S.O.T.T. - Golden State Warriors

Oh, the Warriors. The answer to any question about this team, like the relationship status of that Facebook friend that thinks they are clever, is “it’s complicated”.

After a year derailed by high expectations and injury, the Dubs finally decided to join the tank game all the way to the 7th pick in the draft. With players like Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, David Lee and Andrew Bogut in the starting five, there is a feeling in the air that the team is a solid small forward (or 2010-11 Dorrell Wright) away from the playoffs. This feeling has been fanned by owner Joe Lacob who guaranteed the playoffs last year, and is surely looking to start a winning tradition.

Thus, the Warriors draft room is split. Some of the time we hear that they are looking to draft somebody who is NBA-ready, and if that player isn’t there at the seventh spot, they will trade the pick for an established veteran. At other times, we hear the mantra about a “changed” Golden State Warriors team, who have real talent identifiers in the room and are just looking to draft the best player available.

As a long-term Warriors fan, I know that this team is very good at pushing my emotional buttons, making me think “but wait, if these nine things break right, we will be a contender this year!” I do think that packaging the seventh pick for Luol Deng/Andre Iguodala/Rudy Gay would get the Warriors to the playoffs, but at what cost? They are still one or two superstars away for competing for the title, and shouldn’t that really be the goal?

Thus, I advocate a “best player” available strategy. If that player happens to be 18, extremely raw, and filled with potential (aka Andre Dummond) even better. I’d rather take a shot at the next Andrew Bynum, and if the Warriors don’t make the playoffs next year, so be it.

This entry was posted in NBA Draft Preview and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 comments on “S.O.T.T. - Golden State Warriors

  1. Anonymous on said:

    if they were way below average with scoring machine monta ellis on the squad, what makes you think adding a rookie and old man bogut makes them a playoff team?

  2. Franklin Mieuli on said:

    Well, your reading is incredibly simplistic, and mostly wrong.They were way below average with (below average player) Monta Ellis on the team, (way above average) point guard Stephen Curry hurt, (soon to be way above average) shooting guard Klay Thompson on the bench, and (above average) center Andrew Bogut not on the team. Now, I'm not saying they are going to be world beaters, but assuming they can get a pretty competent small forward, they are looking at competing with the Clippers and Lakers for the division crown, and maybe a 6th seed in the playoffs. Not going to make the Western Conference title game, but something like a 49-33 record looks about right.

  3. Anonymous on said:

    you're joking, right? if my assessment was overly simplistic, yours was patently absurd. monta ellis is a better scorer than anyone the warriors will have on their roster this year. i mean, the owner traded SO THEY COULD TANK. not only was it poor basketball strategy to trade him, it was poor business strategy. gsw is now left without a marquee player, they lack superstar talent and depth. you realize what you're predicting, right?curry, thompson, rookie, lee, bogut >paul, billups, butler, griffin, jordansessions, kobe, artest, gasol, bynuma 50 win team you're saying? if they finish with 40 wins, bob meyers should automatically win gm of the year

  4. Franklin Mieuli on said:

    Ahh, I see that you subscribe to the “scoring is the only metric by which we should judge a basketball player” theory. Monta IS a better scorer than anyone the Warriors will have on their roster this year, agreed. No doubt about it. But just because he can score doesn't mean he's good. Go check out Basketball Reference and look at his Win Shares. The fact of that matter is that he is, and has been for almost his entire career, a below average basketball player. Klay Thompson is one too, but he's only a rookie. He has time to do better.The Warriors only partially traded Monta Ellis to tank, and they were wrong about that one. They should've kept him if they really wanted to tank. They also traded Monta Ellis because he was becoming more vocal about wanting to leave, and because they saw Andrew Bogut, who when on his game is one of the top 10 centers in the league, become available. You're also misreading my post. I said if they get Iguodala, Gay or Deng, not a rookie. A Curry, Thompson, Deng, Lee, Bogut lineup, IF HEALTHY (a big if with two of them), can certainly hang with both of those lineups.

    • Anonymous on said:

      Assuming Harrison Barnes stays, what do you think the adjusted win-total would be? Even if we did upgrade the 3, I think 49 wins is laughable. If the W's are healthy, most of their guys are rehabbing. And that type of jump would be meteoric, sort of similar to OKC when they went from 21 wins in 2009 to 50 wins in 2010. Those types of improvements don't happen too often, and we certainly don't have a Russell Westbrook or a Kevin Durant to spearhead that effort.I say 37-42 wins. Still no playoffs.

  5. Franklin Mieuli on said:

    Well first I have to throw at the caveat that this is assuming no major injuries. Sure Steph or Bogut might be dinged up a bit, but if one of them is out for half the season, then this prediction becomes meaningless. If you extend the Warriors winning percentage this last year to a full 82 game season, they would've won 28.5 games. Given how heavily they tanked down the stretch, I think it is safe to say that they were about a 32 win team. So to that 32 win team you swap out whoever the hell they played at center for Andrew Bogut, which is an upgrade of a couple wins. They're now a 35-36 win team.You swap out a bunch of the minutes Charles Jenkins/Nate Robinson got for Stephen Curry minutes, and you upgrade a couple wins. You're now a 38-40 win team.You get a little bit of growth out of Klay Thompson, a pretty reasonable expectation. You are now a 40-43 win team. Harrison Barnes is probably a net zero compared to what the Dubs got out of small forward last year, so that remains unchanged.So, I expect them to be a .500 club next year. A range of 38-44 wins sounds about right to me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags are not allowed.