Finances are a different matter but go watch that second Warriors vs Hawks game and watch Oubre's defense on Trae Young (who is currently tearing up a top 5 defense on the road in the playoffs) if you think losing him would help the team. The video box score doesn't do his performance justice because it doesn't show how many times he denied Young the ball or got him to pass and it's of course a team effort to contain a guy like that but you can see him in there:
“... if you think losing him would help the team.”
Pretty sure you’re arguing with literally no one here. I haven’t seen one person say losing him would help the team. I’m probably one his “harshest critics!” around here and I’ve said many times I’d love to have him back, but there’s no way to justify it given the cost vs. his impact.
Go ahead and make the tried and true “It’s not my money” argument, but understand that you’re arguing the team with the highest payroll in the league should add the equivalent of the Kings entire payroll for Kelly Oubre. If there’s an argument Meyers can make to ownership, I’d like to hear it. And I’m pretty certain it isn’t “Watch this video of him defending Trae Young if you think losing him will help the team.”
"As of now, the Warriors currently have 13 players under contract for $167,478,593.
If they were to use both picks 6th ($5,988,000) and 14th ($3,562,080) and the full Taxpayer MLE ($5,890,000) while dropping Smailgić ($1,782,621) to balance the roster they would be at 15 players for $181,136,052 with a projected repeater tax bill of $205,577,855 which is already a combined salary+tax of $386,713,907.
Adding Oubre to that at say $15M takes them into the $500M range"
One thing that might be possible is a consolidation of assets where we send out some of Wiggins/Wiseman/2 lottery picks this year for a better player (on a cumulatively lower salary).
Apart from that, tough to see how we could keep Oubre with the luxury tax implications. Whatever your opinion on Oubre, tough to make an argument when the cost of keeping him is > $100 million.
This is what I’ve been insisting since hearing Patrick Murray break down the cost of keeping Oubre on that LGW podcast/YouTube vid; there’s just no way you over $100M in expenses to add a guy who will be the 6th or 7th best player on the team, at best.
Lacob/Gruber have nothing to apologize for. They’ve shown their willingness to commit big money to get and keep stars and key players, but the ROI just isn’t there with Oubre.
Its not depressing, its just reality. Its the direct result of 5 finals, 3 chips, in 5 years. This is a massively top heavy team, so all narratives about contending have to stop and start with getting maximum production from the top 4 salary guys.
Interesting. Given that, Oubre is probably gone, Smiley gone, and maybe we keep GP II instead of Mulder or some such variation around the fringes (Jessup? Mannion?). If we keep both picks and use the MLE, that could be a pretty good team but maybe we make a trade. As he notes there are other possible variations.
A lot of people say we should sign and trade Oubre, but if we sign Oubre for $20M and trade him, wouldn’t the salary of the guy coming back be equally devastating with all the associated tax penalties?
If we get less dollars than we give up, don't we just get a TPE? not entirely sure how that works. Also for us to sign and trade Oubre someone's going to have to think it's worth getting hard capped for
I'm not sure either. I thought we had to come within a certain percentage of a salary match. I don't see how being hard capped could work for us. It sounds like we just have to let Oubre walk to reduce the tax load. Of course we signed him because Klay went down, and we're getting Klay back so there's that.
We gave up Andre for literally nothing and got a huge tpe so I think there isn't a percentage requirement? Also to clarify we wouldn't be hard capped but the team trading for Oubre would be
But at whatever point you use the that TPE (and I think it would have to be before that season is over) you’re taking on a big salary with enormous tax implications.
Funnily enough I would've rooted for the Nets to win it all had they not added Harden. Nash is cool and getting a "proper" ring (I know he doesn't care that much for the one he "won" with us) would be neat, KD will always have my love and I always felt Kyrie Irving is extremely disrespected by the NBA community as a whole even though he was the second-biggest reason Cleveland won in 2016 (the first being Kiki Vandeweghe, obviously). With Harden, however, they can get yeeted as far as I am concerned.
As much as I appreciate KD, I can't root for the Nets. They are a soulless killing machine that needs to be stopped.
