Warriors 2.0: from Showtime Lakers to the Spurs

[Bart]

.

OK, for the last time, and I'm asking this in good faith: do you genuinely not realize how you come across, or is this just your way of having fun here? Nothing wrong with either answer, but there are only two ways to explain your posting/argument style:

1. You like to stir things up, to pretend not to understand what the other guy means if they elide a word or phrase because to most that word or phrase is implicit and obvious, to seize on semantic minutiae and go on for pages about them...you like that because that's how you enjoy posting on message boards. It's trollish and assholish but you are well within your rights to be that way. We'll call this "dtroll"

Or

2. Are you genuinely puzzled by the pushback you get here, by the ridicule and laughter you engender? Do you genuinely think your arguments are rock solid and appropriate in the manner they are presented, and that everyone else misunderstands you and furthermore is incapable of reaching your level of logic? We'll call this "dtsperg"

There is no other alternative. You are either dtroll or dtsperg. If there's a third possibility I'm all ears.

Because here's the thing, the Klay > AD thing encapsulates this perfectly. To non-spergs, Wamu's point was childishly obvious. He was saying given two players of similar or comparable ability, he prefers the one who is a shooter. He did not need to spell out that for players with an obvious chasm between them (like Klay and AD), his point was not applicable. Non-spergs understand that implicitly. So either you literally do not understand his point (one that we all do, easily), or you do and you are dtroll.

As I say, either if fine but I have no idea which it is.

Pretty harsh, bud. I like dtgold, he makes things entertaining here.

 

[msgkings322]

.


Pretty harsh, bud. I like dtgold, he makes things entertaining here.

I agree! He's a great poster, intelligent and friendly. But he argues like he's either a troll or a little socially unaware. I'm genuinely curious which.

And if you've seen his style with Wamu and others, I'm no more harsh than he is.

 

[Bart]

I agree! He's a great poster, intelligent and friendly. But he argues like he's either a troll or a little socially unaware. I'm genuinely curious which.

And if you've seen his style with Wamu and others, I'm no more harsh than he is.

True, but writing a whole dissertation about someone's posting behavior is a bit too harsh, IMHO.

 

[msgkings322]

True, but writing a whole dissertation about someone's posting behavior is a bit too harsh, IMHO.

I'm just baffled, honestly. I had to lay it out like that because he hasn't responded to simpler inquiries.

 

[handicappers]

weed is a gateway drug

 

[broncosmitty]

Ok, bear with me, just back from a nice run at the poker room and pretty high on cannabis. But this is my real opinion, heard this on local radio, makes a lot of sense.

Signing Draymond solidifies the model the Warriors are going for here. They obviously are no longer the 300 pound gorilla dominant team that they just were. Like the 90s Bulls and Showtime Lakers, they were one of the top 5 (top 3?) best teams of all time, and everyone knew it, and every year they were expected to be in the Finals.

Those days are obviously over. So now they have the core of Curry, Thompson, and Green signed up long term. They do not expect them to be as good as they age, but they will be the core. The model is the Spurs, who were never the big dog gorilla team that everyone feared at the start of the year, they were just excellent and contenders year after year. Never got to back to back Finals (let alone won back to back).

Spurs had their core 3 (Duncan, Ginobili, Parker), Warriors have theirs. Spurs had Pop. Warriors have Kerr, a Pop disciple and, if his back holds up, can be expected to be around a while. He's not some angry intense yelling coach who wears players out. Like the Spurs, to make this work the Ws will need their own Kawhi, a young talent who catalyzes the vets. Is it D'Angelo? Maybe maybe not. But over the next 5 years I think the Warriors have as good a shot as any at winning another ring, maybe two. The core guys are middle aged not old. Jordan was just hitting his stride at 30 as far as rings.

So that's what's up...

I've also succumbed to reefer madness this fine evening good sir.


And agree with your Dubs optimism.


While hoping I can see Draymond in a Stones uni before he gets his final T.

 

[broncosmitty]

weed is a gateway drug

Like Little House on the Prairie was a gateway TV show to Highway to Heaven.



