Yes! : Bucks 120 Warriors 98

Yes!  This is what we’re supposed to be rooting for, right? Getting Joe Lacob his lottery pick back? If not, I’m confused.            

Mark Jackson:  Fitz got it exactly right for once, when he stated that this game reminded him of the Charlotte game, in that it was decided in the first quarter.

Well, almost exactly right.  Both this game and the Charlotte game were decided before tipoff, when Jackson drew up his lineup card and game plan.  Starting Andris Biedrins against a team playing a PF, SF and SG front line, and two PGs in the backcourt.  Squeezing the air out of the ball on rebounds.  Walking the ball up the court.  I can just imagine Jackson and Malone brainstorming before this game: “We can’t get in a running game against Brandon Jennings and Monta Ellis, right?  We have to slow it down and beat them with our defense. Right?”

Wrong. Mark Jackson fed his Warriors team a 12 point first quarter. And a blowout on their home floor. Again.


And then, because this is a no excuses basketball team, we got treated to another Pastor Jackson post-game presser:  “They threw all the punches, we threw none.” “We didn’t make them feel us.” “An embarrassing effort.”


Jim Barnett: Barnett’s griping about the Warriors walking the ball up the court started early in this game.  In the first quarter, in fact.  And lo and behold, Fitz actually joined in, commenting that Skiles would love to play the Warriors in a half-court game. Right again, Fitz! Is that a record?

When the Warriors finally got the small-ball going in the second quarter, leading to a Klay Thompson early offense three, Jim couldn’t control himself.

You see what happens when you let the flow come in?

Love you, Barnett.  Call me.

Monta Ellis: This beautifully controlled performance in the most emotional of all circumstances was the best F*** you that Monta could have delivered to all of the snake oil salesmen stat peddlers and ignoramuses in the media who have criticized his play as selfish and out of control over the years, and who were all smugly predicting to each other on Twitter that he’d go off for 40 in this game.  Monta Ellis never forced his offense out of personal need. He did it out of team need, because for several years he has been playing 40 minutes a game on teams with decimated or intentionally incomplete rosters.

His shot selection wasn’t horrible when he shot 60% for a month playing alongside Baron Davis and Stephen Jackson under Don Nelson.  And it won’t be horrible playing under Scott Skiles on this talented Bucks roster.

I’m going to really enjoy watching him play in the playoffs.

Klay Thompson:  Umm…  the return of Andrew Bogut can’t come soon enough for Klay. To be fair, this was an impossible matchup for him, even when Jackson was trying to hide him on Beno Udrih. But this is a no excuses basketball team. Right? Or is that on hold until next year too? If so, someone should notify Mark Jackson.

MBam’s 10-15:  A direct result of the Warriors’ bigs being pulled away to give help.

Mike Dunleavy:  Is a good basketball player, enjoying a fine season under a good coach who knows how to use him.  I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Gilbert Arenas and Jason Richardson froze him out.

I have to admit to getting some perverse enjoyment at 4:23 4Q, when Dunleavy got Dom McGuire up in the air on a shot fake, and then layed some wood. Ever seen him do that before?

Dom McGuire: Did anyone else see Dom walk right by Bogut, who was offering him a high five after that driving slam to end the third quarter?  I wasn’t really sure whether that was intentional or not.

Until I read McGuire’s post-game comments when asked about the Udoh trade: “That’s some bullsh-t, I’ll be straight up. I’ma keep it 100.” “Hey, I ain’t got no say so, but I was happy with my goons.” (Courtesy of @SherwoodStrauss)

I have an opinion now.

The Andrew Bogut Trade Analysis: It’s coming, never fear.  It’s in the final stages of fermentation, and will be the next thing out of my vat.

Which is why I’ll cut this short, and let you take it from here.

69 Responses to Yes! : Bucks 120 Warriors 98

  1. Added above: a little something on Dom McGuire.

  2. geraldmcgrew

    Go Bucks! Is this my new Eastern conference team? We’ll see. Hard to resist the Pacers.