I find it funny that the New Yorkers seemed to have embraced the Knicks over the Nets based on the fact the Knicks games sold out in 20 minutes versus the Nets having to offer discounts to get people to their games.
The New York Knicks are an institution in NYC while the Nets spent most their history in Jersey. Nets just need more time to take root in the community. Also, frankly, the price of tickets selects for certain types of fans, of which the Nets have fewer.
Yeah, that’s generational fandom and wealth buying tickets in Manhattan, plus they all think MSG is the center of the basketball universe for some reason. 🤷🏼♂️
Brooklyn is definitely “hip” and happening and the place to be seen. There’s certainly money there, but not the layers of it like old NYC or Bay Area tech money.
the part that probably hurts is that the Nets had a pretty cool home grown team coming into shape there. It got blasted to smithereens for the "mercenary JuggerNets" (lmao Apricot!)
FWIW, the Nets have put themselves into the same luxury tax hell as the Warriors are in going forward. They have $113m tied up in Harden, Durant, and Irving. Jordan, Dinwiddie, and Harris make a combined $37m, so there are at $150m for 6 players. Unlike the Warriors, they will be drafting around 26. They do have a bunch of likely to be late 2nd round picks.
The one thing missing from these pieces are the panic meter trades. If the favorite loses, are there any scraps the vulture Warriors can scrounge? Be it a Gasol or an Ibaka/Batum. I love me some Joe Harris, but the Nets ain't losing this series. And I doubt they trade him even if they lost early.
If Miami gets swept in the first round are they really going to pay 15 million for Iguodala's services next season? I like their team but I like the idea of an Iguodala for the vet min reunion more.
Aren’t Obama and batum free agents anyways? I suppose I’d take George too, but I doubt they’re trading him or Leonard... but if we’re considering the fantasy land where these guys are all disgruntled after failed playoff run, then we get them cheap
Yes, Obama became a free agent on Jan. 20, 2017. He's kind of old for the NBA though. 😊 Oh, you mean Ibaka! He has a player option for 2021-22 for $9.7 mill. We're not going to get him or Kawhi except in dreams. Batum is UFA and made $2.56M this season.
LOL yes... Ibaka, stupid autocorrect. So you're saying he could become a free agent if he decides he wants to prioritize championships and that LAC isn't the place to get there.
said the Warriors had set up for James Wiseman to work out with Kevin Garnett this offseason: "The thing now is you don't want to throw a guy (out there) that's not 100 percent healthy with KG -- or else you're in trouble (laughs)."
What's going on with that? I had meniscus surgery and was playing 6 weeks later. Of course, I was not 7 feet tall, but I wasn't 19 either. He should be running and jumping after 3 months, surely......also, even if he can't play, he can be working out, watching film, doing stuff in slow-mo.....
I had one to and it was very minor (especially compared to the cartilage damage). They said after they got in there that Wiseman had the “bad” kind of tear, which has to be repaired on not just shaved, IIRC...and it’s a much longer recovery time.
DWest and KG are a couple of fantastic models for him to work on specific aspects of his game. Remember that we only got old man DWest, dude was putting up nice offensive numbers for years!
Ughh would have been so helpful. Wiseman needs so much development/reps and he's going to miss an entire offseason after not being able to participate in summer league last year. Not to mention he would get injured whenever we'd have an easy stretch.
Seems like even he couldn't do all the physical stuff, just going through positioning with KG and West in slow motion (not doing anything risky) and talking about how to see what's going on and respond would be great learning experience.
After Ben Simmons scored just six points on 3-of-9 shooting in Game 1, Sixers head coach Doc Rivers said he doesn’t understand criticism of the standout guard, who contributed 15 assists and 15 rebounds in the team’s victory. “Only in Philadelphia,” Rivers said, per Rob Maaddi of The Associated Press. “If you guys don’t know the treasure you have by now, then shame on everyone because he’s been fantastic for us. … I’m amazed that people don’t see what he does. We’re so caught up in the amount of points he scored. … Does it matter if Ben had all 125? Would we be mad that Joel (Embiid) didn’t score? Who cares who scores as long as we’re scoring. … When Ben plays, we score more points.”
