Vaulting the Warriors to Playoff Mainstays
As has been repeated infinitely this summer and in years past on GSOM and beyond, Chris Cohan's tenure as GSW owner was flat-out embarrasing. With that said, now that Lacob and Guber have purchased the Dubs for $450 million, it's safe to say most of us are expecting immediate results on the court and in the offices leading to a monumental turnaround. Unfortunately, with our current lineup, along with our cap situation, there is no way we can expect to improve beyond a few wins even if we remain healthy.
Currently, the keys to the franchise rest obviously with Stephen Curry. He is our future, and he is shaping up to be my favorite Warrior ever. We have an all-star, 20-10 caliber PF in David Lee, a lethal but undersized 20-25 ppg scorer in Monta Ellis, and a center in Andris Biedrins who has what it takes to be a double-double machine for the next decade. Looking past that, our roster is full of a bunch of role players who can all catch on fire and win us a few games but we can't expect any of them to garner much recognition among star-caliber players.
It's safe to say that the two players Golden State faithfuls would be happiest to see out the door is Ellis and Biedrins, not in a straight salary dump, but for serviceable players who fit in well with what the Warriors need.
Ellis is a fantastic scorer, possibly the best finisher around the rim in the league, and developing a reliable outside jumper. However, we all know he is also the only thing stopping Stephen Curry from becoming a mainstay in the discussions for best PG in the league. Although he often comes up with many steals and frustrates the opposition, his 6'3" frame cannot be expected to stop the Kobe's and Wade's of the NBA. Additionally, his ego requires him to make himself look like a star, instead of doing what's best for the team. I do not remember a single instance this past year where he passed the ball with the shot/game clock winding down. There was almost always a player wide open, but he preferred a contested jumper way outside his comfort zone. With Curry as our cornerstone, Ellis is definitely not needed.
Andris Biedrins is a whole new story. Here's a player who averaged at or near a double-double for 3 consecutive seasons. This past year, for one reason or another, his production level literally fell off a cliff. Injuries may have played a major role in his pitfall, but even when healthy, his attitude to the game was disgusting. He simply seemed afraid to play against the bigs of the league. While he once had super-reliable hands, he dropped pass after pass that would have been converted into dunks, he got beat up in the post by every single player put against him, and he absolutely refused to take a shot, even while being left wide open a few feet from the hoop. We'd all love for him to return to his double-double form, but with 4 years at $9 million each left on his contract, he becomes expendable as well.
Now for the fun part.
Everyone’s always talking about CP3, Melo, LBJ, all the leagues top tier players. I’d love dreaming big, too, but we have no way in hell to attract or obtain a player of that caliber. A series of trades, though, would allow us to instantly become among the favorites to be in the playoffs, perhaps even advancing as far as the Conference Finals (The West is a hell of a lot weaker this year, aside from the Lakers)
First, we get rid of our horrible contracts in this trade:
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2asb7n9
Danny Granger, in my opinion, would be a fantastic wing to work with Curry. He’s an efficient scorer, a passable defender and rebounder, and only 27 years old (D. Lee’s age). He has one of the most valuable contracts in the NBA considering his stats (25 ppg, almost 6 rpg, 43% fg, 38% 3pt). He can create his own offense, and I believe he works well off the ball as well.
Roy Hibbert would give us a huge body to replace Andris. A 7’2" frame and he’s one of the better young centers in the league (at least this past year). He shows a lot of promise protecting the rim and rebounding (and he’s 23, a year younger than Beans).
Jeff Foster is included to make the salaries work. His contract along with Radmanovic’s and Gadzuric’s give us about $20 million in expiring contracts which could easily be turned into another great player from a team looking to shed salary.
Now considering this from Indiana’s perspective, they drafted Paul George who can easily be their starting SF (I’m assuming he’s their future SF to eventually replace Granger, anyways). They get Monta Ellis to be their go-to scorer, which they lack aside from Granger, and they get Biedrins, who we all know is capable of being a double-double machine, and Brandan Wright, who is unnecessary because of his similarities to Ekpe Udoh and the Pacers need another PF.
