PDA

View Full Version : The half-life of the Golden State Warriors



FOXHOUND
06-13-2017, 07:54 AM
First, everyone should read this article by Zach Lowe.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19591472/zach-lowe-golden-state-warriors-potential-dynasty-2017-nba-finals

Beyond the fact that guys like Danny Ainge and Daryl Morey thankfully don't have the same defeatist attitude that some fans have been displaying, and of course Pop and Buford the same, there is a time limit on this Golden State team that supersedes the age of their core four.

Take this important financial tidbit from the article,


They also know the Warriors may not be able to afford their team as the four stars sign mammoth new deals, potentially starting with Durant and Curry this summer. Depending on what happens with Iguodala, Shaun Livingston, and Zaza Pachulia -- also free agents in July -- the Warriors could vault $20 million over the tax next season, and $30 million over in 2018-19.

Thompson becomes eligible for a new deal that summer. Max him out, and the payroll could crack $300 million with extra penalties for repeat taxpayers. And that is factoring conservatively, with Iguodala and Livingston off the books after 2019; a below-market estimate for Patrick McCaw (a restricted free agent after next season); and the rest of the roster filled with minimum contracts, cost-controlled first-rounders, and cheapo second-round picks. (The Warriors have traded their second-round picks in each of the next three drafts, but they are trying to buy back into this draft, according to several league sources.)

Then comes Green, in the summer of 2020. If he hits free agency eligible for the super-max designated player extension, the Warriors are looking at a roster bill approaching $440 million. Coaxing two of the stars into below-market deals wouldn't make enough of a dent. They also paid almost $50 million into the league's revenue-sharing system last season, according to sources familiar with the data.

The Warriors as we are seeing them likely have two more years at most before they unload talent like Klay Thompson and Iguodala becomes far less effective due to age. That's if Iguodala is even there next year, with the upcoming financials that they are no doubt planning for. They are not going to be paying $300-440M a year for their roster. Maybe their guys take pay cuts but I doubt it will be done to any extreme level that can offset that kind of expense.

warfelg
06-13-2017, 08:05 AM
A bunch of us have been saying that from a while and Dubs fans just respond with "don't worry it will work out, no one will take that max, older guys will take massive cuts"

So much for that.

FOXHOUND
06-13-2017, 09:02 AM
A bunch of us have been saying that from a while and Dubs fans just respond with "don't worry it will work out, no one will take that max, older guys will take massive cuts"

So much for that.

Theoretically it's possible, but I'll believe that when I see it lol. Still, if they walk away with 3-4 titles including 2015, I don't think they're going to lose sleep over it.

COOLbeans
06-13-2017, 09:15 AM
If those guys want to keep winning then everyone but Curry will take less. These are selfless guys with a window to cement thmseves into history. There's no way they'll exchange a few million per year for losing against these same Warriors

Scoots
06-13-2017, 09:16 AM
A bunch of us have been saying that from a while and Dubs fans just respond with "don't worry it will work out, no one will take that max, older guys will take massive cuts"

So much for that.

For the most part what I've seen is 3 years at this level barring some miraculous drafts.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
06-13-2017, 09:17 AM
I see the Warriors big4 gone eventually. Probably down to a big 2 of Curry and KD.

AllBall
06-13-2017, 01:24 PM
Up to the players. No one can stop them from taking less money.

TrueFan420
06-13-2017, 01:38 PM
Klay will be the odd man out and we will pay the Tax. Owners said they'd pay up for a winner and we are that. As long as Curry, KD and Green are here we will be a force. Losing Klay will suck tho

mightybosstone
06-13-2017, 01:51 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.

J-Relo
06-13-2017, 03:33 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.

Even-though I agree Klay will most probably be the one out, I do think that this will be not because of Warriors being unable to pay him but because his value and impact is and will continue to be overshadowed by the monstrous talents of Curry and Durant. He seems to stay humble but c'mon where you are one of the best two-way guards in the league and all people talk is Curry and Durant, you are only third or even fourth option in your team, you don't get as many shots so it's not as easy to get into the rhythm and most important point is that people don't see the impact you are making on D, which cannot be easily replaced. Irving would have gone +50 if not Klay, he made the CAVS slow down, how can just a "decent D" guy stop the whole team?

Klay can be a first option and I hope he proves that. Give him the credit.

Yanks All Day
06-13-2017, 03:49 PM
No one is taking less than max money. It's a good thought for a heartwarming story, but it just doesn't happen. These Warriors are no different. Everyone knows this. Let's just enjoy the team as currently constructed. It won't be around for long.

This happens to teams all the time. Golden State got very lucky that Curry's ankles kept him at a well below-market value. It gave them space to get KD. But that's not happening again. There's 4 max players under contract. At some point, one of them is getting traded for cap relief / filler players.

AntiG
06-13-2017, 03:58 PM
You also have to keep this in mind - just like when the Celtics had their big 4 of KG, Pierce, Allen and Rondo, the Heat had their big 3 of Lebron, Wade and Bosh, and the two teams this year - as long as the core stays together, you'll attract veteran free agents that will be willing to sign for the MLE and vet minimum to try for a ring.

tredigs
06-13-2017, 04:06 PM
Well the fact of the matter is that they need to deal a player by ~2019. And Meyers is no fool, he will likely make that move for a younger piece. They're in an incredible position though as their entire core is in their peak and likely won't slow down perceptibly for another 5 years if they stay healthy. They will rely on guys like Zaza, D West, etc taking min contracts to round out the rest of the roster. The best version of the team will be this year and the next couple though.

tredigs
06-13-2017, 04:08 PM
No one is taking less than max money. It's a good thought for a heartwarming story, but it just doesn't happen. These Warriors are no different. Everyone knows this. Let's just enjoy the team as currently constructed. It won't be around for long.

This happens to teams all the time. Golden State got very lucky that Curry's ankles kept him at a well below-market value. It gave them space to get KD. But that's not happening again. There's 4 max players under contract. At some point, one of them is getting traded for cap relief / filler players.
The Heatles ALL took far less than their max (over 10% cuts) and KD has already gone on record saying he will be taking less than the max next year in order for them to re-sign Iggy and Livingston. So, yes, taking less than the max is not a fairy-tale.

FOXHOUND
06-13-2017, 04:14 PM
Well the fact of the matter is that they need to deal a player by ~2019. And Meyers is no fool, he will likely make that move for a younger piece. They're in an incredible position though as their entire core is in their peak and likely won't slow down perceptibly for another 5 years if they stay healthy. They will rely on guys like Zaza, D West, etc taking min contracts to round out the rest of the roster. The best version of the team will be this year and the next couple though.

Yes, I agree. What I meant is the bold. They of course are not going to blow up any time soon, but in terms of being "unbeatable", they're window is likely the next year or two for that to remain. Then they just become a team with Durant, Curry and whatever else still stands lmao.

Hawkeye15
06-13-2017, 04:20 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.

Yep. Agree 100000%. I said the exact same thing way earlier this season. It will be impossible at some point in the Warriors to keep all 4. Klay is the one gone, for sure. They don't even need him to contend, and be the favorites.

Saddletramp
06-13-2017, 04:20 PM
Yeah, they're not going to be taking huge discounts but they'll sacrifice a bit to keep winning. Can't blame them.

papipapsmanny
06-13-2017, 04:27 PM
Wrong thread,

I'll add here though. I am a Wiz fan I hope they go all in or Beal/Wall will be wasted.

Not a celtics fan, but that team is in an unbelievable situation.

They could build a super team today if they wanted to.

They could trade both their picks this year for Jimmy Butler, wait until after the draft and have two more picks in 2018 to trade (Nets will be lotto for sure again)

If ownership/GM want to pay and trade the picks very possible they could trade and have

IT-Bradley-Butler-Horford-Cousins. Warriors aren't going to win the next 6 straight

FOXHOUND
06-13-2017, 04:41 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.

I agree with J-Relo that Klay is not so easily replaced, you're essentially talking about a JR Smith level player in his place. I also agree with you and others that he is an "affordable" loss, as they would net a return and would still have plenty of top end talent.

Everyone is saying they're so good because of their four, we can't pretend that just anybody is going to come in and do what Klay does for them. They become more beatable when they trade Klay and lose Iggy/he drops off from aging. It kinda looks like Patrick McCaw is already being groomed to replace Klay though... :laugh2: :(

Hawkeye15
06-13-2017, 04:44 PM
I agree with J-Relo that Klay is not so easily replaced, you're essentially talking about a JR Smith level player in his place. I also agree with you and others that he is an "affordable" loss, as they would net a return and would still have plenty of top end talent.

Everyone is saying they're so good because of their four, we can't pretend that just anybody is going to come in and do what Klay does for them. They become more beatable when they trade Klay and lose Iggy/he drops off from aging. It kinda looks like Patrick McCaw is already being groomed to replace Klay though... :laugh2: :(

If you take Klay off this team, and replace him with a replacement level player, GS is still the best team in the game, the gap might just not be so laughable anymore.

J-Relo
06-13-2017, 04:52 PM
If you take Klay off this team, and replace him with a replacement level player, GS is still the best team in the game, the gap might just not be so laughable anymore.

You need a good defender in that backcourt. It's not that easy find.

Hawkeye15
06-13-2017, 04:57 PM
You need a good defender in that backcourt. It's not that easy find.

