Draymond Green discussion...and "californiadude" blackmail.

[FNQ]

I've been reading this thread for entertainment value, only saw one poster who could have even possibly implied Drummond was better, and he could have easily meant 'will be better'

[Twinkie defense]

No, Oaktown said he wants to trade Draymond and a first for Drummond and that Drummond is better than Bogut... you have to read between the lines.

[FNQ]

Ah.

So this forum has become mostly a haven for mis-representing people's takes so you can stand on your own soapbox. It's been brutal lately, and that's with a team on a 500 game win streak.

[Twinkie defense]

When someone's whole point is to argue against people saying Ezeli is better than Drummond, when no one has said that, yeah.

But of course you were the main person annointing Drummond as some great savior so I can see why you would be bothered when a second round pick is better than Drummond.

[Mylie10]

When someone's whole point is to argue against people saying Ezeli is better than Drummond, when no one has said that, yeah.

But of course you were the main person annointing Drummond as some great savior so I can see why you would be bothered when a second round pick is better than Drummond.

Turk did say he thinks Ezeli did better than what Drummond would have done if he were here that season. Turks words.

I disagree with Turk also and think Drummond would have helped us more than what Ezeli did.

Also agree with you on Draymond versus Drummond. I think Draymond is simply put a winner. Tough to find those guys.

[oaktownwarriors87]

Did I say "Turk3d says Ezeli is better than Drummond"? NO.

What I said:
"Truk3d was suggesting that rookie Drummond may not have been as effective as rookie Ezeli."

What you said:
"Ezeli was at least as effective (if not more so) that Drummond would have been"if he played for the Warriors his first year.
What's wrong with you dude?

That's not what you said after that, this is what you said:


" I still maintain that Ezeli was at least as effective (if not more so) that Drummond would have been, which can't be proven false since he played for Detroit that year."

And even if you did say that it would still be the lamest, most pointless, piece of **** nitpick argumemt.

SO I didn't say you were talking about a hypothetical situation where Drummond is a Warrior... THAT'S IMPLIED, THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION WHERE DRUMMOND IS DRAFTED BY THE WARRIORS.

[Twinkie defense]

But we drafted Barnes instead of Drummond, not Ezeli instead of Drummond, so you are sorta making an apples to oranges comparison, don't you think?

If you want to compare Ezeli, compare him to someone drafted late in the first round or later.

And BTW do you think Drummond is more valuable to the team than Barnes + Ezeli?

Drummond is a nice asset, decent player. Center height is always at a premium. I just never understood how the Warriors made some fundamental error in not drafting him? We aren't talking about Jonny Flynn over Steph Curry here.

Plus that was an excellent draft by the Warriors, just don't undertand what there is to quible about.

[FNQ]

When someone's whole point is to argue against people saying Ezeli is better than Drummond, when no one has said that, yeah.

But of course you were the main person annointing Drummond as some great savior so I can see why you would be bothered when a second round pick is better than Drummond.

Not really sure what that would have to do with anything even if it were true

At least we've cleared up what strawman means

[Twinkie defense]

You have complained about the Warriors drafting Barnes instead of Drummond. Guess that is not as fun now.

And Monroe was your guy, Detroit doesn't even want him now.

I hate soft big men. You can have Monroe.

[turk3d]

Did I say "Turk3d says Ezeli is better than Drummond"? NO.

What I said:
"Truk3d was suggesting that rookie Drummond may not have been as effective as rookie Ezeli."

What you said:
"Ezeli was at least as effective (if not more so) that Drummond would have been"if he played for the Warriors his first year.
What's wrong with you dude?

That's not what you said after that, this is what you said:


" I still maintain that Ezeli was at least as effective (if not more so) that Drummond would have been, which can't be proven false since he played for Detroit that year."

And even if you did say that it would still be the lamest, most pointless, piece of **** nitpick argumemt.

SO I didn't say you were talking about a hypothetical situation where Drummond is a Warrior... THAT'S IMPLIED, THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION WHERE DRUMMOND IS DRAFTED BY THE WARRIORS.

Putting aside all your BS for the moment, what makes you think that if we had drafted Drummond that Jackson would have played him even as much as he played in Detroit considering he shot just 37% fts his first year? Do you realize that Bogut's first year with us (same as when Drummond got drafted) Jackson only played him an average of 24.6 mpg and yet Bogut averaged 50% on his fts, significantly better than what Drummond did for Detroit?

And you do remember how Jackson much of the time didn't want to play Bogut during the 4th qtr and during crunch time towards the end of the game. I guess you forgot how much so many posters were complaining about that and how one of the biggest differences that Kerr has made which has contributed greatly to Bogut's great start this season.

I've never said (or meant) that Drummond isn't a greater talent than Ezeli, what I have said and been saying (for the umpteeth time) that I don't believe that Drummond would have gotten much playing time under Jackson. This is the last time I respond to this. From now on you can argue with yourself about it if you want. I gave you my opinion, and I gave you my reasons for it. You may not like it, don't want to agree with it, don't know what else you want.

