Warriors vs. Rockets @ Houston, Dec. 31, 2005 4pm FSN

The best thing Dunleavy could do for his game right now is develop the mid-range jumper than Chaney has. If he does this he'll be a consistent 15 point guy. Just see how many times Fisher and Baron get Chaney the ball on the corner from 15 out. I agree about the inconsistency. And I'm just as frustrated as you are, but he's helped so much in these last few games even though you don't really see him out there. I re watched the last 2 games. Dunleavy has helped change the tempo of both games believe it or not. I'm actually pretty impressed with his energy and defense lately if that's at all possible. This egde he's been playing with is exactly what the doctor ordered. Now let's just hope that he keeps it up.

I see what you mean about Ike. If Murphy actually boxed his guy out instead of reacting to the ball the rebounds would probably be more spread out. It's funny, I get so angry at Murphy for not boxing out but he has a nose for the ball and ends up cleaning those boards up many times. Beidrins was doing the same thing last game. He got 4 of those boards without even finding an offensive player to box out. Which says something about Dunleavy and the guards boxing out. I think the team should just watch film of JRich once a shot goes up. It's a boxing out clinic.

 

Yeah. If you are good at one thing, Davis will find you. Just ask Diogu, Biedrins, Fisher, Pietrus, Murphy and Cheaney. And, Dunleavy is a type of player, who can utilize his strength better than other players.

For rebounding, I wish we can have a physical statue, who can't be moved from his position, like Dampier or Fortson. Not many people box out or being pushed around, so whenever rebounds comes, it's a mad rush to whoever grab the rebound first. If our guards can't steal or poke the ball away so many times, we would have far fewer positions in the game. And, it's not like we shoot the ball well (25th with 43.6% fg). It's hard to imagine that our team used to be no. 1 in rebounding for two, three years straight...

 

Why is there the perception that mins/pts/anything is per $$ (mils)? Falling into that trap is what is wrong, you put a team the floor based on your 5 best players, end of story. What the salary is irrelevant, at least from a fan's perspective. Who cares what anybody makes?

Dunleavy is playing hard and has been there when the team stunk and is a key member now when they are winning.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Why is there the perception that mins/pts/anything is per $$ (mils)? Falling into that trap is what is wrong, you put a team the floor based on your 5 best players, end of story. What the salary is irrelevant, at least from a fan's perspective. Who cares what anybody makes?

Dunleavy is playing hard and has been there when the team stunk and is a key member now when they are winning.</div>

Good stuff. I've said a player's salary is irrelevant to the fan but then I get the, "it is costing us future free agent signings that could be better." The point is, Mullin had a vision with this team and you can't expect that vision to be fulfilled in 1/3 of a season; it may take two or three seasons to achieve it. Sure, there may be some pieces to move around here and there, but only to achieve that vision more effectively. Besides, is $44 mil really that much when compared to other high-salaried players around the league? I will agree that Dunleavy isn't fulfilling his #3 draft pick potential, but then again, who cares...we're winning and having the best season in 11 years.

 

Of course salary matters, because we could have utilize that resource to other places. We are already abusing our resources, and because of that, there is very little chance of us resigning Pietrus, and possibly both Biedrins and Diogu as well. I mean, just look at right now. If we hadn't given Dunleavy 44 mils/5 years extension, we probably would have been the front runner for Artest trade involving Dunleavy. Not only we could have improved our front court defense, we could have put better starting 5. Also, I used "1 mils per 1 min" quote, because I wanted to describe how no GM in NBA will accept that type of production from offensive player. While I am not a GM, I don't think it's a stretch that GMs would have same mindset.

Yeah, we are winning. But, how much Dunleavy have contributed to that winning? We all know if either Davis or Richardson goes down, we will be an instant lottory team. But, if Dunleavy goes down, will we really miss him? Just because he is one of us and we are winning, that doesn't mean everything is fine. Even if you are VP of a successful company and you work hard, if you don't produce, you will be fired. Also, one too many times, Dunleavy wasn't best 5 players on the court when it counted.

