Golden State Warriors to waive Raja Bell to keep NBA D-League Call-up Reggie Williams
by Atma Brother ONE on Mar 21, 2010 9:45 AM PDT
in News
Email
PrintLast night's L to the Memphis Grizzlies (see Recap + Game Day Links) was definitely better than that horrific L that capped 2 dozen straight losses in San Antonio (see Recap + Game Day Links), but that's not the big news item of the day for the Warriors.
I guess this means he has to give up his free floor seats at the Oracle?
(pic via www.csnbayarea.com)
Jump for the 411!
GSoM friend MT broke all the details in Warriors Will Waive Raja to Make Room for Reggie over at Inside the Warriors. Raja Bell understands the situation and summed it up perfectly:
RAJA BELL: "I completely understand. If nothing else, I consider myself a professional. I never want to come off as a spoiled, coddled, NBA player. The fact is, I'm not playing this year. ... I can't expect you to hold on to me for my Bird rights when you're playing with eight players."
Definitely head on over to MT's piece and read the entire thing. There's lots of good quotes and thoughts.
Bell has been nothing but professional during his short stay with the Warriors. He's said all the right things and been a good mentor to the younger players on this team. I doubt he'd be too interested in playing for a team that has been "rebuilding" for 16 straight seasons, but it would be great to have Bell around in some role next season. Don Nelson, Larry Riley, and Bell seem to have a mutual respect for one another that dates back to their Dallas Mavericks days. Who knows? Maybe Nellie would be grooming Bell for an assistant coaching spot.
Overall I'd rate this as being the right move. The Warriors have a low head count (understatement of the year) and Reggie Williams has really shined here. It would be a mistake to avoid cutting him just to hold on to Bell for his Bird rights (if someone offers him an increase over his salary this season, it's NOT a good idea to get into a bidding war). It will be nice to see how Williams plays for the remainder of the season. As of right now he looks like a nice player to bring off the bench in the league for years to come.
Believe or not, but Devean George has given this team some solid minutes- better than Marco Belinelli could have I'd venture to say. George is not a young fella by any stretch (not even at that Stephen Jackson level), but you can't knock his hustle and effort on D. He's been stroking it from 3pt land at a respectable rate the past 2 months as well. We've heard a ton about the "problem captains" on this team this season such as Stephen "Captain" Jackson and Monta "can't do it" Ellis, but I think George, Bell, and Corey Maggette haven't gotten enough credit for being solid citizens on this team this year.
Also, I wanted to give some major props to my man Scott over at Ridiculous Upside who was pushing for the Dubs to call-up Williams as earlier as this past December (see Reggie Williams, Golden State Warriors Call-Up, is Good. Toldjya So). Williams has not disappointed.
Was waiving Raja Bell to keep Reggie Williams on the Warriors for the rest of the season a good move?
79 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This move makes sense. Williams will give us some depth next season. Also, keeping George makes sense. He has been playing pretty well, and let’s face it, we need people to play right now. Raja can’t do that, unfortunately. I like the guy, though. Hope we can get him next season. Doubt it, though.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
Its not a bad move becuse of this
Its a bad move because we let another expiring contract get waived.
This FO is full of incompetence.
Are you telling me that the best we can do with 3 of our expiring contracts(George, Claxton, Bell) is waive 2 and sign two D-league players.
Think about that for a second. We signed have signed 3 d-league players. Have we been winning because of those 3 D-league players? NOPE. If we were winning because of these D-League players then I would praise the brilliance of the FO, but this is not the case. This is the FO giving up. This is a FO that’s weak willed. The Blazers faced tons of injuries too and they were still making deals to get Camby. Who did we get at the trade deadline? Tolliver?
I hope all the D-league players are cut this year maybe including CJ depending on who we draft. We need to cut the excess fat off of this roster. Anybody who doesn’t have a specific role and can’t help us with winning needs to go.
The Blazers faced tons of injuries too and they were still making deals to get Camby.
Except for Oden and Pryz their injured have come back. And according to your ‘excess fat’ logic the Warriors would consist of Curry, Monta, Magette, and Morrow. That’s a pretty thin team. Injuries of Biblical proportions seem to not have entered your consciousness.