[FNQ]

You have complained about the Warriors drafting Barnes instead of Drummond. Guess that is not as fun now.

And Monroe was your guy, Detroit doesn't even want him now.

I hate soft big men. You can have Monroe.

There's a very long thread where I defended the Barnes selection, as well as vocally preferred the defense of Udoh to Monroe, who I called overrated for some time.

The throwing poop at a wall idea might work for your takes, but making up other takes for other people doesnt. It certainly doesnt make your strawman or partial information on PER any more right / less entertaining, though

[oaktownwarriors87]

Putting aside all your BS for the moment, what makes you think that if we had drafted Drummond that Jackson would have played him even as much as he played in Detroit considering he shot just 37% fts his first year? Do you realize that Bogut's first year with us (same as when Drummond got drafted) Jackson only played him an average of 24.6 mpg and yet Bogut averaged 50% on his fts, significantly better than what Drummond did for Detroit?

And you do remember how Jackson much of the time didn't want to play Bogut during the 4th qtr and during crunch time towards the end of the game. I guess you forgot how much so many posters were complaining about that and how one of the biggest differences that Kerr has made which has contributed greatly to Bogut's great start this season.

I've never said (or meant) that Drummond isn't a greater talent than Ezeli, what I have said and been saying (for the umpteeth time) that I don't believe that Drummond would have gotten much playing time under Jackson. This is the last time I respond to this. From now on you can argue with yourself about it if you want. I gave you my opinion, and I gave you my reasons for it. You may not like it, don't want to agree with it, don't know what else you want.

Andrew Bogut missed 50 games that season and Biedrins/Tyler/Ezeli played a combined 26.9 MPG.

Your argument is weak and I don't think anyone agrees with you. I always quoted you directly and I never misrepresented your opinion (actually, you misquoted yourself to support your own argument), so you can stop playing that card.

[turk3d]

Putting aside all your BS for the moment, what makes you think that if we had drafted Drummond that Jackson would have played him even as much as he played in Detroit considering he shot just 37% fts his first year? Do you realize that Bogut's first year with us (same as when Drummond got drafted) Jackson only played him an average of 24.6 mpg and yet Bogut averaged 50% on his fts, significantly better than what Drummond did for Detroit?

And you do remember how Jackson much of the time didn't want to play Bogut during the 4th qtr and during crunch time towards the end of the game. I guess you forgot how much so many posters were complaining about that and how one of the biggest differences that Kerr has made which has contributed greatly to Bogut's great start this season.

I've never said (or meant) that Drummond isn't a greater talent than Ezeli, what I have said and been saying (for the umpteeth time) that I don't believe that Drummond would have gotten much playing time under Jackson. This is the last time I respond to this. From now on you can argue with yourself about it if you want. I gave you my opinion, and I gave you my reasons for it. You may not like it, don't want to agree with it, don't know what else you want.

Andrew Bogut missed 50 games that season and Biedrins/Tyler/Ezeli played a combined 26.9 MPG.

Your argument is weak and I don't think anyone agrees with you. I always quoted you directly and I never misrepresented your opinion (actually, you misquoted yourself to support your own argument), so you can stop playing that card.

I think your strawman argument is even weaker and I love how you speak for the rest of the board (same way you try and claim the meaning of what I've said). Of course, you can thini that MJ would play a raw 19 year old rookie who couldn't shoot free throws all you want. Even if you interpreted what I said to mean something different from what I actually meant, I explained it to you enough times. But go on spew nonsense all you want and if you think that everyone agrees with you around here, you're pretty delusional. Just look at the games that Bogut DID play and see who he was utilized by MJ.

[floppymoose]

I love that we took Udoh over Monroe. I'm not sure we ever trade for Bogut if we had taken Monroe, and that means no playoff series victory.

[turk3d]

I love that we took Udoh over Monroe. I'm not sure we ever trade for Bogut if we had taken Monroe, and that means no playoff series victory.

That's actually a good point, floppy. Sometimes a bad move results in something good over the long haul. What bugged me about that (drafting Udoh over Monroe) was that it was connected to the Lee deal so the combination of the two was horrible for this franchise and put us back several years with Lee clogging up our cap space. Who knows what we might have done if it were not for the Lee trade coupled with the draft of Monroe?

[Onus]

But we drafted Barnes instead of Drummond, not Ezeli instead of Drummond, so you are sorta making an apples to oranges comparison, don't you think?

If you want to compare Ezeli, compare him to someone drafted late in the first round or later.

And BTW do you think Drummond is more valuable to the team than Barnes + Ezeli?

Drummond is a nice asset, decent player. Center height is always at a premium. I just never understood how the Warriors made some fundamental error in not drafting him? We aren't talking about Jonny Flynn over Steph Curry here.

Plus that was an excellent draft by the Warriors, just don't undertand what there is to quible about.

