Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Lance Berkman Could Have Torn ACL

RECAP: Warriors 132, Suns 127 -- Big and Beautiful

Suns vs Warriors boxscore / Suns vs Warriors coverage / Preview + Game Thread (730+ comments) / Warriors Web Links

If you didn't enjoy watching this game, you don't like basketball.  The two fastest teams in basketball, and two of the most highly skilled, put on an incredible show in the Oracle tonight.  And after having come up just short in their last few games, the Warriors finally put all of the pieces together.  They were led by Monta Ellis' 33 points and 10 assists, and Corey Maggette's 33 points and 8 rebounds, but they also finally received solid contributions up and down their lineup. Including a gritty fourth quarter performance from their newly returned big man, Rony Turiaf. 

You might think it would be hard to describe a game this fast-paced as being a chess match.  But on one level, that's what it was.  The game began with a chess match, and it ended with a chess match.

Jump for the moves that checkmated the Suns:

Star-divide

Don Nelson started with a lineup of Anthony Randolph at center, Corey Maggette at power forward, Anthony Morrow at small forward, and Stephen Curry and Monta Ellis in the backcourt.  Nothing remarkable there, if you follow the Warriors.  But Nellie assigned the 6-5"  Morrow to guard Channing Frye, the Suns center!  On the surface, you might think this isn't completely crazy.  After all, Frye likes to play on the perimeter and jack threes.  Only Gallinari of the Knicks has made more threes this season.  Putting Morrow on Frye allowed Nelson to play Randolph and Maggette closer to the basket, for shot-blocking and rebounding.

But Suns coach Alvin Gentry is a pretty good chess player himself.  He recognized the Frye/Morrow mismatch right from the start.  In the Suns first two possessions they posted Frye up, getting a foul on Morrow the first time, and a bucket the second.  Morrow struggled mightily in the first quarter, and wound up going to the bench with three early fouls. Did Nellie get outfoxed?  

Well, consider this: Don Nelson has a saying, that a team can only attack one mismatch at a time.  By tempting the Suns to attack Morrow, Nellie lured them away from attacking Anthony Randolph with Amare Stoudemire. Stoudemire had an astonishingly quiet 7 points in the first half, and only 9 for the game.  Randolph, who has been tremendously foul prone in his young career, only picked up 1 foul in 26 largely effective minutes.

This wasn't the only trap that Nellie set for the Suns in this game.  The first time these two teams met, Steve Nash picked up an incredible 20 assists in leading the Suns to a blowout victory.  The Warriors played Nash straight up in that game, and he simply diced them up off the dribble-drive and dish.  In this game, Stephen Curry and his teammates sagged off Nash, denying his drive, and forcing him to become a shooter.  And shoot Nash did, putting up a not very Nash-like 22 shots. To his credit, the 35 year old legend hit more than half of them, including 6 threes.  In the third quarter alone, he was 7-7 and 4-4 from three for 19 points.  But his teammates were relatively quiet.  The Warriors weathered Nash's barrage, and by the third quarter were only down 3.  And Nellie had the end game he wanted.

Rony Turiaf came in for Randolph at the start of the fourth quarter.  Nellie had mysteriously only played him 4 minutes in the first half.  But now the huge-hearted big man was ready to play.  With the game in crunch time, the Suns were determined to go inside to their finisher, Stoudemire.  Turiaf took up the challenge, and denied Stoudemire again and again in the paint.  And he battled the Suns big man ferociously on the boards, forcing him into his fifth foul on a loose ball. 

At 4:45 of the fourth quarter, Turiaf was beat.  Hands on knees, he couldn't cross half-court.  Did Don Nelson take him out?  Was it time to go back to the 20 year old Anthony Randolph?  Heck no.  Nellie called timeout, gave Turiaf a breather, and sent him right back out for the final minutes.  And Turiaf delivered, playing inspired defense down the stretch. Frequently forced to pick up Steve Nash on switches at the top of the key, Turiaf turned him away from the drive time and again.  The now clearly tired Nash was unable to force the issue, frequently forced to give up the ball with no time left on the clock, or settle for his own outside shot. He hadn't missed a single shot in the third quarter. How did he do in the fourth quarter, after being forced by Don Nelson to carry the scoring load throughout the game?

Nash open 3 point attempt at 1:20.  OFF.  Nash elbow jumper at  0:40.  OFF.  Nash open look at a game-tying 3 pointer with 9 seconds left, as the Oracle moaned...