We include a top-5 protected first rounder along with two second rounders and this becomes very plausible. Here would be the lineups following this trade:
Warriors:
PG: S. Curry
SG: R. Williams
SF: D. Granger
PF: D. Lee
C: R. Hibbert
Pacers:
PG: D. Collison
SG: M. Ellis
SF: P. George
PF: T. Hansbrough or B. Wright
C: A. Biedrins
Next up, we fill up our need for a starting SG (I love Reggie, but I'd rather he be a 6th man). Many names come to mind, but the most plausible pick up would be Andre Iguodala. He's a player very similar in build and ability to Danny Granger, but having them pair up on the wing with Stephen Curry quarterbacking and David Lee down low... It has me drooling on my keyboard already.
The 76ers are in a position where they have no cap flexibility being $10 million under the salary cap, they are expected to be among the worst teams in the East, and they just drafted Evan Turner who plays the same position as Iggy. In my opinion, they'd be willing to dump Iguodala for cap relief and an asset. This trade would be tougher to pull off given our limited assets, but here's my proposal:
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=23wtaex
The trade obviously failed but notice that in 10 days the trade will work once restrictions fall. We'd have to take on Nocioni's hefty contract but I feel it's worth it. We'd include the $3 million maximum in cash, along with an unprotected first round pick in 2014 (We lost our 2012 pick to the Bobcats, I believe, and we'd give either our 2011 or 2013 pick to the Pacers in the Granger trade). We'd also include a second rounder or 2 sometime down the rode.
The Sixers might be hesitant to bight, but it's definitely possible. Here would be our final lineup after these two trades:
PG: Stephen Curry
SG: Andre Iguodala
SF: Danny Granger
PF: David Lee
C: Roy Hibbert
Bench:
R. Williams
E. Udoh
C. Bell
D. Wright
J. Lin
A. Nocioni
J. Foster
Plus another player we'd be required to sign for the minimum.
These summarized trades would not improve our depth, would not improve our cap situation, will not help us net a top-5 player, but they will, in my opinion, make us a hell of a lot better, and get us into the playoffs each and every year until our contracts expire. Once Granger's and Iggy's contracts come off the books in 4 years, we'll have some cap flexibility (only Curry and Lee will probably command major contracts) and Curry will be 25 or 26 years old, entering his prime, and already be used to being a winner on the NBA level. I can definitely see the trades happening. It would definitely be a nice way to kick off the new ownership.
Any thoughts?
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!
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
They aren’t trading Igoudala for expirings only.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 12, 2010 9:36 PM PDT reply actions
yah
they’re not giving up iggy without packaging brand along the way
Goal: 8 seed!
Hmm… Monta, VladRad, Gadzooks and Bell for Iguodala and Brand? I’d consider it. Brand’s contract is horrid, but in two years it becomes an expiring…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Aug 13, 2010 5:00 AM PDT up reply actions
None of these trades work
Indy just got George to play the 2 and Stephenson as a Reke type of guy
" Only build on positives , don't stack the negatives...Instead of criticizing , what was a positive?" - Donavin Darius
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
wow --- where to start
looking at your Ellis/Biedrins/BWright for Granger/Hibbert/Foster - I thought we’re seriously overpaying for Granger. Then you wanted to throw in a 1st rounder and 2 2nd rounders on top of that?!?!?!
Granger could be had for Ellis and and a proven Healthy Wright.
Mostly — I just don’t understand the rush to overhaul this roster. It’s already been DRASTICALLY overhauled by the fact that there are only 6 of 15 players returning this year, thus far. Could be 7 if DGeorge or CHunter is signed.
Give the team this year to figure out what it’s identity is - what are the strengths and weaknesses of Curry/Monta/Lee/Biedrins playing together?
