There's a proven blueprint for success. So why didn't the Dubs follow it?

[Onus]

What no one wants to talk about is that Klay, Draymond, and yes, even Steph are all declining. No one can dispute what they've accomplished, but you can't go into this season with blinders on thinking we have these 3 basketball gods and everything should be fine anymore. They need, and will increasingly need, additional help. They couldn't get past the flawed Lakers. I do not believe they would have stood a chance in hell of beating the Nuggets if they had. And next year, the young Kings team they barely squeezed past will be even better, and more experienced. Sorry but minor tweaks around the fringes aren't going to cut it anymore. They need a major shakeup. That "blueprint" doesn't work anymore because the base of it isn't the same and never will be again.

The blueprint is why several of the 2nd tier stars like Wiggins and Looney are so effective.. the failure is when the role players don't fit their roles. If getting role players that fit is tweaks, then yes that should be fine. If its considered major, ok sure.. but the failure was everything beyond the starting 5 + DDV. Wiseman and Kuminga, 2 early lotto picks, gave us practically nothing. Neither is their fault, just bad drafting. Moody was capable but we needed to get Lamb those minutes, it was crucial Lamb understand the system he was watching from the bench in the playoffs. Poole continued to flatline as a team player. JMG continued to show why he's a journeyman. Iguodala was basically a coach.

Despite the abject failure of the 7-12 guys, Wiggins missing the majority of the season, and Kerr's poor ability to develop and instill BBIQ in young players, the team still made it to the semis.. even the championship teams that didnt have KD were constructed extremely well

The starting 5 was still one of the best 5 man lineups in the nba. We had countless 20 point leads that the bench just squandered. I really think we’re an opj type player away from competing.

The biggest thing is that our draft picks have given us nothing.

[whatisacenter]

What no one wants to talk about is that Klay, Draymond, and yes, even Steph are all declining. No one can dispute what they've accomplished, but you can't go into this season with blinders on thinking we have these 3 basketball gods and everything should be fine anymore. They need, and will increasingly need, additional help. They couldn't get past the flawed Lakers. I do not believe they would have stood a chance in hell of beating the Nuggets if they had. And next year, the young Kings team they barely squeezed past will be even better, and more experienced. Sorry but minor tweaks around the fringes aren't going to cut it anymore. They need a major shakeup. That "blueprint" doesn't work anymore because the base of it isn't the same and never will be again.

I agree with all of this and that is why I was hoping Lacob and Co. would see this offseason as the one to move off of Klay and Draymond.

[CDM_Stats]

What no one wants to talk about is that Klay, Draymond, and yes, even Steph are all declining. No one can dispute what they've accomplished, but you can't go into this season with blinders on thinking we have these 3 basketball gods and everything should be fine anymore. They need, and will increasingly need, additional help. They couldn't get past the flawed Lakers. I do not believe they would have stood a chance in hell of beating the Nuggets if they had. And next year, the young Kings team they barely squeezed past will be even better, and more experienced. Sorry but minor tweaks around the fringes aren't going to cut it anymore. They need a major shakeup. That "blueprint" doesn't work anymore because the base of it isn't the same and never will be again.

The blueprint is why several of the 2nd tier stars like Wiggins and Looney are so effective.. the failure is when the role players don't fit their roles. If getting role players that fit is tweaks, then yes that should be fine. If its considered major, ok sure.. but the failure was everything beyond the starting 5 + DDV. Wiseman and Kuminga, 2 early lotto picks, gave us practically nothing. Neither is their fault, just bad drafting. Moody was capable but we needed to get Lamb those minutes, it was crucial Lamb understand the system he was watching from the bench in the playoffs. Poole continued to flatline as a team player. JMG continued to show why he's a journeyman. Iguodala was basically a coach.

Despite the abject failure of the 7-12 guys, Wiggins missing the majority of the season, and Kerr's poor ability to develop and instill BBIQ in young players, the team still made it to the semis.. even the championship teams that didnt have KD were constructed extremely well

The starting 5 was still one of the best 5 man lineups in the nba. We had countless 20 point leads that the bench just squandered. I really think we’re an opj type player away from competing.

