Trade Dunleavy, watch him blossom in years 4 and 5. I've thought about Dunleavy again and if you watch the game, there are two deadly events happening, (1) Dunleavy is not aggressive despite being the Warriors best FG % shooter; and (2) The teammates are not setting him up nor even looking for him. When does he get a screen? When does anyone hit him when he is coming off the screen?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Trade Dunleavy, watch him blossom in years 4 and 5. I've thought about Dunleavy again and if you watch the game, there are two deadly events happening, (1) Dunleavy is not aggressive despite being the Warriors best FG % shooter; and (2) The teammates are not setting him up nor even looking for him. When does he get a screen? When does anyone hit him when he is coming off the screen?</div> (1) No way that Dunleavy is our best shooter. Troy is our best FG% shooter by far. He's the only guy that is almost a sure thing when left all alone. I don't see Dunleavy burying it when there's no need for screens beause nobody is there to guard him! Again I think we're being wishful about his projections of being great as Chris Mullin was or Larry Bird was because they don't take this long in games to find their rhythm. He could be good, but we want our 3rd rounds to be good on both ends of the floor, not just offense. There was no doubt that Chris Mullin and Larry Bird were going to be stars because they could hit their shots unconsciously. They also didn't have Battier, Boozer, Jay Williams and all these other college stars on their team. At least I don't think so. Also Mullin was a gym rat, could play physically and so could Larry Bird. They were not athletic, but they were strong and they weren't wussies like Dunleavy. Also Larry Bird was a true franchise player because he did everything well at power forward. He could post up, hit the fade away jumper, put a body on people, make his free throws, and come through in the clutch on numerous occasions. I don't think either of these guys struggled until year 4 or year 5. Their impact was felt pretty quickly. I mean Dunleavy isn't a highschooler like Jermaine O'neil was. (2) So you're basically saying that Dunleavy will start hitting shots when he gets a screen from a teammate? Why isn't heable to hit his shots when he's absolutely wide open most of the time then? What's the difference? He's hitting the shots almost always from 20 feet out. To top that off if you watch the games the other team's defenders are paying attention to Jrich not Dunleavy. If Dun Dun was a 20ppg scorer consistently (one 20 pt game + 5 turnovers after having played 12 games doesn't count), maybe they might give him Wesley Person or Keith Van Horn type of respect, but they don't. They play off him and let him shoot from the perimeter. Also I thought this guy could create his own shot unlike Jason "I can't dribble" Richardson who always seems to be the shift of focus during most Dunleavy is a bust arguments. Nobody takes his shot seriously, Dunleavy can't take someone off the dribble and he doesn't take it inside when he has the size advantage. Just to get him involved in offense takes a lot of work when Jrich and Murphy struggle themselves to create their own shot. It's like we need another penetrator or a beast in the post to get everyone those good looks because this team has no concept of solid screens and picks. And since we locked up Murphy and Jrich (which we shouldn't have) it makes Dunleavy the odd man out IMO. So basically that's Mullin's que to get players that will support the Murph and Jrich duo by providing tough defense and playmaking to fill in the holes that Murph and Jrich have in their game. Here is an honest question? Do you think Dunleavy was worth a 3rd round pick when there were some real power forward candidates out there like Chris Wilcox and Nene Hilario who can attack the rim and are hard to keep off the offensive glass? I mean Murphy is a good matchup that works in our favor on some nights, but we need someone a little more suitable to matchup against the different types of bodies in the nba. I mean those candidates were right there, we could have also picked a guy like Tayshaun Prince (who I was impressed with) or Jiri Welsch too. I mean we had the extra draft pick we could have easily gone for a lower draft pick to find a suitable role playing small forward with solid fundamentals. Instead we chose the small forward version of Bobby Hurley or a Danny Ferry with no shot: players that were great in college but were not an obvious superstar like Bird or Mullin was. People were reading way much into the Duke Championship