OFF. Game, set, match -- and checkmate -- to Don Nelson and the Golden State Warriors.

The Rest of the Story:

Monta Ellis:  We're getting used to this kind of scoring from Monta.  But he also saw the floor beautifully in this game, setting up his teammates again and again off the drive.  He seems more and more comfortable leading this team the way it should be lead, and his assist numbers keep going up.  His turnovers have been a problem, particularly in fourth quarters.  But tonight they were more a result of simply losing the handle, than of forcing the issue.

I had my doubts about whether Monta was all the way back this season.  I had my doubts about whether he wanted to be a team leader, and whether he was capable of being a team leader.  Those doubts are answered, in spades. Monta Ellis is a star.  And he's verging on becoming something more: an all-star, and a super-star.

Stephen Curry:  Curry played a beautiful half of basketball, going head-to-head in his 29th NBA game against one of the all-time greats at his position.  At half-time, Nash had 13 points and 5 assists, Curry had 11 points and 3 assists (with 0 turnovers).  His 3 point shot is money right now.  It's barely rippling the net.  He was 3 for 4 from three in this game, raising his 3 point percentage to close to 40%. Curry also had 3 steals in this game, at least 2 coming off of Nash, which Nash seemed to take personally, judging by how he came right back at the rookie.

In the third quarter, Steve Nash went off like a rocket.  Some of this might be attributed to Curry's defense, but I don't really think so.  Curry did a masterful job keeping Nash out of the paint, and preventing the pick and roll.  Most of Nash's points came off of open jumpers, which were directly attributable to Nelson's game plan.  And then there's Jim Barnett's take: Barnett said, "The worst thing Curry did in this game was to play a good first half, because it ignited Steve Nash in the third quarter."  Except maybe that was the best thing Curry did, judging by what happened in the fourth quarter.

Curry turned the ball over with a lazy pass in the third quarter, and picked up two quick fouls, which led to him hitting the pine.  And Don Nelson never returned to him until the closing seconds, going with CJ Watson in his place down the stretch.  I thought perhaps Nellie was sending the rookie a message, but Nellie stated post-game that Watson and the team were just playing too well to bring Curry back.

That turnover was Curry's only one of the game, against 4 assists.  His assist to turnover ration recently climbed above 2, and is still climbing.  The Warriors have an elite point guard in the making.  Or two.

The Blackhole:  Corey Maggette's terrific performance in this game caps a several week stretch of great basketball from him.  He was 13-17 in this game, and is shooting close to 70% over his last 7 games.  That is incredible efficiency for a 6-6" player.  His work on the boards has also been strong over this stretch.  In the fourth quarter he got a couple of offensive rebounds and putbacks, as well as some clutch freethrows, that sealed the victory.  He dominated his matchup with Grant Hill.

Feel like booing? 

Anthony Randolph:  Anthony Randolph was quietly effective in this game.  How many times can you say that about this electrifying, and erratic, 20 year old player?  Randolph did a good job guarding Stoudemire, although it helped that the Suns almost never looked at this matchup.  On offense, he let the game come to him, making nice drives when they were open, and nailing his catch and shoot jumpers.  17 points on 7 shots?  Them's Maggette numbers! The kid just might be growing.

The Little Three:  If Ellis, Maggette, and Curry are the Warriors Big Three, then Watson, Morrow and Vlad Rad are my little three.  The Warriors need something from at least one of these guys every night if they hope to win.  Nellie has been playing them interchangeably in the last several games, desperately looking for someone to contribute enough to get the Warriors over the hump.  All three of them have been mysteriously invisible lately. But tonight, all three delivered.

Starting with CJ Watson.  I believe he's one of the best backup point guards in the game, and he showed why tonight. His missing jumper reappeared, of course.  But equally important were his intangibles.  He guarded Nash physically and well down the stretch.  And he handled the point with complete poise in the fourth quarter.  Watson's handle is rock solid. He simply doesn't turn the ball over.  

Vlad Rad had a great floor game, doing a little bit of everything.  Nellie singled his defense out for praise in his post game comments.

And Anthony Morrow came halfway out of his slump in this game.  He went 0-5 on threes, but made several nice plays off the dribble, and was tough on the boards.  Let's call it Chocolate Mist.

