As a longtime Blazers fan and a relatively short-time Warriors fan (2012), the only draft rule I know is: Thou Shalt Not draft an oft-injured big man who has never demonstrated a season's worth of effectiveness at the college level. That is the only draft rule I know.
The Bucky Buckwalter (actual name of Portland's GM) Award winners have broken this rule to draft Sam Bowie, Greg Oden, and James Wiseman, passing on Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Kevin Durant, Al Horford, Mike Conley, and - perspective! - LaMelo Ball, along with Tyreses Haliburton and Maxey.
The Denver Nuggets defied the basketball gods to draft Michael Porter, Jr, and have escaped the wrath of the basketball gods by reason of their ongoing confusion over which Porter, Jr to punish.
Well.... Wiseman wasn't oft-injured until after we drafted him. But he certainly qualifies with respect to never demonstrating a season's worth of effectiveness in college. I would note that a few players who became superstars were drafted straight out of HS, including Kobe, LeBron, and Moses Malone. But those are outliers.
But he was, which was why we didn't even get to see him in preseason games before the NCAA suspension business... Certainly college is not a requirement for NBA level success, even for Blazers big men - Jermaine O'Neal was clearly on the rise before being traded and having All Star seasons in Indiana - but not having a previous year of demonstrated excellence picking on people their own size seems to be a giant red flag for bigs, specifically.
I just checked, too, and they were admittedly not as serious as my remembrance was - the sad thing is, without the NCAA suspension, he would have had a year of playing against Division 1 opponents (no, South Carolina State does Not count), and would have either played his way out of being a consensus top 3 pick, or honed his skills to the point of being ready for the NBA.
It's hard for my thoughts to linger on about something I had 0% control over... I'm not working in the Dubs FO nor have any insight whatsoever into the daily workings of the team so there is nothing for me to regret. Clearly Haliburton would be great on this team. But he's not, so life goes on.
I feel there's so much that has to go right for a team to be consistently successful. Whether it's the draft or other aspects of the NBA, so much of it is just dumb luck. We could just as easily choose to regret the bad choices as we could choose to appreciate all the luck that bounced our way.
An obvious one: two PGs drafted before Steph.
If DLee doesn't get a bitten on the elbow by a zombie, does Dray's development -- and the start of dynasty -- get stunted or pushed back?
If Bogut doesn't suffer a freak accident with his elbow, does the all-star, #1 pick ever get traded to the Dubs?
Similar thing with Livingston.
If an unhappy KD and the new TV deal didn't line up exactly as it did, KD doesn't happen.
If Shaqtin doesn't bully JaVale, he wouldn't need us to revive his career.
OT (and apologies if this was already discussed) but can someone explain why the L2M report says that OKC took more than 5-secs to inbound the ball at the end of regulation but then lists it as a Correct Non-call?
Unless the league just doesn't want to take the heat for something that potentially took the win from us (though most of the loss can be attributed to our own faults).
Some thoughts about Wiseman and the draft in general:
I was very high on Wiseman going into the draft. In my defense, I was much less knowledgeable as a basketball fan three years ago - the Wiseman appeal was basically "Curry gravity, big tall guy open, dunk basketball" - and my main concern was that the Wolves were going to snatch him away with the first pick. I was really pumped up to watch him play with the OGs, and it took a long period of denial before I could admit that he just doesn't seem that talented of a basketball player. A lot of the things that make me (a casual pickup game athlete) bad at sports also seemed to haunt JW: bad hands, slow to process the game, in the wrong place at the wrong time, etc. Every time he did something that reminded me of a bone-headed thing I might do, I got a little more worried.
Anyway, he didn't pan out. And I spent a while justifying the Warriors process: COVID draft, they swung for the fences, they drafted for positional need, etc. I think these justifications are not unreasonable, but they aren't my big take-away from 2020 or even 2021.
Looking back at the NBA Draft results, it feels like the Warriors have been about as good or as bad as a lot of other NBA teams - but they've had the good drafts and good luck concentrated into this small set of drafts in such a way that they were able to build a dynasty and win a bunch of rings. All the lottery picks this millennium pre-Curry (other than Jason Richardson) were pretty lame, the sort of picks that should get your GM fired over and over again. Then came the Curry/Thompson/Green/Barnes selections which happened to overlap just perfectly, the sort of thing that happens to about one team per decade probably (it seems to be happening right now in OKC, although they still have to prove their dominance over the next few seasons). Since then the drafts have produced some duds and some useful players, but no stars, just enough to keep the Dubs competitive. My sense is that these are the results that a lot of GMs get, but not bunched in such a way (or without someone as transcendent as Steph) to win a championship or four. So in that sense we got lucky. Quite lucky. But we also got an inflated sense of what we could hope for in the draft, and so the misses over the past few seasons (even though some of the guys we got are quite decent) hurt that much more. It's Lacob's fault, really, all this lightyears bullshit, but irrational optimism is not terribly surprising coming from a tech bro. Just glad that the Dubs have been relevant and spectacular for so much of my adult life - as a kid watching Erick Dampier I never would have expected anything like this.
The OKC thing is just a record number of lottery picks all within 2-3 years, and trading for Shai, isn't it?
