RUMOR: Stephen Curry is Warriors "Main Target"
by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 22, 2009 12:17 AM PDT
in Rumors
148 comments
My main Target's in MV, but Warriors seem to shop elsewhere. [via www.sohe.wisc.edu]
Make the jump for something way more interesting than your last shopping experience at Tar-jey.
The Word on the Street from Jonathan Givony of Draft Express:
In other Warriors news, it appears that despite not having worked him out, Stephen Curry is the team's main target should he be available with the 7th pick. Other options include Jordan Hill, Tyreke Evans and James Johnson.
A few notes:
- Monta and Curry seem like a poor backcourt duo. They don't seem to complement each other as they're both combo guards who don't seem to have the size to guard NBA 2-guards. If Larry Riley and Don Nelson think Curry's the man at #7 that shouldn't stop them (BPA always), but just pointing that out.
- Notice that the golden people's champ Brandon Jennings isn't on this list?
- Jordan Hill does seem to be on the Warriors' radar, but who really knows?
- This is the first I've heard of the Dubs being interested in James Johnson. Isn't #7 too high for him though?
0 recs |
148 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Not there at 7.
Chris Cohan and Robert Rowell? Oh no hide the children!
by Nuck Chorris on Jun 22, 2009 12:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
this seriously makes me very happy.
trade monta and draft curry.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 12:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If we take Curry over Hill, Evans, Flynn, Jennings, or DeRozen I'd be pissed
Brandon Jennings, Ty Lawson, or Tyreke Evans. A Warrior in 09.
With the 6th Pick in the 2009 MLB Draft, the SF Giants pick Donovan Tate.
Conductor of the We're Back Warrior Movement!
by ejdacanay on Jun 22, 2009 12:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree.....
The Warriors need to pick Curry…….There is no other choice…Monta is a #2 … All they have to do is switch on D.
by nick28799 on Jun 22, 2009 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They Both Suck On D
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 22, 2009 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I seriously doubt that they’d play together.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
why?
i don’t get why the warriors want curry? we need a pass first point guard!! jennings is perfect…. and if he’s not there i see Evans in a warriors jersey if he walked all over jennings at Memphis why not? he has size and he can create shots for him self… but i like jennings pass first mentality….
by Fi7ipin0ch3f on Jun 22, 2009 12:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i dont get why you would want jennings...
currys basketball iq is off the charts and he has the best court vision out of all the pgs in the draft. jennings is inconsistent and doesnt even have a shot…what has he proven over in europe? not to mention jennings isn’t the brightest of the bunch either. i would trade monta because i think he is good trade bait right now…and i would draft curry to replace monta at the PG spot…
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lmao @ best court vision
The biggest reason why he got alot of those assists was because he was the first and only option on the Wildcats. His commanding of double and triple teams gave him the ability to rack up easy assists. This is his first year as a PG and he already has the best court vision? One of the better PG IQ’s in this draft, yes, but saying he has the best court vision is silly, if not ridiculous. Not only that, when he faced BCS competition his field goal % almost dropped 10% from 49% to 40%.
Brandon Jennings, Ty Lawson, or Tyreke Evans. A Warrior in 09.
With the 6th Pick in the 2009 MLB Draft, the SF Giants pick Donovan Tate.
Conductor of the We're Back Warrior Movement!
by ejdacanay on Jun 22, 2009 12:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the only knack on curry is his turnovers, but a big reason for that is because he always had the ball, like you stated. ultimately, i would much rather have the warriors draft curry than jennings. i admit, i wasn’t sold on curry in the beginning, but lately he has really been growing on me and i think that he has the best chance (besides griffin and harden) of being a solid player in the league.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s more than that to his turnovers which is bad for a PG at about 1.5:1 during his Junior year. He’ll be going from a 1st scoring option to no higher than a 3rd option on the Warriors which will drops his effectiveness drastically. And as I mentioned, when he faced BCS competition his effectiveness and shooting ’s dropped off 10, how much more against NBA players? Throw in his subpar athleticism, wingspan, and defensive ability as well as the several shooters we have on the team and inadequate handling guards and I think we certianly can should draft someone better than Curry.
Brandon Jennings, Ty Lawson, or Tyreke Evans. A Warrior in 09.
With the 6th Pick in the 2009 MLB Draft, the SF Giants pick Donovan Tate.
Conductor of the We're Back Warrior Movement!
by ejdacanay on Jun 22, 2009 1:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
who do you suggest drafting then that would be better than curry? i would be fine with flynn, evans or derozan. but drafting jennings at 7 does not sit well with me… especially after watching a few of his games in europe.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 1:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The biggest reason why he got alot of those assists was because he was the first and only option on the Wildcats.
That sort of “logic” can be used to defend or assail any player. If he didn’t get assists, you could as easily modify the statement to say “the biggest reason why he did not get alot [sic] of assists is because he was the first and only option on the Wildcats.”
Clearly, if he could find someone to score such that he could get assists, he wasn’t the only option. Many players in college comand double and triple teams. Far fewer get “easy assists” by passing out of these double and triple teams.
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ejdacanay
According to Matt Steinmetz:
Warriors have the 7th pick in the draft, which player would you look at with that pick?
Stephen Curry. Here’s why, and it’s pretty simple. I keep hearing that Curry might be the best passer in the draft. And we know he’s one of the best—-if not the best— shooter in the draft.
I will say this, however. I think the Warriors are in a brutal position draft wise. It seems pretty apparent that there are going to be hits and misses all over the board. There are too many unknowns. There are going to be a lot of teams up high in the draft who swing and miss and there are going to be teams in the 20s that hit home runs.
If the Warriors do use the pick, I have no doubt their selection will be a smart player, with good ball handling and decision-making skills, and a high basketball IQ to go along with it.
The Warriors are a very bad team when it comes to passing, decision-making and basketball IQ. It’s where the Warriors really paid the price for losing Baron Davis. Now, you have Jackson making the bulk of the decisions, and really, how far will that take you?
