I don't mean to be a pessimist but...

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 5:34 PM PDT Comment 96 comments

Is anyone else a little skeptical of Curry? Sure, I believe he'll be a solid rotation-type player, but I can't imagine him being an All-Star. I bring this up because I was hoping that the Warriors would draft Brandon Jennings, who has that high risk/high reward player. Anyway...I got thinking more about it, and usually when the Warriors make the "safe" decision, it's come back to haunt them.

Trip down memory lane?

1995

Let's start in 1995, where we took the All-American from Maryland, the infamous Joe Smith. Solid player, showed flashes of brilliance, but was never a superstar. Oh, and he was picked before McDyess, Stackhouse, and the high risk/high reward Kevin Garnett.

1996

The very next year, we again went the safe route, electing to draft Todd Fuller, over numerous other future stars, including Steve Nash, Peja Stojakovic, and again another high risk/high reward player named Kobe Bryant.

1997

Again, elected to go the safe route, choosing All-Time Block leader Adonal Foyle from Colgate over Tracy McGrady.

1998

In '98, we actually drafted the higher risk/higher reward player in VC, but then seemed to get cold feet and traded for his college teammate, Antwan Jamison. Sure Jamison was solid, but he never had the star power VC had.

2002

The Draft of Dunleavy...enough said.

2005 and 2006

We drafted Ike Diogu and Patrick O'Bryant, both star players for their collegiate teams, dud players for the Warriors

Now, some of you may argue that Curry had more success in college than these guys, citing the fact that he scored around 25 ppg against D-1 competition. However, look at all the guys above, most of them had solid college pedigrees, and Ike Diogu was even named Pac-10 player of the year. It seems that the college prowess most of these guys had didn't translate well to the NBA.

I'm a big believer in talent trumping experience. If you've got the talent, you've got a much much higher ceiling in this league. IMO, Brandon Jennings' talent > Stephen Curry's.

Some of you might argue that we don't want to wait on Jennings, but what's the rush? Even if we somehow sneak into the playoffs over the next 2 years, do anyone of you truly believe we are championship contenders?

I guess what I'm trying to do is have you guys try to sell me on Curry. Does anyone really see this guy as an All-star? I just see him as being another guy with a solid college career who will never make the All-Star team as a Warrior.

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

1 recs | Comment 96 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I am to

I think if his passing develops he will be a starting point guard but nothing special. But we did not need another shooter but a pure point and he is not it. Not yet atleast.

Rookie: "Why did you bench me?"
Nellie: "Your a rookie"

by dubzfan on Jul 28, 2009 5:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I still cant believe it..

Fuller over Kobe, Steve Nash, and Peja. WOW!! As far as Curry im still optimistic.

It was the shoes!!

by LighTz707OuT on Jul 28, 2009 5:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

What makes it worse...

is the consecutive years in which it happened (taking a “solid” player over a potential star)

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

KOBE...

would have came here though! I thought that he had said that he would only play for the Lakers!

Geeez Louf*ckingweeez!!!

by scottiepimppen on Jul 29, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t remember any of whatever situation Kobe might have created when he was drafted, but I will say, so what? He only has the rights to negotiate with the team that drafts him, why would we have to give in to what he wants? If we picked him, his only real alternative is playing in Europe.

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trip down memory lane?

No thanks.

The “safe pick” at #7 — this year’s Diogu, Joe Smith, or POB — was probably Jordan Hill. Stephen Curry, by all accounts, was straight BPA.

Meanwhile: what exactly is the “high upside” of Brandon Jennings? A fast , athletic 6’1" PG with nice handles but poor shooting skills, rebounding, and discipline? How many guys like that go on to be franchise players? Tyreke Evans was the real “high upside/high risk” pick, but he was picked in front of us.

Curry, a lights-out shooter with at least as much demonstrated PG ability as Jennings, was a perfectly smart and ballsy pick at #7. I dont think there was a single hoops observer, outside of a few anxious diarists on this site, who thought otherwise.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 28, 2009 6:01 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs

I know summer league is by no means an indicator for how one will play in the regular season, but I think the number of assists you rack up is not nearly as random as scoring.

Curry averaged 4.2 APG in 33.6 minutes/game.
Jennings averaged 8.2 APG in 32.5 minutes/game. He also averaged 3.6 steals/game but that’s irrelevant to this disucssion.

I still can’t see Curry as ever being that pass-first point guard, while with Jennings I can.

And the “safe” picks that you talk about (Diogu, Joe Smith, POB) were all considered to be BPA at the time, that’s why they were considered the safe picks.

As for Jennings “upside”, I haven’t seen a PG with that kind of athleticism since Derrick Rose.

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

“pass-first PG” is quickly becoming one of my least favorite terms, its overuse has drained almost all of its meaning

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 28, 2009 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

playmaking PG

He gives other people scoring chances, something this team sorely needs

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

isn’t being a great scoring threat that demands defensive attention a great way to create chances for other people?

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 28, 2009 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No doubt it is but...

when you say great scoring threat, I’m thinking of Kobe and Lebron or other scorers of that nature. I don’t think Curry will get to that level because I don’t see him as having that slashing ability that those other scorers do.

At this point, Curry is more of a scorer that would benefit from a playmaker in that he is a knock-down shooter who would thrive with drive and kicks.

