Warriors (seem like they're) down to Arizona PF Jordan Hill and Davidson PG/SG Stephen Curry
by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 23, 2009 10:15 AM PDT
in NBA Draft
147 comments
The pre-draft mania continued yesterday with Larry Riley and Don Nelson's media session. Nellie has quite the intriguing draft record, so you've got to be naturally excited about Draft Day 2009. Chris Mullin won't be getting in their way with his seemingly endless affection for raw, skinny big man (ahem Patrick O'Bryant, Kosta Perovic, Brandan Wright, and Anthony Randolph). Riley has said he'd like some beef as well. So what does this all mean? Quite possibly Arizona power forward Jordan "Shake 'Dem Dreads" Hill.
Riley and Nellie talk to the media. [via cache.daylife.com]
J-U-M-P for the L-I-N-K-S.
Marcus Thompson's got the info:
Riley, in a session with the local media Monday, said the Warriors are likely to draft either a point guard or a power forward, with the discussion centering mostly on Davidson guard Stephen Curry and Arizona big man Jordan Hill. A selection at either position would create interesting roster decisions this offseason and, if a point guard is drafted, perhaps the need for some smoothing over with guard Monta Ellis.
Who would've thought that in a draft supposedly loaded with point guards and weak in power forwards aside from the Clips new big man, the Warriors would be seemingly fixated on a power forward? BPA always though, but again I ask: Is Hill the best player available? Better than my fav and your fav Brandon Jennings?
Part of me thinks the Riley and Nellie are just messing with the New York Knicks front office and trying to make them sweat with all the Curry vibes. Donnie Walsh and Mike D'Antoni seem to be enamored with Curry and he's also friends with a certain Muppet, which is critical for the summer of 2010. I wouldn't mind some Curry Nights at the Roaracle next season though. Even though they're already "Partying Like It's 2010" our friends over at Posting and Toasting can you tell you all you'd ever want to know about the enigma that is the NYK.
We shall see soon enough...
The linkage:
- Warriors might select a power forward [Bay Area News Group]
- Warriors G.M. Riley will need thick skin [Mercury]
- Riley and Nelson talk Warriors: On the Monta Ellis visit, the point guard issue, and Jordan Hill [Talking Points]
- Warriors not afraid of a little competition after draft [Bay Area News Group]
- Hill the guy - if Warriors pass on point guard [SFGate]
- Warriors GM Riley can't win in draft [SFGate]
0 recs |
147 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
this would be very good news if true. i’d assume that at least one of the two will be on the board and i really like both. i’m on board with this idea. whether or not it’s totally true is an entirely different story.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 10:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
Can’t go wrong with either of these guys.
I think they are both on the same tier talent wise and both should have one skill they can hang their hard hat on Hill (rebounding) and Curry (shooting) that fits the Warrior needs.
Check out Goallineblitz - Free Football MMORPG
Build players, Build teams, watch games...
http://goallineblitz.com/game/signup.pl?ref=4892220
by FLAxwless on Jun 23, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather draft Hill, and if he turns out better than Wright. Trade Wright for an experienced veteran PG to help with developing Monta.
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Jun 23, 2009 10:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Can The Dubs Just Not Draft Anyone?
Is it possible or legal for the Dubs to not draft anyone? Can they pass and just say, “hey, we want to save our $ and spend it on a free agent.” Is it possible for a team to not draft anyone?
I say this because I believe that no one in this all time worst draft will help the Dubs become a better team. Why don’t the Dubs just save all that money and pick up a free agent?
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 10:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s not like a first round pick costs a lot of money. Some of these guys will turn out to be at least decent players. Not that we know which ones those will be, but it’s worth the gamble to find out if the one we pick is.
Please don’t suggest something like that to the W’s ownership, Cohan WOULD just save his money instead of rolling the dice on a potential contributor.
Just so you know the Warriors are over the cap so saving that money doesn’t mean we can spend it on a free agent. Free agents also make more money than draft picks, so we would not get anything good in free agency for the amount of money a draft pick would cost.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Hill thing, I just don’t get. Our most promising young player is a PF, and we have another pretty good young player behind him. Yes, drafting Hill makes BWright expendable, but why lock yourself into selling low on a guy? Why not move BWright if the right deal comes along and just sign a cheap vet to back up Randolph if that happens? We don’t need to have two young high-upside PFs, so I’m not sure why we’d run to grab a third. If Hill’s so special that fit shouldn’t matter, fair enough, but if he were that special, I’m not sure why he’d be slipping to seventh in a weak draft.
