Moving Forward: The Warriors and The Draft
Many things are uncertain about where the Warriors franchise is going. Don Nelson will eventually have his record and he will no longer be the coach of the Golden State Warriors. Will the Warriors still have the same run and gun approach without Nelson or will the team attempt go go for a more conventional approach? The Warriors have many talented players who have either failed to live up to their potential thus far or have been plagued with injuries. The Warriors are in a position this year to get a very high draft pick, despite the fact there is a lot of existing talent on their team. With such a high draft pick do the Warriors draft based on talent alone or do they draft based on need?
Lets take a quick look at the current roster (If Healthy)
C: Biedrins/Turiaf: Biedrins can rebound and score efficiently with limited offensive capabilities, he is at best an average defender, this is amplified when he is the only big on the court as he is much of the time under Nelson's offensive schemes. Turiaf is another efficient yet limited offensive player, Turiaf may be a slightly better defender than Biedrins but Turiaf is not nearly as good as Biedrins at rebounding.
PF: Randolph/Wright: Randolph is loaded with talent, but he is a fairly inefficient scorer. Randolph is a good rebounder and shot blocker, but he is too small and lacks fundamentals on defense to be anything better than a poor defender. Although it has been reported that Wright has gained weight he has missed this entire season. Wright has shown himself with limited playing time to be a more efficient scorer than Randolph although he is a worse rebounder, and suffers from the same problems that Randolph does defensively.
SF: Maggette/Azuibuke: Maggette is as efficient a scorer as they come, but he forces the offense to slow down, and dominates the ball. Maggette draws a lot of fouls which helps the team in more ways than one. Maggette is nothing spectacular on defense is injury prone. Azuibuke is also an efficient scorer, and good 3pt shooter that can run with the rest of the team. Azuibuke is not the greatest defender for a small forward but has shown signs of improvement.
SG: Ellis/Morrow: Ellis has been a prolific but slightly inefficient scorer who is turnover prone. Ellis can do a lot better at shot selection and improve his efficiency dramatically(as he has done in the past), he also should not run the point as much considering Curry is more effective in that category. Ellis is an intense defender who is a master at ball theft, he seems to have transformed into a good defender against smaller guards. Morrow is one of the best shooters in the league and scores at a wonderfully efficient rate. Morrow is not the best defender by any stretch but he always puts in his best effort, and seems to make the right choices.
PG: Curry/Watson: Curry is a great shooter with some slashing ability, and the ability to create shots for others. Curry is still turnover prone, and isn't known as a good defender quite yet despite his good ability to create turnovers through steals. A developing team couldn't ask for a better young point guard to build a team around. Watson is an efficient scorer and is strong for a point guard. Like Ellis and Curry Watson is excellent at forcing turnovers through steals. Defensively Watson is a good defender against smaller guards.
So if we look at this team it looks like we could use 1. A good post defender 2. A good post scorer 3. A good defensive swing-man 4. Someone off the bench that can rebound. 5. More size at SG/SF 6. A backup point guard that can create shots for others, and keep the ball moving on offense. 7. Simply having playing two bigs at the same time when needed.
Trading Block:
Maggette(Due to his long contract and his playing style not exactly meshing with the rest of the team.)
Ellis: For the right price (A post defender or scorer) Ellis would be a good center piece Ellis is talented and he could play with Curry really at this point it is just a matter of will he(not because I believe Curry and Ellis don't like each other but because one of them is now expendable and Curry has more upside at this point I actually like Ellis.)
Biedrins: Randolph/Wright's potential are too high and have yet to be seen. Biedrins is a limited player on a team which needs a more versatile center. Note: Biedrins should not be traded if their is not a new starting center or PF already in place. I also believe Biedrins is a valuable player and he is the only excellent rebounder on the team.
Turiaf: A useful player and that is why other teams might like him to be included in a trade.
Watson: A good player who would fit in with many teams, but the warriors don't exactly need another scoring small guard. Of course I wouldn't mind keeping Watson though.
Azuibuke: Coming off a major injury will Azuibuke be the same? It might be best to trade him while he still has a good deal of value. Don't get me wrong I like Azuibuke but I speak through a purely logical and analytical perspective.
Top Draft Choices:
John Wall PG: Wall is only 19 and even at this point he is considered to have the slashing ability of Derrick Rose and better passing. Wall is also considered a to be a great defender at the college level racking up almost 2 steals per game and being a lock down perimeter defender. Wall turns the ball over too much, isn't a great 3pt shooter yet. Since Wall is 19 years old his decision making is suspect. Wall has potential to be a great NBA player and will certainly be in the running for ROTY right away. In someways however Wall actually has a lot to learn, and won't immediately be a top 10 player in the league.
How does John Wall fit on the Warriors?: The Warriors currently have three scoring undersized guards all with some passing ability. If the warriors wanted to start Curry, Ellis and Wall they would have to have Wall at SF, which is completely idiotic. Ellis or Curry would have to be traded to make room for Wall. If the Warriors do get the No. 1 pick they will have to decide to either draft Wall and trade Ellis or Curry or draft someone else and risk being ruthlessly mocked for not drafting someone who could be a future hall of fame player.
Evan Turner SG/SF: Turner is an excellent all round player who is probably the most NBA ready player in the draft. Turner can score, pass, rebound and defend. Turner is said to have a tremendous work ethic. Turner will have to use his tremendous work ethic to cut down his turnovers when he reaches the NBA, which has been his one weakness. Turner is an efficient scorer who is primarily a slasher and has shown an ability to draw fouls.
How does Evan Turner fit into the Warriors?: Plug Turner into the SF position and he is pretty much the exact player that the Warriors are looking for at that position. It seems as though Turners all round game would fit in well with the Warriors current offense. Turner's work ethic on the defensive end couldn't hurt the Warriors either.
DeMarcus Cousins C: Cousins is the premiere post prospect in the draft. Cousins is a Huge highly skilled post scorer, who is currently destroying smaller opponents in college. Cousins maturity, and attitude has been put into question but he is only 19 years old. Cousins tends to not want to pass the ball when he gets it, and sometimes takes bad shots(again he is only 19.) Cousins has the ability to be a lock down defender down low. Cousins main weakness is his inability to get back on defense quickly enough. I would also add a concern that if he adds on too much weight (he is 19 and 270lbs) he might become too slow for the current NBA game.
How does DeMarcus Cousins fit into the Warriors?: He could be the elite low post scorer/defender the warriors need, however the warriors would have to change their game plan to fit Cousins play style. Cousins at this point is a half court player, and he probably will remain that way for his career.
Derrick Favors PF/C: At 18 years old Favors is one of the most raw and intriguing talents in the draft. Favors is currently on a team without a true passer so Favors has been forced to experiment with creating his own shots. Favors draws a lot of fouls but shoots Fts at only 60% thus far in his career. It will be interesting to see what Favors could do on a team with a suitable point guard. His shooting percentage is 59% in college with a TS% of 61% Favors has tons of energy and can run the floor exceptionally well. At 6'10” 245 pounds Favors has the size and athleticism to be an elite Center on a fast paced offensive team. He has been developing his post game as of late and although he will probably not immediately be an effective post player in the NBA the potential is there. Favors seems to rebound reasonably well, and block shots excellently.
How Does Derrick Favors fit into the Warriors?: He could help the Warriors in every way. This is except for the fact that Favors is yet another project player, he probably won't put up great numbers for a few more years. Favors however has all the ability in the world but at the age of 18 and it is extremely hard to project where he will end up. Although Favors could end up being an extremely smart draft choice down the road I sense I feeling among Warrior fans and probably by extension the front office, that the Warriors need to improve dramatically soon and using a top five draft pick on a project player would be seen as a mistake. With that being said it is extremely tempting to see what Favors could do with a good passing guard like Curry on a team with a fast paced offense.
Al-Farouq Aminu SF/PF: Another raw 19 year old prospect with an ever improving skill set. Aminu offensively is not that efficient. Aminu can drive to the basket and get to the rim but his handling is poor and Aminu is not a great finisher, and creates too many turnovers as a result. Aminu however is very active defensively and has shown a knack for grabbing rebounds.
How does Al-Farouq Aminu fit into the Warriors?: Another raw talent that fits the prototype PF for a guy in Nellies system. The fact that he is a quick undersized PF that still somehow grabs rebounds(especially offensive rebounds) and can run the floor as well as a guard. Aminu is yet another project player but unlike Cousins, and Wall will probably have a limited impact upon arrival. Aminu's talent is hard to overlook however.
Cole Aldrich C: Aldrich is and will not be an offensive Center immediately in the NBA. Aldrich does well around the basket when shots are created for him. Aldrich's defense and rebounding is what set him apart. Aldrich is already a good low post defender with a strong lower body and tremendous shot blocking ability. Aldrich can also rebound fairly well. Aldrich's only weakness defensively is his lack of lateral quickness.
How does Cole Aldrich fit into the Warriors?: Aldrich is really just a role playing center unlike many of the other prospects on this list Aldrich is also much more of a sure thing. Anyone who drafts Aldrich knows exactly what they are getting. The Warriors need someone like Aldrich on the team but the Warriors shouldn't draft him unless they slip past the fifth or sixth pick in the draft and he is still available. Aldrich is destined to be an underrated piece of a good team in the future. Also just by looking at him I know he will be seen as an Adonal Foyle type, the butt of inside jokes for whatever team he is on.
Donatas Montejunas C: The number one international prospect in the draft Montejunas is another 19 year old with a ton of potential. Montejunas is a seven footer who can shoot from the perimeter beat opponents off the dribble and even does well in the post in Europe. Some say that Montejunas's ability to create his own shot and extreme quickness for a center will play better in the NBA than in Europe. With all of Montejunas's offensive upside he has incredible detriments that he must improve on. Montejunas is simply not bulky enough to defend effectively at the NBA level. Montejunas has also shown that he is not very good at grabbing defensive rebounds despite his height.
How does Donatas Montejunas fit into the Warriors?: Montejunas is a dynamic scorer that can run the court very well this aspect of his game fits with the Warriors. What the Warriors definitely don't need is another weak defender in the post. Also Montejunas would completely destroy the Warriors chances of competing on rebounds. Montejunas is a project prospect that could compensate for his weaknesses as he gets older but the Warriors can't invest in that kind of risk with such a high draft pick. I find it interesting that most of the raw PF/C prospects on this list are raw offensively but already have some good rebounding/defense capabilities where as Montejunas is the opposite.
Wesley Johnson SF: Johnson has been a stand out on a great Syracuse team. Johnson is an unselfish player who at 22 is less of a risk than many of the previously mentioned picks. Johnson is a good jump shooter with good fundamentals, he is a good finisher and a solid defender. Johnson is not a good shot creator and does not get to the line as often as some think he should. Johnson has an ever improving shot from beyond the 3pt arc, and is developing a post game.
How does Wesley Johnson fit into the Warriors?: Really any team could use a versatile player like Johnson the problem is Johnson is not really excellent at any one thing, and is probably destine to be a quietly effective role player or starter. Johnson is a safe pick but he is hardly the kind of player you want to draft extremely high in the draft.
Hassan Whiteside C: Whiteside is yet another offensively raw center prospect. Whiteside lacks finesse underneath the basket. Whiteside does have a hook shot and scores somewhat efficiently even though he is limited. Whiteside really excels defensively, using his wingspan to block shots. Hassan is a good rebounder as well. Whiteside's upper body is not yet strong enough but could develop.
How does Hassan Whiteside fit into the Warriors?: Whiteside is a big sleeper in the draft, although he is raw he seems to have more ability defensively than many of the other raw talents. Although his defense is not as good as Cole Aldrich his ability to run the floor and play adequate defense could help the Warriors in particular compared to Aldrich. Hassan would be among my first choices if the Warriors drop out of the top 3 or 4 picks, as it would allow the Warriors to trade Biedrins without losing much. Hassan Whiteside is an extremely interesting sleeper in this draft.
James Anderson SG: Anderson is a prolific and efficient scorer at the college level. He is also one of the only guards in this draft class. In a class filled with unrefined PF/Cs with raw potential, Anderson stands out as a safe role playing guard with the ability to create his own shot and hit jumpers. Anderson is an under control player who rarely turns the ball over, and he has the ability to get to the free throw line better than any other guard in college at this point. Anderson's weakness is on the defensive end, he regularly gets beaten off the dribble in college and many believe that this problem will only get worse in the NBA.
How does Anderson fit into the Warriors?: Having a tall shooting guard would be good except for the fact that by all accounts even the small guards on the Warriors play better defense than Anderson. If Anderson could play better defense he would be a welcome addition to the Warriors bench but since he can't play defense there is no chance the Warriors should consider Anderson. The only reason why I included him in this list is that I was tired of Centers and Power Forwards. Really I should have included Ed Davis who is a perfectly good young PF prospect with a lot of maturity for his age(20) but there are so many 18-20 year old PF/C prospects I couldn't bare to write one more write up about another prospect that has an undeveloped offensive game and is good at jumping blocking shots and rebounding.
This years draft class is pretty interesting. Last year there were a lot of PG prospects with one PF/C as a standout. This year it is the complete opposite. We can only hope that this year's draft will bring about as many surprises as last year's draft.
Overall the Warriors have a lot of choices coming into this years draft and although the draft cannot solve all the problems the team has and catapult them into contender status magically it can theoretically fill a hole. It is my opinion that the Warriors goal for next year should be a record of 35-40 wins and creating a foundation for future years to come, anything else would be icing on the cake. Another season like this one would be dreadful for the franchise.
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!
7 recs |
550 comments
|
Comments
+1
Seems like a better fit than John Wall for how this roster is currently constructed. But either would be awesome.
Love Warriors, Hate Cohan! - Sell the team! Save us Mr. Ellison!
by JustSomeName on Mar 11, 2010 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
That's true
but this roster is constructed very poorly
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 11, 2010 3:49 PM PST up reply actions
Just for record. Turner is more of a 2guard
If we got him i’d wanna move Monta for a larger wing. Turner is pushing 6-6, 205. He’s smaller than Broy and Kobe. Not saying they can’t play SF but at some point it wouldn’t kill us to play normal sized.
Too bad we couldn’t make a play for Nicholas Batum. He is awesome player and perfect SF for a young team moving forward.
Doesn’t the consensus say to move Ellis regardless? I don’t necessarily agree with it (yet).
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Mar 11, 2010 2:47 PM PST up reply actions
I've been a big Monta supporter, but I'm not sure if it will work out with him and Curry.
If we get Wall, I think at least one of Monta and Curry have to go, and maybe even both of them. Curry and Turner Could probably work together, so then I think we should probably trade Ellis.
by freerandolph on Mar 11, 2010 10:33 PM PST up reply actions
I thought he was more like 6'7", 210
but that still isn’t very big
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 11, 2010 3:50 PM PST up reply actions
Just to add
He is 6’7’’ 210 and Kobe is 6’6’’ 205 and B-Roy is 6’6’’ 211, so he will be bigger than both in probably a year
by pericles31081 on Mar 11, 2010 8:53 PM PST up reply actions
I guarantee he's not 6-7
Kobe was" 6-8" also when he came into league. Wait to see actual combine sizes. Just saying he’s prototypical SG size. Not like he can’t play SF, but i’d like it if for once we had a normal sized lineup.
I actually think Roy is probably a good physical comparison though he looks skinnier. Point is, I LIKE roy at SF. But in spurts.
I've never seen Kobe listed at 6'8''.
Everyone compared him to Jordan because they looked similar, although Jordan was much, much bulkier at that point. Maybe they were referring to pre-bulked up Jordan.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
I've seen him listed at 6'7"
and 6’6", but never 6’8".
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 2:13 AM PST up reply actions
The size doesn’t really concern me – the skillset is the same, and there aren’t really that many huge SF’s that are post threats or anything that would give Turner problems – the question would be whether he can rebound well for SF or not. If he’s more of a 2 in terms of his rebounding….well, we already have enough problems on the boards as it is, we shouldn’t compound it by playing a guy at a position he doesn’t rebound well enough for. That said, my impression is Turner is a good rebounder so it probably wouldn’t be a problem?
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 7:23 AM PST up reply actions
there aren’t really that many huge SF’s that are post threats or anything that would give Turner problems
Lebron, Carmelo will be around another 8 yers atleast. Paul Peirce is thick, Kobe and Artest can post people up. Durant will murder you with length unless u can somewhat match it. Gerald Wallace? Want me to go on??
Turner, Monta Curry is still an awful trio defensively. Even if Turner is a good defendeR (probably not yet but he will be) this will be an issue. I think we’d be only team in league who would draft him as a SF.
All i’m saying is i’m not super concerned about whether he’s a SF or SG offensively cause we know there isn’t much of a difference (and if anything skill set wise he’d run point forward). I’m worried about defense, and from watching the WArriors i’m the only one :-/.
If we got Turner, the logical move IMO would be moving Monta + 1 of our bigs 4 a better big if at all possible. And then finding a wing player who fits that Shane Battier mold.
Eh, if he’s a legit 6’6 I’m not too worried about his matchup with most of those players….well, depends on his length, too. I agree that Curry/Monta/Turner isn’t good defensively, I just disagree that Turner has anything to do with it. They aren’t good defensively because of Curry/Monta.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 7:48 AM PST up reply actions
yeah I guess it would be hard to find a 3 who would make up for the backcourts defensive inadequacies
by freerandolph on Mar 12, 2010 6:17 PM PST up reply actions
I'd like to see Turner at the 2
we’d have a real sized lineup for once.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 6:56 PM PST up reply actions
I'm guessing that that would mean trading Monta?
If so, would you rather have a Curry Turner backcourt, a Curry Wall backcourt, or a Wall + Morrow or some other player (meaning that we would trade Monta and Curry to try to make our team bigger and get some good big men)?
by freerandolph on Mar 13, 2010 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
I think Curry-Wall would be a great back court
provided Wall is actually big enough to play 2 (I’m 95% sure he’ll be able to).
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 4:59 PM PST up reply actions
provided Wall is actually big enough to play 2
probably not. if you look at pictures of him & Calipari side by side he looks like he’s about Rose’s height (6’1.5" barefoot, 6’2.5" in shoes). Tyreke obviously towers over Calipari & he’s 6’4" barefoot, 6’5.25" in shoes.
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 9:38 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not sure if its even a matter of size anyway.
Lets say Wall is big enough to be the size of a legitimate 2. He still is really a big point guard. The size would make playing defense a lot easier for a Curry Wall backcourt, but have two point guards who like to have the ball and control the offense… I’m just not sure if that would really work out well.
by freerandolph on Mar 14, 2010 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions
I’ve gone over why I’ve never seen a problem with 2 PG’s. There’s enough shots/opportunities for 2 players, every PG skill is also a skill that helps make you an effective wing, and there’s no problem having too much distribution, it’s when you don’t have enough that you see problems (like Monta at PG).
As for Wall’s size, my opinion is he’ll be big enough, but I’ll wait until we get combine measurements before we know for sure.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions
For the record, I would rather see him at the 2 as well, I just don’t necessarily mind him at the 3.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions
You think
That Curry, Monta, and Turner on the court at the same time would work?
by freerandolph on Mar 14, 2010 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Probably not ideal, and might be best to move one of them in that scenario. I don’t mind Turner at the 3, but when we’re already struggling with our perimeter D on traditional wings (with Curry/Monta), it probably makes the situation a bit worse.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Turner seems like a great fit
on and off the court. Hard worker who can do everything, the perfect complement to a players like Curry and Morrow. I’d really like that backcourt rotation.
But it’d be intriguing to explore trading down a few picks to grab Favors. Plugging him next to Randolph could be pretty nasty. I’ve heard he’s developing a bit of a perimeter game as well which adds to his versatility as a big.
I think Azubuike's trade value is at an all time low.
He will definitely exercise his player option and come back to us for one more season. Maybe we can sign Reggie Williams to a one year deal and see him and Azubuike duke it out for time. They’re both very similar players in terms of offense, but it looks like Williams is better at passing/seeing the floor and Azubuike is better at rebounding. Azubuike seems to have a slight advantage on the defensive end too.
Love Warriors, Hate Cohan! - Sell the team! Save us Mr. Ellison!
I was about to comment on that
Who would trade for Buike right now? No one.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 11, 2010 3:50 PM PST up reply actions
I could see a contender wanting Buike. Not sure they’d be willing to give us anything to make it worth our while, but he’s a good player to take a flier on….
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 7:26 AM PST up reply actions
Cavs maybe?
Didn’t they sign Powe after he went down?
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Exactly
he has absolutely no trade value coming off of that injury
Here's hoping 2010 is the end of our drought.
by Iwantwinners on Mar 14, 2010 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess your right
But I was thinking of teams getting Az because they don’t know if he is not the same and he is low risk since his contract is reasonable. But come to think about it Az’s value probably is at an all time low right now.
