reply actions
Monta's next
I sense he and Nellie are sick of each other. And I sense Nellie can’t wait to give Curry the keys to the car.
More drama ahead.
duh
Is there ever NO drama with the warriors?
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
There’ll be even more drama when we learn that Radman has killed 12 people in the last year. Seriously though, does anyone else think he looks like a serial killer with the beard and the deep-set eyes?
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
Why is everyone so sure we are going to make a move...
I just want to get a gauge of how many people are sure that the FO is going to make a move. Obvious new found financial flexibility aside, what has this FO done to prove that they have the ability & tenacity to go out and make a major franchise altering trade?
My point is what’s to say that the FO just doesn’t get out from under all these contracts and just lets them expire as a cost cutting move.
is anthony morrow really a starter in this league...
i mean lets be honest, he can shoot like no one else, but can he create/distribute/defend like the better than anyone else on the team? i think he’s best as a role player playing spot minutes hitting the corner three… not throwing the ball in his hands with two defenders, hitting the game tying fadeaway. Curry has impressed me more and more and i think Nellie is going to bring him back to the starting lineup.
Curry/Watson
Ellis/Morrow
Bell/Maggette
Turiaf/Randolph
Beidrins/Radmonovic
My God has this started already?
Raja Bell is not a 3
Our SF position should now only be occupied by Maggs and RadMan, both of whom actually play the position.
Curry, Ellis, Bell, Morrow in backcourt rotation.
Randolph, Turiaf, Biedrins in frontcourt rotation
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
We have to play small
until Andris or Turiaf are better. Until then AR/Mikki will be our centers, thus Radman/Maggs will be our 4 and bell our 3 (since buki is hurt too).
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
while that make sense...
we all fail to realize that don nelson is still our coach…
if anyone thinks maggette and rad are 3’s in nellie’s system, they are wrong…
this is the coach that courts curry ellis law watson maggette as a lineup…
unconventional to say the least, and while i don’t think that small ball will take us to the playoffs… it proves more entertaining than watching rad shank a 3 kicking it out off a turiaf post up…
Have you watched Nellie coach at all....
You can bet your azz that Nellie is going to play Radman at the 4 in order to space the floor, draw the big men out, and open up driving lanes for our wings. I think you can see Bell start at the 2 guard spot… maybe. But right now it is up in the air. But Radman will be at the 4.
Curry or Watson
Ellis
Morrow
Radman
Mikki
or
Ellis
Bell
Morrow
Radman
Mikki
AR off the bench at the center spot. Maggs off the bench at the 4 spot. If turiaf comes back you may actually see Maggs at the 3 spot.
You could say that about a lot of teams when their best player is hurt…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 6:47 PM PST up reply actions
Excellent writeup (and stop it, you’re making me blush).
So yeah, we have some real tasty expiring deals at this point, plus attractive young chips of various shapes and sizes. The pieces are in place so that we could at least bid on any big-money guy that came available. Let’s stroll through the league and see 1) who might come available and 2) whether they’d be worth it for us.
Atlanta: the big-money guys they have past this year are Josh Smith and Jamal Crawford. Smith’s off to a spectacular start, and it’s hard to imagine them moving him. Jamal Crawford… ahem.
Boston: Pierce, Garnett… not seeing those. Rondo? I suppose he and Doc could start feuding anew, but it’s hard to see it getting to the point where they dump him. Complicating things further, his extension doesn’t kick in till next year; he’s only making $2.1M this season. Expiring contracts don’t seem to help here.
Charlotte: tee-hee. Guys like Wallace and Diaw could prove useful to us, but if we really wanted one or the other, they’d probably already be Warriors right now. This team ain’t looking to shed talent… they’ve doubled down on their current core (God help them).
Chicago: the big contracts here are Deng and Hinrich. Hinrich’s a solid player, but another expensive two doesn’t really sound like what the doctor ordered. Deng… eh. Having something of a bounceback year, but he seems like a dicey guy to commit to, even if they did decide to move him.
Cleveland: no fit here. They’re not about to move Mo for expirings or gamble on Monta.
Dallas: anyone want Dampier back? There’s also Jason Terry. No great fit, and Cuban ain’t one to pinch pennies or do Nellie any favors.
