Can we agree that the Rush for Amundson trade has been a very good trade for us?
Can you at least give the front office credit for such a great trade? Rush is about to get alot of offers from teams that slept on him this offseason.
4 months ago
J-RIDAH
377 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Great value trade.
Great trade? We’re still 7-11…
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Jan 31, 2012 9:52 PM PST reply actions
7-12*
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
It dont matter. We flipped Lou for a very good player. Why is it so hard for you to give the front office credit?
by J-RIDAH on Jan 31, 2012 9:55 PM PST reply actions 5 recs
credit for making a very good small move
is not enough credit to say they have done a good job overall.
I understand your opinion of the David Lee move is different than most people here, and you consider it a major move in the positive direction. Problem is most people don’t, and no amount of small moves to improve our bench/role players is going to placate them if we don’t see a major change in the win column.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
by Brownie13 on Jan 31, 2012 10:29 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Anybody that says the Lee deal was not a good move should name a better 4 we coulda signed for less money. That destroys their entire argument. Lee has not prevented us from signing 1 player.
Anybody that says the Lee deal was not a good move should name a better 4 we coulda signed for less money.
No one.
We were better off being bad and drafting higher. Lee hasn’t gotten us anywhere but that horrible 35 win territory
by tafkasam on Jan 31, 2012 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 8 recs
So thats your solution? Dont get better, get worse? Ok. Put your future in the hands of a guy coming straight outta college.
You walk before you run mot often
The best teams all started off horrible and drafted someone great
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
i would argue this is not true of the Lakers, Dallas, to some extent Boston… those are the last 3 championship winning teams. Kobe, Dirk and Paul Pierce were late lottery picks, just like Steph and Klay Thompson. Also think about Indiana and Philadelphia, who’ve quietly built really good teams while playing mediocre basketball for years.
by ceterisparibus on Feb 1, 2012 9:15 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I wouldn’t call Indiana and Philly really good. They’re pretty average teams in the NBA landscape. Agree about the Lakers, because, well, they’re the Lakers, but Dallas won 26, 24 then 20 games before Dirk, and 19 in Dirk’s first season, and Boston won 33 then 24 games before landing their Big 3….those weren’t good teams.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
Completey agree with Missing Barry
Even the Lakers 16 years ago were clearing salary cap room so they could land a Star in Shaq. Kobe basically said he was only going to play for LA so they traded for him for a good center in Vlade. And then after in the 2005 season they kept there payroll low until they could land another major trade.
Boston sat Pierce and tanked so they could go after Durant, when there draft pick went to number 5 they traded it for Ray Allen. They then traded all this young supposed talent that had a chance to play to get a star in Garnett.
Dallas landed Dirk when Euros weren’t looked at as franchise cornerstones and they stunk for a while even with him and Finley. They then picked up Nash and became pretty solid.
So unless the Warriors are thinking about creating fake injuries for 2 out of our top 3 players and running just young guys so they can make a big trade in the offseason then getting younger, cheaper and worse is the better option.
Basketball unlike other team sport (except maybe the QB position in football) is defined more by your top player rather than the rest of the team. The way you get top players is either drafting them, or trading young talent for them. In a rare instance you can sign one of them as a free agent, but generally you have to some other pieces they would want to come to.
by Oracle Junkie on Feb 1, 2012 11:35 AM PST up reply actions
But none of them need to tank for 17 years...
by ILoveWarriorsGirls on Feb 1, 2012 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
Ha, I don’t think any of us are advocating 17 years worth of tanking.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
We never tanked
We sucked, drafted badly and made crappy signings and trades to keep us mediocre
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
by dubzfan on Feb 1, 2012 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly!
poor choices in the draft, trades and free agency (and front office) are what have kept this team bad, and it has very little with winning too many games. you say we never tanked, but we’ve drafted high enough to take ANY of the players you just listed in your comment below, except for ray allen (Bynum instead of Diogu, Kobe instead of todd fuller, pierce or dirk instead of antawn jamison, rondo and fisher both went late first round.
by ceterisparibus on Feb 2, 2012 6:53 AM PST up reply actions
Meh, lots of teams missed out on those guys. You can say that about almost any pick – that there was a better player left on the board, but that doesn’t mean your odds of actually drafting that better player were any good. Your odds at the top are pretty good, though, and we’re never really bad enough to get those really high picks…at least not the last decade.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 8:27 AM PST up reply actions
all i mean is there are some teams that are good because they luck into a stud draft pick and some teams that are good because they consistently make smart moves. I think the argument has been made below already, but I don’t agree with people who want to “tank” so we can aspire to be like cleveland, or orlando, or the clippers… teams like that sucked before and they will suck again, soon.
by ceterisparibus on Feb 2, 2012 8:49 AM PST up reply actions
Dunno about Cleveland or the Clippers – looks like it’s gonna be a long time before they suck again. Kyrie is looking goooooood……
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 8:52 AM PST up reply actions
I think you underestimate Sterling's ability to F things up.
He’ll find a way, not matter how unlikely.
Seriously, we have history on our side ya'll....
"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
Possibly, though I think he’s generally more of a thrifty POS than anything else.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 11:13 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah, It's called smart management. Some teams have em', we obviously have chimps pushing keyboards up there.
"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
Dallas got Dirk through the draft
LAL drafted Kobe , Fisher and Bynum, Boston got Rondo and Pierce through the draft and Ray on a draft day trade for a high pick
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
Dirk, Kobe, and Rondo were all draft day trades, just to clarify.
"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
Yeah but they got young guys through on draft day through good assets
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
you know who else came straight out of college?
most of the players in the nba
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
of all the busts you could have named, you come up with joe smith?
a guy who lasted in the league for 16 seasons
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
We were better off being bad and drafting higher. Lee hasn’t gotten us anywhere but that horrible 35 win territory
Maybe.
Not only is getting-better-by-getting worse hard (and rarely successful) but in runs the risk of alienating the players want to keep because you’re a perennial loser (see New Orleans and Chris Paul) and makes it impossible to get key free agents.
So it’s not a clear path to improvement. Add in that it’s a financially losing proposition for the owners (not a consideration for us, but it is a consideration for a GM who wants to keep his job), and it’s hard to take much incentive from it.
good point on gm keeping his job
When ownership is not invested in a long term rebuild, no gm would do it.
I just think the smart move in summer of 2010 was not sign lee, parlay biedrins and/or monta into more youth or picks. Find ways to get more young assets whch appreciate in value and maintain financial flexibility.
From that point of view, we would have more assets to make the big trade when presented Or if we scout well, draft our core and then sign complimentary players.
The idea you can attain a superstar through free agency is not a feasible model for a franchise who’s been as bad as long as gsw. But if we build internally, show some consistency, then maybe…
This model was a big reason lac was able to land paul and boston kg.
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 10:25 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Find ways to get more young assets whch appreciate in value and maintain financial flexibility.
Well, the problem is that most young assets don’t appreciate in value. If they did, I think we’d see fewer perennially bad teams. A youth movement is a risk movement.
I also think financial flexibility may be overrated. Obviously being at or near the cap stops you from using the Miami/New York rebuild plan (which so far is only showing a 50% success rate – ask NY if the half-decade of suck they endured was worth it) but by and large it doesn’t seem like being at or near the cap stops team from getting in on a superstar deal when they (rarely) occur. Especially now that the amount that contracts have to match has been expanded (now you can take back 150% of what you send out) I think financial flexibility is something of a chimera.
This model was a big reason lac was able to land paul and boston kg.
I’m not sure it applies to the Celtics.
Of the ten seasons before the Celtics pulled off the KG trade, 7 of them were in the “unhappy valley” of mid-30s to mid-40s wins.
Only two seasons were under 30 wins. One had 49.
During that same stretch, we had five seasons under 30 wins.
The biggest difference is that during that stretch, Boston picked up Pierce and kept him even though, as they got close to making the KG trade, there was actually a lot of talk about trading him and going for a youth movement.
During that time, Boston also traded away young talent like Joe Johnson for more experienced guys in order to make a playoff push.
The other interesting thing is that, aside from Paul Pierce (who inexplicably dropped to them) they don’t even appear to have drafted that well. The best players they drafted were Pierce, Al Jefferson, and Joe Johnson. Yes, they moved Al Jefferson in the KG deal (and he was a key to it) but Joe Johnson they sold short of his eventual value.
Pierce, famously, was a troubled guy who never seemed to quite put it together despite flashes of brilliance. The Boston fanbase came very close to turning on him a couple of times.
So it seems quite clear that Boston actually didn’t do the “build stability stockpile young guys” thing. If they had, wouldn’t they have shipped out Pierce at some point?
The Clippers are more complicated, with 5 under-30-win seasons in the ten years leading up to the Paul trade. (The Warriors had two in that period). But I actually think the Clippers make a compelling argument against tanking.
Why? Simple. In the past 20 years, the Clippers have had 11 seasons of under 30 wins. In that time, they’e had the #1 pick twice, the #2 pick twice, the #3 pick once, and the #4 pick twice.
Nor have they done particularly poorly with those picks: Lamar Odom, Tyson Chandler, Blake Griffin, … they haven’t drafted a particularly high “bust rate” in the last 20 years although they’ve certainly had their fair share of misses (which is to be expected. Everybody misses on some draft picks – if you plan involves never missing on a draft pick it’s unrealistic).
But despite that much sucking, and reasonable drafting … it took the team 20 years to get something that looks, early in the season, like a contender.
The Wizards make a similar argument. Under 30 wins for 10 of the past 20 years. First pick twice, fourth pick once. Managed to grab some really good players (Rasheed Wallace, Rip Hamilton) and they’re still terrible, with no end in sight. 20 years of suck.
Meanwhile you look at teams like Portland (which got the first pick once, but got absolutely nothing for it) and Denver (one year under 30 wins in the last ten, no #1 picks – meanwhile don’t seem to have drafted that well) and you see a team that’s competitive, can put the scare into any of the obvious contenders in a playoff series, and have assets to be in play anytime a superstar becomes available) and you really want to tell me that the Washington-Clippers plan is a better choice?
by Ronaldinho on Feb 1, 2012 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
the Washington-Clippers plan is a better choice?
What if we call it the "Washington-Clippers-OKC plan? It actually would be an interesting topic to do an in depth study on. One thing worth keeping in mind for any such study is that perennially bad teams are more likely to have bad management and perennially good teams good management, so there’s at least some reverse causation that needs to be considered.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
What if we call it the "Washington-Clippers-OKC plan?
Is that what Seattle did, though?
In the 10 years before drafting Durant, Seattle had fewer than 30 wins once. They never tanked. 7 of those years were in the “unhappy valley” of 30-45 wins.
It doesn’t look like they went into “youth movement” mode until after they had KD. They got him, they realized what they had, and were smart about realizing he was a player who they should build around. So they moved Ray Allen for a draft pick, let someone else pay Rashard Lewis, etc.
They then hit on some draft picks (although a fair number of people think they should have taken Curry over Harden) with guys like Ibaka. And bam, they have a super solid core.
But it really doesn’t look like they went into full rebuild mode until they had already struck gold via luck (getting the #2 pick, having the team ahead of them botch the #1 pick, despite being a middle-of-the-road medicore team (31 wins)).
Your point about management quality is well taken, however.
It doesn’t look like they went into "youth movement" mode until after they had KD. They got him, they realized what they had, and were smart about realizing he was a player who they should build around. So they moved Ray Allen for a draft pick, let someone else pay Rashard Lewis, etc.
didn’t they do that at the same time they got KD, not after?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
didn’t they do that at the same time they got KD, not after?
Rashard Lewis and Ray Allen were both on the team in the season that led up to the KD draft.
i guess i just don't see how seattle could have been so sure KD was the right person to build around when they traded allen and let lewis go
seeing as they only will have seen what KD did in college and what he did in workouts.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
The hype around him was incredible.
