How would things have changed...

[Twinkie defense]

Short on big men, Team USA will likely be sending Drummond home.

[Mylie10]

Short on big men, Team USA will likely be sending Drummond home.

That can't be true! Because we should have drafted him.

[Onus]

Short on big men, Team USA will likely be sending Drummond home.

That can't be true! Because we should have drafted him.

Is Barnes even on the tour?

[Onus]

Absolutely. Also there was the fact that Drummond just came off a ho hum year at UConn, where he was supposed to dominate. I blame that on Calhoun not being there, but Drummond played with no passion that entire year. Add to that the fact that they just brought in Bogut.

In hindsight it looks like a huge bungle, but in the context of changing the direction of the franchise, by making the playoffs and drafting ready players with good character it makes more sense.

That's the other thing that ticks me off. UCONN that year had all this noted internal trouble with coaches and Calhoun not being there. Their young guards were more often willing to shoot than pass. That team was complete chaos with the head coach coming in and out of practice. Surely that had nothing to do with that team underachieving and a raw big freshman not "performing". Even though he avg 10 and 8 with 3 blocks in 28 mpg.

[StatsOfOpinions]

I remember that Lacob and our GM flew to the east coast (New York?) for one, final personal workout with Barnes before the draft.

And I remember wondering at that time, 'Why is the owner going? How much does he know about evaluating basketball players?'

[Warriorfan]

Hindsight is 20 20 team is always in win now mode and big men are projects. We got Barnes Festus Green who all contributed immediately.

[Onus]

I remember that Lacob and our GM flew to the east coast (New York?) for one, final personal workout with Barnes before the draft.

And I remember wondering at that time, 'Why is the owner going? How much does he know about evaluating basketball players?'

The owner was the only one that wanted Drummond ... What the hell does our FO know about evaluating basketball players? :shrug:

[StatsOfOpinions]

I remember that Lacob and our GM flew to the east coast (New York?) for one, final personal workout with Barnes before the draft.

And I remember wondering at that time, 'Why is the owner going? How much does he know about evaluating basketball players?'

The owner was the only one that wanted Drummond ... What the hell does our FO know about evaluating basketball players? :shrug:

He then flew to check him out and then OK'ed it?

[whocurrz]

Well the FO much was higher on Lillard (who generated the opinion on this board that guys would stop being Warriors fans if the FO drafted another guard), Beal, Waiters and MKG than Barnes. I think they definitely didn't want to risk Drummond which sucks, but I think Barnes was more of a move they made in the war room when all the top targets were off the board and they went for the pick they saw as safest rather than the high risk high reward move in Drummond. Also, I remember West's comments seemed more skeptical of Barnes than anything after the draft. Saying he could be a good player if he worked really hard but had a long way to go or something to that tune. This wasn't the attitude they had with Klay who they talked up before the draft and were very confident in when they drafted him. Their picks in Klay, Draymond, Ezeli with later picks seem to show they have good talent evaluation as all have outproduced their draft position when playing.

Many of the people here hated the idea of drafting Drummond and as I mentioned earlier, some said drafting Lillard would be one of the dumbest moves possible. Some people even thought we should draft Fab Melo at 7 or trade back a couple spots and draft him in the late lotto. So people should quit pretending they know more than the FO or are draft experts when really all these discussions prove is that when it comes to the draft some guys are right sometimes and sometimes they're dead wrong. The draft is not an exact science and if you have 5 minutes to make the selection, while fielding phone calls with your job on the line, I'm sure many here would have taken the safe pick in Barnes given those circumstances.

And this is coming form someone who had Drummond as the #2 prospect in the draft. I mentioned all the stuff about how he went to play for Calhoun who was gone and also had to deal with a chucking Napier as his PG. I also had Thomas Robinson not far after him. Hardly anyone gets all this right.