Denver: an interesting possibility if the team somehow implodes, as Melo, Chauncey and Nene are all good players who are locked in through 2011. An implosion doesn’t seem like a great bet, though, and if there is one, I’d say George Karl’s more likely to go than any of their stars.
Detroit: Tayshaun Prince through 2011, Rip Hamilton through 2013. I don’t want Hamilton at that money. Prince, though… Prince is interesting. Brilliant perimeter defender, and a solid, mature, all-around player. If we’re looking to retool, we could do worse. And not at all impossible that they’ll want to dump somebody.
Houston: I guess there’s a kooky scenario where they give us Yao to avoid the risk of his picking up his player option, but I don’t think they’d do that to Yao, and I think they like the end of their bench too much to drop several guys for expirings. Too kooky. No fits here.
Indiana: MURPHY OR DUNLEAVY, ANYONE? The prize here is Granger, obviously. I suppose it’s not impossible that he’d want out, but for PR reasons, I think they’d look for talent in return, not expiring money. We do have talent, though… Monta and a good young guy or two for Granger and a bad contract? I dunno.
LA Clippers: hey, Baron! Boy, we’ve got complicated memories all over the place. Taking on Baron’s contract is the exact last thing we need to do. Kaman? Off to a great start, but has some health risks… plus, with Camby being 35 and expiring, I don’t think Kaman’s a guy they’ll be looking to move.
LA Lakers: the champs ain’t gonna blow themselves up. No fit here.
Memphis: their only pricey player is Zach Randolph. Ewwww.
Miami: their whole damn team is expiring.
Milwaukee: I sure don’t want Redd at his money, and I don’t see the point in swapping Biedrins for Bogut.
Minnesota: Big Al, at $13.5 million per through 2013. We could use a post guy, no question, but Al is not all the way back from his ACL tear, and even healthy I think he’s a bit overpaid. If we’re gonna spend that much on a big, we should try to get some defense out of it.
New Jersey: only big long-term deal is Devin Harris, and they need him to try to attract FAs. No fit.
New Orleans: CHRIS EFFIN’ PAUL. If you want to fantasize, look no further. He seems very unhappy, and is on a struggling team that’s cash-strapped. If things sour to the point where they have to try to move him, we would at least be in the conversation, with a variety of packages to offer. Monta, Curry, a wing and expirings for Paul and Peja? The Hornets are a rare team that might accept a couple extra players back, as they’re in transition and have a dreadful bench. I don’t think Paul will be traded, and I doubt we’d win the sweepstakes for him if we were. But make no mistake: this is the dream scenario.
New York: I get why they’d want to deal with us, but I don’t know why we’d want to deal with them. In another thread, people were saying we should eat Curry’s deal if it meant they’d give us Gallinari. Gallinari’s interesting, but I don’t think he’s that interesting, and besides, is another shooter who can’t rebound really gonna get us anywhere?
Oklahoma City: no big contracts here, no reason to think they’ll disrupt their young core anytime soon.
Orlando: if they’re worried about paying so much luxury tax, they do a damn good job of hiding it. I don’t see a fit here.
Philadelphia: three big contracts here. Dalembert and Brand aren’t worth dumping expirings for, as they just make too much. Iguodala’s great, and a worthwhile target if he comes available… no reason to think he will.
Phoenix: okay, Amar’e. So here’s the thing: it’s only useful to us if he’s willing to extend here. That was already a longshot at best… with all the recent nonsense, I have to think the odds are basically nil at this point. We shouldn’t trade talent for a guy who’ll definitely leave. And since he’s expiring anyway, why would the Suns bother trading him for other expirings? If things go south with Monta, maybe there’s some angle here… the Suns let Amar’e go but get a player back to show their fanbase they’re still committed to winning, while we dump a contract. But I think this is not as likely of a scenario as it was this summer. We’re a lot more radioactive now, and that makes it harder to convince anyone with leverage to extend with us.
Portland: big contracts are Roy and Aldridge. They ain’t going anywhere.
Sacramento: it wouldn’t shock me if they try to move Kevin Martin at some point, but he’s a horrible fit for us.
San Antonio: their studs aren’t going anywhere.
Toronto: the Amar’e issues apply to Bosh, plus he seems increasingly likely to stay put. The other big contracts are Calderon, Turkoglu and Bargnani. No thank you, no thank you, no thank you.
