<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">I guess one can say that Montgomery for his experience level in the NBA is doing what he can on a flawed team to get these guys to play the right way. Yet who are you blaming on the players for not doing the same, if not more than that of what Montgomery is doing? </div> Clif, c'mon man, how long have you been a Warrior fan to have seen what the Warriors can do without an honest inside game over the years. How about knowing that the Warriors are not a good defensive team to begin with over the years? And how about a mediocre zone defensive scheme whose alternative is an even lousier man-to-man defense, coupled with little ability to manufacture their own shots off the dribble on isolations? What can Montgomery and his staff possibly do when their GM Chris Mullin has forced their hands to play the guys under contract for multiple years to come? You don't park guys like Foyle, Dunleavy, Fisher on the 3rd string rotation who've been locked up for years and years when nobody in the league wants anything to do with them. You include them because they'll be back next year, the year after, and the year after that, and the year after that. You have to include them until the front office starts moving the guys that don't fit in on a team. It's especially hard to include the rookie players in that situation because of the other guys' playing times/years left on their deals/experience. The problem with rookies is they are rookies, and unlike the situation the coaches are put in, you don't want to affect the young rookie guys' confidence level by putting them in a situation where they are set up to fail or be left out there to handle the pressure all on their own. You saw how fans reacted to Dunleavy when he was pushed into the starting role right away or how quickly fans are turning on Pietrus now that they've seen him start for a while. That could have been Pietrus years ago and fans would have turned on him quickly for what he couldn't do as a starter. Biedrins also lacked the same consistency. I want to see guys like Ike play and Biedrins play, but this is about also being ready to play ball consistently both mentally and physically which young guys often aren't. One or two game flashes don't count, especially because we don't see these guys in practice the way the coaches do. Defying Mullin certainly means a coach is going to get fired. Look at Musselman when he tried to do his own thing aside from what St. Jean thought was good for this franchise and they both ended up getting fired because St. Jean wasn't the best G.M. and Musselman wanted to win for the short term win column rather than develop these guys and get them to play right. Also young guys don't always develop the patience to play fundamentally sound ball because they don't know how or they think they can do it all on their own like the streetball mentality. Guys like Taft, Biedrins, Ellis either played little or no college ball to even know what good ball is until they learn, which they are slowly doing by observing. None of those guys were Garnett or Lebron James or T-mac to jump in right away and let's not forget a few of those guys don't always blow up in one year. Let's also look at why the Warriors struggled last season: The Warriors have few weapons to score unless its based on dribble penetration or rebound, pass, and running out on slow setup transition defenses. In order to play that way we have to dribble the ball better and quicker and start looking ahead (which we don't), we have to make better passes and not telegraph them (which we don't), we have to take better care of the ball (which we don't), space the floor (which we don't) and we have to make our outside shots or inside layups (which we don't). Warriors whole philosophy of playing a half court game that's organized 5 on 5 is to gain some additional weapons so they can score consistently and efficiently inside and out. If something doesn't materialize they can at least control the floor spacing and where the defenders are playing them. They also have to be organized so they aren't struggling with what to do as a team, they aren't struggling with where to find guys, they aren't struggling with having to take low % shots because they aren't on the same page as the other four guys out on the floor who don't know what the ballhandler will do. The warriors are just too damned undisciplined, impatient, unaware, sometimes ignorant and they don't value posessions enough to even stick to this philosophy 100% of the time they are out there. If it means developing plays so that guys know where to be at the precise spots on the floor at the right times, so be it. Do what it takes to win because we can't play Baron ball unless Baron stays healthy and guys are moving for him and Baron knows where these guys are moving to so he doesn't throw the ball out of bounds or to the opposite team. You can't make something out of nothing because you're likely to throw the ball away when there's a miscue. We need a consistent offense or a consistent defense because it seems this team can't do both. Right now it's frustrating because we've seen this team over time and time again and it immediately comes back to the coaching. We know there's no offensive flow to these things because teams already predict what we do as strengths, what we do defensively and the bottom line is we're not playing smart, we're not taking good shots, and wide open shots are poorly made three point attempts which clank off iron and lead to fastbreaks on us. Sadly, taking these wild shots is what some of the players do on their own when they're taking matters into their own hands because again we've no inside game, no superior dribble penetration to split defenders, no discipline, no patience, no help from guys being left open. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> You notice a lot of flaws or weaknesses on the Warriors as players and even on Mullin. But tell me how Montgomery who is "doing everything" has helped in all of these weaknesses, most notably which you are stressing in execution on the court. </div> With Montgomery I've seen some flashes of better ball movement from the inside to the outside with more of the passing touching different players' hands. When we've got passes going inside from the outside with another player cutting toward the weakside, it gives us options to score around the hoop without being swarmed or having to post down low on isolations. Or here's another one: if we got passes going from the outside to inside back outside, the offensive flow is a lot more smooth when that outside shot is taken. Right now players get impatient and start jacking without even passing or even calling for a screen. If we can't move well without the ball by good passing and swift cuts, we're stuck relying on dribble penetration off isolations. We can see that Baron Davis dribble penetrating leaves one or two guys open under the hoop or out on the arc, but players aren't moving because they don't know what Baron will do next or they aren't moving because they don't know what to do period. This is why we need set plays. During the time when we had our defense together, we managed to get some pretty easy lay-ins on that last two or three game win streak when we took less momentum killing three point attempts and bothered to run some plays to get defenses off balance. A well run play makes it hard for team defenses to react. A well run play makes the offense run more smoothly instead of killing the momentum like an ill advised three, holding onto the ball overdribbling, or driving head on into traffic does. A well run play makes it so a team can pace themselves and know what to do with the ball on offense and conserve energy when they're out playing defense on the other end. *pant pant* A well run half court set makes it so when guys can't run out on the break, it forces defenses into deciding who they need to stay on or if they need to stay at home to guard a shot. We don't do that, we settle for damn shots without moving the ball around because that's the style the players have. The backup point is a shooting guard, the power forward is an outside shooting small forward, our guards are mostly forwards, and we don't have much depth at center (which is why Biedrins suddenly looks more awesome because he's actually completing plays inside). Just imagine this team organized... We've seen some pretty plays from out of bounds because guys spaced the floor, all five knew what to do, they cut and left defenders nailed to the ground for an easy score. Montgomery has also tried to get these guys to move a lot more when there's dribble penetration to the hoop, but guys are standing around or don't have a clue with where to be or what will happen next. You can't play that way because it's essentially 1 on 5 ball, not 5 on 5. Am I repeating myself? Imagine showing these guys the way but they don't listen. It's like some of the guys on the espn board think that a new coach will solve the problem. Maybe it will if the players buy into doing it the right way. Right now the coach is showing them the way and these players need to start being men about it. If players aren't listening they aren't going to get much done this season. They need to look in the mirror as a team and watch those films of the way they play. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Yes maybe players don't take Montgomery seriously 100% of the time, or maybe even 85% of the time(maybe even a lot less of the time, who knows?) but does Mike Montgomery listen to his players? Does Mike Montgomery listen to his assistant coaches even? Remember when Ellis finally got his chance to produce? All of the assistants were saying how they were not surprised by his performance due to his domination in many scrimmages and his performance in the summer leagues. The only reason Ellis got playing time though is because of the injuries. </div> Again, you and I it's a fan's perspective here, but the coach and his GM don't want to playing rookies when #1) they are rookies (fans know nothing of their psyche or what it takes them to get ready mentally and physically like the guys who have played the game do) #2.) Monta Ellis is made a 3rd string point because Dunleavy and Fisher can play those spots and they're under huge deals and they've got more experience #3.) Ellis probably won't get playing time until he gets as much experience as a one year of college nba player and Mullin starts moving other guys who are under deals that no other nba team wants. Can't throw away money with guys recently signed. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> And you are stressing that the Warriors play more post offense and inside. Yet if it's up to Mike Montgomery, it's obvious that he doesn't take inside offense very seriously. Look at how little PT Diogu the best post scorer on the team gets, look at how the other teammates don't adjust to stress to get Diogu his chance. And then in the media he is saying how he is expecting more from Diogu. What about the coaches do something for the players? It seems as if the coaches/Mike Montgomery expects a lot from his players, yet he does what for his players? </div> I'm mad about Diogu not playing, but what do you do when guys aren't getting the ball into Ike or to anyone inside period. Sometimes we have no organization to run that style. Throwing the ball to Ike is essentially isolation plays which they're trying not to do (it means holding onto the ball while the other guys clear aside). They want ball movement 5 on 5 production. Remember, we've got a team that lacks patience, lacks the value of posessions (something that Pietrus ironically complained about in 2003), lacks consistency, they settle for long outside shots without first moving the ball inside to get it back, and they also need more from Diogu on the glass and staying out of foul trouble. Ike may not be consistent yet. For big players it especially takes time for them to get acclimated to the nba game. Plus, we've got Dunleavy, Murphy who are playing power forward because we need rebounding and we need a guy who can dribble penetrate. Apparently we can't get those things at center or at point guard because Fisher is horrible at driving and Foyle can't rebound as well as he used to. All those guys have 4-5 year deals standing the way of the rookies. I don't think Ike will create offense for others just yet because he's still learning, but he understands when to give up the ball and when to go up and score or draw the foul. He'll also box out and do the dirty work on the offensive glass. I want Ike to play but first Mully and Monty have to make some moves so we can trim the rotation to 8 or so GOOD CONSISTENT players. With a 10 man or more rotation the chemistry gets sloppy. Then we also need to have a guy either bust up the offense and dump him the ball, a guy that can knock down outside shots on cue, and other guys that can get open quickly with their feet. Then other guys that can recognize when he's got deep position in the paint to get that 50% or more shot. A lot of times players don't even recognize the mismatch situation or move that ball or space the floor to get the middle open for the big guy. How many other person's defenders get drawn onto the guy receiving the ball? It's ridiculous. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Now this is my thinking: If you aren't part of the solution then you are probably part of the problem. To me, I haven't seen, pretty much, anything that gives me the notion that Mike Montgomery has very many solutions for this team(hince, not part of the solution). Yet like you are posting, CR2, there are quite a few problems that the players are facing on the court, mostly as a coheisive unit. In the Warriors' case without a cast of players that has been to the championship game like the Pistons' squad or the Spurs' squad, or playmakers and leaders like Jason Kidd or Steve Nash, then the next level, which I think is usually the first level to get players to play cohesively is by the head coach and the coaching(even the Pistons and Spurs who I listed, kind of as exceptions, are with very good NBA coaches).</div> I disagree with that logic. Montgomery isn't a problem compared to the problems that already existed way before Monty or Muss. Right now fans have been and are being fed dog crap right now and they impatiently wait for something good to eat before they leave no tip for the waiters and end up not paying the restaurant bill. Montgomery is the cook, but the guy who owns the business doesn't have a budget to buy the things you need to make something good to eat. Is the cook part of the problem or is it the guy who is supposed to get him the cooking supplies and the ingredients he needs to make something good to eat? We're better off than we had been in years, but what did fans really expect going from a bad year to a really mediocre one? I mean let's be realistic about the Warriors chances. I think we got a lot of overly optimistic guys who see a few games last half season and like Mullin, call it a playoff team like he did his 2003 and 2004 teams. They got a long way to go and Mullin sees this now. Can't have total blind faith unless you're also a good judge of talent and can observe what good teams do. I'm not so sure about Mullin... Right now I bet the majority of fans' thoughts are on the short term, I'm seeing long term. I'd rather have Mullin stay with the coaching, find the right talent, develop a strong foundation to support us rather than self destruct and call it over. Pistons, spurs have a different thing going. They players have got talent, unselfishness, discipline, and the GMs know what they need to do to create an environment of stability, flexibility, financial responsibility and winning. It doesn't matter who coaches them because the smart guys on those teams understand what they need to do and they will listen to the right suggestions. However, if you get the Warriors players who the majority are overpaid bums, who only try hard during certain times or on certain ends of the floor, can't make free throws, deviate from the play calls called by the coaches, can't make shots down the stretch or can't even jel because some players on the team are stupid or aren't making the shots they're supposed to make, they deserve to lose. Having Larry f-ing Brown or Phil Jackson or Pat Riley won't help the Warriors much when its totally the way the team lacks talent that fits or lacks reliability and consistency. There's so many things going on with the Warriors and its problems and you can't throw the blame and go the revolving door coach way, because it's proven it never works. Nuggets may have had a case with George Karl, but damn we are not the Nuggets. Not even close to the talent. They can at least rebound and defend the hoop and run plays and make free throws. They suck at shooting, but they at least move around a little and get open and their point guard passes first or looks to drive rather than jack 3's. The only danger that Karl presents is that he's notorious for running star players out of town. Meanwhile, Montgomery is just doing his job, not getting people's faces and working with Mullin. It's a relief they are on the same page working together rather than the whole Musselman debacle the front office had. Mullin fired Musselman, he brought in a coach to teach these guys the right way to play and also give them opportunities to run a lot more if they play the defense. The Warriors can become disciplined by first acknowledging what they are doing wrong as a team and then focus on what the right thing to do is. Then Mullin needs to play his cards right because he should know a good franchise starts with a foundation and we apparently don't have any yet. Baron Davis or Jrich alone is not a foundation unless they grow some more. They are the most complete players we have, but its too much perimeter, not enough of the size, decision making, fundamentals, unselfishness and quickness we need coming from the other positions.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post"> If the coach can't get results with players who have talent,who try hard,care about winning....how is he a good coach?</div> Trying hard isn't enough sometimes, the players have to value posessions and play smart, play defense, be strong mentally when their number is called. I can't stress this enough in discussions. How can a coach be a good coach without players who often choke at the line, or choke from wide open, mishandle the ball trying to create offense, mishandle passes, screw up the offensive flow by jacking stupid shots or not calling plays with the clock still fresh, or do all this other stuff which costs the close, winnable games. We've seen multiple roster changes and a lot of these changes are influenced by guys not getting it done on both ends of the floor and guys who are locked up with guaranteed contracts for several, several years to come. That can ultimately affect what rotation or lineup a coach chooses unless they upset their boss. Mullin signed Dunleavy for a reason and it'd be dumb for Monty to defy him by not playing him and getting his value down unless Mullin was cool with it. Isn't it obvious the guy has his hands tied. Which 8 or 9 man roster do we got with when half of those players aren't getting it done. I'm not trying to be pessimistic, but this team has so many flaws, you can't help but try to be honest that this team needs work. Revolving door coaching won't get it done, unless we find more pieces to get a better balance of attack on offense, better defense, guys who can matchup and be consistent night in and night out. Rookies aren't consistent, guys like Dun and Pietrus aren't consistent, Foyle just sucks, and our offense is preimeter based. Even our starting power