Let's put this Warriors 'chemistry problem' to bed

[bksballer89]

I think we've got different definitions of 'chemistry'. This post was me addressing the idea that there would be personality problems on the team, with 4 stars having problems sharing the spotlight and figuring out who's '#1' and scoring averages going down for some etc. That simply will not be a problem.

They will of course need some games to figure out their best method for playing together. That's not chemistry (to me). That's what happens any time you add significant new pieces to a team. But the players will all get along and no one will mind their role.

Anyone who believes that is an idiot and lack common sense.

 

[msgkings322]

Anyone who believes that is an idiot and lack common sense.

That idiot's name rhymes with PiggyBuss

 

[tducey]

I don't expect the Warriors to be world beaters this year but I think the team should be fine.

 

[tlance]

I don't expect the Warriors to be world beaters this year but I think the team should be fine.

Well, if they are not world beaters, then they are not fine. It is championship or bust for both Golden State and Cleveland. Not saying this is right, but anything less will be seen as a failure.

 

[LAD]

Let's see them play the games.

Two future Hall-of-Famers were in Nash and Kobe were experimented in the same backcourt in 2013...They won 45 games that year.

Wow...could you have found a worse example to use as a comparison??

 

[LAD]

Chemistry is built up over time. To say it's not going to be an issue would not be an accurate statement. You can debate the likelyhood of this being a lingering issue, but not the fact that it is an issue.

I think it's just as unfair to say for sure it will be an issue before they even play a single game as the claims of them not having any issues prior to them playing together.

Why is it ok to make the prediction- siting they haven't played together as a supporting factor- one way but not the other?

 

[CitySushi]

I think it's just as unfair to say for sure it will be an issue before they even play a single game as the claims of them not having any issues prior to them playing together.

Why is it ok to make the prediction- siting they haven't played together as a supporting factor- one way but not the other?

Well what I was saying was it is a legitimate concern with all the turnover of the team. To dismiss it outright would not be accurate. You can say that it will likely not be MUCH of a concern, but you can't positively say it won't be an issue at least at some point. Maybe that issue resolves itself during the pre-season, training camp or maybe it takes halfway through the season for it to dissolve. However, I do think the Warriors ability to overcome this is going to be much sooner than later.

I would never argue against someone saying that it won't be an issue, but the DEGREE to which it is an issue is what I would argue. I don't think it'll be a factor as much as others have said.

Also not sure what you mean by prediction based on one way or another. If a team with a huge amount of turnover has not played a single game, it's evident that there will be some time to learn a new system for guys who have never played in it. Add to that defensive rotations will be a key for the Warriors this year without major rim protection.

 

[LAD]

Also not sure what you mean by prediction based on one way or another. If a team with a huge amount of turnover has not played a single game, it's evident that there will be some time to learn a new system for guys who have never played in it. Add to that defensive rotations will be a key for the Warriors this year without major rim protection.

I just don't see how someone can be so certain there will be problems- even minor ones-without any data or history as supporting factors. This particular group hasn't played together yet so there aren't facts directly related to this group that could be used to sway the argument one way or the other. It's all subjective-no matter which side a person is for or against.

Isn't it possible they could click right away? Maybe not likely- but certainly possible, yes?

To clarify your question above (in bold) you said it can be debated whether or not their chemistry will be a lingering issue, but not the fact that it is one. How do you know for a fact it is an issue if they've never even played a game? But, then say that people who say chemistry won't be a problem isn't accurate- siting they've never played together as the reason their prediction isn't accurate. I guess what I'm trying to point out is how can the same supporting factor be used to support predictions that are in contrast to one another?

 

[CitySushi]

I just don't see how someone can be so certain there will be problems- even minor ones-without any data or history as supporting factors. This particular group hasn't played together yet so there aren't facts directly related to this group that could be used to sway the argument one way or the other. It's all subjective-no matter which side a person is for or against.

Isn't it possible they could click right away? Maybe not likely- but certainly possible, yes?

To clarify your question above (in bold) you said it can be debated whether or not their chemistry will be a lingering issue, but not the fact that it is one. How do you know for a fact it is an issue if they've never even played a game? But, then say that people who say chemistry won't be a problem isn't accurate- siting they've never played together as the reason their prediction isn't accurate. I guess what I'm trying to point out is how can the same supporting factor be used to support predictions that are in contrast to one another?

The fact that they never have played a game is definitive that there will be a learning curve. If you go on a date with someone, there is a chance that you guys can absolutely click right away. But does that mean there is not a learning period where you need to get to know each other better? Does that mean that there will not be any issues going forward?

You're mixing up what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that I cannot argue with someone who says it won't be an issue at SOME POINT for the Warriors. It will be because there is a natural learning curve for the team. The team has replaced 2/5ths of their starting lineup. Added they will also be replacing likely 3/5th of their second unit as well. What I have said is that the degree of concern over this does not worry me in the slightest. But I'm not arguing against someone who says it was an issue. It's unknown at this point and cannot be concretely stated one way or another.