Utah: I continue to think Kirilenko would be a great fit here, as he’s the kind of versatile, self-motivating defender we’ll need to survive as long as Nellie’s in charge. Overpaid, but he’s only signed through next season, so he’s off your hands right after he turns 30… not a huge risk. Plus, if he fizzles, he’s a montrous expiring for next season. However, while Kirilenko has clearly chafed under Sloan at times, there’s no indication of tension there right now… Kirilenko’s playing well and leading the team in minutes. And he’s not the guy they’re looking to deal. Jazz fans are even more desperate to be rid of Boozer than we were to be rid of Jack. Boozer? He’s an expiring, and, I dunno. Screw Boozer.
Washington: Huge-money guys in Arenas, Jamison and Butler… they might well have a desire to deal, but these guy’s ain’t worth it. Butler’s the cheapest and expires the quickest, but he’s also off to a horrible start. Do not want.
So as I see it, our top three targets should be Chris Paul, Tayshaun Prince and Andrei Kirilenko, one Hall of Fame-level talent in his prime and two good players who’d cover some weaknesses and only cost an extra year of salary. Then maybe Gerald Wallace if the Bobcats re-tool. After that, I’m not sure there’s a big contract worth going to the mat for that has any chance of coming available. Anything can happen, and it’s nice that we’ll be in a position to take advantage if and when it does… still, I think there’s a decent chance we don’t end up doing much with these.
That’s not to take away from the trade. This trade got a malcontent off the team, gave us two semi-useful role players and substantially brightened the outlooks for ‘11-’12 and ‘12-’13. Most of us will still be following this damn team then, so we’ll appreciate this trade someday. And look at it this way: if Cohan sells the team by them, with Jack off the books, the new management group will have more freedom to wipe away the horrors of the past. Believe in the future, friends. It will come, some day, at last.
by onlxn on Nov 16, 2009 2:27 PM PST reply actions 10 recs
oh, i'm sorry to hear that
but that explains why you’ve commented so much more than before
by IQofaWarrior on Nov 16, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
hey, your loudness is good reading
even if i don’t agree with everything you say
by IQofaWarrior on Nov 16, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions
I love your loudness here,
I wish I had the ability to make my writing appear like yours. : )
It will be intresting to see what happens with Monta Ellis. I’m not buying into the burning hatred that TK says exists in the Rowell/Nelson/Ellis triangle, but I’m not sure he is a good fit. Ellis is playing well and all ankle injurie concerns are gone, it might be wise to see what the market for him would be come trade deadline.
Thing B
by warriorsscore110 on Nov 16, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
We can trade him in a year or two. No rush. We’re not about to win a championship anyway.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
I am as unemployed as a man has ever been.
did they want someone quieter?
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 16, 2009 8:32 PM PST up reply actions
I think you forgot Joe Johnson
Unless I’m mistaken, he’s a UFA after this season.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Nov 16, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
He is… the Bosh/Amar’e/Boozer stuff applies to him, too. If all we’re giving them is other expirings, there’s no reason for them to do the deal. And if we’re giving them talent, it’s not worth it to us unless we’re pretty sure Joe Johnson will extend here. And while we’d be able to offer more than other teams, I’d be very leery of assuming we can get anyone to extend, given all the other teams with cap room and the stench currently surrounding our franchise.
Tell the Hornets they can have whatever they want if it gives us Chris Paul. Easy. :)
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 2:40 PM PST up reply actions
Chris Paul, Tayshaun Prince and Andrei Kirilenko
Yes, please. And I’ll take seconds.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
I think getting CP3 while fielding a competitive team is all to unrealistic. This guy is putting up Hall Of Fame #‘s and is only what 24? It’s going to take a helluva lot to get him. Curry, Biedrins…hmm what else would they want that we could afford to give up after that? I just don’t think we make good trade partners that could realistically happen. As for Tayshaun Prince and Andrei Kirilenko, I’m not really impressed with acquiring either right now. The Warriors seem more than content with just letting all of their contracts expire in the summer. Plus I can’t expect Detroit or Utah wanting to give away long time players for absolutely nothing. It’s not like we’re giving them young, unproven players (at least Memphis got that in return in Marc Gasol, Javaris Crittendon and a 1st). Plus I would not want to give a first round pick in this draft for those contracts. I’m more than content with waiting until the summer of 2011 for when these guys hit the FA market. I think they’ll be had for less than the full MLE. But that’s just my hunch.