My Warrior Wonder for this game is a tough one.  I think I'll let you decide.

Poll
Who is your Warrior Wonder for this game?
Monta Ellis
1472 votes
Corey Maggette
2740 votes
Rony Turiaf
795 votes

5007 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 45 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Big and beautiful

and witnessing it live at the Roracle it was a sweet victory

Win Or Lose Warriors For Life.........

by mykelala01 on Dec 27, 2009 1:52 AM PST reply actions  

how about Dallas?

31 Y 6.5 ft 250 lbs 0 IQ

Fire Nellie! Fire Cohan! Fire Gregory! Fire David Stern! No need for explanations, just fire em all!

by Missing Barry

by Lat We N Trash on Dec 27, 2009 6:59 AM PST up reply actions  

Dallas should be tops for the simple fact that it was a road game.

by Badly Browned on Dec 27, 2009 8:10 AM PST up reply actions  

neck and neck..

after both wins i felt the need to login and see what people were saying.

by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Dec 27, 2009 8:53 AM PST up reply actions  

Randolph...

Had 17 and 7 in only 26 minutes. Knowing his blocked-shot prowess, Nash seldom tried to pass the ball down low. So what does Nelson do? Doesn’t even let him play but a couple of seconds of the forth! Luckily we got the win but not due to Nellie.
What the hell! Talk about sending conflicting messages to Randolph: “Okay you’ve proven yourself to be good enough to start. Great first half Anthony, I’m gonna sit you most of the second half. Why? Because I hate youth and height.”
Can’t wait till he retires! Second all-time winingest coach? What a joke! Factor in total losses, years coaching, and total championships (0) = average stats = certainly not one of the “greatest coaches.”

by J-House on Dec 27, 2009 2:26 AM PST reply actions  

No, I thought it was smart. You just knew that the Suns would try to attack on the inside during that 4th Quarter, it is our weakest link after all. Sure, AR is good on help defense, but his man to man D, especially in the post, still needs work. I will have to go with nellie on this one.

by Badly Browned on Dec 27, 2009 8:17 AM PST up reply actions  

The dubs outscored them 28 to 19 in the 4th (PHX had scored 35, 36 & 37 in prior quarters) & AR was a team worst -12. That means they were +17 in the 22 minutes that he didn’t play.

Nellie knows what he’s doing. The real problem with Nellie is that he always picks offensive players over defensive ones (the other problem being how much he depends on small ball in his 2nd dubs incarnation). He’d rather take Bargnani than a defensive guy like Chuck Hayes or Kendrick Perkins. He’ll probably fall in love with Donatas Montiejunas in the draft.

by homer simpson on Dec 27, 2009 9:31 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I love +/- (from a few games back)

 Bench Min FG 3Pt FT +/- Off Reb Ast TO Stl BS BA PF Pts
  D. Carroll 17:27 2-5 0-0 0-0 +26 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 3 4

+/- at +26 this guy must be a stud.

"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."

Frank Zappa

by qin on Dec 27, 2009 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

The real problem with Nellie is that he always picks offensive players over defensive ones

in this game, he picked his best defensive player to play the 4th quarter. that was the move that won this game. the team cared about defense when ronny came in and did a remarkable job on the defensive end in the 4th. nellie could have taken randolph or vlad rad and hoped to outscore the suns, but he went with the wounded warrior who wanted to shut the suns down. it worked.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Dec 27, 2009 12:40 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

I really hate +/-. It really doesn't paint an accurate picture some times. It's really wonky.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.

RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."

(MT)

by kenntoe on Dec 27, 2009 1:40 PM PST up reply actions  

You know, there were two things missing from this game

The 3rd qtr collapse, though we did let them go on a couple of runs, but we answered with our own runs, so no 3rd qtr collapse overall.

The 4th qtr close out catastrophe. There was no 15-0 run that we gave the Suns because we froze up and had no idea what to do. For the most part, we hung in, stood our ground, and closed the game out despite the Suns’ efforts.

Not that I’m complaining about those two items being missing. :P

by IQofaWarrior on Dec 27, 2009 5:46 AM PST reply actions  

Good recap

I agree that Nellie coached a pretty good game. Having Turiaf back was great, even in limited minutes—having a defender and rebounder with size on the floor really helps. Maggette was focused and extremely effective, Curry was great in the first half, and Monta was typical Monta. AR was used pretty well—I’d rather see him at high energy in fewer minutes than get exposed over a longer period when his poor defense and decision making can get exploited by the other team. For once this season, Nellie played the matchup game to our advantage.

