PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Who should come off the bench?



sfattahian
07-25-2013, 10:05 PM
Just curious who you guys think should come off the bench?

lol, please
07-25-2013, 10:06 PM
Nice poll. LOL.

lol, please
07-25-2013, 10:07 PM
Douglas, Nedovic, Barnes, Green, Oneal

lol, please
07-25-2013, 10:08 PM
Iggy and Lee are in the poll? Laughable. Troll-esque.

COOLbeans
07-25-2013, 10:19 PM
Thompson and Lee should definitely start. And Iggy will probably be the best wing during training camp.

But Barnes and Thompson are looking pretty good during the USA scrimmage. Especially Barnes. I noticed he was bigger during summer league but he looks ALOT stronger if you haven't seen him yet. And smooth as usual, he could play himself into the starting lineup eventually.

COOLbeans
07-25-2013, 10:20 PM
Thompson also looks alot stronger and more confident in the post and passing out of the post

Scoots
07-25-2013, 10:21 PM
Well with Bazemore starting there is room on the bench :)

COOLbeans
07-25-2013, 10:23 PM
Bazemores not starting

COOLbeans
07-25-2013, 10:23 PM
Well with Bazemore starting there is room on the bench :)

We now have you on record as a Bazemore starting supporter

Scoots
07-25-2013, 10:39 PM
We now have you on record as a Bazemore starting supporter

Oh noooooooo!

asandhu23
07-25-2013, 11:43 PM
uh...

sfattahian
07-26-2013, 12:33 AM
Douglas, Nedovic, Barnes, Green, Oneal

So you think Nedovic and Green are going to get more run than Bazemore and Speights I take it?

sfattahian
07-26-2013, 12:35 AM
Iggy and Lee are in the poll? Laughable. Troll-esque.

I agree with you it's absurd. Just heard some wild stuff on here about Lee or Iguodala coming off the bench, so thought I'd throw it in.

sfattahian
07-26-2013, 12:37 AM
I think they should go with Barnes off the bench for the record.

Monta is beast
07-26-2013, 03:07 PM
I want Thompson to come off the bench, but I think it will end up being Barnes.

Monta is beast
07-26-2013, 03:08 PM
Thompson is more suited to play both shooting guard and small forward, more so than Barnes is at least. That's why in my opinion it makes sense to bring Thompson off the bench.

Monta is beast
07-26-2013, 03:11 PM
It's looking like Barnes is gonna play allot more backup power forward than I thought as well. With how many stretch fours are in the NBA now, he'll be able to put in work on allot of them. He's stronger and quicker than most stretch fours I can think of.

Monta is beast
07-26-2013, 03:12 PM
PG: Curry//Douglas//Nedovic
SG: Thompson//Bazemore//Barnes
SF: Iguodala//Barnes//Green
PF: Lee/Speights//Barnes
C: Bogut//O'neal//Speights

TrueFan420
07-26-2013, 03:25 PM
It's looking like Barnes is gonna play allot more backup power forward than I thought as well. With how many stretch fours are in the NBA now, he'll be able to put in work on allot of them. He's stronger and quicker than most stretch fours I can think of.

Yea with the comments on him looking bigger thats what I was thinking as well. We're gonna go small and run at times but never hurts to have the traditional depth for 4 and 5 and they will help limit the minutes of Bogut.

Spanklin
07-26-2013, 03:39 PM
I want Curry, Iggy, and Bogut to come off the bench to be honest. O'Neal can run with the team for the first five minutes pretty well, and his defense is good. Barnes-Iggy, Iggy-Barnes doesn't really matter who starts there.

So start Douglas, Klay, Barnes, Lee, Jermaine for 4-5 minutes depending on how things are going, then bust in the stars to run and gun clear through that crucial 2nd quarter stretch where big leads tend to build.

This bench is so broad that I want constant pressure through the entire first half without any letting up. That means Curry has to come off the bench because pulling him is a big momentum changer.

I know this won't be popular, but I LOVE the starter as sixth man strategy like Ginobili, Harden, and Jason Terry.

Spanklin
07-26-2013, 03:42 PM
It's looking like Barnes is gonna play allot more backup power forward than I thought as well. With how many stretch fours are in the NBA now, he'll be able to put in work on allot of them. He's stronger and quicker than most stretch fours I can think of.

These ideas never work. Barnes might go situational against a couple cases at best.

Put Barnes on guys like Ryan Anderson or Kevin Love and you're getting posted up to death.

TheGoldenGuy30
07-26-2013, 03:45 PM
I see Thompson and Barnes switching off a lot in the starting lineup. Marc Jackson is going to test both lineups continuously throughout the beginning of the season to see with one he sees best for the future. I am hoping Harrison Barnes can pull out as the future/permanent starter rather than Klay. Right now, I believe Barnes is more important to us than Klay and I believe it will remain that way.

SugeKnight
07-26-2013, 03:45 PM
I want Curry, Iggy, and Bogut to come off the bench to be honest. O'Neal can run with the team for the first five minutes pretty well, and his defense is good. Barnes-Iggy, Iggy-Barnes doesn't really matter who starts there.

So start Douglas, Klay, Barnes, Lee, Jermaine for 4-5 minutes depending on how things are going, then bust in the stars to run and gun clear through that crucial 2nd quarter stretch where big leads tend to build.

This bench is so broad that I want constant pressure through the entire first half without any letting up. That means Curry has to come off the bench because pulling him is a big momentum changer.

I know this won't be popular, but I LOVE the starter as sixth man strategy like Ginobili, Harden, and Jason Terry.

Never gonna happen

Scoots
07-26-2013, 04:01 PM
PG: Curry//Douglas//Nedovic
SG: Thompson//Bazemore//Barnes
SF: Iguodala//Barnes//Green
PF: Lee/Speights//Barnes
C: Bogut//O'neal//Speights

MIB: Iguodala is going to get 35 minutes a game or so ... that leaves Barnes getting less than 13 minutes a game at his main position. You don't think Iggy is going to get ANY minutes at the 2? Just a couple weeks ago people were saying Barnes wasn't going to get any minutes at 2 and now you have him ahead of Iguodala on the depth chart there.

There will be the first people on the floor for the first game of the season, but it's entirely possible a different 5 for the game after that, Jackson is going to mix up the lineup to help the matchups.

I think the main starting group will be Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Lee, and Bogut, but I think Barnes will get starter type minutes like Jack did last year. Those 6 will be around the 30 minute area and that leaves a maximum of 60 total minutes a game for the other 9 on the roster combined. Does anybody disagree with that?

Spanklin
07-26-2013, 04:29 PM
Never gonna happen

Because Mark Jackson has no foresight and can't do anything outside copying the simpler parts of what other coaches do. That's why he runs one of the simplest offenses, which happens to be the easiest to learn and to teach others.

He's not willing to take chances needed to push this team over the top. They'll have to grow and mesh enough in spite of him. I think they're capable, but I wish he'd have the guts and leadership to bring Curry off the bench after 5 short minutes. It's foolproof with our depth; no reason whatsoever not to.

likemystylez
07-26-2013, 04:53 PM
MIB: Iguodala is going to get 35 minutes a game or so ... that leaves Barnes getting less than 13 minutes a game at his main position. You don't think Iggy is going to get ANY minutes at the 2? Just a couple weeks ago people were saying Barnes wasn't going to get any minutes at 2 and now you have him ahead of Iguodala on the depth chart there.

There will be the first people on the floor for the first game of the season, but it's entirely possible a different 5 for the game after that, Jackson is going to mix up the lineup to help the matchups.

I think the main starting group will be Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Lee, and Bogut, but I think Barnes will get starter type minutes like Jack did last year. Those 6 will be around the 30 minute area and that leaves a maximum of 60 total minutes a game for the other 9 on the roster combined. Does anybody disagree with that?

Bogut will likely miss sometime and have games where he plays in the 23-26 minute range.... Speights and Oneil will get opportunities through out the season. Festus is going to have a hard time getting on the floor I think. (Unless we have some big injuries in the front court). Bazemore doesnt really have a place in the rotation (Its unfortunate because hes worked really hard and hes a great guy to have on the team)....the warriors are gonna play with 9 maybe 10 guys Other than the top 6.... Douglas, Oneal, Speights and maybe green. Players are gonna have to earn playing time..... so if festus gets out there he better understand that mistakes will get him kicked off the floor- and festus had a ton of unforced errors.

Yea the rotation is gonna have good players, we arent going to be creating a d league rotation like in past yrs. no more d league team the warriors are fielding- it looks like the front office is interested in winning games now. (and its an adjustment for fans of the team)- LOl thats why scoots is freaking out over minutes for certain people. Thats the type of problem that will work itself out though.

Scoots
07-26-2013, 04:57 PM
So Stylez, I said after the top 6 there will be 60 minutes max to spread around does anybody disagree ... and your answer was?

And I don't think there is anything about my post that could come close to constitute "freaking out over minutes for certain people"

likemystylez
07-26-2013, 05:31 PM
you arent taking into account injuries... you are acting like all the starters will be out therte 82 games... i dont know if bogut even plays 60 games. Warriors players like to sit out any chance they get..... so too much depth is never a problem.

Scoots
07-26-2013, 07:09 PM
I didn't say anything about the depth being a concern.

Assuming there are no injuries do you see the bottom 9 guys getting more than 60 minutes collectively?

Allphakenny1
07-26-2013, 08:07 PM
Because Mark Jackson has no foresight and can't do anything outside copying the simpler parts of what other coaches do. That's why he runs one of the simplest offenses, which happens to be the easiest to learn and to teach others.

He's not willing to take chances needed to push this team over the top. They'll have to grow and mesh enough in spite of him. I think they're capable, but I wish he'd have the guts and leadership to bring Curry off the bench after 5 short minutes. It's foolproof with our depth; no reason whatsoever not to.

Coaches only have to pull stunts like this when their team is bad and they have to come up with a gimmick to have any chance at winning. Don Nelson was great at what you are talking about; Don Nelson never won a championship. With what you are proposing, the Warriors would start every game behind early and have to play catch up. Why not play our best against their best and use our strong depth to support that?

TrueFan420
07-27-2013, 10:06 AM
I want Curry, Iggy, and Bogut to come off the bench to be honest. O'Neal can run with the team for the first five minutes pretty well, and his defense is good. Barnes-Iggy, Iggy-Barnes doesn't really matter who starts there.

