|
Post by allenreed on Nov 4, 2013 17:54:39 GMT -5
I know there's a few fans here. Any impressions after three games? They've looked pretty good at home, but I think depth is going to become a problem. They're going to miss Jack and Landry mhan they think
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Nov 4, 2013 19:18:22 GMT -5
A season is a journey and the end is what really counts...but I think this roster is pretty legit and Jackson knows how to steer the ship. Jack's absence is offset by the combination of Douglas and Iguadola, who will do a lot of ball handling to allow Curry to roam free more. We should see continued growth from the young guns, Thompson, Barnes and Green and some pretty decent backup bigs in O'Neil and Speights along with Ezeli when he returns. And of course Bogut and Lee are in as good a shape as I ever have seen them and both with big chips on their shoulders--Lee because of the trade talks and Bogut because of the injuries--will be out to prove the doubters wrong. I like the team makeup...even some of the young Euro projects. I think we'll see more of Nedovic as the season goes on. They are getting used to each other still but I expect this team will be in position to do some great things next Spring/Summer.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 4, 2013 21:47:18 GMT -5
Not really keen on Douglas so far. He makes a ton of mistakes. Another guy I haven't really warmed up to is Speights. But he seems to be fitting in more. Iguadola had a big night tonight where we absolutely drilled the Sixers, but we may have caught him on the decline. That's not to say he won't be a big help. Bogut just took Cousins out of the game vs. Sacramento, and does a great job clogging the middle. Hope he can stay healthy. Green is much improved. If Barnes can come back fully healthy, the frontline bunch may be scary good.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Nov 5, 2013 5:02:25 GMT -5
Douglas is an established vet with a very specific skill set...tough defense. He wont shoot and score like Jack did but this Warriors team doesn't need him to. He's had some wobbly moments, especially in preseason, but generally he is very reliable, not spectacular.
Speights is a big defender (4 and 5) who has a very good midrange game. Not really a low post offensive threat but he'll gobble rebounds and give some scoring on the second unit.
Iguodala does so much more than just score. In fact Andre doesn't need to score a point to make a huge impact on the game. He can guard nearly every position and do it well...especially at the 1, 2 and 3 (generally the best scorers on the opposition). He can run the offense, run the floor is a great passer and is a high IQ player. He's rarely in the wrong place...he's one of those guys that can do a lot of things well, even when his scoring isnt what it once was.
Bogut brings not only that great rim protection but also a hard edged toughness. Jordon tried to intimidate him and Bogut was having none of it. I would have loved to see them not seperate those guys because you would have seen Jordon running like a baby for protection from the refs.
Barnes will be fully healthy at some point. But the Warriors can afford to wait because they have enough to win games in the meantime.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 5, 2013 11:39:40 GMT -5
I like the Warriors a lot. Their depth will improve considerably when Harrison Barnes returns, giving them a very strong 6th man. More than anything else, I think they could use a good backup point guard. Jack will be missed, although Stephen Curry has taken over for Jack in turnovers.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 5, 2013 16:14:19 GMT -5
Rog- I like the Warriors a lot. Their depth will improve considerably when Harrison Barnes returns, giving them a very strong 6th man.
Boagie- How do you know this?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 5, 2013 20:58:06 GMT -5
Rog- I like the Warriors a lot. Their depth will improve considerably when Harrison Barnes returns, giving them a very strong 6th man. Boagie- How do you know this? Rog -- I think it's fairly self-evident, but your question is actually good one. I should have entered a qualifier such as "I think." This one is close to self-evident IMO, but I still should have used the qualifier. Thanks for asking (and a nice job of humorously putting me in my place). Score one for The Boag! Good going. I nominate your post for post of the day. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#16546#ixzz2jpIrcydf
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Nov 6, 2013 13:53:52 GMT -5
the reason Boagie's question is a good one is because it amplifies very clearly how innane you are when you force people to use "qualifiers" to their opinions. They are opinions and should be treated as such. If you think someone's opinion is off, then say so but don't come back with "you don't KNOW this do you" or something unhelpful like that. Man what a tool you are.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 15:45:15 GMT -5
Randy -- If you think someone's opinion is off, then say so but don't come back with "you don't KNOW this do you" or something unhelpful like that. Rog -- I understand your point here. But a couple of things: . First, I get somewhat tired of qualifying what are often pretty well researched opinions only to have someone state without qualification an opinion that often hasn't been well-researched. . Second, if we look at everything here as an opinion, how do we determine when someone is actually stating a fact? As I think about it, I guess that can usually be determined by the phrasing or context. I guess what truly bugs me is that some here express a half-thought-out opinion and then are almost unwilling to change it even as more facts and analysis reveal themselves. I realize I am considered to guilty of this as well, but I do change my opinion on occasion -- the most recent in my memory being Yusmeiro Petit. Both Mark and I have recently pointed out many facts that Allen appears to be unfamiliar with or paying little attention to regarding Phil Hughes. Boagie seems to ignore many facts about Carlos Beltran. We pretty much know about Don and Buster Posey. How about this? I'll try to be less sanctimonious if others here will try to be more open-minded to facts or analysis that may challenge their opinion. Perhaps we would all be better off. Randy -- Man what a tool you are. Rog -- That's what my girlfriend tells me. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#16571#ixzz2jtpnkuwJ
|
|
|
Post by dk on Nov 6, 2013 17:03:04 GMT -5
.