Liking the Curry idea more and more. I am a firm believer in the wisdom of the Monta-at-PG experiment, and the defensive weakness of a Curry/Monta backcourt would probably be pretty appalling. But Curry does some important things very, very well, and seems to have some real upside. He’s a guy who could possibly make trading Monta down the road a more viable option, and while I like Monta, I think it’d be good to have that flexibility, for defensive reasons. I’d be pretty happy with Curry.
by onlxn on Jun 23, 2009 10:44 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
+1
As always, thanks for showing up to articulate my thoughts on things more concisely and eloquently than I could. Where have you been, man?
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I try to take the occasional Web hiatus for a week here and there… y’know, remember what the outdoors looks like and such. (It’s pretty boring out there.)
by onlxn on Jun 23, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
As Evan Dando sang…
I can’t go away with you on a rock climbing weekend
What if something’s on TV and it’s never shown again?
It’s just as well I’m not invited I’m afraid of heights
I lied about being the outdoor type…
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they really, really believe Hill is the best player on the board, the in-house situation at PF should be ignored, especially since short term, I suspect Hill would be a center.
Hill makes it more likely that Brandan gets dealt, but also possibly that Turiaf or, if there’s a blockbuster, Biedrins gets dealt. I suspect that a plan for Hill, certainly with Nellie coaching, would be minutes at center.
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting. What’s your take on Hill, jae? That plan makes sense if Hill really does have big-time potential, but do you think he does?
by onlxn on Jun 23, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hit return too early, but I was gonna add that taking a center at 7 gives me uncomfortable POB flashbacks. Is the idea that Hill could serve as an undersized Nellieball center? Because if he’s playable at center, and a bunch of teams are still happy to pass on him, that worries me.
by onlxn on Jun 23, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, I don’t have a good feeling about Hill. His rebounding is good, but he’s otherwise not terribly impressive. I think it’s a down year for big men and worry that he’s being regarded as better than he is because of that. But my ability to gauge college to pro talent is ‘flawed’ at best. I don’t think that many teams see him as a center. It’s just my suspicion that that’s where Nellie would play him if he finds time for him anywhere. He’s taller than Turiaf so how “undersized” he is can be debated.
I just firmly stand by the notion that as soon as need enters into the equation, it makes teams start to do dumb things in the draft, allowing them to think that players are somehow better than they are. If the argument to stay away from him is that he’s just not projecting to be that great (and sliding to #7 doesn’t give a big great odds) then avoid him. If the argument is that we already have someone in his position, I reject the argument. Better to have crowded talent at a position than to pass on talent to find someone who’s position in a roster looks to add more ‘balance’ or ‘fit.’
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In addition to rebounding, Hill’s skill set allows him to play opposite almost any big we put next to him on the floor – a nice change from some of the awkward matches available to us now. He can shoot from medium range and he can post up offensively. Plus, he’s strong enough not to get muscled out of the block on defense. While it may be a down year on big men, I’d say Hill has as good a chance or better than Thabeet to be a solid pro and we’d be lucky if he slipped from top 5 to #7. I totally agree that having a crowd of talent is better than looking for “fit” and would add that a crowd of talented bigs is an awfully lucrative asset to parlay
by hardcore on Jun 23, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I generally agree… we’ve discussed this before. My only semi-caveat, as always, is the weird, jumbled nature of our roster: lots of somewhat interesting young guys competing with each other for minutes, a depth chart where 7-12 isn’t all that much worse than 1-6. To get better, we may need to include some of these somewhat interesting young ‘uns in trades, and our opportunities for showcasing them are finite. If we draft, say, DeRozan, and in so doing shove Morrow to the end of the bench, it’d be harder to trade Morrow for value. Hill hurts Wright’s trade value. And so on.
