Why is everyone so high on Golden State's players?

Warriors topics are appropriate in ALL forums!

------------------

 

I understand your point regarding roster changes.I think we should try to get Marc Jackson,he is a hard worker who can score and rebound,although he needs to get better on the defensive end.

------------------

 

Only by you and Lil' Francis.





------------------
Never Underestimate the Heart of a Champion

 

Good job Swopa. That team is set at the 2 and 3 position now they need a center and point guard.



------------------
President of the Steve Francis, Jamal Crawford,Larry Hughes, and Charles Woodson fan club.

 

There is a big difference with Donyell and Damp. Marshall still was sucessful with the Warriors. The only big difference is that he landed on a sucessfull team which brought more attention to him. Swopa if you remember it was me and you who initially wanted the Rockets to aquire Marshall for the very things he is doing at Utah now, but nobody else wanted him because they never got to see his game like we did.

------------------
``We need to FOCASS".... Akeem Olajuwon

 

Im not A warrior fan just a Larry hughes fan.



------------------
President of the Steve Francis, Jamal Crawford,Larry Hughes, and Charles Woodson fan club.

 

Scarface, I may be one of the last living human beings willing to say this, but Dampier has ability, too. He is an excellent low-post defender who can guard people like Shaq, Duncan, and McDyess 1-on-1 without being embarrassed.

Which is why I think that if Dampier is traded, he will go to a playoff team (like, say, Portland or Phoenix) that will find him very useful.

 

Dampier was suppose to be a "can't miss" coming out of college.
Just like A. Foyle.



------------------
President of the Steve Francis, Jamal Crawford,Larry Hughes, and Charles Woodson fan club.

 

Huh?? "Can't miss" centers don't usually go at #8 or #10.

They were each considered arguably the best center in a weak crop.

Here are some comments I found in a quick Web search for at-that-time analysis:

Dampier
"Indiana--They traded up to the 10th pick to draft Erick Dampier? Please."

"He will not turn a team around by himself, but could fit in well with a team that has quality players at the other positions."

Foyle
"He is a hard-working kid who hasn't played a lot of basketball. You've got to look to the future with him. He's a willing learner." (Marty Blake)

"Cato ranks himself among the top three centers and power forwards in this year’s crop, and few scouts would disagree. There’s Tim Duncan, the consensus No. 1 pick; there’s Tony Battie of Texas Tech, who might go second and might go sixth, and there’s Cato. Colgate’s Adonal Foyle, once considered in that group, is falling like a stone."

 

I know, but people only feel like talking about him while talking about the team as a whole.

BTW, what do you see in him?

athletic(There's more athletic people in the league though) and thats pretty much it.

I can really probably shoot better than Larry Hughes.

------------------
Never Underestimate the Heart of a Champion

 

Hughes' shooting form is actually OK.

He just needs to get stronger, which will increase his range (he shot 35% on 3-pointers in the preseason, then faded when the real banging started) and his ability to withstand contact and finish near the basket (a huge percentage of his misses are runners and leaners a few feet from the rim).

Anyone who's seen him knows that he's skinny as a rail. He tried to put on weight over last summer, but lost it again quickly. The question is, will he fill out by age 22, or not until 26 or 27?

------------------

 

vj23k:

with how bad Hughes shoots, I find it hard to believe that he's still in the NBA. I don't think these kiddies realise how mind-boggling ly bad his shooting %'s really are. Let me put it this way: I'd trade Kelvin Cato for Larry Hughes... but if the Warriors offered me Huges for Walt, straight up, I'd turn them down.

Swopa: Strength has almost nothing to do with shooting under 20% for the season. Hubie Davis doesn't seem like the toughest guy in the world. Neither does Matt Bullard.

------------------
A few years back on the Senate floor...
Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe."
Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!"

Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001

[This message has been edited by haven (edited May 24, 2001).]

 

Haven, forgive me for pulling rank here, but how many times have you seen Hughes play?

Except for a handful of games that weren't televised, I've seen nearly every game Hughes has played with the Warriors -- including attending more than half of the home games, and several preseason games as well.

So when I talk about Hughes' form, and the kinds of shots he hits or misses, and how he improved or regressed as the year went on, I'm not pulling stuff out of my ass. Any idiot can look at a Web page of stats and say, "18%, man that sucks." I'm trying to educate my fellow intelligent fans about the nuances behind the stats of a player they probably don't see very often, and why I think he's likely to improve. Sorry if you can't hang with that kind of a discussion.


