Nelson commits to coach Warriors in 2008-09

[nismolos]

Put up a comprehensive account of the Warriors' work against the top-10 teams in the West and we'll talk about it. Until then, you're not putting much effort into backing up a really thin, faith-based argument.

We did split the season series with 4 of the top 5 teams in the west. (Lakers, Spurs, Suns, Rockets) with no bench.

[Thugleavy34]

Injuries to the other teams were abundant. Yet another reason why wins does not always equal success---you have to look at the context.

And what's the reason we had no bench? Because it's difficult to stockpile a great starting 5 that can run-n-gun, let alone have depth off the bench.

[nismolos]

"THe point I was trying to make is that Nelson's system can win a championship if he had the right players. A dream lineup like that can be accomplished via draft although it is difficult."

It is very difficult, in fact, it is more difficult than trying to build a traditional contender. So why put yourself behind the 8 ball? If we had the right players, I could understand using run-n-gun to match the players, but why use the players to match run-n-gun?

We really aren't far from it. Not with Wright filling in his potential. We are/were an Andrew Bynum away (Bynum instead of Diogu, maybe DeAndre Jordan) from being right there.

[nismolos]

Injuries to the other teams were abundant. Yet another reason why wins does not always equal success---you have to look at the context.

And what's the reason we had no bench? Because it's difficult to stockpile a great starting 5 that can run-n-gun, let alone have depth off the bench.

Injuries need to be included as a necessary factor to every team. The Warriors also started 0-5 without Stephen Jackson. Its going to happen to every team, and thats a part of the game. Injuries shouldn't take away from the W's success bc they had injuries themselves. Only Baron played 82 games. Biedrins and Jack were out for a while. Pietrues..er.... yeah. This season wasn't a complete success but it wasn't a failure. This is a winning team now. That can't be failure.

[iowarrior]

One thing that I am happy to see in the article is that "Nellie and the team" decided that he had until June 1st to make his decision on his return.

I would be surprised if Nellie is the one who decided that so the FO, tired of his prolonged "health considerations" of last year, gave him a deadline this off-season - a good move by someone.

[GSW2K4]

-= original quote snipped =-

Who called this small-ball? Only the idiots on TNT and us RealGMers labeled Nelson's system as "smallball". His system is to "run,run,run." Whether that is with big players that can or the good small players that he has. THe point I was trying to make is that Nelson's system can win a championship if he had the right players.

This is a point I don't think people respond to well. I think you're right here -- Nellie's goal was to outrun people, not "out small" people and with this roster he decided to go with the players he felt could best outrun people.

Nellie likes the idea of winning by keeping people off-balance. Nellie was trying to create mismatches and allow a free-flowing -- almost street-ballish -- style of play in almost a total disregard for order that wouldn't allow the other team to get into a flow.

HOWEVER... where the Nellie-haters are right is that the system is ineffective and unsustainable given the personnel we have.

First of all, running is difficult in the playoffs. Someone (perhaps Jeff Van Gundy) point this out recently -- 1) the best defensive teams are in the playoffs and 2) everybody seems to pick up the defensive intensity so there's the unspoken rule that easy layups won't be allowed.

Second, IF we're going to run and not rebound or play defense, we're not going to win. You can't continue to fast break if you're taking the ball out from under the basket and letting the other team transition to defense...

You CANNOT run with Pietrus at the 4 and Harrington at the 5 because they will rarely be able to rebound or defend their position. You might score a lot of points every now and then due to mis-matches, but you cannot establish the type of continuity running requires.

Third, IF we're going to run and chuck the most threes in the league at the 7th worse percentage, we're not going to win.

Baron and Jack did this repeatedly, Nellie allowed it, and it destroyed continuity, again totally undermining the plan to run.

Fourth, and it's amazing that people refuse to believe this, you cannot win a championship without developing a strong core of bigs or one dominant one. We don't have that. Could we get it? Sure. But if you're going to run, you need a big to dominate the paint, get rebounds, and initiate the break with outlet passes... (hinting at who I like in the draft)

I believe in Biedrins, but Nellie kept jerking him in and out of the lineup as part of some scheme to find a mismatch with Al Harrington who just didn't bring it this year.

So IF you want to run to a championship, you HAVE to focus on execution. The suns executed their offense extremely well and part of that is because Nash knows how to manage the tempo to improve teammates. Unfortunately, Baron does not bring the same court presence and we played very sloppy ball. Where would we have gone this year if we had made the playoffs? We beat the Mavs because Avery was simply outcoached and completely disoriented...Sloan was not so amused...

So is our lottery status Nellie's fault? You could definitely say it was the players' fault, but ultimately, if the players are not executing, or rather refusing to execute, it's the coach's job to find a style that does work instead of stubbornly moving forward because we get hot every now and then.

On the day Obama is announced as the presumptive democratic nominee for president, your optimism is appropriate though...

[Warriorfan]

The run and chuck style is the one that worked for this years team. Very few predicted that GS would win 48 wins. And if someone said they would most would say they would be in the playoffs. Nelson has always been about winning the game that he is playing that night.

