Time for warriors to focus on draft and offseason
by passmore8 on Mar 22, 2011 8:23 PM PDT
Email
PrintThe warriors biggest need is a center, there is no question that if we had an interior threat next to david lee they would be a much improved team. The only problem is there is no center in the draft and we can't afford to offer big money to nene/gasol(this all due to the new owners not trading A.B for expirings, he is nothing but a d league center). So here is my plan... In the draft we get a pg possibly jimmer or kemba but I think b. Knight would be the right choice because he is a solid defender and has alot of athleticism and size, he is truly 6"4( an upgrade from curry defensively and he will add much needed size to the front court). Once we draft a pg we would be able to trade curry for a center or forward. Curry would have great value in the trade market and it would be possible to get great players for him. All of the following scenarios will be with B. Knight at point and steph curry traded for another player. The trades with curry will also involve A.B. This will allow the warrior to have around 9-10 million to use in free agency.
1st Scenario:
The warriors trade steph curry and bedriens for Josh Smith. This trade would work for the Hawks for sure because of their need for a pg and this trade would give the warriors much better defense and would make the warriors much bigger. After the trade offer deandre jordan a large contract and he would give the dubs great shot blocking ability and interior defense.
The starting 5 would be pg-knight sg-ellis sf-smith pf-lee c-jordan
2nd Scenario:
The warriors trade curry and A.B for Andrew Bynum. I know it would be a huge risk but bynum can be the best center in the league( with the exception dwight). Bynum is a great rebounder and shot blocker, he is very young and is a huge body. After the trade bring in a defensive minded player like battier to play the sf. Every winning team posses atleast one lockdown defender in their starting lineup and the warriors will need one if they want to succeed. Battier can also knockdown open shots so he can be a solid offensive player.
The starting 5 would be pg-knight sg-ellis sf-battier pf-lee c-bynum
3rd Scenaio:
The warriors trade curry and A.B for Danny Granger. Granger is an all star forward and is underated on both the defensive end and offensive end. Granger has the ability to take his defender off the dribble and finish at the rim. Teaming granger and ellis would make an unstoppable scoring duo. After the trade the warriors would sign deandre jordan.
The starting 5 would be pg-knight sg-ellis sf-granger pf-lee c-jordan
4th scenario:
The warriors would trade curry and A.B for Andrew Bogut. Andrew bogut is the best post defender behind dwight. Bogut is huge at 7"2 and around 260lbs. A giant body is the one thing the warriors need badly. If the warriors signed Battier they would have a great defensive team and monta could still score like he has done in the past years.
Starting 5 would be pg-knight sg-ellis sf-battier pf-lee c-bogut
Please comment with different scenarios that you have and on whether or not you think these trades are good or bad and whether the warriors would have a winning team.
I have been a die hard warrior fan for many years now and i just want to see them win.
thanks,
Gary
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!
125 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m guessing you don’t like Curry?
I dont think he is saying that all. Why not examine all possibilities… option 1 with Josh Smith and Knight as a pg…“if possible” is not so crazy …not bad in fact. I had similiar musings ie; if B Knight is the BAA then I was thinking about the idea of taking him and if he turns out to be as good as he looks then we could trade Monta and slide Curry over etc..or trade Curry if it brings us the right big man..Bynum or Bogut I dunno but Josh Smith…… hmmm
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 23, 2011 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Well he already said below, "not really" haha
But I don’t think we need to look at it as we should trade Curry for the right man. But Curry is the right man for this team.
It’s hard to find good PG’s. But when you find one, you should try to build around them.
I was reading down and I couldn't help but notice
ou’re really hight on BKnight. But can I remind you, he has not played a single NBA game. Been to Summer League, Training Camp… etc
What gives you enough faith to put the team on the back of a player that hasn’t proved themselves yet. For all we know, he could be the next Sebastian Telfair
Lately it seems like good PG talent is easy to find. Definitely seeing a good period in NBA history for PG’s.
by Missing Barry on Mar 23, 2011 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions
^^^^^
Not Really, I do think he is a good player and could suceed on another team but its more that curry and ellis cannot win together. I do think that we could get more for curry but the scenarios posted above were just what the main trade would be.
question
do warriors have their 1st round draft pick this year? i thought NJ had it?
