Dwight Howard doesn't want to come to GS
According to Sam Amick...
Also, I read somewhere that whoever the Warriors will pick up to replace Kwame, they will cut Ish Smith. :'(
4 months ago
Sensei Ben
170 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Why would he want to come here?
New management has shown nothing. If Brooklyn gets him, it’s proof we made the wrong decisions regarding CP3 and Deron.
When a elite player is available, you MAKE a move. Nah instead we prefer to throw our cap space and assets at David Lee.
Deron Williams or CP3 + Monta, and we are a front runner for Dwight. I’m positive. Both the PGs are regarded as among ‘the best’ in NBA. Monta, whether you like him or hate him, is well respected among NBA players as a scorer, and surely Dwight would see him as a great 3rd guy.
But hey, this team is run by morons. Obviously trading AR for 80 mil Googs2.0 was the right move. I hate to write revisionist history. We could have had AR, Monroe down low. We certainly wouldn’t have had a better record in 2009-10. Who knows who we draft in 2011. But we’d be in infinitely better position to make deals. We could still dealt Biedrins for more prospects.
It annoys me so much. If we did that our team would be better in both ways. We’d have 5-7 young assets that we could trade for 2 legitimate stars. Or we could go full-pedo and rebuild.
The difference is Dwill never said he didnt wanna go to Brooklyn. CP3 said he dont wanna come here so why would he stay and bring somebody else with him when they know he dont wanna be here and will bolt the 1st chance he got?
deron was shocked and unhappy he was traded but gave it a shot
Credit nets management
Now they made a huge mistake in free agency/otherr moves
by tafkasam on Jan 13, 2012 8:34 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
He also looked at supporting cast in NJ and said 'UGH'
Anyway I think DWill is gone to Dallas unless the Nets get Dwight or someone legit enough to make them a playoff power and that convinced him.
Beyond that… Cuban (with his title and decade+ success) has earned the trust of every player and basically elevated Dallas to right below Lakers as a premier destination.
Players know Dallas will a) take care of them better than any organization (top class amenities and perks, amazing locker room, little things) and b) they have SMART management who makes the right moves.
I was hoping Lacob could do that in GSW, but so far, he’s shown no vision, nothing. Just Chris Cohan with better sound bites.
He’s also from Dallas, which doesn’t hurt. But different point.
I think Cuban is exactly who we need to follow. He tanked his team, played draft for Dirk and Nash, and built from there. Made the Mavs a true first class organization, like the debartolo 49ers, steinbrenner yankees or the buss lakers.
Okay taf, express your vision of what you would do as GM. Warriors execs do frequent this board from time to time. I’ll make sure your suggestion gets seen.
Appreciate that J(oe L)-Ridah ;)
My feeling is we need to make a major shake up. I like what Lacob and co. have done in terms of PR. I think they have made improvements to oracle experience, I’m sure the team is treated better, and that’ll only improve.
But for the on court product, we NEED to gamble. Trade for Dwight, trade for CP3/Deron etc. I don’t care if they expire. The team as constructed is going nowhere, and contractually, once Curry is signed to an extension, will TRULY be capped out.
If we can’t get a super star, move the other way. trade for picks and prospects. Can we trade LEe + Udoh for Amir Johnson + Barbosa + Toranto’s pick?
Maybe move Monta for a pick.
We are stuck in a mediocre position with little upside. The only two guys on the roster I think could ever be a ‘core’ player on a team are Monta and curry. And neither of them as the guy.
Beyond that, if we trade a lot for Dwight, and he leaves? Well, whatever. We TRIED. Now we can truly rebuild. Start stockpiling picks and youthful assets. DONT SIGN DLEEs
If your orlando is it anybody on our roster you would take ahead of Bynum or Lopez and a 1st round pick? They want a C coming back in a trade, also a franchise like the Magic would not trade a star player to where he does not wanna go. That sets a bad image to the franchise in terms of other stars wanting to go there in the future and it looks bad to the players agents who have influence of where their clients go. It would be crazy to move Monta for any pick besides the 1st pick in the draft. Monta is 1 of the best guards in the game and is still building on his game. Im convinced at this point the cool thing to do on GSOM is to bash Lee. The guy produces night in and night out and this year has been owning the opposite PF on most nights in their matchup. He’s not getting killed defensively this season at all when defending 4’s. I dont understand the Lee hate, if you think we can land somebody better at a cheaper contract im more than willing to listen. Lee should be applauded for his production and wanting to be here unlike most free agents coming off a 20 and 12 allstar season.
I agree Bynum > anything we can offer. Lopez is not though
I’m not down on Monta. I agree he’s overused (which leads to poor shooting nights) and with better players he’d be more efficient. But I would consider all offers for him or anyone.
As for Lee, I think he’s simply not that good. He’s not producing. His scoring is down, he’s shooting poor percentages. And beyond that he makes way too much.
I'm not as down on him as some people
But I do think, if you asked me who I’d trade
in order
1. Andris
2. Lee
long wait
monta
This is a strange feeling J-Ridah.
I agree with you.
Yeah we need to at least try
Doesn’t matter if we lose Curry in that type of deal if he walks. Sad but we tried which is more then before , and our team has done well the last 2 games without him. Not saying we don’t need him but we should consider the fact that if you add a super start to last night’s team they are even better then with Curry
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
Of course he wasn’t unhappy leaving Utah; they don’t have enough strip clubs for today’s young athalete
by john13holmes on Jan 13, 2012 12:08 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with you on Dwight wanting to be in NY and LA part but I don’t particularly think it’s because of the Bay Area. I honestly believe if the Warriors can move to San Francisco, a lot of free agents will change their mind about the Golden State Warriors. I don’t dislike Oakland but every game I go to I find a way to hate the Oracle Arena. Not to mention it’s right next door to where a baseball team is who is trying their hardest to get away from Oakland.
by mrorangesoda on Jan 13, 2012 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
Trust me, moving them to San Fran would not change 1 thing in regards to free agency. If you was to ask a rookie coming into the league where the dubs played he’d either say san fran or the Bay. I hate to break it to yall but San Fran is not a very appealing city to the average NBA player. Its just not. I dont get all the hate on Oakland as a city. We all know the gripe I have with it and the rest of the Bay. But for all these teams to want to leave Oakland is not gonna do anything in terms of attracting free agents, well it would for the A’s because baseball players care about fields and stuff.
