"How come sportswriters never suffer season-ending injuries?"
Tim Kawakami has just published a piece in the Merc + Talking Points calling for the firing of Don Nelson. I disagree essentially with every line of what he has written, and in particular with his conclusion. I think it would be a huge mistake for the Warriors to fire Nellie. Here is my rebuttal.
This team was built by Don Nelson, for Don Nelson: From the frontline to the backcourt, this team was built to do one thing, and one thing only: Run, Run, Run. Biedrins, Randolph and Wright are all at their best when beating their man down court, and at their worst when playing in the half court. Monta Ellis and Stephen Curry can excel in any system, but may be the best fast break backcourt in the NBA. Ellis because of his blazing speed, Curry because of his extraordinary downcourt vision and ability to lead the break.
Putting what promises to be the fastest team end-to-end in NBA history -- when healthy -- in the hands of a conventional coach is a recipe for disaster. This is a Nellie roster, and Nellie should coach it.
Don Nelson has the ear of this team: Has any team in the NBA played harder than the Warriors this year? Seriously, in a season completely without hope, has this ridiculously short-handed and undersized team ever dogged it? Ever shown signs of quitting?
This team believes in itself, and takes the court every night looking for a way to win, against all odds. I don't pretend to have my finger on the pulse of the locker-room, but that is simply not the behaviour of a team that has quit on its coach.
Don Nelson does not have a preference for small ball: For those of you who have scratched your heads, or raged in your hearts, when you've seen Don Nelson play Corey Maggette at power forward ahead of Brandan Wright and Anthony Randolph, this might seem like a curious statement. It's not. I stand by it 100%, based on close observation of Nellie's career since RunTMC.
Don Nelson has had four major coaching gigs: coaching the Bucks, the Warriors, the Mavericks, and again with the Warriors. The only time Nellie has played small ball is with the Warriors. While at Milwaukee Nellie traded for Bob Lanier, and drafted Marques Johnson. In Dallas, once he got his hands on Dirk Nowitzki, Nellie played one of the biggest lineups in the NBA. Every game, all game.
Even with the Warriors, it should be obvious to an objective observer that Don Nelson has always worked determinedly at making his team bigger. He blew up RunTMC -- risking the chemistry of a 50-win ball club -- by trading Mitch Richmond for Billy Owens. Is that the act of a man with a preference for small ball?
Why has Don Nelson so often resorted to small ball with the Warriors? Two reasons: Talent and Money. Don Nelson believes in putting his most talented players on the floor. When those players happen to be big, as in Milwaukee and Dallas, Don Nelson plays big. When they happen to be small, as in both gigs here at Golden State, Don Nelson plays small. Why has Don Nelson played Maggette ahead of Randolph and Wright in the past two years? Quite simply, because Randolph and Wright weren't ready to shoulder the load. They were inconsistent, ill-prepared and ineffective. And then they were injured.
And then there's the money. There is little doubt in my mind that if Nellie had the resources of a Mark Cuban or a Paul Allen to work with that he would have long ago gone after and signed a major free-agent big man, or multiple free-agent big men. He's already proved that, in Dallas. Every single year he was there.
Nellie doesn't have those resources to work with. He has the resources of Chris Cohan to work with, and an inherited roster that lacked an established power forward. What he does have right now is this: three assets. Brandan Wright, Anthony Randolph and a lottery pick. On the basis of those assets, and my knowledge of Don Nelson, I am very comfortable saying this:
If the Warriors come out of the gate next year playing small, I will eat my shorts.
Don Nelson is a great defensive coach. Gotcha! I don't really believe that. But then again I don't believe that coaching defense wins championships. What wins championships is coaching point-differential. Point-differential is the stat that is the most predictive of the eventual world champion, with a 50% success rate.
Don Nelson is one of the best coaches in the league at achieving point-differential. His 2002-3 Dallas Mavericks led the league in point-differential. And if Dirk Nowitzki hadn't injured his knee in Game 3 of the Western Conference Championships against the Spurs, Nelson and the Mavs may very well have won the title.
How does Don Nelson achieve point-differential? Well, that could be the subject of a book. But here's a thumbnail sketch: it involves having at least one big wing player who's capable of shutting down the opposing team's best player. Like Richmond, Elie, Sprewell, Finley, or Stephen Jackson.
Or Kelenna Azubuike and Raja Bell.
It might involve having a couple of other defensive pieces to play matchups with. Like Josh Howard and Eddie Najera. Or Matt Barnes. Or Andris Biedrins and Anthony Randolph.
It involves shooting the best percentage, by having the best shooters and by relentlessly running the fast break. It involves winning the turnover battle, by having the best ball-handlers and shooting the first available shot. It involves running the other team into the ground. It involves melting the brain of the guy on the opposite bench, by matching up unexpectedly, and exploiting every edge mercilessly.
It involves genius, and the complete and utter fearlessness that has led to glorious playoff upsets - with far inferior talent -- of the Robinson Spurs, the Stockton and Malone Jazz and the Nowitzki Mavs.
Don Nelson is not a defensive coach, he is a basketball coach. One of the greatest in league history.
I want to see it again: I've seen it before. RunTMC. The 2002-03 Mavericks. We Believe. Some of the greatest, most exhilarating basketball ever played in this league.
This team is built in the image of Don Nelson. It is arguably one big player -- and one healthy season -- from being able to play like the best of Don Nelson's teams.
I want to see it again.
10 recs | 175 comments
Lets say everyone on our team was 2-3 years older
I think it may work, but there not. He is not a very good coach at developing talent and I’m afraid that a guy like AR won’t develop a post game with him as coach. Also he makes crucial decisions that hurt us, rather it be Monta on the ball, benching AR for Vlad, limiting Andris’ minutes or not controlling vets.
dubzfan - March 14, 2010
developing talent is usually the focus of the player development coach (Rico Hines). anyway, AR’s probably never going to develop a post game. how many big guys that don’t already have some sort of post game develop one during their NBA career?
if anything Nellie’s the wrong coach for AR b/c he gives him too much freedom – great for guys like Baron, Dirk, Spree, Jackson, Monta, Morrow, Barnes who had the ability to expand their games.
Nellie had the right idea during AR’s rookie year – stick to what he’s good at. crashing the boards on both ends & blocking shots while he gains experience to become a better defender.
he really should stop touching the ball on offense so much. %wise only Monta & Maggette use more possessions than AR – more than Curry (& it’s not close). instead of giving him the freedom to dribble & shoot, he should restrict AR (like Harrington shooting 3’s & Pietrus in the corners) to setting screens & moving on the baseline for rebounding & finishing opportunities.
homer simpson - March 14, 2010
But wouldn't that hold him back from his full potential?
And yes players have developed post games. Josh Smith never used to have one and neither did Odom. Also AR’s post game right now is that up and under he does every now and then but nothing else so he has something at least.
dubzfan - March 14, 2010
MYTH: Don Nelson isn't a very good coach at developing talent
The evidence doesn’t back that up.
Look back into the hoops archives:
More recently
Another key thing to add that I noted previously in Nellie doesn’t play rookies myth:
Atma Brother ONE - March 14, 2010
When was the last time he developed a big?
Don’t say C Webb cause he was rushed out of here quickly and developed in Sactown more than here and he already was a great player. And you mention a lot of players that already had natural ability. Are you trying to say Nash would have been a scrub without Nellie? And Hardway and Mitch also were going to be great regardless of Nellie. Yes Nellie can recognize a good guard but has struggled to really develop a big other than arguably Dirk.
dubzfan - March 14, 2010
Also most of the guys you named
Were playing during the 90’s. Thats when Nellie was a good coach and was more successful.His time has come and gone
dubzfan - March 14, 2010
1)you act like there are a sea of talented bigs out there that nellie refuses to utilize. they aren’t out there! there are 2-3 in the league at any given time, and after that you decide between al harrington types or going with a maggette type for the better offensive match-up.
2) who do you think is going to come in and do a better job than nellie? honestly. you aren’t thinking this through. do you want another 10 years of musselmans and carlisimos? hey mike dunleavey just became available…get real! it is a huge advantage to have don nelson impart some wisdom on young players, even if it’s only in-game.
conclusion: it seems most people devoutly against nellie just don’t know enough about bball to make an informed statement.
The Bimbo Coles Experience - March 15, 2010
…really? I think many of us have made pretty fair points against Nellie, and if you take some time to participate in our discussions, you might just find some of us do know a thing or two about basketball….
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
but...
you can still be blinded by your own preconceptions – knowledge or not.
triplesix - March 15, 2010
And that’s a good reason to have in depth discussions about the topics we like to talk about. We can all learn from each other.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Agreed, but somehow that doesn’t seem to hold any of us back…
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
Nash was lucky that Nelson came to Dallas
Otherwise Nash would have been a journeyman backup like Luke Ridnour.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
That’s the mos ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen. Also, are we forgetting Nash started playing his best basketball when he left Dallas?
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Its not
Nash first four years:
3.3 points and 2.1 assists
9.1 points and 3.4 assists
7.9 points and 5.5 assists
8.6 points and 4.9 assists
Those are journeyman numbers and if he continued at that pace he wold have been another Luke Ridnour, but Nelson came along in Dallas and brought in Dirk.
It gave Nelson the perfect system to run with Nash and Dirk. Let Dirk shoot from 15 feet and Nash all he had to was get into the paint. Which is why after the third year in Nelson’s system Nash got the hang of it and his scoring went from below 10 points and one season of over 5 assists too where he’s been at now.
You also realize that Nash’s best ability is playing at a high tempo and thats why even after leaving Nelson’s system to go to the Suns it was pretty much the same with D’Antoni running Phoenix and now with what Gentry is running.
You notice that he struggled mightily with Terry Porter’s system who was calling for Nash to play more defense.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
You seem to think that somehow the system simply changes guys from journeymen to superstars. It doesn’t – Steve Nash is as good as he is because he worked extremely hard and improved his game by huge amounts, to the point where he is one of the most skilled players in the NBA (the most skilled in my opinion). That’s Steve Nash’s doing. A coach might have an influence, but again, you can’t take a journeyman and simply turn him into a superstar. If by “struggled mightily with Terry Porter’s system” you mean Nash was still one of the very best offensive players in the NBA, sure. Yeah, he might have done worse, but the point is still that Steve Nash is talented – the system doesn’t change that.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Are you kidding me?