It's a whole lot easier to find than an all star sharpshooter who can go for 30 any night. Plus, as typical, whatever they need, can easily be found in vet free agency, where players go to a contender in need of a role. Or god forbid they don't overwhelmingly have more talent than everyone else?

FOXHOUND
06-13-2017, 05:03 PM
If you take Klay off this team, and replace him with a replacement level player, GS is still the best team in the game, the gap might just not be so laughable anymore.

I don't think the gap is that laughable right now. This series should be 3-2 if Cleveland executes better on two to three possessions in game 3. Game 1 and 2 were laughable, but once Cleveland started playing to their own potential it was definitely not laughable. Unfortunately for Cleveland, it seems like they need to have their back against the wall for them to fully unleash for whatever reason.

AntiG
06-13-2017, 05:05 PM
You need a good defender in that backcourt. It's not that easy find.

something like Tony Allen on MLE or vet minimum

J-Relo
06-13-2017, 05:17 PM
It's a whole lot easier to find than an all star sharpshooter who can go for 30 any night. Plus, as typical, whatever they need, can easily be found in vet free agency, where players go to a contender in need of a role. Or god forbid they don't overwhelmingly have more talent than everyone else?

Yea, sure, you can take any of them off, they would still be the best team. All I want to point out, people underestimate Klay's impact. He actually became my favorite Warrior after these series, so I might be also exaggerating, but still...

Hawkeye15
06-13-2017, 05:22 PM
Yea, sure, you can take any of them off, they would still be the best team. All I want to point out, people underestimate Klay's impact. He actually became my favorite Warrior after these series, so I might be also exaggerating, but still...

The biggest point of this thread is, eventually, GS won't be able to afford to keep this juggernaut in place. Something has to give..

DanG
06-13-2017, 05:24 PM
I see both Steph and KD taking paycuts.

Do they even need Livingston? McCaw looks like a player who can replace him right away easily. I think Iggy, McGee and West are going to stay. I also see them replacing Zaza with Zach Randolph lol. Can you imagine Randolph with this team who is a mid-range threat and 10x better finisher than Zaza. Defensively nothing would chance imo... Pachulia isn't much of a rim protector.

da ThRONe
06-13-2017, 05:30 PM
It's a whole lot easier to find than an all star sharpshooter who can go for 30 any night. Plus, as typical, whatever they need, can easily be found in vet free agency, where players go to a contender in need of a role. Or god forbid they don't overwhelmingly have more talent than everyone else?

Yeah but Klay is both those things. He was cold this post season, but you still have go respect him and that creates space and open shots for Steph and Kevin.

Hawkeye15
06-13-2017, 05:33 PM
Yeah but Klay is both those things. He was cold this post season, but you still have go respect him and that creates space and open shots for Steph and Kevin.

for sure. But as I stated above, the whole point of this thread is, GS will need to lose some talent at some point. No way around it.

da ThRONe
06-13-2017, 05:37 PM
for sure. But as I stated above, the whole point of this thread is, GS will need to lose some talent at some point. No way around it.

Well yeah he will be the cap casualty. My point was it going to hurt a lot. I don't consider them a superteam without Thompson baring they find another super cheap all nba level player. It'll be like Harden leaving the Thunder.

mightybosstone
06-13-2017, 05:38 PM
Even-though I agree Klay will most probably be the one out, I do think that this will be not because of Warriors being unable to pay him but because his value and impact is and will continue to be overshadowed by the monstrous talents of Curry and Durant. He seems to stay humble but c'mon where you are one of the best two-way guards in the league and all people talk is Curry and Durant, you are only third or even fourth option in your team, you don't get as many shots so it's not as easy to get into the rhythm and most important point is that people don't see the impact you are making on D, which cannot be easily replaced. Irving would have gone +50 if not Klay, he made the CAVS slow down, how can just a "decent D" guy stop the whole team?

Klay can be a first option and I hope he proves that. Give him the credit.

Klay is an excellent defender, but I thought he was the third most important defender in that series behind Green and Durant. I'm not saying he could necessarily be 100 percent replaced, but I think you could find a 3 and D guy who could provide 70-80 percent of what Klay does in those two areas for a fraction of the cost. And I think they'd be totally fine with that.

Saddletramp
06-13-2017, 05:40 PM
It's a whole lot easier to find than an all star sharpshooter who can go for 30 any night. Plus, as typical, whatever they need, can easily be found in vet free agency, where players go to a contender in need of a role. Or god forbid they don't overwhelmingly have more talent than everyone else?

Lol, yeah, not that anyone has said it here but would it be so awful to not be a mile ahead of everyone and instead just a half mile? They'd still have the second and arguably third best players and Green with some role players ranging from average to great.

Every ring chaser will choose GS first for the next few years for the minimum if all they want is a ring so there won't be a problem with depth.


It'd be funny though if they lost Klay and then Steph got hurt to watch KD throw his figurative controller across the room like a nine year old that has to play on normal mode instead of rookie mode.

AntiG
06-13-2017, 05:45 PM
I see both Steph and KD taking paycuts.

Do they even need Livingston? McCaw looks like a player who can replace him right away easily. I think Iggy, McGee and West are going to stay. I also see them replacing Zaza with Zach Randolph lol. Can you imagine Randolph with this team who is a mid-range threat and 10x better finisher than Zaza. Defensively nothing would chance imo... Pachulia isn't much of a rim protector.

Imagine them adding ZBo and Tony Allen in the offseason... insane. They still have Damion Jones off the bench, he's got plenty of promise, and McGee would probably re-sign for the minimum again.

mightybosstone
06-13-2017, 05:53 PM
I agree with J-Relo that Klay is not so easily replaced, you're essentially talking about a JR Smith level player in his place. I also agree with you and others that he is an "affordable" loss, as they would net a return and would still have plenty of top end talent.

Everyone is saying they're so good because of their four, we can't pretend that just anybody is going to come in and do what Klay does for them. They become more beatable when they trade Klay and lose Iggy/he drops off from aging. It kinda looks like Patrick McCaw is already being groomed to replace Klay though... :laugh2: :(
JR Smith is a bad example, because I'm talking about someone who could actually defend. Guys like Courtney Lee, Ariza and Danny Green come to mind. Obviously those guys aren't remotely at the same level as Klay, but they could provide 70-80 percent of the role he played in this postseason.


Yeah but Klay is both those things. He was cold this post season, but you still have go respect him and that creates space and open shots for Steph and Kevin.
A lot of 3-point shooters can create space for other players, though. Pretty much any competent 3-point shooter can. And I'm not saying that the dropoff wouldn't be there, but I'm saying the dropoff would be minimal. This Warriors team could lose 5 percent of its offensive production and still easily be the best team in the league.


Well yeah he will be the cap casualty. My point was it going to hurt a lot. I don't consider them a superteam without Thompson baring they find another super cheap all nba level player. It'll be like Harden leaving the Thunder.
They're still unquestionably a super team. You're talking about a team with two of the five best players in the league and a third All-Star who does literally everything well and happens to be one of the 2-3 best defenders in the league. Green averaged a very efficient 13/9/7/2/2 in the playoffs this year. That's pretty ridiculous production.

da ThRONe
06-13-2017, 06:29 PM
JR Smith is a bad example, because I'm talking about someone who could actually defend. Guys like Courtney Lee, Ariza and Danny Green come to mind. Obviously those guys aren't remotely at the same level as Klay, but they could provide 70-80 percent of the role he played in this postseason.


A lot of 3-point shooters can create space for other players, though. Pretty much any competent 3-point shooter can. And I'm not saying that the dropoff wouldn't be there, but I'm saying the dropoff would be minimal. This Warriors team could lose 5 percent of its offensive production and still easily be the best team in the league.


They're still unquestionably a super team. You're talking about a team with two of the five best players in the league and a third All-Star who does literally everything well and happens to be one of the 2-3 best defenders in the league. Green averaged a very efficient 13/9/7/2/2 in the playoffs this year. That's pretty ridiculous production.

Oh GS without Klay are still title contenders. I just don't view them as a superteam. I don't even know if they win this year. Thompson defense on Irving forced him to work so hard fo get his shot and that was what ultimately did the Cavs in.

Scoots
06-13-2017, 06:45 PM
The biggest point of this thread is, eventually, GS won't be able to afford to keep this juggernaut in place. Something has to give..

They can and will keep them all together as long as they can fill the rest of the roster with enough players who can fill in. They can't really expect to fill in the starting and backup SG spots from the aged ring chaser pool.

The Warriors have to draft well, develop players well, and find quality free agents at every step to stay at this level for sure though, and it won't get at all easier.

This year they can keep pretty much everyone on new multi-year deals, but Iguodala and Livingston will underperform whatever deals they sign if they are 3 or 4 year deals. By the time 3 years has passed they need to have another 5 or 6 cheap role players on cheap contracts with their Bird or Arenas rights.

So ... beyond 3 years it gets really sketchy, but it's totally possible.

Chronz
06-15-2017, 03:34 AM
I don't think the gap is that laughable right now. This series should be 3-2 if Cleveland executes better on two to three possessions in game 3. Game 1 and 2 were laughable, but once Cleveland started playing to their own potential it was definitely not laughable. Unfortunately for Cleveland, it seems like they need to have their back against the wall for them to fully unleash for whatever reason.

Its laughable. Remember when Kemp-GP kept losing in R.1 those 2 years, would you really put any of the teams they lost to above them in terms of talent and future projections? Would you have missed their Finals run by focusing so much on that barometer?

