Is West Trash (so far)?

[and1GS]

Yes, he declined his player option with the Spurs to sign with us for somewhat less.

I think he will be much improved come playoff time. He is adjusting to a new team, new offense and a new defense. I don't expect him to score in double digits or rebound in double digits, just provide consistent quality play when he is in the lineup. He is built for the ruggedness of the playoffs and why our front office went after him in May of this year.

Sure. We also got him because we needed to sign any big for the veterans minimum lol. West will definitely help (i hope) when the pace is slowed down against some teams in playoffs. His ability to draw fouls in the paint during post ups will be valuable.

Keep in mind that Speights also signed for the minimum elsewhere. It was a decision to get West over keeping Speights, not a panic move.

I think he's already started to show his versatility and comfort in our scheme. He knows where to look for the next pass and really battles for boards and inside buckets. I think sometimes we take for granted how incredibly complex our offensive and defensive schemes are. The old timers likely remember the first month of Kerr where the team looked overwhelmingly talented, but a step or two slow at all times. We then kept basically the same exact team in tact for two years and what resulted was beautiful offense and incredible switches on D.

It takes time fellas. Mo was our worst player for a full year then turned into a hugely useful piece...because he finally grasped his role in the team. I'm confident our guys will do the same, especially when we remember that half the team is brand new.

[Mylie10]

I'm seeing Livingston more and more finding West in his comfort zone shot. Hopefully that continues and they actually try and go to it more often.

[GSWarriors22]

Thread should be "is Looney trash?". The Kid has not taken a Midrange, let alone a 3. He misses around the basket and his highly touted rebound ability turns out to be average so far. I know he got minutes against Milwaukee cause he is from there and it was a back to back, but id trade him for a pick at this point.

West is okay, he committed some silly fouls but we should utilize the pick n fade a lil more.

EDIT: Having finished the game against the Bucks, West played well, aside from the quick fouls.

[The-Power]

Thread should be "is Looney trash?". The Kid has not taken a Midrange, let alone a 3. He misses around the basket and his highly touted rebound ability turns out to be average so far.

If you write something it should at least not be obvious crap. Looney's TRB% for his career is at 18.1. Bogut's, for comparison, is at 17.4%. Looney has been an excellent individual rebounder so far, there's nothing to refute this. He misses around the basket? Seriously, was this the first game you watched him? He shoots 93.8% (!!!) at the rim for his career, 92.9% this season - last night's game not included. It's going to go down a little bit but he's been outstanding finishing at the rim, especially for a player who plays below the basket. Zaza's numbers from 0-3 ft? 70%. Durant's? 82.1%. Green's? 63.4%. So yeah, your statement is odd to say the least.

Sure, he has to work on his game but this is basically his rookie year. The shot-mechanics are there, so he's going to improve. Why would he shoot midrange shots when he plays as the Center next to guys like Durant, Curry or Thompson? He does what he should do and this is playing smart basketball which, for him, means finishing around the rim, going for rebounds and keep the ball moving. By the way, he has taken two midrange shots in garbage time without the superstars on the floor. Not to mention we're still figuring out our big men rotation, a pick gives us absolutely nothing this year when we need it.

[GSWarriors22]

Thread should be "is Looney trash?". The Kid has not taken a Midrange, let alone a 3. He misses around the basket and his highly touted rebound ability turns out to be average so far.

If you write something it should at least not be obvious crap. Looney's TRB% for his career is at 18.1. Bogut's, for comparison, is at 17.4%. Looney has been an excellent individual rebounder so far, there's nothing to refute this. He misses around the basket? Seriously, was this the first game you watched him? He shoots 93.8% (!!!) at the rim for his career, 92.9% this season - last night's game not included. It's going to go down a little bit but he's been outstanding finishing at the rim, especially for a player who plays below the basket. Zaza's numbers from 0-3 ft? 70%. Durant's? 82.1%. Green's? 63.4%. So yeah, your statement is odd to say the least.

