JeffBear07 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Everyone says the Warriors instantly got better once Draymond Green returned from Covid, and I agree.

That said, he is averaging just 4.6 pts, 5 rebs, 6.6 assists per game.
He has the team's worst PER,
He has the team's worst 3FG% at 19.4%,
He has the 2nd worst FG% at 33.3%, ahead of D-Leaguer Rookie Nico Mannion.

Steph is making $43M this year.
Klay: $35.3M
Wiggins: $29.5M
Draymond $22,246,956
Kelly Oubre: $14,375,000
James Wiseman: $8,730,240
Kevon Looney: $4,821,429
Kent Bazemore $2,320,044
Brad Wanamaker $2,250,000
and so on....

Draymond will make $24,026,712 next year.
Draymond will make $25,806,468 after that.
Draymond has player option after that: $27,586,224

It wouldn't be shocking to see Draymond be traded, but I don't think anyone would want to take on his salary!
In other words, he probably won't be traded because nobody would want him.

---

I still think you're misstating Draymond's value here. His contributions on the court lie substantially in the way that he quarterbacks both the offense and the defense. With the complex motion offense and switching defense that the Warriors employ, they need somebody like Draymond (quick note: there is almost no one else like Draymond) to make sure everyone is in the proper place, and that's something that is not captured in surface-level numbers (PER is based substantially on counting stats which is why Russell Westbrook has long been a PER monster without being a winning player). As you've acknowledged, the Warriors are clearly much worse without Draymond, a fact that would seem to belie your minimization of him as a player based purely on stats.

Or maybe looking at it from a different perspective: Draymond's extraordinarily high BBIQ is NOS for other elite players. He raises top-level players to greater heights, but alone, he's not particularly useful at raising a team's floor or ceiling unless you're asking him to instill defensive chops in young players. And to that point, if the Warriors have any notion of continuing to be title contenders during Curry's prime years, there is no way they let go of Draymond short of a trade for someone like Giannis who is superlative enough in other areas, including defense, to make up for losing Draymond's uniquely high BBIQ. If you're trading Draymond for draft picks and/or expiring contracts, then you're basically giving up on title contention for at least the next three years and have fun convincing Curry to re-up next year.

---

Coincidentally, here's a stats and analytics-backed writeup on Draymond Green just today by 538: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/draymond-green-isnt-scoring-but-hes-doing-everything-else-for-the-warriors/

And here's a pass from tonight's game that probably only Nikola Jokic and Lebron James among NBA big men even think of making: https://streamable.com/3lmlgv

I'm guessing there's a post above this ridiculing me. If not, I'll do it myself.

I think Draymond and Kelly both read today's BI Warriors thread, because they both destroyed it today. Kelly had a career high 40 on 7 of 10 from 3, while Draymond had a great game with assists and scoring at the rim.

Great game!

Did anyone see Oubre's block of Boban at the rim. Oh my goodness!

sonofabear51 said:

---

Hey CT, I think Oubre heard you talking about him. he went off on Dallas for 40 tonight.

---

Yep. What a game!
I was thinking the W's were going to get blown out halfway thru the 2nd quarter. Instead, it went the other way. What the hell???

JeffBear07 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

JeffBear07 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Everyone says the Warriors instantly got better once Draymond Green returned from Covid, and I agree.

That said, he is averaging just 4.6 pts, 5 rebs, 6.6 assists per game.
He has the team's worst PER,
He has the team's worst 3FG% at 19.4%,
He has the 2nd worst FG% at 33.3%, ahead of D-Leaguer Rookie Nico Mannion.

Steph is making $43M this year.
Klay: $35.3M
Wiggins: $29.5M
Draymond $22,246,956
Kelly Oubre: $14,375,000
James Wiseman: $8,730,240
Kevon Looney: $4,821,429
Kent Bazemore $2,320,044
Brad Wanamaker $2,250,000
and so on....

Draymond will make $24,026,712 next year.
Draymond will make $25,806,468 after that.
Draymond has player option after that: $27,586,224

It wouldn't be shocking to see Draymond be traded, but I don't think anyone would want to take on his salary!
In other words, he probably won't be traded because nobody would want him.

