I am curious about how well some of our bench players are performing on the road vs home, specifically JTA, I recall certain players from earlier Dynasty years like Barbosa and Clark that never seemed to bring the same game on the road, anybody have some home/away stats for JTA or Lee
The angle that Danny Green jumped hard into Poole to block his layup and how Poole had landed freaked me out. I scared my wife with my scream! Can't shake the image of Klay clutching his knee in agony...
There's an ongoing discussion regarding the center position for the Warriors. I think playing against Embiid underscores the disparity between their team's strength at that position and ours. Looney had -- for him -- a very good game, and yet is very much undermatched on both ends of the floor against good centers. And it's notable that Embiid had -- for him -- a rather poor game. This leads Dubs fans in several directions. One is to say that small-ball cures all. And to some extent, running Draymond as the five has been revolutionary and has won many games and even championships. But this approach has its flaws against good centers and we saw that tonight. As tough as Draymond fought, he and Looney can't really bang down low with Embiid and Harris. When Embiid can catch down low and either score or pass out to shooters, that's hard to stop. So this brings up the "Wait until Wiseman gets back" idea. This has some merit, since his athleticism and size should match up much better on defense, and on offense force centers like Embiid into some tough defensive situations. Yet Wiseman in his first year was a real rookie, not surprisingly. He has a long way to go before he can play defense without fouling, know where to be and what to do on offense and defense. And there is no guarantee he will get there. I hope he does, but it's not a sure thing. And then the last thing that's been brought up lately is whether the Dubs would be better off trading young guys for a young center like Myles Turner. I have no clue whether this is an actual possibility or if Indiana is just making trade noises for who knows what reasons. I also haven't bothered to do any trade machine folderol. I'm not actually proposing some move. I'm just saying that it was pretty obvious tonight that if we could magically switch Looney for a guy like Myles Turner, we would be a much better team, and it's OK to say so. I've noticed that offering opinions like that seems to bring a lot of condemnation, and it begs the question of what we're doing here. Is it simply fandom at its purest -- all our guys are good, all the other guys are evil? Or is it fandom plus analysis and discussion? Which is what I like. I can cheer on Looney and at the same time say that if we swapped him for a shot-blocker and agile scorer like Turner, we'd be much better off. We could still play small when we so chose.
Wiseman + Moody for Turner: probably, but would hate myself for it.
Wiseman + Kuminga for Turner: Laugh and hang up the phone.
Ideally we'd get to see Wiseman actually play a bit before considering any trades, but it doesn't look like the timing will work out to allow that.
We know that this team (with a reasonable Klay) has the firepower to win. So trades would be about increasing championship odds by a few percentage points, buffering against injury, and keeping up with deadline moves from the other contenders.
Yes, I agree largely with your points. It's the "probably, but would hate myself for it" part that really is at the core of what I've been thinking about. As fans we can get pretty attached to the players -- I mean, what's the point otherwise? I love Steph and hate LeBron, but it's not like I actually hate LeBron in some personal manner like he kicks puppies. It's just part of being a fan -- it's am emotional matter sometimes. But then many fans, on this site and elsewhere, also have our analytical sides. We spend time thinking about what's best for the team. And it's really hard when these come into conflict, like thinking about trading Wiseman. I want him to have twenty great years as a killer center for the Warriors, in large measure because I have grown attached to the idea personally. But damn, imagine being Bob Myers. You have to take guys you acquired, you speak to daily, you eat lunch with, and call them into the office to tell them they are outta here. That would suck major.
The obvious way to match Turner's salary is to send out Looney, Wiseman and Kuminga. That might help the Dubs win for this year, but that sells the future for a marginal improvement today. We would then be in store for another decade in the cellar only a couple years down the road. Win or lose this year, another season of experience for JW and the obvious growth we are seeing in JK means that we would be almost sure to win it all next year with a fully healthy and reintegrated Klay. For that matter, it's possible that JW grows into the limited role expected of him by playoff time when things really matter. JK is a wild card that just might surprise us all. Winning a few extra regular season games shouldn't be a priority.
Wiseman ($9.2m), Looney ($4.6m), Moody ($3.6m) would get you pretty close, and is slightly more palatable compared to also trading away Kuminga. But it's A LOT, and doesn't actually address center depth since we'd have one less center.
I'm not seeing any other options since everyone else is on a minimum.
So in the end, I think the best bet is stay the course and hope JW grows into being playable defensively come playoff time (same with JK, though his defense as actually looked ok so far this season). Kerr NEEDS to find a way to play these rookies more if he wants them to develop.
Honestly given how imbalanced the salaries on the roster are, it's half a miracle the Ws are 21-5 with $40m of that salary having not played a single minute so far.
Player attachment isn't the only reason I would hate myself. Even if I put on my "cold-blooded GM" hat, there are major risks. What if I do this trade, and we *still* lose to Milwaukee or whoever? Now we have Turner's $18M salary to manage on a team that's already in luxury tax hell, and god forbid it impacts our ability to keep Wiggins and JP going forward. There's a worse-case scenario here that could be really, REALLY bad which doesn't even involve Wiseman turning into an All-Star on another team.
That said....I'm still thinking about it...because of Steph...
Turner says he wants to be a centerpiece on some team. That is NEVER going to happen with the Ws. So a trade for Turner is an awful risk because it's very possible he'd be disgruntled with his role here.
Yeah, those are excellent points. It's a hard call because we don't have a crystal ball but that salary is a major issue. I think your implication, if I understand it correctly, that Myers is playing it smarter by trying to figure out ways to squeeze what we can out of guys on cheaper salaries is spot on.