Chronz
06-15-2017, 03:35 AM
And you guys still underestimate the attention Klay draws but yeah hes sucked this year. As for the thread topic, I'll believe it when I see it but I see the bosom buddies staying awhile.

smith&wesson
06-15-2017, 03:44 AM
Ah 2 more years is still a long time to dominate. Theyll end up with 4 rings...

FOXHOUND
06-15-2017, 05:45 AM
Its laughable. Remember when Kemp-GP kept losing in R.1 those 2 years, would you really put any of the teams they lost to above them in terms of talent and future projections? Would you have missed their Finals run by focusing so much on that barometer?

I imagine I would have looked at them like I do the Clippers now. The talent is there but they just don't get it done come postseason time. Who are the Sonics in this scenario, last years Warriors?

It's not really the same thing because they didn't lose to a surprising team, really. It became a surprise because of how great the Warriors played in the regular season, but I was hardly surprised after what I had just witnessed in the WCF leading into the Finals. The Cavs had LeBron James, they had Kyrie and Love healthy going in though Love got hurt in game 2 and I wasn't sure if I believed that Golden State was truly better because of the injuries to Cleveland in 2015. Remember that the preseason title favorite for 2016 was in fact Cleveland due to those injuries and the question of whether Golden State was really a legit champion. Funny how that turned out.

Of course, Durant swung that advantage right into Golden State's favor but I wasn't watching something so lopsided in that Finals. I've seen Shaq and Kobe vs the crippling weak east in the early 2000's, I've seen Shaq obliterating people like Todd McCullough on those Nets lol. I don't view LeBron and the Cavs as helpless and I think they more than proved that in games 3-5. It's a shame most of the team didn't show up for games 1 and 2 though, and that they couldn't close the deal in game 3 to get this to at least 6.


And you guys still underestimate the attention Klay draws but yeah hes sucked this year. As for the thread topic, I'll believe it when I see it but I see the bosom buddies staying awhile.

This summer is going to be the real sign of what happens. Let's see what Curry and Durant do in their respective contract situations because that is going to set the tone. If Curry takes his 5/$205M, even if Durant takes a pay cut, it's hard to imagine everyone else sacrificing to a large level. These teams don't always end up lasting as long as we think in the moment though.

You look at the first two runs in Miami, they go 12-3 leading into the Finals in year 1 and sweep Dallas without their 4th quarter collapses in games 2 and 4. They go 4-1 in the first round and the Finals in year 2 but an injury to Bosh helps make Indiana and Boston far more competitive than they would be. Wade was 30, LeBron and Bosh were 27. They looked like they were just getting starting and finally got over that hump. They storm into the ECF the next year, an injury to Wade help slow them down needing 7 for Indiana, they enter the Finals with the same exact odds as Golden State did this year but ultimately need 7 and were a rebound and shot away from losing. 2014, we know what happens and poof, they're done after just 4 years total.

You look at the 15-1 Lakers in 2001. Now there's a team that legit could have gone undefeated if not for that long layoff before the Finals. Imagine if Iverson gets hurt like Kawhi? Undefeated, right? Again, another team looking like they were just starting something crazy special. Ring #2, Shaq is 28, Kobe is just 22. Following year they still dominate outside of that great 7 game series vs Sacramento to get #3. Then they lose to San Antonio, regroup for that 4th Finals where they get crushed, Shaq contract situations happens and poof, they're done after 5 years from ring #1.

Now, is this Golden State team like one of those? Do they win another 1 or 2 rings before financial issues break them up or what? Two more years will bring them to the 5-year window from 2015 that the Lakers had. This is different in that it's very doubtful that they lose Durant or Curry, so the fall off wouldn't be as severe, but you never know. As LeBron learned when he got to Cleveland as heavy preseason favorites and seemingly no one to challenge them in the near future, life comes at you fast if a surprise Warriors team sprouts up.

FOXHOUND
06-15-2017, 05:54 AM
Ah 2 more years is still a long time to dominate. Theyll end up with 4 rings...

Yes, they are an all-time great team so that isn't really surprising lol. It's not the run off of 4-6 straight titles that some people think is going to happen though. 4 is a fantastic number but we've seen two different players win more than 4 who just retired last year.

mattyfedrick01
06-15-2017, 06:00 AM
Thanks for sharing details with us.

Vinylman
06-15-2017, 07:26 AM
If those guys want to keep winning then everyone but Curry will take less. These are selfless guys with a window to cement thmseves into history. There's no way they'll exchange a few million per year for losing against these same Warriors

LMFAO

a "few million"

you don't seem to understand basic math

LA4life24/8
06-15-2017, 09:43 AM
Klay will be the odd man out. They could prolly get a decent package for him. Honestly id highly consider trading him sooner rather than later because his value is all time high right now. And honestly after these finals they dont REALLY need him. He didnt play exceptionally well (offense anyway his D was pretty solid) and they still wrecked the entire playoffs/finals.

They trade him for a young 3&D on a cheap contract plus some future picks this summer get the most they can for him.

Klay will get paid in full and have his rings and his own team... everybody ahappeh

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 09:55 AM
Well yeah he will be the cap casualty. My point was it going to hurt a lot. I don't consider them a superteam without Thompson baring they find another super cheap all nba level player. It'll be like Harden leaving the Thunder.

It won't be like Harden leaving the Thunder imo. Green is exponentially better than Ibaka was/is. The Warriors will still be the most talented team in the league minus Klay.

3 all NBA players in their primes, with chemistry and complimentary skillsets should do just fine....

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 09:56 AM
Lol, yeah, not that anyone has said it here but would it be so awful to not be a mile ahead of everyone and instead just a half mile? They'd still have the second and arguably third best players and Green with some role players ranging from average to great.

Every ring chaser will choose GS first for the next few years for the minimum if all they want is a ring so there won't be a problem with depth.


It'd be funny though if they lost Klay and then Steph got hurt to watch KD throw his figurative controller across the room like a nine year old that has to play on normal mode instead of rookie mode.

yep.

Your last little paragraph made me spit up my coffee just a little haha

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 09:57 AM
Oh GS without Klay are still title contenders. I just don't view them as a superteam. I don't even know if they win this year. Thompson defense on Irving forced him to work so hard fo get his shot and that was what ultimately did the Cavs in.

then you didn't view Miami as a superteam obviously, right? They didn't even have the accolades the Warriors have if you straight up dropped Klay from the team

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 09:59 AM
They can and will keep them all together as long as they can fill the rest of the roster with enough players who can fill in. They can't really expect to fill in the starting and backup SG spots from the aged ring chaser pool.

The Warriors have to draft well, develop players well, and find quality free agents at every step to stay at this level for sure though, and it won't get at all easier.

This year they can keep pretty much everyone on new multi-year deals, but Iguodala and Livingston will underperform whatever deals they sign if they are 3 or 4 year deals. By the time 3 years has passed they need to have another 5 or 6 cheap role players on cheap contracts with their Bird or Arenas rights.

So ... beyond 3 years it gets really sketchy, but it's totally possible.

I mean, they are going to consume a lot of the minimum vet guys looking for a title, so depth shouldn't be an issue. They just have to choose wisely who to sign (meaning don't sign a guy about to turn into a corpse).

Reality is, the 2016-18' version of the Warriors is probably their best team. After that, financials will dig into them, but as long as they are smart, they are the best team in basketball. They may just not be able to have head and shoulders more talent than everyone at some point.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 10:01 AM
LMFAO

a "few million"

you don't seem to understand basic math

the 4, especially Curry, would need to sacrifice multiple millions of dollars. You could probably sign an all NBA level player for the amount they will have to give up to stay together.

da ThRONe
06-15-2017, 10:08 AM
then you didn't view Miami as a superteam obviously, right? They didn't even have the accolades the Warriors have if you straight up dropped Klay from the team

Yes I view MIA as a superteam, but that's mostly because James is so elite he carries any really good team into superteam category. Durant IMO is a monster, the 2nd best player and for me he isn't close to James.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 10:29 AM
Yes I view MIA as a superteam, but that's mostly because James is so elite he carries any really good team into superteam category. Durant IMO is a monster, the 2nd best player and for me he isn't close to James.

I don't think a single player makes a superteam, just my opinion. A superteam doesn't go to **** if a single player is out.

BKLYNpigeon
06-15-2017, 10:53 AM
I'll be happy if I can get 2-3 years of this core 4.

Klay is probably the odd man out since his extension comes last. I hope the warriors trade him for something rather then let him walk away and get nothing in return. Can't be as dumb as OKC.

If warriors trade Klay right now they could get Avery Bradley and the #1 pick.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 10:56 AM
I'll be happy if I can get 2-3 years of this core 4.

Klay is probably the odd man out since his extension comes last. I hope the warriors trade him for something rather then let him walk away and get nothing in return. Can't be as dumb as OKC.

If warriors trade Klay right now they could get Avery Bradley and the #1 pick.

You would have to trade him for much less than he makes in return, otherwise what is the point?

No way, on earth, Boston gives you that package for Klay Thompson.

BKLYNpigeon
06-15-2017, 11:14 AM
why not? seems like it costs more to get Jimmy Butler.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 11:16 AM
why not? seems like it costs more to get Jimmy Butler.

because the whole point of this is at some point in time, GS will need to lower it's salary. Getting something for Klay will still be a large step back if you do.

da ThRONe
06-15-2017, 11:19 AM
I don't think a single player makes a superteam, just my opinion. A superteam doesn't go to **** if a single player is out.