So, maybe indirectly he’ll create some scoring chances but he won’t be that facilitator that can get everyone going when shots aren’t falling.

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It seems that “pass-first PG” has become code for “can’t score for himself or create his own shot”

by rjnarayen on Jul 28, 2009 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yea thats one of my biggest problems with it

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 28, 2009 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep but will never be outdone by “Get er done” (I puked a little just typing that), and “It is what it is”. Both moving the English language further into the abyss. Oh and coming up fast on both of those is “week sauce”.

There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.

by qin on Jul 29, 2009 6:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

And the "safe" picks that you talk about (Diogu, Joe Smith, POB) were all considered to be BPA at the time, that’s why they were considered the safe picks.

Mike Dunleavy Jr. was also one of the best college players available at the number 3 spot in the 2003 draft. Everyone loved his basketball IQ just like they do with Stephen Curry’s amazing basketball IQ and leadership qualities.

I just think Curry will be somewhat of a tweener at the guard spot (skills wise); he’s too short to play shooting guard yet he doesn’t have the ballhandling, playmaking and physical tools necessary to be a good point guard. The only way I see him succeeding with his current attributes is if he somehow develops into somewhat of a Steve Nash type of player. A player who’s not athletic, but makes great decisions, has high bball IQ, good playmaking, great handles and can make shots.

But for him to be that type of player will be extremely hard. Yeah, he averaged 28 ppg in college but do you guys really see him becoming that great of a scorer in the NBA when all he does is shoot and doesn’t have great athleticism and quickness to be a scorer in the NBA like Paul/Iverson/Baron etc?

That’s why I kind of had a problem with the Warriors picking Stephen Curry over Brandon Jennings. Stephen Curry could be great at shooting guard, but we already have Monta at that spot so it means that Curry will have to play point guard which will probably be pretty difficult for him. Also, I think that Monta is better suited to play point guard because he has the tools necessary to succeed in that position.

Even though Monta needs work with his ballhandling, he still has amazing athleticism and quickness that makes up for it. And even though he can’t shoot the three, he’s still shown that he can be one of the top scorers in the NBA, so even without the three he shows how great he can be and the potential of being an even better scorer with the addition of a three point game in his arsenal makes me like him even more.

The problem here is that if we make Monta the point guard, then that means Curry would have to play the shooting guard position and I think he doesn’t have the right size to play the 2 and doesn’t really have any skills other than shooting to make up for the lack of height like Monta does.

So basically if he plays point guard, then I would have preferred the Warriors to draft Jennings. If they had to pick a point guard then they should have picked the guy better suited for that position. But it’s whatever, I have doubts about Curry now but he seems like the type of player who could be a surprise and prove people wrong. I’d rather have him come off of the bench for some extra scoring/shooting; it would add more ammo to our offense. I’d rather have a starting line-up of:

PG: Monta Ellis
SG: Stephen Jackson
SF: Kelenna Azubuike
PF: Anthony Randolph
C: Andris Biedrins

But if Stephen Curry can prove that he’s a great shooter, then I wouldn’t mind experimenting with a Monta/Curry starting backcourt with Jackson at the SF position.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 28, 2009 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

edit.

Mike Dunleavy Jr. was also one of the best college players available at the number 3 spot in the 2003 draft.

I meant to say 2002 draft. lol.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 28, 2009 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have doubts about Curry now but he seems like the type of player who could be a surprise and prove people wrong.

yeah, most likely nellie and whoever else picked him?

" I hear the ancient footsteps like the motion of the sea
Sometimes I turn, there's someone there, other times it's only me
I am hanging in the balance of the reality of man
Like every sparrow falling, like every grain of sand."

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 28, 2009 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

PASS-FIRST PG

Don’t you still have to consider AST to TO ratio? Curry doesn’t seem to be a “pass-first” PG, but he can surely score! Jennings isn’t as consistent in that area, although he averaged more in assists! He also totaled more TO’s than Curry (21 v. 18). Jennings blew up in one game having 14 AST to only 4 TO, but he also had a game where he had 7 AST to 8 TO.

Summer league is definitely no indication whether or not a kid is gonna live up to his potential in the NBA. It seems that a lot of players use the summer league to take more risks, thus resulting sometimes in more reward. I think I’d rather have a good, consistent and not so reckless player (Curry), then a high reward maybe even higher risk player (Jennings). But that’s just my opinion!

Geeez Louf*ckingweeez!!!

by scottiepimppen on Jul 29, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are better ways to evaluate a players passing/turnover contributions than an assist to turnover ratio. Is 10 assists and 2 turnovers really better than 14 assists and 3 turnovers? Probably not. Is 2 assists and 1 turnover better than 3 assists and 2 turnovers? Probably. It’s an easy enough and useful enough stat to use just for a quick comparison, but if you really want to compare them, it’s not really the best thing to look at.

“Summer league is definitely no indication whether or not a kid is gonna live up to his potential in the NBA.”

Thank you. At least someone gets it.

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

TRUE

Given Rotudo’s argument about Jennings having a better AST average than Curry, I just wanted to remind him that w/ assists comes turnovers.