Both Mark and I have recently pointed out many facts that Allen appears to be unfamiliar with or paying little attention to regarding Phil Hughes. Boagie seems to ignore many facts about Carlos Beltran. We pretty much know about Don and Buster Posey.
dk...I base what I say about Posey upon my experience as a player and a fan for over 80 years....when I give you the stats that you use to demean another player to show that Posey spent the last half season as the middle order hitter in the league with the least power...your stat, bases per hit, you complete ignore it....when I show that Posey is rated way down for his fielding by your own Fielders Bible in the James yearbook...you come back and say he was rated third...and I say mainly because of his hitting and more important because the vote was so divided....and when I showed the complete wide gap in his hitting as a first baseman compared to his catching stats..no comments....and when I pointed out the great leadership exhibited by Molina which makes Posey look like a novice...again no comment...
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Nov 6, 2013 17:04:35 GMT -5
I guess what truly bugs me is that some here express a half-thought-out opinion and then are almost unwilling to change it even as more facts and analysis reveal themselves. I realize I am considered to guilty of this as well, but I do change my opinion on occasion -- the most recent in my memory being Yusmeiro Petit.
Dood - the obvious question is why does it matter so much to you that people change their minds or not? Accept that people are going to have their opinions and maybe unreasonably so.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 6, 2013 17:22:34 GMT -5
. . I guess what truly bugs me is that some here express a half-thought-out opinion and then are almost unwilling to change it even as more facts and analysis reveal themselves. Allen- People do that Rog. There are still people that support Barack Obama, even though he has been proven to be an incompetent, lying sleazebag. There doesn't have to be logic to it. Both Mark and I have recently pointed out many facts that Allen appears to be unfamiliar with or paying little attention to regarding Phil Hughes. Allen- I think what you're missing here is that I've probably seen Hughes pitch more than you and Mark combined. It ain't pretty. He lacks confidence and has a tendency to make mistakes at the most crucial times. He's a headcase and has been a headache for the Yankees for most of his career. He has ability, I guess, in that he can throw hard. But there's just way better guys out there, especially for that price. How about this? I'll try to be less sanctimonious if others here will try to be more open-minded to facts or analysis that may challenge their opinion. Perhaps we would all be better off. Allen- I doubt that it will have much of an impact on our lives one way or the other. Perhaps you should try to be more tolerant of others and realize that they may have opinions that you don't agree with. Randy -- Man what a tool you are. Rog -- That's what my girlfriend tells me. Allen- I've never understood that expression. Isn't a tool something that's helpful?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 19:07:39 GMT -5
Randy -- Accept that people are going to have their opinions and maybe unreasonably so. Rog -- I guess it's the unreasonable ones that I have a hard time accepting. There are going to be differences of opinion, but when the facts support one point of view, it's hard to accept that another person just can't seem to see it (or is so hard-headed he won't change his mind no matter what). As an example, Allen still thinks that Jonathan Sanchez had a poor season in 2009. Given that Jonathan was virtually right at the league average ERA, how can that be? His won-loss record was poor, but he has limited control over that. In fact, his poor won-loss record is pretty much what one would expect given his very poor run support. His walk rate was one of the worst -- but he had one of the best hit rates. He also had one of the best strikeout rates. In other words, the facts indicate Jonathan was about average -- and above average if anything. The only true argument for Jonathan's having pitched poorly that season is his poor won-loss record. And it has been proven that a pitcher has limited control over won-loss. So we're supposed to evaluate a pitcher based on what he has limited control over rather than the things he has a high degree of control over? How logical is that? Yet Allen persists. I know the guy (and he's a good guy). He's not dumb. Yet he persists in ignoring facts in logic on this one. Not everything is that clear. An decent argument can be made for Miguel Cabrera or for Mike Trout for AL MVP. But for someone to deny they each had very fine seasons would be ridiculous. Even more ridiculous than saying Jonathan Sanchez had a poor season in 2009. Differences of opinion (Cabrera vs. Trout) are fine. Ignoring fact and logic aren't IMO. Frankly, Allen is too GOOD for that. (Not that I've ever seen him have an outlandish opinion on politics or Barry Bonds!) And that is what is so disappointing. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#16579#ixzz2juds3XS5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 19:29:46 GMT -5