forward is a long distance shooter. The problem with Murphy is that his often poor defense stands out if he's not making any impact on the glass or outproducing what he gives up on defense with scoring. The main thing I notice with him is the style of offensive game kills the Warriors momentum and doesn't remember plays as Monty tried to make him more of a high post passer. He's just not used to it. Again trying hard. Effort over efficiency because its all we got. What is trying hard anyway if its not trying hard with talent? I can try hard, but can I get it done? Can I get results and make my teammates better and give them the same trust that they show me? I see the Warriors lacking intensity as well as the talent/chemistry on both ends of the floor. Whether its fatigue or they get sloppy late in the game, the bottom line is the Warriors are not playing an efficient game whereas Montgomery emphasizes effiency and smarter play on offense. There's no 8 or 9 man rotation for us that is any consistent offensively or sound defensively. It's tough for him. I feel really bad for the coaching staff because there's very little options right now and very little room for error with this team. There's only x number of times you can shoot, y number of times you can make defensive stops before its too late. Effort can increase those chances to shoot again or make a stop, but players have to get it done. I do not think the Warriors have the talent to handle both ends of the floor and also stay focussed mentally and be strong mentally.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Clif, c'mon man, how long have you been a Warrior fan to have seen what the Warriors can do without an honest inside game over the years.</div> What do you mean about honest inside game? Fortson/Dampier, Murphy/Dampier with Foyle on both duos is not bad and I guess is more "honest" than a lot of other inside games. The Warriors used to always dominate the glass. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">How about knowing that the Warriors are not a good defensive team to begin with over the years? And how about a mediocre zone defensive scheme whose alternative is an even lousier man-to-man defense, coupled with little ability to manufacture their own shots off the dribble on isolations?</div> I know that the Warriors have bad defenders. I do know that there are very good ones in Monta Ellis, Pietrus, Biedrins, Foyle, and Taft though. And I do agree that the defensive scheme is merely adequate(Why not use the press more now that the team knows Monta Ellis?). How many players in the NBA are great at manufacturing their own shot? The Warriors have a good one in Baron Davis. It also helps to have the rest of the team help those good scorers by setting Pacer/Reggie Miller screens for Dunleavy, Jason, or Pietrus who are pretty good at shooting, or even Derek Fisher. Pretty much the whole offense is to play individually, and the only screens are the repetitive on the ball screens that they use the whole game pretty much. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">What can Montgomery and his staff possibly do when their GM Chris Mullin has forced their hands to play the guys under contract for multiple years to come? You don't park guys like Foyle, Dunleavy, Fisher on the 3rd string rotation who've been locked up for years and years when nobody in the league wants anything to do with them. You include them because they'll be back next year, the year after, and the year after that, and the year after that. You have to include them until the front office starts moving the guys that don't fit in on a team.</div> I agree about the player contracts being a downside. It shouldn't affect the coaching on the court though. Anyway Fisher has been very important for the Warriors, Foyle doesn't play a lot anyway, but he is help in the front court, and Dunleavy has been struggling too. But really all three of those players are pretty important to the team. But yeah I was against Chris Mullin on those moves too. But you gotta make the best out of the hand you are dealt. That's the way it is done in the NBA as a head coach. If you want it to be different then you ought to stay in the college or high school ranks. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It's especially hard to include the rookie players in that situation because of the other guys' playing times/years left on their deals/experience. The problem with rookies is they are rookies, and unlike the situation the coaches are put in, you don't want to affect the young rookie guys' confidence level by putting them in a situation where they are set up to fail or be left out there to handle the pressure all on their own. You saw how fans reacted to Dunleavy when he was pushed into the starting role right away or how quickly fans are turning on Pietrus now that they've seen him start for a while. That could have been Pietrus years ago and fans would have turned on him quickly for what he couldn't do as a starter.</div> Nobody wanted the rookies to start, well maybe besides Ike for a stretch there. I think most people just want to see him get a fair chance to produce and be put in positions where he can succeed by the coaching. Why is it that Ike plays great against Utah one game and then the next game only plays 2 minutes? The only excuse there is to not be playing Ike, Zarko, or Biedrins(who is not a rookie) is because of foul trouble. Though there are many times where they don't play for some other reasons than fouls. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Biedrins also lacked the same consistency. I want to see guys like Ike play and Biedrins play, but this is about also being ready to play ball consistently both mentally and physically which young guys often aren't. One or two game flashes don't count, especially because we don't see these guys in practice the way the coaches do.</div> So, the Warriors could be pounded on the glass and just have no inside presence at all on defense, and Biedrins shouldn't get the PT because he lacks consistancy? Really, age shouldn't be a reason why players shouldn't play. The Warriors youngsters are actually very mature and very focused mentally and gifted athletically in Monta Ellis, Andris Biedrins, and Ike Diogu. Maybe Ike does get out of his realm a bit, but I think that has a lot to do about the whole season's conflicts and confusions between Mike Montgomery and Ike(again a coaching issue) <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Defying Mullin certainly means a coach is going to get fired. Look at Musselman when he tried to do his own thing aside from what St. Jean thought was good for this franchise and they both ended up getting fired because St. Jean wasn't the best G.M. and Musselman wanted to win for the short term win column rather than develop these guys and get them to play right.</div> Sadly this may be true. Also I don't know if St. Jean was too much against Musselman, I think it was more of the ownership who got sick of Musselman because of some lame articles that made Musselman into a villian which ownership ran with. Also Mullin who might have been the one to replace St. Jean the year or two before, wanted a coach that is "free" with the players, which I think is rediculous, especially since Musselman's stricter ways were much better for the team. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Also young guys don't always develop the patience to play fundamentally sound ball because they don't know how or they think they can do it all on their own like the streetball mentality. Guys like Taft, Biedrins, Ellis either played little or no college ball to even know what good ball is until they learn, which they are slowly doing by observing. None of those guys were Garnett or Lebron James or T-mac to jump in right away and let's not forget a few of those guys don't always blow up in one year. </div> Biedrins has played in the NBA for one season and has played in pro leagues already. Ellis already has the saavy and like Biedrins just knows where to be on the court at all times(not matter how old he is, he's great at this thing) and like Biedrins he has great athleticism and feel for the game. I don't really care if they aren't KG's, Lebron James', or TMac's, but really how will we know this now? especially if they don't get(at least weren't getting the PT). ------- Anyway, in the rest of the article you blame something, I don't know what, you just consistantly point out a lack of organization on the team. You point out this is almost all of your paragraphs I believe, and all of that goes onto the coach. You talk about how the players are bad at isolations, yet that is the only style of offense that the Warriors play besides some on the ball screens. There are no off the ball screens, and there is no ball movement. Ball movement doesn't even cross the players' minds. That goes on the coach. Watch the games and you will see the Warriors lead by Jason Richardson will literally play a 10 second offense with usually a lot of dribbling, a lot of dribbling, (how can you want more dribbling?) then put up tough shot/bad shot off bad offense time after time, and then who is there to follow that? Well Murphy, Pietrus, Fisher, and even Monta Ellis has been following the vets and yet where is Monty to make the team play the "right way"? Here is my question for you CR2: If Mike Montgomery were the coach of the Kings, how do you think they would play? My answer: A lot worse than they are, because there wouldn't be any ball movement and on the Kings there are no play makers at the level of Jason, Baron, Murphy, or the likes. One more question: Which teams have more talent than the Warriors? Do you think the Jazz, Lakers, Clippers, Kings, Hornets, Minnesota, Memphis have more talent? My answer: I don't think that those teams have decisively more talent than the Warriors, it may be even at best, but that's it. The difference between the Warriors and these teams is mainly in the coaching I believe. I mean Jerry Sloan, Phil Jackson, Mike Dunleavy, Rick Adleman, the Tsar(and Musselman), and Byron Scott are very good NBA head coaches. I think that is the main difference between the Warriors and the rest of these teams. Those teams are winning and the Warriors continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. But yes free throws are a problem too, which is why I said that coaching and free throws will be the two things that will hurt the Warriors chances of making the playoffs or having a winning season. Finally the people before Montgomery and Musselman, I dont think are the problems. Well maybe I do, if you are talking about Chris Cohan and Rowell or whatever his name is. But who was around before Musselman? Well there was Jason, Murphy, Foyle, Pietrus, and Dunleavy. I don't know if they are the problems, maybe some of their contracts, but I don't know about being the big problems right now.