Bosh and Wade are HOFers. So it wasn't just James, but those 3 combine for me is considered superteam.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 11:55 AM
Bosh and Wade are HOFers. So it wasn't just James, but those 3 combine for me is considered superteam.

Bosh is a HOF'er? We will see. And look at the accolades for those 2 with the Heat. Bosh was never all NBA with the Heat, Wade went through decline after year 1 with the group.

I am not getting into this crap yet again, but I always thought Miami's roster had some flaws, despite having talent enough for LeBron to win trophies with. If they are a super team, than GS is a Dream team.

da ThRONe
06-15-2017, 12:07 PM
Bosh is a HOF'er? We will see. And look at the accolades for those 2 with the Heat. Bosh was never all NBA with the Heat, Wade went through decline after year 1 with the group.

I am not getting into this crap yet again, but I always thought Miami's roster had some flaws, despite having talent enough for LeBron to win trophies with. If they are a super team, than GS is a Dream team.

Absolutely Bosh is a HOFer. People forget his work as a Raptor. He's a 2x champ and although he had to sacrifice the most he still was key to those 4 straight Finals trips.

Again I think we are on the same page for the most part in that what GS has is significantly better than what the Heat were. I'm ok putting them in their own class. For my personal definition of superteam the 2011-13 Heat teams fit the criteria.

Saddletramp
06-15-2017, 02:39 PM
the 4, especially Curry, would need to sacrifice multiple millions of dollars. You could probably sign an all NBA level player for the amount they will have to give up to stay together.

But once you're over, you're over. Let's say (without looking at the actual numbers) that Curry and KD sign for about $30 a piece. Klay and Green make what, $33 combined (and another $3 for three of their bench guys in McCaw/Jones/Looney-I actually looked at the numbers)? That's just about the cap right there ($96M, the cap is $102M) but if they take less to keep Iguodala and Livingston, that'll put them over. Not sure what their cap holds are). No one else is coming in through FA besides vet mins. If they trade Klay, they'll have to fit whatever they want with what he makes, which granted, could be real nice.



Maybe Quinn can come in here and clarify but I'm seeing that (man, I'm bored) Thompson/Green/Looney/McCaw/Jones are all a combined $38 million on the books. Durant is at $27+ but I imagine he'll opt out. Cap is $102M.
Curry's cap hold is $18+M.
Iguodala's cap hold is almost $17M.
Livingston's cap hold is $11M.

Assuming they don't get renounced, that's $38 plus $46 making it $86M. But we know Curry's not taking $18 and I doubt Iguodala will make $17 or Livingston will make $11 (lower I'd assume).

Saddletramp
06-15-2017, 02:47 PM
I'll be happy if I can get 2-3 years of this core 4.

Klay is probably the odd man out since his extension comes last. I hope the warriors trade him for something rather then let him walk away and get nothing in return. Can't be as dumb as OKC.

If warriors trade Klay right now they could get Avery Bradley and the #1 pick.

But Avery is going to get paid too, soon. Better would be Brown and the #1 but I don't think Boston would do that either.

And OKC not getting anything in return for Durant and GS not wanting Klay to walk for nothing are two separate scenarios. If OKC knew that Durant was definitely leaving, they'd have traded him at the deadline for whatever they could get. They thought he'd might have stayed just like Portland thought LMA woulda stayed and the Heat thought Wade was going to stay. I'm sure Klay wants to stay and wouldn't leave when his contract is up but it's not about him leaving or not, it's about them not wanting to pay that much to keep him. So they'll be the ones with the decision and they'll know about what they want to do and when they can have control to trade him or not.

Two separate scenarios.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 03:16 PM
But once you're over, you're over. Let's say (without looking at the actual numbers) that Curry and KD sign for about $30 a piece. Klay and Green make what, $33 combined (and another $3 for three of their bench guys in McCaw/Jones/Looney-I actually looked at the numbers)? That's just about the cap right there ($96M, the cap is $102M) but if they take less to keep Iguodala and Livingston, that'll put them over. Not sure what their cap holds are). No one else is coming in through FA besides vet mins. If they trade Klay, they'll have to fit whatever they want with what he makes, which granted, could be real nice.



Maybe Quinn can come in here and clarify but I'm seeing that (man, I'm bored) Thompson/Green/Looney/McCaw/Jones are all a combined $38 million on the books. Durant is at $27+ but I imagine he'll opt out. Cap is $102M.
Curry's cap hold is $18+M.
Iguodala's cap hold is almost $17M.
Livingston's cap hold is $11M.

Assuming they don't get renounced, that's $38 plus $46 making it $86M. But we know Curry's not taking $18 and I doubt Iguodala will make $17 or Livingston will make $11 (lower I'd assume).

The only reason to trade Klay is for financial reasons though. So why would they take back that salary in a trade? Why not just keep Klay than?

You would either have to get a trade partner under the cap to absorb a good amount of his cap and get back a draft pick or cheap player(s), or let him walk. The only 2 options. I guess the 3rd option is live in the repeater tax..

Saddletramp
06-15-2017, 03:20 PM
The only reason to trade Klay is for financial reasons though. So why would they take back that salary in a trade? Why not just keep Klay than?

You would either have to get a trade partner under the cap to absorb a good amount of his cap and get back a draft pick or cheap player(s), or let him walk. The only 2 options. I guess the 3rd option is live in the repeater tax..

We're agreeing. I think I might have misread your comment that I was quoting, though. I thought you were saying if they sacrificed some money each, they'd have enough to sign another guy, but that couldn't happen once they're over anyway and they're about to be over. My bad.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 03:26 PM
We're agreeing. I think I might have misread your comment that I was quoting, though. I thought you were saying if they sacrificed some money each, they'd have enough to sign another guy, but that couldn't happen once they're over anyway and they're about to be over. My bad.

oh no, sorry. I was responding to Vinyl's comment. Some think if they take a few million each, it works. Um, no. The total between all four of them will be enough to sign a max all NBA player in theory, if you aren't over the cap. Just the four of them would be WAY over the cap if they earned the max. Like way over (north of $15 million over). So the sacrifices will need to be large.

jayjay33
06-15-2017, 04:14 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.


Have to agree keep those 3 and add a good 3 and D guy that can guard 1/2/3 and who you can't leave open. in place of klay and the warrior are don't drop off much at all.

jayjay33
06-15-2017, 04:16 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.

Yep. Agree 100000%. I said the exact same thing way earlier this season. It will be impossible at some point in the Warriors to keep all 4. Klay is the one gone, for sure. They don't even need him to contend, and be the favorites.


Yep it has to be klay. He's basically just a 3 and d guy on this team.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 04:22 PM
Yep it has to be klay. He's basically just a 3 and d guy on this team.

And they would pay him max money to be that. Just can't do that if another team is willing to, unless Klay says he will take the money his actual role commands. Fat chance haha

jayjay33
06-15-2017, 04:24 PM
So, I was about to make a thread about something, but rather than create another Golden State thread, I'll state my opinion in here...

But basically, I've been saying what Lowe is saying here since Durant signed. A lot of us have. It's been the one hope we've all been clinging to for the last 11 months, and Lowe's article does a good job saying that there's a reason why it's a legitimate hope and something the Warriors should admittedly be a little concerned about. However, all that being said, one really, truly terrifying thought has crossed my mind this entire postseason, and that thought was pretty well verified in this Finals series: the Warriors don't need Klay Thompson.

It sounds crazy when you think about it, but consider this: Klay averaged only 15 points a game on sub-.400 shooting in the playoffs with well below average advanced stats of a 9.3 PER, an .049 WS/48 and a -1.5 BPM. The Finals was actually one of his better series, but he only put up 16/5 and had two really bad games in games 1 and 5.

If you look at what Klay excelled at in the playoffs, he was still a very good perimeter defender and 3-point shooter (38.7%). But if all the Warriors need is a decent 3 and D starter to fill his role, they can do that for a hell of a lot less than what Thompson will get in his next contract. And, yes, Thompson is much more than a 3 and D guy. But the Warriors just proved they can completely dominate the rest of the league in the postseason with Thompson doing nothing more than excelling in those two areas.

So as long as the Warriors can keep Durant, Curry and Green on the roster, I honestly don't expect to see a huge dropoff from them in the next 5+ years. They could swap out Thompson with a decent 3 and D guy, and replace guys like Livingston and Iguodala with other quality veterans moving forward, and I could still see them easily winning another 3-4 titles. They're just that good in terms of top tier talent. And that thought will continue to haunt me until I'm proven otherwise.

I agree with J-Relo that Klay is not so easily replaced, you're essentially talking about a JR Smith level player in his place. I also agree with you and others that he is an "affordable" loss, as they would net a return and would still have plenty of top end talent.