I remember Bill Simmons talking about him as having the capability of being as good a scorer as anyone in the history of the league. Other analysis was on that level.
Of course, sometimes that analysis is wrong. But KD, like LeBron, was one of those players who everybody knew was going to be really really good before he entered the league.
It doesn’t look like they went into "youth movement" mode until after they had KD.
Well, I would say they were more simultaneous than anything. They were also the 2nd worst team in the West Ray’s last season, and 5th worst overall – so while they got lucky to move to the #2 pick, I wouldn’t say they were in your “unhappy valley” at that point – they were close to the bottom. Interestingly, the other teams below them were the Celtics, Grizzlies, Hawks and Bucks, each of which has rebounded from there (the Bucks is debatable – they had one good season). So….yeah, we need a more in depth study. ;)
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
Well, yeah.
I think they were really smart the moment they got KD.
They moved Ray and Rashard, being totally okay with that making them worse in the short run. The result was that they already had their franchise player, and they ended up with two other very good draft picks (which became Westbrook and Harden) and another first round pick (which became Ibaka.)
They realized that they had some fliexbility because they would have Durant for five years no matter what, and rather than try to push into the playoffs right away, they immediately went into full-rebuild mode.
But my point is that they only did that once they had arguably the best prospect since LeBron.
It was a really smart approach. If the Warriors somehow lucked into a top pick and grabbed a 19-year-old who was a season or two away, I would probably want to see them aggressively deal Lee and Monta to try to get a couple of more top-ten picks.
But in the absence of that player, I’m not sure that strategy makes sense.
It's a completely different situation.
Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis were shipped out because the owners wanted to move the team. They gutted the organization of anyone that was connected to the franchise’s past. Any other team in that situation keeps Allen or Lewis (or probably both) and contends almost immediately.
They didn’t want to win in Seattle because winning in Seattle meant the team would likely stay there.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 3:51 PM PST up reply actions
Any other team in that situation keeps Allen or Lewis (or probably both) and contends almost immediately.
I’m not so sure about that – you see the contract Rashard got? Allen was getting older, I don’t see those guys as good fits with each other….
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 4:19 PM PST up reply actions
I think Lewis probably walks anyway, yes.
But Allen was a complete shock. He was in his prime still, and had been the face of the franchise.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 6:44 PM PST up reply actions
Definitely the right move in hindsight. No reason to pay a going on 32 year old a bunch of money in that situation.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 6:52 PM PST up reply actions
Allen still in his prime?
He was 31-32, somewhere in there. Definitely at the point where you expect a player to start seriously tailing off.
He was not a player you wanted to build around long-term when you’re trying to focus a team on a 19-year-old.
I mean. I live in Seattle. The Sonics were the team I followed.
Ray Allen was just coming off a 23.6 PPG season. Nobody was expecting him to be traded. It was a complete shock to him and everyone else.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 8:37 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with you SJ, I remember being shocked that Ray-ray was dealt.
I assumed they’d just try and go with Ray, KD and their garbage rotation of pick-a-center, oh and Damien Wilkins. Haha.
"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
What happened in Seattle was a purge.
Shit, even Lenny Wilkins got shown the door.
It just so happened that they had KD to work around. Even without him, it would’ve gone down like that anyway.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 8:38 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, and let's remember KD didn't look like the world beater until his second season.
He showed enough flashes his rookie season, especially late like with that crazy game winner, but there were still some doubts that he’d be this good going into the offseason.
Well, doubt seems strong, but it wasn’t a 100% lock he’d become the guy he is 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
Nobody is ever a 100% lock.
KD has lived up to his potential. Not everybody does. (And some guys end up better-than-anticipated. Looks like Kyrie Irving is going to be one of those guys).
But it’s not after-the-fact reasoning to say that people knew Durant was going to be really really good.
I didn’t watch him play in college, so it’s not like I can claim to have known he was going to be that good. But he was drawing comparisons to Jordan (albiet perhaps without the killer instinct).
Any other team in that situation keeps Allen or Lewis (or probably both) and contends almost immediately.
No they don’t. Because it took KD a year or two to become KD. Is wasn’t until his third season that he legitimately deserved to be talked about as among the best players in the game. By that point, the team has to be anticipating Ray being 33-34 and probably in serious decline. (I don’t think anybody anticipated Allen being as effective at his current age as he is).
although a fair number of people think they should have taken Curry over Harden
haha, I guess they showed them?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 8:42 PM PST up reply actions
To your first point, there probably isn’t one. I’m not sure there was a better move to be made. I think about it all the time. The problem is he’s just not a big enough difference-maker to be paying that much money. And the most often-heard counter-argument is that he prevented us from being able to suck and draft higher. I also don’t know if that would have ended up helping us either. The grass is always greener. But overall, it’s pretty easy to conclude that adding him wasn’t a move that made us significantly better. We did not make the playoffs last year, and don’t look to be in position to do so this season.
To the second one, perhaps Chandler would have signed if we overpaid him the way we did Lee? I don’t know really. Again, it’s hard to tell. But he has certainly nearly capped us out, and the farther into his contract we go, the worse it will get.
Either way, bringing in Lee didn’t make us a playoff team. That’s what I’m looking for to be able to say Larry Riley was a success, in whatever way he does so. Little moves won’t accomplish that, as much as I love the move for Rush, it just isn’t enough. We need a bigger change.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
To the second one, perhaps Chandler would have signed if we overpaid him the way we did Lee? I don’t know really. Again, it’s hard to tell.
With the infinite (not really, but close enough) number of possible moves out there, who knows what may have happened. Maybe we trade for Odom, or land Cousins – those are a couple I can think of – but there’s also the very real possibility of something none of us can imagine right now happening.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 9:54 AM PST up reply actions
But his contract put the front office in a position where they felt it necessary to amnesty bell
I know the front office were talking about taking risks…but god damn!!
Amundson for Rush was brilliant though. 57 percent from 3s and went 4for5 behind the arc today.
Lee is a good player, but his contract limits the front office from signing any specialists for a reasonable amount. It wont be long before we sign Curry to an extension or trade him, or trade Ellis.
Well outwardly we're not going to pursue a trade if we know ahead of time we can't afford it
So I have no idea how many trades we haven’t tried to pursue because of Lee’s contract. I would think that without Lee’s contract we wouldn’t have to amnesty Charlie Bell to go after Chandler (and wouldn’t have to risk amnestying Biedrins just in case it didn’t work out). I think if we didn’t have Lee we could have offered a slightly more attractive contract to Chandler because instead of Lee we’d either have cap space or young players on cheap contracts, both of which are valuable in acquiring good players.
name a better 4 we coulda signed for less money.
how much would we had to pay to move up and draft cousins?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 8:37 PM PST up reply actions
If he was a very good player, I think we'd be a better team.
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Feb 1, 2012 7:06 AM PST up reply actions
exactly
Chandler was the peice that put a perrenial 50 to 60 win team to title status.
Chandler to us ould be the peice to get us to the 8 seed.
That should speak volumes in difference in level of ‘high end’ talent. Aka we don’t have a core worth building around
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 10:27 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Why is it so hard for you to give the front office credit?
cause lou for rush was not the problem they need to fix
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 8:40 PM PST up reply actions
It was an awesome trade
Next step is to trade 2 or 3 of the starters. My choices would be Curry cause of high value, Biedrins for a dump and Wright/Lee. Depending on the other two
I feel like if we just dealt Monta and Andris it’d return either as a dump or more big nasty contracts . So I think Curry’s value needs to be used
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
No shit it was a good move..
Goodness, what a pointless fanshot…
by California KID on Jan 31, 2012 10:13 PM PST reply actions
not really when considering most fans want larry riley fired.
curry & iggy TEAM USA buddies.
by bimmercirem3 on Jan 31, 2012 10:16 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
would you want a GM that can hit once in a while on small moves
but consistently swings and missed on big moves?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Why does that have to be a choice?
I would rather try for swing and see what happens but you have to at least have a plan. I don’t see a plan.
"If God made us in his image then he must be dumb too, and a little ugly on the side."
Frank Zappa
by qin on Feb 1, 2012 12:14 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It was clear from the start lol
but what we need to see is major moves. Moves that bring in difference-makers
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
lets see if he can accomplish anything come deadline. Make moves BOLD MOVES.
curry & iggy TEAM USA buddies.
by bimmercirem3 on Jan 31, 2012 10:27 PM PST up reply actions
Teams with the difference makers your referring to are not eager to get rid of them. Its not a team in the league right now thats not kicking themselves in the ass for not getting Rush when indy was basically giving him away. Just see how many of those same teams that coulda traded for him will offer him a nice contract. Same thing goes for Dorell, teams passed on him that wish they had him now. Same can be said for Reggie Williams and Tolliver, teams coulda had those dudes and passed on em. Riley and Schlenk find diamonds in the rough.
Oh, I know they aren't easy to get
It’s no easy task.
But when you’re the GM of a have-not, you really can only ultimately be judged by your ability to turn them into a have. You can’t get by with solid moves for role players. You need to make a significant change to try to get better. If you don’t, you’re out. Only good teams can afford to just tinker.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
If we would have traded Steph for CP3
Our lineup might have been Paul, Ellis, Wright, Lee, Chandler
I know it was somewhat speculation and rumor, but if it was a true rumor, then it was a deal we completely missed on.
It’s not like deals aren’t out there. Sometimes, you have to give up what you do have to get it done, and it hasn’t seemed like we’ve been willing to do that. Riley, whether directly at fault for that or not, is part of the front office, and the blame falls on all of them. Plus, the owner isn’t the one going to get fired, so Riley really needs to be encouraging moves that will bring significant change or else he’s going to be out.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
The Warriors aren't a franchise going under...
and we have an actual fan base. New Orleans is in the red, and can’t get anybody to show up to their arena. Also, our team around him would have already been at least as good if not better. At worst, we’re a playoff team. If we are capable of getting people to come, even better. Besides, aren’t you confident in Riley to make the right moves around him?
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
Im confident CP3 woulda stepped out as soon as he could which is July. Here’s the list of teams Kenyon Martin is considering playing for in march,
https://twitter.com/#!/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/164581424513552384
LAL,LAC,NYK,SA,ATLor MIA. I can guarantee you he wont go to SA, this is the shortlist for most NBA free agents that can go wherever they want if you take away SA and add Dal. CP3 is no different, he wasn’t gonna stick around when he could play for 1 of them.
Maybe not
but you can’t become one of those destinations without trying to bring in somebody worth the risk. To become a worthwhile place to play, you must either be a popular city, or worth playing for. One of the bigger free agents this off-season actually went to Portland. He could have went to probably any of the teams you listed. He was actually already playing for one of them. Instead he went to Portland for $5M. He didn’t get overpaid to go there. He went there because they already have a solid talent base. They can be a contender, so they are an attractive team to play for.
The next three best UFA’s went to Denver, Indiana and New York. Indiana and Denver are both pretty good teams to this point. New York, eh who knows, who cares at this point. Chandler definitely did go their partly for the limelight, but he’s one of 4. I’m not arguing that those places aren’t more attractive, but you can still be a good place for a player to sign without that extra reason. You just need to have the talent that other players want to play alongside. They want to go to a team they think actually has a commitment to winning. Trading for CP3, regardless of if he would have stayed, would have showed that.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
You fail to mention that said free agent is from Seattle which is basically the same as Portland. You also fail to mention that it was 3 teams really pursuing him and they were Portland,Sac, and Indy. All non-desirable locations.
J-RIDAH...
You’re doing it again. The same thing you say you “don’t do anymore.”
Stop trolling.
You're actually missing the largest reason he went there.
