Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Warriors to sign Jeremy Lin to two year deal

12_medium

via www.paloaltoonline.com





Via Marcus Thompson II twitter(better than steinmetz! haha)

"Jeremy Lin is getting a 2-year deal with Warriors. Not done yet, but will be soon. - http://bit.ly/bZKlCt"

 

I am still not sure if he is ready for the big time, but this will undoubtedly be a move a lot of people around here will love.  His best chance to make a roster is probably with us too as his other choices were, reportedly, Dallas and the Lakers.  Our teams IQ just took a huge jump! 

Time will tell if the Warriors expect him to compete for a roster spot or if this was meant to be a long term plan with him.  I knew if we offered him a deal he would want to play for us more than anyone else.  All the Jeremy Lin fans can start the celebration!

Another link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=5396732

Poll
Is Jeremy Lin the Warriors answer to the back up PG need?
Yes
1220 votes
No
314 votes

1534 votes | Poll has closed

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!

Comment 501 comments  |  10 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Kinda

feels like this is what it would be like for one of us to make the Warriors. Though that could just be the thinking that lead to him being underrated. Congrats to an ex Metro Mirage player.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 6:59 PM PDT reply actions  

that's what I was thinking.

Jeremy Lin going to the Warriors would be like me or any other die hard fan getting to play for Golden State.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t know if you’re any good, but Jeremy can ball!

by bipolarbear on Jul 21, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

haha

I’m only comparing myself to him as a basketball fan, not an actual player. I meant to say that Jeremy Lin on the Warriors would be like any of us as basketball fans getting to play for our favorite team. Not sure if that makes sense.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 22, 2010 2:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

It did then, and it does now.

"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."

Frank Zappa

by qin on Jul 22, 2010 6:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

not really

it bring more azn girls to the game, and that it’s a very good sign. lol

by yimoney on Jul 20, 2010 7:02 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Paly sucks!

But good for Lin. Would he be the first asian-AMERICAN in the NBA?

Is Don Nelson going to Hawaii forever now?

by Brownie13 on Jul 20, 2010 7:14 PM PDT reply actions  

No, back in 1947 the Knicks drafted Wataru Misaka who was a Japanese-American. I think he only played like four games.

by eugthehuge on Jul 20, 2010 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sweet. A nice depth pickup, at worse. He seems pretty unlikely to sniff the production of CJ or Morrow, but I doubt that’s what the brass is expecting. You can’t really go wrong committing half a mil with a team option. I’d guess there’s still another biggish move in the offing, but what do I know.

So … what’s the latest on the “offing,” o wise Mr. Streetballer? Any tidbits you can impart? I’m still smarting over the loss of CJ and Morrow, but if we could swing this deal, I’d recover pretty quickly. Seems like pretty compelling move for all parties — particularly Philly, who rid themselves of $20-25M of financial burden, build around Holiday/Turner and load up on enough expirings to make a serious offseason run at Melo, Yao or Oden.

Strange that ol’ Lou Williams hasn’t been mentioned as a possible Curry/Monta/Reggie backup. With Holiday and Turner in place, it’s unlikely the ‘6ers are that excited about his 3/$17M contract (and everything I’ve read indicates as much). In terms of production and game, Lou is basically Monta with better passing / ball stewardship.

Curry 38 / LWilliams 8 / Lin 2
RWilliams 20 / LWilliams 10 / Iguodala 14 / Lin 4
Iguodala 24 / DWright 24
Lee 30 / BWright 18
Biedrins 28 / Lee 8 / Temporary Udoh replacement (Hunter?) 12

Get GuberLacob on the horn!

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 6:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

Edit

I slightly overstated Philly’s financial burden, but it’s still huge.

Iggy + Lou
2010/11: $17.4M
2011/12: $19.5M
2012/13: $21.1M
2013/14: $15.9M (Iggy only, player option)

Question is, should GuberLacob, as their first major move, greenlight this kind of financial commitment for a very-good-but-not-elite wing and a slightly overpaid, undersized combo guard? I personally would love it if they did. Dumping Monta’s contract cuts the burden in half. And looking around at potential FAs, is there anyone who really thrills? Broken down Yao? Very-good-but-not-elite ‘Melo? Even on the extremely remote chance we could beat out the other suitors for ’Melo’s services, he’ll command max salary, through the beginning of his decline phase, for production that may not be any better than what Iguodala brings.

The fantasy rotation I posted gets us to 50-55 wins, I’d guess. Still a bit thin up front, but great size and versatility at all positions; with a nice balance of experience and athleticism/youth; and Iggy/DWright teaming to form an imposing pair of defensive wings.

I dunno … the standing pat with Monta option doesn’t make a lot sense to me. If Riley made all these moves without some kind of a deal in place (or even in mind) for Monta, I’ll have to think he failed pretty miserably this offseason. To deplete an entire six-man-rotation’s worth of productive, efficient players (CJ / Morrow / Buike / Maggette / Randolph / Turiaf) and still end up with a starting SG making $11M who can’t rebound or defend his position just seems kinda dumb. Then again, we are the Warriors…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

i definitely

think there are some big moves ahead. I dont think we will waste those expirings either

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Fingers crossed. The two-month injunction on trading Gadzuric and/or Bell as part of a larger deal ends on August 22nd. Perhaps (thinking wishfully) that accounts for the current radio silence regarding major deals? Gadzuric could easily be switched for VladRad in my fantasy Iguodala deal. His expiring contract is just about the same size as VladRad’s; and in the meantime he provides some needed rebounding and size. (The Sixers’ frontcourt as currently constituted must be the weakest in the NBA…)

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

I have felt that all the moves we have been making have been setting up a Monta/Vlad package deal. Your trade seems maybe a little too perfect to actually happen, but from my point of view Iggy is the best player available to put in the backcourt with Curry. He is a two that doesn’t need the ball in his hands, is a good enough defender to guard the other team’s stud, and he and DWright can easily switch on all assignments. Make it so!

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Monta + Vlad or Gadzooks also gets us to AK47 territory. Kirilenko can’t slide over to 2 like Iggy can, but he could play some 4, providing nice insurance in case Wright’s shoulder remains cranky. Obviously his all-around game would be a dream fit in our uptempo game. His weakside shotblocking would cover for Lee’s one weakness. Imagine the defensive nightmares we’d give opponents with a 2-3 of DWright/Kirilenko?

This is of course assuming Utah would have any interest in Monta at 4/$44M. I imagine they’d rather have Kirilenko for a year and then a nice fat open salary slot, but DWill and Monta would make for a pretty dynamic backcourt tandem…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

AK47

would definitely be renting the roster spot, like you said. I dont have any interest in him long term as he’d cost too much, but you are right, that empty salary spot along with expirings would be intriguing.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I have often imagined Monta doing well with DWill. That’d be a scary backcourt… offensively at least.

Go Andris's free throw shooting!

by Naticus2 on Jul 30, 2010 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think D-Will could guard 2's

"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.

by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 30, 2010 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Wataru Misaka FTW!

Misaka, a Nisei Japanese American, was born in Ogden, Utah. Playing for the University of Utah, he led his school to the 1944 NCAA and 1947 NIT championships. Misaka took off two years between these titles to serve in the U.S. Army.

A 5’7" point guard, he was selected by the New York Knicks in the 1947 BAA Draft. During the 1947-1948 season, he played in three games and scored seven points before he was cut from the team. Misaka was inducted into the Utah Sports Hall of Fame in 1999.

A documentary film, Transcending: The Wat Misaka Story, by Bruce Alan Johnson and Christine Toy Johnson premiered in 2008.

wikipedia page.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 7:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

That trade would make my year! Not so sure how Philli would be so keen tho...

Melo does not seem like a sure fire"sliced bread" deal to me either. I dont quite see him as the superstar that he may view himself.

Truth be told I still havent gotten over how Sac got Cousins and Whiteside and we got 6th pick after enduring the nightmare of that bizzare year…..the only silver lining was to watch Udoh surprise everyone and kill summer leaque…oh did someone say he’s….INJURED!

by Only In Fairfax on Jul 21, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

Haha. He’s pretty buff too, for a 1940s dude…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

That gym looks creepy

and Misaka looks creeped out, i would be too if i was asian in utah in the 40’s

KeWzEe

by KewZee on Jul 22, 2010 1:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think there are very few, although a lot of Pacific Islanders and Mexicans live there.

Go Andris's free throw shooting!

by Naticus2 on Jul 30, 2010 1:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Topaz, UT

‘relocation’ gulag for more than 8000 Japanese Americans from 1942 through Oct. 1945, mostly from the SF Bay Area. Where the gulag was sited, there were few biped humanoids of any skin tone before the internees.

Music is the Healing Force of the Universe (a.ayler)

by the.monk on Jul 30, 2010 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the United States was gripped by war hysteria. This was especially strong along the Pacific coast of the U.S., where residents feared more Japanese attacks on their cities, homes, and businesses. Leaders in California, Oregon, and Washington, demanded that the residents of Japanese ancestry be removed from their homes along the coast and relocated in isolated inland areas. As a result of this pressure, on February 19, 1942, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which resulted in the forcible internment of 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry.

From Utah website.

Go Andris's free throw shooting!

by Naticus2 on Jul 30, 2010 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

I should also add that California has the most horrendous history of eugenics programs.

Go Andris's free throw shooting!

by Naticus2 on Jul 30, 2010 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rex Walters

was asian american. I think only half though because he doesnt look like it too much.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

half white half japanese

by eugthehuge on Jul 20, 2010 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

thanks! thought he couldnt be full. Lin is the first since him (I think).

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Re: half white half japanese

If that is the case, then Rex Walters must be handsome, intelligent, successful and very popular among the ladies.

Derrick Coleman is my power animal.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 20, 2010 7:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you just go by that picture

He’s certainly the first Special Olympian in the NBA.

Derrick Coleman is my power animal.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 20, 2010 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

To be fair

Mike Dunnleavy Jr. has over a dozen pictures that could rightly award him that distinction.

Derrick Coleman is my power animal.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 20, 2010 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

just like the movie

the ringer. terrible, just terrible, but funny

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not to go on a tangent

But “The Ringer” was a pretty good movie. When I saw the previews, I was like “no way they actually made that movie” But I saw it and I thought it did a really good job of not being offensive (like I’m one to judge) while still being funny.

Derrick Coleman is my power animal.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 20, 2010 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I meant terrible

as in going to hell for lauging terrible haha

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

I actually was also pleasantly surprised by that movie.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bill Chott

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0159273/

deserved an oscar haha. I would have bet my life he was one of the actors who was actually handicapped.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

LOL

Oh brother…

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
Ode to Tim Kawakami

by Doctor Kajita on Jul 20, 2010 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Second

or third, depending on what eugthehuge said. Ray Anthony or Anthony Ray Townsend, I forgot, was drafted by he Dubs about 40-60 years ago.

warriors all the way, coming your way.

by MarkGSW18 on Jul 22, 2010 7:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

How much is the deal?

Also it’s kinda crazy how a fan emailed the owner and asked for it and got his wish and the owner responded to his message

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 20, 2010 7:21 PM PDT reply actions  

first year

is $500,000 with about half of it being guaranteed. The second is a team option. Atleast this is what is being reported as of yet.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

that makes total sense

Cheap contract and now he has a chance to show that he belongs.

by mosdl on Jul 20, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah,

I agree on this being a cheap contract with small risk. I originally imagined this being some sort of 2 year guaranteed deal.

by IQofaWarrior on Jul 20, 2010 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

AWESOME

both basketball wise and marketing wise, this is an amazing move!

Goal: 8 seed!

by dso on Jul 20, 2010 7:23 PM PDT reply actions  

someone needs to tell poormancommish

I bet even he didn’t dream Lin could end up with the Warriors.

Wow, I was really bummed about CJ, but this really makes up for it.

by DomoKun on Jul 20, 2010 7:24 PM PDT reply actions  

The first movement that actually came true. This makes up for CJ two times over.

by lushlife on Jul 20, 2010 7:27 PM PDT reply actions  

This makes up for CJ two times over.

Only if he can play

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 20, 2010 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

LOL @ the first movement thing.

I just noticed that. No wonder why this signing feels a little special.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

And coincidentally-

Cohan is gone!

Chris Cohan- YOU'RE FIRED!

by bonbrillio on Jul 20, 2010 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh hellllllll yeah

Azubuike? More like Azucutie!

by goldenstatelove on Jul 20, 2010 7:30 PM PDT reply actions  

This is a nod the fan base.

I’m CONVINCED this move has everything to do with the campaigning for Lin that took place on this very blog. Not that Lin doesn’t make sense anyway, but this is our GM being responsive.

by Jeremy Belvins on Jul 20, 2010 7:31 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

our GM being responsive.

The owner got emails saying get him, and he wants to be accessible to fans so I think this is a Lacob move

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 20, 2010 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd like to think

some random fans wont alter the way our owner runs this franchise! I think he just had a good workout with them, they saw what he did in the summer league, and obviously know about his Bay Area ties (remember how many people came to Santa Clara vs Harvard). He was on their radar for reasons other than an e-mail he received. Montaellis4president, don’t get any ideas an e-mail him asking for Iverson! haha

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think he did

I just think he listened to the fans

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 20, 2010 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah, but what if it was a majority of fans?

a lot of warriors fans have been talking about jeremy. that e-mail could have caused lacob to do some research on lin and helped him realize how much this player would be liked in golden state.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm pretty sure this is the case

GM, FO, owner, whoever…

This blog is a heavily-trafficed, warriors-speciic media outlet. This was at least partly a PR-motivated decision. There’s no way the Jeremy Lin campaign (as well as previous campaigns on this forum to add an asian player) was not a factor on some level. No matter how tongue-in-cheek they are, it has to register with a new ownership group trying to pacify or even reward a loyal but increasingly frustrated fanbase. Of course, he’s also a promising, smart young prospect and there’s no guarantee he’ll stick, but still…

by Jeremy Belvins on Jul 20, 2010 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

fair enough. didnt think of it that way

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

he owner got emails saying get him, and he wants to be accessible to fans so I think this is a Lacob move

If lacob is that stupid we are totally fvcked . I hope he had a better reason for this move than I can see?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Well I don't think he'll do ANYTHING we tell him.

He’ll only consider the fans’ if what they say actually makes sense.

With the Lin signing. He can play, he’s cheap, and it will help for ticket sales. I’m sure Lacob looked into all of that before making a decision on going for Lin.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

he’s cheap, and it will help for ticket sales

 that’s what I’m afraid of. an owner that thinks that way is a nightmare. Maybe Ellison can chime in with his thoughts on this matter?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 9:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Ellison chimed in with his thoughts he would be a jackass

this wouldn’t have happened if not for his summer league performance. I wouldn’t sweat it too much.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

this wouldn’t have happened if not for his summer league performance. I wouldn’t sweat it too much.

 It’s setting a bad tone for the new direction is the big problem. We need basketball smart decisions not PR directed decisions. I’m just curious if Ellison woulda done it too?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well this is kind of a dead end here.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well this is kind of a dead end here.

 yes it is

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

stop hating?

  Why is it hating to be concerned with team direction? We’ve been thru a lot over the last decade so we don’t need a bunch of PR guys running the show.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

this was one

very cheap move that makes sense for our team on the court as well as with PR. Its a $500,000 partially guaranteed first year contract and a option for the second year. I think you are blowing this out of proportion. He is a smart player who has the chance to be a very solid back up to curry.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

He is a smart player who has the chance to be a very solid back up to curry.

so who’s gonna be the backup till this kid figures out the NBA? We don’t need Binky playing 40+ minutes a night and wearing down halfway thru the season and if we want to make the playoffs we can’t afford the losses from letting an undrafted rookie back him up? I hope they thought this thru further than the fanboys wanting him?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Using your logic

Then Dallas and the Lakers were also just doing this for PR moves. These are quality teams…playoff and championship teams…that were strongly considering Lin, according to reports. I don’t think the argument holds that championship teams can “waste” a roster spot on a random player. If anything, you would think that those teams know a little about how to build champions and finding the proper contributors to fill in the gaps. With that said, I don’t think this is purely a PR move. Or who’s to say PR moves are diametrically opposed to improving a team? If he does sign with the Warriors and proves to be a solid back up, cool. If he’s better? Awesome! But looking for a cheap backup (as is a surefire thing) is a crapshoot. If anything, the Warriors have just been lucky finding decent d-leaguers.. but where is all your hate for their busts? Or what about players that us ‘fan boys’ love that you don’t seem to have a problem with? Seems like you just have tons of hate for Lin when if anything, people’s hardcore love for him has been tempered by what he did as his last college season went on.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jul 21, 2010 1:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

They could afford to “waste” a roster spot.