Everyone is saying they're so good because of their four, we can't pretend that just anybody is going to come in and do what Klay does for them. They become more beatable when they trade Klay and lose Iggy/he drops off from aging. It kinda looks like Patrick McCaw is already being groomed to replace Klay though... :laugh2: :(

But that's the thing you don't need to replace what klay can do. You only need to replace what he did. Very good Spot up 3 point shooter and excellent defender. Doesn't need to be a scorer like klay. That's just gravy the Warriors don't really "need".

jayjay33
06-15-2017, 04:26 PM
Even-though I agree Klay will most probably be the one out, I do think that this will be not because of Warriors being unable to pay him but because his value and impact is and will continue to be overshadowed by the monstrous talents of Curry and Durant. He seems to stay humble but c'mon where you are one of the best two-way guards in the league and all people talk is Curry and Durant, you are only third or even fourth option in your team, you don't get as many shots so it's not as easy to get into the rhythm and most important point is that people don't see the impact you are making on D, which cannot be easily replaced. Irving would have gone +50 if not Klay, he made the CAVS slow down, how can just a "decent D" guy stop the whole team?

Klay can be a first option and I hope he proves that. Give him the credit.

Klay is an excellent defender, but I thought he was the third most important defender in that series behind Green and Durant. I'm not saying he could necessarily be 100 percent replaced, but I think you could find a 3 and D guy who could provide 70-80 percent of what Klay does in those two areas for a fraction of the cost. And I think they'd be totally fine with that.


Nah his d on ky was vital to winning. Along with Durants rim protection.

COOLbeans
06-15-2017, 04:50 PM
LMFAO

a "few million"

you don't seem to understand basic math

I didnt know you had insider information sitting in your Mammy's basement.. or any insight into local bay area media, basic logic and reading comprehension skills. Do you know how much $3,000,000/ year times 5 years is?

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 04:56 PM
I didnt know you had insider information sitting in your Mammy's basement.. or any insight into local bay area media, basic logic and reading comprehension skills. Do you know how much $3,000,000/ year times 5 years is?

they are going to have to give up much more than 3 million a year each on average to keep the band together.

FOXHOUND
06-15-2017, 05:34 PM
But that's the thing you don't need to replace what klay can do. You only need to replace what he did. Very good Spot up 3 point shooter and excellent defender. Doesn't need to be a scorer like klay. That's just gravy the Warriors don't really "need".

I get that Klay hasn't made an All-Defensive team, but I think people are seriously underrating his defense. There are very players in the NBA who can guard Kyrie the way Klay is able to, let alone wing players. If it was easy to find someone who could play excellent on ball D on 1-3 and sometimes 4 (see: Kevin Love) while also being an elite shooter and off the ball scorer then everyone would have one.

He's replaceable, because they have talent to spare, but they will no doubt become worse in doing so. Same thing with Iggy, who will either not be brought back or will naturally become less effect as he's 33-years old. Klay's ability to defend top PGs is very important to Curry's success, as he keeps him from having to deal with it.

Hawkeye15
06-15-2017, 05:39 PM
I get that Klay hasn't made an All-Defensive team, but I think people are seriously underrating his defense. There are very players in the NBA who can guard Kyrie the way Klay is able to, let alone wing players. If it was easy to find someone who could play excellent on ball D on 1-3 and sometimes 4 (see: Kevin Love) while also being an elite shooter and off the ball scorer then everyone would have one.

He's replaceable, because they have talent to spare, but they will no doubt become worse in doing so. Same thing with Iggy, who will either not be brought back or will naturally become less effect as he's 33-years old. Klay's ability to defend top PGs is very important to Curry's success, as he keeps him from having to deal with it.

I mean, that happens to championship teams in most sports. Teams can't afford to keep everyone. No different here. We are all arguing the same thing, that someone will eventually need to go. We also all agree it will be Klay. Maybe we disagree on the impact it will have, but that is about it.

FOXHOUND
06-15-2017, 05:53 PM
I mean, that happens to championship teams in most sports. Teams can't afford to keep everyone. No different here. We are all arguing the same thing, that someone will eventually need to go. We also all agree it will be Klay. Maybe we disagree on the impact it will have, but that is about it.

Yes, it just sounds like some people think that they aren't going to feel that loss. These are the things that make them "unbeatable", so it's only natural that they become more beatable as the pieces fall away. They will still be a large handful on the strength of Durant and Curry alone, of course.

Chronz
06-15-2017, 06:36 PM
I imagine I would have looked at them like I do the Clippers now. The talent is there but they just don't get it done come postseason time.
That would require the Clips to be healthy and/or losing to inferior teams, if anything they've overachieved so you'd be equally wrong there too. Either way, my point is that pointing to a series can be rendered irrelevant simply by changing the underlying point, as you can both point to a series for why its close in terms of talent and why a team isn't getting it done in spite of its talent.

The FACT still remains, the Sonics were FAR more talented and they LOST series, pointing to that series does no good if that's all but I guess we're all here just guessing anyways.



Who are the Sonics in this scenario, last years Warriors?
Dubs are the most talented team in league history.


It's not really the same thing because they didn't lose to a surprising team, really. It became a surprise because of how great the Warriors played in the regular season, but I was hardly surprised after what I had just witnessed in the WCF leading into the Finals. The Cavs had LeBron James, they had Kyrie and Love healthy going in though Love got hurt in game 2 and I wasn't sure if I believed that Golden State was truly better because of the injuries to Cleveland in 2015. Remember that the preseason title favorite for 2016 was in fact Cleveland due to those injuries and the question of whether Golden State was really a legit champion. Funny how that turned out.

A surprising team is suppose to change what, exactly? I mean after losing in R1 to an inferior team are you really suggesting they somehow weren't respecting their opponent (surprise or not) the very next year? I mean, history is rife with teams that outdid a teams talent if you want another example. OR you can find example of a sub.500 team putting up a greater fight in terms of win/losses in a series than a Finals caliber squad, sometimes **** just happens so its definitely not an exact science is my point.

I disagreed with everything you wrote tho, this Finals has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Love is very much a liability vs GS and its because he cant defend in space and when you already have Kyrie as a defensive liability, the lesser fit is the odd man out. Love getting hurt last year might have won them the title but GS wasn't 100% itself so I dont know. What I do know is that the team had already proven true greatness without KD and should have won last year despite their struggles/lack of composure.


Of course, Durant swung that advantage right into Golden State's favor but I wasn't watching something so lopsided in that Finals.

They never needed KD to have the advantage, they underachieved already, all they did was get the ultimate insurance just in case some of their stars underperform. Its unprecedented and outright an embarrassment of riches.



I've seen Shaq and Kobe vs the crippling weak east in the early 2000's, I've seen Shaq obliterating people like Todd McCullough on those Nets lol. I don't view LeBron and the Cavs as helpless and I think they more than proved that in games 3-5. It's a shame most of the team didn't show up for games 1 and 2 though, and that they couldn't close the deal in game 3 to get this to at least 6.
Yeah but the Nets were like the 6th or 7th best team and I honestly think these Dubs would beat those Lakers too. These Cavs were suppose to represent the biggest challenge and their 2 supporting stars are notoriously poor defenders. I saw exactly what I and many others predicted, a sheer lack of competition from an overwhelming talent pool, with one team essentially having to play well above their norm to even stand a chance at barely losing a game. That it almost went to 6 is an accomplishment, its actually the Dubs who underachieved IMO, the difference is they have so many weapons it really doesn't matter.


This summer is going to be the real sign of what happens. Let's see what Curry and Durant do in their respective contract situations because that is going to set the tone. If Curry takes his 5/$205M, even if Durant takes a pay cut, it's hard to imagine everyone else sacrificing to a large level. These teams don't always end up lasting as long as we think in the moment though.
I can only hope, wake me up if it ever happens because I think you underrate just how little KD cares about that stuff. Maybe he'll wake up and realize his talent is too great to have it sooooooo easy.


You look at the first two runs in Miami, they go 12-3 leading into the Finals in year 1 and sweep Dallas without their 4th quarter collapses in games 2 and 4. They go 4-1 in the first round and the Finals in year 2 but an injury to Bosh helps make Indiana and Boston far more competitive than they would be. Wade was 30, LeBron and Bosh were 27. They looked like they were just getting starting and finally got over that hump. They storm into the ECF the next year, an injury to Wade help slow them down needing 7 for Indiana, they enter the Finals with the same exact odds as Golden State did this year but ultimately need 7 and were a rebound and shot away from losing. 2014, we know what happens and poof, they're done after just 4 years total.

Thats not how I view it at all, I've already touched on Y1 with you and I honestly dont remember anyone saying they were just getting started, since when do players with Wade's body type and skillset age better after 30 given that he was declining statistically BEFORE Bron ever even showed up. Its a huge stretch and why I didn't think the Heat were this unstoppable bully, I saw a shallow team lacking depth and playable bigs/PG's, with an aging/declining Wade and a soft Bosh, there was certainly a number of potential challengers and the future didn't look quite as bleak as a champ+73 win team in its prime adding another MVP. But yeah, injuries can change things, the difference is that for GS it really only changes things in the sense that they are lesser favorites but logical favorites none the less against EVERYONE IMO, I just dont like becoming the guy that hopes for injuries.



You look at the 15-1 Lakers in 2001. Now there's a team that legit could have gone undefeated if not for that long layoff before the Finals. Imagine if Iverson gets hurt like Kawhi? Undefeated, right? Again, another team looking like they were just starting something crazy special.
It was a magical run and they did win another title. I just dont see anyone on this team being as driven as Kobe to win without his teams other best player, nor do I see anyone suffering the career altering injury an aging Shaq suffered that final chip with LA. But again, yeah injuries can change anything, Im just looking at the ages of this core and the ONLY concern I have would be for Draymond, how much longer can he defend everything the way he does?