Picking a ton of first round picks for multiple years is going to lead to some hits for anyone, I would think.
Edit: I guess it's not as bad as I thought, they only had four picks in 2022 and 2021, most in the first round, but only one in the top 5. That's not as extreme a gaming of the system as I'd thought it was based on all the raving about how many picks the thunder have compared to the rest of the league.
True, but they've had some impressive hits lately. Although I was under the impression that they drafted Isaiah Joe and discovered that they did not. So not quite as impressive as I thought.
Yeah, the other challenge OKC has is trying to pay all your good players with the new rules. Great that you picked 3 all stars, now, you can only pay two of them. And, their ownership had already shown how they handle that a decade ago
Yeah, that's part of the incredible luck that the Warriors had with Curry. Bad ankles, cheap contract, then magically intact ankles to lead them to championships.
Every year as we know the Warriors basically have two seasons: coming up to the in-season tournament and post in-season tournament, when they typically get mad and really get going. Let's hope they can now once again make the shift from CIST to PIST
Whenever I wonder why I spend so much time on this site, I am comforted with the comments made in the summer of 2020 by our fellow friends. You guys were pretty damn spot on with your draft assessments. Having Hali as our top choice, seeing value in certain role players (Isaiah Joe) and concerns with others (cough Wiseman cough). There is a ton of insight and basketball IQ here. It just kills me when I think about Halliburton and what could have been. So many others like Goofus, Prime Looney, etc felt similarly. We have been so fortunate with draft luck, I try not to get too down when we miss, but man that one hurt.
Having said that, this is my own comment made on October 16th 2020:
Five Alarm Freddy
Oct 16, 2020
Liked by Daniel Hardee
Just draft Haliburton at 2 and be done with it. The guy is the best fit for this team on and off the court.
I am just terrified of trading back and having someone else swoop in and pick him. I see brilliance in him. I would love to get extra picks/assets, but I am not sure what we would get back would be worth it. Then again, I am not much of a risk taker. Tepid bath water flows in my veins...
Watching Seadubs get bullied by SLC, some observations: Kendric Davis is lightning quick, good vision, passing, finishing. Jerome Robinson is not good, does not have a reliable shot from anywhere, passes too soft, is ineffective on D, shoots far too often for his skill level; I don't understand why he gets minutes. Seadubs cannot deal with size and seem to continually try the same thing that didn't work last time, i.e. passing into length and driving into height, turning it over; it's baffling, and bad prep for the big team. Garuba is... oddly effective; he's not fast, doesn't shoot much, is easy not to notice, but contributes; the Loon comps sort of check out.
Since Apricot likes to do all the research I am too lazy to do myself, I pose you this:
When is the last time and/or how many hyper athletic prospects with little experience/BBIQ have actually panned out in the last decade? (Let's keep it as lotto picks only for the Wiseman comparison to be more fitting)
Does Andrew Wiggins count? First overall pick in the 2014 NBA draft by the Cleveland Cavaliers after one year of college basketball with the Kansas Jayhawks
OT: WNBA draft lottery in fifteen minutes. Winner almost certainly gets Caitlin Clark (though I guess we should all be hoping she stays in school and ends up with Golden State).
It's a really compelling lottery this year, with Paige Bueckers and Steph Curry's 'god-sister' (ie. Sonya's god-daughter), Cameron Brink.
I don’t think any of the parties would ever share, but I’ve always wondered how much Lacob influenced Bob’s decision that year. Would he have been more inclined to take a lesser package to trade down for high floor /low ceiling Hali if Lacob hadn’t been pushing Bob to find the next superstar?
This is exactly my question. It's regrettable no matter what, just based on how it turned out, but the version I think would be really condemnable is the one where either Lacob, and/or internet scouting consensus, wielded excessive influence. As you say, we'll likely never know.
I recall the scene (which is featured in that Google Cloud ad) was longer and unedited and the room did not appear all that enthused (apart from Joey Light-year).
Didn't even realize the IST final was yesterday. I'm not sure but I bet the IST was a relative flop overall and the only ones that cared don't need extra bball to watch the nba
I understand ratings were way up for both play-in tourney and knock out rounds. Keep in mind, this is the time of year when only die hards watch much NBA, so they were starting with a low bar, but they seemed to have succeeded in creating more interest. Also, the players were waaaaaaaaay more into it than most people expected, so that helped.
This ^. The IST didn't have to be some grand tournament with all eyes watching... it just needed to generate more interest than game ~20 of the NBA regular season.
OT SORT OF. So watching our 57? Pick TJ D decorate the bench so far, reminds me of PBJ last year. Except TJ D had a very good college career and brings a very specific skill set. Nevertheless, he is joining Wiseman (ex officio, expired) as part of the cheering section for the squad, when he is not trundling down to Santa Cruz. Admittedly Moody and Kuminga also spent a good part of their first year as bench groupies and Santa Cruz recruits.
My honest question is: does TJ D’s game have some major flaws other than missing an outside shot? If so, what are they? Can he not defend the rim? Are there things that the staff recognizes that we (I) cannot see when he plays his very short stints on the floor? Is he somehow in the doghouse?
