Warriors to Work Out Arizona's Jordan Hill
by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 8, 2009 2:39 PM PDT
in NBA Draft
55 comments
Shake 'dem dreads and jump!
From SFGate.com:
The Warriors are bringing in Arizona's Jordan Hill on Friday for an individual workout and will get a first-hand look at a prospect who could fall into their laps with the No. 7 pick. The 6-10 power forward is widely-considered a top-five talent, but reports have him dropping.
Do the Warriors already have a pair of raw and talented young forwards, namely Anthony Randolph and Brandan Wright? Do the Warriors desperately need a PG? Sure they do. Does this draft have a bunch of seemingly viable PG candidates? Sure it does.
But who cares? B.P.A. Unless you're one critical piece away from a NBA championship (which doesn't apply to the 2009-2010 Golden State Warriors in case you were wondering), you always draft the Best Player Available. Case in point, the Warriors seemingly already had their tall, lanky, raw "forward of the future" in Brandan Wright at the time of the 2008 NBA Draft. They went on to select another tall, lanky, raw "forward of the future" in Anthony Randolph and got some criticism at the time for the selection from folks who thought it was just duplication. Is anyone questioning that pick now? I'd venture to say the majority of Warriors fans would rather have AR than Wright right now too. B.P.A.
Now the real question is of course: Will Jordan Hill be the best player available at the #7 pick?
Tell me when to go.
Jordan Hill Linkage:
0 recs |
55 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
smokesceen... we have enough big men unless randolph is a small forward
by gsw.raiders on Jun 8, 2009 2:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
or if wright can’t stay healthy. or if we want to make a trade one of our young, fairly inexpensive bigs along with a bad contract to get some cap relief or a better player.
there’s really not much downside to drafting the bpa and hill could definitely be the bpa.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 8, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
whether a smokescreen or not, they’re covering their bases … curious that he’s not being brought in with a handful of other prospects the way GSW did earlier – does that imply anything? maybe, maybe not … I’m with cap’n hack – if he’s BPA it’s the right move for the reasons stated. Plus, as the playoffs wind down, cannot help but realize how undersized we are relative to most of the best teams in the playoffs and anything that brings about a correction in that relationship is positive for us
by hardcore on Jun 8, 2009 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
why is everything the warriors do a smokescreen
terrence williams is a smokescreen, robert rowell talking about tyreke evans to that kid is a smokescreen, etc. etc.
if thats true then we have a whole lot of smoke and that doesn’t help this team. the warriors would benefit themselves more by working out players they’re actually interested in than just bringing in players to “smokescreen” other teams. by that logic when the draft comes around they have not only “smokescreened” everyone else but themselves also…
by gogoldenbears on Jun 9, 2009 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I promise I’ll get my “making the case for Jordan Hill” post knocked out when I get done with finals at the end of the week.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 8, 2009 2:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Group project...
I wish I had that good of an excuse as to why my Tyreke Evans report isn’t up. Sorry it’s taking so long.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Jun 8, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather see Kurz grow some dreads.
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Jun 8, 2009 3:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i would want a PG but
if Hill is there at 7 you gotta take him as he has alot of upside. But then again he may get in the way of Wright and Randolph’s development so maybe not.
by GSW9 on Jun 8, 2009 3:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Or they could get in the way of his.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 8, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you trade somebody, not the end of the world.
by BacksThePack on Jun 8, 2009 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Compared to Wright
I just don’t think they are all that similar. Hill is a lot bigger at 232 pounds. Wright is more naturaly thin like Teyson Prince. Hill’s combine numbers look great. True 6-10. In a couple years should be 6-10 250. That’s good size.
Hill may be/ become a better defensive player than Griffin and I think he’s much better prospect than Thabust. Thabeet is slow and skinny, get’s pushed around and will see as many offensive rebounds as Ilgauskas. Wright and Randolph gave us hieght but Hill could give us size. (if that makes sense)
1) He would help if we trade Wright or WHEN we have another big go down with injury, we’re too small yet again and right back in the same boat we haven’t been able to get off of for years. Too small and we’ll again be beat up on the boards and we’ll be weak defensively.
2) We aren’t sure Wright or Randolph will actually develop into stars let alone starters. Tyrus Thomas ring a bell? He looked great his rookie year but never got better.