We can not.

"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."

Frank Zappa

by qin on Jul 21, 2010 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

They could afford to "waste" a roster spot. We can not.

 I guess that’s why he’s called fuzzy logic?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

Relax Skep...Lin will not be the first option back up for Curry.

 I know that, I’m just perplexed at letting the fleas wag the tail that wags the dog?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions  

it was

a PR and basketball decision.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, but I also mentioned that he can play.

I don’t think Lacob would have liked Lin if he obviously couldn’t ball.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 21, 2010 2:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Very proud of this move. Proud of the ownership and of course the cultural aspect.

I really hope Lin can shed the novelty label and actually become a productive player. I am confident he can, but part of me is skeptical as well because a big reason of this signing is money and PR.

Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
Ode to Tim Kawakami

by Doctor Kajita on Jul 20, 2010 7:35 PM PDT reply actions  

POOR MAN'S COMMISH

must be creaming his pants right now.

by gotkicks32 on Jul 20, 2010 7:41 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

thats what i was gonna say

definitely thought poor man’s commish would be the first to report this or comment on it

by NIIIIIIIIIICE on Jul 20, 2010 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Me might take some time to develope but I think he could be a solid backup pg for the warriors in the future.

by FoyleFTW on Jul 20, 2010 7:43 PM PDT reply actions  

I wonder why Jeremy Lin of all people would wear number 4 though lol.

by lushlife on Jul 20, 2010 7:46 PM PDT reply actions  

I can’t lie, this is the most excited I’ve been since Curry’s last game of the season. It was a really rough summer, but I’m very happy about this (except for the 2 year deal part).

by belilaugh on Jul 20, 2010 7:47 PM PDT reply actions  

2nd year

is team option and first year is only partially guaranteed.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well in that case…let’s gooooooooooooooo

by belilaugh on Jul 20, 2010 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

More excited than you were for Udoh?

"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!

by caseycheesecake on Jul 20, 2010 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

LOL

TK – Is Monta Ellis again the Lin signing? I say yes!

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 20, 2010 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

against*

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 20, 2010 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

haha

rec’d

Thing A

"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud

by sam23 on Jul 21, 2010 1:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

No, even Lacob can’t turn Monta into Danny Granger so don’t bother.

by lushlife on Jul 20, 2010 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Company ties

Just find his email on there website. He works for one of the most famous VC companies in Silicon Valley.

by farid on Jul 20, 2010 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

I Like it

Mad props to Jeremy Lin. Surprised he is getting a contract, especially for playing on a weak Harvard basketball team, in comparison to the power houses. However, I’ve seen his game and it looks like he can break some ankles and theres not doubt that he will work his butt off and bring positive energy to the locker room.

+1 for the Warriors (good for ticket sales, and the team.)

The Time Is Now! Win Warriors Win!

by ballin on Jul 20, 2010 8:21 PM PDT reply actions  

Damnit

there goes the $15 upper-deck seats

by aznballa13 on Jul 20, 2010 8:25 PM PDT reply actions  

LOL

Ahh. I really need to stop with the ‘LOL’ comments.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

i WISH!

Can’t front on that gut-busting orange chicken. that blows away everything currently at the Oracle. C’mon new owners, bring us some better concessions! Improve the nachos, pizza, and hot dogs …. work out something with costco where Kirkland can supply the snacks!

by dj fuzzylogic on Jul 21, 2010 1:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

kirkland

would be AWESOME

Being a Warriors fan is like cutting yourself... without the cutting

by DMJR on Jul 21, 2010 6:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

IN N OUT! IN N OUT!

by LordKdV on Jul 21, 2010 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

GET SOME FILIPINOS FROM THE PBA

if you really wanna attract most of the Asian fans in the Bay (the ones that follow/play basketball anyway).

by John Edward ''Jed'' York on Jul 20, 2010 8:39 PM PDT reply actions  

Most of them play out of position.

If you’re 6’3" in the PBA you’re most likely going to play PF or something. Screw that. If I was in the Philippines I would play point guard even if I was 6’9".

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

hahaha

forealz…my bro’s 5’10" and im 5’11" almost 6’ and its hard for anyone to believe that we’re Filipino haha

I BELIEVE!!! YOU BELIEVE!!! WE BELIEVE!!!

by GSW-FTW-30 on Jul 20, 2010 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

^ besides the point

…the BEST Filipino player in the PBA has GOT to be better than Lin, and there has to be at least one Pinoy player with NBA size

by John Edward ''Jed'' York on Jul 20, 2010 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

and there has to be at least one Pinoy player with NBA size

Haha, Boykins sets the limbo bar pretty low?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

"and there has to be at least one Pinoy player with NBA size"

Well a good size for an NBA point guard would be 6’3", but there’s not a lot of Filipinos that tall so all the players that size end up playing forward positions. I doubt they can get into the NBA as a 6’3" forward. That’s why the PBA ends up getting “import players” from countries like the US.

That’s why I believe that people should learn guard skills even if they’re the tallest on their team. My high school’s center was 6’2" and couldn’t handle the ball at all. He has the point guard height at 6’2", but his whole life he’s been developed as a center just because he was taller than everyone.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 21, 2010 2:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

well, with alot of your chicks marrying white dudes...

its just a matter of time before some tall half-filipino makes it in the nBA

by John Edward ''Jed'' York on Jul 21, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Seriously

I’ve noticed there’s a lot of white/filipinos out there. It’s soon to be a common breed.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 22, 2010 2:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

Excellent

Low risk, medium reward. If Lin’s as good as CJ Watson, we just saved like $3 mil a year.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 20, 2010 8:42 PM PDT reply actions  

Low risk, medium reward. If Lin’s as good as CJ Watson, we just saved like $3 mil a year.

  There’s no way he’s as good as CJ without any NBA experience. You forget that CJ is a very good shooter and knows the warriors system. If we miss the playoffs because we don’t have a reliable backup guard this is not gonna look so good.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Trust me, if they miss the playoffs it is not because of the guy backing up Curry

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

On the contrary, we really do need someone to play those 12-15 minutes a game.

Somebody like Arroyo or Williams will deliver something like 2-3 wins a season in that role – about what CJ would have delivered.

Somebody like Lin, well, we don’t know. He might deliver no wins. He might be a negative.

And yes, we could miss the playoffs by two games. So it could matter.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

CJ

is very replaceable. He was not going to be the reason we make or miss the playoffs. There is plenty of offseason left no need to be so upset with the move. Lin will be around the 12th-15th man on the roster. Im sure Riley still has more plans for this roster so just wait a bit we dont need to judge how the roster looks after each move, wait until the offseason is over. He has said this is going to be a very busy offseason (which it has) and its definitely not over.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Tears in my eyes...

Truly, there are tears in my eye’s right now. We now have 2 very high character point guards running the show. Lin is the real deal. Man is a winner. I’ve mostly been comparing Lin to Nash, because of his similar play and difficulty overcoming bias’. But Lin is perhaps similar more to Curry. So there is little change when Curry or Lin are on the court.

by bick on Jul 20, 2010 8:51 PM PDT reply actions  

they both

have a high basketball iq and can make plays, but dont compare him to Spicy Curry as they call him on NBA TV hah. He doesnt pass like Curry and his shot is no where near Curry’s. He is nice though, dont get me wrong.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Don't compare

Rookie Nash to Curry either, ’cause Lin reminds me of Nash as a rookie.

by farid on Jul 20, 2010 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sounds crazy

but I think Curry has a very very good chance to be better than Nash.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

WAYYYYYYYY

WAYYYY BTR!!!

Curry and Ellis = VICTORY & A WE BELIEVE 2010-2011 season!!!!

by montaellis4president on Jul 20, 2010 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Way better? Than Nash?

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

in his rookie yrr..

hell yeahh he was wayy btrrr

Curry and Ellis = VICTORY & A WE BELIEVE 2010-2011 season!!!!

by montaellis4president on Jul 20, 2010 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh so you were just saying he had a way better rookie year not that he will be WAYYYYYYYY WAYYYYYY BTR!!!

Okay, just making sure.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dude, are you honestly trying to understand what he says with logic?

"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.

by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 20, 2010 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

You're not alone

I also believe Curry could be better than Nash.

He’s had a bunch of 30+ point 10+ assist games after December; he was third in the league in that category, behind LeBron and Dwyane Wade (funny, they’re both on the same team now) and Curry is just a rookie.

It shows that he can score in bunches while being able get his assists as well. He’s also gotten that triple double, a couple near triple doubles, and even almost got a quadruple double. He’s like Steve Nash, with the ability to get triple doubles like Jason Kidd, but with better scoring ability.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

as long as you explain it and don't end with WAYYYYYYY WAYYYYYYYY BTR!!!

then I’ll go along with it.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I just love it when someone compares a rookie’s year to a Hall Of Famer’s career!

talk to me after 4 or 5 years

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

talking about

what he CAN do. He can be better than Nash. Obviously he has not had the same career, no one would say that.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Its a totally ridiculous conversation at this point

no offense.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

yup

No one is saying that Curry is better than Nash. I only said that Curry might be capable of being better than Nash someday. Some people seriously need to calm down.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 21, 2010 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

makes teammates better...

Nash, Curry, and Lin all make their teammates better, whether they score or not, and are in this respect similar. In other words, they are all great point guards.

by bick on Jul 20, 2010 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

NOW WE CAN SIGN YAO NEXT SEASON

MAYBE YAOO WILL COME NEXT YEAR!!!!!!!!!!

Curry and Ellis = VICTORY & A WE BELIEVE 2010-2011 season!!!!

by montaellis4president on Jul 20, 2010 9:15 PM PDT reply actions  

I swear if I see a fanpost in the same vain ...

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 9:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

?

?

Curry and Ellis = VICTORY & A WE BELIEVE 2010-2011 season!!!!

by montaellis4president on Jul 20, 2010 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

You keep making ridiculous posts that make little sense

Suggesting we sign A.I. and Shaq, while saving cap room for Yao and Melo while keeping Biedrins and all of our other players. Your act is old.

"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.

by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 20, 2010 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

And Shaq!!

AND AI!!!!

PFortyy :)

'11 Champs!

by Potential on Jul 20, 2010 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Forget ai...

we just got J. LIN!!! Why would we go after Ai…. we needa go after barnes and another big guy…

Curry and Ellis = VICTORY & A WE BELIEVE 2010-2011 season!!!!

by montaellis4president on Jul 20, 2010 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why would we go after AI

If only this thought occurred to you earlier lol

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

cos hes a freakin hall of famer once he retires….?

PFortyy :)

'11 Champs!

by Potential on Jul 20, 2010 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

and he shouldve done that 3 seasons ago

Thing A

"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud

by sam23 on Jul 21, 2010 2:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

Of course...

…if Yao came next year, he’d show up a month late, what with having to drag his legs across the southwest.

by Zack Vank on Jul 20, 2010 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Yao goes to the Warriors

Everyone in China will vote for Lin, Ellis, Lee and Biedrins as starters on the all-star team.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 20, 2010 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Great move!

I love this! I’m getting excited about Warrior basketball. Lin is a good player who has a chance to be great. I’m so happy he’ll get the chance to show his stuff, and even more happy it’s with the Warriors.

by eclipse on Jul 20, 2010 9:16 PM PDT reply actions  

Great move all the way around

Jeremy Lin signing is a positive one all the way around. He’s a local kid, plus he’s Asian (great for local demographic), plus he can actually ball.

A old coworker of mine’s son actually played on the same PA high school team as Lin. If you look back on all the articles about him, they all said the same thing: good skills, wrong color. He didn’t even get a sniff from any D1 teams, so chose Harvard instead. Great story made even better because the kid had to overcome all sorts of obstacles to make it to the league.

by barrance on Jul 20, 2010 9:19 PM PDT reply actions  

i saw an interview where he said..

that UCLA approached him for a walk-on position but they got in the game too late and he was already committed to Harvard/Brown..chose Harvard.

by JimBarnett2KevinGarnett on Jul 20, 2010 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

A few teams

wanted him to walk on. UCLA sucked this year too. No doubt he would have been a star for them.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

I played against him in high school

we won state my junior year and he was probably the best player we played against all year.

by Pino on Jul 20, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

...

my cuz told me that he THINKS he tried to get into Stanford but dint get in so went to Harvard…i dont have any sources so not sure if its Lin or some other dude…

I BELIEVE!!! YOU BELIEVE!!! WE BELIEVE!!!

by GSW-FTW-30 on Jul 20, 2010 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

getting into

Harvard but not Stanford when theyd want you as a walk on? I dont believe that to be true

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

He was

offered walk on spots by UCLA, Cal, and Stanford. This is not where I first read it, but I looked it up on google and this came up. He is quoted in it saying which teams offered him spots.

http://www.nwasianweekly.com/2010/06/harvard-grad-got-game-asian-american-looks-forward-to-nba-draft/

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Lacob/Guber dividends already...

This signing doesn’t happen without Lacob/Guber buying team. Dividends of new owner already paying off.

by bick on Jul 20, 2010 9:32 PM PDT reply actions  

Been checkin out other forums...

They’re all pretty high on the Warriors for the upcoming season. Been mentioned in the top 3-5 teams who’ve had the most effective off-season.

PFortyy :)

'11 Champs!

by Potential on Jul 20, 2010 9:36 PM PDT reply actions  

Marketing machine

"The No. 1 thing (fans need to know): we’re going to do our damnedest to bring the Warriors to respectability on the basketball court." - Joe Lacob

by thecity23 on Jul 20, 2010 9:42 PM PDT reply actions  

or just

finally a regular kid making the league. One who hasnt been hyped up so much by the media that he has a larger than life ego (Cousins etc). I agree though, still cool of him im sure the kids loved it.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Looking at the clips of him

Seems like he hasn’t played against very good competition. Looked good against Wall though. He’s obviously worked extremely hard and has some talent – if he has a good training camp and the Warriors are patient with him he might be a good bench player.
Now let’s get a backup center.

by tjmax on Jul 20, 2010 10:13 PM PDT reply actions  

What is the team thinking?

Now, don’t get me wrong, I have no issue with having Lin onboard as somewhere between the 12th and 15th man, and maybe proving over the course of a year or two that he deserves more than that. That’s fine.

But why on earth do you sign your 15th man when you still don’t know who you’re 8th man is?

This team needs a PG who can play 10-15mins a game starting with game 1 of the preseason. No, don’t tell me Monta can play backup PG, because if Monta is our backup PG, then we have to count on Wright and Williams to play more minutes than they should and we have NO DEPTH.

(eg, compare what happens if we have a Monta or Curry injury with Arroyo or with Monta as our backup PG. Monta gets hurt: Arroyo plays 30mpg, Curry picks up some time at 2-guard and Williams and Wright pick up an extra ten minutes each. No real backup PG? All of a sudden Curry and Reggie and Dorrel and playign 48mpg each … which is a recipe for more injuries. Or worse, Curry gets hurt. What, you think Monta is going to play PG? We saw that last season it doesn’t work.)

This reeks of PR-over-substance. Yes, Lin is a great story. Yes, he might eventually amount to something. Awesome.

But right now, we need a backup point guard, and the team is filling out the back end of the roster instead of the first 8-9 positions … you know, the guys who actually play!

Comparing him to John Wall? Lin is two years older. The difference between how polished a 21 year old is compared to a 19 year old … (plus I think Wall is way overrated – Wall is all potential right now, his college production was downright mediocre).

Remember when Belinelli was lighting up summer league? It means nothing.

Its not that I think this signing will do any harm, but is it indicative of a PR-over-substance mindset?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 20, 2010 10:22 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

To be honest, I was assuming they were planning on picking up another point guard

Lin is the last guy on the bench. Only reason why they went into the bidding war for him was because he was local and did okay in summer league. It’s a gamble but I am sure they are not planning on him being the main backup point guard.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

If the team picks up Arroyo or Jason Williams, I'm no longer upset with this move.

Although if this move makes a signing like that less likely, then it’s a bad one.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 20, 2010 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would be pretty shocked if they pick up Jason Williams

After that whole “Do you remember the Vietnam War?” from years ago, plus the fact he is looking to stay near family and it didn’t go to well a few years back when he tried moving back West to play for the Clips.