We had some sloppy play, but fortunately we caught the Suns on the back half of a B2B game on the road—they are awful in both those situations (I think 7 road losses in a row and they’ve only won 1 game after a B2B all year). It’s great to see our own losing streak come to an end.

@worldblee on Twitter.

by worldblee on Dec 27, 2009 8:02 AM PST reply actions  

Corey freakin' Maggette!!

I have been one of this dudes biggest critics but this guy is ballin. im starting to come full circle on his contract. Can’t say enough about his effort and professionalism this entire season regarless of moments where he was the biggest blackhole in the NBA. The healthier we get and put him in positions to succeed (limited mintues at the 4, due to foul trouble and glaring mismatches) i see the potential to not only live up to his contract but maybe even consider it a bargain. His game is smooth when he leaves that tunnel vision at home and brings some decent shot selection with him.

by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Dec 27, 2009 8:58 AM PST reply actions  

I'm with you...

…I’ve bagged on this guy since he first came here.

And as Steinmetz said after the game last night, it’s not that he’s suddenly more “productive” statistically, it’s that his effort is at a level far beyond where it’s been at any other time in his career.

My favorite part last night was just the way he went after rebounds and passing the ball. He was doing things well that didn’t involve him scoring. His shot selection was much, much better and he limited the bonehead plays…

If he can keep this up, he might not be a bargain, but he’ll be worth keeping around…

SwishAppeal.com, women's basketball...covered SBN-style... twitter: @qmccall3

by Nate Parham on Dec 27, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Great recap of a great game. Only one quibble…

That turnover was Curry’s only one of the game, against 4 assists. His assist to turnover ration recently climbed above 2, and is still climbing.

Curry’s A/TO ratio is 1.83, and falling… it’s been a good bit lower in December than it was in November. Curry continues to have one of the worst ratios of any starting point guard in basketball. Seven of his fellow rookies outrate him in the category.

The Warriors have an elite point guard in the making. Or two.

The correct answer here is “zero”. And I’m not saying that to be negative. I like both guys, and think we can win some games with them comprising our backcourt… you don’t need an elite passer to compete in the NBA. Which is good for us, because neither guy shows any signs, whatsoever, of becoming an elite passer. It’s about more than the occasional pretty dish.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Golden State Worriers.

by onlxn on Dec 27, 2009 9:19 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

Good catch

on the assist/to ratio. I guess I repressed the bad stretch in early december. His ratio for the last 5 games looks like 2.6 to 1 tho.

As for the elite status, I stand by my comment. Of course, I’m looking a couple of years into the future with Curry. He compares very favorably with Nash’s early years, both statistically and to my eye.

As for Monta, I can only say that there are many different kinds of elite point guards. He may never be an elite passer. But he’s already an elite player. And he’s already a better passer than players like Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas and Devin Harris, imo.

by Feltbot on Dec 27, 2009 10:56 AM PST up reply actions  

His ratio for the last 5 games looks like 2.6 to 1 tho.

Indeed it is… he’s passed a bit better lately. But I’d that’s precisely because he’s not forcing passes as much; like Monta, he’s a more effective playmaker when he’s not trying to prove that he’s a point guard. The more he tries to do, the worse his ratio gets.

As for the elite status, I stand by my comment. Of course, I’m looking a couple of years into the future with Curry. He compares very favorably with Nash’s early years, both statistically and to my eye.

I wouldn’t entirely disagree on the eye; Curry’s a pretty, pretty passer. As for the stats:

Passing Totals Per 36 Minutes, Rookie Seasons
Chris Paul: 7.8 assists, 2.3 turnovers
Steve Nash: 7.3 assists, 3.3 turnovers
Deron Williams: 5.6 assists, 2.3 turnovers
Rajon Rondo: 5.8 assists, 2.7 turnovers
Devin Harris: 5.2 assists, 2.5 turnovers
Tony Parker: 5.3 assists, 2.4 turnovers
Stephen Curry: 5.2 assists, 2.8 turnovers
Gilbert Arenas: 5.4 assists, 3.0 turnovers

Curry’s not only a worse rookie passer than the pure point guards were, he’s a worse rookie passer than most of the combo guys were. His numbers really don’t compare to Nash’s, and of course Nash took a huge passing leap in his sophomore year that most PGs don’t take.

