I know, I know...Jamison and Musselman are history. But I was just thinking about the past moves, and I thought about the Jamison deal and how it has affected the Warriors one year later. And I have thought about the Warriors and this next season, and I thought about Musselman. And I have come to an interesting idea(for lack of a better word) about both these people and how they were let go by the Warriors. The Jamison deal is still questionable to me. Especially when you add in the teams next moves. The next move they made was the Sura for Cliff deal. Sura was an expiring contract, and I had believed the Jamison deal was to get some cap room. So that was confusing to me. And if you look at what the Warriors have done now, it still seems like they haven't gotten anything but garbage(sorry to Popeye, Eschmeyer, etc.) from the deal. And the Fisher deal also shows that they don't care too much about cap space and good sound contracts. So did they really value cap space that much back then or was it just an excuse to let Jamison go or was it just a false reason to be optimistic about the Warriors and their future? So I was in complete diseray trying to find out why the Warriors had dealt Jamison(especially so quickly and out of nowhere)...So I asked some people online, and they said to improve the team's defense and to improve team offense. So I tried finding players from that deal that have actually done that. And I could only think of Dunleavy(TERRIBLE at defense), who wasn't even part of the deal. And I guess NVE was big in getting Dampier involved early in the season. But that's about it. So now I'm thinking, the Warriors traded Jamison(the team's main scorer and leader), Jiri(a very promising young talent), Chris Mills(an expiring contract), and Fortson(I guess something to be somewhat happy about) for NVE(a somewhat decent replacement for Arenas), Popeye Jones and Eschmeyer(both who didn't do anything last year), Avery Johnson(I liked him, but gave little on-court production), and some foreign guy who I forget now. Ok...so this team obviously didn't trade to add more talent, or get younger and build for the future. And they didn't try to get better defensivly or passing wise as one person suggested. And the cap room hasn't even come for the Warriors one year later. Then I just came to the conclusion that the Warriors were stupid in getting rid of Jamison so quickly, they must have paniced somehow after Arenas left.(I'll get back to my unfinished conclusion i guess about the Jamison deal later) And now the Musselman thing is another interesting firing or letting go of. He was successful, his teams played hard, they won, they beat very good teams, they had improving attendance to the games, and people were getting optimistic as he raised the bars of expectations for the Warriors. And then they fire him. And people say that it's because the players didn't like him(I don't know too many coaches that [all]players do like these days), Mullin didn't want to work with him, the management was mad at him not playing the "young" players, etc. Every single excuse(even though most i felt were very wishy-washy or just plain wrong) they could come up with. The same sort of thing they were doing for the Arenas and Jamison situation the year before. Then I started to think...HEY! the Warriors just wanted to make scapegoats. They were embarrassed from letting Arenas go, and not being able to sign him. So they decide to point their finger at Jamison, and make him the reason why they couldn't resign Arenas and the reason why the Warriors never made the playoffs. Which probably ended up making them deal Jamison(and unfortunately Jiri Welsch) quicker than they should have. And so my theory on the Jamison and Musselman transactions is that the moves were not made to improve the team roster wise or really cap-wise, but to make scapegoats, and to "change the direction" of the team(except they don't seem to think you need more talent to improve the team). Which really sucks. And I think it's time that management shows some balls and take responsibility, instead of making bad moves to cover up previous bad moves. It's just insanely stupid. I don't know if this is true, but it's my theory of what the Warriors were doing in those two transactions. And no I am not saying the Warriors should have kept Jamison forever. I'm just saying they could have done better, possibly, if they shopped him around more and waited until midseason to deal him somewhere. And the cap situation wouldn't have been much different(it probably could had been better), unless if they brought in a really good player I guess. But that would had been a good thing!...And Musselman could had been the person to keep around forever(well probably not literally). But that's my theory...
