Quick Takes: Warriors 104 Heat 89

There’s not a lot to say about these last two Warriors bushwhackings of the inferior Jazz and Heat, so I’ll keep this short:             

The MVP: I’m really disappointed in the Warriors fans in one regard. Their MVP chants when Curry goes to the line are pathetic. Barely audible. Unconvincing.

It’s almost like they think it’s a joke or something, that no one on the Warriors could ever actually be the MVP of the league. Or they’re embarrassed, like their high IQ neighbors will think they’re moronic homers.

Stephen Curry is the MVP, people. He is the best player in the league, on the best team in the league. His leadership, which is never mentioned outside the Bay Area, and rarely within it, is as great as has ever existed in NBA history. Would LeBron James — who has shamed himself this season — have let Steve Kerr take away his high picks to run a motion offense? Would Russell Westbrook? Kevin Durant? James Harden? The best passing team in the NBA starts with the genuine unselfishness, commitment to team, and love for his teammates of its transcendent superstar.

Stephen Curry is the MVP. For Real.

So go ahead and chant. It’s OK. Really. I swear.


Klay Thompson: Western Conference Player of the Week. But not an AllStar?

He is playing beautifully within himself right now. Asserting his offense like a superstar should, but without a trace of selfishness.

There was a two possession defensive sequence at the end of the first half, where he was guarding Mario Chalmers, that I simply marveled at. I pride myself on my ability to evaluate NBA rookies after watching them play one game. Sometimes just one summer league game. But the growth in Klay’s defensive ability has surprised me more than I have ever been surprised in all my years of evaluating NBA players. It has nothing to do with athleticism.

It’s genius.

Born of desire.

Bogut: Was extremely useful against the monsters of Utah, but did the Warriors need him in this game? I’m a little surprised that Kerr didn’t rest him. And it looked to me like he was feeling his knee again by the end.

You don’t win titles in January.

I loved the rueful look on Spoelstra’s face as Bogut hit four straight free throws to foil the Hack-a-Bogut. The fact that Bogut hit them doesn’t mean it wasn’t the right play to hack a 35% free throw shooter in that spot. It was the right play, at exactly the right moment, down about 10 with time waning. Stop the clock, give up less than a point in equity, and try to respond with threes.

I’m actually shocked that Spoelstra is the first coach to crack it open this season. He won’t be the last. It will be interesting to see if Kerr sticks with his determination to finish games with Bogut when he starts missing.

Particularly in the playoffs, if he makes it that far.

Draymond: 1 rebound against the monsters of Utah. 3 in this game, if you count the one he got in garbage time.

Is starting power forward really his position?

Go back through the ten years of David Lee’s career and try to find a single game in which he got 1 rebound. One single game. In ten years. It’s happened to Draymond twice in the last month.

I’m just saying.

The Showcase: As was pointed out to me on twitter, it is Barnes’ minutes that have suffered the most since the return of David Lee. He’s no longer getting those stretch four minutes on the second unit.

And I have been proven wrong about Kerr wanting to stick with second unit Nellieball. It appears that he wants to play Speights and Lee together. At least for now.

David Lee: Is it his return that has transformed the second unit into a force? Or is it the benching of Shaun Livingston?

As predicted, Kerr is jamming him into the pinch-post of the Triangle with regularity. Lee will prove to be an excellent Triangle post-man, no doubt, but it is such a misreading and waste of his singular talent.

Has Kerr never seen video of David Lee in pick and roll with a spread floor?

Right now, Lee is locked in a triangular prison.

L’Affaire d’Iguodala: Could anything be clearer than that the benching of Livingston allowed Iggy to resume his natural role? Making plays with the ball in his hands, the de facto point guard of the second unit. 5 assists against Utah, 7 in this game.

Coaching, system, teammates, role. You cannot evaluate players without regard to those factors.

Iggy can still play, people. In the right system, with the right players, in the right role.

With the ball in his hands.

P.S. His defense on Deng was excellent. At this point in his career, he guards bigger better than smaller.

Justin Holiday: 5 steals in 17 minutes against the Jazz. He’s going to be a true stopper in the league. He’s getting right into people’s shirts.

Which is something that you literally never see Barnes do. Which should have Barnes fans concerned. This young man is going to wind up squeezing Barnes’ minutes too. Particularly when opposing teams play small backcourts that have traditionally been extremely difficult for the Warriors to guard.

On offense, he’s just silky smooth. In addition to the three point shooting, he’s got an in-between game. The ability to catch on the move at the free throw line, take one dribble and go up. Something else Barnes has never developed.

You can sense where I’m going. Holiday is a better NBA player than The Showcase.

Mokur: If you’re going to play Speights and Lee together on the second unit, then, Alvin Gentry, you must unleash MOKUR.

Lee pick and roll, with Speights spreading the floor behind the line.

Devastation to defenses.

Leandro Barbosa: His presence on the floor supercharges the second unit. Allows them to play at a much faster pace. Both on the break, and in the halfcourt.

His ability to penetrate, far and above his creative shotmaking, makes things happen for the Warriors. As does having five dangerous players on the floor.

If I’m Steve Kerr, I’m having a very tough time returning Shaun Livingston to the rotation. A very tough time.

And yet Kerr stated unequivocally post-game that Livingston will play against the Thunder.

I kind of understand…

He’s got an Owner/GM out $16 million breathing down his neck.

209 Responses to Quick Takes: Warriors 104 Heat 89

  1. Interesting observations. I like Livingston though for his size and ability to overpower opposing 2nd unit guards. He can live at the 10-foot baseline turnaround or at the elbow, though I agree LB brings crazy awesome pace. I think Kerr and his team are looking at the second team combinations and realizing they can simply overwhelm other teams with either a power half court 2nd unit (Livingston, Lee, Iggy, Mo, Holiday) or substitute LB for Shaun and let Iggy run it in a hyperspeed up-and-down vortex. Either way, it allows the first unit to rest more and sub in a starter here and there. This seems to be the pattern over the season – the Warriors will either, through the first and/or second team, simply devastate teams in the 2nd and 3rd quarter through their depth. Either their opponent’s first team gets exhausted, playing against too many fresh legs, or their second unit isn’t nearly as talented and gets demolished. And no matter the strategy employed by the opponent – run up and down or grind it down in a slow half court – GS can play both styles equally well. It’s a real joy to watch, both offensively, defensively, and the unselfishness.

    • “a hyperspeed up-and-down vortex”, great description. I think this is the Kerr/Gentry preference.

  2. Man this team is fun to watch. Early in the 1st, Bogut faked a dribble hand-off to Klay as he cut from the wing, only to rip a pass to Curry for a corner 3. A nice little wrinkle in one of their signature actions. Maybe they’ve run that before and I’ve missed it, caught me by surprise!

    I was wrong about Kerr, maybe I’m wrong about Tomsula? In any case, thank goodness for this year’s Warriors, I don’t know how I would be able to handle this year’s 9ers debacle without them.

  3. Fun, informative article. David Lee is the only Warrior with the requisite skills to run a triangle. I guess it’s OK, if Curry is not in the game.

    Too bad about Livingston, but the Clips could really use him at the Wing. Hey Joe, how about a trade for Cunningham?

    Mo looked really good on that 3 the other night Mr Gentry.

    I sure do hope the Warriors don’t lose Green and Holiday in the off season to higher bidders.

    • I’m fairly confident the Warriors will bite the bullet to match any offers to Green.

      Harder to say about Holiday, since his natural position* is SG, and the W’s already have Klay starting at that spot. How much will they commit to someone who would be their backup SG?

      This is especially problematic since I expect another team will be able to offer a starting SG role, and seek to pay him accordingly. And at 26 years old this summer, Holiday has a strong incentive to take as money as he can get right away.

      (*I know many here will argue that Holiday is/can be a SF, but that’s only because Barnes is starting at that position. Anti-Barnes sentiment is so deeply ingrained in this forum that people would argue anyone from Yao Ming to Muggsy Bogues is a natural SF if it meant exiling Barnes. In the real world, Holiday is a SG.)

      • I didn’t know he was 25. Is it set, then, he can’t play PG?

        • Yeah, it’s easy to overlook. But Jrue Holiday, who’s been in the league for six years? Justin is his older brother.

          I haven’t seen any indication that he could be a PG in the sense of running a team. But defending PGs while a point-forward like Iguodala runs the offense? Hmm….

          • The test, of course, is if he could do well enough if Steph goes down or takes a break.

            Incidentally, I read that Holiday was a Myers/Lacob Jr. project. They have a thing for brothers (Currys, Thompsons, Griffins).

          • My other thought is that Holiday may be valuable only with a team like the Warriors. On another team, he may not be able to open up and show his stuff. And maybe he will be overvalued, leave, and not perform.

        • warriorsablaze

          I think you’d find a number of players… Speights, Holiday, Barbosa –probably even Green to a degree– wouldn’t be showing quite as much as they are right now for the Warriors.

          As Felt always says, system matters… and it helps when you have the best player in the game and one of the best SGs drawing an absurd amount of defensive attention.

      • “…Anti-Barnes sentiment is so deeply ingrained in this forum…”

        Get off it, Swopa, that’s bull. Everyone here, including Feltbot, have noted Barnes’ improved results this year. You want to do Barnes a favor? He needs less bull, not more.

  4. cosmicballoon

    There is another way to look at Green as a starting 4.

    a) He should not play the entire game at the 4, especially against the brutes of the league (Reggie Evans, et al.) He can, and should guard the finesse 4s and any spread 4s. He will eat them alive. We saw his limitations against Bosh, who at 6’11”, is probably the best 4 in the league.

    b) On the other hand, the Warriors offense improves because Green forces the brutes of the league to guard him on the perimeter, which opens up anything/everything in the middle for Curry, Thompson and Bogut. (Green has had a diminished role since Bogut returned, which has been fine so far). Also, when he is guarded by a 4, he is able to bring the ball up the floor without any ball pressure. If he was guarded by a 3, he would likely be pressured.

    c) Green not rebounding doesn’t matter as long as Harrison Barnes (or other small forwards) are rebounding. That’s the beauty of having 4 guys on the floor who are 6’6″ and bigger at pretty much all times. He and Lee are completely different players and they should be sharing minutes at the 4.

    d) Green isn’t a max player yet. He is in a system that maximizes him, but he is still not a great scorer. (Barnes is shooting a better percentage from 3 and the field, which no one would have predicted last season.

    e) Green needs to play 4 in part because the Warriors have a TON of talent at the 2 and 3. If that ever changes, maybe a move to the 3 would be a good idea.