Curry could get a lot better. If he can get it into his head that his opponents are NBA-sized and not Wofford-sized, he could correct a bunch of his mistakes and become a better passing asset. But right now, there is no statistical reason to think that he’ll ever be even an average passing NBA point guard. He’s miles behind the curve.

As for Monta, I can only say that there are many different kinds of elite point guards. He may never be an elite passer. But he’s already an elite player. And he’s already a better passer than players like Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas and Devin Harris, imo.

Monta only really qualified as an elite player in ‘07-’08… right now, he’s not actually helping us much. And the main reason why is the continued mistaken presumption that he has any ability to play the point. Not only is he not a better passer than the three you mention, he’s not even remotely in their league. He’s a shooting guard, and if anything, a 10 assist/7 turnover night if further proof of that.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Golden State Worriers.

by onlxn on Dec 27, 2009 8:08 PM PST up reply actions  

We've had this discussion before

about stats. Stats “per 36 minutes” lie. Curry is having a far better rookie season than Nash had in his 3rd season, which was his first as a starter. Nash didn’t average 7 assists until his 5th season. Curry is also having a better rookie season than Arenas (11 and 4). Than Harris, who was a #5 pick (6 and 2). Parker averaged 9 and 4 as a rookie.

And then consider this: First, what big man has Curry been getting assists from so far? Paul had West and Chandler, Williams had Boozer, Milsap, Kirilenko and Okur, Rondo had Garnett and Perkins, Parker had TIM DUNCAN to finish for them. Curry has been getting nothing but assists on fast breaks and jump shots. Hardly a fair comparison.

Secondly, Curry has been playing off the ball as much as point guard so far this season. And his season is only a third of the way through. I believe his stats will get better as the year progresses. I am truly perplexed that you can’t see what a special player he is.

As for Monta, I defy you to show me a shooting guard who brings the ball up the court as often as he does, and is capable of putting up 10 assists, also without a big man to throw to. Turnovers are a flaw, not a classification.

by Feltbot on Dec 27, 2009 10:04 PM PST up reply actions  

i’d be very interested to hear how per 36 stats “lie”. as minutes increase, they don’t tend to change much.

and to say that monta and curry have no one to pass to is simply not true. the warriors have plenty of offensive weapons, many of whom cut to the basket frequently. the fact that they don’t have a typical post anchor to throw the ball in to does not prevent them from racking up assists or force them to turn the ball over constantly. having guards cut to the basket can be just as effective for getting assists and passing to other solid perimeter players should definitely cut down on the turnovers. monta has been forcing it this year and he’s hurting the team as a result.

i’m also getting sick of the “but steve nash had a similar rookie year!” argument. steve nash didn’t become steve nash for a very long time. he was a late bloomer. to assume that it takes every point guard 8 years of good play before suddenly becoming a superstar is silly. it’s possible for guys to make the leap that late in their career, but nash’s career arc is hardly typical. that’s not a slam on curry- he looks good, but let’s settle down on the steve nash comparisons and let’s do that starting yesterday.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Dec 27, 2009 10:30 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Stats "per 36 minutes" lie.

…oooookay. I mean, they “lie” in the sense that they are statistics. No statistic can measure the glint in a man’s eye or the content of his heart or whatever.

But if you’re suggesting that they’re misleading about what a player can actually do in the National Basketball Association, I’d be hard-pressed to agree. The fairest arbiter of a guy’s play is what he does when he’s on the floor. You may believe there’s some vast, magical barrier between “starter minutes” and “backup minutes”, but there simply isn’t. The average quality of your opponents is higher when you start than when you appear in a second unit, but the average difference is small, and is more than compensated for by the fact that you have time to get into a rhythm as a starter. Google “Millsap doctrine” if you don’t believe me. Intelligent, unbiased people have studied this issue far more than you or me. Their conclusion is that consistently good backups make consistently good starters. So, yeah, “per 36” works pretty good by me.

Curry is having a far better rookie season than Nash had in his 3rd season, which was his first as a starter. Nash didn’t average 7 assists until his 5th season. Curry is also having a better rookie season than Arenas (11 and 4). Than Harris, who was a #5 pick (6 and 2). Parker averaged 9 and 4 as a rookie.