This team isn’t going to get significantly better until and unless it gets smarter and shares the ball more. And the only way they’re getting smarter is to add smarter players.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
great, sounds like were getting Dumbleavey again.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 22, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“The Warriors are a very bad team when it comes to passing, decision-making and basketball IQ. It’s where the Warriors really paid the price for losing Baron Davis.”
That’s funny to me.
by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why is that funny?
Is it because even though Baron has an elite-level basketball IQ, that wouldn’t amount to a hill of crap if he didn’t have freakish skills, build and athletic ability?
His hoops IQ is only one of many reasons the Warriors are worse without their best player, especially since mitigated some of that IQ by jacking up bad shots out of laziness regardless of the fact that he knew the “best basketball play” to make.
Steinmetz = Oversimplification Sensation
Reduce your carbon footprint, commit suicide.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jun 22, 2009 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Praising Baron for his passing, decision-making, and basketball IQ is funny to me. I agree with you that he’s shown he has these traits (playoffs vs. Mavs), but 90% of the time he’s too busy not giving a **** to use any of them, and that’s why I find it funny.
by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jump on The CURRY BANDWAGON!
1.Blake 2. Hasheem 3. Rubio 4. Flynn 5. Harden 6. Tyreke 7. Curry 8. Brandon Jennings 9. DeMar DeRozen 10. Jordan Hill (that is how the top 10 will play out)
by Sinigang on Jun 22, 2009 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 on bballl IQ
His first year at pg he did well. He will only improve.
by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2009 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and if curry isnt there
i hope we pick jonny flynn and not some one like jrue holiday who is extremely overrated
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 12:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i hope we pick jonny flynn and not someone overrated player like jrue holiday or jordan hill.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dude....
flynn has no size… and i just think curry would get stomp’d by evans or jennings in the long run and jennings isn’t a scoring pg… he’s a passing pg… thats what the warriors need…. we don’t need a pg like curry where he need to shoot 10-15 shots a game because we have alot of players on the team who can score 15-20 pts a night….. monta… jack…. craw…. mags…. beans… randolph…. morrow…. need i say more? jennungs>curry
by Fi7ipin0ch3f on Jun 22, 2009 1:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
have you even seen jennings play a full game? or just his high school highlights on youtube? i watched some of his games over in europe and i was not impressed. of course he always has his few highlight plays every so often, but the amount of errors he makes and shots he misses exceed way past his little “moments”…
i understand that we have enough scorers on the team like monta…but that’s why we should trade monta and get a solid bigger player to fulfill our needs more.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 1:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
don’t worry, Curry won’t be there at 7… as the draft has gotten nearer and nearer, he’s been working out with higher and higher teams.
Jennings will be there at 7… in fact he might be there at 14…
There seems to be a lot of uncertainty about where Brandon Jennings may end up too. We currently have him slated to be drafted 13th by the Pacers, but sources close to the situation indicate that there are some concerns there that could lead them in the direction of Ty Lawson or Eric Maynor instead. The fact that he worked out for Phoenix on Saturday for the #14 pick is a pretty good indication that he, like most of us, has no idea where he’s going to get drafted at this point. If Jennings begins to slip a bit, look for ESPN’s college basketball crew to not miss the opportunity to get some shots in at his decision to skip the NCAA for Europe.
i hope not. i dislike those snooty college guys like Vitale gushing over NCAA guys and ridiculing international players.
by the evil monkey on Jun 22, 2009 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If not pick BJ.
Yes he will if not Fudge i don’t want James Johnson or Jordan Hill Tyreke going to Memphis He had a good workout and dominated.
1.Blake 2. Hasheem 3. Rubio 4. Flynn 5. Harden 6. Tyreke 7. Curry 8. Brandon Jennings 9. DeMar DeRozen 10. Jordan Hill (that is how the top 10 will play out)
by Sinigang on Jun 22, 2009 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s funny, in the first, first mock drafts James Johnson kept popping up right around the Warriors projected (now actual) spot at 7. What the hell has happened to him now, no one even talks about him? I forgot about him. I remember the same thing happening last year with Randolph, I definitely saw him as a top 5 in one of the initial, version 1 mock drafts, then he just disappeared from the public eye, or at least my eye.
Not comparing the two, I just haven’t heard Johnson mentioned since then so it makes me curious as to why he fell/was ignored.
by belilaugh on Jun 22, 2009 12:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Flynn's size
Seriously, what is wrong with J Flynn’s size?? Chris Paul is the same size, Isiah Thomas was smaller, I don’t understand the big deal? If it’s defense, he’ll play more in half a season than Monta played all year. Jennings will be a bust! Watched him play at Oak Hill – Overrated!!
by Charles W on Jun 22, 2009 7:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Don’t ever put Fylnn in the same breath as Chris Paul or Isiah Thomas ever again. Ever.
They may be similiar in size but let’s not get carried away. Really, what do you think then, all PG’s under 6 feet are super stars. Reallly? What, he has that potential? Really, then you got a hard on for him? What? Come on man. You name 2 pg’s at that size form 4 decades. Let’s assume then that height is a big issue and sometimes, sometimes there is an excpetion to the rule. Sometimes. Really.
by Balance on Jun 22, 2009 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We must have seen very different games…when I watched him play Ed Davis’ team, there was no question who the best player on the floor was (Jennings)…
by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Flynn
f it’s defense, he’ll play more in half a season than Monta played all year.
I think your right. Just watch Flynn’s highlights and recent interviews. He has committed to being a Passing PG ( which he has proved already unlike Jennings) and committed to Defense and getting better.
His size might be an issue, but Monta needs to step up, and With Jackson, Randolph with a Turiaf, we wont be lacking the Defense….
Gotta love the Bay Area drama ;)
by JayFerg on Jun 22, 2009 9:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Flynn is going to Sac they need a point guard with leadership, court vison, pass first, and who can shoot.