3) If he’s still around at 7, which I hightly doubt despite rumors, he’s probably the BPA end of story.
by Balance on Jun 9, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wright and Randolph gave us hieght but Hill could give us size. (if that makes sense)
Perfect sense!
I like BW but we are a bad team, I would rather trade BW for something and use Hill’s size coming of the bench with BR’s skills. That would be a better complement of skill sets at the 4.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 9, 2009 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really like Jordan Hill. I enjoyed watching him play at Arizona. I think he’s the perfect for the Memphis Grizzlies, actually. With that said, we should be in position to grab Brandon Jennings or Jrue Holiday and I think that’s the direction in which we should go.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 8, 2009 4:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
hmmm...
Get rid of Wright somehow and have a Randolph/Hill PF combo?
Sounds pretty good to me, but we need a PG this off-season, or else we’re doomed again.
http://www.youtube.com/user/XeroEnt
Watch my Warriors vids and subscribe!
by Xero on Jun 8, 2009 6:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sounds pretty good to me, but we need a PG this off-season, or else we’re doomed again
Maybe we could package wright and someone else for a point? I’d love to move Montay and Wright for a great point guard and solve a couple of problems at once, under size 2 guard and fragile big man.
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 8, 2009 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he is available then we should take him
I watched Hill a bunch this year being that he was in the pac 10. He dominated games and did so in a very raw way. By that I mean he is very unpolished and excelled with pure effort and heart. Kinda in the way turiaf plays but hasn’t polished his strengths and weakness yet. That being said, I think he’s got a lot of potentail left to go yet he’s already really good as is. I’d be thrilled if we got him. We need another big guy on the team. We go thin at the end of the year and if Beans goes down again Ronny can’t hold us down on his own. Hill could play 4 or 5. Measures up with amare and may…..may…develop similar game.
We can’t pass on him if he’s still there.
by Balance on Jun 8, 2009 8:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
he's older than bwright
and not as good
by tafkasam on Jun 8, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The rumor is hill may drop big time...
not because he isnt good but because… (1. griffin, 2 rubio) 3. okc wants thabeet or if he’s gone a SG (harden, possibly evans or derozan) 4. kings desperately want a pg, and dont view hill as beter than thompson or hawes…. 5. washington want backcourt help. 6 minnesota has jefferson and love. and then US….. i dont dislike hill personally, but he’s no upgrade to a younger bwright and randolph… BUT, apparently toranto likes him… there is a thought he could be drafted and used with biedrins, maggette belinelli to get bosh + fillers
by tafkasam on Jun 8, 2009 8:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I simply said he may drop because alot of teams don’t necessarily view him as an upgrade to what they already have. The team who would perhaps covet him most is memphis, but they are at 2 and will take Rubio and possibly try and trade. A scenerio i wouldnt rule out is kings taking hill and a trade rubio for hill + who knows what.
That being said if he slips past kings he could fall to 9 or 10
by tafkasam on Jun 9, 2009 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if that is the case...
trade the pick with the bust. and maggite.
by warriorfan4life on Jun 9, 2009 12:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Let's say it together... PG
Without an athletic PG who can pass the rock and get our players involved, were staying doomed. How many times last season did our offense go stagnant without a playmaker and Jax hoisted up ill advised shots that clanked off the rim?
Forcing Monta to play his unnatural position which he has never flourished in to being with is not the answer. Last season i watched monta dribble the ball up court, dish it off, and running around the wings many a time. That is not the work of a true PG, even as Nellies PG, he was playing off the ball most of the time.
Id like to see the warriors try to land a Tyreke Evans or a Holiday, maybe even Johnny Flynn if we can’t get the previous two as opposed to Hill. I’m more less happy with our bigs and AR can still bulk up a wee bit.
by meximocha on Jun 9, 2009 7:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If you have high hopes for next season no matter what we do, well then…you’re very optimistic. Monta may not ever develop into a PG, but by following your logic we should give up on him because he didn’t develop into one in 25 games last year (a lot of which were spent just trying to shake off the rust and get back into real game shape). If Monta can develop into a PG (even a shoot first one), he’s more valuable to our team. I don’t see the harm in giving him another shot. Now, if we like a PG available at our position and think he’s the BPA, I’m fine with that, but I think we should be very flexible with our options and be willing to try anything that could help us long term, even if in the short term it hurts us.
by Missing Barry on Jun 9, 2009 8:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you have high hopes for next season no matter what we do, well then…you’re very optimistic.
