WebWideWorries, February 5th

• Tim Kawakami argues that the Warriors should trade for big-money non-impact talent, while simultaneously pointing out that the Warriors are screwed due largely to their big-money non-impact talent. A classically incoherent column that points out the difficulty of working a contrarian gimmick: you can't simply invert every move made by a stupid team and come out smart. Writ large, Kawakami is of course correct that the franchise is incompetent. But in context, the Warriors' unwillingness to add payroll right now is unequivocally the right decision, and Kawakami just makes himself look silly by pretending otherwise.

• Stephen Curry is in the Three-Point Shootout; he and Morrow will both take part in the Rookie/Sophomore Challenge game. In general, I'm very much against the idea that Warriors fans should care about guys playing a part in All-Star Weekend... conflating the team's streak of failure with its streak of All-Star exclusions is a very dangerous mistake to make, and I'd rather not see Morrow play, coming off an injury as he is. But I regard Curry's entry in the Three-Point Shootout as a positive, as it highlights that this is the one thing he's actually been good at. He has the third-highest three-point percentage of the six guys in the contest, and a win is far from impossible.

• Kevin Pelton examines Monta Ellis's ineffectiveness, with an in-depth look at his January 15th performance against Milwaukee. Like any analysis based on a single game, it gives an incomplete picture -- Monta's production on both ends has seesawed dramatically over the course of the year -- but it's excellent analysis nonetheless.

• Speaking of Monta: 82games has updated its plus-minus data, now covering every game through Tuesday's loss to Houston. Maggette's net plus-minus is back in the black and Turiaf's is rising. On the flip side, Monta's -12.8 is worse than any NBA starter's in the last seven seasons (though Troy Murphy and Jeff Green are keeping pace with him this year). Also, Andris Biedrins now has a -5.0 net plus-minus that's roughly the inverse of Turiaf's. Both our offense and defense have been a bit less effective with Biedrins on the floor.

• It wouldn't be accurate, however, to say that Biedrins has been some sort of defensive disaster. Our opponents short worse and grab fewer offensive rebounds when Biedrins is on the floor. They commit fewer turnovers, but he grabs a good number of steals for a center, so it's hard to see how that's his fault. Our opponents get to the line a bit more often when he plays, and that is his fault... his foul rate is too high. But let's keep some perspective here, people. Our defense is crappy mainly because we can't protect our glass or our rim... pinning that on the seventh-best defensive rebounder in basketball, whose 4.5% Block Percentage places him just outside of the league's top ten, is a little bit of a stretch. Once Biedrins stops getting whistled so often, he'll revert to being the mild defensive asset he's always been.

• By Dave Berri's estimation, Corey Maggette was the league's most-improved player through the first half of the year. A commenter named Jared points out why his performance probably isn't sustainable... given Maggette's fall to earth in the past two weeks, it's hard to argue with that.

• More Maggetteology: a fun and rousing defense of the man from our friend Sherwood Strauss.

• Finally, Bradford Doolittle examines the most storied positions in NBA history, and points out that both Maggette and Biedrins walk on hallowed ground. By his estimation, the Warriors' center position (Wilt, Nate Thurmond, Robert Parrish) and small forward position (Paul Arizin, Rick Barry, Mullin) are the fifth and sixth most legendary spots in the game, ranking behind only two Celtic positions and two Laker positions. In truth, the more depressing and telling data lies in the full chart he posts at the end of the article: in its 64-year history, the franchise has never had truly historic talent at the four or either guard position. Ironic, given how perimeter-oriented the team has been in recent decades.

WebWideWorries, January 22nd

What are other people saying about the Warriors? Find about, in today's linkin' park.

• Ray Ratto thinx Monta shoots 2 much. Ray Ratto is a bit of a boob. On the other hand, Monta is shooting too much, and Ratto is the most high-profile Bay Area journalist to acknowledge that so far. It'll be interesting to see if either Monta or Nellie deems this worthy of a response.

• A John Hollinger chat from yesterday... he scoffs at the idea that Monta is All-Star material, for the same reasons we've been mentioning. As with Ratto, however, Hollinger does not acknowledge the role of coaching apathy in Monta's inefficient, gunnin' ways.

• In BBP's latest Prospectus Hoops List, we rank 27th. Bradford Doolittle thinks Curry should get the ball more, and to his credit, he does implicate coaching as a problem here, if only obliquely. But Doolittle's ode to Curry's crossover move betrays his college-centric eye for the pro game. Monta's not stopping Stephen Curry from beating defenders. Defenders are stopping Stephen Curry from beating defenders.