Curry a warrior in 09’ Mark it
1.Blake 2. Hasheem 3. Rubio 4. Flynn 5. Harden 6. Tyreke 7. Curry 8. Brandon Jennings 9. DeMar DeRozen 10. Jordan Hill (that is how the top 10 will play out)
by Sinigang on Jun 22, 2009 9:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
please please
don’t take J.J. Redick 2.0
Oakland Raiders Fan
Golden State Warriors Fan
San Francisco Giants Fan
San Jose Sharks Fan
MMA Fan
USC Trojan Fan
by i love sports101 on Jun 22, 2009 11:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
fortunately, curry doesn’t play anything like reddick, so we dodged a bullet there.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aren’t 2.0 versions supposed to be significant upgrades? Maybe the Redick 2.0 is good, with added new features like being able to play basketball.
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
XP = Vista 2.0
Reduce your carbon footprint, commit suicide.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jun 22, 2009 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
jj redick and curry are completely different players. jj cant create his own shot, while curry can…
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
all these PGs are overrated!!!!!
the only PG i see that would fit the warriors is tyreke evans… jennings is not as good as everyone makes him out to be, i saw some of his games in Europe and he is a crazy ball hog sometimes… curry is basically another SG, lawson is too small, holiday is super overrated, and rubio is not very impressive
im telling you someone will regret something after the draft just like history serves for the dubs
by baydestrian_415 on Jun 22, 2009 11:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For One Last Time
Tyreke Evans Is NOT A Point Guard. When he was at Memphis, they tried to have him play PG but it just didn’t work out. He assist to turnover ratio is terrible and while he is big, he cannot shoot the ball. I haven’t seen anything that shows he can even pass!? Tyreke Evans will develop at SG because that is exactly what he is, and if you think Evans is going to play Point Guard you can expect to be disappointed quickly.
im telling you someone will regret something after the draft just like history serves for the dubs
Every team regrets when they pass someone up or gets a bust. It’s not just the Dubs. I’m sure many teams kick themselves after seeing how well Courtney Lee did this year. Stars and Bust are evident in every draft.
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 22, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When he was at Memphis, they tried to have him play PG but it just didn’t work out.
I don’t want Evans at all and I don’t think he’ll be an NBA PG, but thats not true at all-Memphis got a whole lot better when they put him at PG.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Curry if he's there
Otherwise I hope we trade down. The 76ers are supposedly shopping Brand and his 130 DNPs over the last two years. I’m not totally sold on it, but it would be an interesting idea, something like the 7 pick + an extra piece (like Bellinelli or Azubiuke) for Brand and the 17, where we could grab a Lawson, or a Jeff Teague, or an Eric Maynor. I’m over Jennings. HE CAN’T SHOOT, PEOPLE. The idea of the “pure” point guard is a total misnomer. Even Chris Paul shoots 15 times a game. Remember Baron Davis? He put up 20 shots per game! Like it or not, our PG is going to shoot the ball a good deal, and while I like Jennings’ swagger and the fact that he likes to push the tempo, his limited offensive repertoire and lack of size bother me. Or, if we trade down and get a guard in return, let’s take Hansbrough! He would probably immediately become the 2nd best rebounder on the team and would solidify our frontcourt rotation (Beans, Wright, Turiaf, Hansbrough, sounds pretty good, huh?)
by the guy on Jun 22, 2009 11:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
To get Brand we’d have to give up a bunch of salary…..but I probably wouldn’t be totally against it if there was reason to believe Brand could get back to 100%
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’d be ironic (if we got Brand) after we drove up his price last summer that in the end we just drove the price up for ourselves…
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 6:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
good thing we aren’t talking about drafting anyone who plays like monta ellis.
but really, would you argue with getting another monta, considering at the 7 spot, someone with that kind of talent would almost certainly be the best player on the board?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He might have been talking about the the guy’s post discussing Teague?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
im praying
that this isnt some smoke screen to get the twolves to draft curry and for jordan hill to fall to us at 7.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 22, 2009 12:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
idk
Lets not OVER HYPE these guys tho. Lets get a good pick and see what he does. And Curry dosent fit our plans.
{~R.i.p Sean Taylor #21~}
by Dubz50 on Jun 22, 2009 12:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Curry fits the plan the same way Jennings or any other point guard fits the plan. Besides, Curry can shoot the ball better than anyone else in this draft.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 22, 2009 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Curry dosent fit our plans.
We have plans?
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
can you share “our plans” with the rest of us?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can’t say there’s any real pick I’ll be upset about. Most of the prospects available where we’re picking look very boom or bust, so I’ll be happy with whoever we take and hope for the best. If it doesn’t work out, we can do all the hindsight second guessing we want, but it should be pretty clear there isn’t an obvious good pick for the W’s to make. It’s a pretty big roll of the dice this year…
Oh and I lied earlier, I’d be pissed if we somehow end up with Terrence Williams. Talk about a bum. Man I heard that guy hates being good at basketball. Why would we want someone like that?
by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2009 12:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Curry LOL
Wow. First off, Curry has been riding the coattails of his daddy since his team went deep into the NCAA tourney year before last. Second off, Curry plays really run of the mill college teams. Yeah, he had his cute little run in the NCAA’s, but other than that and his shot, he doesn’t really bring anything to the table. He might drain a couple 3’s in the NBA when its garbage time, but to be drafted in the top 7 is ridiculous. Eric Gordon coming out of a powerhouse Indiana University was 1000 times better coming out of college, yet Curry will be drafted in the same slot as Gordon? That should illustrate how weak this draft is. Mr. Indiana last year getting drafted the same as Curry this year is a joke! Gordon will own Curry and his 165 lbs butt in the NBA.
