Assets to Liabilities..
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 11:58 AM PST
Email
Print
Dude has a nice controversial topic as to which 3 warriors to we need to keep for the future but the true answer to that question is deeper than fan favorites or simply potential. While potential/age is certainly ONE of the most important things to look at i would argue compatibility/chemistry is another and contract/production are the other TWO that need to be factored in for the trade deadline, draft and off season. That being said i would rank our assets for the future
1A. Curry (2.7 mil - 3 more years)
He is here not because he will be a better player than monta or Randolph but because he has the potential to be and the cap is roughly 60 mil and combining his 2.7 mil for the next 3.5 years his rookie deal is a bargain. while he is on this contract he only get trade for a top 5 superstar (which is not going to happen). anything else would be watering down our franchise. So he stays.
1B. Randolph (1.8 - 2 more years)
Im a little down on him hoping for a breakout campaign but we have two more years to get an idea of whether we have a superstar or an underachiever on our hands, before we have to pay him based on potential. Unless someone drastically over pay's, he stays..
3. Ellis (11 mill - 4 more years)
Monta is our third biggest asset simply because he is already paid getting a good idea of what his potential is. Lead by example, ridiculously talented finisher, undersized SG, that is appropriately compensated for his level of talent/ production. Undoubtedly our best player but not necessarily a part of our future (IMO.)
4. Andris (9 mill - 4 more years)
I'm going to judge my man Beans from the first 50 games last year when healthy AFTER he received the ext. Boss hog on the boards over 12 pg and like 12ppg with a few blks. Dude is worth every penny and would argue no other big would fit quite like beans in a run n' gun system like the warriors when he's at full capacity. That being said, he goes if the right deal is offered for an elite low post scorer and simply slide Ronny in the starting lineup. His offensive game is going to get much better but he fits with any personnel we have or get.
5. Ronny (4 mil - 2 more years)
Low post defense is awesome, uncanny blocking ability, lacking on the boards a bit, and one of the best teammates / energy guys (at least from what i see as a fan.) You're not going to find much better return on an investment (other than rookie contracts) than him. Trade-able, but you BETTER get big piece of the puzzle if Ronny is the cost.
6. Kelenna (3.3 - one more year)
If this guys was healthy on a year like we have right now, got lion's share minutes, i believe he'd be in the market for 10 mill per year (IMO.) Reality says he's a mid-level player that may get like 5 mil next year which he may not even opt out to find out. When he comeback next season he will make it alot easier to show maggs the door.
7. Corey (10 mill - 3 more years
Depending on what day of the week you as this guys is either an asset or liability. One day he's a star and the next a bum. He's been lights out the last few months and a bargain for what he been doing, but expecting that even 80%of that performance for the rest of his contract may be unrealistic. For the sake of not competing with the Nets this season, id prefer to dump is contract this offseason as opposed to the deadline.
The only real liability we have looking at the big picture beyond this season is Radman but that will play itself out soon I suspect. A complete team has financial plan, team chemistry and leadership from top to bottom. Trading anyone on my top 6 assets would be creating another hole by plugging one. There's only 2 assets we have that are almost a no win situation in trading and that's 1A and 1B. Personally im tired of seeing other players going to other situations and having success (crawford, harrington, and jackson.) i understand they didn't fit and had to go. the fact that we cannot maximize those player and their talent really makes me question my fan hood.
As far as the specific roles on the team that we have filled and need:
Closer - ??? Monta needs some growing but can be that guy. Not every can have Kobe. even he did dumb crap at the end of playoff games against UTAH..
Energy guy - ronny without question
3pt specialist - Morrow
Bench - be nice to get one or 2 viable cheap options..
Low post CONSISTENT scorer - I don't think Nelly believes in them
Elite perimeter defender (that doesnt demand the ball, can stick the 3 preferably) - Ditto for previous need^ Raja almost fits but he too little too late and i dont want him on a new contract next season.
Leader - Ronny is more of the topping, we need a chauncey type that can produce, control, and lead at the same time which i have faith curry can be but hes a rook..when can we expect that??
Am i right in thinking that we need to fill 2 holes by the start of next season (low post scorer and elite perimeter defender) and we should be able to fill them with combination of our #1 pick and trading anything other than our top 6 assets??