But for all these teams to want to leave Oakland is not gonna do anything in terms of attracting free agents, well it would for the A’s because baseball players care about fields and stuff.
Technically they all want to leave because Oakland’s city council is awful and has a failing economy (oakland). The facilities (raider/a’s) suck, and they can’t get a new stadium built in oakland no matter what they try.
Otherwise, most appreciate the centrality oakland offers to greater bay area.
-
The big issue with moving to SF is luxury boxes and corporate sponsorships. Niners are charging 80k to ‘reserve’ a box in the new stadium + 400+ a ticket in it.
Corporate sponsorships in SF and SJ are just way more lucrative because of companies in those areas.
I agree with your logic. It would change the entire franchise moving to San Francisco.
It is a smart business move that would allow them to make more money, create better facilities for fans, community, and players, and would allow players to conveniently live in SF.
I know that a lot of players live outside of where their team plays, like David Lee and like Baron Davis did, but having a state of the art arena in a revamped area of town would be a huge selling point.
J-RIDAH is taking that for granted. The Warriors moving to San Francisco would change the team but it would also change the city. It’s a small city so something like an arena being built is a big community project.
In the town of Fairfax in Marin County, a state of the art grocery store is being built inside a shopping complex that is otherwise pretty run down. It’s going to change everything, from how the town looks to how people will access it within and outside.
Real estate development projects and a professional team moving into is HUGE.
So, J-RIDAH, I strongly disagree with you. It will allow players, businesses, endorsements, etc. to gain access into an untapped market.
by Doctor Kajita on Jan 13, 2012 1:31 PM PST up reply actions
Your wrong on this 1 Kajita. If the sellout crowd every game at Oracle is not enough to entice free agents, a new arena in SF with more expensive seats wont do it either.
Did you bother to read my post? I’d rather not repeat myself but it’s beyond a new arena and selling out. It’s about building a brand and appealing to and allowing access to community and businesses (local and national/intl). It is basic business. If done successfully, it will break through any racial or cultural deterrent you elude to often.
by Doctor Kajita on Jan 13, 2012 4:09 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I disagree
SF is a far sexier city, especially if they build it in the China Basin next to AT & T. There will be a lot more excitement around the arena with restaurants and bars along the waterfront. it just has a lot more energy than an arena next to a freeway.
Exactly… The Oracle Arena is like that hot girl in Facebook you’ve been dying to take out but when your face to face you find out she used camera angles to make herself look better.
by mrorangesoda on Jan 13, 2012 2:38 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
At least she's easy access.
"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
Nobody is impressed by San Francisco besides tourists. The average NBA player does not fall under the demographic of those that would be impressed by San Fran. Its not that fun of a place. Seriously, its 40 mins from Oracle.
Nobody is impressed by San Francisco besides tourists
Nobody? I know a lot of people that live there that are impressed by the city. So, aside from the tourists and the people that live there, nobody is impressed by the SF. I would imagine that most NBA players are more impressed by SF than they are with Oakland, which is why a lot of teams stay there when they play the Warriors. It might not be NY or LA, but it has a much higher profile and reputation than Oakland. Look at what AT & T did for the Giants. Sure, you have a lot more casual fans, but you can’t deny the stadium has been a major boost to the franchise.
Sure, you have a lot more casual fans, but you can’t deny the stadium has been a major boost to the franchise.
I look at it as a big downfall from the days of mccovey, krusty crab, and the candlestick swirling winds. It’s just a big sports oriented walmart to me these days.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 3:48 PM PST up reply actions
Wasn't it Crazy Crab?
Well, they would probably be in Tampa Bay right now if they didn’t have a new stadium. Candlestick had it’s unique charm, but it was not always the best place to enjoy a baseball game. Since they Giants have moved into AT & T they have been to the WS twice and won once. They have increased their payroll and get good attendance numbers even when they are losing. Personally, I love the park. Cold, windy, and dirty might be OK for football, but isn’t the best environment for baseball.
Cold, windy, and dirty might be OK for football, but isn’t the best environment for baseball.
it was the ultimate home field advantage for those with the foresight to exploit it.
Haha, I been watching too much sponge bob and krusty crab burgers.
My objection to new fancy arena is the type of crowds they bring out, I prefer a fan based attendance instead of an income based attendance.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 4:17 PM PST up reply actions
re: I prefer a fan based attendance instead of an income based attendance.
You might want to consider moving back to your home planet because this one is entirely income-based.
Man, I don’t care nothing about no Mike Montgomery.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jan 14, 2012 9:02 AM PST up reply actions
this one is entirely income-based.
I didn’t say it wasn’t, I said I’d prefer it the other way.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 14, 2012 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
There’s more Warrior players that live in Oakland than Frisco. At 1 time 6 Warriors players were living in the same apt building, aswell as Nellie. What did AT&T do for the Giants? And as I said before, its different when it comes to baseball. They actually depend on the field to win. A arena is at the bottom of every players list of importance, actually its not even on the list. Nobody is impressed with San Fran, if they were the 9ers would be trying to stay there.
The Niners aren't moving because they don't like SF
They’re moving because Candlestick sucks.
While you sit here typing some witty response, Bruce Bochy, world champion, is smiling from above.
Yeah, unfortunately
it does.
Unless you’re looking for a vacant lot.
And I was born there.
by formerlythecity on Jan 19, 2012 10:33 PM PST up reply actions
The issue for players isn't the arenas itself, so much as how much it feels like it's in the middle of things.
Now, unlike J-Ridah, I happen to feel this is relatively low on the priority list after things like “is the team a winning team” and “are they paying me the most money.”
But at the same time, it’s important to understand something. Oakland feels like the sticks. It’s the middle of nowhere. The Oracle arena isn’t close to anything except the airport. Woohoo!
Compare that to MSG – in the middle of Manhattan. The TD Garden is close to the fun parts of Boston. The Staples Center is now the focal point of a really cool nightlife scene (even if it’s not in the same league as, say, the Sunset Strip).
So, yeah, a new arena that felt part of the city – could you imagine something near Union Square? – would be “cooler” to players.
J-Ridah has the causality backwards. Players live in Oakland not because they want to live in Oakland, but because they don’t want to deal with the commute. They want to live close/convenient to the arena. If the arena was in the city, you wouldn’t see six players living in the same apartment building in Oakland.