[turk3d]

And FWIW, if we had picked Drummond, there's in all liklihood that he wouldn't have been the standout he's become in Detroit (after all, did have Bogut). He might not have gotten the opportunity here that he was given in Detroit, a lottery team at the time.

We could have easily been kicking ourselves for picking him instead of Barnes (who likely could have done better if he got drafted by a weaker team). With out luck with bigs, he might have even wound up as a bust for all we know (could have been frustrated playing for MJax).

[Onus]

And FWIW, if we had picked Drummond, there's in all liklihood that he wouldn't have been the standout he's become in Detroit (after all, did have Bogut). He might not have gotten the opportunity here that he was given in Detroit, a lottery team at the time.

We could have easily been kicking ourselves for picking him instead of Barnes (who likely could have done better if he got drafted by a weaker team). With out luck with bigs, he might have even wound up as a bust for all we know (could have been frustrated playing for MJax).

What?!?!

Drummond would have feasted here. Do you not remember that Ezeli started 41 games in his rookie year and played in 78 games? Do you not remember us needing a big body badly in the LAC series to ward off Deandre and Blake?

Drummond would probably be even more highly touted if he was on this team with all the space he'd have to work with rather than playing with josh smith at the 3.

[whocurrz]

Drummond would have likely been a better player here learning from Bogut and he actually didn't get a ridiculous amount of minutes in Detroit as a rookie as Frank didn't play a Him and Monroe a lot together. We probably wouldn't have signed Bogut to a large extension. But we could be in for a step back as Drunmond does not have the impact Bogut does. He's a great rebounder and especially offensive rebounding but he's not a very good defender yet ( not in the same world as Bogut) and Bogut is a much better passer and setting screens. However our options and flexibility would be much better with Drummond than Barnes

[californiadude]

Well the FO much was higher on Lillard (who generated the opinion on this board that guys would stop being Warriors fans if the FO drafted another guard), Beal, Waiters and MKG than Barnes. I think they definitely didn't want to risk Drummond which sucks, but I think Barnes was more of a move they made in the war room when all the top targets were off the board and they went for the pick they saw as safest rather than the high risk high reward move in Drummond. Also, I remember West's comments seemed more skeptical of Barnes than anything after the draft. Saying he could be a good player if he worked really hard but had a long way to go or something to that tune. This wasn't the attitude they had with Klay who they talked up before the draft and were very confident in when they drafted him. Their picks in Klay, Draymond, Ezeli with later picks seem to show they have good talent evaluation as all have outproduced their draft position when playing.

Many of the people here hated the idea of drafting Drummond and as I mentioned earlier, some said drafting Lillard would be one of the dumbest moves possible. Some people even thought we should draft Fab Melo at 7 or trade back a couple spots and draft him in the late lotto. So people should quit pretending they know more than the FO or are draft experts when really all these discussions prove is that when it comes to the draft some guys are right sometimes and sometimes they're dead wrong. The draft is not an exact science and if you have 5 minutes to make the selection, while fielding phone calls with your job on the line, I'm sure many here would have taken the safe pick in Barnes given those circumstances.

And this is coming form someone who had Drummond as the #2 prospect in the draft. I mentioned all the stuff about how he went to play for Calhoun who was gone and also had to deal with a chucking Napier as his PG. I also had Thomas Robinson not far after him. Hardly anyone gets all this right.

This is extremely well said, I was a huge Drummond fan, I also was a huge Tyler Honeycutt fan and thought he was going to be awesome. I was upset when my redskins traded 3 firsts for RG3, when i wanted them to draft Russell Wilson in the 2/3 round who I thought was gonna be a star... I also wanted them to draft either Morris Claiborne or Trent Richardson with there first. Arguably the two biggest busts from that draft. It really is to some degree a crap shoot. You're right I shouldn't pretend (and I don't mean to) to know more than the team management (the draft experts are debatable ). The question I ask is where would be right now if we had drafted Drummond or moved up for Beal. I think they should clean house next year. That's my opinion and it is a somewhat controversial one I guess. However I think some of the same logic that was used for jackson's firing, applies to the current regime though.