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!
70 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice post, good points...draft Cousins....
We do not seem to have ability to grab bigs like Zach Randolf, much less the allstars people dream about so I suggest we draft our beast if possible ….combined with our lightweight but athletic bigs..not a bad future combo…..we even have some decent injured 3’s at the moment so we look at trade/future draft opportunities there.
This opinion is predicated on are ability to get Cousins as a 4/5 low post monster ,.who I think is special….gotta keep losing…sad….other wise maybe one of those wings after Wall.
by Only In Fairfax on Feb 3, 2010 12:40 PM PST reply actions
+1
I think Cousins would be a great pick. They need a big badly, and this would allow them to swing a deal including Andris, and expirings for a 3. Even if they don’t get another 3, they are fine with Buike and Maggette.
+1
almost not worth mentioning but i wrote a post years ago we should pickup zbo..this dude was dropped for nothing…twice!! a legitamite post player would make monta and stephen so much better and pair him next to ronny and bean. No brainer! not to nellie and Co. we only take 6’10 200 pounders!!
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 1:51 PM PST up reply actions
a legitamite post player would make monta and stephen so much better
How do you figure a black hole on offense actually makes his teammates better?
by Missing Barry on Feb 3, 2010 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
zbo, boozer, and al jefferson
would command double teams at times, and help a stagnate offense that dies for entire stretches (3 qtr) and give and inside outside threat to exploit other teams weaknesses!! how does it not help?
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 3:45 PM PST up reply actions
….and give up just as many points on the other end. Look, ZBo has been a good player this year, but its the first year in a while that he has been. Its his first season since ‘02 that his TS% has been above average and he’s already played about as many games this season as he did in either of the last two seasons and his rebounding percentage is at a career high. And none of this addresses the many attitude issues that have come into question along all of his many NBA stops. I dont think its at all fair to blame management for “missing out” on ZBo.
Thing A
i dig that..
but zbo has never been the cancer to the extent that he made out to be. he’s ALWAYS been good for 20 and 10 and because he play under the rim anyway, the microfracture never scared me from embracing him as a fan. him getting dumped to would align closely with diddy coming from the hornets..we could have been receiving those dividends
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 4, 2010 7:32 AM PST up reply actions
Well, first of all, with those 3 examples, let’s seperate them. Zach Randolph before this year was inefficient when he shot the ball, which is what Al Jefferson is. Zach Randolph this year is more efficient, and Boozer is very efficient. So with Boozer, he can get away with being a black hole, because at least when he shoots it helps. This years Randolph can to a degree, as well, because while he’s not super efficient, he’s still a bit above average, so when he shoots, again, it helps. Past versions of Zach Randolph and Al Jefferson, though, don’t help – each time they shoot, it actually hurts their team (well maybe not Minnesota because Minnesota sucks, but if your team was half decent, it would hurt your team).
More to the point of being a black hole, the real point is commanding double teams doesn’t help the offense when you can’t pass effectively out of them. A guy like Jefferson is likely to just shoot anyways, and too often he’ll miss….at least with a guy like Boozer he makes it when he shoots….
by Missing Barry on Feb 4, 2010 8:25 AM PST up reply actions
More to the point of being a black hole, the real point is commanding double teams doesn’t help the offense when you can’t pass effectively out of them.
Exactly — people seem to be missing this point. Post scoring isn’t inherently valuable in and of itself… it’s only valuable when it opens up opportunities for other players. A post scorer who doesn’t pass when doubled doesn’t have a positive systemic effect on your team. If the Warriors think they’ll get better simply through adding a guy with some post moves, they are sorely, sorely mistaken.
Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis
Not only was Shaq in his prime much better than Z-Bo at passing out of the double team — he also had the unearthly, historic combo of size, strength and quickness required to obliterate double and triple teams on his own, if he so chose. He was also, unlike Z-Bo and his ilk, an absolutely dominant defender. Can we just not mention Shaq in the same sentence as guys like Z-Bo, Amare, Jefferson, and Demarcus freaking Cousins?
There will be no extra point!
Can we just not mention Shaq in the same sentence as guys like Z-Bo, Amare, Jefferson, and Demarcus freaking Cousins?