As you are well aware, this paragraph required a truckload of cherry-pickin’. Curry’s rookie season is better than Nash’s third season, but much worse than Nash’s second season; in his sophomore year, Nash outproduced Curry by every just about every measurement basketball observers keep, in almost twice the minutes Curry has played thus far. Your point is that Curry’s rookie year is better than the worst year in the career of a late bloomer who eventually got great. That is true, but not interesting. Everything else here is predicated on the idea that the player who gets more NBA minutes is just, y’know, “better”. No matter how much you credit starting over coming off the bench, I don’t think you think that’s actually true.

And then consider this: First, what big man has Curry been getting assists from so far? Paul had West and Chandler, Williams had Boozer, Milsap, Kirilenko and Okur, Rondo had Garnett and Perkins, Parker had TIM DUNCAN to finish for them.

Three of the nine bigs you cite weren’t on those teams those years, another two were primarily jump shooters, and Kendrick Perkins was a nobody. Thin stuff. Great passers don’t rack up assists because they play alongside skilled bigs; they rack up assists because they’re great passers. You think it’d be impossible for a good point guard to rack up assists alongside Monta Ellis, Corey Maggette and two great three-point shooters? Did I miss the elite 30-point-scoring big man that made Baron Davis look like a great point guard?

Secondly, Curry has been playing off the ball as much as point guard so far this season.

And he’s been a better player off the ball than on it; he’s an excellent passer for a two. But if he were actually a promising point guard, he’d have twice as many assists as turnovers, no matter where he was playing.

And his season is only a third of the way through.

Indeed. Which means that if we want further data about his passing potential, we should turn to his college numbers, which suggest, rather emphatically, that there’s no reason to think he’d make a good NBA point guard.

I am truly perplexed that you can’t see what a special player he is.

That’s because you’re too enamored with your eyes.

A lot of Warriors fans, some of them experienced and intelligent, think we threw away a special player in Marco Belinelli. Their reasoning? “Just watch him!” The guy hit some gritty shots, he threw some highlight-reel passes, and dangit, he had spunk. But you know what? Marco Belinelli actually stank, and continues to stink. If you actually walked through his results, he didn’t hit those gritty shots often enough, he didn’t complete those highlight-reel passes often enough, and his spunk didn’t translate into the brilliantly effective defense some thought it did. Marco may have looked useful; what he did was make us much more likely to lose.

It’d be overstating it to say that the same is true of Curry. He’s been a better offensive player as a rookie than Marco was as a sophomore, not by much, but by some; he’s not outright killing us. And considering his youth, his recent position change and his intelligence, he could improve to the point where he’s an asset.

But he is not an asset right now. He’s not very good on offense, and he’s downright bad on defense… his presence on the floor makes a very bad team even worse. Given that, I am not in the mood to wax poetic about him just because he looks the part. This moronic franchise has fallen in love with far too many players because of how their performances “looked”. Give me the guy that’ll help you win a basketball game.

As for Monta, I defy you to show me a shooting guard who brings the ball up the court as often as he does, and is capable of putting up 10 assists, also without a big man to throw to.

I could name a bunch, but I’ll stick with the most salient: Stephen Jesse Jackson.

We’ve seen this play before, and it sucked the first time. The fact that we make a shooting guard bring the ball up the floor doesn’t make him a point guard; it makes us stupid.

Turnovers are a flaw, not a classification.

Nicely phrased, but clearly untrue… Mikki could average eight assists a night if you spotted him twelve turnovers. Nevertheless, let’s play it your way.

We drafted Monta Ellis as a point guard. In three of the five seasons he’s played, we saw him primarily as a point guard; in the other two, we very much wanted him to back Baron up at the point. Ever since he got here, we have been dying to see signs that this guy is a playmaker.

Monta has played in 261 regular-season NBA games (more than three seasons’ worth)… he’s averaged 33.2 minutes a game. Starters’ minutes, in other words. In those three-years-plus of full-time work, he has averaged 3.7 assists a game. Show me a point guard who’s averaged that little for that long.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Golden State Worriers.

by onlxn on Dec 28, 2009 12:31 AM PST up reply actions  

I do wonder what the comparisons for some of these guys aren’t a bit premature, comparing Curry’s third of a season of games to a season for the rest.