Now, again, how high is this on the priority list for players? Low. A winning culture is much more important. But the AT&T center doesn’t feel like it’s miles from the “cool” parts of San Antonio. It’s ten minutes in a car.
Building a winning culture is the most important thing. You want a superstar to feel like, “Hey, if I go there, we have a shot at a title.” You have to be competitive with money but that never seems so hard for teams to manage.
But yeah, you also want, after playing a road game at an arena, a player’s friend on the home team to be able to say, “Hey, let’s go to this cool place -” and have it be right there. With Oakland that’s just not the case.
The average NBA player does not fall under the demographic of those that would be impressed by San Fran. Its not that fun of a place.
Speaking in absolutes much? There’s no way you can know this in full certainty. You’re being a borderline troll now.
"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 Jan 13, 2012 5:46 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
SF is a far sexier city, especially if they build it in the China Basin next to AT & T. There will be a lot more excitement around the arena with restaurants and bars along the waterfront. it
which has nothing to do with the game of basketball and would just draw more casual fans displacing the true fans. Everything is already too expensive for those that deserve to go to the games based on their love of the sport . We need to figure out ways to lower ticket costs and concentrate on the game on the court instead of the trendy location surrounding the building.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 3:20 PM PST up reply actions
True, but that is the trade off you make when you move into a fancy new arena. A new arena would hurt many loyal fans, but it would probably generate a lot of revenue for the team. I also believe that players would prefer to play in a state of the art arena in the China Basin than an aging one in Oakland. A new SF arena would be in the best interest of the franchise if winning is the main priority. If maintaining a hardcore fanbase and offering tickets at a reasonable price is the main priority then Oracle is the better option.
If maintaining a hardcore fanbase and offering tickets at a reasonable price is the main priority then Oracle is the better option.
if I had to choose I’d take this option. I don’t see the point of playin the peoples game in a pretentious new arena to entertain the 1% .
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
But having fans is not what this topic is about. Hypothetically if you could afford to live in San Francisco or Oakland where would you rather live?
by mrorangesoda on Jan 13, 2012 4:27 PM PST up reply actions
Hypothetically if you could afford to live in San Francisco or Oakland where would you rather live?
Belvedere
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 6:23 PM PST up reply actions
Belvedere?
I would never live there… No nightlife!!!! Hahahaha
by mrorangesoda on Jan 13, 2012 6:45 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Of course DWight does not want to join Warriors
Can you name a superstar who wants to join Warriors?
The point is, make the effort. take the risk. Trade is THE ONLY WAY we can get Howard. Worst case if Howard decide to leave, we gain the cap space. What to loose??
Dallas now looks like the team everyone wants to go. This is because Cuban spend tons of money overpay so players through out the years for them to get to this point.
We need to overpay players and make all possible efforts to bring impact/superstar players here. This is part of the rebuilding process. If Warriors looks for “values” or something that “make sense”, I can see Warriors will be the same team as now for another 15 years.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
No disrespect, but anybody that thinks Steph Curry and anybody on our roster is good enough to land us DH must take Otis Smith for the dumbest man in sports history. Teams would give up allstar Big men in their prime for Dwight. Steph is a shoot 1st point guard on a bum ankle. To think Lacob could convince Smith to do that is insane.
Just offer whatever Magic wants
we are talking about a superstar here. Cash, whatever the players they want, whatever the picks they want.
I am so disappointed that we didn’t trade Curry for CP3. See the effect? Even when CP3 say won’t sign, we now have better chance to land Howard.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 1:14 PM PST up reply actions
To think Lacob could convince Smith to do that is insane.
How about tell Smith to make it work, then Smith got fire by Magic, then Warriors pay top dollars to hire Smith? It is a win-win for Smith and Locob.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 1:16 PM PST up reply actions
ILWG, If your Otis Smith and you trade DH for any combo of players on our team instead of trading with the Lakers for Bynum and a 2nd round pick, you would be looking for a new job the next day.
you would be looking for a new job the next day.
Yes, that’s correct. A guarantee new job with Warriors that pays him twice as much on what he is earning now.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions
gotta think outside the box
since nothing else works
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 4:21 PM PST up reply actions
Teams would give up allstar Big men in their prime for Dwight.
Well, it’s worth pointing out that you never get fair value in return for a player that good.
You would have thought Memphis would have could have gotten more for Pau, for example. One has to think that Chicago would offer a package built around NOah, and we can’t top that, but you can’t assume that they would.
Screw him, if he doesn't want to be here so be it.
On to the next. I do give the FO credit for trying to make moves instead of “standing pat” as the old regime used to say and do however, they need to make a decision and stand by it. Either a) remove the breaks and go all out to get a big name, or, b) explode this team and tank. One or the other needs to be done I would think.
"That was very funny about the old man basketball skills. One is lucky to escape injury when playing against those crafty, crusty sumbitches. And it’s just demoralizing when they demonstrate yet again how to use the backboard from range." - Charlie Custer
by SmittytheCutman on Jan 13, 2012 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
if he doesn't want to be here so be it.
The main reason he wouldn’t come here is that under the rules orlando can pay him a lot more than we can.How bad could it be to stay there for a few more million per year?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 10:43 AM PST up reply actions
How bad could it be? Very bad. You never bring in anybody that does not wanna play for you. For him to look at the Nets roster and say he’d rather play for them than us tells you what comes 1st to him and its not winning.
How bad could it be? Very bad.
You need a lesson on the value of money. Kerr gave the numbers last night and IIRC it was something like 10 million more that orlando could pay him . For that kind of money I’d be happy there even if they didn’t sign any other players and just forfeited every game.I’d even wear a mickey mouse sandwich board and stand in front of the empty arena on canceled game nights.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
You never bring in anybody that does not wanna play for you.
Why not? I am sure Howard won’t be in tank mode that lower his value in his FA year next year.
On the other hand, who wants to come play for Warriors again? KBrown? Fesenko?? Base on choosing who wants to play for Warriors, we will be tanking forever.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 4:25 PM PST up reply actions
Personally I’d give Hibbert or Mcgee a max deal for a 4 year RFA and hope 1 of their teams dont match. Plan B is Kaman, Plan C is to trade Klay and Udoh for Drummond.
didn't know Hibbert and McGee are avaiable
I am up for them too, surely it will be a good upgrade from KBrown.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 8:05 PM PST up reply actions
Do you realize Hibbert, McGee and Kaman all suck?