Turner at the SG position
Trade Ellis + Maggs for a legit starting SF who can defend and shoot the 3.
Curry
Turner
Randolph
Andris
Can anyone think of a good, young SF that can shoot the three ball and defend?
Ariza, Thaddeus Young, Deng, Rudy Gay, Outlaw? Think we could make a trade for any of those players (sign and trade in some cases)?
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Gay would be ideal
Deng is probably the better defender, but he’s an injury liability. Both are young, Deng is actually younger than I thought at 24. But I’d lock in this starting 5 for the next three years and let them develop:
Curry
Turner
Gay
Randolph
Andris
by eastbayglory on Mar 11, 2010 5:01 PM PST up reply actions
+1
That would be an AWESOME lineup. With Watson, Morrow, Azubuike, Wright, Turiaf, Tolliver, Reggie Williams off the bench. If development of players goes well, we get a new owner, management, and coaching staff, we’d become tne next OKC Thunder!
Love Warriors, Hate Cohan! - Sell the team! Save us Mr. Ellison!
by JustSomeName on Mar 11, 2010 5:18 PM PST up reply actions
we’d become tne next OKC Thunder!
Unless Turner is an elite player like Durant is, that’s highly unlikely. Plus, while Turner’s NBA level defense is unknown at this point, the other 4 are all suspect NBA defenders with no bulk or toughness.
by homer simpson on Mar 12, 2010 12:55 PM PST up reply actions
That lineup does look pretty decent
That looks a lot better then it would with Monta and Maggs and minus Turner and Gay…
by freerandolph on Mar 11, 2010 6:22 PM PST up reply actions
deng is awful
he makes Corey Maggette look unselfish. Most Chicago fans hate is offense. 19 foot jumpers all day
Deng is a legit defender
If you look at all those guys around him, you don’t really need an awful lot of offense from Deng.
He’s also a much more willing passer than Rudy Gay, the other candidate at SF.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 2:15 AM PST up reply actions
We would pay Deng that much money to just defend?
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Well he's a good player
good positional rebounder, great midrange shooter, can shoot the three, can take his man off the dribble, and will defend the best perimeter player on the opposing team. I like Deng.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
He's also probably a better small ball 4 than anyone we have
Not saying it’s a great thing to go small, but if Nellie is back (almost certainly will be), Deng we’d be a pretty good candidate for it. Lots of length.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:01 PM PST up reply actions
I like Deng?
I hear it’s good for the garden?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 8:31 PM PST up reply actions
I want a guy that can defend
Someone like Shane Battier. He plays great defense and provides excellent veteran leadership. His offense production has slipped, but we already have enough offensive players. The only problem is how to get him because he’s very valuable in Houston and it’s going to take more than Maggs to get him. Trading Ellis to Houston wouldn’t make sense either since they already have Brooks, Martin, Ariza, etc.
PG – Curry
SG – Turner
SF – Battier
PF – Randolph
C – Biedrins (hopefully he produces at the level he did last season)
I’d be happy if we had a healthy lineup like that.
NICHOLAS BATUM!
Seriously. Awesome defender @ 21. Rebounds. Hits 3s. In another system with more useage he could be a star
Doubt he'll ever be an allstar, but he could be a significant contributor to a good team. It would be great to have him here.
by freerandolph on Mar 11, 2010 10:35 PM PST up reply actions
i dunno man.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/batumni01.html
If we had a Curry/Turner backcourt he’d be ultimate compliment. Can slash, good 3 point shooter, defensive minded, long.
Sorry ppl but the Only Thing Nellie wants more than a Dominant Center is a Point forward.No way Nellie dont start him at 3 if we get Turner.
I don't have a problem starting him at 3
As long as we don’t play Curry and Monta at the 1 and 2. Turner could possibly work out as a 3, although I’m really not sure and only time will tell if he will work well as a 3, but to have an undersized 2 and 3 and to have the 3 smallest players not be very good defender, just won’t work out well.
by freerandolph on Mar 12, 2010 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
Wes Johnson
Defend, yes 2 blocks 2 steals per game
Shoot the three, yes
rebound, yes
Throw down some sick dunks, yes
hog the ball from ellis or curry, no
project player, no
I would love if the warriors got 2 top 10 picks. No one will pick up both Ellis adn Maggette. that’s too much money to absorb. would need a third team. but we i would think we might be able to get a top 10 pick for ellis if a teams wants a PG. There aren’t a ton of good ones in this draft.
I've watched a lot of Whiteside
And I have to say he’s the best defender in the draft, much better than Aldrich. Also you forgot about his jump shot he’s actually made a couple 3’s this year
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I dunno about that.
Whiteside looks really skinny to me still. Looks like he’d get pushed around down low.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
He's not really that skinny
And every young big gets pushed around a little bit, but he’s already stronger than a guy like Camby
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Considering how Jerome Jordan just manhandled, him, I strongly doubt that.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 12, 2010 8:55 PM PST up reply actions
Jordan is really strong already
No surprise. How many times have you seen Whiteside play?
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I don't think Jordan is exactly the world's strongest man.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 13, 2010 5:02 PM PST up reply actions
He's pretty strong
Don’t underestimate him
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Yeah, 7 feet, 235 pounds strong.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
Wirey strong
KG isn’t that heaby and is really strong,so is Odom and Josh Smith.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
IDK
Whiteside is playing against poor competition.
Did you see Favors today against UNC? He dominated on both ends. I see Bosh in him.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Favors has a Looooon--runs out of breath--oong way to go till' he's Bosh like.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
I see a Hakim Warrick at worst
More athletic Brand at best. Not as quick or as talented as Bosh.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
He'd have to really refine his post game to be Brand.
I mean not saying he can’t or won’t do that. He needs to establish a go to move. I don’t want him to be a jumpshooting big man with his size and ability. He had a nice hook shot against UNC. If he could be money with that shot out to 10 feet he’d be deadly. No one would block that shot. Plus he should be a good offensive rebounder with those long arms and activity level. Favors loves to bang down low, should make him a decent rebounder. I think that helps lower his bust potential a bit more. He should be a decent defender at the NBA level. Really the only thing to worry about with Favors is will he be a decent offensive player?
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Offensively he is doing just fine
Especially considering his team does not have a PG and does not run the break. He is super athletic and can run the floor, if he was on a running team he would be doing far better. Also he is one of the most efficient players in college ball.
The biggest thing holding him back right now is that his team puts him on the outside because there are too many inside players on the team.
Pretty sure, if he was on a running team like ours, with a PG like ours, he will end up just fine.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawkGSW on Mar 12, 2010 11:25 PM PST up reply actions
I saw the UNC game and never thought they used him outside too much.
He would be out there occasionally, when they hit Gani on the block. However most of his posessions came down low. He had one score where he received the ball at the top of the key, took a dribble or two and made a left handed layup, contested. It was the first time i’ve ever seen Favors put the ball on the floor for more than a dribble. He also hit a wide open 17 foot jumper.
What I’m talking about with the offensive game is that he is an effective scorer like Andris is. But like Andris, he is no where near a polished offensive player. You don’t look at Favors and think, “damn this guy is smooth”. He puts up some nasty dunks sometimes, but it’s not like he’s Dwight or Amare. He’s athletically superior than 98% of the bigmen in the NBA, so he has that going for him.
To be more effective and to “be a decent offensive player” like I said before, he needs to refine his game. He is effective while being so unpolished. Which is actually a good thing for him considering it. Imagine how effective this guy could be if he was twice as skilled as he currently is. It’s not out of the realm of possibility, but right now, he ain’t there yet.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Idk
I look at him a lot like Amare. He just needs the right system and players. HE HAS NO PG.
He does not necessarily create his own shot yet, but if he is set up at all it goes in. He is just totally on the wrong team right now.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawkGSW on Mar 12, 2010 11:42 PM PST up reply actions
I want Evan Turner
in Golden State. I wish we could get the #2 pick, draft Turner and then trade someone to get another top 5 pick. That way we have to young studs coming in.
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
The Golden Future
PF: Anthony Randolph
PG: Stephen Curry
Can't wait until GS wins a championship!!!
I’ve read some scouts think there’s a pretty big drop off after Wall and Turner. There’s still a lot to learn about all the prospects, of course, but the point is, a second Top 5 pick might not really bring in a “stud” – just a player with good upside but lots of question marks.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 7:29 AM PST up reply actions
a second Top 5 pick might not really bring in a "stud" – just a player with good upside but lots of question marks.
I’d take a chance on Cousins if we could flip some of our D leaguers to get him.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
I think Cousins is the best talent available at the #3 pick.
He is playing on one of the fastest running teams in college and keeping up just fine. I have watched just about every UK gm this season and he passes back out just fine, he has a scoring mentality and is very aggressive. Unusually good footwork skills, soft hands for a man his size. Cannot see the attitude other than a scowl everytime his on the bench rather than on the floor, better than the sadsack look in my mind as he wants to play.
He would be a great compliment to our young bigs especially AR on defense as Cousins has a strong set defensive presence and I believe a compliment to AB as well. He can beast the PF position as well if need. We play many teams where we absolutey need someone like him. I donot agree that he he a great dropoff in talent compared to Turner.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 9:04 AM PST up reply actions
He is playing on one of the fastest running teams in college and keeping up just fine.
Kentucky is about 50th in terms of game pace. They aren’t plodding, but they aren’t among the most likely to run, not by a long shot.
Got me jae, they are listed at 49 in terms of game pace along with the other non running top teams.
and I got caught up watching them zooming up and down the court with those slow non-running guards game after game thinking man these guys run more than the Warriors. Ya caught another “watcher” deceiving himself.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 1:17 PM PST up reply actions
Kentucky
They like to run up and down. That’s how Wall is effective, really. He struggles in a half-court setting. The whole team struggles in a half-court setting. That’s why Mississippi State is effective against them. They can control their tempo. That’s why they almost lost to Stanford in overtime to start the season.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 15, 2010 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
+1
Here's hoping 2010 is the end of our drought.
by Iwantwinners on Mar 14, 2010 10:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Cousins
Cannot see the attitude other than a scowl everytime his on the bench rather than on the floor, better than the sadsack look in my mind as he wants to play.
Head coach John Calipari has gotten in Cousins’ face more than a few times. It’s not really his attitude but more so his immaturity. For example, he’ll throw his hands up in the air and he’ll appear visibly frustrated. You can get into his head. He has gotten better with that over time, though. I remember earlier in the season against South Carolina, he was about 0-for-8 from the line or something like that and you could really see it on his face. Yesterday morning against Mississippi State, he was 3-for-13 at the line at some point and seemed okay mentally.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 15, 2010 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Favors is going to be a beast
If you watch him play, he is the only player on his team and yet he still manages to dominate.
The biggest thing to notice is, there is no PG on his team. If he had a PG to feed him properly, he will be amazing.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
he is the only player on his team and yet he still manages to dominate.
shouldn’t be too hard to dominate no one?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
Georgia Tech
Yes, their guard play is terrible and that’s something very important in college basketball. Their three best players are all big men in Derrick Favors, Gani Lawal and probably Zach Peacock. Len Elmore, an ESPN college basketball commentator and analyst, said that the team has “final four talent and NIT guard play.” They went 7-9 in ACC play, but they did beat Duke once. They are a capable team and Favors is a pretty big part of it.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 15, 2010 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions
But what have they got to lose? This team needs star players of which they currently have zero. And they could especially use a big bodied, defensive star.
Cousins issues are mental (tends to play outside too much & there was a rumor that he may be on meds for being bipolar by Chris Monter in his interview with Tim Roye) but you can’t ? his #‘s. Biggest question on Favors is while he is a great finisher, he may not be able to be an initiator in the post (which he’d have to be to be elite), but as a freshman who should still be in HS, his #‘s are almost identical with the sophomore versions of Al Horford & Antonio McDyess (the 2 players he’s most compared to).
Both have legit size (Favors is listed at 6’10", 246 but may now be bigger since he’s supposed to be a HS senior & towers over Gani Lawal who was measured at 6’9" 229 lbs in the combine last year. Cousins is listed at 6’11" 270, don’t know if the height is accurate, but he did look as tall as Favors in the footage of their match up in the HS championship game. Even with all the talk of AR & BW’s weight gain, they still weigh somewhere around 220.
Having NBA bodies & athleticism, being great rebounders in the college game per minute (Cousins 15.84 reb/36, Favors 11.84 reb/36) and having a history of being on winning teams while being the best or 2nd best player on their respective teams is worth taking a chance on. Even if they flop, in terms of enjoying the season, being one of the 5 worst teams in the NBA is not much different than being one of the 10 worst.
The real ? is can they get a 2nd top 5 pick. They’d almost certainly have to take back an atrocious contract like Arenas’, Brand’s or Rip’s or Villanueva’s, etc for Vlad’s expiring & maybe even one of their young players unless one of those teams actually wants Monta or Maggette or Andris.
by homer simpson on Mar 12, 2010 1:47 PM PST up reply actions
Cousins is even better than his numbers
…HIS TEAM HAS NO POINT GUARD!!!
Him + Curry offensively would be like Nash + Amare (obviously not at the same level, but you know what I’m saying)
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
WOOPS...not cousins...i meant FAVORS
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
You were right the first time.
Cousins would be great with Curry at point and hopefully Randolph/Wright in there as well.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 15, 2010 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions
…HIS TEAM HAS NO POINT GUARD!!!
Plus ( b/c Lawal’s a JR & Favors is a FR) they go to Lawal more than Favors in the post even though Lawal is not as effective (TS% 55% vs Favor’s 60%). It also hurts Favors’ offensive rebounding #‘s b/c on those possessions he’s usually standing at the 3 point line straight away.
The ? with Favors is that he may not be able to initiate offense the way say Howard or Pau or KG in his hey day or Shaq could do in the post. Basically being able to (1) score easily one on one in the post, thus causing (2), drawing double teams and then doing (3) (which really separates bigs like Duncan with guys like Zach or Jefferson offensively speaking – obviously Zach & Jefferson aren’t much defenders) also being able to pass out of those double teams to cutters for wide open lay ups or to guys who are wide open at the 3 pt line.
by homer simpson on Mar 12, 2010 2:02 PM PST up reply actions
I think
Favors would have some success just crashing the glass and pick n rolls. He needs someone to initiate the offense for him and get him wide open looks. I’ve heard he’s developing a post game. But the games I watch he just shoots a turnaround 15 footer. It’s rushed, and it looks ugly on the form. But that’s okay I guess since he’s still 18, right?
I know the gauge for his draft status is all over the board. But I think he’s going Top 5 this year.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Thank Amare
If someone sets him up, its going in.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Definitely possible, Amar’e was supposedly a little lighter (6’10" in shoes & 233 lbs at the combine, Favors is listed at 6’10", 246) & looks like he has more explosion off the floor than Favors. Favors actually looks like he has a wider base (like Yao) which usually helps your post game & post defense in terms of holding position (it’s just hard to get around guys with wide hips a la Sir Charles).
by homer simpson on Mar 12, 2010 3:42 PM PST up reply actions
yes
good recognition of his lower body. Totally different from Brandan and Randolph.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
The big relief would be if we landed the #2 spot. Then people would be glad that we didn’t actually have to pick the best player in the draft.
"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."
Frank Zappa
A guaranteed Evan Turner if Riley/Nelson don’t screw up
Here's hoping 2010 is the end of our drought.
by Iwantwinners on Mar 14, 2010 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I think most Smart Warrior fans are hoping for the number 2 pick.Evan Turner would have to play the 3 which shouldnt be hard since we had Anthony Morrow playing that position more than a few times this season and he is 2 inches shorter than Turner is.I like Demarcus Cousins but i do see a problem with his attitude.Right now he is auditioning for the NBA Draft and he is acting up imagine how he’ll act once he gets paid.
I think most Smart Warrior fans are hoping for the number 2 pick.?
No, I’m pretty sure the smart ones are hoping for #1 since it’s more valuable than #2
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 11, 2010 7:55 PM PST up reply actions
If it were any other franchise...
I’d think they would surely want the #1 pick. However, this is the warriors and I’m not going to recount the numerous blunders that have been made and most likely will be made. Can you imagine, Larry Riley with the #1 pick. That’s a scary thought.
Don’t get me wrong I want the Warriors to get the #1 pick. The problem is I know that the Warriors will blow it. I have confidence in that. You could argue that, “how could they go wrong with they guys we are talking about in this post.” I would respond by saying that whoever they draft could be a great player, but they will screw it up somehow. Whether or not it will be with team chemistry, like, “I can’t play with that guy.” They’ll end up trading away one of our best players for some expiring contracts and then try to explain why it was a good move again. There are countless ways of going with this.
I can only hope the Warriors go with some outside/independent advise on their pick. The current management is too incompetent to make the decision.
Even if all that is true, how does having the #2 pick solve our problems? If anything, the team with the #1 pick will pick the good player and leave us with the bust.
But seriously, what makes you think the current management would completely blow the #1 overall pick?
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
I’m not saying that I wan’t the #2 pick that would be insane. If we got the #2 pick we could get the bust. My point is simply that knowing the Warriors history of failure it would be a complete anomaly for them to actually succeed.
In all fairness though, maybe there is some hope. We did have the foresight to draft Curry, when arguably we could have drafted for need and got Jordan Hill? I didn’t agree with it then and I’m sure glad we didn’t do that.
My problem is that the Warriors have a culture of losing. If we draft a superstar will he want to stay? Or will it be a pit-stop on his way to Boston, NY or LA. Also, along these lines the Warriors have a history of creating malcontent in its players.
So, it’s possible that management wouldn’t blow the pick, but would blow it later in creating some kind of chemistry problem and forced trades and the like.
Well
the only Smart connected to the Warriors I know of is Keith, and I bet he wants John Wall.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 2:17 AM PST up reply actions
the only Smart connected to the Warriors
Time to bring out the big jae, 1st or 2nd pick, which are you hoping for young fella?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 11:19 AM PST up reply actions
In reference to tafkasam...
you obviously never seen Evan Tuner play because he’s nothing like a 2G, he intiates the teams offense 70% of the time and dribbles like a PG. He’s a great passer at a legit 6-7 feet tall, and can play the 1-3 positions in GSW’s offense…case you were wondering
I think you misinterpreted me
he’s physically a 2guard…..I’m telling you he is NOT 6-7.
BTW BRoy, Kobe and Iguodala initiate offense from 2guard position. These r VERY comparable players to him in term of physique. It’s like Warriors fans are conditioned to think anyone over 6-4=Forward.
BTW I really question his handles. compare his turnovers to Iguodala and more so BRoy. It’s my only real worry bout him though. I’d love him here…
I’m just saying I’d want him next to Curry with another wing who is a little bigger an can hit 3s. I don’t want to be undersized!
Looks like I don't need to make another super draft thread
Well done and rec’d
One of the few to have appreciated Cap'n Jax. Do well in NC, get that 8th seed!
Conductor of the "We're Back!" Bandwagon!
If we had John Wall Instead of Steph tonight we would’ve still lost.If we had Evan Turner Brandan Roy wouldnt’ve gotten 41 points.
If we had John Wall Instead of Steph tonight we would’ve still lost.If we had Evan Turner Brandan Roy wouldnt’ve gotten 41 points?
If wishes were wings pigs would fly.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 11, 2010 10:58 PM PST up reply actions
That's a really bad way to look at it
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 2:17 AM PST up reply actions
I agree
it’s extremely pessimistic
Here's hoping 2010 is the end of our drought.
by Iwantwinners on Mar 14, 2010 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions
If we had Evan Turner Brandan Roy wouldnt’ve gotten 41 points.
If we had John Wall this is probably true, as well.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 7:30 AM PST up reply actions
Favors had a fantastic game tonight.
I’m still really high on him. Looking forward to watching Turner tomorrow morning.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 11, 2010 11:20 PM PST reply actions
Ya he destroyed UNC
I’d take him after Turner and Wall.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Can someone explain the Whiteside love to me?
I get the upside aspect, but he has a terrible attitude and is years away from having an NBA body. Does GS really need the defensive version of Anthony Randolph?
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 11, 2010 11:24 PM PST reply actions
Agreed Spider, with a high draft pick we can do better hopefully than a maybe future next Camby.
A great early second round pick to me.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 9:16 AM PST up reply actions
As a reply to many posts
I would like to make two points
PG Curry
SG Morrow
SF Turner
Although slightly undersized would be extremely offensively potent. Curry can create his own shot and play off the ball, as well as create for others. Morrow is a dead on shooter anywhere on the floor. With Turner’s slashing and passing ability there could be a veritable torrent of scoring for those three. Not just scoring but extremely efficient scoring.
If we just got a lock down defender and a post scorer down low our perimeter defense wouldn’t be as much of an issue. Giving up outside shots that have a lower chance of going in is far better than allowing a guy to muscle down low and score every single time, like pretty much every Warrior game lately.