  5. I can’t remember if this has been done since the early weeks of the season or ever, but the rule of thumb has been always keep Klay or Steph on the floor throughout the game. But last night, first half, the unit of Lee, Iguodala, Flash, Speights (and later Bogut), and Holiday was +9, with 8 assists spread evenly among all the players. Take any opponent, with any lineup with Livingston, and I don’t think you’ll find comparable (except maybe when Curry is in to lead and score).

    With Bosh, Miami is essentially a small team, and I don’t think Bogut adds anything against such lineups but rather detracts. His -4, the only negative +/– for the team, is not a fluke. You don’t need a rim protector against Bosh, and on offense Bogut slows it down, especially when paired with youknowwho. The ball stays in his hands a long time when he passes, and there is no reason to guard him as he presents no offensive threat. His line was about the same as Speights’—5-6 boards, two assists each (go Mo!), no blocks. Mo got mo’ buckets, but Bogut beat him on the free throw line this time.

    I don’t think Speights’ +16, the highest on the team, is a fluke either. It’s not that he played a stellar game—he didn’t at all—but when he is on the floor the offense passes to the other players who can push the pace and find openings. And he presents enough of an offensive threat to draw offenders. I’d rather see Speights on the floor than Bogut in many situations, where he will be supported and play better.

    Or instead of either, put Green and Lee in and take advantage of their playmaking and scoring abilities. Bogut’s minutes cut down Green’s effectiveness by subtraction.

  6. We should all be so lucky as to live in David Lee’s “Triangular Prison”. His per 36 numbers since returning are 18.6 pts and 10.4 rebounds on 56% true shooting percentage. Last night he shot 60% and had 6 rbds and 5 assists with no turnovers. The biggest change? His defense is much improved. Still makes some bone-headed mistakes but a lot more positive plays defensively. A lot more.

    And I have no objective evidence for this thought: I feel like the team is holding some things back for when it is needed. Maybe they’ll spring a little more PnR at the right time.

    • Oh, and Lee only played 22 minutes.

    • I’ve also had that thought. Maybe it’s more important right now to learn the new aspects of the offense.

      And maybe I’m just hoping.

    • +1. Green better watch out, Lee is making a case for starting.

      • warriorsablaze

        Kinda thinking the opposite… last night’s bench dominance is making the case that Kerr suddenly has the most powerful bench in the league developing with Iggy, Lee, Speights, and now Holiday emerging. We’ll see if SL can find his place, but we’re starting to look scary in the second quarter…a time where double-digit leads used to be routinely lost.

      • warriorsablaze

        Not to mention, with Lee starting at the 4, Curry and Klay don’t get to the rim like they have all this season.

        It’s hard to say who’s better between Green and Lee when you add up all the intangibles, but to me it doesn’t matter because the starting line up is just working.

        • Agree, starting or not though Lee might deserve more minutes at PF. But, there is no denying that dubs should close with Green.

  7. felt,
    Loved the enthusiasm in your post, like to see more of that. On bogut’s FT%, he is shooting 50% for the season. I was thinking more he shoots, the more comfortable he gets and that will be huge plus come playoff time and this thought lost on MJ. But you are right, there was no need to play Bogut in this game. Rookie mistake by Kerr.

    You are spot on, on Holiday. But, the ditch on Barnes not needed. Against Jazz, he picked his spots nicely on offense having efficient night. His corner 3 is money. Green and Speights each had 1 rebound to show, pathetic for big guys in the same game. Holiday and Iguodala are better than Barnes in many aspects of the game like just being natural scorers out there plus their on ball D, but they don’t give warriors what Barnes give in terms of size at SF or his two way game as stretch 4. Holiday is more like a SG than SF, Iguodala can only play one position, that is SF. Barnes D against PFs seemed to have been improved this year. If Green is PF, can’t play Iguodala or Holiday at SF as they can’t rebound and also can’t switch on D to a PF like Barnes. Let us see how Barnes will come back next year, improved or not. For me, I would like to see a player perform two years in a row which would be an indicator for how long he will play in the league.

    Also, Livingston is a talented player, can’t leave him on bench forever. It is exactly kind of mistake warriors previous coaches had committed. We would need him for playoffs. It is on coaching staff to find him a role to put him there.

    • BTW, just checked and 82games confirms that Barnes is guarding PFs well this year, much better than last year.



      If I am reading those stats correctly.

      • Interesting. At first glance it looks as if Barnes is guarding 4s better this year, with an opponent eFG% of .479 v. .519 for last year.

        But the stats for this year show that ALL of Barnes’ minutes are at PF, with zero time at the 3. That is simply not the case. The majority of Barnes’ playing time comes when Green is playing the 4.

        So, realistically, we have to compare Barnes’ SF stats from last year against his (inappropriately listed) PF stats from this year: opponent eFG% of .484 v .479.

        Some slight improvement, perhaps, especially if you roll in the occasional time Barnes actually does play PF. But big improvement? Not provable from these figures.

        • That is true, stats are off. Thanks for pointing it out.

          It is easier to see Barnes improvement on offense than defense, though seems like he is doing better on D also and clearly rebounding better. Barnes is #1 among all SFs and #2 among all PFs in effective field goal percentages. That is damn good. Unless Kerr ever goes back to Lee at PF, Barnes will continue as a starter. Lee+Barnes will make a bad combo. Green+Barnes works and so would be Lee+Iguodala.

          In the same 82games though, it is proving my perception that Lee is bad at C but very good at PF this year on both ends of the floor. Reverse is true for Speights.

    • Bogut’s now at 60.9% FT on the season.

      By way of comparison, Rajon Rondo is at 31.4%. :-O

  8. I’m frustrated with the talk that the players Green, Klay, and Steph have “developed,” though obviously they have. Rather they have been turned loose—finally—in a system that exploits their talents. Kerr himself has said he’s lucky to have them.

    This is especially true in the case of Curry, whose numbers aren’t that much better than the previous years. I also tire of comparisons of Curry to other stars. Rather, it’s time to compare future stars to him.

    The most repeated comparison is with Nash, but I seriously doubt Nash would have done so well the last years with the Warriors in their system. Curry’s ability to excel in spite of circumstance is one of his talents. And Curry offers so much more in every aspect of the game, plus so many intangibles.

    Some of the media have expressed the desire Curry be more vocal in his team leadership. I don’t buy that at all. Curry is anything but reticent. He knows he is the center of the team and quietly lets the other players come to him, rewarding them with his support and confidence they will win. Let Green bark at the players. He’s good at this.

    His rise to fame, however, has been meteoric. He is easily one of the most engaging athletes we’ve seen in some time, and a counterpart to the gold chain laden. Get him in the playoffs, start a season with a phenomenal run, and he rose to the top almost instantly, like a cork held down in deep water, finally released.

    • Green is same as last year, he was this good last year too as evident from clipper series. IMO, Curry and Klay did improve aided by system. Curry’s ball handling skills, and finishing at the rim could be result of his off season work. Same with Klay, his drives are better and game has slowed down for him. He and Curry benefited from summer camp with team USA, no doubt.

    • “I’m frustrated with the talk that the players Green, Klay, and Steph have “developed,” though obviously they have.”


    • Nicely written.

  9. We live in odd times: http://streamable.com/d66

    (h/t gsom)

    • In a similar vein, early attempts at flight. What we’re seeing this season is the vindication of systems over received wisdom in the cases of Atlanta, the Warriors, and to a lesser extent Detroit, etc., though those latter teams should develop. Before, the main idea was put three stellar players on the floor and let one be the alpha dog (Lacob repeated this early, btw.) Someone with a good mind should have seen that all the decisions that went into building the Cavaliers were just wrong—wrong pieces, wrong system, wrong coach, wrong roster development.

  10. In case you weren’t real clear about how those Shaun Livingston post-ups were going, he is according to this the 4th worst in the league in isolation:


    This analysis of course says nothing about turnovers.

    • Livingston has done progressively better at the iso’s through the season, so the season-long average doesn’t tell us where he stands now.

      The bigger question is whether the Ws offense is a motion offense, or iso’s and post-ups. Ahem. Jermaine is gone this year, and we’re seeing almost zero post-ups even from Lee and Bogut.

  11. I agree 100% Steph is the MVP at this point. His skills, character, and leadership are off the charts. And Klay has become a man this year. Becoming a transcendent backcourt.

    Kerr and staff have done a great job letting the cream rise to the top almost on its own. The seem to have a very fluid and open- minded philosophy towards rotations and units as they grow to know themselves and the players. Iggys still got it on the defensive side of the court and can wreak some havoc and stifle people, especially when he squares up on 2nd teamers. As a back-up PG he is a bit TO prone, howver.

    If Live and/or Harrison were ever going to be moved, their (perceived) value couldn’t be higher than it is now. Just sayin’

    Agree that Bogut should be used sparingly. The next 2 games will most likely require his services a bit.

    Probably about time for GS lose a road game. They’ve only laid one bona fide egg so far(lakers), which is incredible with season almost 1/2 over. Can they really be a .861 team? The fact that it can be pondered over says mucho..

  12. Just a long-term thought:

    “[Holiday’s] natural position* is SG, and the W’s already have Klay starting at that spot. How much will they commit to someone who would be their backup SG? This is especially problematic since I expect another team will be able to offer a starting SG role, and seek to pay him accordingly.”

    The Celtics have basically nothing at the SG, PF, C, and SF positions. Danny Ainge has amassed boatloads of draft choices, high and low, over the next five season. He’s looking for guys who will be hitting their primes just when the high picks and trade exemptions kick in. I foresee an off-season trade sending Holiday and Barnes (or possibly Greene or Ezeli) for a bunch of those future assets, re-stocking what we hope will be a championship-level GSW team.

    • warriorsablaze

      If the Warriors are anywhere near a championship level team this off-season, there’s absolutely no way they are trading two starters for future draft picks.

  13. Added a coda to the Iggy section of my post.

  14. Bogut’s foul line shooting form isn’t bad. Is it too much to expect him to shoot better than 50%? It would be amazing if he played like he wasn’t afraid to get to the line.

    The team is rolling and is set to get even better… scary! Players individually are improving and the teamwork defensively and offensively is getting quicker. But, theres always an Achilles heel and teams that know how to exploit it.

    What is our Achilles heel, and which teams will test us this year? We seem to have the Curry blitzing under control for the moment, but…
    – Is our small ball enough for smaller and quicker teams? (Dallas/Phoenix)
    – Are we exploited by bigger postup/shooting 4’s (Durant/Aldridge),
    – Are we easily broken down by motion offense teams (Spurs/Hawks)
    As everybody knows, its all about the matchups when we get to the finals which is all we care about.

    • Memphis is the only team not solved by this year’s dubs, need to check. The tempo of last two games is similar to a Memphis game and warriors still scored well. Ofcourse is always there but I think we match up well with Spurs and warriors will win with home court advantage against Spurs.

