If We Have to Get Rid of Anybody, We Should Get Rid of Don Nelson

I really don't mind him telling Crawford he's going to leave and don't buy that Craw will not be playing hard now. Think of it this way: he's now in a contract year for the last 20 or so games. He's going to need to play well for him to choose his own destination and make what he currectly does. And I do think he can get cloes to that same deal. For all his flaws, he's still a proven 20 point scorer, somebody's going to pay him more than the MLE

 

Yeah, this is basically what I thought he did and I don't think it's problem as JV is alluding to. It actually benefits everyone involved. If Crawford was worthy of making space for, it would be a different story, but he's overpaid for what he brings to the table.

 

I think you're missing the big picture here, but whatever. It's really about worth, not the cap. Nelson with GM powers equals big doo doo as he will destroy the team for years to come. You have been warned repeatedly. Nelson is a "DESTROYER OF TEAMS ™."

It's no secret that Nelson said Monta was his PG for about a year. He said Monta was a PG instead of a SG the first time he arrived and then had to realize he could play SG, and play it rather well. I think it was a huge mistake in Nelson's player evaluation skills, i.e. Monta is better at SG than PG, and I'll give you your point about Nelson playing Monta at PG.

Also, it's no secret that you're a KawakamiHater, too, so I won't go there, but he's not the only one. Adrian W. of Yahoo! Sports has ripped a new one in Nelson, too.

Before you label me a NelsonHater, I don't hate him. I just want to get rid of him and banish him to Maui, or wherever, now that Mullin's gone and he's got GM powers.

I'm glad you brought up Baron because I think it was Nelson who helped get rid of him. You have to remember Baron and Nelson had a blow up towards the end of his second season. Again, the truth of who's fault it was probably lies with both.

You got two 2nd point's CH? Nice math skills.

Anyway, it was Nelson who said for about a year that Monta was his PG and then yanked him after a few games. BTW, in his first game back, Nelson played Monta over 40 when he said he will limit him to about 25 to 30 mins. That was irresponsible for a coach. Is Nelson's total wins as coach that important to him that he'll jeopardize a player's career? What an idiot. I'll give you the argument that it was too much for Monta to digest. We'll have to see how Monta does as PG. I rather have a real PG there, but will give Monta the benefit of the doubt. We also have Marco, so what will become of him?

I'm not making up facts, but am taking the facts and formulating solid observations and conclusions from them. I argue using facts, reasoning, and historical truth, so I don't have to make up facts, as you say.

 

No need for an apostrophe there. It modifies "point" to make it possessive. You're looking for plural, which would be spelled "points."

 

You're entitled to your opinion. Nelson said he loved Jamal when he first arrived. Boy, it sure didn't take him long to change his mind. I don't think Craw is overpaid for his skills. Crawford's best fit isn't Nelson's system which is for him to play PG. He's more of a SG and plays the point better in a pick and roll system. If you replace Nelson with Smart, then I think you'll like Jamal a lot more.

EDIT: Just want to add, I don't think Mags is that great (because of his lack of passing), except in Nelson's system, so would rather trade him than Crawford unless we get a real PG. If Monta can play PG, then why get rid of Craw?

 

Because Craw can't guard anyone, and that tandom in the back-court will have defensive problems nightly. Like last night, Craw couldn't handle Vince at the SG, so they put him on Trenton Hassell, who ends up posting up Craw for easy buckets. His season average is 3 points, but last night he got 13.

I think Mags and Craw both have good value right now because of their numbers, but both are so NOT valuable to this team's winning percentage. I'd love to move both. If I had to choose one, man, that would be hard. But I would say Mags, because he's so damn annoying on the court to me.

 

According to Monta, he's been playing PG this whole time. Actually, last night, he looked pretty good playing whatever position he was playing. As he would say, "it's just basketball." I think Monta is right. He drove well, shot well, and passed well last night (like a PG). So, you still think it's a huge mistake in Nellie's player evaluation?

Again, how do you know this? Can you confirm that there was a blow up between the two? Rowell was the one who vetoed his extension and it was Baron's decision to opt out. I don't see Nellie anywhere near those two things.

Uncalled for...

You're taking media reports and turning them into facts.

 

Really? Even after Maggette went 1-4 FG and 16-20 FT last night? He missed Morrow for a wide open shot once, but so has a lot of teammates this year. Give the guy a break man, he's doing everything he is asked to do.

So you'd rather keep Crawford in an already overcrowded backcourt? At least Maggette doesn't contribute to that logjam and he comes off the bench.

Right now, the entire team is not valuable to the team's winning percentage. You can't pin it on Maggette.

I know you have your gripes about Maggette and believe me, I was one of his harshest critics earlier on, but he's starting to grow on me.

 

In my opinion, you have it backwards. Mags is the one who creates a logjam. The position that is overcrowded is SF, with Jax, Maggette, Azibuike, Morrow, and even Randolph playing there.

As far as smaller, quicker guards who play either PG or SG, there's only Monta, CJWatson, and Crawford. That's why Craw played 46 minutes last night.