LaMarcus Aldridge essentially recruited him to play for Portland. He kept at fans on Twitter all summer trying to get them to encourage Jamal to play for the Trailblazers. Maybe part of it is being back in the Northwest, maybe part of it is the larger makets were offering less money (though, I do know for a fact that there were legitimate rumors he had interest from Miami and New York, and that the Lakers were mentioned as well), but he went to play there because LaMarcus gave him a reason to want to play there. They’re a good team, they have a good fan base, they’re crowd is always real loud. And he was able to show him the fan side, as Jamal got a TON of love from Blazer fans on Twitter before the lockout even ended.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
I repeat, in 2 years Kyrie will be a top 3 pg and nobody is gonna sign to Cle to play with him. Same would happen with CP3 here.
yeah yeah you repeat you repeat
and we get tired of hearing you repeat it… baseless claims on the future can’t be argued for or against because we just don’t know.
The Bay Area isn’t Cleveland, and CP3 isn’t just a top 3 PG.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
j thinks that every market outside of LA, NY, CHI, MIA, and BOS is equally bad
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Do you know anything about Cleveland, or Ohio in general? Small market, city sucks…it has nothing going for it at all. There’s a reason the Warriors sold for as much as they did. We aren’t Cleveland.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:29 PM PST up reply actions
The fanbase is why it sold for so much. Crazy fans that attend every game no matter the record or roster. It has nada to do with location being that the dubs only own their practice facility. And if a fanbase meant anything to free agents of significance Lebron and Bosh would not be playing for the Heat right now. And to answer your question, I know plenty about Cleveland, my ex Girlfriend is from there and I went a few times to her fam house. Its not a fun place to live. Judging by how many former dubs still live here, neither is the Bay.
And if a fanbase meant anything to free agents of significance Lebron and Bosh would not be playing for the Heat right now.
This is one reason why you take so much flak. You’re asserting cause and effect on a single variable, when we all know it’s much more complicated than that, including you (I’ve seen you acknowledge that). Regardless of where, exactly, we’d all put the Bay as a destination for free agents, I think we should all be able to agree that Cleveland is about as close to us as we are to LA in attracting talent. That place has nothing going for it…
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 2:56 PM PST up reply actions
Im saying in the eyes of a free agent were no different than Cleveland. We both gotta overpay to get a guy to come here and dont stand a chance if a desirable location wants him for equal money.
I’m saying we are. Cleveland is Cleveland. It’s close to the very bottom of the barrel, maybe even THE bottom.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 4:20 PM PST up reply actions
The fanbase is why it sold for so much. Crazy fans that attend every game no matter the record or roster. It has nada to do with location being that the dubs only own their practice facility.
Are you an expert on everything or do you just make things up and pass them off as a fact? Did you read the financial books and see where the value of this franchise came from?
So you’re saying the value comes from the fans and not because we are one of the biggest media markets in the United States. Yes, one of the biggest.
Remember our owners competed with Ellison
So they had to overpay to beat him out
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
That assumes Ellison was overpaying. Not sure that’s a good assumption.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 5:44 PM PST up reply actions
Well to beat out a guy like him you'd need to offer something foolsih
And Cohan was so stubborn that it probably drove up the price
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
Depends on how much Ellison is going to bid – just because he’s worth a lot of money doesn’t necessarily mean he’s going to spend a lot on the Warriors. Furthermore, if I remember right, rumor was our current ownership group was worth more than Ellison’s, too.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 6:53 PM PST up reply actions
And name those teams
We are a top 5 market money wise, keep that in mind
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
There are bigger media markets whose teams are worth less than the dubs. Kills that theory.
Oh really? Name them.
And that is besides the point. The point is that our market has a heck of a lot to do with it. Of course there are other factors as well, but anybody with a brain knows that.
From what you are saying, if we give our fans to Milwaukee then that is going to make them sell for $450 million like we did? That is nonsense.
There are bigger media markets whose teams are worth less than the dubs. Kills that theory.
NO. WITH LOTS OF CAPS BECAUSE I’M SHOUTING BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS DO THIS AND NEED TO STOP. Simplifying things down to one variable again. The price could be mostly because of our huge media market, AND there could be larger market teams worth less. Both these things are possible. I don’t know that’s even true, but even if it is, value is a complicated thing based on LOTS of variables.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 5:44 PM PST up reply actions 7 recs
See I told you, Diss a J-Ridah post and it goes green despite the fact that MB’s post aint really proving me wrong at all. So lets bring some facts into the discussion and for the sake of a demonstrative response ill go caps aswell. MISSING BARRY, MEDIA MARKETS DONT MEAN ANYTHING IN TERMS OF THE VALUE OF AN NBA TEAM. CONSUMER INTEREST IS WHAT MATTERS. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE PHILADELPHIA 76ERS ARE IN A LARGER MARKET THAN THE GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS AND THEY JUST SOLD FOR ALMOST 200 MILLION LESS THAN WHAT LACOB’S GROUP PAID FOR THE DUBS? THE ONLY REASON THE WARRIORS SOLD FOR SO MUCH IS BECAUSE THEY ARE GUARANTEED PROFIT DUE TO THEIR FANS SUPPORTING THEM YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT AND ALMOST SELLING OUT EVERY GAME. I UNDERSTAND ECONOMICS VERY WELL AND YOU WONT FIND 1 FACTOR BESIDES FAN SUPPORT THAT WILL EXPLAIN HOW THE WARRIORS ARE WORTH MORE THAN 150 MILLION THAN THE 6ERS ARE WHEN THEY ARE IN A BIGGER MARKET THAN US. Now I dont expect this to go green but hey im not in a clique either.
so...miami is more valuable than us because of their fans?
and not just because they’re better than us? after all, fan support is all that matters when valuing a team?
see i can play the exception game too.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
by bigkino217 on Feb 1, 2012 8:29 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Whichever team spends the most money on it continually will be worth the most. Its pretty simple. GS has shown a history of high ticket and merchandise sales along with good tv ratings. Media market has nothing to do with that. The Utah Jazz are worth more than the 6ers. Media market means nothing. Fan support/interest means everything.
do you really think new jersey fans spend a lot of money?
why are they the 14th most valuable team? how about the pistons at 17? do atlanta and memphis really have less fan support than new orleans?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2012/01/25/the-nbas-most-valuable-teams/
read the article. there’s an awful lot of mention of TV deals in there, so it’s difficults to say the market means nothing. seems to me like the team values correlate pretty well to the TV deal that they have. Philly may be a bigger market than the bay, but their TV deal is probably much worse.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
TV deals are based on ratings which is a indication of fan interest. It dont matter where you are, if the general public is not interested in the team it decreases the value or never establishes a high value. The fact that Cohan had books that showed fan support for a team that has underplayed for the last 2 decades is what allowed him to get 450 for this team. If he was in Alaska bringing in the same amount of money from ticket sales/merch/TV ratings deal he could still get 450 for the team. Its the fanbase. Lacob just restructured the deal with comcast for 50 mill upfront because the team exceeded ratings expectations.
so now you're counting tv in your "fan support"
that doesn’t sound like what you said before.
The fanbase is why it sold for so much. Crazy fans that attend every game no matter the record or roster.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
TV deals are based on ratings which is a indication of fan interest.
believe it or not, ratings are affected by market size also. O_O i know stunning right?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
who would've ever guessed that media included TV???
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
you just admitted that TV ratings play a big part in team value
how does that support your “media market means nothing” argument?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
It’s not a given that’s Philly is a bigger market than the Bay. For instance, if you use combined statistical areas (a better measure of MSA’s in our case because they split the Bay Area into two MSA’s, which is absurd), the Bay has almost a million more people than the greater Philly area. And of course, average income here is greater than there.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 12:02 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
(Takeaway from this – sometimes statistics are hard, sometimes there are no clear answers and you make arbitrary decisions that aren’t necessarily any more correct than a different decision)
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 12:06 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
THIS ONE NEEDS TO BE GREEN TOO!!
your using the wrong numbers J-Ridah
you say:
…YOU WONT FIND 1 FACTOR BESIDES FAN SUPPORT THAT WILL EXPLAIN HOW THE WARRIORS ARE WORTH MORE THAN …THE 6ERS ARE WHEN THEY ARE IN A BIGGER MARKET … Now I dont expect this to go green but hey im not in a clique either.
you’re right, he finds two…
and here’s exactly why people rec the hell out of MB’s response, it is a factual rebuttal to your exact point.
Rather than just re-stating the assertion, he actually makes a case based on facts.
the Bay has almost a million more people than the greater Philly area. And of course, average income here is greater than there.
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 2, 2012 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
It does not matter what the average income is compared to there. Sure its a sign of people with more disposable income. In regards to Philly having less ppl than the Bay, I dont know how media markets are ranked. I know were 6th and Philly is 4th. Maybe they are only counting the big 3 cities of the Bay. Im saying it dont matter. It dont matter if you have a team in Beijing if the general public isn’t interest in the product.
it's just too painful to try and hold any sort of logical discussion with you
I give up…
you admit the points he makes, which totally address your initial points, and then somehow, illogically proceed to to re-state that you think you are correct because….
I’m done dude
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 2, 2012 11:00 AM PST up reply actions
It does not matter what the average income is compared to there. Sure its a sign of people with more disposable income
Yes, it does matter. Income affects how much money people spend not only on the NBA team, but also on the products advertised during games. A higher income area is going to spend more on tickets, more on merchandise, and more on other goods in general, on average, than a lower income area. Income matters. If you tried to do a regression on a topic like this without using an income variable…well, it’d be the first thing everyone demand you do to get better results. If you really need me to go find you research to support this, I will. I don’t know what to tell you though – income matters. Why would you believe it doesn’t?
dont know how media markets are ranked. I know were 6th and Philly is 4th.
I don’t know exactly how they define it, either. What I do know is definitions are arbitrary. In this case, different definitions give us different results. That doesn’t mean MY way of looking at it is right, and yours is wrong, or vice versa. It just means it’s clearly debatable which market is bigger.
It dont matter if you have a team in Beijing if the general public isn’t interest in the product.
Yes, how interested the fans are matter. We acknowledge that. How many people there are also matters. Number of people * proportion interested = number of fans. It all matters.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 11:21 AM PST up reply actions
Ok so you found the ONE example of a market bigger than us (Philly) that is worth less than us, now where are all of the others?
lol, did you really just say “TV ratings have a big thing to do with our value” and “media markets mean nothing” in the same sentence? WTF? Do you know what the fundamentals of a media market consist of?
I know exactly what I said and what a media market is. If the Clippers are in the second largest media market in the nation yet fans dont watch their games and dont come to see them that media market dont mean a damn. If Utah has a smaller media market yet everybody in the state watches the games and try to attend as many games as they can the media market does not dictate the value in the Jazz franchise. Fan support via purchasing and viewership does. What part of that is so hard to comprehend? Green Bay is a smaller media market than L.A yet they never lost their team due to lack of interest.
Green Bay is a smaller media market than L.A yet they never lost their team due to lack of interest.
I’ll use your own argument, since you seem to think it is a convincing one.
Totally different interest. Totally different sport. No comparison.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
by bigkino217 on Feb 1, 2012 10:05 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
i’ll pose the question again.
so new orleans has more fan support than atlanta and memphis?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Media market and consumer interest are two factors that work together. The number of potential audience members you have times the proportion that follow your team = the number of eyeballs you’re selling the local sports cable channel.
As for talking about the price of franchises, do we even know the details of these deals? Do we know how many assets each team owns, how much debt the owners are assuming? The Knicks could be sold for $100M next year if the new owners were assuming enough franchise debt. Valuations are not based on just a couple of variables – there are lots of variables, and the franchises tend to keep their financial info private….soooooo…..yeah.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 11:59 PM PST up reply actions
We know what the 76ers sold for and we know what the dubs sold for. In terms of media value, Philly is a bigger media market than the Bay is. Thats not up for debate. The dubs sold for almost 200 million more than Philly did. Media market dont mean nothing if those millions of ppl arent interested in the product.