I’m not really disputing the wisdom of BPA for us… obviously a bad team needs to embrace talent above all. But I do think a BPA strategy has somewhat higher potential costs with this roster than it would with others.
by onlxn on Jun 23, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chiming in… I think I’d be happier with DeJuan Blair than Hill, if only because it seems like a ballsier and less safe move. Hill just seems like a generic big body to me. Blair might be undersized, but his heart, by all accounts, is ridiculously oversized. His rebounding numbers are unbelievable — not just great, but like eye-poppingly, historically great. Not sure jae likes Blair, but I can almost guarantee jae’s spreadsheet adores him.
Edit: too late. Thoughts on Blair, jae?
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From watching a few games Blair played in last year…I’ve never seen a college player that can just clear the paint out for a rebound the way he does. I’ve watched strong guys like Powe or Diogu – good rebounders in college…but man Blair is just a whole different level of beast.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but those knees…
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll completely ignore the undersized issue of Blair. He’s got game to make it in the NBA, providing his body holds up. Knee problems are more than a minor concern, especially in a guy who carries a lot of weight on them, has had some issues keeping his weight down and would be asked to run more than he ever has. I don’t think he’s the best bet at that point in the draft.
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I’d be happier with DeJuan Blair than Hill, if only because it seems like a ballsier and less safe move
See what Mike Dunleavy has done to you?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly think Curry will be gone and Hill will be available.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 10:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
that seems like the most likely scenario.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think Stephen Curry slips past the Timberwolves even if he makes it past the Wizards.
It’s all about the Grizzlies and the second pick. If they take Ricky Rubio, the Thunder will select Hasheem Thabeet or James Harden leaving Wizards with one or the other. I’m assuming the Kings will take Tyreke Evans. Then, I think the Timberwolves will take Curry.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But beefier
He can rebound but to be worth it they must expect him to also build a low post game and/or play good defense at the 4.
by T-Money on Jun 23, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like both players, they both have pretty good numbers and decent size for their positions… I like the idea of adding beef, but I’m loving the idea that the PF we already have is adding to his own frame. I read that Randolph is up to 225 now. If he can add some more in the next couple years, he’ll be able to handle some of the bigger guys at PF, cuz the size he was at last year, I think he’s more of a tall SF/PF hybrid.
Curry, 28+ PPG, AND over 5 assists? that’s pretty nuts… but how’s his defense?
Hill, 18 PPG AND 11 Rebounds. I like those numbers if he can be a lock down defender.
by aBulldog on Jun 23, 2009 11:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My idea of the Warriors big-board
1. Curry – Think he’s the smart player they’re looking for next to Monta. They have different strengths, and could play together imo.
2. Tyreke Evans – For the same reasons above, but with the added ability to conceivably play lock-down defense. I think he falls into the category of not going to be there with their pick (Riley said he’s comfortable with 4 PG’s, but that 2 of them will likely be gone by 7…possibly Rubio and/or Tyreke Evans).
3. Jordan Hill – Change of pace big, has a good motor and hustles. Can fit into Nellie’s scheme.
One of these guys will be there with the 7th pick. My idea is that it’s going to be Hill, if the Wizards pass on him. I’d like Curry, but I have a feeling Minnesota or Washington takes him.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
"It takes a special kind of anti-mojo for a team to miss the playoffs 14 out of 15 seasons. Like, say, the Warriors under Chris Cohan."
by kenntoe on Jun 23, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where's
Where’s the option for ‘someone else’
I rather take Derozon if he’s available with those 2. I don’t think Curry WANTS to play here and Hill looks like a Reggie Evans type player and a Diogu type bust.
I’ll be really upset if the Warriors choose either of them…
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 11:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
“I don’t think Curry WANTS to play here”
Who cares. It’s not his call to make. Why wouldn’t he want to play in the 5th largest market in the country with a large and dedicated fanbase, anyways?
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Curry comes from a rather conservative Christian background. Maybe those California freaks scare him.
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just like how Blake Griffen doesn’t want to play for the Clippers, rather the Thunder.
Curry rather play for the Knicker bockers
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course players will have a team, all things equal, they’d prefer to play for. The thing is, they don’t get that choice under the current system. Griffin knows he’s going to LA so he’s not saying anything bad about it, and he’s going to go play and do everything he can to help them win the same as he would for any other team. If we draft Curry, he’ll do the same, so who cares if he’d rather play for the Knicks. Furthermore, it’s not like Golden State isn’t one of the top places to play (marketwise, management is another issue). It might not be NY or LA, but it’s up there with any other metropolitan area in the country.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“So, Blake, what do you know about the Clippers?”
