<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">The Warriors play better when they play team defense in a halfcourt setting, but they lose all that when they go crazy running. It's because their transition defense is too slow. Guys like Dunleavy, Murphy, Fisher, Richardson all get absolutely raped by their own assignments. But, I can say that Fisher/Dunleavy/Richardson are better defenders given their effort. This means have Baron/Murphy stay home sick. We don't need Baron to constantly gamble on steals and have guys blow right by him. We don't need Murphy avoiding help defense, but we need rebounding and consistent scoring from Murphy and playmaking, dominating ballhandling, and all-star presence from Baron, which is the big dilemma. Our best players can be huge problems that complicate the good things our lousy role players actually do. It's that balance of teamwork plus great individual play that get messed up. We need both.</div> I for getting rid of MP and picking up Jared Jeffries using some of our MLE money. He can play some D in transition and play four positions. He even has played center, so he can play all positions. He would be a great guy coming off the bench because he can play multiple positions. We also could play MDJ at the PF spot. While he would be outmatched against the stronger PFs, he should be able to guard guys like Dirk and lighter, more mobile PFs. I wouldn't mind getting rid of Zarko and MP if we could get Jeffries. We are better off with the running game. We just need to put together better combinations. Murphy is a definite weak area with Foyle. I would put AB or POB with Murphy. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Also, the reason why the Warriors do so well in the open court is because they're beating team defenses that aren't set like they are in halfcourt. But if they can't outquick the other team or move with or without the ball quickly, it becomes a halfcourt situation again. It's pointless because transition defense will just pack the middle and force guys who don't really make decisions with the ball to shoot or to slam right into the guy under the basket for the offensive foul. Just watch how non-point guards like Fisher/Ellis run fastbreak compared to Baron Davis. Baron runs it effortlessly. Now with Baron hurt a lot of the time, Ellis is the obvious choice for open court ball because he's quicker, but dude the guy cannot go left, he has problems with his passing accuracy, and he's generally been drafted to be a raw scorer and a ballhawk for now. Asking him to do all the things that Baron does so well to warrant top 3 overall pick is asking him to do a lot. I mean he's a high school rookie still learning by playing some and watching and practicing.</div> With Monty, we will have to play half court and pick and roll again. But it will quickly regress back to 3-ball shooting if the team starts falling behind. Ideally, the defense should pick up the offense, but on the Warriors it's the opposite.
We just have to invest in better players that fit or else we can't play certain styles or hope to improve. It'll be very limited like with what we have now. We can't play Richardson 38 to 40 minutes a game and tax him and Baron to death when nobody else steps up or has the talent/physical ability to play outside what they are currently capable of. They need immediate and reliable help. If we get 8 or 9 players that fit together and we don't have to worry about guys constantly being inconsistent or not ready to play or not being able to do certain things that is expected out of their position, then they need to go. And when they go, we need value back for them so we can add something good. The biggest obstacle is making desirable contracts for the amount of talent being traded and finding the right opportunity where both teams come out winners. Not everything is addition by subtraction nor does it have to be us getting screwed all the time. The sad thing is so much of current situation has to do with the Warriors and they way they've chosen bad investments for the future and overspent, making their trades somewhat lopsided or undesirable for the other team taking on those salaries and players. This franchise can't be fixed over night so I hoped Mullin knew what he was doing. It's like in chess where you need to plan out an attack a few steps ahead. If you blow it, you could lose an important piece like a Queen or a Knight and then suddenly, it becomes harder and longer to achieve victory.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Link? I don't think Dunleavy ever said he didn't understand the strategy, but he didn't play well with guys who wanted to hold onto the ball like it was streetball. That's what happens when all five guys aren't playing as a team. They get disorganized and overwhelmed. But I guess Dunleavy shouldn't talk because he sucks the most as a perimeter guy.</div> I remember reading articles last season about Dunleavy having a tough time finding his role with the current roster. Murphy said something after a Celtics game, or around then, where I believe a journalist asked what he thought about the offensive system, and Murphy said, "What offense?" I believe the question was kind of related to Dunleavy's comments about not fitting into the streetball offense. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Murphy isn't involved in offense because he's not a natural decision-maker with the ball. He'll look to score either off feeds from somebody else or he'll go into triple threat ("double threat") isolations where he can use a combo of pump fakes, jab steps, where he'll either drive all the way to the basket in a few steps or he'll use his step back jumper. When has this guy ever been a passer whenever the team broke away from plays? Murphy is not an assist heavy guy unless its scripted and called out by our guards. Our guards don't really seem to run plays either because they feel they can do it all by themselves or they haven't practiced enough. For a perimeter guy such as Murphy, he's very black-holish and he's been that way for most of his career. A starting power forward should definitely be more teamwork oriented as he's supposed to be the enforcer and the guy that does the little things like the point guard does. If Foyle is acting power forward, then Murphy is doing a horrible job on the little things as Foyle is on offense. The two make lousy teamwork in the paint because they don't go together and neither can play honestly on one side of the court.