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">What do you mean about honest inside game? Fortson/Dampier, Murphy/Dampier with Foyle on both duos is not bad and I guess is more "honest" than a lot of other inside games. The Warriors used to always dominate the glass. </div> I'm saying that Foyle is not an honest inside presence like Dampier was. Dampier actually understands inside positioning and he's got more inside presence in any year of his contract than Foyle ever will. Plus, Dampier can throw a decent kickout pass out of the pivot unlike Foyle. You need big man skills and the muscle when running motion offense or plays going to the pivot. You know inside-outside game? We can't play on the outside like we always do or its going to be predictable, lead to bad shot %'s, and fastbreaks going the other way. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I know that the Warriors have bad defenders. I do know that there are very good ones in Monta Ellis, Pietrus, Biedrins, Foyle, and Taft though. And I do agree that the defensive scheme is merely adequate(Why not use the press more now that the team knows Monta Ellis?). </div> If you were to put all those guys on the floor at once for pressing full court or 3/4's court where do we get our scoring from? That relates to consistency on scoring the basket and who can step up and knows the plays. As I said before coaches are around these rookies to have an idea what they can and can't do just yet. It's a development process and impatient fans can't assume they know more about rookies or talents or what they're mindsets are than the guys who work directly with them in practice, in film sessions, in the locker room. Also do we have 5 guys that can move as laterally quick as Pietrus or Ellis? Do we recognize offenses teams are throwing at us? We barely even remember our own plays or else there wouldn't be breakdowns on the intial passes. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> How many players in the NBA are great at manufacturing their own shot? The Warriors have a good one in Baron Davis. It also helps to have the rest of the team help those good scorers by setting Pacer/Reggie Miller screens for Dunleavy, Jason, or Pietrus who are pretty good at shooting, or even Derek Fisher. Pretty much the whole offense is to play individually, and the only screens are the repetitive on the ball screens that they use the whole game pretty much. </div> Yes, and how healthy has Baron Davis been this year before he missed two or three weeks of basketball from the result of a bum ankle? How many guys can replicate what Baron Davis does when Baron is taking matters into his own hand and not distributing the ball? How many guys can know what Baron Davis will do on offense when he makes it up as he goes along? I agree we lack teamwork, but I don't think its because of the coaches. I'm sure that Montgomery, the guy who emphasizes teamwork, good ball movement, doesn't want his team to play stagnant offense without having an idea what to do. We're forced to play smarter because we can't rely on a injury prone point guard that is a streaky shooter and can't create the entire team's offense by himself. Team ball doesn't work like that. It's that not having an idea what to do that causes the Warriors to break down mentally and start playing on isolations. They just can't execute. If we want to hold a coach responsible for a team that has never played good team ball in a decade for the way they have always played, that's just ridiculous. That's like blaming 5th greade teachers for the students not knowing the alphabet. It takes time to get these guys up to speed so they can have the same weapons as every other playoff team does. Execution and fundamentals. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I agree about the player contracts being a downside. It shouldn't affect the coaching on the court though. </div> You don't think 5-6 year deals don't hang over both Mullin and the coaching staff's heads? This is the NBA not college. GMs made the bed and now they have to sleep in it. Coaches unfortunately are taken along with them. How do we know Mullin and Monty aren't working on fixing the long term problem this offseason instead of worrying about a short term gain to get rookies started this season? Like you said, they have to start from somewhere and if that means playing certain guys so we can deal later, so be it. We know very well the problem is we have very few guys who've even seen the playoffs. We have difficulty trying to get this team to play with what they have and to stop settling for rookie ball. Unfortunately the guys we have tend to always break down when they can't handle it patiently or they can't play the way their positions are supposed to play. Our only playoff guys tend to score like they are shooting guards which is a big problem. Guys looking to score impatiently cannot lead the team to do what the coaches want. Sometimes Baron doesn't either. Everything this offense does is limited to what the point guard does because we have no center to initiate the plays on backdoor cuts. That is why we often find the sucky Dunleavy playing high post at PF. Then we got nobody else because Zarko probably won't be re-signed. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I agree about the player contracts being a downside. It shouldn't affect the coaching on the court though. Anyway Fisher has been very important for the Warriors, Foyle doesn't play a lot anyway, but he is help in the front court, and Dunleavy has been struggling too. But really all three of those players are pretty important to the team. But yeah I was against Chris Mullin on those moves too. But you gotta make the best out of the hand you are dealt. That's the way it is done in the NBA as a head coach. If you want it to be different then you ought to stay in the college or high school ranks. </div> Exactly. So until then, I'm saying the "fire the coach" mentality that's going on elsewhere or here should have people really thinking hard until the playing hand gets better and we get more guys who know their role and won't deviate from it. Then we can see what this coach can do. He should get at least one more year. When someone says "Fire the coach" after a year and half, it says they don't know, they're jumping to conclusions, or they don't understand everything that the guys who know basketball are trying to do for this team (I'm talking about coaches). We cannot support the primadonnas or guys with ego or no heart just like we can't support the fiery coaches who instigate conflict more than they resolve it. Right now I'm at least happy with players behaving and coaches not getting in people's faces unecessarily. We have to accept we're not a good team yet and the losing is affecting our patience. All I know is it seems lately like guys who never played or coached are starting to think they can win with a bunch of guys who've never made the playoffs in over 11 seasons because they showed a little something for two months last season. It's an 82 game season, it's a marathon full of injuries and fatigue and it's about protecting the home court, and growing. We don't have the talent that fits yet, so we need to play with a sense of urgency and value our posessions more. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Nobody wanted the rookies to start, well maybe besides Ike for a stretch there. I think most people just want to see him get a fair chance to produce and be put in positions where he can succeed by the coaching. Why is it that Ike plays great against Utah one game and then the next game only plays 2 minutes? The only excuse there is to not be playing Ike, Zarko, or Biedrins(who is not a rookie) is because of foul trouble. Though there are many times where they don't play for some other reasons than fouls. </div> Rookies can get a fair chance to produce, but like I said it's which players are in front of them and what the front office plans are to help move them. There's a lot of guys with years of guaranteed money that you can't leave off the 8-9 man rotation. Unfortunately in the NBA, you try to find a balance between winning and going with the guys you have that are locked up. We need to find takers for Fisher or Foyle or Dunleavy or whoever isn't fitting the bill on the core talent of this team. Like I said before there are impatient fans thinking about the short term rather than the long term, and the long term is all dependent on the GM decisions. The GM decisions affect what the coaches are having to work with because the coaches need to support that long term plan as well as focussing on their short term goals for the team. Coaches have to fit the philosophy and management of the front office. That is why Musselman got fired and not because he was a bad coach. Musselman also had his hands tied trying to get these guys to play team ball but it ended up having to play rookie ball so there's less things to remember. This team needs to be taught and guys don't always learn as quickly because all 5 guys have to buy into it and they need to adjust. It's not easy. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> So, the Warriors could be pounded on the glass and just have no inside presence at all on defense, and Biedrins shouldn't get the PT because he lacks consistancy? Really, age shouldn't be a reason why players shouldn't play. The Warriors youngsters are actually very mature and very focused mentally and gifted athletically in Monta Ellis, Andris Biedrins, and Ike Diogu. Maybe Ike does get out of his realm a bit, but I think that has a lot to do about the whole season's conflicts and confusions between Mike Montgomery and Ike(again a coaching issue) </div> Biedrins lacks consistency, but he also lacks strength. I'm not a big man coach nor do I know exactly why this is, but I can at least understand that the big man game requires a lot of leaning, lot of heavy contact by heavy players, all while running the floor. What makes Biedrins so good for us is that he's a good hustle player and he has good hands, but he lacks strength right now. I'm all for Biedrins going in ahead of Foyle, but keep in mind Foyle is probably a lot stronger. Bulk isn't the same as strength. A guy like Jeff Foster at age 28 could be physically stronger than a guy that weighs the same as he but is younger and less developed. At center, you need some strength as well as bulk so you don't give up ground so easily and you don't get hurt doing it. I think that's the only reason why Biedrins isn't starting by now it's probably because they need some kind of energy off the bench. It used to be Pietrus, but he got promoted. Also don't forget Biedrin's had the car accident thing messing with his neck so you never know if this is reported to the media or not. Like I said patience and understanding. We don't know the whole reasoning just yet so let's name some possibilities before we start assuming its this and that. Everything has a reason and we can't be narrow minded or jumping to conclusions like we fans know better than the guys who get paid money to work with these players. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Sadly this may be true. Also I don't know if St. Jean was too much against Musselman, I think it was more of the ownership who got sick of Musselman because of some lame articles that made Musselman into a villian which ownership ran with. Also Mullin who might have been the one to replace St. Jean the year or two before, wanted a coach that is "free" with the players, which I think is rediculous, especially since Musselman's stricter ways were much better for the team. </div> I don't think the franchise needs an authoritarian as a head coach. Smart players don't need to be yelled at and told what they need to do. They just do it. Maybe sooner or later some eyes will open up and finally get it. Sometimes pro basketball players, like pro football players, aren't the smartest guys on the planet. And back to Muss, look at how many vets and star players he alienated, not to mention made the picks of St. Jean probably less valuable by not playing them the minutes their deals were worth. GM and the coach have to work hand in hand because unlike college, the coach can't pick his own guys to recruit. Musselman ran with whatever worked but he got guys like Jrich, Dunleavy, NVE or whoever on edge. Truly talented guys who know what they're doing don't need to be yelled at, they feel the sense of urgency all on their own. Plus, you can't take away the game the players are used to and make them something they are not. What if our guys can't even play an honest half court game? That is sad because we don't have the kind of one-on-one isolations unless Baron is healthy and he starts shooting a reasonable %. Since this team has never been a playoff team or had an identity, I'd rather wait until we get the true position players who are comfortable in any offense, not these tall finesse big players or power guards that can't shoot or dribble or pass well. We need more guys where it doesn't matter what style they play, they'll find some way to get it done. We've drafted few players like that because we've been unlucky to consistently fall in shallow drafts or between early to mid first round when the Chris Bosh's, Kirk Hinrich's, are all taken. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Biedrins has played in the NBA for one season and has played in pro leagues already. Ellis already has the saavy and like Biedrins just knows where to be on the court at all times(not matter how old he is, he's great at this thing) and like Biedrins he has great athleticism and feel for the game. I don't really care if they aren't KG's, Lebron James', or TMac's, but really how will we know this now? especially if they don't get(at least weren't getting the PT). ------- </div> Again, jumping to conclusions as a fan. Are we around these guys like the guys who train and coach them? Fans don't have to know what these rookies are capable of, GMs and Coaches do. I think they probably know a lot better than us because all we have are short observations and assumptions based on those short observations. Again, patience. Do we know what their physical limitations are against much stronger players? Sometimes age doesn't matter because its all about talent, but the nba is a physical game and its an endurance game. We can't assume we've got one of these guys that can jump in there and kick ass the way we'd think they would 48 minutes a game. Experience over time also counts for something. A lot of the guys defending Ellis or Diogu have never seen these rookies before but they could just figure them out. I mean Pietrus is pretty easy to figure out now, so why not throw them in when they start to get it and have an idea of what they are doing within the context of the team? I hate to play 5 on 5 ball when one guy is not doing what the rest of the team is trying to do. That's what leads to breakdowns in playing motion offense in the first place. But again, it's a catch 22 because we don't even have 5 guys to play 5 on 5. If we can't play an honest half court game we're not a basketball team because all the good teams can play in any style, any tempo, and with ability to make defensive stops as well. The Warriors have never played this way and it's about time they learn it. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Anyway, in the rest of the article you blame something, I don't know what, you just consistantly point out a lack of organization on the team. </div> I blame the players. I don't know how I can be much clearer than that. I thought it was obvious. The guys make mistakes out there and they don't play as a team. Obviously I see a few players that I like, but the rest are garbage or they don't belong. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> You point out this is almost all of your paragraphs I believe, and all of that goes onto the coach. You talk about how the players are bad at isolations, yet that is the only style of offense that the Warriors play besides some on the ball screens. There are no off the ball screens, and there is no ball movement. Ball movement doesn't even cross the players' minds. That goes on the coach. Watch the games and you will see the Warriors lead by Jason Richardson will literally play a 10 second offense with usually a lot of dribbling, a lot of dribbling, (how can you want more dribbling?) then put up tough shot/bad shot off bad offense time after time, and then who is there to follow that? Well Murphy, Pietrus, Fisher, and even Monta Ellis has been following the vets and yet where is Monty to make the team play the "right way"? </div> Oversimplification. People take what they don't understand and turn it against a figure of authority: the coach or GM just like people do whenever the Warriors fail to make the playoffs. In this case it is the GM because he pretty much chose what players Monty could rely on in the center, forward and point guard positions. If you think about the big man positions and the point guard spots, the majority of those Warriors players don't have the fundamentals or tools to play as a 5 man team just yet. Just look at the passing and poor shot selection. That's not what a coach wants, that is what the player decides to do. Lack of fundamentals and bad decision making gives us incomplete team players. That is like a college math teacher getting blamed for a student that doesn't have the high school prerequisites down for mathematics. Oh we don't blame the student, we blame the professor that gets to teach and grade them. That's unfair. So I disagree it's not something you can point fingers at the coach. This team never had more than 2 or 3 players with a complete game or with any talent that fit. It's why we don't have an identity and its also why the revolving door coaching decisions never got us anywhere. We have incomplete players. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Here is my question for you CR2: If Mike Montgomery were the coach of the Kings, how do you think they would play? </div> Sacramento can play the high pick and roll, they can run princeton offense on backdoor cuts or motion offense or stack offense. That is Montgomery's realm. The problem with the Kings is who does the dirty work and can they play defense? The Kings can at least shoot free throws, move the ball around, and remember plays. Montgomery would probably do well with that club compared to ours. Now that they've got in Kenny Thomas to be a scrappy player for them with either Miller or Bibby setting up offense, it makes for better chemistry. Plus unlike us, they got a forward that can get it done and an all-star center. They've got guys who can operate, we don't and I'm pretty sure the Kings wouldn't have done so lousy if Peja wasn't slumping or hurt most of the time. Kings also have a thin bench and having a good bench is important. Warriors are thin in the big positions and don't have much to set the tone up front. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> My answer: A lot worse than they are, because there wouldn't be any ball movement and on the Kings there are no play makers at the level of Jason, Baron, Murphy, or the likes. </div> Again, I think those are blatant assumptions and that's totally an unfair assessment. The Kings have been to the playoffs before, they've been together longer as a core unit, they have a good core unit, they have some chemistry although not the same as the Webber, Vlade, Christie, Bibby n' Peja days. The Kings team actually made it to the finals, so you can't be comparing how our coach might have failed on that squad. That's like shooters and firearms. The shooter is only as good as his weapon can shoot and the weapon is only as good as its shooter can shoot. If one or the other is bad, you can't hit the target. And the Kings are not playmakers compared to Murphy or Jrich? OMG. How many all-stars do you count on the Kings that have more dimensions to their game, especially passing or cutting? How many times have each of those kings players been to the playoffs together? They've got chemistry, guys like Brad Miller have better passing instincts than Murphy ever will. Guys like Bibby will forever shoot a high % than any of the guys we have on our backcourt. Unbelievable comparrison. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> One more question: Which teams have more talent than the Warriors? Do you think the Jazz, Lakers, Clippers, Kings, Hornets, Minnesota, Memphis have more talent? </div> Again its not talent as a whole, but talent that fits. Kings were one of those teams until they made a trade that seems to be helping somewhat, but not entirely. They need another inside big man and some more depth + defense. Anyway you know that teams without much talent can still win because their teamwork is that good and they play smart, execute and make good decisions and can shoot/play defense. It's a poor question IMO, because a group of 5 guys with talent and a thin bench not playing together is worse than a team with 5 mediocre guys who play smart and execute and have a deep bench. In this case the sum of the parts don't equal the whole. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> My answer: I don't think that those teams have decisively more talent than the Warriors, it may be even at best, but that's it. The difference between the Warriors and these teams is mainly in the coaching I believe. I mean Jerry Sloan, Phil Jackson, Mike Dunleavy, Rick Adleman, the Tsar(and Musselman), and Byron Scott are very good NBA head coaches. I think that is the main difference between the Warriors and the rest of these teams. Those teams are winning and the Warriors continue to make the same mistakes over and over again. But yes free throws are a problem too, which is why I said that coaching and free throws will be the two things that will hurt the Warriors chances of making the playoffs or having a winning season. </div> Those are good coaches, but they are also better teams with more chemistry and more defined roles that understand the plays. The Knicks have "talent" but look at what a good coach Larry Brown is doing for them. He's got nothing to work with. Now if Larry Brown was a college coach (which he was btw) and the Knicks team only went to the playoffs one time with Stephon Marbury, he'd probably get even more flack for not playing rookies more or playing the no defense, run n' gun rookie ball style of way. I mean c'mon, Clif. That is not the main difference between those playoff teams and you know it. How many players on those teams don't rebound the ball well or jack long dumb shots when they can take those shots anytime they want? The playoff teams have some form of discipline, patience, smarts, and just being able to put the damn ball through the hole. The Warriors historically have never had the guys who can do all that, get the other guys involved, while playing defense. There's just no trust or strong mental game these days. Just think if guys like Zarko or Dunleavy were still hitting big. We'd probably win a few more games, but now we're searching for others in the 8-9 man rotation that can get it done and be trustworthy. We'd kick Foyle out, but we'd miss a shotblocker who we have few of. Plus he's holding guaranteed big money like Dunleavy is. Two bad investments that coaches will have to play and live with until they get moved or start playing better to get the inside/outside game going. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Finally the people before Montgomery and Musselman, I dont think are the problems. Well maybe I do, if you are talking about Chris Cohan and Rowell or whatever his name is. But who was around before Musselman? Well there was Jason, Murphy, Foyle, Pietrus, and Dunleavy. I don't know if they are the problems, maybe some of their contracts, but I don't know about being the big problems right now.</div> The problem is the Warriors are a collection of players and not a team. Maybe they need time to develop, maybe their talents don't fit, maybe we need more talent or intangibles that we're lacking. All I know is the mental approach to the game is not there or else they'd be playing motion offense instead of a streetball pickup game. The problem with motion offense is you need a balanced attack coming from all 5 guys and you need to play defense and rebound and do all this other stuff we don't do to get an inside/outside ball movement game going. Even if we got a more seasoned coach and even if that meant we got the 8th seed, who freaking cares. I believe the team is what it it always was and it won't get very far unless they make changes. I just don't care about short term progress if that means two steps back later on if Mullin has the same brain fart again judging the team's chances next season. Getting to the playoffs is only good if you got something big to make it further each year. That means making strong followup moves in addition to picking good draft picks. It means building upon an already strong foundation with guys who are used to each other. I don't think we can make those leaps and bounds with the way our spending has been and our very limited ways of attacking and defending inside and out. We'll be lucky if we're the 2003-2004 New York Knicks. Let's just hope the Warriors do better and find a stronger foundation whether it be fundamentals, talent to keep the inside game honest or getting some dominant player to build on.
CR2, I understand your arguments. I think the differences are mostly between our perspectives and views rather than what we think about the team. I think we are both frusterated Warrior fans. You seem to be a believer that just because someone's title is coach or GM, that they must be basketball geniuses. And I am not going to say that Mike Montgomery and Chris Mullin don't know a lot about the game, because they do, a lot more about many things that I don't know. However, maybe I am more free in attacking the head coach, or people of authorities. It's like the President of the United States. If there are things said by the president that he says will help the economy or something but is obviously stupid, I am not going to waste my time in believing him(for example Bush's excess spending and then response with tax cuts). And heck, if there are continuous problems like Katrina, Iraq War, 9/11, spying on citizens, etc. then heck, I am going to stand up against that man, no matter if his title is President of the United States or anything else. You on the other hands are much more forgiving and lenient and I will respect that. With Mike Montgomery I have just seen a lot of collapses, a lot of bad offense, a lot of bad rebounding, bad rotations, and I haven't seen too much improvement in these areas, besides maybe rotations which may be getting slightly better. It's hard to support a coach, for me, who after games and during slumps just has comments where he himself is saying he has no solutions. That is not what I want to hear from the coach as his player or as a fan of the team. And you talk about roles of the players. I agree with you on this. The roles of the players have not yet been established on this team, and that is the coach's job. This lack of roles is something that hurts Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy, Ike Diogu, Adonal Foyle, and pretty much the whole team, even Zarko. I mean what is Baron's role? I get the since that there are three players with roles on this team, and those players are Baron, Fisher, and Jason who are the players who are there to win games for the team. That in my observations are the roles that Montgomery has given the team. And if they aren't, then they are similar to this because that is how that trio has played this whole season, or at least since mid January when I could finally watch complete games. I hope we are not comparing our team to the Knicks. That is just devastating, have we really fallen that far back? What do you mean about this team has always been such and such? In my mind this team has only been around for one and a half years/seasons. Before then, there was a lot of movement. The roster 3 or 4 years ago was much different than it is now, and so was the franchise from management down. "Musselman ran with whatever worked but he got guys like Jrich, Dunleavy, NVE or whoever on edge." Are you saying that Jason or Mike Dunleavy didn't need some authortive figures in their basketball skills? Jason didn't play because he was a bad defender, and he still is a bad defender. Musselman was the one who pushed Jason, a good thing, and look at how Jason has been improving(I think last year, even his defense was improving a little bit, this year it just sucks). Heck, Jason still isn't that smart of a player either, how much of the offense is initiated from him? It's getting better, but still not that good. And Mike Dunleavy had at least some fire in him under Musselman. But really, I think Dunleavy played more under Musselman than he did under Montgomery last year. And I don't remember any problems between NVE and Muss. Heck you want discipline, and that is something Muss brought to the team. There was not one team that the Warriors took lightly, there were few teams that were must wins that they lost, especially at home, and they rarely were left unproductive on the court. Right now we are 12th out of 15 in the Western Confrence. This is unacceptable, thus CR2's, mine, and a whole lot of other fans' frusteration. Now I am thinking why do I spend this much time following or even talking about the Warriors? It's never going to change or work out. I always had the feeling that they were always so close to something, but just there were always too many obstacles thrown the Warriors way, mostly by the franchise itself and other things too. And look where we are, the same place as the start. Why why why? and how? frusterations...