I still love to offload Monta though. Heck of a player, but just doesn’t work LONG TERM next to Curry. They CAN play together — but they shouldn’t.
btw
in your last part where u put “bench” u included c.bell which would have been traded away in the iggy deal
monta+curry=26 wins, monta+curry+lee+everyone else = 50 wins
by WeStillBelieve! on Aug 12, 2010 11:09 PM PDT reply actions
i agree with joe giant lets just see what kind of chemistry these guys develope!! this is the best assembly we have had ever! imo. and i think dorell wright is gonna be a fixture.. i think our team IF HEALTHY is capable of 3 or 4th seed. beidrens is too skinny.
monta too short.. otherwise it aint broke .next year we trade AFTER beens and monta increase their personal trade values. we trade em both for demarcus cousins? lol
no.. no lets trade udoh for cousins because the lottery wasnt fair to us and im upset now.
this is the best assembly we have had ever!
GSW from 2006-2008 and from the early 90’s and 70’s disagree
" Only build on positives , don't stack the negatives...Instead of criticizing , what was a positive?" - Donavin Darius
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
very true.. i meant since our 15 yr + drought.. i think we would give the 06-08 team a run for its money . i think SLIGHTLY better.
by PIRATEWARRIOR on Aug 13, 2010 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions
but, this never work...
one year before a lockout (possible)
many long-term salaries
ahhhh!! I introduce Brandan in this trade yesterday jajaja (Could these Warriors win a Championship post)
Warriors ¡¡ EN ESPAÑOL !!!!
www.losgswarriors.blogspot.com
Teams don’t want a player that seems to be a loser. After last season, Ellis seems like a loser. He needs to play a lot better this year, if we’re going to see his trade value climb back to where it was prior to Moped Gate. Also, Granger? The Pacers should try to trade him for Chris Paul, not Monta Ellis.
Go Andris's free throw shooting!
Good for the warriors but the other teams aren't going for it.
Don’t think Sixers will give up Igoudala for expiring contracts. Especially w/ Rod Thorn just taking over.
Pacers are going to have an very good PG/SG combo this year w/ Collision/Granger. If they’re going to downgrade to Ellis then they’ll need better compensation.
===
I’m still thinking the best thing Warriors can due is play out the season & see how Ellis/Curry plays out. If they can’t play well together then I’m hoping a more experienced Curry & addition of Lee will improve Monta’s stats enough to improve his trade value.
Granger is SF
George, Rush and Stephenson are 2’s (Steph is a combo and George can play SG and SG though)
" Only build on positives , don't stack the negatives...Instead of criticizing , what was a positive?" - Donavin Darius
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
George can play SG and SG though
Which SG position should he primarily play?
Huh?
If he could play SG and SG which SG should he play? Is this a test?
" Only build on positives , don't stack the negatives...Instead of criticizing , what was a positive?" - Donavin Darius
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
It's a bot.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 16, 2010 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions
He was pointing out your above typo
George can play SG and SG though
Sick of fighting with my computer
by Reverend_Randy on Aug 17, 2010 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions
George can play SG and SG though
probably should play him at shooting guard though as they are rarer than shooting guards?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 17, 2010 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I think so too
With a strike looming the next season, rushing to add a piece without first evaluating how Curry, Monta, Lee, and Beans (along with some other players) gel together, might be an unecessary rush.
by WestCoastWarrior on Aug 16, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Unfortunately, with our current lineup, along with our cap situation, there is no way we can expect to improve beyond a few wins even if we remain healthy.
I find this an interesting premise to start off with. We had major injury issues last year that probably won’t be the same. Biedrins, a solid C, was hurt all year long and when he played, he wasn’t “healthy” – he was hurt, which is why he ended up having surgery after he ended his season. Wright, Randolph and Turiaf all had injury issues. Even despite all that, we still played better than our record indicated. Curry also started taking a bigger role in the offense as the season went on, and he improved as the season went on. A full year of him doing what he did in the last part of the season alone makes us better. Now we’ve added a legitimately good PF, we have healthy guys coming back, a better Curry, likely a lesser role for Monta, we’re going to go from the worst rebounding team ever to a solid rebounding team…..a few win improvement? Really? That’s all? Why?
Additionally, his ego requires him to make himself look like a star, instead of doing what’s best for the team. I do not remember a single instance this past year where he passed the ball with the shot/game clock winding down. There was almost always a player wide open, but he preferred a contested jumper way outside his comfort zone.
