RealGM

CDM_Stats wrote:

Scotty2Hotty wrote:

CDM_Stats wrote:CP3 makes the team better than Poole did, on paper.

Depends on what paper you’re viewing. If it’s scoring, no. If it’s keeping the Warriors pace flowing, no. If it’s more than a 1-year solution, no.

I suppose if you’re banking on a slight fraction of an uptick in more assists and less turnovers, then on paper, you might be right.

basketball math is a lot more complicated than the sum of players' PPGs but ok

You’re more exhilarated that Poole is gone than the addition of Paul. It’s fool’s gold.

Scotty2Hotty wrote:

CDM_Stats wrote:

Scotty2Hotty wrote:
Depends on what paper you’re viewing. If it’s scoring, no. If it’s keeping the Warriors pace flowing, no. If it’s more than a 1-year solution, no.

I suppose if you’re banking on a slight fraction of an uptick in more assists and less turnovers, then on paper, you might be right.

basketball math is a lot more complicated than the sum of players' PPGs but ok

You’re more exhilarated that Poole is gone than the addition of Paul. It’s fool’s gold.

I dont really care which one you think is more important, its just one transaction where we got better short and long term, and the data bears that out. And when I say data, I mean actual data that points to winning, not just looking up stats on ESPN and doing some basic math

CDM_Stats wrote:

Scotty2Hotty wrote:

CDM_Stats wrote:
basketball math is a lot more complicated than the sum of players' PPGs but ok

You’re more exhilarated that Poole is gone than the addition of Paul. It’s fool’s gold.

I dont really care which one you think is more important, its just one transaction where we got better short and long term, and the data bears that out. And when I say data, I mean actual data that points to winning, not just looking up stats on ESPN and doing some basic math

Did we argue over how to replace BadPorn’s scoring?

Lacob reiterated that he wants the core 3 to retire as Warriors.

Discussions on extending Klay Thompson, who’s entering the final year of a five-year, $190 million deal, are quiet at this point, according to Lacob, though he remains optimistic that they’ll figure it out at some point. “Certainly, we’d like Steph, Draymond and Klay to retire as Warriors,” he said. “That is my goal, our goal, and I think it’s a good likelihood that’ll happen.”

CDM_Stats wrote:

a8bil wrote:

CDM_Stats wrote:
Do I? You misunderstanding doesn't make what I say any less correct

Easiest to find an off-ball shooter. Dont know why you think it has to be an exact statistical replacement.. but in that case, I'd still argue its correct. I get that you're for some reason taking up the mantle for Klay right now, but you can make that point with being obtuse about it

Yeah, you do. You keep saying how easy it is to find an off-ball shooter...I'm calling your bluff. My point, which is far from obtuse, is that getting someone who shoots at Klay's level involves paying a max contract...far from an "easy" replacement as you continue to proclaim.

lol ok

look if you want to be the weirdo stan for someone by clearly misrepresenting what people say, you go for it. Leave me the **** out of it, I don't like seeing quality posters go down the troll road

And FTR, easiest is relative. So using your own logic, go find the best 3pt shooter ever? No? Ok, how about one of the best PGs in the past 30 years? No? Ok, how about a 2 way wing that can guard the other team's best perimeter defender while also being a plus rebounder that can shift to PF? No? Ok no problem, all we need is a PF that can play C, run a defense and guard 1-5 while also running the offense? No? Ok last chance, all we need to find is a 21% reb-rate C that can defend anywhere on the court that sets good screens and can also be the point center?

No? Nobody? So maybe saying that Klay's the easiest to replace because his skillset is one of the most common among NBA players actually does make sense? Because thats why I said it. Enjoy the attention your weird Klay fetish gets ya, this is the last from me

Weirdo stan? Troll road? Klay fetish? Are you like 12 yo? Grow up child.

a8bil wrote:

CDM_Stats wrote:

a8bil wrote: Yeah, you do. You keep saying how easy it is to find an off-ball shooter...I'm calling your bluff. My point, which is far from obtuse, is that getting someone who shoots at Klay's level involves paying a max contract...far from an "easy" replacement as you continue to proclaim.