Curry is a flash in the pan and wishes he could be 1/4 the player his Daddy was. BUST!!!!!!! Earl Watson would school Curry. That says it all boys and girls.
by gabezgsw on Jun 22, 2009 1:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Eric Gordon coming out of a powerhouse Indiana University was 1000 times better coming out of college
please look at what gordon and curry did in college before making statements like that. it is plainly not true. indiana certainly wasn’t a powerhouse, and gordon didn’t perform particularly well in the season he played there. he has a sweet jumper that he didn’t really show off in indiana because of his wrist injury. curry has a very nice jump shot as well and some point guard skills to go along with it. there’s really no comparing their college careers; curry was much better.
Earl Watson would school Curry. That says it all boys and girls.
that says that you really don’t know much about stephen curry, which i suppose could be all you were trying to say.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You are the king of trying to discredit people, good ups
by 123707THIZZ on Jun 22, 2009 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
as long as i’m the king of something.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now that's just a good outlook on life
by 123707THIZZ on Jun 22, 2009 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’m probably the king of life outlooks too.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are definitely the king of lower case letters. You can add that one to the resume.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 22, 2009 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what about the king of participating in off topic mini-threads within a post? i seem to do that a lot.
if i can add a couple more “king of”s to my resume i won’t ever have to worry about unemployment again.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’ll reluctantly cede you the title of king of lower case letters only because i throw in a capitalized “I” or a WHOLE word in caps for emphasis every now and then, but i’m not giving up the “king of off topic mini-threads within a post” without a seriously off topic fight.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i used to do the whole word thing, but now i’m all about the bolding of words. i’m also clearly the king of (completely unnecessary) parentheses.
and if you want the title of “king of off topic mini-threads within a post”, you best be ready to come with your ‘a’ game, because i’ll talk about anything that doesn’t relate to basketball with anyone willing to pretend to listen all day long. bring it.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Jimmy Fallon/Conan O’Brien transitions to the NBC late night shows. Discuss.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 1:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
there’s no way that the drop off from conan to fallon can be as big as the improvement from leno to conan. leno sucked and fallon landed zach morris. no one would say that the conan isn’t way better than fallon, but i’d rather watch some idiot giggle at his own jokes than watch jay leno do anything. plus, the fact that leno was on earlier made it all the more imperative to have toss him off of the network.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the whole thing is a little absurd. I agree that NBC must have realized how foolish it was to be wasting Conan in the later time slot when it felt like Leno was a far inferior opening act. That said, I suspect it was largely a financial move by NBC as they figured they could give Conan a salary bump, retain Leno, and bring Fallon on board for a whole lot cheaper than it would be to put a couple shows on earlier. But I think the earlier Leno show is going to be an absolute bomb. Fallon sucks, the Zack Morris interview (you totally stole my thunder with that one) is the only good thing I’ve seen him do and when he runs out of SNL stars to have as guests/designated-funny-hitters he’s really gonna be in trouble. I wonder how the network that landed the best late night host in recent memory managed to to also get two bums like Leno and Fallon. Who really thought Jimmy Fallon would be a good idea? Can we please just put Conan and Kimmel on back to back on the same network? Next topic?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 2:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed on pretty much all of that, though i don’t care about kimmel; i’d like nbc to try to land kilborn, who was outstanding. in his last couple years, kilborn was pretty much unbeatable. between recreating photos, ascot wednesdays, “it’s friday and all i want to do is dance, dance, dance,” 5 questions and generally being a great interviewer, he was amazing. not sure he’s coming back to tv, though.
also important to note: fallon wasn’t funny at all during the zach morris interview. how do you get completely dominated on your own show by some guy who isn’t even on saved by the bell anymore? fallon was awful in that “interview”. but that brings us to another advantage of the new lineup, you can easily get rid of fallon in a couple of months, replace him with pretty much anyone, and everyone’s excited about it. that could prove to be an ace in the hole for nbc.
and, yeah, leno is off the air in that new timeslot in a hurry. that is doomed to fail.
if we can call late night tv settled, i’d vote we move on to the last few episodes/upcoming season of mad men. season 2 ended on a ridiculously good note and i’m way too excited for season 3. if you aren’t a mad men guy, we could easily move onto “what’s the greatest novel ever?” or how good public enemies should be.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not a huge Kimmel fan either, but he seems like the second best thing going on late night now. I’m not sure I’ve ever actually watched his show but it seems like at least once a month somebody sends me a pretty funny youtube video clip… the “unnecessary censorship” bit is always good for some laughs. I honestly never watched Conan much before either, but I can see why he had such a massive cultiish following, the guy is really, really funny.
I’m not a mad men guy, though I keep hearing I should be so perhaps thats something I’ll explore this summer.
Great call on the other two topics though, I really can’t turn down either one.
Obviously “greatest novel ever” deserves its own entire thread and its insanely difficult to narrow it down to one, but I’ll just throw out some relatively quick thoughts. First its tough to argue against either of Orwell’s twin epics, neither one fails to live up to the considerable hype. I’d have to give the underrated author award to Malamud as I really think The Assistant and the The Natural are every bit as good as Animal Farm and 1984. Natural gets some play because of the Redford flick (surprised it hasn’t been terribly remade yet) but Assistant doesn’t get talked about nearly enough. All 4 of those are just awesome reads that are so hard to put down even when you’re reading them for the 6th time. Its kinda cliche but my personal #1 truly is Catcher in the Rye. Its just so perfect, and I feel almost disheartened when I hear about or meet any man/boy in the 17-35 yr old age range that hasn’t read it….it really should be a required rite of passage into manhood-take a road-trip across the country….or another country, master the art of BBQ, take a punch to the face, get ridiculously drunk and do something incredibly stupid, shoot a gun, and read Catcher ….all those things should be accomplished before any male turns 30. I’d give the most overhyped award to Lolita Good book, but it pops up at or near the top of every greatest novel list I’ve ever seen, I don’t quite get it. Cuckoo’s Nest, Lord of the Flies, Uylsses, Slaughterhouse Five, and Les Mis are all way up there on my list too.