[whocurrz]

Well the FO much was higher on Lillard (who generated the opinion on this board that guys would stop being Warriors fans if the FO drafted another guard), Beal, Waiters and MKG than Barnes. I think they definitely didn't want to risk Drummond which sucks, but I think Barnes was more of a move they made in the war room when all the top targets were off the board and they went for the pick they saw as safest rather than the high risk high reward move in Drummond. Also, I remember West's comments seemed more skeptical of Barnes than anything after the draft. Saying he could be a good player if he worked really hard but had a long way to go or something to that tune. This wasn't the attitude they had with Klay who they talked up before the draft and were very confident in when they drafted him. Their picks in Klay, Draymond, Ezeli with later picks seem to show they have good talent evaluation as all have outproduced their draft position when playing.

Many of the people here hated the idea of drafting Drummond and as I mentioned earlier, some said drafting Lillard would be one of the dumbest moves possible. Some people even thought we should draft Fab Melo at 7 or trade back a couple spots and draft him in the late lotto. So people should quit pretending they know more than the FO or are draft experts when really all these discussions prove is that when it comes to the draft some guys are right sometimes and sometimes they're dead wrong. The draft is not an exact science and if you have 5 minutes to make the selection, while fielding phone calls with your job on the line, I'm sure many here would have taken the safe pick in Barnes given those circumstances.

And this is coming form someone who had Drummond as the #2 prospect in the draft. I mentioned all the stuff about how he went to play for Calhoun who was gone and also had to deal with a chucking Napier as his PG. I also had Thomas Robinson not far after him. Hardly anyone gets all this right.

This is extremely well said, I was a huge Drummond fan, I also was a huge Tyler Honeycutt fan and thought he was going to be awesome. I was upset when my redskins traded 3 firsts for RG3, when i wanted them to draft Russell Wilson in the 2/3 round who I thought was gonna be a star... I also wanted them to draft either Morris Claiborne or Trent Richardson with there first. Arguably the two biggest busts from that draft. It really is to some degree a crap shoot. You're right I shouldn't pretend (and I don't mean to) to know more than the team management (the draft experts are debatable ). The question I ask is where would be right now if we had drafted Drummond or moved up for Beal. I think they should clean house next year. That's my opinion and it is a somewhat controversial one I guess. However I think some of the same logic that was used for jackson's firing, applies to the current regime though.

It's not you dude. I've just heard enough of this forum still wragging on the FO for the Barnes over Drummond decision and doing it in a manner that you would think everyone here had Drummond rated super high. I remember a few people liking Drummond but also remember having to defend him against many people who called him a future bust. The people who wanted Drummond probably aren't even a third of those who claim like it was some no brainer decision they could have made. I remember probably more people thinking Meyers Leonard was a good pick than Drummond. Fab Melo too. I wanted Kawhi the year before but people act as if the FO is dumb for drafting Klay over him when Klay is one of the best players in that draft class. Every FO misses on some draft choices. Spurs look great but that's also because they have a steady core of veterans and coaches developing these players. It's probably one of the best ever. Presti is probably the next best at drafting but he's has some questionable choices like Jeff Green over the last two DPOY who play their biggest position of weakness. People on this board have been using hindsight to act as if this FO has been awful in the draft when I think they have brought in some very good players with the big blunder being Barnes over Drummond which I don't think most people on this forum would have made the opposite choice at the time.

Also it's much easier to go for the high ceiling athlete and hope he pans out as a fan than it is when you're in the war room against the clock drafting for your job in a results based industry where patience is not always allotted to GMs. Especially when the owner goes out and guarantees playoffs in his first year and is trying to play for quick results.

[Frank Mulely]

Trading up in the 2012 draft, particularly in the top-10, didn't happen. Teams were coming off a strike shortened season and heading into the 1st full 82 game season under the current CBA. Most teams weren't making draft moves in the lottery that offseason.