Yes, the warriors wanted to throw away the entire season to blame Jamison. *rolls eyes* Jamison was owed a remaining 60 million on his ridiculous contract and his contract alone would have suffocated this franchise. He has no ballhandling skills and he played SF. Boykins made huge plays, Arenas did as well, if anyone should have been embarrassed it should have been Jamison. He was the franchise guy but everyone else made big plays down the end to win games. Not only that but when the warriors failed to make the playoffs Rowell went on the radio and said how dissapointed he was about the season and told about his desire to make the playoffs. That's why they fired Musselman. Are you saying this is ALL a conspriacy? NVE also said that the warriors franchise was obsessed with making the playoffs but he wanted to be a part of a serious contender and he was glad to be traded. Why would the warriors be embarrassed? They could not match any offers for Arenas. It's not like the Carlos Boozer thing. I'm sure the warriors were glad not to pay Arenas 65 million. Let's see this "conspiracy theory" of completely failing to do anything led them to only win one less game then last year. If they wanted to tank, they would have tanked like Cleveland did last year to get the #1 pick. It just goes to show you Jamison wasn't that important if we end us only losing one more game than last year. No offense, but this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Excuse me, I have to go join Cohan and Mullin and plot how to get the entire team to wear bunny costumes as warmups which will lead us to win 36 games and we can blame it all on Murphy.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Yes, the warriors wanted to throw away the entire season to blame Jamison. *rolls eyes* Jamison was owed a remaining 60 million on his ridiculous contract and his contract alone would have suffocated this franchise. He has no ballhandling skills and he played SF. Boykins made huge plays, Arenas did as well, if anyone should have been embarrassed it should have been Jamison. He was the franchise guy but everyone else made big plays down the end to win games.</div> No the people who should had been embarrassed should have been the people who named and made him the franchise player-aka the management. Jamison always played his hardest here and always gave it his all. He has nothing to be ashamed of. He really tried to make this a playoff team and a winning team, and I guess things didn't work out. And instead of the Warriors saying, "Our recent player negotiations have hurt us in retaining Arenas, but we must get over this loss and try to make improvements in our cap(something that Jamison deal has yet to do) and we will need to try to make improvements in the talent of our roster because Arenas was a very talented player and will be missed to some degree." The Jamison deal didn't do any of that. And like I was also trying to say, the Warriors could have held on to Jamison longer and looked to deal him for a lot better deal than what they did. But I believe the Warriors were more interested in getting out of the embarrassment since people were starting to realize that the Warriors have been making bad decisions. So they blame Jamison and deal him a lot quicker than they should have. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Not only that but when the warriors failed to make the playoffs Rowell went on the radio and said how dissapointed he was about the season and told about his desire to make the playoffs. That's why they fired Musselman. Are you saying this is ALL a conspriacy?</div> I also remember he went on the TV and ripped some people too. And maybe that was just all a PR move(I can name quite a few decent PR moves in the past few years by the Warriors). And how does getting rid of a young successful NBA coach and replacing him with Mike Montgomery a relatively successful college coach with no NBA experience or pro basketball experience and who has a track record of losing big games going to help the Warriors win and make the playoffs? That move doesn't go very well with what Rowell was saying. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Why would the warriors be embarrassed? They could not match any offers for Arenas. It's not like the Carlos Boozer thing. I'm sure the warriors were glad not to pay Arenas 65 million.</div> They could had been embarrassed because all summer they were saying that they would retain Arenas. And the WHOLE Warriors fan base was going crazy about resigning Arenas. And when they didn't people were upset. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Let's see this "conspiracy theory" of completely failing to do anything led them to only win one less game then last year. If they wanted to tank, they would have tanked like Cleveland did last year to get the #1 pick. It just goes to show you Jamison wasn't that important if we end us only losing one more game than last year. No offense, but this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Excuse me, I have to go join Cohan and Mullin and plot how to get the entire team to wear bunny costumes as warmups which will lead us to win 36 games and we can blame it all on Murphy.</div> And I didn't mean to say anything about tanking. The Warriors weren't trying to do that. I'm just saying that the Warriors management was more interested in hiding their bad moves and their recent record of winningless seasons by doing things that I think were and are just out right stupid and things that don't even make sence. Mostly to not get the blame for their past.