It is lottery. No playoffs = lottery.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 22, 2011 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions
We have this year, the Nets have next year’s, but it’s protected. It gets less protected through 2015, then turns into two second round picks.
by Uwe Blog on Mar 22, 2011 8:53 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
no pick this year
even if they had a pick, which they dont, trading for rookies means waiting even longer. name a single rookie who has come into the league in the last fifteen years and SIGNIFICANTLY helped make a bad team good. there is no one in college who is better than curry now or even in the next few years. maybe after, but…and curry isnt even curry yet and curry is easily the best shooter on the team, that is something you do not dump.
As much as i think we should hold onto him, monta is the one guy its make sense to trade, if there is the right deal. 2 s and 3s are the easiest positions to fill, 1 and 5 the hardest. trading monta would have to bring an impact frontcourt player who could play with lee. this is not going to be fixed next year either, so i hope gackoluber dont insist on win at all costs so as to stunt further development. we have been in that tailspin since richmond was traded for billy owens.
by felix botticelli on Mar 22, 2011 8:59 PM PDT reply actions
no pick this year
even if they had a pick, which they dont […]
You’ve been misinformed. The Warriors have their pick this year.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 22, 2011 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions
name a single rookie who has come into the league in the last fifteen years and SIGNIFICANTLY helped make a bad team good
Landry Fields!
by Missing Barry on Mar 23, 2011 7:20 AM PDT up reply actions
name a single rookie who has come into the league in the last fifteen years and SIGNIFICANTLY helped make a bad team good.
Kevin Durant…Chris Paul…Dwyane Wade…Dwight Howard…
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
pretty easy formula
just look at top 5 draft picks from the last 15 years, and see where there teams went after that…doesn’t take a rocket scientist (or even a professor of mechanical engineering) to figure this one out.
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
I don't know what to say other than you think we should trade our only good player in every trade scenario.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on Mar 22, 2011 9:04 PM PDT reply actions
I wish I had 4 hands...
so I could give those scenarios 4 thumbs down.
I appreciate the creativity, but anything that involves trading Curry, starting Battier, or relying on Bynum (among other things) is not a step forward. I do like Knight as well though.
Well, it does make sense from the perspective that he’s the only guy on our team with good trade value (Dorell probably has some, too, but obviously not nearly as much). Gotta actually give up something to get something.
by Missing Barry on Mar 23, 2011 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions
+1
curry has the highest trade value by far, yes he is better than monta in many areas and has to potential to be better than monta in almost every-way possible but other people also realize that.
I am open to trading curry if it dumps one of our bad contracts as well as brings us a large return, these trades arn’t likely but I don’t see anything wrong with considering them.
I personally don’t think scenario one would be bad at all, though it does hinge on a ?mark in knight. yes it is a risk, but as many posters on here have said, it is better to take a risk and go for becoming a much better team then to waddle in mediocracy (sp?).
I don’t know what to say other than you think we should trade our only good player in every trade scenario.
Everyone is tradable…I would be ok with Knight and Curry together if trading Monta can bring something …but , anyway it should not be an issue to look at all angles….imagine if we had Knight for instance and we could get D Howard for Curry,Monta and Biedrins….would you go for that Gov?
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 23, 2011 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions
I’d trade our whole roster for Dwight Howard.
by Uwe Blog on Mar 24, 2011 5:36 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Any trade that involves Curry and doesn't bring back a true #1 guy is a bad trade.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
You would rather have Curry than Josh Smith?
by Billy Frijoles on Mar 23, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Given their respective contracts and age, probably. Though Josh Smith is only 25…
by Missing Barry on Mar 23, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah I could definitely see that
10,000 jerseys sold instantly
by Billy Frijoles on Mar 23, 2011 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
"Time for warriors to focus on draft and offseason"
in other words, time for warrior fans to bring up unrealistic trade scenarios and pipe dream signings.
by homer simpson on Mar 23, 2011 12:48 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
in other words, time for warrior fans to bring up unrealistic trade scenarios and pipe dream signings
Thats spot on ha!…..this goes on all season long if you havn’t noticed homer ha! ;-p.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 23, 2011 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd rather just trade Monta for a first round pick and a mid level prospect and exp's.
We’ve got to shake this team up at the very least. Monta is a somewhat attractive piece especially to certain teams. We could definitely use that extra first round pick and an extra young player with upside. But’s that’s all perfect world stuff right now.
I’d dump AB for whatever, but I don’t think we’d even get expirings at this point. It would literally take Curry to rid us of Bean’s contract. So I going into next year, Beans has got to be our back up center. Start Udoh, or the next rookie or whomever you sign/trade for. Beans just isn’t a starting caliber center. At least in a back up role maybe Beans will get his confidence back. However, he will probably permanently be overpaid as long as he’s a Warrior.