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 15, 2012 7:20 PM PST up reply actions
Hibbert doesn't but he's not more than an average starter.
Max deals?
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 15, 2012 7:21 PM PST up reply actions
100% agreed...but how do we establish it with talent we have?
being close to capped out? Best options I see are major gamble trade like Dwight or rebuilding
I don't think it's possible to establish a winning culture without being capped out.
Or close to it.
Remember, the persistent winners are all WAY over the cap.
Being way over the cap doesn’t seem to stop them from being able to make moves: eg, LAL swinging the voided trade for CP3, or Chandler to Dallas last year. Those are the sort of moves we want to see our team be able to make, and their cap situation didn’t stop either of those teams from making the move!
Furthermore, the new rules are more favorable in those circumstances. eg, now you can take back 150% of what you send out, I believe.
When it comes to making a “major” gamble there are smart gambles and there are dumb gambles. When a player is telling you privately, “I’m not going to re-sign with you,” it’s a very different gamble from “I’m going to see how I feel about the team/city in a year.” In once case you’re talking about a smart gamble, in the other a stupid one – it’s not even really a gamble. eg – there’s a world of difference between an all-in raise on the river with three of a kind when there are three flush cards showing than it is when there are four flush cards and multiple straight draws, too. Both are “major” gambles. One can be smart in some circumstances. The other almost never is.
Warriors is a bottom feeder team, only been to the playoff once in 15 years
so face it, okay? We are not in the position to make “smart gambles”. The ball is not on our court, at all. WAY~ overpay or take a huge risk is the only way to go.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 1:09 PM PST up reply actions
If you can't make a smart gamble, the smart move is NOT to gamble.
That’s my entire point. Continue making marginal upgrades, changing the culture, trying to make the team a more attractive destination, while looking for opportunities to make a smart gamble.
“We can’t take a smart risk, so let’s take a dumb one,” is a losing strategy. The team just needs to keep finding ways to improve the roster every season until the right opportunity presents itself.
Because, let’s say that the team has the opportunity to make a dumb gamble. Say we trade Monta and Curry for Howard, even though Howard is saying that he will not re-sign here.
Sure, we pick up some cap space (which is not useful for attracting a top player) and maybe a high draft pick (which usually doesn’t turn into a special player). Furthermore … now we have no assets to offer the next time a superstar comes on the market.
It’s not easy to predict who or when that will be, but it’s dumb to assume it’s not going to happen. Maybe in two years of failed title runs Miami decides that having it’s two best players have games that don’t complement each other means that one of them has to go. Maybe next year Los Angeles realizes it’s hamstrung by Kobe’s contract and has to let Bynum walk. Maybe CP3 is available again in two years, realizing that L.A. is not all it’s cracked up to be – particularly playing for Sterling – but he likes California. Maybe KD sours on OKC the way LeBron did on Cleveland after playoff loss after playoff loss.
I’m not saying any of those options are particularly likely. I am saying that an event along those lines IS likely, however … so you need to be in position to try to capitalize.
And making a big dumb gamble today takes our ability to do that away.
I love to make smart gamble
if we have the chips on our hand, which we don’t have any
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
Right.
So you try to put yourself in a position where you DO have chips.
You seem to be arguing for being the equivalent of the gambler who says, “I’m down to my last $10, but if I push it to the center of the table on this crazy longshot, maybe I’ll get it all back!”
Casinos lovet that guy.
by Ronaldinho on Jan 13, 2012 3:17 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
So what is it to keep that $10?
buying a small hammer so we can build a house in 50 years?
Yes, that works too.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 4:27 PM PST up reply actions
No.
You wait. And you push you $10 to the center of the table when it’s a good bet.
This isn’t that complicated. On the other hand, you sound like someone I’d love to play poker against.
Getting Howard is a good bet to me
Give up whatever to sign him. Team improves, attract other impact/star players (at least they now want to join Warriors!), sign Howard extension. Even if Howard decide not to sign at the end, we gain our cap space, or a good player or two that Howard attracted.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
You seem to think that cap space is more valuable than it is.
I think you need to spend some time seeing what guys actually go for when they sign with the highest bidder.
Howard would be gone at the end of this year. Who are those “good players” who he’s going to attract?
But really, stop thinking that cap space is a particularly valuable commodity. No good teams ever have it, and they never seem to be stopped from making deals because of it.
I’m not opposed to having cap space, but giving up talent for cap space is a stupid, stupid strategy.
by Ronaldinho on Jan 13, 2012 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
cap space is a backup plan
Goal is to convince Howard to sign long term once he join the team, even if it is 1% chance. Better than no chance.
I have been saying cap space is the worst case, which is not too bad neither. What to loose??
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 9:14 PM PST up reply actions
What to loose??
Players who are better than the players you can get with that cap space. Duh.
Losing those players puts you in a position of losing more games, destroys any attempts at creating a winning culture, and makes you a less attractive destination.
So yeah, a 1% chance of Dwight Howard staying is a stupid reason to give up our core for him. Instead, you build a winning culture so that players like Dwight Howard, 2 or 3 or 4 years from now, want to come play here.
I get it. You’re impatient. There are a ton of fans on GSOM who don’t understand anything other than right now. eg, Klay Thompson goes 2 for 8 in his first game after a short camp and he’s a bust, a disaster, our team is incompetent for drafting him.
here we go again
$10 hammer to build a house in 50 years, we get it.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 14, 2012 2:00 AM PST up reply actions
if I am 55, would that make the difference?
what’s your point??
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 14, 2012 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
I miss Mike Fox
Man, I don’t care nothing about no Mike Montgomery.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jan 14, 2012 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
buying a small hammer?
i’d buy big bullets
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 6:26 PM PST up reply actions
I love to make smart gamble
The smart gamble is to look for great players in the draft then go out and play bad enough to earn them. It costs nothing for the chance to grab a top rookie for years of cheap labor. Has worked well for Okla and the Clips.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, that's call looking for a value meal in Cals Jr.
Works for Okla but Warriors never has its luck, and will take another 15 years.
