Warriors vs. Timberwolves @ Oakland, Feb. 4, 7:30PM FSN+

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Clif25:</div><div class="quote_post"> On the other hand, Mike Dunleavy is kind of slow, gee, hehe. I kind of wish he could run fast breaks better...</div>

I disagree. I think you're right on about JRich, but IMO Dunleavy runs the floor extremely well. Make no mistake, he is definately slow. But running the break isn't all about speed. Just look at Pietrus against the Spurs. He blew by his defender several times, but he could not finish the play because he was going TOO fast. On a 2-on-1 or a 3-on-2 break, the wings and the trailers need to create a polarity between themselves and the ball handler. It's about spacing. You need to create a double threat, forcing the defender to honor two threats and ultimately choose which one to defend.

Dunleavy understands this extremely well. He's not fast, but he knows were to be on the fast break, and perhaps more importantly where not to be. When you hear Barnett say a 3-on-1 should become a 2-on-1, he 'aint talking jive. Some players insist on staying in the middle of the play and thus clog up the middle of the break. A good player who's the least of the offensive threats in a 3-on-1 will allow it to become a 2-on-1 and instead trail the play to grab a loose rebound or get back on defense (after all, a 3-on-1 means the other team has a 4-on-2 on the other end). Dunleavy undestands this.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">I'd think about this,Foyle,Fish+07 #1 to Blazers for Ratliff,Blake,O6 #2,08#2.</div>

I'd love this trade, but Portland wouldn't do it:

1)Steve Blake has been one of their brightest prospects lately and I think they want to build with him and Telfair.

2)Portland is trying to start a youth movement and I don't see them wanting to aquire an older veteran in Fisher, let alone two in Foyle and Fisher.

- Although, they would be shedding Ratliff and Fish could mentor Telfair and Dixon. It's possible, but I don't really see it.

However, I love your proposal because it's intelligent and it would be great for the Warriors. Personally I think Ratliff would be superb in the middle for the W's. I really like what he brings.

And with Fish gone, Blake would be a true back-up PG and this would allow Ellis to move to the back-up 2 guard. (assuming Pietrus is the back-up 3 guard and not 2).

I really hope Mully is playing the same kind of "what if" games that you are, REREM.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting REREM:</div><div class="quote_post">I'd think about this,Foyle,Fish+07 #1 to Blazers for Ratliff,Blake,O6 #2,08#2. Ratliffs deal is bigger,and as long as Foyle's,Blake's is no problem. Blake is an old school pass first,no star qwuality but a chemistry plus as an off the bench. Ratliff does not have bulk. He does have more offensive assets than adonal. Both are at their best as shotblockers. With overpaid contracts going both ways,that kind of evens out. We have no #2 in 06,and there are guys I happen to like,especially as defensive assets in the 2nd. We hold 2 #1 picks,3#2's in 07. The Blazers now need a few more round 1 types,more than role guys and projects out of rd 2,so that adds incentive and makes a deal good for both.
</div>

Old man rerem: I think we may actually agree on something.

 

OK, Rerem, I will look closer at what you are talking about next game. I just remember Diogu getting beat on a free throw rebound by the opposing team, and a few other times where I didn't notice Diogu being so helpful on the boards for a stretch when he was in the game. I even believe his lack of rebounding was a reason why he came out by substitution at one point in the game. And in the end coming out with just one rebound in that many minutes isn't a great number for a post player. Then again, it wasn't like the Warriors got out rebounded, so if what you are saying is accurate, then that could be an explaniation to why a lot of the guards piled up on the rebound stat.

But in general, I would like to have a post player who would average more rebounds per minute than Diogu does(he averages less than 3 boards in 14.6 minutes per game). But yes, I will look at how he boxes out like you are acknowledging, which would help the Warriors, and I guess in someways slightly lower his rebounding numbers.

As for Oop, I don't disagree with you. Maybe I would have been better off writing what I had in a way that is more accurate to what I was thinking(my bad writing). It's not that Dunleavy can't make the decisions on the fast break. I just wish that he could put himself more in fast break situations and in the open court like Jason Richardson can, or I wish he could push the ball up more like Davis does, when it's open.

But really, I can't really put a lot of blame on Dunleavy, nor was I trying to. I just kind of wish, with his ball handling skills, and his height to grab rebounds and push the ball up himself after rebounds, that he would be more aggressive and to lead this team more into fast break situtions and into the open court. But it could also be one of those things that you must work at with the whole team, along with having some other fast players on the court, and having the PG have faith in Dunleavy to push the ball up himself. If the team and Mike Dunleavy worked at this a little more, I think it would be one of the things that will make Dunleavy fit in better with Jason Richardson who succeeds in the open court and plays better in the open court, and with Baron Davis who with his height and skills and kind of switch to that off guard spot or whatever on the fast break, if it were lead by Dunleavy.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AlleyOop:</div><div class="quote_post">I disagree. I think you're right on about JRich, but IMO Dunleavy runs the floor extremely well. Make no mistake, he is definately slow. But running the break isn't all about speed. Just look at Pietrus against the Spurs. He blew by his defender several times, but he could not finish the play because he was going TOO fast. On a 2-on-1 or a 3-on-2 break, the wings and the trailers need to create a polarity between themselves and the ball handler. It's about spacing. You need to create a double threat, forcing the defender to honor two threats and ultimately choose which one to defend.