Geeez Louf*ckingweeez!!!

by scottiepimppen on Jul 29, 2009 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that summer league is no indication for future success, but at the very least it shows whether the guy can hang. Curry can hang, but does he have the skillset to the be an all-star?

Also, when you’re a team that consistently gets to the playoffs I have absolutely no problem with good, consistent players, but on the other hand, when your the Warriors, I think you take that home run pick.

by Rotudo on Jul 29, 2009 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 28, 2009 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not that I’m saying Jennings will develop, but I’ll answer your question:

“Meanwhile: what exactly is the "high upside" of Brandon Jennings?”

Think something along the lines of Chris Paul, or Tony Parker. A player that can get wherever he wants on the court at any time and dominate on offense.

by Missing Barry on Jul 28, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

That’s what I’ve been trying to say. I’m not saying Jennings will be an All-star guaranteed, but he has that game-changing talent, something that I don’t see in Curry.

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So why do you think the majority of draft experts had Curry ranked higher than Jennings? Surely these cats factor “upside” into their rankings; if they didn’t they wouldn’t have put an 18 year-old Spanish kid ahead of guys like Lawson and Hansbrough. In the cases of Diogu, POB, Fuller, Foyle et al. there were plenty of loud, mainstream voices lamenting the fact that the Warriors had made the short-sighted, safe, and/or “need”-based picks. There were few if any such voices when they drafted Curry (if you find one, I’d love a link).

I dunno, Rotudo: maybe I’d be more open to the Jennings > Curry argument if (1) it didn’t appear to be based so heavily on 4-5 meaningless summer league games; (2) you didn’t use irrelevant past draft picks to support your case; and (3) this weren’t the 3rd or 4th GSoM diary since the draft with your exact thesis.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Jennings ended up the better player. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Curry ended up the player. To date, nothing has happened that should radically change people’s draft-day opinion of them — assuming the same people haven’t also radically changed their opinion of Marcus Williams.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 28, 2009 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

All valid points...

Of course the draft experts factor upside, however some value it more than others. Also, many of these experts had the opportunity to watch Stephen Curry play multiple times, not the case for Brandon Jennings. Case in point: How often do you hear about Josh Childress, Jannero Pargo, or Juan Carlos Navarrao? There’s just not a lot of media out there to really get a true feel of how players are playing out there. There’s a certain line where a “safe” choice outweighs an “upside” choice. I think the safeness of Curry outweighed the upside of Jennings for a lot of experts.

but I’m not arguing that Jennings > Curry, I’m arguing that Jennings’ upside > Curry’s. Since we don’t seem to be contending for a championship soon, why not shoot for the moon? Yeah, it might be a redundant subject, but look at the success that Baron had with this team. Now, I’m not comparing Jennings to Baron by any means, but Jennings resembles Baron more than Curry does.

Again, this is more about Curry than about Curry vs. Jennings. It’s not just from summer league either. Looking at his davidson highlights, he makes some tough tough shots off the dribble, but all his takes to the rack look like they won’t get him anywhere in the NBA. I mean, I hope he pans out, but I just can’t see the upside with him. Hopefully I’m wrong.

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough. It’s true that some draftniks (Dickie V, e.g.) tend to overvalue guys they’ve seen a lot of. But other draftniks (Chad “Yi is a God” Ford, e.g.) tend to do the exact opposite. In the case of Curry v Jennings, I think Curry may have gotten a bit of “added value” from his high-profile performances in the NCAA tournaments, as well his good looks and personable demeanor; whereas Jennings may have gotten a bit of an undeserved bad rap as a punk for blowing off college and fleeing the country. Then again, qualities like smarts, charisma, and “unpunkishness,” are not immaterial, especially in a PG. (Seriously: how freaking hard is it for an elite athlete to get into some college?)

On balance, I still like the Curry pick, though I may change my tune after seeing them perform for a month or two at the NBA level. At the very least I think we should wait for some more real evidence to come in before making a strong judgment one way or the other.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2009 7:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So I was not aware of this before, but apparently Brandon Jennings is the cousin of Marcus Williams. Not great DNA to be sharing…

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I still like the Curry pick, though I may change my tune after seeing them perform for a month or two at the NBA level.

Shouldn’t that be for a year or two at the NBA level?

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2009 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

For sure. But the reality of a sports blog like this is that people feel the need to “check in” way more often than they should. Honestly, if we can make it through one week of the regular season without a “Curry is a bust and a mistake” diary (or “Curry is an all-star and the best pick ever”) I’ll be impressed.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

“So why do you think the majority of draft experts had Curry ranked higher than Jennings? Surely these cats factor "upside" into their rankings;”

It probably has something to do with the probability of reaching that “upside”…

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 6:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed.

If you wanted to attach a value to it, I’d guess it would be a product of (upside) x (realistic chance of attaining that upside) — analogous to the way they assess risk (worst-case outcome x probability of that outcome, or somesuch).