Color me optimistic!
Seriously, if we make zero roster changes, we would easily be a 35-40 win team with Monta back on the floor the whole time and 10% fewer injuries than last year to other players (yes, we can expect some injuries, but last year was ridiculous, it was “injury gods” payback for the previous year where there were no injuries). If any of the young guys improve appreciably (and Randolph was already starting to show this) or if Monta is able to push Jax back to his natural role of “defender/clutch shooter/point forward when necessary” then we’re in even better shape. If, somehow, we can add a rookie that will actually contribute (highly unlikely) things begin to look even rosier and we can start looking to make a move to get Jamal out of town (as an expiring contract) paired with some young talent for a marquee player at some position of need.
2010-2011 baby!
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
Marco Belinelli : Larry Bird
A) R Dizzle : AB1
B) AB1 : R Dizzle
C) OM : Sleepy
D) Sleepy : OM
E) None of the above
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 9, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
damn
really?
Seriously, if we make zero roster changes, we would easily be a 35-40 win team
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 9, 2009 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
See!
JAE agrees with me, so I must be right!
But seriously, yeah 35-40 wins with just a healthy Monta coupled with “actually trying at the end of the season”. He takes JC off the floor (a big plus), makes Jax realize he doesn’t have to do everything by himself, and gives us another quality warm body to put out there to give some rest to the other guards that are overplayed… yeah, that’s a good 6-10 wins (most of which coming against OKC, Memphis, Minny, Sacto, etc.).
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
Marco Belinelli : Larry Bird
A) R Dizzle : AB1
B) AB1 : R Dizzle
C) OM : Sleepy
D) Sleepy : OM
E) None of the above
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 9, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i feel like as constructed, 35 wins is a stretch. i don’t have any faith in this team to show any consistency, because they have no rock solid inside presence. If this team goes into next year with Monta Ellis as the only addition, the offseason will be a failure. Too many complimentary players that aren’t exactly complimenting anybody…outside of…monta i guess? Something’s gotta give!
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 9, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They won 29 games last year.
Of the games Monta didn’t play this season, 10 losses came against teams picking before us in the draft (as well as countless additional losses to other lottery teams). You mean to say that out of just those 10 games (not to mention the games we played close against good teams), we wouldn’t be able to piece together 5 or 6 more wins with Monta and Biedrins available?
Also to be noted, of the 25 games Monta played (while rusty and coming off a serious injury) Andris only played in 10 of them. In those 10 games, we went 5-5 with 8 games against playoff teams in 6 home games and 4 away games.
When both Andris and Monta were available, we were 0.500 against mostly playoff teams… so, yeah, I don’t think it’s a stretch to believe we’d be slightly under 0.500 against half playoff/half lottery teams with both available and healthy for an entire season.
There, I have concrete evidence backing up my assertion. We do need a star if we’re going to make any real progress, but let’s not sell the team we have short. They’re not a 29 win caliber team with Monta and Andris healthy (both of whom missed more than twice as many games this season as the last two seasons combined, so I don’t think it’s a stretch to expect them to be on the floor more consistently next season, Corey Maggette, Stephen Jackson, and Jamal Crawford’s oldness and injury affinity be darned).
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
Marco Belinelli : Larry Bird
A) R Dizzle : AB1
B) AB1 : R Dizzle
C) OM : Sleepy
D) Sleepy : OM
E) None of the above
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 9, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"concrete evidence"
i guess. the warriors already score a shit ton of points, and imo monta is not a particularly good on-the-ball defender. the team needs defense and a distributor, ten game sample size be damned.
maybe it was the injuries, but it seemed like AB regressed in 08-09? i had such high hopes when monta came back that we’d see at least the glimmer of a good team. Maybe I should concentrate on the whole product more…
In those 10 games, we went 5-5 with 8 games against playoff teams in 6 home games and 4 away games.
Maybe if we find a way to be the effing okc thunder next year we’ll get over the hump.
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 9, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Scoring points is rarely the problem. Scoring points efficiently is a bigger problem. Two years ago, the thing that really gave Monta a boost towards being a real win-creator was that he was deadly efficient from the floor. If he gets back towards that version, it’s an improvement over last year’s team. Monta will get his minutes back at the expense of Crawford and Watson’s PT for the most part. He doesn’t detract from the defense we saw from those two, and adds to the team defense if only by being a better rebounder than those two.