I’d keep hold of Curry out of everyone else on our roster.
If we could get an extra first for Monta, I’d go with two high upside player like Alec Burks, Kenneth Faried (with the second pick), Tristan Thompson, Jordan Hamilton, Chris Singleton, John Henson, Kawhi Leonard, Nikola Mirotic, and Brandon Knight.
I’d look into ways to land Enes Kanter if I were the Dubs. Or i’d look to inquire about Demarcus Cousins if the Sac/Anaheim King/Royals are interested in dealing.
Let’s just hope and pray that the Dubs management thinks outside the box this offseason for once.
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
by kenntoe on Mar 23, 2011 1:01 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Rec'd Kenntoe
I posted the exact same thing a while back….this is a much better draft than most people say….the dream would be to manage a trade( Monta + ( Whoever) for a top 5 pick/expirings +keep our first round for true rebuilding but Monta for another lottery pick would be a very good idea.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 23, 2011 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions
My thoughts were for trading Monta for any first round pick.
But if a team in the lottery wanted Monta even better!
"I thought it was going in," Warriors center Chris Hunter said. "It looked like the invisible man tipped it away at the last second."
"He's chicken curry right now. He'll become beef curry a little later on."
-Keith Smart
I'm sorry...but NO
I agree that we need a proper centre, but trading our best player to get it??? Nope, I cannot agree to that. Biedrins + others and even Monta with Biedrins if need be yes, but not Curry, if he goes, I GUARANTEE you…. in a few years time you would look back and say ‘Damn that was stupid letting him go’…. this kid will be an ALL-STAR of the future, many many times.
'In Lacob We Trust'......
Well, I agree with not trading Curry. The problem is Monta + Biedrins (or any other similar package) won’t bring anything of value back, I think. Curry is the only major trade piece we have, and then Dorell has some value and Udoh might have a bit, but we just really don’t have much left in tradeable assets. We’ve given up most of our trade assets (Randolph, Wright, and role players that can serve as trade filler like Turiaf, Watson, Morrow, Azubuike)…..
by Missing Barry on Mar 23, 2011 7:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes but we're not going to get
a franchise center trading Curry… I can only really think of a handful of center I would trade Curry for, and I doubt any of those teams would go for it.
Since when has a team won anything with a PG as its best player?
Always take the big man.
by Billy Frijoles on Mar 23, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, I do agree in principle, I’d rather have a big man than an outside player, but give me a talented PG over a run of the mill C any day. Steve Nash got pretty close to winning a championship. PG’s can still have a big effect on the game, especially really good ones….
by Missing Barry on Mar 23, 2011 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
No to trading Curry
Already been explained why. I think we should tray and trade Monta for something like a mid first rounder like the T Wolves at 18, as well as Wes Johnson, and or AR. We could draft a combination of Burks/Knight and Valanciunas. I really think Knight could be very good at either guard spot. He’s lanky, with a strong frame, and he is a good defender in college, so I could definitely see he and Curry play really well off of each other. Curry would be the main ball handler, but I could see them both setting each other up really well.
why we trade curry over monta...
I would much rather keep curry than monta because curry will be an allstar, but we need to trade him because he has so much trade value. You would be able to get a much better player for curry than you could for monta. Monta is a great player but other clubs dont see him as the superstar he is. As the warriors you would keep monta because we cant get a star player for him. That is why i had curry in the trade scenarios.
suppositions about 'player x's trade value' are best left to the team's honchos
most fans get biased for certain players and won’t apply the same analysis other teams will when looking at deals. Better questions might be — how hard would player x be to replace ? [this team has made disastrous decisions when it was desperate for a lead guard : trading for Blaylock, signing Fisher, trading a #1 for M.Williams ; lucky three times in 18 years, with Hardaway, Davis, Curry] Or, what does player x have that will significantly help the team become a consistent winner. or conversely, what does he chronically lack that will inhibit the team getting there ?
Music is the Healing Force of the Universe (a.ayler)
As opposed to all the places we’ve gone with what we have right now?
by Missing Barry on Mar 24, 2011 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions
It’s not a great upgrade to change the 2nd most dificult position to fill in the NBA for the 1st one.
We need a good defensive C. Period. But get him trading Curry isn’t the solution for me. We are in a harder situation than last year, now we have Lee’s contract and we know we don’t have Biedrins.
Maybe a Bell for Brendan Haywood plus their first could work.