The biggest thing is that our draft picks have given us nothing.

yep.. key takeaway is that the first championship and last championship had great benches, and thats what put us over the top. Then we have a terrible bench one year, and the response is to tear down the foundation? Make it make sense..

[whatisacenter]

Spoiler:

The blueprint is why several of the 2nd tier stars like Wiggins and Looney are so effective.. the failure is when the role players don't fit their roles. If getting role players that fit is tweaks, then yes that should be fine. If its considered major, ok sure.. but the failure was everything beyond the starting 5 + DDV. Wiseman and Kuminga, 2 early lotto picks, gave us practically nothing. Neither is their fault, just bad drafting. Moody was capable but we needed to get Lamb those minutes, it was crucial Lamb understand the system he was watching from the bench in the playoffs. Poole continued to flatline as a team player. JMG continued to show why he's a journeyman. Iguodala was basically a coach.

Despite the abject failure of the 7-12 guys, Wiggins missing the majority of the season, and Kerr's poor ability to develop and instill BBIQ in young players, the team still made it to the semis.. even the championship teams that didnt have KD were constructed extremely well

The starting 5 was still one of the best 5 man lineups in the nba. We had countless 20 point leads that the bench just squandered. I really think we’re an opj type player away from competing.

The biggest thing is that our draft picks have given us nothing.

yep.. key takeaway is that the first championship and last championship had great benches, and thats what put us over the top. Then we have a terrible bench one year, and the response is to tear down the foundation? Make it make sense.

It's because of how the core/starting 5 looked in the playoffs. They may have had good regular season stats but they were not a dominant lineup in the postseason. The bench may have blown some leads but the starters also blew close games in end game situations.

The core are aging and committing to extensions for Klay and Draymond will not be worth it, IMO.

[HiRez]

What no one wants to talk about is that Klay, Draymond, and yes, even Steph are all declining. No one can dispute what they've accomplished, but you can't go into this season with blinders on thinking we have these 3 basketball gods and everything should be fine anymore. They need, and will increasingly need, additional help. They couldn't get past the flawed Lakers. I do not believe they would have stood a chance in hell of beating the Nuggets if they had. And next year, the young Kings team they barely squeezed past will be even better, and more experienced. Sorry but minor tweaks around the fringes aren't going to cut it anymore. They need a major shakeup. That "blueprint" doesn't work anymore because the base of it isn't the same and never will be again.

The blueprint is why several of the 2nd tier stars like Wiggins and Looney are so effective.. the failure is when the role players don't fit their roles. If getting role players that fit is tweaks, then yes that should be fine. If its considered major, ok sure.. but the failure was everything beyond the starting 5 + DDV. Wiseman and Kuminga, 2 early lotto picks, gave us practically nothing. Neither is their fault, just bad drafting. Moody was capable but we needed to get Lamb those minutes, it was crucial Lamb understand the system he was watching from the bench in the playoffs. Poole continued to flatline as a team player. JMG continued to show why he's a journeyman. Iguodala was basically a coach.

Despite the abject failure of the 7-12 guys, Wiggins missing the majority of the season, and Kerr's poor ability to develop and instill BBIQ in young players, the team still made it to the semis.. even the championship teams that didnt have KD were constructed extremely well

The starting 5 was still one of the best 5 man lineups in the nba. We had countless 20 point leads that the bench just squandered. I really think we’re an opj type player away from competing.

The biggest thing is that our draft picks have given us nothing.