hype or the limited amount of games they played during college and the weak matchups they played against. Dun is just another 6'9 forward in the league if we're trying to find a matchup nightmare we might as well gone for that 7 footer bust that went to Denver. There is one exception with Dunleavy that I have and it's if you play Dunleavy at point guard... I don't have much of a problem as long as he can hustle back and guard the small forward on defense (which we know he will have problems with night in and night out). I'll be watching year 4 and 5 and I'll be impressed if he gets 18ppg, but I won't be settled on him giving up 30 ppg on defense when every nba player realizes its their chance for an easy dunk or fastbreak. Any slowpoke on the perimeter that plays their man soft is a target for domination, which is why they move Keith Van Horn (a player who I think is talented on offense) to power forward a lot. I mean, I've watched the warriors pretty much since the Mullin days and I think there are two deadly events happening. 1.) History is repeating itself, although not as devastating as Todd Fuller or Joe Smith was 2.) History is repeating itself, although not as devastating as Todd Fuller or Joe Smith was
What would it take to get Henrich? I wouldn't mind getting him if it's for the right price. I guess it would be more of a draft day trade, such as Dunleavy and a draft pick for Henrich (and a lower draft pick?) or something like that. But Henrich is averaging 7.5 assists on the Bulls, that's really good. I also wouldn't mind trading Dunleavy for Curry, at least Curry is a big man which the Warriors need. Wilcox wouldn't be a bad idea either...just adding a physical athletic big man would be nice, especially in exchange for Dunleavy.
I don't know but Hinrich would be my kind of player. He's a successful transition from college shooting guard to nba point guard. He does a lot of things well that you're supposed to do at a point guard spot and he has court vision. Plus he knows how to defend other guards at 6'3". He seems like a blend of Steve Nash and Chauncey Billups. He's got quickness, can shoot, play defense, can pass, get the team involved, can see over most defenders, can handle the rock. I doubt the Bulls would trade him. I think he's the heart of the team right now.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Trade Dunleavy, watch him blossom in years 4 and 5. I've thought about Dunleavy again and if you watch the game, there are two deadly events happening, (1) Dunleavy is not aggressive despite being the Warriors best FG % shooter; and (2) The teammates are not setting him up nor even looking for him. When does he get a screen? When does anyone hit him when he is coming off the screen?</div> He might blossom in 4-5 years. YOu can never tell yes or no just yet. But I think the warriors need some action from him NOW. Even myself would take something that's NOW than "5 years"
yeah five years of him sitting on the bench(hopefully) and paying a big contract. Dunleavy can't shoot. Can't guard anyone his size, and sucks. The only thing he does good is pass.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">(1) No way that Dunleavy is our best shooter. Troy is our best FG% shooter by far. He's the only guy that is almost a sure thing when left all alone. I don't see Dunleavy burying it when there's no need for screens beause nobody is there to guard him! Again I think we're being wishful about his projections of being great as Chris Mullin was or Larry Bird was because they don't take this long in games to find their rhythm. He could be good, but we want our 3rd rounds to be good on both ends of the floor, not just offense. There was no doubt that Chris Mullin and Larry Bird were going to be stars because they could hit their shots unconsciously. They also didn't have Battier, Boozer, Jay Williams and all these other college stars on their team. At least I don't think so. Also Mullin was a gym rat, could play physically and so could Larry Bird. They were not athletic, but they were strong and they weren't wussies like Dunleavy. Also Larry Bird was a true franchise player because he did everything well at power forward. He could post up, hit the fade away jumper, put a body on people, make his free throws, and come through in the clutch on numerous occasions. I don't think either of these guys struggled until year 4 or year 5. Their impact was felt pretty quickly. I mean Dunleavy isn't a highschooler like Jermaine O'neil was. (2) So you're basically saying that Dunleavy will start hitting shots when he gets a screen from a teammate? Why isn't heable to hit his