In a way, the answer is yes from Kerr's POV. He obviously doesn't see much upside for the team playing him. I don't see any resemblance to PBJ. TJD has a higher floor than PBJ. I would also like to see him get more playing time but I have no avenue into Kerr's brain. I see no downside to using both TJD and Saric, separately or together. He needs to get more creative(kerr).
To me, the issue is simply that the roster has too many capable players. Leer’s been pretty adamant that it’s hard to play more than 10 players in a rotation, and we seem to have 13 players who deserve time (I’m counting TJD as in, and CoJo as out). If you’re looking at the center position, 20 min Saric, 20 min looney, 8 min Draymond covers the whole game.
That being said, I think Loon and CP3 are a particularly bad combo (CP3 needs a roll threat), and Loon + Draymond pose spacing challenges as well. So I would understand playing TJD more with CP3, but I think TJD is mostly “in case of injury” at this point. He’s a fantastic 12th/13th man, and hopefully can keep getting better.
I think the problem is Kerr has Steph playing at A level, Dray and CP3 playing at B+ level when available and then 10 guys playing around a B- level. Every one has an argument that they’ll play better with more time (vets need time to come around to track record, youngs need time to get reps to grow), and by the end of the season you need 5 guys playing at an A level to go far in the playoffs.
It’s a damned hard decision and the lineup is crying out for some kind of consolidation, trading multiple players for at least one A level player. But that’s the kind of trade most other teams don’t want to make.
Different skill sets. Dario is probably ahead in offense, TJD is ahead on defense. If this is true, wouldn't you expect TJD to be inserted into the line-up when the backcourt keeps getting beat (example: the Sacramento game) to protect the rim?
Dario's combination of size, shooting and passing is really important on offense.
And, if the defense is that bad, it's not like Loon and Dray are playing a ton of minutes. You could bump either guy up 5 minutes when needed, and it wouldn't really be an issue. I think that is essentially what is happening ... when we need more on defense, Dray's in there a little bit more. Otherwise, the default is Dario.
> I think that is essentially what is happening ... when we need more on defense, Dray's in there a little bit more.
I agree with you that that is what is happening. My point is that it is bad for the team. You risk getting to the playoffs and you 1)have overplayed Dray and 2)you haven't solidified TJD to at least provide spot minutes in the playoffs. In short, Dario is not why TJD is not playing. Kerr is deciding to overwork the OGs instead of trust a young player, and the team gets all the benefits AND COSTS of his failure to trust. Those costs will be paid in a more worn out Dray in May.
Draymond is playing substantially less this year even when he's not costing us games with his shit. I hope Kerr doesn't lean on him too much, but so far he hasn't.
First I ever heard that "vets need time to come around to track record" and I absolutely do not buy it. I can see "time to get in shape." I can see maybe 3 games (which is usually about a week) to get their legs under them. I do NOT see spending 1/4 of the season getting back "to track record."
In the Dubs case, there are very good reasons to doubt Klay will ever be able to defend guards at the level needed again. A smart coach re-sets the game plan given this obvious knowledge. And there are very good reasons to believe Wigs has reverted to his career norm of unreliability after a few stellar years proving something in GS. Waiting for those two players to get back "to track record" is a waste of time because Wigs is already back to track record--his career track record--and Klay is at the best track record he will have going forward because Father Time and injury are collaborating to reset his norm. A team player would realize this and voluntarily take a step back and concentrate their minutes in a way to contribute to winning, while nurturing the young guns. Barring that, in such cases a good coach realizes what has happened, eases Wigs and Klay into lower minutes but high-likelihood of success situations to maintain their egos while replacing them with younger, hungrier, high-upside players if such are available. This is definitely not a hard decision. It is only made hard because the coach is invested in Klay, in Wigs to a lesser extent, and is putting those feelings above the team.
Kerr has said he wants Klay to defend 4s more. He plainly knows Klay isn't as quick as he once was. But nowadays everybody switches a lot so it's more difficult.
I’ve been hard on Klay, but if he reverts back to 22 points per game on 58TS% and the starting 5 revert back to the best net rating in the league, that’s pretty valuable.
Kerr’s been sticking his neck out for one of the three guys that “made his career” as he put it. We’ll see how long he continues to do so. He’s had a shorter leash with Wiggins.
Which is weird. Wiggins is pretty young and likely to return to normal form while Klay is the one possibly over the hill (though I'm not convinced yet because the main skill of his that has been suffering is the one skill that supposedly last the longest).
Dispassionately, it might be weird, but like I said, Kerr likely feels he owes the big 3 every possible benefit of the doubt because they made my career”. It’s a lot harder when you’ve been with these guys as people/friends for 10+ years and now reducing his minutes or role potentially takes money out of his pocket.
He moved JMG out of the rotation last year. If you don't perform, Kerr will give you a lot of time to figure it out, but if not, other than the OG, you'll eventually get your minutes cut.
The question I'm thinking right now is: if the Warriors did draft Haliburton, would he have gotten the same amount of playing time that he got when he was with the Kings and the Pacers? My faith in Kerr's handling of the young Dubs is shaky.
