Montalban's Official Bitch About tHe Warriors Superthread

[msgkings322]

They should win 60 games since the West is tougher this year from top to bottom and everyone will be gunning for the Warriors.

So are you gonna bitch after each of the next 20 losses? To be fair they didn't give great effort but this first week has been weird that way for a lot of teams

 

[Montalban]

Livingston is not an excellent defender. A capable one yes, but he brings next to nothing on offense with that unit. There's a reason he plays with the second unit because he's able to utilize his size on iso's on the block. That's not what you want in an offense that has Steph, KD and Klay on the floor at the same time.

In addition, without Draymond and Iguodala, you have two of your 3 best facilitators off the floor as well as two of your best defenders. The Warriors operate a motion offense, and very little pick and roll. And on top of that almost NO pick and roll offense without Draymond.

So you basically have no cohension on offense within the scheme, but you still expect KD and Steph to produce? That's now how they operate and it's not how they're efficient.

Then on defense, the 5th guy has to be able to defend a wing player. That immediately eliminates more than half the bench. Bell, Jones, Looney, West, Pachulia and McGee can't do it. Draymond and Casspi are out.

That left you with a remaining bunch to choose from: McCaw or Nick Young. McCaw is good defensively, but again he brings next to nothing offensively at this point. Or you go with Nick Young who still isn't very good defensively.

Go with McCaw. Then you have two guys, McCaw and Livingston, who bring nothing to the offense and stand around. You can let the defense load up on KD and Steph with easy doubles to prevent looks.

Or you go with Young, who was completely lost defensively that first game.

Lastly, there is no going big and controlling the boards against the Rockets who put out 5 elite three point shooters on the court at any one time. You put two bigs out there and they're going to run you off the court. Think about HOW the rockets erased that lead. It wasn't by a layup line...

I could do this all day...

]Livingston is not an excellent defender
I didn't say he was. I was referring to Thompson
There's a reason he plays with the second unit because he's able to utilize his size on iso's on the block.
Wait a minute, didn't you say we needed to take advantage of the Rockets small lineup? Seems your description above screams for Livingston to be in there.
an offense that has Steph, KD and Klay on the floor at the same time.
Now you're talking. That team on the floor should be able to out-score any opponent for a quarter with a 17-point head start.
In addition, without Draymond and Iguodala, you have two of your 3 best facilitators off the floor as well as two of your best defenders
No reason Curry and Thompson and Livingston can't do the facilitating; especially with the guys each would have available to pass to. Maybe the three most dangerous shooters in the conference? Addionally, Thompson and Durant are excellent defenders; at least good enough to defend a 17-point 4th quarter lead not to mention the great offense they have around them.
Rockets who put out 5 elite three point shooters on the court at any one time.
No they don't. But the Warriors put out 4.
I could go on all day, but elite teams even missing some pieces do not lose 17-point 4th quarter leads at home to inferior teams.

 

[Montalban]

So are you gonna bitch after each of the next 20 losses? To be fair they didn't give great effort but this first week has been weird that way for a lot of teams

Knowing me; probably.

 

[SJ76]

Durant should be kicked out of a minimum 5 games his year due to having fake twitter accounts.

 

[CitySushi]

]Livingston is not an excellent defender
I didn't say he was. I was referring to Thompson
There's a reason he plays with the second unit because he's able to utilize his size on iso's on the block.
Wait a minute, didn't you say we needed to take advantage of the Rockets small lineup? Seems your description above screams for Livingston to be in there.
an offense that has Steph, KD and Klay on the floor at the same time.
Now you're talking. That team on the floor should be able to out-score any opponent for a quarter with a 17-point head start.
In addition, without Draymond and Iguodala, you have two of your 3 best facilitators off the floor as well as two of your best defenders
No reason Curry and Thompson and Livingston can't do the facilitating; especially with the guys each would have available to pass to. Maybe the three most dangerous shooters in the conference? Addionally, Thompson and Durant are excellent defenders; at least good enough to defend a 17-point 4th quarter lead not to mention the great offense they have around them.
Rockets who put out 5 elite three point shooters on the court at any one time.
No they don't. But the Warriors put out 4.
I could go on all day, but elite teams even missing some pieces do not lose 17-point 4th quarter leads at home to inferior teams.

You said two of the best players in the league (I'm assuming KD and Steph) paired with two excellent defenders. If one is Thompson, who is the other?

I didn't say take advantage of the Rockets small lineup, I said to combat it. They're a highly potent offense. Putting Livingston out there doesn't offer anything offensively and he's not a great defender. Also if you think putting him on the block is a better option than keeping the ball in the hands of Curry or Durant, you're insane.