Nash is the perfect defintiion of a system player. If he was on any team that required him to play defense he would have a hard time getting anytime on the court. Nash will go down as one of if not the worst defensive point guard in NBA history.
So, tell me how the worst defender in NBA history would be able to do well in a system like the one employed in San Antonio? How about the fact that Nash refused to buy into Terry Porter’s system who was trying to emphasize more defense since we all know the Suns haven’t won anything in the playoffs under D’Antoni.
Oh yeah its because the supposed best point guard in the NBA refused to play defense or buy into that system. Nash couldn’t even work well with Shaq who even at his age could still demand attention.
I’m sorry but Nash is a product of the system he plays in there’s no argument that would state that he would fit in a much slower system.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
By the way quit buying the media hype of Nash
His two MVP awards are a complete joke as well!
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Yet strangely, he’s been playing on teams that win much more often than they lose and do much, much worse when he’s not playing than when he is playing. This notion that he’s a fraud of sorts doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. He’s a very, very good player who has made his team much, much better.
Facts do not support your assertion.
jae - March 15, 2010
He's been playing on teams
That were able to make his incompetent defense. I really don’t understand why teams don’t clear out the floor to one side and force Nash to defend.
Do the names Raja Bell and Shawn Marion ring a bell for you? Those were the players on the Suns that had to guard opposing point guards because Nash was not able to defend at all.
Yes, Nash has been on winning teams in the regular season? How many Finals appearances does he have? How many times were the Suns bounced out of the playoffs by the Spurs?
Nash was also the one that can be blamed for the suspensions of Boris Diaw and Amare Stoudemire when they came off the bench.
Wasn’t it also Nash’s poor decision on defense to attempt to block a shot by Manu Ginobili that led to the wide open three by Tim Duncan?
If you don’t rememer here’s a clip of it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DYJKoCjWrQ
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
Tell me Sleepy
Why did the Suns need Marion? How come the year after is he gone the Suns don’t make the playoffs?
You know what helped Nash in Phoenix and why is assist continued to climb because Nash had the choice of finding Bell in the corner for three, Marion and his versatility either going to the rim or shooting the three, or Amare Stoudemire and the pick and roll.
In Dallas it was Dirk. Marion, Bell, Stoudemire, and Dirk are the ones that created Nash. Nash was a product of a system that allowed him to use the offensive weapons around him.
Again I know it’s hard for you to believe because you’ve been blinded by the media’s bias that Nash is so great, but Nash will always be a product of the up tempo system he found himself in.
He would have never done well in any other system that would require slowing the pace down.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
jae - March 15, 2010
Evidence
Is clear. Just because you and Sleepy are in denial doesn’t mean that Nash isn’t one of the most overrated players in the NBA or the worst defensive player in the game today as well.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
……
jae - March 15, 2010
Haha. I think I may have found a new sig-quote…
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
Suns’ best player by adjusted plus-minus:
2009/10 Nash +7.3
2008/09 Nash +5.7
2007/08 Nash +9.8
2006/07 Nash +9.9
2005/06 Nash +9.1
Not the be-all of metrics, but through five consecutive seasons, pretty compelling evidence that Nash is much, much more than a “system player.” Do you have any evidence at all to the contrary? Exactly what part of
do you not understand?
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
Facts do
Terry Porter fired because of two things the first one Nash and Stoudemire not wanting to slow the pace down of the game to get the ball into the post with Shaq.
Second Nash and Stoudemire refused to give any effort on the defensive end.
When the results weren’t so good thats when Porter was fired and in came Alvin Gentry one of D’Antoni’s assistants who liked the up and down much better.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Rocky.
I think by now most GSoMers are familiar with this drill.
1. Stake out an extreme, non fact-based stance. For example: “Stephen Curry sucks.”
2. Post a poorly-written, typo-filled “article” about your stance on some silly website that provides a byline to make you look reputable.
3. Repeat the stance 10-50 times a day. Refuse to support the stance with anything resembling evidence. Refuse to listen to or engage other posters when they refute the stance.
4. Slowly realize the stance is full of it.
5. Stake out another extreme, non fact-based stance. For example: “Ricky Rubio sucks” or “Steve Nash sucks.”
Rinse and repeat…
I mean, your brand of baseless opining may well be suited to game threads, or myspace, or youtube, or my 12-year-old nephew’s chatroom, or other places where hysterical, hyperbolic garbage along the lines of
is the order of the day.
In threads like this, in which grownups like Missing Barry and jae are conversing, it really seems out of place.
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
+1
MDB - March 15, 2010
Nash can't play defense
When below average point guards consistently have career games against you it’s a sign that you’re not playing defense at all.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
agreed
if you followed bball back then nash was just another unimpressive defensive liability to back up your starting pg. nelson allowed him the freedom and extended minutes to become a household name.
The Bimbo Coles Experience - March 15, 2010
Yep, Nellie gave him minutes, and miraculously Nash went from nobody to superstar. All because Nelson gave him minutes. Did Nash improve substantially? Yes. Does that mean Nellie is the reason for it? Not necessarily. He probably had something to do with it (not particularly relevant to our current Nellie discussion since Nellie’s past performance isn’t exactly the same as his present performance), but guys don’t go through that transformation simply because they get minutes. Steve Nash improved substantially, and Steve Nash had a lot to do with that. He also improved post-Nellie substantially. You know why? Probably because he was still Steve Nash, and still working at his game and doing whatever it was he did to go from backup to superstar offensive player.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Nash continued to improve
In Phoenix after leaving Nelson because D’Antoni employed the same system. Run, run, and run. There’s no defense in D’Antoni’s system.
Look at Nash’s in 43 out of the Suns 66 games he has not recorded a steal. That means in only 23 games Nash has had one or more steals.
65 percent of the games that Nash has participated in this year he has’t come up with a steal.
Yes, you can make the argument that steals aren’t a reflection of how good a defender is, but in this case it is. Nash hides in a zone defense where he doesn’t have to do much or exert any energy.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Yet, consistently, the Suns are a) a reasonably good team and b) better when Nash plays than when he is not playing. Does this make him a good defender? No, but it provides considerable evidence that he is a good player; whatever defensive limitations he has are more than compensated for by what he does on offense. You seem to want to make him out to be a substandard player. All evidence suggests that he is a very good player. Denying this is as fruitful as denying that water is wet.
jae - March 15, 2010
I never said he wasn't a good player
I said he was overrated by the media. He’s a great passer there’s no doubt about that when he’s in the right system! He’s not a great scorer by any stretch of the imagination though he can get his open looks and score 15-18 points per game.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Do you believe
That Nash is the best point guard in Suns history?
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
<blockquoteMarco Belinelli? Don’t believe the hype. Belinelli is one of the worst rebounding and defending guards in the entire association.>
the rebounding is true, but according to 82games.com Marco would be our most effective wing defender, and the data suggests he is pretty good.
Rest of those guys aren’t good except for Ike.
MDB - March 14, 2010
correction
the rebounding is true, but according to 82games.com Marco would be our most effective wing defender, and the data suggests he is pretty good.
Rest of those guys aren’t good except for Ike.
MDB - March 14, 2010
This "developing talent" argument is odd.
Yes, Biedrins fouled a lot as a rookie. Yet having a foul rate go down is a pretty typical thing that happens to second- and third year players.
Monta gets a lot of credit for “developing” under Nellie, but that also seems strange, since Monta has both developed and regressed, and is currently a highly-inefficient player who Nellie doesn’t even seem to be trying to teach discipline to.
Randolph has not improved significantly under him. Nor has Wright.
Curry had typical rookie issues which he’s overcoming in an typical rookie fashion.
In other words: Nellie has some rookies develop under him, and some not. He has some players regress.
I find it odd how eager some people are to give Nelson credit for a player’s improvement, but to never hold him accountable when a player doesn’t improve, or, as in Monta’s case, regresses.
Remember that if a coach was merely average at developing talent, most of his players would improve from their rookie seasons … since most players improve with experience up to a point. So pointing out how such-and-such a player improved is really not a meaningful data point. The question is, do players improve by unusual amounts under him? Does a player have a better or worse chance of improving more under him than under another coach?
Furthermore, for all the talk about Hardaway and Mullin, I don’t think that what Nellie did ten or twenty years ago is at all relevant to who he is as a coach now. I think he’s slowed down, he’s gotten worse at connecting with players, and he’s less engaged with the team – he doesn’t live and breath it every second anymore, and sometimes it seems like he simply isn’t trying – which is something you NEVER would have said of early-90s Nellie.
Ronaldinho - March 16, 2010
Great post.
voted keep him
KINGofCRA5H - March 14, 2010
Right on!
Let Nellie have his way…they just need to stay healthy.
Evanz - March 14, 2010
Who's available anyway?
I suppose we could give P.J. another shot.
Seriously. You had me with the point on “he doesn’t have the resources to work with.” Defense can improve over time, but this losing isn’t all Nelson’s fault. Give some of the blame to (mis)management before calling for the head of one of the greatest coaches in the game.
ryogahibiki - March 14, 2010
There's plenty of coaches avaliable that can do
A better job then Nelson. I would hardly call Nelson one of the greatest coaches in the game. I would call him an above average coach when he has his true system in place, but when he doesn’t have the players to run that system he is one of the worst coaches.
Nelson was fired from New York because he wanted to use a player as a point forward who had no business handling the ball.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Putting players in bad roles is a clear sign of poor coaching.
MDB - March 15, 2010
There’s all sorts of variants on why Nellie didn’t last in NY. A common thread was that he wanted to do something other than keep the “let’s clear everybody else out and feed Patrick in the post” offense. Ewing didn’t like this. Ewing had more pull than Nellie. Looking back, I suspect that the 33 y/old Ewing would have been better off sharing the post with someone else, with having Anthony Mason do some traffic directing from the front court. I don’t think that’s so much putting players in bad roles so much as it was putting a player in a role he was steadfastly unwilling to try.
jae - March 15, 2010
Ehh, I'm still not convinced
I appreciate what Nellie has done in the past but I still think it’s time to go in another direction.
