SB Nation User Blog: formerlythecity

Warriors don't want Wallace because of money???

formerlythecity — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:29:37 -0000

From the ESPN article quoted by the "rumor" section at Yahoo Sports: "The Warriors, sources say, are not interested in absorbing the contract of Charlotte's Wallace, seeing little need for Wallace (and the four seasons left on his contract after this one at a cost of $38 million) when they have Corey Maggette and the soon-to-be-extended Stephen Jackson."

If this is true (that the Dubs DON'T want to do the Wallace for Harrington deal because of money concerns) it's something I haven't heard talked about. Which player would you rather have on this team for the next three years at this point in their careers? Wallace, or Jackson? Especially when you don't HAVE to extend Jackson to keep him for another season?

If the Warriors really are balking at acquiring Wallace because of $$$ they're needlessly throwing at Jackson, somebody in the Dub's "braintrust" needs to have their head examined. And if money issues are what is keeping this team from improving, the Warriors need to explain that to their season ticket holders. (Maybe a refund for this year? Not likely.)

When viewed in the context of the antagonistic posture Rowell is taking on Monta's contract, by suspending him and holding that he could STILL void the contract if he doesn't like Ellis' condition on his return (the "double jeopordy" basis of the now angry Monta's legal dispute) AND the fact that he nixed the BD deal that Mullin worked out, it suddenly seems obvious that Cohan is having money woes.

It's the only thing that explains the sudden rise of bean counter Rowell, along with the disappearance of Mullin. It also happens to correspond to the Warrior's sudden demise of team chemistry.

The question is: Why is Cohan suddenly becoming a penny pincher? What happened between the end of last year (with most games sold out) and the beginning of this season?

Rowell's sudden emergence may be the tip of the real story here. The real story may be that this franchise's owner is having financial issues, and if that is true it could dramatically alter the future of this team. A team we just thought had finally turned the corner.

What IS true: bad owner = bad team. It doesn't matter what sport.

Will Jackson lead the league in turnovers this year?

formerlythecity — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 03:08:15 -0000

It's quite possible.

It's hard to imagine another team in the NBA that would give as much ball time, and as many shots, to such a profoundly bad ball handler, and such a low percentage shooter.

Jackson's claim to fame on this team seems to be his "defense" and his "toughness" (the only "tough" guy on a reletively "soft" team). Without a traditional big center, and now without a point guard, Coach Nelson seems convinced that the Warriors can't compete without Jackson at the center of things.

At this point, however, the only thing certain about the Warriors, is that they can't compete with Jackson at the center of things.

I know Jackson has lots of defenders on this board, and I'm sure they'll come to his defense as the "Warrior's best player." Those fans always start their argument for "Jackstack" with talk about his tough defense, and end with his "intangibles."

But even Jack's staunchest defenders must concede the Warriors would be better if he stopped hogging the ball, dribbling wildly into walls of defenders, and flinging up out of control shots.

But that's just who he is. He's Baron without the handles.

His patented move consists of slow motion dribbling the ball at eye level, right up to an astounded opposing player, only to have that player (surprise!) take the ball and fly off in the opposite direction. Jackson then flings his arms up in disgust at the refs "missed foul" (it's never his fault for giving the ball away) then running after the player who picked him, and whacking or grabbing that player from behind in a fit of frustration. This immediately results in not only the original turnover, but a completely unnecessary team foul, and easy free throws for the other side.

This series of Jackson "moves" is on display every game. Obviously Don Nelson sees a lot more in the rest of Jack's game than I do, to put up with this. Or maybe it's just part of Nelson's love of deliberately making it harder for his teams to win then it ever should be. But watching Jackson's nightly comedy routine is quickly becoming not fun.

I'm joining the legions of frustrated Warrior fans who say, "If we're gonna lose, let's lose with the kids on the floor." And as long as Jackson is the "best player on the Warriors" (and Rowell seems determined to make that a lot longer than many of us hoped, with a mind bogglingly stupid contract extension) we're gonna lose.

POB a Celtic: All you need to know about Nelson...

formerlythecity — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 19:09:32 -0000

He wasn't "good enough" to earn even minimal rookie playing time with the lottery pick Warriors, but he's good enough to play for the World Champs. (They're obviously dumber than the Warriors.)

Will we ever see a real Center play for this team? Not as long as it's a Nellie coached team.

They will always score points. But they will always be "too small" to be serious playoff contenders. It's the fun, and the curse, of Nellieball.

Good luck to POB in Beantown.