POB, for example, may have less a case of making the “safe pick” than of overemphasizing the upside part of the equation and underemphasizing the “realistic chance” part. (Any number times zero equals zero, alas). In the case of Curry, both ends of the equation made him worthy of a #7 pick, imo.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2009 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think a big difference is

All of those picks above were picks at positions like SG,PF,SF and the lone center patrick obryant. This pick was a point guard in Stephen Curry And he will be playing point guard more times than not. And to be an all star point guard in the NBA you don’t have to have freakish athleticism (nash, jason kidd). While at other spots like wings and power forwards you pretty much have to have great athleticism to be an all star. We made the right pick I think Curry has the IQ, jumpshot and motivational drive to be good.

by FeartheBeard4 on Jul 28, 2009 6:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The main difference between Nash and Jason Kidd is that they have that innate ability that all great point guards have, which is the court awareness and ability to know where their teammates are and where they like to go.

Maybe it can be developed, but how many guys do you see developing that awareness this late in their careers?

I think Curry will always be a scorer at heart, and the scorers who really succeed in this league are those that have that athleticism

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kidd also was a very good athlete in his younger days. His combination of size/quickness/strength was nice, and even in his later days he still had the size and strength.

by Missing Barry on Jul 28, 2009 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

something tells me he will be good. His dad played in the league and he’s been around the NBA for a while growing up so he’s use to mostly everything in a NBA life. Curry got a good head on his shoulders and he works hard so at worse he will probably have the same career his dad had which wasn’t bad. The big key for Curry is if he could grow the 2 inches he has and get to 6’5 so he’ll be a tall PG. If he doesn’t grow i think he will eventually be a good player but i’m not sure if he’ll be an all star or Superstar until he grows and gets bigger but it’s way to early to tell.

by GSW9 on Jul 28, 2009 6:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

His dad played in the league and he’s been around the NBA for a while growing up so he’s use to mostly everything in a NBA life.

Is it just me or does this argument seem pretty ridiculous when you read it? GSW9 I’m not blaming you at all, as I’m certain I’ve used that exact pro-Curry argument more than once here, but it just reads so much worse that it sounds in your head when you’re writing it. Maybe its just because I’ve read far too much of the Jennings v. Curry debates, but if I was on the pro-Jennings side of the argument I’m pretty sure I’d laugh that off. I think the difference in maturity levels between Jennings and Curry is extremely important, but I have a hard time believing that Curry’s dad’s experience is really gonna make him a much better player on the court. Again, nothing personal GSW9, this is meant more as self-criticism than as an attempt to tear apart your argument.

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 28, 2009 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know it may sound silly

but i think having a NBA player for a dad can cause no harm to Curry. Most rookies come in not knowing what to expect and many struggle mighty bad. Not saying Curry won’t hit the rookie wall or have to adjust, just that if times get tough, having a a dad there for advice will be huge compared to a rookie who feels he has no where to go. I understand what you are saying, I’m just pointing to Dell Curry being a slight advantage to Steph than other rookie

by GSW9 on Jul 28, 2009 7:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the concept has merit, I just don’t see it as that big of a factor in the grand scheme of things. I was more concerned with GSW9’s putting so much hope into Curry growing 2 more inches…

by Missing Barry on Jul 28, 2009 8:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I

was hopeful Randolph would grow another inch and he’s now 6’11. Now I know I shouldn’t be putting hope in a player growing but if Curry comes in training camp at 6’5 and stronger, as a PG that would be great and it would help him alot.

by GSW9 on Jul 29, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, it won’t happen by training camp, but it seems it’s at least a possibility for the future, and of course would be helpful if it happened. As long as you realize you shouldn’t be counting on it, per se. You’re talking to the wrong person on this Randolph growing an inch stuff. I’m not ready to believe that report…

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It seems to work out in baseball for some reason, but not basketball. I’m thinking the main reason is that the offspring of NBA talent usually has different size and skill sets then there predecessors. Some go on to be better, and some not even close.

However I can’t wait to see what Antwan Jamison’s kid is going to do, with his uncle being Vince Carter and all. Now that’s one hell of a linage.

There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.

by qin on Jul 29, 2009 6:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

with his uncle being Vince Carter

I thought T-Mac and Carter were cousins? How are vince and jamison related?

WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...

by JustSomeName on Jul 29, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jamison is married to Vince’s sister. Imagine that household at Thanksgiving…

There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.

by qin on Jul 29, 2009 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wanna see what Candace Parker's kids will be able to do

Parents of a WNBA star and an NBA player with an uncle as an NBA player as well. That kid should have great genetics on his side…

WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...

by JustSomeName on Jul 29, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or how about Lebron’s sons.

It was the shoes!!

by LighTz707OuT on Jul 29, 2009 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some crazy knockout games for sure!

by Rotudo on Jul 29, 2009 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

His dad played in the league and he’s been around the NBA for a while growing up so he’s use to mostly everything in a NBA life.

Yeah , it worked wonders for Dunleavey.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 28, 2009 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And Ewing

There's a party in my mind.
And I wish that I was there.

by qin on Jul 29, 2009 6:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, that Kobe Bryant guy, too. :)

When we look for specific examples, we can all find evidence for our opinion, whatever opinion that may be. Personally, I think the effect isn’t so much on a players game, but on their attitude. They come into the league understanding what it means to be a professional and understanding how much hard work it takes to be a good player in the NBA. The guys we’re thinking of may not be the best players in the world (Kobe exlcuded of course), but you don’t see them getting in trouble or acting in embarassing ways or anything. They’ve already had a glimpse of the NBA life, as well as a father who played to be a role model (especially since they wouldn’t be old enough to remember any stupid immature things their dad might have done when he was in his younger years).