Wiseman played 21 minutes per game despite sucking, Brandin Podziemski is getting 19 minutes this year, as a rookie, on a (supposed) contender due to his hustle and bbiq (traits shared by Tyrese). This would have been 20/21 when Klay was out and we were coming off of a 15-50 season. Nico Mannion and Wanamaker alone got 989 minutes that would go straight to Tyrese, another 766 from Mychal Mulder, and you're already at 1755 (Tyrese got 1746 in his rookie year). Then there's another 988 minutes from Jordan Poole that you have to imagine were up for grabs that year, and a ton of shooting guard minutes that went to Damion Lee, JTA, Kent Bazemore, and Oubre. There was no shortage of guard minutes to go around that season.
If the Warriors drafted Haliburton over Wiseman they would have won 60 games and the title his rookie year because they would have gone after a serviceable big instead of a flashy wing. You can look at the record when Wise and Oubre didn’t play.
Giannis then wouldn’t have a title, he wouldn’t have resigned with the Bucks and the whole league would look different.
The Warriors go back to back have more leverage with Klay who then figures out the best new version of himself and Curry is the MVP last year over Embiid when people suffer from Joker voting fatigue.
He almost certainly would not have gotten the same amount of playing time (which has been 30-35 min a game every year). But part of that is just the nature of the team you are on and it's other players.
I think a valid question is, if he played 20 min a game like Wiseman, how much slower would his development be? Of course you can't really know. I think part of why the Haliburton "miss" is so frustrating though is that even if he didn't develop quickly, he was already at a "very good" level the minute he played his first game. Now he has evolved into superstar status, and maybe that would have taken a little longer with the Warriors. But he would have been a positive player from the get-go.
He's a Kerr player through and through: team first, smart, big for a guard, so probably decent on defense (I don't know either way)
He would have been getting regular minutes halfway through his first season would be my guess. As many as the Pacers? Maybe not for a little while, but he'd have been getting them by now (3+ years into his career).
Don't forget this was 20/21, so he would have taken the juicier and more available Wanamaker/Mannion/Mulder minutes with some Poole/Lee/Bazmore minutes for dessert.
Well, off the bat I'll say no he likely does not get 30+mpg on the Warriors, but I do think he plays regularly and does not just ride pine. He feels like a Kerr guy and there's a reason so many here were high on him.
In 2020 Haliburton's backup PG competition is Brad Wanamaker and Nico Manion. Kerr had no interest in playing Poole backup PG until Wanamaker's poor play forced his hand. However, in this scenario, those minutes go to Haliburton and not Poole.
Hmm, since we are what-if-ing, does drafting TH mean that Poole doesn't get minutes and never has a chance to have that insane run during the playoffs, and the Dubs lose to Denver or to Boston? Maybe drafting JW over TH was necessary to getting the OGs that fourth ring. If that was the case, was it worth it? A definite fourth 'ship vs. a better chance, but not guaranteed, at getting one more during Steph's window and having TH for the future.
Poole wasn't very effective against Boston and Kerr didn't play him that much. Only played 14 and 18 minutes, respectively, in Games 5 and 6, and never in the series played more than 25 minutes
We’d have to have Dr. Strange run all the possibilities, but I think in most cases, having Hali over JW would not cost the Dubs the 4th ring. Hali >Poole by pretty much every measure.
Maybe. Depends on if they trade down and get a vet that would push him further down the pecking order.
I think that even your note aligns with the BIG POINT: The Hali we see now is not the Hali we would have had if he had come to the Dubs. Thus, the Dubs would not have reaped the benefits SacTown and Indiana got and are getting.
As a longtime Blazers fan and a relatively short-time Warriors fan (2012), the only draft rule I know is: Thou Shalt Not draft an oft-injured big man who has never demonstrated a season's worth of effectiveness at the college level. That is the only draft rule I know.
The Bucky Buckwalter (actual name of Portland's GM) Award winners have broken this rule to draft Sam Bowie, Greg Oden, and James Wiseman, passing on Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Kevin Durant, Al Horford, Mike Conley, and - perspective! - LaMelo Ball, along with Tyreses Haliburton and Maxey.
The Denver Nuggets defied the basketball gods to draft Michael Porter, Jr, and have escaped the wrath of the basketball gods by reason of their ongoing confusion over which Porter, Jr to punish.
More hype should have been granted this line:
"ongoing confusion over which Porter, Jr to punish. "
Wish I'd written it
Well.... Wiseman wasn't oft-injured until after we drafted him. But he certainly qualifies with respect to never demonstrating a season's worth of effectiveness in college. I would note that a few players who became superstars were drafted straight out of HS, including Kobe, LeBron, and Moses Malone. But those are outliers.
But he was, which was why we didn't even get to see him in preseason games before the NCAA suspension business... Certainly college is not a requirement for NBA level success, even for Blazers big men - Jermaine O'Neal was clearly on the rise before being traded and having All Star seasons in Indiana - but not having a previous year of demonstrated excellence picking on people their own size seems to be a giant red flag for bigs, specifically.
Yeah I checked and you are right, he did have a couple of injuries in college, though not serious ones.