    The place I’m at closes at 11:00, so I’ll have to rush; I’ll try to post supporting link tomorrow, but the reason Mike D got canned (at least the final straw) was he wanted to trade C. Anthony for DWill. Betrays my Nellie bias, but can’t help remembering Knicks-coach Nelson wanting to trade Ewing to Orlando for disgruntled Shack and then…fired.

    For those who say Lacob is on the right track, when Warriors finish a season above .500 again, then let’s talk.

    FB, can’t wait for trade analysis! Thanks, as always.

  3. warriorsablaze

    Pretty hard game to watch. The flow of the past two games was completely gone. Milwaukee executed well, and D. Lee provided the most atrocious defense I’ve seen him provide yet (which is saying a lot). Monta had a nice game but I’m not going to extrapolate it to mean much. I do believe he was misused here, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see the “bad Monta” start to show up once he gets comfortable with his new team. He took a few questionable shots tonight, but he’s not the alpha dog there….yet.

    Slowing it down is the most ridiculous strategy with the current roster. I suppose MJ is trying to impose a culture to prepare for the more traditional roster we’re set to run out next year… but it sure is painful to watch as we’re currently constructed. Much more so when we see how well even this depleted roster can execute when let loose… only to be reined back in.

    I’m guessing you’re going to come out on the negative side for the trade. I think it was necessary and a good deal, though definitely a gamble… the health of Bogut and Curry will be everything.

    • Certainly more eloquent than Monta ever was. This is a culture shift for the Warriors…a coherent star.

    • Listening to these interviews it’s obvious that Bogut is a very bright guy. If I enjoy his play for the Warriors as much as I enjoyed listening to him talk I’ll be one happy fan in the future.

      • Great kid! I always admired his game whenever we played against him. I hope he’s healthy – Bogut’s game should fit in nicely with Curry, Klay, and Lee.

  4. Two thoughts:

    1. Monta doesn’t look good in green.

    2. Maybe it’s early, but I wonder if Udoh’s potential will be developed with the Bucks. This would be a great loss if not.

  5. “In the back of their minds, the Warriors fear Ellis could become an All-Star in Milwaukee, joining the long list of players who turned into superstars after leaving the franchise. But if Bogut stays healthy?”;_ylt=As5XahSzEs2S1qBBQgeqXiM5nYcB?slug=mc-spears_andrew_bogut_warriors_bucks_031612

    Hmmm, long list of superstars? After leaving the Warriors? I have no problem with MSpears but he struck out on that line. In fact, this is one of my main points of contention when debating about the breakup of past Warriors teams……there’s never been anything great that’s been broken up. No great teams headed for a likely NBA title, and certainly no up-and-coming superstar players that were traded before they ultimately became stars of the league. And no, I don’t consider Mitch Richmond or Chris Webber “superstars” of their day. Anyone else “blossom” after leaving GSW? Not to my memory, with the point being that so many Warriors fans over the years have become so starved for success that they wind up overvaluing their favorite players and teams.

    Doesn’t mean that RunTMC or We Believe weren’t fun and exciting teams with some pretty good players along for the ride but those were far from great teams being led by great players. Truth be told the greatest name associated with those teams wasn’t a player but a coach, Don Nelson.

    Hopefully one of these days GSW can put together a truly great team (players) that brings a championship or three back to the Bay.

    • “Superstar” was definitely a poor word choice here. Perhaps rephrased for – long list of GSWs players who left to become very productive players (even All-Stars) for other teams/systems. If Chris Webber wasn’t a “superstar” in his time – a number one draft pick whose play lived up to his billing/potential – then perhaps your definition of a “superstar” may be a tad bit high… LOL!

      • PeteyB, “superstar” = MJordan, Magic, Bird, Kobe, RBarry, JWest, etc. Webber was never close to being in that category. Remember, the Warriors traded him to Washington and how long did he last there? It took coming to the then “Siberia of the NBA”, Sactown, before Webber finally found a home and did well. Good player during his best years but never a “superstar”.