I might put PF ahead of PG in difficulty to fill, to tell you the truth.
As for your trade thought, what does the other team get out of that?
by Missing Barry on Mar 24, 2011 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Speaking of power forwards.
Whomever drafts Derrick Williams has the next thing to Blake Griffen, not as showy but a sure fire future all star.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 26, 2011 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Griffin has a couple of key advantages on Williams – first, size. Blake’s size makes him a more ideal PF, and if Blake ever puts effort in, should help him become a better defender than Williams. Second, rebounding. But yeah, I do see what you’re saying, Williams is explosive and skilled, he’ll definitely be a tough cover in the NBA.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I had been looking at the 6’-9" info then noticed the 6’-8" notation on another site. Did not realize that he is that undersized…but he will find a way to the all stars one way or another but Griffin is definitely a step above…I think that he could move into the superstar realm if he stays healthy throughout his career.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 29, 2011 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Yall are crazy if you think Lacob would trade Curry for anything less than a 20 and 10 guy. He is the most marketed Warrior since the Chris and Tim burger.
He’s already been on team usa and has already been featured in a NBA commercial that was made only for elite players. Obviously he’s gonna be a star and lacob would look so foolish if he traded him for anything less than a star.
Like David Lee?
Counting stats are fun!
by Spider Jerusalem on Mar 24, 2011 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
well, seems like you want to build around Monta...
but including Andris Biedrins only lowers the trade value of Curry.
no one in the NBA is trading a legit C for a PG.
if ATL & IND are looking to move JSmoove or Granger, chances are they don’t want Lee’s contract in return. they want cheap young guys and expiring contracts.
b/c of their salaries and production, Curry+DWright is the starting point. Reggie and Udoh may have value. but Reggie is a RFA (so he’d have to be signed and traded—something which isn’t likely).
so Curry, DWright and Udoh are your starting point for Josh Smith and Granger — cheap, productive salary guys. they make up roughly $10 mill.
Charlie Bell is your biggest expiring at $4 mill. IND probably is okay with Bell over Udoh as long as they get Steph and DWright.
Blow it up
I don’t really care what they do as long as they blow it up. I don’t care if they trade the entire team. This team is not made of winners. The only one that seems like he has the right mind set is David Lee. Yes he has defensive liabilities, but he plays the game the right way, is willing to sacrifice numbers to help the team and has a tough mental make up.
I am all for trading Curry because he has the most potential on the team. I think he is overrated in terms of potential and the longer we keep him, the more his potential will drop. He’s a baby faced kid who has flare, but that doesn’t necessarily win championships. His defensive liabilities in my opinion will always hurt the team too much to make them a championship team, unless all 4 other starters are above average on defense. I like most of those trade scenarios except for the Bogut one. He’s a really good role player and I think Curry is better than that.
Problem I see is that there’s no way you’re going to trade Biedrins. No one will want to take on that contract. So most of these seem kind of silly. I don’t see any of these teams giving up one of their star players AND taking on one of the worst contracts in the league in AB.
Yep we are stuck with Beans.
Will be an expensive backup to Udoh going forward. At least we have a decent undersized C now in Udoh. I guees if we consider Udoh’s and Beans salarys added together it makes our C duo more palatable.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 26, 2011 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd trade curry or Ellis honestly
if either if them was a great player we would have more then 30 wins, I don’t know why people are so against trading curry, if the right deal is out there then get it done.
by gs.mafia on Mar 24, 2011 5:14 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
I don’t know why people are so against trading curry
are they? most people seem to be perfectly fine trading Steph-they just would rather trade Monta first.
personally i’ve always thought that both may be better off as 6th men, but the only reason i’d hold back on trading Steph (unless it was for Bosh or someone like that) is he is in his 2nd yr and has basically shot better than almost every 2nd year player ever. at least with this being Monta’s 6th season, we pretty much know what he is. it’s hard to imagine, but shooting is one of the few things that almost always improves… i think the other two are PG turnovers and foul rates among big men — but someone correct me if i’m wrong on that.
by homer simpson on Mar 24, 2011 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions
ya I've seen a lit of people defending curry trades and saying we should build around him
nothing against steph and I hope we don’t trade people but my point is SOME people are against trading him.
by gs.mafia on Mar 25, 2011 3:07 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Curry trade talk is blasphemy.
Gov’s little brother?
