New Rumors and News Thread

[Captain_Caveman]

We'll see. They going to win 74 this year?

I think you're exaggerating any skepticism of the W's to make it into caricature. No one thinks they're going to be a lotto team. Just that making their championship rings this week is premature.

And my examples prove my point, too. The Warriors already won a title without Durant, and went back to the Finals and lost. We won 1 title with our group, and struggled sometimes with chemistry (that first-round series against Atlanta). The Heat won 2 years out of 4. The Cavs with Lebron/Love won 1 year out of 2.

The last team to integrate this many different pieces was the Bulls under Phil Jackson. Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Kukoc, Ron Harper, role-playing guards, filler bigs. So if the Warriors do that, great. But pointing out realistic questions about the construction of their roster is totally fair.

The ESPN article may have been about last year's team, but it was also about Green's personality and clashes with Kerr. I think it's all over-hyped. But keeping Klay happy is a different issue.

Btw, if we trade Bradley and BKN 17 for Klay it'll be a disaster - he's gone from underrated to overrated.

Your point is that hey, hold up, they might not win multiple titles? We all get that. The games haven't been played yet and lots of things can happen.

But these points being made about super teams not always working out to start, or there being too much offensive talent to share one ball are easily disprovable using 90% of NBA history as an example. With this much talent, it almost always works out. When it doesn't, it is usually due to injuries or the presence of other, comparable elite teams.

Saying that the Celts got taken to 7 by the Hawks before winning a ring in 08, or that the Heat *only* made the Finals in 2011 doesn't prove your point at all. It's just being contrarian for its own sake.

And really, at the end of the day, the only claim here some of you are making is that they somehow might not be as good with Durant and Zaza as they were with Barnes and Bogut. Whatever the future holds, that's crazy talk. We could have this discussion from now until the end of time, and it will never not be crazy talk.

Harrison. Barnes.

Really, now.

FWIW, I didn't say we should trade the Nets pick for Klay, but he's still the best in the NBA at his position and twice as good as anyone we have on our team.

[Captain_Caveman]

It's like, IDK, having a bullpen with four great closers and no middle relief guys. Too many stars, not enough planets to orbit them.

Why do people always make this terrible argument? League history shows pretty conclusively that nothing trumps having the most elite talent. Could be all perimeter guys, could be all frontcourt guys, can be a mix of the two.

Warriors probably have a twice as good a chance for a title this year than the rest of the field combined, which is a pretty claim to be able to utter before a long 100-game season even starts. They won 73 games last year, have been to back-to-back Finals and have now essentially traded a broken down Bogut and Barnes -- who is a poor man's Jeff Green and not even top 20 at his position -- for a guy who might be one of the top 10-15 players ever.

In addition to the two most recent MVPs, they have two other top 15 players, who both excel at both ends of the floor without needing to have the ball inn their hands, and an elite 6th man who is also an elite defender. In addition to potentially/likely being the best offense of all time, with the most floor spacing the game has ever seen, they may also be a top 2-3 defensive team this year with the DPOY and two other guys who have a very legitimate shot at making All-Defensive teams.

Oh, and they play completely unselfishly and likely have the 2nd best coach in the league behind Popovich.
ca
Sure, there are any number of injuries that could derail them, but come on, already.

Actually most of the time it doesn't work in year 1. The '08 Celtics are the exception not the rule. If they stay together chances are they pull through like Miami did but in general putting high usage super stars together is growing pain situation. That said the Warriors were damn good without Durant. It think the hardest thing is going to figure it out how they are going to approach the half dozen real games they play this season.

There is still only one ball. Ironically the Warriors would probably be better off having added a guy like Horford they don't exactly struggle scoring the ball. Nobody is going to turn away one of the best scorers in the game but it isn't like the Warriors can win more regular season games Curry, Durant, and Thompson are all going to watch their scoring avgs drop significantly so they can win 1 more game against the Cavs in June. Bottom line it is the most important thing but its about stopping Lebron James not scoring more points.

I don't know how they lost last year but I would not be shocked if Durant's stay in GS is short.

Got any examples of that of teams in their prime which don't involve them losing in the Finals?

8 of the last 9 Eastern Conference champs were from three different super teams, all of whom doing it in their first year together and again at least one time after that.

Shaq added to a Wade Heat and they win Year 1.

Duncan added to a team with DRob and they win Year 1.

Magic added to Kareem and they win Year 1.

McHale and Parish added to Larry and they win Year 1.

Bulls assemble a super team for 1996 and win Year 1.