Haha, yeah but Rudolf it’s ok?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 4, 2010 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
of course obnoxiously ridiculous upside potential ftw baby!
by dubtown on Feb 4, 2010 3:47 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
It is not OK to mention Shaq's name in the same sentence as the super-long athletic potential upside monster that is Anthony Randolph!
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Feb 5, 2010 11:38 AM PST up reply actions
did shaq make kobe better
or vice versa?
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 3:45 PM PST up reply actions
I think you meant that as a rhetorical question...
….but there are several major flaws in that argument:
1. Shaq is a far better player than ZBo. In spite of his awful free throw shooting Shaq was still a more efficient scorer than ZBo and he was a bigger scoring threat too. In his prime he rebounded even better than ZBo. He was a far better passer and a much better defensive player than Randolph. Efficient scoring, rebounding, passing, and defense….those sound like things that might allow you to make your teammates better. ZBo does one of those things.
2. Kobe is a much better player than Curry or Ellis….or anyone else on the current roster. I dislike Kobe as much as anyone but you just can’t deny that.
3. Most importantly, I’m really not sure that the answer to your question is yes. I’m not sure they did make each other better. Its not difficult to argue that both Shaq and Kobe are among the top 10 players of all time. Each has proven to be capable of being the best player on a championship team. Each has proven they are still dominant players without the other. I can’t imagine any other duo of top 10 NBA players in or around their prime that wouldn’t have had as much success or more than Kobe and Shaq had together. I really dont see any evidence that either actually made the other one better.
Shaq is a better passer and a better defensive player than ZBo. Shaq was just a much, much better player than ZBo. Kobe is a much much better player than anyone on our roster…..
Thing A
my simple point is..
its naive to think a post player that commands double teams doesn’t help a perimeter player go to the next level and maybe kobe and shaq was a bad example because they were one of the greatest duos of all time but where was kobe without Pau.Not in the playoffs!..how bout dwade and shaq the year the won it all? Zbo is as good now as shaq was in that championship year and monta may not be dwade’s equal but is pretty close with his performance this year. we come back healthy and get to 2 players like a zbo and battier and the future will be golden..realistically im not sure those hole will ever be filled
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 4, 2010 8:15 AM PST up reply actions
You have to be able to pass out of the double teams, though. Jefferson can’t do that. ZBo can’t do that (at least he couldn’t last time I saw). Simply getting a double team with the ball doesn’t help in itself, it’s what you do to take advantage of the double team.
by Missing Barry on Feb 4, 2010 8:27 AM PST up reply actions
Bigs take much longer to develop than guards or even forwards because there’s a lot of mechanics involved. Jefferson is still young, but has the mechanics of a very good big man. He has to first learn how to command a double before he can learn how to pass out of it.
Other things that great post players do for you: Get the other teams bigs in foul trouble or if he’s got a jump shot he can spread the floor ala Dirk. That’s why people are all goo goo gaa gaa about the possibility of Amare, Bosh or Boozer. Our offense would wreck kids with one of those guys on the floor.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Feb 4, 2010 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
You know who gets bigs into foul trouble a whole lot more than Amare, Bosh or Boozer? Corey Maggette. Yet there’s a whole lot less goo goo gaa gaa’ing over him.
Thing A
Corey Maggette
gets whoever is guarding him in foul trouble, and last I checked Maggette is a 3 not a 5. When Nelly put him at the 4 so bigs would guard him he was not nearly as effective. Plus the gaping hole in our offense is a dominante big man which is somewhat lacking in the NBA in general, hence all the goo and the gaa.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Feb 5, 2010 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
+1
Randolph is averaging about the same number of assists per 36 (actually slightly fewer) as he has pretty much his entire career and he’s still below average in scoring efficiency. Add terrible defense to the equation and all you’re left with is a guy who is a good volume/bad efficiency scorer and good rebounder. That doesnt sound like a guy who would provide this team with much help….its certainly not going to get them anywhere near the Shaq/Wad championship team.
Thing A
Zbo is as good now as shaq was in that championship year and monta may not be dwade’s equal but is pretty close with his performance this year.
No. Not even close.