“I know they had a down year, but they’ve got a lot of talent and some good young players and I’m going to work hard and…”
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see your point
they’re professionals and should act like professionals. Just like the guy below me showed me that quote from Blake, I see now.
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t take Hill Please God Please I pray in your name.
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) OR 1. Blake 2. Hasheem 3. Rubio 4. Tyreke 5. Harden 6. Curry 7. Jennings 8. Flynn
9. DeRozen 10. Jordan Hill
by Sinigang on Jun 23, 2009 11:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So, you still think that the Grizzlies are taking Thabeet?
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes
yes
Gotta love the Bay Area drama ;)
by JayFerg on Jun 23, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to ESPN’s Chad Ford, Hasheem Thabeet doesn’t want to play for the Grizzlies.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Grizzlies best option..
is to trade that #2 pick to some team for legitimate players that don’t care what team they play for.
If only Warriors can trade the Grizz for Marc Gasol and their #2 pick and get James Harden.
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
or they could just draft james harden. he’ll be on the board. harden’s not a great fit there, but he’s a good player and if teams are scared of rubio, he wouldn’t be such a stretch at the 2.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drafting James Harden would be a bad pick for Memphis in my opinion. Like you said, he’s a terrible fit there. Where will he play?
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’d probably look to deal rudy gay. i think his trade value is a little higher than what he actually brings to the table. of course, they’d make sure harden can play before they do that, but i like his odds of being a very good player.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
However, the Grizzlies would then have two undersized shooting guards with one playing out of position.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but if they could get a good young point guard for mayo, you’d bring harden or mayo off the bench.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t like that.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the idea of bringing a good player off the bench?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I think he’s too good to have coming off the bench when you have a gaping hole at power forward and you have the second pick in the draft.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i can see that. i think that trading rudy gay could get them a pretty good point guard and a decent power foward. like i said, i think rudy gay’s trade value is considerably higher than it ought to be.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think they already have a pretty good young point guard with Mike Conley.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
oops. i totally forgot about him. good catch. then rudy gay could definitely get them a good power forward in a trade. if i recall correctly, there was talks of sending him to phoenix for amare last year.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
teams are scared of Rubio, first most teams loved him.
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ouch:
Thabeet, Ricky Rubio and Stephen Curry have all refused workouts with the Grizzlies.
at least guys will work out for us, guess we should be thankful?
by hardcore on Jun 23, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They need to just trade down and then grab Jordan Hill.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looks like
the Warriors Organization isn’t as bad as the Grizzlies?
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like a lot of the same guys (Curry, Rubio, Holiday off the top off my head) won’t work out for us either. Glass houses, etc….
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rubio & Holiday I get cause they’re slotted top 5 … but didn’t know Curry refused a work out for us, huh. interesting.
by hardcore on Jun 23, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
curry not working out could be a ruse
Im pretty sure riley and nelson are high on him, but they KNOW NY Knicks love him,. We work him out, knicks panic. Its not an uncommon draft strategy. Use Jordan Hill as our main target as a smokescreen…..
Riley’s direct quote was "everyone knows about holiday not working out for us….. (fegen related) Curry and him and curry’s agent spoke a bit, but for whatever reason a workout never happened, but he’s seen enoguh of curry with all the video and speaking at combine.
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holiday’s not really slotted Top 5, except maybe in his own head. Honestly, I still can’t figure out why he’s even Top 10.
Riley mentioned the Curry thing in a recent interview. He didn’t seem overly concerned about it, though. He said 85% of what you need to know can be gleaned from the previous full season alone (game tapes and stats, presumably). That sounds about right to me.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea. They need a center and with Marc Gasol and Hasheem Thabeet that’s a pretty good 4 and 5.