• Speaking of which, the Bay Area Sports Guy thinks some people (including us) are giving Steph Curry short shrift; he makes good points about potentially unfair perceptions of the kid relating to his looks, his favored status with Nellie, his reaction to our drafting him, etc. For my part, I can only say that I don't blame Curry for being overhyped, and I don't begrudge his prettyboy looks, GQ column, or ambivalence about becoming a Warrior. I like him, and I think he'll be a good player for us. I just don't think he shows much potential as an NBA point guard.

• A fun blog post from Neil Paine at Basketball Reference, listing each team's minute-weighted age, height and weight. We've only fielded the seventh-youngest lineups in the NBA -- the Thunder, Kings, Wolves, Grizzlies, Raptors (!) and Nets have been younger -- but our lineups have been the league's shortest and lightest by far. The average on-court Warrior has weighed just 204 pounds this season, while every other team's average on-court player has weighed 212 or more. (Needless to say, this has worked out fabulously for us.)

• Finally, more Curry/Monta discussion over at GSOM, prompted by a pro-Curry post by a member who goes by (ironically) monta.da.boss. Gets into some specifics that we haven't really delved into over here, including the critical point -- stated well by a fella named Missing Barry -- that Curry's lack of athleticism threatens to prevent his being a capable playmaker, no matter how good his passing eye is or isn't.

Sunday Links, 1/10/10

• A recap of Friday's win by the excellent Adam Lauridsen. Some points in here strike me as less-supported than others -- I haven't noticed Maggette struggling on the boards, for instance, and C.J.'s shown a ton more late-game poise in his Warriors career than Curry has -- but overall, very good and clear-headed stuff. Lauridsen is the prominent Warriors pundit with whom we most often seem to agree.

• Geoff Lepper's strategy to get Monta into the All-Star Game. I'd actually rather not see Monta named an All-Star; I don't want his current flawed approach to be cemented with a nod, and Lord knows it'd be nice to see the dude get a couple days of rest. But if you do want him to get there, Geoff's logic seems sound.

• A morbidly entertaining recap of our loss in Denver, courtesy of Ethan at 1984 Watch. He makes an excellent point about the (ab?)use of Turiaf, a point upon which we hope to expound soon.

• A lengthy comparison of CJ and Curry over at Chris Cohan Sucks. Chris is not known for his understatement -- he's even more vehement about Curry's shortcomings than I am -- but it's fun and well-written stuff. Always worth a read.

• Some Warriors talk at the APBRmetrics forum. Topic starts with me re-hashing some points we've made here, but don't worry -- actual smart people start chiming in quickly.

• The box scores at Basketball Reference now feature Four Factors and other fun nerdy data. Now we can reminisce, for instance, about how Portland outsmarted us in every facet of the game eight days ago.

• An oldie but goodie: Dave Berri's measured evisceration of Nellie's smallball tactics over at Wages Of Wins. Written in August, it covers last year's smallball foibles, not this year's. The best (and one of the only) examinations of Nellie's recent performance by a widely-known stathead.

• Speaking of oldies but goodies, it's been a while since I watched Baron pie Monta in the face. Monta is so bothered for so long! This is what the current season must feel like: unending agony, with some asshole in a sportcoat leering at you.

The Story Of Our Season

Anthony Randolph's ankle is not fractured, per Steinmetz. This isn't even necessarily good news, as ligament damage can sometimes cause longer-lasting problems... still, it's news. Randolph will be examined again tomorrow, and we should know more then. Whatever the prognosis, we are not likely to see the young man again anytime soon; he will be out for a couple weeks, at the very least.

This is depressing. And it continues a streak of injuries that has plagued us all year -- Wright, Azubuike, Biedrins, Turiaf, now Randolph. We have had a very unlucky year on that front. And media coverage of the team, which has already gotten a lot of fodder out of the injury angle, will soon frame our health woes as the defining characteristic of the '09-'10 Warriors. Articles like this one are already cropping up. Injuries, you'll hear it said and suggested, are the story of our season.

And, hey. Your top two centers miss a ton of time, your starting small forward is out for the year, you're down to seven playable guys at points, you've had to use a washed-up non-rebounding vet at center, you've already had to sign two D-Leaguers, and now your young stud power forward hurts his ankle... I mean, that's your season, right? Of course you're gonna suck.