I’ve not been playing with the numbers myself, but Dave Berri recently commented that Curry is above average for a rookie (though somewhat, but not extremely below average for all players). He certainly isn’t showing “wow, he’s a certain superstar!” but he’s not playing so poorly as to think that he’s got no chance. Players do tend to improve over their first few seasons in some areas that can take them from being below to above average. Did the comparison players put up consistent numbers for their first season or where they up and down, or was there a reasonable curve as they figured out the game? I’m not saying that Curry will compare favorably at season’s end, but I do wonder how apt a comparison is until we’re talking about most a season.

by jae on Dec 28, 2009 9:13 AM PST up reply actions  

Did the comparison players put up consistent numbers for their first season or where they up and down, or was there a reasonable curve as they figured out the game?

An interesting question, one I’ll poke around on later. But it is worth noting that Curry’s numbers haven’t jumped around much: he’s been a mediocre, low-assist PG throughout the year thus far, and certainly isn’t trending up.

To reiterate my position: I think Steph Curry has the potential to be a good NBA player, even a very good one. I just don’t think the lion’s share of his value will ever come from his passing. To me, his absolute best-case scenario is Mark Price, a very good player, but a worse player, and vastly worse passer, than Steve Nash.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Golden State Worriers.

by onlxn on Dec 28, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Price is an excellent comparison

Now if we can just find a Daugherty and Hot Rod Williams to help open him up for some threes…and a sg who can defend (if immortalized as part of one of the NBA’s classic plays)..

SwishAppeal.com, women's basketball...covered SBN-style... twitter: @qmccall3

by Nate Parham on Dec 28, 2009 12:35 PM PST up reply actions  

You can win without an elite passer in the NBA..

…if you have a guy like Jordan, Kobe, or Shaq on your team…or really good team-wide passing like the Kings at the turn of the century…

Ellis is an amazing scorer, but he’s not superstar level yet…

I don’t know if there is any plan in place for how the Warriors want to build this team, but I will say that at the moment with this collection of talent, we need an elite passer to make this collection of talent work.

I’m not a fan of the Ellis/Curry combo, though I really like both players…but I’d like to see either an elite passer or elite defender in our backcourt…

SwishAppeal.com, women's basketball...covered SBN-style... twitter: @qmccall3

by Nate Parham on Dec 27, 2009 12:22 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Believe me, I’m not saying we’ll challenge for a title with the collection of passers we have now. I’m just saying that the current crop could get us to 44 wins… worrying about anything more than that, with this franchise, is jumping the gun.

I’m not a fan of the Ellis/Curry combo, though I really like both players…but I’d like to see either an elite passer or elite defender in our backcourt…

I’d tend to agree. And if forced to pick one to keep, I’d pick Curry, as dismissive as I sound about him; he’s got the cheaper price tag and the clearer path to competing at one position. I do think Curry could make an above-average NBA point guard — not an above-average passing point guard, but an above-average PG overall. I’m not down on the kid. I just think we’re wasting our collective time by thinking we’ve got a Steve Nash or even a Baron Davis on our hands. These are not the passers we’re looking for.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Golden State Worriers.

by onlxn on Dec 28, 2009 12:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Just to be clear: I wasn't disagreeing with you at all.

I think we’re on the same page here.

However, I’m not sure who I want to keep right now — Curry’s got “upside”, Monta is developing into an elite scorer and seems to be embracing the role of leader on the floor.

I suppose for me it comes down to market value and the vision of what we want this team to become.

I’d probably take offers for both, see what I could get in return, and make a decision based on what would best help create a coherent unit on this team.

Right now, the team is so clearly different play to play depending upon whether Curry or Ellis is initiating the offense… and I’m not sure that’s sustainable…

SwishAppeal.com, women's basketball...covered SBN-style... twitter: @qmccall3

by Nate Parham on Dec 28, 2009 3:59 AM PST up reply actions  

Although we played so well as a team

I think we’re gonna come out playing sloppy the next game just because everyone will start trying to take over.

After all is said and done, we sorta have the Celtics’ number and I think we’ll pull out a win. I just don’t think it’ll be very enjoyable to watch.

by GoldenStateGuerrero on Dec 27, 2009 11:07 AM PST reply actions  

I have come to a decision on Maggs (like you guys really care)

I think if Buike opts out of his contract Maggs should stay. If he comes back you shop Maggs. It’s simple.