I don’t watch enough 76ers to know how they run it, but with Dray we know that they have to have defense up on him. If not he’s a dribble hand off, or pass and screen, away from the most efficient score in the sport. Philly has enough shooters to make a team pay for not having two defenders involved. Simmons assist numbers suggest he’s pretty damn good at working it out.
We have the best and arguably second-best shooter of all-time. While it would be great if Draymond's scoring does improve, this concern goes away next year if Klay is even 75% of his former self.
Klay will help when Draymond has the ball in his hands running the system offense in the high post.
Klay will not help much when Draymond is the roll man and the opponent is daring him to try to score on the 4 on 3. Wiseman could help with that if he can improve his hands since he has "vertical gravity" (hopefully his hands are something they can still work on regardless of his knee), but Wiseman still has a long way to go to be someone you can put out there in an important game and can't be counted on for next season.
Draymond's three pointer has always been more of a luxury than a need imo, whereas his ability to run the 4 on 3 repeatedly is a necessity. Although I suppose if he became a good shooter they could find new bread and butter plays, but you can't expect that at this point.
We already saw some of the issues back when we had Curry, Klay, and KD with Dray, particularly when Iguodala was also in a "I don't wanna shoot the ball" funk.
Sure it will help to have Klay back, but it's still an obvious weakness for playoff defenses to target.
Dray’s issues limit what can be done with the 5 spot. Tough on the offense when you have 2 non-shooters on the floor, much less 3 if its Oubre & Looney with Dray. That’s why Wiseman is so tantalizing: he’s got a nice stroke so he compensates fro Dray. Question is does Wiseman give back that advantage on the defensive end? Answer for now is that he does and JW is a net a negative.
Doesn't it? Does every team have five shooters on the floor at all times? Again, I think the OP is relevant here. Simmons would be an incredible addition to pretty much any team as he is now.
That's on the coaching. When your team allows 50%+ shooting in consecutive playoff games at home with their personnel especially against a pretty average team outside of Doncic your coaching staff is clueless
PatBev’s an A+ mean-mugger with the rep of an elite defender, but probably more like a B- In terms of his actual impact on the floor. He’s basically a smaller, less good Alex Caruso. I’m actually much more impressed by Caruso’s defense, from what I’ve seen.
Strange as it feels to root for Harden, I feel the Nets would have a much better shot at beating LeActor in the finals, if it comes to that. I pick the Nets.
This is a weird series to frame in that manner. Here we have a team who was close to being in the finals multiple times, but hoarded their assets and now despite young talent are barely in the playoffs, playing against the title favorites who went for it all.
I'm not at all sure that I'd rather be the Celtics than the Nets. Their expected titles are almost certainly higher even if Tatum doesn't follow current trends and remains a Celtic for life. There was a time 2-3 years ago where the Celtics core was the envy of the league. But a little bad luck, deciding not to go all in, and they have missed their window.
The envy was always based on the hope on the promise that Tatum and Brown will become superstars, and their other draft picks will pan out. It was always based on hope and optimistic projection. We'll see what the future holds.
It was also based on the hope that they would use all their trade assets and cap room to get a superstar or two to add to Tatum, Brown, and whoever else they kept.
But when the stars they acquired ended up being Kyrie Irving (a terrible fit as a leader of a team) and Gordon Hayward (who had injury woes from literally his first game as a Celtic, plus he was never a true superstar anyway), that plan went sideways. It also didn’t help that many of the supporting pieces (the Roziers and Crowders and such) ended up wanting more than supporting roles (and more s than supporting role money), despite not being good enough to warrant it.
Goes to show how fleeting the championship window can be. Its very difficult for really good teams to take that last step to being champion. Really your stars have to find another gear, a la Steph in 2015, or you have to somehow import a superstar, a la Lebron & KD. Its difficult to add a superstar, because you can only do it when a salary slot opens.