---

I still think you're misstating Draymond's value here. His contributions on the court lie substantially in the way that he quarterbacks both the offense and the defense. With the complex motion offense and switching defense that the Warriors employ, they need somebody like Draymond (quick note: there is almost no one else like Draymond) to make sure everyone is in the proper place, and that's something that is not captured in surface-level numbers (PER is based substantially on counting stats which is why Russell Westbrook has long been a PER monster without being a winning player). As you've acknowledged, the Warriors are clearly much worse without Draymond, a fact that would seem to belie your minimization of him as a player based purely on stats.

Or maybe looking at it from a different perspective: Draymond's extraordinarily high BBIQ is NOS for other elite players. He raises top-level players to greater heights, but alone, he's not particularly useful at raising a team's floor or ceiling unless you're asking him to instill defensive chops in young players. And to that point, if the Warriors have any notion of continuing to be title contenders during Curry's prime years, there is no way they let go of Draymond short of a trade for someone like Giannis who is superlative enough in other areas, including defense, to make up for losing Draymond's uniquely high BBIQ. If you're trading Draymond for draft picks and/or expiring contracts, then you're basically giving up on title contention for at least the next three years and have fun convincing Curry to re-up next year.

---

That's what I call a Hot Take.
Well done.
I'm just sick of him missing so many shots. As soon as he pulls up I know it's a brick. And it is.

I had to check out his career stats. Wow. Truly unimpressive.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/greendr01.html

No wonder he didn't like Durant - his #'s went down as soon as he arrived!

---

Here's what you're missing with your own take though: Even if they were to just straight up dump his salary in a trade without taking any new salary back (which they can't do anyway because of NBA salary matching rules), the Warriors are already so far over the cap that they could only replace him with a veteran minimum or the disabled player exception (~$9 million) they have this year for Klay. So unless you think there's an extraordinary diamond in the rough out there sitting on the couch waiting for a call or languishing in the G League, then you're talking about replacing Draymond Green with, say, a Dragan Bender and expecting the team to improve.

Moreover, to my point earlier in the thread, due to the fortunate timing of the salary cap jump that led to the team signing Kevin Durant in 2015, the Warriors are in a unique position relative to most teams in the league in that they are able to hold four max slots instead of just three. If you trade Draymond for anything less than a fellow max salary player, then the Warriors lose that fourth max slot and the inherent advantage that comes with it, which is why I also said earlier that the only Draymond trade this year that would make sense and keep the Warriors in immediate contention would be in a deal for someone like Giannis (or Gobert, or some other max player who happens to have elite defensive skills).

In other words, trade Draymond this year and maaaaaybe the team gets better this year (when they're not going to be winning the title anyway) only if it turns out that Draymond is really just a fatter Tony Allen nowadays. But then for the Warriors to be title contenders the next three years or so of Steph/Klay's prime, you're basically betting on the team hitting gold in the draft and for that rookie to be immediately ready to contribute and Wiseman to take a huge leap forward, all while reconfiguring their defensive identity around the loss of the player whose been their defensive fulcrum for the past 7 years and all without being able to use free agency to any significant extent. Color me skeptical that all those things happen to come together while Steph and Klay are at the current apex of their abilities.

---

Great post. I'm not going to argue with you at all.

I've watched every game this year (first time in forever, literally) and Draymond has been a complete brick. He was great tonight - it was peak Draymond.
I look forward to pouring over the box score.
And hopefully I'll see more of tonight's stuff rather than the 20% shooter he's been.

WOW
Green's 15 assists were just one shy of his career high and they were the fifth most by any player this season. Green became just the third starting center in history to dish out at least 15 assists in a game, according to Elias Sports Bureau data, joining Wilt Chamberlain and Nikola Jokic.

"People always look at scoring," Warriors swingman Damion Lee said.
"Draymond's one of the best defenders in the game, and also one of the best playmakers. He's always looking to find guys, to get guys shots. Whether he's pushing it in the break, he gets a rebound, you guys have seen it time and time again. He'll get the rebound and have that burst at half court and immediately just start surveying and seeing where the advantages are."

concordtom said:

---

The Warriors were special pre-KD, no doubt about it.
But a big-time WORSE Draymond Green PLUS no KD means there is no way that that pre-KD dynasty returns. Just getting Klay back next year is not enough.

