PDA

View Full Version : Should the Warriors make any major changes?



JasonJohnHorn
06-22-2014, 09:15 AM
There are a lot of trade rumours swirling around GSW right now, but does the team really need to make any major changes?


The Pistons and Bulls of the late of the late 80's and early 90's each had some disappointing playoff exits, but they both had a great core and young players. As Dumars, Rodman and Sally developed, and Thomas, Laimbeer and Johnson reached their prime, the Pistons were able to win two titles without any major changes (Dantley for Aguirre which is a lateral move in my estimation).

The Bulls, likewise, had the same situation. The lost a couple of times with Jordan, Pippen and Grant, but the Bulls waited on Pippen and Grant and were soon a dynasty.


Looking at the Warriors, it seems that they have a lot of great young pieces: Curry, Thompson and Barnes to start with. And some great vets: Lee, Bogut and Iggy.

To me it seems as though they are a MLE signing away from contention. With a PF/C that could spot Bogut or Lee, they'd have a really strong 8 man rotation, and with the right coach, that core could contend for the next 5-6 years.


I'm all for upgrading: Lee for Love would be great obviously, but the T-Wolves would want more than Lee for Love, and if it comes down to throwing in a couple first-rounders, cool, but if it comes down to letting go of somebody like Thompson, I'm not sure that is a good idea. Likewise, rumours have crept up about Tyson Chandler... I think he's a great defender, but he doesn't have the passing skills of offensive game that Bogut has....


Do you guys think the Warriors should stay pat and let these guys develop together? Or do you think a drastic change is needed and would help? I think GMs these days are a little too impatient, and with the great locker room chemistry that the Warriors reportedly have, I think it is a bad idea to break it up unless there can be a major upgrade with a lost cost: look what happened with the Pacers in the locker room when Granger was replaced with Turner.



Thoughts?

FOXHOUND
06-22-2014, 09:45 AM
I think if you can make your team better you have to do it, especially in this day and age. With the way free agency and trades are now you never know which team may load up and leap frog you in any offseason. Houston is trying to dump cap space to sign Melo outright, Denver is trying to trade for Kevin Love, etc.

I think you have to explore all options every year and see if you can improve the roster. After all, it was their aggressive offseason last year that got them Iggy.

HYFR
06-22-2014, 11:57 AM
As currently constructed they are just not title contenders, so yes they should make a change if it makes them better. Love definitely makes them better and IMO it should be done.

I wonder what gsw fans feel on this, their front office seems split on dealing for love.

ESaady
06-22-2014, 12:03 PM
Decision is ultimately left up to the owners. They're weighing all options and latest rumors are that the T'Wolves are asking for Klay, Lee and possibly even Barnes. That's too much in IMO. Personally, as a Warriors fan, I want this trade to happen. One of the original rumors was Klay Lee for Love Martin Barea and the 13th pick. I would have pulled the trigger right there if I were Dubs management.

Crunch Time
06-22-2014, 12:28 PM
They need a legitimate 1/2 combo

ManRam
06-22-2014, 12:36 PM
Should they make a change for the hell of it? No.

Should they make a change if it means snagging Kevin Love? Absolutely.

Dade County
06-22-2014, 12:39 PM
They need to keep Klay no matter what.

If they are truly in the mix to land Love, then they need to be more creative with out having klay on the table.

kobe4thewinbang
06-22-2014, 12:45 PM
They need a legitimate 1/2 comboAbsolutely. Other than Curry, it has been a toss-up on who is going to contribute, and usually it is only one or two guys, which is why they come up short. Love seems to be the missing link of the 1-2 punch and it would diversity GS from just being a 3-PT shooting team (even though Love likes to shoot 3's too).

ManRam
06-22-2014, 12:47 PM
Monta and Klay are pretty damn different players...