So start Douglas, Klay, Barnes, Lee, Jermaine for 4-5 minutes depending on how things are going, then bust in the stars to run and gun clear through that crucial 2nd quarter stretch where big leads tend to build.

This bench is so broad that I want constant pressure through the entire first half without any letting up. That means Curry has to come off the bench because pulling him is a big momentum changer.

I know this won't be popular, but I LOVE the starter as sixth man strategy like Ginobili, Harden, and Jason Terry.

Dude did you create this account just to troll? So unneeded. Leave our forum. Now.

bgdreton
07-27-2013, 11:30 AM
Dude did you create this account just to troll? So unneeded. Leave our forum. Now.

This omg!

sfattahian
07-27-2013, 11:43 AM
Thompson is more suited to play both shooting guard and small forward, more so than Barnes is at least. That's why in my opinion it makes sense to bring Thompson off the bench.

That's true I didn't consider that really... Bazemore could emerge as a backup SG though.

sfattahian
07-27-2013, 11:46 AM
I want Curry, Iggy, and Bogut to come off the bench to be honest. O'Neal can run with the team for the first five minutes pretty well, and his defense is good. Barnes-Iggy, Iggy-Barnes doesn't really matter who starts there.

So start Douglas, Klay, Barnes, Lee, Jermaine for 4-5 minutes depending on how things are going, then bust in the stars to run and gun clear through that crucial 2nd quarter stretch where big leads tend to build.

This bench is so broad that I want constant pressure through the entire first half without any letting up. That means Curry has to come off the bench because pulling him is a big momentum changer.

I know this won't be popular, but I LOVE the starter as sixth man strategy like Ginobili, Harden, and Jason Terry.

Wow! lol I like that you think outside the box, but Curry off the bench??? lol

likemystylez
07-27-2013, 12:01 PM
Wow! lol I like that you think outside the box, but Curry off the bench??? lol

this is in an effort to get bazemore playing time to develop :)

Scoots
07-27-2013, 02:06 PM
Thompson may be more used to playing SG and SF, but Barnes can play SF and PF and team added a player who can play SG and SF in Iggy so Barnes' flexibility is more valuable than Thompson's. Also Barnes is better with the ball in his hands than Thompson.

lol, please
07-27-2013, 04:42 PM
Dude did you create this account just to troll? So unneeded. Leave our forum. Now.If true, agreed.


This omg!
:nod:

Wow! lol I like that you think outside the box, but Curry off the bench??? lol


this is in an effort to get bazemore playing time to develop :)

Curry won't be coming off of the bench. I want Bazemore to develop and stay on the team as well, but benching Curry is not the answer.

4GiantWarrior9
07-27-2013, 06:49 PM
Thompson may be more used to playing SG and SF, but Barnes can play SF and PF and team added a player who can play SG and SF in Iggy so Barnes' flexibility is more valuable than Thompson's. Also Barnes is better with the ball in his hands than Thompson.

I can't wait to see how:

PG Curry
SG Thompson
SF Iggy
PF Barnes
C Bogut/O'Neil/Ezeli

gonna pan out next season

4GiantWarrior9
07-27-2013, 07:26 PM
I voted for Thompson off the bench, I think he has the ability/potential to be a deadly SG 6th man type like Harden, Terry, Crawford, JR Smith kind of player and maybe be better than all those guys adding his defense into the mix...I believe we can get the best value with Thompson off the bench

lol, please
07-27-2013, 07:30 PM
I can't wait to see how:

PG Curry
SG Thompson
SF Iggy
PF Barnes
C Bogut/O'Neil/Ezeli

gonna pan out next seasonWhen did we trade Lee? :confused:

Spanklin
07-27-2013, 07:38 PM
Coaches only have to pull stunts like this when their team is bad and they have to come up with a gimmick to have any chance at winning. Don Nelson was great at what you are talking about; Don Nelson never won a championship. With what you are proposing, the Warriors would start every game behind early and have to play catch up. Why not play our best against their best and use our strong depth to support that?

Not really. Look at the examples I posted, they were all NBA champs or champ potential (OKC). We are loaded this year and that's exactly why it would work. That's the only scenario it works in.

Think about it, when did Mark Jackson pull Steph Curry in the 2nd quarter last season? Wouldn't you rather have him play the entire 2nd quarter and bury teams that are already panting trying to keep up with Iggy-Barnes-Klay rotation running them out the gym?

Curry will be good for up to 38 mpg, who cares when he sits? We are so deep that our other guys can keep the score very tight for the first 8-10 points. It's not like we are talking a 20-4 deficit in 4 minutes.... average score is about 25/quarter? So yeah, like 8 points max difference.


this is in an effort to get bazemore playing time to develop :)

Hahahaha! I like the way you thick, I mean think.

TrueFan420
07-27-2013, 08:08 PM
Not really. Look at the examples I posted, they were all NBA champs or champ potential (OKC). We are loaded this year and that's exactly why it would work. That's the only scenario it works in.

Think about it, when did Mark Jackson pull Steph Curry in the 2nd quarter last season? Wouldn't you rather have him play the entire 2nd quarter and bury teams that are already panting trying to keep up with Iggy-Barnes-Klay rotation running them out the gym?

Curry will be good for up to 38 mpg, who cares when he sits? We are so deep that our other guys can keep the score very tight for the first 8-10 points. It's not like we are talking a 20-4 deficit in 4 minutes.... average score is about 25/quarter? So yeah, like 8 points max difference.



Hahahaha! I like the way you thick, I mean think.
You don't bench your best and franchise player. Curry is far to important. Iggy didn't get that contract to be a bench player and is key in anchoring our d with Bogut. Bogut I could actually live with coming off the bench but he will and should start its more important to limit his playing time and having come off the bench isn't the only way to do that. Barnes will come off the bench.

MackShock
07-27-2013, 09:05 PM
Although I want Klay coming off the bench, it's almost a given that Barnes will.

Guppyfighter
07-27-2013, 09:18 PM
Not sure why people would rather have Klay off the bench. He's not an exactly an energy guy. He's a smart player who plays with in his role and is much better than Barnes right now.

People are confusing untapped potential with who's actually better it seems.

GSRaider
07-27-2013, 09:43 PM
I like Barnes as a player over Klay (pretty much all because of talent and potential and athleticism)... But in this situation... Barnes strikes me as a person who can put his ego aside (not saying Klay is not able) but I'm more confident in Barnes ability to put his ego aside... Barnes is also a more well rounded player imo and that'll serve him well playing with the second team (scoring, getting players involved, rebounding)... In the end, I have the feeling mins will be spread out evenly...

4GiantWarrior9
07-27-2013, 09:58 PM
When did we trade Lee? :confused:
not as a starting lineup, just on the floor in general

MackShock
07-27-2013, 10:39 PM
Not sure why people would rather have Klay off the bench. He's not an exactly an energy guy. He's a smart player who plays with in his role and is much better than Barnes right now.

People are confusing untapped potential with who's actually better it seems.

Just because Klay has a better TS% doesnt mean he's a better player.

By the way, his .515 TS% in the playoffs is the worst on the team among all the players who got significant minutes. Disappearing act.

Guppyfighter
07-27-2013, 11:29 PM
Just because Klay has a better TS% doesnt mean he's a better player.

By the way, his .515 TS% in the playoffs is the worst on the team among all the players who got significant minutes. Disappearing act.


You are right, he is a better player because he scores more, more efficiently, and plays much better defense.

Anyways, using playoffs stats to evaluate players is dumb. Barnes got to tear apart Popovich's worst defenders because that is who Popovich is doing. Klay had Kawhi on him. And the sample size, just don't get me started on samples.

Not only that, Klay played against their best offensive players on defense.

Seriously though, Mack you are smarter than this, stop being contradictory because you don't like objective mathematical models.

Scoots
07-27-2013, 11:42 PM
The difference between Thompson and that list of Harden, Smith, Ginobli, and Terry is that he doesn't handle the ball nor pass as well. The weakest part of Thompson's game, ball handling and penetration, are the strengths of the ideal 6th man. Barnes is not much better if at all, but Barnes can play effectively closer to the basket where it matters less, and he has shown significant growth in those areas, more than Thompson.

Guppyfighter
07-27-2013, 11:43 PM
I will agree that Klay is weak at penetrating, but the dudes handles are nice.

Scoots
07-27-2013, 11:50 PM
Compared to Harden and Ginobli?

Guppyfighter
07-27-2013, 11:52 PM
No. Probably not.

Monta is beast
07-28-2013, 01:02 AM
I think the choice has already been made. I've been watching both Thompson and Barnes, and it looks like Barnes has already put on at least 10 lbs. And to the dude that said Barnes can't play power forward a while back, your trippin. Barnes would have a field day on pretty much all stretch fours.

Scoots
07-28-2013, 01:09 AM
Most front line players put on weight between year 1 and year 2 ... it doesn't mean he's coming off the bench. I think he's coming off the bench, but the weight is normal.

Monta is beast
07-28-2013, 01:19 AM
Not when he said he felt comftarble and strong at his weight last season.

Spanklin
07-28-2013, 01:52 PM
I can see no one is actually thinking about strategy. Especially that 420 guy.

Living inside a box. No winning creativity. At all.

Scoots
07-28-2013, 03:13 PM
You don't put backups against starters and starters against backups, it's psychological suicide.

lol, please
07-28-2013, 03:15 PM
You are right, he is a better player because he scores more, more efficiently, and plays much better defense.

Anyways, using playoffs stats to evaluate players is dumb. Barnes got to tear apart Popovich's worst defenders because that is who Popovich is doing. Klay had Kawhi on him. And the sample size, just don't get me started on samples.

Not only that, Klay played against their best offensive players on defense.

Seriously though, Mack you are smarter than this, stop being contradictory because you don't like objective mathematical models.

Great post.

Monta is beast
07-28-2013, 03:17 PM
I swear since the playoffs the overall basketball IQ on this forum has just plumuted. Too many bandwagon fans!

sfattahian
07-28-2013, 03:20 PM
Not sure why people would rather have Klay off the bench. He's not an exactly an energy guy. He's a smart player who plays with in his role and is much better than Barnes right now.

People are confusing untapped potential with who's actually better it seems.

I agree, Klay is better right now.

Monta is beast
07-28-2013, 03:22 PM
Kay will be better till the 2015-2016 season IMO.

lol, please
07-28-2013, 03:26 PM
I agree with you Mibs on the fact that I want to see Barnes more as well, but we both know Klay will prob start. Sucks, it will be interesting to see how Barnes embraces the bench/6th man role.