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 26, 2011 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
my dream offseason
trade monta for iggy
sign shane battier
sign deandre jordan
roll into 2011/12 (or whenever the next season will be) with a lineup of:
curry
iggy
battier
lee
jordan
and a bench of:
wright
williams
amundson
udoh
lin
i wouldn’t hate that team. and yes, i know this has zero chance of happening
this team would be worse, not better
d wright has been showing more consistency and scoring in different ways besides shooting three’s as the season has gone on.
trading monta ellis for iggy is would be the biggest epic fail trade made in the nba in the past 20 years
you mention dream off-seasn but you still do not have a good back up point guard or a good back up center.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
trading monta ellis for iggy is would be the biggest epic fail trade made in the nba in the past 20 years
I’d trade Ellis for Iguodala in a heartbeat. I wouldn’t even hesitate. Not only that, but I’m sure there were much worse trades that occurred…
trade a 10 point guy for a guy that can score over 20 points any night he wanted too.
fail
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Well you know Iguodala is a good play maker, very good defender, and a good rebounder. He does things that Monta can’t. Monta can score over 20 a game, but he can also do it inefficiently often. Therefore, your assumption on Monta being better than Iguodala based on points is a “fail.”
your points are fail
guard is supposed to score and monta is one of the best scores in the league, period.
go look at your perceived “efficiency” is losing 10 plus points a game for 2 rebounds and a negative 1 steal a game.
other teams have their A game when guarding monta or he will score over 40 points.
monta is 10 times better than Andre Iguodala
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Quick quiz
If you have a guy in your starting lineup who scores 30 points per game, and he sprains his ankle and goes out for a week, would you expect your team to score 30 fewer points per game?
Thing C
quick quiz
if the warriors ever make it to the playoffs.
would you rather have a guy that the opposing team will not worry about as a scoring threat?
or
would you rather have a guy that is rather hard and one of the hardest players in the league to guard?
uhmmmmmmmm…
let me think about that one.
I will take the mediocre player****sarcasm*****
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Who is worried about Monta Ellis? This old chestnut has been brought up time and again, and it’s been repeatedly debunked. Are teams double-teaming Monta to force him to give up the ball? Denying the pass? Not that I’ve seen. Collapsing on a dribble drive is standard basketball SOP, not some genius anti-Monta strategy that every coach in the NBA came up with simultaneously.
Do you think the Warriors would score more or fewer points per game if they replaced Monta Ellis with Steve Nash? Because Nash sure scores a lot fewer per game than Monta does.
Thing C
monta with steve nash?
that does not make sense.
different roles on the team.
you can buy into your own “debunking”
you telling me that other teams do not go over and do not game plan to stop monta?
and that, that has no affect on the game?
the warriors will and would score less points and have one less weapon without monta ellis.
other players will have to pick up the slack.
and do you think that the warriors will rebound better with iggy?
that is false, the warriors suck at rebounding because they do not block out. iggy will have the same rebounding numbers because he will be instructed and play with other players that do not block out.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow. that's all i have to say.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on Mar 27, 2011 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions
tell me about it.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow. that’s all i have to say.
Can we count on that? ;-)
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 29, 2011 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Ha, if the Warriors ever make it to the playoffs? You know who’s going to make it to the playoffs? Iguodala’s team.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions
By the way, if you really think the opposing team doesn’t worry about Iguodala, you’ve clearly never seen the Sixers play.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah you don’t really care about defense I guess. A guard doesn’t always have to score. Why can’t a guard do a variety of things? Just because he doesn’t take as many shots as Monta does doesn’t mean he’s worse. Trust me, Monta for Iguodala is HUGE PLUS for us. But I don’t expect you to know that since you look way too much into points per game. With Iguodala, we get a huge defensive upgrade, we’d get less turnovers, more rebounding, etc. I don’t care if Monta can drop 40 a game or not. That’s irrelevant because he doesn’t even shoot a high percentage. You need to look more into other aspects of the game.
the warriors suck over all on defense and it is more coaching than it is monta ellis
monta ellis gets more steals than iggy-would be a loss there
look at the minutes compared to the turnovers and there is only discrepancy of less than .5
with the loss of the steals and the fact that monta has been improving every year on his turnovers that would be a loss not a gain in those two categories
and you have to consider how often monta has the ball compared to iggy. monta is focus of the warriors offense. you say improve on turnover but will the person who will be handling the ball instead of monta improve on turnovers? not likely.