Yeah, but they weren't able to play much. Steph only played in 56 games, the 4th lowest of his career. Klay only played in 69 games, which doesn't seem that bad, but it's the 3rd lowest of his career. Draymond played in 73 games, which is respectable, however he only averaged 54 games over his previous 4 seasons, so the chances he'll play fewer next year is very good. All of the "we're fine with one more role player" crowd seems to be making the assumption that all these guys are going to be available all year, and fresh in the playoffs. But being in their mid-30s, I think that is a very dangerous assumption that will likely not come to fruition. Chances are very good these guys are going to play less, not more. They'll miss games to do nagging injuries, if not major ones. They'll rest more games (already a huge reason this year why they kept losing to the worst teams in the league).They'll either play fewer minutes per game, or worse, play more minutes a game and be tired and ineffective in the playoffs, which is what happened this year. And that doesn't even include having younger players unexpectedly out, like happened to Wiggins this year. Maybe next year Wiggins is fine, but it'll be other players who are out (Poole, Moody, Kuminga, DDV's replacement, etc.). Gary Payton's health already looks like it's going to be long-term shaky.

There's nothing wrong with Steph, Klay, and Draymond declining a bit, and becoming ever so slightly less reliable. I don't blame them for it, it's just what happens naturally. Overall, they are obviously still very good. But there is a drop-off there that needs to be accounted for. Klay shot 36.8% from 3 in the playoffs, while Steph shot 36.3%. Draymond missed another playoff game via tech limit, and while overall I thought his playoff run was good, it felt like when he was in, his space-collapsing, offensively-limited presence often outweighed all the good "Draymond-y" type things he does. By their standards, that's not good enough. It blows a hole in the whole system.

So yes, I agree the bench needs to be a lot better. That will help. But in addition, they also need to compensate for the inevitable decline (and likely decreasing availability) of Steph, Klay, and Draymond. That's going to be difficult to do by nibbling around the edges and hunting vet min pickups.

[CDM_Stats]

Spoiler:

The starting 5 was still one of the best 5 man lineups in the nba. We had countless 20 point leads that the bench just squandered. I really think we’re an opj type player away from competing.

The biggest thing is that our draft picks have given us nothing.

yep.. key takeaway is that the first championship and last championship had great benches, and thats what put us over the top. Then we have a terrible bench one year, and the response is to tear down the foundation? Make it make sense.

It's because of how the core/starting 5 looked in the playoffs. They may have had good regular season stats but they were not a dominant lineup in the postseason. The bench may have blown some leads but the starters also blew close games in end game situations.

The core are aging and committing to extensions for Klay and Draymond will not be worth it, IMO.

This is the key part for me - the 'core' always included the 6th man who comes in for the death squad, which we use most in the playoffs. That person is responsible for increasing pace and offense, and that was Poole, who shat the bed pretty conclusively. And while Klay was pretty bad himself, he wasnt bad in the SAC series, just LAL, whereas Poole was godawful in both. So if the change to the core was Poole, I'm on board. Even if its Klay, I'm on board, provided there's a tangible plan to go along with it. But Klay certainly does not need an extension, as he has the highest risk of falling off and we have in-house replacements in Poole and Moody if we find a deal that works.

But Draymond is not in that boat. The team defense without Draymond craters, as does decision making, since he's effectively up there with Curry as our best initiator. There is no one on the roster even close to his impact, no one who can step into his role.. and no, Kuminga is certainly nowhere near that guy.

So its clear to me that we need to shake up the top 6, but the obvious choice is Poole. Klay, for all his warts, still keeps a man defender on his hip which is key to the system. Dray contributes way more than most fans will ever acknowledge because he's also a jackass. Poole doesn't provide ancillary value at any level, his value is 100% predicated on his shot going in. And that goes entirely against the W's way of playing, where everyone contributes at every level or at least has to be highly specialized somewhere

So the blueprint should stay the same, they should just adhere to it more. The OP is correct in that assertion.. the problem was that they deviated from it. They invested heavily in raw talent/no BBIQ players with the hope they could turn them BBIQ+.. and with Kuminga, Poole and Wiseman, its failed. With Moody, an already BBIQ+ player pre-draft, its starting to become a success. Which mirrors situations like Oubre (no BBIQ) and Wiggins/OPJ/Nemo (BBIQ+)

Looks fairly straightforward to me

[whatisacenter]

Spoiler:

yep.. key takeaway is that the first championship and last championship had great benches, and thats what put us over the top. Then we have a terrible bench one year, and the response is to tear down the foundation? Make it make sense.