With that being said if we can’t get Turner, Favors seems like a very interesting prospect, with some good passers I think he can do a lot of damage and he has the body to be good down low as soon as he gets some more legitimate NBA experience.
I would actually draft Turner #1 if we got that pick. I would use him at SG and at SF there is no reason to play him only at one position, different situations require different lineups. This is why every lineup needs versatility in the NBA. The Warriors don’t suck because of a lack of talent alone, they suck because they don’t have anyone that can rebound or defend down low right now. When Chris Hunter and Ronny Turiaf are your best true big men you are going to suck, not that either of them couldn’t be successful as role players with the right role on the team.
With Biedrins and Randolph out for the year the Warriors have no one to rebound. Even with Biedrins and Randolph the Warriors still get pushed around down low. In my opinion this is the Warriors biggest gap in competitiveness. Don Nelson’s inability to put two big guys on the floor has also hurt this year. It looks like he hasn’t been doing that because it makes the front court offensively inept.
I would actually draft Turner #1 if we got that pick.
Why?
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 7:31 AM PST up reply actions
There is still this whole “draft for need” mindset instead of “draft the best player and make it work” mindset.
"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."
Frank Zappa
On a team like ours the biggest "need" is the "best player available"
by freerandolph on Mar 12, 2010 6:26 PM PST up reply actions
I actually think that Turner might end up being just about as good as Wall
when it comes to team production. Individually Wall might end up putting together bigger numbers, but with that being said I think Turner will be better sooner and Wall will struggle with turnovers and efficient scoring in his first year or two.
by brutusbrutus on Mar 12, 2010 8:25 PM PST up reply actions
Being able to make a difference right away is not the top priority for us either.
Thats the top priority on a team that just needs that one more player who can make a difference, and help them reach the finals.
For us, we need the player who is going to have the best career. If that player has a good rookie season, great. I would love that. But if we pass up a really good player who has a really good career, for a good player who makes an immediate impact (maybe help us be close to a .500 team!) but doesn’t have as good of a career, I think that would be idiotic.
by freerandolph on Mar 13, 2010 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
if we pass up a really good player who has a really good career, for a good player who makes an immediate impact (maybe help us be close to a .500 team!) but doesn’t have as good of a career
That’s what brought us Dunleavey, he looked like he was more polished than Amare.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 13, 2010 3:50 PM PST up reply actions
we need the player who is going to have the best career
I agree that we probably want the guy that peaks higher, as opposed to how quickly they produce, but career is a bit long. No guarantee the player stays around that long – look at Cleveland, Toronto and Miami all worried about losing Lebron, Bosh and Wade (to different degrees, obviously). Long term thinking is good, but let’s not go too long term….
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Well by the time those guys are possibly leaving for free agency (and I personally can't see any of them actually leaving anyway...)
They have already reached pretty close to their peak level.
If their were two players in the draft and player A was good right away and sustained that for his career and player B wasn’t very good the first 8 years of his career but then became better than player A and went on to have a better career, then maybe it would be hard to choose which player to draft.
But that doesn’t really matter anyway because players don’t usually work like that. Usually the difference between the immediate contributors and the projects is 3 or so years to see which one is better, and thats what I’m taking about. I would rather have a player who becomes an allstar in his 4th year in the league and had a terrible rookie season than one who wins rookie of the year and never becomes an allstar.
by freerandolph on Mar 14, 2010 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Also you can't not draft a player you think you will be better because you're worried about him leaving in free agency...
by freerandolph on Mar 14, 2010 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I wasn’t disagreeing with your points, I get where you’re coming from and agreeing, just saying the long term point we should be looking at is 7 years or so, after that we can’t assume they’ll still be contributing for us. So the better question might be – who can contribute more to our franchise over a 7-8 year span? I’d lean towards whoever peaks higher, but it’s probably fair to at least give some consideration to the player who peaks lower but contributes quicker if he can contribute as much or more over 7-8 years cumulative.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
ok I see that
I just think that the answer to who will help us over 7-8 years and the answer to who will have the better career will be the same 99% of the time.
by freerandolph on Mar 14, 2010 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions
PG Curry SG Morrow SF Turner
I don’t know how bad Turner is at defense but those other two are pretty weak and More-o can’t handle well enough to play starter’s minutes. There’s a lot more to winning than a sweet 3 point stroke, if it worked that way everyone would play smallball but look around … thay don’t!
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 11:24 AM PST up reply actions
Agree with your basic concept except passing up Wall at the #1 and Favors as the big.
I would love to see more of Favors gms though, wish they were in the tourney. We also should not pass on Turner at the #2 but if we want defense were we need it most we should take Cousins at #3 if we have that. I would take Favors if we are #4 or #5 pick.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 9:23 AM PST up reply actions
Is there any way we could trade Maggs + Andris + Ellis for a Star SF and Favors AND getting lucky with the second pick in the draft??
Imagine:
Curry – Reggie Williams
Turner – Morrow
Star SF (Gay? Young? Granger?) – Buki
Randolph – Wright
Favors – Turiaf
(btw if you have not seen Favors play…he is really good…especially when you realize his team has NO POINT GUARD…if he had a PG, he would be infinitely better)
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
+1 on Favors
but seriously Maggette, Biedrins, and Ellis have a 25+ million dollars tied into them and no team on earth would trade for three contracts that size for one super star. It would effectively be trading the corner stones of a mediocre team, and tying much of the teams salary money into that would make your team mediocre.
Also +1 again for including Williams in the guard mix he seems to be a player we might want to keep around. He is far and away better than the others we called up this year. I don’t see Williams at point though.
by brutusbrutus on Mar 12, 2010 1:33 AM PST up reply actions
I don’t see Williams at point though?
haha, guess he had to put the new dollah store toy somewhere?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
He has the ability to run point
Why not go big?
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Getting rid of Maggs/Andris/Monta would mean taking bad contracts back as well.
Something like Iggy/Dalembert/Brand (I have no idea if that works salary wise, just an example).
It’s hard to move all those pieces in one deal.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 12, 2010 2:11 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think teams would want Maggette
he has a bad contract. To include him in a trade actually lowers the value of Andris and Monta.
Gay is hardly a star, by the way. He’s good and I like him, but he really isn’t a star and I don’t see him becoming one.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 2:19 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think anyone wants the players you listed...
I’d love to pry Granger from the Pacers. He’d be a great fit on the Warriors.
Favors is 6-9 or 6-10
He won’t be a center. Also I’d see if we could do Monta for Iggy if we were to trade him for a SF. I’d only trade him for a star 3 or a star 5
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Thats the thing about Favours,not a center, we need a low post C who can move to PF if needed
Along with staying with AB for a while. We would not get much in a trade for him in the near future and he can still return to form but he is not the complete answer there.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 9:33 AM PST up reply actions
Favors is listed at 6'10 247....He's 18 or 19...He has room to grow...I think his NBA hight @ 6'11 265
That’s a perfect size for either C or PF……I would take him @ # 4….
For those that doubt that we should take Evan Turner over John Wall with any pick plz go on ESPN.com right now and watch Ohio State play Michigan or Turn 2 Espn and watch the game.We should focus on what to do with our second round pick. Should we Take Craig Brackins or Jerome Jordan?
And you should go watch Wall
he’s a college freshman and already can take over games. It’s pretty crazy.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
I have a clearcut top 4
Wall, Turner, Cousins, Wesley Johnson
If we drop to the #5 or 56spot ( a situation all too likely considering typical Warrior luck) THEN you pick for need and go with the best 4/5.
And there is a guy who will probably be available at #10 or so if they trade away their pick who reminds of Buck Williams (a near flawless 6’8 PF), Patrick Patterson
You clearly have not watched Favors play...
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Do you like him just because of the one good game that you keep referencing?
by freerandolph on Mar 12, 2010 6:29 PM PST up reply actions
no, because I like Bosh
and this is out only chance at a Bosh type center LOL.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
and this is out only chance at a Bosh
haha, rebound romances are so sad :>(
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 8:34 PM PST up reply actions
If we could draft John Wall who goes Monta or Curry ?
Wouldn’t it have to be Curry, being that he has more value than Monta? And Monta at least has a chance at guarding 2s if Wall can’t do it every night.
I like curry, he seems like he wants to be here.
Monta i don’t know sometimes.
If we could draft John Wall who goes Monta or Curry ?
I don’t know but it would be a situation we would enjoy. Shop them both and see who brings the best offer? The possibilities are endless.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
no doubt
it gives them a chance to upgrade in two areas, and not just one. Only thing is the warriors FO doesn’t give me much confidence, they might be the best team at giving away leverage, and devaluing assets.
by Duh Duh Man on Mar 12, 2010 11:59 AM PST up reply actions
they might be the best team at giving away leverage, and devaluing assets.
haha, Bellini, Jax, and JC exhibits 1,2,3 ?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
Absolutely..
It would be a refreshing change to have a glut of talent. Have they ever had power at the negotiation table?
Monta
I’d be willing to bet on it
Here's hoping 2010 is the end of our drought.
by Iwantwinners on Mar 14, 2010 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I’d be willing to bet on it
haha, carefull ! Our front office works in strange ways.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 14, 2010 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Don't forget Greg Monroe
That guy can play. He was 3 assists shy of a triple-double yesterday against Syracuse while Syracuse’s defense was completely geared up to stop him. The reason I think he’s intriguing, apart from being a GTown fan, is that Monroe has the passing skills and sweet jump shot that make him unique at the 4. He also has size. He has a lot of Chris Webber in his game. Having him on the Warriors would allow our other bigs like Biedrins, Randolph and Wright, who lack a consistent jump shot, to play at the same time.
I didn’t watch the ‘Cuse game, but I find it curious that you say their defense was completely geared to stop them. My roommate is a big ’Cuse fan, so I’ve seen them plenty this year – between their lack of depth at big man and the zone they play, their weakness this year has generally been stopping big men, and their zone generally doesn’t prevent a good big man from being effective…..
So I guess my questions are what were they doing to try to stop Monroe, and what did Monroe do to be so effective, and what does it say about him as an NBA prospect?
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 11:41 AM PST up reply actions
Passing
The Orange would double or even triple team Monroe down low forcing him to pass, something he’s really good at. It’s why he had 7 assists. If I were to say what I think Monroe’s greatest strength is I think it’s passing, and if I were to say his greatest weakness it’s that he’s too unselfish. They’re different sides of the same coin and i think it’s a “problem” the Warriors could use, given how many players on the team have an easy time scoring and a hard time making others look better.
I agree that Syracuse plays a short, 7-man rotation. I don’t know about them having trouble with big guys, but I don’t know their team well enough to have an informed opinion. I know from watching them this year, though, that their overall defense is tremendous and their team is extremely big and athletic. I think they have a chance to win it all this year.
I know from watching them this year, though, that their overall defense is tremendous and their team is extremely big and athletic. I think they have a chance to win it all this year.
Definitely, they’re a very good defensive team, for the first time since ’Melo they really have the ideal personnel in terms of length/athleticism and their forwards being combo guys who can guard the wing and guard most players down low, but in general, other than Onuaku, none of the guys are really bangers capable of guarding a guy like Monroe. I see a potential championship run lead by their D, too.
Did Monroe flash to the high post at all? I could see him being effective up there – not a scoring threat, but with his size both to receive the ball and create passing lanes and his passing ability, it could open up the court against that zone.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 2:04 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with most of what you’re saying. Monroe, though, is a really good shooter and should be considered a potent scoring threat. It’s more his approach to the game than a lack of ability, I think, as far as why he’s not more dominant scoring the ball. Also, GTown plays a Princteon-style offense which can probably be limiting to some players. These are a few reasons why I think he’s going to be a better pro than college player.
Interesting how Monroe was talked about so much in the 09 draft then nothing this year.
Perhaps because 09 was low on bigs and he did not come out. There is a buzz starting again after his play in the T.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
I don’t know about him doing nothing this year. He was first team All Big East in a year when the Big East was far and away the most dominant conference. Hoyas are now playing in Big East Tournament finals, largely b/c of Monroe.
Thx neon, I wasnt being critical of Monroe, just wondering why the hype machine wasnt pushing him.
Since he had a lot of it last year. Looking forward to watching him in the T.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
Monroe will be taken in the lottery.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
And if the Warriors were to get Wall of course Curry would have to be the 1 that Goes.It wouldnt make sense to play Steph or Wall at the 2 spot.
It wouldnt make sense to play Steph or Wall at the 2 spot.
Why not? Wade and Lebron are very good distributors, and they play the wing. Jordan was a very good distributor. Hornacek and Dumars were, too, and they were effective next to HoF PG’s. Having too many distributors is never a problem – the problem is when you have too few.
Also, I’m still wondering how being a better college player (just under the assumption that Turner is) makes Turner a better NBA prospect than Wall….
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 11:38 AM PST up reply actions
If you put Steph or Wall at the 2 spot every night you are begging for what happened last night with Brandon Roy to happen nightly.
Except that Wall isn’t remotely like Steph or Monta. He’s taller, more athletic, and by all accounts seems much, much longer (we’ll have to wait for combine numbers to confirm whether this is true or not). He seems like he has the frame to get bigger. Essentially, you could be looking at a similar guy to Wade in terms of his size, length, strength and athleticism. He projects to be a very good defensive player. No, it’s not like what happened last night at all, we’ll actually have a good defensive player with the size you want to guard a SG.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 1:12 PM PST up reply actions
He is 1 inch Taller than Curry and Ellis.And by no means does he have a D-Wade Frame.Its only 1 guy in the league who can be effective at 6’4 playing the 2 on both ends of the floor and thats D-Wade.Wade was bigger than Wall is his rookie season.Yes i know we play Monta at the 2 right now and we would be in the same boat that we are in now if we had Wall.
Well, keep in mind Wall is a freshman. He’s 19, he has physical development left. It’s about projecting where he’s going to be in the future. He’s already listed as 20 pounds heavier than Ellis, he’s got better lateral quickness, and Ellis has stubby little T-Rex arms (Curry does too, but slightly less T-Rex than Monta), whereas Wall doesn’t. It makes a big difference. Throw 10-15 pounds on Wall and he’s basically Wade, and that’s not uncommon for a 19 year old kid with a good frame to be able to do that.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 1:21 PM PST up reply actions
I think i would like develop Wall like a SG if we were to acquire. When Wade entered the league, all projections were of him being a great scoring point guard. After that didn’t seem to work so well, he moved to SG, and his passing became elite for that position and he was able to work off the ball better. Wall and Wade seem like pretty comparable papers.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
I think i would like develop Wall like a SG if we were to acquire.
I can see Stef and Wall working together, a shooter and a driver, finesse and power,uptown and downtown, preacher and pimp, hiphop and rap, chardonnay and remy, etc,etc… here and there.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 8:47 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, I think that's one thing working in their favor.
Wall already plays great next to a legit college PG (Bledsoe). I think Wall’s game will transcend better to the NBA. He has elite quickness, athleticism, and a good handle. If he works at it, he should get a legit jumpshot. I like and think a Curry/Wall backcourt could be one of the better ones in the league. Definite thunder/lightning kind of approach.
The one caveat would be that if we were to hypothetically take Wall, then I would trade Monta. It’s a tough decision, but I just can’t see giving up Curry when he’s already done an amazing job transitioning into the NBA. And at PG, no less. It is an amazing feat.
I’d trade Monta for a decent rebounding SF. Hopefully with 3pt range and defending ability.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
I’d trade Monta for a decent rebounding SF. Hopefully with 3pt range and defending ability.?
Does Memphis have someone like that? or Charlotte? If we could put together a deal with a team that really wants Montay or Stef we could get better value. Maybe even a three way trade with another team that has the SF we need?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 13, 2010 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
There is no way for me to prove Turner would be a better NBA prospect than Wall.I just watch both players and imagine their potential.I can see Turner’s game translating to the NBA much better than i can Wall’s.And I know which pick would be better for this Warriors team and its Turner.But with our luck we’ll probably end up with a Unhappy Cousins at the 4th pick.
I’m not looking for proof, don’t worry, just trying to have a discussion of opinions with people who have different viewpoints. I like specifics – what about Turner is going to translate better to the NBA? How do you account for the age difference? What do you look for in a prospect, how do they stack up? I’m just trying to get to the bottom of where your viewpoint is coming from, especially since it’s different than most others, and I just like in depth discussions on these kinds of things…..
As for Tunrer being a better fit – I can see that, but it all depends on how good they end up being. If Turner is a solid player and John Wall is a superstar, well…..screw fit, we need the talent, if they end up being similar talents, I probably would rather have Turner. I just don’t see them being similar talents because Wall has special athleticism, the type you see in superstars, and is already a very good player as a freshman, passes well, has no problem blowing by guys in half court or transition, and his weaknesses are generally things players can improve substantially – like shooting, whereas his strengths are things that set him apart from most players, like his athleticism. That’s a big time prospect. I don’t know much about Turner, but I would expect a good prospect to dominate college as a junior, and I haven’t heard anything about him that makes him a good prospect other than how good he is right now. It just seems like the difference between a Wade type prospect and a Brandon Roy type prospect. I’d love Roy, but Wade is on a whole different level.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 1:19 PM PST up reply actions
You do realize that’s just an opinion right? Comparing their final seasons….
Roy’s final two seasons of college ball, TS% 61%, Turner’s last two have been at 59%. Roy is a much better shooter (primarily from the 3 pt range & at the FT line).
Roy’s asst to tov ratio 1.8 vs Turner’s is 1.5. Roy was a better decision maker.
Roy didn’t need to have the ball in his hands all the time 22% usage to Turner’s 28% and fouled a lot less. They both got around 2 steals per 40 & 1 block per 40.
Turner’s rebounding #‘s per minute are much better (10.8 per 40), but before this season, they were about the same as Roy’s (Turner had 6.5 rebs/40 as a fresh, 7.8 per 40 as a sophmore, Roy was 6.8, 7.0, 8.2 & 7.1 per 40 in his 4 seasons). The sudden jump could be a result of playing a different position on defense (like say defending PFs instead of SFs or SGs).
#‘s wise, Roy > Turner. What slowed down Roy in college was that prior to his senior year, his usage #’s were incredibly low (8.6, 16.5, 14.2). For comparison CJ has a 15.7% usage rate, Tolliver a 16.2%, Devean George 13.2%. So basically he was way too unselfish in college & that hurt his base stats like pts per game, assts per game, etc.,.
by homer simpson on Mar 12, 2010 2:39 PM PST up reply actions
#‘s wise, Roy > Turner
I’m not sure I’m really seeing that, honestly. Turner’s racking up 2 more assists per game than Roy did as a senior, scoring the same amount at a similar efficiency (slightly less as you pointed out), but most importantly, rebounding way more, and even last year collected over 7 boards a game. Especially considering the strong correlation between rebounding and NBA success (causation for this is unclear, but it may be due to things like athleticism, desire, and other common variables that translate to NBA success), it seems the big gap in their rebounding numbers might be a very good sign for Turner.
*Turner averaged 35 minutes a game this year compared to just under 32 for Roy as a senior.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Turner’s assist #’s are all usage related.
Statistically, for whatever reason (system, better supporting cast, low post presence, whatever), Roy was not ball dominant in college. Turner is. It’s like when Monta was leading the team in assists over Curry even though Curry’s ratio is much better.
the red flag in the rebounding #‘s is that it’s a 1 year thing. prior, his rebounding per 40 was no better than Roy’s. this season he’s seen a huge jump – the ? is why? if you look closer, it’s his defensive rebounding that has gone from 5.9 per 40 to 8.6 per 40. sometimes this happens when a player goes from playing SF to PF on defense for instance or a team plays a 2-3 zone & a player goes from playing up top to down low (Terrence Williams).
the gap would be a good sign if it were a career gap. but it’s not. it’s a 1 year anomaly that could be a positive; but it could also be a deceiving positive that doesn’t reflect his true prowess at the NBA level.
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions
We'll see, I guess.
Roy was easily the better prospect in my opinion, but I watched him play every game of his career at UW so I’m unsurprised by his success.
Turner, right now, is incredibly unpolished as an offensive player, while Roy already had a very advanced off-hand, and 5 or 6 go-to moves that easily translated to the NBA. Roy, like all the great scorers, had his spots on the floor he wanted to get to, and the advanced ball-handling skills (as well as the athleticism) to get there and finish.
I don’t see that from Turner.
In terms of smarts, savvy and general poise, they’re very comparable. I see the same even keel, unflappable, steady demeanor in Turner that Roy had, but not quite the skill level or athletic ability.
I’m struggling to see how he’ll be an impact player in the NBA.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 12, 2010 8:42 PM PST up reply actions
Just talking about Turner/Wall in terms of being NBA prospects – Wall isn’t anywhere close to Wade right now, either.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
I know what you meant, but I don't think Turner is that type of prospect.