I wouldn’t be terribly shocked if Skip to My Lou shows up. I remember they cut him once summer like 8 years ago but he did once have interest playing in Oakland.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

it doesnt

i dont know why anyone can complain about this deal we are offering the minimun that is only partially guaranteed wont affect the Warriors future moves at all. Just because we signed him before other positions were filled does not mean that we viewed him as our highest priority! He was about to be signed and the Warriors wanted him (and Lin wanted to play here) so they jumped at it. There are still moves coming up this offseason.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

“Bidding war”? He’s getting the NBA minimum for a rookie ($473,604, which is “about $500k” as the ESPN article has it). I guess the ‘war’ came down to guaranteeing half of that. As wars go, this one isn’t really much of a war. The team option is actually a negative from a player’s perspective. It just means that even if he’s great, he won’t get a raise, and if he stinks, they don’t have to pay him.

by jae on Jul 20, 2010 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well technically you can come up with whatever fun phrase to use for it but it was a bidding war

and yes it is centered around the guarantee. By the way, I must admit I am shocked by the fact it is a team option on that second year.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Franco-Prussian War

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

Don't forget the Mavs and Lakers

are luxury tax team so it would have cost them double

by hellafornia on Jul 25, 2010 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

I somewhat agree, but I don’t know that there’s much opportunity cost in signing a back-of-the-roster guy to a little PR-inspired deal. Most FOs work one more than one potential transaction at a time… I don’t think negotiating Lin’s contract would preclude anything else getting done.

It’s nice that this is making a lot of Warriors fans happy. Me, I’d much rather have CJ’s production than Lin’s charms, and I say that as a native Palo Altan.

Golden State Worriers: Angst & Analysis

by onlxn on Jul 20, 2010 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

You obviously aren't asian.

Asian fans have been waiting for an asian-american player. They don’t care about CJ being better, they just want Lin jerseys.

"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.

by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 20, 2010 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

solid backup...

Just as questions swirled around whether Curry should start at the beginning of last season, or play well in the NBA, when giving a chance Curry proved himself to be a stud. Now it’s Lin’s turn to surprise the NBA, just as he has surprised people at every other level since grade school.

If he gets the playing time like Curry did, is it too early to suggest ROY consideration?

P.S. Thank god we didn’t draft Cousins. Anyone else catch his immaturity and poor body language during summer league? Last think dubs need is a head case. Lin is a polar opposite. Class act.

by bick on Jul 20, 2010 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

If he gets the playing time like Curry did, is it too early to suggest ROY consideration?

Yes. Yes it is entiretly too “any time in the history of the universe” to suggest ROY consideration.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

no chance

he is rookie of the year haha

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

omg.

"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!

by caseycheesecake on Jul 20, 2010 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

How would he get Curry playing time

if he’s probably not even gonna be a 2nd string player?

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 20, 2010 11:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

If he gets the playing time like Curry did, is it too early to suggest ROY consideration? P.S. Thank god we didn’t draft Cousins?

   Haha, you gotta be the most basketball challenged person I’ve ever seen?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Haha, +1.

At the same time … it should be noted that Cousins, BS “rookie of the month” honor nothwithstanding, had a pretty terrible LV summer league showing. One great game, three awful ones, including a sublimely godawful final game in which he went 1-12 from the floor with 6 boards, 0 assists, and 5 turnovers … for a lovely plusminus of -30. Overall per 36 numbers, playing against mostly scrubs:

17.6 pts (.333 FG%), 11.8 reb, 5.8 tov.

Those shooting and turnover numbers probably put him among the very worst performers in Summer League who saw regular minutes. Right down there with Evan Turner in any case.

Obviously I’d take Turner or Cousins over Udoh, but right now the chances of either being a bona fide stud as a rookie seem pretty remote. In the case of Cousins, when you throw in the accumulating anecdotal evidence that he’s a bit of knucklehead and a jerk, you start to see why he slipped to #5. The upside is tantalizing enough to warrant selection over generic big bodies like Monroe and Udoh, and possibly the two skinny-smooth wingmen that were taken ahead of him, but the question marks still seem huge, even by the usual standards of 19 y.o. big men.

Overall, tho’, I think I’d take Cuz over Lin. ;-P

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sounds like Cuz is a lock for ROY fo’ sure.

"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."

Frank Zappa

by qin on Jul 21, 2010 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well yeah … if all he has to do to get the mainstream press drooling is shoot 30% from the floor and turn the ball over less often than once every six minutes, he’s got the ROY in the bag!

Wall, so-so showing against Lin notwithstanding, looks head and shoulders above the other draftees to me right now. He’s like a rich man’s Tyreke Evans. I think Blake Griffin has to be considered the frontrunner for ROY, but Wall seems more ready than anyone in his draft class to compete at high level against NBA players. #1 picks are cool that way…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think Blake Griffin has to be considered the frontrunner for ROY,

 has he fully recovered from his injury? How’s his hops??

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

you "think"

you’d take cuz over lin? Its a no-brainer

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Right. Hence the “;-P.”

Have I been away from this site so long that I need to familiarize posters with my nuanced sense of irony and vast repertoire of emoticons?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

In fairness: as long as GSoM is being overrun by drooling 12-year-old remedial cases touting Iverson, Shaq, Drexler, Cousy, and Rasputin as the most awsumest dubzz lineup evr, I can understand the reluctance to assume that a given GSoM post here has been written by someone with a brain…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Say what you want

but Rasputin was the hardest guy to defend EVER. He created enormous matchup problems.

by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 21, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

spot*

lol

This is Kristin Kreuk, now zip it. - GTTM

by disguy on Jul 21, 2010 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wait...

Did the Rasputin in Berkeley close down?

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jul 21, 2010 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

different name

I think. I could be completely wrong though.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Still one in Vallejo?

"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."

Frank Zappa

by qin on Jul 21, 2010 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rasputin is my religious prophet! do not mock him. this is blasphemey, disrespectful and intolerable. Same on you Sleepy. Shame on you GSoM. If i had a stone i would throw it at GSoM.

by Balance on Jul 27, 2010 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

There, there.....

……

(balance? oy, does HE have the wrong prophet)

Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.

by Rasputin10 on Jul 28, 2010 7:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn't really freak out about DMC's summer league numbers to be honest

Granted, the whole rookie of the month this is behind stupid, but he showed he can rebound and at least showed he has talent in the first three games. Of course, I was one of the people who said before summer league that I don’t really worry about offensive stats from big men in summer league.

That being said, I would agree that Cousins clearly displays why he slipped to #5. His attitude isn’t a secret. I also think it is very unlikely he will get a shot at rookie of the year nomatter what simply because the minutes won’t be there.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

wow my typing sucks

“Granted, the whole rookie of the month thing is beyond stupid”

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ok now Wally, way to be humble there but...

….watching Cousins crowd the offense player away from the post with Whiteside behind him leaping up up for the block gave me just a teeny weeny bit of an idea of what draft tandum that I would choose over the #2/3/4 pics this year for the Warriors future needs.

by Only In Fairfax on Jul 21, 2010 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

I wouldn’t really freak out about DMC’s summer league numbers to be honest

To the extent that I’m freaking, I guess it’s about the fact that there can be an award given to a player who shoots 33% from the floor and commits 6 turnovers per 36. It just underlines, once again, the silly fixation of the mainstream press (and casual fans) on raw scoring totals.

But yeah, to draw too big of a conclusion one way or the other from six summer league games is probably unwise.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah I don't really understand what the heck that award was

or who nominates the players or what. Either way, it’s a really dumb award and I would also say a really stupid idea in general to give out such awards in Summer League (I guess they have to pay the bills in some way and this was a way to let T Mobile do so I suppose).

I have a feeling Cousins won’t be playing the same minutes in the regular season and I pray and hope the Kings don’t try and run plays with him in the high post. Yeah he had some nifty passes but also some really dumb turnovers. There is no need for that. The guy needs to learn how to use his leverage against other bigs.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cuz kinda reminds me of Jamarcus. How long until they find the empty bottle of syzurp in his Escalade?

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

I was unaware that Cousins was opiates. In fact, he pretty much acts exactly the opposite of someone drinking codeine.

Plus, he is not trying to learn how to be a QB in the NFL

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

ug

“I was unaware that Cousins was on opiates.”

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

The whole yelling out “this is my $h*t” on the Summer League court after he went like 8-22 and got all his points by knocking dudes 80 lbs less than him around really got the Jamarcus comparison started in my mind. Like, this dude just doesn’t get it. WWJD? He’d yell “this is my $h*t,” and then sip some syzurp.

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Wow so basically you think he is going to be a codeine addicted bust because he yelled "This is my $hit" after winning a glorified pickup game.

No bias there. Nope, none whatsoever.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not sure where I said any of that, but if you want to read into it, be my guest. He just seems like a fairly ignorant person, and he looks like Jamarcus. And I like writing syzurp. I would still have drafted him.

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

a) How does he look like Jamarcus?
b) he’s from rural south (hence the accent)
c) He’s shown to be a hard worker and very personable signing autographs for hours after games.

Let’s stop with stereotypes.

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Believe they are both from Alabama

Either way, the questions about Cousins maturity are no where in the same league as the issues that Jamarcus were involved with. Plus, let’s be honest, trying to be a starting QB in the NFL is a bit more difficult.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

a) he’s a big, bald black dude with a round face
b) the accent has nothing to do with it. Talking mess after beating down scrubs and then coming out and laying an egg in the next game does.
c) Meh. I haven’t seen him described as a hard worker anywhere. He looks pretty out of shape to me. Correct me if you think I am wrong.

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

i think you got issues with Cousins all wrong

No one has very questioned his commitment. It’s been his composure, easy to get under his skin etc. Which albeit is it’s own issue but a much different one.

As for laying an egg in summer league. Happens, he’s a rookie, he’ll lay more. Remember curry last summer? What’d he shoot 35% with 9 fouls per game??

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

The Kings ran him into the ground

He played more minutes than any other Summer League player.

They did this IMO to prove to him ( a stubborn young man) what kind of condition it takes to play night in and out in the NBA.

6 games with 30+ minutes in 7 nights. He won’t even see that in the NBA.

Oh, and the Kings had no guard play in summer league, none at all, it was very dissappointing.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

We really need to find another guard

and I sure didn’t see an acceptable one on our SL team.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Do you?

Tyreke, Beno,Cisco, Greene,Omri

Am I forgetting anyone….I feel like all you need is a minimum contract type player as minutes will be sparse. Donte Greene is such an x-factor for you. If he could put it together…..

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah but Omri and Green should stay away from the SG spot

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really?

I know Omri can’t guard SGs but I thought Donte was a menace defensively when he wantd to be

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Donte' Greene did ok on big guards

but the kid is almost 6’11". Smaller or quick guards night in and out?

Not in my book.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah I think it's just setting him up for disaster asking him to play the 2 spot.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know HighTops highlighted it a few times over at StR

but Donte’s defensive numbers at the SG were actually pretty dreadful.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Interesting

I wasn’t aware. I just know, I’ve seen him play some awesome defense at times, hit open shots, run floor, look like a real quality player.

And i’ve also watched him and think how is he in the nba?

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's the book on him alright

Still young though.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Greene and Casspi

aren’t guards. Cisco has some worries with that bad injury he had last year and is a SG/SF as well.

Yep, we need a guard not even considering the possible injury question.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Kind of funny how you went from no bigs

to 6 bigs you want in rotation (Landry, Cousins, Thompson. Dalembert, Whiteside, Brockman

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

Brockman's gone

just got traded

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

We're Huuuuge!

and that wins playoff games
(when we get there)

Yes, its an amazing change

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whiteside

Funny how like a month before draft some sites had Warriors taking him #6. I wonder how good he is. Being taken in 2nd round and growing slowly will probably benefit him as opposed to Lottery expections.

Still could be notorious POB part 2

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hassan Upside we call him

He’s got a ways to go, epecially in the strenght dept. but he has a chance to be a very good player.

Low risk – high reward, and the Kings signed him to a 4 yr deal even though he was a 2nd rounder.

Barring injuries he won’t see much court time this season, he’s being paid to lift weights and work on post moves.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hassan Upside we call him

Hey, I thought I coined that! When did StR start using it?

Ah well, great minds…

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 21, 2010 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

He didn't show great Hands

in summer league which concerns me. But he’s a kid and won’t be expected to play much this year as I said.
Time always tells.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Add, a stor about work ethic

After a game Kentucky lost where he shot something like 6 for 14 from free throw line he apparently spent extra time in gym every day following week and shot 80%+ next game.

He’s a work in progress and a bit immature but not lazy

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

OK. I just get really turned off to loudmouth dudes who showoff after doing nothing. Humility is a trait I value, particularly in rookie bigs who should know they are about to get served for 82 games.

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

Fair enough...

But how many top teir NBA players are humble? League of trash talking. Personally it’s never bothered me as long as I know player works ass off to back it up

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Remember the Crash Davis Speech.

Even if you get lit up in the big league at first,(and he will) you use your body language to say, “I am Coming!”

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

exactly!

As long he’s working hard/playing hard. I don’t mind trash talk of confidence. It’s when they do it and don’t put in work I got problems…

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

He's an astonishingly good passer

It didn’t pay off as much with those non-NBA type guys on the receiving end as it will when he gets to know some real teammates.

The Give-and-go ’s to Reke will be a staple play if they use him correctly.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

You know what really turned me onto Cousins

When asked about current NBA players without hesitation he said Gasol was best big and player he looks to, to model his game, learn new moves/skills.

That’s a welcome sign if I’m a kings fan. Much more so than Amare for ex.

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly. He has done precisely nothing yet to back it up. So he should keep his mouth shut.

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

And I am not a huge fan of players complaing to the ref, rolling their eyes, and talking trash the whole time

that being said, I am not going to start cracking jokes about him having an opiate addiction and comparing him to another professional athlete in a completely different sport with completely different issues.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Relax, Wally. It is apparent that I touched a nerve with the syzurp comment. Evidently you take substance abuse far more seriously than I do.

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

by Supafishal on Jul 21, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think they might be both from Mobile Alabama

and there is an ESPN or Yahoo sports article where Kevin Durant was signing autographs at a hotel in Vegas during summer league and DMC was around telling him to just say no to signing autographs.

by hellafornia on Jul 25, 2010 12:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Vegas stats are pretty much meaningless

Would you consider a scoring point guard who shot .325 from the field, and averaged 4 a/36 and 3.8 TO/36 an MVP a franchise changing ROY contender?
How about a player who shot .401 from the field, and had a 1:1 a:to ratio?

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jul 21, 2010 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

P.S. Thank god we didn’t draft Cousins. Anyone else catch his immaturity and poor body language during summer league? Last think dubs need is a head case. Lin is a polar opposite. Class act.

Are you suggesting you’d rather have Lin than Cuz? Are you crazy?

Also no way in heck he gets ROY consideration ahead of Cuz, Wall, Griff and ET.

Seriously guys, Lin is not that good. There is a reason he was undrafted. Rarely do undrafted players make it and when they do they are really good at 1 thing. He isn’t , I’d be surprised if he played more than 5 minutes a night

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 21, 2010 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

We’ll just hate all those double-doubles with 5 assists DMC will scowlingly be putting up as a rookie :-)

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

No just no

hes not going to win rookie of the year haha

by GoldenSt8OfMind on Jul 21, 2010 7:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

If he gets the playing time like Curry did, is it too early to suggest ROY consideration?

Yes, way too early. There’s no evidence whatsoever to believe that he’s going to sniff the floor. There will be rookies who play major minutes for their teams this year. What are the odds Lin ever seens anything but garbage-time minutes?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Slightly?

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

jest...

Don’t take everything so seriously… Today we’re having fun.

by bick on Jul 21, 2010 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

P.S. Thank god we didn’t draft Cousins. Anyone else catch his immaturity and poor body language during summer league?

Yes bick you are truly a wise one. You should do a post about this and enlighten us more. Perhaps you should team up with monta4president !

by Only In Fairfax on Jul 23, 2010 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

He was on

other teams Radar. Why is locking him up for so cheap a bad thing? He was on the verge of signing with someone else so we jumped at it.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly

You sign Lin first because the Mavs and Lakers were both looking to lock him up, if they don’t sign him now then they don’t sign him at all. It was a minimum contract and it has no effect on the team’s ability to sign another PG. There is literally no reason to complain about this signing.

by OkayJay81 on Jul 20, 2010 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

After spending 450 million

Spending $ 250,000 guarantee on Lin for good PR is almost an absolute must business move.