you mention shooting percentage again
monta ellis has better shooting percentage and even takes more shots which if iggy took that many shots would be even lower than he is
warriors strength is their offense and the little gain in “perceived” defense is not worth losing double digit points and one of the best scorers in the game today; especially trading monta only for iggy which is what was originally suggested.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions
the warriors suck over all on defense and it is more coaching than it is monta ellis
You’re obviously new to the Warriors because they’ve been pretty crappy on that end for awhile now.
monta ellis gets more steals than iggy-would be a loss there
Omg Monta gets .5 more steals than Iguodala per 36. Man, we’re really going to suffer.
look at the minutes compared to the turnovers and there is only discrepancy of less than .5Look at their per 36 numbers. Monta getss 4.9 assists to 2.9 turnovers. Iguodala gets 6.2 assists to 2 turnovers. That’s a pretty huge margin, buddy. It’s great that Monta took a huge step and turned the ball over less? Iguodala already does turn the ball over less and gets more assists. Just because Monta is the Warrior’s offensive focus doesn’t mean we’ll suffer. I don’t think you’ve notice this, but running the O through Monta has been bad. Are you aware that there are 5 people on the same team? With Monta gone, there will be more shots for more efficient players.
you mention shooting percentage againIt’s pretty damn important.
monta ellis has better shooting percentage and even takes more shots which if iggy took that many shots would be even lower than he isTheir TS% is REALLY close. I’m aware that Monta scores more and efficiently than Iguodala, but he also scores it inefficiently. At least with Iguodala he’ll take less inefficient shots and do other things that we desperately need.
warriors strength is their offense and the little gain in "perceived" defense is not worth losing double digit points and one of the best scorers in the game today; especially trading monta only for iggy which is what was originally suggested.Yeah and obviously our weakness is huge. Take out Monta and put in Iguodala and we’ll be instantly better. More efficient offense, better defense, etc. And Monta is definitely not one of the best scorers today. Guys like Monta and Carmelo get called good scorers because they do it in a variety of ways. To me, if you’re going to score points you need to be efficient. Guys like LeBron, Kobe, Durant, Wade, Dirk, etc.
by DubsFan408 on Mar 27, 2011 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
you did not even read anything I wrote and looked at facts.
yes, shooting percentage is important and monta has a better shooting percentage in all three shooting categories
delete you nonsense nonfactual nonsense post. .
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions
you did not even read anything I wrote and looked at facts.
Seems to me you just couldn’t make a counter argument.
yes, shooting percentage is important and monta has a better shooting percentage in all three shooting categories….Did you read anything I wrote?
delete you nonsense nonfactual nonsense post. .Didn’t you just say I looked at facts? Now it’s nonfactual? smh..
you say something is pretty important and you argue for the opposite to what you are arguing.
monta ellis has better shooting percentages.
you did not make valid arguments which is what i stated last time, go back and make sense to what I wrote and respond after understanding and properly responding. i will then respond to you.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions
……I said Monta scores a bit more efficient than Iguodala. Do you not understand that they both are not efficient scorers? BUT, Iguodala takes a lot less shots than Monta. Those inefficient extra shots that Monta takes hurt the team. Are you not able to comprehend that? The extra shots that Monta takes can be taken by other players on our team (Reggie, Dorell, Curry, even Lee). What do you not get? How am I not making valid arguments? Did you just run out of things to say?
you do realize that, the more someone shoots the ball and the more someone handles the ball
their shooting percentage tends to go down and they tend to have more turnovers.
would you trade kobe bryant for iggy?
they have almost the same number except monta gets more steal.
curry is the only one shooting relatively high number of shots that has better percentage than monta and only by 2%. if you spread that other shots around the team without a monta the shooting percentage will probably go down. the guards and small forward will be the one picking up the slack and they will be lower and easier to defend without monta ellis.
go study more stats and come up with something else.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Their scoring efficiency this season is identical: .534 ts%.
Over the past two years, and over their careers, Iguodala has been more efficient.
Iguodala is as vastly better rebounder and defender, with a much better assist-turnover ratio.
Monta’s only real “advantage,” if you can call it that, is that he shoots more.
Even if you’re willing to ignore all these facts, I do wonder how you explain Monta’s two year adjusted plus-minus of minus 6.26. The fact that Monta has hurt the team more than helped it over the past seasons is not debatable. The best you can do is come up with excuses, most of which we’ve heard many times before. But maybe you’ve got something new? I’m all ears.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 27, 2011 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions
ya, monta is the reason this team sucks, lets just send him to d-league.
you argue rebounding, the warriors coaches do not make the warriors block out, do you think he be the same re-bounder on this team?
warriors have not valued defense under don nelson and keith smart, iggy would be worse defender on the warriors.
warriors strategy has been to score score score unlike other teams. different coach who values defense and rebounds every player on the team will have different numbers.
plus-minus
go study don nelson and keith smart strategy for basketball
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Strawman to the fullest.
ya, monta is the reason this team sucks, lets just send him to d-league.