Grant that we are in winning track, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this team needs to be fixed in order to take next step. Our backcourt, Davis, Richardson, Fisher and Pietrus are one of the best, if not the best backcourt in NBA. In other hand, our front court can't defend, can't rebound, can't block, and can't post up. In terms of stats, our front court should rank one of the worst team in NBA, and the problem won't be solved by just gelling together for X amount of times. Hopefully, we will make PO this year and beyond. But, fans will demand more once we make PO. If we reach first round, fans will demand 2nd round. When we reach 2nd round, fans will demand conference title. And after that, they will wish for title. Fans will continuously demand until the team will win the title, and teams will continuously try to meet their demand. So, are we equipped to make that change? The answer is no.

Combination of Dunleavy, Murphy and Foyle makes 27 mils per year, and none of their contracts ends in 4 years (Dunleavy and Murphy for 5 years). And, if we wish to make a improvement on our front court, we have to remove their contracts to do so, because Cohan is not Cuban, and there is limited resources for us to make moves. Artest trade scenario or any other trade scenario shows that no team wants to take long term contract, and they avoid long and overpaid contracts like a plague. And, every GMs in NBA will avoid both Dunleavy and Foyle's contracts like a plague, and that means we can't just trade their contracts by itself. So, if we wish to remove their contracts...

1. We can accept same plague like contract in return. But it doesn't help our team much.
2. We have to part significant assets for other team to take their contracts. Easy in theory, hard in reality, because no team in NBA like to use their resource on junks.
3. We have to live with whatever we have, and hope for a miracle trade or draft.

Really, when you fill your team with overpaid and long term contracts, you really tie up your options to improve your club. And, that's what Mullin have done in one year+. Yes, our team is improved, but that's our destiny when we drafted Richardson, Murphy and Arenas. In order for us to take next step, some changes are needed. But, for that, we are poorly equipped. The worst possible scenario is that we are stuck in lower half of PO seed for years without significant improvement and eventually dismantle the team.

I don't know how putting 5 best players on the court can be the end of the story. If that's end of the story, teams like Atlanta or New York are faithfully doing their duties as well. I have been Warriors fan for last 13 years, and if I were a person, who purely enjoy what the team is put on the court, there is absolutely no way I would be a Warriors fan for last 13 years. I lived as a die hard Warriors fan because I always look for a hope that this team will be better in the future. And, even if we are above .500, I still maintain that same hope that someday, this team will be better, and I am sure I am not alone. I am really enjoying this season a lot, because it's my first winning season, since Webber era. However, I also get bit depressed, because this team is probably the hardest team to improve after Twerdzik era, because of all those long and overpaid contracts, and my hope is unlikely fulfilled from where we are right now. I will still be a Warriors fan, because even if improvements can be a daunting task for Mullin, there still is a hope that good things can come out from here.

At the end of the day, fans want the team to win the championship, and the owner will spend the resource to improve the club depends on the revenue and the limit. That's why fans are concerned about big and overpaid contracts, because those hinders the team from improving. If your philosophy is "I am happy, as long as my team wins more than losses", salary would be irrevent. But, if your philosophy is "I want to see this team to improve until they win the final goal", you should be concerned about the salary...

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kensaku:</div><div class="quote_post">Good stuff. I've said a player's salary is irrelevant to the fan but then I get the, "it is costing us future free agent signings that could be better." The point is, Mullin had a vision with this team and you can't expect that vision to be fulfilled in 1/3 of a season; it may take two or three seasons to achieve it. Sure, there may be some pieces to move around here and there, but only to achieve that vision more effectively. Besides, is $44 mil really that much when compared to other high-salaried players around the league? I will agree that Dunleavy isn't fulfilling his #3 draft pick potential, but then again, who cares...we're winning and having the best season in 11 years.</div>

Wanna know what Dunleavy's contract affect the team?