Ring #2, Shaq is 28, Kobe is just 22. Following year they still dominate outside of that great 7 game series vs Sacramento to get #3. Then they lose to San Antonio, regroup for that 4th Finals where they get crushed, Shaq contract situations happens and poof, they're done after 5 years from ring #1.

Yeah but that 22-28 is a pretty big age gap that none of these guys share but yes, I get your point. I just dont see what this has to do with the present or the immediate future. Barring injury or severe choke, I dont see how they dont run the next 3 years at min.



Now, is this Golden State team like one of those? Do they win another 1 or 2 rings before financial issues break them up or what? Two more years will bring them to the 5-year window from 2015 that the Lakers had. This is different in that it's very doubtful that they lose Durant or Curry, so the fall off wouldn't be as severe, but you never know. As LeBron learned when he got to Cleveland as heavy preseason favorites and seemingly no one to challenge them in the near future, life comes at you fast if a surprise Warriors team sprouts up.
Had Bron joined a team that could play at such a high level without him I would be as optimistic as you seem to be, sadly I know this team could afford to lose players that would cripple most franchises and still be favored, thats just an unprecedented level of talent we've never seen. Like even if we take Bill off of those Celtics, I dont think they could win the chip outside of Y1 and possibly Y2.

Scoots
06-16-2017, 12:09 PM
I get that Klay hasn't made an All-Defensive team, but I think people are seriously underrating his defense. There are very players in the NBA who can guard Kyrie the way Klay is able to, let alone wing players. If it was easy to find someone who could play excellent on ball D on 1-3 and sometimes 4 (see: Kevin Love) while also being an elite shooter and off the ball scorer then everyone would have one.

He's replaceable, because they have talent to spare, but they will no doubt become worse in doing so. Same thing with Iggy, who will either not be brought back or will naturally become less effect as he's 33-years old. Klay's ability to defend top PGs is very important to Curry's success, as he keeps him from having to deal with it.

Not only is Klay's game underrated, his fit in the the team ... not just his game, but his mentality ... I don't think the Warriors move him just because they don't want to spend the money. If someone is moved it will be in an effort to improve the team long term, and that might be Klay, I just don't buy that "they can't pay them all".

The Warriors cannot add any significant free agents any time soon, anybody saying otherwise is delusional. This year would be the best year to sign a good free agent with the MLE if they can convince them to agree to short contracts until they are Bird protected to then get paid ... but that's incredibly unlikely.

The Spurs are suspected of having handshake deals with their stars to get them to take WAY below their market value in the past ... "Hey, Steph, take $25M to start on this next contract and a few years after you retire we'll pay you $50M to pose for your statue right next to KD's." - paraphrase of something I heard on the radio.

Scoots
06-16-2017, 12:11 PM
I mean, that happens to championship teams in most sports. Teams can't afford to keep everyone. No different here. We are all arguing the same thing, that someone will eventually need to go. We also all agree it will be Klay. Maybe we disagree on the impact it will have, but that is about it.

Championship teams in most sports don't have the soft cap to help them stay together and don't have rosters where all of the best players are just entering their primes.

The question is really easy ... are the Warriors owners willing to pay the roster $200M+ a year in a few years, and as much as $400M a year beyond that? If they can maximize their income they may be willing, but the team better keep succeeding.

FOXHOUND
06-16-2017, 12:26 PM
Had Bron joined a team that could play at such a high level without him I would be as optimistic as you seem to be, sadly I know this team could afford to lose players that would cripple most franchises and still be favored, thats just an unprecedented level of talent we've never seen. Like even if we take Bill off of those Celtics, I dont think they could win the chip outside of Y1 and possibly Y2.

Fair points on previous stuff, we definitely have different views on it though.

Is it really unprecedented though? I mean it's extremely rare, absolutely, but didn't we see OKC trade Harden and stay at contender level for another 4 years not that long ago? Didn't the Lakers still contend and get to another Finals after Kareem retired? The Bulls almost making the ECF replacing Jordan with Pete Myers?

Don't lose faith in the rest of the NBA. I think next year will be more of the same, Warriors-Cavs 4 that is, but by 2019 we should have at least one more name in the fray even if it's just a reloaded San Antonio around Kawhi. You also just never know what could happen, not that I wish injury on anyone.

FOXHOUND
06-16-2017, 12:30 PM
Not only is Klay's game underrated, his fit in the the team ... not just his game, but his mentality ... I don't think the Warriors move him just because they don't want to spend the money. If someone is moved it will be in an effort to improve the team long term, and that might be Klay, I just don't buy that "they can't pay them all".

The Warriors cannot add any significant free agents any time soon, anybody saying otherwise is delusional. This year would be the best year to sign a good free agent with the MLE if they can convince them to agree to short contracts until they are Bird protected to then get paid ... but that's incredibly unlikely.

The Spurs are suspected of having handshake deals with their stars to get them to take WAY below their market value in the past ... "Hey, Steph, take $25M to start on this next contract and a few years after you retire we'll pay you $50M to pose for your statue right next to KD's." - paraphrase of something I heard on the radio.

I agree, his fit is unreal on every level. Kudos to Golden State, and Jerry West's wisdom, on such a greatly built team.

I don't know man, close to $200M may be doable for a year or two but I don't see how any team could survive entering those higher zones Lowe pointed out.

I've never heard of that Spurs handshake deal theory, funny if true haha. Makes me wonder if Cuban has been giving someone named "Nirk Dowitzki" some shares in his companies and Shark Tank deals over the years.

PayDaPiper
06-16-2017, 12:53 PM
Championship teams in most sports don't have the soft cap to help them stay together and don't have rosters where all of the best players are just entering their primes.

The question is really easy ... are the Warriors owners willing to pay the roster $200M+ a year in a few years, and as much as $400M a year beyond that? If they can maximize their income they may be willing, but the team better keep succeeding.


Joe Lacob and Peter Guber purchased the Warriors for 450 million 6 years ago. They are currently valued at 1.5 billion. They both have continued to say that all they care about is winning and have proven that. Lacob is as big a fan as he is owner. I don't see them sitting on their wallets at all and will keep this going as long as they possibly can.

With that said, both Durant and Curry have said they are willing to take less to keep Iggy and Livingston this offseason, how much less is TBD. This team loves one another and loves playing alongside each other. None of them are greedy, I see them keeping this squad together for years to come.

AllBall
06-16-2017, 02:40 PM
Yes I view MIA as a superteam, but that's mostly because James is so elite he carries any really good team into superteam category. Durant IMO is a monster, the 2nd best player and for me he isn't close to James.

So wait, 2/4 wins makes you a superteam? Good to know. :laugh2:

da ThRONe
06-16-2017, 05:51 PM
So wait, 2/4 wins makes you a superteam? Good to know. :laugh2:

The last year Wade regressed quickly I don't consider that a superteam the first 3 years though superteam fit.

valade16
06-16-2017, 06:08 PM
Championship teams in most sports don't have the soft cap to help them stay together and don't have rosters where all of the best players are just entering their primes.

The question is really easy ... are the Warriors owners willing to pay the roster $200M+ a year in a few years, and as much as $400M a year beyond that? If they can maximize their income they may be willing, but the team better keep succeeding.

I read an article that put the salary costs of keeping the Warriors together for the foreseeable future at $1.4 Billion dollars. That is a lot of dough.

AllBall
06-16-2017, 07:38 PM
The last year Wade regressed quickly I don't consider that a superteam the first 3 years though superteam fit.

Wait, so PSD was saying for YEARS that the starting lineup did not fit well and did not compliment each other at all. That their games where to similar, overlapped and stepped on each other. But I guess there's constant flip-flopping going on here.

The Warriors have won more games in each of their seasons than the Heat ever have, and they did so in the loaded West. This argument is ridiculous, the Warriors are in their own category at the moment.

Monta is beast
06-16-2017, 07:46 PM
Well FYI Iggy said he's re signing between 8-12 million. KD said he's taking a pay cut so we can try and bring Livingston back. I'd be kinda surprised if Steph didn't take a pay cut

Monta is beast
06-16-2017, 07:47 PM
The dubs got $$ tho. They financed the new stadium on there own they just paid 4 million for the parade. They repeatedly bought draft picks

da ThRONe
06-16-2017, 08:07 PM
Wait, so PSD was saying for YEARS that the starting lineup did not fit well and did not compliment each other at all. That their games where to similar, overlapped and stepped on each other. But I guess there's constant flip-flopping going on here.

The Warriors have won more games in each of their seasons than the Heat ever have, and they did so in the loaded West. This argument is ridiculous, the Warriors are in their own category at the moment.

Not sure why you are addressing me here? So because the people said something what does that have to do with me and how I define a superteam? What argument is ridiculous exactly?

eDush
06-16-2017, 11:57 PM
If those guys want to keep winning then everyone but Curry will take less. These are selfless guys with a window to cement thmseves into history. There's no way they'll exchange a few million per year for losing against these same WarriorsExactly right Cb :nod: ...if I was Klay I be willing to take less like KD and even sign a short term contract and would demand Steph gets the Super Max contract which I been pushing for since day 1. It's all about winning and everyone knows that this is Steph's team as our fearless leader :clap:

eDush
06-17-2017, 12:00 AM
Well FYI Iggy said he's re signing between 8-12 million. KD said he's taking a pay cut so we can try and bring Livingston back. I'd be kinda surprised if Steph didn't take a pay cutThen you just don't get it cause this is a business decision. Steph cannot take less even one penny less...trust me :nod:

Scoots
06-17-2017, 12:43 PM
Joe Lacob and Peter Guber purchased the Warriors for 450 million 6 years ago. They are currently valued at 1.5 billion. They both have continued to say that all they care about is winning and have proven that. Lacob is as big a fan as he is owner. I don't see them sitting on their wallets at all and will keep this going as long as they possibly can.