So, what are the moves they need to make. It will be another interesting offseason. Oubrey is clearly not the answer and will be gone unless he takes a massive pay cut. He's playing himself into the shlitzone for his next contract, which sucks for him. He was a super expensive 1 year rental. I commend the W's bankers for taking a chance on that working out. Maybe it has helped motivate Wiggins, though, and so you get your payback over there.

---

Let me tell you a little secret. The dynasty is not returning. Dynasty or sobbing are not the two choices. This would be a very good team with Klay. Add Klay next year, a more developed Wiseman, and a solid draft, and they could be in contention. But dynasty is a ridiculous ask. You should've enjoyed it while it lasted.

I did enjoy it while it lasted!!!
I'm hoping for having a chance. This team does not.
This team next year with + Klay - Oubre and a pre-last-night Draymond doesn't have a chance either.

Now then, last-night-Draymond + Klay does have a chance. That was a wild game! 7 players in double figures! 51% from deep on 42 attempts. 37 assists on 51 buckets. 85% from the line. 147 points.
Uh, yeah!! :-)

concordtom said:

---

WOW
Green's 15 assists were just one shy of his career high and they were the fifth most by any player this season. Green became just the third starting center in history to dish out at least 15 assists in a game, according to Elias Sports Bureau data, joining Wilt Chamberlain and Nikola Jokic.

---

He only had one turnover too. Great game from everyone last night.

Klay should just retire and become a commentator.

So, who would you rather have?

Harrison Barnes.
6-8, 225lb
Draft: Golden State Warriors, 1st round (7th pick, 7th overall), 2012 NBA Draft
Born: May 30, 1992
Age: 28-251d

points: 17.2
rebs: 6.2
assists: 3.6
FG: 49.8%
3FG: 41.3%
FT: 86.5%
$22.2M



Andrew Wiggins
6-7, 197lb
Draft: Cleveland Cavaliers, 1st round (1st pick, 1st overall), 2014 NBA Draft
Born: February 23, 1995
Age: 25-348d

points: 17.7
rebs: 4.7
assists: 2.2
FG: 46.3%
3FG: 37.7%
FT: 65.3%
$29.5M


NOTES:
The Warriors were unable to afford Harrison Barnes when Durant said he'd come, and so Barnes went to Dallas. He is now at Sacramento. Barnes was on a cheap rookie contract with the Warriors. They offered him $64M over 4 years in 2015, but he rejected that and ended up shopping himself to Dallas as a FA for $30M more than the W's offer.
While Barnes' ppg is slightly down from his peak 4 years ago with Dallas, his 3FG% and overall PER rating say he's having his best season yet.

I'd love to still have Barnes, but so what? He wasn't going to be affordable with Durant on the team and of course you'd get Durant.

concordtom said:

---

So, who would you rather have?

Harrison Barnes.
6-8, 225lb
Draft: Golden State Warriors, 1st round (7th pick, 7th overall), 2012 NBA Draft
Born: May 30, 1992
Age: 28-251d

points: 17.2
rebs: 6.2
assists: 3.6
FG: 49.8%
3FG: 41.3%
FT: 86.5%
$22.2M



Andrew Wiggins
6-7, 197lb
Draft: Cleveland Cavaliers, 1st round (1st pick, 1st overall), 2014 NBA Draft
Born: February 23, 1995
Age: 25-348d

points: 17.7
rebs: 4.7
assists: 2.2
FG: 46.3%
3FG: 37.7%
FT: 65.3%
$29.5M


NOTES:
The Warriors were unable to afford Harrison Barnes when Durant said he'd come, and so Barnes went to Dallas. He is now at Sacramento. Barnes was on a cheap rookie contract with the Warriors. They offered him $64M over 4 years in 2015, but he rejected that and ended up shopping himself to Dallas as a FA for $30M more than the W's offer.
While Barnes' ppg is slightly down from his peak 4 years ago with Dallas, his 3FG% and overall PER rating say he's having his best season yet.