Man we're just going to go in circles. I think the cold, hard truth is that the Warriors have never played good enough ball to win consistently in an 82 game season for over a decade and a lot of that has to do with lack talent that fits in a team offense and the front office management not being able to do anything before going into the season because of their prior contract committments to guys like Foyle/Fish/ and then Dunleavy. It's obvious that a team cannot be built through the draft alone, unless we get lucky and find a true franchise guy. Because our lack of quality and reasonable priced FA's, the inability to find starting 5 talent that fits together, we shouldn't be firing the coaches when the coaches have absolutely few options to work with. It's like a busted car engine not working, so you replace the tires thinking it's going to fix something. Once the car has a solid, working engine, the tires can then operate and this is why we need to stop firing coaches and address the personnel issue. The front office, players, coaches, it's all one big team rather than 3 separate entities. Sure Montgomery might have made some mistakes, but he's trying to figure out what we have here and what works in an 8-9 man rotation that can play honest D and score productively. These stupid contracts totally hinder who he can leave out of that rotation because chances are Montgomery would leave guys like Foyle/Dunleavy way out. Right now it is totally obvious that the coach has nothing valuable in his stable or the flexibilty and depth to make this season meaningful. The franchise will go nowhere by making a playoff appearance or two if they don't have a strong foundation to begin with so that they can continue going to the playoffs and adding more each season. That foundation has to begin with smarter play, the right physical tools, the right mental tools, chemistry, solid execution, and clearly defined roles. I.e. the PF plays like a PF and not a SF, the PG plays like a PG and not a SG, and so on. This is all depending on how the offense is run, but we need guys to play their positions that tailor to either the outside or inside game and on interior or perimeter defense. Right now we don't have a lot of balance in how we score, our scoring options, level of experience, the patience to run an offense, the flexibility in choosing the roster, depth at size positions and we don't make good enough decisions with passing and moving off the ball. We also aren't quick enough in the transition game or good enough play the defense to go out and run. If we get slowed down, we need to do something else than stand around and wait or try to do our best impersonation of one-on-one play with dribble penetration. So that's why I'm saying it's the guys we have that aren't fitting any roles. We have a shooting guard that is talented, but can't dribble or stay in front of quicker guards or shoot free throws. We have two point guards that score more like shooting guards and they take a lot of shots. We have a center who cannot score inside and a rookie backup who is still maybe a year or two away from developing the physical strength needed to get inside position on the boards. We've got very little scoring coming from inside and guys on the wing that cannot hit their shots. It's the guys we have that are inconsistent and unproductive and the guys that Mullin chose to roll with for 4-5 more years. This hastily assembled long term solution incredibly handicaps the fixing of an 8-9 man rotation when there's 3 or 4 guys in there with hefty contracts that don't put up consistent numbers. You still have to play those guys, though. I mean those 4 stupidly overpaid guys are the ones that block the young guys from seeing some burn. We also have incredibly shallow depth at small forward (probably by design no thx to Mullin and his love for Dunleavy). And keep in mind I'm no real expert, but I keep hearing Fire Monty, when there's no solution that would be better for our team in the long run or the short run. I don't hear any suggestions what would make this team better, except for let's run more, let's run more. That's like saying the solution to fixing the economy is to find a demand and create more jobs. Great! How do we do that? How do you do that if there's no talent to do so and there are other factors in the economy which prevent that? Also, what if it takes time for things to turn around? There's a lot of oversimplifying what can work when the truest solution to good basketball is to study and master various ways of executing an offense so the opposing defense can't react in time. See, that's why we have to stay patient until there's a clear direction towards building a team that can hack it in a 5 on 5 game in any tempo (running open court or half court), and with skill playing both ends of the floor well with hustle, athleticism, individual D, shooting and passing skills. There's no evidence that points to how this team could make the playoffs this season when there's so many flaws right now. It's like wishing for an impossibility. It's like we've got a car with too many steering wheels, but not enough wheels. We need to be balanced and make a proper design around motion offense and parts working inside and outside. And if we remain just a running team, we'll fall short of trying for that balance. We won't get that offensive consistency and defense. And BTW I agree that the bashing of Montgomery is a lot like bashing Bush and all the political issues floating out there. There's a lot of facts and circumstances being left out and that creates a lot of spurious information that gets circulated. A lot it seems true, but maybe there's a half truth. There's something that's not being said that makes a point of view so one-sided, narrow minded it just causes more misinformation. After all the fans calling for Montgomery's head and saying do this and do that probably have their own personal agendas just like those in the country's political forum with ultra-liberal and ultra-conservative views attacking each other. And of course I think both sides of the extremes need to be laid to rest or come to some compromise. I'm not an extremist saying Montgomery is our guy, but he certainly shouldn't be fired over something the team by nature does not do easily (play D, settle down and use their heads). I'm trying to speak out against fans that emulate Barbara Streisand talking about politics and the economy (like they have the background for it [sarcasm] and a realistic P.O.V.[also sarcasm]). I just want all the Monty badmouthers to concisely explain what they understand about motion offense, a princeton offense, a stack offense and the way a running game works. I don't like comments that point out a few things the Warriors don't do well and then immediately blame the coach when they don't understand the principles behind the various ways of playing. For fans criticizing coaches, they better know their plays and if their players have the capability of even running them. What happens if the players don't run any plays well? It's like blaming the dog trainer for why the dog is not learning the tricks. And if the dog is doing it on purpose and not because its stupid, then that dog is a being a punk and it should be put to sleep. > I just hope in all this frustration that fans aren't seeing things incorrectly and don't form this agenda to badmouth something they don't understand or have a distorted/biased view of. And if they truly believe it's the coach and not the players, please explain the plays, multiple examples of how this team could have made the playoffs with somebody else? Why is it we can't shoot wide open shots, make layups, defend the basket, make free throws, box out, set screrens, make good passes, do all these little things which are supposed to help us stay ahead in games? Are there plays for this team that can do better if Montgomery isn't getting it done? Who here has the coaching skills to say that Montgomery should be making these guys play this way. Who here has evidence that by playing a certain way they could win more games than they lose. See? There's no answer for it. The answer we do have is that the Warriors never saw the playoffs with their core group of guys and they have shown time and time again how weak mentally and fundamentally these guys are in the team game. To say otherwise, is just playing hunches or jumping to conclusions. Maybe the whole reason why most college to nba coaches fail is because they go to teams who want to take the easy way out or they inherit a bunch of guys that don't know how to play good team basketball. Anyway, I sure hope players don't have to be discipliend, they are already self-disciplined. That's why Mullin is trying to find these strength of character types, but unfortunately he either overpays them (ruining all flexibility in moving them later) or he gets the hardworking guys on effort who can't perform.