Sure, he has to work on his game but this is basically his rookie year. The shot-mechanics are there, so he's going to improve. Why would he shoot midrange shots when he plays as the Center next to guys like Durant, Curry or Thompson? He does what he should do and this is playing smart basketball which, for him, means finishing around the rim, going for rebounds and keep the ball moving. By the way, he has taken two midrange shots in garbage time without the superstars on the floor. Not to mention we're still figuring out our big men rotation, a pick gives us absolutely nothing this year when we need it.

He played a total of 82 minutes (103 mins in 2 years, McCaw has 125 this season alone) with 21 FGA, that is way to small of a sample size to hail his great shooting or rebounding percentage, especially considering he stays underneath the basket almost all of the time (and gets fed the ball around there too). His "Career TRB%" is heavily influences by the 21 minutes he played in his first season, where he got 25%. To compare his career average with that of Bogut or any Center that has been in the league and actually played significant minutes is, to use your own words, "odd".
2 Midrange shots? Does that count as spacing? I mean he hardly ever shoots the ball (he missed all of the jumpers from midrange too).
The stats hardly represent a fair estimate of his impact at this point, the kid doesnt have 2 full games under his belt in terms of minutes. The fact that he focuses on rebounds while with the starters sounds great, but he hardly does anything else on the offensive end so we can only keep him out there in incredibly short spurts.
Right now, what he gives us is a body. When Jones returns we can add another body to the big man rotation, and skill-wise, Looney is far from ready to break into the rotation. He is fine to play garbage time here and there and that is it, or increadibly short spurt as mentioned above (although he played pretty bad in the 4 minutes he got vs the Bucks). Is that really significant help?
Jones, I hope, will eat up his minutes fairly quickly once he is ready to play. And then we have a guy in Looney that is basically a second McAdoo, but with more value, since you could argue that he has upside and is still very young. If a team would give up a pick for that (which is unlikely anyway), I say you do it.

[The-Power]

He played a total of 82 minutes (103 mins in 2 years, McCaw has 125 this season alone) with 21 FGA, that is way to small of a sample size to hail his great shooting or rebounding percentage, especially considering he stays underneath the basket almost all of the time (and gets fed the ball around there too). His "Career TRB%" is heavily influences by the 21 minutes he played in his first season, where he got 25%. To compare his career average with that of Bogut or any Center that has been in the league and actually played significant minutes is, to use your own words, "odd".

So? I never wrote that sample size wasn't an issue. But the suddenly so important sample size didn't refrain you from commenting about poor finishing or mediocre rebounding. So please tell me why the numbers which falsify your statement are irrelevant but your judgement somehow still has meaningful value. Or is this another case of 'I can see what's going on in a few minutes regardless of what the actual numbers show us'? It has to be and this renders any further discussion with you about this topic pretty pointless.

2 Midrange shots? Does that count as spacing? I mean he hardly ever shoots the ball (he missed all of the jumpers from midrange too).
The stats hardly represent a fair estimate of his impact at this point, the kid doesnt have 2 full games under his belt in terms of minutes. The fact that he focuses on rebounds while with the starters sounds great, but he hardly does anything else on the offensive end so we can only keep him out there in incredibly short spurts.

Did I say this counts as spacing? You did say he has not taken a midrange shot and I disproved your statement. That's it. I've explained why he doesn't take midrange shots with the starters. Not to mention you were the one to refer to the sample size - yet here you are again looking at the limited sample and jumping to conclusions. He focuses on rebounding but also sets screens, keeps the ball moving and finishes at the rim at a high rate which leads to a very high efficiency so far. What else do you expect?

As long as our Rookie (!) doesn't get in the way of our usual play while contributing something positive every now and then he does well as far as I'm concerned. Not sure what you're expecting but I'm getting the vibe that you don't really realize that Looney is a young, unfinished product which is here to grow slowly into a bigger role. You can't expect him to be a high impact player yet - even neutral impact on good teams is very solid for a Rookie and imo he hasn't been a negative on the court most of the time. Looney was going to be a lottery pick if not for health concerns. Now that he's finally on the court it's silly to consider dealing him for a player who would be at best as good as Looney talent- and impact-wise - but a year later while leaving us with one rotation player less this year. Yeah, I don't see the merit at all.