---

Tough question. In a vacuum, I suppose I'd go with Barnes because they're similar enough in what they're capable of providing as 3&D wings that the $7 million difference in salary could be put to additional use. I haven't paid too much attention to how Barnes has grown as a player since leaving the Warriors, so I don't know if he's just gotten better at those random mid-range jumpers he used to always take or if he's just taking more shots near the basket. Wiggins strikes me as being better at creating his own shot and has better lateral movement on defense, while Barnes is better at sizing up against bigger players. But as sycasey mentioned, it's not quite fair to compare them straight up like this, because getting Durant would have been worth at least the two of them combined to begin with.

concordtom said:

---

So, who would you rather have?

Harrison Barnes.
6-8, 225lb
Draft: Golden State Warriors, 1st round (7th pick, 7th overall), 2012 NBA Draft
Born: May 30, 1992
Age: 28-251d

points: 17.2
rebs: 6.2
assists: 3.6
FG: 49.8%
3FG: 41.3%
FT: 86.5%
$22.2M



Andrew Wiggins
6-7, 197lb
Draft: Cleveland Cavaliers, 1st round (1st pick, 1st overall), 2014 NBA Draft
Born: February 23, 1995
Age: 25-348d

points: 17.7
rebs: 4.7
assists: 2.2
FG: 46.3%
3FG: 37.7%
FT: 65.3%
$29.5M


NOTES:
The Warriors were unable to afford Harrison Barnes when Durant said he'd come, and so Barnes went to Dallas. He is now at Sacramento. Barnes was on a cheap rookie contract with the Warriors. They offered him $64M over 4 years in 2015, but he rejected that and ended up shopping himself to Dallas as a FA for $30M more than the W's offer.
While Barnes' ppg is slightly down from his peak 4 years ago with Dallas, his 3FG% and overall PER rating say he's having his best season yet.

---

Well, they are pretty close. But the question is not. I'd rather have 3 years of Kevin Durant and 2 years of Andrew Wiggins than 5 years of Harrison Barnes.

I watch Rachel Nichols and The Jump regularly.
Today was Draymond Green interview day.

OaktownBear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

So, who would you rather have?

Harrison Barnes.
6-8, 225lb
Draft: Golden State Warriors, 1st round (7th pick, 7th overall), 2012 NBA Draft
Born: May 30, 1992
Age: 28-251d

points: 17.2
rebs: 6.2
assists: 3.6
FG: 49.8%
3FG: 41.3%
FT: 86.5%
$22.2M



Andrew Wiggins
6-7, 197lb
Draft: Cleveland Cavaliers, 1st round (1st pick, 1st overall), 2014 NBA Draft
Born: February 23, 1995
Age: 25-348d

points: 17.7
rebs: 4.7
assists: 2.2
FG: 46.3%
3FG: 37.7%
FT: 65.3%
$29.5M


NOTES:
The Warriors were unable to afford Harrison Barnes when Durant said he'd come, and so Barnes went to Dallas. He is now at Sacramento. Barnes was on a cheap rookie contract with the Warriors. They offered him $64M over 4 years in 2015, but he rejected that and ended up shopping himself to Dallas as a FA for $30M more than the W's offer.
While Barnes' ppg is slightly down from his peak 4 years ago with Dallas, his 3FG% and overall PER rating say he's having his best season yet.

---

Well, they are pretty close. But the question is not. I'd rather have 3 years of Kevin Durant and 2 years of Andrew Wiggins than 5 years of Harrison Barnes.

---

No. Of course I didn't ask that question!

sycasey said:

---

I'd love to still have Barnes, but so what? He wasn't going to be affordable with Durant on the team and of course you'd get Durant.

---

Geez.
All 3 of you guys went there. KD wasn't part of the question.

Let's say you are drafting - who do you take?

I suppose the money difference is the primary difference: Wiggins.

(I'll have to watch Barnes closely next time I watch the Kings.)

concordtom said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I'd love to still have Barnes, but so what? He wasn't going to be affordable with Durant on the team and of course you'd get Durant.

---

Geez.
All 3 of you guys went there. KD wasn't part of the question.

Let's say you are drafting - who do you take?

I suppose the money difference is the primary difference: Wiggins.