Warriors Better Off Missing Playoffs? (Maybe.)

formerlythecity — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:39:54 -0000

Watching these Laker games reminds us both of the Warrior's "strengths," and their undeniable weaknesses.

The strengths of this team are Nelson's wacky match-ups, and the team's (and Nelson's) intense, "small ball" top speed style that has been beating most of the bad teams this year, and occasionally winning against teams it shouldn't be able to beat.

But as we saw with the Lakers, it is precisely those "strengths" that are their weaknesses. Running out of gas with a tiny rotation, too undersized to collect easy rebounds or protect the paint, going one on one, and flinging up undisciplined low percentage shots. These are the weaknesses that will either make them miss the play-offs this year, or sneak in and likely get blown out in the first round.

The W's are trying to reach the play-offs undersized and thin on talent. And really, what is the "value" in getting blown out in the first round under those circumstances?

We are faced with the same dilemma we faced during the "Run TMC" years under Nelson. And the reason he finally got run out of Dallas.

The Warriors can't rebound, or guard good big players, the very players they will face in the play-offs. They are routinely dominated on the boards by average big guys (Odom looked like Wilt against this crew) and as currently constructed they have almost no ability to protect the paint. (Especially with Wright on the bench.)

The Warriors couldn't beat the Lakers on a terrible shooting night for Bryant, while avoiding their two best bigs (Gasol and Bynum). The dirty little secret of the last Laker game is not "the bad call," but the W's total lack of any answer for Lamar Odom!

Part of it is Nelson's phobia of Big Guys and his style which gives up on rebounding, and part of it is simply the Warrior's current cast of players.

This team is fun to watch because they are "overacheiving." Nelson loves to "outsmart" the other teams, and beat their big stars with his little no name guys. That way HE gets the credit, not the players. But that gimmick only works as long as his guys can run non-stop for four quarters. And that is obviously humanly impossible against good, deep teams like the Lakers.

Eventually, the inability to rebound, and the wild low percentage shots flung up by the undermanned, exhausted little guys, take their toll.

Perhaps Nelson could manage the roster he's got better, to keep them running longer (playing six guys against play-off teams is a joke) but he's shown no inclination to do that.

So aside from the short term entertainment value of watching a few more games (games they will potentially be humiliated in, as with Utah last year) what is the point of getting into the play-offs with this roster?

To me, it only temporarily hides the weaknesses that Nelson refuses to address (except with the pathetic Webber signing). He won't develop or play the bigs he's got. And there are no answers to that problem in the Warriors future with Nelson at the controls.

This is exactly the sort of wildly entertaining (and wildly frustrating) team that Don Nelson brought us the first time around. And that was exactly the fear that those of us questioning the long term benefits of his return were worried about.

Like it or not, we are having the most fun the Warriors will bring us this year. Right now. During the "regular" season. Because the realities of this team are about to set in.

This is not a serious play-off team.

The sad treatment of first rounder POB, and the benching of Wright all season, suggests that the Warriors will NOT be a serious play-off team as long as Don Nelson decides who plays. And if the Warrior's re-sign all the current cast to mammoth, long term contracts this off season, we may be stuck with this undersized team for years.

You may be willing to give up watching a serious play-off team in exchange for the adrenaline we get out of the regular season. But at some point, just winning games during the regular season won't be getting people high anymore. At some point the team, and the fans, will have to come to terms with the limits of this team as it's currently constructed. The limits of "Nellieball."

Maybe "missing" the play-offs will be the best thing for the long term. It might just get a conversation going. This team is playing at it's limits, night after night, and it's still not good enough. That should be a sign to all rational Warrior fans. This team (and maybe the coaching staff) still needs serious work.

No Change, No Playoffs This Year?

formerlythecity — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:32:14 -0000

I know this is sacrilege around here, but having seen the Ws play all the teams in the West now, I think it's safe to say that the teams on top of them in the standings at this point, are legitimately BETTER teams than the Warriors.

Unless Portland comes back to reality, it's going to be Golden State duking it out with Utah (and potentially Houston) for the last spot??? They're in the 8th slot now, with the Jazz playing crappy and still only a game behind. Are the Warriors really going to win more games than Utah the rest of the season?

I'm thinkin' without attaining a beastly Power Forward (or Center, but what's the chance of that?) this team is on the bubble at best, and watching the playoffs at home on cable TV at worst.

There are rumors of a trade, which is of some comfort, because it shows, as Nellie pointed out in the KNBR interview, the front office KNOWS they "need help."