#HighOnVictorFrench

 

[handicappers]

Like Little House on the Prairie was a gateway TV show to Highway to Heaven.



#HighOnVictorFrench

The Waltons was a gateway to suicide.

 

[broncosmitty]

The Waltons was a gateway to suicide.

 

[dtgold88]

Completely? He had the big 3....just like the Warriors and Kerr are trying.

Pretty sure duncan was the only constant in the first 2 wasn't he? Going by memory, but the Big 3 were him, Robinson and Elliot, correct? Then replace Elliot/Robinson with Parker/Ginobili

Then got back with them playing bit parts and kawhi the #2.

Isn't to say another coach could not have had success with those guys.....but Pop did. so far, Kerr had the same Big 3 during the run, only adding Durant after a 3-1 failure.

 

[dtgold88]

Who said likely? I said they are in the mix. The bookies think they are 6th best to win it THIS year. Better than Boston, Utah, and Denver. The idea is not that they are going to keep motorboating the league, it's that they are going to be in the mix for the next 4-5 years and with some luck (like all champions need) might get another win or two.

I really don't see what's wrong with that logic.

Also, it's just an ACL. Guys come back from those all the time especially with modern medicine. It's not an Achilles, or a blown up knee like Shawn Livingston, or even Paul George's leg break.

100% spot on here.....nothing wrong with being in the mix but not a no-brainer favorite.

 

[dtgold88]

OK, for the last time, and I'm asking this in good faith: do you genuinely not realize how you come across, or is this just your way of having fun here? Nothing wrong with either answer, but there are only two ways to explain your posting/argument style:

1. You like to stir things up, to pretend not to understand what the other guy means if they elide a word or phrase because to most that word or phrase is implicit and obvious, to seize on semantic minutiae and go on for pages about them...you like that because that's how you enjoy posting on message boards. It's trollish and assholish but you are well within your rights to be that way. We'll call this "dtroll"

Or

2. Are you genuinely puzzled by the pushback you get here, by the ridicule and laughter you engender? Do you genuinely think your arguments are rock solid and appropriate in the manner they are presented, and that everyone else misunderstands you and furthermore is incapable of reaching your level of logic? We'll call this "dtsperg"

There is no other alternative. You are either dtroll or dtsperg. If there's a third possibility I'm all ears.

Because here's the thing, the Klay > AD thing encapsulates this perfectly. To non-spergs, Wamu's point was childishly obvious. He was saying given two players of similar or comparable ability, he prefers the one who is a shooter. He did not need to spell out that for players with an obvious chasm between them (like Klay and AD), his point was not applicable. Non-spergs understand that implicitly. So either you literally do not understand his point (one that we all do, easily), or you do and you are dtroll.

As I say, either if fine but I have no idea which it is.

Here's the 3rd possibilty, not that I expect you to have an open mind (or between 2 similar players in overall ability). Was kind of new here and I cannot read minds. Had he said only between Love and Klay he prefers the shooter I could understand, but he made a generic like comment saying between the shooter and big guy.

I get you are argue the poster and not post guy - and no need to come with the "it's not me, it must be you because so many say so" retort. They are also argue the poster and not post guys. I'm still the newer guy and expect it. I was a lot younger back then but probably found myself playing that role back in my AOL forum or CBS days so I get it.

As for most of the ridicule and laughter? I laugh at it. I mean, a guy can go off on a meltdown filled with F bombs and namecalling and tell me I'm unstable and folks will agree. Ya gotta chuckle at that.

If I got upset about it I have it in me to ignore a post and/or scroll.

 

[dtgold88]

I just did!

That reminded me of the My Cousin Vinny line when the witness says "you could say that" and he replies, "I did say that...would you say that."

 

[dtgold88]

.


Pretty harsh, bud. I like dtgold, he makes things entertaining here.

Thanks?

All seriousness, thought I gave a good, fair reply. ...didn't think his post was harsh.