  15. It occurred to me recently that the Warriors’ meteoric rise has been accomplished essentially without having any of its new additions playing an important role. Barbosa—and now Livingston—have been exchanging DNP’s. Ezili has been out for most of the season—and even when he’s been healthy, hardly played. And Brandon Rush…well…(Holiday does look promising but his emergence has been pretty recent).

    Moreover, David Lee’s missed many games—as has Bogut. And Iguodala—despite his very recent improvements—has played below expectations. And yet, they’re having a record breaking season so far. Clearly, improved play by Draymond, Steph, Klay, and Speights (also Barnes to a lesser extent)—along with a new coaching staff—are responsible for this. Truly an amazing transformation.

  16. Most extravagant flop of the season to date, perhaps even Record-Breaking in some way:


    A for Effort! E for basketball purity!

  17. Pensées


    Prolegomena to Any Future of the Season

    1. Nature abhors a vacuum. Also winning streaks. Remember the Oakland A’s winning streak, back in 2002? Boom, out in the first round. To Minnesota.

    2. Nature also abhors the NBA schedule.

    3. In order to win you have to learn how to lose.

    4. The Warriors are not the best team in the NBA because we do not know who the best team in the NBA is.

    5. The ideas of basketball strategists, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually slaves of some defunct strategy.

    6. The eternal noise of infinite hype frightens me.

    (with apologies to Pascal, Kant, Billy Beane, JMK, and probably Aesop and maybe Wittgenstein)

    • prolegomenon (ˌprəʊlɛˈɡɒmɪnən)
      n, pl -na (-nə)
      1. (Literary & Literary Critical Terms) (often plural) a preliminary discussion, esp a formal critical introduction to a lengthy text

      Oh boy.

      • Hat, I’ve had it with your trolling, and I’d take it as a curtesy if you just kept your distance. If you don’t like something, pass by, as I and others are doing with other commenters (and I made a mistake with Longtimer, for which I apologize), as I am trying to do with you.

        I do not intend to change what I say or how I say to suit your or anyone else’s whims. I do invite serious criticism, however, from anyone so disposed. I’m trying to figure things out. Arguments need serious counterarguments. It’s what makes this blog thrive.

        • @ rgg: Apology accepted. Thank you for steering clear.

          @ Hat: Please follow rgg’s lead and do not respond to my postings. Thank you in advance.

          • And I repeat the apology. This is a competitive blog, and the goal for all of us is to get better, not take pot shots at each other. We do it by trying things out and debating and seeing what comes out of that. We all get better that way. I’m sure I’ll find good reasons to return to your comments.

            I regret this, however. Smack talk is an art which I appreciate. But you have to be good at it.

        • I also greatly appreciate the range of knowledge and experience many bring to the blog, in and outside of basketball. It’s what brought me here, with Feltbot in the lead. I hate to see someone try to squelch that.

          • Agreed, you took a couple of shots, I responded–and then suggested we cease and desist because I knew it would quickly become an awful bore–not least for the other posters.

            I will use my will and assume you were not trying to get yet another dig in and let you be on your merry way….

          • Not at all, not a dig at you (and am not sure how you construed it as such).

            One thing we all have to remember is that our audience is broad. Often we respond to things we hear elsewhere, and aren’t taking on individual posters here.

        • “I’d take it as a courtesy, etc.”

          Not a chance, rgg. You apparently haven’t noticed, but The Hat is not your only critic here, only, recently, the most persistent. Stick to basketball, contribute to our mutual enlightenment and enjoyment, and try not to repeat your concerns so excessively. We’ll all thank you for it.

          Believe it or not, I often enjoy your insights and your writing. When you offer insights. When you write. Typing is not writing.

          LT, you starting participating on this blog by attacking the blogger with some epic-length posts. Felt was gracious enough not to respond in kind. The Hat is not that gracious, but he has never flamed you either. His comments were limited to corrections of fact, perhaps aggressively worded but still nothing personal. So, again, there’s not a chance in hell that The Hat will promise to refrain from commenting on your posts.

          Don’t want to hear from The Hat, LT?
          a) Don’t make shit up, and
          b) contribute to the discussion of basketball here.

          Thank you both for reading.

          • I’ll take that for an invitation, Hat.

            You are an old fool and a coward. If there’s anything I’ve learned about fools and cowards, it is that there is no way to convince them they are fools and cowards and no hope they’ll ever realize they are fools and cowards themselves.

            And yet you speak, like Lacob, from a position of entitlement. It’s probably why you suck up to him. It must be why you think you have the privilege of telling people what they can say and what they cannot. Everyone who feels entitled is a fool and a coward.

            Btw, I have known people, one intimately, very high up, in the world of finance and industry and have had intelligent conversations with them. No one speaks the sentimental and superficial tripe you spout.

            This is not your blog. This is not a popularity contest. This is not a sandbox.

            Unless, of course, Feltbot decides that’s what he wants.

            You are a coward because you hide behind your childish guise and take pot shots at anything you find distasteful, yet when challenged are evasive and incoherent and puerile. For the life of me, I haven’t seen anything intelligent in any of your comments, nor is it ever apparent you even understand anything you read and attempt to critique, but that’s your business. I just stopped reading them and have left you alone. Feltbot has been critical of the FO as well, and you were shot down on your criticism. It’s probably why you try to find someone down here to attack.

            You want to bring people to your level and dumb us all down. But rest assured, you and your ilk have inherited the earth. And you are fouling it.

            Keep your hands to yourself and stay away, you old fool.

            QUIT TROLLING.

          • I guess you missed this part:

            “Believe it or not, I often enjoy your insights and your writing. When you offer insights. When you write. Typing is not writing.”

            An emotional snit, name-calling, speculations about my personality and character? Wow, rgg, you need to disengage a little here, for your own sake. After all, you’re just another anonymouse like me, remember?

            Readers of your work have opinions about it. That’s the reality of it. Accepting reality will help you develop emotional maturity. Go for it.

          • You never make an insightful comment about anything. You just condemn and censure.


            And this will be my refrain.

          • Oh joy. More name-calling, more childishness.

            Your refrain? If only it were so. Then we could all get on with a discussion of basketball rather than rgg’s neurosis.

    • “1. Nature abhors a vacuum. Also winning streaks. Remember the Oakland A’s winning streak, back in 2002? Boom, out in the first round. To Minnesota.”

      Bad comparsion, anyway you put it as, it is negative comment on warriors accomplishments, IMO.

      • Not in the least, Harry.

        • rgg, winning championship is the best case scenario and what you explained is worst case scenario.

        • Teams have coasted into playoffs and failed. They have to be tested and hardened over the course of the season, and need to make adjustments. Kerr, after all his years, I’m sure knows this and is making preparations. I wonder now if he wants to go 2 for 2 this weekend.

          And the team will be tested. I’m just preparing myself. It has been an unreal season. The Warriors are playing well, very well, but they have had so many breaks and have faced many easy opponents. This will change too.

          • “but they have had so many breaks and have faced many easy opponents”

            Right there, you are undermining warriors wins. Team played almost half season which means warriors played all kinds of teams , hot or cold, full strength or half strength, and won most of them. You have a point if warriors have a so-so record,

            What holds in future for the team as worst case scenario shouldn’t be the basis to undermine what has been accomplished so far. Warriors are a seasoned team, played three tough playoff series with the same personnel. With the exception of Holiday, everyone one rotation is tested in playoffs, Now, warriors can get a team that they don’t match up well, may be Memphis is that team, but that is the case for every one. Memphis won series against Spurs, OKC and Clippers when they were least favored in all those series.

            By all means, warriors are the best team in the league as evident with +11 pts differential.

          • rgg, BTW, for me it looks like you are having hard time coming into terms with warriors success. Try to enjoy the season, this kind of season doesn’t come that often for warrior fans.

          • Not in the least again. I say they have had a lot of breaks and easy wins because they have. That doesn’t undermine anything. What it means is that we have yet to find out exactly how good they are. We will, and I am optimistic.

            I don’t know anyone who is good at anything who isn’t self-critical and critical of what he does. This isn’t negativity, but fuel for improvement. And I strongly suspect this is what Ker and staff are doing. I doubt they are giving each other Chris Christie hugs.

          • One last point on breaks. By this time, every team in the league got some breaks but warriors were without Lee and Bogut for long time too. If you say we played 1 game with OKC without Durant, I would say most in the league played against OKC without Durant. The bottom line, warriors are the best team in the league this year. Can this change, sure. Probability, low.

          • No, you’re right. I knew they could win without Bogut. They did it two seasons ago. I never thought they could win without Lee, much less without Lee and Bogut. Most, I’m incredulous. Kinda hard to believe.

            Our sense of reality has been stretched this season. Good teams have collapsed, others are scratching. The Warriors, however, have been winning with relative ease. Takes getting used to.

            But I think that is what is going to make this an engaging season, seeing how Kerr adjusts in the months to come and what he brings to the playoffs.

          • “I knew they could win without Bogut. They did it two seasons ago. I never thought they could win without Lee, much less without Lee and Bogut. Most, I’m incredulous. Kinda hard to believe.”

            Didn’t get what you are saying. Two years ago, Warriors won playoff series and competed against Spurs without Lee but with Bogut. They could have also won with Green+Lee as PF/C tandem had MJ started series with them as starters. May be you are saying same thing as me, pardon me if it is.

  18. From CSN: Bogut, Iguodala, and still Ezeli out tonight against OKC.


    • You have to wonder if Kerr is shooting for 1-2 this weekend. But OKC might be the best bet for a win, the way they’ve been playing. Bogut, however, doesn’t add much against OKC, except maybe to muscle up against Adams and Perkins, neither scorers. Iguoldala, however, will be needed.

      Then again, maybe he’s loading up for what will be the more serious contest, Houston, on Saturday.

      The joys of having a lead in the standings.

  19. As usual, I appreciate the new musings by Felt.

    Glad to see that L’Affaire d’Iguodala (I like that) has made a turn for the better of late. I would caution that it’s only been a few games so far. Moreover, it’s not like he’s really tearing it up. His contributions still have been sub-par for the $48 Million Dollar Man (and 4 pick giveaway) even over these last few games. And remember that he’s mostly playing against inferior teams’ inferior second units—all while playing on a superior one. Easy to look good…

    Livingston and he are an awkward fit for sure. We’ll see what happens with Livingston but I wonder what the 2 game DNP’s signify. A small undisclosed injury? Some form of disciplinary treatment? Wanting to explore different 2nd team combinations? Setting up a trade (i.e. “showcasing” Barbosa)? Or precisely for the reasons Kerr gave—nothing more and nothing less. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.

  20. Despite the silly title, an unusually well-researched article from Bleacher Report:


    “Only one player in NBA history has averaged at least 23 points, four rebounds, eight assists and two steals per game for an entire season. Curry is on pace to become the second.