Roy was criminally underrated coming out of UW (as was Wade). Turner is approaching very overrated at this point.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 12, 2010 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe we'll find out there's only one Roy-like player. Roy.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Also what Makes you Guys Think Larry Riley isnt capable of making a good decision when it comes to the draft? Do u have any examples that he cant draft wisely? Im not on the bandwagon of saying he is doing a bad job.We have Steph here and he refused 2 trade him when half of the bay wanted him traded for Amare.I think he’ll make a good choice at whatever slot we get in the draft.If he can find good D-Leaguers i cant see why he cant find good college players.
Do u have any examples that he cant draft wisely?
Riley was director of player personnel for 6 seasons ‘94-’00 & 5 drafts. In those 5 drafts they drafted Bryant “Big Country” Reeves 6th overall, Abdur-Rahim 3rd overall & Roy Rogers 22nd, Antonio Daniels 4th overall, Bibby 2nd overall, Steve Francis 2nd overall (traded for Michael Dickerson, Othella Harrington, Antoine Carr, Brent Price, plus 1st and 2nd-round picks)
In his defense, the W’s drafted Joe Smith, Todd Fuller, Adonal Foyle, (Antawn Jamison) & traded the #10 pick for Mookie Blaylock & #21 for Vonteego Cummings.
But just like the W’s, he missed out on some superstar players for some primarily support cast type players.
And Stu Jackson was the Team President at the time, so Riley was probably more like Higgins was for Mullin.
by homer simpson on Mar 12, 2010 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
I honestly don’t follow college enough to have a good feel for that. I wish we had taken a flier on Blair last year, that would have been nice. He’s still a huge injury risk, but for that kind of production, who cares? Assuming we don’t take someone like Cousins, I think we should look for a big that can play some low post D and rebounds well. College rebounding rate seems to be a very good predictor of how a guy will rebound in the NBA, and more than that, correlates well with overall success. That’s how you find guys like Millsap, Landry, Blair (though he was a lottery pick other than the injury issues)…..seems like a no risk strategy, and we could definitely use that kind of player if they pan out.
by Missing Barry on Mar 12, 2010 1:24 PM PST up reply actions
This team is cheap.
They wouldn’t have bought the requisite pick to take Blair. Even if I wished upon a star to make it happen.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
If Ws Draft Turner...
By a lot of accounts (Steinmetz being one who has heard this from “insiders”) Turner may actually be best suited as a PG. I see (my opinion only, but I’d like to get other takes) the following 2 options as maybe the best going forward:
1) Monta and Curry both stay. Ws can play either of them with Turner (Curry at 1 when Ellis or Turner on bench, Turner at 1 when Curry on bench) or have a “small ball ish” lineup of Turner at the 3. This allows Watson to play as the 4th guard/energy guy off the bench (probably the type of role he will flourish in the most). Attempt to trade Maggette for anything that will help down low (probably would have to package him with either Wright or Randolph to get something valuable, keep whoever they deem is better).
2) Trade Curry+Maggette for an impact 4. Now, this is not to say that Monta is better than Curry, that’s an argument for a different time. By a lot of accounts though, Curry is considerably more valuable than Monta, and plays a rarer position at less money. You may be able to get much more with him on the block. IF Turner is actually a solid PG, you can have Monta shift back to the 2 on offense and guard the other team’s PG. Turner is said to be a solid defender and can guard 2s and 3s. Watson stays as the 3rd guard to spell either of them.
In both scenarios, Buike plays heavy minutes at the 3 (if he comes back healthy, I like his overall game and defense miles more than Maggette, especially considering the contract).
Thoughts?
If we get Turner, we trade Monta for an impact SF.
Curry
Turner
SF
AR
Andris
also, maybe we can try to make a move for Favors with Andris and Maggs contracts…Get Favors + a bad contract.
Curry
Turner
SF (Granger/Thaddeus Young/Iggy/etc)
AR
Favors
I think Favors would be a perfect fit on an up tempo team with a passing PG like Curry, I just hope we can make a move to get Favors and Turner somehow (with luck).
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Why?
Turner can easily be a 3 and is currently on OSU playing point on offense and a lot of time at F at OSU. Curry, Ellis and Turner together would be fantastic. Ellis wouldn’t have to handle, we get another slasher which we need since we are too perimeter oriented. That would basically be Baron, Monta and Jack all over again but better and younger (I know Steph isn’t as big as Baron but you get my point). It’d be similar but better. More potential, more energy, less turnovers (Which Steph still has an issue with, but that will pass) and best of all establishes a more clear plan for the team. Youth movement, acquire young talent and stockpile it
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
You really don't think
Turner at the 2 would be FAR better?
Bigger team!
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Not really
Cause than Buike who is small for a 3 would start anyway cause we won’t get a star 3 for Monta. Defensively ET has no issue guarding 3’s and Monta with lesser minutes could definately guard a lot of 2’s with the exception of guys like Kobe and Wade and maybe Joe Johnson (who some say is a natural 3). Also on offense ET at the 2 doesn’t create mismatches and is much more predictable than him at SF
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
We don't need a star 3
just an impact 3 like Deng or Gay.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:30 PM PST up reply actions
Both work fine
I wouldn’t mind a star though…
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I agree.There is only 2 maybe 3 small forwards i can see Turner having a problem guarding but those are the same 3 every forward in the league have problems guarding.With this lineup next year the dubs have the 6th spot in the playoffs next year.
C-Biedrins
PF-Wright
SF-Turner
SG-Ellis
PG-Curry
Coming off the bench
C Jerome Jordan Azubuike
PF-Randolph
SF
Sg- Bell-Morrow
PG-Watson
We can trade Maggette and Turiaf for a Grilled Chicken Sandwich Imo.
I just eyeballed a list of NBA small forwards
I could see Turner having trouble with half of them. I’d have to see Turner’s actual weight and length (at the combine) before I make a decision on some of the borderline guys, but it could be like play BRoy at the 3.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:31 PM PST up reply actions
He's reportedly a lot longer than Roy and maybe taller
I seem him having trouble with LBJ,Melo,Pierce,Granger and KD mainly. Those guys are just too strong and KD is just so good. He’s considered to be a guy who will be an amazing defender at this level at three different positions as well
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well
he’s like 6’7", 205-210 and long, which I believe to be true. He might just be 6’6", but he isn’t especially strong. I could also see him having trouble with Gerald Wallace, Rudy Gay, Iggy, and even Deng (kind of a stretch on Deng.)
But this is all idle speculation- I want to see his physical stats at the draft combine before I make any big decisions based on his body.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:41 PM PST up reply actions
I can see Wallace and Iggy being issues
Gay and Deng though are probably not the biggest of issues cause both are very perimeter oriented and not very strong and are predictable. I can see him gaining a couple pounds get to 215-220 in the NBA also
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I could see him getting to the low 210s as well
Gay is 6’8" with a 7’3" wingspan and was 222 when he came into the NBA. He’s also super athletic. He’s at least 230 now. He’s big, fast, athletic and has a good outside shot.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:48 PM PST up reply actions
Gay is very perimeter oriented
If he went in more he’d be an issue, I still think he could be an issue but not so bad that ET couldn’t even stand a chance against him.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I know Steph isn’t as big as Baron but you get my point?
that he’s too small to be " a beard"?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 8:53 PM PST up reply actions
Maggette's contract is a bad one
so it’s not like Curry + Maggette=more talent than just Curry.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:29 PM PST up reply actions
Definitely agree about the bad contract. But adding Maggette has really very little to do with adding talent.
But, if the Ws are going to give up a potential start PG still on the 2nd year of his rookie contract, they are going to expect for/likely get something pretty good in return. And likely, that good player will probably be getting paid somewhere in the 10-14 million range. In order for it to work, the salaries would have to match up, hence adding Maggette. Plus, you can leverage the other team by having them take Maggette if they want Curry.
Well
I still think that Maggette is the wrong contract to add to do that. Sure, he has a big contract that gets you to the $10-11 million range, but he also has a really bad contract that no one wants. Even Bad Vlad has a better contract.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:57 PM PST up reply actions
Got ya. I agree it would be an easier sell to get rid of Vlad’s contract. But, if the other team really wants Curry, thats big leverage to allow them to get rid of Maggette’s contract.
Obviously all of this is a big if and neither of us has any insight as to their plans.
if the other team really wants Curry, thats big leverage
definitely, if we got wall we’d be able to either leverage Stef for a great bigger player or keep him if they don’t want to pay up. We’d be in a can’t lose situation. Sorta opposite our present can’t win situation I guess?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 8:58 PM PST up reply actions
Can't lose situation?
Whaa..? that sentence and the Warriors don’t compute.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Sorry but what Impact SF can you see being traded for Maggette? If we can move Mags it would be for garbage Expiring contracts.
Thats why you package him with Andris.
Andris + Maggs for SF + Favors pick.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
TRADING THE PICK AS AN OPTION....
Being that we have a young and raw team on our hands, is another young and raw player really what we need? 4 of our current starting 5 are age 24 or below. Plus I’m guessing Jersey and Minny are drafting Wall and Turner respectively.
Maybe a team like Indiana would take the #3 pick along with Maggette, and Azubuike or Morrow for Danny Granger? Indiana hook up again? Maggette has a cheaper contract than Granger for the same amount of years plus they would get a high pick and a solid young SG.
Or we could trade Monta for Granger straight up, but I really like the idea of Curry, Ellis, and Granger.
Staying with Indy, I do believe there is a significant drop off in talent after Turner and Wall, so I don’t think we would be missing much if we traded the pick for Dunleavy straight up, maybe throw Radman in their to clear some cap space. I know, I know, ‘Dunleavy? That fool sucks!’ The thing is he has improved tremendously, especially on the defensive end, he can also handle the ball well too. So given the fact that we’re so young and raw, giving up a #3 pick that will probably end up being another raw, undeveloped, player with an uncertain outcome, for a player who can give us exactly what we expect is a solid trade to me. Plus Mike D off the bench allows Nellie to mess around with small ball like no other.
Other players worth inquiring about while using the pick as trade bait:
Iguodala for a similar package proposed to get Granger.
Maggette and the pick for Kirilenko. We have to throw in another contract to make it work, maybe Radman is enough
These are just some random thoughts. Keeping the pick and Maggette is still a good option. I think this team, when healthy, can more than compete for the final couple playoff spots in the West. But if trades like these are possible, we have to execute them.
I wouldn’t trade the pick for Kirilenko…but the other two would be possible.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Yeah, and actually the more I think about it, Monta for Granger straight up would be pretty cool.
Curry/Watson or Jerome Randle?
Azubuike or Morrow
Granger/Maggette
Wright/Randolph
Andris/Ronny
Or Start Maggette and Granger at the SG spot. That lineup is probably a little better defensively, and we don’t lose too much on the offense
Naw the lineup would be:
Curry – Reggie Williams
Turner – Morrow
Granger – Buki
AR – Wright
Favors – Ronny
(Well, maybe not the Favors part…just a dream that we trade someone like maggs for his pick)
Also, I don’t think we’d be able to get granger for Ellis strait up. I think we’d have to do Ellis + Andris or Ellis + Maggs.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Ellis + Andris for Granger is very iffy
Danny is essentially on the same level as Monta. Great young player but can’t lead a team. I’d shop around Beans +Maggs+Vlad (he will be a big expiring next year) and try to get a SF if we end up with a big.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
LOL
As much as I defend and love Monta, Granger is far and away a better player.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Based on what?
He’s the best player on a team slightly better than us. He’s not a very good passer, on defense he’s above average but nothing great and like Monta can’t be a number 1 guy. He scores more efficiently cause he is used well as an off ball guy running off screens and posing up.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well
Granger has good size for his position, is a great outside shooter, and can score efficiently while being a number one option. Even if he shouldn’t be a number one option, he has been pretty good at it. His TS% this season is basically average while putting up 23 PPG. That is more valuable than Monta’s 25.something PPG at below average TS%. Last season, Granger had a TS% of 58 (Monta’s career best) while putting up 25.8 PPG in a slightly slower pace (102 GS vs 100 IND).
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
He's not a good 1st option
He may be efficient but it doesn’t translate into wins. Similar in a way to how Kevin Martin statistically speaking could be a good 1st option but in reality isn’t. I’m not doubting he’s a great player but he’s on the same level as Monta in terms of skill, ability to help a team win (neither can be a 1st option on a good team but great 2nd ones) and on defense Granger seems to get really lazy. He could be great if he put in the effort on that end. Also I think the year Monta’s TS was the year we saw him turning into a beast off the ball. If we had him play the same role he used to currently I think he could easily still average 23-25 a game
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well
I think Monta is more like a 3rd option and Granger is more like a 2nd option, unless he also had a player about as good as himself with him, if that makes sense. Granger isn’t a top tier star.
Monta’s TS was at 58% was when he was a third option and only took 15 shots a game. Granger had that TS% at 19 shots.
I think Granger is a better player in a large part because of his size. He’s big for his position rather than small.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:46 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not sure how size makes someone better
If were talking how useful someone can be size is a great bonus, but as a player which would take in skill I think there about even. Also I’d argue Monta now can easily be a 2nd option off the ball. With an improved outside jump shot and somehow being able to post up now (not a lot but still is pretty effective when we do) he could be a 2nd option. Not saying he’s a great post up guy but has added to his game a little bit
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Size makes someone better
because it doesn’t put them at a disadvantage. That’d be like saying “I don’t see why speed makes someone better” or “I don’t see why having a jumpshot makes someone better.”
Monta is an undersized player, Granger is big for his position. All else being equal, I would always take the big player.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 10:03 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not sure how size makes someone better
cause the basket is up high and everyone is trying to get in position to put a ball in it? If it was done with the basket on the floor and one guy at a time on the court then size wouldn’t matter much.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 10:24 PM PST up reply actions
Based on:
He is higher efficiency.
He has a better jumper.
He is better from long range.
He is bigger.
He is a FAR better defender.
Yes, I love Ellis, but Granger is significantly better on the defensive end.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
He is higher efficiency. – Monta can be just as efficient when off the ball (stats do show this)
He has a better jumper. – From three?Yes. Mid range? I’d say Monta
He is better from long range. – Yes
He is bigger. – Not sure how it makes him better as much as it just means that he can guard bigger guys like 3’s and some 4’s.Monta doesn’t guard those guys. It’s too different in contrast to really determine how much of a difference that makes, especially since they play different positions
He is a FAR better defender. – False, he gets lazy on defense and Monta is very underrated as a defender. How can I tell? Expert writers have called him a very good defender, some players have called him a good defender (Shaq at one point called him a top 7 guard)and even if you don’t agree with them he is a ball hawk. And like my above point they play different spots so you can’t really tell who truly is a better defender since guarding a guard is much different than guarding a forward.
I still say there in the same tier of players
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
But Granger is high efficiency at high volume
while Monta was only high efficiency at low volume.
Just checked the stats- from 10-15 feet out, Granger has a slight advantage. From 16-23 feet out, Monta has a slight advantage. In years past, Granger was much better from 16-23 feet out, even compared to Monta in 08. Besides, that is a bad shot to take.
Again- having good size for your position is important. You may not see it because us Warriors fans have to deal with crap undersized lineups. Monta guarding 2s is similar to Maggette guarding 4s.
You overrate Monta’s defense. He takes as many plays off as Granger. I’m not gonna say that Granger is a good defender, but he is big so he can’t get posted up very easily. I also don’t trust Shaq’s opinion for much, especially regarding things like that because people will arbitrarily say top x without really thinking of it. Monta may be a top 7 guard (after CP3, DWill, Nash, Kobe, BRoy, Wade… Rondo, Billups, Johnson.. more like top 10 guard), but Granger is a top 4 small forward.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 10:11 PM PST up reply actions
I think you underrate his defense
So it’s somewhere in between our to opinions. The size thing can’t be compared to a good jump shot like you said above since that is a skill and not a physical trait. You can be a good player regardless of size for your certain position. It’s tough to compare to guys of different positions that are so vastly different from each other. It’s like asking who’s better DWill or Bosh? You can’t really compare the two very well. Also I wouldn’t be surprised if Monta is just exhausted from all his minutes. That can affect someones overall play, usually a player will hoof it on defense if there tired more so than offense. Not an excuse but is possible. I feel like if he played around 35 minutes a game his overall play and energy would be much much higher
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well
I’m not trying to say that Monta is a bad defender, and I think if he got the opportunity to defender players his size he could be a good defender. He’s done a passable job on guys bigger than him, but in lots of games he’s just gotten rocked, like last night against the Blazers. I just pulled up his position stats for SG at 82games.com. His eFG% has been 0.477, which is kinda bad. He has allowed his match up to have an eFG% of 0.533, which is pretty great. Average for 2s is 0.498.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 1:59 AM PST up reply actions
Based on what?
Wasn’t he actually an allstar once?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 8:59 PM PST up reply actions
Being an all star doesn't prove much
It’s a popularity contest, and he’s in the east so it’s really easy to get into compared to the west
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Uh
Only the top 5 is a popularity contest. The next 7 guys is based on performance.
Monta would only have to compete with Wade, Johnson, Rondo and DRose in the East. As long as he was on a winning team, he could be the 5th guard on the team. In the West, he doesn’t have a shot because there is one more top quality guard.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 10:12 PM PST up reply actions
I'd say if Monta were in the east
He makes the all star game, in the west you need to be a winner. In the east not so much
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Just about everyone who was named to the All Star game this year
was on a winner. DRose was on a borderline .500 team and he was the only one.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 2:01 AM PST up reply actions
Before they were announced
I don’t think Rose was playing like an all star, now he is but not then.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well
when he was named to the team, he had been on a tear for about 3 weeks, so that was a big part of his selection. Who else did he have to compete with anyway?
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 5:12 PM PST up reply actions
Being an all star doesn't prove much
It proves more than being a reject for the 3rd backup slot?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 10:27 PM PST up reply actions
I'd love it, but the Pacers would never do it.
That’s why I hypothesized in a “what if” dream. what if we got the #1 pick and the Pacers got the #2, and we traded down for Turner, in exchange for swapping Monta for Granger. The Pacers being so weak in the back court, may be more motivated than us to get a superstar point guard. That move with Turner at the 2 and Granger at the 3 could be just what we’ve waiting for.
by War Years Legacy on Mar 12, 2010 7:00 PM PST up reply actions
I know I'd be happy
As long as we get rid off maggette too.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
The thing is he has improved tremendously
There’s no way he can improve that personality to the point that warriors fans would want him back. Even if we were guaranteed a ring with Dunleavey or a last place finish with JarretJack I’d take Jack :>)
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
I would draft Wall if we got the first
Wall is a must draft, a star in the making. I don’t care about who we got or who we need to trade, Wall is a must have player if we got the first the overall pick. Besides that, I hope we can trade Ellis for Al Jefferson. AR is overhyped by most fans in here, the kid is good but he is not a Lamar Odom or KG, let’s not overhype AR. He has far more weaknesses and I don’t believe he will ever gain the weight needed to defend Gasol, Nowitizki, Milsap, Amare, etc. Matter fact I think Dejuan Blair will kill him in the post. He is hustle player at best. What the Warriors need is a beefy PF/C who can score 20 and grab 10 rebounds. Al Jefferson is young guy who might be available if we offer them Ellis and some other fillers. Here is the lineup I would like to see for next year.
Curry – CJ
Wall – Ammo
Buike – Maggette
Al Jefferson – Wright
Beans – Turiaf
I think this lineup would make us a better team.
Waaaarriors
Al Jefferson?
The guy is Maggette as a power forward. Just without the whole getting the free throw line a lot part.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well that's just it
if Al Jefferson was like Maggette, he’d be Amar’e Stoudemire.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:37 PM PST up reply actions
I think this lineup would make us a better team.
I don’t know, our D leaguers are pretty good.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 9:02 PM PST up reply actions
Now, most of what you say I agree with….actually, everything except your example – Al Jefferson. I buy into your premise of trading for a better PF, it’s just Jefferson isn’t the right guy to go after because he isn’t very good.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions
There is no GM in the League that u can say always drafts Good players.And u cant say the Warriors are Cheap if you are crying about Maggette’s contract being too much to move him.Biedrins,Mags and Monta are examples the Warriors aint cheap.So is Stephen Jackson.They dont mind paying but the problem is they have to overpay because FA’s dont want to come here.When Steph’s contract expires he wont have a hard time getting the warriors to resign him if he wants to stay.
In that case
Wesley Johnson, Whiteside or Cousins. Whichever one falls we grab
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Wesley Johnson, Whiteside or Cousins. Whichever one falls we grab
haha, Nellie’s already got his eye on some beanpole PF or scrawny PG that can shoot 3’s. No hope for you !!
