i mentioned this yesterday too. he never had this kinda impact in Washington or Milwaukee when he was there for his short stints. Always worry how people who flourish in GS can replicate that elsewhere, especially here around weaker defenders.
He likes to throw that around as if anyone cares.
@SlyPokerDog you need to look into your "ignore" feature.... he has me muted but he's apparently still seeing my posts. Your IT department needs to fix that.
we used our biggest FA asset on a position where we already have a guy who is better than him (Hart) without addressing our glaring needs at forward/center. And the biggest problem for me, that @Ed O did not bring up... we hard capped ourselves for absolutely no reason.
Sharpe is a rookie with upside...he probably won't get much burn this season just like every rookie we sign...he's not going to be up to speed on defense in the NBA yet at all...he'll be on the practice squad and Payton will get all those minutes...we're going to use Ant, Dame, Hart and Payton as rotation guards. book it. Sharpe will get garbage time burn at best...the other guys are towel waivers like Blevins and Elleby were.
Guards who lead the NBA in steals are not easy to find...also guards who don't chuck and think they're shooters are hard to find. Our team sucked at creating turnovers and pt of attack defense...this kid solves both those problems while Grant, Ant and Dame take the shots....nothing not to like about it. Defense wins championships and this kid just won a championship....all these other guards you speak of didn't..we signed a stud who will increase your possessions by a large margin. Great pickup ....you can put Ant and Hart, Dame and Gary or Ant and Gary and Dame and Hart and you have a balanced offensive and defensive guard rotation
you might have an opinion the points, but i certainly think they're worth debating. i'm sure others agree with them.
GP also didn't play the minimum minutes required to show up the leader boards.
This is absolutely false. We don't get any credit for what he's done in the past. All we are paying for is the future. As I indicated, though, it has to do with his ceiling and it also has to do with whether his last season is a blip or what kind of player he really is. If it was his rookie year, then of course it would be more assuredly what kind of player he is. Or if he was like Ant, young in age but a few years under his belt, the improvement might be a true improvement, rather than a hot streak and/or being in the right place at the right time.
You don't think height is relevant? Really? In basketball?
Anyone with common sense knows that while recent production matters (more than, say, what happened five years ago), at some point when there's a sudden uptick of productivity, it's more likely to be a combination of a hot streak, luck, and/or being in the right place at the right time than to be that he's suddenly a better player.
That was just one example. And if we paid him more, then he might have wanted to leave. But we will never know as we paid a borderline NBA player more than he got from the Warriors. There's a consistent "Cronin couldn't have done better" explanation after he makes a bad move and I don't see how he keeps having to make these bad moves... why does the NBA hate Joe Cronin?
Waive him? Maybe someone will pick him up?
Curry, Klay, and Green (as much as I dislike him) tend to carry a lot of the water for that team, and it's easier to plug replacement-level dudes in... the same way Jordan/Pippen/Grant (or Rodman) made other guys (Paxson, Kerr, Harper, etc., etc.) look so much better.