Public Enemies should be outstanding, but I’m a little scared. In a way it seems a little too perfect- perfect story, director with some great ones under his belt, perfectly cast. But Depp does tend to over-act a little bit and I’m not sure Dillinger is a character where he can totally get away with it. I’ve been a huge Bale fan since American Psycho and he seems so perfect for his role, but I wouldn’t be all that surprised if he totally botched it either. Michael Mann is the most concerning. Heat and The Last of the Mohicans are both probably among my top 10 favorite movies of all time, but I can’t think of anything great he’s done since and Miami Vice, Hancock, and The Kingdom were all stinkers. I’m definitely excited for it, but a bit nervous too.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
mad men is the only truly “great” television series in recent memory. it’s really well done and it starts out feeling light-ish, to get your attention and interest, but by the time you’re hooked, you realize that you are watching the first foray into tragedy that i recall on television. it satisfies your “getting punched in the face” man requirement from your couch.
for me, the novel question is simple, it’s gatsby. first off, it deals with what it means to be human in a particular setting as opposed to having a story and putting humans in it. that is a key requirement for any great novel. second, the way it separates itself from much of the pack is the sheer aesthetic weight it carries. there are so many scenes that just crush you. and once the second half gets going, there’s just no stopping that train, no roadblocks will slow it, you’re about to be absolutely run over by that novel. then of course, fitzgerald’s prose is unequaled. it makes his weaker stories worth reading and fantastic stories like gatsby all the better.
side note: it isn’t the great american novel, because it isn’t american enough. as far as modern america goes, that’s revolutionary road. don’t let the movie fool you, while the movie was good, the book is sooo much better (to sound as snobby as possible) and there were a couple of tweaks in the movie that really held it back.
agreed on lolita, it was pretty good, but the adoration it receives is a bit confusing to me.
believe it or not, i’ve never read catcher. everything i’ve heard about it makes me think that i should, but also that i missed the boat on thinking it was utterly fantastic by waiting so long to read it. if i had read it as a 17-20 year old for the first time, my understanding is that it is much easier to relate to. i still plan on getting around to it, but probably not for a while. i won a $100 borders card that i promptly spent on summer reading materials and have the GREs to prep for, so it seems like a next year situation for me.
i’m confident in public enemies, but yeah, michael mann scares me. on the plus side, the trailer for public enemies was a better cinematic achievement than any of the actual movies you listed. tough to say that a 3 minute clip is more impressive than an entire movie, but those ones were dreadful. i walked out of hancock.
here’s what prevents this one from being bad. johnny depp’s acting prowess and implicit seal of approval (by acting in it and depp just doesn’t do bad movies) and christian bale taking up his keeanu reeves 2.0 role (in the way jae describes it, as a substantial upgrade) that he is so good at. if want someone to play a stoic, but brooding character who will speak in monotone, bale is your man and he’s got that going in what i’ve seen of this one. he better not genuinely smile in that movie or it’s instantly ruined. fake smiles are fine, but no christian bale character is allowed to be happy about anything.
side note/set of questions: how many millions of dollars has christian bale cost keeanu reeves by stealing keanu’s bit and being so much better at it than keanu ever could have been? was a keanu reeves batman a possibility? are those movies watchable with him instead of bale? these are all things i’ve very interested in figuring out.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
mad men is the only truly "great" television series in recent memory.
Mad Men is a good show. It might be the best series that is still making new episodes of. But unless you’ve got a real, real short memory, it isn’t the best in recent memory. The Wire was not just the best show when it was on, but possibly the best piece of TV ever. The Wire: Mad Men:: Jordan:: Brandon Roy.
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
never watched the wire. i don’t get hbo, but i’d imagine that there are a few shows that can be considered great that are on hbo or showtime. cable tv, it isn’t close, it’s all mad men.
of course, something tells me that i’d still prefer mad men over the wire, but since i haven’t seen it, i can make no real judgments about that.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the wire is available on iTunes….one of the few shows I’d say really is worth the price of the DVDs/download
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wire, the
probably the apotheosis of amerikan realism dramatic television. our public library in oaktown has the dvd’s, and many of the themes in the wire reflect what’s going down in oaktown and the declining cities across amerika. the genius writer also created one of the best police tv shows ever, homicide, and is now working on a mini series centered in post-katrina n’awlins.
in the category of historical fiction dramatic television, i nominate “rome”. incredible sets (huge area also used in scorsese’s ‘gangs of ny’) and costumes, vivid characterizations with extras recruited from veteran italiano well versed in the nuances of roman soldiers and ordinary people.
by the.monk on Jun 23, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rome was solid, deadwood was also very good, Ian McShane could very well be the best actor most people haven’t heard of.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Wire was sooooooooooo good. I watched all 5 seasons in about 2 months, including one weekend where I really don’t know if I left the house and I think I watched a full season and a half. Every character was awesome, and having some familiarity with Baltimore made it even more interesting.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Mad Men really is the Roy to The Wire’s Jordan then I definitely need to check it out.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha, I hadn’t really thought about Bale as the new, improved Keanu, but that is pretty dead on. Reeves considered for Batman? Man I don’t know, I guess its possible, but I don’t think he couldve made those nearly as good as they were. Much has been made of Bale’s obnoxious growling Batman voice, but he did a pretty dang good job as Bruce Wayne.
I agree you may have missed the boat on catcher. If you don’t read it as a teen or in your very early 20s you probably won’t relate to it, but I think once if you do it hooks you and you probably love it for life.