All those things you mentioned are exactly the reasons why you don't make a lateral move for Turner. This isn't simply "player attachment" it's a smart FO not being complete morons
I think that game looks a helluva lot different if we don’t miss strings of open looks from the perimeter, allowing the Sixers to control the pace and Embiid to regularly post up is going to be a big problem for a lot of teams
In short: I agree. I’d like to upgrade at center. But actually getting a deal done for a top ten center of the type that would fill this roll is somewhere between difficult and impossible. Add to that the reality that we have a big center on the team coming back realsoonnow (Wiseman ofc) and making a trade now seems unnecessary.
The real issue last night was not Embiid’s awesome center strength but the W’s 3 point shooting. 12 of 48 shooting is going to lead to losses. If we had merely shot a mediocre 35% and hit 17 then we would have won easily. Imagine that game - would you still be making this comment?
Indeed I agree that the three point shooting was off. Obviously Thybulle is a badass defender, is one part. But I would say a big part of why there were fewer made threes is that shooters weren't also slashing. I didn't see a ton of drives from Curry, Poole, Wiggins, anyone else. That's because the interior defense is intimidating, because: centers. And when you don't establish a threat to drive, it's easier to guard you at the perimeter. But I'm not sure such a trade would be all that impossible. If you could trade Wiseman and Kuminga for Turner, would ya do it? I would in a heartbeat, but then I'd never be allowed on this site again, because we all do love the potential of young players. It's really almost as exciting as the actual production of vets. Makes you feel like a proud parent, every time Poole hits a three or whatnot.
Actually meant Wiseman and Moody. But to me it's not about the specific deal, it's about whether we fans are willing to acknowledge that there is a real problem or not. Obviously Myers is gonna do what he thinks best no matter what we think, but it's interesting to discuss as fans.
I don't know if I would characterize it as a "problem" to the extent that none of the contenders are perfect. But I agree that center is the one position other playoff teams could exploit. And by "other playoff teams" I'm basically thinking Milwaukee.
I don't think anyone would deny that a frontcourt of Dray + Turner + Looney increases our championship odds this year compared to Dray + Looney + Wiseman. By how many % points? And is it worth the cost?
I've always been in the boat of "do everything to maximize Steph", but I know many will disagree (including Joe Lacob, it would seem).
Yeah, we are in agreement. In my original post I specified that I didn't actually want to get into a discussion of which trade makes sense right now, more a discussion of our views about the center position as it stands and I think we're in complete agreement there. What to do about it is very much trickier.
I would not agree that this is a one-game sample. Rather, if I may say so, you've got the one game sample going with Looney's +12 last night. I'll say this: if you want to argue that Looney is a credible offensive threat over his career, feel free, but I just don't see the evidence. If we already had Myles Turner, had nurtured him as a pick and developed him, and someone said, hey do you want to trade him for Looney, he gives you 5 points and 6 rebounds a game over his career you'd say oh hell no. To me, it is indeed obvious. The loyalty to Looney is about sentiment not actual evaluation of basketball skill. Which is fine, loyalty is part of sports.
You said “it was pretty obvious *tonight*” so yes, you were talking about one game sample.
Beyond that, stop putting words in my mouth. I’m not “loyal” to Looney, or any less objective than you; and you have no idea how I would react to a similar deal if the Warriors if Turner were a Warrior (and if the Ws were a similarly sad sack, nowheresville franchise to the Pacers, which is the only way your hypothetical makes any sense).
All I’m saying is that what is “obvious” to you is not obvious to many people, and not just because they’re fanboys and you’re not. By Kawakami’s recent account, the Warriors are a “no” on dealing Wiseman (a sine qua non for any Turner deal) so the franchise appears not to be as hot on Turner as you seem to be.
My apologies. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, nor posit that you are any less rational or slave to being a fanboy than anyone else. My thought was that we all have that dilemma but apparently that didn't come across. Apologies.
All good. Sorry if I came on strong. I can definitely see the arguments for a Wiseman-Looney for Turner trade (if Indy were willing); I just think there are more nuanced arguments against it than just “but we love Loon!!!” (most of which have been articulated here, so no need to rehash!)
We plan on trying to plug Wiseman in. I don't think you're advocating we just sit him when healthy, but instead try to plug him into the system. I won't say that Klay is a plug-in, because he's already shown that he knows what to do, if healthy. But Wiseman hasn't. Do you trust him to switch correctly in a playoff game in crunch time? I don't, and I do trust Myles Turner -- or any decent center - more. I might be repeating myself, but I think that the loyalty to Looney is about sentiment and not actual evaluation of basketball skill. Which is fine, loyalty is part of sports, but let's call it what it is.
I don't get the line of reasoning either. Curry had another terrible shooting night and the answer is replace the center? If Curry had made 6 of 14, instead of 3 of 14, it's a tie game.
Agreed, if I were only saying this because of the Philly game it would be a weird thing to say. But for me it's all season, even years of frustration. It's about every game played since Bogut was not healthy and available. And even when he was he wasn't much of a threat to score and couldn't switch, leading to the small ball revolution.
We. Have. Lousy. Centers.
They may be centers who have learned the system (like Loon) or who have not (Wiseman) but they are not very good. Curry had a bad shooting night because of Thybulle but also because the Dubs couldn't penetrate and dish, or establish a threat to drive so as to get more open looks, which is because Philly has a strong interior defense. Plus of course Thybulle was outstanding.
I mean, Looney +12 / Embiid -9 ends any discussion about what was “obvious tonight” with respect to the center position.