With that said, both Durant and Curry have said they are willing to take less to keep Iggy and Livingston this offseason, how much less is TBD. This team loves one another and loves playing alongside each other. None of them are greedy, I see them keeping this squad together for years to come.

The latest valuation I saw has the Warriors worth $2.6B and they estimated in 2 years it could be near $4B when they are opening a team owned arena in SF. So yeah, they've got money.

As for the "secret deals" ... Iguodala and KD have both mentioned that they are enjoying the investment opportunities in Silicon Valley, you know, where Lacob is a top investor. It wouldn't even be illegal for Lacob to be "recommending" certain investments to Warriors players where their money could be vastly increased.

The concerns about the Warriors being a problem are really short sighted. KD and Curry are 28 and they are not LeBron, chances are they will be past their peak in 3-4 years and the team will have no flexibility to improve so even if they do choose to keep paying on the huge deals they will come back to the pack just by age and injury likelihood soon enough.

Another factor to consider is that in 6 years there will be a new batch of TV/media deals and they could be for considerably less money. Max contracts will reduce with the cap automatically ... but if the Warriors don't sign players to max contracts they may not shrink like a true "max" deal would.

Saddletramp
06-17-2017, 02:00 PM
That investment thing sounds shady as ****.

Scoots
06-17-2017, 02:14 PM
That investment thing sounds shady as ****.

It does doesn't it? But as a partner at a major venture capital firm it's kind of his job to find investors.

Iguodala got heavily into it the first year he was here and has spent some of his off-time actually working in investments and has mentioned many times the benefits of "being here with these people".

I recently heard Iguodala may end up taking FAR less than his market value to stay.

I wonder what other ways Lacob can use to get more money out of the Warriors to defray the coming roster costs?

Saddletramp
06-17-2017, 02:21 PM
Sure, Lacomb should just have these players "invest" with his buddies and sign for real cheap. "Hey, Chris Paul, sign with us for the vet min and we'll get you in touch with xxx and he'll turn your $2 million investments into $100 million in a week. {winkwinknudgenudge}. And tell DeAndre to get a buyout and we'll do the same for him. Oh, and do you have Gordon Hayward's number? We need another bench piece."


Seriously though, this stuff is kind of ********. How are the Indiana's and Orlando's of the NBA supposed to compete?

SfgiantsJD3
06-17-2017, 02:37 PM
snipped ..

As for the "secret deals" ... Iguodala and KD have both mentioned that they are enjoying the investment opportunities in Silicon Valley, you know, where Lacob is a top investor. It wouldn't even be illegal for Lacob to be "recommending" certain investments to Warriors players where their money could be vastly increased.
...snipped

I don't think they need secret deals, just mingling, playing golf and socializing with key players of VC firms gets you in a better position to take advantage of opportunities based on available capital and risk goals. Yes theses opportunities are open to all but limited funds may be filled with those prequalified on a short list before they go out to the public.

I don't think people out of the area understand that magnitude of investment capital in silicon valley and SF for VC firms.

Scoots
06-17-2017, 03:32 PM
I don't think they need secret deals, just mingling, playing golf and socializing with key players of VC firms gets you in a better position to take advantage of opportunities based on available capital and risk goals. Yes theses opportunities are open to all but limited funds may be filled with those prequalified on a short list before they go out to the public.

I don't think people out of the area understand that magnitude of investment capital in silicon valley and SF for VC firms.

The "secret deals" was referring to earlier posts about handshake deals stars for other teams may have accepted for pay after they retire to take smaller contracts when they were still playing. The investment opportunities IS about meeting people who then offer investments, and if Lacob offers some guidance that's all above board. And yes, the money available by being in the room and having money to invest is staggering.

FOXHOUND
06-17-2017, 04:10 PM
It does doesn't it? But as a partner at a major venture capital firm it's kind of his job to find investors.

Iguodala got heavily into it the first year he was here and has spent some of his off-time actually working in investments and has mentioned many times the benefits of "being here with these people".

I recently heard Iguodala may end up taking FAR less than his market value to stay.

I wonder what other ways Lacob can use to get more money out of the Warriors to defray the coming roster costs?

Man... **** James Dolan.

:laugh2:

lol, please
06-17-2017, 05:10 PM
Yep. Agree 100000%. I said the exact same thing way earlier this season. It will be impossible at some point in the Warriors to keep all 4. Klay is the one gone, for sure. They don't even need him to contend, and be the favorites.

Disgree with both of you. The Splash Bros will retire both as Warriors, like Kobe did a Laker.

lol @ "they don't need Klay". We didn't need Durant either.

Scoots
06-17-2017, 05:23 PM
Man... **** James Dolan.

:laugh2:

It ALWAYS comes down to the owner ... and we had Chris mother ****in' Cohan for 20 years.

The Warriors sold in the 2010-2011 off-season and here they are with 2 titles.

FOXHOUND
06-17-2017, 05:33 PM
It ALWAYS comes down to the owner ... and we had Chris mother ****in' Cohan for 20 years.

The Warriors sold in the 2010-2011 off-season and here they are with 2 titles.

Yes, and you guys should enjoy your success. :clap:

James Dolan will be dead one day, so at least Knicks fans have that to look forward to. Hopefully the owner situation is solved then.

Scoots
06-17-2017, 05:36 PM
Yes, and you guys should enjoy your success. :clap:

James Dolan will be dead one day, so at least Knicks fans have that to look forward to. Hopefully the owner situation is solved then.

Raiders fans for years were waiting for Al Davis to pass ... then his son took over.

49ers fans got Denise York and she gave control to her son and that has not gone well either.

Dolan got a kid?

JasonJohnHorn
06-17-2017, 08:41 PM
They got four guys worthy of max deals: Curry, KD, Green, and Klay.

I mean.... that's over a 100 mill a season just for four guys in their starting line-up.

Frankly speaking, if they have to let one go, it should be KD because he's the oldest, and the other three have already proven they can win (73 reg. season wins coming off a title).

They can let Livingston go and pick up a vet back-up ring chaser for the vet min and frankly, can fill out their entire bench that way. They could even trade Livingston for a pick.


Curry can get the supermax; KD can't. And none of the other players could sign one with another team.

So....

Curry at 36 (?), KD at 27, Klay 18, Dray 18. That puts them at 110 for four players, which is just under the luxury tax. That is just under a 100, leaving them with about 14 mil before the luxury tax.

If Livingston wants a pay day, let him chase one. He's not worth keeping. There are plenty of PGs who are decent vets who want a ring and would play for the vet min.

They need to lock up a rim-protector with that remaining money.


They can keep this core together, but consider this point again: they are a championship team without KD.


I think the first thing they need to do is call up Bogut though. They need him back.

Scoots
06-17-2017, 09:39 PM
They got four guys worthy of max deals: Curry, KD, Green, and Klay.

I mean.... that's over a 100 mill a season just for four guys in their starting line-up.

Frankly speaking, if they have to let one go, it should be KD because he's the oldest, and the other three have already proven they can win (73 reg. season wins coming off a title).

They can let Livingston go and pick up a vet back-up ring chaser for the vet min and frankly, can fill out their entire bench that way. They could even trade Livingston for a pick.


Curry can get the supermax; KD can't. And none of the other players could sign one with another team.

So....

Curry at 36 (?), KD at 27, Klay 18, Dray 18. That puts them at 110 for four players, which is just under the luxury tax. That is just under a 100, leaving them with about 14 mil before the luxury tax.

If Livingston wants a pay day, let him chase one. He's not worth keeping. There are plenty of PGs who are decent vets who want a ring and would play for the vet min.

They need to lock up a rim-protector with that remaining money.


They can keep this core together, but consider this point again: they are a championship team without KD.


I think the first thing they need to do is call up Bogut though. They need him back.

KD will likely be closer to $31, Curry MAY agree to a matching contract to KD, Draymond is at 16+ not 18. The Warriors can pay whatever it will take to keep Iguodala and Livingston because they have their bird rights, McAdoo is restricted.

The Warriors also have the full MLE to spend on a free agent and the Bi-annual exception to offer too.

And still after all that West may not retire and come back for the minimum. McGee may come back for the minimum. Last years 1st round pick Jones is a center. Zaza, since he got that hit money for that KL job, may come back for less. Nene may go ring chasing this year. Add to that the fact that Green plays some center on a regular basis and the Warriors will probably be okay.

What they need is a backup to Curry to replace Clark.

nastynice
06-18-2017, 01:00 PM
So wait, 2/4 wins makes you a superteam? Good to know. :laugh2:

They came together as a superteam. They ended up sucking ***, but hat makes no difference. It's as tho had the Spurs beat the Warriors this year, doesn't make the Warriors any less a super team, just makes them a failure

Vinylman
06-19-2017, 01:37 PM
the 4, especially Curry, would need to sacrifice multiple millions of dollars. You could probably sign an all NBA level player for the amount they will have to give up to stay together.

that was my point... we aren't talking about a "few" million

the other problem will be draymond... he is such a psycho he will want a max deal for sure... the good news is that they have him signed a year longer than klay.

like I have said ... two more years max before we start seeing the chinks in the armor...

