What to do with the Warriors? Fans chime in


What to do with the Warriors? Fans chime in

Well, I asked for some ideas about what you would do about the Warriors and I got plenty of responses. Thanks for all of them. Ill throw out some of my ideas and incorporate many of your suggestions.First off, here are some of my big-picture thoughts about the Warriors, now 6-11 Im at the point where I think you have to break up the trio of Stephen Curry, Monta Ellis and David Lee. Each has a lot to offer individually, but I dont think collectively they complement each other well enough and Im not convinced they bring out the best in each other.
If youre going to go forward with that threesome, I think the only way you get significantly better then is to acquire a player that is better than each of those three -- without giving up any of them. And I believe that is unlikely to occur.Those are very general thoughts, and now lets got onto some of yours -- with my replies to a few of them. Camby411 wrote: The problem with the Warriors has nothing to do with Steph and Monta and has everything to do with the center position. This team gets killed by bigs inside and on the boards every possession. Biedrins has lost it and Udoh will never find it.My take: How can I disagree with that? The center position has been a killer for the Warriors in recent years and this year is no exception. Biedrins has been marginal, at best, and coach Mark Jackson hasnt helped him with limited playing time.If theres one thing I dont understand its that Jackson maintains Biedrins is having a good year but then he doesnt play him very much. Jackson typically cites matchups as the reason why.Regardless, I think its been proven that the Warriors are a better team when either Biedrins or Udoh plays the five and not David Lee. But Jackson likes to play Lee at the five especially when the other team has a perimeter shooting big men on the floor.I dont think Biedrins will ever again be a factor in a Warriors uniform. I think hell have to go to another team in order to recapture part or all of his game. I disagree with you on Udoh, however. He might not ever be a star, but hes the kind of player teams need to be successful: Hard-working types whose numbers dont show up in the boxscore.Michael Saltzman wrote: Look to move the starters. The starters we have dont mix well together. We have talent off the bench at every position, and we can get more for the starters in return anyway.John Fike agrees, saying: Blow it up. Move Monta for anything. Rebuild from scratch.My take: Theres certainly no doubt you could get more for a Curry or Ellis, but as you know the real question is: What do you get in return. Thats why the notion of trading Lee is dicey. Lee makes so much money that you are unlikely to get anything of significant value back for him. Its not that Lee isnt a skilled NBA player and doesnt have value, its that his contract is so prohibitive that you would get little bang for the buck if you tried to trade him.I think, in essence, when youre talking about trading the starters, the only ones with real value are Curry and Ellis.Ernest Smalls writes: Give them a chance.My take: I dont necessarily agree with this idea, but its every bit as valid as wanting to break up the team. On a practical level, were talking about a Warriors team that has a first-year coach and core (Curry, Ellis, Dorell Wright and Lee) that has only played together a little over a year.That core helped the Warriors win 10 more games last season than the one before. Yes, theyre off to a little bit of a rough start, but there are worse things you could do than play out the season and then assess what youve got.Like I said, Im not crazy about putting off the idea of changes, but its a school of thought thats out there and has merit behind it.DJ_ILLusive wrote: Id start Brandon Rush over Wright, trade away some of the offensive talent for some tougher, defensive-minded players. If it means Monta or Steph or Lee, DO IT. Have you seen Mark Jackson bench any of his regular rotation players for lack of effort? NOPE. Make a public apology for using amnesty of Charlie Bell instead of Biedrins. Nuff said.My take: I disagree on starting Rush over Wright and heres the reason. Right now Rush is producing and Wright is struggling. But I think Wright is slowly but surely coming around. Id keep Rush coming off the bench because hes giving you something on a consistent basis, but I would keep having him cut into Wrights minutes if things continue like they are. I think that if you move Wright to the bench, you risk losing any production from him for the rest of the season.As for the apologizing about the amnesty aint gonna happen. However, not that time has passed, I have to agree that using the amnesty provision on Bell was a monumental blunder. Not just because they failed to land DeAndre Jordan, which they had hoped. But because they ended up using the amnesty provision on a player with an expiring contract. In other words, they got rid of an asset for absolutely nothing. Terrible.Carlosanimals wrote: All I know is that, as a fan, Im sick of hearing excuses. Whether its blaming the teams failures on the various coaches or pointing out how young the roster is or, this year, pointing out how close the losses are. All these amount to nothing.My take: Im with you. The excuses are pathetic and counterproductive. The Warriors have failed to make the playoffs for 16 of the past 17 seasons. Quite simply, there are no excuses for that.Qtlaw881 wrote: Quite playing small-ball. The Warriors got hammered by the Grizzlies late because the Warriors were going with LeeDominic McGuire vs. Marc GasolMarreese Speights. Plus Ellis-Curry-Wright are not great rebounders, either. Grizz were getting shots from two feet away. Get some bigs who can play.My take: I agree with you. I dont like David Lee playing the five, not even a little bit and particularly in the fourth quarters of games when by doing that youre making certain you dont have your best defensive lineup on the floor.Im also with you on getting some bigs who can play, but those bigs dont grow on trees. The fact of the matter is the Warriors brought in Kwame Brown, who is by no means considered a star. And yet when Brown played, it was obvious how much better the Warriors defense was when he was in there.Hometownfan wrote: Gotta build around Ellis. Curry has what seems to be a lingering, career-killing injury. Lee is a keeper but everyone else is really a piece player. If we could trade Curry, Id do it in a heartbeat, as much as I like the guy. He is damaged goods.My take: Im not ready to go that far with Curry yet that hes damaged goods. Hed never had a history of ankle problems before last year and Im going to go under the assumption this is not a long-term thing. Obviously if it is, thats a game-changer.In any event, at this point the Warriors are going to have to let Curry get games under his belt, if for no other reason than to show the league and themselves that hes fine.One issue regarding trading Curry, though, is that he is still on a rookie contract and if you want a legitimate player back, youre going to have to pair Curry with one of your big contract guys either Biedrins or Lee, most likely. And the addition of either of those guys would water down the trade and not yield what youd likely get for Curry and Curry alone.Parkerhmb1 wrote: Please let them continue to lose. Seriously. This team will do nothing as constructed. They have to get a first-rounder this year or they will remain mired in mediocrity for another four years. It actually irritates me more when they win than when they lose. TANK IT.Brandonhaha and Wolfman are in agreement when it comes to finishing poorly so that the Warriors dont lose their first-round draft pick, which is protected, Nos. 1 through 7.My take: Id like to get into the word tanking. Tanking is when you purposely try to lose. No player or any self-respecting coach would ever do that, nor should they.However, a very rational basketball mind, thinking long-term, could do worse than deciding to shut down Curry in order for him to get completely healthy. Give Charles Jenkins a chance to run point guard for the rest of the year with Nate Robinson backing him up. At the end of the season, I guarantee youll know whether hes a starting point guard, backup point guard or third point guard at the end of the season.Also, nobodys going to get mad if you start playing Klay Thompson more. Thirdly, I think its time to think about trading Biedrins. Although Biedrins value is severely diminished, there are many contending teams always looking for big-man help. Maybe its time to see if you can get anything for Biedrins, even if its a player on a shorter deal or a second-round pick.These type of moves might not yield as successful a season as if you dont do them, but you could make the case these moves are better for your long-term viability as a franchise.