[Prius]

The game vs Bucks West looked more comfortable and doing the things we need him to do. Making good passes, scoring inside during right opportunities rather than force things, etc.

[GSWarriors22]

Did I say this counts as spacing? You did say he has not taken a midrange shot and I disproved your statement. That's it. I've explained why he doesn't take midrange shots with the starters. Not to mention you were the one to refer to the sample size - yet here you are again looking at the limited sample and jumping to conclusions. He focuses on rebounding but also sets screens, keeps the ball moving and finishes at the rim at a high rate which leads to a very high efficiency so far. What else do you expect?

As long as our Rookie (!) doesn't get in the way of our usual play while contributing something positive every now and then he does well as far as I'm concerned. Not sure what you're expecting but I'm getting the vibe that you don't really realize that Looney is a young, unfinished product which is here to grow slowly into a bigger role. You can't expect him to be a high impact player yet - even neutral impact on good teams is very solid for a Rookie and imo he hasn't been a negative on the court most of the time. Looney was going to be a lottery pick if not for health concerns. Now that he's finally on the court it's silly to consider dealing him for a player who would be at best as good as Looney talent- and impact-wise - but a year later while leaving us with one rotation player less this year. Yeah, I don't see the merit at all.

You dont want to see the merit. We are having a discussion about a player whose playing time is so inconsistent that we cant even take the stats for a fair representation.
Looney needs a lot of time and a lot of work, and there is a reason why he hardly played in the last 5 games. I dont even know if he can be considered as "a rotation player", cause he isnt even in the rotation. And as I said, with Jones coming back, we have another young, athletic Center that has less of a medical history and some nice tools to work with. He might not be ready from the get go but I doubt that Looney has been doing enough to assert himself.
We are in Win Now and I dont see the merit in grooming a player for 3 years, before he is ready to play consistently. We saw what immediate impact we can get with McCaw and next years Draft for example is considered to be a lot more talented! Im not saying McCaw is the norm but its better to take a chance on that or trade a pick for someone.
Looney needs consistent minutes sooner or later, and I doubt he will get them with us. Also, I think in terms of the type of player he is, I dont think Looney shows potential to be an amazing player that would justify the time and effort we would put in. He is a niche player, that, if things go well, stays healthy and becomes a player that focuses on rebounding. This, in itself, isnt bad, but Idk if that will be the output that the Warriors will hope for, after working with him for so long.

Also, im not saying we do it now, we can wait until the trade deadline and see which teams go into rebuild mode as the season goes along. I could imagine that a team would take a chance on Looney and maybe we can get a Veteran out of it that can help. That would also give the Warriors and Looney time to establish the rotation (or hs place within), and then you can reevaluate.

[The-Power]

You dont want to see the merit. We are having a discussion about a player whose playing time is so inconsistent that we cant even take the stats for a fair representation.

Agreed. But your presented view here makes it all the more surprising that you made claims about him (mediocre rebounder, deficient finisher at the rim) earlier. You want to question the sample size? Go ahead, nothing wrong with that. But you can't state something which is not in line with the data we have, then refer to small sample size issues but still not backpedal regarding your earlier claims. Simply put: you can't say he's a poor finisher or mediocre rebounder when there's nothing to back it up. If someone had praised him for his finishing and rebounding at the NBA level I wouldn't have chimed in had you mentioned the limited sample size. But this isn't what you did.

Looney needs a lot of time and a lot of work, and there is a reason why he hardly played in the last 5 games. I dont even know if he can be considered as "a rotation player", cause he isnt even in the rotation. And as I said, with Jones coming back, we have another young, athletic Center that has less of a medical history and some nice tools to work with. He might not be ready from the get go but I doubt that Looney has been doing enough to assert himself.

Looney is a rotation player just like McGee or Clark are. Kerr wants to see what he's got at the 5 and hasn't established clear rotation patters yet - aside from playing Zaza and West regularly, mainly because they are veterans who left money on the table. Did he do enough to assert himself? Who knows, we simply don't have sufficient information. Can Jones help us more than Looney? Again, we don't know and I doubt anyone in our organization wants to take the risk of relying on him at all this year.