Vinylman
06-19-2017, 01:42 PM
I didnt know you had insider information sitting in your Mammy's basement.. or any insight into local bay area media, basic logic and reading comprehension skills. Do you know how much $3,000,000/ year times 5 years is?

LMFAO... typical clueless homer fan...

you don't understand the cap and you don't understand how underpaid both Dray and Klay are at this point

Scoots
06-19-2017, 03:00 PM
that was my point... we aren't talking about a "few" million

the other problem will be draymond... he is such a psycho he will want a max deal for sure... the good news is that they have him signed a year longer than klay.

like I have said ... two more years max before we start seeing the chinks in the armor...

Dray is a psycho and took less than the max last time to help the team build and it was his idea, then gave away millions the week after he signed the new deal.

I don't think it will be the players not happy with each other, how much money they make, or how they play that breaks the team up.

I think they will struggle to fill the roster with the right kind of players to keep winning and when they start losing it can go bad quick.

Vinylman
06-19-2017, 03:50 PM
Dray is a psycho and took less than the max last time to help the team build and it was his idea, then gave away millions the week after he signed the new deal.

I don't think it will be the players not happy with each other, how much money they make, or how they play that breaks the team up.

I think they will struggle to fill the roster with the right kind of players to keep winning and when they start losing it can go bad quick.

Again he didn't give up meaningful money... that won't be the case next time

"He didn't take a max deal" is a nice PR narrative but utterly meaningless in terms of numbers

Hawkeye15
06-19-2017, 04:08 PM
that was my point... we aren't talking about a "few" million

the other problem will be draymond... he is such a psycho he will want a max deal for sure... the good news is that they have him signed a year longer than klay.

like I have said ... two more years max before we start seeing the chinks in the armor...

there are multiple threads of Warrior fans coming up with anything possible to try and convince us (or maybe themselves?) that they can keep all 4.

So much money would need to be left on the table, I can't possibly see the Warriors keeping all 4 after 2019. The repeater tax just gets worse.

Kyben36
06-19-2017, 04:10 PM
cavs are the same way, probably worse off truthfully, while sure they dont need to resign anyone, their repeat tax is going to kill them down the road.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 04:40 PM
Again he didn't give up meaningful money... that won't be the case next time

"He didn't take a max deal" is a nice PR narrative but utterly meaningless in terms of numbers

No. It's a fact. He had a chance at a max deal last year and didn't take it and you are the one who said "the other problem will be draymond... he is such a psycho he will want a max deal for sure" ... how are you so sure?

Hawkeye15
06-19-2017, 04:41 PM
cavs are the same way, probably worse off truthfully, while sure they dont need to resign anyone, their repeat tax is going to kill them down the road.

they are currently worse, because they paid their 3 guys huge deals. GS is luckily still on more friendly deals for their stars. That will go away, and even if they don't take the full max, the amount all of them need to leave on the table to stay together, is massive.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 04:42 PM
there are multiple threads of Warrior fans coming up with anything possible to try and convince us (or maybe themselves?) that they can keep all 4.

So much money would need to be left on the table, I can't possibly see the Warriors keeping all 4 after 2019. The repeater tax just gets worse.

See, I don't understand this ... no "money need to be left on the table" other than by KD. If KD accepts the maximum raise on a new contract which would be around $31M for next year (or around $4M less than the max for next year) then the team can literally max all of them out.

The team can keep them all. They may not, but they can.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 04:48 PM
cavs are the same way, probably worse off truthfully, while sure they dont need to resign anyone, their repeat tax is going to kill them down the road.

They are worse off at the moment because they are already in the repeater tax, the Warriors will be there next year, and the Warriors will likely escalate far beyond the Cavs quickly enough. The only question after KD accepting his maximum raise rather than a maximum deal is how much the Warriors owners are willing to pay. If they win the next 4 titles they may be willing to pay $400M a year in salary and tax penalties.

hugepatsfan
06-19-2017, 04:50 PM
See, I don't understand this ... no "money need to be left on the table" other than by KD. If KD accepts the maximum raise on a new contract which would be around $31M for next year (or around $4M less than the max for next year) then the team can literally max all of them out.

The team can keep them all. They may not, but they can.

You're just reading but not really understanding what people are saying. They can pay everyone whatever they want. People are just pointing out that the cost of that is so ridiculous that there's no way they do.

I might be in the minority in that I think they can keep the Big 4 an that they will. I think those guys will take less to help it though obviously it will still be astronomical. They'll take a few million less each. But there's no way GS does that and pays all the bench guys. No way IMO.

FOXHOUND
06-19-2017, 05:03 PM
they are currently worse, because they paid their 3 guys huge deals. GS is luckily still on more friendly deals for their stars. That will go away, and even if they don't take the full max, the amount all of them need to leave on the table to stay together, is massive.

I think it's more about them paying Thompson, JR, Shump and Frye $48M this year. :speechless:

They can get under the luxury line by 2019-20, depending on what happens, but really they're just operating under LeBron's timeline right now anyways. They only have 2-3 years left to contend no matter what their bill looks like.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 05:31 PM
You're just reading but not really understanding what people are saying. They can pay everyone whatever they want. People are just pointing out that the cost of that is so ridiculous that there's no way they do.

I might be in the minority in that I think they can keep the Big 4 an that they will. I think those guys will take less to help it though obviously it will still be astronomical. They'll take a few million less each. But there's no way GS does that and pays all the bench guys. No way IMO.

I understand that point ... but when you are talking about the salary cap "can" and "can't" and "must" and "have to" all have real meaning. And if this team wins the next 2 titles I don't think Klay is leaving for money reasons (either way), and in 3 years I think the same of Draymond.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 05:36 PM
I think it's more about them paying Thompson, JR, Shump and Frye $48M this year. :speechless:

They can get under the luxury line by 2019-20, depending on what happens, but really they're just operating under LeBron's timeline right now anyways. They only have 2-3 years left to contend no matter what their bill looks like.

It will be interesting if LeBron wants to hang on until the Cavs have to cut him or if he opts to leave again and can spin it as being for the Cavs rather than against them. "I'm taking my aging body to Los Angeles because my wife wants to live there and I want to save the Cavs the HUGE money they've been paying me, and just because I'm magnanimous I traded myself for a future 1st round pick this time!"

Hawkeye15
06-19-2017, 05:41 PM
See, I don't understand this ... no "money need to be left on the table" other than by KD. If KD accepts the maximum raise on a new contract which would be around $31M for next year (or around $4M less than the max for next year) then the team can literally max all of them out.

The team can keep them all. They may not, but they can.

they CAN. If they want to pay out their nose, exponentially growing, they CAN.

They won't...

Hawkeye15
06-19-2017, 05:42 PM
I think it's more about them paying Thompson, JR, Shump and Frye $48M this year. :speechless:

They can get under the luxury line by 2019-20, depending on what happens, but really they're just operating under LeBron's timeline right now anyways. They only have 2-3 years left to contend no matter what their bill looks like.

The Cavs are in a worse play simply because they are paying more for less. With their financial constraints, they painted themselves in a corner.

COOLbeans
06-19-2017, 05:43 PM
Warriors put up 4 million this year for the championship parade. They are amond one of the most well off ownership groups in all of sports. They will resign guys to remain championships. These guys love winning, I cant see them letting a key guy walk for a few million.

Hawkeye15
06-19-2017, 05:43 PM
I understand that point ... but when you are talking about the salary cap "can" and "can't" and "must" and "have to" all have real meaning. And if this team wins the next 2 titles I don't think Klay is leaving for money reasons (either way), and in 3 years I think the same of Draymond.

really? Human nature would be the opposite I think. They won their titles, why not make that money now?

FOXHOUND
06-19-2017, 06:01 PM
It will be interesting if LeBron wants to hang on until the Cavs have to cut him or if he opts to leave again and can spin it as being for the Cavs rather than against them. "I'm taking my aging body to Los Angeles because my wife wants to live there and I want to save the Cavs the HUGE money they've been paying me, and just because I'm magnanimous I traded myself for a future 1st round pick this time!"

:laugh2:

That would be wild.

FOXHOUND
06-19-2017, 06:02 PM
The Cavs are in a worse play simply because they are paying more for less. With their financial constraints, they painted themselves in a corner.

Oh for sure, without question.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 06:55 PM
they CAN. If they want to pay out their nose, exponentially growing, they CAN.

They won't...

It's not exponential either. And they might ... like I said, if they keep winning.

Scoots
06-19-2017, 06:56 PM
really? Human nature would be the opposite I think. They won their titles, why not make that money now?

Because he values winning above other things ... more than most people do.

eDush
06-22-2017, 03:56 PM
really? Human nature would be the opposite I think. They won their titles, why not make that money now?

Because he values winning above other things ... more than most people do.That poster only cares about $$$. Dubs players and fans alike only care about winning while getting paid :clap:

I would play for the Warriors for minimum wage cause I care about winning :nod: not those greedy fans!
:no:

Lloyd Christmas
06-22-2017, 10:03 PM
Just for fun, what does everyone think the warriors could get for klay in a trade?