[Andrew McCeltic]

My point is they might not win the title this year. They're thinner up front. They have an unusual mix of personalities. And they were tested last year by the Thunder, who had a ton of size, and lost to Cleveland, who had a ton of size. It's a huge gamble on the new, pace and space NBA.

Saying that it doesn't work out because of the presence of other, comparable elite teams. Well, yeah. That means you've lost to another comparable, elite team. Why did the Warriors lose in this last season? They didn't really have injuries, they won 73, and I don't even think the Cavs were a "comparable" team.

I'm not sure what we're really arguing about, except whether you're absolutely right and infallible and everything else is crazy talk. Because we are like 90 percent in agreement on this.

I do disagree on Klay, I think he's overrated by playing next to Curry on a winning team, in a great system. He's top 10, but I remember having this argument about where Pierce ranked 15 years ago. Longevity and situation do a lot to separate the wheat from the chaff. I wouldn't say he's head and shoulders above other top 10 shooting guards, but he's playing to his highest potential right now in a good situation.

[Captain_Caveman]

It's like, IDK, having a bullpen with four great closers and no middle relief guys. Too many stars, not enough planets to orbit them.

Why do people always make this terrible argument? League history shows pretty conclusively that nothing trumps having the most elite talent. Could be all perimeter guys, could be all frontcourt guys, can be a mix of the two.

Warriors probably have a twice as good a chance for a title this year than the rest of the field combined, which is a pretty claim to be able to utter before a long 100-game season even starts. They won 73 games last year, have been to back-to-back Finals and have now essentially traded a broken down Bogut and Barnes -- who is a poor man's Jeff Green and not even top 20 at his position -- for a guy who might be one of the top 10-15 players ever.

In addition to the two most recent MVPs, they have two other top 15 players, who both excel at both ends of the floor without needing to have the ball inn their hands, and an elite 6th man who is also an elite defender. In addition to potentially/likely being the best offense of all time, with the most floor spacing the game has ever seen, they may also be a top 2-3 defensive team this year with the DPOY and two other guys who have a very legitimate shot at making All-Defensive teams.

Oh, and they play completely unselfishly and likely have the 2nd best coach in the league behind Popovich.

Sure, there are any number of injuries that could derail them, but come on, already.

Agreed. I love ya Parl, but there are two things that stop the Warriors from winning it all this year:

1.) Injuries. Massive, crippling injuries.

2.) Lebron somehow, someway, impossibly, finding yet another level.


That team has so much talent that they'll cruise through the regular season and win plenty of games while working out all of their kinks.

It's like that gif (which I can't find now), of Arenas et al saying, about our big three, that a championship team cannot be built in one year, which ends with a shot of the big three smoking cigars, captioned "Y'all were sayin'?"

Only worse.

I'm definitely not sleeping on the injuries thing. Losing Curry, KD or Draymond would probably be fatal against a healthy Cavs team or comparable opponent. Losing Klay or Iggy would also be quite damaging. Maybe even Zaza.

100 games is a long time, but agree that they will likely be on cruise control for most of the year.

[SMTBSI]

Why do people always make this terrible argument? League history shows pretty conclusively that nothing trumps having the most elite talent. Could be all perimeter guys, could be all frontcourt guys, can be a mix of the two.

Warriors probably have a twice as good a chance for a title this year than the rest of the field combined, which is a pretty claim to be able to utter before a long 100-game season even starts. They won 73 games last year, have been to back-to-back Finals and have now essentially traded a broken down Bogut and Barnes -- who is a poor man's Jeff Green and not even top 20 at his position -- for a guy who might be one of the top 10-15 players ever.

In addition to the two most recent MVPs, they have two other top 15 players, who both excel at both ends of the floor without needing to have the ball inn their hands, and an elite 6th man who is also an elite defender. In addition to potentially/likely being the best offense of all time, with the most floor spacing the game has ever seen, they may also be a top 2-3 defensive team this year with the DPOY and two other guys who have a very legitimate shot at making All-Defensive teams.

Oh, and they play completely unselfishly and likely have the 2nd best coach in the league behind Popovich.

Sure, there are any number of injuries that could derail them, but come on, already.

Agreed. I love ya Parl, but there are two things that stop the Warriors from winning it all this year:

1.) Injuries. Massive, crippling injuries.

2.) Lebron somehow, someway, impossibly, finding yet another level.


That team has so much talent that they'll cruise through the regular season and win plenty of games while working out all of their kinks.

It's like that gif (which I can't find now), of Arenas et al saying, about our big three, that a championship team cannot be built in one year, which ends with a shot of the big three smoking cigars, captioned "Y'all were sayin'?"