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">If the coach can't get results with players who have talent,who try hard,care about winning....how is he a good coach?</div> He's not. Monty sucks at getting anything out of the players except getting them to screw up. I tried to be open minded about Monty all season. Didn't have this many complaints about him last season, but he's changed for the worse imo. Mainly, his substitutions are bad, he doesn't call enough time outs to stop the other team's momentum and doesn't call enough good plays (except for out of bounds). He didn't develop the rooks, AB and MP either because their play was not planned. Whatever PT they got was because Monty was forced to play them due to injuries to the starters. Finally, I don't know why he went to the pick and roll system despite being successful last year by running. My conclusion is Monty was the wrong hire. First, he's a college coach who is in over his head in the NBA. Second, his system doesn't fit the players and it's easier getting rid of the coach than the players. That said, there are still issues remaining with the players. We need a proven winning NBA coach to come in next year, e.g. Doug Collins. I'm not sure what kind of records Paul Silas or Terry Porter have. Who else is available? It's too bad we can't give Smart or Elie a chance. But 12 years without playoffs is just too damned much! Next, we still have to evaluate the team's problems. Once we identify those, then we can evaluate our players and see which ones to keep and which ones to trade. Of course, if Pierce or KG become available, then we can make exceptions. Also, Mullin screwed us with his gladhanding multi-million dollar contracts to every Tom, Dick and Harry (RE: Foyle, Fisher and Dunleavy). These guys we may not be able to trade no matter what.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting hoopsword.com:</div><div class="quote_post">The End Is Near For Monty: Tick.Tock. Mike Montgomery is on the clock. It’s sad that this statement is true, but Mike Montgomery will be fired as the head coach of Golden State Warriors. It remains to be seen if it happens in the next 20 games, but its commonly believed it will happen soon and that Keith Smart will replace him as interim head coach. The flaws in the Warriors have more to do with Baron Davis, who has zero confidence in Monty, and his infection of the locker room. If you recall Monty really had the Warriors clicking last year at the end of the season, and were trucking along at the start of this season. It’s the constant tinkering with the lineup and some repeatedly bad X & O decisions that has turned the team on him, and he’s on the downward spiral, that will ultimately cost him his job. Monty is a solid coach and he proved he could coach at this level, but once again the NBA has been shown that college coaches do not garner the respect from players that they once used to, and the mechanics of coaching professional athletes is different than college. The next challenge for the Warriors may not be finding Monty’s replacement, rather determining if Chris Mullin is really the best guy to be making the decisions. </div> http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_16504.shtml <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Espn.com:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm told that Keith Smart is more likely than Mario Elie to be named interim coach in the event that Golden State dismisses Mike Montgomery before the end of the season. Yet club insiders insist it remains far more likely that no change is even being considered until the offseason, no matter how many losses pile up and no matter how many stories you hear about the erosion of locker-room respect for Monty. The Warriors' fall from a 12-6 start, after so many pundits projected them to finally halt their 11-season playoff drought, puts them high on the season's list of Most Disappointing Teams, up there with Minnesota and New York. But Warriors GM Chris Mullin, remember, has stated repeatedly that Montgomery is safe. At season's end, Montgomery will be halfway through a four-year deal worth about $10 million. Long-suffering Warriors fans inevitably will be hoping that, by that point, Montgomery would want a buyout to go back to the college ranks. This group obviously needs more than a major trade to generate any optimism going into next season. </div> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?pa...ydime-060311-12 ----------------------- Anyway, last night I was watching this musical at the high school. It soon popped into my head just how similar a musical is made with all of its people to a NBA team with all of its people. First there is the writer and the planner and producer of the performance(ownership/Chris Cohan). Then there is the person in charge of casting and choosing the actors and the singers and dancers, and which person/actor will be best to the performance and which aspects of the script,(Chris Mullin's job for the Warriors), and then there is the director who must put all of the actors and pieces given to him and know where each performer exceedes and where others stumble; this is usually done by giving actors the proper roles. Which leads me to my point. The Warriors have players with a lot of different styles and threats. It would be difficult to really construct something that would make everyone shine. However on the same page the players of this team just don't have the roles and understand their roles on the team, especially as they change so often for many of the players such as Zarko, Ike, Andris, Ellis, etc. The Warriors have some solid starting acts such as Baron Davis, Jason Richardson, Troy Murphy, and some young players just urging to be stars with their potential. In my opinion Mike Montgomery depends too much on Fisher, Baron Davis, and Jason Richardson as if they were like Tom Hanks, Brad Pitt, or Tom Cruise of being successful in the box office. Mike Montgomery then misses using his supporting actors/players. Or he just misuses his supporting players. It's like if Ike isn't a good actor persay but he can sing and dance like noother on the cast, then don't make him act all the time or most of the time, and try to get him to sing and dance and entertain the audience like that. Same with Mike Dunleavy, maybe he can't dance, but he is a great actor and can sing a bit, so make that the skills that shine. OK, maybe I look nuts right now, but that is my analogy to Mike Montgomery. He is just a very bad broadway musical director who can't assign the proper roles to his cast or find an identity for his show(is it action, comedy, romance, whatever). The other side I guess could always go against the casting director, Chris Mullin. Or maybe the script writers/producers just completely set up a terrible script and setting. The Warriors are just looking like a complete flop and disapointment.
Regardless of how people feel about this team, we need the supporting cast. I don't think we have it. In the end, it's about becoming a team that can do almost everything well inside and out, but most importantly play defense extremely well. I can't believe all the close games we've lost it was either free throws, bad shot selection or not controlling the glass and boxing out that killed us. Fundamentals. When guys who aren't typically good defenders on their own have to move a lot more to cover up their teammates' weakness or lack of quickness, they end up getting tired and unable to perform down the stretch, the team breaks apart, assignments get broken up, opponents get easy baskets inside or wide open j's which they hit (whereas we do not). It's a lot of slack to cover on help D if you think about which Warriors on this roster are actually capable of being a 3rd all-defensive team player. None in the starting rotation at least! 4th Quarter scoring is a problem for us just like the years before when teams would zone up on us because we have nobody who can penetrate the zone, shoot without bricking, or big guys that can cut hard and force the defense to collapse into the middle. That's why I'm not so hard on the coach because our outside game is pretty mediocre this year compared to last (Only Jrich has been stellar this season). We also have very little inside footwork or inside positioning in the post to keep opposing defenses honest, and we don't have a balance between inside and outside game or the right ways to find passing/scoring like the Phoenix Suns do (from Nash, Diaw, Joe Johnson, other glue players that can both score and defend). Plus, like any coach wants is he wants players to play good defense because then, baskets don't go to waste. It's part of the whole valuing posessions mentality. You take care of the ball, find/create/take good high % shots, execute together, and you play defense so the other team doesn't score layups or inside points. You can count the number of good defenders on this team that can read the angles and move fast laterally on one digit. It's not too many. Too many flaws on offense and defense. If we got a guy like Larry Brown we'd still suck. C'mon guys admit that. I love the Warriors but man they still suck like they did the years before unless everyone is playing up to their capacity. All the good players in the league play up to their capacity every single night and a lot of times our players don't play what they are capable of doing. That inconsistency is why they aren't very good role players for their positions or are all-stars. If Murphy is playing center and Dunleavy is playing power forward, the matchup by the coaching is horrible, but it also tells me that our center must really f-ing suck and we need Dunleavy of all people to create dribble penetration/kickout passing when it ain't coming from the guard or small forward spots.