The fact that you listed Thompson as a facilitator, tells me everything I need to know about your knowledge of their games. What sort of offense are they supposed to run with two non-shooters on the court and no big man for a pick and roll game?

Also when you have two non-shooters in the game, where do their defenders go? Think hard about this one, with respects to the other guys on the court.

Two good defenders don't make up for 3. That's just bad math.

Rockets Career 3 point averages without CP3:
Anderson: 38.1
Harden: 36.4
Gordon: 37.9
Tucker: 35.3
Ariza: 35.0

 

[Montalban]

Durant should be kicked out of a minimum 5 games his year due to having fake twitter accounts.

Ya, that is flat out weird. Being that worried about what people think that you have to make up friends on line to defend you? Good lord, that doesn't say much about his self esteem. He should know he is one of the best players on the planet and not give a fuck what people on the net say.

 

[CitySushi]

@Montalban

We're pretty much going in circles at this point.

You haven't disputed anything I've written from a technical aspect. You also haven't provided any insight as to what the Warriors should have done to combat that loss other than mostly a "play better" game plan. So if you have anything to contribute to what the Warriors could have actually done better in terms of their loss to the Rockets game, I'll probably call it a day with this one.

 

[Montalban]

You said two of the best players in the league (I'm assuming KD and Steph) paired with two excellent defenders. If one is Thompson, who is the other?

I didn't say take advantage of the Rockets small lineup, I said to combat it. They're a highly potent offense. Putting Livingston out there doesn't offer anything offensively and he's not a great defender. Also if you think putting him on the block is a better option than keeping the ball in the hands of Curry or Durant, you're insane.

The fact that you listed Thompson as a facilitator, tells me everything I need to know about your knowledge of their games. What sort of offense are they supposed to run with two non-shooters on the court and no big man for a pick and roll game?

Also when you have two non-shooters in the game, where do their defenders go? Think hard about this one, with respects to the other guys on the court.

Two good defenders don't make up for 3. That's just bad math.

Rockets Career 3 point averages without CP3:
Anderson: 38.1
Harden: 36.4
Gordon: 37.9
Tucker: 35.3
Ariza: 35.0

Livingston can post up any of the 5 guys you mention above so he would be effective on offense. Just because he is posting on the block does not mean he has to shoot it, however. he has the three best shooters in the conference to pass to.
Durant and Thompson are excellent defenders but I did say "along with" Curry and Durant so I'll give you that. But my lineup clearly does not have two non-shooters in it. We disagree whole heartedly about Livingston's ability to score and rebound but Swaggy P is definitely not a non-shooter.
Again though, the 17-point cushion negates all your arguments. There is no denying that a lineup of Curry, Thompson, Durant, Livingston and any 5th guy, even if they gave up 40 in the quarter, should not be able to score 24 of their own and win the game. You cannot deny that.

 

[Montalban]

@Montalban

We're pretty much going in circles at this point.

You haven't disputed anything I've written from a technical aspect. You also haven't provided any insight as to what the Warriors should have done to combat that loss other than mostly a "play better" game plan. So if you have anything to contribute to what the Warriors could have actually done better in terms of their loss to the Rockets game, I'll probably call it a day with this one.

Of course I have, you just don't want to see it. I could say the same thing about you in regards to my arguments. If you can dispute that a lineup as offensively talented as Durant, Curry, Thompson, Livingston and Young should be able hold a 17-point lead for 12 minutes, I'll listen.

 

[tlance]

Livingston can post up any of the 5 guys you mention above so he would be effective on offense. Just because he is posting on the block does not mean he has to shoot it, however. he has the three best shooters in the conference to pass to.
Durant and Thompson are excellent defenders but I did say "along with" Curry and Durant so I'll give you that. But my lineup clearly does not have two non-shooters in it. We disagree whole heartedly about Livingston's ability to score and rebound but Swaggy P is definitely not a non-shooter.
Again though, the 17-point cushion negates all your arguments. There is no denying that a lineup of Curry, Thompson, Durant, Livingston and any 5th guy, even if they gave up 40 in the quarter, should not be able to score 24 of their own and win the game. You cannot deny that.

That is the exact point you are failing to grasp though.

Posting Livingston is fine when he is playing alongside McCaw, Iggy, McGee and one of the starters. If you are running the offense through Livingston with KD and curry on the court, then you are doing it wrong.

If I am coaching against that lineup, I put my smallest, weakest defender on Livingston (an intentioNlly bad matchup if you will) begging them to try and take advantage.

 

[tlance]

Of course I have, you just don't want to see it. I could say the same thing about you in regards to my arguments. If you can dispute that a lineup as offensively talented as Durant, Curry, Thompson, Livingston and Young should be able hold a 17-point lead for 12 minutes, I'll listen.