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

by dubzfan on Dec 27, 2009 11:35 AM PST reply actions  

It would be wise for buike to stay

after his injury, he won’t get as good as a deal if he waited one more year.

by mosdl on Dec 27, 2009 7:11 PM PST up reply actions  

you

just made me think will he even be that good after the injury?!

So I don't have a signature well these words would do! Who knew that upgrades can have downgrades too!

by 24k state fan since 87 on Dec 27, 2009 9:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Good game, but let the young fellas get some run in the 4th

I hoped with Biedrins/Turiaf coming back we could get some momentum going, but seeing Turiaf gassed kinda brought me back to reality that these guys are gonna need time to get into game shape, and work themselves into the offense.

The team energy was great, and Turiaf played with the heart he’s known for, hopefully Biedrins on Monday can give the W’s the same lift.

Maggette played really well, i was really impressed. I like it when he shoots more FGs than FTs, like he’s actually shooting to score instead of shooting to draw fouls, which is my main gripe, it might be super efficient it just seems janky to me, especially when we aren’t winning.

Also ( this is small), I didn’t like curry sitting in the 4th, if Monta can be out there making bad play after bad play then Curry should get some run too. I know you can’t take Monta out, and CJ played well, but give the young fella some run, Randolph too. I love it when we win, but I could get more into a win if it was because the young players had a hand in it when it counted. It’s not like we’re fighting for a playoff spot, unless the Nelson’s all time win total counts as such.

by Duh Duh Man on Dec 27, 2009 12:32 PM PST reply actions  

Nellie said in the post game

that he wanted to bring Curry back in the 4th, but CJ was playing well, so he left CJ out there.

by IQofaWarrior on Dec 27, 2009 6:16 PM PST up reply actions  

true

but Curry had a bad stretch, where he caught those two fouls and made that bad pass, and it was like poof, to the bench you go, he coulda brought him back early in the 4th. i felt with his good play in the first half he deserved a chance to redeem himself CJ be damned. Watson did play well, I just hate that on such a bad team it seems like the rooks get such a quick hook.

by Duh Duh Man on Dec 27, 2009 10:26 PM PST up reply actions  

NBA is an absolute joke.

The Warriors never make the Top 10 plays,it’s not like the #1 play was any better.
 Maybe I’m just asking too much but the Dubs needs some recognition.

by Cpt. Jack in the Box on Dec 27, 2009 12:56 PM PST reply actions  

I wanted that AR block on Amundson to be there.

OT: Did anyone else laugh when Barnett said “I like Dick….(forget last name)…”

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.

RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."

(MT)

by kenntoe on Dec 27, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions  

Or the tic tac toe play...

Curry behind the back to Monta who dishes it to Randolph for the flush.

by Cpt. Jack in the Box on Dec 27, 2009 5:12 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree, that was a really good play

I think they wouldn’t even show our highlights if they didn’t have to, I saw on NBA TV where they were voting for the game of the week, and I believe it was when we were gonna play Mem, and outta 6 games like 2% of the votes were for the Mem/GSW game. It hurt my heart to see such a low number. I wanna blame such a low number on the grizz, but I can’t in good conscience. So if they don’t wanna see our games, why would they wanna see our highlights? I agree It sucks.

by Duh Duh Man on Dec 27, 2009 10:20 PM PST up reply actions  

so far...

my favorite game of the year and my favorite recap of the year. good stuff.

by stopher on Dec 27, 2009 1:41 PM PST reply actions  

Turiaf FTW

Monta definitely played a great game, and he’s becoming a great leader for this team. Magette also had a monster night. But Turiaf came back and really gave it his all. His inside presence really gave the Warriors a needed push. I say he’s the Warrior Wonder for last night’s game..

by soljabunny on Dec 27, 2009 4:13 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


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)


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

Atma-160_small Atma Brother ONE

Gw090_small Fantasy Junkie

Natehead_small Nate Parham

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

Small Hash

Small dj fuzzylogic

600px-olympic_rings_square olympicmike

Small IQofaWarrior

Shutterstock_10276351_basketball_mind_small Evanz

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

We_still_believe_small R Dizzle

Small Adam Lauridsen

Small jae

Gsom_tony_small Tony.psd

Kanji_love_small Sleepy Freud

Japan_by_miaumi_small YaoButtaMing

Drmlg_logo-gmail_small Poor Man's Commish

Nellie2_small Feltbot