Dunleavy understands this extremely well. He's not fast, but he knows were to be on the fast break, and perhaps more importantly where not to be. When you hear Barnett say a 3-on-1 should become a 2-on-1, he 'aint talking jive. Some players insist on staying in the middle of the play and thus clog up the middle of the break. A good player who's the least of the offensive threats in a 3-on-1 will allow it to become a 2-on-1 and instead trail the play to grab a loose rebound or get back on defense (after all, a 3-on-1 means the other team has a 4-on-2 on the other end). Dunleavy undestands this.</div>
Great analysis Oop and you definitely explained in a way in which we all learn something about basketball. I mean something such as floor spacing is a huge deal but it hardly gets talked about from a spectator standpoint. If there's no room to maneuver, it gets harder to execute and the risk goes up in moving with the ball to make things happen. You basically wind up in a Baron Davis situation forced to make something out of nothing or risk turning the ball over with nowhere to go. It's also one of the things that I admire about Barnett analyzing the game and talking about such subjects as floor spacing, fastbreaks, sealing off the rebounders, and the right way to set screens or defend on the switch because it's all about team work. I like Barnett even though he tends to over-analyze when something else is going on in the game, he obsesses about Dunleavy, and he uses the tired catch phrases when we're going through a typical late game meltdown, but he's usually dead-on on some fundamental teamwork issues the Warriors are lacking. If you don't have the teamwork fundamentals, it definitely gets in the way of team chemistry and winning the games that are absolutely winnable.

I think Pietrus and Dunleavy pretty much spell out what is wrong with this franchise. It's incomplete and still developing with its strengths and its weaknesses. Almost every player we have is not all that well balanced. We got Pietrus who is electrifying as an individual player and can get results both ends of the floor more frequently than Dunleavy because of his superior physical tools. The problem is Mickael tends to hurt the team when he tries to do too much or goes into these bad habits, makes bad decisions with the ball, or things he doesn't understand yet and is supposed to know as an nba player. He's just so raw sometimes.

Then we got Dunleavy who could be a head coach someday because of his knowledge of the game and could be pretty good if he started knocking down his shots and driving more. He's got great technical skills, good decision making, fundamentally sound in all aspects of the game, but he lacks Pietrus' aggressiveness, energy, and he doesn't do well unless he actually has the ball more often and he's got teammates that bought into playing organized with floor spacing, setting good screens for him, executing off the ball, etc. When the Warriors do all those little important things, I think Dunleavy plays pretty well in the midst of all that. When he's lacking confidence, or not comfortable in his shot and there's a breakdown in team play, I think he tends to struggle and go passive. I think Dunleavy could really do well under coach Montgomery but he's like one of these guys whose understanding of the team game is in the right place (like Montgomery), but he's one of these players that can't do too much unless he's confident within himself and there's some sort of game plan all the guys agree to play so there's no high risk style of play discomfort. For instance, there are times when Dunleavy cannot drive because there's not enough room to move or there's nobody decent to pass to (we've got no inside threat and Foyle is pitiful as an offensive guy in terms of consistency). Also, nobody clears out for Dun and Dun doesn't assert himself like a point guard who's in charge of the show. He can drive the ball if people clear out for him and he doesn't need to be that fast to do it if he can go left equally well as he can go right and use those first steps to get to the hoop in shorter time than a smaller player. He can also dribble behind the back and hit the pull up shot, crossover from left to right, right to left, and he can follow his own miss if he wasn't told to run back on D because the Warriors aren't too fast on transition D. When Dunleavy's shooting comes along, I think it will help the rest of his game, but the Warriors have go to get better big men that can really set good screens and work on the timing coming off of it. And also until Dunleavy actually becomes good consistently, the Warriors are always going to be hurting. If he could just play well all the time, we would be all right, I believe. I'd rather have Pietrus as undersized small forward or starting shooting guard (Jrich to SF) than Dunleavy at small forward if we're just going to play open court offense over the halfcourt game that we need to learn how to play.

The Warriors team as a whole needs to move the ball better and space out, and the Warriors need to move more and know who to look for on a play set. Since they are a small team, they need to be aggressive in going after those rebounds. They also need to run play sets so they don't stand around doing nothing in the first place waiting for Baron to make things all right. Baron has to endorse the halfcourt game and thrive in it. No sub 40% shooting, pass second, streetballing point guard has ever won a championship or gone far in the playoffs and at least 40% guy like Jkidd knows when to give the ball up. Baron needs to become like Chauncey Billups under Larry Brown or be like Jason Kidd down the stretch... There just needs to be a transformation in our most important and best player. He needs to be humble like Jrich and not cocky to the point where he refuses to improve his ability to play point and work with the coaching staff.