Conversation with Lacob

[floppymoose]

I like Nene a lot but I agree he is a horrible fit next to Lee.

[Coxy]

Im a big fan of an Ellis + Biedrins for Darko + Wes Johnson + #20 deal.

[oaktownwarriors87]

We are going to have to dump Monta or Biedrins to offer Nene the kind of money it is going to take to pry him away from Denver.

I also think the new CBA will hurt our efforts as well.

The owners want a higher cap, but they want a hard cap. So it would actually give the Warriors a lot more cap room(20+) than they already have (7-9 million).

I have also been big on using whoever they draft to move a contract like Bells if there is no hard cap. That would take them to 13-15 million.... easily enough for Nene.

[oaktownwarriors87]

I like Nene a lot but I agree he is a horrible fit next to Lee.

Compared to Dwight Howard he is a terrible fit.

Compared to any realistic option the Warriors have he is great.

[510TWSS]

I like Nene a lot but I agree he is a horrible fit next to Lee.

...Then we need to get rid of Lee.

[510TWSS]

I think if Randolph is getting 4/$74 that Nene is going to get 5/$98M. He's a Center and he's pretty young.

Oops I meant 4/71 which is what Z-Bo got.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/21 ... _Extension

Shoot, maybe 5/98 would be the Warriors price to overpay for him. It sure won't be market value netting Nene here.

[floppymoose]

:lol: ...Then we need to get rid of Lee.

I agree with that. Defense is more important than offense from the bigs. Someone plotted the possessions from last years playoffs to see who was defending each shot. I'm not saying this proves my claim, but it is at least supporting data:

http://www.backpicks.com/2011/01/22/defensive-usage/

[r8rrich12]

Nene n Bebe

[oaktownwarriors87]

:lol: ...Then we need to get rid of Lee.

I agree with that. Defense is more important than offense from the bigs. Someone plotted the possessions from last years playoffs to see who was defending each shot. I'm not saying this proves my claim, but it is at least supporting data:

http://www.backpicks.com/2011/01/22/defensive-usage/

Awesome read

I agree with you on the idea of defense, that's why I hated Troy Murphy more than you. I just disagree that the Warriors could do any better overall.


Also, people should read this part

Why does your final defensive usage not sum to 100%?

*Confused*

Good question – the answer is at the top:

“According to my tracking, in the 2010 NBA Playoffs, 56.3% of true shot attempts (FGA’s + 0.44 * FT’s) were taken while being guarded. 14.0% of possessions ended in turnovers. The other 29.7% were either:

open shots (as a result of a defensive breakdown, defenders being effectively screened out or from transition opportunities)
free throws (from non-shooting fouls — the penalty — intentional fouls and technical fouls)”

So ~30% of the time, we’re not dealing with players being guarded for those reasons. About 3% of the time a turnover was “unforced.” Defenders aren’t getting any “usage” when those events occur.

Hope that helps.

This deserves its own thread.

[floppymoose]

I agree with you on the idea of defense, that's why I hated Troy Murphy more than you. I just disagree that the Warriors could do any better overall.

Well, you may be right about that. I think the difference between me and a lot of the more casual fans is that I'm willing to tolerate some truly epic suck for years if it's in the cause of building a good team. But Lacob has to pay the bills and that is definitely going to influence the decisions.

[Twinkie defense]

Offense and defense are BOTH important in the front court. You could just as easily flip your usage conclusion Floppy and say "since most of our shots are coming against other teams' bigs around the basket, we need a guy who can convert a high percentage of those shots."

And since it's extremely difficult to get a big man who is both offensively and defensively proficient, probably the easiest way around that dilemma is to get one of each. Too bad Biedrins didn't live up to his part of the equation - so let's replace him with someone who can.

Guys who I have advocated for in recent years: Gortat, Turiaf, Dalembert, Chandler. It's not that hard.

[floppymoose]

Offense and defense are BOTH important in the front court. You could just as easily flip your usage conclusion Floppy and say "since most of our shots are coming against other teams' bigs around the basket, we need a guy who can convert a high percentage of those shots."