It's not that easy to trade away a max contract player, who isn't the #1 option on a team (or 2nd for that matter), who has one skill and that's it, which is scoring around the basket on quick shots. The Mavs took on a terrible contract in order to get rid of him in Stackhouse, and the W's didn't want to handcuff themselves by doing that. The reason they got a #5 pick was that the draft was so weak, and the Wiz didn't need another disapointing draft pick that they would have to wait on. With regards to Muss, it wasn't just the players who were starting to dislike his brash and abrasive manner, it was the entire organization. I heard after losses, he would be a huge ***** (rhymes with brick), towards everyone. Also the organization obviously was trying to go with a youth movement and they brought in players like Cliff (thank god) and Cheaney to teach the young guys in practice, so then in game situations they could excel, the only problem was they weren't getting into games, and the youth movement was suffering at the price of a couple extra (meaningless, looking back) wins. I would have loved to see how Pietrus improved as the season went on, but he never played until it was absoulutely necessary. Muss is a great coach and did everything I could have asked from him, he changed the make-up of the franchise and I think got Mullin interested again, which turned out to be bad news for Muss. I am very thankful to Muss and I think he will be a great coach wherever he goes, he seems like he would be awesome at the college level.
I think the conspiracy thing is a pretty big reach. The way I look at it, there is a simple explanation for both the moves: 1. The Jamison/Fortson trade. I've always said that at some point a franchise has to take a stand on an unproven player and hope he develops into an allstar. The Warriors did that with Jamison when they signed him to the max deal. Unfortunately, it didn't work out. As Mullin assumed control of the franchise it became clear that Dunleavy and Murphy had more potential than Jamison and Fortson. And if Dunleavy and Murphy didn't pan out, Mullin knew he had the cap space to go after someone in free agency. You may say that Mullin could have possibly gotten more for Jamison, but in retrospect, I think it was a pretty fair deal. Jamison put up big numbers on a bad team and when NVE came in, he was supposed to be the best player on the team and provide the clutch scoring the Warriors lost when Arenas signed with Washington. 2. The Musselman firing. You could have a better "scapegoat argument" with the Musselman firing than the Jamison trade, but I still don't buy it. Mister Jennings and Upsidedownside7 gave good reasons for the Mussleman firing, and I agree with them, but I have a few more of my own. I believe the main reason Musselman was fired was because Mullin wanted to bring in his own guys. Just like when a new coach is allowed to bring in his own assistants, a GM is allowed to bring in his own coach. Bay Area fans saw it with Donahue firing Mooch. Now it's true that some new GM's keep the old coaches, but the GM has to be comfortable with the coach, and Mullin never appeared comfortable with Musselman. The two had VERY different views on who should get playing time and what type of team the Warriors should be. Musselman wanted to play the vets and make the Warriors a defensive-oriented team. Nothing gets a coach fired more than playing vets when the GM wants him to play the young kids. Tim Floyd getting fired in Chicago is another example of it happening. By always going with Sura, Boykins, Cheaney, Robinson, and NVE over Arenas, Richardson, Pietrus, and Dunleavy, Musselman sealed his own fate.
