<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Dunleavy the solution or the problem for Warriors? <font size="-1">By Marcus Thompson II</font> Oooh, to see Warriors small forward Mike Dunleavy at his best. To see him weave his way to the basket and convert an off-balance layup. To see him curl off a screen and snap the net with a jumper. To see him zip a pass through traffic that nobody saw coming. He can really leave you awestruck. "There aren't a lot of guys with his skill level at that size," New Jersey Nets coach Lawrence Frank said. Ugh, to see Mike Dunleavy at his worst. To see him missing wide open set shots. To see him still on the wing while his man converts a layup. To see a game in which he played 30-plus minutes but to forget he was even on the floor. He can really leave you hanging. "Would the (Detroit) Pistons trade Darko (Milicic) for Mike Dunnuthin?" a fan asked on the Times' Web site. Such is the Dunleavy Dilemma, which Warriors executive vice president of basketball operations Chris Mullin has to solve. Is Dunleavy part of the solution to the Warriors' problems, or part of the reason for them? Is he the right fit to join forward Troy Murphy and guard Jason Richardson as the Warriors' core? </div> MORE AT http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...rs/10905121.htm What do we do with the tweener?
I say, be patient, dont sign him to an extension, just let him play out his contract and let the market decide if we want to keep him. Unlike Richardson and Murphy, Dunleavy has not shown the promise of a big contract player, nor the desire to become one. Until he stays in the Bay Area to work on his game and to gain some strength and some facet to his game, he can be a minium player. When he starts showing that desire and shows in on and off the court, then we can sign him. Next year is do or die for him. We panicked when Richardson's agent threatened a trade if we did not sign them to extensions. We did because we were on the cusp of a play off birth with them. Without them, we are the same old Warriors. Now that pressure is off Mullin. It is all on Dunleavy. If Dunleavy blows up, we reward him. If he plays the same way, he will get a mid level exception at best...
Either way, Warriorsfan I think we should retain his bird rights by extending his team option. I think we already did though, so we made him a restricted free agent. If he plays hot, his value goes up, and that gives us something to work with in terms of trades if there's a better player we want.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">A few NBA experts also suggested Dunleavy's shortcomings are in his chest. They said that when he decides to become more aggressive and more committed to improving himself, he'll be a special player. He's validated such statements with his new-found aggression. Over the last four games, Dunleavy has consistently attacked the defense -- highlighted by Sunday's one-handed dunk attempt over Stoudemire, drawing a foul. He's averaged 20.5 points and 8.0 rebounds in that span and looked like a different player, a dominant player.</div> I didn't know I was considered an NBA expert, it's flattering and all, and I guess if Thompson wants to call me an expert...I'll let him. As I've said for two years, once Dunleavy believes he can dominate the game, he's going to start dominating games. I think Warriorfansnc93 hit the nail right on the head, don't extend him, let him play out his contract and determine his own value, especially given that the new CBA will probably reduce the maximum size and length of contracts. And Custodian, the team picked up Dunleavy's option last summer, so he'll be a restricted free agent at the end of the '05/'06 season.
Dunleavy is a keeper. He's more versatile than Van Horn and look at what he makes. He is finally showing what he can do and is using his confidence to excel.
I think we should wait and see, but hopefully we can surround him with better defenders if he's the guy that will make the Warriors tick. He looked a lot faster in the past few games and played with more passion which everyone was finally waiting for. I know there will be some general fallout when Dunleavy actually has a bad game after his last 4 good games, but he's probably shown more than he has in a long, long time to sway the haters to his side and now focus tirades on Troy Murphy. I like Troy Murphy, but I have mixed feelings about his health and contract size and what he'll do to team chemistry when he returns. Remember when Brian Cardinal was looking awesome at the 4 and then Murphy came back and then things kind of got messed up? I'm starting to wonder about Murphy now. Can he play unselfishly, make others better or is he a chucker?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post"> And Custodian, the team picked up Dunleavy's option last summer, so he'll be a restricted free agent at the end of the '05/'06 season.</div> Dude you are an expert. And thanks for the info, I had forgotten if Dun's team option was exercised or not.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Dunleavy is a keeper. He's more versatile than Van Horn and look at what he makes. He is finally showing what he can do and is using his confidence to excel.</div> He's definitely bringing a lot of things that he hasn't proven very much before Murphy went down. The big question is will he be a future 4 or will he be a 3? I can't see him being a 3 unless our power forward can guard small forwards or our big man is so intimidating that wing guys would rather spot up for jumpers than take it to the hole. Is that Biedrens right there?