</div> The bolded part is my big problem with Montgomery. You have to be the leader as a head coach for this franchise. These players don't know how to win. This is why the team needs a coach that knows how to win, especially in the NBA. Also for strategy-wise for this team, I would bet if the perimeter players decided to set off the ball screens for each other, especially for Dunleavy and Jason, that their production and the team's FG% would be much better than 29th in the NBA, and there would have been less 3 pointers taken. Heck, even setting off the ball screens to open up Murphy would have helped. I am starting to believe, that you are looking too far into what this team can't do or what these players can't do, than what they can do, and how to help these players produce from their actual abilities. And these players have tons of ability. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Just like everyone else, I don't like Montgomery playing guys like Foyle/Dunleavy/Fisher over more promising athletes, but maybe in some way the coaching staff felt he had no choice if young guys weren't ready to play. We have this mentality that the young, unproven guy showing flashes of skill is going to stay consistent, know how to play as a team, and replace the guy starting right away. It's like Fortson over Spencer, Murphy over Fortson, and now Ike over Murphy. Who's next in line? Why don't we ease them into the rotation bit by bit until they understand the playbook, and find better trades for Murphy at veteran PF than Harrington.</div> I am not saying that these young players should be replacing the starters. I wrote in my first post, that I like the starters, and am fine with the starting lineup. I understand that there are fans for the Warriors like this. So maybe these statements aren't directed at me. However my suggestion or hope, would be to have the bench fill in for starters in situations that the individual bench player would succeed and help the team. When the team is struggling in rebounding, and has been for a long stretch, this doesn't include playing Dunleavy at the PF position when Ike Diogu should be there, or Zarko Cabarkapa. It also includes playing Monta Ellis to help the perimeter defense, when players like Earl Boykins are killing the team, or when other PG's are tearing the Warriors apart, instead of playing Fisher, who is much slower, there. I want Montgomery to learn to fill bench players in for starters at proper situations. He has a big problem with this. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Just like rookies like Pietrus scoring a point per minute back in the day, doesn't mean he's ready to play. Also, maybe he felt rookies didn't understand the playbook to work better as a team so they need time to learn it. The main goal is to get these guys to play like a team, develop with confidence, and eventually make others better. This is generally what happens when our team is full of 1 or 2 year players and there's no veteran infrastructure in place to take the presure off and all the young guys want to play their way out of Oakland. Do we think guys like Murphy/Fisher/Foyle/Dunleavy take the presure off the rookies? Hell no. So what's the point of playing our best rookies if the veterans are going to get these rookies into close game situations where they could easily fail and never recover emotionally or confidence wise. It was very hard for guys like Richardson to gain confidence until the Warriors invested wisely in veterans such as Clif Robinson/Calbert Cheaney/Nick Van Exel and all these guys that are consummate pros in their positions and are vocal leaders who've been excellent leaders. We want more guys like Jason Richardson, Baron Davis + aggressive, legit inside presence in the court + glue, and not soft jump shooting, fumbling big, lack defense, lack offense big men.</div> I don't know any of these rookies/young players that are going to get emotional damage by playing basketball. Also these bench players don't need to know the playbook, heck there isn't even a playbook, so there seems. And if there was, they definitley used it better than the starters had, if we compared the bench's teamwork at the end of last season, when they got tons of minutes in the last week of the season. All the Warriors needed from the bench, was just a stretch of defense to stop guys like Boykins, Parker, Kobe, etc. or other team's big men, or help on the boards for a little while. You don't need to know a whole playbook to do this. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">(1)Like if we put Ike on the floor and take Murphy out, who rebounds, who boxes out? (2)If we play Murphy at center, who defends the rim? (3)If we take Dunleavy out and Baron is hurt, who dribble penetrates, makes smart decisions and passes the ball like a true point guard? (4)If we put Pietrus in and Richardson in at the same time without Baron Davis, who sets up and creates for both of them? (5)If we take Fisher out, who shoots the three ball? (6)If we put Ellis in, how are we sure this guy isn't Baron Davis with the shot selection/injuries and without the playmaking/leadership skills?(7) What if we put in Andris Biedrins throughout the game and each time he keeps putting the Warriors over the foul limit? Each time we put Andris Biedrins out there, he proves nothing honest to the referrees. He keeps getting called on committed fouls he's doing as a bad habit.