The Blazers were still winning
when they lost their players to injuries.
"Biblical Proportions"?
A little over the top…
by Billy Frijoles on Mar 22, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
So what did you want us to do with his expiring?
The trade deadline is passed, there was nothing to do with his expiring. The money will still come off the books at the end of the season, so who cares. Why have an injured body around when we can keep a player with a little bit of promise. Reggie’s deal probably isn’t multi year, the rest of the season will be like a tryout.
Re: Are you telling me that the best we can do with 3 of our expiring contracts(George, Claxton, Bell) is waive 2 and sign two D-league players.
That’s kind of one of those thoughts that sounds logical on the surface and the fan in me want’s to say “yah. WTF?”. But, the thing is, who could they have traded those expirings for? That’s the missing piece of that argument. The only thing teams are going to give the W’s in return for expirings is a longer-term deal and there are no superstars on the market.
We already have all the big dollars wrapped up in one-dimensional players. Maggette, Ellis, and Biedrins. Do you want to add Amare’s one-dimensional game to that list? Otherwise, there is nobody that I’ve heard of as being available that would improve the team.
Of those three, Biedrins brings the most needed skill to the table and at the least cost. If he comes back to form, he’ll also be a viable threat to score on offense (he can also pass a bit too) which makes him probably the most valuable of that bunch.
They don’t need to get more specialists with bad deals, they need to somehow get rid of a couple of Mullin’s overreactions for some similarly skilled guys with better contracts.
The roster has depth at every position if everyone is healthy. The hardest positions to fill are kind of set (4 &5) as is the 3. You have your PG of the future and a SG who just needs to chill out on the 20’ brick-fest. If he “can’t do it, just can’t”, well, SG is the easiest spot to fill in the NBA and there is always someone who will want his scoring.
The biggest issue is health. You can’t trade expirings for that.
I give pressure the reach-around.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 21, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Isn't this misleading?
Expiring contracts will expire at the end of the season. It’s almost the end of the season. If we waive them their contract will still expire and that frees up money at the end of the season. What is an expiring contract worth if the trade deadline over and the season so close to the end? I don’t get it.
Re: Isn't this misleading?
No. Maybe poorly written, but not misleading.
To put it very plainly. I’d rather let the expirings expire than make a trade for a player that’s not going to be better than what is on the roster for next year and has a long contract. That’s it.
My point is, there was no trade to be had. If there was, what was it? No trade >>> Bad trade.
I give pressure the reach-around.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 21, 2010 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t see how that follows. Nor does your comment follow from what bloodsweatndonuts wrote:
We already have all the big dollars wrapped up in one-dimensional players. Maggette, Ellis, and Biedrins.
This doesn’t preclude basically everyone on the Warriors being one-dimensional.
Personally, I might expand the definition of one-dimensional to mean “too flawed, in one way or another, to be the type of player you can build a good team around.” By this definition, I think everyone on the team may be one-dimensional, with the possible exceptions of Curry and Randolph.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 22, 2010 6:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Perhaps this will help as it wasn't the best-written post ever
Here is my premise: If you have $30m wrapped up in 3 players, they should all be exceptional or at least very good at more than one thing. You have a limited amount of space under the Luxury Tax so, that chunk should be eaten up by maybe three players that are “dominant” in more than one major area or, ideally, two that are dominant in 3 to 4.
Maggette is a dominant scorer. He can do it limited minutes and limited shots. A+ on that. He’s a pretty bad passer and he’s about average at everything else. $10m? I suppose, if it was a skill that the Warriors were lacking, but, it is not. So, he’s expensive and somewhat redundant. No Warrior scores at the exceptional combination of rate and volume that he does, but $10m is a bit much for that incremental upgrade.
Ellis, can be a dominant scorer and used to be headed in that direction. For some reason, he’s taking a lot of bad shots which negates his volume scoring. He’s dominant at stealing the ball and he’s also, an all-world turnover machine which IMO cancels out the steals. So, if everyone on the Warriors is leading the league in turnovers, you’d have a point.