Philly is a bigger media market than the Bay is. Thats not up for debate.
Actually, that is a debatable point.
Media market dont mean nothing if those millions of ppl arent interested in the product.
Obviously. You’re not even disagreeing with what I said! Nobody has said fan interest doesn’t matter. It does. Everyone agrees. It’s just not the only variable.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 9:33 AM PST up reply actions
Cleveland's awful.
I been there enough times to know.
Guys would MUCH rather be here than there, in terms of living conditions.
It’s not even close.
http://nbawarriors.wordpress.com/
+1
Our area is nicer and Ohio isn’t anything to show off and the Cavs owner is awful
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
Ohio isn’t anything to show off
It’s worse than that. Ohio and Cleveland are dying. Their industries are dying, their people are leaving…there’s nothing attractive there.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 5:46 PM PST up reply actions
nobody is gonna sign to Cle to play with him. Same would happen with CP3 here.
Is that why lincecum took off to where ever he went as soon as he got a chance?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 9:00 PM PST up reply actions
be prepared for the moving of the goalposts to "lincecum isn't a young black athlete from the ghetto"
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
be prepared for the moving of the goalposts to "lincecum isn't a young black athlete from the ghetto
haha, you nailed that one :>)
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 9:31 PM PST up reply actions
Is that why lincecum took off to where ever he went as soon as he got a chance?
Lincecum is gone in 2 years unless the giants pay yankee dollar. You really expect a ‘hometown discount’?
People who think he’s a ‘low key west coast guy’ really have another thing coming. He’ll stay if he’s paid, he probably likeS SF. He’d jump an opportunity to go to NY if they offered a penny more
I’m thinking hoping the long hair and pot-smoking will play a lot better at Fenway… :-)
There will be no extra point!
ha
I wouldn’t rule it out. I just happen to know, the guy won’t take a hometown discount. If Giants match an offer, I think he stays.
If NY, Boston or somewhere desirable goes beyond, he’ll go.
Let’s not forget, when all-star game was in NYC, he got ‘sick’ and didn’t play? cause you know… he flew to nyc to get a ‘cold’, not a hangover ;)
Other than that park, Tim's the only thing worth seeing on that team.
Says the bitter A’s fan…
"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
Michael Urban on 95.7 had an interesting not about home town discounts.
He said that the MLBPA discourages home town discounts and encourages the player to get their full worth. He also said one of the last guys he knew who took a home town discount (Tim Hudson, ATL 3/$9M 4th year option) he was heavily scrutinized by the PA saying how getting your full worth is not just in his best interest, but the best interest of all the other guys in the Show looking to get paid their worth.
With that said, in 2 year Timmy’s getting $25M+ if he stays healthy.
"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
Exactly.
I give them a lot of credit but this is a small move.
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Feb 1, 2012 7:07 AM PST up reply actions
You are right J
They deserve credit for a good move. Now lets see a good move for a starter.
i credit them for getting lucky
All the crap moves easily outweighs this ONE good move which they probably got lucky on anyway. Our front office deserves nothing but criticisms for what they have done to our team.
I rekn even if we keep our pick this year, the FO will somehow manage to mess it up and draft the wrong player AGAIN
Somewhat. Rush is shooting 60% from three. That won't continue.
When/if his three point percentage comes back to earth, he’ll be the exact same player he’s always been.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 9:08 AM PST up reply actions
Just a little perspective
the FO will somehow manage to mess it up and draft the wrong player AGAIN
it’s not like we have been drafting total scrubs, it’s not fair to cherry pick some random better player that was taken after the guy we picked. These guys found Steph, Udoh, and just maaaaybe Klay works out as a long-term bench player (I remember being pissed in all of these cases)
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
Udoh and Klay
Will at BEST be benchwarmers on a playoff team. Klay is too one dimensional and can’t create his own shot and Udoh can’t rebound to save his life.
Curry, well he’s half decent and would start on a playoff bound team…. But he really needs to cut down his silly errors.
meh
benchwarmers on a playoff team
you can say that about the vast majority of players in the NBA, it’s meaningless
The last full-on washout we drafted was POB
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 4:36 PM PST up reply actions
no. it was a horrible trade.
of course it was a good trade. Credit to the front office. Call me when they make another good trade in 2-3 seasons
Yes, it was a good move.
However, I don’t give Riley all the credit for it. It seems fairly obvious that all personnel decisions are a group effort these days. They’ve made some good moves, but they’ve also made their fair share of questionable ones.
Why do Riley get all the blame tho? When it comes to good decisions its hard to give him credit yet when a bad move is made he gets all the blame. Cold game.
He was responsible for the Lee trade. Obviously there is some debate about whether that was a good or bad trade for the Warriors. I’m part of the contingent that didn’t like the move and felt Riley should have just left the roster alone until the new owners took over. He also drafted Udoh instead of following the conventional wisdom and taking Monroe. Myers and West weren’t on board for that draft so that falls directly on Riley. The rest of the bad decisions you can spread the blame among the entire front office. I’m just not a Riley fan. I don’t like how he got his job and some of the things he says in the media are off putting to me.
I judge GM’s by their finds. He finds players other teams passed on and make those same teams offer those players nice contracts. Reggie was nobody before Riley found him. Same goes for Tolliver and even Dorell. Rush is about to get a very nice payday from a team that coulda had him for basically nothing. I say that to say he’s damn good at finding talent. Udoh may not be Monroe in terms of scoring but Monroe will never ever be the defender Udoh is. That defense alone will keep him in the league for at least 10 more years. In regards to Myers and West, your mistaking if you think they scout anybody. West got Klay because he worked out in his backyard and Lacob wanted to make him happy.
Then make him a scout, not the GM. Tolliver was good in the Warriors fast paced, no defense system, but it’s not like he is a great NBA player. He was an OK player on a bad team last year and a bad player on a pretty good team this season. They were calling up D-leaguers left and right so it’s not too surprising that a couple of them turned out to be decent players. Riley has done some good things, so I’m not gonna rip on him too hard, but it’s not like he is RC Buford.
Its only 1 RC Buford, even the championship contending teams dont have 1. Presti and Buford are the best right now but Riley aint far off. He’s in the top 5 of GM’s easily.
If he is such a great GM then why are the Warriors trying to phase him out? They hired Myers to be his replacement. I don’t know what Riley has done for you to consider him a top 5 GM. The Rush trade was great, but it’s not like he was a complete diamond in the rough. Everyone already knew he could shoot, rebound, and play defense. That is exactly what he is doing for the Warriors this season along with a ridiculously high shooting percentage from 3. I don’t know how long he is going to shoot 60%, that is bound to sink eventually. The rest of his numbers are near his career averages. He just seems like a guy that is benefiting from a change of scenery.
Rush is a diamond in the rough because every team in the league is kicking themselves for not taking him 2 months ago. Last year Riley signed the NBA leader in 3pts made. This year he finds the best 3pt shooter. In regards to Myers being hired to be his replacement, GM is a young man’s game. He wont be around forever, he’s grooming Myers to replace him. Myers was also signed because of his connections to teams and agents. His strength is negotiating right now, Riley’s is talent eval. Put them together and its the perfect combo.
Like I said, he has done some good things, I just don’t think he is anywhere near a top 5 GM. There are GM’s all over the league making good moves and finding nice players late in the draft. I’m more impressed by the Nuggets GM that was able to steal away all of the Knicks talent for a guy they could have signed as a FA.
I’m just not a fan of Riley in general. Maybe it is because he is remnant of the Cohan regime and its dysfunction. I don’t like how Nellie installed him to be his puppet. I don’t like how he made the Lee trade to impress the new owners so he could keep his job. I just find him irritating and not very believable at times. Like when he drafted Udoh and was trying to convince everyone he was a well rounded player with a very nice offensive game. Or how he was trying to downplay the importance of the amnesty, like it was virtually worthless. Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
by Pippen on Feb 1, 2012 12:19 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Are we really arguing if Riley is a top 5 GM?
I don’t think he’s a top 15 GM.
He has no real vision, no creativity, and his eye is mediocre. He cannot spot raw potential
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 7:05 AM PST up reply actions 5 recs
Riley as a top 5 GM is a non-sequitur.
"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
All these teams arguably have/had a better bench then us since Riley has been GM and have been better at finding bench players
Philly
Indy
Chicago
Dallas
Memphis
Spurs
Portland
Utah
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
Last year Riley signed the NBA leader in 3pts made. This year he finds the best 3pt shooter.
maybe he’s found the secret to a losing season? It wasn’t lack of dope tats all along.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 9:04 PM PST up reply actions
I’d take Kevin Pritchard, who is close with Lacob over Riley.
Built Portland. Probably best draft day moves with acquiring Roy and LMA without drafting EITHER behind Nellie2.0 grabbing Dirk and Nash with tractor Traylor (lol, one of the all-time fleeceS).
Other great GMs- Donnie Nelson, MAsai Ujiri in Denver, Gar Forman in Chicago (he found Noah, Gibson, Asek, and they have another eurokid who everyone thinks highly of, Mirotic who he drafted and is coming next year
I judge GM’s by their finds.
That’s where you’re judgements are wrong.
I judge a GM by their ability to build a winning roster.
Saint Jean found a bit of talent. Mullin did too (well Mullin had most success of any GM in GSW). Twardzik found some talent.
Riley is on year 3, and I haven’t seen a real tangible step forward with this team. What’s worse, I’ve seen NO vision.
Guy is impatient but at the same time, he’s toop conservative. He doesn’t have balls to completely overhaul the team. He doesn’t have patience to develop a player. And I question his eye.
Everything you need to know about why Riley is a poor GM is in his drafting philosophy, drafting proven college players. He doesn’t rate international players or younger players. That may be ‘safe’ but you’re basically killing your chance to ever get a difference maker and cutting off so many avenues. Lets look at OKC. They drafted 3 core guys who were 2 years or less of college. They drafted Ibaka when few people knew of him. San Antonio Portland? Go without saying.
I don’t CARE about the bays ability to attract free agents. I know we probably can’t. I care about our ability to build internally. If you win, you’re city becomes more beautiful, your team more desireable.
Minny has been the motto of what you seem to want, tank for picks. Yet their future dont look any brighter than our regardless of their starters all being young top 5 draft picks.
this must be a joke
i’d take minny’s core over ours any day
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
I’d say the same about OKC. It’s easy to pick the example that supports the case you’re trying to make. Anecdotes aren’t evidence, though.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 9:57 AM PST up reply actions
id trade our whole 5 for rubio and love
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 10:29 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Top 3 PF
Future top 5 PG
Trade assets
Proven coach
Young guys with great potential…
Against a team overpaying mediocre players with no elite talent
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
Because his failures are massive and doom the franchise, and his successes are minor and barely register.
Maybe that has something to do with it.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 9:09 AM PST up reply actions 7 recs
Larry Riley stay making good moves. He stay finding talent. Only bad talent evaluation you can name is Monroe over Udoh but Udoh is 1 of the best post defenders in the league so its not like he took Cole Aldrich or Xavier Henry like alot of ppl here wanted.
Larry Riley stay making good moves. He stay finding talent.</blockquote
What does that mean? I honestly don’t understand that grammar, can you rephrase it?
can you rephrase it?
“What is, Larry Riley stay making good moves.”
J-Ridah for $1000, Alex…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
NO it was NOT a good move! Because Larry Riley made it!!!#!!!!
by Slightly Hyphy on Jan 31, 2012 11:01 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Of course this was a good trade. Remember when Riley said he was trying like the "dickens?"
This is what he had in mind, Amundson for Rush. He could have traded Ellis for Iguodala but he was spending the better part of the last year trying to figure out how to get rid of Amundson for Brandon Rush. Riley knew that if we got Brandon Rush we would immediately become a top tier team, even while losing the incredible Amundson. As I remember the fans themselves wanted Amundson to be signed, simply so he could be used as a trade chip for Rush.