lol ok

look if you want to be the weirdo stan for someone by clearly misrepresenting what people say, you go for it. Leave me the **** out of it, I don't like seeing quality posters go down the troll road

And FTR, easiest is relative. So using your own logic, go find the best 3pt shooter ever? No? Ok, how about one of the best PGs in the past 30 years? No? Ok, how about a 2 way wing that can guard the other team's best perimeter defender while also being a plus rebounder that can shift to PF? No? Ok no problem, all we need is a PF that can play C, run a defense and guard 1-5 while also running the offense? No? Ok last chance, all we need to find is a 21% reb-rate C that can defend anywhere on the court that sets good screens and can also be the point center?

No? Nobody? So maybe saying that Klay's the easiest to replace because his skillset is one of the most common among NBA players actually does make sense? Because thats why I said it. Enjoy the attention your weird Klay fetish gets ya, this is the last from me

Weirdo stan? Troll road? Klay fetish? Are you like 12 yo? Grow up child.

yes, yes, yes. Because your logic was terrible and was clearly done so you could get on your soapbox about Klay, who I dont even hate nearly as much as the board does. Pathetically transparent, tbh

And at least make a better argument next time. You see the part where your argument makes no sense? Maybe that should be the focus

CDM_Stats wrote:

Scotty2Hotty wrote:

CDM_Stats wrote:
basketball math is a lot more complicated than the sum of players' PPGs but ok

You’re more exhilarated that Poole is gone than the addition of Paul. It’s fool’s gold.

I dont really care which one you think is more important, its just one transaction where we got better short and long term, and the data bears that out. And when I say data, I mean actual data that points to winning, not just looking up stats on ESPN and doing some basic math

Wow we really got better short term with acquiring Chris Paul. And long term? How quickly will he and his absurd 28.4M for a 38-year old 2nd team PG be shuttle-trained out?

I guess you were right. We won a whopping two more games this season, ESPN stats, basic math & all not even needed.

Straight to the 10th seed and a one-game exit.

The data really bared that out.

Tried to tell you...fool’s gold. But nope...you didn't want to listen. Too stubborn to listen...stubborn much like your fav cheap-shot narcissist who once again...just couldn't help himself this season...12 games missed. 12 games that could have been given to a more level-headed trade averaging more than a triple single for the 6th season in a row.

But let's just bring he & CP3 back. Let's run this sh*t show back one more time. See if the data can manage to bear that out next season, both for the short and long term.

Yeah, scotty, you are corect. We got rid of Poole who played at an MVP level this season for old man CP3. And while we could have kept the Shaqtin a fool MVP and his salary for three more years, we now will shed Paul's non-guaranteed contract this summer. What a disaster!

if you think that the poole/cp3 trade led to our downfall then i don't really know what to tell you beside the fact you don't see the forest for the trees.

CP3 was entirely about getting Poole off the team. That he may have helped us win an extra game or two over last year was purely coincidental. Honestly he played better than I thought he would. He still has positive value on the court and some gas left in the tank, much more than Klay does.

Ultimately, he's a bad fit for the system, too expensive, and won't be back.

The Poole for CP3 move was consequent purely from a business perspective. Poole was damaged goods at that point and it majorly showed this year.

However, the value destruction happened earlier for the Warriors. Poole went from exciting young prospect to overpaid malcontent (of course they could have also not extended him, but that doesn't make much of a difference as they still traded him for only small negative value) because of the culture that GSW allowed around Green, for years.

And those are the kind of things that will kill any ambitions for an old and overpaid team that has to work the margins to remain competitive. You have to find extraordinary value on the cheap. Adding value to get rid of a formerly good young prospect (and getting almost nothing out of other drafts) is the opposite.

Twitter's AI thinks Klay Thompson vandalized houses in Sacramento with bricks... can't stop laughing

weekend_warrior wrote:The Poole for CP3 move was consequent purely from a business perspective. Poole was damaged goods at that point and it majorly showed this year.

However, the value destruction happened earlier for the Warriors. Poole went from exciting young prospect to overpaid malcontent (of course they could have also not extended him, but that doesn't make much of a difference as they still traded him for only small negative value) because of the culture that GSW allowed around Green, for years.