Only worse.

I'm definitely not sleeping on the injuries thing. Losing Curry, KD or Draymond would probably be fatal against a healthy Cavs team or comparable opponent. Losing Klay or Iggy would also be quite damaging. Maybe even Zaza.

100 games is a long time, but agree that they will likely be on cruise control for most of the year.

Well, yeah, my point #1 was probably overstated; KD or Curry goes down and everything is back up in the air. Which is why I'm fine with jockeying for position and keeping our eyes open for now.

Point was that I agree that they're the prohibitive favorites, and deservedly so.

[Andrew McCeltic]

I'm willing to call them favorites, too. I don't think that's in dispute. I'm just not willing to say their new roster fits together so perfectly and without issue that they're going to win 80 and get a ring this year, if everyone's healthy.

Hell, like, look how Boston took a little bit of a step back when we let James Posey walk. This board debated that for years. The Boguts and the Barneses and the Ezelis matter.

[Captain_Caveman]

My point is they might not win the title this year. They're thinner up front. They have an unusual mix of personalities. And they were tested last year by the Thunder, who had a ton of size, and lost to Cleveland, who had a ton of size. It's a huge gamble on the new, pace and space NBA.

Saying that it doesn't work out because of the presence of other, comparable elite teams. Well, yeah. That means you've lost to another comparable, elite team. Why did the Warriors lose in this last season? They didn't really have injuries, they won 73, and I don't even think the Cavs were a "comparable" team.

I'm not sure what we're really arguing about, except whether you're absolutely right and infallible and everything else is crazy talk. Because we are like 90 percent in agreement on this.

I do disagree on Klay, I think he's overrated by playing next to Curry on a winning team, in a great system. He's top 10, but I remember having this argument about where Pierce ranked 15 years ago. Longevity and situation do a lot to separate the wheat from the chaff. I wouldn't say he's head and shoulders above other top 10 shooting guards, but he's playing to his highest potential right now in a good situation.

I don't think they are thinner up front at all. They played Barnes a lot at PF, and will do the same with KD, who is taller, longer, heavier and about 100x more talented. They also added David West, in case you missed it. Recent draft pick Kevan Looney is finally healthy as well.

For the roughly 44 minutes a game that was essentially played by Bogut, Ezeli and Speights at center, they are now looking at Zaza, Varejao, McGee and Damian Jones. Can easily add a buyout deadline guy as well if needed.

To me, it sure looks like they improved tremendously at SF, very much so at PF, and are comparable at C, with more depth all around.

As to Klay, he's not a franchise guy but is the best SG in the game and a two-way player with amazing range.

[Captain_Caveman]

I'm willing to call them favorites, too. I don't think that's in dispute. I'm just not willing to say their new roster fits together so perfectly and without issue that they're going to win 80 and get a ring this year, if everyone's healthy.

Hell, like, look how Boston took a little bit of a step back when we let James Posey walk. This board debated that for years. The Boguts and the Barneses and the Ezelis matter.

I think perhaps I am just more familiar with that team and the actual players being discussed here. Barnes has been bricking shots like it was his religion since last year's playoffs, all through the Finals and the Olympics, and all through preseason with the Mavs. Before a single regular season game has even been played, Dallas papers are writing articles asking if the Mavs are having buyer's remorse:

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dallas-mavericks/mavericks/2016/10/22/harrison-barnes-giving-mavs-case-buyers-remorse

I also think if their core guys were that worried about chemistry with KD over Barnes, they wouldn't have spent a year recruiting him heavily right in front of Barnes' face.

Harrison Barnes is a scrub with no heart and not much talent. I'd take Jeff Green all day over him, never mind an MVP like KD. Not a Posey situation at all.

They might miss Bogut barely, but that was true even with him on the team, as he failed to finish the year more often than not. His body is broken down and not very likely to stay healthy going forward.

Ezeli is an injured scrub who barely played the last two years.

[Andrew McCeltic]

My point is they might not win the title this year. They're thinner up front. They have an unusual mix of personalities. And they were tested last year by the Thunder, who had a ton of size, and lost to Cleveland, who had a ton of size. It's a huge gamble on the new, pace and space NBA.

Saying that it doesn't work out because of the presence of other, comparable elite teams. Well, yeah. That means you've lost to another comparable, elite team. Why did the Warriors lose in this last season? They didn't really have injuries, they won 73, and I don't even think the Cavs were a "comparable" team.

I'm not sure what we're really arguing about, except whether you're absolutely right and infallible and everything else is crazy talk. Because we are like 90 percent in agreement on this.