Monta is beast
07-28-2013, 03:32 PM
I think it will make him a more diverse player. He'll do allot more ball handling than he would as a starter. But I can almost promise you most nights the finishing lineup will be:

Curry
Thompson
Iguodala
Barnes
Bogut

sfattahian
07-28-2013, 03:34 PM
In my opinion, Klay is a super high-end role player and fits in better with the starting five. Barnes will have the ability to make more of an impact off the bench where he'll be the primary scorer for the bench unit. If he started, he'd have a harder time getting shots with Curry, Lee and the rest of the starting 5. Let him build his confidence dominating against other team's second units. He can really make an impact off the bench with his speed and athleticism. He needs to develop defensively too, where Thompson is more advanced at this point.

Scoots
07-28-2013, 03:37 PM
I think O'Neal or Lee are the more likely finishing centers because of foul shooting.

Barnes is going to get plenty of minutes.

Monta is beast
07-28-2013, 03:41 PM
I think O'Neal or Lee are the more likely finishing centers because of foul shooting.


Barnes is going to get plenty of minutes.

Ok I see you.

Enzy
07-29-2013, 03:41 PM
I'd like to think of Iggy as a massive upgrade to JJ. Jack got huge minutes off the bench and closed out games. Why not use Iggy the same way? He's getting that huge contract because he's going to help us win a lot of games. I don't think he needs to start in order to help us with that. Curry/Thompson/Barnes/Lee started and won a lot of games for us last year. I think we're better off using Iggy as that utility guy off the bench to move in when the offense or defense starts to slump. He can let Curry move off the ball and penetrate to get our shooters open looks. Basically, he can do everything JJ did but better, especially defensively. I think Iguodala is just as good off the bench as he is starting- he'll probably also close out most games for us. Thompson (definitely) and Barnes (probably) will play better as starters. Of course, that's just my opinion. One way or another, having six starting-caliber players is the best problem the Warriors have had in many years and I think we're all looking forward to how it plays out. Let's all just hope for a healthy season and the coaching staff will have things worked out by the end of the it. Playoffs are all about momentum so as long as we've got our system figured out by then, we'll do some serious damage out there.

Guppyfighter
07-29-2013, 03:43 PM
Iggy's not as good offensively as Jack. Iggy ranked in the 24th percentile of the pick and roll ball handler. He can't run the half court like Jack and he's a bad shoote, or at the very least, inconsistent.

He's deadly in transition, but he can't be used like Jack's instant offense.

WestCoastSportz
07-29-2013, 05:10 PM
I think Toney Douglas can take the Jarrett Jack role. He's that instant offense combo-guard off the bench. At this point, Klay is a spot up shooter and not one that can create his own shots on a consistent basis.

Guppyfighter
07-29-2013, 05:32 PM
I think Toney Douglas can take the Jarrett Jack role. He's that instant offense combo-guard off the bench. At this point, Klay is a spot up shooter and not one that can create his own shots on a consistent basis.

I think that's fair, but Klay has a post game and we shouldn't just gloss over that. Other than that though his isolation is meh.

Scoots
07-29-2013, 06:23 PM
Very few teams have guys who can do it all exceptionally well it's about mixing and matching the skills and getting them all on the same page. There is so much depth now if the team really works it's going to be a big credit to Jackson for getting all the pieces to mesh.

Some teams have "bench units" where they replace most of the starters together, this group is more likely to have a few replacements here and there and shorter stints on the court.

COOLbeans
07-29-2013, 07:34 PM
Everybody wants Klay to be the next Kobe when in actuality he's one of the best young players to ever be drafted by the Warriors. And he's still getting better

TrueFan420
07-29-2013, 07:35 PM
I think Toney Douglas can take the Jarrett Jack role. He's that instant offense combo-guard off the bench. At this point, Klay is a spot up shooter and not one that can create his own shots on a consistent basis.

If I'm not mistaken Douglas is know for his defense not instant offense.

lol, please
07-29-2013, 07:39 PM
Kobe was always my favorite player in the league after Shaq and Jordan left, but please let's not ever compare those two again, no matter how good Klay becomes. The ONLY thing I like about Kobe is his talent/skill/demeanor on the court. Thinking Klay could in any way remind someone of Kobe just makes me want to vomit, especially since when most people think about Kobe, they aren't thinking about his ball game.

Spanklin
07-29-2013, 09:32 PM
Kobe was always my favorite player in the league after Shaq and Jordan left, but please let's not ever compare those two again, no matter how good Klay becomes. The ONLY thing I like about Kobe is his talent/skill/demeanor on the court. Thinking Klay could in any way remind someone of Kobe just makes me want to vomit, especially since when most people think about Kobe, they aren't thinking about his ball game.

Haters gonna hate.

Klay had a bum rap coming out of Texas that's why we got him. People keep putting him down ever since before the draft and that fuels him harder. He proves all his critics wrong but it's never enough to some people.

lol, please
07-29-2013, 10:33 PM
I never see anyone putting Klay down, most people, fans and non fans alike agree he has a pretty high potential and good shooting mechanics.

COOLbeans
07-29-2013, 10:52 PM
Kobe was always my favorite player in the league after Shaq and Jordan left, but please let's not ever compare those two again, no matter how good Klay becomes. The ONLY thing I like about Kobe is his talent/skill/demeanor on the court. Thinking Klay could in any way remind someone of Kobe just makes me want to vomit, especially since when most people think about Kobe, they aren't thinking about his ball game.

If you read again, you'll see that I wasn't comparing the two players.

People keep expecting this guy not to make mistakes and criticize him because parts of his game lack development in certain specialty areas in which only a future superstar would be exhibiting so far in addition to other aspects that he's improved.

Klay is an ace shooter, a very capable defender, has a good post game, and is getting better at attacking gthe basket. But he stills gets criticized because other parts of his game still suck

COOLbeans
07-29-2013, 10:54 PM
Haters gonna hate.

Klay had a bum rap coming out of Texas (washington)that's why we got him. People keep putting him down ever since before the draft and that fuels him harder. He proves all his critics wrong but it's never enough to some people.

Washington state

likemystylez
07-30-2013, 01:35 AM
Haters gonna hate.

Klay had a bum rap coming out of Texas that's why we got him. People keep putting him down ever since before the draft and that fuels him harder. He proves all his critics wrong but it's never enough to some people.

and im a casual fan

lol, please
07-30-2013, 01:49 AM
Stop stylez.

Goose17
07-30-2013, 02:30 AM
im a casual fan

I'm so happy for you! The first step to curing the disease that is your existence is to admit that you are a problem. Well done bro.

MackShock
07-30-2013, 04:12 AM
stop goose.

Goose17
07-30-2013, 05:53 AM
stop goose.

Okay...

You're no fun.

TrueFan420
07-30-2013, 05:57 AM
Washington state


and im a casual fan

Both he a troll leave it.


stop goose.


I'm so happy for you! The first step to curing the disease that is your existence is to admit that you are a problem. Well done bro.

Mac is right. Goose we all agree and disagree with Stylez but never question his fan hood. Dude has been there for thick and thin.




We are warriors fans, not laker or heat fans, we been here done that. Stylez has every reason to be skeptical. But win or lose I will never question his fan hood and neither should you. In jest or not we are better than that.

TrueFan420
07-30-2013, 05:59 AM
Ps Stylez some times I swear your garlicboy but under a new name.

TrueFan420
07-30-2013, 06:00 AM
Pss garlicboy come back you always add good conversations

Goose17
07-30-2013, 06:06 AM
Double post.

Goose17
07-30-2013, 06:10 AM
Both he a troll leave it.





Mac is right. Goose we all agree and disagree with Stylez but never question his fan hood. Dude has been there for thick and thin.




We are warriors fans, not laker or heat fans, we been here done that. Stylez has every reason to be skeptical. But win or lose I will never question his fan hood and neither should you. In jest or not we are better than that.

The comment he made about coaching was idiotic but it doesn't make him a casual Dubs fan I was implying he was a casual basketball fan. Anyone who played (high school, college or whatever) knows how important the coach is.

Yes I'm joking 99% of the time. It's just fun winding him up. But he shouldn't take himself so serious. I don't dislike him or anything, I just know he bites.

Besides, when are people going to accept that Stern is a member of the crab people and he's rigging games to save his species?

Scoots
07-30-2013, 11:46 AM
Is "stop goose" an instruction to Goose or to the rest of us? :)

For a 2nd year player Klay played great. I think he'll make a similar leap to what Steph did in his 3rd year and gain in consistency quarter to quarter rather than play so boom/bust. I like Klay's game and I think he should start.

MackShock
07-30-2013, 01:35 PM
Stop trolling Stylez... Is what I mean by "stop Goose"... Or stop trolling in general... Honestly IMO if you can't debate with civility then you aren't worth debating with. Resorting to name calling and insults shows how immature one can be.

Point in case is Stylez vs Goose, or Guppy vs Scoots..

Scoots
07-30-2013, 03:15 PM
Other than calling him Gunty I didn't resort to any name calling I think. :)

Re-watched the playoffs games in full over the last week ... Barnes first step improved a lot from pre-season to post-season. If he stays aggressive he will dominate backup SFs and big PFs. He could live at the line, also does someone have Barnes' efficiency numbers by month?

MackShock
07-30-2013, 04:27 PM
Scoots, you are nothing but class. I can tell by your posts that you are calm and collected.

Guppy on the other hand is PMSing because he doesn't agree with you.

Goose17
07-30-2013, 05:02 PM
Stop trolling Stylez... Is what I mean by "stop Goose"... Or stop trolling in general... Honestly IMO if you can't debate with civility then you aren't worth debating with. Resorting to name calling and insults shows how immature one can be.

Point in case is Stylez vs Goose, or Guppy vs Scoots..

Yeah? I think you'll find it was him who hurled out the bait first. How long has Stylez been a member? How many B.S arguments has he been in? I'm not the problem here, I'm the solution ;)

Monta is beast
07-30-2013, 05:38 PM
Class+***=beyonce

Spanklin
07-30-2013, 05:51 PM
Washington state

You know what I meant. Everyone was talking about his bad attitude and how he was a head case with no confidence.

I never bought it and was gonna be pissed on draft night if we passed on him like everyone ahead of us. I couldn't believe Knight, Jimmer, and BozoBiyombo went before him.