    His company will be Michael Jordan.”

  21. Both Bogut and Iggy are “resting” tonight. Thoughts:

    1) Will Bogut rest again tomorrow?
    2) How dumb was it to play him against the Heat? My eyes didn’t deceive me.
    3) Now we know why Kerr was so certain SL would play tonight.
    4) This probably means Iggy’s knee tendonitis is acting up, which explains a lot about his play and Kerr’s choices this season.

    • “4) This probably means Iggy’s knee tendonitis is acting up, which explains a lot about his play and Kerr’s choices this season.”

      I’m going to give Kerr the benefit of the doubt here. 4 games in 5 nights is tough for any player, let alone a 30-year old with a history (at least recent one) of knee issues. Kerr just might be playing it safe.

      If Iggy’s knee were acting up, would one additional night off really make that much a difference? They’d probably keep him out for 2 weeks in that case.

    • coming off a respiratory infection, bogut playing vs. UT at altitude, a very weak opponent, was a sensible game to skip if they wanted him to split the back to back games. resting iguodala will both preserve him and clear minutes to give livingston extended play, and an opportunity to apply whatever he’s learned from watching. main question for me, will he be as effective pushing the tempo on offense as the iguodala/holiday/barbosa trio.

      • Kerr is comparing and contrasting Livingston and Igudala and Livingston might be moved. I also think Iguodala knees need more rest. He said himself he is not pulling out all his tools.

    • Bogut is resting before getting extra minutes tomorrow. Mo on Dwight for any length of time is not a recipe for winning.

  22. Feltbot (or anyone):

    Did you watch OKC/Houston last night, and if so, any thoughts for the weekend? I just caught the box score.

    • I have been fascinated by the Josh Smith move, which defied all conventional wisdom. And I think there are signs that the Rockets may have found something.

      He’s been moved to the second unit, where he can get the usage he craves, and also play some small-ball five.

      They’ve started playing him in pick and roll, which works well as he’s very mobile, and a very good finisher and passer. And it has the secondary effect of getting him work closer to the basket without destroying the spacing.

      He got 7 boards in 19 minutes last night, and while he’s lost some jump, he’s still a decent rim protector.

      Durant payed him a compliment last night, calling him an extremely smart player.

      Coaching, system, teammates, role.

      • Hmm. Why do I think you’re inviting a comparison with Smith’s play?

        Am also curious about your take on Houston’s 3’s. Obviously they are launching them. Just as obviously they hit early, got in a rhythm, and put OKC in a hole. And OKC couldn’t hit theirs, but they were playing catchup. I think that’s the point—there has to be a strategy to heaving them up.

        Do hope to hear from you this weekend, above or below.

      • Cool. Smith didn’t fit the existing system, so McHale changed the system to best capitalize on what Smith could contribute.

        McHale isn’t always quick to respond to game conditions, but overall he’s been pretty creative about scrabbling together winning 5-man lineups. As a result, the Rockets might be the Ws most scary opponent this season.

        Yeah, I know, most people think Memphis is scariest, but they’re kinda predictable, ya know? In basketball, unpredictability is a win factor.

        • Josh Smith is talented player, think made all defensive teams plus does average high number of assists, a sign that he can create for himself and others. The shot selection though is horrible, he shouldn’t shoot at all, kind of take Iguodala’s stance on shooting, don’t shoot. Think Josh Smith will hurt more than help in long term.

  23. Lt: Welcome. Fresh voice and terrific
    writing in accurately questioning some
    of Felty’s pronouncements and his trying
    to run away from words whose meaning
    are clear on their face.

    Do agree with you that Feltbot is to be
    applauded for never launching
    personal attacks on those who
    question his views.

    Kind of interesting that Nellie is for
    playing Bogut over Lee and Speights
    at center and Felty is committed to
    defining Nellieball differently than
    Nellie himself. From now on, for
    accuracy, Nellieball should be referred
    to as Feltyball so as to not bastardize
    Nellie’s own views.

    Curry is the Warriors and the Warriors
    would be an average team without him.
    Yes, is the NBA’s MVP.

    Thompson has shown improvement this year
    In virtually every statistical category except his
    turnover rate has increased playing fewer
    minutes. Still disappointed that he does
    not to get to foul-line more and more and does
    give the Warriors extra possessions.

    Glad Kerr is coaching the team and playing
    Speights with Lee and not following
    Felty’s advice. Also, like that Bogul starting
    Being on court in crunch time.
    in crunch time.

    Holiday a revelation as a SG. No reason
    to compare Holiday to Barnes as they
    play different positions.

  24. @17: Regarding the subject of trolling, as a once and future troller myself, I wouldn’t dream of discouraging it. Players, coaches, front offices and owners are all in the arena. They are fair game for judgement and abuse of all kinds. I have made it a point of this blog to put other journalists and bloggers into that very same arena. Why should they be spared the ridicule that they themselves so frequently heap on those they cover? That makes no sense to me, and is a major reason why I started this blog. The journalistic conventions of brotherhood are an annoyance to me. I see them as an inducement to mediocrity. And also, as in the case of Tim Kawakami, an inducement to corruption. That’s why I make it a point to blow those conventions to bits in my own writing.

    Are posters to be spared the rigors and terrors of the arena? I think not. While we do aim high, our genre is not that of the Philosophical and Literary Society.

    I do, however, have my own personal scorecard. Points are awarded for wit, brevity and astute basketball insight. Points are subtracted for repetitiveness, tedium, and low basketball to insult ratio.

    • Gloves off, then. I must confess I enjoy it.

      • “Gloves off?” rgg, you’re out of gloves. You might as well do without.

          • OK, fine, perhaps that explains your obsessive-compulsive need to flood this site with wordswordswords which fail to adequately assess/appreciate the history-making success of your team. Thanks, I guess.

            Now snap out of it.

          • Seriously, Hat. Do you not realize what an idiot you are? It’s not clear you understand anything. As for words, do you seriously get paid for this?

            And I’ll give this a rest for now.

          • “I’ll give this a rest…”

            Gosh, rgg, you repeatedly promisepromisepromise, then fail.

            Seriously, I couldn’t possibly care one way or another about you as a person, rgg. I don’t know you. We’re all just anonymice here.

            I like reading meaningful discussions of basketball on this site. Sometimes your anonymous online persona delivers meaningful, worthwhile discussions of bball topics. That’s GREAT! I personally admire and appreciate your astounding literacy, and I love your creatively artistic side-tracks.

            But too often you don’t go there. We’re not here at this site to discuss your “personal concerns,” pal.

            This year’s Warriors are embarking on new territory, COMPLETE DOMINANCE of a league that changes its game rules every year for the express purpose of preventing a single team from dominating.

            You are witnessing NBA history in the making, my friend. “What happens when the team hits the salary cap, etc., 5-years-down-the-road, blahblah” is so irrelevant you might as well be talking about the snail darter or global warming or something.

            Next year the NBA rules will be different. And the next year after that they’ll be different again. This year, Kerr (and yes, Lacob and his FO) have positioned the Warriors to COMPLETELY KICK ASS IN ALL WAYS.

            Got a problem with that? Whatever for?

          • Sucking up and making stuff up again, Hat. Give it a rest.

            Also a really boring comment.

          • I was hoping for at least your usual fallback, a literary reference, but I’ll handle my disappointment. Quite easily, in fact.

    • Bless you, Feltbot. May you live forever and foster a cult in your honor.

      Or whatever.

    • +1

      And can you please at least consider referring to “Nellieball” (sic) as “Feltyball?” One of the main reasons I’ve been reading you is because of your unrelenting application of your basketball philosophy (if at times loosely defined) to the goings on in the NBA–and especially the Warriors. While Nellie openly disavows what I’ve gathered to be your understanding of “Nellieball,” it doesn’t mean that you haven’t gleaned some important insights. You have, so keep it up.
      But please own the damn thing; it’s nothing to be ashamed of at all. Quite the contrary, in fact.

      Call it what you want, but my vote is for “Feltyball!”

  25. Tonight is a puzzle without Iguodala. I assume Kerr will start Speights again, but Adams neutralized him last game. I’m thinking Lee might be more useful starting for a variety of reasons, and maybe Speights will get open with the second unit, who will need the scorer. He won’t be able to pair Speights and Lee, who aren’t played to advantage together. But then who is going to run the offense for the subs, who will need Lee’s playmaking abilities? And he’s not going to put Curry into heavy service on a back to back.

    Is Kuzmic back? (ugh)

    • Livingston plus Holiday will take Iguodala’s role, expect Klay to play with subs too. PF/C,I think would be, Green+Speights followed by Green+Lee and Barnes+speights. May also see Barnes+Green some time. Many ways to go.

      • A prediction in two parts:

        – Green will deliver or Kerr will bench him for the long-term good of the team, and Green himself.
        – If Green delivers, the Ws win. Otherwise not.

        • Do you mean if Greenaked 3s because that is only part he is inconsistent with. Don’t see warriors lose this game, Speights and Holiday may be due for big games and Curry will have big game too.

          • **Do you mean if Green makes 3s or not because that is only part he is inconsistent with.

          • In the last game Kerr yanked Green for yakking at the refs instead of focusing on his play. Izzo (Green’s college coach and biggest fan) tweeted Green to chide him for only 3 rebounds.

            Green at his absolute best is a big-time all-NBA difference-maker. At anything less than his over-achieving best, he is a too short, too slow tweener who doesn’t fit anywhere on an NBA court. Slight difference in performance, big difference in results.

            Green continues to over-achieve, the Ws win. He doesn’t, the team loses.

    • No need to match up Perkins. Last time, they did go small for about 6 minutes first half—Green, Barnes, Holiday, Iguodala, and Livingston. Lee joined them second half, and was interspersed throughout.


      But they had Iguodala. Barnes and Livingston will be in the spotlight tonight. Anyway to squeeze Barbosa in there? I just can’t see the assists.

      • That worked because Green made 3 if I recall correctly.

      • Plus they can’t run the starters hard if they want a shot tomorrow. I can’t figure this out.

        • making it simple — will the primitive OK offense force kerr into playing his impact scorers Demigod curry and thompson long minutes. if OK fails, kerr won’t. lee and holiday can provide adequate relief for speights, green, barnes.

  26. Hat called it, green didn’t overachieve.

  27. Not disappointing. You knew Westbrook and Durant would bounce back, and Ibaka came alive. I didn’t think they’d get back in the game as much as they did.

    But (thinking ahead)—

    They need Iguodala’s defense. There is no question. The perimeter was porous all night. And when one link weakens—you know the saying.

    I was hoping Holiday would open up. They need an extra shooter.