Luckily for Lacob, Lin’s ability and other teams going after Lin gives the signing credibility.

Hopefully he surprises people. It would be a great start for the Lacob – Guber era.

by JSML on Jul 20, 2010 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

Putting the numbers in a context we can relate to

It’s like spending $ 1,800 to buy something and then you are able enhance its appeal fairly significantly, judging by the boards reaction, for another $ 1. It’s a no brainer.

by JSML on Jul 21, 2010 7:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

When you put it that way it seams pretty sleazy to me.

“And for just $1 more I will throw in a shinny new Asian!!!”

"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."

Frank Zappa

by qin on Jul 21, 2010 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

Why is locking him up for so cheap a bad thing? He was on the verge of signing with someone else so we jumped at it.

Well, the smart thing woulda been to let one of those teams pick him up then we could see how he did without wasting our roster spot? If he turned out serviceable we could sign him when his contract was up if he really wanted to be a warrior.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 20, 2010 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really wouldn't sweat this at the moment Skeptic

I would have to think they are going to bring another point guard in before it’s all said and done.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really wouldn't sweat this at the moment SkepticI would have to think they are going to bring another point guard in before it’s all said and done

  Haha, no sweat, if they don’t bring in another one we’ll be eliminated from playoff contention by christmas and I can switch to watching kings and laker games sooner :>)

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions  

the Warriors

will probably bring in another pg. He is not going to take away someones roster spot who is better than him. He still has to go to training camp remember that. He is partially guaranteed a salary of just under $500,000 that is nothing in the NBA. We could end up sending him down to the D-league still as well if it doesnt work out. I dont get the issues with this deal. The team doesnt sign players in order of importance. When we have a chance to get someone we like for very cheap (and other teams are on the verge of signing him) then do it. If the Lakers and Mavs wanted him he can obviouosly ball too. Be patient, there is plenty of offseason left.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Another great signing

If he doesn’t show that he belongs in the top escalon that is the NBA, then they can always send him down to the D-League for a bit. However I think that this is another TEAM PLAYER that is a building block to a winning franchise. Bye bye to those shoot first players like CJ, (even though I liked him and he was the Clutch Jumper). With only 11 players on the current roster, using the minimum on this guy shows that the new ownership is in charge. They know that Lin will bring money to the team regardless of playing time. Its about entertaining your crowd!

It will be great to have another PG with incredible shooting and passing skills. If only Morrow were here to spread the floor better with a 3pt threat….. I love Reggie, but using the trade exceptions and draft picks there is a chance to land a very solid player with him as trade bait. I don’t have time to work out who they could get so I leave that up to you.

Curry/Monta/Williams/Morrow/Buike/Maggs/AR/Wright/Goose/Turiaf/Udoh= Wins

by danielholl on Jul 20, 2010 10:25 PM PDT reply actions  

Bye bye to those shoot first players like CJ

If I am not mistaken, I thought Lin was one of those shoot first players.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 20, 2010 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

nope

he is a distributer, playmaker type. However, I have to say to danielholl, he is not a PG with incredible shooing skills. His lack of a great outside shot has been one of the knocks on him.

by tom88gsw on Jul 20, 2010 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would say best case scenario, he becomes a homeless man’s Tony Parker. Lin is a slasher.

by lushlife on Jul 20, 2010 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nice pick up.

Cheap and if he is not ready to contribute right away, he can get some seasoning down in the D-League.
Riley might want to consider doing the same thing with Samahan. He had a pretty good summer league and should be just as inexpensive.

by ajtrinc on Jul 20, 2010 11:42 PM PDT reply actions  

Samahan and Lin would be a great duo.

They played pretty well with each other and have great chemistry. It was exciting to watch them interact with each other.

by bimmercirem3 on Jul 20, 2010 11:45 PM PDT reply actions  

samhan

would get eaten alive by NBA bigs.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Maybe

Your not bringing him in to become your starting center, but he did have a good showing in Las Vegas and it wouldn’t hurt to have him at the end of the bench or down in Bakersfield.
As with Lin, it wouldn’t hurt to bring him in, get some good PR and possibly develop a good role player on the cheap.

by ajtrinc on Jul 21, 2010 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Im not even

talking about starters. He would get eaten alive by NBA backups right now. Do you remember Baylor’s bigs shutting him down and making him life very difficult in that game? 15 pts on 17 shots after averaging over 30 in the previous two games. He has some work to do before he will make a roster.

by tom88gsw on Jul 22, 2010 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

1 game.

Your basing his NBA potential off one game where Baylor made stopping him their defensive focus?
I think he had a pretty good showing for Dallas in Las Vegas and wouldn’t be that bad of a deal to sign him to a contract similar to Lin and see if he can’t develop into anything. At worst we have someone to play garbage time.

by ajtrinc on Jul 23, 2010 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

we can get

Tolliver for cheap and he is much more proven than Samhan. He is too slow (especially with his shooting mechanics) which makes him very easy for NBA players to guard.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

Agree with you there

We do need another big that can actually give us minutes, Tolliver probably being the best option since he is already familiar with the team, but to fill out our roster, Samahan can be a low risk option.
3 of our 15 will be inactive, so why not bring in a younger guy that you can develop, send down to the D-league and maybe get something in return for little investment.

by ajtrinc on Jul 27, 2010 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

samhan is also a bay area product from san ramon yeyee

   haha, well don’t email Laycob that, we’re running out of pity spots.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good Investment

Cheap Contract + the Kid showed us at summer league he can play…
Good Job to the Warriors for getting him!
now if we only had morrow

by Mzed on Jul 21, 2010 12:22 AM PDT reply actions  

the Kid showed us at summer league he can play…

And Marco and Kurz showed us they were all stars there too….

This is my sig, what do I do with it?

by dubzfan on Jul 21, 2010 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

We’re essentially throwing the season.

Trade Exception + Watson for Cash? + Expiring Contracts + This signing?

Seems like ownership wants to start anew after this season is over, hope for a high pick and build around Curry, Ellis(?), Lee.

by BTT on Jul 21, 2010 2:54 AM PDT reply actions  

what are you talking about?

The additions of Lee and Wright alone probably add 15 wins to last years’ total, and that’s without a healthy Biedrins the whole year. 45-50 wins is not out of the question. You call that “throwing the season”?

by Evanz on Jul 21, 2010 4:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

People need to

realize this is not the final move of the offseason. Watson was not going to make or break our season. Have faith in the improvement of Curry and additions of Lee and Wright. Its not like we were a 50 win team and lost our stars we won 26 games last year and have improved.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Full Health....

50 wins is A LOT to ask To get there we need Curry or Monta to take step to be an elite player like BRoy and Durant did to take there teams to 50 win plateau. If that happens then yes, 50 wins is in reach.

Realistically, if Monta and Biedrins can return to 2008 form, and Curry improves, we stay healthy I saw .500. And then 2011/12 is year team should make playoffs

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I the team stays healthy

I’d project the current lineup to 42-44 wins

by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 21, 2010 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

time to change your name huh haha

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

The additions of Lee and Wright alone probably add 15 wins to last years’ total

This is high comedy at best.

So you are basically saying that:

Lee + D. Wright = Randolph + Azubuike + Turiaf + Watson + Morrow + 15 wins?? Really?

by UncleCliffy on Jul 21, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

The additions of Lee and Wright alone probably add 15 wins to last years’ total

 Just staying healthy would add 15 wins to last years total which would just bring us up to barely sucking territory.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

.500

is barely sucking? Thats were we would be with 15 more wins.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

.500 is barely sucking?

You got your standards, I’ve got mine.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

we have to

be realistic in the improvement of the team. For right now, .500 would be a successful season. Its going to take more than one year. Of course I dont want the Warriors to be a perennial .500 team, but when we just finished a season where we won at a .317 clip, I will gladly take .500.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Very misleading .317 IMO

Like Skeptic said, this team would have been much, much better last year with no injuries. The ‘10-’11 team will be better in terms of wins and losses, and credit will be attributed to Riley, Nellie, and the new owners, but in reality, it’s just a health issue.

For right now, .500 would be a successful season. Its going to take more than one year.

This might be true, but because the W’s set their goals at the 8th seed, that’s where they can top out if everything goes right. So, while .500 would be a successful season in ‘10-’11, they must be on the path to .600 or above ball in successive years. But they are not.

by UncleCliffy on Jul 22, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

they must be on the path to .600 or above ball in successive years. But they are not.

 Well, lets not rule it out too fast. Binky and DLee are .600 team quality players so maybe if EpicUdon turns out better than good and they do something with Montay’s and Dre’s contracts we would be close?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

there are

future moves to be made. We can not say for certain that they are not on the path to .600 or above ball. We have legitimate building blocks and assets than can be moved.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, the reason for optimism is this:

Our top six players in terms of minutes last year were:

Curry, Ellis, Maggette, Morrow, Watson, Tolliver.

That list, this year, is likely to look like:
Curry, Ellis, Lee, D.Wright, Biedrins, Williams.

Every single one of those players (including Curry and Ellis, who appear on both lists) are likely to be substantially better than they were last year (even if Curry doesn’t improve from his end of year form). Trading Mags, Morrow, Watson, and Tolliver for Lee, Wright, Biedrins, and Williams is a MASSIVE upgrade. Night and day difference.

Talking about a marginal upgrade on this team makes no sense. We’re not the same team.

I believe that Lee and Curry are good enough to be top-3 guys on a championship team. The real question about them is if they are good enough to be #1 on a championship team.

I believe that Biedrins is good enough to start on a championship team in healthy. Monta has the ability to be a top-five player on a championship team (although I think if he doesn’t get it he could turn into a cancer which could destroy this team).

D. Wright is a great supporting player. B. Wright has been very good when he’s been healthy.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 4:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I believe that Lee and Curry are good enough to be top-3 guys on a championship team.
Binky and DLee are .600 team quality players

I don’t get how you can make these statements. Has either player ever played for a .500 team?

Now, there’s no doubt I’m a Curry fan, and there’s no doubt I strongly dislike the Lee trade. Isn’t it possible that you guys are overrating Lee’s ability to transform this team? Now, I know this isn’t a Lee thread, but you two (and many others) seem to anoint Lee as a top-of-the-line PF when in reality he has had one excellent year. Why do I think he’s just good and most certainly not great?

Our top six players in terms of minutes last year were:
Curry, Ellis, Maggette, Morrow, Watson, Tolliver.

That list, this year, is likely to look like:
Curry, Ellis, Lee, D.Wright, Biedrins, Williams.

Ronny, give me a “this year” list with last year’s injuries. What happens if for example Biedrins, B. Wright, and one other player have injury-plagued seasons? Won’t it be the same ole story?

by UncleCliffy on Jul 22, 2010 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, I didn't make the second statement, but ...
Has either player ever played for a .500 team?

That question becomes pretty irrelevant when you look at the quality of their teammates. Replace Lee or Curry with LeBron James and neither last year’s Knicks or last year’s Warriors make the playoffs.

I don’t know where you get that Lee has had “one excellent year.” I’m curious, which year was that?

The year he had a .584 TS% and averaged 11.3 reb/36?
Or the year he had a .590 TS% with 12.1 reb/36?
Or maybe the year he had a .6006 TS% and only managed 11.1 reb/36?

Or I guess maybe it wasn’t any of the last three years, because after all it was in his rookie year that he had his career best in TS% and reb/36.

In other words, nothing – absoltuely nothing – about David Lee’s 2009-10 season screams “fluke” in the context of his career. THe only thing he did drastically different was shoot the ball more.

The only way you could say that you felt he only had one excellent season was if you were only looking at PPG.

Like a lot of players who aren’t expected to do well, it took Lee a year or two after he was delivering on the court before his coaches started to notice and gave him minutes and/or ran plays for him. Quite frankly, it says something about Isiah Thomas as a coach (not something we didn’t already know, mind you). We saw something similar with Andris Biedrins – when Nellie replaced Monty as coach, it didn’t take Nellie too long to figure out that maybe we should try to set that guy up a bit more. Biedrins was, on a per minute basis, great very good his second year but that idiot Montgommery only played him 15 minutes a game. (Granted, he was till fouling a lot, but it was still pretty inexcusable).

Ronny, give me a "this year" list with last year’s injuries. What happens if for example Biedrins, B. Wright, and one other player have injury-plagued seasons? Won’t it be the same ole story?

You’re missing my point.

Yes, if we have similar injuries to last year, we’ll have similar problems.

But the point is that, if you’re going to talk about the Warriors as a 26-win-team, realize what team you’re actually talking about, who the guys on the floor were. Anthony Tolliver was our #6 minute guy, for crying out loud. On most teams he would be lucky to be active for half their games.

I was speaking specifically about people who talk about this team being marginally better than last year’s team, to which I say, that’s absurd – because of who last year’s team was. We are a much better team because we have much better players.

Yeah, if we’re gutted with injuries and have to run Anthony Tolliver out there again, we’ll suck. But that’s pretty unlikely.

Do you agree or disagree that Lee, Wright, Biedrins, and Williams are much, much better – not just a marginal upgrade – over Mags, Morrow, Watson, and Tolliver?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 23, 2010 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree

with you here for the most part, but dont throw out the replace Curry with Lebron and the Warriors dont make the playoffs. They definitely would.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Replace Curry with Lebron?

This last year? No, we don’t make the playoffs.

The Warriors won 26 games last year.

According to wins produced, Lebron created 24.78 wins and Curry created 9.83.

26+24.78-9.83=40.95. Round up to 41.

41 wins = 10th place in the west, out of the playoffs by 8 games.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

the team

dynamic would be completely different with Lebron on the team. You cant just swap their WP and say thats how they would finish. For example, Monta would not be shooting 22 shots per game and trying to do too much. Just saying, there is more to it than that.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Because you think Monta would have deferred to a clearly superior player?

Except that, you might recall, Monta said he thought he was better than Lebron.

It’s easy to come up with a reason to imagine WP would be higher than predicted. THe thing is, it’s also easy to come up with reasons why it might have been worse: maybe Monta would have been trying to show he was better than LeBron and therefore would have shot even more.

WP is actually pretty darn good at tracking the effect of trades. You can’t just wave your hands and say “it doesn’t apply here.”

Yes, the change to the team dynamic would be drastic – but the 15-win difference between the two players is, in itself, a pretty dramatic chance.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

id like to think

Montas opinion would change being around Lebron everyday, but this is Monta we are talking about.

I hear what you are saying, but do you really think, for example, Charlotte would only be 3-4 wins better if they traded Gerald Wallace for Lebron? Or Dallas only 4 games better trading Kidd for Lebron? Or that Dallas would be 11 games WORSE if they traded Kidd for Kobe? There is much more than goes into it. According to WP the Rockets would finish with 1 more win if they traded Budinger for Carmelo.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

or for Monta fans

The warriors would have finished with the same record if they traded Monta for Daniel Gibson.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, I do.

Kidd-for-Lebron, Wallace-for-Lebron are great examples of the inaccurate mental shortcuts. Notice what you’re falling back on here, “But … but – Kidd can’t be better than Kobe!” That’s really what you’re saying, right?

You call in that trap with comparing Budinger and Carmelo, too. Carmelos is a “big name” (mental short cut: big name = great player) and Carmelo is a volume scorer (mental short cut: the player who scores more is better).

WP works well enough that when there’s a surprising result I hesitate before assuming a problem with the numbers. The issue comparing those two players is that Carmelo is a foward (and in fact played nearly a quarter of his minutes at power forward, a position which he does not rebound adequately) whereas Chase is a guard (and rebounds the 2 well).

So if you traded Chase for Carmelo, and then ran Chase out there as a power forward, you would see his WP number drop dramatically.

That doesn’t apply to comparing Curry to Lebron, because Lebron can play four positions on the floor – it’s almost impossible to play him out of position.

This is why, often with WP it’s better to evaluate trades of drastically different players based on WP48 and how it changes your expected lineups and minutes played by various players. You’re not, in practice, just replacing Carmelo’s minutes with Chase’s. You’re putting different groups of players on the floor for different amounts of time.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

bq You’re not, in practice, just replacing Carmelo’s minutes with Chase’s. You’re putting different groups of players on the floor for different amounts of time.