Everyone has always underestimated Klay and he will prove everyone wrong, even the ones on this board who still refuse to acknowledge his greatness.

Scoots
07-30-2013, 06:22 PM
I was stunned Jimmer went before Klay, Biyombo had crazy athletic potential so I at least understand that risk.

sfattahian
07-30-2013, 11:00 PM
I want to hear Enzy's opinion on the original topic, since he's the one who voted Iguodala come off the bench... be interested to hear his perspective.

likemystylez
07-30-2013, 11:11 PM
I want to hear Enzy's opinion on the original topic, since he's the one who voted Iguodala come off the bench... be interested to hear his perspective.

that might actually be what happens during iggys 3rd and 4th yr of the contract. I still think Barnes has a chance to be a top 10-15 player in the league. Regardless of whether or not he starts next yr- he'll probably be the best player on the team before hes 24

likemystylez
07-30-2013, 11:18 PM
I was stunned Jimmer went before Klay, Biyombo had crazy athletic potential so I at least understand that risk.

dude was a stud in college, and he had an amazing tournament. Hindsight is 20/20, but in what was thought of as a weak draft... Jimmer going number 10 wasnt THAT crazy. ON a separate issue- the scouting report wasnt very good on klay thompson. he apparently had no defensive game, was a horrible athlete, and was basically just a shooter.

sometimes I think one writer who has not seen 80% of college players writes a little something about all the different prospects- and other writers who havent watched any college ball just kind of reword what the first scouting report says. Anybody who watched Harrison barnes through highschool and college would tell you that he played nothing like Glen Rice- but that was what he was compared too. His game actually reminds me of a cross between kobe bryant and loul Deng (not saying thats how good he will be- but how he plays)

Spanklin
07-31-2013, 12:26 AM
I was stunned Jimmer went before Klay, Biyombo had crazy athletic potential so I at least understand that risk.

I have to temper that Jimmers stuff a bit since it was the Maloofs obviously being desperate morons trying to save their father's empire.

We were really lucky to get Klay. I don't think fans realize this. Actually, some comments prove we don't realize.

lol, please
07-31-2013, 01:34 AM
I am going to have to wait a couple more seasons before I state we are lucky to have him, I want more of a sample size.

Monta is beast
07-31-2013, 01:36 AM
that might actually be what happens during iggys 3rd and 4th yr of the contract. I still think Barnes has a chance to be a top 10-15 player in the league. Regardless of whether or not he starts next yr- he'll probably be the best player on the team before hes 24

Curry can still get allot better. You think Barnes will end up being better than him?

COOLbeans
07-31-2013, 02:36 AM
I want to hear Enzy's opinion on the original topic, since he's the one who voted Iguodala come off the bench... be interested to hear his perspective.

I actually meant to vote Barnes

COOLbeans
07-31-2013, 02:38 AM
Curry can still get allot better. You think Barnes will end up being better than him?

I think it's a real possibility

Monta is beast
07-31-2013, 03:02 AM
That's scary.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 09:16 AM
Curry can still get allot better. You think Barnes will end up being better than him?

yep, with how well rounded barnes game is at the age of 20 (21 now), and with him being a top tier athlete- I think he will be better than curry within a few yrs. And yes- i expect curry and thompson to keep getting better. I just hope barnes doesnt defer to Lee and curry as much going forward.

COOLbeans
07-31-2013, 12:23 PM
I think in 3 years Barnes will be alot better than Paul George is right now

MrBistre
07-31-2013, 01:00 PM
Barnes will be first off the bench in my opinion because not only of the multiple facets of his game but also of Iggys. It almost doesn't matter who the first player to sit is, Barnes will come in and players will shift positions. If Curry sits Iggy will slide all the way from 3 to 1. If Klay sits Iggy might slide to 2 or even 1 with Curry playing off the ball. If Iggy sits, straight up 3 for 3. If Lee sits Barnes comes in as a stretch 4, if Bogut sits Lee slides to stretch 5, Barnes to 4 (not that I like that particular lineup... but that's how flexible we look)

I think the best thing about the makeup of this team is that, barring injuries, we might not have anybody average more than 30 - 32 minutes. If we can get to the post season without running Curry into the ground and with Bogut and Lee fully functional... pretty scary.

Scoots
07-31-2013, 02:27 PM
In my case the Jimmer thing isn't hindsight. I was really worried the Warriors might draft him. He's a hell of a shooter, but he looked like a lot of other college scorers who didn't have enough size/athleticism/quickness/game to translate with success to the NBA.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 03:27 PM
In my case the Jimmer thing isn't hindsight. I was really worried the Warriors might draft him. He's a hell of a shooter, but he looked like a lot of other college scorers who didn't have enough size/athleticism/quickness/game to translate with success to the NBA.

a lot of people said the same things about Steph Curry though. Granted he isnt the exact same player- but had some of the same question marks. I do think curry is a far better athlete than Jimmer- even if he isnt an elite one at the nba level.

IM just saying that the 10th pick in a weak draft isnt THAt crazy or that big of a reach to take a guy like Jimmer (granted it hasnt worked out)

Monta is beast
07-31-2013, 04:50 PM
If Barnes does become better than Paul George were winning multiple championships, and there would be absolutely no reason to trade him no matter what. I still think the Warriors might look to package Thompson & Lee for a young power forward like Monroe. I get the feeling that Lacob is realizing that Lee isn't going to be apart of our core in a few years, and adding another young talented piece would be a great way to take our team to the next level.

COOLbeans
07-31-2013, 07:29 PM
If Barnes does become better than Paul George were winning multiple championships, and there would be absolutely no reason to trade him no matter what. I still think the Warriors might look to package Thompson & Lee for a young power forward like Monroe. I get the feeling that Lacob is realizing that Lee isn't going to be apart of our core in a few years, and adding another young talented piece would be a great way to take our team to the next level.

I'm just curious, why do you have that feeling and what was said or done (by Lacob and co) to give you that idea?

Monta is beast
07-31-2013, 08:05 PM
I'm just curious, why do you have that feeling and what was said or done (by Lacob and co) to give you that idea?

I think Myers has had something to do with it. But when Lacob first bought the team, all sources said he would hold onto Lee regardless. We heard reports this off-season that they were shopping Lee. That and we performed well without Lee in the playoffs, he had to notice that as well.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 09:17 PM
I think Myers has had something to do with it. But when Lacob first bought the team, all sources said he would hold onto Lee regardless. We heard reports this off-season that they were shopping Lee. That and we performed well without Lee in the playoffs, he had to notice that as well.

I dont believe those reports- or I atleast think there was more to it than what was reported. If myers can unloan beidrins and jefferson to one team- he could find a way to get value for david lee coming off an all star year. He could get more than Bargnani

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 09:18 PM
If Barnes does become better than Paul George were winning multiple championships, and there would be absolutely no reason to trade him no matter what. I still think the Warriors might look to package Thompson & Lee for a young power forward like Monroe. I get the feeling that Lacob is realizing that Lee isn't going to be apart of our core in a few years, and adding another young talented piece would be a great way to take our team to the next level.

You think monroe is that good?

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 09:23 PM
If Barnes does become better than Paul George were winning multiple championships, and there would be absolutely no reason to trade him no matter what. I still think the Warriors might look to package Thompson & Lee for a young power forward like Monroe. I get the feeling that Lacob is realizing that Lee isn't going to be apart of our core in a few years, and adding another young talented piece would be a great way to take our team to the next level.

Barnes has elite talent, how fast he develops will depend on how aggressive he is on the floor. If he sits and defers to players around him people wont know how good he is. He has the ability to be a franchise player though- no question in my mind

Guppyfighter
07-31-2013, 09:24 PM
I dont believe those reports- or I atleast think there was more to it than what was reported. If myers can unloan beidrins and jefferson to one team- he could find a way to get value for david lee coming off an all star year. He could get more than Bargnani


I forgot who reported it, but a beat writer said the Warriors were trying to trade Lee for Bargs so they could re-sign both Jack and Landry.

If the off season went exactly like our FO wanted we would trade Lee for Bargs, re-sign Landry and Jack. And then unload Jefferson and Biedrens and sign Iggy.

Curry/Jack
Klay/Dray
Iggy/Barnes
Landry/Speights
Bogut/ O'Neal

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 09:30 PM
I forgot who reported it, but a beat writer said the Warriors were trying to trade Lee for Bargs so they could re-sign both Jack and Landry.

If the off season went exactly like our FO wanted we would trade Lee for Bargs, re-sign Landry and Jack. And then unload Jefferson and Biedrens and sign Iggy.



Curry/Jack
Klay/Dray
Iggy/Barnes
Landry/Speights
Bogut/ O'Neal

doubt it... because it didnt take all that much to land bargnani. the raptors would have taken lee in a second if that were the exact trade.

Guppyfighter
07-31-2013, 09:48 PM
doubt it... because it didnt take all that much to land bargnani. the raptors would have taken lee in a second if that were the exact trade.

Nope, because the Raptors wanted to shed salary and get draft picks. They didn't want a productive player because they goal isn't to make the playoffs this year. They are eventually trying to win a championship and they felt getting three draft pick backs and cap flexibility would lead them to winning a chip sooner than trading for Lee would.

sfattahian
07-31-2013, 10:26 PM
that might actually be what happens during iggys 3rd and 4th yr of the contract. I still think Barnes has a chance to be a top 10-15 player in the league. Regardless of whether or not he starts next yr- he'll probably be the best player on the team before hes 24

That's a bold statement. Curry already is a top-10-15 player, and to think Barnes will be better than him is going out on a limb. I'd be happy if he made the all-star team once or twice. Considering we got him for tanking that one season, I think it's awesome we even have him at all.

sfattahian
07-31-2013, 10:29 PM
I think in 3 years Barnes will be alot better than Paul George is right now

Another bold statement considering he was the best player on a team that was one game away from the finals.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 10:36 PM
That's a bold statement. Curry already is a top-10-15 player, and to think Barnes will be better than him is going out on a limb. I'd be happy if he made the all-star team once or twice. Considering we got him for tanking that one season, I think it's awesome we even have him at all.