Thing A
Wow, whoever wrote that needs to look up some stats, and see how bad of comparisons those are, and that there were many more components that just D Wade and Shaq on that team. They had a team defense concept in mind, and good role players around them.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 4, 2010 8:08 PM PST up reply actions
I think stats show Shaq was a much better player throughout his career than Kobe.
When Kobe doesn’t have a top 5 bigman ( Gasol, Shaq, Odom, Bynum), he can’t win games. Until Gasol came, they had a pretty similar roster and they were topping out at 42 wins. They add Gasol and that goes up to 55.
They go to finals in 03-04, trade Shaq for two very good players ( Odom, Butler) and Kobe can’t get them to a winning record? Kobe may fill up the stat sheet, and have amazing performances, but he is nowhere near the top perimeter players in the league who single handedly carried their teams ( Lebron, Wade, Paul). It seems the trio of Gasol, Bynum, and Odom have much more of an effect on winning games than Kobe does.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 4, 2010 8:06 PM PST up reply actions
Nice post, rec'd
One of the few things I disagree with
Low post CONSISTENT scorer – I don’t think Nelly believes in themEveryone believes in low post scoring, it’s a must to be succesful in the NBA. We just don’t have anyone that can score in the post. Baron, Jackson and Goose were the best we had. Two of them are gone and Goose is not strong enough yet to establish deep position, but he’ll be fine.
Regarding your “two holes,” I agree with the low post player, I see that as our biggest problem. In regards to an elite perimeter defender, yeah it would be a huge help but it’s not our biggest concern. IMO it’s leadership, we need a floor general and a coach with more of a rebounding mind set. We’ve been an horrible rebounding team ever since Nelly got here, maybe even before but i can’t remember.
shane freakin' battier
if i was GM he the player we need to plug several holes.. one of the best perimeter defenders and i thing he’s capable of changing the culture on our with with ronny’s help!
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
I think all the salary cap/luxury tax rules, as well as our unattractiveness to a FA (bad ownership + losing franchise) makes the salary thing not as important a factor as you’re weighing it. It’s not baseball where you can always find a way to use your money to fill a need at market efficiency in terms of wins per dollar….there’s only 5 positions available @ 48 minutes per game, and a limited supply and demand of good players. Signing guys like Ellis/Biedrins to extensions rather than trying to acquire guys through FA is a much better way to spend your money, so I guess my ponit is I don’t think it’s likely you can put the money you save to a very good use that’s productive for the franchise both long term and short term. I think talent/potential are the most important factors.
Not every can have Kobe. even he did dumb crap at the end of playoff games against UTAH..
Also, Kobe’s not very good in late game situations despite ESPN’s attempt to market him as great in them. He settles for long contested jumpers almost every time and shoots a low percentage. Looks great when it goes in – we remember when it goes in because the highlight gets played over and over, but you’d be surprised how often it doesn’t.
That is true about kobe..
but monta has been abysmal in situations to close out games but i have to believe that with all the miraculous shots he does make its not a matter of physical but more of learning, improvising standpoint. keep in mind kobe always has the best defender, and always has defenses geared to stop him. regardless or bad percentages kobe is the best closer. period. I get ur espn take tho..
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, I wasn’t trying to say Monta is good at it, he’s not, either. Just pointing out that all the “if I could choose one player to take the last shot” stuff is bogus for guys to choose Kobe, because of players on Kobe’s level, he performs poorly in those situations. I’d much rather have Lebron, Wade, Chris Paul, Steve Nash, etc. If you watch the Lakers, it’s so predictable, too. In any end of quarter/game situation, they get it to Kobe, it becomes a clear out, he goes 1 on 1, and takes a contested long jumper. It’s like clockwork. There’s a reason that’s not the strategy for the rest of the game – it’s not a winning strategy and results in low percentage shots.
by Missing Barry on Feb 3, 2010 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
Is there such a thing as someone that shoots a high percentage at the end of games?
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Feb 3, 2010 2:45 PM PST up reply actions
Nope, shooting percentages across the board go down in those situations. Kobe’s just goes down even more than it should, and is much lower than his peers like Lebron (guys who actually man up, use a pick, and go to the rim)….
by Missing Barry on Feb 3, 2010 2:55 PM PST up reply actions
you call it man up, but if i had the ref in my pocket and continued to get calls in my favor legitimate or not im going to to do it again and again. his livinghood and legacy are benefiting justified or not
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 3:05 PM PST up reply actions
Are you impliying that Kobe doesn't have the refs in his pocket?