It really would have come down to Barnes or Drummond. In an interview earlier in the day of the 2012 draft, West indicated that the Warriors weren't interested in waiting two years for Drummond. They wanted someone who could play right away, especially someone who played their weakest position. Whether this was his stance, the consensus of the front office, or both I am not sure.

@ Jerry West: respect but the game's passed you by. Quick baller blocking baby Lebrons (Kawhi), baby Shaqs (Drummond) and baby Dirks (Love) on our roster just because you're afraid you might not last more than two years!

[Frank Mulely]

It's not you dude. I've just heard enough of this forum still wragging on the FO for the Barnes over Drummond decision and doing it in a manner that you would think everyone here had Drummond rated super high. I remember a few people liking Drummond but also remember having to defend him against many people who called him a future bust. The people who wanted Drummond probably aren't even a third of those who claim like it was some no brainer decision they could have made. I remember probably more people thinking Meyers Leonard was a good pick than Drummond. Fab Melo too. I wanted Kawhi the year before but people act as if the FO is dumb for drafting Klay over him when Klay is one of the best players in that draft class. Every FO misses on some draft choices. Spurs look great but that's also because they have a steady core of veterans and coaches developing these players. It's probably one of the best ever. Presti is probably the next best at drafting but he's has some questionable choices like Jeff Green over the last two DPOY who play their biggest position of weakness. People on this board have been using hindsight to act as if this FO has been awful in the draft when I think they have brought in some very good players with the big blunder being Barnes over Drummond which I don't think most people on this forum would have made the opposite choice at the time.

Also it's much easier to go for the high ceiling athlete and hope he pans out as a fan than it is when you're in the war room against the clock drafting for your job in a results based industry where patience is not always allotted to GMs. Especially when the owner goes out and guarantees playoffs in his first year and is trying to play for quick results.

I rated Drummond super high and was raising holy hell about it when word slipped they were likely to pass on him.

Anyway the point is right now you need athleticism to compete. I cringe when I see Lee and ancient Bogut on the floor while teams like the Clippers just absolutely outclass them athletically. There's a reason why Kawhi was finals MVP. Yeah Pop's system helped a LOT but he's got the ability to stand front of LeBron and not get completely outclassed as an athlete. You can't coach that. Drummond was blooming obvious. I'm confident i can spot these kinds of ridiculous situations and the Warriors have a knack for creating them. I yelled at the TV when they passed on Kobe, KG, T-Mac....seriously this is what defines the Warriors as a franchise. Pass up golden opportunities. Trade prime Webber.

Sorry but this strategy of getting a bunch of choir boys on the floor just isn't working. You gotta take some chances. Sometimes the best players are chippy. Take Love, he's got a bit of a bad rep as a prima donna but I'll bet you money by the time he's 31 or so people will be singing his praises as a player.

West has got to go. Here's your golden watch, now stop screwing up our roster!

[turk3d]

And FWIW, if we had picked Drummond, there's in all liklihood that he wouldn't have been the standout he's become in Detroit (after all, did have Bogut). He might not have gotten the opportunity here that he was given in Detroit, a lottery team at the time.

We could have easily been kicking ourselves for picking him instead of Barnes (who likely could have done better if he got drafted by a weaker team). With out luck with bigs, he might have even wound up as a bust for all we know (could have been frustrated playing for MJax).

What?!?!

Drummond would have feasted here. Do you not remember that Ezeli started 41 games in his rookie year and played in 78 games? Do you not remember us needing a big body badly in the LAC series to ward off Deandre and Blake?

Drummond would probably be even more highly touted if he was on this team with all the space he'd have to work with rather than playing with josh smith at the 3.

MOP.