It's because of how the core/starting 5 looked in the playoffs. They may have had good regular season stats but they were not a dominant lineup in the postseason. The bench may have blown some leads but the starters also blew close games in end game situations.

The core are aging and committing to extensions for Klay and Draymond will not be worth it, IMO.

This is the key part for me - the 'core' always included the 6th man who comes in for the death squad, which we use most in the playoffs. That person is responsible for increasing pace and offense, and that was Poole, who shat the bed pretty conclusively. And while Klay was pretty bad himself, he wasnt bad in the SAC series, just LAL, whereas Poole was godawful in both. So if the change to the core was Poole, I'm on board. Even if its Klay, I'm on board, provided there's a tangible plan to go along with it. But Klay certainly does not need an extension, as he has the highest risk of falling off and we have in-house replacements in Poole and Moody if we find a deal that works.

But Draymond is not in that boat. The team defense without Draymond craters, as does decision making, since he's effectively up there with Curry as our best initiator. There is no one on the roster even close to his impact, no one who can step into his role.. and no, Kuminga is certainly nowhere near that guy.

So its clear to me that we need to shake up the top 6, but the obvious choice is Poole. Klay, for all his warts, still keeps a man defender on his hip which is key to the system. Dray contributes way more than most fans will ever acknowledge because he's also a jackass. Poole doesn't provide ancillary value at any level, his value is 100% predicated on his shot going in. And that goes entirely against the W's way of playing, where everyone contributes at every level or at least has to be highly specialized somewhere

So the blueprint should stay the same, they should just adhere to it more. The OP is correct in that assertion.. the problem was that they deviated from it. They invested heavily in raw talent/no BBIQ players with the hope they could turn them BBIQ+.. and with Kuminga, Poole and Wiseman, its failed. With Moody, an already BBIQ+ player pre-draft, its starting to become a success. Which mirrors situations like Oubre (no BBIQ) and Wiggins/OPJ/Nemo (BBIQ+)

Looks fairly straightforward to me

straightforward to you because that's your opinion.

I disagree with you but for the sake of argument let's say I agreed. Are you on board extending Draymond for 3 years? Do you think Klay would be happy returning without an extension? What ring-chasing "high IQ" vet min free agents would you target and more importantly would they choose the Warriors over other contenders with the days of GS being a ring-chasers first choice appearing to be long gone? Or is there a trade you would make using Poole/JK that would bring in similar players to fill the 6th man roll and a rotation player?

Let's look at last season, the Warriors were basically a .500 team and that was with Curry missing 26 games and Wiggins missing 45. Two of your low IQ guys, Poole and Kuminga, filled in Curry and Wiggins and the team basically performed at the same level as they did when they were at full strength.

Also, the bench excuse doesn't stand out to me as it does to others here. Last year's playoff bench was Poole, GP2, OPJ and Belly. This year's playoff bench was Poole, GP2, DDV and JMG.

To me the biggest difference between the title year and last season was that the starters had trouble closing close games during the regular season and they looked overmatched in the second round vs. a flawed Lakers team after barely squeaking by the Kings on the shoulders of Curry's 50 point game.

[Warriorfan]

Main thing missing on the road defense. Wiggins and GP2 could have affected this. #3 home #28 Road.

[Crazy-Canuck]

I dont see a problem with the blue print, it works. But the pieces aren't quite there due to alot of dysfunction. I can't help but believe that money played a big part in our regression.

Wildhorst brought up our contract situation again.

Dray and klay are both eligible for an extension this off season. This could be the last big deal for both guys.

If the team wants to run the core back, they need to take pay cuts. They need to wiggins themselves on these extension. But, they also know that the dubs are a cash cow and the also know that poole just cashed in a big pay day.