Exactly, there is more that goes into it. When players go to new teams they will often tweak the way they play to better fit the team and other players roles change. So the WP isnt going to be always be the same. Also, im not just saying Kobe is better than Kidd, which is obvious. I’m saying adding Kobe and taking Kidd off the roster would make Dallas a much better team regardless of what WP says. The fact that WP say a Kobe for Kidd swap would make Dallas 11 games worse (going from the #2 seed to the #8 seed) is absolutely rediculous.

Also, I dont know what mental shortcut you think I am taking when I say Lebron for Wallace would lead to more than a 4 games boost for Charlotte. In my mind, there is no way a Lebron led team with the support of Mo Williams, Old Shaq, Jamison and co. can reach the #1 seed in the east, but a Lebron team with support of Jackson, Felton, Chandler and Diaw would barely get the #5 seed. Thats what WP says would happen.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

formatting error

bq You’re not, in practice, just replacing Carmelo’s minutes with Chase’s. You’re putting different groups of players on the floor for different amounts of time.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m saying adding Kobe and taking Kidd off the roster would make Dallas a much better team regardless of what WP says. The fact that WP say a Kobe for Kidd swap would make Dallas 11 games worse (going from the #2 seed to the #8 seed) is absolutely rediculous.

Why? What’s the logic here – akin to the problem of swapping Chase and Carmelo’s minutes?

Kidd, per minute, was better than Kobe this year. By a fair margin. Some of this is because Kobe had an off-year. Some of it is because Kobe is habitually over-rated by casual fans because he’s a high-profile volume scorer.

How do the minutes shuffle to improve the team more than a straight WP swap?

You saying it’s ridiculous isn’t an argument. You want to make the argument, make the argument.

Because from here it looks like you just can’t get past your mental shortcuts about Kobe. You probably think he’s a clutch shooter, too.

In my mind, there is no way a Lebron led team with the support of Mo Williams, Old Shaq, Jamison and co. can reach the #1 seed in the east, but a Lebron team with support of Jackson, Felton, Chandler and Diaw would barely get the #5 seed.

Well, let’s make this comparison properly, rather than just throwing out the names that you seem to think are good players (and leaving off, incidentally, the second-best player on the Cavs in the process).

The Cavs ran the following players out there who were above average on a per-minute basis, who played more than 1000 minutes for the team.

Moon (their second-best player), Varejao (their third-best player), Hickson,
Moon,
West.

(Jamison would qualify without the minutes restriction, but I want to talk about regular rotation players for the whole season).

You’ve got an entire starting lineup of above-average players, although the team played Shaq too much and Varejao too little. (They were a much better team with Varejao in and Shaq out, by the way).

Meanwhile, Charlotte ran out the following above-average per-minute players with Wallace (minutes player >= 1000):

Raymond Felton.

(MOhammed, Graham and Thomas don’t qualify based on minutes).

So you’re saying you don’t understand a team which had Lebron plus FIVE above-average regular rotation players would be 4 seeds higher than a team with Lebron plus ONE above-average regular rotation player?

THe funny thing is, your player lists make it abundantly clear that you’re using lazy thinking here. Because if you actually looked at the players you’d see that CHandler, Diaw, and old Shaq were below average players this year. They are some of the bigger names, so you’re clearly using the bigger name = better players shortcut.

But I suspect you’re also using the “scores most points = better player” shortcut, because you include Jamison and Mo Williams, who were tied for second-most PG scoring on the Cavs.

So I think you’re using both of those mental shortcuts, rather than actually looking at how much better the Cavs were from positions 2-6 on their roster than Charlotte. It’s not particularly close.

That you don’t see a big difference there suggests you either a) aren’t actually looking (instead relying on mental shortcuts) or b) don’t have the slightest clue how to evaluate non-superstar players.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 27, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

If Moon

is the second best player on the Cavs, how come he was playing 17 mpg and having a stat line of 4.9 pts 3.1 reb 0.8 assist?

 I am not just referring to players ppg when saying who was his supporting cast. Im going by players who played big minutes. Lebron made those guys on the Cavs better, just watch how terrible Cleveland will be this year. I didnt mention Varejao (who I like a lot) or Hickson, but I wasnt about to list off the entire lineup. Tyrus Thomas played decent for Charlotte and provides a lot of defense but I didn’t mention him either.

Do you not understand the type of attention Kobe demands from the other team? They would be forced to gameplan for him WAY more than anyone would have to for Kidd, which would make Dirk better as well. How many times do you think Kobe received double teams and extra attention compared to Kidd? This alone makes the game much easier for the players around him.

by tom88gsw on Jul 27, 2010 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Do you think that Kobe jacking up a ton of bad looks would actually help Dirk?

Offensively, their games are pretty similar. They’re both primarily midrange jumpshooters, which Dirk is better at.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 27, 2010 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

They would be forced to gameplan for him WAY more than anyone would have to for Kidd, which would make Dirk better as well. How many times do you think Kobe received double teams and extra attention compared to Kidd?

First of all, teams don’t really game plan for opponents for the regular season. They just don’t. There’s no time. Teams barely practice during the regular season – implementing a specific game plan just for one opponent simply doesn’t happen.

Secondly, you’re claiming that having a shoot-first player rather than one of the best players in the league at setting up other players would help Dirk? That’s madness. Kidd is great at setting up his teammates. Kobe so-so. (He seems perfectly capable, he’s just indifferent to it.)

As for Moon, I made a point about per-minute production for a reason. You don’t have to score a lot to be an effective NBA player (a point you seem to miss).

Tryus Thomas was a below-average player when it came to production. Hickson and Varejao weren’t. The Cavs had some slightly-below-average production guys, too … but they had a bunch of above-average guys, and Charlotte didn’t.

WHy is that such a hard distinction to understand?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 27, 2010 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Let's do the calculation using Wins Produced.

Azuibuike basically didn’t play last year. So it’s not like we’re really “-Azuibike” this year – he didn’t add anything last year. Randolph added very little.

Going by Wins Produced:
Players: WP
Azuibuike 1.11
Randolph 2.54
Turiaf 1.64
Watson 4.1
Morrow 3.53
Total outgoing: 12.92

Lee: 17.3
Wright: 5.2
Total incoming: 22.5

Net difference: + 9.58 wins.

If you add in the loss of Maggette (4.25 wins) we’re down to 5.33 wins improvement over last year, although bear in mind that our team WP from last year is 31.74 – almost identical to our pythagorian w-l from last year. In other words, if we ran the same team out there again, with the same injuries, we’d expect to do about six wins better.

So assuming we play at the pythagorean level, the moves we’ve made thus far put us around 37 wins.

The question then becomes, where do we get more wins from?
Fortunately, it’s not too hard to imagine this team finding some more wins.
For example, Monta’s best year had him in the ballpark of 10 wins. THis last year he was about two. It’s there optimistic, but not unreasonable, to think that he might get to the ballpark of 7 wins. So that’s five more.

Gets us to 42 wins.

Andris produced 3 wins last year. His best year was around 13. Again, optimistic but not unreasonable to say he adds 10, total, so 7 more.

Gets us to 49 wins.

Reggie Williams was a solidly above-average player when he was on the floor, but only played for the last third of the season. Assuming his production tails off a little bit, but he plays substantially more minutes would double his total production, and adds 2 wins.

51 wins.

Two years ago Brandan Wright contributed 2 wins in very limited minutes. Assuming his production tails off a bit but he plays many more minutes should be good for at least two more wins.

53 wins.

Curry should be better this season than he was last. Even if he just plays at the level he was playing at the end of last season, for the whole year that should be something special. He was worth almost 10 wins last year. So, maybe 13 this year? Again, optimistic, but not unreasonable.

56 wins.

That covers all our primary rotation players except for a backup PG. Somebody like Arroyo is worth about 2 wins in that role, maybe a smidge more. Somebody like Lin might be negative. Let’s leave this out for the time being.

So there are a LOT of optimistic assumptions in all that, most particularly about health (and this team clearly has problems is Beidrins doesn’t come back) and Monta Ellis, but that strikes me as a pretty reasonable upper bound for this team.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can say that again!
there are a LOT of optimistic assumptions in all that

In the West – really?!

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Out of curiosity. Assuming Warriors stay healthy, what would you project?

50 wins is too high for me, BUT, Curry’s continued growth (he is capable of being a 25-30 point scorer if he wants to, but I still project him more to be high teens and pass), David Lee’s addition, Biedrins returnin to form (which is a quiet but highly efficient, elite rebounding center who is a good weakside defender) and let’s assume Monta can get closer to the 07-08 version of himself than the 09-10 version. Where would that leave the Warriors?

Outside the Lakers, I don’t see any other team who can out rebound Lee and Biedrins down low which has been Warriors biggest hole in last couple years. And not many people can run court way Monta and Curry do

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

So many roster changes

so many injuries.
 I have no idea and wouldn’t even guess until I see some pre-season games. You seem awfully thin up front again, especially since Udoh will be out until Xmas or so.
I really like the Biedrins/Lee combo if they stay healthy, seems like a good pairing. But who comes off the bench to relieve them?

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I really like the Biedrins/Lee combo if they stay healthy, seems like a good pairing. But who comes off the bench to relieve them?

Thats problem. If Udoh and Wright were healthy I’d feel ok, cause realistically you’re looking at Lee going 36 a night, and Biedrins 32.

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Any more injuries up there - Any

to Lee or Biedrins and 30 wins would be hard to reach IMO. But like I said, no predictions until I see that team on the court together.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

If healthy but with issues 42 wins. If healthy but Monta and Beans with no issues 48-52 wins this season.

And improvement after that. During the We Believe I remember being amazed at our luck of being healthy for 2 years compared to the previous years and always worried about the way Nellie seemed to overplay the star players without much rest. Fatigue causes injury. My main complaint about Nellie. He better not do this to Curry.

by Only In Fairfax on Jul 23, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

as much as I like advanced statistics

I think the David Lee trade + Sale of team will do more for this team than anything. No one can deny last year was a disaster for morale. Injuries, trades etc. etc. etc.

Biedrins returning to health will be huge. Monta seems to have an attitude adjustment too. That alone should adjust his game from selfish “I want to be Kobe” to Monta circa 07-08 who we all fell in love with.

I’m insanely curious about our schedule. A good early schedule, where Warriors can get off to a good start will be absolutely vital. Some positive energy to start season for once will keep everyone committed and not just ‘out for there own’.

BTW, Everything I’ve seen/heard from Lee (interviews, knicks fans, team usa camp), I LOVE the guy. So much commitment, energy. Seems like a real leader, picking up teammates. Already working nonstop with Curry on pick and rolls. I think it’s likely David Lee will be one of team captains, and thats a good thing. Love Ronny, but when your backup mediocre big is your captain, how much respect can he garner?

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

we might need to define "pretty reasonable" and "upper bound"

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I do think you all grossly underrate David Lee and how good he can be for us.

He’s not Gasol, Dirk or Bosh… but behind that elite group, i really have a hard time taking Amare, Boozer over him. Yeah they do certain things better, but overall, not so sure.

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know I undervalue David Lee

I don’t watch the Knicks much and it’s always stuck in my mind that he played in the D’Antoni system and the Knicks always sucked. At the same time I have looked at the advanced stats and it gives a very different view than I have. Still, though just can’t get my preconceived thoughts out of my mind so I try not to talk about David Lee as much as possible because I know I am likely just biased on that one.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

20 ppg, 12 rpg, 3.5 apg, efficiently

if he were an other player you’d be so excited :D

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

and I think you are right

but like I said, I have a preconceived notion as to why he got those numbers. When looking at the advanced stats his numbers still hold up really well so basically I think at this point I am just biased. Hence, not making many comments because I know I am just biased at the moment.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

The only concern I have...

He did it mostly @ Center. While it’ a subtle change, it could effect his game. I don’t expect those numbers again, but if he gives over 15 points, rebounds and passes same way I’ll be ecstatic. This team wasn’t exactly lacking explosive scoring.

For some reason David Lee signing makes me think of my moneyball A’s . Art of the undervalued. I can’t help but think if Lee was an inch taller, drafted higher, or black or foreign, he would garner MUCH more hype. but cause of preconceived notions and stereotypes he won’t be.

Watch Knicks do worse without him. While Amare is more explosive scorer, they didn’t need scoring as much as all the dirty work Lee did that Amare never has. (though amare has a better supporting cast)

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

20 ppg, 12 rpg, 3.5 apg, efficiently if he were an other player you’d be so excited :D

yeah cause if it were rudolf putting out those numbers he’d still have lots of upside.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 21, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

this

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are you implying Randolph can be that good???

I’d be happy if he could average those numbers inefficiently. Lee’s a high quality player. I am willing to bet Randolph won’t be this good

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

don’t watch the Knicks much and it’s always stuck in my mind that he played in the D’Antoni system and the Knicks always sucked.

Well, look at the Knicks last year according to WP. The next best player on that team was about the same quality as CJ Watson.

How good would the Warriors have been if they had Curry, and the next-best player was CJ?

It’s really hard to blame Lee for the Knicks suckitude, or to talk about how he’s not that good or else they would have won more, because of the truly abysmal quality of the rest of their team. The Warriors were substantially better everywhere else on the floor, and we only managed 26 wins.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

At the same time I have looked at the advanced stats and it gives a very different view than I have

I know I am likely just biased on that one.

Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed

by wallywagon11 on Jul 21, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Just to follow up on that thought:

The Knicks last year went 29-53 with a Pythagorean w-l of 31-51.

Their WP-modelled finish is 30 wins.

And yes, that includes Lee’s 17.3.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Which of my assumptions - specifically - do you not like?

I don’t want to be difficult here, but it seems like people are rejecting that analysis because of the conclusion, NOT because of the process.

Do you think Beidrins or Monta won’t return to form? Do you think that Lee isn’t really worth his WP #? What?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

They aren't givens

Biedrins SHOULD return to form if healthy. Monta is more a question for me, for him it’s all about ego and deferring. BTW It’s not unfair to mention, Monta did miss almost all of 08-09, so a down year was expected. I don’t expect him to have a .580 TS% again, but if he could be more like .555-.560, 20 ppg and keep turnovers down around where they were previously, i’ll be very happy.

The real X factor is Curry’s development. If he becomes elite, that’s a huge jump in wins

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hey, I pretty much agree

I did a little more spreadsheeting, though, to give some more possibilities. I took the WP48 numbers for everyone on the roster (except Lin) for the last three years and calculated the average, max, and min. I then assigned mpg to each player so that the total number of mpg = 240 (i.e. 5*48). Obviously, the results will depend on this assignment, so for reference, here’s how I split up the minutes:

Player MPG
Bell 10
Biedrins 30
Curry 36
Ellis 36
Gadzuric 2
Lee 36
Radman 5
Udoh 0 (he’s out for a while, so I’m basically neglecting him for now)
Williams 30
B. Wright 25
D. Wright 30

Crunching all these numbers, I came up with the following results (rounded to nearest win):

Using WP48 from 2010 Alone
53 wins

WP48 Average 3 Years
58

WP48 Worst Year Over Last 3 Years
43

WP48 Best Year Over Last 3 Years
72

Clearly, the “best” projection is ludicrous. That only happens if each player duplicates his best season, which is highly unlikely. It’s nice to see that even in the “worst case” scenario, where each player duplicates his worst season, we appear to reach 43 wins rather easily. The biggest caveat here is the minutes I have assigned each player. I fully realize that injury or coach’s decision could affect these, but I think they appear reasonable. Anyway, my two cents…

by Evanz on Jul 21, 2010 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nice.

for me it’s reasonable as the upside potential for this lineup. We will have some minus players on the team, though. Allowing for a reasonable number of injuries, and splitting the difference on AB and Ellis for this year, I sti think 42-44 wins is a reasonable projection.

by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 21, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

I like win shares a lot more

It’s a bit less optimistic in a player’s value in adding wins.

Returning Players:
Curry 4.6
Tolliver 2.5 (if he returns)
Williams 1.7
Biedrins 1.6 (injury-lowered)
Ellis 1.3
George 1.3
Hunter 1.3
B. Wright 0 (injury)
Radmanovic -0.2

Outgoing:
Maggette 6.3
Morrow 3.5
Watson 3.1
Randolph 1.5
Turiaf 1.4
Azubuike 0.7 (injury)
Moore 0.6

Incoming:
D. Lee 10.3
D. Wright 4.3
Bell 2.0
Gadzuric 0.5
Udoh: ?
Lin: ?