When I listened to the Nelson interview on KNBR it hit me how many All Star caliber PF's Nelson drafted. Sure he got Webber and Marques Johnson with top 3 picks but Nowitzki, Tyrone Hill, and Chris Gatling were all picked in to lower lottery or mid teens.

[floppymoose]

you cannot win a championship without developing a strong core of bigs or one dominant one. We don't have that. Could we get it? Sure. But if you're going to run, you need a big to dominate the paint, get rebounds, and initiate the break with outlet passes... (hinting at who I like in the draft)

But is someone who is 6' 7.75" really a big in the nba?

[Chris Cohan]

Actually, Warriorfan, quite a lot of fans were convinced the team was a 50 win team primed to take a 4, 5, or 6 seed in the playoffs. That noise began some time ago and was plastered far and wide. Now is not the time to rest on the laurels of unexpected returns.

And you are drumming up tired remarks about players who in almost every instance became All Stars only after they were free of Nelson's clutches. In the case of Marques Johnson, you've named a 6'7" small forward. This argument is not only hollow and instrumental, it patently avoids substantive analysis of what made them All Stars in their new locales and roles and what kept them from enjoying their greatest and most recognized success while Nelson manipulated them to suit his wiles.

What is most consistent in Nelson's history, from running the 6'8" Rod Higgins at center with FAR better shooters, penetrators, and passers in Mullin, Richmond, and Hardaway than we have now in Harrington, Jackson, and Davis, to the one solid gold find, Dirk Nowitzki, is a gimmick and a style predicated nearly exclusively upon streamlined offense and a near total avoidance of post play control at seemingly all costs in favor of three point shooting, running, and, for lack of a better turn of phrase, screwing with opponents instead of legitimately beating them to the highest heights of serious, final NBA success.

Don Nelson has quite simply taken the entertainment commodity of professional sports as its own end and seems to have made damned sure that he never worries about any other value in his preparation and planning.

When he routinely falls short of preparing a team who can take all comers, his defenders routinely point to wins and fun. But for whatever reason, all those wins have yet to produce a team with any shot at beating the best of the best. And losing in the ugly fashion his teams seem prone to eventually doing is not fun. Not fun at all.

Do better research on these matters if you hope to convincingly counter one of the most insightful and balanced posts any of us wack-jobs have mustered in some time (thanks, GSW2K4).

[Twinkie defense]

These were the days:

Boston 113 at L.A. Lakers 126
Boston 122 at L.A. Lakers 141
L.A. Lakers 103 at Boston 109
L.A. Lakers 107 at Boston 106
L.A. Lakers 108 at Boston 123
Boston 93 at L.A. Lakers 106

BTW almost no one (if anyone at all) predicted the Warriors would win fifty this season... have a look back at the prediction thread last summer. Most thought the Warriors would be around the same (42-40), or a little worse... after all we were without J-Rich, and people assumed that would adversely effect the record.

After the first six this season (when some were predicting disaster ; ), when Warriors were tearing up the League (and before the collapse), I'm sure many adjusted their expectations upward, as you would expect.

[Chris Cohan]

No, I've seen the higher predictions far and wide, including among season ticket holders I've since had much different conversations with. Dig up the RealGM predictions if you can, I'd be interested and can't recall posting much on the subject. But I am not at all limited to the Real GM community in describing a very real current of optimism and hyperbolic expectations after the Dallas series.

More importantly, I absolutely recall active seed talk through the summer and many saw the 8 seed to be a failed year.

Let's not minimize those overstatements. I think we deserve a chance to feel that way about our team within reason, not simply of misplaced idealism after a one trick pony show. So we shouldn't feel ashamed of saying those things. We should be concerned about what we can do to measure up to those ideals.

Win totals are not enough if the playoffs are outright missed, just as a lucky playoff matchup domination is not good enough if the next step exposes fundamental issues such as free throw shooting, rebounding (in a HUGE way), defense, and much, much more.

[GSW2K4]

-= original quote snipped =-


But is someone who is 6' 7.75" really a big in the nba?

I know, I know.

And I wouldn't think of trading Wright, Biedrins, Ellis, or even SJax for him...it's hard to believe any Warriors fan would...

But Kurt Thomas, Antawn Jamison, Jason Caffey, Boozer, David Lee have similar measurements and have had an impact...

Millsap, Haslem, and Drew Gooden are in his standing reach range and also have been effective...

In shoes, I take his 6'9.5", 255 lbs over Diogu's 6'8" 255... even with the difference in standing reach...

In other words, Love's probably not an all-star, but not inconceivable that he could have an impact on the boards...

[GSW2K4]

The run and chuck style is the one that worked for this years team. Very few predicted that GS would win 48 wins. And if someone said they would most would say they would be in the playoffs. Nelson has always been about winning the game that he is playing that night.

Win totals are not enough if the playoffs are outright missed, just as a lucky playoff matchup domination is not good enough if the next step exposes fundamental issues such as free throw shooting, rebounding (in a HUGE way), defense, and much, much more.

Rowell covered most of this (and has been saying it for a while ) but the fact is we not only missed the playoffs, but we had control of our own destiny and gave the playoffs away.