Biedrins, as I said above, is probably the one I’d keep since he is a dominant rebounder and the Warriors are desperate in that category. The difference between him and the next guy down is more than incremental. This is the case where I’d pay $9m for that skill if he can stop being a negative on offense. He used to be a “two dominant skill” guy with being in the top 1-5 in both rebounding per 36 and FG%. If he can get back to that, then he’s the perfect $9m guy for this roster.
I give pressure the reach-around.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 22, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I hope all the D-league players are cut this year maybe including CJ depending on who we draft. We need to cut the excess fat off of this roster. Anybody who doesn’t have a specific role and can’t help us with winning needs to go.
Thats terrible of you to say. Besides Hunter, all of our D-League/Undrafted players look like keepers, who help this team out.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
I don't believe Tolliver has a spot on this team next year...
we’re already occupied at the 3 and 4 spot with guys that NEEDS to play.
by Cpt. Jack in the Box on Mar 21, 2010 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I think he does.
At least 3rd string center. And i think he’s better than Turiaf.
Nellie needs to go! but while we suffer....John Wall or Evan Turner please!
Even if he does stay...
the max he’s going to get is like 2-3 minutes a game.
With everyone healthy,I find it hard to fit any minutes in for Tolliver.
Turiaf might not be better than Tolliver at scoring,but he brings that energy off the bench we need.
by Cpt. Jack in the Box on Mar 21, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Tolliver is better than Hunter
But Hunter has size we need. He’s played very well lately, I’d like him back over Tolli since he has more size and more of a post game
We all love the Warriors..
We all hate Cohan as an owner of this franchise…
Hunter
doesn’t need the ball to be effective. Unlike the rest of the team. He seems to be capable of putting up double doubles and playing tough D without much focus/attention on him. That itself makes him worth keeping somewhere.
by Billy Frijoles on Mar 22, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Unlike the rest of the team. He seems to be capable of putting up double doubles and playing tough D without much focus/attention on him
Yeah, I was impressed by his coolness. He would be a great backup or platoon center. If we plan to move Dre we should keep hunter.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 22, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
What else can we do?
Reggie Williams is a good player, probably more valuable than Tolliver and Hunter. At this point, we need healthy bodies to get us through the end of the season. I like Bell a lot and thought he could have done something good for us, but he’s only played 1 game and hasn’t really done much for us. Good luck to Bell, seemed like a really good guy. He’s the guy I always saw sitting on floor seats cheering on the Dubs.
AWFUL MOVE
Raja Bell is a legit NBA player who has a lot to add to any team, including good defense, something the warriors don’t understand. Cutting Bell over Devean George is nothing short of a joke. “I just can’t cut a healthy player” says Riley, “I’m just a dumbass who doesn’t understand basketball or contracts” (made that 2nd one up)
I don't get why this is an awful move.
Bell wasn’t playing. Probably wasn’t going to play and probably wasn’t going to sign next year. If he is going to sign next year, this move will have no effect on that. Plus his contract was coming off the books anyway so who cares?
by won't stop on Mar 21, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It was a tough choice between Devean George and Raja Bell
The Warriors wanted to keep Raja Bell around, I presume because he’s a great teacher or role model or whatever in the locker room for the young kids, so at first glance, waiving George would be the logical choice. But waiving a healthy body puts that much more strain on the existing healthy players still playing hard with a limited roster, so that logic would mean that Bell should be waived, but you risk pissing off Bell and having him look elsewhere during the summer.
I think waiving Bell ends up being the better choice. Not only do you keep a healthy player on the floor, you also send a message to the other healthy players that Riley hasn’t forgotten about them and is looking out for them. That’s consistent with Riley waiving Speedy over Hunter back when Tolliver’s 10-days were up. That’s also consistent with Riley’s rule requiring injured players to be on the bench. It helps Riley build and maintain rapport between himself and the players, which can be helpful later on during contract talks. Of course, all this is still risking alienating Raja Bell.
Fortunately for Riley, Bell totally understands the decision, supports it, and promises not to let it impact his summer decision. So Riley gets the best of everything. He gets to keep a healthy George on the floor. He gets to show the players that he hasn’t forgotten about them. And he doesn’t lose his relationship with Bell, assuming Bell sticks to what he says, and based on what I’ve seen of him, I think he will.
