Not upset, really just wanted to start another warriors thread noting how awesome they are even without curry.
Some people said Steve Nash was a system player under D'Antoni. Turned out that D'Antoni was a system coach under Nash.
Green is way better than cousins or whitside and im starting to like whiteside. Towns is the truth Gonna be the best big in the league in 2 years. Prob already top 5. But for a team that already has a superstar guard/wing. Green all day.
if you had to pick one "system" player on the Warriors team there's no way you go with Green before Thompson.
Reporter: Drayond, Flood you win, No Flood you win, no no You No win Draymond: You asked me that in practice already. I want you FIRED!
i'm willing to bet Green's numbers and recognition around the league drastically decreases if he was on say, The Rockets or The Kings.
Same with Curry or Klay, the point is they make each other better and Kerry makes them all better with his system, that's how you get to 73 wins.
Why would their numbers drastically decrease? A fair amount of their production relies on receiving timely, accurate passing. On the Warriors, Draymond Green provides this. However, this is not a unique skill. In fact, it's fairly common among point guard, shooting guards, and small forwards.
Those guys have great chemistry, that's one of the most important facts in winning at this level. That being said, it doesn't mean they are system players. Yes, they make each others better, the system makes them look good, but they also make the system look better. Klay is like Ray Allen, who can create his own shots occasionally, but is a deadly shooter when open. Every team/system would try to create open for him, it's not just Kerr's system makes him better. As for Curry, he will be the 1st open in almost every team, regardless which system he will be under. He makes the system. Green is the biggest beneficial from Kerr's system, most on the offensive side. He will still be a good offensive player, but probably won't be able to collect that many assists. But defensively, he is who he is, a top defender in the league, regardless what system he is under.
Couldn't agree more Great Teams like the 1996 NBA team were freaking SCARY even their bench would look like a great team, but it's the effect of playing great basketball with great Players and within a great system Take this bench alone and they would be smacked in the first games
I bet the rockets would be a top 3 seed in the west if we had Green on our team. He would be the best player (even over Dwight), due to his IQ to roll over and help against any penetrators. Can you imagine us being last in defensive rebounding with Dwight + Green? We'd probably be top 10 overall on defense by adding him alone. He does so many little defensive things that never show up on the stat sheet. Can you imagine a death lineup Rockets version with Green at the 5 (while not losing any rim protection.)? Rockets need a leader? How about the best leader in the NBA? ... I do agree that Green needs to be paired with another superstar since he can't be your primary scoring option.
I've been having this debate in sports groups on Fb. I think he's a star player while others call him a role player. They say that's he's worthy of the max (on Warriors at least), worthy of being an all star player but isn't a lead aka star player bc he can't create his own shot.
Yeah sorry, I watched all our preseason, saw how bad this team was. Started betting against them for the first ten games or so then jumped on the Warriors bandwagon full time. I've been a fan of the Rockets for 20 years and I was rooting against them in the first round. If they don't care, why should I care. When we have a team that plays with half the heart draymond green plays with I'll be back.
It just come down to how you define star player. Some people say it's creating your shot, others think it's by wins and losses. The analytics revolution has definitely expanded what we think is a star player but let's be serious here. No team wins 73 games without multiple elite players, just doesn't happen. Bulls had mj, lippen, Rodman and kukoc who could have started for many teams that year. He isn't a lead player for sure, but he's definitely a second best player on a championship team, there's no doubt about that. You can replace klay but there's no replacing what green brings to them, at least with one person.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Steve Kerr thinks there is a much more fitting label than "superstar" for Draymond Green. <a href="https://t.co/5aEK9CCQF4">pic.twitter.com/5aEK9CCQF4</a></p>— NBA on ESPN (@ESPNNBA) <a href="https://twitter.com/ESPNNBA/status/727234985279762434">May 2, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Somehow Morey passed Green and draft another tweener White in 2012. Not to mention Rockets had 3 1st round picks that year.