(I'll have to watch Barnes closely next time I watch the Kings.)

---

I mean, you did include and highlight their respective salaries, so that sorta opened that can of worms. But if you take that factor out, then I think it just depends on whether you think the "real" Wiggins is closer to the Warriors version or the TWolves version. If the former, then I take Wiggins. If the latter, then Barnes.

concordtom said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I'd love to still have Barnes, but so what? He wasn't going to be affordable with Durant on the team and of course you'd get Durant.

---

Geez.
All 3 of you guys went there. KD wasn't part of the question.

Let's say you are drafting - who do you take?

I suppose the money difference is the primary difference: Wiggins.

(I'll have to watch Barnes closely next time I watch the Kings.)

---

On a Warriors thread asking who you'd rather have, a guy that the Warriors chose not to sign or a guy they traded for, it is reasonable to answer based on all the factors in play. You weren't just randomly comparing two NBA players. You were comparing a guy the Warriors had and chose not to keep with a guy who now plays the same position. That may not be the intent of your question but it is obviously in the equation which is why we all answered it that way.

My answer is I will take 3 years of KD and 2 years of Wiggins over 5 years of Barnes because that was the real world choice

In relation to your question, based on the stats you posted it is close with Barnes being slightly better and cheaper but also being older. However I haven't watched Barnes recently and stats don't cover everything. Wiggins has done well on defense this year. I don't know how well Barnes is doing. Based on the last time I saw Barnes, I'd take Wiggins, but I like them both. I think people's view of Wiggins is colored by the expectation of being a number 1, and that is no longer relevant

Well, I see your point.
I DID have to go back and read why/how exactly Barnes left.
But initially I wasn't thinking about KD at all. I was just thinking, "gee, they are very similar players".

concordtom said:

---

Well, I see your point.
I DID have to go back and read why/how exactly Barnes left.
But initially I wasn't thinking about KD at all. I was just thinking, "gee, they are very similar players".

---

He left because they signed/were about to sign Durant and they needed the cap space to do it.

Curry 57 points last night in a narrow loss.

Kerr should have played the foul game down the stretch. Down one with 29 seconds, foul. If he makes both you can tie with a 3 or hit a quick two and foul again.

Instead, luka had the ball up top, draining the clock, then W's had to double as he backed down his defender - he passed to wide open corner 3, ball game.

The warriors were banking on one missed shot, then getting the rebound, with enough time to race down and get a good shot as they were out of timeouts, , though they are way shorter than Dallas and all other nba teams. Wrong strategy at that moment.

Maybe Kerr simply didn't want OT.

By the way, Isaiah Thomas gets lots of nods as an all time PG. I take Curry 10 times out of 10.

Warriors vs Spurs in 25 minutes

KEVIN GARNETT:
" I don't know if even the guards from 20 or 30 years ago could play in this time right here"

...But Garnett is also refreshingly complimentary of today's NBA.
Garnett, via David Marchese of The New York Times Magazine:

Quote:

---

"The game is at another level. I want you to get on a court, sprint corner to corner, stop on a dime and shoot a 3. I want you to do 10 of those. Then I want you to focus on how tired you are. Because these players do that for 48 minutes. I don't think guys from 20 years ago could play in this game. Twenty years ago, guys used their hands to control players. Now you can't use your hands. That makes defense damn near impossible. Can you imagine not hand-checking Michael Jordan? Naw. The fact that you can't touch players gives the offensive player so much flexibility. Defensive players have to take angles away and stuff like that. But if you have any creativity and ambition, you can be a great offensive player in this league. The fadeaways, one-leg runners, the one-leg balance shots that's stuff that Dirk Nowitzki brought to our game. And now when I watch Joker6 play, it feels like he has taken that Dirkness and mixed it with his own talent. And Steph Curry revolutionized things with being able to shoot it from distance with such consistency. Klay Thompson. Dame Lillard. These guards changed the game. I don't know if even the guards from 20 or 30 years ago could play in this time right here. It's creative. It's competitive. It's saucy. You'll get dropped! A [expletive] will cross you over and break your A.C.L. these days. The game is in a great place."