We are in Win Now and I dont see the merit in grooming a player for 3 years, before he is ready to play consistently.

That's fine, even though I strongly disagree. However, please understand that your view isn't shared by our executives. Myers, for instance, repeatedly emphasized the importance of young players coming in (see, for example, the cash the Warriors put on the table to purchase a second round pick) who develop into rotation players. Not to mention that this is really Looney's first season, after recovering from injury recently and still battling with conditioning issues no less, so there's no reason to believe that it'll take three years for him to play consistent minutes. If he's not ready to play 10-15 MPG in a year then I'm sure we're exploring other options before betting on a magical third year improvement. But there's a good chance that he can play 10-15 MPG in a few months after Kerr got all the information he needs and as long as Looney improves his conditioning, I'd say.

Also, I think in terms of the type of player he is, I dont think Looney shows potential to be an amazing player that would justify the time and effort we would put in. He is a niche player, that, if things go well, stays healthy and becomes a player that focuses on rebounding. This, in itself, isnt bad, but Idk if that will be the output that the Warriors will hope for, after working with him for so long.

I'm not sure what you're expecting. Looney was drafted at 30, so was Jones. McCaw at 38. We successfully worked with Bazemore (undrafted) and Holiday (undrafted), as well as (potentially) Clark (undrafted). Quite frankly, if these players develop into rotation players - which they did or do most likely - then this is great given what these kind of players usually produce league-wide. A niche-player who rebounds well, plays solid defense and moves well on offense would be great for a late first-round pick. I'm not sure what you mean with 'after working for him so long' but I'd think that the Warriors would be pleased to mold Looney into a player who can play 10-15 MPG - they don't expect another Draymond Green. Do you really want to shoot for the stars with a pick next year despite the extremely low odds of getting more than a solid bench-player (which is, I believe, the baseline for Looney barring further injuries)?

I could imagine that a team would take a chance on Looney and maybe we can get a Veteran out of it that can help. That would also give the Warriors and Looney time to establish the rotation (or hs place within), and then you can reevaluate.

If Looney can fetch us a good veteran player and our front office (including Kerr) doesn't see Looney as a major piece going forward, then we should do it. Nothing I disagree with in this instance.

[East Bay Sports]

HE isn't much of a 4 or 5 at this point. He's a tweener in all of The worst ways

[Mylie10]

Relax guys...we are massaging 5 guys into the center position if you include Draymond. Kerr has flat out said that he has given the early season nods to West and ZAza to try and get them comfortable. Lately McGee has got a few more minutes. Kerr promised to play McAdoo as well.

So its not that Looney has done anything wrong, its just that the minutes are very sporadic. And its not because he sucks, its because of the amount of guys playing the position. Hell Kerr has even got Varejao to deal with.

And Jones is coming back, which will further affect playing time down the road potentially. I get it that Looney had a rough one the other night, but I rewatched that sequence and while he didn't convert a couple of looks, its really not anything to go crazy over.

Lots of you guys want to dump West, who has played much better on this road trip. I don't get the instant he's great, he sucks talk, in regards to our players from so many people. Especially the newer players to the roster. I get it if you want to hate on McAdoo or Varejao...we have a better sample size of suck to complain about, but even I have to admit that McAdoo was fine the last game.

Its kind of good we have so many guys to try. But it will take someone literally taking those minutes with some real dominant play...and I don't see that happening.

[Mylie10]

Tough to get in a rhythm when you play sporadically.

[turk3d]

Looney is the future, but i say that West is the present (on a 1 year deal). This is really more like Looney's rookie year. Let him get acclimated and his feet wet. His time will come. Just needs to stay healthy all season in order to have a future. I just wish would play West at the 4 and stop trying to make him a smallball Center, something he's just not familiar with at this juncture.

[Mylie10]

Looney is the future, but i say that West is the present (on a 1 year deal). This is really more like Looney's rookie year. Let him get acclimated and his feet wet. His time will come. Just needs to stay healthy all season in order to have a future. I just wish would play West at the 4 and stop trying to make him a smallball Center, something he's just not familiar with at this juncture.

