PDA

View Full Version : Warriors Fast Start Is Not a Valid Season Indicator



MackShock
12-31-2011, 07:46 PM
The Warriors are off to a 2-1 start and there seems to be a tangible optimism among fans. It’s not just that the Warriors bounced back from a disappointing opening night loss to the Clippers with two wins, it’s how they won those two games: With defense.

But how the Warriors start a season sometimes has no bearing on how they finish a season. Here’s a look at some interesting starts the Warriors have had over the past several years and what ended up happening to those teams.

If you think this year will be different, tell us why.

2010-11: Warriors begin season 6-2.


This was just last season, for goodness sakes, and we know how last season turned out: 36-46 and not even sniffing a playoff berth. Yes, the David Lee injury had something to do with the subsequent slide – they dropped 12 of 13 during a November/December stretch – but there was a lot of optimism about last year’s team early. And quite simply, they weren’t good enough to sustain it.

2007-08: Warriors begin season 0-6.

This was the season after “We Believe” and Stephen Jackson was suspended at the start of the season. By December, the Warriors were above .500 and heading toward an unrewarded 48-34 season. But 2007-08 just goes to show you that how you start a season doesn’t necessarily translate to how you finish one.

2006-07: Warriors begin season 7-3.

This turned into the Warriors’ only playoff appearance in the past 17 seasons. But that 7-3 start slipped to below .500, and the Warriors ended up trading for Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy for Stephen Jackson and Al Harrington, among others. Sixteen wins in the team’s final 21 games translated to a 42-40 record and “We Believe” ensued.

2005-06: Warriors begin the season 12-6.

This was Mike Montomery’s second – and last – season and he hung tough early. But Baron Davis couldn’t stay healthy and Dunleavy and Murphy and Jason Richardson couldn’t keep the team afloat. The Warriors ended up finishing 34-48, helping usher in the Don Nelson Phase II Era.

2001-02: Warriors begin season 5-3.

This team had Larry Hughes, Danny Fortson and Erick Dampier and there was hope after the season was two weeks old. But it fizzled and fizzled in a hurry, with coach Dave Cowens being fired by Christmas and the team finishing the season with a 21-61 record.

1994-95: Warriors start 5-0 … 7-1.

That’s the year that many people believe started the Warriors on their huge downward trend. The Warriors, coming off a 50-win season, traded Chris Webber after he feuded with Nelson, and Bob Lanier ended up coaching the team that season. It finished 26-56.


http://www.csnbayarea.com/blog/warriors-talk/post/Warriors-fast-start-not-a-valid-season-i?blockID=621732&feedID=2799

MackShock
12-31-2011, 07:47 PM
Well, Steinmetz, Ill tell you why.

Were playing defense this season, that's why it will be different. Well see if it can hold up.

lol, please
12-31-2011, 08:15 PM
Well, Steinmetz, Ill tell you why.

Were playing defense this season, that's why it will be different. Well see if it can hold up.

:clap:

likemystylez
12-31-2011, 08:20 PM
I think 3 home games is a rather small and skewed sample size to get a real feel.

I was impressed that the warriors were able to find a way to beat chicago despite not having a great game from a lot of key contributors (ellis, Lee, and wright all had somewhat dissapointing games overall) Chicago is a legit team though and it wasnt a fluke(they finished their road trip 3-1 in CA)

likemystylez
12-31-2011, 08:22 PM
oops, it was NY that they didnt have great individual games against. LOL

Warriors4lyfe12
12-31-2011, 08:49 PM
I think this 2-1 start is a great indication of how the season will be. We played a horrible 4th quarter against the clippers, but we learned from that, we stopped our fast pace, and played defense. The games against NY and Chicago were good examples of how we played defense for the first 3 quarters then give them an offensive onslaught in the 4th. Mark has a good vision on the fatigue levels of players and knows when to take players out. For example, Brandon Rush had 5 fouls midway through the 4th against NY, but he knew that rush wanted to stay in. I think we could easily win (or come in 2nd) in the Pacific. The lakers are kind of in Disarray, the Kings... are the Kings, clippers have 0 bench, the Suns have lost their identity. I think warriors finish the season 41-25

steveweve
12-31-2011, 09:03 PM
Steinmetz is the worst sport analysis ever, they are playing defense this year, unlike any of the other. That's why they'll be more consist then in the past. You can't rely on run and gun all through out the season, but you can rely on good defense.

MackShock
12-31-2011, 09:11 PM
Steinmetz even said it himself that we are playing defense..lol..but he doesnt realize that that's going to be the difference?

Jeff559
12-31-2011, 09:14 PM
Its not the record that is the cause for optimism, its the play. The whole team seems to be hustling, playing tough team defense. Even in the first game against the Clips you could tell that there was a certain buzz amongst the team. Hopefully this translates to long term success..

MackShock
12-31-2011, 09:16 PM
i wouldnt discount the Kings..they have a sleeper lineup.

ESaady
12-31-2011, 10:51 PM
I absolutely despise Matt Steinmetz. He is such a douchebag.

BrandoCommando
01-01-2012, 01:07 AM
i wouldnt discount the Kings..they have a sleeper lineup.

i discount them because they suck and will suck the rest of the season.

MackShock
01-01-2012, 03:34 AM
i discount them because they suck and will suck the rest of the season.

The same can be said about the warriors right?

They have some good pieces..

Evans
Thornton
Salmons
Hickson
Cousins

Young pieces. Evans and thornton are solid, cousins is coming into his own, salmons is seasoned veteran and hickson has very high potential..

killaT
01-01-2012, 03:46 AM
i discount them because they suck and will suck the rest of the season.

wrong.

the kings have a very bright future, perhaps may be more bright than the warriors.

they dont overpay guys like david lee and kwame brown.
but they pay guys like marcus thornton for 5 years/40 million which is more than enough reasonable given his age and what hes done for the kings last season and this season.

if they stick together for awhile, and keep tyreke evans, marcus thornton, jimmer fredette, jj hickson, and demarcus cousins, they have proven talented scoring all through out their lineup which can clearly hang with the warriors. and believe me they may be defensivly better than us with just 4/5 of those players right there.

MackShock
01-01-2012, 08:48 AM
Yeah, they have an actual shooting guard in Thornton, and natural players at every position..the only one would be tyreke, but he's more than capable of playing point and distributing.

BrandoCommando
01-01-2012, 03:33 PM
they still suck. they can live off all the potential in the world they still suck

GSW 2012 CHAMPS
01-01-2012, 05:03 PM
2-2 after 4 home games, I think the team will be different this season but making the playoffs still seems like a longshot.

Lloyd Christmas
01-01-2012, 08:44 PM
You guys are trippin. Steinmetz is a breath of fresh air. He's the only guy on CSN not swinging from the Warriors' nuts. You guys should be happy about that since you have more space on the Warriors' sack to hang with Fitz.

Monta is beast
01-01-2012, 10:46 PM
I really don't know what to think so far. We have looked so bad on offense for 3 out of 4 games.

MackShock
01-01-2012, 11:00 PM
You guys are trippin. Steinmetz is a breath of fresh air. He's the only guy on CSN not swinging from the Warriors' nuts. You guys should be happy about that since you have more space on the Warriors' sack to hang with Fitz.

I can appreciate him because he is hands down the most dedicated beat writer for the warriors in the bay area. he single handedly updating us with news regarding the warriors this whole summer and is by far the biggest contributor to csn bay area