So, klay and dray might have gone out to "prove" themselves moreso klay in order to get that extension. I genuinely do believe they want to retire as warriors, but that poole contract is putting a vice grip to their egos. If wiggs hot what poole got and poole got what Wiggins got, I think the chemistry would have been fine.

[HiRez]

I dont see a problem with the blue print, it works. But the pieces aren't quite there due to alot of dysfunction. I can't help but believe that money played a big part in our regression.

The money is certainly a problem and one that's only going to get worse. But I think the "blueprint" was dependent on Steph, Klay, and Draymond being the prime versions of themselves, which they are not anymore.

[CDM_Stats]

straightforward to you because that's your opinion.

I disagree with you but for the sake of argument let's say I agreed. Are you on board extending Draymond for 3 years? Do you think Klay would be happy returning without an extension? What ring-chasing "high IQ" vet min free agents would you target and more importantly would they choose the Warriors over other contenders with the days of GS being a ring-chasers first choice appearing to be long gone? Or is there a trade you would make using Poole/JK that would bring in similar players to fill the 6th man roll and a rotation player?

Let's look at last season, the Warriors were basically a .500 team and that was with Curry missing 26 games and Wiggins missing 45. Two of your low IQ guys, Poole and Kuminga, filled in Curry and Wiggins and the team basically performed at the same level as they did when they were at full strength.

Also, the bench excuse doesn't stand out to me as it does to others here. Last year's playoff bench was Poole, GP2, OPJ and Belly. This year's playoff bench was Poole, GP2, DDV and JMG.

To me the biggest difference between the title year and last season was that the starters had trouble closing close games during the regular season and they looked overmatched in the second round vs. a flawed Lakers team after barely squeaking by the Kings on the shoulders of Curry's 50 point game.

no, its straightforward because I've been calling these things well ahead of time and its at this point extremely obvious. This system requires high BBIQ. Mainly because offensively there's a ton of improvising done by Curry and Draymond, and the defense requires high level understanding. When you put low IQ players into the mix, they stick out. Thats why Poole and Oubre stick out as notable negatives, and why younger/less experienced low IQ players like Wiseman and Kuminga never did and never will fit. I dont even think its a credible argument to have at this point if I'm being entirely honest

As for the questions, I've already said - to you - that I would extend Draymond as long as Curry's contract, because they are the 1 & 2 of what makes this work. I've also said in the post you quoted what I'd do about Klay, and I'm not really concerned with their happiness level of it. If they want to pout about it, let them.. they'll find the fanbase less than forgiving and the trade market just as bad, along with a FA market that's going to be rife with bottom-feeders and rebuilders, not contenders

I'm also not going to comb through each FA and each trade option and hitch my wagon to anything like that, I can just call out what is working and what isn't.. but generally, I'd be looking for smart veterans who are finding limited markets for their services. Considering what we've done for other smart veterans, I'd think we'd still be a prime destination. And I'd absolutely trade Poole, Kuminga, and/or 19 + other 1sts to make a trade for a vet as well. Plenty of options to choose from.. are they available? Do they want our guys? No idea and no interest in going that deep, but I like the general idea, and love the recent Kuminga news

As for the starters.. its just factually incorrect. The starters remained excellent, even subbing in DDV for Wiggins was extremely effective. There were 2 players (still on the team) who were consistently in our worst lineups, and thats Poole and Kuminga. Ironically they also were both present in two of our seldom used, but highly positive lineups as well (Poole/DDV/Klay/Kuminga/Dray & Poole/DDV/Lamb/Kuminga/Dray).. worth looking into if we keep them both, but the 2 other consistencies are DDV and Dray, 2 ball-handlers. But overall point being, the starting lineup was again great.