Yes, Monta makes poor decisions and isn’t a good passer. Those are skills he is lacking. Do we actually know he has this huge ego that won’t let him defer to other good players? He did it with Baron, now that he’s had a chance to see what Steph can do, and now that we have a guy ilke David Lee….should we expect him to continue to force things with other guys he should have confidence in? I’m not so sure, especially since, you know, I don’t know Monta….
Unfortunately, with our current lineup, along with our cap situation, there is no way we can expect to improve beyond a few wins even if we remain healthy.
A complete organizational turn around doesn’t happen overnight. What’s most important right now is who the new owners pick to make day to day front office decisions. So far this year, you got rid of a terrible owner, made a questionable draft choice, lost some role players, made a trade where you got the best player in the deal (Lee) and you got a SF who might not be a star but at least is an interesting role player. Plus you got a local product that the fans are going to love (no clue if it will translate on the floor but it’s a nice small little feel good story at least and that can go a long way if it ends up working out). That isn’t a bad start, personally I think they are going in the right direction so far.
Now for the fun part.
Agree to disagree. By the way, Hibbert is far from a good rebounder (if you think he is a good rebounder, you must love Spencer Hawes).
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 Aug 13, 2010 8:50 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Foster, Granger and Hibbert for Biedrins and Ellis?? Really? Is this guy Larry Bird? Reggie Williams is not even a starting 2. We’d have to start Charlie Bell. We don’t want to give away our best rebounder and defending big in Biedrins and a…guard in Ellis for Granger, who is basically just a volume shooter, and then Hibbert, who is an upside big that was supposed to be good but now just ‘has a chance’ to make up for that. And Iguodala is not worth enough to give up so much that your whole bench is basically just Reggie Williams.
Roy Hibbert would give us a huge body to replace Andris. A 7’2" frame and he’s one of the better young centers in the league (at least this past year). He shows a lot of promise protecting the rim and rebounding (and he’s 23, a year younger than Beans).Really? So if he was such a prolific rebounder then why did he average 8.2 r36 last year?? he shot less than 50% his whole career, which is not good to hear of someone who strictly plays under the basket. And I don’t even want to know why in God’s name he averages 1.5bpg and 3.5 fouls a game and can actually be considered a good defender.
"The Warriors, who are the most dysfunctional organization in the NBA, were, of course, the team that screwed up the draft."
-Chad Ford, ESPN, 2010 on Ekpe Udoh
by LarryLegendofOracle on Aug 13, 2010 9:30 AM PDT reply actions
7'2" + mediocre rebounder + lots of fouls + below 50% shooting + 1.5 bpg + broad muscular shoulders = better young center with lot of promise protecting the rim and rebounding
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 Aug 13, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Reggie can be a starting 2.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 13, 2010 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions
I would replace "can be" with "might be"
Don’t get me wrong, he looks promising, I just wouldn’t jump on that just yet.
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 Aug 13, 2010 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Not too many rookies post WP48's in excess of .146
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 13, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
that's great
I would still hold off on that. Don’t have access to stats at the moment but considering he hasn’t played very many games yet, I would be a little hesitant to declare him a starting 2. So far what he has done is very encouraging but I wouldn’t declare him a starter yet.
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 Aug 13, 2010 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions
700 + minutes of WP48 .146 seems like a good enough sample. That's like a backups minutes over the whole season.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 13, 2010 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Again, don't have access to the WP48 stuff at the moment
but 700+ minutes over the whole season would be between 8.5 and 9.7 minutes a game.
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 Aug 13, 2010 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Not sure if one season of backup numbers is enough…
by Missing Barry on Aug 13, 2010 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Only one way to find out
and that’s to start him. You can look at his minutes from last year in two ways, maybe. One is that his per-game minutes were starter-level minutes, and the other is that his minutes were the same as for a rotational backup getting 8-10 minutes a game.
So if you consider him a rookie starter, he’s almost up there with Evans and Steph in production. If you consider him a rotational backup, he’s already well above average for the league as a whole. If what you took from summer league was the press, then you missed that he not only looked good, but to the extent that he wanted to and was allowed to, he controlled the games.