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 6:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

so what?

BJ’s cousin is NBA player too.

And as far as (Missing Barry) earlier comment about Marcus Williams DNA, I think it is Stupid. His DNA is great, MW is playing in NBA while most people don’t. Did you watch him play for Huskies? He was definitely a better PG in college than Curry “best passer in NCAA history”.

I was not a big Brandon Jennings draft supporter, so I’m not claiming that “I saw the light”, however after watching him in summer league games, I’m convinced he is lightning quick, will be one of the fastest in the league this year, has a very good court vision and definitely a pure, pass-first PG that we could have used. His shot is not there yet, but shot can be improved easily and we already have a lot of shooters on the team.

by farid on Jul 29, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow…not sure where all this came from. My post about Jennings/Williams DNA was as much a joke as anything, there’s a reason I didn’t elaborate on any possible effect it might have (and only stated the fact that they’re cousins) – because they’re cousins, they’re not even that closely related. You’re reading way too much into my statement. Also, I was going to watch Williams play in college, but when I turned on the game, he wasn’t playing for some reason. Hmm…maybe it was when he was ineligible because of poor grades in 2003-2004? Oh wait, I think it was 2005-2006, when he was suspened for stealing laptops. :)

Not sure what the rest of the response was to. I was just commenting on the possible effects of a having a dad that played in the NBA. Wasn’t even getting into a Curry/Jennings comparison.

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

something tells me he will be good. His dad played in the league and he’s been around the NBA

Where’s Patrick Ewing’s son at these days?…

WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...

by JustSomeName on Jul 29, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A little late to the conversation?

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where’s Patrick Ewing’s son at these days?…

The league banned him because he was too good

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2009 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

he broke the rim while dunking on LeBron so Nike stepped in and got him arresting for that dunk

"Everybody pulls for David, nobody roots for Goliath"-Wilt

by asandhu23 on Jul 29, 2009 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

arrested

"Everybody pulls for David, nobody roots for Goliath"-Wilt

by asandhu23 on Jul 29, 2009 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dunking on Brian

They’re making a new Snickers commercial.

We still believe!!

Become a fan on facebook! www.facebook.com/goldenstateofmind

by R Dizzle on Jul 29, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Curry will at least be a good rotation player

What do you expect of a #7 draft pick in a weak draft class? He could turn out to be an all star, though that certainly isn’t imminent, and he could be a total bust, though with his ability to shoot and high basketball IQ I doubt it. Brandon Jennings, on the other hand, looks like at best the second coming of Stephon Marbury with less offensive skills (not the type of player to emulate,) and could very easily be a bust due to his immaturity and questionable attitude.

by Pearlsofwisdom on Jul 28, 2009 6:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It is early to tell...

but when the Warriors drafted Anthony Randolph, I was intrigued…like this guy could be a beast just judging by his physical gifts.

With Curry, it’s not the same way. Like how we always wished Brandan Wright would pack on size, it just hasn’t happened. It could be simply be their body types.

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 6:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

If we never had the “we picked Fuller over Kobe!” discussion again I wouldn’t miss it. We picked Joe Smith over Garnett too?! SERIOUSLY?!

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 28, 2009 6:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

While I agree with what you're saying

I don’t think Jennings is a better pick than Curry. The dude has already played professionally, and had an assist:turnover ratio that was WORSE than 2:1. If the adage of college/foreign players playing worse in the NBA is true, than Stephen Curry averages less than 29ppg, and Brandon Jennings has a worse assist:turnover ration than 2:1.

The reality is, players with star-potential in passing just don’t pan out. Look at players drafted on their ability to make amazing passes – the player that comes to mind is Sebastian Telfair. Players drafted on their all-around great play, highlighted by passing ability – Chris Paul, Steve Nash, Jason Kidd, etc.

Brandon Jennings has star-potential in passing, no doubt. But he lacks IQ, shooting, etc. Players just don’t make it in the NBA being good passers and nothing else. Look at the W’s summer leaguer, Jared Jordan, and their dud last year, Marcus Williams.

Also, PG’s don’t make it in this league if they can’t shoot. Look at how players like Nash and CP3 are such deadly passers – if their defender didn’t have to play them honestly, many of the passes wouldn’t be there. Do you think Nash and Amar’e’s pick and roll would be so deadly if Nash couldn’t shoot? No, because no one would step out on him, and Amar’e would never be open.

If you want to talk about taking the risky draft prick based on potential, Steph Curry was that guy. The “safe” pick would have been Jordan Hill, Tyler Hansbrough or Ty Lawson.

The people who should be beating themselves up for taking the safe pick are the Grizzlies, Thunder and Kings for passing on Ricky Rubio.

by bradyk2 on Jul 28, 2009 7:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

“assist:turnover ratio that was WORSE than 2:1.”