Now if you want to talk postseason, you really need to stop framing it the same way as the regular season. Its not equal at all, nor is comparing one postseason to another. They are playing specific teams, specific matchups and specific scenarios. The Kings were the best offensive team in the league, on the backs of guys like Fox, Monk and Sabonis. Now a team that doesnt have a credible backup C like OPJ was for us, or doesnt have anyone who can really stick with explosive guards would look vulnerable. More so if offense-only weapons like Poole manage a 46% TS with 25% usage. Then, you go to the Lakers who get by on size, and that whole lack of a capable backup C issue becomes more prevalent, emphasized by the fact that the one game JMG played well in, we won handily. Also doesnt help that Kerr locked into Klay for 78 minutes of 2 close games where he was clearly ineffective, so he obviously shoulders some blame as well. But simply comparing one postseason to another.. that doesnt work. We played 6 different teams across the last 2 playoffs, looking at it as all the same is zooming out too far to be accurate

[CDM_Stats]

I dont see a problem with the blue print, it works. But the pieces aren't quite there due to alot of dysfunction. I can't help but believe that money played a big part in our regression.

The money is certainly a problem and one that's only going to get worse. But I think the "blueprint" was dependent on Steph, Klay, and Draymond being the prime versions of themselves, which they are not anymore.

If your argument is that we cant do everything exactly the same as before, OK that's agreeable. Klay's had 2 major leg injuries and is 33, Draymond is not going to be able to do 36mpg and Curry's only good for 60-70 games a year. But if the argument is that we need major systemic changes, that's working backwards from the answer some of you seem to prefer. Whether its dislike of Draymond or Klay or whatever, I can't imagine an honest, detailed evaluation of the team landing on "we need to make wholesale changes".. there's really very little evidence to back that up

Give guys who deserve it more time. Moody is the prime candidate here, but honestly even PBJ looked to deserve more of a look in important games. Lamb and Jerome even had their moments. But the first step is to address the bench and quit bringing in players who are journeymen because they arent smart players.. and bring in smarter guys who are on the last legs of their career or are trying to rehab their value. Between GP2, OPJ and DDV the past 2 years, we have gotten a 15th man journeyman paid, and rehabbed the value of 2 lower valued players

[whatisacenter]

straightforward to you because that's your opinion.

I disagree with you but for the sake of argument let's say I agreed. Are you on board extending Draymond for 3 years? Do you think Klay would be happy returning without an extension? What ring-chasing "high IQ" vet min free agents would you target and more importantly would they choose the Warriors over other contenders with the days of GS being a ring-chasers first choice appearing to be long gone? Or is there a trade you would make using Poole/JK that would bring in similar players to fill the 6th man roll and a rotation player?

Let's look at last season, the Warriors were basically a .500 team and that was with Curry missing 26 games and Wiggins missing 45. Two of your low IQ guys, Poole and Kuminga, filled in Curry and Wiggins and the team basically performed at the same level as they did when they were at full strength.

Also, the bench excuse doesn't stand out to me as it does to others here. Last year's playoff bench was Poole, GP2, OPJ and Belly. This year's playoff bench was Poole, GP2, DDV and JMG.

To me the biggest difference between the title year and last season was that the starters had trouble closing close games during the regular season and they looked overmatched in the second round vs. a flawed Lakers team after barely squeaking by the Kings on the shoulders of Curry's 50 point game.

no, its straightforward because I've been calling these things well ahead of time and its at this point extremely obvious. This system requires high BBIQ. Mainly because offensively there's a ton of improvising done by Curry and Draymond, and the defense requires high level understanding. When you put low IQ players into the mix, they stick out. Thats why Poole and Oubre stick out as notable negatives, and why younger/less experienced low IQ players like Wiseman and Kuminga never did and never will fit. I dont even think its a credible argument to have at this point if I'm being entirely honest

As for the questions, I've already said - to you - that I would extend Draymond as long as Curry's contract, because they are the 1 & 2 of what makes this work. I've also said in the post you quoted what I'd do about Klay, and I'm not really concerned with their happiness level of it. If they want to pout about it, let them.. they'll find the fanbase less than forgiving and the trade market just as bad, along with a FA market that's going to be rife with bottom-feeders and rebuilders, not contenders