The first time I read Gatsby was for a High School English class I despised. We read it right after Beloved and The Crucible and I disliked them both. I think I just never got over that, I’ve tried to read it twice since then and never gotten all the way through it. You seem to have a love for tragedy-which would explain your Warriors fandom.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, the biggest problem with the hypothetical batman movies with keanu would be the bruce wayne bits. those would be dreadful and might push the movies into the “hard to watch” realm.
and i do thoroughly appreciate a good tragedy. someone who considers “the sorrows of young werther” one of his favorite novels needs to be.
i think to be a good warriors fan has less to do with loving tragedy and more to do with either having low expectations or being a masochist. the warriors winning games is not central to my existence at all and they provide an excellent emotional outlet for me, that’s my only important expectation. there are probably no “tragic” franchises in sports, though if jim kelly had died after the bills lost their last super bowl, the bills might qualify.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but at least we’ve demonstrated that we have a couple differing opinions about things aside from hasheem thabeet.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are the king of trying to discredit people, good ups
Someone needs to play the part of weed-whacker when all the BS starts sprouting up this time of year. =P
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 22, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If by “this time of year” you mean “all the time” then I agree.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hell yey on curry
the man led the ncaa in scoring. “he did it against inferior competition” he also did it with inferior teamates that allowed him to be triple teamed. imagine how good hell be playing with elite athletes that can space the floor for him.
I'm gametime_gsw, and I approve this message.
by gametime_gsw on Jun 22, 2009 2:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The only difference is that he will have 4 other talented players he can pass to unlike at Davidson. So space away all you want he will have some talent to pass to this time.
by Dungeness Crab Dribble on Jun 22, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leading NCAA in scoring...
Kurt Thomas and Vin Baker also led the country in scoring. Look at their careers.
If he was triple teamed, it was by JC transfers that are now working at Chuckie Cheese and Jamba Juice.
by gabezgsw on Jun 22, 2009 2:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wait, what’s wrong with Baker? Wasn’t he on the Olympic team around 2002 or whatever?
by belilaugh on Jun 22, 2009 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what happened to him, i loved that guy
wasn’t he a drunk or something
by 123707THIZZ on Jun 22, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
didn’t he go to rehab at some point? I think it was an alcohol issue, but I don’t remember.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly don’t remember anything about that dude except that he was on the Olympic team. What was wrong with him?
by belilaugh on Jun 22, 2009 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He had a bunch of personal issues. Alcohol, drugs (probably), and such. Wasted talent – he was definitely good at one point and let his life get out of control.
by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vin made a mess of his life, but I doubt that leading the NCAAs in scoring predicted that. Early in his career, he appeared to be a reasonably good player, though he was probably never really as valuable as the popular opinion of him. Right about the time where he was coming into his own as a solid, front line PF, he fell apart, stopped rebounding, lost his shooting touch, stayed fat and out of shape and just fell of the face of the planet.
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Curry goes on to have a Kurt Thomas type of career in a Warriors uniform would you really be all that disappointed?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too small
Much as I admire his heart and passion, I think Curry will have a tough time in the NBA. It was also be awesome if I was proved wrong.
by yobo on Jun 22, 2009 2:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Captain Hack
Come on brother. You’re telling me the Elite 8 is a better conference than the Big 10? Hmm, okay. Wow, just when you thought you heard it all. Davidson’s competition is 1/5th the Big Ten’s. Gordon had infanintly better competition and did very well under the circumstances. Curry did well against very average/below average players. We’re talking Elite 8 man?!
Gordon was on one of the worst teams in the NBA and did very well. Come back to me in a year and lets see where Mr. 165 lbs Curry will be. Then we can compare, because at this point is is a JOKE that Gordon was drafted #7 last year and Curry might do the same in this years draft.
As pathetic as it sounds, yes Stephen Curry is not worth two squirts of piss in comparison to any other draft. It is a great representation of how shallow a talent pool this draft is being that Curry is even mentioned in the top 10 let alone top10 PG’s.
by gabezgsw on Jun 22, 2009 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
you said that gordon outperformed curry in their respective seasons before entering the draft. this is not true. you said that indiana was a powerhouse, when they were a 9 seed that got bounced in the first round of the tourney while steph curry led his subpar supporting cast to the elite 8 (which is hardly riding his dad’s coattails). pretending you said something different than you actually said doesn’t make it the case. your first argument was a mass of false statements and ad homs.
this is a totally new argument and makes more sense. curry did play against inferior competition than gordon, but he also had inferior teammates and was subject to double and triple teams all year while learning a new position (and doing so very successfully, if i may add).
am i sure that curry will be better than gordon? of course not, but seeing as they play different positions on the basketball court and you are comparing their position on a draft board, i’m not sure why that matters. it is a weak draft, but that doesn’t mean that curry won’t be the bpa or that he won’t have a successful nba career. he’s proven himself in college (something you couldn’t say about the injured eric gordon) and has a very useful skillset. there’s no reason to dismiss him before he plays a single nba game.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...
Captain Hack
Come on brother. You’re telling me the Elite 8 (Southern Conference) is a better conference than the Big 10?
I see you’ve met this guy…
He didn’t actually make a judgment about their competition, he just said that Indiana wasn’t a “powerhouse” that year, and that Gordon didn’t perform “1000 times better”. I don’t think anyone would argue that they faced similar competition in their conferences, no matter how much you might wish that they would argue that.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 22, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gordon 07/08 v. Curry 08/09
Per 36 minutes
-—
21.7 ….. 30.7 pts
.433 ….. .454 fg
.834 ft ….. .876 ft
3.4 ….. 4.7 reb
2.5 ast ….. 6.0 ast
1.4 stl ….. 2.7 stl
Gabez: what part of “Curry outperformed Gordon by such a huge margin that you’d have to be a bald-faced liar or a blithering idiot to suggest the opposite” is unclear to you?
Obviously, you can adjust for level of competition. But stop insulting everyone’s intelligence by saying that Gordon was “1,000 times better” coming out of school. I haven’t read a single account of Curry in the past month, stats or scouting based, that’s been less than gushing. Last ESPN / Chad Ford report I heard, they said the Knicks are praying for him to fall to them at #8, but that there’s basically zero chance it will happen.