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
I don't disagree with your point
But management is not even willing to make marginal upgrades. Some of the Monta trades offered seem like marginal upgrades. Treading Biedrins for a couple expirings, to give yourself more flexibility in the summer is a marginal upgrade.
We passed on Gerald Wallace last year, which I thought was dumb. Especially when you consider how reasonable his contract was (years and dollars).
Basically, there is no direction.
Treading Biedrins for a couple expirings, to give yourself more flexibility in the summer is a marginal upgrade.
I disagree. Not trading Biedrins has proven to be a marginal upgrade. And already his trade value is probably higher than it was last summer.
I thought you were one of the ones arguing that Monta-for-Igoudala wasn’t a marginal upgrade. Which trades of Monta do you think would have improved us?
What would we have had to give up for Wallace?
No news here
And the trend won’t change for a while. Free agents are going to shun the Warriors until they a) draft better b) get a new arena c)prove that Mark Jackson isn’t just a mascot hire. That’s going to take some time.
The David Lee signing coupled with drafting Udoh over Monroe and Thompson over Leonard basically paved the way for 3-5 years of losing. More of the same.
Imagine if this was our starting 5:
Stephen Curry
Monta Ellis
Kawhi Leonard
Anthony Randolph
Greg Monroe
It pains me. Talent evaluation has got to change in Oakland and I have very little confidence in Mark Jackson’s ability to turn that aspect of the franchise around. Jerry West maybe, but how involved is he really? Surely he wouldn’t have supported drafting Klay if he knew we were keeping Steph and Monta.
by eastbayglory on Jan 13, 2012 11:25 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
I think signing David Lee was a good thing. The guy is averaging 18/10 and our schedule so far has been against playoff teams. Thompson to me seems like he’ll be a good player and the reason why Kawhi Leonard seems like a better pick right now is because of the system team he’s playing for. I would however agree with you on drafting Udoh. Everyone knows Udoh was a reach yet Riley drafted him.
by mrorangesoda on Jan 13, 2012 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
Eh.
I’m not totally sold on Leonard being all that and a bag of chips just yet. It’s way too early to make a final decision of him vs Klay. His rebounding is great but his offense is terrible. Anthony Randolph is still Anthony Randolph – I’m going to have to see more before I become convinced that his sudden turnaround in efficiency is more than a small sample size combined with Rubio’s creative abilities.
Monroe is a sieve on defense, stlll – (his EFG% against is .584! That makes David Lee of last year look excellent – not good, excellent!)
Monroe is a sieve on defense, stlll – (his EFG% against is .584! That makes David Lee of last year look excellent – not good, excellent!)
Stealing this for the Twitterverse.
by Doctor Kajita on Jan 13, 2012 12:02 PM PST up reply actions
Thanx for the Voice of reason
Watched Spurs othernight, I am growing on Leonard, though I’m not convinced he’s better than Klay.
He;s a definite tweener with Gerald Wallace/poor man’s Shawn MArion type upside.
That said, a lot of like Dallas and Miami are utilize multi-wing, multi-combo guard lineups and blurring positions more and more to utilize players to point where a ‘tweener’ doesn’t scare me.
Heck we did it in we-believe
Well, sure Ronald when you state every negative about each player it looks horrible.
Fact of the matter is that Kawhi and Monroe are already playing better at younger ages than the guys our idiot GM took. AR I agree with you on, I doubt if he ever gets it.
"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
Damn, Klay gets no love. I think the kid has a good all around game. He can defend, pass, rebound and shoot.
Didn't say he'd never get it, just said Kawhi is playing better right now.
"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
Who cares if he's better right now?
I mean, look, Klay is clearly still adjusting to the speed of the NBA game. Anybody who’d seen rookies before could recognize it in his first couple of games.
That’s exactly the sort of thing you don’t make big conclusions off of.
Unsurprisingly, after shooting 30% in his first five games, Klay is shooting 47% in his last five. He’s getting better, rapidly. Does that mean I think he’s a better choice than Leonard? No – I’m officially agnostic on the issue. I merely have a problem with people freaking out because Klay’s taking some time to get used to the NBA.
Monroe is god-awful at defense, which is half the game. He may end up being better than Udoh – at the time, he was the player I wanted to pick, I thought Udoh was a bizarre choice. But what’s happening here is predictable. People are looking at Monroe’s PPG and seeing a few nice offensive highlights and saying, “wow, that kid’s good.”
And maybe he will be good. But right now, as good as he is offensively, he may well be a liability.
I just really don’t get all the doom and gloom. We have new ownership. Half our key front office brain trust haven’t been in a front office before (West and Riley have. Lacob and Bob Myers haven’t) so there will probably be a few rookie mistakes. Jackson’s never been a head coach before so he’s probably going to make a few rookie mistakes.
I don’t expect them to get everything right any more than I expect Monta to make the right decision every time he finds himself just inside the three point line at the start of an offensive possession. Instead, I just want to see steady improvement.
And I’ve got to be honest: there’s plenty of stuff to like that we’ve seen so far. Biedrins is playing much better than he did last year. Monta and Lee are playing much better defensively than they did last year. Our bench is much better than it was last year. We appear to be making a proper commitment to scouting after years of not doing so. We’re spending money to take chances on players who really make a difference 2-3 years from now (Jeremy Tyler).
The only thing they haven’t figured out yet, it seems to me, is how to get a superstar. Now, it turns out that’s really important, but they’re not panicking – they’re being smart about it. They’re taking a good look at every superstar who comes available and evaluating things like “how likely is this guy to want to stick around here?” and “what will it cost to get him?”
People need to have a little patience.
by Ronaldinho on Jan 13, 2012 11:46 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
How much have you watched Monroe?
The times I’ve seen him play he hasn’t looked like a liability. He’s a decent post defender, but I’d agree with everyone that says he won’t anchor a defense. He needs a good weakside defender to help cover his mistakes. But still he’s got great size and length to bother with. He played Bogut pretty well in the post while going for career highs. While not a great defender, Monroe could be decent down the line. He’s playing center now alongside Jonas Jerebko. Of course his numbers look bad on defense. But honestly he’s a bright spot on that otherwise dreary club.
Patience is fine, so long as we stop making controversial decisions that send us all in a tizzy.
"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
He’s a decent post defender, but I’d agree with everyone that says he won’t anchor a defense.