This is mine. After last season, it was pretty much decided that Mullin will hold a power after 04 season. Mullin simply wanted to write his own legacy as a new GM, and in order to do that, he wanted three things; caproom, young talents, and a pick. For Jamison's trade, there are few issues for Mullin to make the deal. `With Jamison's contract, it's very unlikely that Mullin will see any caproom to utilize in the future. `Jamison is the main player for Saint era. `Mullin loved Dunleavy and he saw a future from him. With Jamison, he will not get much chance to play. `If Warriors trade Jamison, Mullin can also remove seemlingly immobile Fortson contract. `After Arenas left, Mullin pretty much wrote off 04 season. If Warriors can't make PO in 04 season, why won't we be really suck and get a good pick? `Mullin might not wish Warriors a bad luck. However, he also wanted to be a GM, who ended PO drought, not Saint. Mullin's future plan was geared toward after 05 season. NVE's contract would end in 05, and same logic is applied for Robinson and Sura trade. After using 05 season to evaluate the talent, Mullin can use 20+ mils of caproom to sign his own FAs, and end the PO drought in 06 season. However, Dampier altered the plan considerably. Nobody really expect Dampier to opt out this season. But, because of that, we suddenly received 10 mils cap room, and in a sence, we were forced to resign Foyle for unexpected price. With found money, Mullin decided to fill up future caproom with Fisher and Najera, and make a push for PO in 05 season by following Memphis's model. For some reason, Muss and Mullin never became friends. Even before 04 season, there was a rumor that Muss and Mullin never got along, and I believe Mullin pretty much decided to bring his own guy after 03 season. To make things worse, Muss made Mullin's future situation worse. Not only, he never cooperated Mullin's demand to develop the talent, he also tried to win every single game, which made Warriors' chance to land good pick worse. No matter the result (even if Warriors made PO) or how hard players played, Muss' fate was sealed. We will see what will happen in 05 season. He brought his own coach and brought effort and hustle to the team, although we paid high cost. Mullin wanted PO spot, and I also believe that we have a best shot to make PO, since Webber era. Let's see what Mullin can do in the future...
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">To make things worse, Muss made Mullin's future situation worse. Not only, he never cooperated Mullin's demand to develop the talent, he also tried to win every single game, which made Warriors' chance to land good pick worse. No matter the result (even if Warriors made PO) or how hard players played, Muss' fate was sealed.</div> <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Not only that but when the warriors failed to make the playoffs Rowell went on the radio and said how dissapointed he was about the season and told about his desire to make the playoffs. That's why they fired Musselman. Are you saying this is ALL a conspriacy?</div> See this is why I came up with my theory. Everything is so wishy-washy. People are saying that the Warriors are ALL about playoffs and winning. I mean how vocal was Rowell about that last season? And now they want to forget about playoffs and tank? I mean how the hell are you supposed to coach under those conditions? You have half the management group telling you that- we better win now and make the playoffs or you will be fired; and then the other half is saying - you better develop the young talent and let go about winning every game or else we will fire you because our younger players won't be able to grow and become the players we think they can be. And to consider the roster provided for Musselman it was pretty much a miracle or lose situation...or pretty much a lose-lose situation(when you enter the amount of injuries and poor free throw shooting). So maybe Musselman was let go because they wanted to make another scapegoat. Or they could have just said-what the hell about us trying to make the playoffs, we can be mediocre and we'll still be OK, look at our fan base, they are loyal. So let's make a PR move and hire/promote Mullin and we'll let him do whatever he wants. And he can even fire the person who has raised the bar for the Warriors like no one else in the past decade. I mean we don't care about winning anymore compared to when we were saying that bad stuff about our team underachieveing. And people want to talk about cap flexibility. And basically there has been no cap flexibilty that has been made from the Jamison deal as of right now. Then you add the Fisher signing and even Foyle's signing to an extent, and can we honestly say that the Warriors are that serious about the cap situation? The only cap room that the Warriors have had this offseason was from Dampier, Foyle(at a point), Cardinal, and Cheaney(at a point) for a certain time not being under contract, and from Avery Johnson retiring(which isn't that much anyhow). Which means very little from the Jamison trade. I think the Warriors could have had a ton of cap room if they had kept the roster as it was before the moves. The Warriors had cap flexibility from Sura's big contract, Mills' big contract, and also Damp's(I guess it was hard to tell at that point last season, but still there would be a lot more cap space this offseason than what we ended up having) and Foyle's contracts would had given the Warriors a lot of cap room, just this offseason. And now people want to say the team wants cap flexibility for next offseason. And I guess that is what they'll get. But if they were waiting for cap flexibility in 2005, why did they trade Jamison in 2003? Especially when you consider that the trade has yet to help the cap situation or improve the talent of their roster. And Fortson would be a lot easier to trade now as well. When you consider how much money people are getting, Fortson's contract isn't that bad. It's still not good but it's not as bad as it was. And I bet the Warriors could have made a package that would had recieved a lot better players than what the Warriors got from the Dallas trade. But I guess that part is retrospect.