I’m not going to give him that much credit for “having the ear of the team”, they are playing hard but the team is half D-leaguers, of course they are going to play hard. I’m skeptical in his ability to get Ellis to buy into a role on this team and he has already struggled to get Randolph and Wright to buy into the system. Just because the guys he wasn’t working with got injured and replaced with D-leaguers eager to prove themselves doesn’t convince me he can still motivate this team.
As far as the small-ball, I agree that he is willing to play taller players but he does play small in style. He seems unwilling to play two post players at the same time which will always make it tough for the Warrior’s to keep up on the boards and on defense. I get the impression that he only plays big guys if they fit in one of two roles; a great shooter who creates match-up problems or an athletic rebounder whose only job on offense is to get put backs. I doubt he’ll ever play a player like Randolph or Wright at the 4 unless they learn how to shoot three pointers.
OkayJay81 - March 14, 2010
I disagree with Kawakami and i know Don Nelson isnt the problem. After all, along with the trade for Jackson and Harrington he helped ressurect the warriors and transformed them into a playoff team with HIS system. Things just took a turn for the worst after losing baron who was clearly the leader and heart of the team(not surprising the other vets wanted out) and now we’re stuck with a young nucleus. I think we’ve got to stick through the growing pains right now and focus on developing the team, and the best way to do that is to keep a consistent system and philosophy or in other words, keep Don Nelson. I am skeptical of him over playing Curry and Monta but im sure that’ll all change if we dont get hit by the injury bug again.
I think the real problem is that we just dont have a big man that makes a big enough impact in the game. Biedrins and Turiaf are good enough role players but we need a star forward or center who can draw some attention away from the guards on offense and control the boards/paint. :( if only Stoudemire and Bosh could be persuaded to come to the bay..
dboogie - March 14, 2010
if we're talking about post presence...
then why when both Randolph and Biedrins were healthy, did Nellie never play them together? The statistics prove that those two together gave the Warriors a chance to compete and even out-rebound teams. So why didn’t Nellie pair them together? Because he’s stubborn and always wants 4 shooters on the floor even when it’s destructive to his team’s chances. That’s a bad coaching job in my book..
eastbayglory - March 14, 2010
I've seen it before. RunTMC. The 2002-03 Mavericks. We Believe.
Haha, Seen nellie f*ckup 3 teams have you? Still don’t get it?
Whatever he builds here he’s likely to abandon or tear up before it’s finished.
But, we’re pretty much stuck with him till he gets his record at least and for maybe all next season so not really much reason to discuss it is there?
The main things we gotta worry about right now is no.1 winning too many meaningless games and getting kicked in our lotto balls and no2 nellie passing over wall, turner ,and cousins for some delicate stringbean who can shoot still more 3’s.
Skeptic con Urquell - March 14, 2010
nice phrase!
Feltbot - March 14, 2010
When Nelson left Dallas
He didn’t destroy them in fact Nelson did a great job in grooming Avery Johnson for the position! Nelson didn’t destroy the Knicks he was fired because the brass didnt’ like Nelson’s style.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Fired from the Knicks
…or maybe because he wanted the brass to trade Ewing to Orlando for Shaq.
Crazy Nellie!
geraldmcgrew - March 15, 2010
if you look back...
even to his Milwaukee days – Nelson begins the process of retooling when it becomes obvious that the Championship is not going to happen. You can usually tell within 2-3 years of having a core whether they are going all the way or not. He was close with many of those teams (minus the Warriors).
triplesix - March 15, 2010
I’m sorry, i don’t agree at all. Don Nelson has been one of the worst coaches in the league these past two seasons. To point out things he did 10 years ago as to why he is great now is not the best way to gauge a post.
MDB - March 14, 2010
If your main argument marking Nelle as a bad coach is the Warriors bizarre injured last 2 seasons then your argument has no legs.
Please name any coach that could made the playoffs or even 48 wins with a team as extremely injured as the warriors these last 2 seasons.
Only In Fairfax - March 17, 2010
The fact that anybody voted to keep Nellie scares me
eastbayglory - March 14, 2010
Not so sure about the author of this post...Mrs. Nelson?
I wonder if Al Harrington, Stephen Jackson, Jamal Crawford and Monta think he the best coach ever.
Sunset Warrior - March 14, 2010
Great post
Neither Jackson, Papovich or Sloan or even the ghost of Auerbach could coach this team any better. This is a 35 win team when healthy. Take away half your players and it becomes a 17 or 18 win team. Nellie’s not at fault but I also think it would be crazy to extend a 70 year old man’s contract.
ChronicMasticator - March 14, 2010
+1 cronic, but reality doesnt seem to be a consideration.
Only In Fairfax - March 17, 2010
Come On Now.
Get Nelly out of here. I think this is ridiculous that it has to even be debated.
iStoner - March 14, 2010
This post was a great read.
I just do not completely agree.
iStoner - March 14, 2010
Not Nelson's Fault
As many of you saw…you give him a talented roster/a roster that actually has more then 8 healthy players and not full of d-leaguers, and he will win you ball games. One of the greatest basketball minds ever. In the playoff year you can say that we should have even beaten the jazz too if it were not for some missed free throws. I mean this year has nothing to do with nelson. What are we on, our 6th d-league call up? Its ridiculous…the fact that this team is even competing the way that they are is amazing and i think that this is because of don nelson. I feel that as soon as we get some new owners we will start turning this around, hell even a roster that is healthy will give us more wins. Don Nelson may not be able to win us a championship, but he is a proven winner and gets teams to the playoffs. I have been following the warriors since 97 so i have seen 1 playoff year as a warriors fan and right now, as a warriors fan, i would just like to see this team consistently start making the playoffs or being in the race at the end and I think Nelson can give us that.
soccerfreak722 - March 15, 2010
Hmmm. Where's the 4th option?
I want to vote for “Fire Chris Cohan”, but that’s not an option. If you look around the league, the problem with the nba is bad owners in big markets. You can blame it on the coaches and the the players because they’re the most movable pieces in the puzzle, but until Cohan opens up his wallet and or sell the team, we’re not going anywhere.
anhsupra - March 15, 2010
Avery johnson
would be perfect
4Ever Golden - March 15, 2010
Perfect to laugh at while you cry, maybe. That high-pitched voice alone disqualifies him in my book.
bleep - March 15, 2010
He'd be a great fit
For the Warriors if they could actually get an owner who cared and a GM with competency.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Honestly, Kawakami is a bum...
All he ever does is hate on the Warriors. I remember reading how he said Curry would be like O’Bryant because he came from a mid-major. The Mercury should fire this guy he’s a horrible and dramatic sportswriter. I hope that the front office doesn’t read his articles and get any ideas. Nellie is not the problem, the team has 5 D-leaguers for Christ’s sake. Give him some talent, like lets say, a lottery PG, veteran Swingman, Rebounding/Shooting 4, and a Rebounding/Shot Blocking 5, like the good Warriors teams and see what they can do. Do you think any other coach could get this much out of such a scrappy group of guys. I don’t think we would’ve won 7 games with a different coach. Just shut up Tim Kawakami, no one likes you or wants to hear your big mouth go off about how you know nothing about any sports.
shahbazi3 - March 15, 2010
he clearly has personal beef with nelson and is letting that dictate his writing. totally unproffessional and not objective writing…
The Bimbo Coles Experience - March 15, 2010
Exactly. I don’t know where the Merc found this guy, his criticism has done nothing. There needs to be way more criticism of the ownership before Nellie gets the axe.
shahbazi3 - March 15, 2010
Can’t fire ownership. There’s been plenty of criticism directed their way over the years, but there’s nothing you can do about it. Just because they’re a bigger problem doesn’t make Nellie not a problem.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
But Nellie bears some blame for the state of the roster!
Clashes with Nellie have contributed to several players leaving under circumstances where we couldn’t get proper value back. (Webber, Davis, Jackson, Harrington, Crawford).
The net result has been a talent drain.
Maybe if Nellie worked better with his players he’d have more talent willing to play for him.
Ronaldinho - March 16, 2010
I gotta stay the course, and yes I voted to keep him here
My basic thought is that the Warriors are in crisis. And in such a basehead environment, only a grizzled cut throat SOB like Nelson gives the W’s any shot. A new coach won’t make a difference. Any new guy they throw into this mess will get eaten alive. We not getting coach K, or any other hotshot. We would get a young dude, without many options or a retread. Either way they wont have the power to really make a difference, and would be stuck coaching the same disjointed team we have now. Now if you gave me a new owner, now you got something. I know it gets old blaming Cohan, but his track record is what it is, and when you own the team you own the team.
Do we really need to run down the long list of helpless bastards who were suckered into being Warriors coaches, only to fail miserably. The sad truth is Nelson is the best we can get in the current situation. It sucks but it’s reality. I can only hope he finds some motivation somewhere, cause it’s a really bad look for him right now. Plus it would be kinda cool after everyone hated on him ( probably rightfully so), and damn near ran him out of town if he could come back, and go out with a solid effort, and by that I mean at least .500, and a more balanced roster.
Let him go out with some dignity, I got respect for my elders.
Duh Duh Man - March 15, 2010
While he might not always play with a small lineup
Nellie has always been determined to play at a fast tempo. In the last 30 years, 15 Nelson coached teams have been in the top 5 in the league in Pace Factor. This up tempo style is proven not to work in the playoffs. In the NBA Playoffs, the game slows down to a crawl and teams are left to bang as the defensive intensity is leveled up. There is a reason that in those same 30 years, only 2 teams (the 1982 and 2009 Lakers) that finished in the top 5 in Pace wound up winning the championship. While it may be fun to watch, the Warriors are going nowhere in this current system.
marzorg - March 15, 2010
You have to make 10 million before you make 100 million
Can’t get there in one leap. You have to have one strategy to get to one level and another to get to a bigger level.
If you want to be a billionnaire, you can’t act like one from day one. Gates had to scramble and overpromise and take huge risks to get Microsoft off the ground.
You draft well. You make the playoffs. You start being attractive to free agents.