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 21, 2010 10:50 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Not only do you keep a healthy player on the floor, you also send a message to the other healthy players that Riley hasn’t forgotten about them and is looking out for them.
That’s a very good message to send. While everyone is making jokes about this ownership and team (rightfully so), don’t forget that there’s 8 (sometimes more) guys out there playing their heart out every night. Their effort cannot be faulted.
Golden State of Mind :: Always keeping it... "Unstoppable Baby!" | SBNation.com
by Atma Brother ONE on Mar 21, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
assuming Bell sticks to what he says, and based on what I’ve seen of him, I think he will.
it would probably be to his advantage to keep his relationship with the Dubs on solid ground, he’s not getting any younger and we are know to over pay for over the hill players.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 21, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Yah well that’s what you said about the Belinelli trade, and now look!
Oh, yah. Good point.
I give pressure the reach-around.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 21, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions
This.move.does.not.affect.anything.
C’mon, man: a butterfly flaps its wings…
When armageddon comes, I’ll know why.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 21, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions
What are you talking about?
This.move.does.not.affect.anything.
If we didn’t do this move, we would only have 3 guards on the (healthy) roster instead of 4.
And we all know how Nellie loves he 3 guard lineups
So let me get this straight... Maggette is the healthy guy.
"Winning is not enough. All others must lose." - Larry Ellison
by Badly Browned on Mar 21, 2010 5:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I think he’s saying that cutting Bell has does not affect the team today, or going forward.
I think we all understand that Williams has produced enough to warrant a contract for the rest of the year and that cutting George was not a good option because they are running out of bodies, he is healthy and he knows the offense and the defensive rotations.
I give pressure the reach-around.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 21, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Although I jump on the FO all the time, they had no choice but to make this move. An injured team can’t cut a healthy body. Personally, I would have waived Radmanovic instead of Bell, but I think the cap hit would have been more severe. I’m not sure, but I think Radmanovic still has a year left on his deal.
Anthony Morrow's jumper is so pure, he has to cut it with baking soda.
Radman has a player option next year
so yeah, he basically has a year left.
by IQofaWarrior on Mar 21, 2010 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Williams is a friggin' gamer, unbelieveable gift he is
As far as Bell, we can resign him off-season. We need to cull players at the end of the season. I say Reggie stays – He is legit!
We got the raw end of that deal.
by Rocco is a Giants fan on Mar 21, 2010 12:50 PM PDT reply actions
Doesn't seem to matter
Would like to see Raja next year, but not really devastated that he might be gone. Wouldn’t be comfortable with them giving him much more than the mid level. Cool dude though, as far as I can tell from my couch.
by Duh Duh Man on Mar 21, 2010 1:03 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
It's a good move
Bell is injured, George was not. We need this 8 man rotation, because having smaller and smaller rotations means more minutes on Curry and Monta, more minutes means a larger chance of injury from stress from the elongated playtime.
However, it was no excuse to waste the 3 expiring contracts as someone else mentioned, we could’ve turned those 3 contracts into 1 or 2 other expiring contracts from other teams. Would’ve freed up 1 or 2 roster spaces for the D-Leaguers.
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!
Alexander Johnson,
Maybe now we can call up Alexander Johnson from the D-league, the guy Ridiculous upside has been pimpin’. With Hunter hurting, warriors need a semblance of a big man.
At least the Warriors can achieve 1 record this year: most d-league callups in a single year.
Good Move
I always knew it was a bad trade from the beginning, getting Bell and Radmanovic was pretty much salary dump. Finding a young talented player like Reggie is at least worth more then having two injured players. For those who say Raja Bell would resign with the Warriors, question is how much? I would rather have a cheap Reggie then an expensive Raja. I think what this team needs to do is focus on trading Biedrins, Maggette and Ellis. If Mayo and Thabeet trade is still on the table, do it. If we can package Beans and Maggette for an expiring contract or a bad contract do it.
The biggest mistake this team done was to build around Ellis and Beans. If we can correct that mistake, we have enough solid rotational players like CJ, Buike, Reggie, Tolliver, Hunter, Morrow and we can best believe with the way our scouts keep finding solid players in D League, we will find one or two every year. We got Curry, AR, Wright as our future. Get rid of Ellis, Maggette and Beans contract, trade for or sign a legit big man in 2011.