He is a reason, not the sole one. There are many factors, and he’s among the bigger issues.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on Mar 27, 2011 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions
go through all my posts and take out all the sarcasm and tell me what fallacies they are.
great way to support weak and invalid argument
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions
No one said we should send him to the d league. We’re saying there is no point for him to be on this team because he’s bad in the role we’ve given him. He’s not suited for this role.
"Of course, these people couldn’t really have predicted...the joke of a mockery of a sham of a circus of Keith Smart’s nightly rotations. " - Sleepy Freud
Steph Curry and Reggie Williams all day baby!
by GovernorStephCurry on Mar 27, 2011 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions
If you’re really interested in it, we can discuss all the fallacies there are. A few brief ones:
TS% is what matters in scoring efficiency. FG%, 3PT%, FT% by themselves are not as good as TS%. TS% combines all 3 of those, while weighting them appropriately in the proportion you shot them. Look at TS% for scoring efficiency.
When a player shoots, he shoots at the expense of someone else on his team taking a shot. Going from a 20 point player to a 10 point player doesn’t make the team lose 10 points, because they make up those shots. Here are the facts in this case: the Warriors, as a team, score more points when Monta does not shoot the ball than they score when he does shoot the ball. This suggests, very strongly, that we can fairly easily replace the shots he takes, as a team. Everyone else will shoot a little more, but you know what? We do better when they shoot it anyways.
Next, steals are not a measure of defense. We also don’t have coaches that simply ignore defense. Iguodala is an excellent defender, and adds much, much more than Monta on that end – he [Iguodala] was picked on Team USA for a reason. Monta has the single worst defensive +/- in all of the NBA – so when he [Monta] plays, our defense gets worse than when he’s on the bench on a greater level than any other player. Yes, Iguodala would give us a substantial upgrade here.
Rebounding – you’d be surprised by just how high the correlation in rebounding is for players changing teams. Yes, Iguodala would get more rebounds for us than Monta does. We are a bad rebounding team. Replacing a bad rebounder for a good one will make us better in that regard. If you can’t see that, I don’t know what to tell you.
Those are a few of the fallacies of your arguments, of which there have been many. If you want to further discuss the general ideas of basketball, I’m more than willing to answer any questions you have.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
you do realize that, the more someone shoots the ball and the more someone handles the ball
their shooting percentage tends to go down and they tend to have more turnovers.
First, you need to compose a better paragraph. Why do you keep double spacing between your sentences?
Second, You do realize that there are players out there who can be efficient while handling the ball, right? Steve Nash is an example. Also, Iguodala used to take more shots and was more efficient. So you can also say that sometimes taking more shots can lead to higher efficiency.
would you trade kobe bryant for iggy?
they have almost the same number except monta gets more steal.
This is probably the most idiotic thing I’ve read in awhile (besides your posts up there). Kobe is ridiculously better than Monta, it’s not even funny. Kobe’s better at EVERYTHING compared to Monta. He shoots a higher percentage, x10 better all around game. So no, I would not trade Kobe for Igoudala because Kobe > Iguodala > Monta.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players Please, just go on this site and read. Come back to me when you start making valid points in your argument (if that’s what you want to call them).
if you do not like they way I write or how it looks, do not read it or respond to it.
your basis for iggy being better than monta,
the same argument can be made about kobe, look at the numbers
that is how idiotic your that argument is.
look at iggy’s numbers when he average 18 points in the season, turnovers and shooting percentage all worse than monta’s
go read that site yourself and stop being full of yourself and attempting to validate your argument by mocking the way I write.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 7:10 PM PDT up reply actions
guard is supposed to score and monta is one of the best scores in the league, period.
And pass, and rebound, and play defense, cut down on turnovers, space the floor, make the right cuts….there are a ton of things every player is expected to do. If you really think all that matters for a guard is scoring, I don’t know what to tell you. You have much to learn, young grasshopper.
go look at your perceived "efficiency" is losing 10 plus points a game for 2 rebounds and a negative 1 steal a game.