I would contend that Drummond + Jeffrey Taylor/Jae Crowder is better than Barnes + Ezeli 24/7/365

We'd be getting Draymond in the 2nd regardless

[oaktownwarriors87]

I think your strawman argument is even weaker and I love how you speak for the rest of the board (same way you try and claim the meaning of what I've said). Of course, you can thini that MJ would play a raw 19 year old rookie who couldn't shoot free throws all you want. Even if you interpreted what I said to mean something different from what I actually meant, I explained it to you enough times. But go on spew nonsense all you want and if you think that everyone agrees with you around here, you're pretty delusional. Just look at the games that Bogut DID play and see who he was utilized by MJ.

"Festus was better suited for that role when Bogut went down"
"He would have taken longer to deveop while we were looking to be making a strong playoff run."
"I just don't think he would have helped us that much"
"I still maintain that Ezeli was at least as effective (if not more so) than Drummond would have been"

Please, for the love of god, look up the definition of a straw man argument before you use that term again.

I also love that you are saying he wouldn't have gotten playing time because of his FT shooting, yet last time you had this discussion with Onus you said Andris Biedrins would have played over Drummond because he's more experienced.

[whocurrz]

But we drafted Barnes instead of Drummond, not Ezeli instead of Drummond, so you are sorta making an apples to oranges comparison, don't you think?

If you want to compare Ezeli, compare him to someone drafted late in the first round or later.

And BTW do you think Drummond is more valuable to the team than Barnes + Ezeli?

Drummond is a nice asset, decent player. Center height is always at a premium. I just never understood how the Warriors made some fundamental error in not drafting him? We aren't talking about Jonny Flynn over Steph Curry here.

Plus that was an excellent draft by the Warriors, just don't undertand what there is to quible about.

I would contend that Drummond + Jeffrey Taylor/Jae Crowder is better than Barnes + Ezeli 24/7/365

We'd be getting Draymond in the 2nd regardless

Don't know if that's necessarily true. If Crowder was off the board it's possible the Mavs would have picked Draymond as Crowder's strengths were also his defense. Crowder was a much better shooter so maybe Nelson and RC don't value Draymond as much but it's very possible they pick Draymond before the pick we got him at. Still getting Drummond, Draymond and whoever would have been probably the best draft that year (NO got Davis but that was a no brainer and then they picked Austin Rivers )

[old rem]

You have complained about the Warriors drafting Barnes instead of Drummond. Guess that is not as fun now.

And Monroe was your guy, Detroit doesn't even want him now.

I hate soft big men. You can have Monroe.

There's a very long thread where I defended the Barnes selection, as well as vocally preferred the defense of Udoh to Monroe, who I called overrated for some time.

The throwing poop at a wall idea might work for your takes, but making up other takes for other people doesnt. It certainly doesnt make your strawman or partial information on PER any more right / less entertaining, though

I REALLY targeted Monroe...with UDOH... the backup plan. onroes obviously is way better even if the Pistons screw up everything. At the time..we did not HAVE Bogut,Dray,Speights. We had a damaged Biedrins

Monroe is somewhat a skills/finesse big.. but .I still see where he'd become an all-round GOOD C. Plan B..He is pretty good at PF. The current thing...he expires. He does NOT come with Bird rights. Likely he gets $10 mill...more or less.. I found a TV in O'Hare Airport on draft day...and MONROE was ours.. was THE guy I wanted.. and AGAIN... the idiot gang blew it. Can't say how everything would have gone.. but ...right now Udoh is a poor man's Ezeli. Going back to the 70's......I lost count of all the WTF?? monents.. stupid **** the Warriors diod...crap trades...dumb drafts....GOOD drafts but the talent gets wasted...dumb FA stuff..losing the KEEPER..overpay on a misfit.

We ....after DECADES....have ownership...front office...coaching..all on the same path. Better late than never.

[old rem]

But we drafted Barnes instead of Drummond, not Ezeli instead of Drummond, so you are sorta making an apples to oranges comparison, don't you think?

If you want to compare Ezeli, compare him to someone drafted late in the first round or later.

And BTW do you think Drummond is more valuable to the team than Barnes + Ezeli?

Drummond is a nice asset, decent player. Center height is always at a premium. I just never understood how the Warriors made some fundamental error in not drafting him? We aren't talking about Jonny Flynn over Steph Curry here.

Plus that was an excellent draft by the Warriors, just don't undertand what there is to quible about.

I would contend that Drummond + Jeffrey Taylor/Jae Crowder is better than Barnes + Ezeli 24/7/365

We'd be getting Draymond in the 2nd regardless

Don't know if that's necessarily true. If Crowder was off the board it's possible the Mavs would have picked Draymond as Crowder's strengths were also his defense. Crowder was a much better shooter so maybe Nelson and RC don't value Draymond as much but it's very possible they pick Draymond before the pick we got him at. Still getting Drummond, Draymond and whoever would have been probably the best draft that year (NO got Davis but that was a no brainer and then they picked Austin Rivers )

I LIKED Crowder a lot. I'd seen less of Dray and yet thought Dray goes late #1..Crowder is in our slot. Dray got opportunity..THRIVED....but in the draft they were similar. Crowder had been a tough guy, good D, a chemistry guy. It worked out for us. Switch Crowder and Green.. and maybe Crowder is ahead now?

Whatever......Dray has been our secret weapon in this remarkable season.