A lot has to do with why you watch. I watch the NBA because basketball at its most beautiful is incredible entertainment, and I watch the Warriors because they exemplify that AND they are the home team. Both of those things contribute to me wanting for them to win championships, but absent the beauty, it’s just rooting for laundry and that’s not nearly as entertaining to me. There is a beauty to KD’s game, and probably Kyrie’s, but you can always tell you are watching a team of mercenaries rather than the product of careful study, patience, buildup and pure love of the game. Yeah, that sounds idyllic and maybe naive, but I’m a poet in my spare time and that’s the kind of thing that appeals to me.
And the Warriors have the opportunity to be a very, VERY home grown team next year with key players Steph, Klay, Dray, Looney, Poole, JTA and Wiseman, along with Lee, Bazemore, Paschall, Mannion and whoever they draft. Chriss would be another guy who’s almost like home grown since he was nearly out of the league at a young age.
Wiggins is the only guy who isn’t home grown, but we was acquired in a trade (so hardly a mercenary) and obviously loves being here and wants to stay.
To my point yesterday fitting into the Kerr system, that “belonging” that they’ve created seems extra important in offense so reliant on unselfish, team-first play.
I mean, in a perfect world, I agree. 2014-2016 may have meant more than the Durant years. But I'd rather be the Raptors with rental Kawhi than the Celtics. And the reason basketball might now be my number one sport is #30. I'll sell my principles to get him more success.
Agree wholeheartedly, GlueandBold. Winning at any cost is hollow. Superteams may dominate, but winning through development is far more rewarding. Regardless of how the team is reconstituted next year, the growth and development of players will be the story that is entertaining, and part of the reason to watch. Of course, as long as Steph Curry is a Warrior, the Dubs will be must-watch TV, because what he does is way beyond normal.
>Celtics fans talk a lot about their many championships, omitting the fact that they’ve won 1 championship since 1986, and most of the previous ones came from Red Auerbach ripping off other hobbyist owners when the league was eight teams that could barely get a highlight on TV.
Kinda makes the point on the last thread of how hard it is to be a modern dynasty in American pro sports...
Playoffs series so far:
76ers-Wizards - Sixers up 2-0
Nets-Celtics - Nets up 2-0
Bucks-Heat - Bucks up 2-0
Knicks-Hawks - Series tied 1-1
Jazz-Grizzlies - Series tied 1-1
Suns-Lakers - Series tied 1-1
Nuggets-Blazers - Series tied 1-1
Clippers-Mavericks - Mavericks lead 2-0 (lol)
The return of Spidah and presence of Grayson Ted Cruz Allen is enough to make root for the Jazz in this series.
Austin Rivers sucks.. but not as bad as Grayson Allen.
Of course Grayson Allen’s now a brick artist.
I pick the Celtics. The will be out in 4, but Tatum is a great player. I hope Nets will watch the Finals on tv
Finances are a different matter but go watch that second Warriors vs Hawks game and watch Oubre's defense on Trae Young (who is currently tearing up a top 5 defense on the road in the playoffs) if you think losing him would help the team. The video box score doesn't do his performance justice because it doesn't show how many times he denied Young the ball or got him to pass and it's of course a team effort to contain a guy like that but you can see him in there:
https://www.nba.com/game/gsw-vs-atl-0022000759/box-score
People don't care as much about defense when they talk about "fit" though.
“... if you think losing him would help the team.”
Pretty sure you’re arguing with literally no one here. I haven’t seen one person say losing him would help the team. I’m probably one his “harshest critics!” around here and I’ve said many times I’d love to have him back, but there’s no way to justify it given the cost vs. his impact.
Go ahead and make the tried and true “It’s not my money” argument, but understand that you’re arguing the team with the highest payroll in the league should add the equivalent of the Kings entire payroll for Kelly Oubre. If there’s an argument Meyers can make to ownership, I’d like to hear it. And I’m pretty certain it isn’t “Watch this video of him defending Trae Young if you think losing him will help the team.”