I think the problem with that claim is the assumption that it was a big shooting the ball. The bigs end up contesting a lot of shots from guards and sf's.

In fact I think the guards end up having higher offensive usage rates than the bigs. I don't have data at my fingertips to prove that, but if you look at the highest usage players at easch position a couple of years back, that seems to support it:

http://boards.ign.com/basketball/b5109/ ... 192599533/

[oaktownwarriors87]

56.3% guarded
29.7% open shots or free throws (is not applied to the usage stat)
14.0% turnovers (is not applied to the usage stat)

23.5% of guarded shots are by the PF.
15.3% of all offense is guarded by the PF.

I think the big men are the most important positions defensively, but the guards get off a little easy here. 29.7% of all offense comes off of break downs, and it's usually the guards that break down the most IMO. Especially on this team.

[floppymoose]

oak, I absolutely agree that the guards breaking down is why the bigs carry the higher load. But all the guards break down. Some are a lot better than others, but in the end those numbers in the article are from all the playoff teams combined. All those good teams have guards getting broken down and bigs bailing them out.

[oaktownwarriors87]

oak, I absolutely agree that the guards breaking down is why the bigs carry the higher load. But all the guards break down. Some are a lot better than others, but in the end those numbers in the article are from all the playoff teams combined. All those good teams have guards getting broken down and bigs bailing them out.

I agree, but I'm not referring to the 56.3% of guarded shots, I'm referring to the 29.7% of uncontested shots. The big men play a much larger role in the 56.3%(guarded) but in the 29.7%(open) I think it would be very different.

Warriors give up the 2nd most assist in the NBA, they're 7th in turnovers, and 2nd in FTA allowed. I'm guessing they give up a much higher percentage of open shots than these playoff teams... it's sad to be a Warriors fan.

[floppymoose]

I think I agree, but now I'm confused. Are you saying the open shots were probably even more guard heavy than the contested ones? To me that would just make the case stronger that offense is more important for guards and defense more important than bigs.

[oaktownwarriors87]

I think I agree, but now I'm confused. Are you saying the open shots were probably even more guard heavy than the contested ones? To me that would just make the case stronger that offense is more important for guards and defense more important than bigs.

56% off offense is guarded... the 2 big men do about 54% of that 56%. Why? Because the guards break down. I think we agree on this.

54% of guarded defense falls on the big men, the numbers show that. What it doesn't break down and distribute is the 30% that is unguarded. They are FTA and shots that are just plain wide open. I am suggesting that of this 30%, less than 54% falls on the big men. Since they don't break that down and distribute it to each position these numbers, IMO, are probably just a little high. So little that it probably wasn't worth bringing up...

I also pointed out that the Warriors are...

7th in FTA allowed
2nd in Turnovers
2nd in Assist allowed

The break down was of playoff teams, teams that are typically much better defensively. The playoff teams gave up open shots 30% of the time. I'm showing that the Warriors give up a higher percentage(see the stats above, they all are/lead to open shots). I'm just trying to apply them to the Warriors, I'm not trying to devalue the numbers.

[floppymoose]

2nd in assists would lead to more open shots. I'm not sure what the 7th in FTA says about it. It could mean a lot of things, including that our bigs couldn't challenge shots well and so fouled a lot. 2nd in turnovers is good, but I don't think it says a lot about the shots we gave up. We probably got more open shots on the other end off of fast breaks from those turnovers we forced, though.

[oaktownwarriors87]

Fouls
Warriors
Perimiter
10.5
Big Men
11.5

Opponents
Perimiter
9.4
Big Men
9.0

Warriors big men do do the Majority of the fouling. Udoh and Biedrins are foul prone and the Warriors are probably a little soft on offense. The big men also guard more shots, so naturally going to foul more.... makes sense.

The Warriors are 5th in fouls and last in fouls drawn and FTA. The Warriors opponents get to the line 7 more times a game. Obviously we need to get tougher. 1st in FGA and last in FTA... sad.

[floppymoose]

Yeah it would be nice to have a big who drew fouls on the opposition. That's not really Lee, and it sure as heck isn't Biedrins, who is the only player I've ever seen run up the tunnel to avoid getting intentionally fouled.