I understand where you're coming from Run BJM, and I appreciate it. But, given how anti-Harrington I was prior to the trade and my almost complete absense during this season (new job), I would like to offer my opinion. First of all, let me say that I believe the Indiana trade was the main reason the Warriors ended their playoff drought. And, if Montgomery were still coaching this team, the Warriors would also not be in the playoffs. Here's my last post regarding trading for Harrington, which I made August 20, 2006: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The only Harrington trade I'd be ok with the Warriors making is Harrington for Dunleavy (and possibly Pietrus). Any trade that has Dunleavy and Harrington on the same roster is just really stupid. First of all, like I've said before, I don't think Harrington will benefit the Warriors at all, since his main attribute is scoring and he's not going to be doing nearly as much of that with Baron and Jason on the roster. And on top of it, the Warriors would still need to add a post scorer, which would give Harrington even less touches. Secondly, why the heck would you trade a productive, albeit overpaid power forward for a less productive and even more overpaid sf would put our already under productive and overpaid sf on the bench, further killing his trade value (or platooning with said incumbent sf and killing both their trade values). Oh, and did I mention that since the Warriors would be overpaying for Harrington because of his scoring prowess and then putting him on a team that doesn't need a scoring sf, they'd kill his trade value too? I have to stop reading about Harrington, I see absolutely no benefit to it and it’s getting to the point that I'm getting physically angry just thinking about it.</div> My points: 1) I was, and still am, a big fan of Dunleavy. Outside of his family, I'll probably be the last guy to turn on him, but even I see how he's just wasting his potential. If he had Brian Cardinal or Matt Barnes' heart, he'd have been an all star a few times over by now. But he just doesn't seem to care. Fine, I get that about him. It disappoints me, but I still keep hoping the light will go on for him, because I hate seeing good talent go to waste. 2) I was very wrong about Harrington. He fits in extremely well with Nelson's style. Though he and Dunleavy have similar games, Nelson's style exploits Harrington's unique strengths (offensive aggresiveness, low post skills) as much as it exploited Dunleavy's unique weaknesses (passiveness, inability to defend the low post). And, as Nelson said after tonight's game, Harrington has learned how to do some things he's never done before, like front centers on defense, which is one of the biggest keys to the Warriors ability to play small ball, and become a more aggressive rebounder. I couldn't be happier with the way Harrington has played for the Warriors, and if its possible, I'm even more impressed with Stephen Jackson. He's the type of player I (and presumably Nelson) thought Dunleavy would be during training camp. I don't care how good Diogu turns out to be, the Warriors were the clear winners in this trade. 3) Sure I didn't want Montgomery fired, just like I didn't want Musselman, St. Jean, or Cowens to stop coaching the Warriors (I didn't really care about Winters since he was just an interim coach). The reason is stability. A coach has a particular style he wants to play, he needs a particular type of player to play that style, it takes more than two years for you to get that type of player, and when you do, you usually sign him to a contract that's more than two years long. So why on Earth would you change coaches every two years? You end up with a bunch of players that don't fit the present coach's system, that don't have chemistry with each other, who were signed to long term contracts because they were the previous coach's "missing piece" but have fallen out of favor with the present coach, and all that subsequently killed their trade value (see Hughes, Larry and Fisher, Derek). If you want a recipe for "spinning your wheels", that's it. 4) The other reason why I didn't want any more trades or coaching changes is that I wanted the team to develop chemistry. Look around the league, it takes years to develop a core that has chemistry together. Dallas, San Antonio, Detroit, Chicago and Phoenix have all had their cores in place for several years. Almost without exception, you build chemistry through stability, not big trades. And, when you do develop instant chemistry through a big trade, it is almost always only when you bring in a point guard (Kidd to NJ, Nash to Phoenix). The Warriors have had 13 years of massive player turnover, they've cleaned house more than any other team in the league, and it got them no where. Fortunately, after 13 years, the Warriors finally got lucky with a trade and developed that instant chemistry. I'm thrilled that it finally happened, because its long overdue. But, the reason its been so long in coming is the very reason I dislike the strategy: its a crap shoot with bad odds. Let me be clear on this point. The success of this trade had less to do with "hey, on paper this is a great trade" and more to do with "I have no idea how this is going to turn out...wow, that worked out really well." What I mean is the success of that trade depended entirely on chemistry, and no one, not the players, coaches, media, or fans could have predicted how it would have turned out. If you want to dispute me on this point Upsidedownside7 and say that you knew it all along, that's fine. It is, of course, totally your prerogative, and it would make for an interesting debate. But before you do, if I were you, I'd take a look at all the past trade proposals you've been for or against and see how many of them worked out like you thought they would. 5) You didn't really hate to tell me that, did you? Now that I've responded, I'll go back to enjoying these awesome Warriors right along side you.
Awesome post wtwalker, it's good to see you've come around to the new players and coach But who cares about what was said in the past... we're in the PLAYOFFS BABY!!!
Good to see you posting again, Wtwalker. It's always great to read your stuff. I got called out a bit in the past, too. In the end, I figure it's all miscommunication. You're doing awesome btw. The warriors success all depends on getting on the same page in terms of everything. You're absolutely right about that. Guys like Baron and Jrich need more players to compliment their styles and strengths. I think that's what we lacked in the end. Coaching is a big part because the players have to fit that style as well. I think only Jrich was the one guy that could play any style under any coach it seemed (as a scoring small forward that is).
I think we all saw a glimpse of what the warriors were capable of doing when they first got Baron in the trade. That season with Baron we ended up being 15-5 when he was in the starting lineup. Those last 20 games were the run n gun style and we all thought that we would stick to the the same style the following season under Monty. But he went towards a different direction and played more of a halfcourt set. I always thought when we first hired Nelly he would go back to that style because thats what he always wanted to do. And just like that first season when we got Baron, this year we ended it the same way finishing what, 15-5 and now we're in the 8th seed!
<div class="quote_poster">iLL PiLL Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">And just like that first season when we got Baron, this year we ended it the same way finishing what, 15-5 and now we're in the 8th seed!</div> Dude... this year we ended 16-5 and 9-1 in the last team! We are sizzlin.
Wtwalker, congratulations on your fantasy ball victory. Especially without Gilbert Arenas. Nice! Well played considering your team was the one with the fewest moves made.
wtwalker, I think you took this well. We had our spats concerning coach Monty and Al Harrington, I've really liked Harrington for a while, you dissapeared and I felt vindicated to be right after my much resisted takes came to fruition. I'm glad you're happy with the deal landing us Al. I never hated Dunleavy like you assumed I did. He had talent but one was clearly a gamer while the other wasn't. Dunleavy for what he is should give Indy some depth. Don't know why they're playing him at the 2 but whatever, he's not my problem. No point getting into Monty, he's gone. Well, not much left to say. I'll c-ya around.