Allen- I think what you're missing here is that I've probably seen Hughes pitch more than you and Mark combined. It ain't pretty. Rog -- I understand what you're saying here. But a couple of things: . First, it's not being pretty doesn't preclude an acceptable performance in the future. . Second, we're talking about your perception vs. facts as stated by Mark and me. I think I'm a pretty good judge of what I see, but I'm very careful not to change my opinion of what I have seen when the facts contradict that opinion. You say Hughes' ERA will be around 5.00. That's an opinion. Mark and I say his ERA on the road has been 4.10, which is a fact. You say Hughes deserved his 4-14 record. Comparing his ERA with his run support strongly indicates he didn't deserve it. Not that he deserved a great record. He didn't. But he deserved a record that was better than 4-14, to a very high degree of probability. Hughes had 11 quality starts, most of them of GOOD quality. In those 11 starts, he went 3-2 with 6 no-decisions. He -- or any other pitcher -- deserved to fare better than that. In 10 of those quality starts, he yielded 2 or fewer runs. In two he yielded one earned run and in another two he yielded no earned runs at all. He didn't deserve a 4-14 record. If you disagree, please share with us your reasons for doing so. And don't just tell us you saw him pitch. You apparently saw some games in which he deserved to get a win and didn't. And you almost certainly saw some games where he would often get a no-decision and instead got the loss. Please give us FACTS that support his deserving a 4-14 record. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#ixzz2juibhc00
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 19:33:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 19:54:37 GMT -5
Don -- when I give you the stats that you use to demean another player to show that Posey spent the last half season as the middle order hitter in the league with the least power...your stat, bases per hit, you complete ignore it.. Rog -- I'll take you at your word here. If we're going to evaluate Buster as a hitter, don't you think we might be better looking at his whole career -- or at least his whole season? Power isn't the only factor in evaluating a middle-of-the-order hitter. Batting average and OBP are also important. The only real detriment I see in Buster as a hitter is that he grounds into too many double plays. Of course, so does Miguel Cabrera. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#ixzz2jut4QYLj
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 20:03:17 GMT -5
Don -- when I show that Posey is rated way down for his fielding by your own Fielders Bible in the James yearbook...you come back and say he was rated third. Rog -- Actually, he is rated #5 by both John Dewan, author of The Fielding Bible, and by the consensus of John and the other nine evaluators that make up the 10-man panel who rate fielders for the Bill James Annual. You could look it up. All I ask, Don, is that you be factual here. Take a look at your Annual, and you will see that what I say is fact. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#ixzz2juuEVutt
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 20:14:15 GMT -5
Don -- and when I showed the complete wide gap in his hitting as a first baseman compared to his catching stats..no comments. Rog -- Perhaps you have forgotten that I compared his batting numbers as a first baseman with his figures against left-handed pitching and found them to be very similar. I then mentioned that because Brandon Belt bats left-handed, a higher-than-normal percentage of Buster's starts at first base come against southpaws. He has hit worst when he has been the DH, which would seem to give him the most rest. A lot of this stuff has to do with small sample size too. For instance, you have pointed out he hasn't hit as well in the late innings as earlier in the game. This season he did his best hitting late in the game. One would also have been right to say Buster did his best hitting in the season's second half. This year that trend got reversed, as well. When you accurately state facts, Don, I don't think we here on the board dispute them. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#ixzz2juwdWAIo
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 20:16:41 GMT -5
Don -- when I pointed out the great leadership exhibited by Molina which makes Posey look like a novice...again no comment... Rog -- I don't remember your pointing that out, but I'm prepared to comment now. I can't say whether Bengie had better leadership skills than Buster, but I'm pretty sure they weren't so much better as to make Buster look like a novice. For what it's worth, I believe Bengie won one Willie Mac and Buster has won the same number. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=2072&page=1#ixzz2juz62cR0
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 6, 2013 20:20:03 GMT -5
What I think most makes me believe you are prejudiced against Buster, Don, is that you make negative comment after negative comment about him while making few positive comments. The guy is considered to be an exceptional player, yet mostly you point out his faults.