I just checked, too, and they were admittedly not as serious as my remembrance was - the sad thing is, without the NCAA suspension, he would have had a year of playing against Division 1 opponents (no, South Carolina State does Not count), and would have either played his way out of being a consensus top 3 pick, or honed his skills to the point of being ready for the NBA.
It's hard for my thoughts to linger on about something I had 0% control over... I'm not working in the Dubs FO nor have any insight whatsoever into the daily workings of the team so there is nothing for me to regret. Clearly Haliburton would be great on this team. But he's not, so life goes on.
I feel there's so much that has to go right for a team to be consistently successful. Whether it's the draft or other aspects of the NBA, so much of it is just dumb luck. We could just as easily choose to regret the bad choices as we could choose to appreciate all the luck that bounced our way.
An obvious one: two PGs drafted before Steph.
If DLee doesn't get a bitten on the elbow by a zombie, does Dray's development -- and the start of dynasty -- get stunted or pushed back?
If Bogut doesn't suffer a freak accident with his elbow, does the all-star, #1 pick ever get traded to the Dubs?
Similar thing with Livingston.
If an unhappy KD and the new TV deal didn't line up exactly as it did, KD doesn't happen.
If Shaqtin doesn't bully JaVale, he wouldn't need us to revive his career.
If Van Gundy was hired over Kerr?
The list goes on...
I approve of Michelle Beadle's take on the IST.
https://twitter.com/MichelleDBeadle/status/1733699641617854681
😊
OT (and apologies if this was already discussed) but can someone explain why the L2M report says that OKC took more than 5-secs to inbound the ball at the end of regulation but then lists it as a Correct Non-call?
https://official.nba.com/l2m/L2MReport.html?gameId=0022301222
It makes no sense 😒. . .
Unless the league just doesn't want to take the heat for something that potentially took the win from us (though most of the loss can be attributed to our own faults).
That is confusing…
Some thoughts about Wiseman and the draft in general:
I was very high on Wiseman going into the draft. In my defense, I was much less knowledgeable as a basketball fan three years ago - the Wiseman appeal was basically "Curry gravity, big tall guy open, dunk basketball" - and my main concern was that the Wolves were going to snatch him away with the first pick. I was really pumped up to watch him play with the OGs, and it took a long period of denial before I could admit that he just doesn't seem that talented of a basketball player. A lot of the things that make me (a casual pickup game athlete) bad at sports also seemed to haunt JW: bad hands, slow to process the game, in the wrong place at the wrong time, etc. Every time he did something that reminded me of a bone-headed thing I might do, I got a little more worried.
Anyway, he didn't pan out. And I spent a while justifying the Warriors process: COVID draft, they swung for the fences, they drafted for positional need, etc. I think these justifications are not unreasonable, but they aren't my big take-away from 2020 or even 2021.
Looking back at the NBA Draft results, it feels like the Warriors have been about as good or as bad as a lot of other NBA teams - but they've had the good drafts and good luck concentrated into this small set of drafts in such a way that they were able to build a dynasty and win a bunch of rings. All the lottery picks this millennium pre-Curry (other than Jason Richardson) were pretty lame, the sort of picks that should get your GM fired over and over again. Then came the Curry/Thompson/Green/Barnes selections which happened to overlap just perfectly, the sort of thing that happens to about one team per decade probably (it seems to be happening right now in OKC, although they still have to prove their dominance over the next few seasons). Since then the drafts have produced some duds and some useful players, but no stars, just enough to keep the Dubs competitive. My sense is that these are the results that a lot of GMs get, but not bunched in such a way (or without someone as transcendent as Steph) to win a championship or four. So in that sense we got lucky. Quite lucky. But we also got an inflated sense of what we could hope for in the draft, and so the misses over the past few seasons (even though some of the guys we got are quite decent) hurt that much more. It's Lacob's fault, really, all this lightyears bullshit, but irrational optimism is not terribly surprising coming from a tech bro. Just glad that the Dubs have been relevant and spectacular for so much of my adult life - as a kid watching Erick Dampier I never would have expected anything like this.
The OKC thing is just a record number of lottery picks all within 2-3 years, and trading for Shai, isn't it?
Picking a ton of first round picks for multiple years is going to lead to some hits for anyone, I would think.
Edit: I guess it's not as bad as I thought, they only had four picks in 2022 and 2021, most in the first round, but only one in the top 5. That's not as extreme a gaming of the system as I'd thought it was based on all the raving about how many picks the thunder have compared to the rest of the league.
Durant Westbrook Harden was also a good Sonics OKC bunch.
True, but they've had some impressive hits lately. Although I was under the impression that they drafted Isaiah Joe and discovered that they did not. So not quite as impressive as I thought.
Yeah, the other challenge OKC has is trying to pay all your good players with the new rules. Great that you picked 3 all stars, now, you can only pay two of them. And, their ownership had already shown how they handle that a decade ago
Yeah, that's part of the incredible luck that the Warriors had with Curry. Bad ankles, cheap contract, then magically intact ankles to lead them to championships.