    Playing Lee low post makes no sense, especially against the likes of Ibaka and Adams. He needs an open court to work—the announcers said it on one of his successful drives. And I had an epiphany, Feltbot, when he had the ball up top and there was a pause and open space and quiet—what if he could hit the 3? Possibilities were illumined. But he still looks tentative shooting. He missed his free throws. There was a moment second half when he passed up an open shot only to travel, and the ESPN showed a shot of the bench, where Mo made an upward hand gesture that said “shoot.” His defense, btw, was quite good.

    Like I suspect 99 44/100% of Warrior fans, I still take a deep breath when Mo shoots. But the pressure was on and he hit. Plus some drives. Without scoring from the front court, I don’t have great hopes. And 4—count them—4 assists. He’s catching on. Boards, and his defense wasn’t terrible. When Westbrook or Durant break the perimeter, there’s not much he can do.

    Barnes did knock down his 3s with a coolness that is impressive.

    Thompson’s inside play continues to amaze.

    I’ll leave the more disparaging remarks to someone else, if so inclined.

    If I were in OKC and commenting on a Thunder blog, I think I would fill up pages about Roberson.

    • And I see Leonard is back with the Spurs. Big win over Portland. Gentlemen, the season is not over.

    • I’m still not sure what Kerr was trying to do tonight with the rests for B & I, unless he was giving role players a chance to step up against stiff competition.

      • 4 games in 5 days for Bogut and Iguodala would be tough. Wise decision to make it 3 games in 5 days. Plus we needed to see how other players will do too.

    • “What if he could hit the 3?”

      You do realize that even Bogut has a better career 3pt% than DLee, right? Yes, SSS and all that but Lee absolutely does not have 3pt range; Mo has significantly better perimeter shooting than Lee. Not an option.

      Warriors were lukewarm, Westbrook and Durant were red-hot. Move on, have a Plan B ready for Westbrook next time they meet.

  28. Feltyball was played tonight with
    Speights, Lee, and Green, sharing
    the center position. And against a
    good team the result was predictable-
    a loss. We missed both Bogut and

    And Felty once again hides what shell
    the pea is under when he says that
    Livingston is one of the worse in NBA
    on isolation, thus denigrating his
    enormous talents rather than say
    he’s shooting 51 percent from field.

    Warriors need one or two more bigs.

  29. Is it OK to talk about the Hawks yet?

    • 2nd best team. Can see nba becoming like NFL where small market teams has a chance.

      • if you are categorizing northern calif or metro Atl — a major media centre for the n.b.a. — as small markets, your information is rather out of date. Atl is changing ownership because the incumbents were woefully ill-equipped/ill-disposed to capitalize on that market’s potential.

    • Yeah, Felt.

      You called it. The Hawks are the best team in the Eastern Conference. Odds are they’ll be in the finals.

  30. I find it extremely ironic that the Warriors were ripped apart by Westbrook-Ibaka pick and roll in the fourth quarter.

    • Speights just didn’t have the footspeed and smarts against Ibaka. DLee would have been a much better counter but I wonder why he was held out.

      I also wonder if theres was an underlying reason to holding Iguodala out of this game as opposed to tomorrows where he’d be matched up against Ariza/Brewer and not Durant.

      • to quote directly from a highly regarded blogger, “the Ws know they can beat the Thunder, so nothing to prove (sic)”

  31. Waiting for Bogot

    I checked the box scores of the games last season, and Bogut was not especially effective in shutting down the OKC scorers or grabbing boards. Rim protectors are overrated (MJax) against teams like OKC and the Spurs, when full strength. The reasons are not hard to find. When you have athletic teams with dominant scorers like Westbrook and Durant, who can score inside and out, and either often at will, along with significant two-way players like Ibaka or Leonard, plus some help on the wings, you need a broad athletic team yourself to match up all over the court. You have to contain as best you can on the perimeter and have mobile help inside. What you can’t do is funnel the scorers to the centers and expect them to provide the last line of defense. The OKC scorers are too quick and attack from too many angles and score from too many places. They need Iguodala, and the major defensive question mark last season was that Green got limited minutes over youknowwho.

    I’ve forgotten how Jackson the Uninspired coached them, but they were high scoring affairs, very close, largely because he got scoring from the guards and I assume they ran. Jackson did coach many good games. This is my other question. They aren’t going to get effective low post play, not with Ibaka and Adams. They will need scorers from the front court, however, and I doubt will be able to count on Speights’ midrange. Lee, of course, is the best candidate, but, again, he needs an open court and needs to pop a midrange to keep his defender guessing.

    This was a test game, and adjustments will need to be made.

    Keep the pen in acid, Feltbot, though you don’t need to be told that. Most of what we hear from the media needs to be etched. Most literary types I know, btw, are much more petty and vicious. This place is civil by comparison.

    • concur, the absence of iguodala affected the defense more than bogut’s. certain combinations have established a cohesiveness, and one among the minus-bogut combos is iguodala-green-lee. kerr also declined to try mixing a reserve into the primary defensive assignments, like sticking holiday onto westbrook for solid minutes. a passive defender like lacob’s Wunderkind barnes won’t help much against OK, and putting green on durant meant minimizing d’mond’s ability to help elsewhere.

  32. Farmar has been bought out. . . .

    • Unfuckingbelievable. I know Steve Ballmer. In the early days of the PC I negotiated with (against) him. He used to be one of the baddest MFs on the planet. Now he’s such a sweetheart he’ll let Doc Rivers replace a productive player with his own marginally effective son.

      Times changes all, I guess.

      • You’d think the man who kept religion out of the locker room would also have kept nepotism out. This cannot work. I also suspect that the dancing fool is not happy with his 6th place team, and he may be behaving differently off camera. This should be entertaining.

        But I assume Farmar will be cheap now, and the Warriors have a roster spot open. I don’t know what to make of Farmar because 1. he has been injured and 2. he has played for the Lakers and Clippers, behind other guards. But he looked good under D’Antoni, the few times I saw him.

        Am impressed with this Ballmer contact, btw.

        • rgg, setting aside our personal flame war for the moment, the “Ballmer incident” was one of the more… publicly interesting… professional events of my life, but not one that I value highly.

          I worked for ITT at the time. Business conditions dictated that I break our MS app contracts while maintaining an MS-DOS contractual relationship. In our negotiations, Ballmer was foul-mouthed, verbally abusive and even physically threatening. (Ballmer is huge and scary!)

          After giving him time to quit “acting out” I invited him to sue ITT (generally not a good plan), then negotiated a deal favorable to both sides. I understand that afterwards Ballmer bragged for years about how he outfoxed ITT. Good. ITT got what it needed too. A win for both sides. But for me, not such a great experience.

        • as an n.b.a. 2-guard, the younger rivers has not established his shooting proficiency, and he didn’t stick around at his elite college program to develop his skills. wondering if his entry into the draft was with his father’s full blessing or recommendation. the elder rivers needs wing defense for his bench, and if the younger sticks around and responds, it’s a plus for the team.

  33. Feltbot:

    I really value your stepping down from the pulpit and mingling with the flock. (How many problems are there with this comparison?) I’ll speak only for myself, but if I ever say anything off or wrong, I do invite your attack. It’s the only way I’ll learn.

    “Gutei raised his finger whenever he was asked a question about Zen. A boy attendant began to imitate him in this way. When anyone asked the boy what his master had preached about, the boy would raise his finger.
    Gutei heard about the boy’s mischief. He seized him and cut off his finger. The boy cried and ran away. Gutei called and stopped him. When the boy turned his head to Gutei, Gutei raised up his own finger. In that instant the boy was enlightened.”

    My problem is I’ve run out of fingers.

    • This was one of my favorite stories for a time. And the suggestion to “be one with everything” had a strong influence on my thinking. A more humorous construal, apt for writers, might be “less is more.”

      • Depends if you are the student or the master. It also reinforces my suspicion that there is a sadistic element in all religions.

        More is more, too. I wish analyses were pushed further here and elsewhere. My means are limited.

        • More blather from the blather-master: “It’s the only way I’ll learn,” “I wish analyses were pushed further here and elsewhere,” “My means are limited.”

          rgg, please, if you don’t have any insights to contribute just shut up and read/learn. You can do that, really you can.

          • No way, propellor top. All my comments are insightful. You just don’t get them.

            And I’m not given much to read down here, except when moto and Feltbot make appearances.

            Give that thing a twirl.

          • Shucks, rgg, even The Hat wouldn’t claim that all his comments were insightful. We’re not your students/sycophants here, ya know?

  34. More fun with numbers:

    Last season the top three teams in the West finished at around 70% or about 60 wins. I’m thinking that number will be high this season but use it for reference. In order for OKC to make the top three this season, they will have to win 88% of their remaining games. San Antonio will have to win 78%. Highly unlikely, in fact almost impossible. They’ll probably finish from 4th on down. (I’m working under the assumption they come back to form and finish strong. I’m also assuming I did my math right, not always a certainty.)

    Moral: The first round matchups this season will be hairy.

  35. A quick note about this Feltbotian claim above:

    “Draymond: 1 rebound against the monsters of Utah. 3 in this game, if you count the one he got in garbage time.

    Is starting power forward really his position? Go back through the ten years of David Lee’s career and try to find a single game in which he got 1 rebound. One single game. In ten years. It’s happened to Draymond twice in the last month.

    I’m just saying.”

    It seems that Felt’s launching yet *another* “Move Draymond to the 3” campaign by making a very unfavorable comparison to his beloved DLee—with poor Draymond on the losing end. I thought Felt had capitulated and walked back this insane idea in his last blog. First, it was Draymond not being able to handle opposing 4’s down low in one game—unlike Lee who, according to Felt, has never, ever once had as many problems in this regard. Now, apparently, Dray’s a weakling on the boards compared to Lee. I’m glad to see that Felt’s *doubled* his sample size (from 1 game to 2) to make this most recent “point.”

    Now, as we all know, there’s a large number of analysts who contend that DLee’s rebounding numbers are inflated due to the fact that he gets lots of “garbage” rebounds (i.e. non-contested ones) because he’s focusing on that rather than defense. The numbers over his career certainly seem to justify this claim as he has had a relatively low percentage of contested rebound (unlike Draymond).

    Let’s also be clear on the following point folks: Draymond has mostly been playing against first team monsters—and usually with Bogut by his side, who’s more responsible for rebounding. In addition, Draymond—because he’s so capable of guarding multiple positions—finds himself much further from the basket than Lee, who is utterly incapable of this. Lee’s also playing at the 4 or 5 (hence the principle rebounder) and against far weaker and less able *second teamers.* So, with this in mind—and given Felt’s hyperventilating claim above—one would expect a massive differential in Lee’s favor. Let’s look at the numbers from a much larger sample size (i.e. the whole season thus far):
    Per 36 minutes: Draymond: 9.0 rpg DLee: 10.6 rpg.
    Draymond also has more blocked shots per minute than the “man-beast” Lee.