I do disagree on Klay, I think he's overrated by playing next to Curry on a winning team, in a great system. He's top 10, but I remember having this argument about where Pierce ranked 15 years ago. Longevity and situation do a lot to separate the wheat from the chaff. I wouldn't say he's head and shoulders above other top 10 shooting guards, but he's playing to his highest potential right now in a good situation.

I don't think they are thinner up front at all. They played Barnes a lot at PF, and will do the same with KD, who is taller, longer, heavier and about 100x more talented. They also added David West, in case you missed it. Recent draft pick Kevan Looney is finally healthy as well.

For the roughly 44 minutes a game that was essentially played by Bogut, Ezeli and Speights at center, they are now looking at Zaza, Varejao, McGee and Damian Jones. Can easily add a buyout deadline guy as well if needed.

To me, it sure looks like they improved tremendously at SF, very much so at PF, and are comparable at C, with more depth all around.

As to Klay, he's not a franchise guy but is the best SG in the game and a two-way player with amazing range.

Are you sh*tting me? Didn't realize they'd fleshed out their front court like that. I don't love the idea of KD at the 4, but didn't know they had West, Varejao, McGee. And Damian Jones. Thought they were just going small overall.

Still hold to what I said about Durant/Thompson/Steph having to make it fit, but I thought they'd actually gutted their power forward and center depth in order to make cap room for Durant.

[bucknersrevenge]

Those 4 guys aren't gonna play a ton of minutes over the course of the regular season anyway. Not only can/will Kerr strategically rest guys throughout the season, but in SO many games against the mediocre teams in this league (which there are many), they are gonna find themselves up by 35 6 minutes inside the 3rd quarter and the rest of the game will be extended garbage time. They should be pretty fresh for the post season. San Antonio, I think has to prove that Kawhi and LMA can lead a team now without Duncan. As for the Clippers, they've pretty much been Golden State's bi*ch the last couple of years and I don't see that changing. The Clippers biggest offseason acquisition was what? Marreese Speights? I don't see anyway they don't at least make it to the Finals.

[azwfan]

I came on here looking for news on which of your young wings were going to be let go / traded and i see dubs talk!
FWIW - Bogut matters. Ezeli matters but he seemed to be injured anyways. Barnes... haha... well he's a good guy and i wish him (and Dallas) the best.

At any rate any news on who is getting cut?

[Parliament10]

I came on here looking for news on which of your young wings were going to be let go / traded and i see dubs talk!
FWIW - Bogut matters. Ezeli matters but he seemed to be injured anyways. Barnes... haha... well he's a good guy and i wish him (and Dallas) the best.

At any rate any news on who is getting cut?

It's supposedly down to R.J. Hunter and James Young.

[165bows]

My point is they might not win the title this year. They're thinner up front. They have an unusual mix of personalities. And they were tested last year by the Thunder, who had a ton of size, and lost to Cleveland, who had a ton of size. It's a huge gamble on the new, pace and space NBA.

Saying that it doesn't work out because of the presence of other, comparable elite teams. Well, yeah. That means you've lost to another comparable, elite team. Why did the Warriors lose in this last season? They didn't really have injuries, they won 73, and I don't even think the Cavs were a "comparable" team.

I'm not sure what we're really arguing about, except whether you're absolutely right and infallible and everything else is crazy talk. Because we are like 90 percent in agreement on this.

I do disagree on Klay, I think he's overrated by playing next to Curry on a winning team, in a great system. He's top 10, but I remember having this argument about where Pierce ranked 15 years ago. Longevity and situation do a lot to separate the wheat from the chaff. I wouldn't say he's head and shoulders above other top 10 shooting guards, but he's playing to his highest potential right now in a good situation.

I don't think they are thinner up front at all. They played Barnes a lot at PF, and will do the same with KD, who is taller, longer, heavier and about 100x more talented. They also added David West, in case you missed it. Recent draft pick Kevan Looney is finally healthy as well.

For the roughly 44 minutes a game that was essentially played by Bogut, Ezeli and Speights at center, they are now looking at Zaza, Varejao, McGee and Damian Jones. Can easily add a buyout deadline guy as well if needed.

To me, it sure looks like they improved tremendously at SF, very much so at PF, and are comparable at C, with more depth all around.

As to Klay, he's not a franchise guy but is the best SG in the game and a two-way player with amazing range.