Andris didn’t regress. He was about the same as he’d been the year before which is what I expect in the future. Andris found it more difficult to score efficiently (though he was still very good from the field) at the beginning of last year when he seemed to try to take on some of Baron’s missing scoring load. The lower FG% didn’t last long and after that, he was back to the 60%+ shooter he’d been before on the lower number of FG attempts. He also didn’t do well at the very end coming off the injury, though I think at that point, everyone had given up trying and he wasn’t getting anything close to a good pass to set him up to score. I’d write of anything that happened in the last 6 weeks or so of the season as being close to meaningless. Everyone had tossed in the towel, but they had to show up at the Oracle since there were people there to entertain in between trips to buy overpriced beer.
by jae on Jun 9, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
meh
We’ll see how Monta responds to a whole season’s worth of teams planning their defense around him. Color me unconvinced yellow.
“Regressed” was definitely the wrong word for Beans on my part. He had hands of STONE last year, which I don’t expect to continue. I’ve got high hopes for beans, and with a real distributor on the team he can be even better. He’s got the pick/roll down to a science, he’s cash money in the paint…all we need is someone to get him the rock that doesn’t turnover the ball 10 times per quarter (jax i’m looking your way). btw- monta is not that distributor.
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 10, 2009 6:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
monta is not that distributor.
Are you sure?
I’m not saying you’re right or wrong, just that we’ve never really seen a healthy, mature Monta/Biedrins combination without another alpha dog (Baron Davis) dominating the ball. When BD was injured during “We Believe”, Monta was not yet what he is today. Furthermore, he has never had a training camp as the primary distributor of the team. I’m not saying that he’s 100% going to be super awesome, but let’s wait to make blanket statements, positive or negative, until he’s actually had the chance to show what he can do as the primary ball handler/distributor. Jax is not, has never been, and will never be that guy. The jury’s still out on Monta, let’s not ask them to rule before all the evidence has been presented.
Have hope, not expectations. Besides, I firmly believe that a “distributor” is not necessary for winning basketball. You need good players who ALL share the ball and give it to the team member who’s in the best scoring position, whether that be Kelenna in the corner, Andris streaking down the lane, Monta on the fast break, or Jax if (and only if) he’s got a hot hand. You don’t need one player to do this because the ball isn’t going to always be in their hands, you need everybody to contribute and look for their teammates… the polar opposite of Kobe in crunch time.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
Marco Belinelli : Larry Bird
A) R Dizzle : AB1
B) AB1 : R Dizzle
C) OM : Sleepy
D) Sleepy : OM
E) None of the above
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 10, 2009 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have hope, not expectations
says you. i live by “expect the worse, hope for the best.” Do i expect monta to be a player that makes others better? That’s what a distributor is; they make their teammates better by putting them in a position to suceed. Monta is what he is: a scorer. And he is a damn good one. My expectation is that we’ll have a square peg/round hole scenario.
You will not have a successful team full of ball sharers unless at least ONE guy commands some attention. I guess what you’re saying is you want the team to be fluent in the language of swinging the ball?
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 10, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think what I really want
Is fewer shots from Jax & JC and more shots for the rest of the team. If we get 07-08 Monta back, which we should, putting the ball in his hands, whether or not he’s a good distributor, will be inherently taking the ball away from Jax & JC, our two worst scorers, which is a plus. Furthermore, having the defense focus on Monta instead of Jax & JC should, theoretically, open things up for Jax & JC to have easier scoring opportunities.
Any additional “swinging the ball” that we get out of Jax & JC not thinking they need to do everything will just be a bonus.
i live by "expect the worse, hope for the best."
Fair enough, I often live by this as well…
That’s what a distributor is; they make their teammates better by putting them in a position to suceed. Monta is what he is: a scorer.
Neither LBJ, nor Kobe, nor Duncan should be considered a “distributor.” But these three “put their teammates in position to succeed” because they’re great offensive players that force the defense to do crazy things to stop them, which opens up their teammates to be in “a position to succeed”. Monta can easily do that, maybe not at LBJ or Kobe level, but he can still draw a double team, and pass out of it, then we can swing the ball to the open man (preferrably Kelenna or Morrow for an open 3, or Andris for an easy layup). This is why a “true PG” isn’t a common theme in championship teams. The star initiates the offense, from there everybody just finds the open man/mismatch.