    C’mon Felt, this is very lame “reasoning.” You are MUCH better than this!

    Along this note, I’m quite certain that not one GM in the entire league (not one!) who would prefer having David Lee starting at the 4 over Draymond—even at the same salary. Not a single one.

    I’m just saying….

    • LT, I know you’re digging for a response from FB, but here’s the deal:

      Lee is fully equipped to deal with bigs, and has done so very successfully in the NBA for 10 years or so. Draymond is 220-230 pounds of hyperactive over-achievement.

      I’m a big fan of Draymond. He’s awesome. But he’s not big. So it is reasonable for someone to wonder how long he can play, quite literally, over his head. The last few games have only emphasized the point: Draymond is a great player, but not large. Without question, DLee is often going to be more successful in the paint.

  36. rgg @31,

    You are looking at the wrong stat to understand Bogut’s influence (or rather, the non-Bogut non-influence) on last night’s game. It is in the rebounding disparity, particularly the guard rebounding, and Westbrook’s rebounding most of all. Bogut’s presence deters Westbrook and everybody else from getting all the way to the rim. Westbrook’s midrange game allows him to get his points but the 15 footer Bogut allows keeps the best rebounder in the NBA under 6’5″ away from prime rebounding position and dump-off position.

    The 18th ranked rebounding team outrebounded the Dubs by 10 and the big guys didn’t do that badly on the boards. OKC, the 16th ranked points in the paint team at 42, scored 58. It is difficult to get game by game points in the paint historically but I could swear that no team has scored 50 pitp in a game Bogut played this year.

    I find his influence on the game to be pretty obvious and clearly valuable.

  37. Rgg and Hat: Please back off.

  38. Against my better judgment I will respond to your somewhat civil response. I am not “digging” for a response from Felt in particular; I AM digging for a point-by-point refutation (or agreement) with each of the several points I actually made. If no one disagrees, then I’ll assume that there’s a general agreement with what I’ve written. For some reason you chose to discuss something I did not mention (because of what I thought were obvious reasons [see below]): i.e. the supposed massive physical advantages Lee has over the “smaller” and more “feeble” Draymond. So, I’ll respond to that here.
    Lee is only 1.5” taller than Draymond but Draymond’s wingspan is 1.25” longer. Draymond is also just as heavy and, presumably, stronger. He also has far superior defensive instincts than Lee. But perhaps most critical, Dray is also much younger and more energetic than Lee. In fact, Felt himself has pointed out that Lee has had multiple injuries over the last two seasons—all related, and serious enough to put his career as an effective player in deep jeopardy (see his previous blog). The young Draymond, by contrast, is virtually indestructible (another poster joked that his bobblehead should be made of titanium) and has not missed a game due to injury in his entire career. And yet he is incapable of playing the 4 due to supposed physical insufficiencies while the aging and highly injury prone Lee can handle the 4 and 5 better?!?!

    I really wonder if I’m going nuts thinking that anyone has trouble understanding all this. Truly bizarre indeed.

    • Lee is listed at 245. Green is listed at 230. No one is indestructible, especially against opponents who outweigh them by as much as 20-30%. But it’s easier on anyone who matches up size-wise, of course.

      Lee is a 9-year vet and multiple All-Star. Green is in his 3rd year, and not projected to ever be an All-Star.

      Lee is a master of the painted area. Green is a jack-of-all, playing all over the floor. In other words, Lee is a talented specialist, Green a talented generalist.

      The decision to play those two is not either/or. The Ws best lineup last year had Lee at C and Green at the 4.

      While Green is an excellent ball player, Lee is a big asset that has been mostly injured and/or under-utilized this season.

      To “play big” without Bogut or Ezeli, Kerr could play Lee+Speights+Green. It’s a lineup we haven’t seen much, including last night (0 minutes with all 3 together).

      Perhaps with Bogut and Ezeli (and even Kuzmic?) available, we’ll see those 3 play together some. That wasn’t an option last night, but it’s easy to see it happening before the end of the season.

      Green at the “3” could actually become necessary. If the Ws had enough real bigs to cover the paint, it might become the only place to play Green, to get him enough minutes.

      • Hat, agree on Green’s limitation as 4. That said Green has limitations on 3 too. He struggled to guard Durant yesterday even if for few positions plus he is not a natural scorer and guarded by 3, he won’t be left open on 3 like he is right now.

  39. Apologies. the last post was @Hat re. #35

  40. While I’m thinking about it, Steph’s sub-par game leads to the similar troubles. When he is hitting from outside, it keeps Westbrook away from the glass. When he isn’t, Steph does the right thing and drives but unless he converts or gets fouled you are bringing a great rebounder in Westbrook to the rim.

    To make matters worse, Steph reverted to early season sloppiness with six turnovers. Together with putrid shooting from Holliday and Barbosa and missing some positive plays from Iguodala, there’s your game.

  41. felt-guv, from your twit it seems you recommend oaklander eastwood’s recent film. please clarify for my elderly brain — are Chris or widow Taya Kyle Jewish, or do you consider him an honorary member of your tribe for killing enemies of Israel ?

    • 1) I haven’t seen the film. That was a joke, for which I stole the picture and improved the punch line.
      2) I can’t recommend the film, as I haven’t seen it.
      3) I don’t believe the Kyles are Jewish, and it has no bearing on my (clearly failed attempt at a) joke either way.
      4) I am not Jewish in anything but ancestry, and only identify as Jewish when being rounded up for concentration camps.
      5) I am not tribal, and in fact am strongly against the whole idea of tribes.
      6) I am not pro-Israel in any sense of the word.
      7) It seems I should not attempt jokes on social media any more.

      • thank you. both of us are probably comfortable getting categorized/marginalized as ‘secular humanists.’ didn’t comprehend the subtlety of your wit, because theatre marquees can have random title truncations or unintentional misspelling, and my biases regarding political/chauvinistic content in mass popular culture.

        most people with any familiarity with the theory and practice of torture understand that it can’t be a reliable means of intelligence collection, and the admission from our grand state that bin L.’s assassination didn’t come from sources under torture was an expensive pro forma gesture. the commercial success, and general acceptance of veracity, of “zero dark thirty” was a logical evolutionary step after the mass entertainment monster understood the fascination with the Abu Ghraib expose’ — torture as pornography could pass with an R rating and less censorship than sexually explicit (in more conventional enactments of course) spectacle.

        if anyone has watched the eastwood film, perhaps you could opine whether c.kyle’s ‘operations’ are depicted as combat duty, or retaliatory terrorism by another means.

  42. Hat,
    You didn’t address any of my core arguments—or defend Felt’s return to lunacy regarding the David Lee/Draymond Green “controversy” he seems to be trying to create. Mainly, you make no mention of rebounding or ability to defend 4’s at all—his key “arguments” for why Dray needs to be moved to the 3. The only thing you did reply to was one part of the size equation. I’ve always seen Lee listed at 230. He lost a lot of weight last year so might have been closer to 225. This year—especially after the long layoff—he looks heavier, indeed out of shape a bit. In any event, their height-to-weight ratios are very similar—with only a small difference in height.
    You say no one is “indestructible.” That’s an absurdity if you’re trying to imply that the two players have the same “indestructability” at this stage of their careers. I can assure you that every single Warriors fan, coach or player would strongly dispute this—including you. So why bother saying it?

    That Lee was an All Star before is completely irrelevant to this discussion. And if, as you contend, the W’s best lineup last year was with Lee at the 5 and Green at the 4 why are you arguing now that Green should be moved to the 3—especially given the team’s success with him at the 4 this year as well? Truly bizarre and non-sensical. Do you understand why I hesitate to even engage with you?

    And why are you—a big fan of Feltyball—pushing for big and less skilled and mobile lineups? I don’t understand this unless you’re trying to toady up to Felt and his obsession with David Lee. My strong sense (and I don’t know the man personally) is that he has contempt for people who would do this. He also doesn’t take pot shots at people; rather, he attacks arguments he finds to be weak—or agrees with them when he does. There’s this quite odd sensibility among several people here that Felt is some sort of shrinking violet that needs to be protected. I’m absolutely certain that’s not the case. Felt has many intelligent and thought provoking things to say—and that’s why I’m here. He also (especially this year) has been pushing some real garbage arguments, in my opinion. We all do at times; I’m just putting my thoughts out there trying to refute them when he does. And if I’m wrong—or pushing garbage arguments myself, just let me know exactly why. No big deal whatsoever. But you don’t have to attack me or others personally in the process. Attack the arguments I (or others) make. That’s what Felt does and I suggest we all follow his lead.

    • Gosh, I’m trying here, LT, I really am. But if you’re determined to look for an argument in everything I write, I’m perfectly willing to take a pass on all this.

      Size matters. Obvioously. Lee is bigger. Green is 10-20 pounds lighter (actual weights can vary by 5+ pounds per game). Playing as a “big,” do you think Green would break down faster or slower than Lee, just based on mass?

      Quality of play matters.
      – Lee is a great offensive talent (an All-Star!), consistently one of the top 5 paint scorers in the league. Sometimes you need buckets. Actually, you never don’t need buckets.
      – Lee is a better rebounder than Green, check his career stats vs Draymond’s season stats.
      – Lee almost always outscores his opponent, doing enough on D to make that possible. I love watching Draymond play, but he rarely outscores his opponent.

      Bigger and less skilled lineups? The Lee+Green front line completely blew away every other combination Coach Jackson used regularly last year. That WAS Jackson’s game-finishing smallball lineup. It worked because Lee is unusually quick – and skilled – for a big man.

      Even better statistically was Bogut+Lee+Green, which was rarely used. I’ve posted the figures here before. You can look them up yourself at NBAWowy. Assuming all our bigs get healthy, that 3-big lineup prevents things like rebounding disparity:
      Utah 44-31 over Ws
      OKC 54-43 over Ws
      With a Bogut or Speights (or Ezeli, etc.) next to Lee – PLUS Green – OKC doesn’t get 16 offensive rebounds.

      Re defending Feltbot, I don’t do that. I argue ideas. Sometimes I argue FB’s ideas because they make sense. FB can easily fend for himself.

      Re Personal Attacks, I’m trying to remember any time I called someone names. Nope, don’t think I have.

      I don’t want to read miles of self-referential crap from someone we all know. To me it seems fair to make that point.

      As for you, LT, I’d be lots more impressed with your opinion if you backed it up with some evidence. Facts and figures. Proofs. I do that whenever possible. Felt does that. You should try it. You’d be lots more persuasive.

      • For some bizarre reason you simply are unable to address the main points I made–all in reference to Feltbot’s “argument” that Draymond should be moved to the 3. I replied to you out of courtesy (and with wariness)–and now it’s clear why I was so hesitant.