Every year as we know the Warriors basically have two seasons: coming up to the in-season tournament and post in-season tournament, when they typically get mad and really get going. Let's hope they can now once again make the shift from CIST to PIST
https://twitter.com/ronkroichick/status/1733969578966049013
GP2 on the stationary bike. He'll be reevaluated later this week. Still think he's a few weeks away.
That's so much better than initially feared though
CNN Shams only cared about first reporting, not accuracy there.
Whenever I wonder why I spend so much time on this site, I am comforted with the comments made in the summer of 2020 by our fellow friends. You guys were pretty damn spot on with your draft assessments. Having Hali as our top choice, seeing value in certain role players (Isaiah Joe) and concerns with others (cough Wiseman cough). There is a ton of insight and basketball IQ here. It just kills me when I think about Halliburton and what could have been. So many others like Goofus, Prime Looney, etc felt similarly. We have been so fortunate with draft luck, I try not to get too down when we miss, but man that one hurt.
Having said that, this is my own comment made on October 16th 2020:
Five Alarm Freddy
Oct 16, 2020
Liked by Daniel Hardee
Just draft Haliburton at 2 and be done with it. The guy is the best fit for this team on and off the court.
I am just terrified of trading back and having someone else swoop in and pick him. I see brilliance in him. I would love to get extra picks/assets, but I am not sure what we would get back would be worth it. Then again, I am not much of a risk taker. Tepid bath water flows in my veins...
Watching Seadubs get bullied by SLC, some observations: Kendric Davis is lightning quick, good vision, passing, finishing. Jerome Robinson is not good, does not have a reliable shot from anywhere, passes too soft, is ineffective on D, shoots far too often for his skill level; I don't understand why he gets minutes. Seadubs cannot deal with size and seem to continually try the same thing that didn't work last time, i.e. passing into length and driving into height, turning it over; it's baffling, and bad prep for the big team. Garuba is... oddly effective; he's not fast, doesn't shoot much, is easy not to notice, but contributes; the Loon comps sort of check out.
so "cannot deal with size" seems like the Kerr senior playbook being followed by junior Kerr playbook!
Whatever the Dubs see in Jerome Robinson escapes me.
Actually, sounds like perfect prep for the big team, unfortunately.
Since Apricot likes to do all the research I am too lazy to do myself, I pose you this:
When is the last time and/or how many hyper athletic prospects with little experience/BBIQ have actually panned out in the last decade? (Let's keep it as lotto picks only for the Wiseman comparison to be more fitting)
Does Andrew Wiggins count? First overall pick in the 2014 NBA draft by the Cleveland Cavaliers after one year of college basketball with the Kansas Jayhawks
Jaylen Brown, maybe Shaedon Sharpe. It's not a long list.
Off the top of my head, the #1 pick of that draft: Anthony Edwards.
OT: WNBA draft lottery in fifteen minutes. Winner almost certainly gets Caitlin Clark (though I guess we should all be hoping she stays in school and ends up with Golden State).
It's a really compelling lottery this year, with Paige Bueckers and Steph Curry's 'god-sister' (ie. Sonya's god-daughter), Cameron Brink.
I don’t think any of the parties would ever share, but I’ve always wondered how much Lacob influenced Bob’s decision that year. Would he have been more inclined to take a lesser package to trade down for high floor /low ceiling Hali if Lacob hadn’t been pushing Bob to find the next superstar?
This is exactly my question. It's regrettable no matter what, just based on how it turned out, but the version I think would be really condemnable is the one where either Lacob, and/or internet scouting consensus, wielded excessive influence. As you say, we'll likely never know.
There's that video floating around of the FO watching the Wiseman trade confirmed. Seemed like only Lacob looked excited (if anyone can find it)
maybe this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry0Nvclpbc4
I recall the scene (which is featured in that Google Cloud ad) was longer and unedited and the room did not appear all that enthused (apart from Joey Light-year).
Trade? Pick?
Sorry, Pick!
Didn't even realize the IST final was yesterday. I'm not sure but I bet the IST was a relative flop overall and the only ones that cared don't need extra bball to watch the nba
I understand ratings were way up for both play-in tourney and knock out rounds. Keep in mind, this is the time of year when only die hards watch much NBA, so they were starting with a low bar, but they seemed to have succeeded in creating more interest. Also, the players were waaaaaaaaay more into it than most people expected, so that helped.
This ^. The IST didn't have to be some grand tournament with all eyes watching... it just needed to generate more interest than game ~20 of the NBA regular season.
The players can all thank Lebron for pushing hard for this tournament. He helped put extra dollars in their pockets and lit a fire.
OT SORT OF. So watching our 57? Pick TJ D decorate the bench so far, reminds me of PBJ last year. Except TJ D had a very good college career and brings a very specific skill set. Nevertheless, he is joining Wiseman (ex officio, expired) as part of the cheering section for the squad, when he is not trundling down to Santa Cruz. Admittedly Moody and Kuminga also spent a good part of their first year as bench groupies and Santa Cruz recruits.
My honest question is: does TJ D’s game have some major flaws other than missing an outside shot? If so, what are they? Can he not defend the rim? Are there things that the staff recognizes that we (I) cannot see when he plays his very short stints on the floor? Is he somehow in the doghouse?