Waaaarriors
I'm all for the move but...
Was it possible to shut down Turiaf for the year, without cutting anyone?
By the way
Check out Reggie Williams’ per 36 numbers through 11 games with the Warriors:
- 19.2 ppg
- 5.0 rpg
- 3.4 apg
Granted he’s been on fire from downtown, but man- impressive. 64.8% TS!
Golden State of Mind :: Always keeping it... "Unstoppable Baby!" | SBNation.com
by Atma Brother ONE on Mar 21, 2010 5:17 PM PDT reply actions
Reggie Williams is the Real Deal
D league or not, this guy has led every league he has played in (2X NCAA, 26.3 D-League), and statistically leads the Warriors in FG%, 3PT%, and FT%, granted, in only 11 games. He really worked his butt off, and made the most of his 2X 10-day opportunity. He also showed he is a team guy, good passer, unhesitating on the boards, low-turnover, low fouler, and is working hard on his defense; all, without even having time to work with the team and learn the plays. He deserves this shot, and could really be part of a future for the Warriors. Bell is a class act, and a consumate professional. I am happy Reggie will get an extended opportunity, particularly in the summer.
by dinohealth on Mar 21, 2010 5:49 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
It wasn’t a good or bad move. It was the only move to make.
by ChronicMasticator on Mar 21, 2010 7:18 PM PDT reply actions
reggiew55 (Reggie's twitter, about 5 hours ago)
Hard work pays off !!! just signed for the rest of the season . I love the bay
====
Welcome aboard, Reggie. Hope you keep learning these last 13 games, and right through summer.
Amen! I can go to sleep, in Europe, now. Mission accomplished! Good luck, Reggie, and keep on working hard. You are all heart. Thanks, for not letting your man down! Dinohealth is signing out off Reggie's net...for good.
by dinohealth on Mar 21, 2010 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That made less sense than those spam posts. Rec!
I give pressure the reach-around.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 21, 2010 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hard work pays off !!! just signed for the rest of the season . I love the bay
Ok, but if you screw up our lotto run you’re outta here.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 22, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Why do healthy bodies even matter at this point?
We suck, this season is over. I would rather play a man down and salvage any momentum possible to keep Bell next year. I know that technically the move doesn’t mean anything in that respect. Bell can still sign here, but we all know it’s not likely, especially now that we have no ties to him whatsoever.
Have you noticed the limited minutes that Morrow is playing right now with Reggie on the team? We should’ve given Morrow all of George’s minutes and cut George, then do whatever it takes to keep ties with Bell and sign him in the offseason. That would have been a much better play.
For one, you end up playing people for too many minutes, resulting in more injuries. We don’t need that.
Welcome to the Pit of Despair! Don't even think about trying to escape.
Do you realize that Morrow and George are playing 20 min. a game over the last 4?
Why can’t Morrow just be playing 40? Who wants to watch Devean George play 20 minutes a night for a 19 win team?!
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 6:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Why do healthy bodies even matter at this point?
It matters because there is a league rule. The league requires that you have 8 players able to play for any game. This has not been a given at several points this season. I don’t know if there would be any sanctions, but I would expect the league to frown upon cutting a healthy player to keep a player deemed most likely out for the season when we’ve on more than one occasion had to petition for an exception to the 15-contract maximum just to be able to get 8 guys who suit up.
I don’t know if there would be any sanctions, but I would expect the league to frown upon cutting a healthy player to keep a player deemed most likely out for the season
but why wouldn’t we pick up a worse player to increase our lotto chances? Playin better now is counter productive.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Mar 22, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
This is only bad if there's an intention to sign Bell
IF the intent in the offseason is to sign Raja Bell, then this is a bad move because now if the W’s sign him it has to be within the available cap space. Going over will incur luxury tax.