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 9:05 PM PST up reply actions
Actually
the 6th pick is worst case.
If we get the 5th pick, I’d like to see us getting Wesley Johnson I think.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 7:37 PM PST up reply actions
1) Wall
2) Turner
3) Favors
4) Cousins/Whiteside/Turner
5) Cousins/Whiteside/Turner
6) Cousins/Whiteside/Turner
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
OOPS
By Turner on the 4/5/6 I meant Johnson
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Sounds good
But at 3 I think it should be expanded to Favors/Johnson/Whiteside/Cousins. This draft is locked up in the top 2 spots, the rest is completely up in the air
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Me neither but he should be looked at
Can’t rule anyone out before all the workouts and interviews
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I'g big on Cousins.
Everyone says he “needs to be in a half court system”. I say nuts to that.
You don’t need to run a 5 man fast break. Cousins is a good outlet passer. He’s even attempted and completed some Kevin Love-like 3/4 heaves. He needs to get conditioned, but I think if we drafted him, Nellie would force him to a treadmill.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
I'm worried about his supposed attitude problems
I don’t think Nellie would try to coach him. I’m also not big on getting another big because what kind of message does that send to Randolph?
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 2:02 AM PST up reply actions
Nellie’s would only be the head coach for his rookie season & player development is Rico Hines’ department.
Randolph is not good enough for people to be worrying about his feelings getting hurt. He should be thrilled that he wouldn’t have to guard C’s since Cousins is at least 270 lbs.
Cousins’ attitude is less of a problem than whether he understands his limitations. Like Randolph, he occasionally seems to think he can dribble, gamble unnecessary for steals, play make & shoot 22 foot jumpers – even though he’s much more effective when he keeps his big body in between the post up player & the basket and either posts up or stays near the paint. on the flip side, he understands his limitations much, much better than Randolph, actually has a post up game (it’s limited, but light years ahead of anything AR has shown) & the NBA body to work in the post at both ends.
if anything the W’s need more bigs. In recent drafts, SGs like Tyreke Evans, Eric Gordon, James Harden weigh more than AR & BW. even Maggette & Buike weigh more than those 2. If Lebron were a Warrior, he would be the biggest guy weight wise on the team. doubt there is any other team that could make that claim (unless you don’t count Eddy Curry as a Knicks player).
by homer simpson on Mar 13, 2010 8:16 AM PST up reply actions
Randolph is not good enough for people to be worrying about his feelings getting hurt.
I guess that’s true.
If Lebron were a Warrior, he would be the biggest guy weight wise on the team.
I think that would be true for more than half of the teams in the NBA.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
I think that would be true for more than half of the teams in the NBA.
every team in the NBA has someone who is listed at a higher weight than Lebron except the Warriors. The Warriors are the only team in the NBA w/o someone listed over 250 lbs.
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
I was under the impression that he has grown
since he was 18. I think there is a thought that he is, in fact, much bigger than his listed weight.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 14, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah, lebron was 245 at the combine, he’s probably somewhere around 260-270 now.
but lots of guys are bigger than they are listed and most teams have a Brook/Robin Lopez, Rasho Nesterovic, Nenad Krstic, Spencer Hawes, Eddy Curry, Brendan Haywood, Chris Kaman, Dejuan Blair, Carlos Boozer, Zaza Pachulia, Kendrick Perkins, Yao, Oden, Bynum, O’neal, Magloire, Okafor, Bogut, Maxiell, Hibbert, Marc Gasol, Dalembert who is bigger than Lebron.
the W’s have no one who is probably within 20 lbs of Lebron. Turiaf was 238 at the combine & he’s listed as their biggest player.
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions
what kind of message does that send to Randolph?
that the reinforcements are here! and you are free to roam the court young stickman
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 13, 2010 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
I’m also not big on getting another big because what kind of message does that send to Randolph?
The message would be “we’re a terrible team. We need to take the best player available. If you’re unable to deal with the ‘message’ of some competition at your position and cannot find a way to co-exist with a talented player who might help us win, you’re SOL and we can’t coddle you to only send positive messages that won’t disturb your frail ego.” Seriously, if there’s a fear of upsetting Randolph, a very good athlete who seems to be a dynamite rebounder but other than that has done close to nothing to show he can make a team win, then there’s gigantic problems, bigger than I care to elaborate on. May as well worry about the message that a healthy player might send to Tom Abdenour.
by jae on Mar 13, 2010 2:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
yeah but there is a big drop off in talent
from 1 to 2 (little gap), then from 2&3 to 4, then……a little way before 5&6.
Basically I wish for the 1 or 2. I HOPE we get the 3 (at least), fear that we might get 4, and don’t want to even think about the 5&6 spots until and unless we end up there.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Here is what I think
Just drafting Turner might lead to having better talent on the team then drafting Wall then trying to trade Ellis or Curry. For instance we draft Wall and we look to get rid of Curry or Ellis, and we get a Power Forward, we still have a hole at starting SF. If we get a Center or PF who is a post scorer then we still have a hole at SF.
However if we draft Turner it gives us more options since we already have two more than serviceable small guards. We can still trade Ellis, Maggette or Biedrins for the post player, and we have more of a complete team.
If we later want to acquire a larger SF and put Turner in the SG position later we could easily do that but lets be serious here if we have anywhere near the philosophy we have now as a team Turner will be a point forward.
What if we trade Ellis
for a starting small forward?
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 12, 2010 10:14 PM PST up reply actions
Who wants to give us one?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 12, 2010 10:27 PM PST up reply actions
Gay?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 13, 2010 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
It’s the top ~3 or so players on your team that determine how good you are. How we match up throughout the starting 5 is not as important as how our 3 best players compare to other teams 3 best players. If we can improve the top of our team, we have to do it, even if it means a hole in another part of our lineup.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Teams with good small forwards dont trade them.Thats why u have to acquire them Via Draft or FA.And enough with the Whiteside Talk.He was Exposed.Second round i think we all can Agree we should take Jerome Jordan.Turner and Jordan would be a great draft for us.And I dont Think John Wall will ever be better than Monta.Had Monta gone to college he would be doing the same things Wall is doing and you guys woulda wanted to trade the entire roster for him like you are doing for Wall.We have a Allstar Caliber guard with Monta and you guys want to trade him for the second best player in college basketball who happens to play the same position as the guy your trading him for.If you guys wanted to Trade Ellis or Curry for a Standout Big like Blake Griffin i could understand but to Trade for what right now is a downgrade with potential would be taking a step back.
Teams with good small forwards dont trade them.
Same can be said about the PG and C positions.
i think we all can Agree we should take Jerome Jordan.
Can’t tell if you’re joking or not but with the second round pick maybe?
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
He said second round
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawkGSW on Mar 12, 2010 11:32 PM PST up reply actions
Ahh gotcha
I read it as, “And enough with the Whiteside talk he was exposed in the second round”.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
He doesn't use a space after he uses a period.
he also skips a lot of periods.
by Reverend_Randy on Mar 13, 2010 2:03 AM PST up reply actions
Greg Monroe
We should get Monroe. The guy can do everything and we need a guy who can contribute immediately. Next year’s lineup:
Curry (Watson)
Ellis (Morrow, Williams, Buike)
Biedrins (Turiaf)
Maggette (Randolph)
Monroe (Wright)
This is a very skilled roster. Defense needs some work, but with Biedrins healthy, and Monroe up front, it would improve immensely. If Randolph and Wright come along and contribute, things look even brighter.
I'm right with you on the Monroe bandwagon
but here’s another interesting idea if we did get him. What if we packaged Wright or Randolph (I’d prefer to keep Randolph, personally) with Monta to get a very good defensive-minded starting SF? Then, we could have a more traditional, bigger lineup that could be better defensively. Something like:
Curry (Watson)
Morrow
NEW WING (Buike)
Monroe (Randolph, Tolliver)
Biedrins (Turiaf)
Potential trade targets:
Andre Iguodala
Danny Granger
I think most of you guys take Monta for granted and its crazy to me. Because if he was on another team averaging 26 ppg you guys would be begging Riley to trade for him.
+1
People call for Al Jefferson, if we got him they’d want his head
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
not sure this is the case
I think we appreciate Monta for what he is but recognize the problems in him playing next to Curry. I think a lot of fans feel like that combination is such a problem defensively that one of them needs to go. Nothing personal, more about the combination of the 2. Monta, b/c he’s good, has value in a trade scenario. It’s not that we “want” to get rid of him, it’s that we know you need to give something up to get something good back. Now, the team could have been smart and worked to pair Monta with a big-bodied PG, like Baron, like a lot of fans wrote the past 2 years. But they didn’t, they drafted Curry, who happens to be extremely good and looks like a real PG.
Now, the team could have been smart and worked to pair Monta with a big-bodied PG, like Baron, like a lot of fans wrote the past 2 years.
Realistically, they weren’t going to be able to acquire a young PG who fits this criteria. As big as Baron is for a PG, he was still too small to defend SG’s & was thus still a liability defensively.
as good as Monta is, probably the most ?able front office move was deciding to break up the 06-07 playoff team by trading JRich in order to have the money to resign a combo guard (& still stay under luxury tax – they only had money for Andris otherwise).
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
not true - you're letting management off the hook too easily
They didn’t have to spend the $10 million per year on Maggette. Without that contract, the Warriors are able to put money into another player.
Also, they didn’t have to extend Jackson. Without that extension, we have his contract expiring at the end of the year which would be very valuable, considering he could help a contender in their playoff push and the money would come off the books. Jackpot. Instead, we’re stuck with Radmanovic’s $7+ million contract next year.
With J-Rich, we got a $10 million trade exception…. only management didn’t use it. Of course.
Without that extension, we have his contract expiring at the end of the year which would be very valuable
At this point, it wouldn’t still be valuable. It might have been valuable prior to the trade deadline, but not after as the expiring stops being something you can use. As it was, they managed to trade his deal for a contract that was “valuable” as an expiring before this trade deadline, but failed to do anything with it. The value never materialized.
The value never materialized.
Not all of it, but financial flexibility is still a good thing.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
haha - ok, you're right
You “corrected” me on a point where any reasonable reader would have understood my point. Yes, his contract would have been valuable this year BEFORE the trade deadline. Excellent clarification.
Moving on, Jackson was traded, along with Acie Law, for Radmanovic and Bell. Law and Bell are expirings. Jackson has 3 years after this year and Radmanovic has a player option for next year for an amount no smart team would now pay, so he’s essentially got 1 more year left after this one, too.
Jackson: $7.7 this year, then almost $28 million over the next 3 years
Law: $2.216 million this year only
for
Bell: $5.3 million this year only
Radmanovic: $6.5 million this year and $6.9 million next year
So, when you say “they managed to trade his deal for a contract that was ‘valuable’ as an expiring before this trade deadline, but failed to do anything with it” you must be talking about the $5.3 million expiring deal Bell has. BUT, without giving Jackson the extension, we would have had a $7.7 million expiring. That’s more than $5.3 million. So, without extending Jackson, we would have had a larger (hence more valuable) expiring deal than we did.
So, even if we don’t get into the fact that that “the value never materialized,” we can recognize that it represented less ‘value’ than it would have if we had simply not extended Jackson. That was my point.
You "corrected" me on a point where any reasonable reader would have understood my point.
I don’t assume that most readers are reasonable.
My experience has been that anything not made explicit will be misunderstood by many. Many things made explicit will be misunderstood as well, but why start at a disadvantage?
i don’t know. is it me or are expiring contracts way too overvalued on this site? how often do they alone bring legitimate stars (i’ll define that as players who have brought their team to playoffs as a #1 option)? seems to me that most just end up expiring.
fans seem to forget that you can’t force teams to trade for your expiring deals & you can’t force players to sign here in FA (“why didn’t they get Gooden or Sessions (etc)?” um… maybe b/c they didn’t want to come here?
the JRich thing move was something w/in their control. b/c Cohan did not want to go into tax territory (all things considered, a reasonable decision), they basically chose Monta over JRich. if JRich was still on the team instead of Wright, the chances that they extend Baron probably increase tenfold.
now it may have turned out (w/ BD & JRich’s demise) that they lucked into the right decision for the future, but the point is that at the time, that is a move (electing to rebuild around a combo guard over a team that while flawed, just made the playoffs for the 1st time in 15 yrs) that is ?able.
by homer simpson on Mar 15, 2010 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
I’m not really following the JRich logic here. There are legitimate arguments trading JRich for Wright was good for our basketball future, and I’d say it even increases the chance we extend Baron because we created more financial flexibility so we had more money available. The most questionable move was not using the trade exception to boost us into the playoffs, but at that point, JRich is gone anyways.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
sorry. let me try to clarify.
i’m not saying JRich for Wright was good or bad. at the time, it was a move designed to allow for the resigning of both Andris & Monta without entering tax territory (no one thought Baron would opt out of $~17 million at the time).
now, trading a veteran starter for a rookie & clearing room in order to keep Monta is a move rebuilding teams do.
most playoff teams however, do not rebuild. that is why the move itself can be called ?able. think about how bizarre that is.
it’s not a perfect example, but if the Bobcats finally made the playoffs & then traded Diaw away for an 8th overall rookie b/c they couldn’t keep Tyrus Thomas’ 17.1 reb rate & 6.3 blk rate w/o going into tax territory, it’d be kind of odd, no? especially considering your star player (in their case, Wallace) is approaching 30.
in regards to the exception, first of all a disclaimer. there is no guarantee that there was an offer for the trade exception. even if there was, there is no guarantee said player would help the team reach the playoffs or that said players contract wouldn’t hinder them in the future.
anyway, we have to remember, no one expected Baron to opt out. using the exception for a ~$10 million player combined with Baron’s ~$17 mill would have put the W’s in tax territory. something they would not do. the whole point of moving JRich was to free up that cash slot for Monta.
also i’d figure if you had JRich tied up till 2011, extending Baron for 3 more seasons (2012) wouldn’t seem so bad unless Rowell/Mullin thought Monta was a PG.
by homer simpson on Mar 15, 2010 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Ok, that makes it more clear, though I’ll add one thing.
the whole point of moving JRich was to free up that cash slot for Monta.
Also, to build for the future. JRich’s contract was a bad one, and especially since we had a replacement ready to go for him (Monta), creating future financial flexibility by unloading him was a good thing, AND it brought back a young PF with potential (and we desperately needed another big man), and one with the athleticism to fit into the team’s uptempo style.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's what is gonna happen
Warriors will move up to the #2 spot in the lottery and take Evan Turner. Then they will trade Monta to Minny for the 4th pick. Warriors take either Derrick Favors or Demarcus Cousins (whichever is still on the board). They pick up an 8 million dollar trade exception for trading Monta. Trade Turiaf, Radmanavic and the trade exception to portland for nicholas batum.
Resign Watson, Reggie Williams, Buike, Hunter and Morrow. Let Bell, George and Tolliver leave.
New Lineup:
PG: Curry | Watson
SG: Turner | Morrow | Williams
SF: Batum | Maggette | Buike
PF: Randolph | Wright
C: Cousins | Beidrins | Hunter
This solves alot of our problems.
Rebounding – Check.
Inside Scoring – Check
Defense on the wings – Check
Ball movement – Check
They only problem is the team has only one vet and his name is Corey Maggette
Portland does it because they get need another C since Camby is probably going to leave.
Minny does it because they don’t another PF/C and the next wing after turner is aminu, who will be a huge reach at 4
by RUN EMC on Mar 13, 2010 2:05 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Inside scoring is not a check
Your replacing our only slasher with another slasher. And Cousins wouldn’t get playing time for Nellie, that attitude wouldn’t let him play and Nellie wants bigs getting up and down if they start. Also there still is no defense on the inside, Beans can’t cuard bulky guys, AR and Wright are still young and developing and Cousins’ defense right now is just being bigger than others. He won’t be a very good defender
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Nellie wants bigs getting up and down if they start.
the C’s aren’t supposed to run in Nellie’s system.
Cousins’ defense right now is just being bigger than others. He won’t be a very good defendertechnically, with just that Cousins will probably be the best low post defender on the team (especially if you factor in his reportedly now 7’7" wingspan (though the last official measurement had him at 7’6"). the ? with Cousins is whether he can defend pick & roll and whether he can at least limit a perimeter player to a semi-contested jumper if he gets switched out.
And Cousins wouldn’t get playing time for Nellie
depends if he can play. Nellie has played big young players who had NBA bodies like CWebb, Big Vic, Tyrone Hill, Gatling. Even Tolliver gets is technically a rookie. BW didn’t play b/c he was built like a high school kid & couldn’t defend the low post more than anything else. besides Nellie is only here for 1 more season as a coach (hopefully).
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not going to doubt Nellie plays young bigs
I’m sure he can play, Nellie won’t like his attitude though. Also I suspect he will have a lot of foul trouble in the pros. His defense will be a project for whomever gets him. And about the system, you may be right but Nellie definitely like a big that can get up and down more than a guy who can’t. Also a quick note, people calling out Whiteside cause of his game against Jordan. Jarvis Varando just had a very good game against Cousins. 18 points, 9 boards and 5 blocks, and Varando is about 6’9 230. Cousins had 10 points, 10 boards and 2 blocks
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
yeah, he’ll definitely experience foul trouble early on. i think historically most bigs do. worst comes to worst, Nellie’s only around for one more season anyway. if his rebounding in the NBA resembles anything like he’s doing in college, he’ll be fine.
btw, Varando got most of his #‘s when Cousins was out. didn’t see the Whiteside game, but i have no problem with him. if he drops b/c people think he got exposed, i definitely wouldn’t mind trying to move Vlad & Kelenna’s expiring deals for a bad contract so they could take a look.
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Speaking of Varando, he would be a consideration for us in the 2nd round.
He has a lot of heart as well as skills. I wonder if he could play as a big SF.?
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 15, 2010 6:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Warriors will move up to the #2 spot in the lottery and take Evan Turner.
Ok, Those moves look decent as long as the other teams would go for them.now what would you do if we luck into the #1 pick instead of the #2?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 13, 2010 2:54 PM PST up reply actions
what would you do if we luck into the #1 pick instead of the #2?
if Minny has #2 & want John Wall, offer to trade down for #2 & the rights to Rubio. hopefully, whoever is at #3 or #4 wants Rubio & then you can pick up Cousins or Favors.
if Pacers had #3 & wanted Turner, i’d see if they’d be willing to move Granger to move up to #1.
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I think getting Turner and Rubio > just Wall.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
no duh.
but David Kahn might have a tendency to fall in love with players like he did with Flynn. if Kahn thinks it’s a one superstar player draft & that player is Wall, he might be willing to trade to get that superstar.
if you had Rubio overseas & had the #2 pick in the Dwight Howard draft, would you trade Okafor (who was also a college star fans thought highly of) & Rubio for Howard?
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Well knowing how badly Okafor turned out, no. Turner doesn’t seem like he will be like Okafor though.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
yeah, i just have very little respect for Kahn & his personnel guys for drafting Flynn. his college #‘s were huge red flags & it’s not like he’s a big man; he’s even small for his position. Lawson’s the same size & his #’s dwarfed Flynn. he even had the audacity to suggest Ellington is in the same realm as Curry in terms of shooting; something like if Curry is 1a, then Ellington is 1b…
by homer simpson on Mar 14, 2010 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow
Why would portland take turiaf and radmonovic combined over 10 mill salary and the trade exception that teams rarely use for a young high potential Batum? Do you realize that they gave up Outlaw to free more mins for Batum, he is part of their future and will take more then lousy players and trade exception to pull such a trade if they are even entertaining a trade offer.
Waaaarriors
nah they traded outlaw cause they were DESPERATE for a big
They are borderline playoffs even with both centers hurt. They needed Camby badly.
portland fans LOVE batum
He’s so young too…. They’d want Randolph for him. TBH If we found a quality PF i’d do it. I think Wright will be better than Randolph anyway.
So all we got to do is this. Draft Turner. Sign and trade Monta 4 DLee. Beans + Mags 4 TJ Ford (expiring + replace CJ as backup PG), Jeff Foster (expiring) and Roy Hibbert. Batum 4 Randolph.
Curry- 22
Turner- 21
Batum- 21
Lee- 26
Hibbert- 23
Bench- Ford, Morrow, Buike, Wright, Turiaf, Radman,Tolliver
NBA Live is so much fun :D :D :D
to get David Lee
we probably need to trade Monta+Randolph. I read an article on ESPN.com that said how D’antoni loves guys like Randolph, and the Knicks should’ve drafted him.
they wil probably get Amare
Lee might be tradeable then. I mean if i were them i’d keep lee w/ amare, but who knows. They won’t get Lebron. If they theoretically got Amare + Joe Johnson would they want Monta??? I know d’antoni likes monta
I think they get Bosh
CB4 has said he doesn’t want to play second fiddle to someone so NYK is a good opportunity for him. I see Amare in Miami, also Joe is not a sure thing. Atlanta can give him more money to retain him and there already a good team. Quick thought, what if Arenas got voided, don’t you guys think Arenas in NYK would be a good fit?