I think I like BritWarriorGirls idea of trying at the deadline for Monta + AB for Bosh + Amir Johnson. It’s worth a shot as both teams match up pretty well. It thins out the roster and gives it better balance. It’s looking more likely that Monta and Curry aren’t going to succeed. Might as well go all in at some point instead of dipping our toes in the water and chickening out at the last moment.
Now whether or not you believe in the Warriors that they can get an extension done, this is the kind of moves that shows the fanbase that “hey, we’re trying to get something going over here”. And then work like hell to get something agreed with Bosh. Surround him with a little toughness in Randolph and Turiaf and then Wright and Radmanovic then you have a pretty good frontcourt. Maggette and Kelena can go back to playing SF, with Raja and Morrow as the offense and defensive SG’s. Only question mark is putting our faith in Curry. For us to be a good playoff team he needs to be a starter. CJ once again becomes the insurance policy.
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)
I’d be all for Monta + AB for Bosh + Amir Johnson, but it’s hard to imagine it actually happening. Toronto would have a good (and VERY Euro) starting line-up… Calderon, Monta, Hedo, Bargnani, Biedrins. However, this ties them up so much financially that they would have to know that this was a playoff team before they made the trade, and I’m not so confident they would commit to that.
If the deadline approaches, and Monta’s attitude goes south, you can sign me up for a Monta for Prince swap.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 3:24 PM PST up reply actions
Prince has a season ending back injury, one that might plauge him the rest of his career. You do realize that trading for Bosh would be a half season rental and then he would be on his way to NY, Miami, or Houston right?
Thing B
by warriorsscore110 on Nov 16, 2009 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
Excellent work (of course)
I’ll reiterate my stance supporting Speedy, Bell, and George for Curry and Danilo- it is the way this team can procure assets (eating 2010 salary). I was a big Gallinari fan before the draft because of his unusual skillset, and I think he would work incredibly well at an extremely low salary for a few more seasons.
Will it happen? Hell no.
Do I want it to? You bet.
Salary Cap would be around 62 Mil next year and the start of Luxury tax would be around 68 Mil
Putting us at about 9 million under the soft cap and about 15 Mil near the Luxury tax level unless we of course make another trade.
One of the few to have appreciated Cap'n Jax. Do well in NC, get that 8th seed!
Conductor of the "We're Back!" Bandwagon!
We won’t be $9mil under the cap. Your numbers are incorrect.
The present salary cap stands at about $57.7 mil, down from the year before. Due to the economic ‘slowdown’ there’s no real reason to believe it will go up substantially and the initial projections were for another year of shrinking cap.
The best estimates I've been hearing put the cap at around $52.5m for next year
The cap is a lagging indicator, meaning that the slowdown from last year will have a bigger impact on the cap # for 2010 than 2009.
I know one thing: Raja Bell could teach Morrow a lot, especially about how to move and get open for 3ptrs. I don’t like Bell, but he is a high-effort, defense guy, and I respect that.
If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.
This trade is good because it will allow us to sign Danny Granger to a max offer in the offseason
But seriously, I have the feeling that GSoM will once again be in hysterics if the Warriors don’t trade these expirings for something exciting. However, we need to realize that they don’t have to be used, but they’re good to have around in case the right offer materializes.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind it if the Warriors stand pat and allow them to expire. That money is going to be spent one way or the other, whether it’s on re-signing in-house talent, signing MLE-types in the offseason(s), or just avoiding exactly this kind of move in the future (trading away superior parts for superior contracts).
Thing C
This trade is good because it will allow us to sign Danny Granger to a max offer in the offseason
No it won’t.
Sarcasm, no matter how obvious it is to the author, often fails to make its way across these interwebs.
The “But seriously” and following statements that directly contradicted signing Danny Granger as a strategy gave it away to me. :)
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 6:52 PM PST up reply actions
Personally, I wouldn’t mind it if the Warriors stand pat and allow them to expire.