</div> Answer 1, Andris Biedrins or Chris Taft, along with some help from Dunleavy or Zarko. Answer 2, Andris or Taft or Foyle, and now possibly POB. Answer 3, Monta Ellis, who was noted by the assistant coaches to be the best player on the court during scrimages many times. Also McLeod could help there now as well. Answer 4, It would be strange to put Pietrus in there with Richardson, but not Baron, especially since Pietrus is most productive with Baron on the court, along with Jason sometimes. However Dunleavy did a fine job as the PG a few seasons ago with Pietrus and JRich as the 2 and 3. Also Monta Ellis could fit in here, along with McLeod or if we are talking about last season, Derek Fisher(just get Derek to try to run more and run a better offense). (5) Who shoots the three ball? Murphy, Dunleavy(if we go by career percentages), JRich who shot well last year from that range, along with Ellis, or Zarko. The team found enough ways to shoot the three ball, it shouldn't be too much of a concern. (6)...because it would be better to just sit ignorantly for a few more seasons, first in practice, second with sub rotations so we will never find out. Also with Montgomery as the head coach, that "bad" shot selection is what you will most likely get. Even Derek Fisher had a pretty bad shot selection, along with the whole team. I mean look at how many three pointers and how early they always shot in the shot clock on each possession. Here is an example of unpleasant people working in an offensive system. Murphy would take a few more shots than he should outside after a while as well, since he got bored running to the basket, standing for two seconds, waiting for the ball to move, just to see it get bricked, then run back on defense again. I think most post players would have hated how the Warriors played last season. That is unless you are Adonal Foyle and have no post game to work with anyhow, or shot. (7) Ok, I agree that is a tough situation. I think though, you just hope it improves, and just say, let him foul out a few times. I mean especially late in games. I know Andris would get 2 or 3 fouls early in the first half, or maybe around the second period. However he never comes back in afterwards. Let him pick up a few more fouls in the forth period, especially if his height, rebounding, hustle, and production is needed. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">No kidding it's in rebuilding mode. If you look at the number of famous coaches who've turned around a college program after about 4 years of turnover and recruiting the right guys, it suddenly works. Why? Because the coach knows what he's looking for and he suddenly has a competitive team. Some of these GMs don't know what the f they are doing and I think Mullin is one of those guys that prepared the wrong roster (a losing roster regardless of Montgomery) for the coach he brought in: Monty or Elie. Give it a chance to rebuild PROPERLY. This means investing in the right vets that fit rather than useless vets that don't fit. It means playing the rookies at a good pace rather than the fan's pace.</div> Rebuilding means making a lot of roster changes and finding new players. Building means, that the roster is set and the franchise is going to play mostly off what they have at that moment. Am I wrong, or misunderstanding something? I am not sure which one you are stressing by this paragraph, rebuilding or building. I believe you can build more around this team, by adding vets that fit, similar to what the Clippers did with the Cassell addition, rather than just rebuilding and getting rid of these players for vet players, which would be rebuilding. But this roster is definitley set to be in the building mode. Maybe there could be a remodel job or something, if the team dealt Murphy for say Michael Finley, Brent Barry, and Luis Scola. But this roster has the talent to win ball games and set a complete and competitive roster, along with making moves to help build on to what the team currently has, without rebuilding. At least this is my idea about the Warriors roster condition. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post"> No, because players that fit are supposed to win more games than they lose in the regular season, not coaches. It's really a player's league. Aside from injuries, star talent and team design should speak for itself. I see a problem in the coaching, but we're playing teams that beat our asses if they wanted to if we had a different coach. See Musselman for instance. He got his ass beat because the GM f-ed him. I see Montgomery getting f-ed over by Mullin in the same way. I see a big problem if the guys known for shooting can't shoot. I see a big problem when this team is labeled a "transition scoring team" but they can't score that well or consistently inside or at the line and they can't even defend the rim in transition or rebound when they miss. I see a big problem when our most important reason for going on a meaningless win streak was a healthy/focussed Baron Davis and guys making their shots at an incredible rate to allow such poor defense on our end.