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Well, if nothing else your ideas were creating and it seems like you put some thought into them. At least it’s new ideas instead of rehashing old ones like “trade for Al Jefferson!”….
(For a second when I saw trade to Minnesota I thought it was going to be another proposal for Jefferson)
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Anyone catch the UK, Tenn game Sat. Cousins had 19pts 15 rb in about 25 min.
19th dd this year on ave 22 min per gm/ chased a guard doen the floor in transition and caused the TO from behind. Not too slow for a big kid.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 13, 2010 4:23 PM PST reply actions
Monroe's better!
Cousins is a head case. He doesn’t always show up. Monroe fits the W’s so much better.
If your worried about a head case better worry about our boy AR as well.
But I still expect him to mature. Cannot totally disagree the fact that an older more seasoned player will have a bit more impact “next” year but I am betting on who I think will be a star difference maker down the road for us. It is fun to argue about this though, just wish one of us had that crystal ball. Bigs do seem to be the hardest to predict but man whoever does luck out and gets the future “big” all star has an edge. This draft has several “possible” future star bigs. It will be fun to see which one emerges.
What is odd for us is that as much as we feel that we have these 2 future young bigs already on board we have not seen THAT much from them and as a test when I imagine even Patrick Patterson on our team I am thinking that AR and BW would be looking at stiff competition for the PF spot and deffinitly the same with Monroe(Favours is “near future” PF and be breathing down their necks in a year if not immediatly). I see Cousins as a true low post C “in tandum” with AB and able to eventually handle the NBA beasts that AB cannot) plus he can move over to PF if needed and despite the worry he is getting down the floor with those fast UK guards.
If you are right about the NBA future of Monroe and we have him I would be the first to buy you a beer. Cheers
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 14, 2010 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Is the success of a big man really that tough to predict? It seems like the bulk of really good big men were taken rather high in the draft. Most of the bigs taken later in the draft stink. I think the real issue is that most bigs don’t wind up being any good. If you’re not picking in the top slot in a year with an impact big man, the odds of the tall guy you take being a stiff is pretty good. That’s not necessarily comforting, but it is predictable.
Thx jae, by top spot do you mean the #1 pick only? Or are you refering to top spots plural.
I know it depends on a particular draft/talent available etc. What your opinion on this draft so far. My reference was based on % of bigs in the top 5 spots that were busts compared to guards and SF in the top spots. Are there stats on that as I was going on perception and general opinion read over the years especially in Warriors drafts.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 14, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes and no...
It seems with more and more young, undeveloped players coming out it’s hard to pick. And also as a result alot of older guys drop because of percieved lack of upside.
Example 2006 draft. Bargnani, Tyrus Thomas and LaMarcus Aldridge in first 5 picks (and POB #9). Paul Millsap was taken in 2nd round. Personally I’d rather have Millsap out of that group
That’s an anecdotal example. There have been drafts in the past where the top picks weren’t worth much and you can almost always find a guy drafted in the second round (or once upon a time, after the 2nd round) who works out to be better than several high picks. I don’t know if the success rate in picking has really changed with teams drafting younger and younger. That’s something to actually examine rather than just stating it to be so and presenting a single season’s evidence to back it.
My point was in the last 5 to 10 years
Or basically since a mass number of underclassmen came out, the draft has become ALOT less predictable. Your point is true in the past. I think if you look deeper at last 10 or so years you’ll see it isn’t as cut and dry because… Well it’s hard to tell. You know, for every tim duncan you have Darko over everyone from Bosh to David West. Tsikisvilli over Amare and Boozer. Kwame Brown over ANYONE…. The Kandi man over… well ANYONE.
Overall point: Since the draft got an influx of youngsters, the ability to draft quality bigs as become a lot more irratic.
It's always been a (bigger) crapshoot with bigs.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Or basically since a mass number of underclassmen came out, the draft has become ALOT less predictable.
That’s what you’re hypothesizing. Has it really become less predictable though? Have there been more ‘busts’ in the top picks and more surprises later on?
You say you’re making a point, but it’s done through assertion, not any actual analysis. It may be true, it may not, but you certainly haven’t done anything more than say it’s true and left it at that.
I think one of the biggest things (and unfortunately one of the things we won’t be able to witness) will be how these guys do in workouts against each other. It’ll really give talent evaluators a better feel for how someone like Cousins can do against guys that are a better match for him in terms of size/strength and athleticism…
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Like how the Kings ended up picking Tyreke over every other PG.
He physically dominated all the other PG’s he went up against with.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
honestly
I think this is going to be one of the worst drafts in quite some time. None of the big men are “sure things”. None. And the W’s don’t need another guard or small forward. They really do need a big. I’m just not sure any of this year’s crop are worth a high pick. Let’s put it this way, I think Randolph and Wright are still our best chance to have a star in the front court. I don’t see Cousins being a star. Favors has the potential, but it’s 2-3 years away. The W’s just don’t have room for another project like that. Of all the big guys, I think Monroe has the best chance to come in right away and contribute in the front court. Even with him, I’m not really sure. I think there’s a 50/50 chance, he’s a bust, too. If we get the top pick, we should definitely try to move it.
I think this is going to be one of the worst drafts in quite some time. None of the big men are "sure things". None. And the W’s don’t need another guard or small forward.
Well just because we don’t need them doesn’t make Wall and Turner a bad draft. Some team doesn’t need someone every draft but they should not just pass them up due to having the roster slot filled.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 14, 2010 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Cousins is a head case.
So is Ronron and he was the best defender in the league when he was young.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 14, 2010 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions
And now he's insane and a liability
but he gave more value than a lot of more politically correct players over his productive years. You wanna have a tea party or play basketball?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 14, 2010 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I like
getting Turner at #2 and then trading Monta/Maggette for either Favors our Cousins. That way we walk out of the draft with a future 2 in Evan Turner and big man in Cousins/Favors. We would kill in Summer league lol
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
The Golden Future
PF: Anthony Randolph
PG: Stephen Curry
Can't wait until GS wins a championship!!!
Hmmm GS that would be an interesting consideration if it was possible to pulloff.
Along with the idea that we could actually attract a decent fee agent with the money saved. Cripes this would have to make us the youngest team in history ha!
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 14, 2010 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I mean seriously have you guys been watching Evan Turner these last 3 days? How can any sane warrior fan say they would rather have Wall over Turner for THIS team. If we had no Steph Curry I could see your point but if you guys have been watching him play these last 3 games and see that he is doing it all by himself and can do it all offensively it shouldnt be any question who we should take even if we had the 1st pick. Back to Back 30 point games. Leading the team in Rebounds and Assists. Game winning shots. Best player in the nation by far.
The reason why a sane fan says to take wall is
THIS team is bad. THIS team should not draft based on what it has, or what positions it has. THIS team should draft purely based on best player available.
I am not saying that is what we should do, or that is what we will do. I am just saying that is why some people want Wall.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
I honestly wasn’t overly impressed with Turner against Illinois. Ended up with a good statline, but wasn’t too blown away by him as a prospect – not overly impressed with his athleticism, his shot is kind of questionable form wise, he was turning it over and had some ball handling issues in general, didn’t always make great decisions, and seemed to be successful simply because the competition wasn’t up to his level. It was only one game, so I’m not trying to get down on him, he’s had a fantastic year……it’s just in terms of his draft status, he needs to be evaluated on things other than simply success at the college level. You need to look at the things that generally determine NBA success.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I stoppped
Reading after I read the words, " CJ Watson" and" Good Defender" in the same sentence. Because he gets steals does not make him a good defender. He could possibly be one of the worse defenders in the league, how come dude stands straight up on defense? Turrible
JVG would be rollin' ova in his grave.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Forcing 2 steals per 36 minutes is not something to be balked at, and although
“good” may have been too strong a word C.J. does play better defense than the guards on the Raptors. Watson is a terrible defender against taller guards, but he is stronger than the average point guard and he uses that to his advantage despite some problems. His biggest defensive asset is forcing steals and therefore points.
by brutusbrutus on Mar 14, 2010 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I mean seriously have you guys been watching Evan Turner these last 3 days? How can any sane warrior fan say they would rather have Wall over Turner for THIS team.
You still don’t understand the theory of taking the best ultimate player instead of the best fitting player. What if we skipped Wall and Curr-bury had a career ending injury next year? or decided he wants to play in charlotte? or what if we take wall and find we can trade him for a better player than turner? We might not positionally need Dwade right now but if we were offered the choice of him or boris diaw who would we take?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 14, 2010 3:13 PM PDT reply actions
as if Wall isbettera more highly regarded prospect than Turner.
by Missing Barry on Mar 14, 2010 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions
You say the best Ultimate player as if Wall is better than Turner.
Cause you said for “this team” which means you don’t think he’s the best player for every team? That sounds like drafting for need to me.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 14, 2010 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I think if you are a team that does not have a good point guard you always should draft a point guard especially if he is a star but if you have a star point guard already and you have a chance to either draft another star point guard or a star small forward and you dont have a 3 I say take the forward but thats just me. Like i said before I think Monta is Wall’s Ceiling.
I think Monta is Wall’s Ceiling.
Not seeing it. Wall is bigger, longer, more athletic, a better ballhanlder, a better distributor, has the physical tools to be much better defensively…..he has everything Monta has and more.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 7:33 AM PDT up reply actions
I really don't see it with Turner. He has to work too hard to get separation from average defenders. I just don't think he's athletic enough to create at the next level.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 14, 2010 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Turner appears to be pretty athletic.
I want him really bad. I don’t like Wall’s game, but i think Wall has a better shot at being our franchise savior than anyone in this draft.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
Turner appears to be pretty athletic.
I dunno, I saw some of the same things Spider Jerusalem did in the one game I watched Ohio St (against Illinois this weekend) – he struggled to create seperation/space against his defender and really didn’t show superior athleticism compared to the guys he was playing. I only watched one game, so I’m not going to make any judgments from it, but I think it does warrant some skepticism and some more looks at his athleticism.
Additionally, here are a couple nuggets from DraftExpress:
Weaknesses include: “Average explosiveness” and “Plays belows the rim”
NBADraft.net has this to say:
Strengths include: “Good upperbody strength allows him to absorb contact and make plays at the rim” and “An above average athlete with good speed and long arms”
Weaknesses include: “Not a freak athlete, but above average by NBA standards with great length”
So it doesn’t seem like there’s a consensus right now, but it’s definitely worth watching, especially as the draft process plays itself out.
I don’t like Wall’s game
Why not?
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 7:40 AM PDT up reply actions
I find him to be a selfish prima donna with his dance, and then the celebration with Cousins was disrespectful to their opponent. I don’t like that he can’t hit jumpers, and the fact he doesn’t create as well as you would want from a ‘star’ point guard. I don’t doubt he will become something special, i just don’t personally like his style.
Also, i find Derrick Rose to vastly overrated. He is terribly inefficient, doesn’t create for others, and is a terrible man defender. I see alot of Rose in Wall, but i also see more promise from Wall still.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
What? How can you not love the John Wall dance? Lol
Also he has a nice mid range jumper thats underrated. And they won there conference tourney, they have the right to be extremely happy and go crazy. I guess they should tone down the super bowl victory and finals victories too. Or even the national championship in college.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
You may get your wish MDB as Turner does not have a lock on the #2 spot and could fall to our probable #3 position
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 15, 2010 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions
As much as I like Turner, if he had the power of T Evans with a 3 pt shooting ability I would be more excited about him.
We will need a nba body/ lock down defender at SF as well. Do you see that in Turner? Not sure if I do, but he will make his mark in the nba for the right team.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 16, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
What dont you See? Back to Back 30 point games aswell as averaging 10 rebound per game in his last 5 games. Did you watch Turner play today? The kid was phenominal and he is the only player on his team thats good so he gets planned for every game and still balls. Honestly I dont know what more Turner could do to impress some of you guys. He is the best Scorer in College Basketball right now. He is a very good rebounder and a very good defender. When his team needs him to score in the clutch he does it every time. John Wall has the Luxury of having 5 teamates that are going to the NBA aswell so teams cant double him because he can dish to another star.
I don't think your problem is with these guys.
It’s with everyone that sees Wall > Turner as an NBA player.
Now, Turner is probably deserving of the Player of the Year honors. He’s been arguably the best college player. That’s fine.
It is his chances of becoming an NBA superstar/perennial All-Star that people question.
I think there are less quesiton marks about Wall because:
A. He has elite run/jump ahleticism.
B. He plays on one of the best teams in the country. He is therefore praised slightly more because winning very much does count for something.
C. He’s proven to adequately handle the PG position (a premium NBA position).
D. Media hyping him up since before he stepped onto the court.
Turner definitely deserves consideration for the #2 or #3 spots in this draft, imo. I think he’ll turn out to be a perfectly fine NBA caliber wing. He needs to shoot better with range. Fortunately shooting ability can come with practice and repetition. He sees the floor well for a 6’7’’ player. His rebounding might be an anomaly, but at least he mixes it up down low.
Now put both in a vacuum and imagine with growth and experience who the better player could be in 5 years.
I think Wall has the advantage. He is younger, plays a premium NBA position, should have elite athleticism at his position (which should help him dominate his opponent).
All that doesn’t take away ANYTHING Turner has accomplished thus far. It’s just that many other view his ceiling as much lower, which then in turn relates back to Wall > Turner for the Warriors, since the Warriors are without a superstar.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Honestly I dont know what more Turner could do to impress some of you guys.
Show us the type of thing you look for in evaluating an NBA prospect, as opposed to evaluating who the better college player is. Athleticism is a huge part of it – you’re playing non-NBA competition, a player should dominate lesser competition like that, especially in their third year of college. The question is – how does what they do in college translate to the NBA? In Turner’s case, one of those question is “if he isn’t blowing by guys in college, how is he going to create in the NBA where everyone is bigger, quicker, stronger, and longer”? If he’s playing below the rim (DraftExpress’ words, not mine), how is he going to finish with guys like Josh Smith, Anthony Randolph, Thabeet, etc protecting the rim? If he plays wing in the NBA, why should we care about his rebounding numbers that come from essentially playing PF at Ohio St? I’m just trying to give you examples to highlight what people look for – it’s not about playing well in college, it’s about demonstrating that the skills that allow a player to succeed in college will allow them to succeed in the NBA, where the competition level is much, much higher. So how does Turner demonstrate his college production and play will play well at the NBA level?
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Brandon Roy is certainly a decent athlete. Not special, no, but no shabby, either. He’s got a decent combination of size and quickness/jumping ability. Either way, just poniting to one player doesn’t mean anything; anecdotes aren’t real evidence. Athleticism matters – most star players have a lot of it, and it’s very important in making the jump to the next level. I’m not trying to say Turner doesn’t have what it takes – I was asking questions not to say Turner doesn’t have those things, but just to present you with some of the things you need to ask when evaluating a prospect. It seems to me there’s a big disconnect here between “what a guy accomplishes in college” and “what kind of NBA prospect is he”. They’re related, sure, but they are not the same thing, and that’s an important concept.
When talking about Turner within the context of the NBA draft, we’re focused on his draft prospects, and you should be analyzing the things he does that tell us how he’ll be as an NBA player (and this involves projecting the future and how he’ll develop as a player in addition to what he already does that he will or won’t be able to do in the NBA), not how good he is in college.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions
the difference is guys like Roy, Nash, Billups, Cassell, Bibby & Curry who aren’t regarded as athletic use their ability to shoot to cover for their so-called athletic limitations. the big ? is whether Turner will have the kind of jumper & range to overcome his. what makes Roy a star is his TS% combined with his phenomenal PPR (pure point rating; which is an asst/tov rating system).
ceiling wise, Turner could be a less athletic Grant Hill before injury. but he could also be what Hill is now.
everyone drools over Turner’s assist & rebound #‘s. and though they look great, Iguodala had a much better PPR 1.46 vs -0.31 (btw, his asst to tov ratio as a soph (1.74) was also better than Turner’s best 1.5 mark as a jr) than Turner and was a 10 reb per 40 guy in both his college seasons while Turner has only managed that this season. the only reason Turner has better per game #‘s is minutes & he has the ball on almost every play. Turner almost doubles Iggy’s usage %.
by homer simpson on Mar 15, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions
I really, really am not a fan of assist to turnover ratio. I wish it’d just go away entirely. :(
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
it has it’s uses. it seems like a simple way to make sure that assist #‘s aren’t just a factor of usage (a la Monta or Iverson) and is easier for most to understand than pure point rating which factors in pace & adjusts for the fact that turnovers are more costly than assists are helpful.
but there’s a lot of flaw in these stats. assists depend on scorekeepers (some scorekeepers reward assists to players who threw the entry pass to a guy who catches the ball, goes to triple threat & 2 or 3 jab steps later takes & hits a jumper), teammates ability to finish or shoot (not talking about drive & kick where you set up a shooter. for instance, Mark Jackson got a lot of assists by just standing at the top of the key and throwing the ball to Reggie Miller after he did all most of the work getting free off of screens & hitting the jumper.) on the other side, passes that lead to fouls at the rim garner the passer nothing statistically.
anyway, looking at all of Roy’s #‘s, you really get a picture of why he is effective. Blazers play the league’s slowest pace (making each possession more important). Roy handles the bulk of those possessions and he either scores efficiently or sets up his teammates to be play finishers all while limiting turnovers.
by homer simpson on Mar 15, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
DraftExpress is not the bible. If you read the following negatives, would you draft this player*?
-Not a true point guard
- Out of control at times
- Shot-selection
- Stuck between 1 and 2
- Ability to defend position at next level?
- Lateral quickness
- Versatility to defend multiple positions
- Limited upside?
- Backup/Fringe Starter?
- College system makes him difficult to evaluate
- Average athleticism
- Average size
- Average wingspan
- Frail frame
- Relies too heavily on outside shot
Who was it? Stephen Curry. BTW, if Turner is playing PF in college, he’ll have a much easier time adapting to SF in the pros. The Big 10 is not a pushover conference either. There’s a reason pro scouts love Turner. If you look at Draft Express, his strengths far outnumber his weaknesses.
Strengths
- Ability to play at different speeds
- Excellent skill-level
- Mid-range game
- Offensive creativity
- Pick and roll play
- Point Forward
- Transition play
- Versatility
- Ability to create own shot
- Change of gears/Hesitation moves
- Commitment to playing defense
- Defensive awareness
- Defensive fundamentals
- Versatility to defend multiple positions
- Aggressiveness
- Basketball IQ
- Coachable
- Experience
- Potential
- Unselfishness
- Winning mentality
- High-level productivity
- Ability to create for others
- Court vision
- Body control
- Coordination
- Fluidity
- Low center of gravity
- Size for position
- Solid frame
- Excellent rebounder
- Mid-range Jumper
Weaknesses
- Turnover prone
- Average explosiveness
- Plays below the rim
- 3-point range
- 3-point shooting percentages
- Limited number of 3-point attempts
The one that worries me far more than “Plays below the rim” is “Turnover prone”. That’s the main concern, but he won’t have to handle the ball as much in the NBA.
I don’t think anyone is really arguing against those points. The conversation is basically trying to highlight that I think J-Ridah is evaluating who the better college player is (and I think he makes good points along these lines), while we’re trying to discuss who the better NBA prospect is. That’s the problem I’m seeing, that while he makes good points for “who’s the better college player right now”, they’re kind of missing the mark on “who’s the better NBA prospect”.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions
Turner
He’s “turnover prone” because he has to handle the ball 99 percent of the time. His team, Ohio State, isn’t deep at all. They play only six or seven guys. There are three guys shorter than him in the starting lineup, but he’s the initiator. I don’t really see how playing below the rim is a weakness. What does that even mean? He won’t dunk the ball? Turner doesn’t have three-point range yet, but I think he could develop it in a few years. He lacks explosiveness, but he can post you up and hit the jumper or just hit the jumper in your face. He won’t be an elite scorer or anything, but I think he can put up about 16 or 17 points a night.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 15, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t really see how playing below the rim is a weakness. What does that even mean? He won’t dunk the ball?