Which isn’t to say that it’s a total non-issue. But neither it is as simple as “trade the farm for Myles Turner, with his poor rebounding and inability to do anything with the ball in his hands except shoot open threes.”
Looney was indeed +12 and Embiid -9 but isn't that cherry-picking one game? Embiid has been near MVP level for years. Looney is not a very good center. He is serviceable. He is pleasant. He tries to fit. But he can't hit a ten foot shot, he can barely hit a layup, he isn't a lob threat, and that's costly. Not for one game, but for his career. I didn't say trade the farm for Myles Turner. What I am saying is that any dispassionate analysis of the Warriors needs would look at what we're getting at the 5 and say yikes. In my view Looney is mediocre, Wiseman is raw, and that threatens our ability to win games and championships. Which is what I care about. btw I hardly think your summary of Turner is fair. He's a good rebounder, a rim protector, and when you say can't do anything except hit the three, that sounds a bit odd to me. He hits 40% from three. That's an amazing threat we'd love to have. If we had Turner, had developed him and all and someone said hey wanna trade him for Looney we'd say GTFOH
My hope is the issue is mostly solved by having Thompson as the outlet to shoot open 3s instead of Bjelica or OPJ (though on almost every other night OPJ has been excellent). My take on last nights game is that the Warriors simply missed too many shots.
Certainly we all hope that having Klay back resolves a lot of problems and if he's healthy, most likely will. But I don't think the Dubs just missed shots last night -- they did, but there were reasons. Thybulle was obviously one of them. But difficulty penetrating was another big reason -- because it's hard to do that when Embiid, or Drummond plus Tobias Harris are lurking. They aren't perfect players either, but they were clogging the lane. Which meant we couldn't establish credible threat at the rim, so we predictably were hoisting threes, which the defense was aware of and was lasered in on. But yeah, I'll agree to wait to see what Klay brings if everyone else will agree to take a good hard look at what Looney and Wiseman bring and evaluate if that's the best we can do.
I wish Kerr would have put Kuminga in earlier in the game. Let the young buck go against those guys. He's a load, and he'd bring plenty of aggression to the task.
The opportunity cost with a deal that big is massive — once you liquidate all the assets, you’re never getting them back.
And of course: no matter who the Warriors add or don’t add at C, their best look in playoff crunchtime is always gonna Draymond at the 5, with either Wiggs or Porter at the 4. So do they really want to trade everyone for a guy who’s probably not going to be on the floor in big situations when the chips are down?
For some masochistic reason I just rewatched game 7 of 2016 when LeBron finally won. It was the peak of the small ball era and we all know what happened. And one reason was that LeBron, Tristan Thompson, and Kevin Love were killing us inside. And we did not in fact run small ball all the time. We started Ezeli and had Varejao out there for long stretches. There has hardly been a bigger game in Dubs history and we had to cringe every time Varejao came in. If we had had a decent center it wouldn't have ended like that. I agree that betting the farm for a center in a trade right now is risky, but it's also risky to say "Looney with all his flaws and Wiseman with all his rawness will get us there." If the center we were to hypothetically get -- just speaking hypothetically here -- were actually good, then we would not necessarily play Draymond at the 5. We do that because it works, and is dynamic, but it doesn't always work and it sure would be nice to have an option that did work. Even if we stipulate that we will play Dray at the 5 in crunch time every playoff game, we can't play him there the whole game and points in the first quarter matter too. I think of it this way: if we already had Turner, Sabonis, some quality big, we had developed them for years, we were loyal to them, and someone said would you like to trade that person for Looney and Moody we'd say GTFOH
I actually think the big reasons for that game 7 loss were:
- Injuries that left Steph, Bogut, and Iguodala either greatly limited or out altogether.
- The bogus suspension of Green in Game 5. To be clear, he probably deserved to be suspended earlier, so maybe what goes around comes around. But the fake 'gamesmanship' of LeBron and the reported pressure on the league office were just bulls***. And after losing games 5-6, I think the Ws were feeling the pressure....
- Cold shooting games by Steph and Klay at the same time.
- Too much Varejao. But this one comes late in my list.
Bottom line: There were lots of reasons. My first thought is not about the center position, other than Bogut's injury.
You already made that simplistic and unprovable point, at least twice.
Re the 2016 finals: I’d argue that giving those Varejao / broken Ezeli minutes to Livingston or Barbosa would have won them the 2016 title at lease as surely as giving them to a less bad center. And you can add a zillion other “would have won if only” scenarios in that finals that don’t need itemizing here.
Pretending that the one alternate reality which suits your taking point is the only one in which the Warriors win the 2016 title is fairly ridiculous.
The game is much more small ball now than 2016. I’m Phoenix went to the NBA Finals last year w/ a 6”6” 4. Game is basically 1 PG, 3 wings and a center. Dubs play GP2, Porter & JTA at the 5 at times.
Maybe it is just wishful thinking, but I think Wiseman is going to be a net plus when he finally gets back on the court as long as the Warriors (and Wiseman himself) don't expect him to be posting people up. He finished his rookie season scoring 19/36 with 9.7 rebounds/36 which isn't bad and he has had a lot of time to work with the coaches during rehab.
And whether it is obvious or not, we can't make that magical switch. I just think that re-orienting the team toward beating Jokic & Embid is very narrow thinking.