</div> Basketball and the NBA is a "team's" league and game. If you look at the teams that overacheived, we see teams that added new leadership to build up their team. For the Clippers it was Cassell and Mike Dunleavy, for the Hornets it was Byron Scott, for the Jazz it's been Jerry Sloan, for the Nuggets it has been George Karl, for the Kings it was Rick Adleman, for the Pacers it has been Rich Carisle, etc. Teams like the Bucks from the late 90's had great talent with Cassell, Allen, and Robinson, yet they underachieved each year it seemed. At least they didn't play up to their potential. The Clippers who have had a lot of young talent, didn't play up to their potential, until last year, again with the addition of Cassell. Montgomery has been helped a lot more by management than Musselman was. We are talking about additions such as Baron Davis, Andris Biedrins, Ike Diogu, compared to losses of Antawn Jamison, Gilbert Arenas, etc. Yeah, the reason why the Warriors couldn't play transition was because of the coaching. The Warriors ran the worst fast break in the NBA last year. Fisher was terrible, and Baron seemed to hold back a little bit to play more half court, which I think was Monty's plan. Also the rebounding wasn't good enough, especially when Dunleavy is playing PF and Foyle is the center. ---------- Anyway, Custodianrules2, you are very keen on the Warriors' players weaknesses. But how has Montgomery helped to overcome these individuals' weaknesses? How has Montgomery helped to make these individuals' skills more productive on the court? Tell me a roster that doesn't have any question marks or weaknesses. The Spurs have very little bench and can't hit FT's. The Heat don't have enough athleticism and are too old. Dallas can't play defense...etc. etc.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">I remember reading articles last season about Dunleavy having a tough time finding his role with the current roster. Murphy said something after a Celtics game, or around then, where I believe a journalist asked what he thought about the offensive system, and Murphy said, "What offense?" I believe the question was kind of related to Dunleavy's comments about not fitting into the streetball offense. </div> Depends on the article, it could be taken out of context? What if Dunleavy was talking about the fact he's got no big men to throw the ball to inside or they aren't setting the screens properly to get midrange shots off. I don't think Dunleavy can complain much, because he sucks this year. The sad thing is nobody else has the instincts to make the extra pass like Dunleavy is willing to other than a focussed Baron Davis, the pure point guard. Everyone else is just looking to score and that doesn't help the team play better or to get guys hustle to get open. Dunleavy comes off as a whiner, but I'm sure his teammates appreciate how he at least tries to find people. Murphy saying, "what offense?" is ironic. The guy is a blackhole if he meant it in a way to bash Montgomery. It could be the point guards aren't running any offense being called out by the sideline. Who knows what he meant. It's pretty vague what he meant. We know something is going wrong because the Warriors aren't organized as a team and never have been. Plus with guys like Skip and Kawakami you never know what's the truth. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> The bolded part is my big problem with Montgomery. You have to be the leader as a head coach for this franchise. These players don't know how to win. </div> That's why these guys have to practice. If they'd rather fart around all offseason that's their business, but they ain't going to win unless they play as a team. The Warriors have never played as a team under any coach that's primarily why we've been a non-passing team that tries to play one-on-one and doesn't play much team defense. If the players don't know how to win, it's because they either keep coming into the nba without knowing how to play the game properly or the GM keeps putting together these teams that have no chance at adjusting and beating the competition. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> This is why the team needs a coach that knows how to win, especially in the NBA. Also for strategy-wise for this team, I would bet if the perimeter players decided to set off the ball screens for each other, especially for Dunleavy and Jason, that their production and the team's FG% would be much better than 29th in the NBA, and there would have been less 3 pointers taken. Heck, even setting off the ball screens to open up Murphy would have helped. I am starting to believe, that you are looking too far into what this team can't do or what these players can't do, than what they can do, and how to help these players produce from their actual abilities. And these players have tons of ability. </div> I don't think Montgomery forgot the game of basketball. He's been handed a lousy team. How many times have we made the playoffs again in the last few years? None. Strategy wise we dont' have the talent to coast, we need a little more x's and o's, guys who can shoot, move their feet, and not get confused what they're supposed to be doing when the point guard calls out the play. We can play the Musselman way which simplifies things but they'd still get their ass kicked because the Warriors don't play as a team. It's like trying to put square pegs into round holes. There's no reliable all-around offensive game as a team and on defense they're way way worse, especially in transition. Even if we call out plays for Murphy, he's not the kind of player that will get others involved if guys come out on him. Then what happens is if he misses at his 41% shooting rate, we lose any chance at getting the offensive rebound, because Foyle is not a good rebounder anymore, and guys like Dunleavy, Fish, Jrich need to run back before they get slaughtered in transition. If these players had tons of ability, we'd be able to get more points in the paint, we'd be able to pass the ball more, we'd be able to create our own shots. This team just doesn't do it. I'd hate to be negative but Mullin's team has no chance. The veterans can't even buy time for our projects to get smart. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I am not saying that these young players should be replacing the starters. I wrote in my first post, that I like the starters, and am fine with the starting lineup. </div> The bench still needs to give quality minutes and guys like Zarko, Pietrus, Biedrins seemed to have taken a step back and it's because they for every mismatch they have, they are a liability doing something else. We should have fewer guys with liabilities, more solidness to their game, and the ability to develop fewer projects at one time. We have to have guys ready to produce right now and if we can't find that from the draft, then we needed our vets to at least do something right without being a liability on the floor. Too many liabilities. I'm also not fine with Foyle/Fisher as point guard and center because they are tweener type backups trying to play important team roles that set the tone on both ends of the floor. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I understand that there are fans for the Warriors like this. So maybe these statements aren't directed at me. However my suggestion or hope, would be to have the bench fill in for starters in situations that the individual bench player would succeed and help the team. When the team is struggling in rebounding, and has been for a long stretch, this doesn't include playing Dunleavy at the PF position when Ike Diogu should be there, or Zarko Cabarkapa. It also includes playing Monta Ellis to help the perimeter defense, when players like Earl Boykins are killing the team, or when other PG's are tearing the Warriors apart, instead of playing Fisher, who is much slower, there. I want Montgomery to learn to fill bench players in for starters at proper situations. He has a big problem with this. </div> I disagreed with Dunleavy at PF, but who else can handle the ball and pass like a true playmaker? Fisher sure can't and Ellis is still in development. The only way we get dribble penetration without having to play guys like Ellis is Dunleavy at PF, because God knows he sucks at doing anything with quickness at SF. Jrich has no point guard instincts or skills, Fisher lacks them too, and I don't know what the deal with Ellis is but we could have used that dribble penetration and defense. Ike should have been playing more, but I don't know the reasons for why he sat. He'll play because that's why we drafted him, but he needs to adjust as well. Considering a good deal of mediocre Stanford player big men made it to the NBA, I think Monty knows what he's doing in developing guys the right way. That's my opinion. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I don't know any of these rookies/young players that are going to get emotional damage by playing basketball. </div> First of all, how do you know? We're not out there with fans cheering us one moment and then booing us if we're in a shooting slump. We're not out there with teammates or coaches yelling at us for making a costly mistake. Look at how Pietrus looks lost and how he's afraid to do anything because he'll get ridiculed. Stuff like that. What about guys like Kendrick Perkins who started crying in one of the playoff games because he missed both free throws which were important free throws. Guys can get scared and they can't handle the pressure. It's maybe also why guys like Chris Mullin started drinking and other players doing all this weird behavior when the media and the fans are scrutinizing everything they do like the franchise depends on it. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Also these bench players don't need to know the playbook, heck there isn't even a playbook, so there seems. And if there was, they definitley used it better than the starters had, if we compared the bench's teamwork at the end of last season, when they got tons of minutes in the last week of the season. All the Warriors needed from the bench, was just a stretch of defense to stop guys like Boykins, Parker, Kobe, etc. or other team's big men, or help on the boards for a little while. You don't need to know a whole playbook to do this. </div> True. Poor defense was a major reason why the Warriors stunk it up. But they also had no clue of what to do. That's why the Warriors need to practice. Again last week of the season don't mean anything because teams don't care about playing us. We're not going into the post season so teams don't give a rat's ass about us. That's why we beat Dallas in the last month. If Dallas really wanted to play us they could kick our asses anytime they want. This is what happens when the team no longer has to deal with the pressure of staying in the playoff hunt and other teams don't have to worry about playing us in the post season. Other good teams have already made the playoffs so they don't need to win more games. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Answer 1, Andris Biedrins or Chris Taft, along with some help from Dunleavy or Zarko. Answer 2, Andris or Taft or Foyle, and now possibly POB. Answer 3, Monta Ellis, who was noted by the assistant coaches to be the best player on the court during scrimages many times. Also McLeod could help there now as well. Answer 4, It would be strange to put Pietrus in there with Richardson, but not Baron, especially since Pietrus is most productive with Baron on the court, along with Jason sometimes. However Dunleavy did a fine job as the PG a few seasons ago with Pietrus and JRich as the 2 and 3. Also Monta Ellis could fit in here, along with McLeod or if we are talking about last season, Derek Fisher(just get Derek to try to run more and run a better offense). (5) Who shoots the three ball? Murphy, Dunleavy(if we go by career percentages), JRich who shot well last year from that range, along with Ellis, or Zarko. The team found enough ways to shoot the three ball, it shouldn't be too much of a concern. (6)...because it would be better to just sit ignorantly for a few more seasons, first in practice, second with sub rotations so we will never find out. Also with Montgomery as the head coach, that "bad" shot selection is what you will most likely get. Even Derek Fisher had a pretty bad shot selection, along with the whole team. I mean look at how many three pointers and how early they always shot in the shot clock on each possession. Here is an example of unpleasant people working in an offensive system. Murphy would take a few more shots than he should outside after a while as well, since he got bored running to the basket, standing for two seconds, waiting for the ball to move, just to see it get bricked, then