I’ve actually seen LeBron called for offensive fouls in last play situations.
by Reverend_Randy on Feb 3, 2010 3:32 PM PST up reply actions
officiating changes at the end of games
how can anyone score effectively in the last minute? You never know what will be called, which you would think plays against the defense who is afraid to make contact, but it works against the offense who jacks up bad shots hoping for contact more often than not.
by warriorsvictim on Feb 3, 2010 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
he does and im not denying it..
i would take advantage of it too..its not his fault..
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
but it does ruin the game
from a fans perspective..
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 3, 2010 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t get what we’re arguing against. My point is Kobe settles for contested long jump shots after he waves the pick away to go one on one. I’d rather have a guy like Lebron take the shot who actually uses the pick (pick and rolls are more effective than one on one) and tries to get to the rim to get a quality shot instead of a crappy one.
by Missing Barry on Feb 4, 2010 8:28 AM PST up reply actions
I would argue on Andris
His offensive game is not going to get much better. We will be better off trading him for a talented 4 and trying to use Wright, Turiaf, whoever at the 5 spot.
Except that Wright and Turiaf are no where near as good.
"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."
Frank Zappa
by qin on Feb 3, 2010 3:45 PM PST up reply actions
Yes but to be fair...I think everyone has the horn for Biedrins for his rebounding...
Could we not tempt Randolph to concentrate on becoming a good centre? He has probably about as much reach as Biedrins…much better atheltic ability… and will probably take more rebounds if he learns to play the position…
I am just not sure if he could put on a bit more weight to make this option a possibility..
Randolph at the 5, Wright at the 4?? or All-star level player at 4 and then Turiaf/Wright combo as back-up?
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
by BritWarriorGSW on Feb 3, 2010 4:00 PM PST up reply actions
Randolph at the 5, Wright at the 4??
I think that’s a very viable combo for stretches during games. That’s one reason that I wouldn’t have a heartattack if Andris were traded (assuming we got good value back, of course). For all the talk about how Randolph should be learning the 3, we’ve been ignoring that he’s actually played pretty well at the 5. Why not groom him more to do that?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
That would be the most athletic and long frontlines in the league. If that were to happen, Turiaf would have to be traded for a better defender and rebounder.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 3, 2010 5:16 PM PST up reply actions
nope...
As I have said countless times before..for what you get back for Turiaf… does not even vaguely equate, to what the man brings to this team outside of rebounding. If Turiaf is used sparingly.. you simply put a rebounding beast on court with him..so when Turiaf goes for the block…the other covers the boards…
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
by BritWarriorGSW on Feb 3, 2010 5:19 PM PST up reply actions
If we keep our 4 main bigs, I’d like to see stretches with Wright/Randolph manning the 4/5 occasionally and Ronny/Andris doing the same at other points. Oddly enough, our supposed 4s are better complements to each other than any of our 5s. Same with our centers. It’s odd, really.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Oddly enough, our supposed 4s are better complements to each other than any of our 5s.
Actually, scratch that. Wright/Andris and Randolph/Turiaf make lots of sense too. I just think our lineups work better if we play Ronny/Wright and Andris/Randolph combos a little more sparingly. That’s less true for Andris/Randolph, because the rebounding ability helps to make up for the lack of “fit,” but if Ronny and Wright come off the bench, they should almost never play together. The rebounding woes would be tremendous.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Randolph will never be big enough to guard the center position effectively.
Remember that, in almost every non-Nellie-designed offensive system, the 4 and 5 have identical offensive responsibilities. You may run more plays for one of them, because he’s a better player, but the responsibilities of the position (setting baseline screens, being an offensive threat via the high post, posting up low, offensive rebounds, moving into position to finish on other guy’s drives, etc) are identical. In fact, the 3-seconds-in-the-key rule often means that the players are constantly rotating between spots on the floor with each other.
When you have a team with one player who is a dominant low-post player (Tim Duncan is the best example, but the same was true of Karl Malone, and it’s true of pretty much every player who it couldbe an issue with) what you see is that the team runs the plays for him whether or not he is the biggest player on the floor, and, thus, the “center.”