No, he’s really not. He gives up a lot of points at a high rate. Playing Bogut pretty well? Bogut is terrible! (TS% last season .496, worse this year). He’s also primarily a jump shooter, where I suspect MOnroe’s length helps him. It’s inside where Monroe’s lack of strength is an issue that he’s just terrible.
Patience is fine, so long as we stop making controversial decisions that send us all in a tizzy.
It seems to me that any time frame that relies on more than two-games worth of foresight sends people into a tizzy.
In the post he's defending well enough for a 2nd year guy.
Last I saw his opponents FG% was sub .400. Monroe is shooting more from outside and he does face up in the post, but the guy is shooting over 55%. Don’t have a problem with that. His lack of drawing free throws is one aspect he needs to improve on though.
That last sentence you quoted I’m not referring to games. I’m referring the the front office making questionable decisions: the amnesty, lee, Jordan fiasco, drafting Not-Monroe. And you made a point about the FO being new so I should give them more time, however they failed in the offseason to come thru on any kind of big mouth promises. Why even set yourself up like that? Anyways, it’s probably just a cynical reaction to a team that has done nothing but disappoint.
"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 referring the the front office making questionable decisions: the amnesty, lee, Jordan fiasco, drafting Not-Monroe.
Lee and Monroe were before our current front office was in place. That was Riley and, to some extent, Lacob. The guys we’re counting on to be the brains (Meyers and West) weren’t involved. (Lacob wasn’t involved with the Udoh pick at all, although you can blame him some for the Lee contract, I believe).
I don’t see the amnesty problem or the “Jordan fiasco.” The team took a calculated risk with the Bell amnesty. It didn’t work out. That doesn’t mean it was a bad bet.
And I don’t see any “fiasco” at all with Jordan. We made a play. We didn’t get him. If you think we offered too much, well, somebody else is now paying that salary and dealing with it.
Meanwhile, the decision NOT to amnesty Biedrins is already paying dividends, and leaves David Lee as the only reasonable amnesty candidate … and let’s be honest, that’s not going to happen. If David Lee had been amnestied, he would have been BY FAR the best player amnestied. The team would have been worse, with no clear path to getting a clearly better player than Lee.
That probably means Monta and Curry are getting disgruntled, so now we’re looking at trading them for less than value.
That’s just a bad path.
however they failed in the offseason to come thru on any kind of big mouth promises
What big mouth promises did they make? Did they promise Chandler? Did they promise Jordan?
I only remember saying that they were going to actively go after players that they wanted, and that’s what they did.
They spouted off how they're going to get a center.
And then get goose egged and settle for Kwame. I’m not even judging them that harshly based off the result because I didn’t have high hopes that they’d succeed. ALthough I did think Tyson would sign with us at one point.
I could see the logic in going hard for Tyson in order to lure CP3 here at the time. But getting DJ just didn’t seem like a big enough move for this franchise. He’s young, and athletic but has some holes in his game. The fiasco comes from wasting everyone’s time in hoping that Sterling wouldn’t match DJ when he already said he would. And at a measly $4M extra it made me laugh when I first heard it. Then it made me really angry that we amnestied Bell. An expiring contract. It reeks of desperation coming from a franchise that has extremely little amounts of success. It just doesn’t make us look prepared, organized or show us as a first rate organization. Instead people go, “Well that’s the Warriors being the same ol’ Warriors”.
What we really need is a culture change and we’ve tried to do that in the Front office. However two things with that; we should’ve cleaned house and let the new people go do their job. Larry Riley is not the savior of anything and should’ve been shown the door with Nelson. Second we should’ve purged the roster and started over with Curry. But no, we ended all hopes of rebuilding by signing David Lee to be our Nellie ball center. And then we fired Nellie. Just a dis-organized franchise from the get go. Disappointing.
"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
FWIW I wouldn't have even used the amnesty this year unless we got Dwight or CP3.
"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
DJ is about to be a allstar in a month and leads the league in blocks. He’s better than Chandler right now.
He’s better than Chandler right now.
by what measure???
tyson chandler is scoring and rebounding at a higher rate than DJ, and has an absolutely insane TS% of 76.8% so far. other than blocks, DJ’s statistics are largely worse than last year, when he was nowhere near being an all star.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
All star by fan vote only.
Even Grant Hill was voted in when he was in Orlando, your point is??
"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
he wont be voted in
bynum is playing too well
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
I'd love to see the quote you call "spouting off."
Because I think you’re mis-characterizing their words to make a big deal out of nothing. Yeah, they said they wanted to go out and get a center. They made a pretty solid good-faith effort. What else do you want?
Process is more important than immediate results. A lousy process – like a Monta drive-into-three-people shot, can sometimes get you good short-term results, but in the long term a better process gets you better results every time.
The fiasco comes from wasting everyone’s time in hoping that Sterling wouldn’t match DJ when he already said he would.
How is that a fiasco? How did having to wait a week hurt us? What’s the big deal?
In no way is that a “fiasco.”
You’re judging this all out of proportion to the effect on the franchise.
However two things with that; we should’ve cleaned house and let the new people go do their job. Larry Riley is not the savior of anything and should’ve been shown the door with Nelson.
That’s a reasonable question. On the other hand, if you look at what happened to Cohan with Twardleman, you can see that there’s a lot of room for an owner to go wrong by “cleaning house.” Twarzick was a terrible choice, and he happened in part because Cohan felt the need to “clean house” but didn’t have the expertise to clean house well.
By making more deliberate choices, Lacob has avoided that trap. Riley is now being put in a better position to succeed and we have a solid brain trust. Larry Riley is just one voice among many, and I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that he’s unqualified to have his voice in those discussions.
Second we should’ve purged the roster and started over with Curry.
Well, as I’ve said to others, I disagree on this point. It is very hard to get better in the NBA by getting worse. You can’t land an elite player as a free agent without a solid core already. You can’t trade for one if you don’t have assets. And it’s very hard to get the first pick by tanking, and even if you do, you’re more likely to get a Kwame/Bargnani/Bogut/Oden than a Howard/Lebron (and that’s leaving aside players like Rose, who can be successful but need a very specific team around them in order to do so).
I can respect that there are differing opinions about this (although obviously I think I’m right :) ) but the notion that the decision to not go the tankapalozza route is completely justifiable on basketball grounds.