run back on defense again. I think most post players would have hated how the Warriors played last season. That is unless you are Adonal Foyle and have no post game to work with anyhow, or shot. (7) Ok, I agree that is a tough situation. I think though, you just hope it improves, and just say, let him foul out a few times. I mean especially late in games. I know Andris would get 2 or 3 fouls early in the first half, or maybe around the second period. However he never comes back in afterwards. Let him pick up a few more fouls in the forth period, especially if his height, rebounding, hustle, and production is needed. </div> This is all conjecture. The rotation changed many times this season, most notably at center and SF. I think the coach knows there's a problem, but he can't fix things if guys can't shoot or dribble or play defense. And even without Biedrins, the Warriors kept putting the other team in the bonus. If guys are ready for more minutes I'd say give it to them and maybe try a few different lineups, but it's hard when guys don't play their positions like they're supposed to or they just lack skill and basketball fundamentals. Believe me I'd rather have Dunleavy play point guard and chuck away Fisher alltogether. That's why his ass got his traded. But yeah, I definitely think Montgomery could have done a little more, but not enough to win more games than we lose. We'd miss the playoffs again anyway without Baron. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Rebuilding means making a lot of roster changes and finding new players. Building means, that the roster is set and the franchise is going to play mostly off what they have at that moment. Am I wrong, or misunderstanding something? I am not sure which one you are stressing by this paragraph, rebuilding or building. </div> We're rebuilding, but you still have to have guys ready to play as a team on both ends of the floor. If they can't handle that then they aren't ready. The last few drafts in '03 and '04 we had guys that couldn't crack the rotation. Musselman was hesitant to play Pietrus and I'm sure he wouldn't have played Biedrins right away because they're all learning basketball and trying to learn English. Monty had some guys this season that could play center, but was forced to use Ike because Taft got hurt, and Biedrins became unreliable. As for holding Ike back in some games, he had his reasons, especially if they were injured during camp. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> I believe you can build more around this team, by adding vets that fit, similar to what the Clippers did with the Cassell addition, rather than just rebuilding and getting rid of these players for vet players, which would be rebuilding. But this roster is definitley set to be in the building mode. Maybe there could be a remodel job or something, if the team dealt Murphy for say Michael Finley, Brent Barry, and Luis Scola. But this roster has the talent to win ball games and set a complete and competitive roster, along with making moves to help build on to what the team currently has, without rebuilding. At least this is my idea about the Warriors roster condition. </div> Exactly, we need to find vets that fit, rather than just settle for names with no games. We need to focus on developing less projects, and get guys that can play without being such huge liabilities. If Finley, Barry, and Scola were coming here for Murphy I'd crap my pants. That's a good trade. I don't believe the Warriors have a chance though with their current roster unless Baron is healthy and other guys are producing. There's no evidence they can hang on in an 82 game season without something going wrong. It's not just the coaching, it is everything. Mostly the players. It's the same thing going on with the Knicks and how they have talent, but it just doesn't fit and it can't hang defensively or on the boards. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Basketball and the NBA is a "team's" league and game. If you look at the teams that overacheived, we see teams that added new leadership to build up their team. For the Clippers it was Cassell and Mike Dunleavy, for the Hornets it was Byron Scott, for the Jazz it's been Jerry Sloan, for the Nuggets it has been George Karl, for the Kings it was Rick Adleman, for the Pacers it has been Rich Carisle, etc. Teams like the Bucks from the late 90's had great talent with Cassell, Allen, and Robinson, yet they underachieved each year it seemed. At least they didn't play up to their potential. The Clippers who have had a lot of young talent, didn't play up to their potential, until last year, again with the addition of Cassell. </div> See you're naming teams that are complete and a lot more mature. We're not complete and we're top 5 youngest teams in the NBA trying to develop too many projects. If Montgomery had the team that those playoff guys have, maybe we'd win more and Montgomery would be less of a scapegoat. We're talking about the almighty Warriors that can do no wrong because of what happened in March 2005, but can't repeat that when it comes to a full 82 game season. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Montgomery has been helped a lot more by management than Musselman was. We are talking about additions such as Baron Davis, Andris Biedrins, Ike Diogu, compared to losses of Antawn Jamison, Gilbert Arenas, etc. </div> Are you kidding me? Replacing Claxton with Fisher and Dampier with Foyle isn't my idea of help. Management basically put Montgomery in a worse situation than Musselman was ever in because Mullin killed any dribble penetration or inside presence we might have had with his loony bin signings. Baron Davis was one addition that brought immediate help, what has Biedrins done, plus what can the Warriors do when Baron Davis is hurt? What do we do? The coach can't suddenly find the next answer when there's no next best thing. Also with Ike again confused why Montgomery didn't use him more. He'll use him this year or else I don't know what is wrong with him. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Yeah, the reason why the Warriors couldn't play transition was because of the coaching. The Warriors ran the worst fast break in the NBA last year. Fisher was terrible, and Baron seemed to hold back a little bit to play more half court, which I think was Monty's plan. Also the rebounding wasn't good enough, especially when Dunleavy is playing PF and Foyle is the center. </div> The reason why the Warriors couldn't play transition was becaus they had terrible rebounding and terrible transition defense. The guy rebounding has to start the break. The guy with the ball in hand, has to run the break well. Both Fisher/Foyle/Murphy all these guys just suck for this type of game. I would like to see more of Biedrins or Zarko but these guys were having off years. It also doesn't help when guys this year suddenly forgot how to shoot wide open jumpers. The rebounding at any of the big positions was piss more period (aside from Murphy) and so was dribble penetration from any other position including point guard (besides Baron). Dunleavy just cannot beat people off the dribble and make use of his passing unless his shot is falling or he's beating slower guys. That's why they put him in power forward because Zarko wasn't doing so hot, Jrich can't dribble well or dish off the drive, Fisher stank at everything point guard related except throwing alley oops. ---------- <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> Anyway, Custodianrules2, you are very keen on the Warriors' players weaknesses. But how has Montgomery helped to overcome these individuals' weaknesses? How has Montgomery helped to make these individuals' skills more productive on the court? Tell me a roster that doesn't have any question marks or weaknesses. The Spurs have very little bench and can't hit FT's. The Heat don't have enough athleticism and are too old. Dallas can't play defense...etc. etc.</div> Again, you can't label teams have inside outside presence or a defensive game, plus control of the paint and the glass. How can Montgomery turn crap into gold? That's why I'm saying it's not his fault. He's got to have a more competitive roster so they can play different tempos, they can make adjustments, they have reliable team players that can shoot, handle the ball, and make the extra pass. If we don't have a superstar player, then we need better teamwork so everyone can make each other better. We have too many guys that don't make other teammates better. That's why when Baron Davis got hurt and other players took a step back, Montgomery became screwed. There went the reliability, any chance of good ball movement, and all-star presence. It's also because the Warriors fail to learn the plays, run them, and practice them. These plays can work as well as the out of bounds plays if guys move a little quicker and make better decisions with the ball. Instead guys like Fisher or the rookies turn the ball over, telegraph passes, take lousy shots for themselves, or they don't know the plays. It's why Fisher got fired. He got the numbers to get out of the Warriors and that's probably why he got played a lot. Unfortunately we don't have good backups for Foyle and for Dunleavy. Hopefully this changes soon.
I think this lineup has potential, but we say the word potential every year. We need reliability + results. C: Biedrins (double double potential if he stays out of foul trouble and matches up with other centers) PF: Ike Diogu (I think he's great, but I may be overrating him. I think he has the ability to be Zach Randolph with more attempt at altering shots and doing other things without the ball to be effective) SF: Mike Dunleavy Jr. (This guy sucks, but he's useful as a secondary guard if his shot is falling and he has a chance to rebound from an awful year which he sucked even more than usual) SG: Jason Richardson (great scorer, great without the ball, decent with the ball, not really a true shooting guard) PG: Baron Davis (needs to stay healthy and become more focussed on running halfcourt if the team gets slowed down in transition or can't get the outlet pass to start the break. The team also needs to pace itself so they can play the 4th and have quality posessions. This is also dependent on what they can do to make stops on the defensive end. The Warriors win a lot more when they play defense.)
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">We just have to invest in better players that fit or else we can't play certain styles or hope to improve. It'll be very limited like with what we have now. We can't play Richardson 38 to 40 minutes a game and tax him and Baron to death when nobody else steps up or has the talent/physical ability to play outside what they are currently capable of. They need immediate and reliable help. If we get 8 or 9 players that fit together and we don't have to worry about guys constantly being inconsistent or not ready to play or not being able to do certain things that is expected out of their position, then they need to go. And when they go, we need value back for them so we can add something good. The biggest obstacle is making desirable contracts for the amount of talent being traded and finding the right opportunity where both teams come out winners. Not everything is addition by subtraction nor does it have to be us getting screwed all the time. The sad thing is so much of current situation has to do with the Warriors and they way they've chosen bad investments for the future and overspent, making their trades somewhat lopsided or undesirable for the other team taking on those salaries and players. This franchise can't be fixed over night so I hoped Mullin knew what he was doing. It's like in chess where you need to plan out an attack a few steps ahead. If you blow it, you could lose an important piece like a Queen or a Knight and then suddenly, it becomes harder and longer to achieve victory.