I'm also not going to comb through each FA and each trade option and hitch my wagon to anything like that, I can just call out what is working and what isn't.. but generally, I'd be looking for smart veterans who are finding limited markets for their services. Considering what we've done for other smart veterans, I'd think we'd still be a prime destination. And I'd absolutely trade Poole, Kuminga, and/or 19 + other 1sts to make a trade for a vet as well. Plenty of options to choose from.. are they available? Do they want our guys? No idea and no interest in going that deep, but I like the general idea, and love the recent Kuminga news

As for the starters.. its just factually incorrect. The starters remained excellent, even subbing in DDV for Wiggins was extremely effective. There were 2 players (still on the team) who were consistently in our worst lineups, and thats Poole and Kuminga. Ironically they also were both present in two of our seldom used, but highly positive lineups as well (Poole/DDV/Klay/Kuminga/Dray & Poole/DDV/Lamb/Kuminga/Dray).. worth looking into if we keep them both, but the 2 other consistencies are DDV and Dray, 2 ball-handlers. But overall point being, the starting lineup was again great.

Now if you want to talk postseason, you really need to stop framing it the same way as the regular season. Its not equal at all, nor is comparing one postseason to another. They are playing specific teams, specific matchups and specific scenarios. The Kings were the best offensive team in the league, on the backs of guys like Fox, Monk and Sabonis. Now a team that doesnt have a credible backup C like OPJ was for us, or doesnt have anyone who can really stick with explosive guards would look vulnerable. More so if offense-only weapons like Poole manage a 46% TS with 25% usage. Then, you go to the Lakers who get by on size, and that whole lack of a capable backup C issue becomes more prevalent, emphasized by the fact that the one game JMG played well in, we won handily. Also doesnt help that Kerr locked into Klay for 78 minutes of 2 close games where he was clearly ineffective, so he obviously shoulders some blame as well. But simply comparing one postseason to another.. that doesnt work. We played 6 different teams across the last 2 playoffs, looking at it as all the same is zooming out too far to be accurate

Prime free agents attracted last season were DDV & JMG. No buyout players chose the dubs.

If Lacob is cool with the outrageous payroll for a second round exit at best he should follow your plan.

[WarriorGM]

The roster for next year seems more or less set.

Chris Paul doesn't seem to fit the prior paradigm.

Saric and TJD might be Draymond fill-ins.

Team seems light on the wing positions too that was held by Barnes/Iguodala only having Wiggins as someone who can be considered fairly dependable. Moody still not tested enough.

Going by the blueprint I cannot say they've followed it. The team will have to show they can win using a different model.

[Chris Porter's Hair]

It seems disingenuous to say, "We had a blueprint that worked with OPJ. Why did they move away from that and play JaMychal Green?" Because those two guys are basically the same player with one important exception: OPJ played well when it mattered, and Green played poorly when it mattered.

[WarriorGM]

It seems disingenuous to say, "We had a blueprint that worked with OPJ. Why did they move away from that and play JaMychal Green?" Because those two guys are basically the same player with one important exception: OPJ played well when it mattered, and Green played poorly when it mattered.

My second post in this thread addresses this, but I'll add a little more. Kelly Oubre Jr. also seemed to match but we probably learned from that experience a certain level of BBIQ was also required.

Perhaps I'm also blinded a bit due to my own impressions when I was looking at prospects. With both OPJ and Bjelica there were instances when they played against the Warriors that I noticed them and said to myself this guy is a good player and would do better on a better team. That's why I was excited when they joined. Oubre and JMG never gave me that vibe. When they joined I could only be neutral because I didn't know much about them although I think JMG's name rang a bell because he was on a list of players with 40% 3-point shooting at one time.

If there is something to be hopeful for with CP3 it's that he's a high BBIQ guy, so maybe the deviation from the model isn't as big as the positional fit may imply.