  6. The Warriors play 2 really good games (after the trade) and then throw in a stinker. Such is part of life in the NBA, especially in The Season of Asterisks.

  7. Mark Jackson on KNBR (Thursday). Tanking? Not if you believe what’s said on this podcast.

    • Don’t believe.

      After 4 slow games in which they averaged under 85 points,
      followed by 4 fast-paced games in which they were very competitive, the Warriors return to the slow game.

      Someone is either being:
      a) unbelievably stupid, or
      b) not unbelievably stupid.

      Sighted last night: Dominic McGuire as PG.

      Dearie me. Who could need more evidence than that?

      • warriorsablaze

        It is a bit suspect. The only thing I can come up with is that maybe MJ is trying to instill the halfcourt game culture… even before the roster is setup for it. This philosophy will hurt Curry when he comes back. He’s an elite transition PG… but drops off heavily when having to grind it out.

        If we’re going to become a halfcourt team, they consider developing some sort of offense. Bucks had great execution in the halfcourt last night despite not really having a big man. Our horrid defense definitely aided in that, but they looked pretty smooth… even with Monta fresh into the system.

        • A bit suspect. Right. As is the notion that the Warriors should immediately start playing a style of game they don’t have the players for, in preparation for a time 7 months away when they hope to have different players.

          • warriorsablaze

            Agreed… I can’t come up with any other reason other than MJ wanting to install his system regardless of the roster. It’s moronic. All season we’ve had much more success when getting out in transition.

        • +1 Warriors Blaze

          Wondering whats up, fast = win and competitive (reference comebacks in 2nd quarter after horrid starts).
          slow= 85 points or under boring and sloppy hoops.

          At the game Lacob seemed to be sweating it out against the Bucks, and from MJackos public pronouncements they are not tanking, I take him at his word.

          Of course Feltbot’s logic and Lacob/MJack logic are about the same as Chocolate versus Vanilla. Who knows what they are thinking.

          Thing is, Milwaukee is the 9th team in the Eastern Conference. Does that put them at 14 in the West? And they were up by 30!
          HELLOOOO any body up there in Oracle Land? We didnt play Miami or Chicago last night… Mcguire and Lee had several turnovers. Thompson and Robinson also missed a lot of shots.

          Defensively, a lotta help by Lee, Dominator and Biedrins because the guards didn’t keep their assignments in front of them. But Feltbot already notes several flaws.

          Tonight, Utah will work to slow down the tempo. They do not want Dubs to run. Will Jackson accommodate? I guess it depends what he has for dinner?

  8. I’m hoping to see more of Jeremy Tyler, Charles Jenkins, and Chris Wright. This is the time to see what we have.

  9. felt…fully agree with your Barny comments about being critical of “Walk-it-up” Jackson…

    But was wondering in your love-fest for Barnett what your thoughts were about his comments on Anthony Randolph, “The (Warriors) should of kept him” & then he was critical of Mr Don Nelson’s treatment of said AR?

    …and a preemtive strike…you’re wrong about the critcism of trading your favored Monta for Bogut. Even Monta knew it was the right thing to do.

    • I heard Monta say he was emotionally prepared for it and didn’t have a problem with it. He was very careful not to offer an opinion about it, saying only “it is what it is,” “I’ve seen this happen many times,” “It’s not a surprise” and the like.

      That is not an endorsement.

    • scotch@13

      I never suspect that Feltbot thinks Nelson was perfect. I think it is a comparative evaluation between Jackson and Nelson. If Mark Jackson’s win loss record was successful, FB wouldn’t look good with the criticism. Arguably, (And if you believe Lacob, Riley, Myers et al), the Warriors have a better roster than the “sins 0f the past”, and there might be an improvement in the win loss record. Last night’s game featured a lethargic at best walk up offense that generated 12 points against the Bucks. Is that open to critique? I think so. I didnt see a 7 footer out there for Milwaukee…Jackson criticizes his players, FB can criticize the strategy.

