Mailbag: On Jackson going to bat for Lee's 'D'

Mailbag: On Jackson going to bat for Lee's 'D'
November 14, 2012, 3:26 pm
Share This Post

Programming note: Hawks-Warriors coverage kicks off tonight at 7 p.m. with Warriors Pregame Live, only on Comcast SportsNet Bay Area!

Mailtime Do you buy that bit on Lee from coach Mark Jackson that hes not hurting the team defensively? I was there Saturday, and he wasnot good. David, San Francisco: Steinmetz: I actually do buy it. Now, Im notsaying that I buy that David Lee isnt hurting the team on defense. Im sayingI buy the fact that Mark Jackson believes Lee isnt hurting the team ondefense.If theres one thing I think Ive figured out with MarkJackson over the last year-plus, its that he does believe the things he saysat the time whether its that the Warriors would make the playoffs or thatStephen Curry is an elite defender or that Lee doesnt hurt the teamdefensively.REWIND: Jackson defends playing small, Lee's defense
I have no doubt that Jackson doesnt really look at Leesdefense or anyones, for that matter in a vacuum. I think first andforemost its about the team.And what Jackson sees is that his team is holding opponentsto .417 shooting from the field. Right now, thats good enough for fifth-bestin the NBA. When was the last time the Warriors were doing something likethat?The way Jackson figures it and its certainly one way todo so is this: How bad can Lees defense be if were holding teams to thatlow of a shooting percentage?For me, the question isnt so much whether Jackson believeswhat he said about Lee; he does. The question is whether or not what he says iscredible to his team and to a lesser extent, the fans and media.Has anyone seen Charles Jenkins lately? For somereason hes become the forgotten man on this team. He was one of the few brightspots on the team last year. Whats going on? Steve, Albany, Calif.Steinmetz: I had a feeling this might happencoming into the season, and it was tough to see a way around it. Curry is theteams starting point guard and Jarrett Jack is his backup. Both of thoseplayers are entrenched in the rotation and its just not going to leave manyminutes for Jenkins.Jack is going to be Jacksons first choice when he wants tosubstitute for Curry and Jack is going to be Jacksons first choice when itcomes to subbing for Klay Thompson.Jenkins might be able to see some time when Jackson goes toa small backcourt, perhaps in a lineup like: Jenkins, Curry and Thompson orJenkins Jack and Thompson.But the reality is that Jackson feels his best small lineupin the backcourt is Jack, Curry and Thompson.So, that leaves Jenkins fishing for minutes.What exactly is the Warriors offensive style? Aspresently constituted, the Warriors dont strike me as a very athletic team. Isthat a winning formula in todays NBA? Mark, Capitola, Calif.Steinmetz: Good question. Not really sure. When Iasked that question to general manager Bob Myers and Jackson before the season,both indicated that they thought this was a versatile team, with the abilityto play more than one style.The thinking was that certain lineups would be more suitedto run and other lineups would be more suited to play in the halfcourt. Onelineup may be a good offensive one and another may be a good defensiveone.That sounds good, but its tough to pull off. If thats thecase, it would seem to mean that the Warriors might not really have any setrotations this year that each game will be a different one from the previousgame depending on the opponent.Im not really sure what the style of this team is. I dothink theyre better defensively. But I dont buy and I havent bought foryears that the Warriors are fine at the offensive end or that scoring isntan issue for the Warriors.Its one thing to score through three quarters; its anotherto be able to score in the fourth quarter of a game. The Warriors certainlyhavent shown this year they can score late in games.The reality is that theyre a jump-shooting team and theylack players who can create for teammates.I do think its difficult to create an identity withoutAndrew Bogut in the lineup consistently. But I also dont think one will bemagically created just because he comes back.Would Warriors ownership consider signing aveteran shooting guardsmall forward to replace Brandon Rush? Maybe a guy likeMickael Pietrus? It addresses our need for a perimeter defender and spot-up3-points shooter. Or is having Kent Bazemore good enough (salary-wise)? Andrew, San Francisco.Steinmetz: I dont think thats in the cards rightnow and Im not sure it needs to be. First of all, the Warriors have 15 playerson their roster, and 14 of those contracts are guaranteed. Kent Bazemore, No. 15,is on a partial guarantee.So, the first thing the Warriors would have to do sincetheir roster is at the maximum is waive a player. Not sure they want to dothat.Secondly, if the Warriors sign a free agent that money wouldbe tacked onto their payroll. Right now the Warriors are in the luxury taxarea, which means they would go further into it. Conventional wisdom is thatthe Warriors will get back under the tax when it really matters at the end ofthe season so going further above doesnt make sense.Lastly, as for Pietrus, lets just put it this way: I dontreally see him making the Warriors any better.

More Team Talk