The raw win shares here equal 29.9. I think it’s safe to say that many of the returning players such as Curry, Tolliver, Williams, Ellis (in a reduced role), and Biedrins (in a less injury-prone year) will increase the win total.

My guesses for WS compared to last year:
Curry +2.5 (strong end to season)
Tolliver +0.5
Williams +1
Ellis +2.5 (reverting to 2006-7 performance in terms of WS)
Biedrins +4 (reverting to 2008-9 performance in terms of WS)
D. Wright -1
B. Wright +2 (reverting to 2008-9 performance in terms of WS)
Other players combined +1.5

Dorell Wright had a breakout year last year that I’m not sure is sustainable. This adds up to 43 win shares.

Obviously, no one really knows how good this team is, and games have to be played. But I’d wager that 43 wins is significantly more likely than 56 wins.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Why do you prefer win shares to wins produced?

The problem with Win Shares is that it’s calculated from a win total already in mind. It says, “oh these wins, this is how many you can credit this player for.”

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hit reply too soon ...

I agree that WP is very optimistic about this team compared to the conventional wisdom.

But it just has a ton of predictive power. What I don’t like about Win Shares is the fact that it’s not really testable, since it adds up to the team’s wins by definition.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly
What I don’t like about Win Shares is the fact that it’s not really testable, since it adds up to the team’s wins by definition.

Its a team game much more than football or basketball.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

basketball

is more of a team game than football? Thats just not true.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

I never

really looked at the WP chart until now and there are many problems with it. The spurs would be three games worse if they swapped Kobe and Manu? There are many more examples that are just as crazy.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Mental short cut:

“Kobe is the biggest name in the game, so he must be one of the best players.”

But let’s go through the list:
Efficiency: Manu. By a lot.
Volume scoring: Kobe – by a smaller margin than you think)
TOs: Manu
Rebs: Manu
Stl: Manu
Blk: Manu
Ast: Manu.

So let me ask you: aside from the conventional wisdom that says Kobe must be better because he’s Kobe, why is Kobe a better player than Manu?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

TBH

Manu per minute is better than Kobe, but Manu is hurt often so i think Kobe gets the edge for being able to play more games. I doubt that is tom’s reason, but it could be.

"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.

by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 26, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Long post is long

Wins Produced HEAVILY weights rebounds. I like David Lee a lot, but there’s no way he is worth 17 wins. The main debate within APBRmetrics is putting weights on certain statistics. Berri has overvalued rebounding and undervalued scoring in his metrics, overcompensating a bit too far. Berri set the sum of WP to zero, which implies that scoring doesn’t win games. I’m sure we can agree that scoring wins games, even if it’s a bit overrated by the media and fans.

Another annoyance with WP is the argument that a shot should be taken unless there’s a 50% chance of scoring. Shooting efficiency is pretty important, but someone has to take the shot and carry the workload for the team. Additionally, the best players supposedly contribute many times the wins that everyone else contributes, and that’s not really believable.

What I like about Win Shares is the FACT that it adds up to the team’s wins. This way, we have a pretty good glimpse of what they actually did the previous season, without speculation. I have liked Dean Oliver’s “Four Factors” because they put weights that make sense by estimating estimate a player’s points scored and allowed per possession. It’s not completely perfect, but it takes into account ideas of +/- and most importantly, per-possession statistics with good weights.

Quite frankly, having predictive power would be cool if done right, but I’d be damned if David Lee was better than Dwayne Wade just because he rebounds better. Lee is a 14.4 win improvement on Randolph in WP and better than Wade. The implication that guards like Wade are not really not as valuable because they don’t rebound is overdone.

The problem is that Wins Produced really HASN’T had great predictive power. It’s a bit better than PER (LOL Hollinger), but that’s not saying much. His book defended Isiah Thomas for spending some $120 million on the Knicks because he believed they were worth that much. Looking at his midseason predictions in 2010, I can assure you that Camby is not worth 23.6 games and Baron Davis is worth 8.1.

Anyway, people interested in APBRmetrics are largely dismissive of WP for similar and probably more reasons. There are probably more problems with WP, but I’d have to read more into it.

Wow, long post is long. Should watch myself next time.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

This debate can be easily settled

You say 56 wins, I say 43. If the Warriors win 50+, you win. If the Warriors win 49 or less, I win.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Perhaps.

But injuries can change that, as can minutes distribution. If Nellie plays a lot of D. Wright at the 4, all bets are off.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Pretty sure you've got the win locked up

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

30 win

improvement is not happening. Yoyo will have this bet haha

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Perhaps we can all agree on this:

The Warriors have the talent to break .500 at a minimum. Anything less than that, with a more normal injury distribution, represents a failure of coaching.

by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 21, 2010 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

The problem is that Berri's weights are really testable.

I agree with you, quite frankly, that you can argue that the weights should be different.

The problem is, I haven’t seen somebody else come up with better weights that test as well or better. If Berri really overvalues rebounds, then somebody should be able to come up with a better formula, weighting rebounds less compared to scoring, that produces better results.

And I don’t think anybody has.

Shooting efficiency is pretty important, but someone has to take the shot and carry the workload for the team.

And yet, examples where a high-volume, low-efficiency scorer leaves a team and the team suffers are pretty rare compared to examples where such a player leaves and the team suffers or improves offensively.

Additionally, the best players supposedly contribute many times the wins that everyone else contributes, and that’s not really believable.

Why isn’t it believable?

The problem I have with Win Shares is that the same player, playing with different teammates, will get a drastically different number. If, say, Monta put up very similar numbers as the 5th-best player on the floor (and was therefore on a very good team, which won a lot of games) as he did as the best player on the floor (and was therefore on a mediocre team,which won very few games), then his win share would vary dramatically, wouldn’t it?

Or am I understanding the calculation wrong? (It’s quite possible).

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Have you looked much into SPM?

Basically, it’s regressing a player’s box score stats back to their adjusted +/- to come up with a linear weights system. Here are the current weights that B-R has come up with: http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?page_id=4122 and here’s a thread with some different worked out weights (for a different set of stats) http://www.sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/viewtopic.php?t=2603

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jul 21, 2010 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Problems of WP: Example of the 2010-11 Miami Heat
If Berri really overvalues rebounds, then somebody should be able to come up with a better formula, weighting rebounds less compared to scoring, that produces better results.

Yep, win shares.

And yet, examples where a high-volume, low-efficiency scorer leaves a team and the team suffers are pretty rare compared to examples where such a player leaves and the team suffers or improves offensively.

I actually agree with this. I’m just saying that WP de-emphasizes scoring too far.

Why isn’t it believable?

Alright, I’ll take you up on this one. Miami Heat based on last year’s numbers:

LeBron +24.78
Wade +16.93
Bosh +11.84
Haslem +8.89
Miller +8.24
Chalmers +1.73
Juwan Howard +0.85
Joel Anthony -0.77
Ilgauskas -1.14
Pittman ?

This total is 71.35 wins. Considering that LeBron and Wade are not in their primes yet, we should expect WP to be higher for both of them. Is the 2010-11 Miami Heat the greatest team of all time? Even you must agree that this is not a likely scenario.

The problem I have with Win Shares is that the same player, playing with different teammates, will get a drastically different number. If, say, Monta put up very similar numbers as the 5th-best player on the floor (and was therefore on a very good team, which won a lot of games) as he did as the best player on the floor (and was therefore on a mediocre team,which won very few games), then his win share would vary dramatically, wouldn’t it?

I concede that it is likely that WS can shift a good amount with new teammates, but it’s often due to team chemistry changes that puts players in new roles. Even if we assume that you are completely right on this (and you might be), I think it’s safe to assume that the Heat won’t win around 75 games.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

For the record, when I did the WS for the Heat a few days ago, it was something around 60. I added a few wins based on the fact they have potential to be better and predicted 63 wins from this current roster, assuming that they don’t add anyone else.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

WP actually usually peaks at 25

Wade is nearing the end of his prime.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 12:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yep, win shares.

I haven’t seen significant testing which implies such a thing. If you have a link, or you can point me to a big chunk of data which supports that argument, I would love to read it.

I mean, we have years and years worth of data here – are you saying that someone has actually crunched the numbers and compared the two against actual results?

I’m just saying that WP de-emphasizes scoring too far.

Again, I’d love to see some large-scale data analysis to support this conclusion. One data point (more on what you offer below in just a second) doesn’t really mean anything one way or the other.

his total is 71.35 wins. Considering that LeBron and Wade are not in their primes yet, we should expect WP to be higher for both of them. Is the 2010-11 Miami Heat the greatest team of all time? Even you must agree that this is not a likely scenario.

Whether it’s intuitively likely or not doesn’t interest me. What does interest me is whether it actually happens.

Lots and lots of times, people attack advanced statistics because the results seem counterintuitive … and yet their predictive power holds. The proof will be in the pudding.

I’m concerned that the heat don’t have enough rebounding, but I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

And actually, I believe those players are mostly in their prime at this point, They shouldn’t be continuing to improve.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

As I’ve commented to jae, it’s true that I do not have conclusive evidence against WP, just select parts, nor am I particularly inclined to spend the hours to do the empirical study. WP just doesn’t sound convincing enough to be worth the effort.

are you saying that someone has actually crunched the numbers and compared the two against actual results?

I would love to see this. I don’t mind being wrong, if it were the case. If WP has been proven to closely match the standings year in and year out of the vast majority of teams, I’ll eat my hat. This is all you need to prove.

Whether it’s intuitively likely or not doesn’t interest me. What does interest me is whether it actually happens.

I’d be glad to give up if the Heat do in fact win 72 games. My skepticism of WP has everything to do with predictive value.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Get out the BBQ sauce.
If WP has been proven to closely match the standings year in and year out of the vast majority of teams, I’ll eat my hat.

Read “The Wages of Wins” and “Stumbling on Wins.” It’s all there.

WP tracks with team wins with an R^2 of about .9.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

You accept the bet, then?

Given current rosters:
Warriors: 43 wins vs. 56 wins
Heat: 63 wins vs. 72 wins

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

The problem with the bet is that there are too many variables.

eg, the assumptions I used – Biedrins returns to form, Monta accepts his role, no major injuries – would slant things in your favor.

How do we control for that?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, WP isn’t really as predictive as you say, then, is it?

We both made the same assumptions about Biedrins and Monta, and assumed normal injuries. I think it’s fair to assume that the Warriors will win a few more games if the starting lineup remains mostly healthy and a few less games if the lineup remains injury-prone like last year.

We can’t easily control for that, but I think we can assume that it will change the W-L record by a few games either way.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not that internet bets are worth the nonpaper they're not written on but . . .

At the end of the season, could you figure out who actually played on Miami and Golden state and then apply the pre-season WS and WP to those players for the time they actually played and see if WS or WP did a better job of correlating with the actual win/loss results?

Derrick Coleman is my power animal.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 22, 2010 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

My point is that you don't have to wait until after the season to do this.

If you read Berri you’ll see that this has been done for past seasons.

That’s why a made a BBQ sauce comment when Yoyo wrote:

If WP has been proven to closely match the standings year in and year out of the vast majority of teams, I’ll eat my hat.

Because it has. The standard he set has already been met. Of course, I can understand not wanting to eat one’s hat, but we can get some really tasty sauce for it …

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Congrats, you win the debate! Good job! I need to brush up on my debating skills because I have not been as eloquent or precise with words as I would have hoped to be. I was probably a bit overambitious in trying to disprove WP. Also, skepticism, of course, of Berri’s methodology doesn’t constitute a logical argument.

That said, I remain unconvinced that the Heat will win 72 games, or that the Warriors will win 56 games. I don’t think you convinced other fans here, either, judging by the other responses. Therefore, I am going to wait and see whether this year’s results actually bear fruit before accepting your conclusion in full.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

P.S. You’re not seriously suggesting that the Warriors will be a championship contender through winning 56 games, are you? The Lakers won it all winning 57 games this past year.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm just saying you set a bar, and WP hopped over it.

So I understand wanting to move the bar, but I fail to see how the the performance of two teams in one season should be taken as an acid test for a measurement that has many years, and many teams, worth of data supporting it.

The one of my assumptions I’m most pessimistic about is Monta Ellis.

I think it will be interesting to see. I also think that the Warriors will only live up to their WP-potential if Nellie is no longer the coach. (Earlier in his career he consistently won more than WP would predict. The last couple of seasons, he’s won less. I don’t think it’s a fluke.)

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh, I just used those two teams as examples that seem ridiculous. Of course, we should look at a complete sample size of all thirty teams. Basically, I am saying that I don’t trust Berri’s data and want to do my experiment with it, hence I will be looking closely at how his WP calculations this year fares versus the standings. I’m sure my skepticism is understandable.

What were the WP totals of the Warriors the last few years? I’m curious, as you say that Nellie’s been underachieving.

I, too, am a bit skeptical that Monta will “return to form”, but am giving him the benefit of the doubt. He just hasn’t looked that great since his MIP year.

Nellie’s an interesting case because it seems much more difficult to separate coaching ability as a variable, since there are just so many variables to take into account. I’m not going to pretend that I can make a good judgment on how he is as coach, except that he appears to be utilizing some players quite efficiently and others not so much.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Last year for the Warriors ...

our WP was around 32. Our Pythagorean W-L was also at 32.

(I only know that off the top of my head because I calculated it for another post recently).

Berri wrote an article, the year before, about how Nelson had misused our players resulting in the team being much worse than it should have been – if I have more time later I’ll add up the actual WP we had and compare it to our real and pythagorean wins, but Berri’s point was actually a little more complex than that, so I’m not sure exactly what the result will be.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

The curious thing is that Nellie is also one of the very, very few coaches for whom players are more productive (albeit a not monumental). He can get more out of players than most coaches. This doesn’t always mean he’ll use them optimally in terms playing time.

Last year and the year before I thought Nellie gave up. If the team starts playing well, I suspect he’ll have a reasonable rotation. I’m not sure why I suspect this, but I would like to dream a bit.

by jae on Jul 22, 2010 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

The curious thing is that Nellie is also one of the very, very few coaches for whom players are more productive

depends if they are nellie type players. He failed to get anything out of Foyle and not much out of cabbages and TMNT.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2010 8:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hope you're right, Jae.

I’m pessimistic, but I’ve been wrong before and I’m sure I’ll be wrong again.

He looks like someone who doesn’t care. His lack of involvement during the draft makes him look like someone who doesn’t care. Maybe even like someone who doesn’t expect to coach this year.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 23, 2010 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

WP

Warriors total WP (actual wins):

2009: 31.1 (29)
2008: 46.8 (48)
2007: 40.2 (42)
2006: 37.2 (34)

by Evanz on Jul 23, 2010 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

bit confused here

You said earlier that WP has been proven to match the standings year after year. Are you saying that WP predicts the scores of a future season (say 2010-11) based on a prior season (2009-2010)? Or that at the end of a season (2010-11), the WP for that season (2010-11) will equal the actual win total? The former is a prediction, the latter is a correlation (or retrodiction). I agree that WP correlates well with same-season win totals. But I’m not at all convinced that it is predictive, because except for the true superstars in the league, there is a lot of variation of WP stats from one year to the next for players. Is that the analysis that Berri did? If so, I should really buy the book.

by Evanz on Jul 23, 2010 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

WP changes a lot from year to year?

No, it doesn’t. Or at least, WP48 doesn’t – injuries may change minutes played, which would affect WP48.

But it’s actually pretty darn consistent. You don’t huge swings with most players most years, except early in their career and late in their career. Obviously, a case like Monta Ellis 2009-2010 is the exception.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 24, 2010 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not that internet bets are worth the nonpaper they're not written on but . . .

they can be if the stakes are public humiliation instead of cash.

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

WP just doesn’t sound convincing enough to be worth the effort.

This is a rather poor way to evaluate a hypothesis.

by jae on Jul 22, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Perhaps. I know other APBRmetricians can and have done a better job of being critical of Berri’s metrics than me, including Dan Rosenbaum (Cavs) and Dean Oliver (Nuggets).

The comment referred to “being worth the effort” for me to investigate further on WP, not that Berri shouldn’t try to tweak it and improve it.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Those are common complaints loged against WP, but no one has been able to back them up.