You can’t land an elite player as a free agent without a solid core already.
the problem is how do we get that core? we’re not currently a good free agent destination, so i would think the logical choice is to build through the draft. not saying you need a #1 pick, but a couple picks in the top 5 or 6 is a good start, especially if you can get lucky with one or two.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Honestly, I think we're closer than some think.
We need everybody healthy. Because of the zombie bite and Steph’s ankle, I don’t really feel like we’ve seen what this group is capable of, and I actually do think we’re getting competent (if imperfect) coaching for the first time in a while.
“Get better players, repeat as necessary.” We develop the talent that we have, while looking for opportunities to upgrade. We see what the ceiling is for a Monta-Curry backcourt while trying to raise Monta’s value for a potential trade if it doesn’t work out. We use good coaching to improve the value of players like Biedrins (already worth much more than he was a year ago at this time). We add quality bench players like Brandon Rush and Nate Robinson.
Cleveland has a new arena, new draft picks with more coming, and a cuture of winning for the last 6 years. Nobody wants to sign there. In regards to talent evaluation, was Klay a bad pick if he gets better and keep shooting like he did last night?
Klay's fine
Whether him, Burks, Morris or Leonard are better? Way too early.
Cleveland’s winning culture was linked to a man who wasn’t their so you can’t compare it.
They aren’t interesting in signing free agents. They are trying to follow OKC’s model. Stockpile talent, sign your best ones to extensions, make a move (trade) with your youth to bring in what you need.
by tafkasam on Jan 13, 2012 12:43 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Exactly. J-RIDAH is cherry picking pretty unique and exceptional situations to prove a point.
by Doctor Kajita on Jan 13, 2012 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
True
Cleveland’s winning culture took itself to South Beach. They started winning when he came and they stopped when he left. Also, comparing an arena in SF to one in Cleveland is a joke.
I never heard of a player signing anywhere because of their arena. If the Lakers still played in the forum every free agent would still wanna go there for the most part.
It won’t be the arena itself that would draw in the top free agents but it would help. You mentioned here in this thread or some other thread that if you ask any college player about the bay area they’ll immediately point out San Francisco. Do you ever watch the games in TV. Every chance they get they show the Bay Bridge or Golden Gate Bridge or a shot of the bridges from the piers at San Francisco or sometimes even downtown San Francisco. Believe me just having San Francisco attached to the Arena will make people take another look. LA is LA and NY is NY but most of your so called top cities are not free agent destinations as well. Chicago overpaid for Carlos, and NJ is only getting hyped up because of a new stadium being built in Brooklyn/New York. Dallas… Easy Mark Cuban owns the team and who wouldn’t want to play for an owner who pays the premium every year to have a team that his star player is comfortable with and don’t even mention Miami. Who wouldn’t want to play for a team that consist of 2 of the top 5 players in the NBA.
by mrorangesoda on Jan 13, 2012 4:50 PM PST up reply actions
If everybody wanna come down on how much of a dump Oakland is then have at it, if ppl wanna talk about how afraid they are to go to dubs games because of Oaklanders then do that too. But to actually believe that a young kid from the ghetto would be impressed enough by a arena in SF that it would factor into him signing here is beyond reaching.
No more of a reach than speaking in absolutes.
"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 Jan 13, 2012 7:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
But to actually believe that a young kid from the ghetto would be impressed enough by a arena in SF that it would factor into him signing here is beyond reaching
most young kids from a ghetto would sign here with or without an arena instead of working at mickey’d’s or hustlin on the streets.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 13, 2012 7:23 PM PST up reply actions
I’m not trying to dump on Oakland. I think it is an underrated city, but it is impossible to appreciate that from the area immediately around Oracle. Maybe a kid from ghetto, wouldn’t be impressed with an arena in SF, but that is impossible to know. Not all NBA players are created equally. Again, I think it has more to do with the vibe and energy surrounding the arena.
I never heard of a player signing anywhere because of their arena.
J-Ridah you seem to interpret things with exaggerations. When people are talking about a new arena in SF with places surrounding it, etc they aren’t saying that free agents will want to sign here just because we have a new and cool arena. They are simply saying it helps.
If you have the choice to play in a crappy arena or a brand new state of the art arena, which do you choose? A new one. Easy choice.
Nobody is saying free agents would want to sign here just to play in our arena. They are just saying it can’t hurt to have a brand new and spicy one. For some reason you get fixed on a single detail and exaggerate it. Don’t pick cherries.
I was referring more to cities than the actual arena.
SF and Cleveland isn’t a very fair comparison. I don’t think a FA would come or stay simply for a nicer downtown SF (or even Oakland) arena, but it is just another feather in their cap. It helps to create the first class image the Warriors new owners are working towards. When players leave the arena and they see people hanging around on the streets having a good time at restaurants and bars, there is just a more positive/fun vibe. It would also be a more attractive venue for potential investors, partners, and sponsors. It’s not everything, but if the owners are looking to maximize the value and potential of this franchise, then a new arena in a vibrant neighborhood is something they seriously need to consider.
I agree
Doesnt matter if some sports “reporter” says that some unnamed sources say that Dwight says he doesnt wan to play here. You have to take the gamble. best case we make a play for Deron, and keep DH here, If he doesnt want to stay we try to work a S&T for draft pics and young talent.
Either way we are in a better position than we are now
Of course he's not gonna want to come here looking from the outside
It doesn’t matter!! Make the trade!! Get him here, then Lacob & Co. can be in his hear for the next 2 months and show him the advantages of staying.
- More $
- Bay Area = untapped big market
- Max Adidas shoe deal
- Deron Williams & Monta Ellis
- Acting career, courtesy of Peter Guber
It’s a lot different being here and understand the big plan then looking at the Warriors from the outside with a 3-7 record, 1 playoff appearance in last 15 years, no defense in the past…
Like Lacob said, we don’t have much history so we’re selling the future
by Babyface Assassin on Jan 13, 2012 11:38 AM PST reply actions
+10
Do it! Even if he doesn’t want to resign, still do it! We got nothing to loose!
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
but Mark Jackson tries
anybody else catch this
@ around the 20 second mark
“Boy, check out these nice uniforms”
LOL
awesome, it cuts out too quick, and Dwight is facing the other way, but I love it!
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Jan 13, 2012 12:22 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
still can be a player in howard trade
I can see us positioning ourselves to be part of a three team deal.
