RECAP: Warriors 118, Timberwolves 94 - Whiff!
by Hash on Mar 3, 2009 10:23 PM PST
in Recaps
42 comments
Whooooooa! First and foremost, let's all throw up MAJOR props to GSoM faithful ROMESdavidWOOD37 for taking the initiative to put up the Open Thread today. Honestly, I'd like to say that the reason I whiffed on the thread had something to do with a supervillian, an incredibly cool car with lots of explosive themed gadgets, and of course, droves of beautiful women encountered at every twist and turn in my plot to save the world...
...but in actuality, it had a little more to do with the fact that I thought I was scheduled to write on tomorrow's game against Chicago.
Yup... not quite as exciting... But there you go.
ONTO THE RECAP!
Boxscore | Open Thread (Romes Edition)
"Listen, Kevin, not sure if you heard... Kinda trying to tank here... You're not making it easy."
Well I think it's safe to say that despite our many woes, there are definitely NBA fans out there that have it tougher than we do! (Not a hell of a lot tougher, mind you.) Tonight we saw some of those poor souls in Minnesota. Now, there's really three ways that you can look at a night like this
1) We're pulling our road game together.
2) The Timberwolves are REALLY hurting without Al Jefferson.
3) Both.
Well, we know number 2 to be true. Let's be optimistic and choose option 3 shall we?
Surveeeeey saaaaaaays..... JUMP!
Honestly, short of Mags' inability to hold onto the ball tonight, you can't fault any of our players for having sub par games. What we encountered tonight was truly the perfect storm of our players hitting near maximum efficiency while our opponents hit near rock bottom.
Now I don't want to get carried away here. While we can cast many a stone in the direction of Minnesota for their performance tonight, it would unwise of us to do so without first acknowledging that we take residence in a prime glass house real estate market ourselves. But that being said, it's pretty rare that we get to be on the statistical upside of a victory. So let's take a look as some of the factors that led to tonight's mollywhoppin'!
Decent Shooting - As a whole, our shot selection was on point tonight. The Dubs shot 45.7% from the field tonight, with that total being diluted by Jackson (shocker), Crawford (shocker), Watson, and Kurz (sshhhhhocker!). Stack that up against the Wolves' 35.9% and we're looking okay as long as we...
Didn't Get Killed on the Glass - Sure, we didn't outboard the Wolves - but we certainly held our own in tempering their 2nd chance buckets. With Turiaf on the bench (arguably our biggest inside bruiser) it was good to see Davidson, A.R. Mags, and Jax pick up the slack to help out Andris. Because grabbing those boards leads to better transition plays, especially if we...
Move the Ball! - With a beautiful 6 dimes from Jax, 5 from Jamal, 3 from Watson it was clear that our point guards were finally able to focus on creating plays that involved their teammates. I hear that's pretty important for point guards. Well, that and...
Controlling the Ball - Mags aside, no one on the team had more than 1 turnover. That's pretty impressive - especially for a team that ranks number 7 in turnovers per game with the all time turnover per game leader for the 2008-2009 NBA season on the squad. You guessed it. Stephen Jackson. Well at least his average came down a bit tonight, right?!
I'm fully aware that this picture has nothing to do with the content of this article. But seriously. Look at it. How can I NOT put this up?!
Well, overall, it was a great showing. The Warriors put a stop to their three game slide and, rare as it may be, did what they were supposed to do considering the caliber of team that they were up against. While our record doesn't set us too far ahead of the Wolves, personally, it would have been pretty depressing to see the Warriors drop this one - despite the fact that we are on the road. Seriously, that would be like losing to the Clippers or something.
Oh wait...
Oooooh yea. This one is Jax all the way. After riding the pine last game to make room for the youngsters, Jax came back with a vengeance with 23 point, 7 boards, 6 dimes and, perhaps the most important stat of his line, ZERO turnovers. Can't argue with progress!
(And a cap tip again to ROMESdavidWOODS37 for stepping it up on the Open Thread!)
0 recs |
42 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
jeez....
i didnt even know there was a game today cause i didnt see a pre-game report.
I am Greg Oden, i am goingz to be trade to The Warrior. hoooray.
Warriors for life. Raiders till death. And The A's when i get free tickets.
by STIX on Mar 3, 2009 10:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
No opponent defensive pressure = No Jack turnovers
I think an honorable mention goes to Marco for heating up in the first to help bury the TWolves early, and Morrow, for heating up the 4th to permanently destroy any hope of a TWolves miracle comeback once they inched to within 14. That’s the depth of our team.
But am I the only one who’s getting a bit fidgety and annoyed with Crawford? It seems like his main contribution to the game is to take volume shots. I don’t know if that’s what Nellie and the coaching staff want him to do, or if he has the green light, so he chooses to take volume shots. Whichever it is, I just don’t feel any impact from him during the game.