Therefore, you’ll quickly realize that Randolph already is basically, offensively, a center. He has the offensive game of a 4/5 in a traditional system. He appears to want to be more of a 3, but doesn’t have that game yet.
But, as people have noticed, he really struggles to defend larger opponents. Thus, when Turiaf or Beans is out there, Randolph is the “4” – it should be less of a mismatch.
I would love to see the team use AR in the high post. Get him the ball at the elbow, have him face up, give him cutters … and give him another big man to hit in the low post. But, of course, to do that you need him on the floor with another big man. Potentially he could develop into a devastating weapon from there. Whether you call him a 4 or a 5 is irrelevant (Sampson was very effective from the high post. So was Sabonis. They were both clearly “centers”)
The primary difference between who gets listed as a 4 and who gets listed as a 5 is guards the bigger opponent.
I’m not sure it’s his lack of size that’s his issue for guarding centers. Certainly, it’s not helping him, but I don’t think it prevents him from doing it either. Camby isn’t exactly the Incredible Hulk, but he can guard 5s. What Randolph needs to do is keep at the strength training and then we’ll check back from time to time to see where he’s at in regards to D-ing up bigger centers. I won’t rule that out for him.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
We have a terrible time getting rebounds. Using Turiaf and Wright exclusively without Andris in the mix will make this problem much, much worse.
by jae on Feb 3, 2010 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
Where you have half a point:
Biedrins is one of the few players on a roster who has a lot of trade value, because he has valuable skills and a reasonable contract which doesn’t escalate every year.
That means if we were going to find a way to trade for a better power player, it would be hard to put together a package for him that didn’t include Biedrins.
But, of course, identifying a better power player who’s actually avaliable may be a hard thing to do. WHich should tell you something about Biedrins’ value.
Eh, a big man is a big man, who cares if we’re trading him for a 4 or a 5. Think about this, though – if you want to trade for some other player (whatever player you want) on the basis of Biedrins limitations, why would the team with this player you want to acquire want to trade him for Biedrins?
by Missing Barry on Feb 4, 2010 8:30 AM PST up reply actions
I don't see how radman
Is a liability to the future. When he was healthy he was helping out and then he got hurt. He’s an expiring contract next year at a decent price…. He’s no liabilty. We don’t have any terrible contracts ( Maggette could be if he goes back to his injured ways next season). We just need to aquire talent, because we are lacking in that department right now.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
your right,,
i was jus t blowing off steam..im so disappointed in him. he came here hungry shooting the ball good, playing defense and rebounding. now its like he’s just a bag of water out there lacking confidence. Everyone goes through slump but he just looks like a whipped puppy. and to have to endure that 6 million going to waste next season sux. please sell him!!
by IndubitableBayAreaGM on Feb 4, 2010 8:25 AM PST up reply actions
Well, according to reports he has been playing with some severe achilles tendinitis since mid december
which seems to be around the time he went into this ridiculous slump. He probably shouldn’t play the rest of the year. He most likely was pulling through with the pain simply because we were down to 8 players. In a way our 6 million will go to waste if he doesn’t play at all, but his value of an expiring deal most likely will have some value.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 4, 2010 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
Blow up the team.........
I am coming to a faster and faster conclusion that the GSW’s need a completely fresh start in 2010/2011 aside from a few core pieces.
My thoughts are this….
Keep:
Ellis, Curry, Randolph, Turiaf (Captain Vet…lockeroom gold), Buike.
Possible keeps: Bell, Morrow, Tolliver, possibly Wright (such a ‘broken’ risk).
Try to trade: Biedrins, Maggette, Wright, George, Claxton, Radman.
Just simply lose: Karl, Hunter, …… Nellie, Smart.
WHY?
Can anyone tell me what our salary sheet looks like with just the ‘Keep’ line and then the possibles?
I think from all our supposed good players, Biedrins is the one that I think may attract interest and while I love Corey’s play of late, we have to take advantage of that form to move that contract. Then maybe trade CJ, George, Radman and Claxton for a useful wingman?
In short…keep the core….clear the decks….this also includes Nellie and Smart.. I would really like to see a new head coach with Tom Thibodeau as our defensive coach to school Randolph in the true art of defense and some of our other players.