Agree Turk.

Looney and Jones will be relied on more heavily next year when we are trying to pay Steph and Durant. Most likely some of the other dudes won't be resigned, so the long view is for Looney and Jones, as well as McCaw, to be to have much bigger roles next year.

McCaw is just busting the door down with good play. But since McCaw was a -18 last game, we should probably get rid of him too....or at least start a McCaw is trash thread, lol

[GSWarriors22]

You dont want to see the merit. We are having a discussion about a player whose playing time is so inconsistent that we cant even take the stats for a fair representation.

Agreed. But your presented view here makes it all the more surprising that you made claims about him (mediocre rebounder, deficient finisher at the rim) earlier. You want to question the sample size? Go ahead, nothing wrong with that. But you can't state something which is not in line with the data we have, then refer to small sample size issues but still not backpedal regarding your earlier claims. Simply put: you can't say he's a poor finisher or mediocre rebounder when there's nothing to back it up. If someone had praised him for his finishing and rebounding at the NBA level I wouldn't have chimed in had you mentioned the limited sample size. But this isn't what you did.

Looney needs a lot of time and a lot of work, and there is a reason why he hardly played in the last 5 games. I dont even know if he can be considered as "a rotation player", cause he isnt even in the rotation. And as I said, with Jones coming back, we have another young, athletic Center that has less of a medical history and some nice tools to work with. He might not be ready from the get go but I doubt that Looney has been doing enough to assert himself.

Looney is a rotation player just like McGee or Clark are. Kerr wants to see what he's got at the 5 and hasn't established clear rotation patters yet - aside from playing Zaza and West regularly, mainly because they are veterans who left money on the table. Did he do enough to assert himself? Who knows, we simply don't have sufficient information. Can Jones help us more than Looney? Again, we don't know and I doubt anyone in our organization wants to take the risk of relying on him at all this year.

We are in Win Now and I dont see the merit in grooming a player for 3 years, before he is ready to play consistently.

That's fine, even though I strongly disagree. However, please understand that your view isn't shared by our executives. Myers, for instance, repeatedly emphasized the importance of young players coming in (see, for example, the cash the Warriors put on the table to purchase a second round pick) who develop into rotation players. Not to mention that this is really Looney's first season, after recovering from injury recently and still battling with conditioning issues no less, so there's no reason to believe that it'll take three years for him to play consistent minutes. If he's not ready to play 10-15 MPG in a year then I'm sure we're exploring other options before betting on a magical third year improvement. But there's a good chance that he can play 10-15 MPG in a few months after Kerr got all the information he needs and as long as Looney improves his conditioning, I'd say.

Also, I think in terms of the type of player he is, I dont think Looney shows potential to be an amazing player that would justify the time and effort we would put in. He is a niche player, that, if things go well, stays healthy and becomes a player that focuses on rebounding. This, in itself, isnt bad, but Idk if that will be the output that the Warriors will hope for, after working with him for so long.

I'm not sure what you're expecting. Looney was drafted at 30, so was Jones. McCaw at 38. We successfully worked with Bazemore (undrafted) and Holiday (undrafted), as well as (potentially) Clark (undrafted). Quite frankly, if these players develop into rotation players - which they did or do most likely - then this is great given what these kind of players usually produce league-wide. A niche-player who rebounds well, plays solid defense and moves well on offense would be great for a late first-round pick. I'm not sure what you mean with 'after working for him so long' but I'd think that the Warriors would be pleased to mold Looney into a player who can play 10-15 MPG - they don't expect another Draymond Green. Do you really want to shoot for the stars with a pick next year despite the extremely low odds of getting more than a solid bench-player (which is, I believe, the baseline for Looney barring further injuries)?

I could imagine that a team would take a chance on Looney and maybe we can get a Veteran out of it that can help. That would also give the Warriors and Looney time to establish the rotation (or hs place within), and then you can reevaluate.

If Looney can fetch us a good veteran player and our front office (including Kerr) doesn't see Looney as a major piece going forward, then we should do it. Nothing I disagree with in this instance.

I get what you are saying. I think I might have jumped the gun on my statement that he is "trash". I get that the Warriors are figuring out the rotations. I just dont see Looney as having a skillset that will really help us for more than 8 mins per game for the moment, and, unless he elevates his game significantly out of no-where, for the rest of this year. Whether or not that is worth passing up on potential trades, I question. But thats my opinion.
And the thing about guys like Bazemore and Holiday is that they played well for us/did what he needed them to do and then took the next step elsewhere, and we pretty much lost out on any value in return. Im okay with that, their value was the amount of minutes they played for us at backup and letting them go was absolutely the right choice.
But trading Holiday during the season for example wasnt really an option because it would have made us incredibly thin at the 2 guard position (and he was a nobody). With Looney, even though he is a big, and we are thin at the 4 and 5, I dont think his loss would be so hard on the team. We have 5-6 guys capable of playing the 5, with Dray, West and KD filling up minutes at the 4. Then we have McAdoo who is trash but if we need a guy to play garbage time or fill in for 3 minutes (id rather not, but still), we have that too. And he still gets that "lottery talent" tag, so Im sure he has some value.

And finally, I read this all the time and its a little annoying: Looney was picked at 30, but he is a "lottery talent" if it wasnt for injury. What is it then? He is obviously healthy, so if we look at him as a guy who has lottery potential, lets judge him by that standard. And the expectation towards lottery players is, that they manage to break into the rotation and help the team (eventually). Now Looney is in an extra difficult position, bcs he landed with the best team of the league and that doesnt allow for a lot of playing time, but that is the risk of drafting a player that needs a lot of work. We cant say he is lottery talent, so his longterm place here is justified and then backtrack and say "well he was picked 30th so there shouldnt be any expectations".

I understand that we have a young kid here trying to fit into this team and figuring out his role, Im not saying he should be playing like McCaw does, since the latter is an exception. Im saying that this team can make rotation players look really good and that ultimately, we have to look at Looney and try and be realistic about what he can do, what he can become. And if there is a deal that gives us value enough value in return, I say you do it.
We dont have a pick in 17, so keeping the young guys coming is good, but if Looney doesnt develop enough, try and get a guy that doesnt need as much work in a more talented draft pool is what I say.

[FNQ]

I dont want to dump West by any means but he was a fish out of water the first 2 weeks.. looks better now and willing to see how it plays out, but he wasn't doing much different than Zaza for the first chunk of the season, and Zaza was vilely hated, and West escaped it because of a tiny +/- sample.

No way do you cut him because there's little chance you get better by doing so, but I would greatly prefer to see Looney over West. Looney's more fluid and athletic, and I'd rather coach up the talent there than a vet banger who's primarily going to play 5 for us. If West ever plays 4, you have to assume that the 5 is bigger and slower, and that is not our style at all.

[Onus]

You dont want to see the merit. We are having a discussion about a player whose playing time is so inconsistent that we cant even take the stats for a fair representation.

Agreed. But your presented view here makes it all the more surprising that you made claims about him (mediocre rebounder, deficient finisher at the rim) earlier. You want to question the sample size? Go ahead, nothing wrong with that. But you can't state something which is not in line with the data we have, then refer to small sample size issues but still not backpedal regarding your earlier claims. Simply put: you can't say he's a poor finisher or mediocre rebounder when there's nothing to back it up. If someone had praised him for his finishing and rebounding at the NBA level I wouldn't have chimed in had you mentioned the limited sample size. But this isn't what you did.

Looney needs a lot of time and a lot of work, and there is a reason why he hardly played in the last 5 games. I dont even know if he can be considered as "a rotation player", cause he isnt even in the rotation. And as I said, with Jones coming back, we have another young, athletic Center that has less of a medical history and some nice tools to work with. He might not be ready from the get go but I doubt that Looney has been doing enough to assert himself.

Looney is a rotation player just like McGee or Clark are. Kerr wants to see what he's got at the 5 and hasn't established clear rotation patters yet - aside from playing Zaza and West regularly, mainly because they are veterans who left money on the table. Did he do enough to assert himself? Who knows, we simply don't have sufficient information. Can Jones help us more than Looney? Again, we don't know and I doubt anyone in our organization wants to take the risk of relying on him at all this year.

We are in Win Now and I dont see the merit in grooming a player for 3 years, before he is ready to play consistently.

That's fine, even though I strongly disagree. However, please understand that your view isn't shared by our executives. Myers, for instance, repeatedly emphasized the importance of young players coming in (see, for example, the cash the Warriors put on the table to purchase a second round pick) who develop into rotation players. Not to mention that this is really Looney's first season, after recovering from injury recently and still battling with conditioning issues no less, so there's no reason to believe that it'll take three years for him to play consistent minutes. If he's not ready to play 10-15 MPG in a year then I'm sure we're exploring other options before betting on a magical third year improvement. But there's a good chance that he can play 10-15 MPG in a few months after Kerr got all the information he needs and as long as Looney improves his conditioning, I'd say.

Also, I think in terms of the type of player he is, I dont think Looney shows potential to be an amazing player that would justify the time and effort we would put in. He is a niche player, that, if things go well, stays healthy and becomes a player that focuses on rebounding. This, in itself, isnt bad, but Idk if that will be the output that the Warriors will hope for, after working with him for so long.

I'm not sure what you're expecting. Looney was drafted at 30, so was Jones. McCaw at 38. We successfully worked with Bazemore (undrafted) and Holiday (undrafted), as well as (potentially) Clark (undrafted). Quite frankly, if these players develop into rotation players - which they did or do most likely - then this is great given what these kind of players usually produce league-wide. A niche-player who rebounds well, plays solid defense and moves well on offense would be great for a late first-round pick. I'm not sure what you mean with 'after working for him so long' but I'd think that the Warriors would be pleased to mold Looney into a player who can play 10-15 MPG - they don't expect another Draymond Green. Do you really want to shoot for the stars with a pick next year despite the extremely low odds of getting more than a solid bench-player (which is, I believe, the baseline for Looney barring further injuries)?

I could imagine that a team would take a chance on Looney and maybe we can get a Veteran out of it that can help. That would also give the Warriors and Looney time to establish the rotation (or hs place within), and then you can reevaluate.

If Looney can fetch us a good veteran player and our front office (including Kerr) doesn't see Looney as a major piece going forward, then we should do it. Nothing I disagree with in this instance.

I get what you are saying. I think I might have jumped the gun on my statement that he is "trash". I get that the Warriors are figuring out the rotations. I just dont see Looney as having a skillset that will really help us for more than 8 mins per game for the moment, and, unless he elevates his game significantly out of no-where, for the rest of this year. Whether or not that is worth passing up on potential trades, I question. But thats my opinion.
And the thing about guys like Bazemore and Holiday is that they played well for us/did what he needed them to do and then took the next step elsewhere, and we pretty much lost out on any value in return. Im okay with that, their value was the amount of minutes they played for us at backup and letting them go was absolutely the right choice.
But trading Holiday during the season for example wasnt really an option because it would have made us incredibly thin at the 2 guard position (and he was a nobody). With Looney, even though he is a big, and we are thin at the 4 and 5, I dont think his loss would be so hard on the team. We have 5-6 guys capable of playing the 5, with Dray, West and KD filling up minutes at the 4. Then we have McAdoo who is trash but if we need a guy to play garbage time or fill in for 3 minutes (id rather not, but still), we have that too. And he still gets that "lottery talent" tag, so Im sure he has some value.

And finally, I read this all the time and its a little annoying: Looney was picked at 30, but he is a "lottery talent" if it wasnt for injury. What is it then? He is obviously healthy, so if we look at him as a guy who has lottery potential, lets judge him by that standard. And the expectation towards lottery players is, that they manage to break into the rotation and help the team (eventually). Now Looney is in an extra difficult position, bcs he landed with the best team of the league and that doesnt allow for a lot of playing time, but that is the risk of drafting a player that needs a lot of work. We cant say he is lottery talent, so his longterm place here is justified and then backtrack and say "well he was picked 30th so there shouldnt be any expectations".

I understand that we have a young kid here trying to fit into this team and figuring out his role, Im not saying he should be playing like McCaw does, since the latter is an exception. Im saying that this team can make rotation players look really good and that ultimately, we have to look at Looney and try and be realistic about what he can do, what he can become. And if there is a deal that gives us value enough value in return, I say you do it.
We dont have a pick in 17, so keeping the young guys coming is good, but if Looney doesnt develop enough, try and get a guy that doesnt need as much work in a more talented draft pool is what I say.

I'm not sure what type of return you're expecting out of Looney?

I'm guessing you think it's either a late 1st or 2nd, which at that point is a total crap shoot and a project player. That project player would be a year behind Looney's learning curve, since Looney is now in his rookie year. Don't expect young bigs to contribute for at least 3 years, just too much to learn and make an impact especially that late in the draft. So you'd be waiting an additional year for this project player to make the rotation.

If you expect a veteran, what kind of veteran are you getting that will be able to crack the rotation? The types of veterans that would be available would probably be the Zaza/David West types and we already have West and Pachulia.

Looney has definitely disappointed his last 2 outings, but his minutes are so sporadic and limited that it's hard to build any type of rhythm. I'd also expect his nerves were ramped up 1000 for his first game back home in Milwaukee. Also remember he hasn't played competitive basketball in a year.

In the long run Looney will be fine. He already displays quite good defensive discipline and some offensive awareness. I do have high hopes for him though.

[Onus]

I dont want to dump West by any means but he was a fish out of water the first 2 weeks.. looks better now and willing to see how it plays out, but he wasn't doing much different than Zaza for the first chunk of the season, and Zaza was vilely hated, and West escaped it because of a tiny +/- sample.

No way do you cut him because there's little chance you get better by doing so, but I would greatly prefer to see Looney over West. Looney's more fluid and athletic, and I'd rather coach up the talent there than a vet banger who's primarily going to play 5 for us. If West ever plays 4, you have to assume that the 5 is bigger and slower, and that is not our style at all.

I'd love for Looney get more playing time over West, just to speed up his development and acclimate him faster, but I doubt that's happening anytime soon. He still looks tentative and just looking to not mess up.

[Quazza]

I dont want to dump West by any means but he was a fish out of water the first 2 weeks.. looks better now and willing to see how it plays out, but he wasn't doing much different than Zaza for the first chunk of the season, and Zaza was vilely hated, and West escaped it because of a tiny +/- sample.

No way do you cut him because there's little chance you get better by doing so, but I would greatly prefer to see Looney over West. Looney's more fluid and athletic, and I'd rather coach up the talent there than a vet banger who's primarily going to play 5 for us. If West ever plays 4, you have to assume that the 5 is bigger and slower, and that is not our style at all.

I'd love for Looney get more playing time over West, just to speed up his development and acclimate him faster, but I doubt that's happening anytime soon. He still looks tentative and just looking to not mess up.

the game looks like it's going a little fast for Kev at the moment

[Onus]

I dont want to dump West by any means but he was a fish out of water the first 2 weeks.. looks better now and willing to see how it plays out, but he wasn't doing much different than Zaza for the first chunk of the season, and Zaza was vilely hated, and West escaped it because of a tiny +/- sample.

No way do you cut him because there's little chance you get better by doing so, but I would greatly prefer to see Looney over West. Looney's more fluid and athletic, and I'd rather coach up the talent there than a vet banger who's primarily going to play 5 for us. If West ever plays 4, you have to assume that the 5 is bigger and slower, and that is not our style at all.

I'd love for Looney get more playing time over West, just to speed up his development and acclimate him faster, but I doubt that's happening anytime soon. He still looks tentative and just looking to not mess up.

the game looks like it's going a little fast for Kev at the moment

Yea it does, which is understandable. Not playing for a full year and getting sporadic minutes it's going to be hard for him to get his feet under him. That's why I wish he'd get more playing time just so he can get use to it and know that he belongs.