        No more dealing with you–that’s for sure.

        • Great!

          But perhaps you overlooked the point that the Ws best (statistically, numerically, PROVABLY best) lineup was with the Ws playing two “real” bigs + Green. That puts Green at the 3, my friend.

        • Greens best and natural position is at the 3 and would thrive in that position and will (should) take Stretch-4 minutes as well. This is apart from DLee or Barnes. However, given the current rooster and DLees age and recurring core injuries (which are connected to the legs) it is logical and prudent to start and play Green primarily as a 4. (Green is a full 2″ shorter than DLee btw.) Both Green and DLee should be assisted when defending Los Toros (Griffin, Randolph). Also note Iguodala and DLee minutes are rising relative to Barnes and Green minutes. Kerr is open minded.

  43. Think torture highly effective regardless
    of what Congress says. Although CIA
    case studies show torture didn’t lead
    to any fruitful information did not
    CIA officers to turn over any
    records that did. Especially if Us
    behind any of the terrorist acts.
    And, according to Congress many
    person tortured were not
    terrorist so of course torture
    was meaningless.

    Read report from 90’s that said we
    tortured people to get them infiltrate
    Central American revolutionary groups.

    Spoke to guy who told me that
    during Vietnam war, US would throw
    captured soldier from a plane and then
    told next person he would suffer same
    fate if he did not fess up. Told it worked.

    Regardless of what President Obama says
    Thin we con tiniest to torture.

    • Frank, torture is illegal, immoral and disgusting.

      Reagan himself signed the UN Convention against torture, making it illegal under US law.

      Reagan was proud to ban torture, because laws are an expression of ideals, not just judicial technicalities. We’re the Good Guys. If we torture, we’re not the good guys. Torture eliminates any moral authority we might have to enforce laws. If we torture, we’re terrorizing prisoners. We’re terrorists.

      I’m not personally OK with having a torturer on the payroll. I don’t want to know anyone who would be OK with that. It’s a repellent concept.

      You may be right. Some agency within the maze of the US government may still torture prisoners. Nevertheless, it’s at least somewhat reassuring that Obama says we don’t do that. It’s at least lip service to our national ideals. The ideals Reagan believed in, and Bush/Cheney violated.

    • I think it’s useful, at least for me, to listen to John McCains view, as a formerly tortured prisonor. They killed Bin Laden, Pravo, but the horse was already out of the barn.

  44. Maybe an off night, but they got beat. I’m not that sold on Houston—I don’t see the chemistry, the fits, and it’s hard to have confidence on a team built around Harden (cf. Curry).

    Mo and Iguodala saved Livingston’s butt again and kept them in the game first half, while Lee was crucified in the low post.

    About half of my criticism of Bogut comes from listening to Fitz, who has to be punctured. “Howard is eating them alive,” (or something similar), referring to Howard’s play while Bogut was playing. Howard didn’t have any problems getting shots up over Bogut, and scored about half his points against him. And Lee and even Speights put up better moves on Howard, frustrating his shot. Lee, especially muscled up on several occasions. Yes, Howard got to them on others.

    I didn’t see the “rim protection” or defensive influence. Beverly got two layups in Bogut’s first stint, and the real strength of the defense 3rd quarter came from the other players with steals, harassment, etc. while Bogut was waltzing with Howard.

    6 boards, 2 assists (Mo had 3)—and 3 quick fouls.

    And 2 points. “Bogut is the hub of the offense,” Fitz again. This is utter nonsense. The offense picked up when he went out.

    And look what happened when Bogut went out 3rd quarter and Lee came in and Lee played with Curry in an open court.


    • Here’s the game flow:


      Lee was +12 in his 6 minute stint the last part of the 3rd. quarter. 8 points, 5 boards. Bogut in his stint at the beginning of the 3rd? 1 board, 1 assist, 1 block, 0 points. (He still had +9 because of Steph and Klay and his minutes overlapped with Lee.

    • Forgot to make my Men in Black crack. But they have, in fact, won all their Saturday games while playing in their pajamas.

    • Sheesh. 11 assists for Curry and 5 blocks for Klay.

    • bogut seemed mobility impaired on defense relative to howard, but on several possessions d’mond-G. arrived like a swarm just as howard initiated the closing move on his shot. howard talks proud but rarely takes leadership against tough opposition, though he’ll get his stats. containing harden essentially defused their whole offense. Por prevailed against them in the last post season with resilience and toughness, their two best guys equal to harden and howard, the team better coached.

      • I see we’re getting an entirely different take on the other blog, and that Roget’s Thesaurus has been pulled out again— Kierkegaard? I assume Feltbot is busy.

        • taken out of whatever context of its actual origin, that kierkegaard quote on face value is totalitarian — orwell would love it. further, it is so blatantly a rhetorical cover for contriving any sort of oppositional contrasts, it probably reflects a low regard of that blog’s readers. giving lauridsen the benefit of the doubt, his rhetorical thumbing the nose at his readers is probably done subconsciously, and all is well-intended.

          • I can see no way how one can read this ‘everything resolves itself in contradiction’ statement as a totalitarian.
            On purely logical grounds it is a parodox – resolution being the opposite of contradiction.
            Totalitarianism is, by definition, an absence of contradiction. So the goal point of totalitarian statement would always be something else (negation of/resolution of ) than contradiction.
            It’s obvious that Kierkegaard is playing here (or struggling) with paradox, knowingly making both the content and the form of its statement contradictory.
            Being anti-Hegelian as he was, he does not let/posit resolution of any contradiction. Quite the contrary, he, let’s say, enjoys contradiction.
            It is antitotalitarian as it can be.
            I believe one might get impression of it being totalitarian in that it uses terms of materialist dialectic, which as we know is marxian in its origin, which is in itself derived from hegel, which is derived from kant and etc.
            Thus, Heracleitus, says – Fire!Fire!Fire!

            Other than that, there’s nothing contradictory in what warriors are doing basketball wise.

            On even lighter note, here’s smth else to ponder head’s about – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%27s_paradox

          • +1 Martin! Note, however, moto’s complaint was that AL took the K quotation out of context, or, more likely, is not aware of the context.

            It’s what I like about this blog, the irreverence, the irrelevance. But often irreverence and irrelevance are relevant.

        • Make that Bartlett’s Quotations. Desk sets of compact paperback versions of the reference trio Bartlett’s, Roget’s, and Webster’s were popular gifts for high school students long ago, what I had in mind. Think what you like here. This is a stupid mistake.

          • Well, I’m sure all quotations are without context, that’s what makes them quotations. That is not to say they are good form of making arguments, but rather rhetorical devices. How bad or good they work, depends on the context in which the quotation is used, not the original field. Still, best way to do that is probably follow the lead of Borges and invent authors/lines to quote. It is most honest and funny device of technique otherwise often reduced to just having brand names inserted for props. Arguments at authority.

            Note, that moto says that one can read this quote as totalitarian without context. I fail to see (and explain why) how.

            “Everything resolves itself in irrelevance.”

          • Kierkegaard earned the right to ponder contradictions through thought and experience, and fear and trembling. It’s hard to appreciate what he says without knowing that context. And it’s what frustrates me with so many references to past works now, that writers skim off the top for their own superficial purposes without much sense what lies beneath.

            Borges earned the right to ponder paradoxes, as he deftly framed so many. But I’m sure he’d come back with the same retort you made.

            I am impressed, Martin. I have to confess that anything beyond bonehead logic is out of my range (Curry’s paradox).

    • Correction: “Bogut was eating them alive” while Bogut was out, not “playing,” them being Lee and Speights. It just wasn’t true. Bogut had a marginal role in the defense.

      • Bogut doesn’t look quite back to where he was prior to the injury. Let’s hope he can recover because regardless of your observations rgg (I despise your abuse of plus/minus btw), the guy is essential to this team’s playoff ambitions.

        The story isn’t whether or not Bogut has an impact, it’s if he can offer his services as a fit and willing 7 footer.

        • Art—

          Thanks. Yes of course they’ll need him. But look at what I said. It is Bob Fitzgerald’s fawning over Bogut I am reacting to. Fitz is bad anyway, but with Bogut he is ridiculous. Lee once made a pass and he called it a “Bogut pass.” He makes it sound like Bogut carries the team. That is miles from the truth. Fitz is not alone here, if you read around. And in general it is against such inflated notions I react, as I have with estimations of other players.

          But I do question what Kerr might be doing with Bogut. He is less effective, negatively so, against the better, faster, teams like the Spurs. Yet Kerr has said he wants to close with him and is doing so. Even Jackson wouldn’t do that.

          The criticism of Lee is just as inflated the other way and drives me crazy. Forget the +/– and just watch the game. Or look at the graph rise dramatically in the game flow midway through the third quarter and look at Lee’s stats. He was finally played to advantage, with Curry, in an open court, and the results were dramatic.

          The sobering reality, of course, is that we might not see other one in top form or at all at the end of the season, given health questions.

          • “might not see either one”

            (Never write until you’ve had your second cup of coffee.)

          • warriorsablaze

            It’s good that both Lee and Bogut are playing more limited minutes… that at least helps the possibility one or both will be ready to go come playoff time. Lee seems to just need to be managed…. Bogut’s injuries are always random so I guess we just have to hope for good luck in the timing.

            Credit to Lee that he seems to be playing markedly improved defense… 3x his normal block rate, and in the few games I’ve been able to watch lately, has been noticeably better at providing help (which has always been his weakness on D). Also, recently he seems to be actually setting screens instead of always slipping them… Nice to see an older player filling in some of the holes in his game.

          • Lee’s defense will always be influenced by the quality of the defenders around him, especially on the perimeter. He’s not 7 feet tall and there are things he cannot do. He had to do too much by himself and often got caught years ago. Or put him with an athletic, mobile center, like the rookie Ezeli. I don’t recall many complaints about his defense then.

          • warriorsablaze

            Of course, Lee gets excuses and has to take no responsibility for his shortcomings, while Bogut and Barnes must solely own theirs.

            Your biases are comical.

            People have noted Lee’s weak help defense (though often does OK facing up against his man) since his New York days. It doesn’t take too many half-hearted rotations and shot challenges with your arm below your shoulders before people take notice.

          • I have never known Lee to back down from any challenge, make excuses, or not take responsibility for anything he does. The criticisms of Lee on defense make no sense and I don’t know why they perpetuate.

          • But Lee’s defense has been amply covered here. To answer your point directly about help defense, before, with a weak perimeter, he was asked to do too much, cover too much court, and often got caught in situations where he had no good options. But now that the perimeter is strengthened, especially with Iguodala, this problem has been covered.

            You throw the word “bias” around freely here.