Agreed. If the only reason to make a switch is to beat Jokic or Embiid, that is indeed narrow thinking. But let's look at the top teams in the league. There are a lot of really good tall guys. Can we really, dispassionately say that we have a decent counter other than Draymond for Suns: Ayton, Utah: Gobert, Bucks: Giannis, Memphis: Vucevic, Miami: Adebayo, Memphis: Steven Adams, even Clippers: Zubac? Those guys kill us fairly often unless Draymond goes thermonuclear, which he doesn't always and it isn't fair to ask of him. I think it's narrow thinking to think "Welp, the Good Lord dealt us Kevon Looney who isn't very good but has learned the system, and that's how we have to play this decade because we developed him and we are risk-averse." We can make a trade, but we'd have to be willing to analyze the situation dispassionately. Looney is mediocre at best, Wiseman is raw as can be, Kuminga and Moody are assets, and if I were Bob Myers I'd be on the phones. Why should we stipulate our centers have to be so lousy? We have a world class point guard, shooting guard, power forward, so we're not allowed to have a great center? That makes no sense to me.
Every team seeks to maximize its assets. Obtaining an upgrade from the current 5 mix is, in view, terrible roster management — especially a maxish contract guy. You’ve got to save money somewhere. Bringing in Turner means Wigs and JP likely out or reach on the Dubs’ budget. The Dubs have answer, and that answer is on the current roster.
That said, Dubs won’t win if their 3 outside shooters are ice cold.
This is all fair. Embiid is a beast that we can only slow down and not stop. Loon and Dray did as well as anyone could hope. On the offensive side, Philly basically stopped Steph raining 3s and we didn’t capitalize on the doubles. Over 7 games…I think our guys and coaching staff make the necessary adjustments to lessen the impact of Embiid & Thybulle. So I’m happy to roll with our personnel believing that over 7, we got’em.
Oh MAN would I trade Wiseman and Moody for Turner in ten seconds. Would I live to regret it? Maybe. But that's being a GM. Ya gotta roll the dice sometimes.
Rolling the dice doesn't mean to do what you want the dubs to do, which is jeopardize the future and possibly this season with such shortsighted moves such as getting a C that does nothing on offense but shoot 3s when the dubs are already loaded with shooters.
I predict you'll be beating this same drum all season, but be absolutely wrong at every turn
Please don't predict things about what drum I will or won't beat, and I will offer you the same kindness. It takes a conversation about basketball and makes it into a personal matter, and I don't like it.
Why not? I'm not tryna fight. Just curious why you wouldn't trade. I'm not saying it's realistic or that I have any GM powers, or that I'm necessarily right. I'm just curious what the mindset is -- why not trade Wiseman and Moody for Turner? We might regret it but we might profit tremendously, isn't that also possible?
I think the idea is if we have a new center (like Turner), it will have been in a trade involving Wiseman, so sadly integrating Wiseman would no longer be an issue.
Splitting two with the Suns, okay, they're damn good and their D was stifling, especially that first game. Losing to the Spurs, not so good. Tonight... the Sixers ARE a good team, that was solid D, and Embiid is a load. So 3-3 in the past 6 games, and of the losses, only the Spurs you'd think we should have no trouble with. The next 5 teams we play have losing records though and none are scary. So there's our test.
I think the Raptors can be 0-16 and will still give us a dogfight. I'm pretty worried about the next 4 games, even the Pacers. Of course as long as we get back to playing our game we should be in good shape
Raptors defensive scheme is to stop Curry at all costs. By not playing Curry at all, Kerr will confuse the Raptors and will have no idea who to guard. 4D chess move right there! /s
Watching this reporter interview Curry with a loose mask constantly slipping off his nose is infuriating. This shithead could tank the entire Warrior season.
Good game by Philly, they are a good team and wanted a split at home. Nice defense on our shooters, some clutch shooting. A couple iffy calls (both challenges were head-scratchers). I thought Draymond had a great defensive game. Bjelli had a terrible game. Too many ill timed turnovers. Oh well.
IMO, I think tonight's game was the hardest game of the road trip. The other teams are against teams with worse records, so I think the Warriors are fine on those games. However, since those games are gonna be back-to-backs, I'm expecting another loss in one of those games since the Warriors will be too tired and/or Kerr will be resting some of the players.
I am curious about how well some of our bench players are performing on the road vs home, specifically JTA, I recall certain players from earlier Dynasty years like Barbosa and Clark that never seemed to bring the same game on the road, anybody have some home/away stats for JTA or Lee
The angle that Danny Green jumped hard into Poole to block his layup and how Poole had landed freaked me out. I scared my wife with my scream! Can't shake the image of Klay clutching his knee in agony...
He was diving into people way before that. I was yellow was going to hurt someone. When Poole went up I though this was it. Dude has me traumatized.
There's an ongoing discussion regarding the center position for the Warriors. I think playing against Embiid underscores the disparity between their team's strength at that position and ours. Looney had -- for him -- a very good game, and yet is very much undermatched on both ends of the floor against good centers. And it's notable that Embiid had -- for him -- a rather poor game. This leads Dubs fans in several directions. One is to say that small-ball cures all. And to some extent, running Draymond as the five has been revolutionary and has won many games and even championships. But this approach has its flaws against good centers and we saw that tonight. As tough as Draymond fought, he and Looney can't really bang down low with Embiid and Harris. When Embiid can catch down low and either score or pass out to shooters, that's hard to stop. So this brings up the "Wait until Wiseman gets back" idea. This has some merit, since his athleticism and size should match up much better on defense, and on offense force centers like Embiid into some tough defensive situations. Yet Wiseman in his first year was a real rookie, not surprisingly. He has a long way to go before he can play defense without fouling, know where to be and what to do on offense and defense. And there is no guarantee he will get there. I hope he does, but it's not a sure thing. And then the last thing that's been brought up lately is whether the Dubs would be better off trading young guys for a young center like Myles Turner. I have no clue whether this is an actual possibility or if Indiana is just making trade noises for who knows what reasons. I also haven't bothered to do any trade machine folderol. I'm not actually proposing some move. I'm just saying that it was pretty obvious tonight that if we could magically switch Looney for a guy like Myles Turner, we would be a much better team, and it's OK to say so. I've noticed that offering opinions like that seems to bring a lot of condemnation, and it begs the question of what we're doing here. Is it simply fandom at its purest -- all our guys are good, all the other guys are evil? Or is it fandom plus analysis and discussion? Which is what I like. I can cheer on Looney and at the same time say that if we swapped him for a shot-blocker and agile scorer like Turner, we'd be much better off. We could still play small when we so chose.