---

This is a welcome assessment from a retired player, too many of whom are overly defensive of their eras.
It's also exactly right.
NBA players are more skilled and athletic than ever. Yes, the NBA has become less physical. But with less contact permitted, players must be so much better conditioned to play tight defense throughout a game. That's especially true given how much better outside shooting is now. So many players even centers drill 3-pointers if left open for an instant. Many of them even sink 3-pointers even when contested.
Of course, some former players could adapt to the current environment. Garnett who was ahead of his time would translate just fine.
Likewise, some current players would struggle amid more physical play.
But, overall, players are better now. It's the natural evolution.

Did anyone watch last night vs Spurs?

Draymond had 7-10-10, but missed two FT's in the last couple minutes, and then made a terrible play with 8 seconds left. He threw 2 balls straight out of bounds earlier in the game.
My viewing party said Draymond Green blew the game, and if you watched Curry at the end, very exasperated, his body language said the same. I thought the FT's were worse than the attempt to draw foul shots at the end. It's the very thing I've been grousing about. Curry puts in a ton of practice and attention to these things. I don't get the idea that Green does nearly enough in this area.
A career 70.9% FT shooter, he's at 70.4% this year. Better than I thought.


With 8.7 seconds left in Monday's game, San Antonio led the Warriors 103-100. Guard Damion Lee inbounded the ball to Green just inside the halfcourt line, and the Warriors were ready to run a play to get Steph Curry or anyone else open for a game-tying shot.


But Green launched a shot from a few feet inside halfcourt. He's shooting 19.5 percent on 3-pointers this season, and this one was forced with eight seconds left in the game. Why?

"He thought they were gonna foul him," Warriors coach Steve Kerr said, taking the blame for not reminding his team before the play that the Spurs tend not to foul in those situations.

Green, known for his hoops IQ, out-thought himself this time.




Tonight, he's out: Green (knee) is questionable for Tuesday's game against the Spurs, Anthony Slater of The Athletic reports.
Green is being listed as questionable on the second half of a back-to-back due to soreness in his right knee. Since missing the first four games of the season, Green has appeared in every game for the Warriors. If he's held out Eric Paschall could see increased run.

concordtom said:

---

Did anyone watch last night vs Spurs?

Draymond had 7-10-10, but missed two FT's in the last couple minutes, and then made a terrible play with 8 seconds left. He threw 2 balls straight out of bounds earlier in the game.
My viewing party said Draymond Green blew the game, and if you watched Curry at the end, very exasperated, his body language said the same. I thought the FT's were worse than the attempt to draw foul shots at the end. It's the very thing I've been grousing about. Curry puts in a ton of practice and attention to these things. I don't get the idea that Green does nearly enough in this area.
A career 70.9% FT shooter, he's at 70.4% this year. Better than I thought.


With 8.7 seconds left in Monday's game, San Antonio led the Warriors 103-100. Guard Damion Lee inbounded the ball to Green just inside the halfcourt line, and the Warriors were ready to run a play to get Steph Curry or anyone else open for a game-tying shot.


But Green launched a shot from a few feet inside halfcourt. He's shooting 19.5 percent on 3-pointers this season, and this one was forced with eight seconds left in the game. Why?

"He thought they were gonna foul him," Warriors coach Steve Kerr said, taking the blame for not reminding his team before the play that the Spurs tend not to foul in those situations.

Green, known for his hoops IQ, out-thought himself this time.




Tonight, he's out: Green (knee) is questionable for Tuesday's game against the Spurs, Anthony Slater of The Athletic reports.
Green is being listed as questionable on the second half of a back-to-back due to soreness in his right knee. Since missing the first four games of the season, Green has appeared in every game for the Warriors. If he's held out Eric Paschall could see increased run.

---

That's like saying, "Green puts a ton of practice and attention into his defense. I don't get the idea that Curry does nearly enough in this area."

(Sorry. Gotta stick up for my guy Draymond!)

concordtom said:

---

Did anyone watch last night vs Spurs?