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/golden_state.htm

I believe current league average salary is 6-7 mils per year, and Dunleavy will get 9 mils per year in average. This year's salary cap line is 49 mils and luxury tax line is 62 mils. Next year, we committed at least 65 mils per year with current situation, and there is no indication that Cohan will bite luxury tax or how much. A year after that, combination of Davis, Fisher, Richardson, Dunleavy, Murphy and Foyle alone will be 60 mils. In current situation, we have no chance to keep Pietrus. A year after that, current existing 6 contracts would take 65 mils, and unless we dump somebody, Biedrins is gone. And, if you consier that rest of 6-8 mens will cost at least 10 mils, it's not a pretty picture by any stretch of imagination, and we need to save every penny possible. Instead, we gave Dunleavy a 9 mils for next 5 years, and his production has been minimal.

If you believe Mullin has a long term vision...

1. Any of Davis, Fisher, Richardson, Dunleavy, Murphy or Foyle can be parted for expiring contract or better pieces. Sure, teams would line up for Davis or Richardson, but we know what will happen to our club, if they are removed. Some teams may be interested on Fisher or Murphy as their contracts get shorter, and it probably will take Davis or Richardson to part Foyle or Dunleavy's contract.

2. Mullin truly believe that what we have now will lead us to the distance. As much as I like my current team, without a change, this team will not go above 6th seed in West.

Even when we make a trade proposal, we realize how it's difficult to dump long and overpriced contracts. If we can't trade Davis and Richardson's contracts because of our needs and can't trade Dunleavy and Foyle's contracts, because nobody wants them, we either have to dump Murphy or Fisher's contracts to nothingness just to resign our own rookies. Hardly an improvement. And, improvement via trade? Like adding a impact players with a large contract? You can forget about it.

Well, if Cohan turns out to be Cuban ver. 2, there is a hope. But, in current situation, it doesn't look good...

Edit: Is Dunleavy's 9 mils per year that much overpaid? We pay Dunleavy to basically score and do little things. He doesn't have a duty of PG to distribute the ball, PF or Center's duty to grab the rebound and control the middle or superstar's duty to carry the team when it matters most. We don't even ask him to be a defensive stopper. So far, Dunleavy scored 9.6 pts for his 8.8 mils average salary, about 1.1 ratio. If you use the same rule, we have to pay Richardson 21 mils instead of 12 mils and 11 mils instead of 6 mils for Fisher. For Pietrus' extension, we have to pay over 9.5 mils, not to mention he is a defensive stopper and plays about 10 mins less than Dunleavy.

For 48 mins scale...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?s...ontype=2&pos=sf

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?s...&avg=48&pos=all

Dunleavy ranked 31 out of 40 qualified SF in scoring, and 140 out of 180 in total. And, it was nearly impossible to find a scorer who's less productive then Dunleavy and paid more. Really, Penny Hardaway was the only one who produces less and paid more in SF position, and I had to expand the list to overall. In terms of production/salary wise, it's not even a question whether Dunleavy's return for the investment is THAT overpaid or not. It's more toward one of the league's worst contracts. And, until Dunleavy steps up and produce, it still will be like that throughout his career...

 

I can't believe people are saying that pts/reb/ast/etc equating to $$$ doesn't make sense. Of course it does, what else do you value a player on? Intrinsic value? Accept the fact that Dunleavy is doing bad this season, and I can say with confidence that he doesn't deserve anywhere near as much as he's getting as of NOW. I can only hope that changes.

You guys say Mullin has a vision, but it seems his vision isn't strong enough to see the rules of contracts. Dunleavy was going to be a restricted FA the end of this season. IF Mullin had signed him at the end, do you think ANY team would offer 44 mil for Dunleavy with how he's playing right now? I think not. We would have kept him for much MUCH more cheaper. And we'd have a better chance of keeping Pietrus. And had Dunleavy had a breakout season, he'd get a big fat contract, say... 44 mil?