Wiseman + Moody for Turner: probably, but would hate myself for it.
Wiseman + Kuminga for Turner: Laugh and hang up the phone.
Ideally we'd get to see Wiseman actually play a bit before considering any trades, but it doesn't look like the timing will work out to allow that.
We know that this team (with a reasonable Klay) has the firepower to win. So trades would be about increasing championship odds by a few percentage points, buffering against injury, and keeping up with deadline moves from the other contenders.
Yes, I agree largely with your points. It's the "probably, but would hate myself for it" part that really is at the core of what I've been thinking about. As fans we can get pretty attached to the players -- I mean, what's the point otherwise? I love Steph and hate LeBron, but it's not like I actually hate LeBron in some personal manner like he kicks puppies. It's just part of being a fan -- it's am emotional matter sometimes. But then many fans, on this site and elsewhere, also have our analytical sides. We spend time thinking about what's best for the team. And it's really hard when these come into conflict, like thinking about trading Wiseman. I want him to have twenty great years as a killer center for the Warriors, in large measure because I have grown attached to the idea personally. But damn, imagine being Bob Myers. You have to take guys you acquired, you speak to daily, you eat lunch with, and call them into the office to tell them they are outta here. That would suck major.
The obvious way to match Turner's salary is to send out Looney, Wiseman and Kuminga. That might help the Dubs win for this year, but that sells the future for a marginal improvement today. We would then be in store for another decade in the cellar only a couple years down the road. Win or lose this year, another season of experience for JW and the obvious growth we are seeing in JK means that we would be almost sure to win it all next year with a fully healthy and reintegrated Klay. For that matter, it's possible that JW grows into the limited role expected of him by playoff time when things really matter. JK is a wild card that just might surprise us all. Winning a few extra regular season games shouldn't be a priority.
Wiseman ($9.2m), Looney ($4.6m), Moody ($3.6m) would get you pretty close, and is slightly more palatable compared to also trading away Kuminga. But it's A LOT, and doesn't actually address center depth since we'd have one less center.
I'm not seeing any other options since everyone else is on a minimum.
So in the end, I think the best bet is stay the course and hope JW grows into being playable defensively come playoff time (same with JK, though his defense as actually looked ok so far this season). Kerr NEEDS to find a way to play these rookies more if he wants them to develop.
Honestly given how imbalanced the salaries on the roster are, it's half a miracle the Ws are 21-5 with $40m of that salary having not played a single minute so far.
Player attachment isn't the only reason I would hate myself. Even if I put on my "cold-blooded GM" hat, there are major risks. What if I do this trade, and we *still* lose to Milwaukee or whoever? Now we have Turner's $18M salary to manage on a team that's already in luxury tax hell, and god forbid it impacts our ability to keep Wiggins and JP going forward. There's a worse-case scenario here that could be really, REALLY bad which doesn't even involve Wiseman turning into an All-Star on another team.
That said....I'm still thinking about it...because of Steph...
Turner says he wants to be a centerpiece on some team. That is NEVER going to happen with the Ws. So a trade for Turner is an awful risk because it's very possible he'd be disgruntled with his role here.
Yeah, those are excellent points. It's a hard call because we don't have a crystal ball but that salary is a major issue. I think your implication, if I understand it correctly, that Myers is playing it smarter by trying to figure out ways to squeeze what we can out of guys on cheaper salaries is spot on.
All those things you mentioned are exactly the reasons why you don't make a lateral move for Turner. This isn't simply "player attachment" it's a smart FO not being complete morons
I can think of 30 million reasons why Wiseman + Moody for Turner doesn’t happen.
I think that game looks a helluva lot different if we don’t miss strings of open looks from the perimeter, allowing the Sixers to control the pace and Embiid to regularly post up is going to be a big problem for a lot of teams
In short: I agree. I’d like to upgrade at center. But actually getting a deal done for a top ten center of the type that would fill this roll is somewhere between difficult and impossible. Add to that the reality that we have a big center on the team coming back realsoonnow (Wiseman ofc) and making a trade now seems unnecessary.
The real issue last night was not Embiid’s awesome center strength but the W’s 3 point shooting. 12 of 48 shooting is going to lead to losses. If we had merely shot a mediocre 35% and hit 17 then we would have won easily. Imagine that game - would you still be making this comment?
Indeed I agree that the three point shooting was off. Obviously Thybulle is a badass defender, is one part. But I would say a big part of why there were fewer made threes is that shooters weren't also slashing. I didn't see a ton of drives from Curry, Poole, Wiggins, anyone else. That's because the interior defense is intimidating, because: centers. And when you don't establish a threat to drive, it's easier to guard you at the perimeter. But I'm not sure such a trade would be all that impossible. If you could trade Wiseman and Kuminga for Turner, would ya do it? I would in a heartbeat, but then I'd never be allowed on this site again, because we all do love the potential of young players. It's really almost as exciting as the actual production of vets. Makes you feel like a proud parent, every time Poole hits a three or whatnot.