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 10, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can we establish a difference between drawing a double team and drawing a help defender please? Nobody’s going to double team Monta (well, maybe in a pick and roll situation if that’s how they choose to play it), but when Monta starts beating his guy he’ll draw a help defender. Both draw 2 guys and get the defense off balance and open things up, but it’s two different situations when a help guy comes compared to an actual double team coming before the offensive player has had a chance to make a move…
by Missing Barry on Jun 10, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd call that semantics
But, fair enough, I’ll try to be better about differentiating the two… for what it’s worth.
Can you help me fully understand the purpose of differentiating the two? To me, it’s just: The help/double team comes before he beats his man or after. Either way, you’ve got two players required to guard one which leaves somebody wide open.
Also, even LeBron and Kobe don’t get truly double teamed (when two defenders run at them before they beat their guy) unless they’re on fire like NBA Jam. It’s more that all 5 defenders are ready to step in and help. It’s really only the post players that require a double as soon as they start dribbling or even before…
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 10, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well yeah, it is semantics, but you kind of came up with the reason I like to differentiate between them. Superstars get doubled. Guys who are in a position where it’s “one guy simply can’t get the job done alone”. Wings almost never get doubled – Kobe when he’s hot, every once in a while I see teams do it to Lebron. The big difference is rotations are easier in a true double team, because a team’s planned out their double team strategy ahead of time and does it on their terms, not the offensive player who’s beat his man.
I guess the real reason I like to differentiate is just because superstars get double teams, and while Monta is a very good offensive player, I don’t want to lump him in with the few players that can consistently, over the course of an entire game, be the lone focus point of a good offense. Until Monta gets to the point where he can beat his man all game long, it’s just help defense coming for those occasions that he beats his guy.
Just one note: A lot of times teams get their help D in place and force superstar wings like Kobe/Lebron/Wade to a spot on the floor where they know the double team is. I’m cool lumping that in with the double team classification if you are.
by Missing Barry on Jun 10, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about we make it easier on ourselves
We’ll call it double team, help defense, whatever… and say that Monta Ellis is not as good as LBJ & Kobe. Which basically seems to be the point of what you were trying to say.
I’ve only seen a true “double team before he starts moving” in recent memory on Duncan, Shaq, and Howard (to a much lesser extent). It really only happens with big men. Perimeter guys don’t get double teamed because it’s too easy to pass out of it and it’s not worth it bringing that many people that far away from the basket.
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 10, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
Just one note: A lot of times teams get their help D in place and force superstar wings like Kobe/Lebron/Wade to a spot on the floor where they know the double team is.
Don Nelson and the We Believe Warriors agrees with this. Somewhere, Dirk is still in the fetal position crying.
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 10, 2009 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
right
The star initiates the offense, from there everybody just finds the open man/mismatch.
Based on what I’ve seen, Monta is not this star you speak of. The crazy post on EWA hit it on the head, we’re a bunch of complimentary players…not quite complimenting anyone in particular. Give me Chris Bosh then we’ll talk about 35-40 wins!! Actually, just give me Chris Bosh. For all my “expect the worst” mumbo jumbo, I really do have a gut feeling the dubs are scheming towards something big. Our players have actual value, teams are looking to dump salary, could be the perfect storm. hopey hope changey change
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 10, 2009 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe if we find a way to be the effing okc thunder next year we’ll get over the hump.
Maybe having our best players on the floor when we play against OKC will help us beat them. What do you think? We went 2-2 against them (with one loss on a buzzer beater) while missing one of Monta or Biedrins in each game. The games we won were double digit wins, one of the games we lost was a buzzer beater, the other was a 7 point loss without both of our two most efficient scorers (Monta & Maggette) when Belinelli and CJ Watson combined for 60 minutes of floor time. Do you really think upgrading from Belinelli/CJ to Monta/Maggette wouldn’t be worth 7 points?
maybe it was the injuries, but it seemed like AB regressed in 08-09?
Please explain what you mean by “regressed.” You pose that as a question, which is a good thing because you didn’t answer that question.