shots when he's absolutely wide open most of the time then? What's the difference? He's hitting the shots almost always from 20 feet out. To top that off if you watch the games the other team's defenders are paying attention to Jrich not Dunleavy. If Dun Dun was a 20ppg scorer consistently (one 20 pt game + 5 turnovers after having played 12 games doesn't count), maybe they might give him Wesley Person or Keith Van Horn type of respect, but they don't. They play off him and let him shoot from the perimeter. Also I thought this guy could create his own shot unlike Jason "I can't dribble" Richardson who always seems to be the shift of focus during most Dunleavy is a bust arguments. Nobody takes his shot seriously, Dunleavy can't take someone off the dribble and he doesn't take it inside when he has the size advantage. Just to get him involved in offense takes a lot of work when Jrich and Murphy struggle themselves to create their own shot. It's like we need another penetrator or a beast in the post to get everyone those good looks because this team has no concept of solid screens and picks. And since we locked up Murphy and Jrich (which we shouldn't have) it makes Dunleavy the odd man out IMO. So basically that's Mullin's que to get players that will support the Murph and Jrich duo by providing tough defense and playmaking to fill in the holes that Murph and Jrich have in their game. Here is an honest question? Do you think Dunleavy was worth a 3rd round pick when there were some real power forward candidates out there like Chris Wilcox and Nene Hilario who can attack the rim and are hard to keep off the offensive glass? I mean Murphy is a good matchup that works in our favor on some nights, but we need someone a little more suitable to matchup against the different types of bodies in the nba. I mean those candidates were right there, we could have also picked a guy like Tayshaun Prince (who I was impressed with) or Jiri Welsch too. I mean we had the extra draft pick we could have easily gone for a lower draft pick to find a suitable role playing small forward with solid fundamentals. Instead we chose the small forward version of Bobby Hurley or a Danny Ferry with no shot: players that were great in college but were not an obvious superstar like Bird or Mullin was. People were reading way much into the Duke Championship hype or the limited amount of games they played during college and the weak matchups they played against. Dun is just another 6'9 forward in the league if we're trying to find a matchup nightmare we might as well gone for that 7 footer bust that went to Denver. There is one exception with Dunleavy that I have and it's if you play Dunleavy at point guard... I don't have much of a problem as long as he can hustle back and guard the small forward on defense (which we know he will have problems with night in and night out). I'll be watching year 4 and 5 and I'll be impressed if he gets 18ppg, but I won't be settled on him giving up 30 ppg on defense when every nba player realizes its their chance for an easy dunk or fastbreak. Any slowpoke on the perimeter that plays their man soft is a target for domination, which is why they move Keith Van Horn (a player who I think is talented on offense) to power forward a lot. I mean, I've watched the warriors pretty much since the Mullin days and I think there are two deadly events happening. 1.) History is repeating itself, although not as devastating as Todd Fuller or Joe Smith was 2.) History is repeating itself, although not as devastating as Todd Fuller or Joe Smith was</div> The Dunleavy I see is not left all alone on the perimeter. He does not move that well off the ball so I'm saying he needs some screens and plays called for him. From what I saw last Friday night, the defender is in his shirt and then he does not get the ball in an aggressive position. I love Mully, but he got scorched routinely. He hustled and played the passing lanes but he was a liability. Sure Nene, Prince and Wilcox (you're kidding me right?) look good right now but if you had selected them at 3 you would have been laughed at. Dunleavy was a major contributor to the National Champion Blue Devils. I hate Duke but will admit that Dunleavy looked like the 3rd best player, hands down. You have the benefit of hindsight looking back, the important thing is to look forward and Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler are not an improvement. JRich and Pietrus? Get your athletic fix but they are too small to guard SFs so you are going to have a liability in JRich at the 2 and an undersized SF in Pietrus, regardless of how good a defender he is.