I dont know if curry is viewed as a top 10-15 player... if so hes like number 15, but yes, i can completely see him and barnes being in the top 15 or so players in the league. with klay as a borderline all star level player as well.

sfattahian
07-31-2013, 10:37 PM
I still think Curry and Bogut are more important than Barnes and I can't see that changing. Barnes has to improve a lot before we start talking about him like this. He showed flashes of offensive dominance in the playoffs, but he wasn't being guarded by Iguodala, Green and Leonard, because they were on Curry and Thompson. Let's see him do it more consistently before we crown him the future of the franchise... don't mean to be a kill-joy.

Guppyfighter
07-31-2013, 10:38 PM
Another bold statement considering he was the best player on a team that was one game away from the finals.

That team was almost as medium as the 2004 Pistons, and they are in the East.

Seriously though, all their metric stats for each player is ****ing insanely close. And although George is a fantastic player the gap between him and a player with a ton of untapped potential is not far.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 10:38 PM
Another bold statement considering he was the best player on a team that was one game away from the finals.

barnes as a 20 yr old vs george as a 20 yr old- barnes was by far the more complete player. I think george will probably be the better defender (although I expect barnes to be a good defender too)... but will be a better all around offensive weapon. George isnt too bad of a measuring stick though.

Hibbert helped a lot against the heat in that series. a 7 2 guy with talent is something the heat are bound to have a tough time with.

Guppyfighter
07-31-2013, 10:38 PM
I dont know if curry is viewed as a top 10-15 player... if so hes like number 15, but yes, i can completely see him and barnes being in the top 15 or so players in the league. with klay as a borderline all star level player as well.

He is the 12th best player in the league.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 10:44 PM
He is the 12th best player in the league.

according to who?

and are you including d rose and kevin love who had bad yrs last season. I definitely think when curry is on- hes probably top 5 in the league.

Guppyfighter
07-31-2013, 11:00 PM
according to who?

and are you including d rose and kevin love who had bad yrs last season. I definitely think when curry is on- hes probably top 5 in the league.

Me. You can take my opinion for what it is worth. And yes it includes those players.

In sheer production next year I think

1. Lebron
2. Durant
3. Paul
4. Dwight
5. Parker
6. Rose
7. Harden
8. Westbrook
9. Love
10. Dwade
11. Melo
12. Curry

Noticeable Omission: Kobe Bryant, Achilles injury is really, really bad. Tim Duncan, age causes decline and I think it will be a bit more noticeable this year at the age of 38. Although, last year he was fourth in the league in efficiency metrics. His impact on defense was the second best in the league and his offense was very efficient. So, I have my some thoughts me leaving him off the list is a mistake.

And to add your comment about him being top five when he is on. I think that's fair honestly. His two amazing games this season ranked first and fifth in terms of best single individual games. The 54 point game being the best out of anyone ever had last season.

likemystylez
07-31-2013, 11:17 PM
Me. You can take my opinion for what it is worth. And yes it includes those players.

In sheer production next year I think

1. Lebron
2. Durant
3. Paul
4. Dwight
5. Parker
6. Rose
7. Harden
8. Westbrook
9. Love
10. Dwade
11. Melo
12. Curry

Noticeable Omission: Kobe Bryant, Achilles injury is really, really bad. Tim Duncan, age causes decline and I think it will be a bit more noticeable this year at the age of 38. Although, last year he was fourth in the league in efficiency metrics. His impact on defense was the second best in the league and his offense was very efficient. So, I have my some thoughts me leaving him off the list is a mistake.

And to add your comment about him being top five when he is on. I think that's fair honestly. His two amazing games this season ranked first and fifth in terms of best single individual games. The 54 point game being the best out of anyone ever had last season.

Interesting, I guess I never really listed the players. Assuming they continue to improve, where would you rank Kyrie Irving, John Wall, (those are more like what id want in a star pg)... granted i love curry... and he made the playoffs soo cool this yr. I also like Brook Lopez, aldridge and Noah when healthy... lol its weird how everyones opinion of bosh has gone down- would people still think hes a top 10 player if he played for a bad team?

Scoots
07-31-2013, 11:40 PM
I think Thompson's game is going to be helped by Jack not being around. I've been doing my traditional re-watching of games from last year, and while we will miss Jack's playmaking late in the shot clock there were a LOT of times Jack caused it to be late in the shot clock and Thompson would just end up standing and watching because he knew he wasn't terribly likely to get a pass, but with Curry on the floor he was in near constant motion. With Jack gone, and Thompson focusing on his handle and passing this off-season he can be more aggressive, and as he gets more aggressive he should be more successful.

I worry about the parts of Landry and Jack's games we didn't replace, but I am hopeful they will be replaced with different skills from several other players.

To that end I think it's critical Thompson start and get a chance to be aggressive with the starters and see that success and that it can be sustained throughout his time on the floor. Barnes doesn't need more confidence, he just needs more opportunity, and he'll get that coming from the bench.

I want the season to start.

Monta is beast
07-31-2013, 11:49 PM
Me. You can take my opinion for what it is worth. And yes it includes those players.

In sheer production next year I think

1. Lebron
2. Durant
3. Paul
4. Dwight
5. Parker
6. Rose
7. Harden
8. Westbrook
9. Love
10. Dwade
11. Melo
12. Curry

Noticeable Omission: Kobe Bryant, Achilles injury is really, really bad. Tim Duncan, age causes decline and I think it will be a bit more noticeable this year at the age of 38. Although, last year he was fourth in the league in efficiency metrics. His impact on defense was the second best in the league and his offense was very efficient. So, I have my some thoughts me leaving him off the list is a mistake.

And to add your comment about him being top five when he is on. I think that's fair honestly. His two amazing games this season ranked first and fifth in terms of best single individual games. The 54 point game being the best out of anyone ever had last season.

Stop making it so easy to call you dumb.

1) LeBron
2) Durant
3) Paul
4) Howard
5) Rose (If he plays as well as he did before)
6) Harden
7) Curry

Monta is beast
07-31-2013, 11:51 PM
To put Wade over Curry is insane. No other word can describe that opinion.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 12:06 AM
Stop making it so easy to call you dumb.

1) LeBron
2) Durant
3) Paul
4) Howard
5) Rose (If he plays as well as he did before)
6) Harden
7) Curry

Your homer is showing.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 12:18 AM
I thought we were not calling people names?

Monta is beast
08-01-2013, 12:27 AM
Your homer is showing.

Curry is flat out better than Wade. He's more efficient and effects the game in more areas than Anthony, Love. And I would take Curry over Westbrook 8 out of 10 times. No homer, just opinions and facts.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 12:47 AM
Curry is flat out better than Wade. He's more efficient and effects the game in more areas than Anthony, Love. And I would take Curry over Westbrook 8 out of 10 times. No homer, just opinions and facts.


Curry's obviously better than Wade offensively, but Wade is a game changer on defense and top defensive teams have higher winning percentages than top offensive teams. So his impact on defense gives him an edge.


Melo scores in greater volume than Curry, but I can also see the argument here because Curry's a better playermaker. I have Curry and Melo at 11 and 12 interchangeably. But there is no way Curry's better than Love. Love scored just as efficiently in his healthy year in greater volume while being the best rebounder in the league.

You can easily put Curry in the top ten and I agree. But he's not the seventh best player in the league.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 12:49 AM
If you include Curry's trend from last year, you should include Love's too :)

MackShock
08-01-2013, 01:28 AM
Efficient....lol. It effectively turns basketball into the best bang for you buck.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 01:47 AM
Efficient....lol. It effectively turns basketball into the best bang for you buck.

Efficiency is what wins basketball games. 100 percent, empirically proven.

Teams will generally have the same exact amount of possessions, give or take two. The only way to win is if you produce more points per possessions.

lol, please
08-01-2013, 02:01 AM
Efficient....lol. It effectively turns basketball into the best bang for you buck.

I don't want any bang for my buck, I want to bang for free. ~lolPhillies

MackShock
08-01-2013, 02:42 AM
Efficiency is what wins basketball games. 100 percent, empirically proven.

Teams will generally have the same exact amount of possessions, give or take two. The only way to win is if you produce more points per possessions.

Wrong, another way to win is to limit your opponents points per possession.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 03:19 AM
Wrong, another way to win is to limit your opponents points per possession.

This is the worst of "arguing to arguing" with me, Mack.

That's the same exact thing I said. You score more points per possession. If you limit your opponents points per possession, that means you are scoring more points per possession.

Mack, you are being extremely unreasonable with pretty much everything. I am not going to give an extremely inaccurate portrayal of what you are actually like, but I can tell you this is ridiculous.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 04:14 AM
Am I making you mad?

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 04:17 AM
Am I making you mad?

No, but I think you are trying to make a point and I am letting you know right now it's going right over my head.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 04:22 AM
No, but I think you are trying to make a point and I am letting you know right now it's going right over my head.

shucks ;)

MackShock
08-01-2013, 04:24 AM
I don't want to troll you, but you seem to think anybody's opinion that is different from yours is invalid, and you quickly criticize them.

winwarriorslose
08-01-2013, 04:33 AM
gay

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 04:34 AM
I don't want to troll you, but you seem to think anybody's opinion that is different from yours is invalid, and you quickly criticize them.

No. That's not true.

1.) Of course I am going to think my opinion is right. That's why it's my opinion.

2.) Confirmation bias. I tell people all the time when I agree with them or if I can see why they have the opinion they do. But even if I didn't I think it's obvious you are going to see me disagree with people opposed to everything I don't respond to. I don't respond to a lot of things whether I agree or disagree.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 04:41 AM
You seem to respond only to certain....people!

TrueFan420
08-01-2013, 05:09 AM
gay

Very insightful

Scoots
08-01-2013, 11:47 AM
I still don't think Gunty is serious about his position that he's stated several times that GMs only use stats to make decisions. It's so silly I assume it's just a trolling position he enjoys.

"Efficiency" is a convenient name to encompass all of basketball, but defined as he did "The only way to win is if you produce more points per possessions[sic]" it includes offense and defense and is effectively useless in evaluating a player.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 12:39 PM
Efficiency lol.. The object is to score more than your opponent.. Whether your efficient or not there has to be an outcome

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 01:27 PM
Efficiency lol.. The object is to score more than your opponent.. Whether your efficient or not there has to be an outcome

The only way to win while being less efficient is to get more possessions than the other team. So get all the two for ones.