[CDM_Stats]

It seems disingenuous to say, "We had a blueprint that worked with OPJ. Why did they move away from that and play JaMychal Green?" Because those two guys are basically the same player with one important exception: OPJ played well when it mattered, and Green played poorly when it mattered.

My second post in this thread addresses this, but I'll add a little more. Kelly Oubre Jr. also seemed to match but we probably learned from that experience a certain level of BBIQ was also required.

Perhaps I'm also blinded a bit due to my own impressions when I was looking at prospects. With both OPJ and Bjelica there were instances when they played against the Warriors that I noticed them and said to myself this guy is a good player and would do better on a better team. That's why I was excited when they joined. Oubre and JMG never gave me that vibe. When they joined I could only be neutral because I didn't know much about them although I think JMG's name rang a bell because he was on a list of players with 40% 3-point shooting at one time.

If there is something to be hopeful for with CP3 it's that he's a high BBIQ guy, so maybe the deviation from the model isn't as big as the positional fit may imply.

BBIQ is what makes people adaptable to the model. Shaun Livingston was not a motion offense player, and he was valuable because he didn't disrupt what was happening around him, he found ways to fit in. CP3 is one of the smartest players of the past 2 decades.. I'm sure he'll be able to figure it out

All that said, would it surprise me if the best closing unit did not have CP3 in it? Not one bit

[Onus]

It seems disingenuous to say, "We had a blueprint that worked with OPJ. Why did they move away from that and play JaMychal Green?" Because those two guys are basically the same player with one important exception: OPJ played well when it mattered, and Green played poorly when it mattered.

My second post in this thread addresses this, but I'll add a little more. Kelly Oubre Jr. also seemed to match but we probably learned from that experience a certain level of BBIQ was also required.

Perhaps I'm also blinded a bit due to my own impressions when I was looking at prospects. With both OPJ and Bjelica there were instances when they played against the Warriors that I noticed them and said to myself this guy is a good player and would do better on a better team. That's why I was excited when they joined. Oubre and JMG never gave me that vibe. When they joined I could only be neutral because I didn't know much about them although I think JMG's name rang a bell because he was on a list of players with 40% 3-point shooting at one time.

If there is something to be hopeful for with CP3 it's that he's a high BBIQ guy, so maybe the deviation from the model isn't as big as the positional fit may imply.

BBIQ is what makes people adaptable to the model. Shaun Livingston was not a motion offense player, and he was valuable because he didn't disrupt what was happening around him, he found ways to fit in. CP3 is one of the smartest players of the past 2 decades.. I'm sure he'll be able to figure it out

All that said, would it surprise me if the best closing unit did not have CP3 in it? Not one bit

who would you expect to close?

[CDM_Stats]

My second post in this thread addresses this, but I'll add a little more. Kelly Oubre Jr. also seemed to match but we probably learned from that experience a certain level of BBIQ was also required.

Perhaps I'm also blinded a bit due to my own impressions when I was looking at prospects. With both OPJ and Bjelica there were instances when they played against the Warriors that I noticed them and said to myself this guy is a good player and would do better on a better team. That's why I was excited when they joined. Oubre and JMG never gave me that vibe. When they joined I could only be neutral because I didn't know much about them although I think JMG's name rang a bell because he was on a list of players with 40% 3-point shooting at one time.

If there is something to be hopeful for with CP3 it's that he's a high BBIQ guy, so maybe the deviation from the model isn't as big as the positional fit may imply.

BBIQ is what makes people adaptable to the model. Shaun Livingston was not a motion offense player, and he was valuable because he didn't disrupt what was happening around him, he found ways to fit in. CP3 is one of the smartest players of the past 2 decades.. I'm sure he'll be able to figure it out

All that said, would it surprise me if the best closing unit did not have CP3 in it? Not one bit

who would you expect to close?

CP3

[ILOVEIT]

The blueprint was small ball before other teams caught on.

Other teams have now caught on.

In addition, Warriors now face inability to sign impactful vets.

The REAL secret sauce is signing title hunting impactful vets. When they don't have them, they lose.