Couple of things: 1) Custodian, to answer your question about drafting Dunleavy 3rd, at the time I thought it was a great choice. Of course you can say that with 20/20 hindsight the Warriors would have been better off taking Stoudemire. But you know what, if teams had that draft to do over again, Stoudemire would be taken #2, so the Warriors still wouldn't have gotten him. In '02 my draft board was as follows: 1) Jay Williams 2) Yao 3) Skita 4) Dunleavy 5) Butler. I stand by it 100% because the draft isn't an exact science, all you can do is take the guy who is the most talented/best fitting guy for your team. At the time Murphy looked like the pf of the future and Stoudemire refused to work out for the Warriors (because he had a guarantee from Phoenix) so he wasn't a realistic possibility. None of the other available pfs had shown anything to make you think they were better than Murphy. Oh, and let's not forget the miriade of baggage Stoudemire was supposed to bring with him (6 high schools in 4 years, mother and brother in jail, having his entourage hand out promo sheets to NBA scouts, etc.) 2. I am absolutely mystified by Dunleavy's season so far. He had the full backing of his teammates, GM, and coach this year and with Pietrus out, he didn't have to look over his shoulder. I don't remember ever being as disappointed in a player the way I'm currently disappointed in Dunleavy. 3. I highly doubt Dunleavy will be traded any time soon. His minutes are way below what they should be if Mullin was showcasing him for a trade. 4. I love Brand and would jump at the chance to trade anyone but Murphy or Richardson for him, but I don't think he's going anywhere soon. I've long predicted that Sterling would be willing to deal Brand, but that was based on the premise that the Clippers would keep losing. They're playing some pretty good ball right now, and with the Lakers being down, the Clippers have a shot at taking over a greater portion of the LA market. 5. I also don't see a Dunleavy/Curry swap happening any time soon. The Bulls are very happy with Deng and Nocioni at sf/sg. If they're going to trade Curry, I have to think it would be for a big man. I think the bottom line is that if Dunleavy continues to flounder this year and Pietrus flourishes, we could be looking at a Februrary trade before the deadline. I can't even believe I'm typing this, because it was absolutely the last thing I would have expected this season.
Dunleavy was added to be a passer and shooter. The best players available from college at the 3rd pick I think were Drew Gooden and Caron Butler(I think those two had a little bit better outstanding years over Dunleavy that season). And clearly neither of them fit on the team that well. I also don't think Dunleavy fit on the team either. But the Warriors were inamored by his ball handling skills, his shooting, and his size. However with Mills already, and another possible mid round draft pick available from the 76ers(and another second round draft pick), I didn't think shooting was that big of a need, to just take a shooter at that high of a pick, especially to play behind Jamison. And with Dampier not performing that great and then there was Foyle to back up, I believed that the Warriors should have drafted Nene who had the physical structure and length(Gooden called him a beast) to be able to play center in a very short time. Thus I believed the Warriors should have drafted Nene(maybe by trading down first) instead which would give the Warriors the chance to at one day near put out a starting 5 of Arenas, Jason, Jamison, Murphy, Nene. However the Warriors selected Dunleavy, also which could had been a move to bring in Mike Dunleavy Sr. to coach, and we have seen where this has taken us. But the past is the past and there's nothing you can do about it but to learn.