It means he might have a harder time finishing in the NBA, where the quality of athletes is far superior to college.
by Missing Barry on Mar 15, 2010 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Eh
If Turner can get near the rim, I think he’ll be fine. He has a few moves near the rim with a nice touch. He won’t throw it down, but two points is two points.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 16, 2010 12:49 AM PDT up reply actions
If Turner can get near the rim
Another question mark – if he’s not playing above the rim (in other words, not explosive), will he have the quickness/explosiveness to even get to the rim? I’m not saying he doesn’t, just saying it raises questions. The NBA is a whole different game than college, it’s much more difficult to get to the rim, and once you do, to actually finish with the quality of athlete you’re playing against.
by Missing Barry on Mar 16, 2010 6:53 AM PDT up reply actions
I think Turner will be ok at getting to the rim. He has alot of nifty, change of pace moves that i think will translate well to the pros.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
Thats his main strength
His first step and hesitation moves are going to translate very well. He may not be an explosive athlete but he will get to the rim a lot and very well. Similar to how Tyreke Evans as a rookie gets to the rim. Not super quick, but determined
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
I dunno, Tyreke isn’t an elite athlete or anything (good athlete, great strength, but definitely not elite), but it seemed to me in college he could get to the rim much easier than Turner. Granted, I’ve barely watched Turner, so I could be very off, but at least against Illinois Turner struggled to blowby to the rim. Tyreke didn’t have the same struggles last year.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions
I share that concern as well.
Turner has decent run, jump and speed ability. But he’s rather skinny in his 6’7’’ frame. Kind of like a slightly bigger Rip Hamilton. I think he might be a player stuck between the 2 and 3 right now. His jumpshot and 3pt range are below NBA standards, and has the slashing game (minues elite athleticism) of a SF. If he wants to guard SF’s, he’ll need some added bulk.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
Right now we have A.Morrow guarding 3’s. Before Azubuike went down it was his job. We had Morrow guarding Kevin Durant and your worried about Evan Turner being able to play 3? He is 2 inches taller than both those guys. He is closer to Scottie Pippens build than Rips.
well, his arms look bigger than Rips, and Nose is smaller than Pip's!
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
I told Randolph that Bill Russell would tell him to keep that ball in play and start the break.
RANDOLPH: "I know. But sometimes, you gotta let ‘em know."
(MT)
by kenntoe on Mar 14, 2010 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think it would be interesting
to see Stephen to run the pick and roll with Cousins. The Orlando game a couple weeks ago showed me a glimpse of hope of how effective we can be if we utilize our big men more in our offense.
by golden_solitude on Mar 14, 2010 7:35 PM PDT reply actions
Trade Biedrins for another top 10 pick
if we could draft Johnson, or Turner, AND pick up Cousins or Monroe, whiteside, favors i think this would be ideal.
Sure Beidrins is a decent player. We need better players. Beidrins will never be a great player we should trade him for a guy who Might if we want to every be a championship team.
I’d love Riley to pull a Minnesota move and get 2 top picks by trading beidrins and then pick up a young FA is we have any cash left.
It's very possible, we might have to give up more
After all, the Wizards traded their pick for Randy Foye and Mike Miller (Miller’s even an expiring this year) last year
"It's like Will Smith, remember the Fresh Prince? Get the ball don't let nobody else shoot? That's kinda what the offense can be sometimes, and they're just standing around waiting for Monta to make a play"
-MT2
by golden_solitude on Mar 14, 2010 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Biedrins
How exactly is he going to get us a high pick? He hasn’t proven much of anything other than that sitting on the bench is easy for him with all of the injuries.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 15, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Big men tend to fetch reasonable returns in trade. He’s “proven” when healthy that he’s among the very best rebounders in the game and that he’s very efficient with his shots, meaning he doesn’t waste possessions taking shots he isn’t likely to take. Those are reasonably valuable skills that tend to help teams win games. They’re more valuable on a team with better perimeter defense and another post scorer. His game suggests that he’s more valuable on a better team. He was more valuable when we were overall a better team.
A bigger problem than his value is that a team has to have cap space to absorb his contract in order to trade him for a pick.
+1 jae, and I feel we should keep him and add Cousins in the center IF we cant pick Wall or Turner.
I am hoping to see that combo along side healthy AR/BW with Buike and Maggette at SF untill we can trade for a SF or draft a SF next year. Meanwhile see how Curry/Monta workout and if not that is our trade focus. If neither AR/BW ever develope then we are truley screwed. If they live up to our dreams and AB comes back from the dead then we “could” at least become good enough to make the playoffs. Only other hope is to continue being so bad that we manage to draft a superstar later on. Wall looks like the only possible superstar in this draft to me but Turner and Cousins could be high impact players down the road. Just another concept/opinion here.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 15, 2010 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Evan Turner vs. John Wall, NBA-style
March, 13, 2010 Mar 1311:44AM ETEmail Print Share By Eamonn BrennanWe’ve already settled the essential National Player of the Year question — it was settled before Evan Turner hit yesterday’s ridiculous 40-foot shot to beat Michigan in the second round of the Big Ten tournament. But one pro-John Wall consensus remains, and it has to do with the NBA draft. Wall is, and has for months, been considered the consensus No. 1 overall draft pick come June. That hasn’t changed.
But should it? After all, Wall is clearly talented, hyper-athletic, intuitive beyond his years and pretty much everything NBA scouts are looking for in a franchise point guard. Turner has rocketed up draft boards thanks to his brilliant junior season, and he’s settled in right below Wall at No. 2. But could he actually overtake Wall? If SB Nation’s Andrew Sharp — one of the most ardent John Wall fans you’ll find outside the Commonwealth — is thinking it, then it’s worth thinking about:
Again, it’s a stretch to think that anyone could unseat John Wall, and don’t get me wrong: I’ve been on the John Wall bandwagon since November. But if Turner can carry Ohio State to the Final Four and possibly a national title, combined with everything else he’s done this year—shots like that one, coming back from a broken back after missing just six games, winning the Big Ten—it’s sort of a toss-up, right? Is Turner-Wall the new Oden-Durant?
It’s an apt comparison. The one difference I would throw in there is that you can’t go wrong here, unlike the way the Greg Oden-Kevin Durant draft created the dichotomy between “lunky franchise center” and “lanky potential uber-scorer.” Wall is the pure point guard, but Turner has proven he can play the position. Neither has injury concerns to worry about. And both should be very, very good at the next level.
Both have a lot of basketball to settle before they get to that point, though. In the meantime, NBA scouts can commence (or, rather, continue) their salivation.
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/6602/evan-turner-vs-john-wall-nba-style
C. Reina had a pretty good evaluation for Curry’s game which was done last May. He recently did one on Turner on the 10th. Included the two kentucky ones he did earlier.
by homer simpson on Mar 15, 2010 2:09 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Good stuff, Homer — thanks for the link! Much as I love Turner’s maturity, versatility and “fit” for this team, Reina’s insights make me wonder if, in the event we pop the #2 pick, we shouldn’t strongly consider taking Cousins. Whatever “attitude issues” the kid may have, any Freshman who can average
15.7 reb/36
11.2 fta/36
against top-flight NCAA competition can’t be accused of not getting after it 110% when on the floor. I mean, I might take Cousins based on those two numbers alone. As Reina points out, rebounding is perhaps the most translatable NCAA skill. And you can’t teach 6’11 270…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 15, 2010 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Thx Homer,quite impressed with Reina's take on these players. He is now on my short list.
He was spot with Curry and gave the most up to date take on what I have seen Cousin’s play on the court and “current” reports on him. Most of the stuff on the draft sites are warmed over takes from his high school days and I agreed especially with Reina’s take on the attitude comments.
When I saw Cousins smile after getting 2 teeth chipped in half and run back out on the court I was thinking that this is some attitude the Warriors could use in the low post.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 15, 2010 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions
A question for Homer
How do Reina’s other projections line up? It’s fine and dandy to give credence to a draft expert, but there are 1000s of experts out there with projections for 1000s of players. One of them being correct does not mean that expert is necessarily likely to be correct on subsequent draft projections.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 16, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
True Dubz but I certainly liked the depth of his analysis and the fact he did not seem to be splicing in other peoples outdated observations(from last year like many of them have been doing so far)
By the end of T and lottery hopeful we will see more original observations and analysis.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 16, 2010 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
As long as we dont slide down to the 5th pick were good.We’d still end up with Favors or Cousins if we picked 4th.
Whiteside and Johnson are still decent picks at 5/6
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawkGSW on Mar 15, 2010 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Johnson > Whiteside I think.
Johnson could be a really good fit for this team (better than Turner I think).
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 15, 2010 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Isn't a Whiteside also a big young raw player who could be really good after a few years in the league?
by freerandolph on Mar 15, 2010 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not very high on Whiteside.
Huge bust potential.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 16, 2010 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Agreed
Whiteside, playing for Marshall, didn’t exactly play against the toughest of opponents. Their SOS was 115th in the country. Even with that, he wasn’t a dominant scorer by any stretch of the imagination and weighs just 215 pounds. He could be the next great thing or the next big bust.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 16, 2010 12:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Steph never played against really tough opponents
If a guy can play he can play, and if anything Whiteside turns into a very very good defender who can hit a jumpshot.
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Whoa.
Steph led his team to within a shot of the Final Four, beating Gonzaga, Georgetown and Wisconsin, and gave Kansas (the eventual champion, mind you) all they could handle. Besides that, he lit up UNC, Duke (twice), NC State (twice), Maryland, Michigan, Oklahoma, UCLA and West Virginia. And he was consistently great for three years.
Whiteside hasn’t proven himself at all. This team has enough project big men who can’t stay on the floor.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 16, 2010 3:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Besides that, he lit up UNC, Duke (twice), NC State (twice), Maryland, Michigan, Oklahoma, UCLA and West Virginia.
In several of those games, he scored many points, but the performances weren’t all that special on cursory examination. I tend to think that “lit up” suggests that one get the points in a manner that doesn’t involved taking nearly as many shots as points scored. His 24 against UNC took him 22 shots. Generally speaking, that’s a formula for losing.
Jae, did you see his teammates? They were horrible.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
I know that he was real close to a one-man show. I watched him play several times while he was at Davidson. It wasn’t a stacked squad, That doesn’t change the fact that 24 points on 22 shots isn’t really that impressive. I still don’t consider it lighting anyone up. He had a difficult time scoring against many of those teams that Mr. Jerusalem contends he “lit up”, achieving it only by hoisting up a whole bunch of shots.
Out of curiosity, jae: would you have bristled at the term “lit up” had he not included NC on his list…? ;-)
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions
What about his Junior year?
When they didn’t even get in the tourney?
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Some of those teams listed he played during his junior year.
Point is, he’s 10000000x more tested than Whiteside, who so far has been destroyed by the one NBA-level player he’s gone up against (Jerome Jordan).
He’s a paper tiger at this point.
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 16, 2010 7:15 PM PDT up reply actions
He nearly had a triple double against Memphis and they have some NBA talent
I guarantee he becomes a very good shot blocker that can hit a jumper out to 20 feet. Just by that he will get time and will prove to be effective, also his ability to run the floor helps
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Davidson
When they had Stephen Curry, they always scheduled tough opponents. Their in-conference schedule sucked, but they played a lot of legitimate teams outside of the Southern and teams like College of Charleston and Wofford.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Mar 16, 2010 6:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Depends if Ohio St. or UK gets knocked out early in a upset.
That would have some impact on Turner/Cousins draft fortunes. If UK goes to the final game for example I would not be surprised to see him as the #2 pick. If UK falls out and Turner/Ohio St. make it past Kansas to the final Turner would have the #2 sealed probably and the Wall/Turner debate would go into overdrive but even with that senerio dont count on Cousins falling down to #5 unless he dives in the workouts as well. I would not bet on that happening unless Georgetown/Georgia Tech turn into Cinderfellas with Monroe/Favours.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 16, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Second round picks? Why aren’t we speculating about who will be available after 30+ picks and who will more than likely not be worth much? Probably because the odds of getting an impact player at 1-6 are pretty reasonable, but the odds of getting one at 31-36 is pretty lousy.
(Why are we capitalizing “thread”, “draft”, and “talking”?)
here's the way I look at it
We already got the #1 pick in the draft. His name is Stephen Curry. If the 2009 draft were held today, Curry would be the top pick, no doubt about it. All anybody knew about Curry was that he was a lights out shooter. Now he’s morphed into an amazing point guard, continually being compared to Steve Nash. It really doesn’t get better than that.
If the 2009 draft were held today, Curry would be the top pick, no doubt about it. All anybody knew about Curry was that he was a lights out shooter. Now he’s morphed into an amazing point guard, continually being compared to Steve Nash. It really doesn’t get better than that.
Honestly, if Curry were still in college, I don’t think there’s anything he could do at Davidson to put his draft stock above Wall’s. Competition level isn’t high enough, he isn’t athletic enough (regardless of any of our opinion’s on how much it actually matters, you can’t deny it’s a huge factor in where guys get drafted)…..then I’d also go and say those “comparisons to Steve Nash” are basically just picking the best player of a similar style, much like Randolph was being compared to Odom/KG over the summer. By all means discuss Curry’s skills, but saying he’s like Steve Nash isn’t really any more meaningful than claiming he’s like Steve Kerr or Dell Curry or some other lesser player that he plays a similar style to.
by Missing Barry on Mar 16, 2010 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t see how you can pass up Wall, his upside is way above that of Monta and Curry, as well as Turner, he has a legit chance to be a top 5 player in the NBA. You can build a team with solid players all around, but the NBA is built on superstars and it is exceeding difficult to win a championship without one.
I’m not sure what you think I have wrong.
by Missing Barry on Mar 16, 2010 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions
He’s not talking about who’s “better,” right now. He’s talking about who stands a better chance of blossoming into a superstar — the type of elite player whose mere presence tends to make for a winning team. I suspect there are very few (if any) serious hoops observers/scouts/experts who would rate Curry over Wall in this respect. I suspect there are very few (if any) NBA GMs who wouldn’t take Wall over Curry.
You’re a Warriors fan, right? Has it occurred to you that might not be that objective in this matter?
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 6:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Steph is already blossoming into a superstar. Then again, as you suggested, I am a Warriors fan and have been following the team all year. Are you?
I have, and I am. My affection for Curry at this point is verging on dementia — ask the Sleepyette. I’m glad I never have to make a decision that involves trading Curry for Wall. However, NBA GMs get paid the big bucks to make tough, painful decisions. Most GMs would not trade the #1 pick this year straight up for Curry. Conversely, I would be quite cross with NellieRiley (if perhaps a bit relieved) if I heard they had been offered the #1 pick for Curry and turned it down.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions
The problem is you would end up with John Wall and nobody else. I would end up with Stephen Curry and say, Derrick Favors, who is going to be a beast up front.
Catch me if I'm wrong...
But Sleepy would end up with Wall & Favors, while you would end up with Curry & Favors. We can all agree that Curry plus the #3 pick would be hard to turn down.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 17, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions
not sure
in what scenario you end up with Wall and Favors. Is that assuming we get the #1, and trade Curry for the third pick? Suppose it depends who gets the pick and what they need.
Are you trying to Curry Favors?
Yes, we’re clearly talking about a straight Curry-for-Wall swap, which would leave us with our pick — hence, Wall plus Favors, or Wall plus Turner, or Wall plus Cousins, or Wall plus Wes Johnson etc. It would also leave us with Monta, Randolph, Wright, Biedrins, Morrow, Buike and the rest of the crew.
Not quite sure how you got from
Curry > Wall
to
(Curry + our First Round pick + everyone on the team) > Wall
Some wacky combo of strawman and mission-creep, no doubt…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, yeah. You’re the one who said you’d rather have Curry than Wall, and that Curry would be the #1 pick in this draft.
We already got the #1 pick in the draft. His name is Stephen Curry. If the 2009 draft were held today, Curry would be the top pick, no doubt about it.
That was the whole point of the discussion: Curry v. Wall, period. Only you can fathom how you got from there to:
The problem is you would end up with John Wall and nobody else.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Wall would be drafted ahead of Curry if Curry was still at Davidson finishing up his senior year, and it wouldn’t even be a question. Of all the knocks on Curry that caused him to get picked where he did, the only one he could have answered in another season of college was whether he was really a PG or not, and that’s only if he started passing up his own shots to get others involved (which probably would have made Davidson worse). So basically, Curry couldn’t improve his draft stock much, or at all, by staying in college a year, which means he has no chance of supplanting Wall as the #1 pick in this draft.
Also, I’d probably take Wall over Curry right now, knowing what we know.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 6:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Right
You think Wall is better than Curry. That’s what I thought. I disagree.
You think Wall is better than Curry.
Not what I said. I think, given what we know right now, that Wall is a more valuable prospect than Curry.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 7:59 AM PDT up reply actions
… and the vast majority of NBA GMs would agree with that assessment, I suspect. And since, in the end, they’re the ones who determine value, your assessment is likely correct.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions
We already got the #1 pick in the draft. His name is Stephen Curry. If the 2009 draft were held today, Curry would be the top pick, no doubt about it.
No, there’s doubt about it. I suspect that a number of teams would still take Evans over Curry, and most would still take Blair over Curry simply because an impact big is worth a bunch. I’m happy with Curry, but let’s not get carried away with hyperbole.
Blair?
DeJuan Blair over Curry? Are you kidding? haha lol
DeJuan Blair over Curry? Are you kidding? haha lol
Did you watch the allstar rookie/soph game? Blair lookedmore impressive than Curr-bury.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 16, 2010 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Still hasn't answered the "No ACLs" question yet...
And he won’t for years to come.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 17, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Still hasn't answered the "No ACLs" question yet...And he won’t for years to come.
well if it’s enough years to make a career then it won’t matter. He don’t play like a guy with bad suspension.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 17, 2010 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly...
If he doesn’t flame out in the next 2-3 years, the “No ACLs” issue was apparently not a problem. But the risk is still there until that bears out.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 17, 2010 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Thought I’d share a piece from Chad Ford’s chat today.
Q:
What are some of the personality issues that scouts are concerned about with Cousins? With the highest PER in college basketball, it seems like he’s a lock for top 3.
A:
Two things stand out. He’s struggled to control his temper all year. In some ways, his personality reminds me a lot of Rasheed Wallace. He just can’t contain himself. Second is that he’s had a history (going back to his high school days) of not always giving a maximum effort. I’ve watched Kentucky play at least 10 times this year and it’s come up in every game. As far as a basketball player goes — he’s got everything you want in a post player with the exception of explosive athleticism. Cousins is strong, skilled, has a high basketball IQ and can do everything on the court. But he’s not the quickest or most explosive guy.
Interpret it how you see fit.
his personality reminds me a lot of Rasheed Wallace.
we could only hope to get a player as good as a young Rasheed. If that’s cousin’s projected talent then he should be the 2nd pick.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 16, 2010 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Wes Johnsons
i still think Johnson is under rated on most draft boards. I’ll bet once he gets to the combine and after a strong show at the tourney he’ll be the envy of every GM. What’s not to like. He’s as athletic as anyone whos in the NBA can shoot the three WITH elevation. Can score over the tallest defenders inside. averages about 2 blocks adn 2 steals a game and dos it all consitantly, efficently and with good form. Oh, and all with out the ball – so to speak. Sure he’s a couple years older but he’s still young and he’s shown dramatic improvement. Could one image if he continued his improvement at the same rate with his natural gifts? If i’m a GM at any number under the #1 pick i’m seriously considering him. Maybe it’s just me but i see superstar potential all over him. He seems to have a geat attitude and could walk on to any team and immediately contribute. I don’t know how Nellie passses on him.
You may have some good points, I’ll just try to answer the question you raised:
What’s not to like.
Well, you kind of address it here:
Sure he’s a couple years older but he’s still young and he’s shown dramatic improvement. Could one image if he continued his improvement at the same rate with his natural gifts?
Supposedly the evidence on aging curves basically tells us that they work based on age as opposed to “how long you’ve been in the league”, which means Johnson is way farther up his development curve than most. In that case, he SHOULD be a lot better than other prospects who will end up being just as good as him, and he’s lost some of his biggest years of development already because of his age. Now, Johnson is an individual, and this is based on averages, so I’m not claiming to know what will happen with him individually…..but it is a concern and does give you something to “not like”. I think it’s a bigger deal than you’re making it.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 6:55 AM PDT up reply actions
and after a strong show at the tourney he’ll be the envy of every GM
you have the script of the tourney already? that could be worth a fortune to the betting world.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 16, 2010 10:47 PM PDT reply actions
Trading Curry would be a typical Warriors move. Trade the 1 player that the fans love for a guy that you think and hope will be better. Trade the guy thats being compared to Steve Nash for the guy thats being compared to Derrick Rose. A bird in the hand is worth more than two in a bush. You have Curry and you know he’s very good.
If you’re really going to base your evaluations on “best player of a similar style that player reminds you of”, at least be fair to Wall. You should be looking at Wade as his comparison, not Rose.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Wade entered the NBA as a 21 year old and weighed 212 at the combine. We’ll see what 19 year old John Wall weighs, but he’s listed at 195. It’s not unreasonable to think he’ll put up some weight in the next couple years (freshman 15 anyone?). Anyways, the point is really that the Curry-Nash comparisons are completely of the mold of “let’s take the best player Curry reminds us of and compare them”, and by that logic, Wade fits that same mold pretty well for Wall – picking Derrick Rose as the comparison would be like picking Mike Bibby as Curry’s comparison.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Wade
is not even a point guard. How does it make any sense to compare the two?