And those are the kind of things that will kill any ambitions for an old and overpaid team that has to work the margins to remain competitive. You have to find extraordinary value on the cheap. Adding value to get rid of a formerly good young prospect (and getting almost nothing out of other drafts) is the opposite.

JP would not be able to fetch much of a contract had they let him play out the season, and they could have done a S&T for much less to another team.

svart wrote:Yeah, scotty, you are corect. We got rid of Poole who played at an MVP level this season for old man CP3. And while we could have kept the Shaqtin a fool MVP and his salary for three more years, we now will shed Paul's non-guaranteed contract this summer. What a disaster!

if you think that the poole/cp3 trade led to our downfall then i don't really know what to tell you beside the fact you don't see the forest for the trees.

CP3 has a positive impact (which is amazing considering how much he was deployed in 3G/4G lineups), we have a malleable expiring contract to use through July for any trades, he absolutely crushed Poole in terms of impact, and the team can definitely get under the 2nd apron

Wins across the board. Short term and long term, a good move

This seems like a situation where someone had a golden opportunity to let an embarrassing take die in silence, but instead convinced themself it was still clever and shot themself in the foot.

When you are over the cap what are the rules for keeping your players when there contracts are up?

What are the rules for pay cuts when a decining player agrees to re-sign with a team for a pay cu? Are there any restrictions on pay cuts?

I want to keep Klay at a salary that does not overpay klay by more than 10%.

The fact that wee are allowed to sign and trade Klay at a salary that pays trade a lot more than Klay is worth could be worth something. Overpaid Klay and or overpaid Chris Paul plus cash plus many draft picks could be used to acquire a very good fairly paid player.

My feeling if that Klay can handle a pay cut without pouting and being sad then give Klay the pay cut and keep Klay. Trade Chris Paul and Moody and cash and draft picks for our new starting off guard.

Trade Payton, cash and draft picks for a strong physical 7 food 3rd string center and a dribble stopping little ultra fast defensive ppest excellent defender 3rd string point guard who is bad at shooting and passing.

Podz and Curry can not defend point guards but they can be point guards on offense. There is nothing that says your ultra fast bad shooting back up point guard can not set screens and picks for Curry or Podz.

A defensive point guard with no offense plus Podz plus Trayce plus Kuminga 4 man unit needs 3 point shooting which is where Klay or Quinones come into the picture.

CDM_Stats wrote:

svart wrote:Yeah, scotty, you are corect. We got rid of Poole who played at an MVP level this season for old man CP3. And while we could have kept the Shaqtin a fool MVP and his salary for three more years, we now will shed Paul's non-guaranteed contract this summer. What a disaster!

if you think that the poole/cp3 trade led to our downfall then i don't really know what to tell you beside the fact you don't see the forest for the trees.

CP3 has a positive impact (which is amazing considering how much he was deployed in 3G/4G lineups), we have a malleable expiring contract to use through July for any trades, he absolutely crushed Poole in terms of impact, and the team can definitely get under the 2nd apron

Wins across the board. Short term and long term, a good move

indeed. i actually would love him back at minimum, but i guess he will want more than that.

They'll bring Klay back for 3/$54M with a player option in the 3rd year.

EvanZ wrote:They'll bring Klay back for 3/$54M with a player option in the 3rd year.

Yuck.

Thats the Duncan Robinson rate... only Klay is much older and should no longer be pushing 30 minutes.

I agree that this is a very likely scenario. And its a scenario I am very much opposed to.

If we don't make trades, I think we are much better off with Wiggins/Moody/Podz/Payton handling the 2/3 minutes with Podz and a FA PG (Dunn or someone similar) handling backup PG minutes (essentially the CP3 minutes). And if we don't keep Klay as a backup at 15m or under, will also just need a vet min that can space the floor (maybe its just Quinones but he's not that good...).

EvanZ wrote:They'll bring Klay back for 3/$54M with a player option in the 3rd year.

This doesn't sound unlikely but why $54M? Seems oddly specific.

Seriously if they bring back Klay at any amount I'm going to have to stop watching