I just read today that Roger Federer asked Tiger Woods to watch him play in the U.S. Open. Tiger's presence motivated him to win his third Grand Slam title for 2006 and ninth of his career. Why can't the Warriors dominate like that? Sure, golf and tennis are individual sports but put a KG, Amare or Pau Gasol (when healthy) on the Warriors and we'd be pretty dominant. "If there's any athlete in the world who knows exactly how Federer feels as he dominates his peers and gobbles up Grand Slams, it's Woods. They met for the first time before the match, and Federer then set out to impress his counterpart. Federer out-aced the big-serving Roddick 17-7, compiled a 69-33 edge in winners, and made only 19 unforced errors..." The No. 1-ranked Federer went 27-1 at this year's Grand Slam tournaments, the only setback coming against Rafael Nadal in the French Open final. Federer became the first man since Ivan Lendl in 1985-87 to win three consecutive U.S. Open titles -- and the only man in tennis history to win Wimbledon and the U.S. Open back-to-back three years in a row..." "Federer spoke last week about wanting to get to know Woods. It finally happened Sunday, thanks to their shared management agency. Woods and Federer have much in common. Both successfully hit shots none of their foes would try, and they're at their best when it matters most: Federer is 9-for-10 in major finals, the closest equivalent in tennis to Woods' 12-0 mark when leading going into the last round of a major." "More and more often, over the last year or so, I've been kind of compared to Tiger -- what he's doing on the golf tour, me doing on the tennis tour," Federer said. "I asked him how it was for him. Many things were similar. He knew exactly how I kind of felt out on the court. That's something that I haven't felt before: A guy who knows how it feels to feel invincible at times and when you just have the feeling like there's nothing going wrong anymore."
I don't really pay attention to tennis, to tell you the truth, so when you say grandslam I'm thinking either baseball or something you order at Denny's. But yeah, I wish we could dominate at least when we play home games. We can't even protect our home floor.
The easiest way to dominate is with an inside presence. The players that you suggested all point to the fact that you recognize this too. And it can't just be dominant offensively inside, but also defensively. Unfortunately, as we all know, this has been the greatest problem for the Warriors for the longest time. Teams can certainly win without a dominant big man, but it's just much harder. On the same token, the search for the next great big man is why team execs overvalue big men so much.
To dominate, you must first control yourself and find the optimum level. Um, the Warriors are not a cohesive unit and will not be until they start respecting and trusting each other.
I agree with both Zhone and Philsmith. With the Warriors it's a bit of everything going wrong, especially with team roles and guys being too limited to fit them as talented, experienced, true-starting players. It's like a successful business company that no longer has those individuals that made the company great to begin with. It's like they fired all the experienced, skilled guys with lots of potential and replaced them with new, inexperienced, not as skilled, not as well trained individuals. The company has to grow within, that takes time and they'll be lucky if they find a star employee from that pool without developmental leadership (guys who were good enough to be all-stars or high level employees at one time). Players like Jrich, I think, really improved with guys like Calbert Cheaney and Nick Van Exel, but I think none of the other Warriors really had the upside to improve like he did. We had a lot of euro-projects, and one good college prospect to play an inside game, a nice high school guard to possibly backup Baron Davis the way Leandrinho Barbosa backs up Nash, but it's still a lot of rookies and only Baron Davis/Derek Fisher/Cheaney are the only guys who have seen the playoffs. Foyle or any other career warrior obviously hasn't. Murphy/Dunleavy/Pietrus now seem like limited upside players after watching improvements from year to year.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">I don't really pay attention to tennis, to tell you the truth, so when you say grandslam I'm thinking either baseball or something you order at Denny's. But yeah, I wish we could dominate at least when we play home games. We can't even protect our home floor. </div> Yup, we need to win at home regularly if we are to make the playoffs. When you win grandslams in tennis and golf, you are winning the biggest tournaments. They are the major tournaments and there are four each year. You get the biggest payouts (not always, but you'll make it up in endorsements if it's not the largest), but more important you definitely get the respect from your peers, fans and people who don't even know about the sport. It would be equivalent to winning a lot of championship rings. Of course, Warriors fans would settle for just making the playoffs, so it's a long way away off. It's like every year we have a chance to win the championship. The Bulls were the last team to do it. I'm not sure if there is another team like that currently, but if the Warriors get Greg Oden or Kevin Durant then it could be like getting a Shaq or Amare for your team.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Zhone:</div><div class="quote_post">The easiest way to dominate is with an inside presence. The players that you suggested all point to the fact that you recognize this too. And it can't just be dominant offensively inside, but also defensively. Unfortunately, as we all know, this has been the greatest problem for the Warriors for the longest time. Teams can certainly win without a dominant big man, but it's just much harder. On the same token, the search for the next great big man is why team execs overvalue big men so much.</div> What hurts are analysts saying POB won't be a great fit with the Warriors under Nelson. They do have a point. POB will get his chance, but even if he is a good player the fit may not be there. Mullin will likely have to trade him in order to get the players that will fit with Nellie. Maybe AB, Ike, Taft (big men) and Monta and one of the Utah players (small men) will flourish under Nelson. But it always seems with the Warriors that we need one player like KG or Amare to make them great and we don't have the pieces or draft position to get that player or players.
Are you suggesting that Golden State Warriors fans dominate metaphors like Tiger Woods and Roger Federer?