You're certainly not always wrong -- but you appear to be quite one-sided.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 6, 2013 23:07:18 GMT -5
Frankly, Allen is too GOOD for that. (Not that I've ever seen him have an outlandish opinion on politics or Barry Bonds!) And that is what is so disappointing. Allen- Gotta call here, Rog. What outlandish opinions have I had on either? What makes them outlandish other than they disagree with yours?
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 6, 2013 23:19:18 GMT -5
. Second, we're talking about your perception vs. facts as stated by Mark and me. I think I'm a pretty good judge of what I see, but I'm very careful not to change my opinion of what I have seen when the facts contradict that opinion.
Allen- Interesting. When I present Hughes' overall ERA as being over 5.00 in two of the last three years, that's not a fact? You may want to check your last sentence above. It may contain a Freudian slip.
Hughes had 11 quality starts, most of them of GOOD quality. In those 11 starts, he went 3-2 with 6 no-decisions. He -- or any other pitcher -- deserved to fare better than that. In 10 of those quality starts, he yielded 2 or fewer runs. In two he yielded one earned run and in another two he yielded no earned runs at all.
Allen- We've gone through the quality start dance. Meaningless stat. After watching him pitch, he may have deserved worse than 4-14. He won one game in which he gave up six runs in 5.2 innings. He got a no decision in a game in which he gave up four runs in .1 innings, and another in which he gave up five runs in four innings. Could have had three more losses right there.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 6, 2013 23:21:14 GMT -5
Back to the original topic. It looks like Harrison Barnes may be OK.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 7, 2013 9:36:16 GMT -5
Darn, clearly we got away from basketball for a whle there.
IMO the Warriors can ill afford to be without Steph Curry, and an injury to Andrew Bogut would be quite damaging as well. The loss of David Lee wouldn't help, but could be overcome to a degree. Losing a mid-sized player wouldn't be too tough to handle.
The loss of any starter or key reserve for a long period is difficult, but with three starting-caliber mid-sized players plus Draymond Green, an injury at the small forward or shooting guard positions shouldn't be devastating, particularly at the three.
|
|
|
Post by dk on Nov 7, 2013 12:39:03 GMT -5
Don -- when I show that Posey is rated way down for his fielding by your own Fielders Bible in the James yearbook...you come back and say he was rated third. Rog -- Actually, he is rated #5 by both John Dewan, author of The Fielding Bible, and by the consensus of John and the other nine evaluators that make up the 10-man panel who rate fielders for the Bill James Annual. You could look it up. All I ask, Don, is that you be factual here. Take a look at your Annual, and you will see that what I say is fact. dk..as I told you over and over, he was rated for his hitting, not his fielding...he was not ranked in the top 9 in any of the fielding charts...in fact, as I told you again and again, the only reason he rated #5 as a catcher was that 3 of lesser experts picked him in the top 5...the other voters had him unranked or low in the pecking order...,that is a fact and try telling it like it is for once...
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Nov 7, 2013 15:00:39 GMT -5
IMO the Warriors can ill afford to be without Steph Curry, and an injury to Andrew Bogut would be quite damaging as well.
Dood - yeah it absolutely killed them last night when Currie twisted his ankle and Bogut got an early 5th foul. Or, wait...they poured it on and increased the lead, didn't they?
Nevermind.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 7, 2013 16:36:46 GMT -5
They're really going after Curry this year. I think he's going to have to adjust his game if he wants to score like last year. On the other hand, it's seemed to open up things for Thompson. I was surprised by Minnesota's effort last night. It's a little early in the season to be phoning it in.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Nov 7, 2013 16:48:36 GMT -5
I wouldn't say Minnie phoned it in...the Warriors defense deserves credit for frustrating the hell out of them. Rubio couldn't get his passes through the normal lanes because of the arms and anticipation of Iggy and Klay, and those two also did a great job on the perimeter and shutting down the dribble drives...and Bogut, while he was in there, gave nothing in the paint. To beat the Warriors, you either need lots of fast break points, 2nd chance points or to go absolutely berserk from beyond the arc.
~Dood
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 9, 2013 0:25:33 GMT -5
Tough loss tonight. But hey, no Curry, they didn't shoot very well, and we're still in it til the end. Douglas stepped up in the absence of Steph, but we just couldn't get a rebound down the stretch. San Antonio is just amazing. They execute, hardly ever miss on a play they should make, and play so well together.
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Dec 1, 2013 20:08:13 GMT -5
Very disappointing season so far. Lack of concentration. Too many stupid reach fouls, bad free throwing. As I predicted, depth is a real problem. Speights is nearly useless. Nedevic? What's the point of this guy? He's slow, can't play defense, has no outside shot.
|
|