Yeah, the more I look at it, the more okay I am with that outcome. It’s tempting to dream about that one last, high-priced piece of the puzzle, but most of the plausible high-priced pieces are pretty warty… more to the point, we don’t even have a good sense of what the puzzle is right now. Is Monta a one or a two, a leader or a malcontent? Is Curry going to be good or just solid? Will Morrow be a role player or round out his game enough to start? Is Randolph going to turn into a guy we can rely on? Are Biedrins’s defensive struggles permanent or more a facet of the weak team D around him? How many of these guys have the potential to be decent or good defenders? Is Azubuike a part of our future plans? Is Wright?
We’re riddled with question marks, partly because of youth, partly because of injuries, partly because of drama, partly because of Nellie’s hyperactive lineup switches and lazy coaching. It’s really hard to say what we have here, both on an individual level and on a team level. How good would this team be in 2010-11 if we didn’t touch it before then, and if Nellie’s gone by then, as I still think we will be? What would our ceiling be with this roster… 45 wins? 38? 51? 22?
We need to learn more about these guys… sift out the keepers (if there are any) from the others, and especially figure out what we want to do with Monta. Until we do that stuff, it’d be pointless to add any expensive player that was less than top-tier. Chris Paul? Sure, trade the entire team for him in a heartbeat. Gerald Wallace? Maybe… but what puzzle does Gerald Wallace fit into?
Unless things clarify themselves quickly — something I don’t expect as long as Nellie’s our coach — I don’t think we’re gonna be trading for a big name in February. We will probably, and probably should, take a year to sort out our own house.
this is our team - get used to it
bosh, CP3, even granger are not walking through that door.
no one from we believe is walking through that door.
best we can do is try to help our young guys blossom – the talent, I think we all agree is there. But talent can’t blossom without playing time or cancers on the team. Jax part of both those problems.
This team isn’t as bad as they might seem. Two three’s away from being 5-4 instead of 3-6. I think when we get wright, buike and beans back we might suprise some folks.
Monta now has to man up and be a leader, I say give him until december to shape up or trade him before the deadline. He’s good but not good enough to risk hurting the development of our young guys.
My hope now is that Nelson gets his 20 or so wins so he can get the record and move back to maui.
sigh – low standards are nothing new
We should fire Don Nelson and hire Byron Scott to coach.
It’ll cause Chris Paul to demand a trade to the Warriors.
We package Monta + expirings + draft picks + whatever they want for Chris Paul at the trade deadline.
Then we can build a real team around a real superstar.
Best case scenario.
"We Deserve"
Im not going to lie
I wanted to keep Acie Law. He was looking good
I dont see why everyone wants to trade off Monta Ellis
He is a very good player… he puts up 20 points and 5 assists a game and we want to trade him off??? I would much rather give away curry tthan monta… Monta is quicker and more athletically talented… curry is a gonna be a good player but frankly the warriors do not need shooters… plus i do not see the defensive potential in curry as i do in monta…
I think...
Most people see flashes in Curry of Basketball IQ about 50 times better than Monta’s. He has great handles and quick hands, has been a proven shooter (oof at the moment but will come back) and has floor general capability….soemthing Monta is never going to have in my opinion…
We can get a great deal more value for Monta now…rather than in a year when I think people will be looking at Monta in a whole different light..
Dont get me wrong…I like Monta’s play, I just think he could help us land a real key piece at some point…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 5:18 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t see what the knocks on Monta’s basketball IQ are about. Sure, he might not always try as hard as he can on defense, but the dude generally takes good shots, moves extremely well without the ball, is pretty decent at anticipating and creating turnovers on defense….that all says basketball IQ to me. I do not want our offense running primarily through Monta, nor do I think Monta is a superstar – he is what he is, and that’s a great complementary player. Give us one great player that the offense runs through and Monta is a perfect #2 piece – the way he played when Baron was here. Not many players are as good without the ball as Monta, and that’s a pretty good trait for roster construction.
We can get a great deal more value for Monta now…rather than in a year when I think people will be looking at Monta in a whole different light..
Completely disagree. Monta needs a good year to put the moped accident behind him. That’s the light people see him in. We need them to see the good basketball player again.
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
Ok...we'll come back in a year and see where we stand..
But..i am sorry…Monta does NOT have good Basketball IQ… he has very poor court vision and despite his insistence that he is capable of being a PG, is is not. He will be an excellent combo guard, but no more.