You start winning 50 games, 55 games. You start being attractive to free agents and top flight coachs.
The question is can Nelson rebuild the Warriors into a playoff team? He will be around for what, 3 years max?
JSML - March 15, 2010
What Nellie did in the past is exactly that – in the past. He doesn’t even coach practices, he’s pretty clearly mailing it in. Whatever you say about Nellie’s smallball history, this year he has given us terrible lineups (Mikki Moore started 20 games for 406 minutes played before we finally realized how bad he was, and he played over better players like Randolph at times) and played smallball at the expense of bigger players that would help us win. If you have the talent at guard, whatever, unfortunately we do not.
This is a problem. Have you seen our team? We are not very good, or talented. That we’re building a team to fit Nellie in itself is a problem that should be rectified. Using it as an excuse to keep Nellie around is a huge problem.
Overall I see no reason to keep a coach around who doesn’t even have the motvation to coach practices, makes questionable lineup decisions, and overall plays a brand of basketball that isn’t bringing us anywhere. Nellie needs to go, and it’s not even a question.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
We are talented
May not be good, but for sure we’re a talented team. We’re the youngest team in the NBA… are we still? But anyways… we’ve got a very talented team that just needs time to grow. Yes, I know we don’t have the ELITE talent that we all dream of getting (Lebron/Kobe/Wade…) but we do have the talent that EVERY elite team would want on their team. It’s been said again and again… we’re 1 piece away from getting to the big picture boys. Please, oh please, Chris Bosh come to the warriors this off season! I know you liked seeing us run you down with a bunch of nobodies!
bojangles408 - March 15, 2010
Have you watched us this year? There’s a lot of things our team is lacking. We might have some guys that could play complementary roles on good teams, sure, because those good teams would be able to mask their weaknesses (like defense, for example, and that applies to every single member of the Golden State Warriors). We’re 18-47 right now, we aren’t one piece away from contending for anything. Well, maybe a Lebron away from contending. The Raptors are under .500 in the East – bring Bosh over here and we’re competing for maybe the 7th spot in the West? That still makes us closer to an average team than a good one. It looks an awful lot to me like your version of talent is more "young guys who haven’t shown us their ceilings yet (they will) and who’s flaws have yet to appear (again, they will). Potential and future growth is nice, but we also have to consider the reality of how good they’ll most likely become. In most cases…..that’s pretty questionable.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Honestly speaking
This team has some very good pieces. The backcourt has proven to be one of the best in the NBA, and if they continue growing and learning to play well together, it will only get better. What this team desperately needs right now is Beidrins to return to Beidrins form and a 4 that can stretch the floor like Al Harrington used to be able to do. If Randolph can pan out and mature a little more, this team can be a very good basketball team. Throw a swingman like Turner or Johnson into the mix, and this team can compete in the playoffs for sure. Hell, I would even keep Maggette around next year just because he’s been such a class act and gone through so much with this franchise.
PG: Curry/Watson
SG: Ellis/Bell/Morrow
SF: Turner/Maggette/Azibuike
PF: Randolph/Wright
C: Beidrins/Turiaf
That team looks very deep and promising. Of course it rests on our ability to grab Turner in the draft, but I think if we can steal Wesley Johnson then we should do that, otherwise there’s no point in taking another project big man. As much of an exaggeration this is, the teams fate rests on Beidrins to shape up over the summer and return to his rebounding form, and the health of our PFs. Everyone else has proven they can compete at an NBA level.
shahbazi3 - March 15, 2010
The best backcourts in the NBA don’t reside on 18-47 teams. Chris Paul alone is a better backcourt than what we have. Deron Williams is, too. As is Wade. Kobe. Durant (if you want to call him backcourt). Rondo/Allen. Brandon Roy. Nash. Maybe Chauncey. Top talent is vastly more important than having solid players, and we don’t have much top talent right now, no matter what position you’re talking about. A top 5 of all ok and decent starters isn’t a very good NBA team. We don’t have a top anything, and that’s why we aren’t that talented. You’re also putting way too much stock into “growing together” – talent is what wins, when you add talent to teams, they do better, when you subtract it (like Kobe running Shaq from the Lakers), they do worse, even if they don’t necessarily like each other or play well together. “Fit” can be important, sure, but that’s not even in our favor, Monta and Curry aren’t a great fit together…..
Talent is what matters, and top talent at that. We are not a talented team. We have complementary pieces with significant weaknesses.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Wrong
The Warriors backcourt is as strong as any team’s in the NBA! The problem is the frount court players for the Warriors they don’t have anyone.
Chris Paul and Kobe Bryant would not be able to carry the Warriors to a better record than they have right now and they are at the top of the list when you talk about indvidiual players.
The reason why Denver, Portland, New Orleans, and the Lakers have a significant advantage record wise is because each one of those teams have someone who can score in the low post.
Denver with Carmelo Anthony and Nene, Portland with LaMarcus Aldridge, New Orleans with David West, and the Lakers with Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol.
By the way when Kobe didn’t have a big man how well did the Lakers do?
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
Everything in NBA history suggests the opposite. Have you noticed the Hornets have a much better record than us? Did you see what Kobe did in his 3 seasons without Shaq/Pau. The Lakers weren’t nearly as good, but they weren’t 18-47, either. They were much, much better than we are. You honestly couldn’t be more wrong calling us the strongest backcourt in the NBA – that’s 40% of our lineup, and if 40% of your lineup is as strong as you suggest, your team won’t be one of the very worst in the NBA.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
(The Hornets are 7-14 since Paul got hurt on Jan 29, but were 25-21 before that point)
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
+1,
That was the perfect and concise response to the ‘we have a great backcourt rhetoric’ argument.
warriorsscore110 - March 15, 2010
You misspelled “The Warriors backcourt can score a bunch of points and has fooled some Warriors fans into thinking that this alone makes it among the best in the game, despite its abundant flaws, principally defensive, but in other areas as well.”
They were between a mid 30s and mid 40s win team without him. That’s not great, but it’s a significant deal better than the Warriors are.
jae - March 15, 2010
Even with those teams
The Lakers had something that the Warriors do not have. A capable wing player who can take the ball out of the hand of Bryant. The Lakers had two of those players Lamar Odom and Caron Butler.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
What definition of “talent” are you using? I don’t see the talent here as being all that exceptional. Most fans of most teams could make arguments that their teams have ‘talent’. Relative to a college team, it’s true. Relative to another NBA squad…?
jae - March 15, 2010
Agreed.
When watching us play the Nets and the announced the starting lineups, I felt that they looked better than us on paper. We have scrappy players that play their heart off, but they don’t have the size nor the skill to compete every night at a high level. Looking at Harris (an allstar), Lee (Starting SG in the NBA finals last year, entering his second year), Douglas-Roberts (15ppg scorer early on), Yi/Williams (Lottery Picks who are projects), and Lopez (one of the better Cs in the league) they should have killed us when we were rotating Cartier Martin/Deavan George/Tolliver/Hunter into the game… but we won by 30+. I think if the franchise quits wasting its picks and drafts NBA ready players, then we’ll be fine. Because Nellie has shown impatience with some of the younger big men.
shahbazi3 - March 15, 2010
it's not so much that you're wrong...
…as you’re so seemingly uninformed you really shouldn’t comment.
if you think the type of system played is as important as who the head coach is for developing players, you aren’t familiar with sports. it is incredibly luck to have had nelson at all with ownership as inept as the warriors have. he is profoundly knowledgable. not just about his system, but all the systems played in the NBA. do you think he wouldn’t be able to run the princeton offense, or the triangle? come on! the guy has a wealth of knowledge in a league full of inexperienced, sometimes knock-kneed figurehead coches. is that what you want for the warriors? which brings me to my second point:
who is going to replace nelson that will be better? you’re just not informed if you think the warriors are likely to get a better coach. do you remember the past ten years? pj carlesimo, garry st. jean, eric mussleman are a few names i remember, and they’re the names of horrible failures at the coaching postition. get real!
The Bimbo Coles Experience - March 15, 2010
Frankly, if you’re going to be that big of a douchebag, you could at least say something that’s even relevant to the statement you’re responding to. Nothing you say addresses any of the points that I make or shows any understanding of what I wrote about.
? Do I say anything that suggests this, or even discusses this topic?
Whatever, I flat out don’t like you now, I’m done responding.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
sorry barry but you're taking a pretty divisive stance
when a fan jumps on the media-hype bandwagon it brings down the level of discussion.
what is there that is substantive in this quote for me to respond to? this is cookie cutter stuff kawakami would release as “talking points” if he were bill o’reilly. sorry if i’m antagonistic or rude here, but it’s hard to have the one decent coach my team has had in years be lambasted for “questionable lineup decisions” or not leading practices when the guy is don nelson. the warriors are so lucky to have him, even at 70, and it hurts to hear all that hoops knowledge crapped all over because he makes eccentric lineup changes or doesn’t lead practice.
this is a very young, very unskilled team. do the warriors really need nelson leading practice reminding kids a third his age making millions of dollars to box out, or teaching them how to run a fast break? his role is so much more important that that. then there are the lineup changes. do we really need to adress this? this is the third worst team in the league. what do the lineups even mean? those “questionable changes” allow us to not have to watch 30min of beans and turiaf on the floor together. they also exploit matchups, which is a good thing.
no hard feelings though, eh? feel free to be rude back! if i can’t be rude to crotchety old statisticians this site is virtually useless to me…
The Bimbo Coles Experience - March 15, 2010
Your opening to that last comment really rubbed me the wrong way. It has nothing to do with being rude – it’s the fact that you aren’t participating in discussions, simply claiming others have no basketball knowledge whatsoever while apparently touting your own but offering no discussion-worthy points or reasoned arguments whatsoever. If you want to discuss, drop the attitude, but more importantly, discuss. Make counter points. Use evidence. We’ve been over many of these topics before, if you participated in the discussion you’d understand where the ideas are coming from. Nobody here respects TK, calling us out for jumping on his “media-hype bangwagon” is pure BS. We have real discussions here. You’re welcome to join.