Wiseman AND Kuminga for Myles Turner is an absolute no. Even the Pacers' fans are only asking for one of the two, plus salary matching.
Actually meant Wiseman and Moody. But to me it's not about the specific deal, it's about whether we fans are willing to acknowledge that there is a real problem or not. Obviously Myers is gonna do what he thinks best no matter what we think, but it's interesting to discuss as fans.
I don't know if I would characterize it as a "problem" to the extent that none of the contenders are perfect. But I agree that center is the one position other playoff teams could exploit. And by "other playoff teams" I'm basically thinking Milwaukee.
I don't think anyone would deny that a frontcourt of Dray + Turner + Looney increases our championship odds this year compared to Dray + Looney + Wiseman. By how many % points? And is it worth the cost?
I've always been in the boat of "do everything to maximize Steph", but I know many will disagree (including Joe Lacob, it would seem).
Yeah, we are in agreement. In my original post I specified that I didn't actually want to get into a discussion of which trade makes sense right now, more a discussion of our views about the center position as it stands and I think we're in complete agreement there. What to do about it is very much trickier.
And all those missed shots resulting in transition opportunities for Philly… sigh. Felt like the Warriors had way more open shots all night too.
> “It was pretty obvious tonight that if we could magically switch Looney for a guy like Myles Turner, we would be a much better team.”
Not a given; and either way, a one-game sample does not make anything “obvious.”
Fwiw, the Warriors were a team-high +12 with Looney on the floor night.
I would not agree that this is a one-game sample. Rather, if I may say so, you've got the one game sample going with Looney's +12 last night. I'll say this: if you want to argue that Looney is a credible offensive threat over his career, feel free, but I just don't see the evidence. If we already had Myles Turner, had nurtured him as a pick and developed him, and someone said, hey do you want to trade him for Looney, he gives you 5 points and 6 rebounds a game over his career you'd say oh hell no. To me, it is indeed obvious. The loyalty to Looney is about sentiment not actual evaluation of basketball skill. Which is fine, loyalty is part of sports.
You said “it was pretty obvious *tonight*” so yes, you were talking about one game sample.
Beyond that, stop putting words in my mouth. I’m not “loyal” to Looney, or any less objective than you; and you have no idea how I would react to a similar deal if the Warriors if Turner were a Warrior (and if the Ws were a similarly sad sack, nowheresville franchise to the Pacers, which is the only way your hypothetical makes any sense).
All I’m saying is that what is “obvious” to you is not obvious to many people, and not just because they’re fanboys and you’re not. By Kawakami’s recent account, the Warriors are a “no” on dealing Wiseman (a sine qua non for any Turner deal) so the franchise appears not to be as hot on Turner as you seem to be.
My apologies. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, nor posit that you are any less rational or slave to being a fanboy than anyone else. My thought was that we all have that dilemma but apparently that didn't come across. Apologies.
All good. Sorry if I came on strong. I can definitely see the arguments for a Wiseman-Looney for Turner trade (if Indy were willing); I just think there are more nuanced arguments against it than just “but we love Loon!!!” (most of which have been articulated here, so no need to rehash!)
Thank you. All good.
Plugging new players into Kerr’s system mid season unless filling a huge injury hole seems like rolling the dice to me
We plan on trying to plug Wiseman in. I don't think you're advocating we just sit him when healthy, but instead try to plug him into the system. I won't say that Klay is a plug-in, because he's already shown that he knows what to do, if healthy. But Wiseman hasn't. Do you trust him to switch correctly in a playoff game in crunch time? I don't, and I do trust Myles Turner -- or any decent center - more. I might be repeating myself, but I think that the loyalty to Looney is about sentiment and not actual evaluation of basketball skill. Which is fine, loyalty is part of sports, but let's call it what it is.
I don't get the line of reasoning either. Curry had another terrible shooting night and the answer is replace the center? If Curry had made 6 of 14, instead of 3 of 14, it's a tie game.
Agreed, if I were only saying this because of the Philly game it would be a weird thing to say. But for me it's all season, even years of frustration. It's about every game played since Bogut was not healthy and available. And even when he was he wasn't much of a threat to score and couldn't switch, leading to the small ball revolution.
We. Have. Lousy. Centers.
They may be centers who have learned the system (like Loon) or who have not (Wiseman) but they are not very good. Curry had a bad shooting night because of Thybulle but also because the Dubs couldn't penetrate and dish, or establish a threat to drive so as to get more open looks, which is because Philly has a strong interior defense. Plus of course Thybulle was outstanding.
I mean, Looney +12 / Embiid -9 ends any discussion about what was “obvious tonight” with respect to the center position.
Which isn’t to say that it’s a total non-issue. But neither it is as simple as “trade the farm for Myles Turner, with his poor rebounding and inability to do anything with the ball in his hands except shoot open threes.”
Looney was indeed +12 and Embiid -9 but isn't that cherry-picking one game? Embiid has been near MVP level for years. Looney is not a very good center. He is serviceable. He is pleasant. He tries to fit. But he can't hit a ten foot shot, he can barely hit a layup, he isn't a lob threat, and that's costly. Not for one game, but for his career. I didn't say trade the farm for Myles Turner. What I am saying is that any dispassionate analysis of the Warriors needs would look at what we're getting at the 5 and say yikes. In my view Looney is mediocre, Wiseman is raw, and that threatens our ability to win games and championships. Which is what I care about. btw I hardly think your summary of Turner is fair. He's a good rebounder, a rim protector, and when you say can't do anything except hit the three, that sounds a bit odd to me. He hits 40% from three. That's an amazing threat we'd love to have. If we had Turner, had developed him and all and someone said hey wanna trade him for Looney we'd say GTFOH
My hope is the issue is mostly solved by having Thompson as the outlet to shoot open 3s instead of Bjelica or OPJ (though on almost every other night OPJ has been excellent). My take on last nights game is that the Warriors simply missed too many shots.