The "it's not my money" argument basically equates to "I'm just fantasizing and this has nothing to do with reality."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdv9bvFw-CI&t=1811s
Myers saying that 400m will be past the limit that they can spend.
Person over at reddit did the math - https://www.reddit.com/r/warriors/comments/nlu5x9/bob_myers_said_in_his_last_presser_he_thinks/
"As of now, the Warriors currently have 13 players under contract for $167,478,593.
If they were to use both picks 6th ($5,988,000) and 14th ($3,562,080) and the full Taxpayer MLE ($5,890,000) while dropping Smailgić ($1,782,621) to balance the roster they would be at 15 players for $181,136,052 with a projected repeater tax bill of $205,577,855 which is already a combined salary+tax of $386,713,907.
Adding Oubre to that at say $15M takes them into the $500M range"
One thing that might be possible is a consolidation of assets where we send out some of Wiggins/Wiseman/2 lottery picks this year for a better player (on a cumulatively lower salary).
Apart from that, tough to see how we could keep Oubre with the luxury tax implications. Whatever your opinion on Oubre, tough to make an argument when the cost of keeping him is > $100 million.
This is what I’ve been insisting since hearing Patrick Murray break down the cost of keeping Oubre on that LGW podcast/YouTube vid; there’s just no way you over $100M in expenses to add a guy who will be the 6th or 7th best player on the team, at best.
Lacob/Gruber have nothing to apologize for. They’ve shown their willingness to commit big money to get and keep stars and key players, but the ROI just isn’t there with Oubre.
This is kind of depressing, but also makes me a little glad because I don't want radical changes.
Its not depressing, its just reality. Its the direct result of 5 finals, 3 chips, in 5 years. This is a massively top heavy team, so all narratives about contending have to stop and start with getting maximum production from the top 4 salary guys.
Interesting. Given that, Oubre is probably gone, Smiley gone, and maybe we keep GP II instead of Mulder or some such variation around the fringes (Jessup? Mannion?). If we keep both picks and use the MLE, that could be a pretty good team but maybe we make a trade. As he notes there are other possible variations.
A lot of people say we should sign and trade Oubre, but if we sign Oubre for $20M and trade him, wouldn’t the salary of the guy coming back be equally devastating with all the associated tax penalties?
If we get less dollars than we give up, don't we just get a TPE? not entirely sure how that works. Also for us to sign and trade Oubre someone's going to have to think it's worth getting hard capped for
I'm not sure either. I thought we had to come within a certain percentage of a salary match. I don't see how being hard capped could work for us. It sounds like we just have to let Oubre walk to reduce the tax load. Of course we signed him because Klay went down, and we're getting Klay back so there's that.
We gave up Andre for literally nothing and got a huge tpe so I think there isn't a percentage requirement? Also to clarify we wouldn't be hard capped but the team trading for Oubre would be
But at whatever point you use the that TPE (and I think it would have to be before that season is over) you’re taking on a big salary with enormous tax implications.
Funnily enough I would've rooted for the Nets to win it all had they not added Harden. Nash is cool and getting a "proper" ring (I know he doesn't care that much for the one he "won" with us) would be neat, KD will always have my love and I always felt Kyrie Irving is extremely disrespected by the NBA community as a whole even though he was the second-biggest reason Cleveland won in 2016 (the first being Kiki Vandeweghe, obviously). With Harden, however, they can get yeeted as far as I am concerned.
As much as I appreciate KD, I can't root for the Nets. They are a soulless killing machine that needs to be stopped.
I find it funny that the New Yorkers seemed to have embraced the Knicks over the Nets based on the fact the Knicks games sold out in 20 minutes versus the Nets having to offer discounts to get people to their games.
The New York Knicks are an institution in NYC while the Nets spent most their history in Jersey. Nets just need more time to take root in the community. Also, frankly, the price of tickets selects for certain types of fans, of which the Nets have fewer.