There are only 18 rookies who have had that level of production in their rookie years since 2006. That puts him in the company of Roy, Rondo, Milsap, Rodriguez, Love, Oden, Fernandez, Randolph, Moon, Horford, Landry, Evans, Curry, Lawson….
He can start.
Baseball is a chamber orchestra. Football is a marching band. Basketball is a modern quintet. jazz, rock, hiphop, pop/ all about the beat./ still my revolution not/ til you dance through it.
Rookies with
700 or more minutes, that is.
Given the costs of the other players on that list, Reggie is probably the best value going for a team that wants to be very good and is concerned about cap. AR comes close, and he will almost certainly be starting.
I usually hedge what I say with contingencies and coulds and ifs. Not Reggie. I honestly and fully believe he’s the most underrated young player in the NBA right now. He’s really really good, and it’s a pity people think it’s homerism to say it.
Baseball is a chamber orchestra. Football is a marching band. Basketball is a modern quintet. jazz, rock, hiphop, pop/ all about the beat./ still my revolution not/ til you dance through it.
I honestly and fully believe he’s the most underrated young player in the NBA right now.
What? I thought they just said that was Jeremy Lin?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 13, 2010 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Silly rabbit
Lin’s still a prospect.
Baseball is a chamber orchestra. Football is a marching band. Basketball is a modern quintet. jazz, rock, hiphop, pop/ all about the beat./ still my revolution not/ til you dance through it.
Does VMI trump Harvard
on the NBA stud scale?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 14, 2010 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Everywhere
trumps Harvard on the NBA stud scale. It’s interesting, though – Reggie showed even better than Lin on the PAWS stuff, and had his value knocked down for…. strength of schedule. Hmm. Maybe it doesn’t matter as much for really good players.
Baseball is a chamber orchestra. Football is a marching band. Basketball is a modern quintet. jazz, rock, hiphop, pop/ all about the beat./ still my revolution not/ til you dance through it.
Maybe it doesn’t matter as much for really good players.
or it doesn’t matter for really bad teams who have no better options?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 17, 2010 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I like Reggie, as well, though I think it’s important to note the closer you get to the 700 minute minimum you used, the less impressive the performance is (because of the inverse relationship between variance and N).
by Missing Barry on Aug 13, 2010 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Sure
but he was also 8th among all rookies with more than 250 minutes or so last year, 13th among all of them. Interestingly Roddy comes closest to him in overall numbers.
Baseball is a chamber orchestra. Football is a marching band. Basketball is a modern quintet. jazz, rock, hiphop, pop/ all about the beat./ still my revolution not/ til you dance through it.
He can start.
He is not ready to start in this league. He doesn’t have the skill set to be an NBA level starter at a very high level. I don’t think he can’t stay in this league for a long time, I just think that he isn’t starter material, not for a rebuilding team.
"The Warriors, who are the most dysfunctional organization in the NBA, were, of course, the team that screwed up the draft."
-Chad Ford, ESPN, 2010 on Ekpe Udoh
by LarryLegendofOracle on Aug 13, 2010 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Why?
Sick of fighting with my computer
by Reverend_Randy on Aug 13, 2010 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions
You’re way undervaluing Granger. He’s not a volume scorer at all. He’s one of the best SF’s in the league, and easily the best player in that deal….
by Missing Barry on Aug 13, 2010 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions
We. already. have. wing. scoring. He’s not a 2 and he’s not giving us any cap relief at all. Granger is a phenomenal shooter, but is not an upgrade over what we already have, shooting-wise and is only so valuable for the shots he takes.
"The Warriors, who are the most dysfunctional organization in the NBA, were, of course, the team that screwed up the draft."
-Chad Ford, ESPN, 2010 on Ekpe Udoh
by LarryLegendofOracle on Aug 13, 2010 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
is not an upgrade over what we already have
Who is he not an upgrade over?
by Missing Barry on Aug 13, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Who is he not an upgrade over?