Think a bit before ranting next time. I know you’re capable of better.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 22, 2009 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think some people are realizing that the throwaway “he’s not athletic” line might have been false and he’s rising on team’s wish lists accordingly. The scouting of HS talent is so much better than it was a couple of decades ago. The flip side of that is that some people seem to be reacting as if the HS scouting is dogma forever.
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
The flip side of that is that some people seem to be reacting as if the HS scouting is dogma forever.
Yeah, I’m surprised how much I’ve been reading things like “well coming out of HS he was a top PG prospect” or “he was recruited as a combo guard”. After you’ve seen a guy play in college for a year or two (or even the NBA in some cases) who cares what people thought when he was playing in high school. Shouldn’t a players actual college performance trump any preconceived notions that he carried with him into college?
In HS any extremely athletic guy that can play a little bit is projected to be something special. At that point players are young enough that you can reasonably expect a good bit of improvement in a guys game before they get to the league. There is, of course, a pretty high fall-out rate among “the next big thing” type of players. It seems like people don’t notice sometimes when these super athletic guys don’t actually perform as well as the more “normal looking” guys that no one got excited about in high school.
It’s surprising how long it can take a guy to shake the “not-that-athletic” label, even when putting up great numbers (see Curry and Lawson). It’s also surprising how long a guy can get by on a reputation he earned by being able to jump higher, or have longer arms than any other high school player in his state.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 23, 2009 12:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OMG NO WAY!!! YOUR CRAZZZZY! CHECK OUT BRANDON JENNINGS OAK HILL ACADEMY YOUTUBE HIGHLIGHTS. HE WILL COMPLIMENT MONTA PERFECTLY!!!!!!!!
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
*Elite 8*
Meant to say Southern Conference…my bad. How could I forget that powerhouse of a conference?
by gabezgsw on Jun 22, 2009 3:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Eh, Steph Curry
I mean, he is a good scorer, and he has some pretty good vision, but I think that he’ll have a hard time adjusting. The only resemblance between him and Monta is that they are both small combo guards and they both are small (weight wise). Monta is far more athletic and faster, while Curry isn’t either of these things. He can shoot but I don’t know how he will be able to do the same things he did in college. When Davidson played good teams, he became a scorer but shot the ball many times to get his points. Look up against, Oklahoma 12-29 (6-15 3PT), NC State 15-33 (4-14 3PT), West Virginia 9-27(4-14 3PT), Purdue 5-26 (2-12 3PT)….. Thats just a few games but that seems to be the case with Curry. We have more than enough scorers on this team, so what we don’t need another player like Curry. A legit point guard who can be a floor leader, become a pass first PG & be dedicated on defense as well is who I would rather draft
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 22, 2009 4:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For what it’s worth (and I don’t think it’s worth much) Curry was far, far, far faster and jumped much higher at the combine than Monta.
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah but
Combine speed and game speed are two totally different things. But I was referrin to when Curry was in college. When talking about who is the fastest players in College Basketball, Curry isn’t one of the first people I think of. Lawson, Flynn and Jennings have much more explosivenes and athleticism is their game. Also, I think Curry won’t like the stronger defenders since they’ll be very physical with him … And unlike Lawson, Flynn & Jennings, Curry isn’t a good finisher near the basket, something Monta excels at I believe.
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 22, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anyway you slice is, Curry isnt SLOW. He is more than adequate. He isnt monta, we know that… but realistically you could name the players faster on the break than monta on 1 hand… point being, ivery few.
Curry isnt a good finisher at rim? OK… we have monta, maggette, jack and even buike do we NEED another finisher at rim. Curry is great off screens and pull up midrange shots. Curry knows how to move off defenders too, he’s been double and triple teamed all season and shot respectable percentages. He is deceptive and knows how to use his body to create the seperation he needs. Something that often is unnoticed in these combines but invaluable
by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2009 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He puts up deceptive numbers
While he does have a really good shot, he is a volume shooter. He got his points, but took alot of shots to make them. He was triple teamed once, against a foolish dumb team. He has one year of experience playing PG and I’d rather put my stock in a player who has been playing the 1 for some time. One year of playing the 1 in the Southern Conference and than becooming the 2 when playing big time schools tells me something; while he can pass, he’s not a pure Point Guard and we don’t need two combo guards that aren’t experienced playing the point.
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 22, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Volume shooter is not a knock. Volume shooters who ONLY score by volume shooting tend to be overrated. But volume shooters who make their shots are a good thing. Curry tended to make his shots.
by jae on Jun 22, 2009 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also keep in mind the options you’re dealing with here – Evans and Holiday don’t exactly have a big PG resume, Jennings didn’t get the chance to do that much in Europe…basically if that’s your philosophy all you’re left with is Lawson and Flynn.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 6:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly My Point
I’ll take either one of them….. Rather pick Jonny Though
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 23, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But do you think Lawson and Flynn are as good as the other guys that will be available or do you just think they better fill a Warriors need?
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funny how people see things differently
Sports Nation on ESPN has a National poll.
Who will have the best pro career out of the following players?
1) Rickey Rubio
2) Tyreke Evans
3) Stephan Curry
4) James Harden
And the Winner!!!!…………………………… Stephan Curry. Thats what the country as a whole thinks.
by Dungeness Crab Dribble on Jun 22, 2009 5:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
wow. that’s a surprise result. i’d take harden or rubio over him, but i suppose that poll is as much of an indicator of who most espn viewers recognize by name than who will actually be better.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 22, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
interesting, but to be fair
Curry has gotten quite a bit more ESPN attention than any of the rest of those guys
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a Sportcenter Draft special on ESPN at 7
It better not be Stuart Scott and Steven A Smith hosting
by 123707THIZZ on Jun 22, 2009 6:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Stephen A. Smith is gone.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah i just remembered that, they didnt renew his contract
THANKFULLY
by 123707THIZZ on Jun 23, 2009 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Quite frankly...