But make no mistake, I'm not trying to make an argument for keeping Crawford, lol! I want them both gone. But I don't like how Maggette also takes away minutes at the PF in Nellie's system. That's the kicker for me. I can live with Craw getting some of the PG/SG minutes, I guess. But if Maggette's going to take minutes from Randolph/Wright.... well then hell no!

 

Gotcha. Well, hopefully, in Nellie's new "traditional" lineup, we're going to see a lot of Randolph and Wright at PF exclusively (not holding my breath).

The logjam we all speak of isn't really at a set position. They're all swingmen who start their offense on the perimeter. But Maggette doesn't always initiate his offense that way. His teammates are looking for him a lot these days too, be it on a weak side cut or on a fast break. At least he's decisive on what he wants to do. To me, he's worth what he's getting paid, but that's just me. I say this because no one else on the team can do what he does. Sure, others can score, but it's the way he scores. It's immediate, efficient, and it is now coming in the flow of the offense (some may argue this, but I think he is not taking away from his teammates but for the occasional non-pass to a wide-open Morrow).

 

I love the childish bashing.

So Nellie loved/loves Crawford. Does that mean that Jamal deserves the money he's making? And Assume Nellie is overpaid, how exactly does that effect the cap/team? I think the fact that Nellie's giving Jamal a head's up and allowing for him the freedom to show that he can carry the load at the 1 is more than most coaches would do for someone in his position.

As for Jamal at the 2, if you look back at any of my posts regarding 2 guards in the past, you'll know that I'm always for paying them next to nothing because I think they're a dime-a-dozen (unless you can get a Kobe/Jordan like player)

Here's a hypothetical for you, if Nellie worked out a deal with Crawford before the trade for Harrington that stated that he'd walk after this year... considering Monta's injury, would you say it was a good trade? I'm not alluding that this happened, I'm just curious as to your stance here.

Either way, Jamal not having that contract with the Warriors next year is good for the team.

 

No, because circumstances can and do change, and that's too much money to put at stake (which could cripple the team for other moves) for some kind of secret, verbal agreement. Same reason I wouldn't want to sign one of these big name players without an actual extended deal in place. Coaches can retire or be fired, injuries happen, teams can be sold or moved, the economy can tank, other players can be brought in who overlap positions, a player can get disgruntled for whatever reason, etc. Just too much to risk without a contract.

If Craw didn't have the player option I'd be fine with the deal, because they did need to fill holes and while I don't like Crawford's game, he does have some talent and is somewhat versatile. But they gave up a big expiring contract in Harrington for something they don't need going forward.

 

Fair enough. Now assume that Crawford takes Nellie's advice and opts out. Do you still think it's a bad trade?

 

It wouldn't be a bad trade, but it wouldn't really be a good trade either. I would call it a wash. Crawford didn't really add anything to this team unless you're talking being an additional mentor to the younger players and exuding the epitome of professionalism.

Crawford the player took away vital minutes from Belinelli and Morrow.

 

Yeah, but Harrington would've taken minutes away from Randolph/Wright. Either way, it's a player who is kind of in the way of development and not really bringing much else.

Personally I would've liked to see them get something actually valuable in the trade--like package Harrington with a pick or a prospect to get a starting PG--instead of just settling for a swap of two contracts.

But at this point, the opt-out of Craw would be a blessing.

 

Agreed. Considering how well Belinelli took to handling the ball, I think you're right. At the beginning of the season, I wasn't sold on him playing extensive minutes.

I'm not sure that Morrow's minutes were really affected. In the end, I think Crawford busts his arse our there. I'm personally not a fan of how he plays the game, but I think he's done a lot for Randolph. It's good to have another vet around who doesn't pout after every foul that the young guys can learn from. Magette, Harrington and Jax all do. If he opts out I'd say it's a wash.

 

Well, not really, since Al refused to play. At the time (before the trade), it was a blessing in disguise as much as it was a distraction. I was really excited to see Wright play significant minutes at PF. It didn't really pan out that way until later into the season and then Wright got injured against the Lakers...probably his best game as a pro.

 

You're entitled to your paying 2's next to nothing and I'm not saying I like Jamal's contract, but first you have to admit that Nelson made a mistake trading AL in the first place. If you won't admit Nelson traded AL, you gotta admit Nelson's weird substitutions and doling of time eventually drove AL crazy. What drove him most crazy was probably having to play center and getting beat up all the time in order to play Nellie ball and get wins for Nelson. If Nelson would give up playing Nellie ball all of the time, then maybe he can keep some the players that he likes and they won't rebel and ask to get traded. Are you a big fan of Nellie ball or small ball?

As for the Jamal trade, it would have been better to not do it. Even your boy Nelson said as much by admitting that he talked to Jamal about opting out.

I'm beginning to think the Warriors panicked because of Ellis being injured and pulled the trigger. So, I have to admit you're right in Ellis being the cause. It was the same with getting Mags, the Warriors panicked because Baron opted out. Same with going for Elton Brand and Gilbert Arenas. They panicked and were throwing money away. Who do you think were the ones panicking? I can't just put this one on Nelson.