Dun not a 4 in the WC <div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">He's definitely bringing a lot of things that he hasn't proven very much before Murphy went down. The big question is will he be a future 4 or will he be a 3? I can't see him being a 3 unless our power forward can guard small forwards or our big man is so intimidating that wing guys would rather spot up for jumpers than take it to the hole. Is that Biedrens right there?</div> In a conference that has Nowitizki, Garnett, Duncan, Brand, Randolph, Gasol, Weber, and Odom to name a few at PF, the option of playing MD out of position at the 4 does not seem any more workable than Murphy as a solution. You should not have to play someone loke MD "out of position" ( A Barnett comment) to make them comfortable. People seemed enamored with the increased scoring of this small line up. Unfortunately it is not resulting in wins.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting anotherview:</div><div class="quote_post">In a conference that has Nowitizki, Garnett, Duncan, Brand, Randolph, Gasol, Weber, and Odom to name a few at PF, the option of playing MD out of position at the 4 does not seem any more workable than Murphy as a solution. You should not have to play someone loke MD "out of position" ( A Barnett comment) to make them comfortable. People seemed enamored with the increased scoring of this small line up. Unfortunately it is not resulting in wins.</div> I agree, although I think playing Mike out of position is helping him get a new lease on life. He is realizing some of the things he is able to do. I don't see his future being as a starting 4, but there is no reason why he couldn't log some minutes at the 4 each game. The thing with Dunleavy is that 95% of the time he has a mismatch with his defender. In the last few games he's been posting up guys like Dirk and Rodney Rogers. Obviously he is not going to score a lot from this position against those players, but if he starts posting up players like Chucky Atkins (they have been matched up this season), Mike is going to be able to run them over. Mike has a large skill set and I'm happy to see him getting a chance to practice something besides his point guard skills and outside shooting.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting anotherview:</div><div class="quote_post">In a conference that has Nowitizki, Garnett, Duncan, Brand, Randolph, Gasol, Weber, and Odom to name a few at PF, the option of playing MD out of position at the 4 does not seem any more workable than Murphy as a solution. You should not have to play someone loke MD "out of position" ( A Barnett comment) to make them comfortable. People seemed enamored with the increased scoring of this small line up. Unfortunately it is not resulting in wins.</div> Yeah... I hate tweeners. We have a team full of them. I'm not too pleased without defense, but the whole point is we're scoring a lot more and it's better to be excited than to pretend we have skills in the half court track, outside shooting, perimeter/transition/team/post defense, and a low post game. btw welcome anotherview.
^Dammit! You beat me to it. Anyway. welcome Anotherview. Feel free to post info on yourself in the Warriors Fans Roll Call. PM if you need anything once you get 5 posts
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah... I hate tweeners. We have a team full of them. I'm not too pleased without defense, but the whole point is we're scoring a lot more and it's better to be excited than to pretend we have skills in the half court track, outside shooting, perimeter/transition/team/post defense, and a low post game. btw welcome anotherview.</div> A few years back it was glaringly obvious that Jamison and Fortson could not co-exist on the court at the same time. They always seemed to get in each other's spots all the time. I think that Murphy and Dunleavy are the same way. Murph has a quick trigger and Dunleavy moves well without the ball. One of the two has to go. When Murphy was out last season Dunleavy picked up his game. I'm glad the temporary move to the 4 gave MD some of that juice back, but it'll slip away the moment Murph comes back. Not because of the switch back to the 3, which many will feel is the problem. But because of the disruption in the flow of the game. This team would even improve with a downgrade at the 4. Addidtion by subtraction, not because Murhpy is a bad player, but because he does not fit inside Monty's system.
One more point.. I was critical of JRich at the beginning of the season, because of how much he dribbled the ball with the clock ticking. I wish I would've recorded some of those games, because I'd bet that Murphy standing around had just more to do with that than Jrich not understanding the offense.
Good points, Cohan. I'm thinking the same when it came to Fortson, Jamison, and Dampier all crowding the paint and not having enough floor spacing on offense. I used to be down on everybody, but I'm liking Jrich. He's getting everyone involved when he plays. He got 7 assists last night in addition to his 26 points which was awesome. I like Murphy a lot as a player, but how can you be that big, not have a post game by now, and then now block at least one shot a game. Then again I ask myself about those things from Foyle and the other 6-10 to 7 footers that never bothered to develop the footwork and finnesse part of their game.
I agree with Warriorsfan that we should wait for one more year and decide the future of Dunleavy. I would be extremely angry if we give Dunleavy an extension this summer. For 2 and 2/3 years, Dunleavy had his moments twice, when he played PG and PF. However, he was disappointing as SF so far. If we can permanentaly put Dunleavy as PG or PF, it wouldn't matter. But, Dunleavy is not a long term solution as PG, because it requires anybody else to guard PG. As PF, he averaged 18.8 pts/7.2 rebs, because he can materialize the mismatch against slower PF. However, mismatch for us also means a mistmatch for other teams. For last 6 games, we gave up 110 pts and other teams shot 50.2% from the field (league's worst is 46.9%, which is us...), so as exciting as it has been, if we plan to win consistantly, this small line up needs to be changed one way or the other. Also, since we signed Murphy for long term, Dunleavy at PF is a short term solution to begin with. At the end of the day, in order for Dunleavy to get a fat contract, he needs to flourish in SF, because he can't be a long term solution for PG, SG, PF or C. And, I really hope that Mullin doesn't give an extension until Dunleavy proves that he can be a quality SF in the league...
One things for sure... Dunleavy doesn't have Murphy, Dampier, and Richardson's bastard of an agent, Dan Fegan to say MAX every time. But the thing that isn't for sure is Chris Mullin's generosity when it comes to contracts. Foyle and his agent must have been outside the door after he signed that 6 year doobie, doing break dances and NFL end zone victory celebrations in the hallway. "Go Adonal, Go Adonal, It's your Birthday!" High-five!
Dunleavy ideally is a 6th man,not saying he's demoted to a sub role but that as a guy who is usable at 4 spots and seems best when there's unusual matchups,it is where he can make a big impact. The Warriors have no All stars or recent All Stars so being deep and versatile is an option worth aiming for. I definitely like Murphy. he leads the team (by a lot) in 3pt% and rebounding,and I refuse to unload more guys who are leading the team in various categories