Now, to address some specifics. If Don Nelson is taking practices off, what is he doing to impart all his basketball knowledge on his players and help them develop? I’m not talking about coaching them the proper technique to box out – anyone who “knows anything about basketball” realizes this is a discussion about the finer points of basketball. When guys are in practice, they need to be coached. If they cut wrong, they need to be told what they should do. When they aren’t in the right place, or pass up a good shot (or take a bad one), they need to be told about it. I’ve never claimed Nellie doesn’t have a wealth of basketball knowledge to share with his players to make them better – I believe he does. The problem is he isn’t sharing it. He isn’t coaching the guys. Where does this come from? A quote directly from the horses mouth that we’ve discussed here before – Nellie is quoted as saying he basically doesn’t coach practices. How are they supposed to grow as players without Nellie coaching them? What good does whatever coaching ability he have do in that situation?
We’ve also been over his lineups. Frankly, they’ve sucked. Maybe you don’t remember because the last month or so we’ve been playing without enough players, but at various points we’ve had guys who played over superior players. Anthony Randolph looks lost out on the court at times, sure, but he’s a better PF than anyone else we had, and he was being sat on the bench in favor of Corey Maggette at the 4, in favor of Mikki freaking Moore, VladRad…..Randolph has his issues, but he was a better option, and we have evidence of this. I care. Biedrins PT has been limited at times, too. On the other hand, we’re running Monta into the ground. Why? Why is he being given free reign to play all game long playing the way he has?
We’ve had these discussions, and I’ve come to the conclusion that Nellie favors certain skills too much while undervaluing other skills. He likes guys who can shoot or handle the ball to play at 4, and he’ll gladly give up rebounding and defense in favor of it, and it’s lead to much lesser players playing in place of superior players. It’s not ok. I don’t want a coach who doesn’t coach and then doesn’t send our best players out there. What does that accomplish? Not to mention we continue to look for offensive players without addressing our huge weaknesses – defense and rebounding, and I believe Nellie is part of the systematic dysfunction within our organization that completely ignores important facets of the game, and his lineups demonstrate this. We need to move on.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
IIRC, I’m pretty sure MB is a crotchety young statistician…
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
That would be correct.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
System plays a big role especially in the NBA
Steve Nash wouldn’t be anything without Nelson. I’m sorry if there are people who believe otherwise. If Nash was in a system that predicated itself on defense or physicality such as with San Antonio or Utah, Nash would have had a much more difficult time.
Why? Cause Nash at his best is in the open court where there’s very little structure. Slow down the pace on Nash and he struggles mightily. Furthermore force Nash to become the number one option in terms of scoring and there you go Nash can’t survive. Nash’s best skills are being the number two or three option in terms of scoring and his best attribute is his ability to pass the ball and let others score.
Nash isn’t the only one who struggles in a slower paced environment! What has Baron Davis done since he left for the Clippers? Nothing. He’s nowhere near the player he was in Nelson’s system.
Why? Cause Mike Dunleavy’s system was predicated on playing at a slower pace and not running the fast break nearly enough. Which, makes it difficult for Davis too thrive in because he’s better at an up and down pace.
Secondly how was it luck that the ownership of the Warriors got Nelson? The ownership didn’t play any role in getting Nelson! Chris Mullin while GM talked Nelson into coaching the Warriors.
Third there are plenty of coaches that could do a better job than Nelson is doing right now. In terms of win-loss record it would take a couple of seasons. Such as Maurice Cheeks, Eddie Jordan if he’s fired by Philadelphia, or even Avery Johnson all could do a better job.
You talk about Nelson’s experience in the league. Well if Nelson has all this experience how Nelson has never ever developed a dominant post player as coach? How come he’s never won a NBA championship as coach?
You’re right in the fact that Carleismo was a failure, St. Jean was a failure. But, Musselman was not a failure at al! In fact he deserved more time as coach because he was getting the Warriors to play hard game in game out and besides Nelson’s two 40 plus win seasons, Musselman had the second best two seasons in the decade when the Warriors won 38 and 37 games.
The 38 wins in the 2002-2003 was the best total for the Warriors since the 1995-1996 season when the Warriors won 36 games with Rick Adelman as coach of the Warriors.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
+1
MDB - March 15, 2010
This was a very well-thought out post and a bold one at that, given that most of the people here are calling for Nellie’s head. I am surprised that the votes are pretty even though.
I’m ambivalent about who coaches the team. To me, it makes no difference because we have incompetent ownership and management (Cohan and Rowell). If the Warriors had LeBron James, the management would somehow f*ck it up in some unimaginable fashion.
At least Don Nelson has a track record of success (and failure). Cohan is nothing but failure unless you count 2007, which he unilaterally blew up immediately thereafter.
Doctor Kajita - March 15, 2010
We Believe happend in spite of Cohan
…not because of him.
Eric Remer - March 15, 2010
Trust me, I’m not giving him credit for it, but I’m just laying out the failure vs. success track record while he has been owner.
Doctor Kajita - March 15, 2010
rec'd for one particular statement
Don Nelson has a preference for SKILLED players who can play uptempo. not short players. It just so happens, it’s harder to find bigs who are skilled, but when he’s had anything resembling he’s played them and played them heavy minutes. Does anyone really think if Nellie coached the lakers (for ex) he wouldn’t be playing odom, gasol, bynum 30+ mins each???
Problem is in his second stint at GSW the bigs he’s had have for the most part been way too raw for consistent NBA minutes. For every flash of brilliance Randolph shows, he has much longer stretches of head scratching play…
tafkasam - March 15, 2010
And despite all that, it’s not like our small guys are loaded with talent – this isn’t the We Believe team that had legitimate talent and depth outside and a huge lack of it inside, as much as someone like Randolph’s play is frustrating, he still does good things, and our options aren’t any better, especially when putting in someone like Morrow or CJ means moving Maggette to 4. Morrow + Maggette < Maggette + Randolph if they’re playing the 3 and 4. Plus, Mikki Moore! Why oh why play Mikki Moore?!
I also agree Nellie looks for certain skills in his players, but I think those skills are generally biased towards wings and especially this year his preferences have really hurt our team. He undervalues things like rebounding and defense and overvalues being able to shoot and handle the ball on offense.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Yes and No
You make it sound like Randolph wasn’t getting PT pre-injury. He was getting 23 mpg which is probably more than he’d get in most teams. Of course now his new crush is Anthony Tolliver. I can’t wait for him to trade Randolph or Wright to free up minutes for Tolliver
tafkasam - March 15, 2010
When Wright is hurt, and given our other options, this is terrible. I cannot emphasize how horribly dumb this is. Mikki Moore averaged almost 18 minutes per game for us. Maggette was getting minutes at the 4. Randolph should have been playing more than 23 minutes, not only for his development (and I’m not a huge believer in games being big in development simply because they’re such a small portion of the amount of work a player puts into his game), but because he was the best option available.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Fundamental difference between you and Nellie then. He’s adamantly said he will never play a player more than he deems his ready for (unless it’s garbage time). He doesn’t believe in learning as you play. You have to learn TO play
tafkasam - March 15, 2010
If it wasn’t clear, that’s along the lines of what I was suggesting – that games are only a small portion of a players development, most of it comes outside of game situations. The point is still we had inferior lineups playing instead of Randolph. Randolph wasn’t ready to do the things Nellie wanted him to, that might be true, but he still brought more to the table than other options (like Moore, or Maggette at 4).
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
not to pick a fight...
but how many NBA games have you coached? Backseat drivers should remain silent until the end of the ride.
Nelson’s past shouldn’t be used to predict future success?
Then how else do you judge a coach – we did win 48 games a year and a half ago didn’t we?
Stop picking on the man he’s not the problem – your frustration of rooting for the worst franchise in the NBA is making you too cynical. As a Warrior fan you should have this down already.
“Really looking forward to the new season – we have lots of talent and I think we can compete this year – only to be ranting and raving by the all-star break.”
triplesix - March 15, 2010
Really? Why should we discuss anything at all? Why ever let new people coach in the NBA if they haven’t coached before? If you have some concerns arguments against what I said, that’s fine, I like the discussion, but at least come up with real arguments.
One of the primary points a few of us have been getting at is Nellie is mailing it in. He’s not putting forth the same level of effort as he has in the past – so there’s an actual reason why we’re discounting the past. He’s said himself he doesn’t really coach practices, he doesn’t coach defense, he certainly doesn’t look like a man putting in the effort required to be successful. This version of Nellie is not the same version of Nellie he’s been in the past.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
That sounds pretty nebulous to me. Should a coach really be fired if he doesn’t display the expected amount of “joie de vivre”? He had pneumonia, for goodness sake.
I don’t really see how performance merits dismissal in this case, either. Coaches are often fired when their players quit on them. But his players seem to be all playing hard. Sure, most of them are d-leaguers and rookies who would be playing hard for anyone, but it is still one less reason.
What’s left? Development? He is apparently not as hands on as other coaches might be, but there are assistant coaches for that. I just don’t see coaching to be an issue at this case, either way.
bleep - March 15, 2010
And that’s fair, I would probably say the same thing on the surface. The problem is, we have real evidence that he is – he doesn’t coach practices, he doesn’t coach defense….he doesn’t do a whole lot in general. That’s “mailing it in” in my book.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
these are real arguments...
why do you suppose – based on no certain fact that Nelson is coaching any different than in the past. Do you have proof that he never assigned certain responsibilities to his assistants or are you just parsing outtakes and talking points from other media sources and rehashing the same old diatribe posted on this site for the last year and a half.
Yeah, i get it we are all frustrated with the losing – but it’s not like its new or was any different before Nelson got here so relax.
The article actually makes a very valid point that any other coach would have his players not even trying by now – but Nellie is doing a commendable job getting these guys to giver it their all every night even though they are out-talented on a nightly basis.
triplesix - March 15, 2010
Not seeing that. Some of these guys are professionals, some of them are fighting for their careers….they have plenty of motivation to play hard. Personally, I’d rather see them play “effectively”.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
And if this is your objective argument then I say what proof do you have. When I watch games I see him yelling at refs and players, drawing up plays in TO’s – you know the things coaches do. By what standard are you measuring effort?
