ImageImageImageImageImage

The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development

Moderators: floppymoose, Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair

Did the Warriors front office fail Curry this year?

Yes
16
38%
No
26
62%
 
Total votes: 42

Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#61 » by Scoots1994 » Mon Jun 7, 2021 12:57 pm

superunknown wrote:so are they anticipated that this offseason several vets will sign here? because if they were about to do it last year before klay went down, now that klay is close to return and steph just showed what he's capable of, those vets shouldn't have any issue in coming here now. let's wait and see.


I think they were in the running for more players last year before Klay got hurt but it's not like they can force players to choose the Warriors. That hasn't suddenly changed this year, and this year the FA class is worse than last year and the Warriors have even less minutes and less prominent roles to offer.

A shooting big who can mentor Wiseman and play <20 minutes a night. Not many out there who would rather take that role with the Warriors rather than be part of the group who fill the hole at the center position for the Lakers for example.

A playmaking guard who can run the offense for the 2nd unit. Again, the Lakers need that guy too and on the Lakers you might start and get more minutes.

So, the Warriors look better for winning but worse for minutes and role for those players. The only place they could offer a bigger role and minute last year was the wing are Oubre filled last year and with Klay back and Wiggins improvement there is less room there this year on the Warriors.
SpreeChokeJob
Pro Prospect
Posts: 824
And1: 453
Joined: Jun 30, 2017

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#62 » by SpreeChokeJob » Mon Jun 7, 2021 2:10 pm

The goal of this past year was not to contend but to show that they could. That way they could attract vets.

Curry has made the case for vets to join this team, the front office did not. In two years they have only come up with Wiggins, Poole, and Anderson that could be counted on.

At the rate they are going they are closer to rebuilding than competing barring any blockbuster trade.
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#63 » by Scoots1994 » Mon Jun 7, 2021 3:10 pm

SpreeChokeJob wrote:The goal of this past year was not to contend but to show that they could. That way they could attract vets.

Curry has made the case for vets to join this team, the front office did not. In two years they have only come up with Wiggins, Poole, and Anderson that could be counted on.

At the rate they are going they are closer to rebuilding than competing barring any blockbuster trade.


But what would you have done with the extremely limited resources the Warriors have had available? Basically 5 2nd round picks and the 2nd pick in a weak draft last year and extremely limited money. How would you have transformed the Warriors roster?
superunknown
Junior
Posts: 467
And1: 111
Joined: Sep 25, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#64 » by superunknown » Mon Jun 7, 2021 3:35 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
SpreeChokeJob wrote:The goal of this past year was not to contend but to show that they could. That way they could attract vets.

Curry has made the case for vets to join this team, the front office did not. In two years they have only come up with Wiggins, Poole, and Anderson that could be counted on.

At the rate they are going they are closer to rebuilding than competing barring any blockbuster trade.


But what would you have done with the extremely limited resources the Warriors have had available? Basically 5 2nd round picks and the 2nd pick in a weak draft last year and extremely limited money. How would you have transformed the Warriors roster?


I guess, but it's only a guess, via a blockbuster trade like it's been mentioned.
at the end of the day, you get busy winning or you get busy losing. if you cannot (for whatever reason, cap situation, limited assets, etc.) build a contender around the actual main pieces, you might have to shake things up. of course it's not guaranteed that by doing that you'll be automatically a contender. in fact it's all about finding a way. what this way will be is not strictly defined. it migh be a lucky ball in the lottery, an unexpected FA that becomes available, a masterful FA, a blockbuster trade, you still have to find a way.
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#65 » by Scoots1994 » Mon Jun 7, 2021 4:03 pm

superunknown wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
SpreeChokeJob wrote:The goal of this past year was not to contend but to show that they could. That way they could attract vets.

Curry has made the case for vets to join this team, the front office did not. In two years they have only come up with Wiggins, Poole, and Anderson that could be counted on.

At the rate they are going they are closer to rebuilding than competing barring any blockbuster trade.


But what would you have done with the extremely limited resources the Warriors have had available? Basically 5 2nd round picks and the 2nd pick in a weak draft last year and extremely limited money. How would you have transformed the Warriors roster?


I guess, but it's only a guess, via a blockbuster trade like it's been mentioned.
at the end of the day, you get busy winning or you get busy losing. if you cannot (for whatever reason, cap situation, limited assets, etc.) build a contender around the actual main pieces, you might have to shake things up. of course it's not guaranteed that by doing that you'll be automatically a contender. in fact it's all about finding a way. what this way will be is not strictly defined. it migh be a lucky ball in the lottery, an unexpected FA that becomes available, a masterful FA, a blockbuster trade, you still have to find a way.


Okay, the problem is that the vast vast majority of the time those things, blockbuster FA, blockbuster trade, fail to get instant titles too.

The reality is that the Warriors didn't really have an avenue to get a franchise fortune changing superstar that would overcome the lost games of Klay and Curry over the last 2 years. There just wasn't much opportunity to make team changing moves when the very expensive core is old and hurt.
Chupchup
Sophomore
Posts: 170
And1: 30
Joined: Oct 21, 2020

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#66 » by Chupchup » Mon Jun 7, 2021 5:00 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
superunknown wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
But what would you have done with the extremely limited resources the Warriors have had available? Basically 5 2nd round picks and the 2nd pick in a weak draft last year and extremely limited money. How would you have transformed the Warriors roster?


I guess, but it's only a guess, via a blockbuster trade like it's been mentioned.
at the end of the day, you get busy winning or you get busy losing. if you cannot (for whatever reason, cap situation, limited assets, etc.) build a contender around the actual main pieces, you might have to shake things up. of course it's not guaranteed that by doing that you'll be automatically a contender. in fact it's all about finding a way. what this way will be is not strictly defined. it migh be a lucky ball in the lottery, an unexpected FA that becomes available, a masterful FA, a blockbuster trade, you still have to find a way.


Okay, the problem is that the vast vast majority of the time those things, blockbuster FA, blockbuster trade, fail to get instant titles too.

The reality is that the Warriors didn't really have an avenue to get a franchise fortune changing superstar that would overcome the lost games of Klay and Curry over the last 2 years. There just wasn't much opportunity to make team changing moves when the very expensive core is old and hurt.


The FO didn't need a blockbuster trade to help give Curry more help this season. Curry is 33 and his window is closing very fast as we wait for the perfect blockbuster deal. Again the thread is about if the FO failed Curry and not the future Warriors team success. And no we don't need to trade Minny pick or non lotto protected 1st rounders.

As we didn't make ANY trades of value during the trade deadline, did we opt out again this year because we didn't have a "contender" ? Making noise in the playoffs is still good as we see what happen to the Lakers/Suns and what almost happened to the Clippers. We almost certainly could have given the Suns trouble if CP3 hurt too.

Nuggets got Javale for 2 late 2nd rounders and a prospect. Javale would sure have been nice as a 10-15 min change of pace center. We certainly needed the size, shot blocking, and rebounding. I personally would have loved Demarcus Cousins as a backup C too. He would have been great offensive initiator (granted potential negative on defense for us). Did we even make a push for him? Did we even try to trade Oubre? Oubre + 2nd rounder for D Rose? We certainly needed another guy that can pass, dribble and shoot.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#67 » by FNQ » Mon Jun 7, 2021 5:29 pm

Chupchup wrote:
The FO didn't need a blockbuster trade to help give Curry more help this season. Curry is 33 and his window is closing very fast


He's in the final 3 for MVP
User avatar
oaktownwarriors87
RealGM
Posts: 12,071
And1: 3,719
Joined: Mar 01, 2005
 

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#68 » by oaktownwarriors87 » Mon Jun 7, 2021 6:04 pm

The two big pickups were Oubre and Wiseman. Both were terrible, and they were especially terrible with Curry. I can forgive the mistake of taking a chance on these guys, but I can't forgive the lack of action they took by the trade deadline.

Curry without Wiseman and Oubre
OFF: 127.1
DEF: 110.3
NET: +16.8

Without Curry, Wiseman and Oubre
OFF: 104.1
DEF: 103.3
NET: +0.8

Oubre without Curry
OFF: 97.4
DEF: 111.3
NET: -13.9

Wiseman without Curry
OFF: 101.1
DEF: 113.4
NET: -12.3

Wiseman and Oubre without Curry
OFF: 105.8
DEF: 127.3
NET: -21.5

Curry, Wiseman and Oubre
OFF: 100.0
DEF: 109.0
NET: -9.0

Curry and Wiseman without Oubre
OFF: 112.7
DEF: 120.8
NET: -8.1

Curry and Oubre without Wiseman
OFF: 114.3
DEF: 111.6
NET: +2.7


Kent Bazemore had the worst net rating with Stephen Curry when Wiseman and Oubre were off... and he was +11.6! Without Wiseman and Oubre the Warriors were paying like an elite team. We could see this well before the deadline, yet nothing was done and a season of MVP level Curry was thrown in the trash.

I also don't appreciate Steve Kerr resting Stephen Curry in the 4th quarter of a close, winnable games when Stephen Curry wants to be on the floor. I mean, if you want to rest Curry then don't make him carry Oubre and Wisemans weight.

The players were clearly more dedicated to winning this season than the coaching staff and front office. I'm not cool with that.

Almost as annoying as Morant pushing Currys hip back into Green with his right forearm to get the game winning shot.

https://youtu.be/f57qWKdzXz4?t=123
PockyCandy wrote:Is Ball's shot any more ugly than Curry's? Curry just seems to launch it towards the basket like an 8 year old.
SpreeChokeJob
Pro Prospect
Posts: 824
And1: 453
Joined: Jun 30, 2017

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#69 » by SpreeChokeJob » Mon Jun 7, 2021 7:08 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
SpreeChokeJob wrote:The goal of this past year was not to contend but to show that they could. That way they could attract vets.

Curry has made the case for vets to join this team, the front office did not. In two years they have only come up with Wiggins, Poole, and Anderson that could be counted on.

At the rate they are going they are closer to rebuilding than competing barring any blockbuster trade.


But what would you have done with the extremely limited resources the Warriors have had available? Basically 5 2nd round picks and the 2nd pick in a weak draft last year and extremely limited money. How would you have transformed the Warriors roster?


That second pick last year was important. Should have traded down for Halliburton and other pieces, plus picks from other teams. Even if they didn’t win the trade if give a little more to trade down. I have no problem with them drafting Wiseman for potential, but he will be ready when this team rebuilds. Halliburton is ready now and if he adds some muscle he will get better next year.

Oubre and Wannaker, the front office could have chose anyone else and would have been a net neutral for the team.

The most important decisions Oubre and Wiseman were not good for the immediate future. Wiseman may become good but that is the distant future. Those two decisions were important because they carry over and determine what happens next year.

They needed to add players that could contribute in the rotation and carry over to next year. Halliburton would have helped immediately. The Oubre trade exemption was more difficult to get the deal done. Maybe including Paschall plus second round picks could have gotten another player or players that were more suitable. Like others said McGee would have helped and would have come cheap.

If they weren’t committing to the season they needed to heal Curry’s tailbone during the end and perform a semi tank for a chance at some of the higher draft picks for some solid bench rookies and future core. Either that if they won the lottery they could decide to keep the future core or package one of the max salaries for a star.
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#70 » by Scoots1994 » Mon Jun 7, 2021 11:07 pm

Chupchup wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
superunknown wrote:
I guess, but it's only a guess, via a blockbuster trade like it's been mentioned.
at the end of the day, you get busy winning or you get busy losing. if you cannot (for whatever reason, cap situation, limited assets, etc.) build a contender around the actual main pieces, you might have to shake things up. of course it's not guaranteed that by doing that you'll be automatically a contender. in fact it's all about finding a way. what this way will be is not strictly defined. it migh be a lucky ball in the lottery, an unexpected FA that becomes available, a masterful FA, a blockbuster trade, you still have to find a way.


Okay, the problem is that the vast vast majority of the time those things, blockbuster FA, blockbuster trade, fail to get instant titles too.

The reality is that the Warriors didn't really have an avenue to get a franchise fortune changing superstar that would overcome the lost games of Klay and Curry over the last 2 years. There just wasn't much opportunity to make team changing moves when the very expensive core is old and hurt.


The FO didn't need a blockbuster trade to help give Curry more help this season. Curry is 33 and his window is closing very fast as we wait for the perfect blockbuster deal. Again the thread is about if the FO failed Curry and not the future Warriors team success. And no we don't need to trade Minny pick or non lotto protected 1st rounders.

As we didn't make ANY trades of value during the trade deadline, did we opt out again this year because we didn't have a "contender" ? Making noise in the playoffs is still good as we see what happen to the Lakers/Suns and what almost happened to the Clippers. We almost certainly could have given the Suns trouble if CP3 hurt too.

Nuggets got Javale for 2 late 2nd rounders and a prospect. Javale would sure have been nice as a 10-15 min change of pace center. We certainly needed the size, shot blocking, and rebounding. I personally would have loved Demarcus Cousins as a backup C too. He would have been great offensive initiator (granted potential negative on defense for us). Did we even make a push for him? Did we even try to trade Oubre? Oubre + 2nd rounder for D Rose? We certainly needed another guy that can pass, dribble and shoot.


The "blockbuster" wasn't my idea it was what I was replying to.

Javale wouldn't have changed the results of this year. 8 different teams have let him go. At this point at least 1/3 of the NBA knows he's not a good player. Trading a player and 2 picks for him is crazy.

DeMarcus got more than the minimum and wasn't worth it.

What makes you think D Rose wants to play for the Warriors?
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#71 » by Scoots1994 » Mon Jun 7, 2021 11:09 pm

Part of the record this season was also to keep their pick.
shazam_guy
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,133
And1: 598
Joined: Feb 03, 2009

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#72 » by shazam_guy » Tue Jun 8, 2021 12:38 am

20/20 hindsight from fans will be certain to help the front office do better next time. Thanks for those contributions, especially the "make a blockbuster trade" suggestion. I was terrified the management and coaches would have to do all the work by themselves.
Chupchup
Sophomore
Posts: 170
And1: 30
Joined: Oct 21, 2020

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#73 » by Chupchup » Tue Jun 8, 2021 12:59 am

Scoots1994 wrote:
Chupchup wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
Okay, the problem is that the vast vast majority of the time those things, blockbuster FA, blockbuster trade, fail to get instant titles too.

The reality is that the Warriors didn't really have an avenue to get a franchise fortune changing superstar that would overcome the lost games of Klay and Curry over the last 2 years. There just wasn't much opportunity to make team changing moves when the very expensive core is old and hurt.


The FO didn't need a blockbuster trade to help give Curry more help this season. Curry is 33 and his window is closing very fast as we wait for the perfect blockbuster deal. Again the thread is about if the FO failed Curry and not the future Warriors team success. And no we don't need to trade Minny pick or non lotto protected 1st rounders.

As we didn't make ANY trades of value during the trade deadline, did we opt out again this year because we didn't have a "contender" ? Making noise in the playoffs is still good as we see what happen to the Lakers/Suns and what almost happened to the Clippers. We almost certainly could have given the Suns trouble if CP3 hurt too.

Nuggets got Javale for 2 late 2nd rounders and a prospect. Javale would sure have been nice as a 10-15 min change of pace center. We certainly needed the size, shot blocking, and rebounding. I personally would have loved Demarcus Cousins as a backup C too. He would have been great offensive initiator (granted potential negative on defense for us). Did we even make a push for him? Did we even try to trade Oubre? Oubre + 2nd rounder for D Rose? We certainly needed another guy that can pass, dribble and shoot.


The "blockbuster" wasn't my idea it was what I was replying to.

Javale wouldn't have changed the results of this year. 8 different teams have let him go. At this point at least 1/3 of the NBA knows he's not a good player. Trading a player and 2 picks for him is crazy.

DeMarcus got more than the minimum and wasn't worth it.

What makes you think D Rose wants to play for the Warriors?


For Javale and Demarcus, it's subjective on their worth and value. Both were solid contributors when they played with the Warriors. In limited minutes they're upgrades to what we had. They won't bring us to the Finals by themselves but I think they could have pushed us into the playoffs and who knows what happens there.

I believe D Rose got traded to NY in exchange for Dennis Smith Jr and a 2nd round pick. It wasn't a buyout so it's really up to the FO to work their magic.
Chupchup
Sophomore
Posts: 170
And1: 30
Joined: Oct 21, 2020

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#74 » by Chupchup » Tue Jun 8, 2021 1:08 am

shazam_guy wrote:20/20 hindsight from fans will be certain to help the front office do better next time. Thanks for those contributions, especially the "make a blockbuster trade" suggestion. I was terrified the management and coaches would have to do all the work by themselves.


How's it 20/20 when half the board was asking why we didn't make a trade of value during the trade deadline? Most of us wondered why we didn't trade Oubre when his contract was expiring and it didn't seem like he was a good fit for the team. Most folks knew during the season we were getting crushed on the boards and wanted a vet center. Everyone knows to slow down Lebron we need some shot blocking at the 5 spot. (CP3 said the exact same thing after they closed out the Lakers, it was in reference to the importance of Ayton for them)

We also needed a 2nd person who can pass, dribble and shoot. When they doubled Steph, we had no one who could take advantage (granted this one would be much tougher to fill than a vet center)
Jester_
General Manager
Posts: 8,196
And1: 724
Joined: Mar 25, 2011

Re: The Front Office failed Curry this year 

Post#75 » by Jester_ » Tue Jun 8, 2021 4:14 pm

Onus wrote:
Jester_ wrote:
Onus wrote:I can agree with this. They almost threaded the needle exactly how they wanted it to play out. Other than the fact not making the playoffs. It's not the worst thing in the world.

But again when you have a top 15 player ever and you're not prioritizing winning while he's in his prime, is that really what you want to portray as a franchise?


"Treadmilling" is not "winning". Unless you're walking away with a ring, you're a loser.

Klay was down FFS. Best case we mortgage our future for a 4th seed and get 4-2'd by the Jazz.

How is that helping anyone?

What does treadmilling have to do with anything?

I guess reading is a lost skill


I'll let you steep in your own irony
User avatar
Onus
General Manager
Posts: 9,882
And1: 1,859
Joined: May 12, 2008
Location: NOA

Re: The Front Office failed Curry this year 

Post#76 » by Onus » Tue Jun 8, 2021 4:21 pm

Jester_ wrote:
Onus wrote:
Jester_ wrote:
"Treadmilling" is not "winning". Unless you're walking away with a ring, you're a loser.

Klay was down FFS. Best case we mortgage our future for a 4th seed and get 4-2'd by the Jazz.

How is that helping anyone?

What does treadmilling have to do with anything?

I guess reading is a lost skill


I'll let you steep in your own irony

I've constantly said in this thread it has nothing to do with trading players or signing players. It's the fact they started wiseman and oubre to "develop" them in a role that isn't even in a role that they would be playing in the future. It's the fact they decided this season was lost so we should develop wiseman and ended up missing out on the playoffs. It's the fact that they threw away an mvp trophy for curry, that they threw away a playoff spot. They chose to develop for the future when they literally have an mvp caliber player in his prime. They literally chose to try to play for the future rather than play to win games. That's how they failed Curry. Now you can choose to agree with that or not.
Most 4th Quarter Points in Final since 1991
1995 Shaquille O'Neal 11.5
2000 Shaquille O'Neal 11.5 (61.1% TS)
2015 Stephen Curry 10.8 (75.1% TS)
1997 Michael Jordan 10.7 (55.1% TS)
1998 Michael Jordan 10.6 (50.6% TS)
2011 Dirk Nowitzki 10.3 (68.0% TS)
User avatar
and1GS
RealGM
Posts: 23,556
And1: 1,709
Joined: Nov 12, 2008
Location: home of 3x champs + supporter of all-time weakest moves
   

Re: The Front Office (specifically) failed Curry by prioritizing development 

Post#77 » by and1GS » Tue Jun 8, 2021 4:52 pm

I'd argue our issue this season wasn't that we developed for the future, it's that we couldn't decide if we wanted to do that or compete for a mid playoff seed. That indecision led to us pursuing both simultaneously, which is obviously incompatible with success.

I would have been fine with either approach. Play Wise 10 mpg until he earns it and start with Oubre on the bench (after that horrendous first third of the season). Or play Wise 25, make Poole a rotational guy early and experiment with Mannion early on. Just don't try and do both multiple times in the same season.
Topher wrote:Do I seem mad? I’m about to make love to my wife so I deff ain’t mad.

Quazza wrote:ALL FUTURE ERECTIONS WILL BE NAMED KEVIN FOR BEING SUCH A STAND UP GUY
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office failed Curry this year 

Post#78 » by Scoots1994 » Tue Jun 8, 2021 5:20 pm

Onus wrote:
Jester_ wrote:
Onus wrote:What does treadmilling have to do with anything?

I guess reading is a lost skill


I'll let you steep in your own irony

I've constantly said in this thread it has nothing to do with trading players or signing players. It's the fact they started wiseman and oubre to "develop" them in a role that isn't even in a role that they would be playing in the future. It's the fact they decided this season was lost so we should develop wiseman and ended up missing out on the playoffs. It's the fact that they threw away an mvp trophy for curry, that they threw away a playoff spot. They chose to develop for the future when they literally have an mvp caliber player in his prime. They literally chose to try to play for the future rather than play to win games. That's how they failed Curry. Now you can choose to agree with that or not.


What if Curry was on board with all of the moves?
User avatar
Onus
General Manager
Posts: 9,882
And1: 1,859
Joined: May 12, 2008
Location: NOA

Re: The Front Office failed Curry this year 

Post#79 » by Onus » Tue Jun 8, 2021 6:41 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
Onus wrote:
Jester_ wrote:
I'll let you steep in your own irony

I've constantly said in this thread it has nothing to do with trading players or signing players. It's the fact they started wiseman and oubre to "develop" them in a role that isn't even in a role that they would be playing in the future. It's the fact they decided this season was lost so we should develop wiseman and ended up missing out on the playoffs. It's the fact that they threw away an mvp trophy for curry, that they threw away a playoff spot. They chose to develop for the future when they literally have an mvp caliber player in his prime. They literally chose to try to play for the future rather than play to win games. That's how they failed Curry. Now you can choose to agree with that or not.


What if Curry was on board with all of the moves?

Even if Curry is on board with it, that doesn't mean it was the right thing to do. Just like player injuries, the player probably is asking to play through it, but sometimes you have to do what's in the best interest of the player and protect them from themselves.
Most 4th Quarter Points in Final since 1991
1995 Shaquille O'Neal 11.5
2000 Shaquille O'Neal 11.5 (61.1% TS)
2015 Stephen Curry 10.8 (75.1% TS)
1997 Michael Jordan 10.7 (55.1% TS)
1998 Michael Jordan 10.6 (50.6% TS)
2011 Dirk Nowitzki 10.3 (68.0% TS)
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: The Front Office failed Curry this year 

Post#80 » by Scoots1994 » Tue Jun 8, 2021 10:19 pm

Onus wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
Onus wrote:I've constantly said in this thread it has nothing to do with trading players or signing players. It's the fact they started wiseman and oubre to "develop" them in a role that isn't even in a role that they would be playing in the future. It's the fact they decided this season was lost so we should develop wiseman and ended up missing out on the playoffs. It's the fact that they threw away an mvp trophy for curry, that they threw away a playoff spot. They chose to develop for the future when they literally have an mvp caliber player in his prime. They literally chose to try to play for the future rather than play to win games. That's how they failed Curry. Now you can choose to agree with that or not.


What if Curry was on board with all of the moves?

Even if Curry is on board with it, that doesn't mean it was the right thing to do. Just like player injuries, the player probably is asking to play through it, but sometimes you have to do what's in the best interest of the player and protect them from themselves.


You are saying that if he agreed with the plan they still failed him? So if he was involved in making the plan you are saying they should have gone back on their agreed decision and screwed him over for his own good. Riiiiight, I'm sure superstars love it when you disregard their opinion.

Return to Golden State Warriors