ImageImageImageImageImage

Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders?

Moderators: Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair, floppymoose

Old_Blue
Senior
Posts: 588
And1: 150
Joined: Jul 02, 2019
         

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#21 » by Old_Blue » Tue Apr 27, 2021 3:09 am

Nobody other than Steph should even be allowed to shoot the ball.
User avatar
floppymoose
Senior Mod - Warriors
Senior Mod - Warriors
Posts: 51,383
And1: 10,332
Joined: Jun 22, 2003
Location: There is no public health without the public.

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#22 » by floppymoose » Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:00 am

If they are healthy they are dangerous. The biggest problem is that we have little idea how anyone other than Curry and Green will react to the pressure of a playoff game. In Curry's first playoff run in 2013, that GS team was better than the Spurs, but they didn't have the playoff experience and got too nervous in crunch time execution.

I believe this version of GS if healthy is better than any of the teams they might see in the play-ins, but who knows what will happen to Wiggins, Oubre, Mulder, etc.
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 16,818
And1: 520
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#23 » by Twinkie defense » Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:01 am

No, not contenders this season, but you have to imagine what they could do with Klay back, another year in the system for the new/young guys, and the addition of a top-five lottery pick this summer... just with a healthy Klay during the recent stretch you gotta think Warriors beat Celtics and Wizards.
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 16,818
And1: 520
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#24 » by Twinkie defense » Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:03 am

No Western Conference team is going to look forward to playing the Warriors in the play in or playoffs.
WarriorGM
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,912
And1: 1,888
Joined: Aug 19, 2017

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#25 » by WarriorGM » Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:27 am

Onus wrote:
WarriorGM wrote:I have been critical of the front office for leaving Curry with such a miserable team for a reason. Same reason I've considered the preoccupation with tanking and draft picks odious.

Stephen Curry is the greatest player in basketball. He always gives you a chance. We are seeing him take the worst team in the league last year that was further weighed down by the worst player who has gotten significant minutes in the past few seasons to the cusp of a playoffs berth and a .500 season. It should be obvious that he is capable of making even an average team a contender. Indeed we may need to look back at that 2015 team and evaluate just how much better than average it really was without Steph. It's possible he has already taken an average team to a championship.

The lack of faith shown in Curry has been disgraceful. That's why anything less than saying Curry is the best player in the league has me up in arms. This year could have been a strong contending year even without Klay, but because so few thought of Curry in the proper light, that opportunity looks likely to be squandered.

I agree 2015 wasn't a highly talented team at all.

But aren't you showing a lack of faith in Curry by counting him out this year?


I'm not completely counting him out this year even now. But chances for a title could have been helped significantly if he had a team that could be trusted to hold its own even if he isn't on the floor.

michaelm wrote:You do have a point that wasting a year of Curry’s prime is just that, wasteful. You have never come up with a name or names who would have made them contenders next to Curry who was/were gettable given salary cap constraints and Thompson’s salary suiting on the bench though.


I think the strategy of completely renewing the team last year was questionable and has had consequences up to now. Bell and Jones weren't going to set anyone's hearts on fire but there is reason to believe they would have been better than Wiseman and Paschall this year. In the draft thread I suggested the idea of trading the number two pick for someone like Matisse Thybulle. Maybe that was undervaluing the pick and a Marcus Smart was a better target but even Thybulle would have contributed more this year.

With someone like Thybulle on deck one might be more willing to chance parting with Wiggins or Oubre. Wiggins and Oubre while probably still being better than Thybulle are not great value and take up cap space. If one could have traded Wiggins for someone like Gordon that would give more flexibility in terms of cap space. Looking at it now I wonder if something like Wiggins and Oubre for Gordon and Vucevic could have worked. If so Vucevic could have been kept or traded. Oubre for Lonzo is now looking like a big missed opportunity if that was ever on the table. I was also in favor of trading down for additional assets to pick Haliburton or Vassell.

Do any of these move the needle enough? Don't know, but I think they are marginal improvements. If one is really looking for a more dramatic improvement but with relatively little cost, then looking for players with good chemistry with Steph is probably the way to go and you'll only find that if you play different players with Steph. That's why last season was an even bigger waste than is recognized. At least it could have been used to see how various players look next to Curry. But he got his injury and management held him out as long as possible and the season prematurely ended. Who knows if Burks was a keeper or even if Smailagic has more to offer. Those questions should have been answered already. But I don't even know if the team has ever been actively seeking answers to them.
User avatar
Impuniti
Head Coach
Posts: 6,138
And1: 4,578
Joined: Jan 18, 2016

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#26 » by Impuniti » Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:50 am

Onus wrote:If we get the 8th seed, I can see us beating Utah. If Denver can beat the Lakers I can see us beating Denver, I don't think we can beat a healthy Lakers. I think we can beat the Clippers. I'm not sure about the Suns. So out of the top 4 teams in the west we can possibly beat 2 of them. That's not too bad. Out of the east I don't think we beat the Nets. The Bucks would be tough, but we could beat the Sixers. So 1 out of the 3 in the top of the East. We have a chance if everything breaks for us but highly unlikely

I give Warriors a 5% (close to no chance) vs the Lakers and Nets. Low chance vs Clippers or Bucks. Anybody else, well.. who knows.
ILOVEIT
RealGM
Posts: 12,167
And1: 2,391
Joined: May 28, 2004

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#27 » by ILOVEIT » Tue Apr 27, 2021 5:21 am

Impuniti wrote:
ILOVEIT wrote:No. But let's put it this way. There is definitely a scenario where the Warriors get a little lucky with Lakers, Clippers, Denver, Utah taking each other out or having injury or chemistry issues.

But there is no way Warriors would beat a healthy Nets, Bucks...hell...even Knicks. Just too small.

You add a healthy Klay....definitely...but Warriors have shown zero ability this year to execute down the stretch in close games....and that's what Playoffs are all about.

Image

Just stop it. In some magical scenario where the Warriors would make the final, it sure as **** wouldn't be against the Knicks. And vs a healthy Warriors team, Knicks would get diced.


lol....ya got me.
Looking forward to 2073....bye bye pouting moody Durant...hello again the 73 win style of hoops!
michaelm
Head Coach
Posts: 7,143
And1: 3,040
Joined: Apr 06, 2010
 

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#28 » by michaelm » Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:47 am

WarriorGM wrote:
Onus wrote:
WarriorGM wrote:I have been critical of the front office for leaving Curry with such a miserable team for a reason. Same reason I've considered the preoccupation with tanking and draft picks odious.

Stephen Curry is the greatest player in basketball. He always gives you a chance. We are seeing him take the worst team in the league last year that was further weighed down by the worst player who has gotten significant minutes in the past few seasons to the cusp of a playoffs berth and a .500 season. It should be obvious that he is capable of making even an average team a contender. Indeed we may need to look back at that 2015 team and evaluate just how much better than average it really was without Steph. It's possible he has already taken an average team to a championship.

The lack of faith shown in Curry has been disgraceful. That's why anything less than saying Curry is the best player in the league has me up in arms. This year could have been a strong contending year even without Klay, but because so few thought of Curry in the proper light, that opportunity looks likely to be squandered.

I agree 2015 wasn't a highly talented team at all.

But aren't you showing a lack of faith in Curry by counting him out this year?


I'm not completely counting him out this year even now. But chances for a title could have been helped significantly if he had a team that could be trusted to hold its own even if he isn't on the floor.

michaelm wrote:You do have a point that wasting a year of Curry’s prime is just that, wasteful. You have never come up with a name or names who would have made them contenders next to Curry who was/were gettable given salary cap constraints and Thompson’s salary suiting on the bench though.


I think the strategy of completely renewing the team last year was questionable and has had consequences up to now. Bell and Jones weren't going to set anyone's hearts on fire but there is reason to believe they would have been better than Wiseman and Paschall this year. In the draft thread I suggested the idea of trading the number two pick for someone like Matisse Thybulle. Maybe that was undervaluing the pick and a Marcus Smart was a better target but even Thybulle would have contributed more this year.

With someone like Thybulle on deck one might be more willing to chance parting with Wiggins or Oubre. Wiggins and Oubre while probably still being better than Thybulle are not great value and take up cap space. If one could have traded Wiggins for someone like Gordon that would give more flexibility in terms of cap space. Looking at it now I wonder if something like Wiggins and Oubre for Gordon and Vucevic could have worked. If so Vucevic could have been kept or traded. Oubre for Lonzo is now looking like a big missed opportunity if that was ever on the table. I was also in favor of trading down for additional assets to pick Haliburton or Vassell.

Do any of these move the needle enough? Don't know, but I think they are marginal improvements. If one is really looking for a more dramatic improvement but with relatively little cost, then looking for players with good chemistry with Steph is probably the way to go and you'll only find that if you play different players with Steph. That's why last season was an even bigger waste than is recognized. At least it could have been used to see how various players look next to Curry. But he got his injury and management held him out as long as possible and the season prematurely ended. Who knows if Burks was a keeper or even if Smailagic has more to offer. Those questions should have been answered already. But I don't even know if the team has ever been actively seeking answers to them.

So basically they should have got an Oubre level player who was better for the team than Oubre has been, and a vet Center.

I am sure they didn’t sign Oubre with any thought that another player on a similar level and salary would be better. And I believe they had a vet Center or Centers lined up, along with expecting Chriss to be available to play. From where I am in the world the signing of Wiseman and Klay going down were close to simultaneous, but if there was sufficient time for consideration sure maybe they should have pivoted. I could see Lonzo Ball + maybe someone of the ilk of Gasol or Baynes giving them a better chance this year, but probably not being enough for a title. Their playing scheme needs another high level shooter, and such guys don’t grow on trees. Oubre is looking rather more valuable recently in a changed role in any case, but perhaps too late.
HiRez
RealGM
Posts: 10,068
And1: 2,180
Joined: Dec 29, 2011

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#29 » by HiRez » Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:58 am

To anyone who watched the Dallas game, I dare you to defend this team as any sort of contender.
User avatar
cpower
RealGM
Posts: 13,613
And1: 5,074
Joined: Mar 03, 2011
   

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#30 » by cpower » Wed Apr 28, 2021 4:23 am

HiRez wrote:To anyone who watched the Dallas game, I dare you to defend this team as any sort of contender.

we are contending to win lotteries
ILOVEIT
RealGM
Posts: 12,167
And1: 2,391
Joined: May 28, 2004

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#31 » by ILOVEIT » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:10 am

Anthony Slater
@anthonyVslater
·
Apr 27
The Warriors are kings of blowout Ls this season. Loss margins after tonight's Dallas bloodbath: 53, 39, 31, 30, 26, 26, 26, 25, 22, 22, 21.
Looking forward to 2073....bye bye pouting moody Durant...hello again the 73 win style of hoops!
WarriorGM
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,912
And1: 1,888
Joined: Aug 19, 2017

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#32 » by WarriorGM » Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:16 am

ILOVEIT wrote:Anthony Slater
@anthonyVslater
·
Apr 27
The Warriors are kings of blowout Ls this season. Loss margins after tonight's Dallas bloodbath: 53, 39, 31, 30, 26, 26, 26, 25, 22, 22, 21.


This is always what we were working with this season—the worst team in the league last year and probably still the worst team this year without Curry. All things considered it's not as bad as it looks. A couple of the bad losses were at the very start of the season when the team had barely played with each other. The worst was in a game Curry wasn't playing. Yesterday's game was against the Mavericks who had the highest offensive rating of all-time last year and who earlier this year blew out the Clippers and won by 51 points. Bazemore and Lee are out, the effect of Wiseman and Oubre better understood. Expectations were low following Klay's re-injury. If the team makes the playoffs there is only upside if one isn't concerned with draft picks—and I'm not.
User avatar
whatisacenter
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,803
And1: 4,837
Joined: Aug 05, 2013
 

Re: Are the non-Wiseman Warriors contenders? 

Post#33 » by whatisacenter » Fri Apr 30, 2021 4:25 am

I think the answer to this thread is a resounding NO!

Return to Golden State Warriors