Here's the problem: everything in that description applies to the Portland Trail Blazers. Health-wise, they've had it every bit as bad as us. Their top ten guys -- Roy, Miller, Aldridge, Oden, Przybilla, Batum, Fernandez, Outlaw, Blake, Bayless -- have missed a combined 115 games due to injury or illness thus far. Our top ten guys -- Monta, Biedrins, Maggette, Randolph, Curry, 'Buike, Turiaf, Wright, Morrow, CJ -- have missed 111. And yet the Blazers are 23-15, and on pace to grab the sixth seed in one of the most loaded conferences in league history. The story of their season will not be about injuries; the story of their season will, more than likely, be written in the playoffs. If they're not willing to accept health woes as an excuse, why should we?

One Size Fitz All

Last night's fizzle out and the subsequent self-pitying response from Bob Fitzgerald pushed me to think a little bit more about how the Warriors are presented by their king philosopher king. Setting aside Jim Barnett for the time being, here are my very impressionistic thoughts on Bob Fitzgerald and his complicity in the continued misery of the Warriors.

Fitzgerald is not a bad broadcaster. His voice has a solid timbre, he doesn't chatter excessively, and years of Warriors ineptitude have forced him and Barnett to get to know the league and to give opposing teams and players their due. Fitzgerald and Barnett can't fairly be accused of homerism in its classic, chauvinistic sense. Sure, they can be less than magnanimous when talking about the opposition, and they clearly want the Warriors to win — this is much is apparent when Fitz squeals with delight and Barnett quivers with didacticism — but overall they're not terrible. They have trying jobs, they know the floor game, and I appreciate their work, most of the time.

But Fitzgerald is not interested in using his knowledge or access to criticize the development of the Warriors. This is no big surprise, as he draws a paycheck from Cohan, but it strikes me as incongruous that he can, especially on his KNBR radio show, profess on the Warriors with ultimate entitlement yet without any sort of proviso, disclaimer or disclosure of his employ of the Warriors. More specifically, he takes the path of least resistance in his coverage; he's not a journalist. For all we might expect from someone who reasonably knows his basketball and watches every Warrior game closely, we get very little substance, and lots of one-dimensional, pedestrian praise of Monta's quickness, Turiaf's fervence, Maggette's ability to draw fouls, etc. These things excite me too, but there's so much more, and it can only be tapped by thinking critically and honestly about the many squalid and entropic levels of the Warriors.

My biggest problem with Fitzgerald is his tone and mien with callers on his radio show. He's condescending and peremptory, and has nothing but contempt for Warriors fans who simply want to know a bit more about goings-on in Oakland. And he dismisses any sort of higher-order discussion of the Warriors with rhetorical agnosticism, red herrings, and militant acquittals for all. I don't claim to know this man's mind, but it strikes me that for Fitzgerald, not only do the Warriors have a plan, but it is so self-evident that it never even needs to be broached or meditated on, and the Warriors exist independent of the past and the future, where any dysfunction is simply the result of injuries and other soft contextual events.

I, like Owen, was charmed and amused by the inclusion of Fitzgerald on the enemies list of Fans Vs. Cohan. He may not be a chief villain in this war, but he is most definitely an enabler, and his obscurantism, appeasement and willful absenteeism from any kind effortful rumination on the current Warriors state of affairs are damning. Finally, it bothers me that Fitzgerald's tenure with the Warriors follows Cohan's very closely — though Tim Roye's does too, and I fucking love the subtle and engaging Tim Roye, the Mario to Fitz's Wario.

Housekeeping, Simmons

It has been asked how one might contact the makers of this blog. A reasonable question, indeed... our computerin' is not yet up to snuff, and you'll have to bear with us on certain details. For now, feel free to direct any questions, comments, suggestions and criticisms to goldenstateworriers | at | gmail | dot | com. We would love to hear from you. And Twitter? Oh, yeah, you can find us on Twitter. BIGTIME. Better jump aboard this train before it leaves the station; we are gaining a new follower every five or six days.

Down to business. A commenter has asked us to weigh in on Bill Simmons's recent weighing in on the squad's direction.

Now, we Worriers read the Sports Guy with the same pronounced ambivalence that most Americans do. We want him to hold himself to a higher standard joke-wise. We want him to settle down about Larry Bird. Above all, we want him to never, ever write about poker again (yeah, nothing shows you're a true-blue veteran card player like quoting "Rounders," you fucking chickenhead). A lot of the time, Bill Simmons annoys us something fierce.

But he's also a funny and perceptive writer, and we respect those who, like us, care more about the NBA than the stupid amateurs in the college game. More to the point, when Simmons pops in on the Warriors, he almost always has a solid handle on the state of play, and his most recent piece is no exception.

(We'll quote most of the Warriors section. This may anger ESPN, but it's not like they're going to sue us... those milquetoasts don't have the balls.)