Yeah, that’s generational fandom and wealth buying tickets in Manhattan, plus they all think MSG is the center of the basketball universe for some reason. 🤷🏼♂️
Brooklyn is definitely “hip” and happening and the place to be seen. There’s certainly money there, but not the layers of it like old NYC or Bay Area tech money.
the part that probably hurts is that the Nets had a pretty cool home grown team coming into shape there. It got blasted to smithereens for the "mercenary JuggerNets" (lmao Apricot!)
Mostly anyway. L'Angelo Russell wasn't home grown.
FWIW, the Nets have put themselves into the same luxury tax hell as the Warriors are in going forward. They have $113m tied up in Harden, Durant, and Irving. Jordan, Dinwiddie, and Harris make a combined $37m, so there are at $150m for 6 players. Unlike the Warriors, they will be drafting around 26. They do have a bunch of likely to be late 2nd round picks.
It sure did. I would hate if something like that happened to my team.
The one thing missing from these pieces are the panic meter trades. If the favorite loses, are there any scraps the vulture Warriors can scrounge? Be it a Gasol or an Ibaka/Batum. I love me some Joe Harris, but the Nets ain't losing this series. And I doubt they trade him even if they lost early.
If Miami gets swept in the first round are they really going to pay 15 million for Iguodala's services next season? I like their team but I like the idea of an Iguodala for the vet min reunion more.
I had this same thought.
I want to see what the Clippers will do with their roster if they get swept by the Mavs in the playoffs.
Who would we really want from the Clips?
I mean I'd take Kawhi, Ibaka, and Batum. Hell I'd probably take PG13 if need be. Of those, Ibaka and Batum seem like great, realistic targets.
Aren’t Obama and batum free agents anyways? I suppose I’d take George too, but I doubt they’re trading him or Leonard... but if we’re considering the fantasy land where these guys are all disgruntled after failed playoff run, then we get them cheap
Yes, Obama became a free agent on Jan. 20, 2017. He's kind of old for the NBA though. 😊 Oh, you mean Ibaka! He has a player option for 2021-22 for $9.7 mill. We're not going to get him or Kawhi except in dreams. Batum is UFA and made $2.56M this season.
LOL yes... Ibaka, stupid autocorrect. So you're saying he could become a free agent if he decides he wants to prioritize championships and that LAC isn't the place to get there.
Move to Seattle
Win or lose I don't think Harris is going anywhere. Players like him are too valuable in today's NBA
Hmm, I definitely see that’s relevant, but it is pretty hard to judge how panicky a team is…
https://twitter.com/drewshiller/status/1397585890696912905?s=21
Bob Myers just now on
@957thegame
said the Warriors had set up for James Wiseman to work out with Kevin Garnett this offseason: "The thing now is you don't want to throw a guy (out there) that's not 100 percent healthy with KG -- or else you're in trouble (laughs)."
At minimum I think the Warriors need to hire some bigman specialist for their coaching staff specifically for coaching up Wiseman.
No offense to Chris DeMarco, but I'd like some specialized coaching oversight for Wiseman.
What's going on with that? I had meniscus surgery and was playing 6 weeks later. Of course, I was not 7 feet tall, but I wasn't 19 either. He should be running and jumping after 3 months, surely......also, even if he can't play, he can be working out, watching film, doing stuff in slow-mo.....
I had one to and it was very minor (especially compared to the cartilage damage). They said after they got in there that Wiseman had the “bad” kind of tear, which has to be repaired on not just shaved, IIRC...and it’s a much longer recovery time.
*one too
That would have been huge for him. Really sucks
Apparently they had him set up with David West too.
DWest and KG are a couple of fantastic models for him to work on specific aspects of his game. Remember that we only got old man DWest, dude was putting up nice offensive numbers for years!
Ughh would have been so helpful. Wiseman needs so much development/reps and he's going to miss an entire offseason after not being able to participate in summer league last year. Not to mention he would get injured whenever we'd have an easy stretch.
Seems like even he couldn't do all the physical stuff, just going through positioning with KG and West in slow motion (not doing anything risky) and talking about how to see what's going on and respond would be great learning experience.