With Nellie though, who knows what "help" means. Maybe not the "big guy" that seems so obvious to many of us. (He might want another 5' 10" Hardaway type!) Anybody else notice POB got a sudden couple minutes the other night? If that wasn't a "showcase," what was it? But what can the Warriors get by trading one of their unproven bigs? A proven big? I doubt it.

It's hard to see what they can do without giving up a piece of the current franchise, or a fan favorite. Pietrus didn't even attract much interest as a free agent. Harrington? He's the only thing resembling inside "bulk" they have right now. Jackson can't go because nobody will touch him. The rest are untouchable, or worth little in trade.

It's too bad the JRich trade wasn't helpful THIS season. But they are stuck with the hand they have.

It may be "wait til next year," either for a trade, or for one the team's young guys to get out of Nelson's dog house and develop into filling the current hole. (They're not going to shoot their way into and through the play-offs with 3 pointers.)

Or maybe Nellie will just be happy to continue with his legacy of fun and exciting teams who tantalize, but never have enough size... We shall see.

"Brick" Daddy: Where is the back-up PG?

formerlythecity — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:41:56 -0000

Unfortunately, it's not just an "opinion" that BD is a poor shooter. He put on a clinic in brick laying last night that will be hard to top. 6-23! (My little brother and I could at least hit the rim 25 feet from the basket.) But curiously, nothing ever seems to change with Baron's propensity to fire away. Even though he is among the worst shooting PGs in the league.

It cost them the game last night.

Will it cost them a playoff berth? Some numbers below...

Baron IS the POINT GUARD, right? The "ball handler?" The "play maker?" When he does those things he IS one of the better PGs in the league. When he shoots, he is... not.

Baron's job at the Point is to take care of the ball and make sure each trip down the floor results in the highest percentage chance at scoring.

As opposed to a "shooting" guard, whose job is to... shoot. To not worry first about things like distributing the ball.

So why does Baron shoot so often, while his higher percentage shooting teammates stand there and watch?

Why does he dominate the offense, insisting on being THE scorer for the Ws, while firing up brick after excruciating brick?

One would think that it would start to dawn on him (and the team) that in that role, he is a LIABILITY for the Warriors, not a asset. But he (and the team) seem to have a curious lack of consciousness about that.

There's nothing like watching BD dribble down and fire up a ball from 30 feet without a single Warrior near the basket, and having it drop, like a gift, into the hands of the other team, who turn around and head the other way. I call that a turnover. The stat sheet doesn't. But those kinds of low percentage decisions clearly end up with the same result.

Baron is averaging about 8.5 assists and 3 turnovers (not counting the bad shot "turnover") per game. That's a "plus 5.5" on play making decisions. Utah's Deron Williams is averaging over 9 assists with almost 4 TOs. For roughly the same "net" (plus 5). Steve Nash is averaging 11 assists, with 4 TOs, for a plus 7.

Ok, so Williams and Nash are perhaps the best PGs in the league, and they're only slightly better or as good as Davis, based on the assists/turnovers ratio, aren't they? Uh, sadly, that's not the whole story.

So what is the REAL difference between these three???

Field Goal Percentage.

Nash 52.8
Williams 52
Davis 41.7

AND Shots Attempted.

Nash 12.7
Williams 14
Davis 19.6

Not only are Williams and Nash making over 20 percent MORE of their shots (the PERCENTAGE difference between 40 and 50 percent shooting, for those who don't want to do the math) they are actually TAKING far fewer shots!

They are letting teammates with even HIGHER percentage shots take more shots per game than Baron is.

When you factor in team offensive rebounding... Williams has Boozer and Okur standing there to gather in misses and put them back, while Nash has Stoudamire and Marion making his misses often look like ASSISTS.

Watch Nash when he shoots a long range jump shot. It usually happens when one or two of his guys are in rebounding position.

With the Warriors, when Davis flings up a brick, THE OTHER FOUR WARRIORS ARE OFTEN ALREADY HEADING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. In Nelson's defensive scheme, nobody on the Warriors even stays around to ATTEMPT an offensive rebound, as he sends them back on defense when the ball is launched. Thus making so many of Baron's huge number of misses into virtual turnovers.

"But you're comparing Baron with the best PGs in the league," you say. That's "not fair to BDiddy!"

Ok, let's compare him to the PGs on the winning teams in the NBA (teams over .500) in FG percentage.