If he was a FA, but finished his contract with the W’s, then they could sign him and go over the cap without paying the luxury tax…
I agree
and if there isn’t an intention to sign a player like Bell, then it’s hard to imagine this organization ever turning the corner. I like Reggie and the way he plays, but the reality is we already have guys like Reggie in Morrow and Azubuike. Maybe they can’t pass or defend quite as well as Reggie with the eye test over this short period of games, but they both have been very successful in their short careers.
That’s besides the point, keep Reggie. But to drop a guy like Bell who could potentially be a difference maker on this team seems silly. And for what, to add another limited wing player or to keep Devean George around for the “stretch run”? This is why we are the Golden State Warriors.
And quite frankly, our insistence as a fanbase to declare that moves like this “don’t mean anything” plays into the hands of our completely unimaginative front office. There is a human side to every move, and anybody knows that if there is intention to keep Bell, he must be shown that with our actions. I don’t buy his quotes that it doesn’t matter to him, that he understands. He’s a standup guy that won’t throw an employer under the bus. That said, there are already rumors that teams want to work him out during the last week of the season so that they can sign him for the last week as a good faith gesture to then hopefully lock him up next year.
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions
if there isn’t an intention to sign a player like Bell, then it’s hard to imagine this organization ever turning the corner.
An intention to sign a 34 year old guard, known mostly for his defense when defense seems to decline rapidly with age, who is coming off a season where he missed most of it with injury, who projects to be a limited time backup is what makes teams turn the corner?
But to drop a guy like Bell who could potentially be a difference maker on this team seems silly.
It does seem silly to think that Bell would be the difference maker.
And for what, to add another limited wing player or to keep Devean George around for the "stretch run"? This is why we are the Golden State Warriors.
This was about being able to put 8 healthy bodies on the court, something that hasn’t been a given for much of the season.
And quite frankly, our insistence as a fanbase to declare that moves like this "don’t mean anything" plays into the hands of our completely unimaginative front office.
Except for the fact that it doesn’t mean anything, that’s true.
I think you've belabored the point that it doesn't matter
To say that Raja Bell would not be a difference maker on this Warrior team absent of any defense or toughness is your opinion. I strongly disagree. Bell would be more valuable to the Warriors than Reggie Williams next year. To imply that Bell would not be a valuable defensive asset to the Warriors because of the general point that “defense seems to decline rapidly with age” is just not enough in my opinion to not go after him. He made a difference in the very brief period he was on the court and bench for the Warriors.
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions
To imply that Bell would not be a valuable defensive asset to the Warriors because of the general point that "defense seems to decline rapidly with age" is just not enough in my opinion to not go after him.
It is not my opinion that players decline with age. It is an empirical fact. How much depends on the player. Are you disputing that players decline, or do you just somehow believe that bolstering the back of the bench is really going to boost this team?
He made a difference in the very brief period he was on the court and bench for the Warriors.
A very small sample size.
So are you saying that a healthy Bell would not help?
Plus, he would not be at the back of the bench. He would probably start and play 25 minutes a night. In fact, Bell is the kind of player that might work in rotation with a Curry/Ellis backcourt to compensate for their defensive liabilities.
And no, I’m not saying that players don’t decline with age. But it just seems to me that all teams need a variety of different pieces: some young, some old; some guys who can fill it up, and some that can get stops. This is an “empirical fact” that this organization continues to ignore. Do you disagree?
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions
I am saying that prioritizing Raja Bell as a means to fix the team is short-sighted and suggests priorities that are far, far out of whack with what it takes to build a winning team. They should prioritize keeping him at about the same level as preventing stuffed animal abuse.
If Bell was not at or near the back of the bench, then something would have gone horribly, horribly wrong (again), far more wrong than Bell near the front of the bench would fix.
If you are of the opinion that teams need vet players who can play defense, I don’t disagree. However, Raja Bell is not a unique talent. He is far, far, far from irreplaceable. It sounds as if you do not believe this. If the idea is to get a vet who provides those skills, I’d suggest targeting one who is younger. The odds of paying a 34 year old to be injured and show extremely diminished skills is higher than targeting younger vets.
short-sighted to go after a player like Raja Bell as opposed to another offensive minded D-leaguer?
cutting Bell was extremely short-sighted. This was a move to secure as many wins this year as possible. Nellie knows that new management might not keep him around. This is about winning 5 more games this year. Fine.