 

I don't think anyone will argue the fact that dunleavy's contract is a killer. However, since he's here, and he's been playing well the last few games, let's not boo him every game. If you watch last game again, you'll see that he was given a role to bust his but chasing TMac around and bring the ball up, clean up the boards. Dunleaby took 5 shots, 1 of which was with almost no time left on the shot clock. Simply put, Monty gave Davis the Green light to score more. And Dunleavy (stat book aside) helped win that game.

Look back at my posts, I had pretty much given up on MDJ, but he's been playing with a little bit of an edge lately, which will help the team win. Would Pietrus starting have translated into more wins? That's a tough question to answer, and this is simply an opinion obviously. I think the way Dunleavy was playing, probably so, but now that he's finding his game again, I'd say I'd rather have MDJ in the game.

 

Mullin is gambling that young players will make progress enough that their $ will become reasonable...plus that team and league revenues keep rising so the lux tax line goes up and Cohen has some cash to pay some excess. It is a risk,and the Dun deal really does stretch it. What would be the point in locking up Dunleavy and saying we'll just abandon Pietrus,Biedrens,and any FA over the next 3 yrs? May as well toss in the towel,deal J rich for an expiring and regress to the annual lottery watch....again. I can't believe Mullin has painted himself into a corner on an impulse. I agree that some of our contracts are above market value now,and those players will need to step up just to get to where they are tradable. I figure there is a plan. When we watched Arenas bolt,then traded Damp and Jamison for scraps,I feared the W's were on a spiral that would take years to reverse....well,surprise,a little trickery and the team is actually better.

 

I agree completely with Kwam on his statements about the cap situation and the direction this team will most likely go in. I will use the offseason after the 2002-2003 season as an example of this. The Warriors were headed into a very prosperous direction as a franchise(after the addition of Pietrus too). However problems with previous spending by St. Jean on (mostly mediocre) players like Fortson, Dampier, Sura, Mills, and a little on Jamison, prohibited the team from giving Arenas a good offer to resign him. And what happened next was like one big avalanche over the once very promising roster and team that had a new very successful and young head coach in Eric Musselman who was contending to become Coach of the Year.

Anyway my ultimate point is that the Warriors will once again go into this direction, and I fear that we will again never see the true potential of this current and young roster; which without contract problems, I think would become a premier(oh how I can't spell) team in the NBA.

Anyway, the Dunleavy we are getting now, is the same Dunleavy that we have gotten during December and the winter months that we have gotten in the past. I mean, I remember Montgomery was playing Dunleavy less than Musselman had last year, even, during this time period. Anyway, I would like to see Dunleavy, or I would find it better if Dunleavy had more of a mindset like Jason Richardson. Jason takes it on his shoulders to make this team successful. Dunleavy puts it on his shoulders to...I don't really know, just go in there and maybe make a play once every 10 minutes that he is on the court. I mean he even says it himself to the world that he has nothing to worry about "the team is winning".

But hey, I guess we still have this year(and next too I believe). I say, let's hope Pietrus can come back soon and stay healthy the whole year, hope that Taft's back problems lessen. Turn Taft into the new Dampier, who can box out and clear the paint for boards by Murphy, Biedrins, etc. block and contest shots, and get some easy buckets from Baron and Jason and Mike. And then finally, let's try to get more production from the other bench guys including Monta Ellis(with scoring, energy, and maybe defense too, yes?). And then we could make this a very productive bench, with a great starting lineup that is already assembled here. And then we are ready to win, right? Ready to contest for a championship! I hope.

 

Sorry guys, I'm not reading all that. I'm on vacation. ;-)

I'm sure you're right, whatever you're saying, so we'll just leave it at that.