With that being said I do actually think the team would be better with Rush starting in place of Monta and Monta coming off the bench for 28, or 30 minutes a night. I think Monta would be effective in that role to say the least.
Lacob would never allow Iggy for Monta. Nor should he.
Iggy is arguably the best player on a 15-6 team. monta is not even the best player on a 7-12 team. are we really arguing this?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
you don't think iggy is the reason why they're winning?
who is then?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Doug Collins. If you wanna give a player the most credit then id say Holiday. Id say Thad Young helped as much as Iggy if not more. They are a deep team thats why they win. Stats dont suggest Iggy is the reason they win.
Every stat. How can you not lead your team in anything yet get credit as being the primary reason their winning?
Why do you have to lead your team in anything? A guy like Iguodala legitimately contributes to every single phase of the game. You don’t think that can total up to a pretty large contribution, even if it’s not the team leader in any given category? If you want an example of another guy like that – think Manu Ginobili. Legitimate superstar, one of the very best players in the league at his position, and he usually doesn’t lead his team in any given category, either.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
Which is good, because he isn’t the sole reason. However, he is one of the big reasons. The others being Duncan and Pop, and I’d say Tony Parker to a slightly lesser extent than those 3.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:16 AM PST up reply actions
My point is to say Iggy is the reason Philly is winning is misleading. Look at what his teamates are doing compared to what he’s doing.
iggy could do more for us though
Curry and lee can pick up the differential in scoring wed lose from monta to steph.
But with iggy we get an elite defender, much better rebounder, bette passer who is less turnover prone
I think curry, rush, iguodala, lee, :headache: is a better starting 5
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 10:31 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Iggy isn't a great offensive option and he isn't on the Philly team.
But he is their best perimeter defender and good passer. I think their bigs are playing great defense and their team is benefiting, but Iggy is a main contributor to why they’re really good.
"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
Every stat. How can you not lead your team in anything yet get credit as being the primary reason their winning?
pretty sure iggy is the best defender on that team. do those defensive “stats” not count as leading the team in a “stat”?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Every stat
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
by dubzfan on Feb 1, 2012 5:29 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
jrue isnt even as good as steph
thad isn’t even as good as you think lee is. the way you talk about our bench, it’s like you think that our bench is just as good as philly’s. so that would make monta and iggy the only real difference.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
that's according to your logic
now if you were willing to accept that david lee isn’t good, and our bench isn’t as good as you think they are, then you might have a closer comparison between monta and iggy.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
(per 36 mins.) 13.4 pts (on .540 ts) / 6.6 reb / 5.2 ast / 2.0 stl / 2.0 tov / 1.3 fouls.
And then there’s the defensive half of the game: Teams are scoring 90.5 points per 100 possessions when he’s on the floor, compared to 100.8 points when he isn’t.
Of course he’s not “the” reason they’re playing well. He is a big reason.
There will be no extra point!
Philly is stacked. They got Lou Will who been killing, Thad been killing, Holiday been killing, Elton has woke up sorta, Turner is on point. To say Iggy is the reason they balling is hella misleading.
They are one of teams that is mildly successful without a clear “core” of players – they get contributions for a number of players. Iguodala is probably still their best player, but yes, many other guys contribute quite a bit (relatively speaking), as well.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:07 AM PST up reply actions
Thats up for debate. I say Thad is better than Iggy. Havent checked the stats but im sure he’s more efficient aswell.
Eh, I wouldn’t say so, I think Thad is a better scorer than Iguodala, but Iguodala is literally better at every other aspect of basketball. Better defender by a bunch. Better rebounder. Better passer. Plays smarter/better team basketball.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
I think here you’re overrating their offensive production and underrating how good Iggy is as a defender and how much that aspect of his game translates to actual wins.
"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 and Allen are among the very best in the game. Arguing who’s better misses the point in my opinion.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:30 PM PST up reply actions
Iguodala has a better overall game than Monta
Igguodala is great at defense, Ellis is not. Iguodala rebounds very well for his position. Ellis scores less efficiently but more often than Iguodala. I would say that Iguodala’s defense would improve the team significantly and whatever we lose on offense that makes up for in spades.
Also Iguodala leads Philly in assists I think. I would say that Lee, Curry and Iguodala would be a better core to build around than Ellis, Curry and Monta. You could even take Lee out of that equation and just build around Curry and Iguodala it doesn’t really matter, Iguodala is just a better overall player than Ellis.
I think Ellis could actually fit in with another team better than he does with the Warriors. Defensively the Warriors back court is just too terrible to compete with other teams. We of course also need a better center(as always) but still how could you not pull the trigger on an Iguodala/Ellis trade?
It would’ve been nice to get some capable defensive players since we’re so quick to holler to anyone that’d listen that we’re playing “defense” now.
Ellis needs to go to a team that has better defenders than he is. I also think he would do better just by a change of scenery and a scaled down role. He needs it be beaten into his brain that he’s not a number 1. And on another team he’d have to accept that or get left behind cause no other team will have the amount of patience the Warriors have shown him.
To me it feels like he’s just going through the motions, and I don’t necessarily blame him. It’s our toxic culture of accepting mediocrity that I think has jaded our holdovers. Another reason why I think tearing it down to be the best path to moving forward. Trading Monta is step one.
"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
To say Iggy is the reason they balling is hella misleading.
Agreed. Fortunately, no one said that.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 10:20 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Lacob would never allow Iggy for Monta. Nor should he.
cause he’s too busy fixating on Dre’s latest free throw attempt? You ever hear about the forest and the trees?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 9:12 PM PST up reply actions
Was anyone ever arguing it was a bad trade?
I mean… like… ever?
Haha, yeah.
J-Ridah’s the expert at building giant straw men out of a few scattered posts, but in this case I think you’d be hard to find even a few scattered posts that didn’t love the Amundson/Rush deal. I mean, doesn’t a straw man require at least a blade or two of straw?
@J-R: what I don’t get is why you think everyone who criticizes Riley on this board is incapable of giving him credit where credit is due. As far as I can tell, the vast majority of posters on this board call things as they see them. When Riley does something good, they give him props; when he does bad, they give him crap. That’s sort of how it’s supposed to work.
Indeed, I suspect there may be only one regular poster on this board who seems to have the same line of propaganda regarding every move Larry Riley makes, regardless of the real-world ramifications of the move. Any ideas who that might be? ;-P
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 8:44 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Riley never gets credit on this board. He just gets blame. You know it as I do. If this was a Riley thrashing post nobody would find fault in it. Yet when I simply ask does the man deserve credit for such a find, you see the response it garners.
Riley never gets credit on this board. He just gets blame.
Nah — he gets plenty of credit (and not only from you). Of course he also gets plenty of blame, but then that’s because (a) second-guessing GMs is a big part what fans on boards like this do; and (b) the Warriors kind of suck. Obviously you’re never going to change the first part of that, but it’s pretty clear to me that if the Warriors didn’t kind of suck, you’d see a lot more credit for Riley’s moves and a lot less blame. For most fans, W-L are the bottom line.
Yet when I simply ask does the man deserve credit for such a find, you see the response it garners.
What — you mean near-total agreement with your basic premise, mixed with the usual annoyance at the pointlessly combative and self-satisfied way in which you state the premise?
For me the ironic thing is the way you so consistently toe the Warriors’ party line, no matter what evidence there might be to the contrary, while at the same time talking to other posters here like you’re Mr. Keeping-It-Real and they’re a bunch of naive fools.
Unless and until you figure out how to resolve that irony, you’re likely to keep getting the same tone of annoyance in many of the responses to your posts, even when your basic points are totally valid.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 9:43 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I dont mind the annoyance because it comes from the same ppl. New ppl on the board or those that dont frequent the fanshot section seem to agree with me. Some ppl are gonna disagree with anything that says by J-Ridah. Im okay with that.
Cool. So long as you realize that what you call “disagreement” frequently has very little to do with substance of your posts and a whole lot to do with style. Specifically:
1. Tiresome repetition of the same points.
2. Building giant straw men.
3. Refusing to stay on topic / moving goalposts in order to “win” arguments.
4. Self-satisfied tone that says, “I’m wise and y’all are foolish.”
I mean, yeah: I don’t think you’re going to change anytime soon, mostly because I think you kind of enjoy antagonizing people and making yourself the center of attention. But if you grow up a bit and get tired of all the disagreement, you’ll find that working on those four stylistic issues will win you a lot more support here — even among the posters who you seem to think give you a hard time simply because of your user name.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks for your opinion but you can put it in your back pocket and sit on it. Im grown dude. Im not Bigkino, I dont enter threads looking to disagree with certain posters. I agree often with just about everybody on this board yet the same handfull of dudes seem to disagree with anything I say even if it was that Mark Jackson is African American, somebody will find a way to disagree with me saying that. If I was to make a post under a different name it would be agreed with. If I dissed J-Ridah’s post under a different name it would turn green. Its the same handfull of guys tho. Those new to the board or rarely visit this section tend often to agree with me and can observe the hate I get.
If I was to make a post under a different name it would be agreed with.
I guarantee you that if you wrote it in the same manner, and it wasn’t something i agreed with you on, i most certainly would not agree with it just because it’s not J-ridah.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
in fact, quite often i see people post stuff that i disagree with, and plenty of them are new (or at least i dont know who they are)
that doesn’t stop me from disagreeing with them.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
mm and now on top of your pretentious "Im always right you're always wrong" attitude
you know have this arrogant “me against the world” mentality. Lets not forget the endless baseless arguments and belief that what you say is martial law and no one can disagree with it and you can’t be wrong…
J-Ridah. I don’t care if you have a 1000 accounts under different names… You are so easy to pick out of a crowd. Your “hate” is something you brought on yourself, so don’t start blaming people because of your delusions and because you’re unhappy with your life to the point where you have to come on a blog and just be a trolling hard headed….
You’re not even worth this long of a response. I come onto this blog to hear varying opinions with factual support, but your endless posts just dilute the intelligent discussion that could be had.
lol. So im a troll unhappy with my life. LMAO. If that was the case I would be the 1 hating on ppl and dissecting their post to find a argument. How do I know your dumbass is gonna disagree with me when I make a fanshot giving props to the team were all here to support? See what I mean when I say when a person talks long enough they tend to accuse you of being them?
You kinda do hate on people
Just more subtly. You ignore people’s arguments and dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as idiotic (or at the very least below you). I disagree with the means in which you convey your points: I do agree that Rush was a great find, but that doesn’t make Riley an amazing GM. I’m about 50/50 on his decisions. Half of his decisions have been good and half haven’t been very good. But why do I need to talk about the good since most people agree with me on the good? And why be happy with only half good when demanding more puts pressure on the GM to be better and care more?
Wait when did you make that last point? I don’t care if you have contrasting opinions: thats the fun of a blog. However, you also should be diligent in your arguments. Base it on some facts (some speculation is okay) and listen to other people’s arguments and give them credit where credit is due. You don’t do that. Someone can make a valid point, and then you repeat your own point (You say A, I say B to counter A, so to counter B you repeat A. It doesn’t make A any more right than B).
But if you can’t do that no one is going to respect you, and while you claim you don’t care if people respect you, you sure do complain and accuse people of being haters quite a bit and that “everyone hates J-ridah”.
Im grown dude
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
I think Riley is a decent enough GM honestly.
The problems are from above him imo. I have to believe that Lacob wants to win immediately(he guaranteed it on the website.) I think Riley was told to bet the house on Tyson Chandler and DeAndre Jordan. I have to believe that it was Lacob’s decision to use the amnesty on Bell, since it is his money. Riley is being told what to do, because he is using someone else’s money.
Now with the moves that I can ascertain were definitely Riley that do not involve direct relation to the ownership I would say that he has done fair. He drafted Curry, Thompson and Udoh in my opinion Curry was excellent and Udoh wasn’t a bad choice either. Thompson has just started and time will tell how he turns out(although I absolutely disagreed with the choice at the time.)
