Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Golden State Septic Tank

Pm4396178_medium

No need to call these guys. A Septic Tank is currently being installed at the Roaracle Arena as you read this...

Star-divide

No Crawford tonight, no Jackson vs. Jazz, no Biedrins vs. Pistons [Examiner]:

Tonight it's Jamal Crawford. Sunday against Utah it will be Stephen Jackson. Next Friday against the Detroit Pistons, it will be Andris Biedrins. Warriors coach Don Nelson said he will continue to periodically give one of his veterans a game off so as to facilitate more playing time for the team's youngsters. Nelson said Corey Maggette will miss an upcoming game, too. He just hasn't figured out which one yet.

I thought it was a joke that Jamal Crawford was being singled out and the young fringe NBA 2's on this roster were being gifted playing time, but now it all makes sense (somewhat). Rather than pad the Warriors win total with the heavily loaded home schedule and send them back to the bottom of the lottery, Nellie's tanking it.

Sounds like a good long term plan (debatable), but I can't imagine other season ticket holders being too happy about this after paying the biggest season ticket price in the entire association even after the team missed the playoffs for a ridiculous 13th time in 14 years. The $8 undercutting of the Club 200 season ticket holders is weak too. It's like these poor souls paid nearly a year in advance for the "privilege" to pay about 5 times the price. Cohanomics is wonderful ain't it?

Robert "Buy Tickets! BUY TICKETS! BUY TICKETS!!" Rowell- Guess what's going to happen when season ticket renewals are up this spring?

Poll
Is it obvious that the Warriors are tanking it?
Yes: They're tanking it.
277 votes
No: They're still playing to win.
146 votes

423 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 33 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

You play to win,

but as a lifelong W’s fan, I have to say that I don’t think it is wrong to give the youngsters more playing time which could (and probably will) result in more losses. If that helps them in their development for next year, I think that is better for us as a franchise as opposed to trying to win every game at the expense of their development.

A higher draft pick is collateral benefit from this as well. It’s taboo to say that is the objective, but as a fan, shouldn’t I want the best for my team in the long run? It’s a very valid point in an honest debate.

by Gob on Feb 27, 2009 2:11 PM PST reply actions  

and this might get JC to opt out...

so we can use that salary $$ for a real PG or PF.

by FishStix on Feb 27, 2009 5:18 PM PST up reply actions  

is that…. mr hankey?

by vinchenzy on Feb 27, 2009 2:17 PM PST reply actions  

mr hankey?

    Christmas came early this year :>)

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 27, 2009 2:23 PM PST up reply actions  

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllaw suit ?

     no, poo suit

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 27, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions  

We're going to play with the mentality to win

Now I don’t expect our guys to win that many the rest of the season, but I expect our guys to play to TRY to win, to make their mistakes and learn from them. They’re not going to play just to go through the motions, which is my definition of tanking.

by IQofaWarrior on Feb 27, 2009 2:28 PM PST reply actions  

I Hope...

Nellie does play guys like Belinelli, Morrow, Randolph, BWright(if he ever comes back), Willimas and Kurz. If Jackson, Andris, Crawford and Maggs miss a game here and there, I don’t think it spells Nellie purposely losing. I think it spells veteran relief. This “tanking” is being made from a mole hill to a mountain. Why, I don’t know. Resting a guy every once in a blue moon doesn’t bother me. Maybe our younger guys will gain some extra experience while our veterans will rest their bodies. The Dubs have been playing 7 guys for a long time. This year is a wash, better that we rest for tomorrow all while gaining more experience and NBA ready bench players then win an extra 6 games because we played the hell out of our starters while potentially hurting or running them down for next season. I mean the Dubs get the 9-14 pick every year. Do I think they are tanking on purpose, no, but it would be nice to get the next Amare, D Wade, Durrant, D. Howard, Derron Williams or CP3 with a 1-5 pick.

by gabezgsw on Feb 27, 2009 2:42 PM PST reply actions  

To comment further on the whole Crawford's agent's noise making

With the benching of Jack and Biedrins in the upcoming games, doesn’t that throw an egg on Crawford and/or his agent’s face?

by IQofaWarrior on Feb 27, 2009 3:15 PM PST reply actions  

doesn’t that throw an egg on Crawford and/or his agent’s face

More so in Cohan’s face, but at this point, its hard to belive that he cares.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Feb 27, 2009 10:58 PM PST up reply actions  

With the benching of Jack and Biedrins in the upcoming games, doesn’t that throw an egg on Crawford and/or his agent’s face?