...but the way Warriors fans revered them is eerily similar. Too much so, in both cases. I'm sure they've all finally came around on the Monta front, and I'm sure that would eventually happen too if they are lucky enough to see Klay and whatever else traded for Love.

Klay's a good player. He brings value to a team. But he isn't a dynamic offensive player (essentially just a catch-and-shoot player) and they can compensate for his defense in other ways. You don't let him get in the way of getting a top 7-or-so player in this league. I'm still stunned at how much push back there is from Warriors fans. Especially because he's going to have to be paid soon...and they already have a lot of money tied up into that core.

tredigs
06-22-2014, 12:50 PM
They need to keep Klay no matter what.

If they are truly in the mix to land Love, then they need to be more creative with out having klay on the table.

Love is about 3 tiers above Klay as a player. He's replaceable, and players of Love's caliber do not come available every day. I would argue that Curry, Bogut and Iggy are the Warriors most important pieces, so if you can add a top 6 player to your roster without even giving up one of those three, it's a no brainer. I'm not as high on Klay's upside as some others, I think he's generally going to be the spot-up shooter with +defense that we've seen in the past couple years for the next few years. If he could facilitate, had truly elite D, or was capable of breaking down a defense off the dribble I'd be more adverse to letting him go. But, he's a no-brainer to dish out when a superstar level talent is on the table.

DWNTWNLakeShow
06-22-2014, 12:56 PM
I think if you can make your team better you have to do it, especially in this day and age. With the way free agency and trades are now you never know which team may load up and leap frog you in any offseason. Houston is trying to dump cap space to sign Melo outright, Denver is trying to trade for Kevin Love, etc.

I think you have to explore all options every year and see if you can improve the roster. After all, it was their aggressive offseason last year that got them Iggy.

This exactly. very well said

Goose17
06-22-2014, 01:58 PM
If it's the right deal, sure. But you don't break up a good thing just for a big name, sometimes you just have to be patient and grow your grass greener than that other side will ever be.


The original idea was to partner Love up with the Splash Brothers, not break the Splash Brothers up to get him.


Like I said before...


The more I hear about these trades the more I think we should just stick with what he have.

If we let Steve Blake walk and O'Neal retires that's 4/5 mil to sign a FA, then you have the 9mil TPE. Use one to get a back up point man who can penetrate and pass and the other to get a back up big man who (ideally) can play the 4 and 5.

We can afford to stick with our core for another season while the staff get themselves acquainted with everything and Kerr gets some experience under him. See where we land and make a move next season when we have Lee expiring (everyone likes a big expiring that can still contribute), Speights, Barnes and Klays options, Crawford coming off the books and a first round pick to play with.

Develop the talent we have, see if Barnes gets better and if he does make the decision to either sell high or give him a reasonable extension. See how Draymond fits in, is he going to be a high caliber role player or a genuine starter? See how Dre's offense comes along. See how the new coaching changes things... for all we know Kerr and Gentry's offense could make us dangerous enough without Love, we might be looking to add a defensive PF with passing ability by this point next season rather than another scorer.


I'm still on the fence about all of this... there's too many variables.







Personally I'm just worried about how Love fits into the roster.

Curry - Iguodala - Barnes - Love - Bogut.

Only two of those guys average more than 9 points per game. A starting 5 where only two guys can score 10 points or more? Come on.

Three of those guys have an injury history that should be concerning to any gm.

The reason we have been so successful over the last couple of seasons is because of our defense. By trading away Klay we lose a high caliber wing defender, Love is an upgrade over Lee defensively but not by much.

By trading our first round pick in 2015 (which is what they want, Klay + Lee + The pick) we leave ourselves with no picks for three consecutive years.

Love will want a max deal most likely. Between him and Steph we will have no cap space for years to build around them. We have to hope our current youngsters produce like we hope they can.

Love can score in the post when he has too but he drifts out to the perimeter a lot. With Lee gone, who does the post scoring? Or are we just going to camp outside and spray 3's all night?