[whocurrz]

It's not you dude. I've just heard enough of this forum still wragging on the FO for the Barnes over Drummond decision and doing it in a manner that you would think everyone here had Drummond rated super high. I remember a few people liking Drummond but also remember having to defend him against many people who called him a future bust. The people who wanted Drummond probably aren't even a third of those who claim like it was some no brainer decision they could have made. I remember probably more people thinking Meyers Leonard was a good pick than Drummond. Fab Melo too. I wanted Kawhi the year before but people act as if the FO is dumb for drafting Klay over him when Klay is one of the best players in that draft class. Every FO misses on some draft choices. Spurs look great but that's also because they have a steady core of veterans and coaches developing these players. It's probably one of the best ever. Presti is probably the next best at drafting but he's has some questionable choices like Jeff Green over the last two DPOY who play their biggest position of weakness. People on this board have been using hindsight to act as if this FO has been awful in the draft when I think they have brought in some very good players with the big blunder being Barnes over Drummond which I don't think most people on this forum would have made the opposite choice at the time.

Also it's much easier to go for the high ceiling athlete and hope he pans out as a fan than it is when you're in the war room against the clock drafting for your job in a results based industry where patience is not always allotted to GMs. Especially when the owner goes out and guarantees playoffs in his first year and is trying to play for quick results.

I rated Drummond super high and was raising holy hell about it when word slipped they were likely to pass on him.

Anyway the point is right now you need athleticism to compete. I cringe when I see Lee and ancient Bogut on the floor while teams like the Clippers just absolutely outclass them athletically. There's a reason why Kawhi was finals MVP. Yeah Pop's system helped a LOT but he's got the ability to stand front of LeBron and not get completely outclassed as an athlete. You can't coach that. Drummond was blooming obvious. I'm confident i can spot these kinds of ridiculous situations and the Warriors have a knack for creating them. I yelled at the TV when they passed on Kobe, KG, T-Mac....seriously this is what defines the Warriors as a franchise. Pass up golden opportunities. Trade prime Webber.

Sorry but this strategy of getting a bunch of choir boys on the floor just isn't working. You gotta take some chances. Sometimes the best players are chippy. Take Love, he's got a bit of a bad rep as a prima donna but I'll bet you money by the time he's 31 or so people will be singing his praises as a player.

West has got to go. Here's your golden watch, now stop screwing up our roster!

Well first of all, you're one of the few people I'm talking about who did want Drummond. And Inagree we shouldn't just draft choir boys. I'm not saying the current FO hasn't made mistakes too. I'm just saying that it's much easier to make these criticisms of going with the high upside guy over the sure thing when you're a fan with no real responsibilities and pressures. Also that the FO has done a solid job of drafting besides that Barnes over Drummond pick but tons of people here are acting like they've done terrible and missed obvious choices when hardly anyone had Drummond as a a prospect they wanted.

I wanted Drummond and started a thread on goldenstwarriors.com forum after his junior year of HS about how we should tank the year Drummond enters the draft. But I'm not sitting here saying I know more than West. You can criticize his philosophies as he seems to value drafting perimeter players over bigs, (a philosophy any warrior fan should hate) but using hindsight to act like we know more is just stupid and missed on these obvious choices, especially when the majority of people didn't know any of this. It sucks we missed on the pick but no one hits on every pick and the other picks of this FO show they have a pretty solid idea of what they're doing as far as drafting goes so people shouldn't act like we have this FO that's clueless when it comes to the draft.

Also Barnes had a great combine that year and in college showed glimpses of having that fearless swag that lots of the best perimeter players have. He took and hit multiple game winners with some big games and took the leadership role and the heat that came with it after Marshall got hurt. He wasn't this low upside robot many people seem to claim he was.