I'm not in the least disputing this team's caliber, but IMO that front court is a real potential issue needing to be addressed. If they get first half of '16 Zaza it's probably all right, but it is well within the realm of possibility that Zaza, West, Varajeo and McGee are collectively shot and need to be replaced. West in the playoffs last year played 10 games at 17 mpg and put up 12/7, terrible rebounding percentages and a .492 TS%, and will be almost 37 in this year's playoffs.

It really won't stop them because they are so good, but I think the story is that while every title contender can be derailed by injuries, the depth is older and weaker in the front court than most for me.

[Fidel Sarcasmo]

GS is gonna have a record number of games this year where they score over 120 in a game. Even if their defense isn't spectacular, they have so much fire-pire on offense that the other team just wont be able to produce that kind of output. It take a fantastic shooting percentage just to get over 105-110 a game. These guys are gonna knock down everything. They're the best offense I've seen since the late 90's early 2000's version of the Sacramento Kings. A little less fast break and less flashier passing but with more efficient scoring. they were hard to believe last year and now they have a prime hall of famer coming in, hungry to win a title. I can't see these guys losing in the finals this year, minus some real injuries or a depleted bench. GS has the offensive Gatling gun to everyone else's pistol.

I mean if you open up a game in the 1st quarter and score 40 pts and the other team has 20 after the first quarter, your in dream world if you think a team isn't feeling like a blow out is coming. GS will score 35-40 pts so many times this year in the 1st quarter when their 4 all-stars are in the game. I can't see how that wont demoralize the other team right at the beginning. Russel westbrook can get as mad as he wants and play super hard against GS this year cause of what happened. There's no amount of anger he could conjure up that'll stop GS from putting up a first quarter with something like 35-38 points. With Health, the league is eff'd for a couple years, until key-player contract time rolls around again for GS. And then maybe their owner is willing to go into Cleveland Cav's tax land just to keep the band together.

[FakeScreenName123]

the depth is older and weaker in the front court than most for me.

that's the trade off when the 2nd/3rd best player int he world joins yer team? u can't have everything...

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

Based on Klay Thompson's remarks through the media ("I'm not sacrificing ****") as well as the games that I've watched thus far.....yeah, I could see him getting pretty pouty after a couple of seasons, similar to how Ray Allen was under Doc. Klay will be relegated to being a spot-up shooter, but I think Klay fancies himself as a guy who can handle the ball. He's not wrong, and he's much too young to be just a spot-up shooter for the rest of his career. I can see him getting frustrated after a little bit, especially when he starts seeing all of the Under Armor ads and Nike ads featuring Steph and KD. Hell, even Draymond Green is getting on national Footlocker Ads. Meanwhile, Klay is sponsored by Anta. You know anybody rocking Anta? I sure as heck don't.

[Zaschrona]

I think Klay will be just fine. I think he should have a career year. Barnes had so many open looks last two years, but he couldn't take an advantage from them. This time Durant will be much more closely guarded. The result should be more open looks for another shooter - and that should be Klay, he should have more open looks this year. Durant is going to get Barnes', Barbosa's and Speights' looks and a few more shots from Iguodala. Curry 19 shots, Durant 19, Thompson 17, Green 9, Iguodala 4, Livingston 4, McCaw 4, West 4, Zaza 4, JaVale 4. They had 87 shots per game, should have a few more this year.

[24istheLAW]

I think people are sleeping on Zaza a bit in all this Warriors talk. He is a really good center. I'd worry about him being on the downside age-wise but he's efficient in every aspect of the game. Good passer like Bogut, good rebounder. Can score out of the pick and roll as the roll man. Has enough skill to be on the floor late in games. He's 10x more valuable than a paid-to-be-7-feet-tall dude like Ezeli, and while he might give up some value to Bogut in the banging bodies department he's more complete.

People have talked about the Durant signing being unfair for competitive balance but it's Zaza playing for nothing that is more startling to me than Durant getting paid somewhere around his actual value.

[TheOGJabroni]

I used to not be a big fan of Klay, admittedly, but I would be all in for him. I've seen some wonder whether he is overrated; I used to think he was just a beneficiary of Curry but that was too easy of a way to look at it.

All alone, he is probably the second best shooter in the league. He can create off the dribble. One of the best defenders at his position. He's already played for a selfless team, so he would fit right in, but in a bigger role.

On the other hand, I think someone like Bradley could do wonders for a team like the Warriors. He'd provide what they wanted from Barnes in reality and wouldn't demand as many shots for this "super team".

I give it a .1% chance of it happening AND him coming to Boston, but I will dream about that...

[Edug27]

I give it a .1% chance of it happening AND him coming to Boston, but I will dream about that...

0.0000001% chance.