That’s not actually how it works. When you replace a guy that scores 20 points for a guy that scores 10 points, you don’t just lose 10 points. What actually happens is there are more shots available for the team to take, and so you make up a lot of those points. If those 20 points are scored inefficiently, you often actually end up scoring MORE, as a team.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Monta or iggy
I am a big fan of iggy but monta is much better than him and I have to admit that iggy is overrated and has also never been an allstar. Monta has posted allstar caliber #’s in his last 3 or 4 years and iggy has never had a huge season
Ha, that’s funny. “Iggy has never been an all-star, but nevermind that this also applies to Monta, I’m going to make up a new term to make it look like Monta WAS an all-star.” On the other hand, Iguodala was just a key member for Team USA at the Worlds, picked by one of the best coaches alive, and given a significant role on that team. Monta’s never even been considered for that. Iguodala is also the best player on a team about to make the playoffs. You really think Monta is the better player?
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions
d wright has been showing more consistency and scoring in different ways besides shooting three’s as the season has gone on.
You realize Wright would still be on the team, don’t you? When you add more good players, it tends to make you better, not worse….
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Thats a dream that I could live with as well.
my dream offseason
But not sure that it is realistic to achive..sigh ;-l
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 29, 2011 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I think GSOM doenst have real fans
I have been here my entire life, 34 years, born in raised in SF, been to hundreds of Warriors games, and NEVER met one fan who cries like these “internet” fans do here. This is pathetic. They are NEVER satisfied. Last year they were screaming for Monta’s head. The possibility of trading Curry was enough to get you banned off the site. Now its Curry’s head these people want. Gimme a break. I think when Lacob was annoyed recently with the “real fan” comment, we KNOW that he was talking against the bloggers on this site. Swear to Christ I have never seen a bigger bunch of whiners in my life.
lol boohoo
Remind people again who’s whining?
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Mar 27, 2011 5:25 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Why, exactly, should we be satisfied?
“You will eat your gruel and you will like it, damn it!”
Thing C
don nelson and the old trainer are no longer with the warriors
hopefully this off-season riley and smart will be shown the door
that is reason enough for hope.
this same team with the new trainer and real coach who strategy’s is not shooting three’s and with making the team block out for rebounds, will make the playoffs next year.
and there is still the free agency and the draft to improve
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Do you really think Keith Smart doesn’t know what it means to block out? That he just tells the guys, “oh, don’t bother blocking out, it’s not like defense matters, anyways”…? I mean, I’m looking forward to a new coach, as well, but if your expectations are a new coach will just magically turn bad players into good ones with a snap of his fingers (which is basically how I see the idea that our team will all of a sudden start blocking out and doing a much better job rebounding like a light bulb suddenly went on), can’t say I have anything close to the same expectations.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Also, we don’t have enough cap space to do anything meaningful in free agency or a high enough draft pick to expect to get much in the draft….
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh yeah, and we didn’t even have much of an injury problem this year, so you can’t even expect improvement from a new trainer.
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Udoh’s Wrist.
Lee’s elbow.
Curry’s ankles.
We may have had a below average # of player games lost due to injury but I still think these were very significant. This was made worse because i do not think Smart had much clue how to use his bench.
With all due respect, I am a Analyst Hall of Fame candidate. If you are offended by my comment, I did write "With all due respect".
by KillaContract on Mar 28, 2011 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Right, injuries happen, no team gets through a whole season unscathed, but relatively speaking, we had a pretty good injury situation this year.
by Missing Barry on Mar 29, 2011 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions
what happens when
you have riley, don nelson, and keith smart leading the way. lol
but most of the suggestions people make do not make sense.
all snipe on the stupid trades the warriors make but yet most would trade curry and ellis away for nothing.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Mar 27, 2011 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions
yet most would trade curry and ellis away for nothing
Ha, what site are you reading, because around here, it’s almost unanimous that we all like Curry and are generally reluctant to trade him?
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions
crazy
Think of this site like a bar full of longtime suffering Warrior fans who all have various opinions and live in a country that allows people to express their opinions freely. If you dont like it hear check out Philly/Boston and NY fans. You really wont like it there.
by Only In Fairfax on Mar 27, 2011 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Hi, nice to meet you, I’m happy to hear you’re satisfied with mediocre, but entertaining/uptempo teams that have a worse playoff track record than any other franchise (from when Cohan took over). I hope you continue to live a happy existance!
by Missing Barry on Mar 28, 2011 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions
Festus Ezeli
THIS guy is the one i think we should draft in the second round if he slips that far.. what do you guys think?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