 

I just can't believe how disgruntled W's fans can get after 11 years of losing and then we finally have a winning team...it's like you guys are never happy. I guess it wouldn't be fun if there wasn't something to be upset about, right? Believe me, I understand that, but come on, the W's are winning...that hasn't been muttered in 11 years!

Step 1: Make playoffs
Step 2: Do well in playoffs

Let's try step 1 first and enjoy it before you get all antsy about salary numbers and how we can't add that winning piece to the puzzle. The way I see it, as long as the Spurs and Pistons are existence, there is no point in trying to become that team. Such an optimistic I am, huh?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kensaku:</div><div class="quote_post">I just can't believe how disgruntled W's fans can get after 11 years of losing and then we finally have a winning team...it's like you guys are never happy. I guess it wouldn't be fun if there wasn't something to be upset about, right? Believe me, I understand that, but come on, the W's are winning...that hasn't been muttered in 11 years!

Step 1: Make playoffs
Step 2: Do well in playoffs

Let's try step 1 first and enjoy it before you get all antsy about salary numbers and how we can't add that winning piece to the puzzle. The way I see it, as long as the Spurs and Pistons are existence, there is no point in trying to become that team. Such an optimistic I am, huh?</div>
There is maybe a bit more pessimism than is warranted, but I think a big part of the frustration with Dunleavy is that there was no need to sign him to a contract, and that by doing so, Mullin so far looks less than capable -- to be gentle about it.

Dunleavy has stepped it up the last few games, both in terms of performance and emotion, but he is still a bonafide laggard when his contributions are matched up against his salary. What's also worrisome is the quote that was posted here a week or two ago about how Dunleavy still didn't understand his role on this team. Well, let me tell you, for $9 mil a year your role is to play like a top quartile SF.

But with all that said, I am really enjoying this season.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Spliff:</div><div class="quote_post">There is maybe a bit more pessimism than is warranted, but I think a big part of the frustration with Dunleavy is that there was no need to sign him to a contract, and that by doing so, Mullin so far looks less than capable -- to be gentle about it.

Dunleavy has stepped it up the last few games, both in terms of performance and emotion, but he is still a bonafide laggard when his contributions are matched up against his salary. What's also worrisome is the quote that was posted here a week or two ago about how Dunleavy still didn't understand his role on this team. Well, let me tell you, for $9 mil a year your role is to play like a top quartile SF.

But with all that said, I am really enjoying this season.</div>

I definetely agree with that assesment.

 

To all those fans who worry about $$, granted $$ matters with respect to the salary cap, but you are making a huge assumption, that a free agent will want to sign with Golden State. Notwithstanding some minor progress, I highly doubt that Golden State is perceived to be a primo free agent destination. They play at the Arena and Oakland is a second child to San Francisco (don't get me wrong, I love the Bay Area, work in Oakland and would never move).

Number 2, even if a free agent wanted to come to the Bay Area, there's always that Larry Bird exception and the fact that whether unrestricted or not, the home team can pay more (around 15-20% more); hence why did Ray Allen stay in Seattle?

Do not point to Shaq, he moved from Orlando to LA. Kobe was never going to the Clippers when he could get more from LA and stay in the same place. Duncan? He's never going anywhere nor is Yao.

As for trades, you need to have assets to trade. If you do not sign your players, you have nothing.

You naysayers want it both ways, you want flexibility to make the big trade but do not want to pay for those assets. Yes it would be great to have tradable assets who have low priced expiring contracts but that's not how it works. The best asset is a Dale Davis, 13M and expiring, which is the only reason the W's got Baron. Those are few and far between plus you have to have those assets when they stink too. At the minimum, guys like Murphy and Dunleavy are not huge contracts with no growth potential but contracts which may pay off in 2-3 years.

Arenas? He was a 2nd rounder who the Warriors could never have afforded, unless they were 8-9M under the salary cap.