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post">And people want to talk about cap flexibility. And basically there has been no cap flexibilty that has been made from the Jamison deal as of right now. Then you add the Fisher signing and even Foyle's signing to an extent, and can we honestly say that the Warriors are that serious about the cap situation? The only cap room that the Warriors have had this offseason was from Dampier, Foyle(at a point), Cardinal, and Cheaney(at a point) for a certain time not being under contract, and from Avery Johnson retiring(which isn't that much anyhow). Which means very little from the Jamison trade. I think the Warriors could have had a ton of cap room if they had kept the roster as it was before the moves. The Warriors had cap flexibility from Sura's big contract, Mills' big contract, and also Damp's(I guess it was hard to tell at that point last season, but still there would be a lot more cap space this offseason than what we ended up having) and Foyle's contracts would had given the Warriors a lot of cap room, just this offseason. And now people want to say the team wants cap flexibility for next offseason. And I guess that is what they'll get. But if they were waiting for cap flexibility in 2005, why did they trade Jamison in 2003? Especially when you consider that the trade has yet to help the cap situation or improve the talent of their roster. </div> Clif25, I think this conspiracy thing has warped your memory a little bit... 1. The goal was never to have cap flexibility THIS offseason, it was always to have cap flexibility NEXT offseason. 2. I don't think you remember how bad the Warriors cap situation was with Jamison and Fortson on the team. Fortson was signed through '06/'07 at 6-7 mil a year and Jamison was signed through '07/'08 at 12.5 to 16.3 mil. They combine for over 20 mil for the '05/'06 season which means the Warriors would have had NO cap space next offseason, and they would have still had to re-sign Richardson and Muirphy. Now they did have some expiring contracts (Sura, Mills, and Foyle), but since they wanted cap space for the '05 offseason, there's really no difference between Sura's expiring deal this offseason and Robinson's expiring deal next offseason. Mills had a 5 mil expiring deal, but c'mon, the Warriors now have Laettner's 6.5 mil expiring deal and Davis' 9 mil expiring deal. As for Foyle, he was resigned for 6.5 mil (we think...), but Damp was supposed to never have opted out, so Mullin was counting on having his 8 mil on the books as well. Trust me, cap space was the main motivation for the deal. The Warriors went from possibly not being able to re-sign all their young core to being able to re-sign everyone AND go after a top tier free agent.
Good points, getting rid of Jamison definitely made enough room for several options. We can re-sign Jrich or Murphy and you know the more and more I think about it Mullin has put himself in the best possible situation for a long shot at Yao Ming if he really wants to move his family out here. It would be a good defensive team with a good backup center, good veteran leadership, a good veteran point guard, and several other pieces that can shoot the ball and pass. Who knows, you know? Stranger things have happened. Wish I could comment more but I'm up to my neck in work.
This is a good thread. Conspiracy theory or not, the I think the team is in a better position then ever. Two years ago, there was the hope that the W's could emerge as one of the youngest and most talented teams. Unfornuately, it didn't work out that way. Think of the lineup under Muss- Arenas, JRich, Jamison, Murphy, Damp. Wow, who wouldn't be excited about that lineup. So much has changed over the past two years. Jamison wanted to pick the franchise up, but his intrinsic value didn't equal the monetary weight of his contract. So no matter how much he wanted to remain a Warrior and help the franchise, he was hurting it by just being on the team. Fortson was a sinking ship, and I feel bad for the Sonics. ESPN has Fortson listed as their key acquisition this past off season. Muss was doomed from the beginning of last season. He was going into a lameduck season. I thought he'd be resigned and even hoped he would, but when the Dunleavy argument came up and the all-around grumbling fans heard about him, Mullin had to step in a hire his own man. The W's are all about winning, whether they make the playoffs or now we'll see. What's another year compared to 10. I doubt that the W's have ever tried to "throw" a season, and its unlikely Muss and Jamison we're the targets of a conspiracy. The problem was with Saint. Now that Mully's in charge let's see where he takes the W's. Again, all we can do is hope. And cheer for Jamison and boo Arenas when the Wiz come to town.