      With respect to Randolph, I agree with Barnett: Nelson was way too hard on the guy. In addition Barnett criticized Randolph for coming out of LSU too young, and not knowing how to play basketball. Randolph is not perfect as well. I hope AR pays his dues and gets to play somewhere in the NBA, as he was a likeable player. It has’nt worked out for him in NY under D’Antoni, and now Minnie under Adelman.

    • Endorsement no…but resolved yes. I see a satisfaction about the trade from Monta & by extension imo he needed & embraced a new direction & the Warriors needed a new direction.

      …and Wooden I stand four-square behinds feltbot’s holding MJax’ feet to the fire about not employing the running game properly! There simply is no excuse going from 110 pts in the paint the previous two games to that hot mess last night.

      I’ve followed the Dubs since the 60’s & I will not ever support “Walk-it-up-basketball”…Keep fighting the good fight felt!!

      • …and Bogut is the center Nellie had wet-dreams about.

        Just imagine how Nellie would’ve thrived with a mobile big with his 2-way skills!

  10. If Milwaukee makes it to the playoffs (yes, I know, in the east), they will have a team much like the one we just tore apart:

    Two small guards, no centers, but several athletic, flexible, and capable forwards (also one prince, who was royal last night). I suspect Jennings will have an adjustment to make and their small backcourt may be more problematic. Curry was committed to making it work and is a better pg in the right system.

    What I envy is the speed, power, and flexibility they now have well down the roster. Also their salary structure–they are poised to make changes, even make a big deal if it falls their way. Both of these we gave up. Curious to see how the two teams fare next year, especially against each other.

    • +1 rgg

      Funny how Milwaukee Mgmt disagree in how successful going small might be. The venerable Coach Skiles was ecstatic at the game last night. For good reason, his team scored 120 points the past two games, and have a liklelyhood of getting into the playoffs. I hope they do and beat Miami (they won two out of three this year). I know…dreamin…

  11. One clarification: I don’t think Jackson’s tanking. Coaches always coach to win. It’s management’s job to do the tanking, if they so choose.

    • So you’re saying that when Jackson does dumb things, it’s not intentional. He’s not trying to fake anybody out, he really is that dumb. But his integrity is intact.

      Not sure that the idea is reassuring, actually. There’s no upside for the team. He’ll be dumb next year. At least if he were intentionally tanking, he could knock it off at some point.

  12. The Warriors play 2 really good games (after the trade) and then throw in a stinker. Such is part of life in the NBA…

    No it’s not, Steve. This is Joe Lacob”s doing. He forced the W’s to miss all their shots in the first quarter. And he somehow helped the Bucks make all theirs. Don’t you see it Steve? It’s so clear.

    Right, felt?

    • Many people seem to think that a team or player’s performance is completely unrelated to the coach’s gameplan. I’m not one of them.

      I happen to think that the Warriors starting lineup against the Ilyasova-less Bucks was obviously wrong, while the exact same starting lineup against the Jazz was obviously right. Call me eccentric.

      • Wasn’t talking about the coaching, felt.

        Many people here seem to think that a team or player’s (in-game) performance is completely related to the ownership’s long term plan. I’m not one of them.

        And speaking of coaching/lineups: So, your saying just cuz AB started that game, that’s what made the W’s miss all their shots in the 1st Q, and caused the Bucks to make all theirs? C’mon now…

        • I’m pretty sure at least Barnett agrees with me. There are easier ways to beat a Scott Skiles defense than walking the ball upcourt and playing 4 on 5. Particularly when your center is useless on the defensive end against a small ball opponent.

  13. Transcript of interview with Joe Lacob after the Bogut introductory PC Friday night (from TK). Tanking? Not if you believe what’s said in this interview.


    -Q: What are your feelings after the two deals?

    -LACOB: We’re just excited…

    You just don’t get the opportunity very often to add something like that. Andrew, he’s a centerpiece and he’s a center. And he’s a good one.