Certainly we all hope that having Klay back resolves a lot of problems and if he's healthy, most likely will. But I don't think the Dubs just missed shots last night -- they did, but there were reasons. Thybulle was obviously one of them. But difficulty penetrating was another big reason -- because it's hard to do that when Embiid, or Drummond plus Tobias Harris are lurking. They aren't perfect players either, but they were clogging the lane. Which meant we couldn't establish credible threat at the rim, so we predictably were hoisting threes, which the defense was aware of and was lasered in on. But yeah, I'll agree to wait to see what Klay brings if everyone else will agree to take a good hard look at what Looney and Wiseman bring and evaluate if that's the best we can do.
I wish Kerr would have put Kuminga in earlier in the game. Let the young buck go against those guys. He's a load, and he'd bring plenty of aggression to the task.
Yeah. And they had like 4-5 great looks from Wiggs and Porter that were halfway down and popped out. Game looks really different if those fall.
Notably, it takes Philly out of their extreme Steph focus and gives them fewer transition opportunities.
…
The opportunity cost with a deal that big is massive — once you liquidate all the assets, you’re never getting them back.
And of course: no matter who the Warriors add or don’t add at C, their best look in playoff crunchtime is always gonna Draymond at the 5, with either Wiggs or Porter at the 4. So do they really want to trade everyone for a guy who’s probably not going to be on the floor in big situations when the chips are down?
For some masochistic reason I just rewatched game 7 of 2016 when LeBron finally won. It was the peak of the small ball era and we all know what happened. And one reason was that LeBron, Tristan Thompson, and Kevin Love were killing us inside. And we did not in fact run small ball all the time. We started Ezeli and had Varejao out there for long stretches. There has hardly been a bigger game in Dubs history and we had to cringe every time Varejao came in. If we had had a decent center it wouldn't have ended like that. I agree that betting the farm for a center in a trade right now is risky, but it's also risky to say "Looney with all his flaws and Wiseman with all his rawness will get us there." If the center we were to hypothetically get -- just speaking hypothetically here -- were actually good, then we would not necessarily play Draymond at the 5. We do that because it works, and is dynamic, but it doesn't always work and it sure would be nice to have an option that did work. Even if we stipulate that we will play Dray at the 5 in crunch time every playoff game, we can't play him there the whole game and points in the first quarter matter too. I think of it this way: if we already had Turner, Sabonis, some quality big, we had developed them for years, we were loyal to them, and someone said would you like to trade that person for Looney and Moody we'd say GTFOH
I actually think the big reasons for that game 7 loss were:
- Injuries that left Steph, Bogut, and Iguodala either greatly limited or out altogether.
- The bogus suspension of Green in Game 5. To be clear, he probably deserved to be suspended earlier, so maybe what goes around comes around. But the fake 'gamesmanship' of LeBron and the reported pressure on the league office were just bulls***. And after losing games 5-6, I think the Ws were feeling the pressure....
- Cold shooting games by Steph and Klay at the same time.
- Too much Varejao. But this one comes late in my list.
Bottom line: There were lots of reasons. My first thought is not about the center position, other than Bogut's injury.
You already made that simplistic and unprovable point, at least twice.
Re the 2016 finals: I’d argue that giving those Varejao / broken Ezeli minutes to Livingston or Barbosa would have won them the 2016 title at lease as surely as giving them to a less bad center. And you can add a zillion other “would have won if only” scenarios in that finals that don’t need itemizing here.
Pretending that the one alternate reality which suits your taking point is the only one in which the Warriors win the 2016 title is fairly ridiculous.
The game is much more small ball now than 2016. I’m Phoenix went to the NBA Finals last year w/ a 6”6” 4. Game is basically 1 PG, 3 wings and a center. Dubs play GP2, Porter & JTA at the 5 at times.
Maybe it is just wishful thinking, but I think Wiseman is going to be a net plus when he finally gets back on the court as long as the Warriors (and Wiseman himself) don't expect him to be posting people up. He finished his rookie season scoring 19/36 with 9.7 rebounds/36 which isn't bad and he has had a lot of time to work with the coaches during rehab.
And Philly was -9 with Embiid on the floor.
And whether it is obvious or not, we can't make that magical switch. I just think that re-orienting the team toward beating Jokic & Embid is very narrow thinking.
Agreed. If the only reason to make a switch is to beat Jokic or Embiid, that is indeed narrow thinking. But let's look at the top teams in the league. There are a lot of really good tall guys. Can we really, dispassionately say that we have a decent counter other than Draymond for Suns: Ayton, Utah: Gobert, Bucks: Giannis, Memphis: Vucevic, Miami: Adebayo, Memphis: Steven Adams, even Clippers: Zubac? Those guys kill us fairly often unless Draymond goes thermonuclear, which he doesn't always and it isn't fair to ask of him. I think it's narrow thinking to think "Welp, the Good Lord dealt us Kevon Looney who isn't very good but has learned the system, and that's how we have to play this decade because we developed him and we are risk-averse." We can make a trade, but we'd have to be willing to analyze the situation dispassionately. Looney is mediocre at best, Wiseman is raw as can be, Kuminga and Moody are assets, and if I were Bob Myers I'd be on the phones. Why should we stipulate our centers have to be so lousy? We have a world class point guard, shooting guard, power forward, so we're not allowed to have a great center? That makes no sense to me.