OT from hoopsrumors:
---
After Ben Simmons scored just six points on 3-of-9 shooting in Game 1, Sixers head coach Doc Rivers said he doesn’t understand criticism of the standout guard, who contributed 15 assists and 15 rebounds in the team’s victory. “Only in Philadelphia,” Rivers said, per Rob Maaddi of The Associated Press. “If you guys don’t know the treasure you have by now, then shame on everyone because he’s been fantastic for us. … I’m amazed that people don’t see what he does. We’re so caught up in the amount of points he scored. … Does it matter if Ben had all 125? Would we be mad that Joel (Embiid) didn’t score? Who cares who scores as long as we’re scoring. … When Ben plays, we score more points.”
---
Sound familiar?
Do teams have to guard Simmons? Because that's all anyone wants.
I don’t watch enough 76ers to know how they run it, but with Dray we know that they have to have defense up on him. If not he’s a dribble hand off, or pass and screen, away from the most efficient score in the sport. Philly has enough shooters to make a team pay for not having two defenders involved. Simmons assist numbers suggest he’s pretty damn good at working it out.
They also have other scorers/shooters. Clearly Kerr and Myers agree that Dray needs to look to score more
We have the best and arguably second-best shooter of all-time. While it would be great if Draymond's scoring does improve, this concern goes away next year if Klay is even 75% of his former self.
I don't think it fully goes away but of course it helps
Klay will help when Draymond has the ball in his hands running the system offense in the high post.
Klay will not help much when Draymond is the roll man and the opponent is daring him to try to score on the 4 on 3. Wiseman could help with that if he can improve his hands since he has "vertical gravity" (hopefully his hands are something they can still work on regardless of his knee), but Wiseman still has a long way to go to be someone you can put out there in an important game and can't be counted on for next season.
Draymond's three pointer has always been more of a luxury than a need imo, whereas his ability to run the 4 on 3 repeatedly is a necessity. Although I suppose if he became a good shooter they could find new bread and butter plays, but you can't expect that at this point.
I think Klay helps the 4 on 3 situation... kinda makes it a 3 on 2 situation if his defender can't leave him on the perimeter.
We already saw some of the issues back when we had Curry, Klay, and KD with Dray, particularly when Iguodala was also in a "I don't wanna shoot the ball" funk.
Sure it will help to have Klay back, but it's still an obvious weakness for playoff defenses to target.
Dray’s issues limit what can be done with the 5 spot. Tough on the offense when you have 2 non-shooters on the floor, much less 3 if its Oubre & Looney with Dray. That’s why Wiseman is so tantalizing: he’s got a nice stroke so he compensates fro Dray. Question is does Wiseman give back that advantage on the defensive end? Answer for now is that he does and JW is a net a negative.
I concede to both of you, the concern does not fully go away.
Doesn't it? Does every team have five shooters on the floor at all times? Again, I think the OP is relevant here. Simmons would be an incredible addition to pretty much any team as he is now.
Can we trade Draymond for him?
OT: Anyone see that Clipper defense against Doncic? LD made incredible shots but Leonard/George/Beverley defense my A$$
If Steph saw defense like that he'd score 130 points
Same for Denver vs. Lillard...
Beverley just runs around and hopes he's annoying you enough to take you out of your game
What about Leonard and George? I didn't see much of them checking Doncic, but they're eeennndllesss rants about their defensive prowess
That's on the coaching. When your team allows 50%+ shooting in consecutive playoff games at home with their personnel especially against a pretty average team outside of Doncic your coaching staff is clueless
P.S when I say average I mean a mortal team instead of juggernaut like the 2016-2017 Warriors because that'd be understandable
but then again after last year this team might just be mentally weak
PatBev’s an A+ mean-mugger with the rep of an elite defender, but probably more like a B- In terms of his actual impact on the floor. He’s basically a smaller, less good Alex Caruso. I’m actually much more impressed by Caruso’s defense, from what I’ve seen.
Warriors went after Caruso two years ago I think, but he chose to remain with the Lakers. Would have been nice.
Strange as it feels to root for Harden, I feel the Nets would have a much better shot at beating LeActor in the finals, if it comes to that. I pick the Nets.