Klay shoots the 3 better than Love. Statistical fact.


On top of all that we've never seen Love in the post-season, this sounds dumb but it's possible that he won't be as productive, he's never played against teams in that atmosphere, playoff basketball is a whole other game. Look at Harden, consistent regular season stud, consistent playoff dud. It happens, some guys just aren't built for it.


And then off the court...

By trading Klay it pisses off Curry. Curry didn't want Jackson gone, they fired him. Curry has grown close to Klay and wants him to stay, now they're trading him? Do they actually want Steph to leave?




I'm not against moving Klay or signing Love, I'm just not convinced this is the right deal.

Goose17
06-22-2014, 02:00 PM
I'm not as high on Klay's upside as some others, I think he's generally going to be the spot-up shooter with +defense that we've seen in the past couple years for the next few years. If he could facilitate, had truly elite D,

He almost does have truly elite D, and for his age that's astounding. He outplayed Iguodala defensively for a large chunk of last season.

Or maybe I just think that because I'm european.

mavwar53
06-22-2014, 02:31 PM
They need to keep Klay no matter what.

If they are truly in the mix to land Love, then they need to be more creative with out having klay on the table.

Couldn't agree more, Klay is truly the key on defense, as good as Iggy is on D he cannot gaurd CP3, Parker or Westbrook the way Klay can, without Klay the warriors will get killed with dribble penetration, negating Bogut's presence inside.

raiderposting
06-22-2014, 02:34 PM
Love+Martin>>>>>>>>Lee>Thompson and it's not even close. Love is a top 8 player. I don't think Thompson has top 8 potential. He's just rated higher because the SG position is weak and lacks multiple high level stars. Warriors would be dumb not to do that deal.

raiderposting
06-22-2014, 02:36 PM
Monta and Klay are pretty damn different players...

...but the way Warriors fans revered them is eerily similar. Too much so, in both cases. I'm sure they've all finally came around on the Monta front, and I'm sure that would eventually happen too if they are lucky enough to see Klay and whatever else traded for Love.

Klay's a good player. He brings value to a team. But he isn't a dynamic offensive player (essentially just a catch-and-shoot player) and they can compensate for his defense in other ways. You don't let him get in the way of getting a top 7-or-so player in this league. I'm still stunned at how much push back there is from Warriors fans. Especially because he's going to have to be paid soon...and they already have a lot of money tied up into that core.

This

FOXHOUND
06-22-2014, 10:33 PM
Absolutely. Other than Curry, it has been a toss-up on who is going to contribute, and usually it is only one or two guys, which is why they come up short. Love seems to be the missing link of the 1-2 punch and it would diversity GS from just being a 3-PT shooting team (even though Love likes to shoot 3's too).

I see what you're saying, but the Spurs literally just won a title with their depth and it being a toss up on who is going to contibute. I'm sure you're used to the way the Lakers have won it all but I think that's a rare thing. As much as I like Curry he doesn't impact the game as much Shaq or Kobe did, so right off the bat you're behind. Having a duo THAT good, one that is capable of carrying you to a championship, is a very tough and rare thing.

I think getting Love would be great though, but it really depends on what's the cost. Klay is definitely expendable in a deal like that but that comes with a lot of loss. His defense was the most important thing for them in a lot of ways. The way he guarded Paul in the playoffs was outstanding, and having a SG capable of guarding the elite PGs like that does wonders because of how weak a defender Curry is. Taking him off PG's, the deepest position in the league to put him on SG's, arguably the least, is a very important thing.

But this deal probably has zero chance without him being involved. That's a tough road for them to go down, I can see why the orginazation is split. They're already so strong offensively, although Love could bring them to an even higher level. But what does that mean for their defense? Love's defensive impact is a huge problem. Curry + Love may be the best offensive duo between their scoring talent, shooting and passing combination. The problem is they would DEFINITELY be the worst defensively.