Report: Derrick Rose 'has committed to sign' with Cavs


Report: Derrick Rose 'has committed to sign' with Cavs

The Cleveland Cavaliers appear to be adding a former MVP to the roster.

Free agent point guard Derrick Rose has "committed to sign" with the defending Eastern Conference champion Cleveland Cavaliers, according to The Vertical.

The pact is expected to be a one-year, $2.1 million deal, according to ESPN.

In one season with the Knicks, Rose appeared in 64 games. He averaged 18.0 points, 4.4 assists and 3.8 rebounds in 32.5 minutes.

News of Rose joining the Cavs comes as trade winds swirl around starting point guard Kyrie Irving.

Drafted No. 1 overall in 2008, Rose spent the first eight years of his career with the Bulls and won the 2010-11 NBA MVP.

Adam Silver feels bad for Cleveland: 'Where there's smoke, there's fire'


Adam Silver feels bad for Cleveland: 'Where there's smoke, there's fire'

When Adam Silver speaks, you listen (or in this case, you read what he said).

The NBA Commissioner joined The Rich Eisen Show on Monday morning and was asked the following question:

"Are you ecstatic of all this news, all the drama that's being played out in all these rosters in free agency?"

Silver's answer was kind of surprising.

[RELATED: Report: LeBron won't waive no-trade clause for any team]

"I love the interest. I'm not ecstatic about the drama," Silver began. "I feel bad for whatever is going on in Cleveland, and I have no first-hand information.

"But I assume where there's smoke, there's fire. Brian Windhorst has sort of been cataloguing LeBron's career for a long time, and he usually has very accurate insights from that team."

Last Friday, Windhorst broke the news that Kyrie Irving requested a trade.

LeBron James was reportedly "blindsided and disappointed."

"It's upsetting to hear that, when you see superstar players who have co-existed -- who had so much success together, obviously three Finals in a row, one championship -- to hear that for whatever reason, there's a sense that they can't continue to co-exist," Silver added. "Yeah, that's drama, but it's not necessarily the kind of drama that the league wants."

The Cavs selected LeBron with the No.1 overall pick in 2003.

The Cavs selected Kyrie with the No. 1 overall pick in 2011.

LeBron can become a free agent next summer, while Kyrie can hit the open market in July 2019.

Will the Cavs give in to Kyrie's request? Stay tuned...

Drew Shiller is the co-host of Warriors Outsiders and a Web Producer at NBC Sports Bay Area. Follow him on Twitter @DrewShiller