He got Lee, who does take up a huge chunk of salary, but he is also a valuable player especially offensively, we did not give up much for him.
He also did not rebuild after Curry’s rookie year, which is what I believe he should have done(I understand that this directly relates to Lee) He let a couple players go that were cheap yet useful(Belinelli, Williams) He also picked up some good talent(Williams, Toliver, Hunter, Wright, Rush probably more) The thing is Riley has not been exceptional because he has not taken a huge risk that has paid off. In my opinion he has taken too many half-measures with a poorly constructed team. That is my criticism of him. He has made fairly competent little moves and I wouldn’t say the Lee trade was a flop either. He is simply an average GM right now.
The problems are from above him imo.
I’d be willing to test this theory.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 6:41 PM PST up reply actions
you do realize
that nobody is disagreeing about the fact Brandon Rush was a good trade right? As in, nobody.
Ease up on the persecution complex. The cross is just too much to bare.
I think you kind of enjoy antagonizing people
People obviously also enjoy getting antagonized by him. Just look at the number of comments on this post and the volume of responses he gets in general. You should thank him for having “style” and contributing so much to this site instead of implying that he he is trolling. I will. Thanks J-Ridah! Please don’t stop. Perhaps you feel threatened when one poster contributes more to this site than some of the people that get paid for it.
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 Feb 1, 2012 11:20 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
who gets paid for it?
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
That not my business but the adds at the top of this page are not there for aesthetics. However the bebe add does not hurt my eyes.
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 Feb 1, 2012 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
SBNation gets the lion’s share of the ad revenue. I think the founders of the site may get a tiny little taste of that. The rest of the GSoM team gets the occasional perquisite (tickets, press passes, gear, etc.), and of course, the pleasure of writing about the Warriors!
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
You need a better agent. You deserve more.
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 Feb 1, 2012 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Just look at the number of comments on this post and the volume of responses he gets in general. You should thank him for having "style" instead of implying that he he is trolling
I actually have occasionally thanked him for provoking interesting conversation. “Trolling” is your word, not mine.
Perhaps you feel threatened when one poster contributes more to this site than some of the people that get paid for it.
Haha, that’s it! I hereby bequeath my entire GSoM salary to J-Ridah! XD
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
He spurs debate on here. He will respond to every single person that disagrees with him on his fanshots. He doesn’t let much slide and rarely concedes anything. He definitely keep things interesting around here when there isn’t much to discuss. It would be a lot more boring around here without him. If you can’t deal with him, then don’t engage him and steer clear of his posts.
pretty much this
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Here's what I said at the time...
Each of these acquisitions in isolation are not awe-inspiring, but taken together, they suggest a real commitment to defense and rebounding improvement this year. There is no doubt that Tyson Chandler would have made a bigger impact, but to be honest, I think I’m happier with these 3 moves in combination, than I would have been handing over a truckload of cash over several seasons to DeAndre Jordan. Jackson and Riley definitely have talked the talk when it comes to defense, and now it appears they really are starting to walk the walk. To sum up:
These are some grown man moves that we made here.
How about that, J-RIDAH?
J-RIDAH: Its not 1 player in this draft better than Monta or Lee. Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu. Andre Drummond could be good but he is not impressive at this point at all besides his size. This draft is hella overated.
(JaVale) Mcgee is better than anybody in this draft.
I'm confused are you taking credit for the trade?
Did you have anything to do with it besides reading about it online?? Nah
by mekanikal on Feb 1, 2012 8:51 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Show me where I allude to having anything to do with the trade. The trade I suggested was Monta and Lou for Hibbert and Jones.
So whats the point of this post?
Obviously it was a gopd trade
by mekanikal on Feb 1, 2012 11:15 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Good job, Front Office.
You put a band-aid on a howitzer wound, but it was a pretty Dora the Explorer band-aid. And it’s waterproof.
So really good job, guys.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 9:07 AM PST reply actions 5 recs
+1 (and rec'd, this should be green)
look, I put the Rush acquisition right around the level of DWright…nice, solid player, but that’s hardly enough to get any sort of congratulation parade going
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 10:08 AM PST up reply actions
Never said a parade was called for. It just irks me when only the negative things are mentioned around here.
that's understandable, but it's still just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic
just be careful about keeping things in perspective.
Sure, Rush is about to get a ton of calls. But you know what? Even though I’d love to keep him, he’s pretty replaceable.
We still have serious problems with our roster. I love what we did with our bench mostly (I woulda kept Reggie for sure).But the fact that our bench was addressed before our starters pisses me off more than it makes me happy.
This is a well-founded criticism of the FO. I give them credit for the things they get right, but you must maintain a bit of perspective on the importance of various roster moves.Not everything is absolute black and white, it’s perfectly ok to agree with certain moves
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
Rush is not easily replaceable. For us he is because we have Klay who I am convinced is a underated defender. But his skillset is damn near impossible to find in the league. A guy who is a very good perimeter defender and rebounder and a deadeye 3 point shooter. Good luck finding another guy like him in the league.
he's not that great of a perimeter defender
he gets beat an awful lot, he’s just athletic enough to recover sometimes
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
He dont get beat a awful lot and he makes his teamates better with help defense with his shot blocking. He was a diamond in the rough. He has more value now than what we got him for. If we had Rush signed for 2 or more seasons we could get a mid to late 1st rounder for him probably.
With a mid to late 1st rounder, you hope to get a guy like…Rush. Meh. Draft picks that aren’t high lottery picks really aren’t that valuable.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
Its alot of C’s that are good that was picked in the mid 1st round. Hibbert being 1 of them aswell as Mcgee. Kawhi who you all love was had for George Hill.
Hibbert, McGee and Kawhi are all, at best, role players you add when you already have your core. And for every one of them there are multiple guys who aren’t that good.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:10 PM PST up reply actions
Wanna bet that JaVale helps his team to a winning record in the next 2 years? These criteria don’t really answer the question I’m driving at – is a guy a real difference maker or not? Will he make a significant difference to how good a team is?
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:19 PM PST up reply actions
Well it depends on his supporting cast. I dont see Dwight turning the current Wiz roster into a playoff team. Tyson Chandler was slept on before he got to Dallas. Javale surrounded by decent talent is a difference maker. For instance, you put Mcgee on our roster and were a 7th seed team at worst. Quote me on that.
See, that’s what I disagree with. JaVale doesn’t play winning basketball.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:31 PM PST up reply actions
(And Dwight turns anyone into a playoff team)
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:31 PM PST up reply actions
Definitely seen some nice breakdowns from Truthaboutit.net highlighting the way he’s often in the wrong position. It’s blocked for me at work, though – maybe later I can try to look? Basically, he has no basketball IQ. For every block, he’s out of position to challenge the offense frequently. For every nice offensive play, there’s a boneheaded one. He has tons of potential, and some skills, I completely agree there…but it’s gonna come down to how much he really figures out how to play. I have no insight into that beyond the observation that I don’t think he’s figured it out yet.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
hahaa, I poked around for a minute, and found this
"No other sports athlete simultaneously straddles the WTF to OMG line like JaVale McGee."
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
Can’t see it now, but I’m almost certain I’ve read that exact article and it’s one of the ones I’m thinking of…
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 4:21 PM PST up reply actions
I tend to agree with David Thorpe's feeling on the guy
He’s ben poorly coaches his whole career in poisonous atmosphere. Same with JWall. If either were n San Antonio or OKC or somewhere with a much better structure and foundation to develop players they’d be infinitely better off.
If you have time, listen to NBA today podcast on ‘the royal jelly’ I posted.
McGee makes a lot of awful players. But he has has a skillset and tools which are all-star caliber in this league. He needs some good coaching and teaching.
I hate podcasts and video. Don’t do them. Just give me a damn article to read! Anyways, figuring out how much coaching can help is…well, really hard to figure out. Some guys just get basketball, some guys never will, most are somewhere in the middle. It’ll be interesting to see how McGee develops. He definitely has tools.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 8:29 AM PST up reply actions
I think you'd really appreciate it
It’s thorpe talking about player development and how the situation is so important for 99% of players not named lebron, durant, rose, kobe etc. Guys who will make ti regardless.
He cites Westbrook as an example of a guy who many thought would bust, but OKC was confident they had environment and staff to bring the obvious talent to effective basketball.
He talks about how Wall, McGee particularly have opposite going on. How in Wall’s case particular you see so much talent, but environment with Gilbert Arenas situation, horrendous cast of players who are selfish, and flip saunders are exactly the wrong situation for him to grow (looks at sacrament too with tyreke and demarcus being given undeserved green lights)
He also talks a lot about what makes an NBA role player, ie Udonis Haslem. How a guy can really grow his game.
All and all, I think you’d appreciate it.
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/36199/nba-today-david-thorpe
That is the stuff that they give the baby bees that makes them turn into queens. It’s powerful stuff that is at the core of what he believes about the power of coaching in hoops. On the NBA Today podcast, Thorpe really gets into what that royal jelly is and how it works.
The way he tells it there are some players (LeBron James, Kevin Durant) who will succeed no matter what their environment. Some other players simply aren’t cut out for the NBA.
But in between are most of the players we talk about every day. He says all kinds of guys (James Harden, Russell Westbrook, Udonis Haslem, JaVale McGee, Tyreke Evans etc.) could be amazing with the right setting, the right coaching, the right inspiration and trust. Without the “royal jelly,” they could all be far less valuable, or even out of the league.
The" royal jelly" approach to the game is almost the exact opposite of the idea that a player is what he is, and that is that, and there is nothing anybody can do about it.
I completely agree with Thorpe, for young players.
Granted some are uncapable and some are unwilling to learn. But if a player is willing has some tools, you can really grow them to productive players.
The approach is pretty much opposite of what we’ve seen in GSW over the years. Randolph, Wright and so many others given the ’can’t play’ label.
Maybe so, or maybe we don’t know how to develop talent.
If we drafted Westbrook do you think he’s better than Monta? Doubt it. Doubt we know how to harness his skills.
and to sum up, this is why this team frustrats me to death: ZERO plan
We suck at developing players. Even Stepho who is far more mature than most, has seen no real development since Nellie left, and is a depreciating asset. When he has tools to put up Rose-like numbers on better efficiency (different game but still)
We want to trade for a star, but we can’t pull the trigger.
At some point, LAcob needs to lay off his ego-tistical high horse and realize, we’re doing nothing, we’re going nowhere. We need a true commitment to SOMETHING. I’d suggest going the youth/development route. Bring in right staff (we might have them), right scouts/GM (not Riley) and commit. Or if he wants to get a superstar, have the fortitude to actually take a chance on a rental and set the clock to put pieces around them. MAybe CP3 or Dwight don’t want to be here, but they also don’t want to walk from 30+ mil
And anyway, if we could surround either with peices to make a deep playoff run and potential to go farther, they will think about staying.
IF they left, well I wouldn’t blame Lacob. I’d say ‘hey, he tried, something cohan never did’
Yep, everything about him says he thinks he knows best.
The emails, the interviews, that wtf gif of him going crazy on TV.
The guy wants to do it himself so he can get the credit for being some sort of savior.
Give it a year or so before his Warriors soul gets it’s cherry popped. Then he’ll be the General of our Tank…cough I mean rebuild plan.
"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
Wanna bet Mcgee makes a allstar game in the next 2 years?
what’s the odds on J-ridah getting burned out and off riley’s nuts within 2 years?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 1, 2012 9:29 PM PST up reply actions
odds of J-ridah getting burned out and off riley’s nuts within 2 years = odds of riley getting fired within 2 years
(then he’ll be all over the new GM’s nuts)
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
hahahha, at this point, I'm just going to assume you are serious about this
do you see how badly you are contradicting yourself here?