Berri has adjusted the importance of rebounds and scoring, but the overall numbers don’t change much.

by Spider Jerusalem on Jul 21, 2010 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wins Produced HEAVILY weights rebounds. I like David Lee a lot, but there’s no way he is worth 17 wins.

Wins Produced weighs a point and a rebound and a steal and a turnover exactly the same.

Berri has overvalued rebounding and undervalued scoring in his metrics, overcompensating a bit too far.

This is a common charge. Were it true, then the predictions on team wins when players change teams should be off. If this is not the case, then the opinion that it overvalues players, and it’s an opinion as you are presenting it, is not valid. This is an empirical question. It should be dealt with empirically.

Additionally, the best players supposedly contribute many times the wins that everyone else contributes, and that’s not really believable.

Again, you are treating an empirical question with your opinion. When really, really good players according to the measure aren’t available, what happens? That’s the important data, not what your opinion is.

The implication that guards like Wade are not really not as valuable because they don’t rebound is overdone.

You do not understand how the metric works.


There are probably more problems with WP, but I’d have to read more into it.

That statement is true. You should read more into it. I can tell from what you posted that you are missing quite a bit.

by jae on Jul 22, 2010 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions  

Wins Produced weighs a point and a rebound and a steal and a turnover exactly the same.

how does it account for hard to quantify things like moving your feet to stay in front of a guy, or boxing out, etc. ?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2010 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

how does it account for hard to quantify things like moving your feet to stay in front of a guy, or boxing out, etc. ?

If those things result in points, rebounds, steals, turnovers, it accounts for them by counting the points, rebounds, steals, turnovers. If it doesn’t result in a change in any of those things, it makes no difference whether it “accounts” for them. The metric isn’t explaining why someone rebounds better, shoots better, causes turnovers, etc. Don’t confuse the why with the what.

by jae on Jul 22, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Don’t confuse the why with the what.

 I’m just trying to figure out how a defensive guy who creates the bad shot or the bad pass turnover gets his credit for his team mates rebound or steal?
  Seems like this metric would be more weighted toward the big numbers guys than a metric that rates the value of the players by simply taking the team record and dividing up the wins credit based on their playing time percentages?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fair enough. I don’t have all the data to disprove WP because I haven’t conducted a two-year study of it, nor am I inclined to.

Do you have the data to prove that WP does value players correctly? Honestly, I wouldn’t mind being proven completely wrong. What is this important data you speak of that proves without a doubt that WP is extremely accurate and predictive on team wins?

Give it your best shot. The ball is in your court.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

As has been posted here many, many times: this forum is not conducive to presenting voluminous data. Berri has presented it in his books and in the edited volume that explains WP in more detail.

by jae on Jul 22, 2010 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's because he is ridiculously efficient

rebounds extremely well, dishes lots of assists, and rarely turns it over.

"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.

by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 24, 2010 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

It sounds like you're asking the question rhetorically.

Kidd had a hell of a regular season last year. THe postseason showed how it was largely smoke and mirrors (and yet another example for the point I keep making, that teams don’t game plan very much for each other in the regular season).

So when you say “highest rated PG,” what do you mean?

The PG who did the most to help his team win? Sure.

Don’t look any of the players up:

                    A B C
pts /36 10.3 13.5 18.2
TS% .577 .540 .559
ast/36 9 9.6 10.3
reb/36 5.6 4.4 3.9
to/36 2.4 3.0 3.2
stl/36 1.8 2.3 1.2
pf/36 1.8 2.4 2.7

Those are the top three PGs in the league last year, by WP.

Which one would you rather have?

A – Jason Kidd – strikes me as the obvious choice if you look at those numbers, unless you are seduced by the siren song of volume scoring. (Of course, D. Williams – C – wins that tally. And is it surprising that he’s the one who gets the most press? People notice volume scoring!)

Now, does that mean I’d rate him top among PGs? Again, depends what you mean. There are a variety of reasons why I’d NOT pick Kidd if I were building a team.

Age is one. But even beyond that he’s no longer quick enough – he was effective last season because teams played him as if he were the bad-shooting, lightning-quick guy he was when he’s younger, but now he’s the opposite of that – as an soon as a smart opponent game-planned for that, he fell apart.

If I was picking one of those guys to build a team around, in fact, I’d probably pick Deron (who WP rates lowest) because his game is the most complete. Rondo’s lack of consistent outside shot/killer instinct is a big part of why the Lakers beat them in the finals.

But that doesn’t mean Derron was better during the regular season. He wasn’t. Kidd was really, really good in the regular season. Clearly better than Derron.

Just because you’re using statistics doesn’t mean you check your brain at the door, but this case isn’t particularly challenging. It’s pretty hard to make the case that another PG was better than Kidd during the regular season last year. It seems absurd because we simplify things, we use shortcuts, and our mental shortcuts are things like, “Kidd was great, but he’s over the hill,” “Derron is the best PG in the league not named Paul,” and “Rondo is a great young PG on the rise.”

It just so happens that those mental shortcuts, with respect to Kidd this season, were wrong. Now, they were perfectly reasonable – Kidd had been in rather serious decline for several years. But he made a major change in his game – adding a deadly (.425) 3-pt shot (.075 better than his career average – and made it his primary offense weapon (61% of his shots were 3 pointers. His career average was 33%).

And if you didn’t watch him enough to see that change, and recgonize that it wasn’t a fluke, there’s no way you’d think, intuitively, that he had such a great season.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 25, 2010 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

it's not a choice between volume scoring and efficiency, though

A guy who shoots as efficiently as Kidd should take more shots. He’s hurting his team if he hands off the load to guys who don’t shoot as efficiently. Nash is incredibly efficient, and manages to put up more points per minute than Kidd or Williams.

by Evanz on Jul 25, 2010 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think it's a stretch to say that you're "hurting" your team -

by scoring efficiently at low volume.

At best, you might say, “you could be doing even more to help your team if you shot more.” But that’s very different.

But, ultimately, your post reveals that you haven’t bothered to look up the Mavs performance this season, because if you had looked up the Mavs performance this season you wouldn’t write something like:

He’s hurting his team if he hands off the load to guys who don’t shoot as efficiently.

Jason Kidd was the SIXTH-most efficient Mav last season.

That means, most of the time, when he dished off, he wasn’t consistently dishing off to someone who was less efficient than he was. He was often dishing off to someone who was MORE efficient than he was.

Nash scored more, and more efficiently. He also turned the ball over more, rebounded at lot less, and stole the ball a lot less. I sounds a LOT like you’re falling back on the “whomever scores more is the better player” argument.

Furthermore, Nash was (tied as the) second-most effiecient player on his team. Therefore, using your logic that an efficient player hurts his team by passing the ball to a less-efficient guy, then Nash was hurting his team MORE than Kidd, despite scoring more.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

TS

let’s talk about TS% and give it a little more thought (than just saying he’s SIXTH on the team). Of the guys who played significant minutes last season, here are the numbers:

Terry – 33 mpg – 55.2 TS
Berea – 20 – 52.6
Butler – 24.4 – 50.7
Dampier – 23.3 – 63.7
Chandler – 22.8 – 64.3
Haywood – 26.5 – 58.8
Marion – 32 – 53.5
Dirk – 37.5 – 57.8
Stevenson – 11 – 38.1
Beaubois – 12 – 61.7
Gooden – 25.1 – 54.7
Howard – 26.7 – 49.6

Going over to 82games.com shows the following lineup frequency (top 5):

1. Kidd-Terry-Marion-Nowitzki-Dampier
2. Kidd-Butler-Marion-Nowitzki-Haywood
3. Barea-Kidd-Marion-Nowitzki-Dampier
4. Kidd-Terry-Marion-Nowitzki-Gooden
5. Kidd-Howard-Marion-Nowitzki-Dampier

It does appear that Kidd was generally out there with at least one or two players with higher TS%. Does that mean his shot total was appropriate? Difficult to say. It does tell me that Marion and Terry basically should never be shooting the ball.

As for my critique of Kidd, I suppose I should dial it back, since he was playing with some very efficient shooters. Doing some cursory analysis of Williams, using the lineups from 82games.com, it’s also not clear whether his “volume shooting” was out of line. Like Dallas, Utah has a lot of efficient scorers, but Williams is at most 1-2 points below his teammates, so it’s hard to fault him for taking his own shot. And it’s not as if he was putting up insane number of shots. I suppose the bottom line is players should take a number of shots that is appropriate for the level of efficiency that they are surrounded by (within reason). Good shooters should take more shots, unless they are surrounded by even better shooters. Just looking at these numbers, it’s striking how efficient teams like Dallas and Utah are, and it’s obvious why they are so good year after year. Curry would be the least efficient player on many of these lineups.

by Evanz on Jul 26, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

It does tell me that Marion and Terry basically should never be shooting the ball.

No argument there.

it’s striking how efficient teams like Dallas and Utah are, and it’s obvious why they are so good year after year.

My work here is done.

:)

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

One more thing:
The implication that guards like Wade are not really not as valuable because they don’t rebound is overdone.

I’m surprised that I let this one pass.

In 2010, WP rated two big men (people who predominantly played PF or C) as better than Wade.

in 2009, WP rated one big man (Dwight Howard) as better than Wade.

In 2007 and 2008, Wade was injured, and played many fewer minutes and was less effective in the minutes he played, and thus WP rated lots of big men as being better than him.

But in 2006, pre-injury, WP rated ZERO big men as being better than Wade.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Win Shares vs. Wins Produced
The problem with Win Shares is that it’s calculated from a win total already in mind. It says, "oh these wins, this is how many you can credit this player for."

That’s not really true. From B-R’s article:

James made team Win Shares directly proportional to team wins. In his system, a baseball team that wins 80 games will have exactly 240 Win Shares, a baseball team that wins 90 games will have exactly 270 Win Shares, etc. In my system, a basketball team that wins 50 games will have about 50 Win Shares, give or take.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

It’s using Dean Oliver’s stats from BoP to estimate how much they contribute to the team winning. Win Shares aren’t set to compute to team wins, they just turn out that way, much like Wins Produced. (If I’m completely missing something here, please correct me.)

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jul 21, 2010 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, this sounds accurate.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Omar Samhan's twitter comments on Lin
Jeremy Lin is a great player and even better person. I’m so happy 4 him
@John_MonSF. Me 2. But the Warriors just don’t like me.

Ah, that’s sad.

by Evanz on Jul 21, 2010 4:18 AM PDT reply actions  

samhan

does have a sense of humor ill give him that. He knows he is not NBA ready.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

nickname for Lin?

does anyone have any information on lin’s nickname (if he had one) in college or before? if anything else this is an awesome PR move for the warriors, and the story behind it (fans mailing lacob) should make a lot of dubz fans feel like “hey, this is my team.” looking forward to an exciting season with the new and (hopefully) improved squad.

by Land of the Rising Dubz on Jul 21, 2010 6:13 AM PDT reply actions  

I like Shaolin

I’ve seen that tossed up a few times on these boards. Not sure if that’s his nickname or if someone here came up with it. Either way, It’s cool.

by Ozwarrior on Jul 21, 2010 7:16 AM PDT reply actions  

The Shaolin Warrior

Sounds kind of corny, but it might grow on to me if it becomes official.

by Precise Films Productions on Jul 21, 2010 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

Where's Tim Hardaway

when he need him the most?

=Gaucho=

by Gaucho! on Jul 21, 2010 10:14 AM PDT reply actions  

Congrats

I’m not sure you need him but -
I like that kid, he looks like a ‘winner’ to me in some intangible way. Of course Nellie may change that :-).

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Jul 21, 2010 11:01 AM PDT reply actions  

A good cost-efficient move.

Awesome TS% and eFG%.

Advanced Statistics FTW.

by Physics Dr. on Jul 21, 2010 11:31 AM PDT reply actions  

He was, what, a 4th year college student?

Most of those guys break advanced stats. It’s like if Dwyane Wade could play the 2010 Nets every night.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 21, 2010 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's not that they "break" advanced stats ...

… it’s that the amount of room for improvement is much smaller. They’re closer to who they’ll be than the younger guys are.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

You'll see these 4th year students

with PERs and stuff well above 30, is what I meant, I guess.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 21, 2010 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, PER is a stupid stat anyway.

I wish Hollinger would just give it up, because it’s pretty worthless.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 21, 2010 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

it is, but I think these players might also break WP or Win Shares as well.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 21, 2010 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed

PER is completely useless. I don’t know why Hollinger still bothers with it at all, besides to look like he knows something everyone else doesn’t.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 21, 2010 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

its true

he is the most hyped undrafted free agent ha. You have to understand why though.

by tom88gsw on Jul 21, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Definitely

And add it’s the bay area (large asian-american community) AND he’s from bay. I just find it funny…

I think he’ll provide useful

by tafkasam on Jul 21, 2010 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Until Lin plays a minute in the NBA

I wouldn’t compare him to anyone just yet.

by Cpt. Jack in the Box on Jul 21, 2010 1:45 PM PDT reply actions  

What I like...

is how aggressive this kid is coming off the pick n roll, he explodes to the basket and will dunk it on occasion. He’s crafty with the dribble and his defense will surprise you. Good pick up! Cheap pick up! And forgive me if I’m not sad CJ Watson is gone, contantly blowing 2 on 1 fast breaks

by Brothaplease09 on Jul 21, 2010 7:43 PM PDT reply actions  

To you people that keep insisting we must trade Ellis, get over it! The Lee trade forbids it because he had it put in his contract.

When David Lee was traded to us, he had it put in his contract that Monta, Steph and Biedrins will be here for his entire tenure with the Warriors during the contract! It’s amazing how so many people that call themselves “TRUE” Warrior fans can turn on somebody so quickly that actually produces for his team. We turned on Harrington because he said he wanted out and stopped playing, we turned on Jackson because he wanted out and stopped playing, and Monta said he was unhappy with the moves made last year and he went and averaged 25.5 points per game and around 5 assists per game and you guys still want to turn on him? He’s done nothing but improve and produce while he’s been here and he’s just going to get better. At his young age averaging 26 points per game? At his prime in about 2 or 3 years he’ll be around the 29 point range since he’s added a 3 point shot. Do we want to be the idiots that traded away a talented and elite scorer like Monta and seperated the most productive and what could be the best backcourt in the league? Not again! NOW PLEASE STOP WITH THE MONTA TRADE TALK! HE WILL BE HERE FOR 6 MORE YEARS! and I am ecstatic to see the most dynamic, explosive and productive backcourt in the league run all over every team in the league night in and night out. And to the talk about his defense is weak, I guess he is always in the top 10 in steals in the league based on luck right?

by believer11 on Jul 22, 2010 2:06 PM PDT reply actions  

Wow, do you really think we haven't heard all of this before?

Except that David Lee contract thing. That’s new.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

When David Lee was traded to us, he had it put in his contract that Monta, Steph and Biedrins will be here for his entire tenure with the Warriors during the contract!

Where did you get this interesting bit of (probably totally made up) bit of ‘information’? Since very,very,very few players manage a no-trade clause in their own contract, I find it very hard to believe that Lee could swing a “no-trade-my-teammates” clause. I doubt one would be allowable. Since the Warriors don’t control ANY of those players’ fate for the length of Lee’s contract, it’s a guarantee that they could not possibly make. But of course reason isn’t important when you’re blatantly making things up.

by jae on Jul 22, 2010 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is a freaking masterpiece.

I can’t even look directly at it without experiencing a mild epileptic convulsion.

Derrick Coleman is my power animal.

by bloodsweatndonuts on Jul 22, 2010 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

When David Lee was traded to us, he had it put in his contract that Monta, Steph and Biedrins will be here for his entire tenure with the Warriors during the contract!

So we’ve reached the “I’m just going to make random junk up” part of the conversation, now?

by Ronaldinho on Jul 22, 2010 2:14 PM PDT reply actions  

Oh goody

This is may favorite part of the conversation. Here let me try:
Monta Ellis was an effective and productive player last year.

That was fun!

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jul 22, 2010 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hahaha

Your comment does not reflect your sig, which says that you are “Monta Ellis’s $1 Fan!!!”

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wow, did I really type $? Haha, that’s classic.

"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
FREE POSEY IS FREE

by Yoyo on Jul 22, 2010 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can be Monta Ellis's number one fan

and still think he’s an ineffective basketball player.