As a fan since the early '70s, I'm just happy that there is some excitement in the Arena and hope for the future, I do not need a championship in 2005 or even 06 or 07, just hope. The only player who would take the Warriors possibly to a championship is really Duncan or Shaq or maybe LeBron (but he does not play enough D). Garnett? no way. He just somehow does not do it for some reason, although he may someday and I think he's a great player/professional.

 

Nobody is talking about signing outside FAs. We are talking about signing our OWN FAs, like Pietrus, Biedrins, Diogu and any of future rookies. With our cap situation, signing outside big named FAs are just too far fatched.

In theory, we can sign any rookie with any amount. In reality, that's not the case. If we go certain amount, we pay luxury tax, which no owner like to pay. In our future, Cohan has to pay roughly 10 mils luxury tax just to keep Davis, Richadson, Dunleavy, Murphy, Foyle and Fisher, and fill rest of roster with as little as possible, if current 62 mils luxury tax line is intact. If we ever plan to resign Pietrus alone, our payroll will probably push to 80 mils, which is top 5 in NBA. And, if Cohan refuse to pay luxury tax, we are talking about immidiate tear up process, although I believe Cohan will pay some sort of luxury tax or he would never approved Mullin's spending spree to begin with. You have to understand that just because we can do it in theory, that doesn't mean we will do it in reality. Yes, we can sign all of FAs via Bird's rule. But, in reality, we are tied up by the limit Cohan sets. Nobody really knows what Cohan really allow Mullin to spend. But, just reflecting past, it would be very hard to do anything more than just keeping our existing 6 long term contracts.

Exactly what are you talking about? We want a flexibility, but we don't want to pay those contracts? If you have a choice to lock up a player early, but the price is losing a flexibility, ALWAYS consider another ways, and see how those ways measure up with signing a big contract. For case like Dunleavy, why jump the gun and make an early decision, when you have nothing to loss even if you waited one more season? Or even case like Murphy, we could have signed Abdul-Rahim for MLE, since he knocked Warriors first after he didn't get traded to Nets. Although, it's totally different matter whether Murphy or Abdul-Rahim would be a better choice, if we waited to sign Murphy, that option would have opend up for us as well. Bottom line is that nobody knows what will happen in the future, so unless you are getting a bargain, you do not tie up your flexibility by signing a long term contract. For Dunleavy, we are not getting any sort of bargain deal and there is no reason for us to sign him early. It's kinda ironic that Mullin didn't want to sign Richardson and Murphy in their third year, but it turned out to be pretty OK, but Mullin wanted to sign Dunleavy early, and so far, his contract becomes one of the worst contract in the league.

If you believe Dale Davis was a great asset for a trade, there is no argument there. Problem is that none of our big contract end in less than 4 years. So, in order for them to be a great asset, we have to wait for 3 to 5 years to harvest those great assets. That's the biggest reason why we are stuck with bad contract situation.

I don't know how 6 years 60 mils contract or 5 years 44 mils contract are not considered as a huge contact, especially when Dunleavy's production makes his contract one of the worst contract in the league. I certainly wish Dunleavy will do more than scoring 9.6 pts for his rest of his career. And, if he has any plan to be his contract worthy, he better put up something like 18/5/3. And, good luck with adjusting himself with Davis, because Davis is not going anywhere anytime soon.

Warriors had no chance of signing Arenas. There is no argument there.

I am enjoying this season like any other die hard Warriors fan. And, if you are satisfied with haning in lower PO seed for next 4-5 years and face inevitable rebuilding process, be my guest. But, I wish Warriors would take next step in near future. It may not be a championship exactly, but at least I want this team to be a serious contender. In order to do so, we need to make a change, especially front court, and we are not in good position to make necessary deals. It doesn't mean there is basically no chance for those deals to happen. But, it would be very hard, and I wish Mullin can prove me wrong someday...

 

philsmith75
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">As for trades, you need to have assets to trade. If you do not sign your players, you have nothing.