His arguments are actually good though. They speak to a profound understanding of the game.

 

[CitySushi]

Of course I have, you just don't want to see it. I could say the same thing about you in regards to my arguments. If you can dispute that a lineup as offensively talented as Durant, Curry, Thompson, Livingston and Young should be able hold a 17-point lead for 12 minutes, I'll listen.

What offense would you have the Warriors run with that lineup? The reason the Warriors small lineup is effective is because you have Draymond. He's the key and I don't think you seem to grasp that. Without him there is no pick and roll offense for the Warriors to run. Steph and KD can't run a P&R together. Klay and Young are off the ball scorers. Livingston is useless outside the block.

So if your offense is predicated on putting Livingston in the block on a post up, you're basically relegating KD and Steph to being weakside spot up shooters. You'd have a 1 in-four out offense with your least productive offensive player with the ball in his hands at all times with that unit. You've taken the ball out of Durant's and Steph's hands to create for others. On top of that it's exponentially more difficult for them to create for others without having any sort of pick and roll option. You're just asking them to iso (which is not their game) and just make something happen. But you know who is elite at this? James Harden.

Also it was a 13 point 4th quarter lead. I haven't corrected you previously, but it was 13.

What I don't think you're grasping is that while each of those players, INDIVIDUALLY, is great, the sum of their parts do not work as effectively within the constructs of the offense without two essential cogs: Draymond and Iguodala. They are the reason the small ball lineup works. Without them it's almost impossible to get the semblance of balance the Warriors covet.

You have to factor in how the parts work. You can't just put bodies out there like you think they will fit and disregard any negative aspect.

The Rockets are a great team. It's not like the Warriors got dismantled by the Nets. They got outscored by an OVERALL better small ball lineup. That's not to say individually they were better, but collectively, they were better.

Otherwise the Thunder would have killed the Spurs every year when they had KD and Russ. Those two guys for years were the best combo in basketball. But they couldn't get passed the Spurs because collectively, they were better as the sum of their parts. It's the same thing that happened in the Rockets game.

That's my spiel. If you can dissect it and tell me where I'm wrong I'd be happy to listen.

 

[Montalban]

His arguments are actually good though. They speak to a profound understanding of the game.

So, Here is the scenario:

You have to bet your family's lives on the outcome of one quarter of basketball. The Rockets have Anderson, Harden, Gordon, Tucker and Ariza (Sushi's dream lineup).
The Warriors have Curry, Durant, Thompson, Livingston and any other Golden State Player. The Warriors have a 17 point head start and are playing at home in front of 12,000 rabid fans and need to come out ahead after 12 minutes. Who are you going to put your bet on to win the game?

I'll answer for you; The Warriors. That's it in a nutshell. They are better and should have won.

 

[Montalban]

What offense would you have the Warriors run with that lineup? The reason the Warriors small lineup is effective is because you have Draymond. He's the key and I don't think you seem to grasp that. Without him there is no pick and roll offense for the Warriors to run. Steph and KD can't run a P&R together. Klay and Young are off the ball scorers. Livingston is useless outside the block.

So if your offense is predicated on putting Livingston in the block on a post up, you're basically relegating KD and Steph to being weakside spot up shooters. You'd have a 1 in-four out offense with your least productive offensive player with the ball in his hands at all times with that unit. You've taken the ball out of Durant's and Steph's hands to create for others. On top of that it's exponentially more difficult for them to create for others without having any sort of pick and roll option. You're just asking them to iso (which is not their game) and just make something happen. But you know who is elite at this? James Harden.

Also it was a 13 point 4th quarter lead. I haven't corrected you previously, but it was 13.

What I don't think you're grasping is that while each of those players, INDIVIDUALLY, is great, the sum of their parts do not work as effectively within the constructs of the offense without two essential cogs: Draymond and Iguodala. They are the reason the small ball lineup works. Without them it's almost impossible to get the semblance of balance the Warriors covet.

You have to factor in how the parts work. You can't just put bodies out there like you think they will fit and disregard any negative aspect.

The Rockets are a great team. It's not like the Warriors got dismantled by the Nets. They got outscored by an OVERALL better small ball lineup. That's not to say individually they were better, but collectively, they were better.

Otherwise the Thunder would have killed the Spurs every year when they had KD and Russ. Those two guys for years were the best combo in basketball. But they couldn't get passed the Spurs because collectively, they were better as the sum of their parts. It's the same thing that happened in the Rockets game.

That's my spiel. If you can dissect it and tell me where I'm wrong I'd be happy to listen.