Besides his non-charming personality (similar to a gnat) Musselman suffers Jim Tracy syndrome meaning new GM want a coach loyal to them. Musselman has never given any indication of loyalty to Mullin or his basketball philosophy in addition to being a lame duck coach. If he had another two years on his contract, most likely Mullin would of taken a wait and see approach for at least a year. For the money that Fortson and Jamison make, Murphy and Dunleavy are a much better investment for next year (3 million a piece roughly) compared to 20+ for Fortson and Jamison. I still like Jamison more than VC and Houston who also received horrendous contract extensions the year before the cap. We have a nice team with a good balance, savy vets (Crob, Davis, Foyle and Fisher), defensive focused youths (Biedrins, Pietrus) and a young improving core (Speedy, Dunleavy, J-Rich, T-Murphy). Unfortunately, we have no franchise player or low post scoring threat but it takes one lucky draft, one unexpected player development or key free agent signing to make the difference. On the bright side, we should no problem scoring against Washington Wizards.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting dareedle:</div><div class="quote_post">Besides his non-charming personality (similar to a gnat) Musselman suffers Jim Tracy syndrome meaning new GM want a coach loyal to them. Musselman has never given any indication of loyalty to Mullin or his basketball philosophy in addition to being a lame duck coach.</div> This is exactly what I'm saying. Musselman wasn't loyal to the Warriors or Mullin? How would have Musselman been loyal to the Warriors as a whole? From what I am hearing and seeing, if Musselman had given more playing time to his younger players to danger his chances of winning more games Rowell would had been very upset. And if Musselman had done what he did do and try to win everygame he would have made Mullin upset. So it was a lose-lose situation unless if Musselman pulled off a miracle and made the playoffs. And this is part of what I'm saying because instead of the Warriors saying our management group wasn't all on the same page during last season and we could have put Musselman in a very unstable position. They are now saying that Musselman didn't get along with management or the players and wasn't cooperative even though there were about 2 absolutelyt different things being told to him. And basically the only thing a coach really needs to be loyal to are his players. And I think it's fair to say that Musselman gave his players 100% every day as a Warriors head coach. Sometimes he might have been a little down during some tough stretches as a young head coach, but he did give all he had every day I believe. And he was very loyal to his starters. He started the same 5 almost everygame his first season, and I bet he would have wanted to do the same last season, but the injuries didn't help there. Maybe some of his players didn't enjoy every moment playing for him. But look around the whole league, those types of situations and conflicts are part of basketball and the NBA. But he was very loyal to them and wanted to get the best he could out of each player. And seriously, after every shakey incident. You rarely ever heard anything said about the incident by anybody 2 days later. Maybe there would be a little article about it, but nothing much else. And actually you would never see any type of poor effects of Musselman having "bad" relationships with his players by the players performances on the court. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The W's are all about winning, whether they make the playoffs or now we'll see. What's another year compared to 10. I doubt that the W's have ever tried to "throw" a season, and its unlikely Muss and Jamison we're the targets of a conspiracy.</div> Maybe they weren't part of a conspiracy. But I'm saying they were pieces and moves to make the Warriors management look less responsible for past decisions and losing seasons, and to try to bring optimism to the organization somehow(in a very poor manner in my opinion). The Musselman firing means that Dunleavy, a fan favorite, will be happier and will play better and become a star in the league(yet to be seen). And letting go Jamison is going to give the Warriors cap space(something yet to be obtained), and now we don't have Jamison who was the reason we couldn't do anything in the past, so of course the future is brighter. I mean Jamison, he was our franchise player and he didn't do anything(even though he was our best player most of the time) so of course we had to let him go(even though it was the management's fault in signing him to such a big contract). I'm not going to dispute the cap flexibility we'll have in 2005 from the Jamison trade. I am just upset how the Warriors pointed their finger at Jamison and made him the scape goat, and how they dealt him so quickly when the product of the trade has been very bad and poor thus far. But maybe it was just too difficult to find a better trade. But I am also thinking the Warriors didn't try hard enough to find a better trade and was more interested in making Jamison a scape goat. Just an idea of a possibility that the Warriors could have done. I think it makes some sence in my opinion. But maybe i am just plain out wrong.