Who would you have him take minutes from?
Is primary goal to get the erstwhile +/- king starting lineup to be it's peak self or try out rookies?
PS: That lineup was positive for a change last game in 16 min - may be because they didn't close - but still positive.
In a way, the answer is yes from Kerr's POV. He obviously doesn't see much upside for the team playing him. I don't see any resemblance to PBJ. TJD has a higher floor than PBJ. I would also like to see him get more playing time but I have no avenue into Kerr's brain. I see no downside to using both TJD and Saric, separately or together. He needs to get more creative(kerr).
To me, the issue is simply that the roster has too many capable players. Leer’s been pretty adamant that it’s hard to play more than 10 players in a rotation, and we seem to have 13 players who deserve time (I’m counting TJD as in, and CoJo as out). If you’re looking at the center position, 20 min Saric, 20 min looney, 8 min Draymond covers the whole game.
That being said, I think Loon and CP3 are a particularly bad combo (CP3 needs a roll threat), and Loon + Draymond pose spacing challenges as well. So I would understand playing TJD more with CP3, but I think TJD is mostly “in case of injury” at this point. He’s a fantastic 12th/13th man, and hopefully can keep getting better.
I think the problem is Kerr has Steph playing at A level, Dray and CP3 playing at B+ level when available and then 10 guys playing around a B- level. Every one has an argument that they’ll play better with more time (vets need time to come around to track record, youngs need time to get reps to grow), and by the end of the season you need 5 guys playing at an A level to go far in the playoffs.
It’s a damned hard decision and the lineup is crying out for some kind of consolidation, trading multiple players for at least one A level player. But that’s the kind of trade most other teams don’t want to make.
B- is pretty kind to Wiggins, but if we're weighting his more recent efforts more in the grade book, then I'm all for it.
Yeah, Curry A+, Draymond A-, Dario/CP3,Looney,Moody B+, Brandin/Gary B, Trayce/Klay/Kuminga C, ehhrmm... etc.
I'd say Dario has been well more than a B- player. And that's who TJD is fighting for minutes with.
Use them ensemble.
Different skill sets. Dario is probably ahead in offense, TJD is ahead on defense. If this is true, wouldn't you expect TJD to be inserted into the line-up when the backcourt keeps getting beat (example: the Sacramento game) to protect the rim?
Not really, no.
Dario's combination of size, shooting and passing is really important on offense.
And, if the defense is that bad, it's not like Loon and Dray are playing a ton of minutes. You could bump either guy up 5 minutes when needed, and it wouldn't really be an issue. I think that is essentially what is happening ... when we need more on defense, Dray's in there a little bit more. Otherwise, the default is Dario.
> I think that is essentially what is happening ... when we need more on defense, Dray's in there a little bit more.
I agree with you that that is what is happening. My point is that it is bad for the team. You risk getting to the playoffs and you 1)have overplayed Dray and 2)you haven't solidified TJD to at least provide spot minutes in the playoffs. In short, Dario is not why TJD is not playing. Kerr is deciding to overwork the OGs instead of trust a young player, and the team gets all the benefits AND COSTS of his failure to trust. Those costs will be paid in a more worn out Dray in May.
Draymond is playing substantially less this year even when he's not costing us games with his shit. I hope Kerr doesn't lean on him too much, but so far he hasn't.
First I ever heard that "vets need time to come around to track record" and I absolutely do not buy it. I can see "time to get in shape." I can see maybe 3 games (which is usually about a week) to get their legs under them. I do NOT see spending 1/4 of the season getting back "to track record."
In the Dubs case, there are very good reasons to doubt Klay will ever be able to defend guards at the level needed again. A smart coach re-sets the game plan given this obvious knowledge. And there are very good reasons to believe Wigs has reverted to his career norm of unreliability after a few stellar years proving something in GS. Waiting for those two players to get back "to track record" is a waste of time because Wigs is already back to track record--his career track record--and Klay is at the best track record he will have going forward because Father Time and injury are collaborating to reset his norm. A team player would realize this and voluntarily take a step back and concentrate their minutes in a way to contribute to winning, while nurturing the young guns. Barring that, in such cases a good coach realizes what has happened, eases Wigs and Klay into lower minutes but high-likelihood of success situations to maintain their egos while replacing them with younger, hungrier, high-upside players if such are available. This is definitely not a hard decision. It is only made hard because the coach is invested in Klay, in Wigs to a lesser extent, and is putting those feelings above the team.
Kerr has said he wants Klay to defend 4s more. He plainly knows Klay isn't as quick as he once was. But nowadays everybody switches a lot so it's more difficult.
I’ve been hard on Klay, but if he reverts back to 22 points per game on 58TS% and the starting 5 revert back to the best net rating in the league, that’s pretty valuable.
Kerr’s been sticking his neck out for one of the three guys that “made his career” as he put it. We’ll see how long he continues to do so. He’s had a shorter leash with Wiggins.
Which is weird. Wiggins is pretty young and likely to return to normal form while Klay is the one possibly over the hill (though I'm not convinced yet because the main skill of his that has been suffering is the one skill that supposedly last the longest).