I direct you to post 73 which ends all arguments about who should have won the game. I guarantee you, despite all your hand wringing and excuse making, you'd take my lineup over yours with the given scenario.

 

[Montalban]

What offense would you have the Warriors run with that lineup? The reason the Warriors small lineup is effective is because you have Draymond. He's the key and I don't think you seem to grasp that. Without him there is no pick and roll offense for the Warriors to run. Steph and KD can't run a P&R together. Klay and Young are off the ball scorers. Livingston is useless outside the block.

So if your offense is predicated on putting Livingston in the block on a post up, you're basically relegating KD and Steph to being weakside spot up shooters. You'd have a 1 in-four out offense with your least productive offensive player with the ball in his hands at all times with that unit. You've taken the ball out of Durant's and Steph's hands to create for others. On top of that it's exponentially more difficult for them to create for others without having any sort of pick and roll option. You're just asking them to iso (which is not their game) and just make something happen. But you know who is elite at this? James Harden.

Also it was a 13 point 4th quarter lead. I haven't corrected you previously, but it was 13.

What I don't think you're grasping is that while each of those players, INDIVIDUALLY, is great, the sum of their parts do not work as effectively within the constructs of the offense without two essential cogs: Draymond and Iguodala. They are the reason the small ball lineup works. Without them it's almost impossible to get the semblance of balance the Warriors covet.

You have to factor in how the parts work. You can't just put bodies out there like you think they will fit and disregard any negative aspect.

The Rockets are a great team. It's not like the Warriors got dismantled by the Nets. They got outscored by an OVERALL better small ball lineup. That's not to say individually they were better, but collectively, they were better.

Otherwise the Thunder would have killed the Spurs every year when they had KD and Russ. Those two guys for years were the best combo in basketball. But they couldn't get passed the Spurs because collectively, they were better as the sum of their parts. It's the same thing that happened in the Rockets game.

That's my spiel. If you can dissect it and tell me where I'm wrong I'd be happy to listen.

Agreed. It was 17 with a minute left in the 3rd. 13 minutes-12 minutes, no difference. They should have held the lead.

 

[Montalban]

That is the exact point you are failing to grasp though.

Posting Livingston is fine when he is playing alongside McCaw, Iggy, McGee and one of the starters. If you are running the offense through Livingston with KD and curry on the court, then you are doing it wrong.

If I am coaching against that lineup, I put my smallest, weakest defender on Livingston (an intentioNlly bad matchup if you will) begging them to try and take advantage.

So you post up Durant. Who stops him inside with Houston's vaunted small offense?

 

[tlance]

So, Here is the scenario:

You have to bet your family's lives on the outcome of one quarter of basketball. The Rockets have Anderson, Harden, Gordon, Tucker and Ariza (Sushi's dream lineup).
The Warriors have Curry, Durant, Thompson, Livingston and any other Golden State Player. The Warriors have a 17 point head start and are playing at home in front of 12,000 rabid fans and need to come out ahead after 12 minutes. Who are you going to put your bet on to win the game?

I'll answer for you; The Warriors. That's it in a nutshell. They are better and should have won.

I would bet on the Hawks with a 17 point lead. That is not the point though.

Draymond is by far their most irreplaceable player. Remove any other player and they are still best in the league. Dray? Not so sure.

 

[Montalban]

I would bet on the Hawks with a 17 point lead. That is not the point though.

Draymond is by far their most irreplaceable player. Remove any other player and they are still best in the league. Dray? Not so sure.

Its exactly the point.

 

[Montalban]

The baskets that the Mavs made to cut it to 48-36 and 53-44 epitomize the Warrior season so far. Three rebounds before they scored on each of those two possessions.
Then we have the Mavs shooitng 18 free throws already and the Warriors being in the penalty already with more than half the second quarter remaining.

The talent level difference betwee the Mavs and Warriors is staggering but yet the Mavs hang in there by oiut-hustliung and out rebounding the Warriors. The Warriors are incredibly lazy.

 

[tlance]

The baskets that the Mavs made to cut it to 48-36 and 53-44 epitomize the Warrior season so far. Three rebounds before they scored on each of those two possessions.
Then we have the Mavs shooitng 18 free throws already and the Warriors being in the penalty already with more than half the second quarter remaining.

The talent level difference betwee the Mavs and Warriors is staggering but yet the Mavs hang in there by oiut-hustliung and out rebounding the Warriors. The Warriors are incredibly lazy.

You do understand that this is the single biggest game of the season on Dallas' schedule right?

Say what you will, but the Mavs have a lot more to play for in this one than the Warriors do. Of course they will be the hungrier team.