Not nearly the issue you’re making it out to be. First, is a ratio an appropriate way to judge assists and turnovers? Probably not. Second, assists are different in Europe. They play a different game, but more importantly, they’re more stingy in awarding assists over there. Comparing Jennings to Telfair seems a lot like you’ve decided you don’t want him and found a player that would help your case. I could just as easily point to Rajon Rondo and Tony Parker.

by Missing Barry on Jul 28, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Glad you have such an eye for talent that

you can make this determination after 5 summer league games. Guess you know more than Dick Vitale and the other experts who make a living off the game.

by crab dribble cocktail on Jul 28, 2009 8:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It’s not just his summer league games. Check out his career highlights from at Davidson. He makes some crazy shots, but his drives to the basket aren’t as convincing. Those shots are getting altered a lot more in the NBA. It’s just my opinion, not declaring he’ll be a bust or anything. Like I said, I think he’ll be a solid rotation player, but not an All-star. Never said anything about Jennings being an All-star either though, just that I thought he had way more upside.

by Rotudo on Jul 28, 2009 8:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

curry's shots getting altered in the nba.

the nba is much more of a team game than him running a one man show at davidson. he will have a lot more room to shoot when monta or maggette are driving through the lane, with randolph and biedrins ready for passes and stephen jackson and morrow shooting mid range or 3-point jumpers.

the defense is going to have to cope with alot more things than just ‘stephen curry dribbling across half court and throwing up shots that are likely to go in unless the defense is ontop of him.’

The Beginning of the "We Believe" Movement of Melbourne, Australia.

by DoomBizzle on Jul 28, 2009 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: he will have a lot more room to shoot when monta or maggette are driving through the lane

Right, he’ll have all the room he want’s but no ball to shoot.

Unless Monta decides he’s going to pass more this year, especially to some kid who’s the coach’s new pet and who’s getting more media attention than him.

I think in Maggette’s case, he would rather ingest the ball than pass it.

Reduce your carbon footprint, commit suicide.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 29, 2009 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Curry seems like he needs to shoot to be effective, whereas Jennings wouldn’t, and on a team full of players with a shoot-first mentality, that doesn’t necessarily bode well

by Rotudo on Jul 29, 2009 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jennings

is already proving to be an immature, headcase with his mouth. I see him becoming the next Marbury at best. All the talent in the world, but his egotistical delusion and lack of leadership is what doomed his career. Leadership is not defined by how loud you bark at your teammates and coaches, it is about setting an example for how you practice and play the game. An 18 year old kid getting over a million bucks to ~~play professional basketball~~ audition for the NBA should not have been bitching about playing sparingly behind vets that are earning their living.

Yes, I’m sure Jennings would be a perfect fit next to guys with histories of questionable character or judgment.

LeBron James? I'm the only Ty Crane.

by misterjennings on Jul 28, 2009 9:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

What doomed Marbury is not knowing what a good shot is or how to run an offense. Jennings may have some attitude/maturity issues, but I don’t think it’s fair at this point to conclude those will lead to poor shot selection and dominating the ball on offense.

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

filling a need vs drafting the best athlete

I think it should be pointed out that many of the disasterous/ho-hum picks of the Warriors were part of the Warriors eternal hunt for a good bigman. While they’ve definately improved there, going from the woeful Alton Lister/Cunningham/’Les Jepson era to the so-so bigs, Murphy et al, and finally a big we can be excited about in AR, and with some decent guys next to him in Biedrins, Turief, Maggette.

When the Warriors have just drafted the best athlete available they’ve done much better. Wasn’t Sprewell drafted while the W’s still had Mitch Richmond playing the 2?

Which brings us to Jennings vs. Curry. I agree that at this point the Dubs need a ball distributor more than another shooter but if I had to choose I’d go with Curry, much better shooter, & concern about Jennings’ rather weak showing in Europe and the possible ‘posse effect’ (off-court problems).

by Chris4 on Jul 28, 2009 11:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

CURRY

Let me be the first to say it one more time: Curry is the Holyfield of the NAB, he’s da real deal, and will be an impact player for GS this year.

Not because of any one particular part of his game, but because of all the different aspects of his game.

He will control the team once he is given the keys to da Chevy!!

He has all the abilities one could ask for, the great passer, see’s the court, controls the ball, a great driver and finisher, and always a threat for the long bomb, and he’s just going to get better and better:

He’s a gamer, and he’s a winner.

He will be runner up to Blake this year:

Too many people have gotten swayed by the media or have some unrealistic expectation that Curry has to look like an LBJ or it’s a bust.

I think Curry is a cross between Nash/Iverson, and will prove to be the perfect pick for this team for many years to come.

Forget about Jennings, he’s a flash in the pan, Curry will prove to be a leader and a winner.

You heard it frist from Forest!!!

by ForestGrump on Jul 28, 2009 11:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i think so too

he’s going to be great for us this year. Curry has better defense than Monta already and he has the potential to be even more of a sharpshooter from the mid range.

by bojangles408 on Jul 28, 2009 11:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Amen

Not to mention the fact that he proved he was a competitor who thrives under pressure. Now that’s something which is unteachable.

by youngdubs on Jul 29, 2009 12:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He will control the team once he is given the keys to da Chevy!!

Don’t you read the news? The Chevy is bankrupt. Wasn’t that keys thang what ya’ll were sayin about Montay last year? Is Curr-bury the new Montay?