" Only build on positives , don't stack the negatives...Instead of criticizing , what was a positive?" - Donavin Darius
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
I see a big “HEAT” logo on his jersey…..
by Missing Barry on Aug 13, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I meant, as a shooter and a wing scorer, he is not an upgrade over what we already have in Reggie Williams, if you look at the shooting %s. He is a slight upgrade over Monta Ellis, but nobody is going to make that trade.
"The Warriors, who are the most dysfunctional organization in the NBA, were, of course, the team that screwed up the draft."
-Chad Ford, ESPN, 2010 on Ekpe Udoh
by LarryLegendofOracle on Aug 13, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Slight upgrade over Monta? In what way is the upgrade “slight”? Granger is basically better than him at everything.
Seriously, Granger is by far better than any wing we have. If you like Williams, why not play the two of them together?
by Missing Barry on Aug 13, 2010 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Seriously, Granger is by far better than any wing we have. If you like Williams, why not play the two of them together?
That’s my point. I know Monta is not that great of a wing…but still.
Granger would collapse our cap space, and no, we’re not going to trade Monta and get him in the same deal. At the same time, he’d just be a wing scorer…when we already have of wing scoring and desperately need low-post scoring to balance the offense. Granger is okay as a shooter, and can do a lot more than he is given credit for, but come on… he is not that great that we have to ignore our needs and go out on a limb to get him because he is available..
"The Warriors, who are the most dysfunctional organization in the NBA, were, of course, the team that screwed up the draft."
-Chad Ford, ESPN, 2010 on Ekpe Udoh
by LarryLegendofOracle on Aug 13, 2010 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
We just got David Lee and Wright’s back and healthy! We solved our low post scoring problem! Whether it’s smart to move the pieces it would take to get him is a different topic – I’m just strictly talking about how talented Granger is. From that standpoint, he would give our team a talent upgrade.
by Missing Barry on Aug 15, 2010 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions
We just got David Lee and Wright’s back and healthy! We solved our low post scoring problem!
Monta just said he likes Curry! We solved our backcourt problem!
"The Warriors, who are the most dysfunctional organization in the NBA, were, of course, the team that screwed up the draft."
-Chad Ford, ESPN, 2010 on Ekpe Udoh
by LarryLegendofOracle on Aug 15, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Now, which one of them can guard shooting guards?
That’s the backcourt problem
Sick of fighting with my computer
by Reverend_Randy on Aug 15, 2010 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Hopefully Dorrell Wright? The thought of Monta guarding the #2 offensive wing for most teams doesn’t worry me too much…
by Missing Barry on Aug 15, 2010 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions
It should.
He’s still a bad defender.
"Everybody loves Basketball-Reference.com. Except the Kobe fans".- DubsFan408
by GovernorStephCurry on Aug 15, 2010 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions
We solved our low post scoring problem!
how? by just ignoring it?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 17, 2010 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions
We got this guy named David Lee. And this other guy named Brandan Wright is healthy.
by Missing Barry on Aug 18, 2010 6:55 AM PDT up reply actions
interesting
I never thought of either of them as low post players, more like lightweight bigs?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 18, 2010 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Unfortunately, with our current lineup, along with our cap situation, there is no way we can expect to improve beyond a few wins even if we remain healthy?
We are starting with the bar very low, there’s no way a healthy team with Binky, Montay, DLee, DoorL, and DreBarry couldn’t win 20 more games than last year’s hurt squad with Dleague replacements and a rookie point? A 20 game improvement would just get us up to decent so that’s not much to expect.
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 13, 2010 10:58 AM PDT reply actions
20 game improvement would just get us up to decent
still, that would be huge!!
But I think we would need to execute at least one of these dream trades to get there
Our schedule looks pretty tough, especially early in the season.
If the Dubs struggle early, we could be in for another long, ugly season
Remember:
A Warriors fan with low expectations is a happy Warriors fan
by Duby Dub Dubs on Aug 17, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
We have too much talent for a long, ugly season. The only thing I could possibly see leading to that is injuries to key players.
by Missing Barry on Aug 17, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions

by 






