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) OR 1. Blake 2. Hasheem 3. Rubio 4. Tyreke 5. Harden 6. Curry 7. Jennings 8. Flynn
9. DeRozen 10. Jordan Hill
by Sinigang on Jun 23, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, actually, they need a power forward since Gasol is a center, but Thabeet doesn’t want to play for the Grizzlies.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
then who does he want to play for?
can’t play for the team like the Warriors, up and down tempo
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’d rather play for Oklahoma City or Washington.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Washington
would be perfect for him
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
washington has mcgee/haywood and blache
they want a backcourt mate for gilbert… be it harden or tyreke evans
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
would mcgee, haywood and blatche really keep you from drafting someone?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The latest news from Ford still has Thabeet going to Memphis.
(POSTED: June 23 — 10:16 a.m. ET)
• The Thunder weren’t the only team to meet with Hasheem Thabeet in Los Angeles this past weekend. The Grizzlies, after being snubbed by Thabeet in their workout, flew to L.A. and met with him for three hours.
Sources close to both Thabeet and the Grizzlies expect Memphis to take him at No. 2. If it doesn’t, chances are there is a trade in the works.
by homer simpson on Jun 23, 2009 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s weird. The bottom portion should be included in the quote as well.
by homer simpson on Jun 23, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are the only other person to watch this video...
HILL = BUST!! Did anyone watch him play with Arizona?!?! f_cking scrub! Take the best guard available and get a physical big man in free agency
by Charles W on Jun 23, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with this in sentiment if not tone.
OK, in tone, too. ;-)
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I watched several Arizona games and “scrub” was never really a word that came to mind. “Unpolished” did, and I could see how “low hoops IQ” could’ve to others, but not “scrub” much less “F’ing scrub”
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 23, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hill, Curry, Evans, or Hill, Evans, Curry
Based upon what Riley said, there’s pretty good reason to think the Dubs FO doesn’t know what’s likely to happen on the 25th much more than we do.
Re Hill:
"He’s ready to play in the NBA right now. He shoots the ball well, plays on the block and really goes after the boards. He could play for us."
In the context of the question, "He could play for us" meant they were saying he could play in the rotation as a rookie right away, not something to be dismissed. If Hill slips to #7, the discussion probably ends there.
Re PGs:
"There’s a lot of potentially good point guards, but I don’t see any of them taking over a team, at least right away. Right now, we see Monta at the 1 (point) and Stephen Jackson at the 2. That’s how we’d start out at training camp. If we did draft a point, it would be somebody with as much experience and height as possible."
No surprise about Monta/Jax 1-2, which is 100% in sympatico with what Nelson said earlier. No PG in this draft is going to come in and start, and GSW isn’t likely to trade for a starting caliber PG either – get used to the idea of Ellis at PG with either Crawford or a draftee backing him up.
Assuming Rubio is gone by #7, that would leave the 6-3 Curry (Jr), and Evans, (6-5 but only a freshman) as likely picks at #7. Non-PG need not apply. (Adam Lauridson’s article is reverberating – GSW under Nelson drafting to address need.)
Am still hoping they take a look at Lawson (short, but a Sr and tough and effective PG) and Blair (my dark horse candidate) if Hill’s gone.
by hardcore on Jun 23, 2009 11:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What about the Aussie PG from St. Mary's?
St. Mary’s was an AP Top 25 team for the majority of the year. Is Patty Mills really that much of a drop off from all the other vanilla, cookie cutter run of the mill PG’s in the draft?
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 12:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Supposedly his draft stock is in the late 1st round, early 2nd round range. I’d love to trade for a pick to get Mills as our backup PG.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in context
the more kenny read about hill
the more interestin a andris-amfeny-jordan front line seem 2 intrique
the rout of taking a 4 with wheels & trading 4 a vet 1 gaurd (miller, hinrick) could be a plan….
ANY QUESTIONS???
by KennySeagle on Jun 23, 2009 12:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The Chicago Bulls have held trade talks with several teams about packaging the 16th and 26th picks into one higher selection, with two league sources insisting the target is Duke shooting guard Gerald Henderson.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
same post said:
“We’ve also had talks with teams about moving back,” Gar Forman said. “And we’ve had talks with teams where either with one or both of our picks, we move out.”
I’d venture EVERY team is making calls about moving both up & back as we approach Thur
by hardcore on Jun 23, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They shouldn’t move up to grab him. I really don’t like Gerald Henderson at all.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope to god we don't take Hill
He just screams mikki moore meets chris wilcox (without the psycho personality) Thats not a bad thing, but I think at 7 players like Curry, Evans (if available), de rozan will all be much better pros.