Size, skillset, athleticism….people get way too into this “PG” thing – PG’s have the same skills as wings, they just also distribute and get teammates involved (in other words PG’s are just superior players!). With Wade, you’re talking about a guy that gets 6.5+ assists per 36 minutes, which is actually more than Derrick Rose (in Wade’s 2nd year in the league he racked up more assists than Rose has in either of his).
I’d also note that Wall is listed as being bigger and heavier than Rose. But again, the main point is Curry/Nash is a comparison based on the “best player of a similar style” – in Wall’s case, Wade is the best player of a similar style – similar size, athleticism, skillset.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions
picking Derrick Rose as the comparison would be like picking Mike Bibby as Curry’s comparison.
The Curry/Bibby comparison seems pretty apt.
no way
Curry’s going to be much better than Bibby. You’ll see.
I think he’s already better than Bibby, even at Bibby’s peak. Better shooter, more efficient scorer, better rebounder, better at stealing the ball. Plus 2-3 inches taller. I think he’s a more gifted passer too, though it may take a year or two to show up in the assist numbers. Unlike Bibby, Curry hasn’t had the luxury of playing alongside studly big men like Webber/Divac or Horford/Smith and long, studly wings like Peja, Christie and JJ.
The only area where Bibby in his prime has a slight edge is in taking care of the ball, but again, you have to attribute some of that to being able to play with great passers like Webber, Christie, Divac, and Johnson.
Plus, Curry is cute and doesn’t look like Verne Troyer.
Barring injury or some other weirdness, I’d rate Mike Bibby as Curry’s absolute floor.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Barring injury or some other weirdness, I’d rate Mike Bibby as Curry’s absolute floor.
Honestly, I’d say the same about Rose and Wall.
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Well...
Rose & Wall play different styles to Bibby… plus, Bibby’s skin color is much closer to Curry’s.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I meant Rose (at least the current version) is Wall’s floor. Rose is surprisingly not very good at the moment.
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Very surprising given the continued accolades and hype
How long do you think it’ll take for the general public to realize that he’s really just not very good?
Kevin Love, Brook Lopez, Westbrook, Randolph… I’d probably rather have any of them than Rose.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
I’m just in a wait and see mode, myself. I’m not writing him off, he’s still really young with plenty of potential, and you look at guys like Nash and Paul – they both made significant jumps after their first few years in the league. Rose is still only 21, maybe he’ll catch up to being as good as people think he is before they realize he isn’t?
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Absolutely
Still young with potential, but so are those other guys… and with the exception of Randolph, the others have already started producing. Rose needs to develop that jumper, something NBA players typically do, but still… it needs to happen.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Right on
Let’s hope the Wallflowers don’t get their wish.
Wallflowers
Haha, I hadn’t heard that one before. If you came up with it, I’m impressed — not just with the elegant catchphrase but also with the sly, backhanded implication that Wall fans are nerdier / less likely to get dates than Curry fans. Very well played.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Trading Curry would be a typical Warriors move.
I’ll disagree with this one rather significantly. A typical Warriors move would be to overvalue him while he was unproven, allowing an overly optimistic opinion block moves that could help the team, only to see him fail to develop into a superstar, grouse about how he hates it here and then wind up leaving for nothing or get moved in a panic “must get SOMETHING back” sort of deal.
It’s been a long time since the Warriors actually traded away someone who improved a bunch after leaving, or traded away a guy at peak popularity. Mostly players have been about what they’ve been after the trade and mostly they’ve traded guys who have worn out their welcome here.
If people are comparing Curry to Nash, it should be in the “we certainly hope Curry, who isn’t as good as Nash, improves so he can be as good as Nash” but there’s obvious differences. From day one, Nash was a significantly better distributor.
A bird in the hand is worth more than two in a bush.
This is not always true for NBA trades and a terrible blanket statement to use to dictate all your trade decisions. A gamble on a player with superstar making may be worth more than the reasonable, potentially rather good but less likely to be a superstar player.
A bird in the hand is worth more than two in a bush.
This is a statement best reserved for when you’re standing between Dick Cheney and a bush with birds in it…
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 17, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions
If you’re really going to base your evaluations on "best player of a similar style that player reminds you of", at least be fair to Wall. You should be looking at Wade as his comparison, not Rose.
Haha, Some people just wanna make it difficult don’t they?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 17, 2010 10:39 AM PDT reply actions
Seems like the Majority of the Warriors fans on here would trade Curry and take Wall. Here’s hoping you guys get your wish. However I dont think the majority of the season ticket holders would agree with that decision.
And that's the problem with the Warriors FO
They seem to think in terms of “The STHs like Player X, so we can’t trade him!” instead of “Wow, that’s good value for Player X and it will make our team better. More wins = happier STHs.”
In the immortal words of Mike Singletary: “I want winners!” I don’t care if we have to gut the team to acquire said winners, I just want them. I want to watch a team wearing the Golden State Warriors jerseys win lots of basketball games. I don’t care if Stephen Curry is traded to Minnesota if that move brings us winners.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 17, 2010 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions
maybe I'm crazy
But Wall is vastly overrated. He’s only #1 because it’s a very weak draft for bigs.
He’s only #1 because it’s a very weak draft for bigs.
Or because he has a special blend of size, skills and athleticism?
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m not disagreeing with his physical attributes. But if he had come out with Durant or Dwight Howard, we wouldn’t even be having this argument. No way he goes above those guys.
Durant might have gone ahead of him, but maybe not, I dunno – Durant’s not exactly an elite athlete, and athleticism does tend to be heavily favored when it comes to the draft, so I could see a plausible argument for Wall over Durant (though I won’t claim I have any idea who’d get picked first). Also, if you remember, Howard wasn’t thought of as a slam dunk, strong #1 pick. The Magic took a lot of flak for picking him over Okafor. Some people agreed, some disagreed, so I could plausibly see an argument for Wall being a good enough prospect to get picked over Howard, too. Would you consider Wall on the level of Okafor as a prospect, or not even on the level but in the same conversation at least? If he is, then he’s in the discussion for #1 overall for that draft.
My impression of John Wall’s draft stock right now is he’s a pretty solid #1 overall as far as recent history – the only guy I don’t think he would at least get a look at for #1 against is Lebron.
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Wall seems to be “middle tier top overall” (a category that goes back to about 0.05 seconds ago when I typed it. A heralded big would be picked ahead of him, were one available, because when one is available, then he’s the top talent in the draft. It’s rare that more than one of those guys comes available, and rarer still to have 2 (the O’Neal/Mourning draft being the clearest [Mourning would have gone #1 over just about any other year] with Howard/Okafor being close in that there were two who were clearly more heralded than all others. But Wall seems close to consensus top talent in the draft in that there’s not a whole lot of cries that this is a terrible draft year and we’re looking at a fraud like Bargnani being picked #1 or a few ‘probably real good players’ who could go #1 but it’s really hazy who the best is. My impression is that he’s a significant step higher regarded than Rose (who wasn’t a consensus — there was thoughts that Beasley could go #1) and is up there with the guards who have been seriously considered or picked #1, but wouldn’t go #1 if there was a polished big around.
but wouldn’t go #1 if there was a polished big around.
Definitely agree, I’m just not sure we’ve had any great prospect big men recently. As good as Howard is now, people had a lot more questions about him when he was drafted (probably stemming from disappointing careers from guys like Chandler, Curry and Kwame.
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
probably stemming from disappointing careers from guys like Chandler, Curry and Kwame
Yep… the fear of the unknown because 90% of the people with opinions had watched Blokafor dominate college ball for 3 years, while the only thing they knew about Howard was that he was a raw big out of HS… just like Chandler, Curry, and Brown (trying to remember KG was too hard).
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Look at the history of the #1 pick. Rose and Iverson are the only point guards taken that high in the last few decades. #1 is pretty much reserved for big guys (or insane talents like LeBron).
#1 is pretty much reserved for big guys (or insane talents like LeBron).
And it mostly should be. Big men win championships. I’d much rather have a big. Again, not trying to say Wall is a better prospect than some of these guys, just that he’s at least comparable enough (even taking position into account) to be given real consideration.
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
#1 is pretty much reserved for big guys (or insane talents like LeBron)
LeBron is a really big guy. He also just happens to be really fast, a great ball handler, and a phenomenal playmaker.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Durant might have gone ahead of him, but maybe not, I dunno
Let’s see… elite scorer, elite rebounder, complete physical mismatch? Yeah, Durantula goes ahead of Wall by a mile. It’s not like Wall’s throwing up crazy assist numbers. He’s definitely a great blend of size/speed/playmaking, but not on Durant’s level… who didn’t even go #1 in his own draft because there was a quality big that year. Wall over Howard OR Okafor is laughable. He might be in the discussion, but anybody with brains would take the big.
To draw an NFL comparison, remember Mario Williams over Reggie Bush? Houston took a lot of flak over that too, but who’s been the better NFL player? Bush is a glorified 3rd down back while Williams has registered almost 10 sacks a year.
Taking the big man may not be the “sexy” pick, and there will be plenty of people out there blinded by the athleticism, but at the end of the day the guy making the decision has to decide which player will have a bigger impact… and that’s almost always the big man.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions
the guy making the decision has to decide which player will have a bigger impact… and that’s almost always the big man.
And I wasn’t trying to present Wall as the correct pick in those instances, just pointing out that he probably has the talent for GM’s to at least give him some consideration, even if he ends up going after they do.
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Only crappy GMs would pick a guy like Wall over Durant or a quality big man
Wait… only crappy GMs pick at the beginning of the draft. So, he very well could get picked first because the person making that decision will inevitably be bad at making decisions.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Durant is the best college basketball player i have ever seen
and i watch a ton of college ball. I still can’t believe that Portland went with Oden. Can you imagine Druant playing with ROY and Aldridge? That might be the best team in the west had that happened. I’m just saying that Wall does not compare to Durant at all. he’s good but his jumper is suspet. Further more Turners jumpers is worse adn his mechanics are poor. I’m officially out there and maybe by myself. I’m not a turner fan. I don’t think his left hand is good enough fro him to be a full time ball handler in the nba. that with his 3pt shooting puts him down my draft board. I think he’ll be a great role player if he makes defense his number one focus. I’d much rather have johnson.
Can you imagine Druant playing with ROY and Aldridge? That might be the best team in the west had that happened.
1) Aldridge is overrated. He’s OK, but people talk about him like he’s an all star.
2) You realize that a team with Roy, Durant, and Aldridge has zero big men, right? Fine, they’ve got Joel Przybilla, Juwan Howard, and Marcus Camby (remember, these are the 2010 versions of Howard and Camby, not the 2001 versions). That means they’re going nowhere in the playoffs. They get beasted by LAL, SAS, Utah, and probably even have a tough time with Memphis.
Even with the dismal career Oden has had and the stellar career that Durant has had, I still think it’s even money which will win a championship first.
That being said, Durant is miles better than Wall and anybody else in this year’s draft. My comment was to suggest that only a stupid person would pick Wall over Durant and that it’s only possible because the GMs of crappy teams are typically stupid.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 20, 2010 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Do not understand why you would feel that this is a weak draft for bigs?
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 18, 2010 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
It could be a good draft for bigs. It’s an unknown draft for bigs as the bigs all have some questionmarks around them. Several may pan out or none may pan out. So far, there’s not any who are close enough to a sure thing to bank on, but clearly some guys with the ‘tools’ to be very good.
Yeah, that’s my feeling too – there’s actually a lot of talent with the bigs, but they all have huge question marks so it’s really unknown which will be good. Basically, none of them individually are amazing but there are enough intriguing/talented ones that you’d expect at least a couple to turn out pretty good.
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Am i the only Warrior fan hoping we lose more games than Minnesota so we have a better shot to get in the top 2?
Certainly not.
But since the chances of Minny picking up five games on us with 16 games remaining are basically nil, the hoping is mostly of the pipedream variety. If you haven’t noticed, the Wolves are a terrible, godawful team — worse by far than our team full o’ D-leaguers. They just lost consecutive games to the Suns and Jazz by a total of like 137 points.
As far as Turner @ #1: dude, you really need to recuse yourself on the subject. People are talking. ;-P
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 17, 2010 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions
But since the chances of Minny picking up five games on us with 16 games remaining are basically nil, the hoping is mostly of the pipedream variety. If you haven’t noticed, the Wolves are a terrible, godawful team — worse by far than our team full o’ D-leaguers. They just lost consecutive games to the Suns and Jazz by a total of like 137 points.
But, But, But….AL JEFFERSON!
by Missing Barry on Mar 17, 2010 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Dude....
it was only 60. That’s only 19 points more than we beat them by in November…
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
I was watching Around the horn earlier today and Wilbon said he talked to Alot of GM’s who said they would take Turner over Wall. He said he talked to reps from the warriors aswell. He said he talked to Kobe and Kobe said he thought Turner should be the number 1 pick. If the Nets get the 1st pick dont be surprised if they take Turner.
Well it shows you that NBA players (and good basketball players in general) are pretty inept talent evaluators, and thus make terrible decisions when they are promoted to high positions in the FO.
All the NBA players think Kobe is far better than Lebron, and many of the young, top AAU players, and college basketball players feel the same way.
Its obvious to people who even understand basketball from afar, and can understand statistics and not " best mid-range jumper in the game", or “hardest worker” know there are various players who are better (and have been better ) Bryant.
Kobe Bryant is another example…. Didn’t he want Andrew Bynum and Odom traded for a 35 year old Jason Kidd? Would the Lakers even be in title contention now, if they had made that move. Or what about his various statements about players being all stars like Ellis, and Jefferson, who are just high volume chuckers.
MJ wanted Pippen traded on draft day for a player none of you have heard of….
Basketball decisions shouldn’t be made by NBA players.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
+1 MDB look at MJ with overall responsibility for basketball decisions at Charllote the last 5 yrs.
Now that he owns the team maybe he can make Cap’Jack the manager!
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 18, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Basketball decisions shouldn’t be made by NBA players.
I’d qualify that in that basketball decisions shouldn’t be made by people just because they were/are NBA players. Some former players have been rather good decision makers (or at least appeared to be) like Kevin Pritchard and Jerry West. Some have been horrendous (like Bill Russell when he was the defacto GM in SAC or Jordan, who has now been responsible for picking Kwame Brown #1 and Adam Morrison #3).
There doesn’t seem to be anything magical about being able to play at the highest level that conveys an ability to know what skills/talents/abilities in others will translate to winning. I’m not even sure that many great players are really aware of what it is that they are doing that is responsible for their greatness and what is just part of what they do. That there are so many rather superstitious athletes suggests to me that they, like many people, attribute results to things unrelated. If an MLB pitcher allows himself to think that he’ll fail if he doesn’t hop over the basepath on his way to the mound or an NBA player believes that he has to wear a particular headband to play at his best, I have no faith that players will value particular contributions on the court appropriately as they relate to winning.
In other areas of life, anthropologists have studied these sorts of things and found that in complicated enviroments (and a professional sports league at the highest level probably qualifies) where the factors that lead to success are high and there are many variables to consider, often what people say is important isn’t terribly important. Successful strategies seem to be merely copying the successful people as much as possible without worrying about what qualities are peripheral to success. Especially when the copying is incomplete, the results may vary. Sometimes it leads to real confusion when things don’t go well (e.g. he’s scoring 20+ ppg; great players score a lot of points; he should continue to play the way he is, because scoring a lot of points is the marker of a great player; failure is the fault of others").
Knowing which qualities to look for doesn’t necessarily need to be something that one can even express (and will often times express wrong even when decisions are based on important variables) and doesn’t need statistical analysis in all cases. Statistical analysis is, however, a means of getting at the important variables systematically, without relying on the “intuition” that is really just the human brain processing the variables and coming up with its own analysis. All brains are not created or developed equally. Similarly, the results of the non-systematic approach vary greatly.
All the NBA players think Kobe is far better than Lebron
Nah, I think they say this for competitive reasons:
1. Kobe is an insecure SOB. If you say he’s #2 (or more realistically, #2 on his own team) and then play against him, he’ll have a huge vendetta out against you and your team. Bad news.
2. LeBron is a securse SOB. He knows he’s #1 and that anybody who says otherwise is just and placating Kobe.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
There’s also the “Kobe has won titles” factor. This is a convenient trump card. By playing it, you do not openly admit that the quality of teammates has a gigantic influence on whether or not you can win and thus do not alienate other players suggesting that they are what is holding Lebron back. “He has to learn how to win” is better than saying “the big men Kobe has played with [Shaq, Gasol] so significantly trum the bigs Lebron has had [Big Z, Varejao] has had that it more than makes up for the difference in quality of Lebron over Kobe.” Praise teammates when you win, do not criticize when you lose seems to translate to “don’t consider them when you consider who the better player is”.
But Lebron has Shaq and Kobe has Shaq. If Lebron doesn’t win a championship with him, it obviously proves Kobe is better. :)
by Missing Barry on Mar 18, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Wilbon said he talked to Alot of GM’s who said they would take Turner over Wall.
They always try to mask their real intentions, if they say what they really think it makes it easier for their opposition. The truth will only come out when their draft timer starts ticking down.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 18, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Yah yah...
Whatever. It’s just GMs trying to jockey around so that nobody knows which players they’re targeting and they can keep some of their leverage. If the the team at #1 wanted Wall and knew the team at #2 loved Turner, they could take Turner, swap picks, and save millions of dollars for nothing. It’s all just posturing. Turner is a great player. The team that gets him will be happy. Doesn’t make him better than Wall though.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 18, 2010 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Is it that hard for you guys to think ppl actually like Turner more than Wall? As i’ve been watching Tournament coverage today most analyst’s like Turner more than Wall. President Obama even said he thinks Turner is the best player in the nation. I know that has nothing to do with the draft and upside and all that but like i said dont be surprised if Evan Turner is the first player to come off the board in the draft. Larry Riley will be in attendance to watch Turner play tommorow. If he likes what he see and we get the first pick I dont think he would hesitate to take Turner first.
Being the best college player doesn’t mean you will be the best NBA player. I think people have been trying to prove this to you for about a month now.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
Laettner is one of the best college players of all time. Specifically, he was the best player in college in 1992. He won every award there was that year, and was on the original Dream Team. The only college player on the team. Presumably, they thought he was the best.
He was the best Power Forward in College. Thats about it. Shaq was by far the most dominant thats why him and Zo went ahead of him. And he was a winner thats why he was on Team USA. It didnt hurt that he was white either.
No, shaq went over him because he was obviously the best pro prospect in that draft.
sorta like Cousins and Turner this year ?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 18, 2010 10:03 PM PDT reply actions
I’m telling you
a) that you appear to be massively incompetent at using the reply button. I don’t know if you’re just short the synapses to make the link or are doing it to be spiteful at this point. If the latter, do realize that the powers that be can and will remove poorly threaded posts.
and
b) yes, in college, Laettner was the more effective player. He certainly didn’t show the sort of brute force and explosiveness that would translate to being a better NBA player, but for sheer ability to win college games Laettner was better. I don’t like saying that either. I hated Laettner. Two of my happiest moments were went Montross screamed at him from the tunnel as blood was dripping from Montross’s head vowing to come back as soon as the last stitch was tied and making good on his promise, coming back to seal off the win and b) watching Laettner getrejected from Players on Franklin St. when he thought it would be a good idea to try to get his (presumably fake) ID. What. Did he think that he wouldn’t be recognized? What did his fake ID say? That he was Bill Walton?
He was despicable (with full on Daffy Duck spit-spray intonation there). But Laettner was a hell of a college player, at the time, the best in the country. There is a reason he played in 4 final 4s and won two titles. Don’t confuse what you see in the pros with what happened in college.
The interesting thing is, Laettner was actually a very solid pro: 868 games, career 15.5 pts / 8.1 reb / 3.1 assists per 36, career .557 TS%. (Psycho T will be extremely lucky to do that well as pro). I think it’s testament to what a stud Laettner was in college that he’s generally considered to have been a semi-bust in the NBA.
I hated Laettner.
Well, as a UNC grad, you’re probably not objective, but is there anyone other than Duke fans who didn’t feel this way? He just had that irritating silver-spoon demeanor, and the type of Rob Lowe / Jason Priestley face that chicks tend to dig and guys tend to want to punch…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 19, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Tyreke's injury?
Does this mean the Kings will seriously tank now? We’re only 4 games ahead of them in the lotto race and only 5 ahead of the next team so we could take a serious hit to our future if we win too many more games.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 20, 2010 9:19 PM PDT reply actions

by 