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

As far as I can tell no one on this whole thread has mentioned defense at all. Does anybody get that defense and rebounding are our two problem areas? Are you really worried about our ability to score and make plays with Monta, Maggs, Morrow, Buike, Jack, Biedrins, etc, etc, etc??? Isn’t perimeter defense our biggest weakness, consistently forcing our big men out of good rebounding position when they need to help, causing us to get dominated on the glass? That was and is my issue with Curry. While he may have been “BPA” (a term that gets thrown around as if the mere existence of consensus makes it true), I highly doubt he turns out to be “Best Perimeter Defender Available.”

Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!

by Supafishal on Jul 29, 2009 10:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I haven’t heard any mention that Jennings is a better defender (or even that he has more “potential” as a defender) than Curry. They both seem quite adept at forcing steals. Overall, I would guess that Curry’s much higher basketball IQ extends to his understanding and execution of defense.

As for rebounding: Curry had very solid rebounding #s his three years at Davidson (5.4, 5.0 and 4.7 reb per 36) while Jennings is called out as poor rebounder in his DraftExpress profile. If there were any signs at all that Jennings were a rebounder anywhere near the class of CP3 or Rondo, I’d be a lot more excited about him. As it is, his rebounding skills/effort seem much more comparable to Bassy Telfair’s than to those of CP3 or Rondo.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 29, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Defence

I didn’t have time to cover every aspect of Curry’s game in my post, but that was another point I wanted to make, he rebounds well, and is a smart defender:

I don’t know that there is one thing that defines his play, it seems to be his all around game, with a superior BBIQ.

He’s going to have a learning curve no doubt,but under Nelson he has a chance to be an impact player on this team, why? Because Nelson wants it, Riley wants it, RR wants, it and the fans want it, and the one main part of his game that stood out in summer league was that he wants it.

As any rookie we give him a couple good seasons to develop, but he seems more seasoned than most rookies, I think he is quick on his feet and will stand under the pressure, see how he does in pre-season as a determiner as to how many games it’s going to take to pencil him in as the starting PG.

I’m sure Monta will be allowed to blow it a few times before Don can justify giving the keys to Curry =)

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t know that there is one thing that defines his play, it seems to be his all around game, with a superior BBIQ.

“He’s going to have a learning curve no doubt,but under Nelson he has a chance to be an impact player on this team, why? Because Nelson wants it, Riley wants it, RR wants, it and the fans want it.
You are making him sound more and more like our old friend dunleavey :>) excuse me while I go throw up.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Septic-You are making him sound more and more like our old friend dunleavey :>) excuse me while I go throw up.

I was never sold on Dunleavy, I like him, but not at # 3 in that draft, I wanted Amare:

I also wanted Bynum over Diogu, and Curry over Jennings :) go figure=)

I don’t see any comparisons between the two, Mike played behind a great looking little point guard and had Boozer doing all the dirty work.

Curry made his reputation with no one around him, he carried his team on his back and almost got to the final four last year, he was not a second of 3rd option, he was THE OPTION !!

You just don’t know much about basketball my man !! +)

If your gonna throw up, please clean up your mess, other people are trying to post in here +)

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

True, Dunleavy was the 4th best player on his team. Possibly even the 5th depending on Duhon.

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 6:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I mean, would drafting for a perimeter defender done more to help our team for next year? Probably. I don’t think that’s the correct way to build a franchise, though. I’d rather see us acquire as much talent as possible, and figure out how to best use it later. By the time Curry becomes an impact player (assuming he develops as we all hope), how many of our current players will still be around? If we’re talking about 4 years in the future or something, the only players left might be Randolph, Biedrins and one of our role players like Morrow or something. In other words, the problem might naturally solve itself – so for now, given that we aren’t competing for the championship, I’m ok not worrying too much about the defense/fit side of things and trying to get the best players possible.

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hi Berry:

The correct way to build a franchise is to build around a true leader with a great BBIQ, just like the Hornets have done:

We have the perfect pick for our team, this guy is almost NBA ready, he’s still growing, and will come into camp a lot stronger, I think he will be an impact player,

We have the youngest team in the NBA, so no worries, Curry will develop his game faster than AR, and you can quote me on that if you like !!

Grump

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm, I'd like to think that you're right about his development time,

but I don’t see it yet. He could develop quickly, right now he probably wont fetch major minutes. Basically Steph is going to have to be better than Buike to take his starting position, I’d be very suprised if that happens. I think Steph could very well work his way into the regular rotation, but I would be suprised if he was starting anytime this year.

by myk on Jul 29, 2009 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Basically Steph is going to have to be better than Buike to take his starting position

Curry is our PG he won;t be competing with Bukie, he’s the only who is able to control the tempo and stabilize the offense, If Don hasn’t seen that yet he will after a few looses in a row running the ball through Monta and Jack.

That will be his calling card, he will take over the offense and ignite the the teams fast break, he has great hands and ill get his fair share of steals.

If I was Da Don, I would prepare the team now, let them know that Curry is going to get the reigns of the team, and to run the ball through him. that will change the whole team for the better.

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The correct way to build a franchise is to build around ~~a true leader with a great BBIQ~~ one of the 5 best players in the NBA, just like the Hornets have done

by Missing Barry on Jul 29, 2009 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The correct way to build a franchise is to build around a true leader with a great BBIQ, just like the Hornets have done:

Curr-bury now equals CP#3? You better lay off those chocolates, they’re going to your head.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2009 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like the Curry selection and I like Curry, I think he'll be great, eventually.