Hill is older than BWright, everryone forgets that. When BWright had a solid freshman year, this guy couldnt sniff the floor. I realize everyone develops at a different pace but Hill only showed up in a year when the pac10, PARTICULARLY in the front court was weak. His sophmore year there was Ryan Anderson,. Kevin Love, Lopez Twins, and of course mbah Amoute! And he couldnt do anything against them. I’m just in no way sold he upgrades our team or ever will.
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
.
know why Warriors probably want Hill rather than Wright, Riley wants ‘Beef’.
I personally think Brandan Wright > Jordan Hill but Riley wants beefy players.
If only Jordan Hill could be a David West type player, maybe even a little Tim Duncan, but could possibly be as bad as Wilcox, yes.
7
by AlbinoWhale on Jun 23, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
did u really compare him to DUNCAN?!
david west… maayyybbbeee he took time to develop. Duncan, no chance
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For the record, Wilcox had the natural physical abilities to be a good player, he clearly just didn’t develop any skills to go along with them.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wilcox is a good player
good rotation big man, can rebound, score a little, defend a little…. thats where i see Hill…. a good rotation big.
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about Psycho T?
Tyler Hansbrough? If all you guys think this draft is so chalked full of ballers such as Curry, Hill and Jennings and Flynn, what about one of UNC’s most acomplished players in the history of their legendary hoops program?
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 12:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Psycho T rated pretty well in DX’s Power Forward Crop by the Numbers.
Not in the same realm as Griffin or Blair, but generally better than Jordan Hill. Numerically speaking, of course.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. He’s white so he must be really unathletic.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
RDizzle’s sidekick jae is not amused.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rumor: Rumors r going to package Wilson Chandler for #5 pick
chandler + larry hughes 4 the 5 and some expiring contracts… most likely mike james?
They would keep 8, the theory is to make sure they get Stephen Curry (or maybe tyreke evans) and use 8 on Jordan Hill or Demar DeRozan
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you have a link?
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Knicks blog
http://www.postingandtoasting.com/
Multiple sources confirmed that the Knicks have discussed a potential blockbuster trade between the teams that would land the fifth overall pick and allow the Knicks to keep their spot at No. 8. The deal likely would have to include one of the team’s most valuable assets, swingman Wilson Chandler, which would be a difficult decision……..
http://www.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/ny-spknix2312907784jun22,0,7357399.story?track=rss
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
something that isnt largely discusses is
Knicks believe Curry will help them get Lebron. Lebron likes him, they are friends. I dont really see how a team with a few young rookies is gonna sway lebron, but its NYC
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Knicks could just really want Curry in it of itself.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 23, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Donnie Walsh and Mike D’Antoni seem to be enamored with Curry and he’s also friends with a certain Muppet, which is critical for the summer of 2010.
Uhhh a Nike Muppet reference wasted…
Man I thought that was a good line!
by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 23, 2009 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you mention “the Muppet,” you’re still proving a variant of Sleepy’s Law.
As a hoops discussion grows longer, the probability of a fan proposing an unlikely way for his team to acquire LeBron James approaches one. ;-)
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I approve of calling the Knicks “the Rumors.”
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
hill ready to play in the near term
is probably riley/g.m. hyperbole. from the scouting, he has problems with turnovers and his hands are suspect. he didn’t start playing until middle school and has had inconsistent coaching. that’s not the profile of a player who will find fast favor with nelson, but there’s minutes needed to back up the centers and randolph, so he’ll get opportunities. even j.davidson had regular minutes before he broke his foot. he won’t be a big boost to the team though, if he’s just average in his d, passing, and smarts/team play—they can find other means to get points and boards. when people say he can play the post, passing is a big part of playing the post well—the better teams can neutralize the guys who were decent post scorers in college if they’re not smart and can’t handle the ball (diogu).
by the.monk on Jun 23, 2009 12:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What about...
I give up. Man this draft is weak sauce. Lets face it. All this discussion about who we should draft is silly. Regurgitation at its finest.