------------------


[This message has been edited by Swopa (edited May 24, 2001).]

 

Why is he in the NBA????? Are you serious?



------------------
President of the Steve Francis, Jamal Crawford,Larry Hughes, and Charles Woodson fan club.

 

swopa:

Hang with that kind of discussion? You mean the type in which a homer-fan basically looks for all that's good about a player and sees with rose-colored glasses?

Your eyes lie, your brain fools you... stats don't. The fact is, the big majority of the shots Larry Hughes took this year didn't go in. Nothing you can say in his defense will change that. Golden State lost more than they won when Hughes was on the floor. Nothing you can say will change that either.

In the NBA, stats are less important than in like MLB (where they're nearly everything), but I still rely on them more than a completely biased person such as yourself. the way you pump GS up, there's no way they should have lossed a game this year, much less the vast majority of them.

It's not just me. Many NBA scouts are quite skeptical of Hughes as well. Why don't you ask heypartner or live? They seem to know more about scouting than anyone else on here.

There's a reason Philly kept Iverson but traded Hughes, and there's a reason they didn't get that much in return.

Yes, anyone can find out Larry Hughes shooting percentages. And at the very least, doing so should put a limit on how much you can admire Hughes. Those numbers are so abominable atrocious that nothing you can say in his defense really makes a difference.

I saw GS play about 3 times this year... twice in games where Hughes was playing. I wasn't impressed, and stats back me up. Your subjectivity has caused you to err.

------------------
A few years back on the Senate floor...
Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe."
Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!"

Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001

 

Why is he in the NBA????? Are you serious?

Maybe saying that is a little extreme, but you have to realize some people actually do place importance on the value of fundamentals like shooting over athletism/hops. Larry Hughes and Jamal Crawford have the later of the two, but not the former. And if you've played basketball your whole life and are in the NBA, and you still can't master the basic fundamentals of shooting and team play, then someone could make a case that perhaps you don't belong, or at least could use some major improvement.

------------------
President of the Mo Taylor and Jason Collier fan club!

Draftsource.net-- the premier source for draft info. Profiles, rankings, mock drafts, and more!

 

Haven, if you think I'm a "completely biased" homer for the Warriors, you can't have read very many of my posts.

I think Hughes will improve, and have stated in great detail in this thread why I believe that. You disagree; fine. One of the advantages of having my extensive firsthand experience in watching the Warriors (and there aren't that many, believe me ) is that I don't get intimidated by the dissenting opinions of others.

Other Warriors fans jumped all over me toward the beginning of Joe Smith's second year, when I said he was overrated and should be traded before the league found out about him -- but I didn't care, because I knew what I was seeing. Time proved me right in that case, but of course I'm wrong sometimes, too. We'll see how things turn out for Hughes.

------------------

 

Swopa:

I've probably read the vast majority of your posts ;P. In general, I think you're a good poster. I think you understand the game, and you're certainly more accurate in describing players than the kiddies. I don't blame you for team-loyalty... I'm probably nto totally impartial about some of the Rockets. I *do* think your team loyalty affects how you think of Hughes, but then... who cares?

If you hit the nail on the head concerning Joe Smith... more power to you. I guess we'll just have to let time settle this one.

I know you've seen more of the Warriors. All I'm saying is... when one player shoots 44% and another 46%, sometime observation and analysis of game action will really show you that the difference was the result of better teammates, nagging injuries, strength, etc... and maybe the player with the lower percentage really is better.

I just think that there's a minimum statistical threshold that players have to meet to be considered NBA viable. Hughes doesn't meet it... it's possible that I'm wrong. I just think the *odds* are that Hughes will be a dud.

That said, I do think his problems are mental. If he can work out some of his issues, and practice his jumper, there's a pretty good shot of his being a good player. I just wouldn't take that bet if only a nickel were on the line .

------------------
A few years back on the Senate floor...
Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe."
Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!"

Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001

[This message has been edited by haven (edited May 25, 2001).]

 

Just thought I'd update this thread to point out that through the first week and a half of the season, Larry Hughes is shooting 49.3% from the field, and 41.7% on 3-pointers.

Even though he's the starting point guard and brings the ball up 90% of the time when he's on the floor, his FG attempts are down to 10.4 per game (down from 16 last year, and 21 in his first half-season with GS). Oh, and the Warriors are over .500, too.

Hydra, haven, Achebe, NIKEstrad, DoD ... on your way out of this thread, please deposit your preconceptions about Hughes being a selfish, undisciplined "jackup artist" into the wastecan on your left.