Draymond had 7-10-10, but missed two FT's in the last couple minutes, and then made a terrible play with 8 seconds left. He threw 2 balls straight out of bounds earlier in the game.
My viewing party said Draymond Green blew the game, and if you watched Curry at the end, very exasperated, his body language said the same. I thought the FT's were worse than the attempt to draw foul shots at the end. It's the very thing I've been grousing about. Curry puts in a ton of practice and attention to these things. I don't get the idea that Green does nearly enough in this area.
A career 70.9% FT shooter, he's at 70.4% this year. Better than I thought.


With 8.7 seconds left in Monday's game, San Antonio led the Warriors 103-100. Guard Damion Lee inbounded the ball to Green just inside the halfcourt line, and the Warriors were ready to run a play to get Steph Curry or anyone else open for a game-tying shot.


But Green launched a shot from a few feet inside halfcourt. He's shooting 19.5 percent on 3-pointers this season, and this one was forced with eight seconds left in the game. Why?

"He thought they were gonna foul him," Warriors coach Steve Kerr said, taking the blame for not reminding his team before the play that the Spurs tend not to foul in those situations.

Green, known for his hoops IQ, out-thought himself this time.




Tonight, he's out: Green (knee) is questionable for Tuesday's game against the Spurs, Anthony Slater of The Athletic reports.
Green is being listed as questionable on the second half of a back-to-back due to soreness in his right knee. Since missing the first four games of the season, Green has appeared in every game for the Warriors. If he's held out Eric Paschall could see increased run.

---

Yeah. Green played well the entire game... but made a bone-head mistake at the very end. I think he was hoping to get a call, but nobody really wants Green to be the one taking 3 FTs to tie a game. Green usually makes great decisions on offense. He made a mistake at the end. I'm not worried unless that becomes a pattern, but in his past 3 games he's had 40 assists and 13 turnovers.

wraptor347 said:

---

Yeah. Green played well the entire game... but made a bone-head mistake at the very end. I think he was hoping to get a call, but nobody really wants Green to be the one taking 3 FTs to tie a game. Green usually makes great decisions on offense. He made a mistake at the end. I'm not worried unless that becomes a pattern, but in his past 3 games he's had 40 assists and 13 turnovers.

---

The FT's are what really pissed me off. On the final play, the defender was on him with a hand, but backed off. FREE throws. At least make 1.

Big C said:

---

That's like saying, "Green puts a ton of practice and attention into his defense. I don't get the idea that Curry does nearly enough in this area."

(Sorry. Gotta stick up for my guy Draymond!)

---

And keep doing so. :-)

Anyone starting to have regret of picking Wiseman over LaMelo Ball?

Ball made a career-high seven 3-pointers most of them from several feet behind the arc and finished with 24 points, 10 assists and seven rebounds Monday night as the Charlotte Hornets defeated the short-handed Houston Rockets 119-94.

Ball is 21 of 40 from beyond the arc in his last six games.

Wiseman seems overwhelmed by the moment, while Ball seems to thrive in it.
That's a personality trait that I wouldn't expect to change.
Wiseman is a bit like a deer looking at the headlights.
Ball is like a kid in a candy store.

That said, I suspect Ball wouldn't mix well with the Warriors.
Draymond would be up his butt.
Ball wouldn't be able to play so freely with these revered vets/legends.

But, MAN, that could be a fun show. Small ball seems to be working well, and having Ball as a dynamic engine to it all could have been whiplash fun.

I've been VERY wary of any of the Balls for a long time. But Dad has finally shut up, and LaMelo is making me eat my words. Good for him.

Right now, Lebron is #1 in the ESPN MVP Straw poll with Embid #2 and Jokic #3. Curry is way down on the list.

Nice discussion last night. You gotta love Shaq admitting that the Old School "can't win without a dominant big" is outdated and that he and Barkley got "shut up".
Shaq constantly says Steph is his favorite player.

And he is extremely entertaining. He plays 1st and 3rd quarters, sits first half of 2nd and 4th, in to finish games. And when he is in, he's mostly going for it.

At the beginning of the season, he was deferring to a lot of other players. Now he knows he's just ON.
It's tough to watch other teams double team him so much, but it's also funny. Last night he got a TON of layups because they overplay him at the perimeter, then he jukes them all and the lane is wide open - he makes simple left or right jukes at the rim against a final defender for the seemingly easy layup, however even there he is magical.

Currently #2 in scoring in the league.