</div> At a higher level of chess you have multiple threats,but I always set up a basic defense that takes a few moves to crack. I then attack with many pieces-go hard and aggressive,each little attack gets my forces into better position for the final kill...each move is intended to force the opponents move,keep him on the defensive,don't let him even start an offensive,I hack away,sacrafice sometimes. If I give you my rook for free...don't smile....you're finished. I've even used a Queen sacrafice to set up the finishing combination. A big thing Chess and Basketball share is you gotta dictate the tempo,sieze the initiative,develop every piece to its best role and don't leave a bunch of pieces on the bench doing nothing. The big difference? Your rook will never go 0-5 from the free throw line.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">At a higher level of chess you have multiple threats,but I always set up a basic defense that takes a few moves to crack. I then attack with many pieces-go hard and aggressive,each little attack gets my forces into better position for the final kill...each move is intended to force the opponents move,keep him on the defensive,don't let him even start an offensive,I hack away,sacrafice sometimes. If I give you my rook for free...don't smile....you're finished. I've even used a Queen sacrafice to set up the finishing combination. A big thing Chess and Basketball share is you gotta dictate the tempo,sieze the initiative,develop every piece to its best role and don't leave a bunch of pieces on the bench doing nothing. The big difference? Your rook will never go 0-5 from the free throw line.</div> Ah, if only Mullin studied Chess he'd plan ahead better... Good points, REREM, but in Chess both sides have the same and equal number of pieces starting out. It feels like the Warriors have nothing but pawns and at best, a bishop or two. No queens, knights, or rooks. Not enough balance to attack or defend and at least get a stalemate. Meanwhile, the other team has all the pieces they're supposed to have unless we're fighting against other lottery teams with the same problems as us. Atlanta, Knicks, Seattle, Blazers. We could kick those teams, but we need to beat playoff teams. If the Warriors had the balance to begin with, we could dictate the tempo on offense or defense. We need the right pieces to do this. I don't think we have those pieces unless one of the rookies shows up.
We have pieces-but I've won games where the other guy had a rook and a knight that never moved once-and another piece or two that pretty much was wasted. Isolated,a pawn is weak,vulnerable...working as a team-the pawns can be a dominant force. Deployment of the pawns is the biggest difference between an amateur's game and a master's. I've taken a queen with a pawn on discovered check. Those are great fun. As long as our bench has 5 lotto picks and there's folks saying this guy or that needs experiance or ain't ready,as long as the 11 th ,12th, men don't really have a role we need to develop-play them,get those pawns and knights and bishops into a situation that they could be what delivers victory. Next year at this time I want us to feel that we have 10 legit starters,that we will send fresh waves at them,wear them down if nothing else. This Roster has 10 former Lotto picks. that is a lot. That does not even include Monta.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">We have pieces-but I've won games where the other guy had a rook and a knight that never moved once-and another piece or two that pretty much was wasted. Isolated,a pawn is weak,vulnerable...working as a team-the pawns can be a dominant force. Deployment of the pawns is the biggest difference between an amateur's game and a master's. I've taken a queen with a pawn on discovered check. Those are great fun. As long as our bench has 5 lotto picks and there's folks saying this guy or that needs experiance or ain't ready,as long as the 11 th ,12th, men don't really have a role we need to develop-play them,get those pawns and knights and bishops into a situation that they could be what delivers victory. Next year at this time I want us to feel that we have 10 legit starters,that we will send fresh waves at them,wear them down if nothing else. This Roster has 10 former Lotto picks. that is a lot. That does not even include Monta.</div> Well that's assuming the other guy actually knows how to play chess. Remember, we're still a team that hasn't made the playoffs in ages. Why is that? It's because bad GMs are hired by bad ownership and the bad gms put together players that can't get the job done because they suck or they don't fit together to make each other better and cover all the roles needed. It sucks, but there's really no avoiding it unless the mistakes of the past aren't repeated. Mullin should think ahead before he makes major committments. But he wasn't thinking, because he doesn't know how to play general manager much like the guy you played against that probably din't know how to play chess. Any seasoned chess player knows how valuable the Knights are because they move in an L shaped pattern whereas the other pieces only move side to side or diagonally. Also in terms of rookie development, we've never developed rookies. We've never talked to them, trained them, seen them practice, what they're dealing with in a pressure situation with fans and teammates watching on. Let Montgomery develop these guys in his own way. He's put together some nice college programs, but unfortunately he doesn't get to do this because Mullin assembles the programs for him. But I think Montgomery can develop the young guys like he does his red shirt freshmen. I didn't say Montgomery was necessarily the right fit, but he should be the least of our problems when we consider our "core group" and the vets surrounding it. Give it time. Give Mullin and Monty time to get the right pieces. If they can't, then I don't know what to say. We're going to lose.