Who made Jamison a scapegoat, he is a one-dimensional "franchise" player, that we were lucky to trade, because just like Shawn Marion you don't want your Max player to be your 2nd or 3rd option on a team.
i don't really see all the controversy in the moves to let arenas go, trading jamison or fire musselman. the first two were done for better cap room and financial flexibility in the future, the latter done because of use of the bench and player development. musselman did a good job with this team, but i just don't think mullin saw the type of improvement from the younger players that he wanted/expected, and clearly he thinks that bringing in a college coach (that has a history of being a good developer of young talent) will help. but that was also combined by bringing in good assistant coaches who have been around the league with guys like stotts and elie, and he's brought in/re-signed some good veterans like chaeney, foyle, fisher, najera, etc. simply put, the young players on this team are going to be given every opportunity to succeed early on in their careers with solid basis of coaches, veterans and role players surrounding them. the gamble mullin is taking is that there will be enough improvement, and consistency, from the young players on this team that it can compete...and if it doesn't, the financial future of the franchise isn't in jeopardy, so that changes can still be made in the future.
I have to side with the opponents of the conspiracy theory. Jamison was traded because his contract was a giant anchor on the franchise. Cap room has yet to materialize, but it was never intended to materialize at this point. Just wait until next year when the Warriors will be in a position to sign their nucleus and possibly upgrade the team still further via a free agent acquisition. The Warriors a couple years back were a disaster, and one that showed no signs of improving. You cannot undo all of that overnite. As I see it, the master plan makes sense, and is being implemented according to schedule. With regards to Musselman, I actually liked him and was sad to see him let go. But I understand the reasons behind his dispatch. What really has me upset is the choice of Montgomery. A, he's from Stanford. That's his biggest flaw (guess where I went to school?). B, he has no experience at the pro level. C, his teams routinely choke. I am not optimistic, but I would be happy if it turns out I'm wrong.
Spliff you gotta give Montgomery a break. A.) I know you're joking Not a Stanford fan, but let's be fair. Sure he's from Stanford, but look at the players he has to recruit. They have to have a certain GPA and SAT scores with no exceptions for any athletes. That basically makes the Stanford team forced to play organized team ball without any superstars, so he's perfect for the Warriors who have no real stars that can bring it every night. He's done a whole lot more with a lot less given Stanford's stringent entrance requirements. B.) He has no experience at the pro level, but you have to make the jump somewhere. He's only one of a handful that has won the John Wooden lifetime achievement award and he'll make this team better and teach the players how to execute an offense and play team defense. C.) See A. No stars, that's not his fault.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting goldenstatefan:</div><div class="quote_post">i don't really see all the controversy in the moves to let arenas go, trading jamison or fire musselman. the first two were done for better cap room and financial flexibility in the future, the latter done because of use of the bench and player development. musselman did a good job with this team, but i just don't think mullin saw the type of improvement from the younger players that he wanted/expected, and clearly he thinks that bringing in a college coach (that has a history of being a good developer of young talent) will help. but that was also combined by bringing in good assistant coaches who have been around the league with guys like stotts and elie, and he's brought in/re-signed some good veterans like chaeney, foyle, fisher, najera, etc. simply put, the young players on this team are going to be given every opportunity to succeed early on in their careers with solid basis of coaches, veterans and role players surrounding them. the gamble mullin is taking is that there will be enough improvement, and consistency, from the young players on this team that it can compete...and if it doesn't, the financial future of the franchise isn't in jeopardy, so that changes can still be made in the future.</div> Man you should have seen my earlier posts bashing Musselman. You'd think out of a timeout, things would be more organized, but often times there weren't. The sub patterns were garbage and passing and cutting is too predictable for teams that can rotate out and play team defense. What we needed were some set plays, a point guard that can run and initate offense to test the other team's ability to react to certain plays, and then run the plays that the other team doesn't respond well too. Now with Dunleavy/Pietrus combo you got a French guy that is too quick for most 2 guards that can slash toward the hoop, Dunleavy, an oversized small forward who can pass and hit people moving without the ball and be able to take the ball up himself and shoot from the outside. Where were the plays written for these guys? There's like a dozen plays surrounding a simple two man game like this and I guarantee the other team would have to make constant adjustments just to stop either one.