My point was that Curry already has better basketball IQ than Monta….he can see the floor much clearer and is a natural floor general that given time..In my personal opinion…could very well become an All-star PG.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:04 PM PST up reply actions
I agree that Monta isn’t much of a passer/distributor at this point in his career. That’s one factor. There are many other things that he does do very well that show he has a good understanding of the game, though. Unless you’re simply using “basketball IQ” to describe passing and not much else…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:07 PM PST up reply actions
No...basketball IQ is about understanding the WHOLE game...
Monta understands his own game right now…he does not see “the game” per say from the set play, reaction, opportunity sense…. understanding where he should be at any given time….positioning so that he can help teamates where needed. Most great basketball players would state Basketball IQ to be the ability to read players and the court and especially on defensive plays, understanding where the threat will come from and being positioned to assist where needed. I’m sorry but no Monta’s BBallIQ is not comparable in my opinion (and thats all its worth), to Curry…
Monta does have skills, yes of course he does and he scores well, but he simply does not do enough on D “yet” to show that he understands the game to the same level as Curry, who clearly see’s opportunities and threats much faster and deals with it in a calm maturity you would expect of someone with probbly about 5 years experience of the league..
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:21 PM PST up reply actions
I was never in this argument to compare Ellis in Curry. I simply object to peoples criticisms of Monta like he has no idea what he’s doing on the basketball court. I see the exact opposite. He has his shortcomings, on defense it’s mostly from consistent effort on and off the ball, on offense he lacks court vision and passing ability for a PG right now. However, as I’ve said, he does some things extremely well that not many other players do. His movement off the ball is as good as anyone in the league. You might be impressed by someone like Rip Hamilton who has an offense designed to let him run off screens right and left – but with Monta, it’s not about the sets. It’s how he sees the play develop and cuts to the proper place (often to the rim) without the ball. Give him someone like Baron who can deliver the ball where it needs to be, and it’s easy to see how Monta shot over 53% from the floor as a guard. Simply put, he understands offense and where he needs to be to be most effective.
Defensively, like I said, he creates a lot of turnovers. Given his alligator arms and lack of defensive presence/ability/effort, this looks like pretty strong evidence to me that he has a pretty good understanding of positioning and sees plays develop. Not to mention all the charges he’s been taking this year – more evidence of his ability to anticipate and see the game.
Again, overall, I’m just not seeing the whole “Monta is basketball retarded!” thing. (Yes, that was an exaggeration, it was for effect, get over it. If you want to say Curry’s basketball IQ > Monta’s, fine, but when you start saying 50 times better I infer that must mean Monta’s is pretty poor, which is the point I’m arguing against. His basketball IQ is good – not the best, but very solid)
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:31 PM PST up reply actions
No you drew a conclusion out of thin air...
Where did I say Monta has no idea what he is doing? or is retarded??
I didnt… you created that all by yourself… I simply stated Curry has better Basketball IQ than Monta…just like Deron Williams has better basketball IQ than Rondo….
Is Rondo a good/great player yes I personally think he is, can Ellis be a Great/good player, yes I tink he can…
You cant get into an arguement with someone about their point of view, if you then state they said something when they didnt….
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:38 PM PST up reply actions
I may have exaggerated your point (something I confessed to in my last statement), but saying Curry has 50 times better basketball IQ than Monta is a pretty strong statement. I didn’t take that at face value, per se, but I interpreted that as basically being the difference between one of the highest basketball IQ players in the league and one of the lowest. Excuse me for seeing 50 times better and thinking that was meant to be a very strong statement…
I don’t believe you simply stated Curry has a better basketball IQ than Monta. I believe you painted them as having a huge gap, one that was large enough that it had to mean Monta was well below average. If that’s not what you were saying at all, you can clarify…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:42 PM PST up reply actions
Plus there’s the whole:
Monta does NOT have good Basketball IQ
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:43 PM PST up reply actions
He doesnt!!!!!!!
That does not affect whether he is a good player or not…its got bugger all to do with it…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:50 PM PST up reply actions
ok clarification
Monta’s basketball iq is not very good. I personally believe his basketball iq as compared to Curry, is like comparing Biedrins rebounding ability to Mikki Moore….
Does this mean Monta is a bad player no, absoutely not. He simply does read the game and more importantly “control it” the way a good floor general does. All great floor generals have GREAT basketball IQ. CP3, Deron Williams, Billups etc…. i personally believe Curry “could” reach that level… who knows I may be wrong…do I see Monta becoming a floor general no sir… I dont.