I didn’t even notice.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 23, 2009 1:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
no thanks on Curry
What team did he play for?
how far did they get in Ncaa tourney?
the answer to those questions are the reason i see a big old bust written all over him.
by Warriorfan on Jun 22, 2009 6:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Just going strictly by your criteria, I don’t get it. He’s taken Davidson to the Elite 8. What’s bad about that?
by Missing Barry on Jun 22, 2009 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yea davidson was bad
they only beat gonzaga who is basically the memphis of the west. and then they beat the georgetown hoyas who i think won the big east that year (toughest conference in college by far although jay would probably disagree). then a tough wisconsin team before finally losing to the evetual ncaa champs, the jay-hawks, by 2 points in the elite 8.
I'm gametime_gsw, and I approve this message.
by gametime_gsw on Jun 22, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah but what has he done for me lately
by Warriorfan on Jun 22, 2009 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dont worry tho, hell probably gone before we pick
I'm gametime_gsw, and I approve this message.
by gametime_gsw on Jun 22, 2009 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
no thats terrible.....
Holliday’s 9 ppg took ucla to 2nd round. Harden went to second round. Evans went to sweet 16. Jennings hid in Rome. I mean really, he’s accomplished most in college if thats your criteria
by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Warriors are keeping quiet on Curry though....
-Didn’t work him out. Whether he decined or not is disputeable. Riley said they spoke on phone but nothing happened. The only player who openly denied GSW was jrue holiday cause of fegen.
-If warriors make it known they want Curry, you can bet, NY Knicks will jump to 6 and grab him, they LOVE curry. Curry is high on NYK, mostly cause his agent has sold him on the money he could make there. Still he keeps bringing up D’antoni’s style of play suiting him, pushing the balll…. clearly GSW would as well
-Griffin, Thabeet, Rubio, harden will be gone in top 4.
-The question comes 5 and 6. If someone grabs hill or holiday early, washington will probably select harden. IF he is gone they have been high on Tyreke Evans. Either could be good partner for Gilbert Arenas in backcourt.
-Minnesota have made it known they are high on Tyreke Evans, however the thought is if he is gone they will take Curry.
-Both Washington and Minnesota r listening to offers to teams who want to trade up for peticularly Curry, Hill and Evans… OR if rubio falls.
Personally, I think Curry is an ideal fit for GSW. He may be undersized, but going into next year he can give us 10-15 mins at pg relieving monta, and 10-15 mins at 2guard next to him without too much drop on our overall defense. Playing him a full 35-40 next to monta would be problem, but he wouldn’t do that.
by tafkasam on Jun 22, 2009 10:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Curry is a capable leader and a player with a big heart. I think in the long run he will be much more interesting to develop. U got to pick the best player avail.
by hkingkong on Jun 22, 2009 11:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ellis/Curry Backcourt
would look great…if it were Dale Ellis and Dell Curry circa 1993.
All kiddings aside, Dubs should draft Steph at #7 if he’s still on the board. IMO, Curry will have the easiest transition to the NBA out of all the guards in the draft.
Throughout his amateur career, Steph has been the main target for opposing defenses. To me, it doesn’t matter if the talent level of his competition and teammates are average at best. His role as a marked man in college will benefit him as a pro.
My TOP 5 Guards:
5. Brandon Jennings – Awesome at Oak Hill. Average in Italy. He did the opposite of what Curry did by playing with the Euro pros out of high school. Can playing in Europe help him in the NBA game? If so, it will take awhile. If not, we’re looking at Sebastian Telfair.
4. Tyreke Evans – He describes himself as Tracy McGrady. I wonder if he was talking about Magic McGrady or Rocket McGrady. Either way, his 70% free throw shooting needs to improve.
3. Stephen Curry – He has hoops in his blood and high hoops IQ. No, I’m not talking about Mike D. I’m talking about the next Reggie Miller (maybe).
2. James Harden – He’s a crafty 6’5", 220 guard from L.A. Sounds like someone that played for the Warriors in recent times. Although his athletic ability doesn’t compare to Boom-Dizzle’s, he might have an impact in the league like Davis.
1. Ricky Rubio – I’ve been on his bandwagon for awhile. He would fit perfectly in NellieBall. Watching his clips is like watching a movie about Pete Maravich played by Scott Baio. Comparing him to Pistol Pete is a bit of a stretch, but he’s the beginning of a new generation of Euro talent.
by SuperFly on Jun 23, 2009 5:50 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
So If
He doesn’t become the next Reggie, how many years do we have to wait before someone can categorize him as a Bust? Not saying he’s going to be, but just wondering
GSOM- Where Education From Debate Happens
by The Dedication on Jun 23, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too Much Coffee Yesterday
It just seems really weird to me that Curry who has been loved and hyped by the media is a top 10 draft pick. I think my 12 year old cousin is heavier than Curry, but I shouldn’t discredit the kid because his body is the same as a highschool cross country runner. It really goes to show how weak this draft is. Regardless, I prey the Dubs don’t draft Curry but I wish the kid well.
Can we just not draft anyone this year? No one will make the Wariors better this year in the draft other than Mr. Griffin.
BTW, Godon is 1000 times better than Curry right now and Joey Dorsey will be the next Carl Malone. :)~
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Carl Malone
please tell me thats part of the joke
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come on Sammy
Joey Dorsey being the next Carl Malone is a joke. So is this draft excluding Rubio and Mr. Griffin.
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 12:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm still not really clear
I know you were a Dorsey fan last year and you’re admirably poking fun at yourself a little bit for that, but is the Carl part of the joke?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
C, K whateva...
I made fun of myself. And Karl Malone’s spelling of his name is fu*ked up.
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 1:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
ok
I just thought it was funny because I’ve never seen it spelled with a C and it just looks really funny to me like that. Yea, when you think about it, spelling Carl with a K is pretty funky, but since I’ve seen it like that since I was a little kid I guess I never really questioned it.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts 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.