1. Nellie Doesn’t play rookies unless the entire team is hurt a la 2009.
2. Aside from Griffin, all the other players available are about as productive as Ike Diogu or Josh Powell.
3. Richard Hendrix would be a top 10 draft pick this year. Does that tell you anything…
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 1:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
“2. Aside from Griffin, all the other players available are about as productive as Ike Diogu or Josh Powell.
3. Richard Hendrix would be a top 10 draft pick this year. Does that tell you anything…”
Gotta disagree with both of those. There will be productive players in the draft, it’s just hard to figure out which players will be the productive ones and which won’t. And I’m not going to even address point 3.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All I've seen of him is the Warriors workout
And I’ll say I’m concerned by the lack of elevation on any move other than when he went for a dunk. Looking a liitle stiff with what I percieve to be some stiffness in the hips and knees with several shots taken with lack of good square up (although this looked ok on his jumpers, but it didn’t look like he was hitting many jumpers on the move without defense…) Lastly, there were a couple fumbles with the ball without any defense…
And with this there is obviously no way to assess rebounding and defense.
For those of you who saw him play in college, are these concerns?
by Warrior fan since 1985 on Jun 23, 2009 1:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Due to us getting killed on rebounds year after year
I chose Hill
by Golden Boy on Jun 23, 2009 1:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
wow, turning off KNBR
Fitz and Brooks:" Jordan hill is the 3rd best player in draft behind Griffin and Harden. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
by tafkasam on Jun 23, 2009 1:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Where would Richard Hendrix be drafted this year?
Where would Richard Hendrix be drafted at in this years draft based on his college performance.
Top 10 pick, low first round, 2nd round, not drafted at all?
by gabezgsw on Jun 23, 2009 1:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Reading what DraftExpress has to say about Hendrix, as a prospect he basically sounds like Leon Powe minus the injury issue. Short and strong, but long. Similar college stats. Not much polish on their overall game. Enough bulk to guard the post but will probably struggle matched up out on the perimeter. I’d guess 2nd rounder. Late 1st at best.
by Missing Barry on Jun 23, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOZER
Find some way to bring him to da Bay!! He killed us on the boards…Send Crawford and Maggette for him
by Charles W on Jun 23, 2009 1:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
hill will be a bust. draft curry.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Jun 23, 2009 1:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hill is only good because there are no other power foward competition but Blake and him.
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) OR 1. Blake 2. Hasheem 3. Rubio 4. Tyreke 5. Harden 6. Curry 7. Jennings 8. Flynn
9. DeRozen 10. Jordan Hill
by Sinigang on Jun 23, 2009 1:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
DRAFT HILL!!!!!!!!!!
hill is a beast.. last year he was rated very high on the draft board but he didnt enter the draft… he is the 3rd best big in this draft after griffin and thabeet…..
after we draft hill we can make him compete with wright… if hes better than wright then we trade wright for a PG
by baydestrian_415 on Jun 23, 2009 2:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't want either of them
If he is available draft Tyreke Evans if not trade down
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 23, 2009 2:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Blah Blah Blah
We’re getting either Tyreke Evans or Brandon Jennings, a trade on draft night is a possibility as well.
by ARandolph on Jun 23, 2009 2:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
… from an authority.
Is it true you grew two inches and added 20 lbs of muscle this offseason, Mr. Randolph?
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 3:15 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Exactly +1000
Why would we need Hill?
We be doin' it CROOKLYN style!!!!!
by LighTz707OuT on Jun 23, 2009 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha. I was actually trying to make a funny about ARandolph the GSoMer and his professed powers of premonition. But your (implicit) point about ARandolph the Warrior is well taken.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Jun 23, 2009 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, haha
My bad. If he really has gained 20 lbs of muscle, then whats the point of going after Hill.
We be doin' it CROOKLYN style!!!!!
by LighTz707OuT on Jun 23, 2009 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes I did
And I’m 6’ 11" now and my doctor says I’ll be 7’ by the end of next season!
Been a long time Sleepy, been a long time.
Judge: "In the case of 3 month old Tracie Taylor, we find that Dirk Nowitzki .... IS the father!"
Dirk [in Hassellhoff accent]: "That baby don't look like me!"
by AR4 on Jun 23, 2009 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey!!
Mr. Randolph why do you always look sad?