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 7:55 PM PST up reply actions
I think this conversation is our most productive so far. I think we have a little different opinion of what “basketball IQ” constitutes, which is bound to happen with such a vague word. As I said earlier – I don’t see Monta as the primary creator/distributor, either. This is one of many factors that I view as part of basketball IQ, though it seems to be the most important for you. For me, to have a good basketball IQ, it’s not necessary that he plays like Chris Paul. I see basketball IQ as the process of reading, reacting, anticipating and making the right decisions. He may not always do this well with the ball in his hands, it’s a fair point, but I see his best role in the present being without the ball in his hands, and between how well he does those things without the ball and how well he does them on defense I view that as still having a high basketball IQ, even if it does not mean it necessarily translates into him being able to play in a Chris Paul-like style.
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 8:01 PM PST up reply actions
fine....
then we will agree to disagree… good night!
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 8:07 PM PST up reply actions
but saying Curry has 50 times better basketball IQ than Monta is a pretty strong statement.
Is BB IQ a linear scale?
It was a figure of speech...
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 17, 2009 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
One of my main issues with Monta....
I have never liked the fact that Monta doesn’t have a position to play. Nellie wanted him to be a point guard, but he says he’s just a guard. Players that people like to compare Monta to, Gilbert Arenas and Tony Parker, if asked the same question would undoubtedly call themselves point guards. It’s more than just getting assists, it’s knowing the offense in and out, knowing where everyone should be at every time. Monta is unwilling to commit to doing any of that.
This position problem wouldn’t be an issue if Monta was our 6th man or anything like that (see Ben Gordon, Jason Terry) because those types of players come in for whoever and do what is needed of them. When your supposed franchise player doesn’t have a specific position, it becomes more difficult to build around him.
This also becomes an issue, because as the franchise player, Monta wants and should have the ball in his hands a lot. However, with every game, it becomes more glaring to me just how bad Monta’s handles are for a guard. I don’t know whether it’s just his overall lack of awareness, if he’s too quick for his hands to keep up, or if he just doesn’t practice enough, but if you’re going to have the ball in your hands in key moments, you need to be able to hold onto it.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 5:36 PM PST up reply actions
Bobcats @ Magic
just reached halftime right now. Jack starting.
http://www.atdhe.net/10303/watch-charlotte-bobcats-vs-orlando-magic
I've been watching the whole game...
Same ol’ Jack shot selection wise, but he’s actually rebounding.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 5:19 PM PST up reply actions
cool thanks
i just tuned in at the end of the 2nd qtr
by IQofaWarrior on Nov 16, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions
well done...
Be strange to see him in a uniform already..damn they got that ready fast…I wonder if his name and numbers are “stick on” heat press type!
:)
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 5:19 PM PST up reply actions
hahahahaha
steal by jack, then goes into a transition 3, brick, magic announcers laugh, call it a golden state shot
by IQofaWarrior on Nov 16, 2009 5:42 PM PST up reply actions
I was actually about to comment that same thing rofl.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Nov 16, 2009 5:43 PM PST up reply actions
I just cracked up on that too...
But he is certainly playing like a player revived…
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 5:47 PM PST up reply actions
Morrow has to be huge for us now
Formally known as PFortyy.
http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt
Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!
unfortunately
he’s not. he’s not yet comfortable with his offensive game, dribbling, etc. So when he’s pressured, he doesn’t do much but pass it back.
by IQofaWarrior on Nov 16, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions
Indeed
It’s not something that’s gonna happen anytime soon either..
Hopefully he proves me wrong though, losing Buike & Jack in 2 days gives Morrow all the opportunities in the world!
Formally known as PFortyy.
http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt
Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!
morrow's problem was jax
I think he was tentative because of two reasons:
obviously, still young and learning and could use a good coach
but also, he seemed intimidated by jax and wasn’t aggresive like he was in summer league because he was deferring to sjax. thats partly why he forced an ill advised shot at end of bucks game – trying too hard to prove to jax and monta that he belongs.
morrow will be fine, we all saw it at the end of last season.
I hope you're right..
We need all the help we can get!
Formally known as PFortyy.
http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt
Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!