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/andris_biedrins/career_stats.html
He scored more, rebounded more, dished out more assists, raised his assist:TO ratio above 1, stole more balls, blocked more shots, stayed on the floor longer… the only first order metrics that got worse were FG% FT%, and fouls. This is not “regression”. Some of his “per game” statistical improvements can be accounted by increased playing time, but, at the very worst, that means he kept his level of performance, which was already pretty high, for a longer duration… which is a positive.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
Marco Belinelli : Larry Bird
A) R Dizzle : AB1
B) AB1 : R Dizzle
C) OM : Sleepy
D) Sleepy : OM
E) None of the above
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 10, 2009 7:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
i think it had to do with the hands of stone. he uncharacteristically dropped so many passes this season, that i expected all his numbers to be in line. he blatantly did not regress. in fact he did the opposite…“do more gooder.” he can get that TO number down, for sure.
On 5/7, the best part of waking is up LOLDGERS in my cup.
by GameSix on Jun 10, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously, if we make zero roster changes, we would easily be a 35-40 win team with Monta back on the floor the whole time and 10% fewer injuries than last year to other players
You know 35-40 wins is not very good don’t you? Aim low and hope for the best? or blow up the team and start all over??
Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 11, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you read anything else?
Ever heard of “Patience is a virtue”?
Ever heard of “shortsightedness”?
We have enough young talent (one of the youngest teams in the league no matter how you calculate it), and we had a lot of bad luck last year. You want to just blow everything up and start over? What if the same thing happens next year (which it will because teams that have just started rebuilding rarely do anything quickly)?
If everybody just keeps the status quo (stays as good as they already are, but doesn’t improve), we’ll be a 35-40 win team if we stay at least marginally healthy.
If anybody on our team actually shows improvement, we’ll be better than 35-40 wins. That includes:
Monta returns to “old Monta” and gets his mid-range game back
Randolph being “late season AR” instead of “early season AR”
Jax deferring to Monta & Maggette
JC deferring to Monta & Maggette
Draft pick provides some positive impact on team
If any of the following happen we’ll be in the 40-45 win range:
Monta becomes even a marginally effective PG
Randolph shows further improvement (adds a post move or two, solidifies a 15 footer from his favorite spot, learns how/when to jump for a block and how/when to keep his feet and box out, etc.)
Jax focuses on defense and takes fewer than 12 shots/game
JC takes fewer than 12 shots/game
Maggette stays healthy for an entire season (long shot)
The Warriors are not as bad as their record, the world is not going to end, and there is hope for the future.
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 12, 2009 6:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The league (and league history) is littered with mistakes made by going for ‘need’ picks. Selecting a position first rather than a player is a means to take your already not great odds at selecting a guy who can play and making it even worse. None of the point guards should be depended on to come in and spark the offense (which itself was not close to our biggest problem). A year is a long time for our “need” to change. Every GM knows it. At heart, they know that drafting a guy who can play is better than drafting a position.
But this has all been said before. The chorus of “we need a point guard” gets louder and louder urging on the sort of thinking that produces bad decisions. I suspect that voice speaks inside the GMs head as well, and its louder and louder in those most prone to make mistakes.
by jae on Jun 9, 2009 9:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
100% dead on
but I simply don’t think Jordan Hill is special. He is a role player in nba at best. The Chris Bosh comparisons are ridiculous. bosh at 21 was nearly a 20/10 guy in nba. At best I think we are looking at next Chris Wilcox/later career brain grant type player. Doesnt do anything for me. If 1 of these pg’s has more potential, i say pick them
by tafkasam on Jun 9, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
its the dreads
lol compared to every player with dreads… not bosh but definitely wilcox and brian grant ; )
by gogoldenbears on Jun 9, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everybody take note
You can add “hairstyle” to the race and build stereotypes when making fun of certain players.
“I knew Andris would be good when he started spiking his hair like Kirilenko!”
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
Marco Belinelli : Larry Bird
A) R Dizzle : AB1
B) AB1 : R Dizzle
C) OM : Sleepy
D) Sleepy : OM
E) None of the above
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jun 9, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A young Chris Wilcox on this team would not be a bad thing.
There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.
by qin on Jun 9, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think
virtually any of the point guards in the draft will help us immediately…. Its going to take some time for 95% of them to get used to the NBA. It’d be better to get the BPA and trade for a seasoned PG or at least let monta develop into one.
by Butt Secks on Jun 9, 2009 10:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yah.
It’s not a question of would you draft hill or derozan or williams over a PG but more of is insert player name here better than everybody else available???
by lightz0ut on Jun 9, 2009 1:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