[Onus]

Well the FO much was higher on Lillard (who generated the opinion on this board that guys would stop being Warriors fans if the FO drafted another guard), Beal, Waiters and MKG than Barnes. I think they definitely didn't want to risk Drummond which sucks, but I think Barnes was more of a move they made in the war room when all the top targets were off the board and they went for the pick they saw as safest rather than the high risk high reward move in Drummond. Also, I remember West's comments seemed more skeptical of Barnes than anything after the draft. Saying he could be a good player if he worked really hard but had a long way to go or something to that tune. This wasn't the attitude they had with Klay who they talked up before the draft and were very confident in when they drafted him. Their picks in Klay, Draymond, Ezeli with later picks seem to show they have good talent evaluation as all have outproduced their draft position when playing.

Many of the people here hated the idea of drafting Drummond and as I mentioned earlier, some said drafting Lillard would be one of the dumbest moves possible. Some people even thought we should draft Fab Melo at 7 or trade back a couple spots and draft him in the late lotto. So people should quit pretending they know more than the FO or are draft experts when really all these discussions prove is that when it comes to the draft some guys are right sometimes and sometimes they're dead wrong. The draft is not an exact science and if you have 5 minutes to make the selection, while fielding phone calls with your job on the line, I'm sure many here would have taken the safe pick in Barnes given those circumstances.

And this is coming form someone who had Drummond as the #2 prospect in the draft. I mentioned all the stuff about how he went to play for Calhoun who was gone and also had to deal with a chucking Napier as his PG. I also had Thomas Robinson not far after him. Hardly anyone gets all this right.

This is extremely well said, I was a huge Drummond fan, I also was a huge Tyler Honeycutt fan and thought he was going to be awesome. I was upset when my redskins traded 3 firsts for RG3, when i wanted them to draft Russell Wilson in the 2/3 round who I thought was gonna be a star... I also wanted them to draft either Morris Claiborne or Trent Richardson with there first. Arguably the two biggest busts from that draft. It really is to some degree a crap shoot. You're right I shouldn't pretend (and I don't mean to) to know more than the team management (the draft experts are debatable ). The question I ask is where would be right now if we had drafted Drummond or moved up for Beal. I think they should clean house next year. That's my opinion and it is a somewhat controversial one I guess. However I think some of the same logic that was used for jackson's firing, applies to the current regime though.

It's not you dude. I've just heard enough of this forum still wragging on the FO for the Barnes over Drummond decision and doing it in a manner that you would think everyone here had Drummond rated super high. I remember a few people liking Drummond but also remember having to defend him against many people who called him a future bust. The people who wanted Drummond probably aren't even a third of those who claim like it was some no brainer decision they could have made. I remember probably more people thinking Meyers Leonard was a good pick than Drummond. Fab Melo too. I wanted Kawhi the year before but people act as if the FO is dumb for drafting Klay over him when Klay is one of the best players in that draft class. Every FO misses on some draft choices. Spurs look great but that's also because they have a steady core of veterans and coaches developing these players. It's probably one of the best ever. Presti is probably the next best at drafting but he's has some questionable choices like Jeff Green over the last two DPOY who play their biggest position of weakness. People on this board have been using hindsight to act as if this FO has been awful in the draft when I think they have brought in some very good players with the big blunder being Barnes over Drummond which I don't think most people on this forum would have made the opposite choice at the time.

Also it's much easier to go for the high ceiling athlete and hope he pans out as a fan than it is when you're in the war room against the clock drafting for your job in a results based industry where patience is not always allotted to GMs. Especially when the owner goes out and guarantees playoffs in his first year and is trying to play for quick results.

the only good draft pick Myers has had is Draymond Green. Klay was a Larry Riley pick as Bob had just been brought in in April of 2011. He is now 1 of 4 with Ezeli being a question mark and Nedo not being able to make it through summer league.

[Onus]

Also Barnes had a great combine that year and in college showed glimpses of having that fearless swag that lots of the best perimeter players have. He took and hit multiple game winners with some big games and took the leadership role and the heat that came with it after Marshall got hurt. He wasn't this low upside robot many people seem to claim he was.

He really was if you were paying any attention