Otherwise this game is like this

Four possession game for each team

Team 1: 3 (3 ppp)

Team 2: 2 (2 ppp)

Team 1: Miss, rebound, putback, 5 (2.5 ppp)

Team 2: Miss, 2 (1 ppp)

Team 1: Miss, 5 (1.6 ppp)

Team 2: Make 2, 4 (1.3 ppp)

Team 1: Miss, 5 (1.25 ppp)

Team 2: Make 2, 6 (1.5 ppp)

Team two wins. They were more efficient.

The chances of a team while being less efficient is less than a percent chance and it involves being almost identical in their efficiency while one other team gets three more possessions. The only realistic way to win is to be the more efficient team. It's why the two most efficient players in the league care about synergy. It's why GM's pay 500k a year to use mysynergysports and every single they have.

Teams will never make a roster move without consulting these kind of stats. No matter how they evaluate players, stats will always be used every single time.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 01:39 PM
Teams will never make a roster move without consulting these kind of stats. No matter how they evaluate players, stats will always be used every single time.

You know I read things people say and the words they use ... words like "never" and "always" would not be used by a statistician in a conversation about statistics unless they are actually proven fact. In this case your use of "never" has already been disproved.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 01:43 PM
You know I read things people say and the words they use ... words like "never" and "always" would not be used by a statistician in a conversation about statistics unless they are actually proven fact. In this case your use of "never" has already been disproved.

All teams have different ways about doing things, but each team never finalizes a roster move until they can pick apart the data. There is just no way around that. I know you are trying to argue because you didn't like the particular rhetoric I used, which makes your argument more unpalatable.

lol, please
08-01-2013, 01:48 PM
What does that have to do with the fact that what he says, and what they would probably be telling you is true or fairly accurate? "Never say never" while generally true, is a surefire sign that you lost the arugment and are laying on the ground with straws at your fingertips.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 01:53 PM
There you go with "never" again ... what stat did the Patriots use to come to the decision to cut Hernandez? We both know the answer is none. They didn't use a stat. They didn't talk to their analyst. They made a human decision and a business decision and a PR decision all without stats. To use a less emotional example to you ... the 49ers traded Charles Haley to the Cowboys because Haley was a bad guy who was out of control, not because his play warranted his leaving the team. Not ALL roster moves involve the stat guys.

The 49ers numbers guy Paraag Marathe has been there through 4 head coaches ... if the stats were so important why did it take until the team got great coaching for them to start to win?

Have you seen the movie Moneyball? I know it was just a movie, but Brad Pitt was making some of his moves NOT using stats, but using psychology to make decisions. That is true all the time in all pro sports. Teams will choose to let a player go or bring a player in because they fit the team as people even though the stats say otherwise.

I have never said a bad thing about stats or stat analysis in any of my posts yet you react to me like I have a negative emotional response to stats. It's just that some people think it's all about stats and that's simply not true.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 01:55 PM
What does that have to do with the fact that what he says, and what they would probably be telling you is true or fairly accurate? "Never say never" while generally true, is a surefire sign that you lost the arugment and are laying on the ground with straws at your fingertips.

Was this to me or to Guppy?

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 01:58 PM
There you go with "never" again ... what stat did the Patriots use to come to the decision to cut Hernandez? We both know the answer is none. They didn't use a stat. They didn't talk to their analyst. They made a human decision and a business decision and a PR decision all without stats. To use a less emotional example to you ... the 49ers traded Charles Haley to the Cowboys because Haley was a bad guy who was out of control, not because his play warranted his leaving the team. Not ALL roster moves involve the stat guys.

The 49ers numbers guy Paraag Marathe has been there through 4 head coaches ... if the stats were so important why did it take until the team got great coaching for them to start to win?

Have you seen the movie Moneyball? I know it was just a movie, but Brad Pitt was making some of his moves NOT using stats, but using psychology to make decisions. That is true all the time in all pro sports. Teams will choose to let a player go or bring a player in because they fit the team as people even though the stats say otherwise.

I have never said a bad thing about stats or stat analysis in any of my posts yet you react to me like I have a negative emotional response to stats. It's just that some people think it's all about stats and that's simply not true.

Have you read the book or actually watched the movie? Every choice he made was based on stats in the movie.

I was going to let you stew in your madness by not responding, but literally everything Beane does in that move is on stats. "Why are you trading all of these players?" It was because he wanted Scotty to play because of his amazing walk rate.

lol, please
08-01-2013, 01:59 PM
Was this to me or to Guppy?

You I guess, you are the one trying to hang on the whole absolutes like that changes much, the main points he is trying to make still stands.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 02:03 PM
My point was central to our ongoing discussion. He continues to maintain that all GMs use only stats to make their decisions. I maintain he is not only wrong but likely does not actually believe that. He continues to use absolutes about that one point, the only point I've been arguing with him about all this time :)

Other than that one thing you'll find I've been supportive of what he's saying, if not the way he's saying it.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 02:08 PM
My point was central to our ongoing discussion. He continues to maintain that all GMs use only stats to make their decisions. I maintain he is not only wrong but likely does not actually believe that. He continues to use absolutes about that one point, the only point I've been arguing with him about all this time :)

Other than that one thing you'll find I've been supportive of what he's saying, if not the way he's saying it.

I know you think it's wrong, but teams literally use statistics in every single roster move. It doesn't matter if there are other parts of the process, stats are the only thing they will use every single time.

You won't find a GM that said he made a roster move without consulting statistical models.

lol, please
08-01-2013, 02:10 PM
There may be GMs who don't use only stats, but rest assured no sports franchise that expects to be competitive doesn't have loads of data and staticians that contribute to every major signing/trade/move they make.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 02:28 PM
There may be GMs who don't use only stats, but rest assured no sports franchise that expects to be competitive doesn't have loads of data and staticians that contribute to every major signing/trade/move they make.

I never said GMs don't use stats or minimized their importance to them.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 03:51 PM
It is pretty much a given that stats are used to determine a players ability. They are a resume so to speak. At least from a GM or hiring manager standpoint. Make sense?

Now, much like most jobs, a resume doesn't tell an employer everything the candidate can do..

Just like how stats cannot gauge a players FULL ability.

If you can't agree with that parable then I'm sorry.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 04:21 PM
I know you think it's wrong, but teams literally use statistics in every single roster move. It doesn't matter if there are other parts of the process, stats are the only thing they will use every single time.

You won't find a GM that said he made a roster move without consulting statistical models.

You're misunderstanding or misreading his posts. It's the same problem you had with me.

We're saying that every GM uses stats. But they don't explicitly use stats and ignore everything else, they pull all of their resources and base their decisions on various factors, one of those main factors is the statistical analysis. But it's not the ONLY thing they use, it's just a part of what they look at, a significant part, but still just one part.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 04:28 PM
You're misunderstanding or misreading his posts. It's the same problem you had with me.

We're saying that every GM uses stats. But they don't explicitly use stats and ignore everything else, they pull all of their resources and base their decisions on various factors, one of those main factors is the statistical analysis. But it's not the ONLY thing they use, it's just a part of what they look at, a significant part, but still just one part.

THIS.

Should we just assume Gunty's not going to get it publicly?

Goose17
08-01-2013, 04:32 PM
THIS.

Should we just assume Gunty's not going to get it publicly?

He already agreed with me via Visitor Messages after the last thread was closed. I can only think he skimmed through your post and missed the "they don't only use stats" and saw it as "they don't use stats".

I like Guppy, but I don't understand this argument. Of course GM's have analysts on their payroll that crunch the numbers and will sway decisions and play an important part in the way the GM decides to run/build the team. But I can't think of any (in basketball) that base their entire opinion on statistics.

I said it before and I'll say it again. To ignore any resource, any information, any advice would be ignorant. The people that disregard stats and ignore them completely are just as foolish as the people that rely on them solely to form their entire opinion. You need to look at every aspect.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 04:34 PM
If all they consider is statistics, traditional scouts would have been replaced by now, and trust me, they haven't. Stats are an extremely valuable tool. But they can't tell you everything.

Scoots
08-01-2013, 04:41 PM
And I don't think anybody is arguing that point. The things we've learned about sport from advanced statistical analysis have been really interesting to about one in 10000 sports fans, but the result in the sports themselves have been profound.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 05:09 PM
I think my post regarding the resume parable sums it up completely.

I don't know if Guppy agrees, but he has made it clear that he thinks GM's only use stats to determine a players ability and NOTHING else, which is NOT the case.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 05:19 PM
I think my post regarding the resume parable sums it up completely.

I don't know if Guppy agrees, but he has made it clear that he thinks GM's only use stats to determine a players ability and NOTHING else, which is NOT the case.

But if you look at my visitor messages you'll see that he in fact doesn't think that.

I honestly believe he's misinterpreted the posts in here to be completely dismissive of stats. I could be wrong though.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 05:20 PM
You're misunderstanding or misreading his posts. It's the same problem you had with me.

We're saying that every GM uses stats. But they don't explicitly use stats and ignore everything else, they pull all of their resources and base their decisions on various factors, one of those main factors is the statistical analysis. But it's not the ONLY thing they use, it's just a part of what they look at, a significant part, but still just one part.

You are misreading me. I didn't say there wasn't various factors, but I did say ultimately every decision goes through the data department.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 05:21 PM
If all they consider is statistics, traditional scouts would have been replaced by now, and trust me, they haven't. Stats are an extremely valuable tool. But they can't tell you everything.


Traditional scouts heavily use advanced stats so I don't see your argument here. It's why there are less and less busts each year now.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 05:28 PM
Traditional scouts heavily use advanced stats so I don't see your argument here. It's why there are less and less busts each year now.

"Traditional scouts use advanced stats". That doesn't make any sense. Advanced stats are not a tool used by traditional scouts, the clue is in the part where it says "traditional"

And there's still coaches/GMs who openly despise advanced statistics, I find it hard to believe the final decision is made by their analytics department.

Stats are a massive part of how they make their decision but it's not the only part and it certainly isn't the deciding factor in every choice they make.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 05:34 PM
"Traditional scouts use advanced stats". That doesn't make any sense. Advanced stats are not a tool used by traditional scouts, the clue is in the part where it says "traditional"

And there's still coaches/GMs who openly despise advanced statistics, I find it hard to believe the final decision is made by their analytics department.

Stats are a massive part of how they make their decision but it's not the only part and it certainly isn't the deciding factor in every choice they make.


Advanced stats aren't limited to what we have on synergy and basketball reference. Although scouts do use synergy to see what kind of plays they usually do and exactly how good they are it.