Klay is a headcase, not that Wiggins is not. Klay suffers more. Wiggs flows with it all. I'd like to see both gone in the not too distant future.
Dispassionately, it might be weird, but like I said, Kerr likely feels he owes the big 3 every possible benefit of the doubt because they made my career”. It’s a lot harder when you’ve been with these guys as people/friends for 10+ years and now reducing his minutes or role potentially takes money out of his pocket.
Even if loon is on one leg, he will play over TJD - from the top 15 all time coaching book of Kerr
I think it is simply that Kerr is going to play Loon, Saric, and Dray first, and it doesn't leave any minutes for him.
Related note - Sea Dubs are on in 20 minutes if you want to watch a Coach Kerr play lots of young guys
He moved JMG out of the rotation last year. If you don't perform, Kerr will give you a lot of time to figure it out, but if not, other than the OG, you'll eventually get your minutes cut.
Me upon seeing the link headline to this post:
https://media.tenor.com/xZRydwTh5dwAAAAM/birdman-hand-rub.gif
🤣
The question I'm thinking right now is: if the Warriors did draft Haliburton, would he have gotten the same amount of playing time that he got when he was with the Kings and the Pacers? My faith in Kerr's handling of the young Dubs is shaky.
Wiseman played 21 minutes per game despite sucking, Brandin Podziemski is getting 19 minutes this year, as a rookie, on a (supposed) contender due to his hustle and bbiq (traits shared by Tyrese). This would have been 20/21 when Klay was out and we were coming off of a 15-50 season. Nico Mannion and Wanamaker alone got 989 minutes that would go straight to Tyrese, another 766 from Mychal Mulder, and you're already at 1755 (Tyrese got 1746 in his rookie year). Then there's another 988 minutes from Jordan Poole that you have to imagine were up for grabs that year, and a ton of shooting guard minutes that went to Damion Lee, JTA, Kent Bazemore, and Oubre. There was no shortage of guard minutes to go around that season.
If the Warriors drafted Haliburton over Wiseman they would have won 60 games and the title his rookie year because they would have gone after a serviceable big instead of a flashy wing. You can look at the record when Wise and Oubre didn’t play.
Giannis then wouldn’t have a title, he wouldn’t have resigned with the Bucks and the whole league would look different.
The Warriors go back to back have more leverage with Klay who then figures out the best new version of himself and Curry is the MVP last year over Embiid when people suffer from Joker voting fatigue.
Yes Joe could have had it all.
He almost certainly would not have gotten the same amount of playing time (which has been 30-35 min a game every year). But part of that is just the nature of the team you are on and it's other players.
I think a valid question is, if he played 20 min a game like Wiseman, how much slower would his development be? Of course you can't really know. I think part of why the Haliburton "miss" is so frustrating though is that even if he didn't develop quickly, he was already at a "very good" level the minute he played his first game. Now he has evolved into superstar status, and maybe that would have taken a little longer with the Warriors. But he would have been a positive player from the get-go.
He's a Kerr player through and through: team first, smart, big for a guard, so probably decent on defense (I don't know either way)
He would have been getting regular minutes halfway through his first season would be my guess. As many as the Pacers? Maybe not for a little while, but he'd have been getting them by now (3+ years into his career).
He would have taken Poole and DDV minutes.
Plenty.
Don't forget this was 20/21, so he would have taken the juicier and more available Wanamaker/Mannion/Mulder minutes with some Poole/Lee/Bazmore minutes for dessert.
I would guess he would've been a fit a la Podz and so would have gotten time.
See my earlier comment anticipating the Podz response, which shows why the Podz comparison is not informative.
Well, off the bat I'll say no he likely does not get 30+mpg on the Warriors, but I do think he plays regularly and does not just ride pine. He feels like a Kerr guy and there's a reason so many here were high on him.
In 2020 Haliburton's backup PG competition is Brad Wanamaker and Nico Manion. Kerr had no interest in playing Poole backup PG until Wanamaker's poor play forced his hand. However, in this scenario, those minutes go to Haliburton and not Poole.
Hmm, since we are what-if-ing, does drafting TH mean that Poole doesn't get minutes and never has a chance to have that insane run during the playoffs, and the Dubs lose to Denver or to Boston? Maybe drafting JW over TH was necessary to getting the OGs that fourth ring. If that was the case, was it worth it? A definite fourth 'ship vs. a better chance, but not guaranteed, at getting one more during Steph's window and having TH for the future.
Poole wasn't very effective against Boston and Kerr didn't play him that much. Only played 14 and 18 minutes, respectively, in Games 5 and 6, and never in the series played more than 25 minutes
We’d have to have Dr. Strange run all the possibilities, but I think in most cases, having Hali over JW would not cost the Dubs the 4th ring. Hali >Poole by pretty much every measure.
WOW, Never thought of that. Amazingly good question!
Maybe. Depends on if they trade down and get a vet that would push him further down the pecking order.
I think that even your note aligns with the BIG POINT: The Hali we see now is not the Hali we would have had if he had come to the Dubs. Thus, the Dubs would not have reaped the benefits SacTown and Indiana got and are getting.
He was really good out the gate though and would’ve been a Kerr guy for sure.