Every team seeks to maximize its assets. Obtaining an upgrade from the current 5 mix is, in view, terrible roster management — especially a maxish contract guy. You’ve got to save money somewhere. Bringing in Turner means Wigs and JP likely out or reach on the Dubs’ budget. The Dubs have answer, and that answer is on the current roster.
That said, Dubs won’t win if their 3 outside shooters are ice cold.
*tonight
This is all fair. Embiid is a beast that we can only slow down and not stop. Loon and Dray did as well as anyone could hope. On the offensive side, Philly basically stopped Steph raining 3s and we didn’t capitalize on the doubles. Over 7 games…I think our guys and coaching staff make the necessary adjustments to lessen the impact of Embiid & Thybulle. So I’m happy to roll with our personnel believing that over 7, we got’em.
This
But yes - if Miles Turner was on offer, salary matched and Indy were happy with Loon, make the swap!! Still love Loon…and his new hair style
“Salary matched” with Wiseman plus either Kuminga or Moody? Cos that’s what we’re likely talking about here.
Oh MAN would I trade Wiseman and Moody for Turner in ten seconds. Would I live to regret it? Maybe. But that's being a GM. Ya gotta roll the dice sometimes.
Rolling the dice doesn't mean to do what you want the dubs to do, which is jeopardize the future and possibly this season with such shortsighted moves such as getting a C that does nothing on offense but shoot 3s when the dubs are already loaded with shooters.
I predict you'll be beating this same drum all season, but be absolutely wrong at every turn
Please don't predict things about what drum I will or won't beat, and I will offer you the same kindness. It takes a conversation about basketball and makes it into a personal matter, and I don't like it.
Agreed, and not doing that.
Why not? I'm not tryna fight. Just curious why you wouldn't trade. I'm not saying it's realistic or that I have any GM powers, or that I'm necessarily right. I'm just curious what the mindset is -- why not trade Wiseman and Moody for Turner? We might regret it but we might profit tremendously, isn't that also possible?
I think the idea is if we have a new center (like Turner), it will have been in a trade involving Wiseman, so sadly integrating Wiseman would no longer be an issue.
They made a bunch of tough shots, and got a few bounces… we didn’t. Move on…
Ha ha, this pretty much how I felt, too...
I’d add to reasons for loss: gave up too many layups. Lack of rim protection was more obvious tonight.
Mostly in transition, I think
Offensive and defensive efficiency for the next four teams according to the ESPN Team Hollinger stats:
Pacers: #14 on offense, #14 on defense
Knicks: #15 on offense, #23 on defense
Celtics: #17 on offense, #10 on defense
Raptors: #19 on offense, #17 on defense
Splitting two with the Suns, okay, they're damn good and their D was stifling, especially that first game. Losing to the Spurs, not so good. Tonight... the Sixers ARE a good team, that was solid D, and Embiid is a load. So 3-3 in the past 6 games, and of the losses, only the Spurs you'd think we should have no trouble with. The next 5 teams we play have losing records though and none are scary. So there's our test.
I also think our record allows Kerr to continue tinkering with his lineups which will payoff come playoffs
I think the Raptors can be 0-16 and will still give us a dogfight. I'm pretty worried about the next 4 games, even the Pacers. Of course as long as we get back to playing our game we should be in good shape
You make good points but dogfight or no, if we can't beat these teams we aren't as good as we thought we were.
Raptors defensive scheme is to stop Curry at all costs. By not playing Curry at all, Kerr will confuse the Raptors and will have no idea who to guard. 4D chess move right there! /s
Meh. Sometimes the shots don't fall. Can't win them all.
Man, Otto missed like 5 wide open threes. Pisses me off. You had one job.
Andre did not look ready for minutes.
Has Damion Lee hit a single jumper since returning from injury?
Bjelica got stuffed in the basket again.
Credit to Wiggins and Poole for keeping the ship afloat as long as they did.
Even Poole missed some open bunnies and got burned on D.
Iguodala may NOT have been ready. Dray got into early foul trouble. In retrospect, might have needed to go to JTA there.
Warriors shot like shit and still had that game close to in the bag at the end of the third.
This is a great team, just annoying to see an inferior team pick up a W against them.
Is Klay+Wise back to G-League?
In fairness recently we have faced very good defense by the Suns and Sixers.
Watching this reporter interview Curry with a loose mask constantly slipping off his nose is infuriating. This shithead could tank the entire Warrior season.
True. Then again, Kerr has been the king of loose masks slipping off since the start of the pandemic.
Good game by Philly, they are a good team and wanted a split at home. Nice defense on our shooters, some clutch shooting. A couple iffy calls (both challenges were head-scratchers). I thought Draymond had a great defensive game. Bjelli had a terrible game. Too many ill timed turnovers. Oh well.
Pacers' last 10 games:
-Routed the short-handed Bulls 109-77
-Lost to the Lakers in overtime 124-116
-Routed the Raptors 114-97
-Lost to the Bucks 118-100
-Barely lost to the Timberwolves 100-98
-Lost to the Hawks 114-111
-Lost to the Heat 113-104
-Beat the Wizards 116-110
-Routed the Knicks 122-102
-Beat the Mavericks 106-93
IMO, I think tonight's game was the hardest game of the road trip. The other teams are against teams with worse records, so I think the Warriors are fine on those games. However, since those games are gonna be back-to-backs, I'm expecting another loss in one of those games since the Warriors will be too tired and/or Kerr will be resting some of the players.
Time to get Kuminga and Moody some minutes that matter.