Rush is not easily replaceable. For us he is because…
if you can replace him with a non-elite rookie, chances are there are a number of other options across the league.
I’m telling you, Rush is an ok player, but that’s about it.
Our problem on this team is that we have a bunch of “ok” players…we’re set on that front. What we really need is to improve our starting 5
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 12:48 PM PST up reply actions
I dunno, Thefalosha, Pavlovic, James Jones, Afflalo, Batum, Martell Webster, Prince, Dudley, Courtney Lee, Belinelli?, Daye?, Redick, Pietrus, Battier, Hamilton, Bogans, Anthony Parker, Salmons, Dorell….I’m sure I could name others. Even if they aren’t quite Rush, it’s not like the difference is big. Plus, why does the team needs Rush’s exact skillset? There are plenty of guys who produce similarly but in slightly different ways.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 12:58 PM PST up reply actions
Because were a jumpshooting team that lacks toughness and perimeter defense. I already said we have Klay and he could easily replace Rush. But just look at what Mike Miller has made in his career, good teams always need a guy like Rush on their roster.
My point is that I would take a Gerald Wallace, for example. By your criteria of finding a good jumpshooter, defender, and rebounder, Gerald Wallace doesn’t qualify, because he can’t shoot. By your criteria of replacing Rush…he wouldn’t be an option. But the thing is, Gerald Wallace ALSO fits what we need, and is a better player than Rush. That’s the point I’m getting at when I question why someone needs Rush’s exact skillset. Someone who’s a better defender and rebounder than Rush, who gives us another guy that can penetrate and also gives us our first player who can actually draw some fouls, fits a need for us, too.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:17 PM PST up reply actions
I totally agree. I always wanted Crash on this team. Thats why I was demanding they sign Dominic Mcguire 6 months ago and they listened. Its the same reason their holding onto Chris Wright right now. Those players have toughness that you need to win. A team can only have 1 Gerald Wallace tho, somebody has to provide the offense.
David Lee was a pretty big acquistion. He’s a damn good 4 and wins his matchup almost every game. I dont think you realize how hard it is to make another move like that where we clearly get the better player and he’s 1 of the best at his position. Riley cant make a magical trade that can get us something of significance when we dont have a draft pick to add in trade.
I agree with you that fans underestimate how hard it is to make a trade happen in the NBA. Now, your evaluation of David Lee? Much more questionable….
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
D-Lee is a stud. Were lucky to have him. Of course you’ll disgaree due to our record but dude is a damn good 4.
What about him is so good, exactly? I see a player who’s legitimately awful on defense, whose rebounding numbers are inflated, and who’s an effective offensive player, but unfortunately, doesn’t seem to fit well on offense with other bigs (mostly due to a lack of post game). Overall, I’d call him a weak starter/strong bench player. Ideally, he’d be the first big off the bench.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:03 AM PST up reply actions
numbers are inflated
You should make this your tag line.
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 Feb 1, 2012 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
funny, because this was the part that stands out to me about D Lee
I see a player who’s legitimately awful on defense
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 10:09 AM PST up reply actions
If Lee is top 5 in scoring and rebound among 4’s, I dont care how awful he is on help defense. Like I said before, he wins his matchup most nights. Monroe puts up the same kinda numbers Lee does yet you want Riley fired for taking the better defender. Cant have it both ways.
Well, first, defensively I don’t think he’s just awful in help D. I think he’s pretty awful on the ball, too. Second, not so sure about your stats there. Just pulled up points per 40 on hoopdata for PF’s, and here is what I see:
Love
Aldridge
Harrington
Bosh
Griffin
Anderson
Nowitzki
Millsap
Randolph
Cousins (maybe he should be a C)
Amare
Lee
So that’s not even top 10. Same goes for rebounding:
Cousins
Varejao
Love
Evans (wouldn’t include him because of his limited sample, except he’s basically in line with his career numbers)
Ilyasova
Humphries
Haslem
Griffin
Millsap
Davis
Gooden
Hickson
Boozer
Lee
Like I said, I think his rebounding is overrated. He doesn’t box out well, and frequently gets boarded over – he does get those hustle boards, though! I believe the fact that he hasn’t had much of a positive impact on team rebounding the last few years supports my theory.
As for winning his matchup, what are you basing that on, exactly? So far with David Lee on the court this year we’ve been outscored by a little over 7 points (I think it’s per 100 possessions). With him off the court we’ve outscored our opponents by just over 6 points.
Lastly – Monroe – I actually agree that he’s a pretty similar player to David Lee right now. The thing is, though, Monroe is 21 years old (so he may improve significantly) and costs just over $3M. Earlier you asked who we could have gotten at PF that would cost less than Lee? Well, what if not signing Lee prompted us to draft Greg Monroe, rather than Udoh? Then let’s say we signed Reggie Evans as our Udoh replacement. There you go – plausible scenario that answers your question. One of many, many different scenarios that are at least plausible enough to give some thought to.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Udoh was not drafted because Riley knew he was gonna sign Lee. Riley had no idea what Lebron was gonna do. Had Lebron signed to NY we would not be able to trade for Lee. Monroe was passed on because his work ethic was questioned, he was a slug at the combine, and Samhan owned him in their workouts. Udoh at the very least was a defensive beast. And we can all agree Udoh is 1 of the best defenders at his position right?
J-Ridah, this is exactly the sort of feet-shuffling response that gives folks the fits around here
here’s how debate works.
1.) 1st party states a premise (hopefully with supporting evidience)
If Lee is top 5 in scoring and rebound among 4’s, I dont care how awful he is on help defense.
2.) Response to initial premise:
a.) not just help D
b.) he’s not top 5 in scoring OR rebounding
3.) then 1st party rebuts the response
but…you go off on some tangent about Lee/Udoh/Monroe…
Can you admit that some of the criticism of D Lee is legit???
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 11:28 AM PST up reply actions
Lee is top 5 in rebounding and scoring among 4’s in per game stats which is the old testament of stats to yall.
yeah, we are all born again neo-stats around here
heck, even when you sort by per-minute, Lee is still top 10-15
but my problem is that going down this list here I see a ton of guys who are way better than Lee defensively….heck, I’d probably put him as bottom five on D – so (to me) that equals out to a pretty average player…
I still like him. Still happy he’s a Warriors.
But I’d trade him in a heartbeat
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 12:56 PM PST up reply actions
We’ll never agree on this. This is 1 of those things that’ll always divide a room. Me being a fan of this team since I started watching hoops, I know better than to think we could sign a better 4 than Lee. You probably think we can. Time will tell.
This is 1 of those things that’ll always divide a room.
David Lee’s defense? Pretty sure the only people on one side of that room would be you and David.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 1:22 PM PST up reply actions
Me being a fan of this team since I started watching hoops, I know better than to think we could sign a better 4 than Lee. You probably think we can.
I don’t really understand why you limit the criteria so much. It’s possible to be really good with a bad PF. The idea is to build a really good core. There is no single way to do it. Team building isn’t about coming up with 5 solid starters, it’s about having 2-3 really, really good players. David Lee gets in the way of team building, with his contract, by making the team better (but not being good enough to make the team “good”), and because he cost us some assets to acquire.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:26 PM PST up reply actions
No disrespect Barry, but dont you ever attempt to being taken seriously when you say Randolph,Buike and Rony are assets. They were liabilities.
His point is valid
Randolph as a 21 year old power forward with all the physical gifts and the perception ‘nellie ruined him’ was an asset.
How about the fact we were supposedly offered love for Randolph in the summer of 2010?
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2010/06/04/should-the-warriors-consider-trading-randolph-yes-but-carefully/
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 2:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
And we move up to the 4 spot, if we do this then...
We get Cousins
PG-Curry
SG-Monta
SF-???
PF-Love
C – Cuz
Sigh
RIP Al Davis
PS3 - agentpoop (dont ask why the name... tell me if your from a blog)
twitter - @nateoak5
"No difference maker in this draft taf. Sorry to be the 1 to break it to you." J-Ridah 1/23/12
Nope
Minnesota was unwilling to swap picks + players. They wanted Ranolph + 6 for Love. Then possibly Randolph for love straight up,.
Anyway you tie it, we look like losers there.
Randolph and #6 for Love...we should have done that.
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Feb 2, 2012 8:33 AM PST up reply actions
But if you dig up old fan posts
Everyone said ‘no way, they have to give us love + #4 to consider it. Randolph has SO MUCH POTENTIAL’
Funny cause I think I was probably on that bandwagon too. No way I thought Love would lose this much weight and be this good.
Then again, I’m not paid 6-7 figures to be an NBA GM to evaluate.
yea it's funny
love was always viewed as a relatively low upside guy
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
love was always viewed as a relatively low upside guy
no he wasn’t he was thought to be one of the best values in that draft.
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 2, 2012 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
And fairly enough, I think. Love is a nice player, but unless something has changed, he’s a serious liability on D, and I don’t see him changing that at any point. It seriously cuts into his value.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
hmm
I have been very skeptical to get on the KLove bandwagon, but the numbers suggest otherwise.
Defensively he’s becoming less of a liability. Holding his opposing PF to .424 efg% and opposing center to .473efg%, in both cases he’s outrebounding them with a 7.3 and 2.9 margin
hey don't look at me on that
pretty much anyone looking at objectively would realize it was insane not to say yes
Oh yeah...
Randolph and… Curry? I forget which draft.
.
.
.
.
.
Son of a b… we should have done that.
udoh is the only #6 pick we've had recently
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
Or what they really wanted, us to take al Jefferson
I’d definitelty take Al + 4 for Biedrins + AR
I’d probably take Al plus a later pick for that too
Turiaf would be the best center on this roster, and Randolph is extremely productive in his whopping 12 minutes a game.
If he wasn’t behind a guy named Kevin Love, he’d be putting up pretty good numbers.
Also there’s the asset of cap space, which is pretty massive. Add those things up, and I’d much rather have them instead of David Lee. No question about it.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think you can call Randolph extremely productive.
His per 36s aren’t that good. He looked to be a great rebounder, but he hasn’t been. And his offensive rebounds are down, which means it’s not just the playing-next-to-Love effect.
And while his efficiency has gone way up (the Rubio effect?) his tendency to throw up dumb turnovers hasn’t gone away.
Furthermore, Randolph is somebody with a pretty well-documented set of work-ethic issues, and it’s possible being traded twice in short order, and ending up in one of the least-desireable locations in the league, may have shaken him up. We can’t assume he’d be who he is now if he had stayed with us.
I believe I just did!
His rebounding is down, sure. But his defense has looked better, and his efficiency is way up. He also looks a lot better and more active on the court. I’ve watched the Timberwolves quite a few times, and I’ve always come away impressed with Randolph’s effort.
I’d swap him with Lee without a second thought.
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 3:59 PM PST up reply actions
Nobody besides Amare?
The guy who played almost 37 MPG last season? Really?
by Spider Jerusalem on Feb 1, 2012 3:54 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, I believe all 3 were positive assets, in the order of: Randolph, Turiaf, Buike (expiring contract). That doesn’t mean they’re amazing assets, just that they have worth. I would argue Randolph was definitely a solid asset back then, and Turiaf was/is a solid role player.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
Nothing? No. Little? I wouldn’t necessarily argue against that.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
per game stats which is the old testament of stats to yall.
Hmmm? The culture around here has long been to not use per game stats…ever.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 1:20 PM PST up reply actions
Definitely something I've looked into recently.
Gambino is a mastermind...
by GovernorStephCurry on Feb 1, 2012 6:40 PM PST up reply actions
A very good trade? I’m not so sure about that. What does “very good” mean, exactly? It’s pretty obviously a positive trade, but personally I have a hard time talking about moves that are mostly meaningless in the grand scheme of things as “very good”. We’re still a mediocre team with no clear direction towards changing that. I’m really not going to give our GM much credit until I see a substantial change in direction, and so far….well….not seeing it.