  No, just makes him more right. You don’t bench vets that you want to keep or get value in a trade for.

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 27, 2009 3:26 PM PST reply actions  

Atma...

You seem to be taking a pretty hard stand against the move of occasionally benching the vets to play the young guys. I can understand your point from a season ticket holder’s point of view, because it sends a bad message after you dropped your hard earned cash on tickets. Also because Jamal is a pretty entertaining guy to watch.

But…

Here is the other side of things. You seem to assume that Crawford is by far a better player than Marco and Morrow. I’m not so sure and here is why.

When you look at the per minute stats Marco and Crawford are very similar players. Marco shoots a better percentage but Crawford gets to the line more. Crawford has a slight edge on assists and the turnovers are about the same, but Marco gets nearly twice as many steals and plays better defense overall. IMO Marco’s improved defense might actually give him a bit of an edge.

I know what yo are going to say “Those are per minute stats! you can’t actually assume that Marco will perform that well if given more minutes”. Well without getting into the “Millsap Doctrine” I will concede that point. And that is exactly the reason that we should play him more. If he is performing equal to Crawford, and Crawford may or may not be opting out in the offseason, wouldn’t it be nice to know whether or not Marco can keep playing at this level if given more minutes.

It does make more sense than trying to let everyone play in the same game. As long as they keep the effort up I don’t really mind it.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on Feb 27, 2009 3:45 PM PST reply actions  

I really don’t mind if Crawford plays or not, but our best big man (Biedrins) and best wing player (Jackson) should be playing every single game unless they’re hurt. I think Nelson is sending the wrong message to this team.

The Ultimate Opportunist

by Rated-R Superstar on Feb 27, 2009 3:49 PM PST up reply actions  

I can understand that...

Sitting Andris doesn’t make any sense at all. Sitting Jackson makes a little more sense because he is a wing player and he regularly logs so many minutes, but I still get your point.

If Nelson really does start sitting one starter every night then that will be going a little further to tank the season than I expected. I thought there would just be a little more caution surrounding injuries and more evenly distributed minutes. I didn’t expect them to go this far.

Still I can tolerate sitting one of the wing players from time to time without finding it distasteful. I’m not sure how I feel about this plan to give someone the night off every game. Especially if the guy behind him is significantly worse (which is the part which is debatable).

Thing 2

by olympicmike on Feb 27, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree

I think the intention is good. Just not the execution.

Nellie just went from one extreme to another.

Fans generally want the young guys to play when the vets clearly is having a bad game.

No need to bench anybody so one can play. Just give everyone equal opportunity.

Hold SJax to the same standard as Anthony Morrow. That is, send the message that while they are always gonna be the first in line to play the game, the other guys will get a chance if you keep making bad plays.

by lightz0ut on Feb 27, 2009 5:36 PM PST up reply actions  

"Fans generally want the young guys to play when the vets clearly is having a bad game."

I don’t. I want to see the best player who earned the PT. A player’s age doesn’t excite me one bit. Good players get me excited, not welfare handouts for young, unestablished players. After rebuilding x14 what’s so exciting about seeing another rebuilding project through youth?

(olympicmike- More detailed response for you here my man)

by Atma Brother ONE on Feb 27, 2009 5:42 PM PST up reply actions  

After rebuilding x14 what’s so exciting about seeing another rebuilding project through youth?

I would rather rebuild with a foolish dream of being good one day, than this quick fix 8th seed best case scenario team.

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Feb 27, 2009 11:01 PM PST up reply actions  

For what it's worth

GSWings, 2008/09

FG%
.472 Watson
.469 Azubuike
.460 Morrow
.444 Belinelli
.414 Crawford
.412 Jackson

3FG%
.489 Morrow
.475 Watson
.463 Azubuike
.387 Belinelli
.344 Jackson
.315 Crawford

Reb/36
5.6 Azubuike
5.4 Morrow
4.4 Jackson
3.7 Watson
3.0 Crawford
2.9 Belinelli

Ast/36
5.7 Jackson
4.3 Crawford
3.7 Belinelli
3.6 Watson
1.8 Morrow
1.7 Azubuike

TO/36
0.9 Morrow
1.4 Azubuike
1.7 Watson
2.3 Crawford
2.4 Belinelli
3.5 Jackson

Steals/36
1.8 Watson
1.5 Belinelli
1.4 Jackson
1.1 Morrow
0.9 Azubuike
0.8 Crawford

Plus/Minus
+4.4 Watson
+3.6 Morrow
+0.4 Azubuike
+0.4 Jackson
-1.5 Crawford
-2.0 Belinelli

I feel for Crawford, but it’s pretty clear he’s the least effective player of the bunch, or at least down there with Marco. And given that he has zero upside, and that multiple DNP-CDs might inspire him to opt out this offseason … the bench really seems like the most sensible place for his butt.