From what I’ve seen thus far he has a lot of growing left to do. Summer League left me very unimpressed. Based on that, he is lower on the depth chart than Morrow, Marco, and CJ. He’s really going to have to turn it around if he wants to play a significant role this year. I don’t see any possible scenario where he starts. Nellie plays his best players, Monta, Jack, and Buike are all way better than Steph.

by myk on Jul 29, 2009 3:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

What Curry were you watching this summer?

You must of been looking at someone else :) the Curry was more than I expected, I thought he was just a great shooter and a good passer, but after seeing him I saw a whole different side of him.

When he was out the team went down the drain, there was no continuity with him out, also I had no idea that he was able to get to the basket and finish, his passing is going to be spectacular at times not just good.

I see him developing this year, he’s way to savvy, has all the tools, the only player I clearly liked better was Blake. that guy is going to be a real monster.

Grump

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

His finishing at the basket was better than I expected

Everything else was worse. I don’t if you only watched the Sacramento game, but we did not “go down the drain” when he was out. I didn’t really see much of a difference. He shot a hair above 30% from the 3pt line and overall. He only averaged 4.2 assists and had over 3 T.O’s. I was expecting a better performance than that. Sure he averaged 21 ppg, but he shot way too many shots. His TO’s were too high. He wasn’t as efficient as I expected him to be. I think he can still develop into something special. He has a brain for the game, we have a good coaching staff, Keith Smart will help him tremendously.

by myk on Jul 29, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stats:

I wouldn’t look at the stats, they are meaningless,most all his passes that would of been assists with the first team were missed.

Secondly, there is no doubt he was pressing on his outside shot at first, but then he switched gears and started driving to the basket and looked spectacular,

What was so impressive was just the way he took control when necessary, he had AR taking a lot of pressure off of him, but he looked like he is able to step up when it counts.

You have to look at his leadership abilities, and his BBIQ along with the way he is able to control the tempo. I forgot about his outside shot when I see the rest of his game, that will come around.

We got a hell of a player in Curry, don’t jinx the kid just yet =)

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

his BBIQ ?

can he make memphis ribs?

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 29, 2009 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just out of curiosity ...

… does anybody really think the Warriors would have been better with Carter over Jamison?

And when talking about Dunleavy, one has to point out that none of the guys taken in the picks immediately behind him have exactly set the league on fire. You have to drop six spots, to Amare, to find a guy who was a significant amount better than Dunleavy.

I mean, Drew Gooden, I’d rather have him now, but he’s a midlevel exemption player. DuJan Wagner, out of the league. Nene might be a little better – but it’s debateable (although I’ll be pilloried for saying that on this group, since we all hate MDj). Chris Wilcox? Eh. Marcus Haislup? Marvin Ely? No, and no.

Basically, Amare and Caron Butler, who were taken six and seven spots after MD, are clearly bette.r (Although Caron took until the last couple of years to show it).

Which begs the question: is it really fair to judge a draft based on the fact that you can dig deep into the draft and find a better player? Isn’t that the definition of cherry-picking?

Now, if Jennings ends up being a better PG than Curry, that’ll be interesting, because they were both plausible picks at #7. But I wonder how many GMs would have taken Jennings first? Would any have?

(I mean, there isn’t a GM in the league who would have taken KG over Joe Smith. Not one. You can say, fairly, that we should have taken Stack or Sheed, that it was poor GM work to pickup Smith. Those guys were entering the discussion of the top pick. KG wasn’t.)

by Ronaldinho on Jul 29, 2009 5:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I do think that the Warriors would have been better with Carter. Look at the Toronto teams he carried to the playoffs. Yeah, he had Tmac, but he was nothing more of a role player then. If I recall correctly, the 2nd option on those teams was Antonio McDyess, Charles Oakley, and Jerome Williams. He carried those teams to the playoffs and Jamison never got us there in all the years he played here. Plus the excitement value he created would have helped put GSW on the map. Imagine Gilbert and Vince vs. Gilbert and Antwan

by Rotudo on Jul 29, 2009 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

KG

Not until a few days before the draft did I know much about KG, but it was something to think about, but it was another story with Kobe, we heard this kid was the bomb, but we went for position that year and the GS curse gained legs.

By the way, I still like Dunlevay, hated to see him go, I think he’s a good player, but expectations were just to high for him to live up to right away.

As far as Jamision and Carter, it seems Carter’s has been a more dominate player most of his career, so that may tilt the better pick towards him, but Jamision has been consistent and has longevity, he’s still going strong and Carter on his way out.

The problem we had with Jamision was we tried to make him out first option, and that was not who he was, he is a good second and a great 3rd option, a scoring machine and a good re-bounder.

We did the same thing with Fish, he is great as a 3rd or 4th option,.when the defense don’t key on him, but the coach tried to make him some kind of savior because he had some rings.

Jackson is a good example, a guy who can be a good 3rd option, but as a first option he stagnates the team, he’s not Kobe or LBJ, and since we don’t have that luxury we have to have a PG that can take all that pressure off these guys so they can find there true place on the floor, and i think we have that in Curry, he’s got a veterans mind, and knows how to take the pressure, we got extremely lucky in my opinion.

by ForestGrump on Jul 29, 2009 6:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs