RealGM

Just think about it for a second. The Warriors aren't a defensive juggernaut. They have been successful. We have a lot of people from the Warrior organization within our management team.

I think if we want to see what our future team will look like we should look down the road at what they did previously?

Thoughts?

There's some similarities but the comparison isn't that great because our main guy is Cousins and their guy is Curry and neither of us have a comparable piece.

This is probably just me being overly pipe-dreamy but I like the potential comparison to the Spurs. Before you laugh follow me here and try to use your imagination... Cousins = Duncan; Stauskas = Ginobili; McLemore = Green; McCallum = Joseph; Thompson = Splitter.

That's about where the comparisons break down. We have Gay instead of Leonard who are vastly different players. Plus no Diaw, Parker, or Mills. But overall I think we should be adopting the Spurs model, put Cousins in the middle of the floor as the centerpiece of the offense and surround him with passing and shooting and see what happens.

I see it. At least from the perspective of offense. I'm hoping, however that we are better than the Warriors when it comes to defense. For long-term, deep-playoff success you need a balanced approach to both sides of the basketball. This is where Malone comes in. If he can somehow communicate a culture that values stopping opponents, then as long as we acquire the talent we have the ability to be a strong playoff team. Even in the west.

I see it as well. I just don't see where our personnel matches up with what Malone does? Maybe we have had a roster that has been filled with selfishness and players unwilling to play team ball? Then again the old Kings team became quite good defensively after winning a few games and understanding that was the next step to being a great team.

I wish Thompson = Splitter but it's more like Thompson < Splitter. All those other equations could work as our team improves, but I've been done with Jason for a while. He's not gonna get any better.

ICMTM wrote:Just think about it for a second. The Warriors aren't a defensive juggernaut. They have been successful. We have a lot of people from the Warrior organization within our management team.

I think if we want to see what our future team will look like we should look down the road at what they did previously?

Thoughts?

Andre Iguodala and Andrew Bogut in the starting lineup. Draymond Green, Jermaine O'Neal, and Festus Ezeli off the bench. They do have defensive players. Unfortunately they're always injured, so they have to play Harrison Barnes and David Lee and stuff.

I think we're being built like that, yes.

Before this turns into a Jason Thompson thread my thinking with Guys on the Spurs are they have their roles. Because our roster, coaches, and system changes biannually it makes for inconsistent play.

When we had Petrie he coveted a certain type of player. Even with the analytics and scouts a group desires a certain type of player. That's where I see the similarities.

I'm hoping after a full training camp with a full roster, that Malone will look each player in the eye and get them to verbally commit to playing good, hard defense. So much of the concept of team can be learned just by learning how to work as a unit to shut down an opponent. Individual defense will only get you so far where simple pick and roll, or screen play will get ANY defender out of position. The answer comes down to how well your teammates will read the offense and be there to back you up until you can recover. The best team defense comes when teammates look out for each other, know how to hedge on the P&R, or how to cover the passing lane without giving up on their man. I think our offense will take care of itself we have the offensive talent. This entire training camp should be simply dealing with fundamental team defense drills until reacting to the opponent's offensive plays becomes second nature.

ICMTM wrote:Before this turns into a Jason Thompson thread my thinking with Guys on the Spurs are they have their roles. Because our roster, coaches, and system changes biannually it makes for inconsistent play.

When we had Petrie he coveted a certain type of player. Even with the analytics and scouts a group desires a certain type of player. That's where I see the similarities.

PDA came from the Nuggets. Did you consider them to the Warriors in terms of the players they coveted?

enderwilson wrote:

ICMTM wrote:Before this turns into a Jason Thompson thread my thinking with Guys on the Spurs are they have their roles. Because our roster, coaches, and system changes biannually it makes for inconsistent play.

When we had Petrie he coveted a certain type of player. Even with the analytics and scouts a group desires a certain type of player. That's where I see the similarities.

PDA came from the Nuggets. Did you consider them to the Warriors in terms of the players they coveted?

PDA was with the Warriors before the Nuggets ....Duhn duhn Duuuuuuuhn!

They bought a mess full of trash and little talent.

They drafted two SG's arguably BPA both times, and signed the Dirty Laundry.

Hosed trash to get Rudy.

It's only been a year.

blind prophet wrote:They bought a mess full of trash and little talent.

They drafted two SG's arguably BPA both times, and signed the Dirty Laundry.

Hosed trash to get Rudy.

It's only been a year.

...And?

I personally think a full off-season together will do wonders for this team. If IT can come back cheap enough and we can sign a PG like livingston to start then we may have something. I like the idea of our 6th and 7th players off the bench being IT and Landry. I would really like to dump Thompson though if possible.

but if they plan on Stauskas being their version of curry light (which is possible I do see strong comparisons) then we are absolutely built like the warriors. They probably envisioned Bmac being a mini Klay Thompson. Sadly, he isn't. IT could be our version of Jarrett Jack (when they had him and Landry i.e. a scoring guard off bench). We just need some kind of defensive anchor.

Remember we missed out on Iggy last year...and hes now a Warrior.

ICMTM wrote:

blind prophet wrote:They bought a mess full of trash and little talent.

They drafted two SG's arguably BPA both times, and signed the Dirty Laundry.

Hosed trash to get Rudy.

It's only been a year.

...And?

They have not done enough yet to make that sort of claim.

For one we are supposedly building around Cousins, which is no where like Golden State.

If you go by what Malone is saying they're are trying to pattern themselves after the Spurs. And I can see it. Cuz is a lot like Duncan offensively and he's probably going to be up there with him defensively, at least compared to Duncan now. Stauskas looks kind of like Manu. Parker? Well, can't get it right all the time but if you look at how the Spurs played in the playoffs Parkers role changed quite a bit. Maybe you could replace his basic production and ability to score in iso with Gay. Certainly need some major help in the role player department.

If they are trying to pattern themselves after the Warriors it's probably a stretch since both rosters main core is nothing alike. Cuz and Gay is far different from Curry and Lee, or Curry and Klay.

jeffjtk1234 wrote:Remember we missed out on Iggy last year...and hes now a Warrior.

And we'll see how long he can stand being the bottom feeder. At times last year it looked like he missed the spotlight. Oh well, all's well that ends well. Gay is the exact talent this team needed next to Cousins if he continues to play his best.

I think they see that good defense begins with good offense. I'm too lazy to look up the stats, but I reckon that when our defense was set, we weren't terrible. Where we got murdered was in transition, and the way to improve that is to limit the transition opportunities for the other team by hitting your jumpers and taking care of the ball, hence why we drafted the way we did.

Wolfay wrote:I think they see that good defense begins with good offense. I'm too lazy to look up the stats, but I reckon that when our defense was set, we weren't terrible. Where we got murdered was in transition, and the way to improve that is to limit the transition opportunities for the other team by hitting your jumpers and taking care of the ball, hence why we drafted the way we did.

And it's totally true. Heck, look at this last finals, neither the Heat or the Spurs were that great defensively. The Spurs locked in when they needed to and otherwise played flawless ball offensively.

Still do need some personnel to anchor that defense though.