Rondo (Bos) 53.5 (7 attempts)
Parker (SA) 52.6 (15.8 attempts)
Nelson (Orl) 45.9 (10.3 attempts)
Billups (Det) 44.9 (11.3 attempts)
Paul (NO) 47.9 (15.1 attempts)
Harris (Dal) 46.6 (10.7 attempts)
TJ Ford (Tor) 46.2 (11 attempts)
Iverson (Den) 43.8 (17.9 attempts)

Baron 41.7 (19.6 attempts)

(There are only two starting Point Guards in the league who are WORSE shooters than Davis.)

The ONLY winning team in the NBA with a Point Guard taking the most shots is San Antonio, with Tony Parker. (And that's probably because Duncan is hurt. Last year he and Duncan were about even in shots per game.) But BOTH Duncan and Parker MAKE WELL OVER 50% OF THEIR SHOTS! (Which is why the Spurs are the best team in the NBA.)

Chris Paul comes close to Parker's 15.8 attempts at 15.1, but neither of those guys come close to Baron's whopping 20 attempts per night. And New Orleans isn't going far this year either.

Only the dinosaur Iverson at 17.9 attempts per game approaches BDiddy for ball hoggishness, and EVEN IVERSON DOESN'T TAKE THE MOST SHOTS ON HIS TEAM. Luckily for Denver, Carmelo gets that honor.

On a seasonal basis, year after year, the teams with the best shooting percentages win the most games.

Here are the top five teams with the highest percentage this year. Utah, Phoenix, San Antonio, Boston and Detroit. Hmmmm, sound familiar???

Surprisingly, the Dubs are in the middle of the NBA pack (or a little above) at 45% team shooting.

But Davis is shooting 41.7. And leads the team in shots attempted.

So what does that mean?

It means, obviously, that there are a lot of other Warriors who are better shooters, making up for some of Baron's misses, and lifting the team percentage up.

Unfortunately they are not taking enough shots to overcome Davis yet, and lift the team up to the shooting standards of the top NBA teams.

It means the Warriors are winning games DESPITE BD's tremendously poor shooting. And until they allow other players who are better shooters to take more shots, they will be stuck in the middle of the NBA. A playoff "fringe" team.

A FUN team to watch, but a fringe team.

It's time for somebody to tell Baron that he needs to be a play maker first, and a shooter second, if they really want to get to the next level.

Will that "somebody" be Don Nelson?

We'll see.

The Baron Davis sucks diary

formerlythecity — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:09:07 -0000

No, I'm not joking. And yeah, I'm a Warrior fan. Baron was the reason they lost to the pathetic Clips. Period.

24 FRICKING SHOTS FROM ONE OF THE WORST SHOOTERS ON THE TEAM???

If he could've even hit 30 percent from the 3 line, the Dubs would've been in overtime. (Even if only to watch him hoist up more bricks for the extended period.)

And didn't anyone notice him "take the last shot" at the half, which would've put them ahead going into the locker room? Er, except instead he showed off his handles, and let the shot clock expire.

I don't have the numbers, but anyone who has watched the Dubs over the last few seasons knows, when Baron holds the ball for the "last shot" of the quarter, it's most likely going to clank off a rim, or get stuffed.

Baron is simply NOT a shooter. And he never HAS been. He's always near the bottom of the league in FG% among PGs, and his 3pt shooting has always been embarrassing. So he should go to the rim more and get fouled, you say? He can't shoot free throws either. 68% lifetime.

Bigger teams just pack the middle, and hack every W taking shots in close (because they know even if they get to the line, they'll miss) or force them to shoot from outside (where perentages tell you they miss, and bigger guys are standing there collecting uncontested rebounds).

But Davis BELIEVES he's a shooter. He (and apparently Nelson) BELIEVES he's the best shooter on the team. And so he dominates the shot attempts almost every night. And except on those nights when they accidentally fall for him, the W's are fighting against Baron's averages.

I enjoyed the run at the end of the season. My jaw was on the floor watching them beat Dallas. I couldn't believe my eyes. It wasn't the same team of brick layers I watched all last season. Instead every shot seemed to go in. And the fact is, anybody who watched the NBA all season KNEW they were whipping a BETTER team.

They were the NBA's Colorado Rockies last year.

But that was last year.

Is it possible to be a Warrior's fan and not "believe" this team as currently constructed is a play-off team? I humbly suggest it is.

They're too small (because Nelson either benches or gets rid of big guys) and because they don't have enough high percentage shooters taking shots (KA may be a welcome exception) they can't play "small ball" consistently. With the current recipe they can't win unless at least two guys have crazy. over-their-heads, shooting nights. There's no escaping the numbers on this team.

I'll watch the Warriors because I'm a fan. But even though hope springs eternal, I'll probably find some other things to do in a couple weeks. When they're 2-8.