Once again lest I remind you he coached us to 48 wins a year and a half ago. So stop saying his past is irrelevant – a year and a half is hardly past enough to warrant such statements. Like I said earlier – wait until the ride is over before you start chimng in with your expertise in x’s and o’s and leading groups of men.
triplesix - March 15, 2010
As I addressed previously, he’s admitted himself all the coaching responsibilities he’s delegating away. The dude isn’t doing his job.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Feltbot is 1000 times more of a journalist than Tim K
End of story.
Eric Remer - March 15, 2010
While I disagree with Feltbot’s post, I can agree with this statement. :)
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Well, 1000 × 0 = 0… ;-)
I wouldn’t call either of them “journalists.” They’re passionate, moody, opinionated bloggers, like pretty much everyone on this site. As a rule, I think Feltbot’s posts are more thoughtful and reasonable and less sensationalist and knee-jerk negative than TK’s. Plus, unlike TK, he’s totally honest about the fact that he’s presenting his opinions, as a fan; and he doesn’t try to tout his credibility as an “insider.”
That said, in the case of Nellie, I’m about 65/35 in the Kawakami “camp.” As others have said, most of what may have been true about Nellie in the past no longer really applies. And even the stuff that people considered true in the past was probably only partially true. Whatever else you might say about Nellie, he’s an extremely complex dude. Both TK’s and Feltbot’s takes tend towards oversimplification, imo.
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
I don't get it
To watch game after game after game of these terrible teams that play no semblance of defense and then come to the conclusion that our coach is good and deserves to keep his job… I simply don’t get it.
Go Warriors.
Neon - March 15, 2010
To look at our roster and realize that one healthy player was a lottery pick, surrounded by D-leaguers and undrafted players, I would expect the team to be a lot worse than it is now.
shahbazi3 - March 15, 2010
Why? Curry and Monta have been healthy, even Maggette’s been pretty healthy, sure injuries have affected us, but we’ve been pretty bad, about as bad as you can be, and some of our best players have played. Even if Nellie has gotten a lot out of these guys, I wouldn’t expect a huge difference, and Nellie’s negatives far outweigh his positives. “He can coach D-Leaguers” isn’t something we need. If that’s true, he should be where he belongs – coaching in the D-League. We need someone that actually puts in the effort to coach, and will play our best players.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
GSoM
Clearly, GSoM doesn’t stand for General School of Management; you guys are absolutely lost. I am NOT a Tim K fan. I think he writes sensationalist nonsense to sell newspapers rather than just reporting the news, but on this point, he is completely right.
C’mon guys, looks at this team clearly. This is NOT the Bucks. This is NOT the Run TMC era. This is NOT the 2002 Mavs. And this is NOT the We Believe team. Get over it.
Nellie’s coaching jobs with those teams are irrelevant to the current situation. The man is old, folks, and his job is not getting easier. He has exactly one year on his contract, and the look on his face and general body language should say enough. He’s tired. He’s worn down. And he most certainly doesn’t have the energy to keep up with young players to really ensure their development.
If the majority of you truly believe that Nellie is the correct man for this job, the coach of the 2010-2011 Warriors, then this team will continue to suck.
Nothing else matters except what Nellie has done with this team. You cannot dissociate Nellie’s coaching with his management style b/c they are one and the same. If you choose Nellie the coach, you are going to get Nellie the GM (aka Larry Riley) as well. So, you get to piss off the players, and then you get to trade them for 30 cents on the dollar as well.
I find it ridiculous to believe the support for this guy. What? He took you guys to the playoffs in 1993? And again in 2007? Wow…I’m so impressed. In a league where everyone makes the playoffs, this is not even average. Jerry Sloan has had the Jazz in the playoffs just about every single year since 1993, and yet, I’m sure most posters here would claim Nellie to be at least Sloan’s equal.
And my boy Atma’s comments above are just another example of him determining what everyone should think on this site. He is not interested in discussion. He is not interested in hearing someone’s POV. Instead, it’s just another attack on Chris Mullin (what does he have to do with anything??) and more blind support for Big Brother. Don’t worry, Atma, the sheep will continue to flock your way, and you can keep deleting posts that disagree with your voice b/c they are “low quality.”
Look, I don’t know how to say this nicely, but Warriors fans need to wake the *%$! up!! You guys are trapped in this dream world of losing, where losing becomes reality. Because of this, input from fans and decision making by management have both become seriously flawed.
Kawakami’s points, however, are valid and accurate. They really cannot be disputed.
UncleCliffy - March 15, 2010
Nice qualifications on Tim Kawakami...
He’s full of sensationalist nonsense, at the same time, valid and accurate. I stopped reading after “valid and accurate.”
brewitt - March 15, 2010
Cohan -> Rowell -> Nelson, therefore I disagree
Feltbot, as a fellow GSoM writer, of course I love ya man, and you’re a helluva poker player, but if the following equation is true…
Cohan… begets Rowell… begets Nelson
…then I must, unfortunately, humbly disagree. Yes, Nelson is the best coach under a regime instituted by Cohan/Rowell.
No, Nelson is not the best coach “for these guys”.
To find the best coach for these particular guys, you needn’t look very far: Keith Smart. However, we all know that would never happen under Cohan’s watch, for a variety of reasons which I will not delve into at the moment.
Also, I don’t know if someone already said the above. I don’t really spend a lot of time reading comments. Hats off, if someone else said this.
Poor Man's Commish - March 15, 2010
Keith Smart
I just don’t see any evidence that Smart would do any better. I’d love to see some because Nellie has anointed him his eventual successor, but I don’t see any. I have serious doubts of him being even an average head coach in this league.
There is no great coach “for these guys”. These guys are young. These guys have a collectively low hoops IQ. These guys are not very talented. These guys are going nowhere. No coach can go anywhere with this roster and injuries.
Atma Brother ONE - March 15, 2010
I actually see evidence Smart is just as bad or worse than Nellie. All my complaints about Nellie apply to what I’ve seen from Smart, as well. Sure, stepping in as a temporary head coach is an awkward situation, but that doesn’t excuse giving Mikki Moore more minutes than Nellie was….
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
I agree that what he did was bad, but i think 6 or 7 games is a terrible sample size to throw him under the bus for….
MDB - March 15, 2010
He's got more than six or seven games
He’s got pretty much all of the last half of last season too. There was no improvement by the Warriors when Smart was given control in fact the Warriors regressed even more.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
I’m not judging results, just judging the process. His lineups really rubbed me wrong. That’s not a “sample size” type thing…
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
When has Nellie anointed him his successor?
He likes Keith as an assistant. Thinks he does a good job. I don’t recall Nellie ever taking the step to say “Keith Smart should succeed me”
I’m also in the “not convinced of Smart” boat. The way he got tactically manhandled by coaches like Eddie Jordan was painful. Maybe I’ve gotten to used to Nellie at least outsmarting the opposing coach though. Whether it translated on the court or not, you new Nellie was always a step ahead in terms of tactics. Nellie has to easily be the least desirable coach to coach against. He forces you to play to his hand and not visa verse.
tafkasam - March 15, 2010
Is that why
Towards the end of last season Nelson handed over the reigns and allowed Smart to coach the team while Nelson sat back and watched?
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
This is probably for the same reason that Nellie barely coaches this year. He’s mailed it in.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
See The Warriors’ Next Coach Will Be Smart. Nellie has been saying this since Jan 2007.
Atma Brother ONE - March 15, 2010
Smart has had his chances
The Wariors defense hasn’t improved with Smart who was jokingly referred to by Nelson as the defensive coach and Smart also coached a lot of games last year and also while Nelson was out with pneumonia.
With Smart running the show the Warriors are even worse. Therefore Smart is not even close to being the best option for the Warriors.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
I’m not sure what you mean here. How was he risking chemistry of a 50 win team? Run TMC never won 50 games. (Run TMC, for what it’s worth, lasted 2 seasons). The year after he traded Mitch away, they won 55 games.
jae - March 15, 2010
Funny how closely that mirrors the We Believe situation…
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Run TMC was sweet dude I don’t know what you are talking about. Did you even watch them play? And no I’m not talking about highlights from youtube.
I think you are missing the point. The point was the controversy surrounding the trade of Mitch Richmond and Billy Owens and breaking up Run TMC which was so popular. As the story goes they needed a big man. Owens was bigger, but not quite big enough. He turned out to be a bigger small forward who could handle the ball. At the time we really needed a rebounder and a defensive presence which Owens unfortunately could not fulfill.
brewitt - March 15, 2010
Billy Owens
We had a pretty good discussion about this last summer:
Polling GSoM: Was Billy Owens a “monumental NBA bust”?
Atma Brother ONE - March 15, 2010
I really hope we don't end up calling Brandan Wright- Billy Owens part 2
There are similarities there too.
tafkasam - March 15, 2010
I watched them play many, many times. Whether or not they were “sweet”, they never won 50 games in a season. If you don’t know what I’m talking about in that sense, I’m not sure where to begin. Do you need to learn to count to 50, or are you facing some other obstacle?
People liked Richmond. Owens never lived up to the billing. Nonetheless, they went from about a .500 team to a 55 win team when making that switch. Was that responsible for all the improvement? Maybe, maybe not. But to hear the revisionist historians, you’d think that Run-TMC was a contender, not a borderline playoff team (back when that meant .500 in the west) who couldn’t ever win a game once Owens showed up.
jae - March 15, 2010
With Nellie it's complicated...
well at least for me it is. I really like him in general. I like his unconventional style. I think he’s an entertaining interview. I think he’s a very capable coach. But, I can’t ignore the fact that the last two seasons have been two of the more painfully uninspired coaching performances I’ve witnessed. Two years ago I couldn’t imagine calling Nelson, a coach who relies so much on his creativity and out-of-the-box-ishness, uninspired. What happened?