We be doin' it CROOKLYN style!!!!!
by LighTz707OuT on Jun 23, 2009 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because..
no one else but me understands that I’m the best player alive!!!!!
Judge: "In the case of 3 month old Tracie Taylor, we find that Dirk Nowitzki .... IS the father!"
Dirk [in Hassellhoff accent]: "That baby don't look like me!"
by AR4 on Jun 23, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aww
Poor guy, lol
We be doin' it CROOKLYN style!!!!!
by LighTz707OuT on Jun 23, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By 2012...
Randolph will be 7’3’’ and 285 lbs or pure muscle. We shall call him MEGATRON. Calvin Johnson will be irked, but then Anthony “Magic” Randolph will throw one of his “I’m so mad I might cry” face, and Johnson will go back whimpering to his mother.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
"It takes a special kind of anti-mojo for a team to miss the playoffs 14 out of 15 seasons. Like, say, the Warriors under Chris Cohan."
by kenntoe on Jun 23, 2009 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we're stacked with perimeter players
we’re better off drafting J-Hill and start loading up on big men. Hill has more of an NBA body vs. B-Wright and Randolph and he’s got a decent upside. As remarkable of a shooter Curry is, do the Warriors really need another outside scorer and ‘tweener guard?
And let’s get past his raw scoring and shooting ability, what other skills does he really have? To me, he’s another Ben Gordon, Aaron Brooks, Ronald Murray, etc. I mean, there’s nothing wrong with having a Ben Gordon on your team, but when you already have a plethora of sharpshooters like Morrow, Buike, and Jacks, why do we need another one?
Hill for 1st pick!
We Believe!!!
by crossphaded on Jun 23, 2009 5:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
morrow and buike are our only sharpshooters
Everyone else is not efficient from long range.
by Calamity on Jun 23, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is not your fathers Warriors (of 3 yrs ago)
We have two guys who can hit it consistently from outside the arc and there both backups. We have a few guys who can hit it from mid range consistently and that’s a good thing.
I’m all for Hill, but this team has a lot of holes that need filling.
Oh and even if Jax was a sharpshooter, that would be one in your starting lineup.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 24, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hill makes no sense
That guy is not top 10 material in my opinion. I know we dont need anymore guards, but maybe we can start dealing some? Stephen Curry in a landslide for sure. Not sure why people are even picking Hill. Seriously have you seen this guy play? Hendrixx could get any playtime, but this guy will?
Give me a break. If they draft Hill, welcome to another lame draft.
by sjboy on Jun 23, 2009 5:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That guy is not top 10 material in my opinion.
I think that’s a relative statement. Had Hill been in the 07’ or 08’ drafts, you’d probably be right. But this year? I’m not so sure I agree.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
"It takes a special kind of anti-mojo for a team to miss the playoffs 14 out of 15 seasons. Like, say, the Warriors under Chris Cohan."
by kenntoe on Jun 23, 2009 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt Steinmetz admits he knows very little about the college players
Steinmetz was on Rzr & mr. T and had to admit he does not know much about any of the players the Warriors are about to draft. He says if you cover the NBA you have no time left to follow the college game so his opinion is formed by what others tell him. He was saying that Jordan Hill had avery limited skill set and Mr. Twho follows Arizona basketball religiously told him he was very wrong and that his overall skill set might be better than Blake Griffins. So when these guys write an article about who we should draft and their opinions we can pretty much rest assured they have no real knowledge fo what they are saying.
by Dungeness Crab Dribble on Jun 23, 2009 5:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Tolbert has less objectivity regarding U of A products than I do about UNC products.
by jae on Jun 23, 2009 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neither.
trade the down the pick.
by warriorfan4life on Jun 23, 2009 8:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If any...
Curry, cuz we already have randolph for PF. If the warriors are committed with monta to be our PG then get curry for SG.
{~R.i.p Sean Taylor #21~}
by Dubz50 on Jun 23, 2009 8:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Does this matter?
Will either Hill or Curry even be available when the Warriors draft? The whole thing seems like a smokescreen. It seems like they will have to decide between Holiday or Jennings.
by StayGolden on Jun 24, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Did you have to go there??
I was trying to eat lunch.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 24, 2009 11:22 AM PDT 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.