    Really good one.. We can argue whether he’s top five, top three, I don’t know… I don’t really care what people call him.

    I just know he’s a really good player, a helluva lot better than the Warriors have had here for a long time, probably, all due respect to current and past players.

    He’s a great fit for this team. And we had a goal of re-architecting the team. It’s taken us a year-and-a-hal fto put in the penultimate piece to that re-architecture, which I think is Andrew, and along with David Lee, I think we’re set inside.

    And we’ve got Curry and Klay Thompson on the outside, two incredible shooters.

    All four of them are great passers, which is really unusual. Take a look around, you won’t find a situation where you’ve got such great passers at every position. We think basketball’s a team sport, it’s meant to be played passing the ball, sharing the ball, and I think that the sum of the pieces is going to add up to being a really good team..

    -Q: What does Jerry West feel about this?

    -LACOB: He’s ecstatic. This just doesn’t happen every day. It could have taken us three, four, five years to add this piece. When are you going to do it? It’s not going to happen in the draft. It’s not going to happen in free agency unless you get lucky.

    We almost got a really good center, but not at this caliber. So, you know, we feel pretty excited about what we’ve accomplished. Now we still have more work to do, but we’re leaps and bounds ahead of where we were from a week ago.

    -Q: What medically did you need to know about Andrew?

    -LACOB: We did all the typical checks. You can only do what the MRIs and all those types of things show.

    Dr. Maloney and the people at Stanford that we’ve brought on here… assure us this is very low-risk. This is a bone, bones heal. There’s no issue here at all.

    In some respects, Steph Curry’s injury is something more to be concerned about, because it’s hard to define what the problem is. A bone, you can see it’s healed…

    The elbow’s obviously way past healed. It’s not to say he couldn’t get injured again, everybody can get injured. And historically he has been somewhat injury-prone, so that’s a fair assessment.

    But we think we’ll do everything we can do keep him healthy and he should be healthy and we’ll go from there.

    -Q: You added about $30M in long-term money in these two deals…

    -LACOB: Can I ask you a question? Do you care, does a fan care about how much money it is? What do we care about? We care about winning. That’s what we want to do, right?

    -Q: What I think fans care about is that you’ve eaten into any future cap room. Is this some response to the fact that you tried to get free-agents last December and maybe that’s just not going to work, so you decided to trade for it?

    -LACOB: We tried really hard on free-agency last summer and we came really close. And we had not a tremendous amount of cap room, but we had enough to try to make those plays. And obviously we had to stretch to make that play, as we all know.

    We would’ve been in a similar, relatively speaking, situation this next summer. And the crop of free agents, mostly restricted free agents, the big men that were available.

    So we looked at that and said, we think our best shot to improve really now was going to be trade. Because draft, yes, there’s some good players. If you get the No. 1 overall pick, you’re probably going to get a good big man. But other than that… it’s a good draft, it’s a deep draft, but I’m not sure there’s anybody like that in this draft.

    So yeah, we did a pivot. I think it’s fair to say we did a pivot and said we’re going to do this through a trade, a big trade.

    No guarantees you can ever pull that off, and we were very fortunate that we were able to do this.

    -Q: What’s the likelihood that you start talking seriously about shutting Steph down for the rest of the season?

    -LACOB: No, you’re asking the wrong question, everyone keeps asking that. The question is when will he be healthy? It’s not are we going to shut him down…

    Right now, it’s one of those injuries that nobody can really say for sure why this keeps recurring. We need to know, though. So we’ll get another opinion if we have to.

    If it requires shutting him down, then we’ll do it. If it doesn’t, if we can get him back to play sometime in the next month, we will.

    -Q: Are you comfortable with the chance you might shut him down?

    -LACOB: It’s very important that he be healthy. We don’t want to risk further injury…

    But any talk or any consideration or any even discussion about shutting him down and getting to the draft pick and all that stuff, that’s, like, ridiculous. That’s completely not in my thinking, Jerry West’s thinking. And I’ve told everyone in this organization, you will not even consider thinking that way.