Well look at Lou’s numbers compared to Rush’s and its obvious it was a “very good” trade. We robbed Indy, now can you honestly say that if Amundson was beasting for Indy right now, there would not be a 200 post fanshot about how we got robbed by Indy and Riley needs to be fired? See what im saying when I say the negative gets celebrated around here?
I guess we just have very different definitions of “very good”, then. So far we’ve obviously gotten the much better end of the trade, so we agree there. I just reserve “very good” kind of praise for things that make a real long term difference for the franchise.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:19 AM PST up reply actions
Personally, I think it was a fantastic trade, just on a rather inconsequential level.
Call it a “fantastic little trade.”
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
No team in this league can win with Biedrins as its starting C unless it had multiple allstars on it with him. So no trade will make a huge difference until its a upgrade at the C.
So no trade will make a huge difference until its a upgrade at the C.
Monta and Curry for LeBron and Wade would probably move the win dial a bit.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 1, 2012 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
id prefer a trade of monta or curry + lee for lebron or wade + bosh
But I won’t be picky
Do it riley! They can’t walk for 5 years :)
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 10:34 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
unless it had multiple allstars on it with him
Yeah, this is kind of what I’m waiting for – our GM to do something like that.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
which brings up my fundamental issue with riley
If we can’t sign a superstar (and I agree with J, we don’t attract one. Too many suitors and we won’t be #1 on their list). So how do we attain them?
The best option seems drafting and getting younger. Either find a durant, rose etc. Or stockpile enough assets so you can trade for a kg.
That’s where I disagree with riley. Lee was a move which put us in mediocrity range of not beingable to do either
by tafkasam on Feb 1, 2012 10:37 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
No GM has the power of tanking. You can trade all your players for trash but even then they dont have the power of tanking. If you think Lacob would ever even consider it your in for a long life as a Warrior fan.
We gutted the entire bench. Its only 3 3rd year starters on the roster. Thats already a rebuilt roster.
nope, that's a rebuilt bench
we have the exact same starting 5 as last year
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 12:49 PM PST up reply actions
I hear ya. But its not like they haven’t tried to get a upgrade at the C. Its 1 thing to support a team thats not willing to spend. Their willing, its not Lacobs fault his team is located in the Bay.
yeah, I hear ya and agree
I know they are trying…
but the whole premise of this post is that you seem to think Riley should be given some sort of pass on criticism because of the Rush acquisition.
all I’m trying to point out (along with others) is that you are weighting the Rush acquisition too much, while ignoring or discounting concerns that would seem to be much more important overall
"I am very worried about the Warriors"
-brutusbrutus
by Duby Dub Dubs on Feb 1, 2012 1:33 PM PST up reply actions
I dont expect Riley to perform miracles. Thats why I can put his contributions in a proper context. A miracle is getting a guy like CP3 or Dwight to fall in love living here. Thats out of his power. The guys that fall in love here are role player guys like Dorell. Stars who can go anywhere are looking for……..well you know.
I guess I disagree in one sense
I’d have taken the Curry + filler gamble for CP3.
CP3 is a class of player we haven’t ever had. I know he doesn’t want to be here, initially. I also think if we got him, we’d have Chandler. Chandler may have preferred new york, but a move for CP3 probably would have swung his opinion.
Now I believe a CP3, Monta, Dorell, Lee, Chandler starting 5 would be a top 4 west team, maybe higher if their was no lock out and lack of practice time.
Now we’ll see if we can improve our team thru monta or lee trade or we’re good enough as is.
Would CP3 REALLY walk from 30+ mil the new CBA would make him lose?
Well if he wants to, then OK. We can totally rebuild. Our players would have more value for trades for picks.
I guess I’m just really not sold on our main pieces at all. I like them all individually, I do not like the mix. We can never get all 3 going at same time. And all 3 have major defensive deficiencies. We would be better with Curry, IGuodala, Lee or Monta, Rondo, Lee or even Curry, Monta, Chandler. I just don’t like the make up of team. It’s majorly flawed.
So I’d like to atleast try something bold, and if it backfires it does.
I don’t question lacob’s ambition. I question his decisionmaking and thought process. He clearly looks green to me. And I don’t buy Riley is that good a GM. We’d be much better bringing in a more shrewd GM, who’d probably recomend things I’m saying
Who cares though?
Monta, Lee, Curry, Dorell are not THAT good. Our starting 5 is not good. Those 4 are not that good.
That’s my point. We have no piece we should really care to hold onto. Our pieces don’t fit well and we have major deficiencies.
The fact we won’t make a ballsy trade, in my opinion, shows delusion or complacency.
I can buy your point ’don’t just dump’ but really? Shouldn’t we try to move Steph or Monta for something? Can’t we find a suitable replacement for whichever is moved?
Steph nor Monta has been able to garner a offer that would make us better from what I heard. Lacob couldn’t keep his floor seats if he moved Steph for anything short of a borderline allstar or allstar.
Lacob and his entourage of 50 take up the floor seats because they can’t sell them.
by Doctor Kajita on Feb 1, 2012 4:16 PM PST up reply actions
so Cp3 isnt a borderline allstar or allstar?
And don’t you go saying “but he would have left in April.” Thats not the point. This is what Spider means when he says you move the goal posts. You a point A, someone counters with point B, and then you bring up a point C that isn’t related to or contradicts point A.
Okay so they coulda gotten CP3 for Steph,Klay and Ekpe. Was it worth it for a rental? There’s smart moves and dumb moves. Giving up your last 3 draft picks for CP3 rental is up for debate if its smart or dumb. Im just a GSOM poster. Maybe him being here for 4 months coulda attracted free agents after he left. Who knows? I tend to think Steph,Klay and Ekpe in a trade could garner more than a rental, silly me.
but see that wasn't the point.
The point is that you claim that our players as trade bait could not net us an all star. Now you’re admitting that but still dismissing my argument because you think it doesn’t help the team. Thats not the point: you’re shifting the point of the argument to make you right and me wrong when you need to stay on topic. And thats the first time you’ve ever admitted uncertainty Jridah. “Who knows?” I think thats the first time I’ve heard you say that… But thanks for the sarcasm.
In principal you are right
But it goes against everything Lacob says. Being bold, taking risks etc.
I 100% agree with you, we make that trade alone, cp3 is gone.
However where I disagree is, if we make additional moves, he walks. Yes it’s a gigantic gamble, but lets say we did it, then we were able to get Chandler to sign? You think Chris Paul walks then? Leaves 32 mil on the table?
I do agree with you, as large part of the bay’s problem attracting players is the lifestyle here is not what your average nba player wants.
However the bigger issue is, we’ve been just plan garbage for 20 years, and we don’t have some esteemed history like the celts. We got a nice little history, but still.
Lacob and co. are talking big, but no different than what Gilbert or other relatively ‘new’ owners do .
Players go by the ‘show me model’.
This could have been lacob’s chance to SHOW.
If it failed, then you know what, we atleast tried, and we can go from there. I Think most fans actually would love that. They’d make CP3 the scapegoat, like like lebron in cleveland.
Deron Williams is about to walk away from the Nets leaving them with nothing when they coulda had Favors,Harris and our pick aswell as their own pick. Its gonna be some cold sh*t to witness when he does it. Im not willing to gamble on a expiring contract that does not want to be here in the 1st place. Thats too much of a gamble. Call it scared money or non-risk taking. I just couldn’t do it. You’ll look like a idiot for doing it when he walks because he clearly told you he wasn’t gonna resign and he didn’t wanna be here. I’d take him at his word.
Deron Williams is about to walk away from the Nets
Sup wit dat? I thought Brooklyn was one of the desired places to play?
Mirror on the wall
Here we are again.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Feb 2, 2012 9:42 AM PST up reply actions
Hang on I need to push the goalposts back
That wasn’t the point… It was one minor point of it, but his major point was the claims of “risk taking” and “big moves” that the FO promised they would do. And we do need one.
Well, you're not being un-reasonble
I just happen to think it’s a gamble worth making.
In the Nets case, they did it and made the wrong moves after the fact. If we did it, we’d better be thinking 3-4 moves down the line. How are we going to surround him and make this team enoguh of a contender that cp3 can’t walk?
You can never pull a move like this off without thinking a few moves down the line.
@Deron- now the NEts are in an unenviable position, but remember… Deron lives in NYC (manhattan), he likes it. if they make any sort of step to get a 2nd guy, he’ll stay.
Otherwise, maybe they should consider trading him for Amare + whatever they can scrape off the knicks.
Amare, Fields, picks for Deron? Atleast then you got yourself a player under contract for 3.5 years, and some prospects and cap space to make additional moves.
I’m just thinking outloud. Obviously I’d rather have Deron than Amare.
Nets should see what Brook Lopez can get though. Brook + filler might be able to get something worthwhile. Maybe Brook + Humphries for Josh Smith ?
I bet Atlanta considers it had.
I agree with you in that situation. Like you said, they gave up a high pick and Favors – those are the kinds of assets you tank to get. When he walks, all you’ve done is set yourself back multiple years. I think the Warriors situation is a little different, though. If Paul walked, it wouldn’t really set us back multiple years, as we were never in a real rebuilding position – rather, it would accelerate us into a true tank/rebuild.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2012 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
look at Lou’s numbers compared to Rush’s
First I agree that this was a great trade for our FO. Only they know who in that group is most responsible. But half of what makes this trade good is getting rid of Lou who was/is awful. I think Riley was responsible for signing Lou so this trade fixes a Riley mistake. Also we should all be giving credit mostly to Brandon Rush as he is the one most responsible for making this trade look good.
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 Feb 1, 2012 10:35 AM PST up reply actions
Eh, we were paying Lou what, $5M over 2 seasons or something? I’d hardly call that a mistake.
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2012 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
I admit that I liked the signing of Lou at first but after last season I was hoping he would just not exercise his option for a second year. So it was a mistake/failure in my opinion. That $2.5 Million might have meant us still having an amnesty to use.
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 Feb 1, 2012 10:48 AM PST up reply actions
Front office should get credit for this
But not entirely Larry Riley. The one year that Larry Riley was the main person he did this.
Draft Udoh over Monroe and signed Lee to a superstar contract. I have no problem with Lee but at that price… Too much. Also not to mention that was the year when Bron, Wade, Booz, Bosh and Amare was free agents so you can also agree that Lee was not really being sought after but we went ahead and traded for him not to mention a part of that trade was AR who was considered a very good trade chip at that time.
Now if you want to talk about Rush, you have to realize that Amundson was out the door by the start of the year, he only got signed because of his player option. Rush in Indy was considered disposable because of the young talent they have and Indy did not want to sign him to an extension and they wanted to a backup big ala Amundson. So yes we lucked out on Rush but in no way shape or form should Larry Riley get full credit.
Look at what Boozer got, Look at what Elton Brand got. If you think a 4 coming off a 20 and 12 allstar season wasn’t gonna get 80 mill in a summer where everybody got overpaid I dont know what to tell you. He makes less than Boozer and Brand, enough said.
Look at what Boozer got, Look at what Elton Brand got.
you don’t think that chicago and philly regret those contracts? naming worse contracts doesn’t suddenly make lee’s contract better.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
by bigkino217 on Feb 1, 2012 3:39 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
with that attitude
we could sign rush for like 4/50, and you could respond by saying “at least we didn’t give him 60”. that doesn’t make the contract good.
"Anthony Davis is no different than Al Farouq Aminu." - J--Ridah
Me: So who (from the 2011 draft class) compares with (Anthony) Davis?
J-Ridah: Biyombo
by bigkino217 on Feb 1, 2012 3:41 PM PST up reply actions 4 recs
I don't care to put this into a greater context with other trades or signings or how good of a job the front offices has done
but hell yes that was a great trade.
by wallywagon11 on Feb 2, 2012 8:19 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
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