Anyway, not much else to take from a blowout of the TWolves. I thought we got laxidasical in the third, but being up 30 will do that for you, but so does a lack of a killer instinct. Oh well, 4 road games in 5 nights. Next game please. Which vet is next on the wheel of benching?
PS. Hash, I have a funny feeling you didn’t catch the game, and you wrote your recap based on the box score.
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 3, 2009 10:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Sjax played less than 30 mins
When he is fresh, less horrible decisions. As for maggs, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt with his taped hand.
As for crawford – he should have driven to the basket more often. If he did that more, he would score more and not rely on hot jump shooting.
The one bad thing – 73.9% ft shooting – that allowed the wolves to narrow the gap.
Marco/morrow did indeed seal the game with good playing time and good shooting. I wish marco had played more and cj less (cj has been cold lately – 2-7 shooting)
by mosdl on Mar 3, 2009 11:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yes, Anthony to Anthony!
Anthony Randolph dish to Anthony Morrow for three! Strange AR didn’t get an assist on that. Maybe Morrow held on to it for a sec before taking the shot, negating the assist.
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 3, 2009 10:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Waddup Hash!
Thanks 37 times for the shotout. I was just trying to keep the OPEN THREAD movin’. all good though. Thanks for the great recap!
oh wait. it wasnt that great because I wanted you to piss off R Dizzle with giving WW to Marco Belinelli. You did hear IQofaWarrior say:
I think an honorable mention goes to Marco for heating up in the first to help bury the TWolves early
loll. jk.
I love steve jack and he deserves the Dub Dub. Did you sayyyyyyyyyyyyyy zero turnovers? sayyy what? he definitely deserves it for that.
He is Money in the comcast commercial.
Keep it movin GSoM.
GO WARRIORS STILL! SO WHAT!
LGW (times 537)
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Mar 3, 2009 11:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
There will be no Marco WW going on here man
We still believe!!
by R Dizzle on Mar 3, 2009 11:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL.
All good.
There will be No Rob Kurz WW either. (well except for that career game vs. Denver earlier in the season. 20 points. 7-11FG 63.6%. 7 boards. 2 Gaffles. 2 Blocks. He absolutely killed it. Melo. K-Mart. and Nene even played. I know you love the coach so much………..but why in the FLYING HELL did your boy Don Nelson give him a DNP-CD the next game? I am sure you were pissed off and I myself….did want to see him play because he definitely deserved to play.)
Orlando was the next game. They didn’t have Dwight Howard but Rashard Lewis lit us up for 21 points. 8 rebounds. and 5 Assists.
Tell me why the hell AR only had 2:21 minutes and Rob Kurz had 0 freggin minutes when we damn well could have used them both THAT PARTICULAR NIGHT.
I am sorry. but when nellie makes decisions like that it blows my mind and pisses me off.
Alot of Warriors fans would disagree, but I think if we had Rick Barry that game he would be smart enough to at least play Kurz and AR to defend Rashard and slow his arse down.
Go Warriors still.
LGW shells.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Mar 4, 2009 12:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Correction: Rick Barry as coach.
ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDD…..Clifford Ray for all our Bigs (Stickman PF’s included) and even guards that can play SF.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Mar 4, 2009 12:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
gaffle haha
do people still use that word for stealing?
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 4, 2009 7:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL.
Naw. I somehow just thought of that word. Hella old school. lolll.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Mar 4, 2009 10:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Two points:
No one on the Warriors had a negative +/-. I know a lot of people don’t like that statistic, and I know that you should always have great +/- numbers in this big of a win, but it brings up interesting points such as:
Biedrins led the Dubs with a +20. Rebounds are important.
Our worst +/- went to Watson who had a measly +2 despite playing 28 minutes. That means that for the 28 minutes with Watson on the floor, we outscored Minnesota by 2, while for the 20 minutes with him on the bench, we outscored Minnesota by 22. We need a PG.
Morrow had a +17 (keep in mind our best was +20)
Randolph, despite having an off night statistically, had a +18, which is showing that he is becoming a defensive presence. It is great to see the rooks be able to come off the bench and keep the team rolling. Nelly is resting the vets to play the rooks more, but when your two best rooks have better +/- than Maggs, Jax or Crawfish, I say play the rooks more because they can help us win.
Second:
While SJax does often get a ton of turnovers, and is the league leader, 7 of the 14 players who join him in top 15 in assists are also in the top 15 in TOs. You make plays, you make mistakes.
Also, everyone else in the top 10 in TOs, except arguably Russell Westbrook and Caron Butler, are franchise players.
by bradyk2 on Mar 4, 2009 12:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
+100000 to your second point
This point does not get made nearly enough. Guess it’s a little inconvenient for the knee-jerk Jack haters.