Would clearing out the ‘lose and trade’ options, give us enough of a shot at becoming a serious player in the Free agency market? and no I do not mean Amare….that guy can go swing to be fair…with his overinflated sense of self worth.
The dream combo is Bosh and LeBron…as a package… whoever gets those two together…becomes a serious championship contender in my opinion… question is…could we do enough cleaning of house…to make this franchise of interest enough to these guys to join?
Ellis,
Curry,
Lebron,
Bosh,
Randolph…….
with
Bell,
Morrow,
Buike,
Turiaf,
Draft pick,
Tolliver,
A new wingman….
Maybe the ability to keep Wright…..
I believe….. that is a championship squad, but would it require Larry Ellison to make it happen???
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
Forgot CJ in the 'Try to Trade' line...
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
by BritWarriorGSW on Feb 4, 2010 9:57 AM PST up reply actions
The dream combo is Bosh and LeBron…as a package… whoever gets him those two together…becomes a serious championship contender.
There, fixed it.
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Feb 4, 2010 2:24 PM PST up reply actions
PS
The Warriors are not living that dream
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Feb 4, 2010 2:24 PM PST up reply actions
Great...now is there a chance you could help answer what I was asking?
I have no idea if it is even possible…hence the question…. i.e. what exactly do the Golden State Warriors have to do to become a player in the Free Agent market…. or is it simply a case of ‘We have Cohan as an owner…therefore not a hope in hell?’
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
by BritWarriorGSW on Feb 4, 2010 4:59 PM PST up reply actions
We have to
A) Have a winning brand
B) Have some history
C) Be a large enough market
D) Have an owner who doesn’t suck the life out of the organization
E) Have existing talent on the team, not just “potential upside”
F) Be a good/fun place to live
So far, we’ve got F, we’ve got C, I think, and a little B, but only for people who don’t recoil at the memory of Rick Berry. We don’t necessarily need all of these things, but we need more than one and a half.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Feb 5, 2010 11:45 AM PST up reply actions
I see..
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
by BritWarriorGSW on Feb 5, 2010 6:12 PM PST up reply actions
i doubt anyone will this summer.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 4, 2010 8:14 PM PST up reply actions
Turiaf (Captain Vet…lockeroom gold)
You want to keep him over players like Biedrins, Wright, Maggette, and Morrow. I don’t really get it.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 4, 2010 8:13 PM PST up reply actions
Turiaf is a great value skills/salary while having little trade value
I actually like Maggette more and more, we just dont have complementary pieces
by warriorsvictim on Feb 5, 2010 10:31 AM PST up reply actions
Because your thinking like a fan...
Those players mentioned are part of a team that in terms of performance, is currently licking the sweat from Lucifers danglers right now….
However they have less value to us than supposedly Ellis, Randolph and Curry.. as my learned friend below points out…Turiaf’s trade value for what we get back for him….is nowhere near the actual upside/positive value he brings to this team… (I thought I explained that but maybe not).
So its not about keeping him over Wright, Maggette, et al, but more about who we can trade that people might actually want, to enable us to change the squad to help the supposed rocks of our future… we cannot keep everyone and still make changes… but if we dont change enough…. then yet again…we shall visit the ‘horned one’ to have another dose of salt!
Comprende?
Jan 16 2010 - Onlxn quote on Stephen Curry - "one of the worst playmakers in basketball"
by BritWarriorGSW on Feb 5, 2010 6:18 PM PST up reply actions
Turiaf’s trade value for what we get back for him….is nowhere near the actual upside/positive value he brings to this team
I’m not sure that this is true, but I’m inclined to agree. For a team that’s so thin up front and so lacking in man defenders, trading away a big guy who happens to play solid man D seems difficult to do if we want to make the team better in the process. As part of a package, he’s dealable, but we’d need to make sure we were getting some good pieces back.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
We can probably get alot in return, compared to his actual value. He is an average defending, terrible rebounding 4/5 that blocks shots. Alot of teams may want to add him as “beef”. We probably could get a Jamario Moon type player in return.
Send him to Denver with George for Joey Graham, Balkman, and Petro. They probably do it. I’d do it. Expirings, and good defensive perimeter players…nice.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 5, 2010 10:41 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