But dude, are you seriously arguing that Bell would not be a step in the right direction for this organization? I’m not saying he’s the answer to all our problems, and I’m not saying he’s going to be a part of this team’s core for the next decade, but in the meantime, while Curry comes into his own and we sort out who is going to lead this team, why not secure a guy like Bell?
“extremely diminished skills” is a bit of an overstatement. I see a guy who’s not only defended but shot almost 40% from 3 the last couple years.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3467
“If Bell was not at or near the back of the bench, then something would have gone horribly wrong” – on what ground are you arguing this point? So would it be better to have Reggie Williams as your 6th man? What is the alternative that you are arguing that defends this move by the Warriors?
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
What I'm asking you is...
what does it take to build a winning team, jae?
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
But dude, are you seriously arguing that Bell would not be a step in the right direction for this organization?
I am seriously saying that as moves go, it’s insignificant. I am seriously saying that if you’re banking on a 34 year old bench player being a step in the right direction for a team that isn’t even close to being mediocre right now, your priorities are totally out of whack. Terrible teams shouldn’t build by getting guys in the twilight of their careers and expecting much if anything from them.
So would it be better to have Reggie Williams as your 6th man? What is the alternative that you are arguing that defends this move by the Warriors?
Please look up “strawman”. Either you do not know what it means or you are intentionally using one or you are just hopelessly confused.
I do know what a "straw man" is
and that’s why I was asking you to clarify what you are saying. I don’t mean to put words in your mouth or distort your position. From what I can tell, you’re not saying much. You’re saying that this isn’t about Williams or George or anybody, it’s just not a significant move. Ok, great.
But it just seems to me that every decision the front office makes should be about securing “Better players”, no matter where that player fits on the roster. So even if you presume that Bell should be a bench player, I would argue that so too should Williams, and Devean George shouldn’t even be on your team if you want to be successful. I would value these players Bell > Williams > George.
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions
But it just seems to me that every decision the front office makes should be about securing "Better players", no matter where that player fits on the roster.
Whatever seems to you is irrelevant when considering some realities of the rules involving NBA contracts. Some moves are about securing ‘better players’ (curious capitalization of ‘better’ omitted), but some have to be about fielding a team. (And keeping Bell hardly qualifies as getting better players when he cannot presently play.) When you can only field 8 healthy bodies and are at the limit of your contracts, waiving one of the healthy bodies is not a realistic option. Cut George to sign Williams and you’re then asking the league for (yet another) exception and you’re down to 7 guys who can suit up. I’m not even sure the league would have allowed that. I’m not sure it’s ever been tested.
I would value these players Bell > Williams > George.
Long term value? Maybe. (I tend to think that in long term value the actual equation is Bell=Williams=George=0.) In terms of immediate "need to suit up 8 healthy guys because that’s what the league dictates you need to do and Bell doesn’t fit that bill.
I really do find this notion that somehow keeping either George or Bell in terms of impact on the team next year and going forward (and very likely Williams, though he’s the lone wildcard since he’s still young) is somewhere between totally irrelevant and meaningless, with a strong possibility of total insanity in terms of thinking about keeping guys in their mid 30s who have been injured significantly this year to be on a team that’s terrible where they have between 0% and 0.001% of being helpful at the point in time when the team has improved enough to matter at all.
In terms of what they’ve done this year, Williams has played well. His ability to put the ball in the basket efficiently has been more than a bit impressive. I’d rather keep him than Bell a) because there’s a chance he might be around if and when the team gets good and b) he’s an unknown at a point in his career where players can and do still improve. Bell is not at this point.
And once again, in the short term, having guys who can actually suit up is important. In the long term, George? Bell? Who cares? George is gone. If Bell comes back for anything more than the vet minimum, I’ll be mad at management for wasting their money on a guy who won’t be around if and when the Warriors ever become a winner. I’d rather have them try out younger guys. I’d rather have them get vets who are younger and might be around for at least a few years.
Once again: This.move.does.not.matter.