Having watched the game up to this point
Jack has zero assists, a couple of TO’s, he has bricked up several shots 3-10 and his rebounds are mainly off of missed free throws. Just like when he played for us!!
by crab dribble cocktail on Nov 16, 2009 5:48 PM PST reply actions
Haha Jack -18 in Charlotte right now
. I just remembered that Raja Bell has gotten in a few fights with Kobe. They hate each other. Good to have Bell back in the west for that reason.
If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.
He is not shooting well at all
Those two FT’s were FUGLY!!!
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 6:22 PM PST up reply actions
yep, jet lag maybe.
If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.
by cybermaldonado on Nov 16, 2009 6:23 PM PST up reply actions
That fade away 3 over Jackson...
THAT is Karma…lol Carter just owned him horribly….
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 6:33 PM PST up reply actions
I’m still in (ecstatic) shock that we got such a decent return (in terms of talent and salary burden) for a 31 year-old salary albatross that was holding a gun to our heads. It’s like Thanksgiving and Christmas all rolled into one…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Nov 16, 2009 6:33 PM PST up reply actions
I just dont see...
Larry Brown and Kackson getting along!
I think this may be a short term visit for Jackson.. when could they trade him away again if they wanted to?
GSOM Blog Beast!
Now, I have no idea if Charlotte is doing this or not, but the more I think about it, the more I’m intrigued by Charlotte buying Jack low off us and then selling him high to a team like Cleveland that’s forced to win now for Lebron at the deadline. If they pull that off, frankly, it’d be genius.
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 7:00 PM PST up reply actions
VC against Jackson
lol.. VC just hit a fade away 3 in front of Jack’s face…. swish!!
Hhahahah they go to Jackson for the simple layup...
and fail…. I am so pleased we have gotten rid of everything to do with Jackson…. which is a great shame as he a did a great deal for the local community in Oakland…
GSOM Blog Beast!
he said in the huddle "give me the ball"
by IQofaWarrior on Nov 16, 2009 6:40 PM PST up reply actions
He's got that..
Losing Feeling….whoa oh that losing feeling…
He got that losing feeling..now he’s gone…gone ..gone….
Ohhhhh hell yeah…..
Dudun derdun..derdunn dunn dunn… ;)
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 6:45 PM PST up reply actions
Jackson’s inability to finish at the rim was one of the things that bugged me most about his game. He was never an explosive guy to begin with, but with the extra bulk (and age) he now appears to have like a 2-inch vertical…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Nov 16, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions
Interesting...
The Orlando commentators were describing how Gerald Wallace needs to be on a team with fast open play….
agree and think Wallace would fit in well in a Warriors uniform…
GSOM Blog Beast!
I love Gerald Wallace. Amazing he only took 5 shots tonight.
If Bochy coached the Warriors Bengie Molina would start every game at PG.
by cybermaldonado on Nov 16, 2009 6:53 PM PST up reply actions
Aaaaaaaaah!
How am I JUST hearing about this now?!!
Actually, no, I did see a ticker scroll across the bottom of a TV that said something about Vlad and Raja being traded, but I never saw for whom who they were traded for.
Poor Jack.
He’s 4/14, 1/4 from 3, 4/8 FT, and missed a clutch layup. Poor poor Jack.
* snicker *
We're gonna have like 6 players who can play against Cleveland lol
Formally known as PFortyy.
http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt
Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!
thats ok...
We have “SuperCJ”… our road warrior super hero! ;)
GSOM Blog Beast!
by BritWarriorGSW on Nov 16, 2009 6:59 PM PST up reply actions
Radmo = Nellie's new Center.....
Take that to the bank.
Let the Kids play Billy!! No More Rent-a-Vet in Oakland!!
For the current situation, it’s probably true. Let’s hope our bigs start getting healthy quick…
by Missing Barry on Nov 16, 2009 8:46 PM PST up reply actions
With all the expiring contracts the Warriors have now...
I just hope they can sign a good big man this coming offseason, like Dirk or Bosh.
by Bay Area Sports Fan on Nov 16, 2009 9:07 PM PST reply actions
The expiring contracts they have are not enough to get anywhere close to being able to sign Bosh or Nowitzki. They may be able to trade for someone before the deadline, but they will not be much, if any, under the cap, certainly not anywhere near far enough to make a competitive offer to a big name.
You are right
I guess I was overly optimistic.
by Bay Area Sports Fan on Nov 16, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
Related FanShots on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