I don't think Nene can be a center in the west. Denver is currently looking to trade him because they don't think he can be one either. Also, Arenas wouldn't have been on the team because drafting Nene (or anyone else) instead of Dunleavy wouldn't have changed the fact that the Warriors were over the cap and couldn't re-sign Arenas.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Couple of things: 1) Custodian, to answer your question about drafting Dunleavy 3rd, at the time I thought it was a great choice. Of course you can say that with 20/20 hindsight the Warriors would have been better off taking Stoudemire. But you know what, if teams had that draft to do over again, Stoudemire would be taken #2, so the Warriors still wouldn't have gotten him. In '02 my draft board was as follows: 1) Jay Williams 2) Yao 3) Skita 4) Dunleavy 5) Butler. I stand by it 100% because the draft isn't an exact science, all you can do is take the guy who is the most talented/best fitting guy for your team. At the time Murphy looked like the pf of the future and Stoudemire refused to work out for the Warriors (because he had a guarantee from Phoenix) so he wasn't a realistic possibility. None of the other available pfs had shown anything to make you think they were better than Murphy. Oh, and let's not forget the miriade of baggage Stoudemire was supposed to bring with him (6 high schools in 4 years, mother and brother in jail, having his entourage hand out promo sheets to NBA scouts, etc.) 2. I am absolutely mystified by Dunleavy's season so far. He had the full backing of his teammates, GM, and coach this year and with Pietrus out, he didn't have to look over his shoulder. I don't remember ever being as disappointed in a player the way I'm currently disappointed in Dunleavy. 3. I highly doubt Dunleavy will be traded any time soon. His minutes are way below what they should be if Mullin was showcasing him for a trade. 4. I love Brand and would jump at the chance to trade anyone but Murphy or Richardson for him, but I don't think he's going anywhere soon. I've long predicted that Sterling would be willing to deal Brand, but that was based on the premise that the Clippers would keep losing. They're playing some pretty good ball right now, and with the Lakers being down, the Clippers have a shot at taking over a greater portion of the LA market. 5. I also don't see a Dunleavy/Curry swap happening any time soon. The Bulls are very happy with Deng and Nocioni at sf/sg. If they're going to trade Curry, I have to think it would be for a big man. I think the bottom line is that if Dunleavy continues to flounder this year and Pietrus flourishes, we could be looking at a Februrary trade before the deadline. I can't even believe I'm typing this, because it was absolutely the last thing I would have expected this season.</div> 1.) It's not science, but you want to go for the guy that has the most ability to matchup well against other forwards in the league. I didn't think he'd have the quickness or strength to guard players like Ron Artest or Matt Harpring. But yeah you're right, you pick who you like and I obviously didn't like Dunleavy no matter what he did at Duke. He had Bobby Hurley and Danny Ferry written all over him IMO. 2.) Yeah I am frustrated by him too, especially because of the defense and lack of aggressiveness. He needs to hustle more and he just doesn't do it. No energy at all. It's like watching someone who stopped caring. 3.) You're right you play him more, teams will realize that he sucks and is not a starter. You play him less, people will think he's not even in the league anymore. 4.) I like Brand too. Good defensive/offensive player. He ain't big, but he's strong and athletic and has fundamental basketball skills and that's what counts. 5.) If I was the bulls GM, I wouldn't even trade "Benny the Bull" for Dunleavy. We'll see what goes down February. I would like very much for Dunleavy to get traded because I can't stand the "lost look", the airball shots, the missed free throws, and the poorest defense anymore. At times he makes Jrich look like Pietrus. How many points does this guy have to score to overcome all his weaknesses? I mean run TMC was great, but c'mon all scoring and no defense just doesn't gets you further than the 1rst round of playoffs. I guess first things first, we have to make the layoffs... but I don't think Dunleavy is a scoring machine type of player. He's like the unselfish play of Larry Bird without the size, post game/defense nor the muscles or shooting touch of Chris Mullin.