Monta is the singular of Montus, of the Montai
by Supafishal on Mar 4, 2009 6:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
Obviously Jax makes dumb plays sometime, but Kobe leads the lakers in turnovers. lebron leads the cavs. CP3 leads the hornets. Nash leads the suns. it’s just what happens when you’re the best player and the playmaker on your team.
by bradyk2 on Mar 4, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Point understood
but it seems like a lot of Jack’s turnovers are the kind where he tries to stubbornly force his way into the defense, who collapses on him, who strip the ball from him. It wouldn’t be so bad if it didn’t happen the same way each time, and is therefore patent-pending.
Now, I don’t watch Kobe, Chris Paul, or Nash on a daily basis, but I have a feeling their turnovers don’t look as bad.
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 4, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure they make some that do
They’re just better and have better teammates than Jax, or we’d be in the playoff picture and we’d be winning and talking about all the good things Jax does. Since we’re losing, we focus on the bad things.
And I’m sure if you go to the Hornets fan club, you’ll find people who say bad things about CP3 and his turnovers…
I’m not saying Jax is in any shape or form on the level of Kobe, LeBron, or CP3, but he’s our playmaker and thus is the focus of our opponents’ game plans and the guy who’s trying to make plays instead of just being the spot up jumpshooter in the corner or the rolling big man.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 4, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In terms of its impact, how a turnover ‘looks’ doesn’t matter at all. The problem with Jax vs the other guys who are tops in turnovers is that the rest of his game doesn’t stack up. He doesn’t shoot well enough to demand the ball as often as he does (prerequisite for turning it over is having ball in the first place in almost all cases). He isn’t the passer that the point guards on the list are. Assists aren’t some sort of turnover antimatter (turnovers are more costly than assists are valuable) but as a gauge of how well someone utilizes his time with the ball, it’s a reasonable rough guide. Of those other 7 guys among the leaders in both turnovers and assists, no one else has a A:TO ratio below 2. Westbrook (not in the top 15 in assists) also has too many turnovers given the number of assists (and doesn’t make up for it with good shooting). It is not an accident that both play for terrible teams.
by jae on Mar 4, 2009 10:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A few more pointers:
Jack’s shooting percentage is lower than those other guys, because his game is different. But it is important to note certain assets that stand out, for instance SJax is shooting better on 3s this season than CP3, Kobe, Wade or LeBron.
Sure jack doesn’t have as amazing passes as CP3, but he gets the team INVOLVED. I’m not justifying that he has the most turnovers in the league, merely that it’s natural for him to be near the top.
Also, let’s look at +/- numbers again, because they show if you’re helping your team win. let’s look at the last few games Jack played in:
Minnesota – Jackson: +12. Team high: +20 (biedrins) team average: +11 (I realize this number can be misleading)
Charlotte – Jackson: +6. Team high: +9 (belinelli). team average: -1.5
Clippers – Jackson: -6. Team high: +6 (Turiaf). team average: -6.5
Thunder – Jackson: +7. Team high: +13 (Crawford). team average: +6.5
Lakers – Jackson: -9. Team high: +10 (Randolph). team average: -4.4
Blazers – Jackson: +1. Team high: +15 (Azubuike). team average: +4.4
Knicks – Jackson: +18. Team high: +27 (Turiaf). team average: +9.4
Jazz – Jackson: +21. Team high: +25 (Maggette). team average: +11
In general, the Warriors do better with Jackson on the floor.
by bradyk2 on Mar 4, 2009 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jack’s shooting percentage is lower than those other guys, because his game isdifferentworse.
As for the +/- numbers, if I take your statement that “the Warriors do better with Jackson on the floor” that doesn’t really speak to the fact that he turns the ball over too much. It just tells you that he is probably a bit better than whoever is replacing him on the floor.
Think of it this way. If you give Jackson the ball on offense there are only so many outcomes. He can pass off without creating an advantage for anyone which has basically a neutral effect. He can make a shot which obviously has a positive effect. He can miss a shot which obviously has a negative effect. He can get himself to the free throw line. He can make an assist (again positive). Or he can turn the ball over which is worse than missing a shot because there is no chance at an offensive rebound and has a higher chance of creating an easy basket for the other team in transition.
Without weighting these positive and negatives (I’d really have no idea how) lets just add them up.
Jackson (per 36 minutes):
+
Made fgs: 6.3
Assists: 5.7
Trips to the FT line (We’ll use total ft made / 2 to keep relative value of a mae fg): 2.4
-
Missed shots: 8.9
Turnovers: 3.4
+2.1 positive outcomes
That’s 14.4 positive outcomes and 12.3 negative outcomes. Now this is obviously very fuzzy math but Jackson will give you roughly 2.1 more positive outcomes per 36min than negative. Now let’s take a look at some of the other guys you mentioned.