But traditional scouts are extremely precise because they use advanced stats now. Whether it be to check acceleration, full blown sprint speed, how fast a player can decelerate, what kind of vertical can you expect when they are fully developed. Traditional scouts absolutely use advanced stats. This is an indisputable fact. I know it sounds like an oxymoron, but it's true and using the title of their name as an argument won't change.

Secondly, I know it's not the only part, but stats are used in every single roster move. And no, there are no GM's that despise advanced stats. All of them rely heavily on it. It's why NBA teams spend millions of dollars to come up with better even more amazing stats. Every single GM love stats.

There are still coaches that don't believe in advanced stats however. But that will eventually change. Just like it is and has in baseball.

You will be hard pressed to find any choice made by any team not backed by cold, hard, statistics. You just won't find it. It's like a fairy now a days.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 05:44 PM
I agree they're used in every roster move but that isn't the same as saying they are the deciding factor.

Sometimes they might be the deciding factor, but they're not always the deciding factor.

There's too many variables to take into account when making decisions, you cant just rely on Stats they are just one part.


And no. Not all scouts use advanced stats. It is not an "indisputable fact" (a phrase you've been throwing around a lot recently, as if by saying that it is indisputable it suddenly will be). The analytic department will take care of a lot of that, some scouts will use them but not them all.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 05:47 PM
I agree they're used in every roster move but that isn't the same as saying they are the deciding factor.

Sometimes they might be the deciding factor, but they're not always the deciding factor.

There's too many variables to take into account when making decisions, you cant just rely on Stats they are just one part.


And no. Not all scouts use advanced stats. It is not an "indisputable fact" (a phrase you've been throwing around a lot recently, as if by saying that it is indisputable it suddenly will be). The analytic department will take care of a lot of that, some scouts will use them but not them all.

Well, most traditional scouts do use advanced stats and that's a fact.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 05:51 PM
Well, most traditional scouts do use advanced stats and that's a fact.

It's not a fact.

If it's a fact, prove it.

You can't just say "that's a fact" and expect me to go "it is? Okay. Sorry".

I've seen your posts. I expected a better counter argument from you. I'm disappoint.

My dog can speak three languages. All of them alien. That's a fact.

Dat feel...

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 05:55 PM
It's not a fact.

If it's a fact, prove it.

You can't just say "that's a fact" and expect me to go "it is? Okay. Sorry".

I've seen your posts. I expected a better counter argument from you. I'm disappoint.

My dog can speak three languages. All of them alien. That's a fact.

Dat feel...


It is a fact.

If you want, you can ask this professional scout about it. https://twitter.com/jameskerti

He will give you a reasonable answer and then think to himself "the ****, of course we use advanced stats, it's not really a question."

Goose17
08-01-2013, 06:00 PM
It is a fact.

If you want, you can ask this professional scout about it. https://twitter.com/jameskerti

A link to a twitter account is not evidence.

If it's a fact, where did you learn about it? How do you know it's a fact? Provide evidence.

It's no different from me saying. "None of the scouts wear blue ties. That's a fact".

What makes your statement a fact and my statement a blatant lie?

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 06:02 PM
A link to a twitter account is not evidence.

If it's a fact, where did you learn about it? How do you know it's a fact? Provide evidence.

It's no different from me saying. "None of the scouts wear blue ties. That's a fact".

What makes your statement a fact and my statement a blatant lie?

So I am guessing you don't want to validate your opinion on what scouts do by asking a professional scout how scouts go about doing things.

To learn about the industry and the nuisances, you need to ask the people inside said industry's. A simple google search and you can confirm this guy is real.

And then you can ask him questions until your heart is content. I can't guarantee he will respond, but he's highly reputable in the business and he does scout for college and NBA teams.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 06:06 PM
So I am guessing you don't want to validate your opinion on what scouts do by asking a professional scout how scouts go about doing things.

To learn about the industry and the nuisances, you need to ask the people inside said industry's. A simple google search and you can confirm this guy is real.

And then you can ask him questions until your heart is content. I can't guarantee he will respond, but he's highly reputable in the business and he does scout for college and NBA teams.

None of that is relevant. You're deflecting.

If it's a fact, how did you learn of this fact? Where are you getting the information? You had to learn this from somewhere.

If you learned it from tweeting a scout that's fair enough. Link me to the tweet.

I'm simply asking how you know this to be a fact?

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 06:08 PM
None of that is relevant. You're deflecting.

If it's a fact, how did you learn of this fact? Where are you getting the information? You had to learn this from somewhere.

If you learned it from tweeting a scout that's fair enough. Link me to the tweet.

I'm simply asking how you know this to be a fact?

Any linking to tweets would reveal who I am.

Like I said. Ask him yourself. I have given you the tools to learn about how scouts do things and their processes.

I suggest following this guy and if you want to know stuff from him tweeting at him. Obviously my word isn't gold, so go ahead and take the time to either verify information discredit it.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 06:15 PM
I don't understand why you can't tell me where you learned this fact.

You continue to deflect the question. I'm willing to be proven wrong, in fact, I actually want to be proven wrong.

You must have learned about this fact from somewhere.

You can't claim something is a fact and then tell people to discover it for themselves. That to me looks like you've made a false claim, have no evidence to support your supposed "fact" and are now trying to get out of it by deflecting.

Just tell me where you learned of this fact.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 06:17 PM
I don't understand why you can't tell me where you learned this fact.

You continue to deflect the question. I'm willing to be proven wrong, in fact, I actually want to be proven wrong.

You must have learned about this fact from somewhere.

You can't claim something is a fact and then tell people to discover it for themselves. That to me looks like you've made a false claim, have no evidence to support your supposed "fact" and are now trying to get out of it by deflecting.

Just tell me where you learned of this fact.

Sure I can. I am doing it right now. And it's rather irresponsible of you to not try to obtain as much information as possible.

Why don't you want to ask this scout about the nuances of scouting right now and how scouts generally go about their due process? Seems like someone who likes basketball would jump at the opportunity to talk to a scout.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 06:26 PM
Why don't you want to tell me where you learned of this "fact"? Is it because you made it up? It's rather irresponsible of you to state something is a fact without being able to provide evidence to back up such a claim.

It's not difficult, with all the posts you've made you could have told us by now. Your reluctance only fuels speculation that you are lying.

Let me be clear. Explain how you gained knowledge of this fact. If you refuse to, I'll accept that as being the same as not being able to and I will take that as admittance that it is not a fact and your way of conceding to me and accepting you are wrong.

It's time to step up, tell me how you gained this knowledge or you've lost the debate.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 06:33 PM
You don't have to take my word for it. You can learn about it yourself. IF you don't want to, you are robbing yourself of a great opportunity to learn what scouts do. What I said is most definitely a fact and I don't care if I "win" or "lose" whatever debate this is you think we are having. I could not care less about being right and wrong.

The only thing I am unsure of is why you are so anti voluntary knowledge. It's right at your fingertips, but you'd rather sit here and demand something I am not willing to divulge.

You are doing yourself a disservice to yourself by not using the link I provided to a professional scout to know the ins and outs of scouting.

He also did a reddit ama if you'd like to know about that.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 06:33 PM
Sounds like Guppy is full of BS.

For a guy who is so sure that he would destroy Mibs in a fist fight, you sure are scared to show your face.

You talk a big game, talk loads of crap to every body on here, but don't want people knowing who you really are.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 06:37 PM
Sounds like Guppy is full of BS.

For a guy who is so sure that he would destroy Mibs in a fist fight, you sure are scared to show your face.

You talk a big game, talk loads of crap to every body on here, but don't want people knowing who you really are.


I have literally provided an NBA level scout that you guys can question and learn from. It doesn't matter if you think I am full of BS because you can be asking him questions about what scouts do.

If you don't believe that traditional scouts use advanced stats that's your prerogative, but you can take the time to find out yourself, which both of you sound unwilling to do.

Goose17
08-01-2013, 06:49 PM
It would be easier for you to tell us how you came to learn about this fact, it would take less than five minutes.

You claimed something to be a fact but failed to back it up with the appropriate evidence, therefore it is not a fact.



For future reference this is how you present a fact;

NBA teams and GMs use advanced stats to help make many decisions and rightfully so, they're an extremely useful tool. But they're not as dominant as you may believe...

Not every NBA team has an analytic department. This is a fact.

Supporting evidence:

"Twenty-two of the thirty N.B.A. teams have some kind of analytics department in their front offices"
http://m.newyorker.com/online/blogs/sportingscene/2013/05/sam-hinkie-advanced-stats-76ers.html


That number has since risen to 23,

http://www.nbastuffer.com/component/option,com_glossary/Itemid,90/catid,44/func,view/term,NBA%20Teams%20That%20Have%20Analytics%20Depar tment/

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 06:57 PM
I find it to be a more enriching experience to seek out knowledge for yourself. I have made it pretty easy to do so as well.

If you are too lazy for that, that's your problem.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 06:58 PM
Lol. You just deflected my whole comment.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 07:01 PM
And what does seeking knowledge for yourself have anything to do with us asking you to show your work, or merely back up what you speak? Yeah you gave us the account of a scout, but all you're saying is "find out for yourself" barely even attempting to validate your arguments.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 07:10 PM
And what does seeking knowledge for yourself have anything to do with us asking you to show your work, or merely back up what you speak? Yeah you gave us the account of a scout, but all you're saying is "find out for yourself" barely even attempting to validate your arguments.

Here is how this all happened.

"Scouts use advanced stats."

"Nu uh. You can't declare that a fact."

"Okay, here is this scout. Ask him how scouts go about scouting. I already know it's fact but my word doesn't mean anything so here is someone who can give you all the ins and outs you need to know about how scouts scout."

"Nu uh, I don't wanna do that."

If you don't care how scouts have evolved and how they use advanced statistics, that's fine. But it's mostly just laziness on your parts. You are willingly being ignorant by not attempting to question James Kerti.

MackShock
08-01-2013, 07:18 PM
This is how it actually happened :

"Scouts use advanced statistics "

"can you prove it?"

"here, ask this guy. Hell answer for me"

Calling us lazy when you don't feel like explaining.. Lol.

Guppyfighter
08-01-2013, 07:21 PM
This is how it actually happened :

"Scouts use advanced statistics "

"can you prove it?"

"here, ask this guy. Hell answer for me"

Calling us lazy when you don't feel like explaining.. Lol.

Eh, I feel like that's a fair representation as well. Both lazy.

Still, I find it better than you hear from a professional scout yourself.