What about:
Dwight Howard to Nets
Warriors get Marshon Brooks (6’5" SG averaging 14 a game, a rookie who is a Nick Young type) and Nets draft pick (currently they are 2-9) and we may also need to take Hedo
Magic get Monta and filler like Udoh and Wright
would make for a tough season but put us in a good potision moving forward
JR, I'm not going to question your fanhood...
I know you’re a big fan.
But I have a Q, how do you want us to win a title, if we can’t ever attract a FA (according to you) and you don’t want to tank/rebuild?
Serious Q, I want to know…
When the next big earthquake breaks SF into a floating island that makes its way to LA’s best night clubs.
by Doctor Kajita on Jan 13, 2012 9:13 PM PST up reply actions
Dallas paid top dollars to so many players to rebuild the team for the past 5~7 years
When you are not wining, players are not gonna come. Need to throw money out like crazy to attract them. Women and drugs work too but I think they are illegal…
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Jan 13, 2012 10:58 PM PST up reply actions
i think he means the team can't offer women to players
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Monta didn't get that memo
Man, I don’t care nothing about no Mike Montgomery.
by bloodsweatndonuts on Jan 14, 2012 9:13 AM PST up reply actions
Dallas did it the right way. They brung in the pieces that could matchup well with any team. So far Riley has done that. If our team was healthy for every game we’d be at least 1 game under 500 right now going into a road trip that would put us 2 games over 500. We’d be a 7th or 8th seed by the end of the year. In July we could go out and get a guy like Kaman or Mcgee. Try to buy a late 1st round pick if not go get the best sf scoring player in the D-League in case DW aint scoring at the same rate. Keep Rush if he’s willing to take a paycut aswell as Mcguire. Develop your young guys like Klay and CJ until they can net you a upgrade over Dorell. Then we’d have a core that could pull a upset. I know we would all like the simple road to the ring like trading a guy whose not even a top 3 point guard for the best big man since Shaq left L.A but thats not gonna happen. So we have to go the Dallas route. Were not very far off from the Dallas route if you think about it.
the dallas route required a superstar
we still don’t have one of those. that’s a pretty big hurdle. if we can acquire a superstar that is willing to stay for a couple years, we can absolutely follow the dallas route.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Im gonna give you some more sig material. I think David Lee could have a season like Dirk did last season.
by J-RIDAH on Jan 14, 2012 12:10 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
a season like dirk? or a postseason like dirk?
dirk wasn’t that spectacular during the regular season, just a normal superstar. during the postseason, however, he was by far the best player in all of basketball. david lee might very well have a season like dirk (though i don’t think it is very likely), but it’s pretty absurd to think he is capable of what dirk did in the postseason.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
I think Lee can dominate the 4 spot against just about any 4 in a best of 7 series. Call it what you want.
he needs to make the playoffs first
if he was that dominant, don’t you think he would have made the playoffs at least once by now?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Funny, I think the exact opposite of this sentence.
"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
lol
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Call it what you want.
naivety? wishful thinking? too much nightlife? or just rattlin their cages :>)
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 14, 2012 9:49 AM PST up reply actions
Superstars
Let’s play that “player A, player B” game again.
Player A Player B
PTS/36 20.6 19.9
TS% .601 .605
Reb/36 8.7 4.2
Ast/36 2.1 6.5
Both players are considered defensive liabilities.
Obviously, looking at the rebounding/assist numbers we see that these are different types of players. Any guesses as to who these players are?
Player A is Dirk at 22 years old. Player B is Steph at 22 years old (eg, last season).
And contrary to popular belief, big men don’t take longer to develop. Point guards do.
Look at Dallas.
Yes, they had Dirk, but for years the complaint about him was that he wasn’t good enough to win a title. He was considered too soft. Not truly elite.
Did Dallas tank? No. Did they worry about cap room? No. Rather, when they saw a chance to improve their roster, they generally took it.
And when everybody was saying, “Dirk isn’t good enough to be the best player on a champion,” they didn’t try to flip him, they kept saying, “What does Dirk need around him to win?”
And then went out and got that. And when it wasn’t good enough, they kept trying and got somebody better.
i think this works just fine when you already have a core capable of winning 50+ games every year
you’re just looking for those marginal upgrades to put you over the top. it’s hard to tank with a roster capable of winning 50+ games. if we’re convinced cuban knows what he’s doing with his team building, he’s even outright stated that when dirk retires, dallas is probably going to be really bad for a couple years (read: tank), in hopes of finding another player to build around.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Dallas didn't become a 50-win team until Dirk's third year.
How do you know when you have that core?
Remember, for years the knock on Dirk was that he wasn’t good enough in crunch time.
Dallas didn’t become a 50-win team until Dirk’s third year.
first of all, that was 11 seasons ago, so we’re talking about building a long timebuilding around a player that you hope actually lasts that long and still plays at a high level.
How do you know when you have that core?
i would argue when you win 50 games (or at least make the playoffs). i personally don’t remember dallas trading and making marginal upgrades 11 seasons ago just to get to 50 wins. i feel that had more to do with improvement out of dirk and nash than anything else. do we currently have players capable of improving us to a 50 win team without a major roster change?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
*spending a long time building
not building a long time building. i should really proofread
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
My point - as evidenced by my player A/player B comparison -
- is that the difference between Curry and Dirk-at-Curry’s-age is smaller than you might think. I’m not saying that I expect Curry to be that quality of a player, but it absolutely can’t be ruled out that Curry is the superstar we need.
it's difficult because curry has been hurt this year
if curry was healthy and our team had showed significant improvement (equivalent of a 45-50 win team), it’s likely i would share the same opinion as you.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
How different are their isolation scoring rates/percentages?
Dirk always struck me as a pretty good iso player. He could play in the post (kinda), high post and if you cleared a side for him.
Or maybe what i’m asking is, do you think Curry would ever command double teams the way Dirk does at times?
"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
As much as I like Curry:
There’s a 99% chance he never becomes as good as Dirk.
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 15, 2012 7:32 PM PST up reply actions
. Were not very far off from the Dallas route if you think about it.
If we had Dirk you mean?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jan 14, 2012 9:45 AM PST up reply actions
Dirk who..Dirk Diggler?
Hey-O!
"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
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
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