I think your assessment of Bell vs. Williams for next year is incorrect
I’d like to see a year from now how each will have contributed to their respective teams. I still think Bell has a couple productive years in him, you clearly do not. Reggie may turn out to be a nice player, but once again, he’s a redundant piece on this roster: a young, offensive player.
I don’t really know what else to say. I understand that dropping Bell isn’t the biggest deal in the world and I know that we need 8 healthy players on the roster. The front office could have made the roster work for the remaining games based on the premise that Bell is just a better asset for next year’s Warriors than Reggie Williams.
To me, this move more than anything points to the fact that Bell was not going to sign here regardless. If that is the case, than yah, this.move.does.not.matter.
by eastbayglory on Mar 22, 2010 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Whether they contribute to their respective teams isn’t the same thing as whether they’d contribute to the Warriors. If you are a terrible team (and the Warriors are) investing in a 34 year old is very different than if you are a good team that needs the final piece. This is a very important distinction. It does not seem to be one you are making.
If he was a FA, but finished his contract with the W’s, then they could sign him and go over the cap without paying the luxury tax…
Whether or not he was our free agent affects whether or not we can re-sign him independent of the salary cap, but it does not impact the luxury tax in any way at all. Do not confuse the cap and the tax. They are different things entirely.
The reason it is a bad move is because they will now need to use exception for Bell
You are correct in that the luxury tax is not impacted but had the Warriors kept him they could have went over the salary cap plus held on to their mid level exception to sign another free agent. The releasing of Bell means now you must choose between Bell and another free agent since either move will mean using the exception. Generally there is about 10 million between cap and luxury tax so that would not have been an issue to keep Bell plus add someone another free agent with mid-level. The proper move would have been to release George and sign another D-Leaguer preferably one who can rebound. This season is shot.
If it took more than the vet min to keep Bell, it’s too expensive. Teams don’t need to use exceptions to sign players at that point. If it takes the mid level to keep him, that’s money that should better be used on a guy who has a chance of being with the team in the future should they ever turn the corner. It might make some sense if you are a good team that is filling in the right pieces around a possible contender. But an awful team that gives MLE money to a 34 year old reserve? That’s idiotic.
The proper move would have been to release George and sign another D-Leaguer preferably one who can rebound.
It’s not clear that this was an option. Riley’s comments, as usual don’t reveal anything; he doesn’t openly mention the CBA constraints even when they exist. But the team has to field 8 healthy bodies for games. The move came because Williams had to have his contract picked up or be released. He was one of 8 healthy bodies. So was George. Dumping George would have meant the space to keep Williams, but not the space to keep Williams and pick up (yet) another D-leaguer. This situation has not precedent so far as can tell, but I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if releasing George while only 7 other players were ready to play was not an option with the league.
The proper move is to not care and realize that if you’re worried about George or Bell going forward, you’ve lost your marbles.
I would have liked to see see a defensive specialist brough in from the D League
This season is lost. Williams is decent, but there is no reason to keep him so we can try to win a couple more games. He will not be here next year.
The Dubs could have tried to find a Defensive minded player to bring in and see how he would fit into a Nellie team. This would potentially lead to a place on the roster next year unlike Reggie William’s stint, since we may not have any great defenders next year depending on how injuries, etc play out.
With 4 potential scorers on the floor at all times, a Rodman or Bowan type player would have been a good choice.
by warriorsvictim on Mar 23, 2010 10:15 AM PDT reply actions
It really makes me mad when people talk about the DLeague! Some people act like it’s just the DLeague! Some of the player’s in the DLeague are better than some of the guys in the NBA. If you haven’t had a chance, go to NBA.com and go to the Dleague site and research yourself. A lot of those guys are amazing basketball players and deserve a contract with the League. Some of them went to DII or DIII colleges and didn’t have the chance to get noticed by scouts and had to work 10times harder than other’s just to get in the DLeague.
I am a huge Raja Bell fan and have followed him since Boston U. But Reggie is playing amazing ball, and has played well all year for the Skyforce. He played 31 games and his average was 26.4 PPG with 5.5 rebounds. So good for you Reggie….
I know all of you have diff. opinions on the DLEAGUE but if you don’t really know about it or follow the DLeague or any of it’s players don’t talk about it…….
Personal opinion.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