Thing 1

by Sleepy Freud on Feb 27, 2009 6:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Good breakdown...

There is a legitimate case to be made for Crawford’s reduction in time simply based on his performance. I’m a little surprised by the announcement of vets sitting games out on a somewhat regular basis. If you are going to sit somebody though I think Crawford is the best candidate.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on Feb 27, 2009 7:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I dont see the reason why Biedrins is sittng though

whats the advantage here? That we can see what Jermario has, or play Randolph off posistion for consistent minutes?

Thing B

by warriorsscore110 on Feb 27, 2009 11:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Agree Completely...

If there is one guy that should not sit it Beans. I don’t see any benefit from Beans sitting out unless his ankle is still an issue. He sure looked good tonight though.

Thing 2

by olympicmike on Feb 27, 2009 11:27 PM PST up reply actions  

the benchings

crawford is benchable just due to his performance. i don’t like seeing him play. the stats above back up the notion that it doesn’t make sense to play him so much, because almost everyone on that bench who can play the point (sorry, marcus, not you) is as good or better than him. put in marco for defensive purposes and you don’t lose much offensively at all. i’m still not sure how good marco’s going to be, but if he’s already as good of a player as crawford and we plan on keeping marco around, he should get more minutes. and if it chases crawford out of town, all the better, i’d love a few extra bucks to toss at a free agent who does something we actually need.

i’m even ok with jack sitting every now and then because i don’t want years added to his legs because we played him 48 minutes a game for no good reason. if nellie thinks we’re better when he’s on the floor and hates to pull him, putting him in a suit every now and then will curb that desire at least a bit, or i’d hope it would. and it’s not as though we have a shortage of wing players on the roster.

biedrins sitting is inexcusable. that’s garbage. it makes zero sense other than to mark a game on the calendar that we want to lose. i don’t think anyone would argue that sitting him is justifiable based on team success this year or development of young players for the future. we don’t have pob on the team anymore, there’s no center at the end of the bench wondering when andris will have a seat so he can play. it’s a half-assed forfeit.

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Mar 1, 2009 9:47 AM PST up reply actions  

this started as a reply to olympicmike, but sort of took on a life of its own. so, i’m not trying to accuse OM of being a biedrins bencher. just to clarify…

heart of a champion, will of the warrior.

by cap'n hack on Mar 1, 2009 9:49 AM PST up reply actions  

KNBR

Crawful as my cousin calls him is a good player. Not really good or great or whatever, but he’s filler for the time being. 50-50 on him staying next year, but its the NBA, he’ll probably be traded for Wally Szczerbiak or something.

I listened to Nellie on KNBR yesterday and he never said the starters would sit once a game every game. He said that he had planed to sit a player time to time for rest and Barbierri and Tolbert asked who. He mentioned SJax, Crawford, maybe Andris. He also alluded to the fact BWright is still in an arm sling. Not good news for ole Brandon. Nelson planed to use Belinelli and Morrow more often and rest some vets. I don’t believe that’s “tanking”. I believe its called molding the current roster into a more complete team. Team, meaning next year. The Dubs are done for ‘08-’09. It makes sense to me that starters would sit time to time, albeit it sucks big time, to once again see the Dubs in the situation they are often in. That’s looking in from the outside, circa 1994-2007 and ‘07-’08.

by gabezgsw on Feb 27, 2009 6:52 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)

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Why Steph Curry is the Warriors most important player, and why they should heavily consider trading him
Warriors2_medium_small
Tom Abdenour... Where is he now?

Recent FanPosts

Small
A little off topic: does GOM sell t-shirts?
Small
Warriors @ Nuggets Preview
Monta_small
Warrior Wonder Standings (December/January)
Angel_beats__logo_small
Looking at the Late-Game playcalls
Ringnovember1981_small
Should Andris Biedrins be sent to the D-League?
Angel_beats__logo_small
An Alternative Explanation to why the Warriors let Lin, Williams and Bell go
Small
Now's the time to trade Curry to Charlotte
Small
Now is the time to make a trade.
Small
What was Nate Robinson's pre-dubs rep?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


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