    By the way, you don’t have to tell Mark Jackson that, because he’s a competitor and I’m sure you’ve heard it from him. There’s no way. We want to win every game. I want to win tonight, really badly.

    -Q: Why did you trade Monta Ellis instead of Stephen Curry?

    -LACOB: I’ll be honest, we would’ve traded either one if we had to, to make the next move for this franchise. Everybody’s trade-able, and Steph knows this, everybody knows this.

    I’m not saying we value one more than the other. One may have more value than the other to various teams and you can surmise all you want about that. Only we know the offers we did or didn’t get.

    But we really had to make this move to re-balance–I know (some) have pointed towards that, and I think there’s some truth to it. We concluded we needed to re-balance the roster and they were our two best trading chips and one of them probably had to go to get this guy.

    -Q: Would you have a discussion about Bogut not playing in the Olympics?

    -LACOB: I have not talked to him about that… I’d have to sit down and talk to him and talk to our staff and think it through.

    -Q: Mark Cuban says he doesn’t want his guys ever playing in the Olympics…

    -LACOB: Yeah, well Mark will say everything very loudly and directly, whatever comes to mind, I guess. But that’s something I’d want to give more thought before I comment on, honestly.

    -Q: What was the thinking on the Stephen Jackson deal… Did you just have to get into the first round?

    -LACOB: No, I don’t think that was necessarily the case, though that was an objective. I think at the end of the day, we looked at it, not really Stephen Jackson-for-Jefferson, necessarily… we looked at the arch of the whole thing…

    I think money’s a contributing factor, certainly we did take on money… I think we’ve got the core pieces now and we can probably get to where we need to with the remaining pieces better through the draft than having some additional cap space.

    Unless you’ve got a lot of cap space to go after the premier guy, those very few players, I’m not sure it makes that much difference.

    -Q: What other pieces would you like to add?

    -LACOB: I think you should talk to Larry about that, or Jerry or Bob… But clearly, we gave up Ekpe Udoh. Obviously we didn’t want to, but you have to trade something to get something.

    So we probably have to replace him at some point. We need another big, we need some depth… And the draft is very strong, if you look at it, it’s very strong in four-men, power forwards.”

  14. Some interesting numbers for the Warriors and whatever “style” they purportedly play:

    The Warriors are averaging 98.4 per game which is 1st in the Pacific Division and 4th in the Western Conference. They’re allowing an average of 99.9 per game which is 4th in the division and 12th in the West.

    Obviously the offensive numbers are the most interesting, especially considering how their “boring halfcourt offense” is more efficient and prolific than the Lakers, Clippers and Suns.

  15. I guess there is a god. The last two nights, have shown us instead of all the energy expended trading for Andrew Bogut for two of your best players could have been better used by just amnestying Andris Biedrins. In the long run, it would have been cheaper, AND
    Monta and Epke on the Dubs last night instead of their opponents – WARRIOR WIN
    Udoh in the game tonight at the end, instead of an and one foul by Andris Biedrins – WARRIOR WIN

    Joe, Larry, Logo et al — Your two games down with your WIN at all costs theme. Good Luck the rest of the way.

  16. So why did Jefferson get minutes and shots over Rush (0 shots)? And I was worried SJax was going to chuck the ball. OK, one game. He has one or two more seasons at 10m? I assume this means he will be a serious part of the team, that Rush and other possibilities will not be pursued–and he will be hard to trade because of his contract? I also wonder how motivated he will be to play for this team after stepping down from the Spurs (cf. Fisher and Odom).


    Discord in the Lacob love nest:

    “My fiancee is mad at me,” he said to the San Francisco Chronicle in the hallway off the court before Wednesday night’s game. “She hasn’t talked to me in two days.”

    She didn’t like the Ellis trade. Stay tuned.