Chris Paul
+
FG made: 7.1
Asst: 10.5
Ft made/2: 2.7
20.3 total
-
FG missed:7.2
Turnovers: 2.9
10.1 total
+10.2 positive outcomes per 36 minutes
Steve Nash
+
FG made: 5.4
FT made/2: 1.5
Asst: 10.4
17.3 total
-
FG missed 5.9
Turnovers: 4.0
9.9 total
+7.4 positive outcomes per 36 minutes
Ok, I didn’t factor in three pointers and I’m sure I’m missing something but I think you get my point
Jackson: +2.1 positive outcomes per 36
Chris Paul: +10.2 positive outcomes per 36
Steve Nash: +7.4 positive outcomes per 36
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Mar 4, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well played
props on solid statistics. And let me clarify by saying that I in no way am placing him in the same category as CP3 or Nash.
Jack obviously has some turnovers that should be avoided, but it is important to remember how much worse we are with him on the bench, whether it’s the other day vs. Utah, or the first 7 games of last season…
by bradyk2 on Mar 4, 2009 3:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s pretty good. There’s a quick measure called “winscore” (not to be confused with a less useful “game score” which is similar but doesn’t weight the stats for their effect on the game) that measures productivity in a similar manner. There’s an explanation of a means to weight the various stats here.
The notion that somehow it’s ok to miss shots because your game is “different” is pretty much absurd. Jackson isn’t the effective offensive weapon that he seems to think he is. If he is your best offensive player, your team will not be very good. Hey, waitaminit! We aren’t very good.
by jae on Mar 4, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My point when I said "different"
Was that Lebron and Kobe, have much more back-to-the-basket games. Both of these players are far superior to Andris Biedrins, yet Beans has significantly better fg%, because of the game he plays and where he makes his buckets.
I’m not dumb enough to say “Jackson should have a low fg% because he takes bad shots, that’s ok” merely that players like LeBron and Kobe get a bulk of their points with their back to the basket, or in transition.
by bradyk2 on Mar 4, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yea...
it seems like a lot of Jacks turnovers can be avoided. he just seems to make boneheaded plays. sometimes it looks like he throws it right into the teeth of the defense. He can avoid turning the ball over if he just made better decisions and not tried to force the issue every time. If it’s too much of a risk to make the pass through a small window, just pull it back out and set up a play or break your defender down. He has the skills to do so but it just kills me when the turnovers are so boneheaded.
Blind eyes can look at me and see the truth!
by ItsDatFriscoSwag25 on Mar 4, 2009 2:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
we won only because of
rob kurz. put him in and magic happens.
by kin on Mar 4, 2009 2:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
From Marcus Thompson, about Marco last night
“Funny moment early in the second quarter. Belinelli lost Foye with a pump fake and drove to the basket. But his no-look pass to Crawford in the left corner sailed wide right and into the stands. Before the ball landed in the lap of a fan, Nellie was out of his seat on the bench looking for Anthony Morrow. He immediately sent Morrow in for Belinelli.
Marco sat the remaining 10 minutes of the second quarter. He started the third quarter, but played just the first three minutes, 6 seconds before getting yanked. He never returned.
Looks like Nellie’s got a new puppy in the doghouse.”
I guess Marco has a lot of work left to do before getting out of Nellie’s doghouse.
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 4, 2009 9:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Poor marco
He and morrow were shooting lights out though
by mosdl on Mar 4, 2009 10:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess Marco has a lot of work left to do before getting out of Nellie’s doghouse.
I keep sayin he needs to develop a look pass.
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 Mar 4, 2009 9:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
+1
That’s hilarious.
He should also never be allowed to shoot while standing still.
Reduce your carbon footprint, commit suicide.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 4, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
also never be allowed to shoot while standing still.
or upright , should have a 15 degree tilt o meter in him that has to be triggered before the shot can be released.
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 Mar 4, 2009 9:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
D*mn that dog house!
Blind eyes can look at me and see the truth!
by ItsDatFriscoSwag25 on Mar 4, 2009 2:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
props to ROMESdavidWOOD37 for opening the playpen when daddy din't show
It was a good time out.
I forgot it was a morning game and missed the first 3 quarters but sounds like the kids played pretty good together and came out of it without getting mopped?
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 Mar 4, 2009 9:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
haha. Thanks man.
I thought you said Moped when you said mopped. lol. that was just dumb of me.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Mar 4, 2009 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
haha
that should be the new term…“Ugggh son! You just got moped’ed!!”
Blind eyes can look at me and see the truth!
by ItsDatFriscoSwag25 on Mar 4, 2009 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ROMES!
ure dope. i’ll be working on the you know what blog soon. i just need to learn how to make one. pwah! <3
by ms.RAHdig on Mar 5, 2009 4:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
naw. youre dope!
Hi ms.RAHdig.davidWOOD37. Pwah! Welcome to GSoM. <3
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Mar 7, 2009 3:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
Related FanShots on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