Spanklin
08-02-2013, 06:01 PM
Does anyone know where to get points scored by quarter last season?

I can construct a near perfect rotation if I can get my hands on the proper stats and tables.

lol, please
08-02-2013, 10:34 PM
Gotta love the dude who brings zero discussion to the table but wants to exercise a power trip by deleting any post he feels is inappropriate.

Guppyfighter
08-02-2013, 10:34 PM
Does anyone know where to get points scored by quarter last season?

I can construct a near perfect rotation if I can get my hands on the proper stats and tables.

No you can't. Those are irrelevant numbers that aren't adjusted for pace, that aren't adjusted against rotations, and it's extremely random.

This is how I know you don't study statistics like you claimed. Please stop posting.

Monta is beast
08-02-2013, 10:46 PM
Nobody who has a life studies stats

likemystylez
08-02-2013, 11:11 PM
Nobody who has a life studies stats

at the risk of putting myself down- Guppy wrote that on an online Golden State Warriors Forum in the middle of the offseason.

Not sure how much of a life any of us have if we are posting on here daily....sorry if this offends anybody. LOL we dont hold it against you here :D

Guppyfighter
08-02-2013, 11:25 PM
Mibs is projecting.

MackShock
08-02-2013, 11:35 PM
at the risk of putting myself down- Guppy wrote that on an online Golden State Warriors Forum in the middle of the offseason.

Not sure how much of a life any of us have if we are posting on here daily....sorry if this offends anybody. LOL we dont hold it against you here :D

despite that i have 23k posts..id still say i have a life outside of PSD...most of us do..

but those who are on general discussions and other forums who are on PSD all day..not so sure. i dont know if they have office jobs and are on here all day,..but its ridiculous that they have 50k+ posts...but then again theyve been around since 2004 or earlier..and ive only been here since 09.

likemystylez
08-02-2013, 11:43 PM
despite that i have 23k posts..id still say i have a life outside of PSD...most of us do..

but those who are on general discussions and other forums who are on PSD all day..not so sure. i dont know if they have office jobs and are on here all day,..but its ridiculous that they have 50k+ posts...but then again theyve been around since 2004 or earlier..and ive only been here since 09.

you dont gotta lie to kick it,

no need to sugar coat it man, in thelast few days on this forum we have seen passionate arguments over

1) Kevin Durants market value (when the thunder are not even shopping him

2) Will harrison barnes be as good as George

3) where does steph curry rank in the nba

4) whether or not a player playing well should have any effect on his team winning games

5) whether or not stats lie

6) and dont get me started on the lunch thread

so yeah- when there is nothing basketball related happening with the warriors- the fact that we are checking in on the forum would indicate to an average person....we have no life.

MackShock
08-02-2013, 11:45 PM
its the offseason..those things you listed are not typical

likemystylez
08-03-2013, 12:00 AM
its the offseason..those things you listed are not typical

I listed random topics from the last week- that have us engaged. I thought my point was as clear as day

MackShock
08-03-2013, 12:32 AM
but they still arent typical lol..

but yeah were all losers

lol, please
08-03-2013, 01:10 AM
at the risk of putting myself down- Guppy wrote that on an online Golden State Warriors Forum in the middle of the offseason.

Not sure how much of a life any of us have if we are posting on here daily....sorry if this offends anybody. LOL we dont hold it against you here :D
You are talking as if posting on PSD required a hour long drive away from the nearest town to enter an underground kiosk to make a post. People post from the mobile app and any PC anywhere, I have posted from games, bars, commuting, or just at the pad, like right now. Far from telling about who has a life and who doesn't, lol, and with all due respect, being a hardcore multi-sports fan IS a life, and a grand one at that; life without sports sounds boring to me.

sfattahian
08-03-2013, 01:33 AM
Nice poll. LOL.
That's what she said!

sfattahian
08-03-2013, 01:39 AM
at the risk of putting myself down- Guppy wrote that on an online Golden State Warriors Forum in the middle of the offseason.

Not sure how much of a life any of us have if we are posting on here daily....sorry if this offends anybody. LOL we dont hold it against you here :D

sad but true


Mibs is projecting.

lol

Scoots
08-03-2013, 01:43 AM
I wish I knew what my deleted posts were ... I know they were deleted because my nickname for Guppy wasn't liked. I'm a little surprised the posts were deleted.

I spend probably 10 cumulative minutes a day on PSD. I've got plenty of time for a life.

lol, please
08-03-2013, 01:53 AM
I wish I knew what my deleted posts were ... I know they were deleted because my nickname for Guppy wasn't liked. I'm a little surprised the posts were deleted.

I spend probably 10 cumulative minutes a day on PSD. I've got plenty of time for a life.
Mods don't have objectivity on this site, except for one or two. The rest are heavily biased and play favoritisms, but will deny it to the end, and the "fans" of these mods will defend them, it's a losing battle.

bigmac8675
08-03-2013, 02:24 AM
All the above

likemystylez
08-03-2013, 08:28 AM
Mods don't have objectivity on this site, except for one or two. The rest are heavily biased and play favoritisms, but will deny it to the end, and the "fans" of these mods will defend them, it's a losing battle.

yeah its kind of like NBA officiating :horse::hide:

likemystylez
08-03-2013, 08:34 AM
You are talking as if posting on PSD required a hour long drive away from the nearest town to enter an underground kiosk to make a post. People post from the mobile app and any PC anywhere, I have posted from games, bars, commuting, or just at the pad, like right now. Far from telling about who has a life and who doesn't, lol, and with all due respect, being a hardcore multi-sports fan IS a life, and a grand one at that; life without sports sounds boring to me.

Touché..... truer words have never been spoken- but your preaching to the choir man.

LOL- I dint mean to inspire controversy (ehh well maybe a little bit)- but allow me to rephrase. Anybody who has the time and interest to respond to a thread about statistics in an offseason Golden State warriors forum- really has no room to accuse someone else in the forum of not having a life. It just struck me as kind of Ironic thats all.

Scoots
08-03-2013, 01:49 PM
Anybody who has the time and interest to respond to a thread about statistics in an offseason Golden State warriors forum- really has no room to accuse someone else in the forum of not having a life. It just struck me as kind of Ironic thats all.

This

lol, please
08-03-2013, 04:00 PM
yeah its kind of like NBA officiating :horse::hide:

Sad but true. :laugh2:

eDush
08-04-2013, 07:58 PM
Well with Bazemore starting there is room on the bench :)

Bazemore would only start if the team is in tanking mode or Curry and Douglas are DNP.

Scoots
08-04-2013, 10:25 PM
Wow, nice pull :)

MackShock
08-05-2013, 01:38 AM
thread bumper...edouche

lol, please
08-05-2013, 03:20 PM
Bumped? How do you bump a thread that's already on the first page? Bumping a thread means you are pushing a buried thread to the front. :facepalm: For a TM you do make youself a laughing stock on a near daily basis in one form or another. I don't know whether to cry, or laugh. :laugh2: :facepalm:

Scoots
08-05-2013, 04:11 PM
You could have chosen silence instead :)

Monta is beast
08-05-2013, 04:48 PM
Haha I mean I have a life, on light days I post on here tho

MackShock
08-05-2013, 06:22 PM
Bumped? How do you bump a thread that's already on the first page? Bumping a thread means you are pushing a buried thread to the front. :facepalm: For a TM you do make youself a laughing stock on a near daily basis in one form or another. I don't know whether to cry, or laugh. :laugh2: :facepalm:

I don't know who's a laughing stock..you or me. Bumping means posting in it (usually a thread that no one has posted in a long time) and is "bumped" to the top right under the stickies.

Stop being a dick Phillies, you know what I meant.

likemystylez
08-05-2013, 08:56 PM
Haha I mean I have a life, on light days I post on here tho

Ummm- you post every day don't you?

lol, please
08-05-2013, 11:24 PM
I don't know who's a laughing stock..you or me. Bumping means posting in it (usually a thread that no one has posted in a long time) and is "bumped" to the top right under the stickies.

Stop being a dick Phillies, you know what I meant.
You can't "bump" a thread that was like the 6th option on the first page, everyone already sees it ya big dummy. You silly goose, you! Pun intended. :laugh: :laugh:

I want what you're smoking. Then I can blaze with wwl and talk about how the Dubs are about to win a 'ship.

MackShock
08-06-2013, 12:47 AM
As long as it's not on the top, it can be bumped. And for those 5 threads that were bumped, I'm pretty sure they were lower than 6th since nobody commented in them for 2 weeks minimum.

Besides, what you're thinking of is resurrecting a thread..like what Guppy was doing to be a jerk.

Leandres_sf
10-07-2013, 05:10 PM
@gswscribe: Klay Thompson ready to embrace reserve role: "I'm going for Sixth Man of the Year." http://t.co/PNtHxnK4Xq

Nothing's official yet, but it's good to gear that Klay is opening to coming off the bench. He could be a great sixth man, instant offense, good d.

COOLbeans
10-07-2013, 08:18 PM
I liked Klay off the bench as well, he looked good and will exploit 2nd team defenses.

Scoots
10-07-2013, 08:32 PM
It may well change on a regular basis depending on who the team is playing. There is no point in more speculation now ... we are 2 weeks from having actual data.

Guppyfighter
10-07-2013, 11:30 PM
I could care less about who starts and doesn't. Minutes are all that matters.

Leandres_sf
10-08-2013, 03:17 AM
I could care less about who starts and doesn't. Minutes are all that matters.

Minutes, and what point in the game players get said minutes.

MackShock
10-08-2013, 04:11 AM
I could care less about who starts and doesn't. Minutes are all that matters.

yup. because minutes are numbers.

Guppyfighter
10-08-2013, 04:35 AM
yup. because minutes are numbers.

I care about things that produce results. A players production and his ability to affect a game go hand in hand with minutes. Whether someone starts or not doesn't.

likemystylez
10-08-2013, 09:49 AM
Well looks like we wont have to worry about this problem anymore- barnes is out for the next few games (and to frame it correctly- as scoots would say)- we should assume he will be out until late january.

Scoots
10-08-2013, 11:07 AM
Efficiency in the last 4 minutes in a blow out don't matter as much as in the first 4 minutes.

Guppyfighter
10-15-2013, 04:10 AM
Efficiency in the last 4 minutes in a blow out don't matter as much as in the first 4 minutes.

You are right, technically speaking. Win probability would be affected differently.