  17. +1 rgg

    Seem like at least two out three of the following are gone, if nothing more than other teams will have more cap space?

    I think all of the above have terminatng contracts. As FB noted, they are playing for next year. Nate and Rush are doing so well, it seems like teams will go after them. Maybe Dom too?
    Maybe since Rush is restricted, Dubs can match, I dunno.

  18. (Still waiting for the Feltbot take. The suspense is killing us.)

    Summing up:

    Bogut is a great acquisition. It’s hard to argue the toughness of a guy who played Aussie rules football (and tennis?). Great guy, too, Berko! If an aggressive ownership had acquired him and kept his team intact, it would have been a coup. But look at the price we’ve paid:

    1. Giving up Ellis, a rare talent, the options he offers the team
    2. Giving up real players who might have developed this year and contributed next — Udoh, probably Rush, others?
    3. Having to essentially start over with the team next year with new players — drafts, whatever. And, related, wasting another year that might have been used for player development.
    4. Losing flexibility to develop depth some time to come. No money left and no tradable pieces. Jefferson’s contract, which I assume will be hard to move, a significant chunk of the cap, already maxed. No tradable pieces–except maybe Curry and Klay?
    5. No real backups, should Curry and Bogut’s health become issues.

    Then factor in the probable control offense Lacob wants to run:

    1. Curry plus Klay will really be porous on defense.
    2. It doesn’t look like the team will get the swing forward that might make the tandem work.
    3. The plan will ignore Curry’s real strengths in leading a running game and maybe turn him into an average guard. I can see him getting trapped in the backcourt with double teams and turning it over. So maybe Curry will become expendable. But here’s another scenario. He’s a free agent next year, right? Will he want to stay here?

  19. RGG- Monta Ellis is also a FREE AGENT next which mean he is gonna want a huge increase which he is not worth. Monta Ellis is not an elite player because if he was the Warriors would have been in the playoffs.

    You fail to recognize the most important thing that Bogut will provide which is a defensive presence that can block shots and protect the paint.

    Chris Mullin he sure was a defensive presence. I’m sure you loved him.

    • Dude, get your facts straight.

      Monta is 2 more years away from being a free agent.

      In the last 3 months, Monta has single-handedly shut down Dwyane Wade, Derrick Rose and Chris Paul – and the Ws won all those games. Not bad for a “nobody.” Neither Monta’s replacement nor Bogut is going to stop those guys.

      If Bogut can run next season, he will be probably be a fine addition to the team. He might not be able to run. He will not run 40 minutes per game like that “nobody” Monta.

      Right this minute the Warriors don’t have a backup for Bogut signed for next year (except a useless Biedrins). Nor do they have a backup under contract for Curry, Thompson or Lee. After making the Bogut trade, the team doesn’t have the money left to sign good backups. I don’t see how that makes the team as a whole better after the trade. Could you explain it to me?

  20. @ 26-28


    Adding Kwame to the Bogut trade had a huge impact on the Warriors ability to fill out their roster for next year. If he hadn’t been included in the deal, the Warriors could have released him and used his $9mil to sign Rush, McGuire, Robinson and additional help as needed. A couple of mid-level veterans at backup PG and PF would have been very good to have.

    By shipping Kwame’s expiring and ending up with Jefferson’s 2 remaining years instead, the Warriors are left with at most only $3.5 mil under next year’s cap, after signing two draftees. The team will be required to hire a minimum of 3 additional players with that $3.5 mil, just to meet the league minimum number of players. We’re talking 3 rookie-level salaries here.

    Rush currently makes $4 mil and is a free agent this summer. He is gone next year unless the team goes over the cap to keep him. They won’t.

    CWright is also gone, and probably Jenkins. The dubs have a chance of retaining Nate and Dom, but only if no one else is interested in them. If the team is willing to go over the salary cap for any one of those players, they have that option. But they won’t.