You naysayers want it both ways, you want flexibility to make the big trade but do not want to pay for those assets. Yes it would be great to have tradable assets who have low priced expiring contracts but that's not how it works. The best asset is a Dale Davis, 13M and expiring, which is the only reason the W's got Baron. Those are few and far between plus you have to have those assets when they stink too. At the minimum, guys like Murphy and Dunleavy are not huge contracts with no growth potential but contracts which may pay off in 2-3 years.
</div>
I could not have said it better myself. Lets enjoy the success of this season so far and not expect to make a quantum leap all the way to a championship in one season.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kwan1031:</div><div class="quote_post">Nobody is talking about signing outside FAs. We are talking about signing our OWN FAs, like Pietrus, Biedrins, Diogu and any of future rookies. With our cap situation, signing outside big named FAs are just too far fatched.

In theory, we can sign any rookie with any amount. In reality, that's not the case. If we go certain amount, we pay luxury tax, which no owner like to pay. In our future, Cohan has to pay roughly 10 mils luxury tax just to keep Davis, Richadson, Dunleavy, Murphy, Foyle and Fisher, and fill rest of roster with as little as possible, if current 62 mils luxury tax line is intact. If we ever plan to resign Pietrus alone, our payroll will probably push to 80 mils, which is top 5 in NBA. And, if Cohan refuse to pay luxury tax, we are talking about immidiate tear up process, although I believe Cohan will pay some sort of luxury tax or he would never approved Mullin's spending spree to begin with. You have to understand that just because we can do it in theory, that doesn't mean we will do it in reality. Yes, we can sign all of FAs via Bird's rule. But, in reality, we are tied up by the limit Cohan sets. Nobody really knows what Cohan really allow Mullin to spend. But, just reflecting past, it would be very hard to do anything more than just keeping our existing 6 long term contracts.

Exactly what are you talking about? We want a flexibility, but we don't want to pay those contracts? If you have a choice to lock up a player early, but the price is losing a flexibility, ALWAYS consider another ways, and see how those ways measure up with signing a big contract. For case like Dunleavy, why jump the gun and make an early decision, when you have nothing to loss even if you waited one more season? Or even case like Murphy, we could have signed Abdul-Rahim for MLE, since he knocked Warriors first after he didn't get traded to Nets. Although, it's totally different matter whether Murphy or Abdul-Rahim would be a better choice, if we waited to sign Murphy, that option would have opend up for us as well. Bottom line is that nobody knows what will happen in the future, so unless you are getting a bargain, you do not tie up your flexibility by signing a long term contract. For Dunleavy, we are not getting any sort of bargain deal and there is no reason for us to sign him early. It's kinda ironic that Mullin didn't want to sign Richardson and Murphy in their third year, but it turned out to be pretty OK, but Mullin wanted to sign Dunleavy early, and so far, his contract becomes one of the worst contract in the league.

If you believe Dale Davis was a great asset for a trade, there is no argument there. Problem is that none of our big contract end in less than 4 years. So, in order for them to be a great asset, we have to wait for 3 to 5 years to harvest those great assets. That's the biggest reason why we are stuck with bad contract situation.

I don't know how 6 years 60 mils contract or 5 years 44 mils contract are not considered as a huge contact, especially when Dunleavy's production makes his contract one of the worst contract in the league. I certainly wish Dunleavy will do more than scoring 9.6 pts for his rest of his career. And, if he has any plan to be his contract worthy, he better put up something like 18/5/3. And, good luck with adjusting himself with Davis, because Davis is not going anywhere anytime soon.

Warriors had no chance of signing Arenas. There is no argument there.

