If Webber had stayed in GS after 1994

migya · Post #1 » by **migya** » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:41 pm

If Webber had stayed in Golden State after 1994 until 1999, Owens still traded for Seikally, Marciulionis, Mullin and Hardaway don't get traded, do the Warriors compete and did they win any championships?

Lineup:
Hardaway/Jennings
Sprewell/Marciulionis
Mullin/Houston
Webber/Gatling
Seikally/Alexander/Rozier

That's a very good roster.

Owly · Post #2 » by **Owly** » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:28 pm

migya wrote:If Webber had stayed in Golden State after 1994 until 1999, Owens still traded for Seikally, Marciulionis, Mullin and Hardaway don't get traded, do the Warriors compete and did they win any championships?

Lineup:
Hardaway/Jennings
Sprewell/Marciulionis
Mullin/Houston
Webber/Gatling
Seikally[sic]/Alexander/Rozier

That's a very good roster.

Houston is not really a small forward. Primarily a PF. If required to play a second position, a center in GS. Seattle tried to develop him as a 3 but contemporary sources say he lost a lot defensively (the value of his heft advantage, and whilst solid mobility for a 4, insufficient for a 3) and wasn't skilled enough offensively.

Mullin, Hardway are not healthy.
Seikaly was ineffective in GS (and not healthy).
Heck, Keith Jennings and David Wood are the only 2 guys above 70 games.
The Googs Marshall hybrid gets over the threshold but they don't get him, they get Webber who played 54 in Washington.
Sarunas got 66 in Seattle.
Houston got 39 (though likely to do with his playing ability, the Barry Bible mentions no injuries).

I don't know how the Webber-Nelson issue is resolved in this hypothetical but unless there's some massive leap in health then this team is nearly as bad as it was IRL (Webber is an upgrade on his successors, probably even after accounting for the injury and resultant deeper bench minutes, I'd guess).

Lenneth · Post #3 » by **Lenneth** » Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:29 pm

Probably not. Hardaway vs Sprewell was another problem, and I think that team will eventually get blown up due to a chemistry issue between young and old. Even if we ignore the chemistry issue, Warriors were all offense with no defense. They also didn't have a dominating post-up player for the playoff. I think they could have been very exciting team, and they will probably do better in this era. But for 90's, I think their limit was the Western Conference final.

migya · Post #4 » by **migya** » Sat Jun 12, 2021 5:51 am

Lenneth wrote:Probably not. Hardaway vs Sprewell was another problem, and I think that team will eventually get blown up due to a chemistry issue between young and old. Even if we ignore the chemistry issue, Warriors were all offense with no defense. They also didn't have a dominating post-up player for the playoff. I think they could have been very exciting team, and they will probably do better in this era. But for 90's, I think their limit was the Western Conference final.

Webber was a very good defender in his rookie season and likely would have remained for longer than he did in Washington. Seikally was a good inside player as well and the issue of having no big talent is eliminated with those two, while all having elite guards and wing.

Chemistry issues aside, which happened after Webber left, that roster is loaded, built for speed and scoring, with good defense, coach permitting which means change in coach (Rick Adleman) took over shortly after and was good all-around coach. Hardaway, Sprewell and Webber were all very good defenders at that time and the bench was solid as well.

With the addition of even just one solid veteran, such as Dale Ellis or Ricky Pierce one or two years later, they could contend.