Well, he’s getting older, he doesn’t have top talent to work with, and the team has been hit hard by injuries. I guess it’s pretty understandable that he’s no longer willing to lose sleep staying up all night coming up with new schemes to defend the opposing teams star players (see Yao, Dirk, or Carmelo a couple years back). Instead we’ve seen the birth (and demise?) of the “defensive coordinator”, the delegation of almost all of his coaching responsibilities, and what would appear to be someone who may have moved past the stage of coddling the the egos of the modern NBA athlete and into a stage where he may be unable or unwilling to maintain good relations with his players (see Baron, Al, Jackson, Crawford, Monta, Randolph, and Andris). Obviously those relationships were a two way street and some cases have been more serious than others but the frequency of public tension between players and coach on this team has honestly been alarming to me. Especially for a coach that has had a pretty good reputation about handling players personally in the past (Mullin and Jackson being the more obvious examples).
Can he return to form? I’m not sure. Chances are that we enter next season with the same ownership, upper management, and similar talent to what we’ve had the last two seasons. Is there a good reason to think he will be reinvigorated next season? Look, if he comes back refreshed and ready to be his old self I’ll gladly watch to see what he can do. I just don’t see it at this point though.
olympicmike - March 15, 2010
Coming into this season, I thought he probably would be reinvigorated. While he coached poorly and lazily last year, on some level you could chalk that up to frustration at the team’s situation: after losing Baron and Monta in short order, you can understand why he might just say “screw it” and punt on the year.
There was really no excuse to do the same this season. Coming into the year, Nellie had a healthy Monta, a rookie PG that Nellie was raving about, a healthier Maggette, and a guy in Randolph who’d started showing some signs of stardom… sure, there was Jack drama, but he was out of the picture before Thanksgiving. This was a team a professional coach should’ve been sufficiently motivated to coach, even once injuries started to hit. That’s not to say they’d necessarily be good, even if healthy. But there was enough here to merit paying some real attention. Nellie hasn’t paid that attention.
The first real warning sign was in the preseason, when Ralph and Tom interviewed Nellie and asked him how he liked the team. He said something to the effect of, “Sure, I like it fine. I really liked it before Wright went down, though.” It seemed weird that he was making such a big deal about the loss of a backup power forward he’d clearly never cottoned to. It sounded like the guy was already making excuses: “Yeah, we might’ve had a hell of a year if Brandan Wright hadn’t gotten hurt.” I’m as big a Wright booster as there is, and I can’t take that claim seriously.
At this point, I don’t think there’s any reason to believe Nellie will get motivated again; he’s just coached too lazily for too long. Health alone won’t do it… even on the rare occasions when he had Curry, Monta, Maggette, Randolph and Biedrins all available at the same time, he’s stubbornly smallballed his way out of some wins (in Portland, for instance). The only thing he seems to be paying attention to is his paycheck.
Nellie’s my favorite coach of all time, but mentally, he retired two years ago. It’s time for the team to acknowledge that and move on.
onlxn - March 15, 2010
Onlxn, I like your posts and this one is no different. But can you explain this comment? What about him makes him your favorite? Is this another one of those “Well, in the Bay Area, alternative is mainstream, so let’s make sure we have an alternative coach, and the people will support him” things that I’ll never get?
Why am I the only poster who would put Nellie as my #273 favorite of all time? Why does everyone think so highly of him while I think so low? Why am I the only person who thinks we could have picked a perfectly mediocre-to-average coach and thinks it would make no difference in W-L record?
Now, I’m sure it has something to do with the fact that I moved to the Bay Area in 2001, so I never experienced Run-TMC and never paid too much attention to Nellie’s good-but-not-great Mavs teams. But people on this board bring up the “good ole days” all the time, and yet I never, ever see the relevance.
Use this analogy: I am a NY Mets fan (sorry). It is 2010. Similar to the GSW, I am not crazy about the management or direction of that team. But imagine if I were to post on a Mets forum about Doc Gooden, Keith Hernandez, and Darryl Strawberry, most would just respond, “quit living in the past.” If I were to talk about the crappy mid-90s teams, with Bobby Bonilla and Vince Coleman, most would just respond, “they sucked.” And if I were to talk about the late 90s teams of Mike Piazza, Edgardo Alfonzo, and Al Leiter, then most would say “Not relevant.” And they are right. None of these discussions would improve the 2010 Mets or the 2011 Mets or the 2012 Mets.
So what’s the difference? Why do we as GSW fans constantly have to bring up the ancient history of the Warriors to determine the future? I guess it’s a symptom of losing. But it’s not something that makes any logical sense.
It makes some sense to dissect We Believe and its aftermath, but discussions of Run-TMC, Billy Owens, Chris Webber, Mitch Richmond, Tim Hardaway, Chris Mills or Mookie Blaylock have nothing to do with Nellie’s crap coaching job the past few years and have even less to do with the general direction of this franchise.
UncleCliffy - March 15, 2010
I’ll just chime in and say you’re not the only one, I more or less feel this way, too. I also don’t get the nostalgia of the past in Nellie’s case – I’m still mad at him for running Webber off.
Missing Barry - March 15, 2010
Sure. Three reasons, in descending order of importance:
1) He’s been on the bench for the few happy moments I’ve had as a Warriors fan.
2) He’s an entertaining character, unlike most of the anodyne coaches in the league.
3) His teams, when effective, tend to play a style of basketball that I find entertaining.
All of your points against Nellie are completely valid… it’s sad that Warriors fans are tempted to wax nostalgic about a 48-win team. And I’ve been on the “Nellie’s coaching like crap” bandwagon since the beginning of last season… you won’t hear me defending his performance in the slightest. I think he may very possibly be the worst coach in the league right now. Hell, I’m tempted to argue that his ‘06-’10 coaching job hasn’t been as good as Eric Musselman’s ‘02-’04 work, given the talent each had on hand. And I certainly haven’t forgotten that Nellie ruined this franchise once (and may do it again if he’s given the chance).
But I found Musselman to be a grating figure, and every other head coach the Warriors have had since Nellie’s first go-round has been more or less incompetent. So who else am I going to be attached to?
Nellie was there when Timmy was at his most effective (as a Warrior) and fun, and when Baron was at his most effective and fun. I realize that’s not much in the scheme of things, and that it certainly doesn’t blind me to the fact that he’s doing a terrible job and should be sent packing. But I’m a Dubs fan. Those few, middling happy memories are all I have.
onlxn - March 15, 2010
Surely his pneumonia and back problems constitute some excuse? If players can be injured, why not coaches? Even as just a casual fan, I definitely see a big change in his courtside demeanor over the last month or so.
bleep - March 15, 2010
Nellie has lost weight. Does that mean anything? It means he’s really fat. LOL.
You know what they say about guys with big hands.
They have big feet.
Doctor Kajita - March 15, 2010
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this. Nellie always talks about how players really start to come into form in their third year and during camp he was hyping Wright like crazy. He couldn’t have known that Wright would get injured again… If anything, I think this is one of the few instances where Nellie is being completely honest about a player and how he feels about them.
samuraaaaiiiiiii - March 15, 2010
fail
Should have been a reply to onlxn.
samuraaaaiiiiiii - March 15, 2010
thank you!
Kawakami’s column bothered me – it would have bothered me more, but I am so used to his relentless attention-seeking negativity that I quickly tuned it out and moved on with my life.
But I am delighted to find that there is someone else out there who actually thinks Nelson has done a pretty darned good job this year.
The team has played very hard for him, and I defy TK or anyone to name someone who could have gotten more out of them given all the injuries.
johnpfree - March 15, 2010
I'm am shocked...
at this post and some of the comments. They actually make sense and use logic and facts. Wow! Nice job. I’m not being sarcastic. I don’t really have much to add but what you guys (and gals) are saying about Nellie makes perfect sense to me. Where are all the Nellie haters?
brewitt - March 15, 2010
Don Nelson Is One Player Away From Playoff Contention
I agree with your analysis. The makings of the best backcourt in the NBA in already on board. Curry-Ellis will go for minimum of 50 points, on any day, in the future. I would love to see Curry-Ellis-Williams gel together and go for 75 points, on any day, in the future. Add any good power forward and a good center, and you have the nucleus of a playoff contender. They will run anyone to the ground, and beat you with the long shot as well. Don Nelson can make it happen!
dinohealth - March 15, 2010
Reggie? Marvin? Walt? Gus? Hank? Lucinda?
Sleepy Freud - March 15, 2010
Nellie made the game more fun
I’m much more of a hoops fan because of Don Nelson’s coaching, making the most of the talent he had, starting in Milwaukee. I suspect the teams that beat him in the playoffs would have done as well or even better with him as their coach. I know it only means so much, but when he coached against Phil Jackson in the ‘92 All-Star game, the West won by 40…..40!!! When he finally hangs it up, I hope someone can pick up where he left off (even if one thinks he left-off/lost-it some time ago), or I won’t enjoy the game as much. Alas, he’s probably one of a kind. I, for one, hope he’s not done impressing the basketball world.
By the way Feltbot, I always read your blog because you make being a Warriors fan more fun. I read Kawakami too, because I need to balance the light with the darkness. Thanks for the positive vibes!
geraldmcgrew - March 15, 2010
Positive vibes..
combined with the knowledge.
geraldmcgrew - March 15, 2010
Keep Nelson around, but not as head coach...
My main problem with Don Nelson as the head coach is that if we were to draft a talented young big man, or bring in a talented young big man, Don Nelson would just waste his potential anyway. Don Nelson may know how to use the players that he has in the best way possible, which is why he has more wins than any coach to ever coach in the NBA. However, the man has never won a championship in all his years, so obviously he can only take teams so far. I just don’t think he knows what to do with a player to make him better. He knows what to do with a player to put him in a position where he’s a mismatch for his opponent. There’s more to being a head coach then coaching though as strange as that might sound. You need to be able to develop your players, and yes he is great and developing guards and recognizing talent in guards, which is why I would like the Warriors to try to keep him apart of the organization, just not as head coach.
ntfarell - March 15, 2010
just wanted to add:
I love Don Nelson, Don Nelson is a genius, and the man! to rebuttle my own comment, the main problem with getting rid of him is trying to find someone better than him, that the team can trust has the ability to restructure the way the team runs…it’s just at some point, they gotta move on. If the Mavericks couldn’t do it with Nowitzki and Nash, we sure as heck can’t expect to do it with this team. That’s all I’m sayin.
ntfarell - March 15, 2010
Maybe this is why no one agrees with me. I don’t want to find someone better. I want to find someone different .