I'm saying that this group of players alleviates concerns over LINGERING issues on chemistry. But there will be a learning curve for chemistry to develop, as with all relationships, personal or professional.

 

[LAD]

It's unknown at this point and cannot be concretely stated one way or another.

This is my point exactly.

 

[CitySushi]

This is my point exactly.

Ok, so I don't get what we're arguing about?

Let me put it this way. You've met probably lots of people in your life. From the minute you met them, did you know everything about them? Their likes and dislikes? Their tendencies? What their motivation was?

If you can say yes, then you're a very special person. I can't say the same for myself. Logic would dictate to me that upon meeting someone new, there is a learning period. Now whether or not that learning period takes place over 2 weeks or 2 months, is up for debate.

Steph will have to learn whether or not KD likes to cut high or low when being pressed up. Draymond will have to learn if Pachulia is going to roll to the hoop or step out at the high post on a pick and roll. David West is going to have to learn where to look for secondary pass options off the high post. KD will have to learn where to rotate off the ball, when it's swung on defense to the weakside.

I really don't know what you're arguing about with me.

 

[LAD]

Ok, so I don't get what we're arguing about?

Let me put it this way. You've met probably lots of people in your life. From the minute you met them, did you know everything about them? Their likes and dislikes? Their tendencies? What their motivation was?

If you can say yes, then you're a very special person. I can't say the same for myself. Logic would dictate to me that upon meeting someone new, there is a learning period. Now whether or not that learning period takes place over 2 weeks or 2 months, is up for debate.

Steph will have to learn whether or not KD likes to cut high or low when being pressed up. Draymond will have to learn if Pachulia is going to roll to the hoop or step out at the high post on a pick and roll. David West is going to have to learn where to look for secondary pass options off the high post. KD will have to learn where to rotate off the ball, when it's swung on defense to the weakside.

I really don't know what you're arguing about with me.

I don't think we're arguing- just debating two different perspectives.

You are correct- when I meet people I don't know everything about them. But, when I have to work with new peers (we'll use that example since it seems to apply here) while getting to know them does take time it doesn't always necessarily mean there will be issues. That is also the point I'm trying to make with this group of guys.

They're not complete strangers- but based on what we know about each of them I think it's safe to predict while they will continue to learn more about each other-there are many basketball related things they're already familiar with about one another. I think that is part of the reason Steph, Dray & Iggy helped recruit KD and welcomed him with open arms. I also think when that fact is thrown into the debate it supports the assumption that they won't have issues going forward.

But, as we've already agreed, there's no way to know what will happen for sure- either way.

 

[trojanfan12]

Let's see them play the games.

Two future Hall-of-Famers were in Nash and Kobe were experimented in the same backcourt in 2013...They won 45 games that year.

I think the fact that they only actually played maybe 5 games together all season because Nash got injured in the second game of the season, may have had a little something to do with the number of wins. Don't you?

 

[WiggyRuss]

Ok, so I don't get what we're arguing about?

Let me put it this way. l. David West is going to have to learn where to park his wheelchair, as there just is not space on the bench.

I really don't know what you're arguing about with me.

what?

 

[trojanfan12]

Logic would dictate to me that upon meeting someone new, there is a learning period. Now whether or not that learning period takes place over 2 weeks or 2 months, is up for debate.

I think people are confusing "chemistry problems" with learning to play together. Chemistry problems are guys not getting along, complaining about touches, who works harder, etc. Think Shaq/Kobe.

What you are describing is learning to play together. Learning to play together can become chemistry problems if they are never able to figure it out so that everyone is happy. But a team learning to play together doesn't automatically mean chemistry problems, even if it may look that way at times while they are figuring things out.

Of course, if they struggle at all or one of them so much as sighs or looks like he's mad, it will be reported as chemistry problems.

 

[WiggyRuss]

All the talk of how 4 stars can't coexist, expected fights over who is 'the man'...

Not a chance, y'all. The team was already noted for their chemistry, how tight they were, no egos, all likeable guys who would go through walls for each other (including Draymond, especially him, if he's on your team you love him), for example Iguodala accepting the 'bench' role without a peep.

Now add KD, also known for an ego in check (almost to a fault). He's going to fit right in from day 1, this is a perfect spot for him.

The Warriors are NOT a team that will have chemistry problems

So the haters need to come up with something else, this one is done.

def. put these chemistry issues to bed....no doubt about it.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

def. put these chemistry issues to bed....no doubt about it.

Klay sure opening the season like a "superstar" in front of his home fans...Two points, zero rebounds, zero assists, GS trails by 18.

 

[Shanemansj13]

They need to work on turnover problems.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Curry, KD and Pachulia cant play defense

 

[WiggyRuss]

Curry, KD and Pachulia cant play defense

draymond is obviously a great defender- and he is a "big" man despite being 6 foot 8 on a GENEROUS day....it just seems like that is a problem....that they have 2 bigs that are both older guys, neither are rim protectors and neither are particularly good defenders...

i mean- its knit picking- the Warriors are gonna win a ton of games and compete for the title- but i think its hard to operate when you have such weakness in your front court.