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">The Dunleavy I see is not left all alone on the perimeter. He does not move that well off the ball so I'm saying he needs some screens and plays called for him. From what I saw last Friday night, the defender is in his shirt and then he does not get the ball in an aggressive position. I love Mully, but he got scorched routinely. He hustled and played the passing lanes but he was a liability. Sure Nene, Prince and Wilcox (you're kidding me right?) look good right now but if you had selected them at 3 you would have been laughed at. Dunleavy was a major contributor to the National Champion Blue Devils. I hate Duke but will admit that Dunleavy looked like the 3rd best player, hands down. You have the benefit of hindsight looking back, the important thing is to look forward and Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler are not an improvement. JRich and Pietrus? Get your athletic fix but they are too small to guard SFs so you are going to have a liability in JRich at the 2 and an undersized SF in Pietrus, regardless of how good a defender he is.</div> True about Jrich and Pietrus about being too small, but that's okay, we need to get early offense anyway and I think the two can do it. On defense, we can find some way to integrate Cheaney or defender Ansu Sesay. Dunleavy is at times open as he can get, and if he is never aggressive he'll never help get the team the scoring they need, because he sure won't d it up with those lead feet of his. Also I wouldn't care if I got laughed at picking Wilcox at 3rd, or even Nene at 3rd, I'm getting more upside. Remember my guy was Wilcox, then Nene since Amare Stoudamire would not workout and had questionable mental makeup. Dunleavy did not have much upside beyond the skills he already had. He had skills: Dribble the ball okay... Pass okay... Shoot okay... but how does he compete with the nba and learn to dominate against other players in his position? I felt he just can't, the guy isn't that tall, he's not that fast, he doesn't seem to be a hustle player. The Dirk Comparrisons, the Bird Comparrisons, and the Peja comparrisons were just nuts. Unless he's quick or big like Dirk, Peja, or strong with a soft touch like Bird he's just another stiff who was great in college, but not meant for the nba. Plus Larry Bird? C'mon it was obvious Larry Bird was a true star in college, a real deal. Dunleavy was questionable to me when he had guys like Carlos Boozer, Jay Williams, and all these other players that made the nba that get recruited by Duke. Plus the bottom line is you have to matchup and he had no upside if he struggles to matchup against quick, tall small forwards like Dirk and Peja on a nightly basis. Dirk can matchup, Larry Bird could matchup, Peja can matchup. Dunleavy can't matchup and I've observed he just doesn't have the physical tools needed to play the 3. Whereas Nene and Wilcox could if they played the 4. The 2002 draft was weak for small forwards IMO that year and we should have focussed on the depth of talent available at various positions. The power forward spot was the most obvious place to find true potential. Plus, we needed those players more since I felt at the time Jamison was going to be our permanent small forward and there was no need to waste a high pick on a backup player we don't intend to keep. And there was always a doubt in my mind that Dunleavy at the third pick was not going to cover all of Jamison's weaknesses like defense or be the likley candidate to replace him if Jamison was moved. He just doesn't have a huge upside IMO and I've felt that high level of disgust since they called his name on draft day at #3 overall. My heart just sank like "wtf you doing?"
I've never bought the argument that since Dunleavy looks passive that he is passive. People said the same thing about Duncan, but it's not true at all with him. I don't think Dunleavy has any less hustle in him than guys like Murphy or Richardson. Another thing is that Dunleavy looks so fluid when he's moving with and without the ball that he looks like he's moving slower than he is, but that's just because he's not making any wasted moves.
No Dunleavy is passive because his play is passive. His facial expression doesn't help much in believing otherwise, either. Dunleavy looks like he's going slower than he is because everyone else is moving faster Plus does Dunleavy's fluidity help get us points when Richardson clanks every shot and he passes up on his or bricks them just as bad as Jrich? I sure wish he'd make some wasted moves to get out on a shot. The guy knows he can't get there in time and just stands there like they're shooting free throws from the 3 point arc. We'll set some screens for Dunleavy and see if it improves his offensive game, but don't be suprised when Pietrus or Najera are out on the floor our score actually gets closer because we're making defensive stops. Also come to think of it a Jrich and Pietrus smallish lineup wouldn't be all that bad on defense compared to Jrich and Dunleavy. I mean it's like acids and bases. I think at least Jrich's poor defense and Pietrus's good defense will cancel each other out . Whereas Jrich and Dunleavy will burn a hole all the way to the rim since neither are great on the ball defenders or defenders off the ball. We're assuming that Jrich and Dunleavy are both acids in case I'm confusing people.