UncleCliffy - March 15, 2010
Different
Also means better.
Rocky632156 - March 15, 2010
So PJ, Musselman, Montgomery etc.
are better?
Eric Remer - March 16, 2010
This is a typical W’s fan attitude. W’s fans compare the current coach to past W’s coaches rather than to other current coaches in the league.
That’s like dating an annoying, ugly girl, but since you’ve only dated uglier, more annoying girls in the past, you don’t even bother to approach the nice, cute girls. Of course, you are stuck with the annoying, ugly girl, yet none of your friends have any idea why you date her. But you just keep on thinking, “Well, she’s the best I’ve done, so she must be good for me. I’ll just stop looking.”
UncleCliffy - March 16, 2010
This is, in my opinion, the key statistic when examining Don Nelson’s ‘06-’10 coaching performance.
With Baron Davis: 84-61, .579
Without Baron Davis: 55-113, .327
This isn’t simply his first two years against his last two. The “without” Baron figure includes the 19 games Baron missed in ‘06-’07, during which the Dubs went 6-13.
Don Nelson was very, very good at coaching Baron Davis, because he knew how to maximize Baron’s gifts: let him run, give him offensive freedom and plenty of three-point shooters to kick out to, try to deflect your way into some decent defense. Nellie’s current laissez-faire approach was extremely well-tailored to Baron, and so, with Baron around, his coaching was effective. Not monstrously so — 84-61 is not an earth-shattering record, given that Mike Montgomery went 41-41 in games Baron played — but it was effective. With Baron aboard, Nellie was a good coach.
Without Baron, he’s useless. Laissez-faire only works if you have a brilliant offensive creator who can take advantage of it… Baron was that creator. Jack was not. Monta was not. Curry, however good he may get someday, is currently not. Since Baron left, the chaotic, free-flowing style has led to more turnovers, fewer threes, and more losses. And yet, Nellie hasn’t tried to tweak things a bit… he’s still coaching like he has Baron Davis.
This is by no means the only thing Nellie’s been doing wrong lately. He’s run Monta into the ground for no discernible reason whatever. He’s mistaken Corey Maggette for a power forward, Mikki Moore for a useful player, and Vladimir Radmanovic for a more valuable contributor than Anthony Randolph. His “work” on the defensive end pretty much speaks for itself. His handling of late-game situations has been execrable. The guy’s phoning it in something fierece… it’s not like there’s just one mistake you can point to.
But I think the Baron disparity captures it best. Nellie’s good teams tend to feature supremely skilled offensive decision-makers, and he gets more out of those guys than other coaches do. But when he doesn’t have a guy like that around, an on-court proxy who can help the team run itself, he’s either unable or unwilling to change things up. So unless lightning strikes (“lightning” being defined as “John Wall, Chris Paul, or Stephen Curry taking a leap”), he’s basically useless to us.
onlxn - March 15, 2010
Speaking of Baron Davis, have you seen Curry play recently?
Curry is a virtuoso offensive talent. People don’t want to hear this, but Don Nelson is the perfect coach to develop him. He’ll never have Baron’s post game, but his decision-making and open-court playmaking ability are already stunning, and he’s only a rookie.
Eric Remer - March 16, 2010
Stunning? I’d rate it as “promsing” or “acceptable” but certainly not stunning. I’m happy we’ve got him, but I won’t inflate him into something he isn’t at this point. I think we’ve been battered too long with low expectations such that a point guard who averages about 5 assists in 36 minutes with a substandard A:TO ratio starts looking stunning. Or is this just in a limited definition of “open-court” that will allow maybe 2 or three plays a game tops?
jae - March 16, 2010
yes stunning, as in very (in this case pleasantly) surprised
the word makes sense. he is more than we expected, and im not quite sure what your standard for acceptable is, but he is definitely more than that.
Won - March 19, 2010
Nellie has to go
Especially, for playing Mikki Moore. Mikki Moore would have gotten kicked out of the local Y team for being a horrible player, yet it took an injury to Moore to stop playing him. Why did Nelson not bench him ala Marcus Williams??
Don’t get me wrong, I like offensive minded basketball, its fun to watch when we not completely getting destroyed on the boards. However I really did not need/want to watch combo of Moore, George and Radmanovich this year, those are 3 most horrible players in the league in my book, and it is clear that Nelson had huge impact on getting them playing time.
Over last couple of years, Nelson could have brought this team along a lot better, helped develop chemistry between players, or at least not alienating players. He has failed to do that.
Now, it looks like Nelson has found a new offensive toy in Curry, it looks like his passion is coming back. I don’t think that fair to the rest of players that we had, especially Monta and Randolph.
farid - March 15, 2010
Your hyperbole is excessive
Even for a Warriors fan.
Eric Remer - March 16, 2010
Honestly, with the awful product this team gives us year in and year out, I don’t think anything really qualifies as excessive.
Missing Barry - March 16, 2010
Nash is not overrated
Nobody, not Alvin Gentry or Steve Kerr or Nash’s wife is going to say he is a lockdown defender. He does not possess superior lateral quickness and he has a bad back; should Nash grind his back to dust by exerting 100% on PG’s who, as a position, are getting bigger seemingly by the minute? Of course Nash’s defense is a liability. Kobe’s incessant desire to get his shots no matter what is a liability; he has cost the Laker’s some games. LeBron’s free throw shooting (especially in the clutch) is a liability. Yao Ming’s terrible pick and roll D is a huge detriment to his team, but all of these guys are household names worthy of their praise (just like Steve Nash). If Nash could play D like Billups or Rondo (or at least how Rondo used to play D) then he would be the most dominant PG in the game, but that’s not Steve Nash. He’s just an amazing, HOF worthy player and yes, it’s all because he’s an offensive genius that has clearly been the biggest reason the Suns have been sniffing at the title for so long.
Those who say Steve Nash is overrated are desensitized by the superhuman athleticism of so many of today’s NBA players. Steve Nash is, all-around, the most skilled player in the NBA, and when the Suns were the best team in the NBA (the year Stern robbed them by suspending Diaw and Stoudemire for something that had zero effect on anybody but Stern’s “I <3 Duncan Dynasty” manpon) the Suns went from #1 to lottery bound whenever he missed a game. He was the heart, soul, and talent of the best team in the league. Most of you spouting nonsense about how oeverrated he is are definitely not Suns fans, and probably never watch Suns games. Steve Nash can’t dunk or even do a 360 lay-up, so what?
adricha1 - March 16, 2010
(I’ll just point out here that it all came from one poster)
Missing Barry - March 16, 2010
Thanks, but no
Nash maybe skilled in the passing area. Ball handling he’s bad at just force him to slow the pace down and he’ll struggle holding onto the ball. Maybe you can use the argument that the defenders are more athletic, but maybe it’s the fact that the only way that Nash can make an impact is in an up tempo environment.
Nash’s defense is horrendous. It’s also hard for any team to win especially in the playoffs when they are playing 4-5 basketball. That’s how bad Nash’s defense is.
If you’re going to go by assists Nash is number one. If you were going to say what point guard would you want on defense? You would never in a million years say Nash. If you were to ask which point guard would you want if you needed to take over the game scoring wise? It wouldn’t be Nash either.
If you wanted a point guard to help out on the glass? There’s no question that Nash wouldn’t ge considered. If you wanted a point guard to come up with a steal? Again Nash can’t do that either.
There’s a reason why the most successful Sun teams had Raja Bell and Shawn Marion! They could guard anyone on the court and had to make up for Nash’s pathetic defense. Marion and Bell could guard the opposing team’s point guard because Nash couldn’t and refused to do it.
Rocky632156 - March 17, 2010
One More Thing
Steve Nash might not be quick, but he takes charges like a madman.
adricha1 - March 16, 2010
No he doesn't
He flops like a fish out of water and most of the time he isn’t even in position too take the charge or he’s in the restricted circle.
Rocky632156 - March 17, 2010
Still don't understand the Nellie apologists
How long do we have to be the laughing stock of the league before we as fans become outraged? Check out Kobe’s quotes after last night’s game:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=300315009
He basically equates us to nothing in the NBA landscape and points to the fact that our style is never in the playoffs. Ever.
So while fans will be wowed by close games like last night, the fact remains: we can’t hold leads against good teams because they don’t take us seriously the first three quarters and then they turn it on when it matters and always end up victorious.
I also don’t know why people are claiming that Nellie can develop talent at this point in his career? Really? Based on what evidence? Simply listing the talent that has been through his teams historically does not prove that he is good at developing talent.
Wake up Golden State of Mind!! We have so much loyalty, which is a good thing, but lets be honest guys and gals, Nellie is done! Plug a young, passionate, hands-on coach with this talent and lets see what we can do!
eastbayglory - March 16, 2010
That style ran him out of the playoffs every single season when the Lakers met the Suns. Until the Suns got broken up.
Feltbot - March 16, 2010
Curry messed up lakers D
we are one big man away from breakout season.
GSWeri - March 16, 2010
Tonight's a perfect example of why Nelson has got to go
Starting lineup was wrong. It should have been Ellis, Morrow, Maggette, Tolliver, and Hunter not Ellis, Watson, Morrow, Maggette, and Tolliver.
No excuse for the Warriors who are undersized not to do the fundamentals such as boxing out!
Silly mistakes also cost the Warriors like Ellis throwing the ball away when Maggette wasn’t even looking.
As for Nelson the fact that the Warriors do not play defense except for the first few seconds of the shot clock is another thing. It allows teams to get any shot they want. How many open layups do teams get against the Warriors? How many open mid range jumpers can opposing team’s get? How many open threes?
Nelson is not the best option for the Warriors. Let’s face it if the Warriors do not get him the record this year he’s coming back to break the record of Wilkens.
Rocky632156 - March 17, 2010
Get Real
I cannot believe this line of BS. It takes more than point-differential, “Defense.” Oh yeah in the case of the Warriors, a playoff spot, not 31 games back with a 18 wins and 48 big losses. Small back will never get you anything, oh except heartburn, sleepless nights, and on the bright side you get a high first round pick.
PhxSuns#7 - March 17, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Golden State Of Mind to post a comment.