I am enjoying this season like any other die hard Warriors fan. And, if you are satisfied with haning in lower PO seed for next 4-5 years and face inevitable rebuilding process, be my guest. But, I wish Warriors would take next step in near future. It may not be a championship exactly, but at least I want this team to be a serious contender. In order to do so, we need to make a change, especially front court, and we are not in good position to make necessary deals. It doesn't mean there is basically no chance for those deals to happen. But, it would be very hard, and I wish Mullin can prove me wrong someday...</div>

The point is that there is no point in continuing to discuss how bad Dunleavy's contract is. We are stuck with him and we have to hope for the best. It's a long contract and while he sucks right now, there is the perceived chance that he will earn what he is getting paid.

So, with that said, how do you know that the W's will be stuck in the lower PO seed for the next 4-5 years? HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT? You can't base that assumption just on Dunleavy, Fisher, Foyle, and Murphy's contracts. Things change, like players getting better (i.e. raising their trade value) and other teams wanting to unload a player (i.e. Artest). There is always a chance to get better, regardless of how many "bad" contracts you have...you have to start with what you have and it hasn't even been half a season and people are already making predictions that the W's will be a lower playoff seed for the next 4-5 years???

 

I don't know that, and it's just my assumption. My assumption is that I just don't see much of good thing comes out from our current front court.

1. Currently, our 27 mils front court (Dunleavy, Murphy, and Foyle) can't defend, can't rebound, can't post up and can't block. And, I believe no matter how long we stick together, I just don't believe they will dramatically improve any of those 4 aspects in the future. With those 3, I don't see that we can be a serious contender. If you have a faith on Dunleavy, Murphy and Foyle, and someday, they deserve to be a front court of serious contender, you can just skip reading this.

2. If we want to be a serious contender, we need to change.

3. So, can change made inside? Without dumping the contract, we can't even sign Pietrus, Biedrins, and possibly Diogu.

4. So, can change made outside? Without dumping the contract, we can't take any big contract.

5. So, can we dump the contract? We will not dump Davis and Richardson's contracts, Fisher and Murphy are barely tradable, and Dunleavy and Foyle are untradable. Seriously, if you believe that someday, any of Fisher, Murphy, Dunleavy and Foyle will play so well and make their contracts attractive like Davis or Richardson, feel free to stick with your faith.

6. I am not saying we can't make any trade or we are destined to be stuck at lower PO seed for few years. However, we are not in a good place to make a change. We have attractive rookies and picks to trade. But, we do not have a big expiring contract for next 3 years, so unless other teams take any of our long term contract, acquiring big contract is out of question. And, it will take a lot of suger coating to trade any of our long term contract, besides Davis, Richardson and possibly Murphy. Seriously, that's why I came up with wild Garnett trade idea involving bunch of our rookies and Murphy or Richardson before the season start. Of course, since Wolves are still contending for PO, that's very unlikely at this point.

Changes still can be made in any circumstance. But, all I am saying is that we are not in good position to make a change, and just looking back the past, if you are not in good position to make a change, you usually don't make a good changes. Sure, teams do unload players, and the reason we were able to grab Davis is because we had an expiring contract. But, right now, even if Wolves dangle KG for just expiring contacts, we can't get it for next 3 years. In Artest trade, the best package we can offer is Pietrus, Biedrins, and Cheaney for Artest, and even if we make that trade, we are investing 16 mils per year on SF position and in position to bench brand new 5 years, 44 mils contract.

Seriously, I have been saying we have a financial problem ever since last offseason, and one thing I learned is that nobody likes to hear a bad news. I am enjoying the party as much as anybody right now. But, I have to say that this ship is heading toward iceburg field. I mean, if you want to continue partying, be my guest, and frankly, there is nothing I can do to change the course of this ship. Also, I don't know our captain Mullin will manuver through iceburgs safely or not, and I would be thrilled for Mullin to prove me wrong. But, please do not underestimate the potential destruction of those iceburgs, because numorous ships went down because they hit those iceburgs...

Edit: Speaking of change, there is a rumor going on that we may swap Murphy and Pietrus for Artest and a filler. Stay tuned...