          • warriorsablaze

            Lee doesn’t make excuses…luckily, he has you and Felt to do so for him.

            No one said Lee backs away from a challenge, and I even said (And have said many, many times on this board) he often holds his own one on one. He’s a poor team defender. Curry, by contrast, is the opposite… not a stopper, but an effective team defender.

            Criticisms of Lee’s defense have been noted by many and existed long before Goldsberry’s presentation clowned him. That you can’t see it is irrelevant.

          • It is the cheapest trick in the book to question the integrity of whoever says things you do not understand. Lee’s weaknesses on defense have been amply noted here, but they have been put into a larger picture, how he contributes overall to the team. You miss entirely the point about shoring up the perimeter.

        • I don’t think so either. Bogut looked sort of “hobbly” and “stiff” to me at times since he returned from platelets injections. Kerr played him 19 minutes last night and hopefully continues to limit his minutes and rest him out of some games periodically.

          Hopefully, DLee continues to get into shape and rhythm, allowing Bogut to reduce playing time, looking forward to the playoffs.

      • I don’t know why I see no “reply” function to previous post of rgg.

        So, if I can put it that way, I understand the sentiment of the first paragraph, but not the judgement. I see no evil in that popular writing (which is most blogging) can sidestep the necessary requirements of serious anlytical format. Hey, maybe, someone will find that quote interesting and dig deeper and discover hegel, marx, heracleitus etc. for themselves, maybe they’ll pick a book or a google and read on the topic.

        For this sylogism to work:

        1. If it is raining, I will meet you at the theater.
        2. It is raining.
        3. Therefore, I will meet you at the theater.

        You must assume that 1 is true.

        And you use 2 step to see if conditional part of 1 is true to prove that 3 is true which validates 1.

        But in Curry’s paradox when you assume 1, which contains itself (is self-referential) you simultaneously say that 2 is true (and thus 3 is also).

        You assume that ‘if 1, then 2″ is 1. So if 1, which is 1 (true) by the requirement of formal logic, then the conditional part is true since it is equivalent to 1, thus all of its parts.

        The moral is that somes logical mechanisms have limits and cannot prove its operations to be unfallible, hence the need for more qualifiers and extensive restrictions. They can not say how and why/if they work by (containing) their own operations.

        In other words, self-reference is an interesting thing. And while I (and each of us) use it everyday with no problems, in some cases it works as a noisy bug you can’t locate for hours in a lone norwegian hut and even after you succeded and let it out (or kill) you still hear it buzzing.

        A. “Can I ask you a question?”
        B. “I can not answer it.”

        • It’s when people appropriate such quotations and present them in their own scheme as serious thought that I have problems. Otherwise, everything done with irony and humor is legit. Sometimes illuminating.

          Curry paradoxes abound in blogs.

          You can only nest so far with replies. There may or may not be profound reason for that.

          • yes yes, choice of kierkegaard was a strange one, i remember wrestling with fear and trembling for some college paper, and while my head and understanding of K. was no clearer because of that, actually quite the reverse, i learned one lesson that there’s no simple answers to abyssal vacuums of existence.

            in this case, i assume, the quotation was used for humorous purposes, because i don’t think AL meant that warrior basketball trials are that contradictory as a choice between love of a son and god.

  45. The other night with Speights and
    company defending the paint against
    the Thunder. the Thunder shot 53 per
    per cent. Last night Houston shot
    42 percent. Bogut playing helped the

  46. cosmicballoon

    Umm, the Warriors obliterated Houston in the second half last night. Let’s talk about that a bit. In particular, Curry’s pass to Barnes is probably his most spectacular play this season. I rewatched it 5 times and I still couldn’t tell when he actually looked over his shoulder and saw Barnes. Amazing!!

    • curry didn’t need to look over his shoulder to sense where barnes was. going back to when the play initiated, curry and barnes were in close proximity on transition defense, both occluding the progress and passing lanes of the Hou player in the backcourt. as curry went to the right in pursuit of the loose ball, barnes is in his right peripheral vision, slightly behind him. the rest was curry’s calculus on where barnes would be at the moment when curry secured the loose ball.

  47. Spurs waive Austin Daye and are trying out the D-League. I admire teams that recognize their mistakes and try to correct them.


    Everything has been illuminated.

  49. Livingston and B-Rush are dead weight. If the Warriors really want to be the most versatile team in the league then they need to trade them and pick up a smaller,faster and floor spacing capable point guard.
    Think Spurs with Patty Mills and Corey Joseph

    my picks..
    Byran Roberts
    Jarret Jack

    What do you guys think

    looks like GSW signed JMM to a 10 day. Wonder if somethings brewing?

    • “Reflecting on McAdoo’s three seasons in Chapel Hill can prove vexing for Tar Heels nation. Billed as the next in a lengthy line of North Carolina superstars, the former McDonald’s All-American never seemed to live up to the hype.”


      Has he shown something in Santa Cruz? He was unimpressive last summer.

      • couple of notes on the lesser mcadoo, gathered from another blog with a source or two that follows the ‘cruz team. Mem also offered a ten day contract, so they might have been stuck to do the same or lose his services, possibly for the season’s remainder to a principal rival. he’s been making over his game in ‘cruz — at chapel hill as a 4 he liked to do perimeter stuff like a 3 but lacked the shooting and ball skills, but apparently now he’s re-made himself to focus work around the paint, on both ends. kuzmic has been in ‘cruz for a while. kerr and staff might be choosing mobility and range over bulk, and as mediocre as mcadoo was as a scorer in college, his ceiling as a pro, scoring wise, probably surpasses kuzmic’s.

    • Strongly concur. Was that other Clips PG (not Farmers) waived? I thought his name was Cunningham. Maybe I don’t recall correctly.

  50. martin, thank you for the commentary on kierkegaard — had hoped that someone better read in philosophy would respond. some quotations demand at least a sentence or three to describe their context. you can refute the statement as totalitarian, because you’ve read the philosopher and have absorbed the context of his thinking. taken alone, use of the indefinite pronoun ‘everything’ is all encompassing, and the statement provides a cover for orwellian doublethink — “ignorance is strength” attains a different level of epistemologic truth. taken on its own by laypeople not as schooled as you in logic or critical thinking, it can be reduced to contradiction = resolution, or another way, our nation’s Pax Americana, peace = war. you might be too smart or sophisticated in your reasoning to understand what more simple minds like mine make from bald kierkegaard quotations. shalom

    • Thanks for clarification on what your thought process was.
      Now I see how it can be read as that peace may be achieved by war.
      Of course, that assumes that there’s a valid analogy between war and contradiction, in which to resolve would mean to kill or destroy. Actually, having in mind Kierkegaards religious preoccupations (or should i believe it was love that was more important in the end?), it probably is closer to your reading than mine.
      For one can read resolution of contradictions as destroying opposites (of course to that one must assume that thre some uncontradictory things, some hegelian ground or universal spirit that can exist without contradiction), or, as I read it – as knowing oneself through contradictions, and thus seeing it as a positive thing, as something that needs to be sustained and fostered.

      As we (I) are playing logic/word games (seriously, as all worthy ones) your sentence “you can refute the statement as totalitarian” can have a ambiguos meaning (be fuzzy), for one can read it as implying that:

      I can refute (closer to a sense of “repudiate”, ”deny”) it, because it is totalitarian

      I can refute it because I am totalitarian (frankly, this version lacks an article in front of “totalitarian” in your original statement, but with modern dissapearance of it (an article) in language i might interpret it like that)

      And the third version, which i assume you meant by reading your post, that is – I can refute that the statement is totalitarian (in its meaning, as probably implied by kierkegaard).

      • kudos to you for comprehending my badly worded phrase. re-reading my response right after posting (no edit feature here, which handicaps the clumsy writers like me), realised another article or pronoun was needed, but trusted in your intelligence. so yes, the third version was my intention.

        • gonna rewatch warriors-houston with russian announcers (i like them so much more than my native ones). that kierkegaard stuff got my synapses reeling.

      • For a complete layman like me, can a philosophy generally expressed as “if it’s going to be its up to me” representative of Kierkegaard’s thinking?

        My grandmother (a devout Western Catholic) was fond of saying “act as if everything is up to you and pray as if everything is up to God”.

        • marc, your mantra in a general sense could apply to the existentialists, where kierkegaard is usually put in the philosophic taxonomy tree. it explains camus’ suicide, apart from his likely depression in the pre-prozac era.

        • no, certainly not of kierkegaard, whom considered three modes of existence – aesthetic, consisting of interest and pleasure, ethical, of communal/social responsibilities and religious, which he,unable to lead, he admired most. there’s a popular phrase – knight of faith – derived from his works.
          the philosophical turn towards subjectivity started with descartes (i think, therefore i am [though ”I” as we understand it was not emplyed by his thinking]) and caught fire in kant’s thinking, to whom our understanding of world was limited by forms of experience that were idiosyncratically human.
          first philosopher of will, schopenhauer, gets closer to extreme subjectivism by positing that the the world is as will and representation, but still not quite there yet.
          here comes then, fichte, who altogether wants to get rid of any objectivity, by positing that there’s nothing existing outside ego. so, he might be closest from the old ones, but until comes stirner, who is the godfather of nihilism, individualist anarchism, some existensialism (though i believe more so of literary movements).

          then there’s a split with a) hegel going reverse and sayin that subjectivity is just a point in history of absolute spirit knowing itself and b) nietzche, to whom all is a falsification, and humanity has to rebuild itself from scratch, basing power(s) as sole agent differentiating all values, thus,need to go beyond good and evil.

          even for XXth century existentialists, the bigger concern was nothingness and coruption of society than pure subjectivism/egoism. in other words, it was a reaction to brutality of wars, and a try at finding ways of dignified existence where you can no longer trust religion, politics or tradition.

          one must have in mind that european thought was always very indebted to preceding schools and so such a radical break with long standing tradition without recourse was an impossibility.

          so, i believe, your moto (no pun intended) is rather more akin to new age neocapitalist mentality of how to become richest, bestest and all that solely by sheer will power of your own.

          • I knew you’d find a way to get back to Warriors and basketball.

          • Thank you. That’s a keeper. Wonderful summary.

          • Feltbot @24 is wrong. This is a Philosophical and Literary Society. We may have lost FP’s, however (Feltbot Points). I assume we’ll see a score with graphs at the end of the season.

            I did enjoy all this, Martin.

            I would make a case, though, that thinking outside a field might open up thought inside it. Hollinger’s narrow statistical studies not only block appreciation of the game but also may be closing out insights that might make teams better.

  51. What on earth are they going to do with McAdoo?


    • #15, hardly anyone at #15 will get a chance to do anything. Nope, no trade in works, can’t see the team front office do anything to risk current season.