    That’s the cap picture for the current roster no matter what the dubs do with Jefferson. If they keep him, they will run short-handed next season. If they trade him for 2-3 players whose combined salaries match his, they could fill out their roster better but it wouldn’t change the money available for the unsigned players currently on the team.

    Playing Jefferson last night was no doubt the dubs assessing him for a trade/keep decision, and probably to showcase him for a trade. I think it would be almost impossible for the Ws to keep him. Dorell works for less than half Jefferson’s salary.

    The Warriors don’t need to play Rush any more. Forget about winning or losing, the team already knows he is gone in a few weeks.

    • Right. I forgot about Kwame’s expiring.

      And that makes sense, what you said about Jefferson’s minutes. Will Jefferson be easy to trade (is it 2 years x $10m)?

      • Yeah, that’s Jefferson’s deal. I don’t know his tradability. He hasn’t played many minutes for SA the last couple of years, but he doesn’t come with baggage like “some people.”

      • Yes, and in the unlikely event, they trade RJ, it would be for players that are not good?

        • Players that earn relatively little but can hopefully still make a contribution, like Nate and Dom.

          • Are we really that thrilled about Nate? I suspect he’s gone, Jenkins is back, along with Rush.

          • Lots of people aren’t thrilled about Nate. If the Ws hadn’t signed him he would have been out of the league this year. He’s been on 4 teams in the last 4 years. He’s on a veteran minimum 1-year contract with the Ws.

            On the other hand, it really helped the Warriors to have him this year, he’s a fan fave, and he’s a known quantity. So it’s hard to imagine what the Ws management thinks of Nate. They might really hope to have him back.

    • Thanks White Hat. Really appreciate the information. Not to sound desperate, but does Kirk Lacob have a jumpshot, and can he guard Kobe? Gotta Ask the Truth about that.

    • @White Hat – Great points regarding the roster for next year.

      The W’s have 3-4 draft picks of new blood coming too. With Jefferson’s and Biedrins’ really bad contracts – and Dorell’s more reasonable but soon to be expiring contract – more roster turnover is inevitable. I expect more trade rumors for sure.

      I hope the Warriors go over the salary cap, but not near the luxury tax to complete the roster. I’d like to keep Rush and McGuire as bench players for sure. I prefer Rush and McGuire because their defense can be near-elite. Loved having Nate – but he will probably make a lot more money elsewhere after this season.

      The W’s can make a qualifying offer of around $4 million – to keep Brandon Rush for next year. He’s not a free agent yet. If this in not offered, only then Brandon Rush will be a free agent.

  21. white hat, rgg, there are three fat contracts that run through June ’14 if the players exercise their options to stay the final year, bogut (does not have the option), biedrins, jefferson. if curry has not re-signed to go beyond his rookie deal by then, he’ll enter restricted free agency as well. the only expiring contract of any size coming sooner is d.wright’s 4.1m ending in ’13, but the increased cap restrictions of the new c.b.a. also get going that season. the budget for free agents, if no more significant deals get made, will be very tight this summer and only slightly better next summer.

    they’ll have one mid-level exception per season to use on free agents, otherwise the only flexibility they have is with undrafted, waived, and d-league free agents like Robinson was this season, who get minimum deals, and whether they give their second round picks guaranteed deals. it’s quite possible they won’t be able to afford to keep Rush ; another team can make him an offer that stresses the lacobite budget, in the exact same manner that Mullin pried Turiaf from LA-L. the offer to Jordan this fall didn’t meet that criteria because the sterlings had cap room to match comfortably.

  22. So still in all of the above,

    Even if we are not lucky enough t0 keep 2 out of 3 (Nate, Rush, Dominator), then we replace them with ‘similar’ players at low cost.

    1) If the replacements do well, they move on after next season (ala the aforementioned three amigos after this season).
    2) if replacments dont do well, they are on their respective ways after next season.

    Either way, the roster turnover will continue until the dubs get out of the salary bind.

    Mid Level money is crucial. Thus draft success is crucial…we need that #1 pick this draft to be real good to do anything next season or after.