Monta Ellis's #1 Fan!!!

by philthiest on Jul 22, 2010 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

hmmmm...let's try

 “Don Nelson’s head is totally in the game”….. not bad…….
“Consistent strings of injuries that don’t change with roster changes are bad luck” oh!

yep, real fun!

by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 22, 2010 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

25.5 PPG is completely ineffective huh? and Kobe said he hates guarding Monta because with his 3 pt shot you cant, thats ineffective right?

You people are unbelievable how quickly you want monta out of here, I am not his #1 fan but I am a fan of putting the best team out on the floor, and just because Monta’s 2 inches shorter than the prototypical NBA 2 guard you want to trade him? Why? If monta’s 6’6 would we be hearing this talk? Absolutely not, if he shoots such a bad percentage at 45%, whats a good percentage because very few shooting guards shoot 50% or better. And at 6 3 he’s too short? D-WADE is 6 4 so height is nothing. And the David Lee contract, Larry Riley, David Lee, and Lee’s agent all stated that it was in his contract and that WAS THE ONLY WAY HE’D COME HERE!

by believer11 on Jul 23, 2010 12:43 PM PDT reply actions  

And at 6 3 he’s too short? D-WADE is 6 4 so height is nothing.

If Monta missed as few shots as Wade misses, trust me, nobody would be talking about trading him.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 23, 2010 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed

Monta is nowhere near the type of player D-Wade is. It is not even close.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

25.5 PPG is completely ineffective huh? and Kobe said he hates guarding Monta because with his 3 pt shot you cant, thats ineffective right?

Completely ineffective? Not completely, but you’ve fallen into the same fanboy trap that most fall into of seeing points-per-game and equating this with being effective. It’s a mistake that fans, coaches, players, and GMs often fall into but it is still, absolutely and certainly, a mistake.

Kobe hates guarding Monta because of Monta’s 3 point shot? That’s strange given that Monta’s 3 point shot isn’t very good. Where did you get that interesting morsel, not that it matters much. Monta’s 3 point shooting wasn’t a valuable weapon. Kobe’s opinion doesn’t change that.

if he shoots such a bad percentage at 45%, whats a good percentage because very few shooting guards shoot 50% or better.

FG% is a rather lousy tool for valuing a player as well. FG%, without considering how many of those shots were 3s and how well he did on those threes and without considering how often he got to the FT line, does not give a clear view of how productiive his actual shooting was. Comparing only on FG% is like comparing batting average in baseball without taking into account how many extra base hits a player got or how often the player drew a walk. It’s not totally worthless, but given better tools that are readily available, relying on it is dumb.

by jae on Jul 23, 2010 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

And the David Lee contract, Larry Riley, David Lee, and Lee’s agent all stated that it was in his contract and that WAS THE ONLY WAY HE’D COME HERE!

David Lee’s contract can’t speak.

I’m pretty sure you’re putting words in Riley’s, Lee’s, and Lee’s agent’s mouths as well. Link?

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 23, 2010 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

the David Lee contract, Larry Riley, David Lee, and Lee’s agent all stated that it was in his contract and that WAS THE ONLY WAY HE’D COME HERE!

I recall him saying he specifically asked if Montay, Dre, and More-O were gonna still be here cause he din’t want to sign if they weren’t but he probably didn’t know enough about the lying front office to get it in writing. Haven’t heard his thought on the More-O dumping yet , maybe Lee is biting his tongue or realizes he’s been shafted and is just sitting on it till he can do a Jax and exit?

Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 23, 2010 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

I recall him expressing his excitement at the prospect of playing with Curry, Monta, and Morrow. I don’t recall him saying their presence was “the only way he’s come here.” We already dumped Morrow for nothing without him saying boo; I can’t imagine he’d be any more miffed if we dumped Monta for something of fair value (Iguodala, e.g.).

In any case he’s under contract now; and I’d bet a lot that there’s no stipulation in the contract about the specific makeup of the Warriors’ roster. If Riley finds a good deal involving Monta, there’s nothing he can do about it except whine. Since he doesn’t appear to be a whiner, I imagine he’ll get over it. Especially if dealing Monta brings back a solid big man and/or a two-guard who can score efficiently, rebound, and defend his position.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 23, 2010 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

David Lee

is much more of a “true professional” than Jack was or ever will be. He is not the type to ask for a trade or ever not give 100% on the court. I don’t see him getting himself involved in such situations and, like you said, I am sure he would have no problem with Monta or Goose being traded if good players were on the other end of the deal as well.

by tom88gsw on Jul 26, 2010 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

It’s obvious through his play on the court and his character off the court that Lee is a man of integrity. Reason often travels closely with integrity, and I can’t imagine David Lee having trouble understanding the process of rearranging talent. None of these players are family, close friends, or teammates that have walked through the fire by his side. If he’s smart enough to evaluate the Warriors and recognize some of the team’s talent, he’d likely be able to do the same with other players in the league he has competed against.

by lilboots on Jul 26, 2010 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also, Wade is 6'4", 220 lbs

with a 6’10" wingspan. Monta is 6’3", 180 lbs with a 6’2" wingspan. It’s completely unfair to compare their size or production. Wade is simply much better.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 23, 2010 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Kobe hates guarding Monta because of Monta’s 3 point shot? That’s strange given that Monta’s 3 point shot isn’t very good. Where did you get that interesting morsel, not that it matters much. Monta’s 3 point shooting wasn’t a valuable weapon.

Are you even a warriors fan? Do you even watch the games? over the last 20-25 or so games of the season Monta’s 3 point percentage was 39% (heres the link) http://www.nba.com/playerfile/monta_ellis/game_by_game_stats.html
And a good three point shooter is considered to be at the 40% range right? So do you want to explain to me how he’s NOT an average 3 point shooter and improving to good? Because if school served me correctly, 39% is only 1% from 40 correct? Everybody stop hating on Monta, and sure people do fall in love with PPG but its not like Monta’s shooting 30% and still hoisitng it up, he’s at 45%, and a 3 point shot now at 40%, with his quickness? Why would you want to trade that away? He was the 6th highest scorer in the league and 3rd among guards behind Dwyane Wade (48% shooting) and Kobe Bryant (46% shooting), and we want to trade an elite scorer for what? Iggy? Because he’s a few inches taller? and averaged 17 PPG and his 3pt shooting percentage was way worse than Monta at 31% Why? What logical reason would force you to trade an elite scorer? If its his attitude, all he wanted was some big man help, so we have David Lee now, that’s all he wanted. This next statement is a little shaky because Larry Riley said it so forgive me lol but he said on KNBR that he’s spoken to Monta and he’s the happiest he’s been in 2 years. If he is happy, him and Steph can co-exist, Steph’s 17 and 10 and Monta’s 25.5 and 6 sounds alot better than Stephs 17 and 10 and Iggy’s 17 and 5, or is that just me?
And the 3 players were Monta, Steph, and Biedrins, not Morrow.

by believer11 on Jul 23, 2010 3:07 PM PDT reply actions  

Monta’s 3 point percentage was 39%

Monta’s 3P% never got that high for any stretch of the season.Hoopdata says that it was 38% for the month of March (only 9 games). 7 of his last 10 games were in march, and his 3P% over his last 10 games was only 33%.For most of the season, it was below average.


and sure people do fall in love with PPG but its not like Monta’s shooting 30% and still hoisitng it up, he’s at 45%, and a 3 point shot now at 40%, with his quickness?

Use TS%, not FG%. It’s an incomplete stat. His TS% for the whole season was below average at .517. Average for a SG is like .540. For all players, it’s .545. The reason TS% is better is because it accounts for three point shooting and ability to get to the free throw line. At no point in the season was his TS% even average.
The reason we want Iggy is cause he can play defense really really well. Normally the difference is exaggerated by fans, but pace can help account for their differences in other stats. He’s a better rebounder and more effective passer than Monta, as well as being a very good defender. Monta is kind of a better scorer when he’s paired with an elite point guard.
Basically, Monta isn’t an elite scorer. He’s a very good scorer in the right situation, but elite scorers don’t need the right situation to be very good.

Pro-Skub for life

by Reverend_Randy on Jul 23, 2010 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Are you even a warriors fan?

Is this a serious question, or is your obviously defective reasoning at a loss and short of being able to say something intelligent, you’re reverting to “are you even a fan” rhetoricals to hide your utter irrationality.

Do you even watch the games?

Many of them. Most of them actually. Your point?

[I’ll let others deal with your inane attempt at mathematical reasoning that was no more convincing that your totally fabricated clause in Lee’s contract. I’ll respond to something substantive when you back up or back off the fabrications.]

by jae on Jul 23, 2010 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cherrypicking time periods and incomplete numbers can make anyone look pretty good. If you care about making a fair assessment about a player, it’s always better to expand the sample size and look at the big picture. TS% tells you a lot more about a player’s effect on winning ballgames than FG%. A full season’s worth of numbers tell you more than the “the last 20-25 or so games.” And if your point in citing the last 20-25 games was to show that Monta trended up as the season progressed, you failed to note that in terms of overall FG% he mostly trended down. Monta had a bad year last year, no matter how you parse it.

I don’t think Philly would be crazy enough to trade a very good wing player for Lou Williams redux, but if they were, we’d be crazy not to jump at it. There’s basically nothing Monta does better than Iguodala, other than occasionally look cool on ESPN highlights. Iguodala’s a more efficient scorer, much better rebounder, much better passer, and better at taking care of the ball. Anecdotally he’s a much better defender. He’s a whole lot bigger — not just taller, but much stronger and longer. Your rather superficial comparison of Monta’s height to Wade’s failed to note that Wade is much stronger and has much longer arms than Monta, which allows him to lock down 2s and some 3s in a way Monta, with his 6’3"-ish wingspan, simply can’t. Iguodala is similar to Wade in this respect, only longer still. (And accounts from the US team tryouts suggest that he’s even more “swole up” this season than in seasons past).

Meanwhile, I’m still waiting for the exact quote from Lee or Lee’s agent. It’s not that I don’t trust you … well, OK, I don’t really trust you. In any case, an actual quote is always better than a second-hand report.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 23, 2010 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Monta’s 3P% never got that high for any stretch of the season.Hoopdata says that it was 38% for the month of March (only 9 games).

You are so quick to criticize the why dont you do the math from January 15th until the end of the season, it’s 26 games, that’s where i got my percentage from. You say it was only one month better than 33%, go add it up do the math. You’ll see it comes out to 38.6% from 3. I rest my case, and dont get me wrong, Iggy is a good player but you cant say he’s a more efficient scorer and the only thing Monta does is look better on Sportcenter, Iggy’s percentage is so high because he dunks dunks dunks and dunks, a jumper here and there but all dunks. Monta on the other hand is about 60-40 when speaking about layups to dunks so of course his percentage was lower than Iggys, so were wade, Kobe’s and half of the NBA guards, 45% is not god-awful like a lot of you claim it is. Monta has better quickness and so what if Iggy has the size? I recall Thomas and Dumars doing it and both were severely undersized, Dumars played the 2 at 6’3 and I believe they won a few games and a championship or two. Im not comparing Ellis and Curry to Thomas and Dumars career-wise im just showing the facts. Two 6’3 guards can play side by side and succeed. So go ahead and hate and talk down and hate Monta, but give him and Curry a chance this year with some healthy big men and an All-Star in David Lee. Give them a chance together, I recall a certain stretch in december when our entire team was healthy for the 1st time all year and Curry and Ellis played great together beating Phoenix Boston and sticking with the Lakers. Dont be so quick to turn on a player from YOUR OWN TEAM! Give it a chance and say 20-30 games we are underachieving, then start the criticism and trade talks. But coming into last year, you guys criticized Curry saying he was too small and trade him for Stoudemire, and Now look. Nobody 100% knew Curry would be this good and until mid-January Monta was asked to carry the team scoring wise. Now that we see how good Curry is and Monta has confidence in him, give it a chance to work.

by believer11 on Jul 26, 2010 8:37 AM PDT reply actions  

I rest my case, and dont get me wrong, Iggy is a good player but you cant say he’s a more efficient scorer

It’s seldom that I see “I rest my case” used in a post that makes a solid argument. This is no exception. As a rhetorical device, one should save it for when a good case has actually been made, not when there’s been a vomiting up of poorly supported statements and errant assertions.

You most certainly can say that Iguodala has been a more efficient scorer than Monta for most of his career. You can certainly say that he was more efficient last year, and if you said that, you’d be correct. If you said that Monta was more efficient last year, you’d be, what’s the word I’m searching for? Oh, yeah. You’d be wrong.

Iggy’s percentage is so high because he dunks dunks dunks and dunks, a jumper here and there but all dunks.

Jumpers made up a greater percentage of Iguodala’s shots (71%) than they did for Monta (66%). Your assertion that Iggy had a “jumper here and there” with the implication that he almost never took jumpers is simply wrong. Do you bother to check what you are writing for any semblance of accuracy? It does not appear that you did. If you try to construct an argument around evidence, it’s a good idea to see that the ‘evidence’ you use isn’t a fabrication.

by jae on Jul 26, 2010 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

You are so quick to criticize the why dont you do the math from January 15th until the end of the season, it’s 26 games, that’s where i got my percentage from. You say it was only one month better than 33%, go add it up do the math.

Ah, yes, the cherry-picked sample.

This is a very common trick used people trying to manipulate statistics to dishonest ends. Why January 15th? There is no logical way to justify starting on that date.

One suspects that you pick January 15th specifically to exclude his 1-for-6 day on the 13th, in fact.

But of course you’re being more dishonest than that, because he actually shot 36%, not 38.6%, in the sample size you define. (15-40 Feb, 19-50 Mar, 7-20 Apr. Jan games starting with the 15th: 3-7, 3-9, 3-7, 0-2, 2-5, 0-5, 3-7, sums to 14-43. Add it all up and you get: 55-153, which is a whisker under 36%.) Or maybe you’re not being dishonest here, maybe you’re just bad at basic math.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 26, 2010 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Actually 14-42

for 55-152, for 36.18%. but it’s immaterial, and he would have done better to leave January and April out all together.

Potential is what you pitch when you have low current value.

by Rasputin10 on Jul 28, 2010 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

I feel bad for Lin

with so much hype in the bay surrounding him its going to be tons of pressure for an undrafted rookie

by mekanikal on Jul 26, 2010 4:51 PM PDT reply actions  

I guess it depends on how you look at it.

Given his tremendous fortune as of now, according to the little chance he actually had of being drafted, or being invited to play in summer league, or being invited to a training camp, or an offered contract, I’d say he’s been swimming against the tide the whole way. He may very well handle this pressure through using it as encouragement.

I will not say much on religious matters, as people tend to get very touchy on the subject. But Jeremy Lin looks to God first above all things for support. He does not look to the media or the hoopla of what fans are shouting. He has his own source of encouragement deep within. In a sense, this can always be relied on through a struggle that requires great strength and therefore makes him a more likely candidate to succeed than others who require exterior motives to boost their confidence. Luck is the residue of design, and the key to any success is having strength within yourself first.

by lilboots on Jul 26, 2010 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"

Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Why Steph Curry is the Warriors most important player, and why they should heavily consider trading him
Warriors2_medium_small
Tom Abdenour... Where is he now?

Recent FanPosts

Small
A little off topic: does GOM sell t-shirts?
Small
Warriors @ Nuggets Preview
Monta_small
Warrior Wonder Standings (December/January)
Angel_beats__logo_small
Looking at the Late-Game playcalls
Ringnovember1981_small
Should Andris Biedrins be sent to the D-League?
Angel_beats__logo_small
An Alternative Explanation to why the Warriors let Lin, Williams and Bell go
Small
Now's the time to trade Curry to Charlotte
Small
Now is the time to make a trade.
Small
What was Nate Robinson's pre-dubs rep?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


GSoM Crew -------------------------

Atma-160_small Atma Brother ONE

Gw090_small Fantasy Junkie

Natehead_small Nate Parham

--------------------------------------------------------

Small Hash

Small dj fuzzylogic

600px-olympic_rings_square olympicmike

Small IQofaWarrior

Shutterstock_10276351_basketball_mind_small Evanz

--------------------------------------------------------

We_still_believe_small R Dizzle

Small Adam Lauridsen

Small jae

Gsom_tony_small Tony.psd

Kanji_love_small Sleepy Freud

Japan_by_miaumi_small YaoButtaMing

Drmlg_logo-gmail_small Poor Man's Commish

Nellie2_small Feltbot