<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Warriors coach Eric Musselman said Monday that if small forward Mike Dunleavy is "100 percent" he'll start against the Los Angeles Lakers on Wednesday at the Arena. Bad news for Brian Cardinal, right? Not necessarily. Cardinal, who has started the past four games, still might be introduced with the starters Wednesday because power forward Clifford Robinson's status is now unclear. Robinson didn't practice Monday because of back spasms. Dunleavy and Cardinal were both in Musselman's first unit during practice. Cardinal has averaged 20 points while shooting 63.4 percent from the floor in the past four games, all starts for Dunleavy, who suffered a sprained left ankle against Chicago on Jan. 30. </div> http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctime...ors/7970983.htm ========================= What do you guys think of this? Should Cardinal remain the starter after averaging 20 points in the four games he started? I personally think Dunleavy should start once again. I hate to see a player lose his starting role to an injury. Now if he doesn't produce when he comes back...that's a different story. Cardinal could possibly be starting for Cliff Robinson against the Lakers due to Cliff's back spasms.
The Warriors are just too talented. Even if it's a starting frontcourt of Dunleavy and Cardinal, what will happen when Murphy comes back?
The warriors have a talented Frontcourt but I don't want Brian to lose his starting role because he has been playing really well.Maybe we could start both of them.
Start Dunleavy. He's the future. The reality is that Cardinal has maxed out. He's awesome, but really more suited in the long run to coming off the bench and then playing against the other teams second team and perhaps closing the game if he's hot. I truly admire Cardinal and am grateful that he's bloomed but I cannot get blinded into thinking in the long run he's better than Dunleavy.
I'll tell you all this: I like Cardinal and Claxton starting. I could be biased though but look at it this way: Dunleavy is fine off the bench, plus he plays 3 positions (some point, shooting guard, small forward) which can be great for exploiting mismatches which he was so used to at Duke. Now here is what I like about Cardinal. Cardinal has more toughness at the 3 spot and can get his defenders into foul trouble real early at both ends of the court early in the game. Just because Cardinal is an inch or two shorter than Dunleavy, doesn't matter much to me because he gets to the line and more importantly, makes his free throws (something Dunleavy can't do as well). Watch that one game where Cardinal scored like 32 points. In that game, Cardinal and Speedy took defenders out early with their "draw contact" style of play and pesky defense. (Cardinal is not the most athletic defender, but he sure does play physical enough to annoy his man into commiting stupid fouls). Also, everyone is complaining about losing games by leaving points at the line and which starting players are poor at the line? I can tell you the current two of the starting five that don't suck. Guess who they are?
Like philsmith said, the Dunleavy is the future and it would make no sense to start Cardinal over him. We need that lift from Cardinal coming off the bench. He seems to make everyone around him better when he comes in the game and that is the kind of player we need coming off the bench. He will probably still be in the game in the clutch so it really makes little difference.
^ I agree...The Warriors are better off having Cardinal come off the bench as a spark....Dunleavy is the future SF of this team and there is no reason to give up on him at this point....However, if the Warriors creep into striking range of the playoffs and Cardinal continues to outplay Dunleavy, then I would suggest a temporary change...at this point tho, Dunleavy is the way to go IMO
I'm kind of torn between who to start. If the warriors were in the playoff hunt I would probably start Cardinal, since he's earned a starting spot based on his play, and I think they play better with him starting. Mainly because when Dunleavy started they usually started off kind of slow. But since the Warriors have a very small chance of getting to the playoffs, the Warriors would be better off starting because like other posters have said he is their future.
I'd keep Dunleavy on the bench because he's versatile with the 2,3 and sometimes the 1 or even 4. He's an all around guy basically and he's efficient. However, he doesn't get you to the line the rest of the way like Speedy and Cardinal do. Everyone complains about not getting to the line or leaving points at the line, well Speedy and the Custodian make sure it gets done.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">I'd keep Dunleavy on the bench because he's versatile with the 2,3 and sometimes the 1 or even 4. </div> Dunleavy can't defend at the 2 or the 4...He's pretty much set in stone at the 3 IMO
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting notMuchgame:</div><div class="quote_post">Dunleavy can't defend at the 2 or the 4...He's pretty much set in stone at the 3 IMO</div> He can't defend at the 3 either, so what's the point? I'm sure that's why Calbert Cheaney is inserted for Dunleavy. It is certainly not for Calbert's tired old don't bother passing, pull up baseline jumper with a man in his face. This is what I hate about slow nba players. At least hustle like the Custodian if you're all slow.
I agree with custodianrules2, we would have a better chance of winning if cardinal were starting. But the problem is that the warriors are not really in the playoff race and that is the only reason why I would start Dunleavy since he is the Warriors future.
Dunleavy is going to be a better NBA player than Cardinal. He may never play with the heart that Cardinal plays at but he is better suited for the NBA. The reason we got rid of Jamison was to make way for Dunleavy. He is our future and we need to give him time and develope him. Just like philsmith said, this would be a different story if we were in the playoff race.
I think the only reason people pressure Dunleavy to start is because he is the 3rd pick overall in his draft year with scouting comparrisons to all kinds of players like Schemprf, Nowitzki, Peja, or even Larry Bird. He's even got tons of front office pressure to play him. Talk about a great white hype. But I will hand it to Dunleavy since his play has been ultra efficient. And if he gives the warriors that early offense and ability to find open people and make people around him better, that's when I will start kissing Dunleavy's ass. But for now, I see Cardinal/Claxton duo as making everyone around them better and the game easier for everyone else to play.
Who knows, maybe Musselman is being pressured to start Dunleavy but I think it is the right move. Maybe he won't be the next lary bird or dirk nowinksi, but we will never know if we dont give him the chance to prove himself. He has the make up to be a great offensive player. I don't see a problem with starting Dunleavy and then letting Cardinal finish off games until Dunleavy matures enough to take on that role.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Was Dunleavy ever a star at Duke or was he a role player? I'd say role player.</div> If he was a role player, he was the best role player Duke has ever had.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rudeezy:</div><div class="quote_post">If he was a role player, he was the best role player Duke has ever had.</div> And not hard to score when you're much taller than most average 3's in college. Welcome to the NBA where everyone is faster, stronger and can score and is the same height or taller than you. That's Dunleavy's world right now. I still think he was picked partly because of an opportunity to lure Dunleavy Sr as head coach instead of Musselman. Like I said I will be convinced if he can win at both ends of the court and get extra posessions. He was doing it for a little while, but he hasn't been the model of consistency unlike Brian Cardinal.
Yes Dunleavy has struggled but we have seen what he is capable of doing, even against these NBA players. He has a beautiful shot and when he is aggressive he can cause many problems for the defense, especially with his passing skills.
If you guys remember, Dunleavy was shooting extremely well before he got injured. A starter should not lose his starting position due to an injury. But if Dunleavy does not produce, slowly start phasing in Cardinal to start. As far as starting him because he is the future I disagree. Sometimes a player needs to be gradually given playing time until they prove they are worthy of starting. Dunleavy was shoved into this starting role because Antawn was traded, he did not "earn" it. It was given to him by default. We also need to judge who deserves to start based on the TEAM's success when one player is in for another. If the Warriors are +15 when Dunleavy is in, and +20 when Cardinal is in, then start Cardinal until that changes. I definately can see Cardinal coming in and providing a spark and closing games like Boykins did last year. That will be his role. Dunleavy produces better when starting than he does when coming in as a spark. That role is not best suited for him.