I would not be rooting for a team just to beat LeBron in the finals. I don't think he's going to be there, unless he's able to get a ticket.
I hope you're right!
This!
I can't get motivated to pick a favorite in this match but in any case, the Celtics are going to get swept.
And yet, many here want to do a little strip mining and net a mercenary for the Dubs.
They want more than that, they want 4 or 5 star mercenaries that will play for the veteran minimum. Also a pony.
This is a weird series to frame in that manner. Here we have a team who was close to being in the finals multiple times, but hoarded their assets and now despite young talent are barely in the playoffs, playing against the title favorites who went for it all.
I'm not at all sure that I'd rather be the Celtics than the Nets. Their expected titles are almost certainly higher even if Tatum doesn't follow current trends and remains a Celtic for life. There was a time 2-3 years ago where the Celtics core was the envy of the league. But a little bad luck, deciding not to go all in, and they have missed their window.
The envy was always based on the hope on the promise that Tatum and Brown will become superstars, and their other draft picks will pan out. It was always based on hope and optimistic projection. We'll see what the future holds.
It was also based on the hope that they would use all their trade assets and cap room to get a superstar or two to add to Tatum, Brown, and whoever else they kept.
But when the stars they acquired ended up being Kyrie Irving (a terrible fit as a leader of a team) and Gordon Hayward (who had injury woes from literally his first game as a Celtic, plus he was never a true superstar anyway), that plan went sideways. It also didn’t help that many of the supporting pieces (the Roziers and Crowders and such) ended up wanting more than supporting roles (and more s than supporting role money), despite not being good enough to warrant it.
Goes to show how fleeting the championship window can be. Its very difficult for really good teams to take that last step to being champion. Really your stars have to find another gear, a la Steph in 2015, or you have to somehow import a superstar, a la Lebron & KD. Its difficult to add a superstar, because you can only do it when a salary slot opens.
A lot has to do with why you watch. I watch the NBA because basketball at its most beautiful is incredible entertainment, and I watch the Warriors because they exemplify that AND they are the home team. Both of those things contribute to me wanting for them to win championships, but absent the beauty, it’s just rooting for laundry and that’s not nearly as entertaining to me. There is a beauty to KD’s game, and probably Kyrie’s, but you can always tell you are watching a team of mercenaries rather than the product of careful study, patience, buildup and pure love of the game. Yeah, that sounds idyllic and maybe naive, but I’m a poet in my spare time and that’s the kind of thing that appeals to me.
👍🏼
And the Warriors have the opportunity to be a very, VERY home grown team next year with key players Steph, Klay, Dray, Looney, Poole, JTA and Wiseman, along with Lee, Bazemore, Paschall, Mannion and whoever they draft. Chriss would be another guy who’s almost like home grown since he was nearly out of the league at a young age.
Wiggins is the only guy who isn’t home grown, but we was acquired in a trade (so hardly a mercenary) and obviously loves being here and wants to stay.
To my point yesterday fitting into the Kerr system, that “belonging” that they’ve created seems extra important in offense so reliant on unselfish, team-first play.
I mean, in a perfect world, I agree. 2014-2016 may have meant more than the Durant years. But I'd rather be the Raptors with rental Kawhi than the Celtics. And the reason basketball might now be my number one sport is #30. I'll sell my principles to get him more success.
Agree wholeheartedly, GlueandBold. Winning at any cost is hollow. Superteams may dominate, but winning through development is far more rewarding. Regardless of how the team is reconstituted next year, the growth and development of players will be the story that is entertaining, and part of the reason to watch. Of course, as long as Steph Curry is a Warrior, the Dubs will be must-watch TV, because what he does is way beyond normal.
Yeah no. Winning is winning.
>Celtics fans talk a lot about their many championships, omitting the fact that they’ve won 1 championship since 1986, and most of the previous ones came from Red Auerbach ripping off other hobbyist owners when the league was eight teams that could barely get a highlight on TV.
Kinda makes the point on the last thread of how hard it is to be a modern dynasty in American pro sports...