 

[dtgold88]

I agree! He's a great poster, intelligent and friendly. But he argues like he's either a troll or a little socially unaware. I'm genuinely curious which.

And if you've seen his style with Wamu and others, I'm no more harsh than he is.

You have been, though I'm just one who isn't easy to offend. Pretty sure you have called me autistic and/or retarded.

I argue if there is something to argue. If you notice I pretty much never (or very rarely) start a troll thread. I often reply after I'm called out by the real troll. Isn't to say I never troll.

 

[dtgold88]

I'm just baffled, honestly. I had to lay it out like that because he hasn't responded to simpler inquiries.

I answer all direct questions if I notice....unlike many of your buds who dance, deflect, distort and spin.

In fact, once I gave a list of the posting styles one might have and asked you to choose where you thought you fell in. You deflected and never answered.

How long before I get ripped for derailing this thread (keep in mind I pretty much agreed with you on your topic)?

I kid.....I kid. Sort of.

 

[dtgold88]

Here it is, @msgkings322 ....asked you a while back a similar question about style and you would not answer.

We have these traits in most posters

1) Love to argue
2) Comments are made based on poster and not post
3) wont admit when they are wrong
4) wont let go when someone wont admit to a mistake or foolish comment
5) want the last word
6) Call people out for 1-5 while doing 1-5

I'm guilty of 1, 4 and 5.

You? I'd say 1, 2, 4, 6 but what say you?

 

[CitySushi]

Would have thought @CitySushi would like this post/thread, and add to it, but he seems to not like me being another frequent-posting Warriors fan.

Too bad, he's a great poster.

LOL wut. I'm almost never on during the weekend, unless it's to quickly check something or post a pick on the mocks. I haven't even read your initial post, but will do sometime soon. Chill, lol.

 

[shopson67]

weed is a gateway drug

....to junk food, a LOT of junk food

 

[CitySushi]

So lot to process here in this threat but:

1) Yes the Warriors have committed long term to their big 3, but I believe this was always the plan all along. Even in the huge debates with @WiggyRuss it was conceded that the Warriors may not be able to pay all 4 of their stars long term, but there was hope that in the short term they would stay together for at least another year. Since KD opted to leave, the Warriors had to pivot and honestly it was the safest move for them to lock up those 3. All 3 players will likely be just outside of their primes by the time their new deals expire, so it gives the Warriors flexibility. They will most certainly need to hit on some younger players to go the route of the Spurs model, but come playoff time I believe those three will be the heavy lifters.

2) Honestly the biggest key to the Spurs model was Duncan, Parker and Ginobili. Their conduct on the court and their selfless style of play was able to help them sustain their play. Additionally they were able to take backseats when necessary to younger players and there will likely be a time when that needs to happen for some of the Warriors guys as well.

3) Kerr will need to prove himself again. He transformed the 2015 team, but slowly got away from that each and every year. 2016 he had that back injury that kept him out a significant period of time and he was still affected on the bench with crazy headaches. Then in 2017 they added Durant so he shifted some principles to help incorporate him. It's been a slow downward slide for him on his in game coaching and his strategies, and he'll need to completely reinvent his vision for the current Warriors and the foreseeable future. Pop was able to do that. Kerr has to prove he can do this as well.

4) RC Buford is really someone that people over look when they're assessing the Spurs dynasty. The Warriors will need to replenish their roster and fully utilize their draft picks to maximize the potential run of the Warriors core. Bob Myers needs to show he can hit on these guys and get some value. Because of the Warriors run, he drafted specialists/immediate impact guys, instead of trying to dig a bit deeper. Guys like McCaw, Bell, Evans, Jones, etc were all guys he hoped could just plug and play at various times because he was limited with what he could do in free agency. I get it, but at the same time, it's now put us in a huge hole because none of them worked out. If just one of those players became a starter level player at this juncture, we'd be talking about the Warriors in a much different tone.

TLR

Cliff notes:
Keys will be Core giving way to youth at times, Kerr reinventing the team dynamic, and Bob Myers elevating the talent of the roster.