Our playoffs essentially started in March and the performances against NO & Pho (forgivable), Dal, Denver (twice) when it counted were not at all. Were not satisfactory by any standard...

Even if this year is an anomaly, relative to other teams' performances, 48 wins was not enough. If our 48 wins this year count as "success", then Barkley, Stockton, Malone, the 91 Blazers, and Shawn Kemp (and probably Patrick Ewing) all deserve rings because they did very well and just happened to run into the anomaly we call Jordan.

[Warriorfan]

48 wins are because of having the 2nd winningest coach in NBA history not despite him. The talent on this team is much closer to 40 wins then the 48 the team got. Everyone is entitled to their own definition of success but in most of the worlds criteria top 3 in winning pct and most wins would qualify.

[GSW2K4]

I'm not clear on the relationship you're making between his overall career success and the evaluations of this season....

Nellie is a successful NBA coach...I think coaches are good at different things, not all of which can be measured by championships...

But I think people are focusing more on this year and the immediate future. They did well to win 48... but missed the playoffs. I don't think anybody in the Warriors organization -- from Monta to Nelson to Mully to Ownership -- deems this season a success (from all media reports).

It's also worth considering that those wins, which weren't enough for the playoffs, came at the expense of developing of our young guys (based on media reports). So while another coach might not have gotten those wins, might they have shaped BWright, Marco, POB, and Lasme into productive rotation players? Just a tradeoff to consider.

[Subaculta]

-= original quote snipped =-



But Kurt Thomas, Antawn Jamison, Jason Caffey, Boozer, David Lee have similar measurements and have had an impact...

I agree with you that players of that 6'7-6'8 build can play inside... but one of those names is waaaay out of place.

[Subaculta]

Actually, Warriorfan, quite a lot of fans were convinced the team was a 50 win team primed to take a 4, 5, or 6 seed in the playoffs. That noise began some time ago and was plastered far and wide. Now is not the time to rest on the laurels of unexpected returns.

here's some threads from the start of last season... I don't see anyone on this board getting to carried away

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=716119

couldn't find the actual prediction thread... maybe someone could help with that.

[Chris Cohan]

-= original quote snipped =-



here's some threads from the start of last season... I don't see anyone on this board getting to carried away

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=716119

couldn't find the actual prediction thread... maybe someone could help with that.

Actually, the number 50 shows up a lot in those threads. You yourself considered Bucher's prediction of 50 "bold" but many were in agreement and the 8 seed was rarely (never) mentioned as satisfactory. There were lots of people making bold statements about the Warriors in many arenae and, as I clearly said, I'm talking about the much larger fan community outside the online forums.

I was not a poster on this forum until September of last year and can't recall what my prediction was, if I made one.

But I will say that I am not impressed by 48 wins because of the way we finished and the way we played against elite teams once they had dealt with their own injuries and trades and had buckled down for the playoff runs.

Because 48 did not make the playoffs, the number is not relevant in the context of the actual competitive demands and our responses to them in season. An ugly Denver team won more and made the playoffs, largely thanks to also beating us soundly in a key matchup. Dallas made their statement and New Orleans embarassed us on national television. The Phoenix game was troubling in more than one way. The Spurs game we won't even discuss.

That was our direct playoff competition and we were incapable of making any case for belonging among them. A midseason hot streak against weak competition means nothing to me when the ultimate storyline is that we could not measure up to the real competition, yet again, when the luck ran out and the chuck fell short.

[turk3d]

-= original quote snipped =-

Actually, the number 50 shows up a lot in those threads. You yourself considered Bucher's prediction of 50 "bold" but many were in agreement and the 8 seed was rarely (never) mentioned as satisfactory. There were lots of people making bold statements about the Warriors in many arenae and, as I clearly said, I'm talking about the much larger fan community outside the online forums.

I was not a poster on this forum until September of last year and can't recall what my prediction was, if I made one.

But I will say that I am not impressed by 48 wins because of the way we finished and the way we played against elite teams once they had dealt with their own injuries and trades and had buckled down for the playoff runs.

Because 48 did not make the playoffs, the number is not relevant in the context of the actual competitive demands and our responses to them in season. An ugly Denver team won more and made the playoffs, largely thanks to also beating us soundly in a key matchup. Dallas made their statement and New Orleans embarassed us on national television. The Phoenix game was troubling in more than one way. The Spurs game we won't even discuss.

That was our direct playoff competition and we were incapable of making any case for belonging among them. A midseason hot streak against weak competition means nothing to me when the ultimate storyline is that we could not measure up to the real competition, yet again, when the luck ran out and the chuck fell short.

+ 1

I'm much less "im-pressed" and much more "de-pressed" considering how the team just totally collapsed the last couple of weeks when it looked almost certain that they were going to be playoff bound. About all we wound up with is a lotto pick and one more year of Nellie in contrast to very little playing time for our future stars in BWright, limited minutes for Andris Biedrens and a complete washout of our 7' lottery pick Center in POB to go along with Baron and Jack implosions and very little cap money to re-sign our bench. That's small consolation as far as I'm concerned. I'd trade the pick in a heartbeat to have made the playoffs this season.