Hear, hear CR2. Where were the plays last year? Muss, had that pretty garbage motion offense that was basically stagnant when the W's couldn't score. He never changed anything. How many times last year were the W's caught just passing the ball around till someone had to heave a shot up. The biggest eyesore was the Raptors game where they were winning by 12 or so, then ended up losing by 3 or 4 after scoring just 2 points in the quarter. Wow, you would think Muss would draw up a play just for someone to drive to the basket get fouled and actually get two free throws. There were times when Muss' calls were mind-boggling. Like having Sean Lampley in the game during crunch time. What was that. I mean I'm a big Lampley fan since he played college ball at Cal, but common, the guys a 10 day contract-man. Richardson has shown marked improvement in the past few years, but I expected more out of him last year. This being his contract year, I expect to see some bigger strides. I'm not saying that Muss stunted JRich, but it sure seems that he digressed in some parts of his game, hopefully he can put it together, along with Murph. Maybe with Dale Davis here, Murph can fire up that intensity and dunk on him all day in practice like his rookie season. WOW, that dunk was nasty. Dunleavy, Speedy, JRich, Murph and Foyle. Its time to step up.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting YayAreaFanatic:</div><div class="quote_post">Hear, hear CR2. Where were the plays last year? Muss, had that pretty garbage motion offense that was basically stagnant when the W's couldn't score. He never changed anything. How many times last year were the W's caught just passing the ball around till someone had to heave a shot up. The biggest eyesore was the Raptors game where they were winning by 12 or so, then ended up losing by 3 or 4 after scoring just 2 points in the quarter. Wow, you would think Muss would draw up a play just for someone to drive to the basket get fouled and actually get two free throws. </div> The thing about Musselman was that his open offense was mostly the Jamison and Arenas show. When we lost those two guys, it was time for him to go as well. It was no longer the same team. Also his substitution patterns on defense were just stupid. Who the heck takes out Dampier when he's only played 36 or so minutes with only three fouls in the 4th quarter after he scored the only two points in that Toronto game in the 4th quarter? He was the only guy who was denying layups and making wing players think twice about driving toward him. Also he rebounded the ball after a defensive stop. We couldn't rebound worth a lick. Also we could have used Arenas, Murphy, and Jamison's free throw shooting ability. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting YayAreaFanatic:</div><div class="quote_post"> There were times when Muss' calls were mind-boggling. Like having Sean Lampley in the game during crunch time. What was that. I mean I'm a big Lampley fan since he played college ball at Cal, but common, the guys a 10 day contract-man. Richardson has shown marked improvement in the past few years, but I expected more out of him last year. This being his contract year, I expect to see some bigger strides. I'm not saying that Muss stunted JRich, but it sure seems that he digressed in some parts of his game, hopefully he can put it together, along with Murph. Maybe with Dale Davis here, Murph can fire up that intensity and dunk on him all day in practice like his rookie season. WOW, that dunk was nasty. Dunleavy, Speedy, JRich, Murph and Foyle. Its time to step up.</div> I hope they all have breakout seasons.
