Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They have a very impressive roster on paper, especially considering that David Lee has only played 1 game (hamstring) but is expected to return sometime this week
Over the years I have seen NBA teams rack up wins the first 20 games, and wind up going nowhere in the playoffs.
Good point, its not how you start but how you finish, nevertheless it will be interesting how it all plays out the rest of the season. Especially if they continue to play good defense. As Steve Kerr said last night after the game, “I love this team. These guys just compete, and I think they’ve figured out that if they just take care of the ball and defend every night, then we’ve got a chance to win. (Defense) has been the constant during this streak.”
The Warriors by the way lead the NBA in defense FG%, with opponents shooting only .411.
I've caught all their games this season. They needed to lose those two games to cinch up their play. In the first handful of games, they made a lot of turnovers, the starters did. The last few weeks the starters have been taking care of the ball. Only have I seen the turnovers balloon when it was garbage time. What Kerr has done, is he manages the players well. I don't think they play more than 29-32 minutes a game. With everyone able to rest throughout the game, it has allowed the team to play hard on both ends. The defense has been tough, everyone contributes. Teams double team Steph and Klay, leaving Barnes, Speights, Igoudala, and Green open, for wide open shots....Draymond had like 7 3's! Unselfish ball, everyone get's theirs, the nights Steph scores less than 20, it's because he is distributing the ball around, to the other guys.
What was unclear, even to Thibodeau immediately after the game, was whether the Bulls were just a sloppy mess or whether the Warriors...forced the Bulls into all those screw-ups. The Warriors do have a bunch of 6-foot-7-ish players (Harrison Barnes, Green, Thompson, Andre Iguodala, Shaun Livingston) who are long enough, quick enough and defensive-minded enough to not have to worry about individual matchups. They switch every assignment and made ballhandling life miserable for the Bulls.
In another thread I stated that initially I thought the Warriors were making a mistake replacing Mark Jackson with Kerr. But after the great start the Dubs have gotten off to, that doesnt appear to be the case. But in all fairness to Mark Jackson, Kerr inherited a team that had been in the playoffs the last two years. So everything that Jackson "built" was already in place. Much easier job than taking over a team that is in dissaray which is usually the case and common when a new coach is hired.
No, ownership built the team, and Jackson inherited one which had a completely new starting five from two years before he was hired. Jax refused to be an "x's and o's" coach and fired any assistant (like Scalabrine) or banished any advisor (like West) who tried to create plays. He does get credit for turning them into a defensive-minded team, but otherwise he was a purely motivational coach who was getting by on the players' talents.
No, ownership built the team, and Jackson inherited one which had a completely new starting five from two years before he was hired. Jax refused to be an "x's and o's" coach and fired any assistant (like Scalabrine) or banished any advisor (like West) who tried to create plays. He does get credit for turning them into a defensive-minded team, but otherwise he was a purely motivational coach who was getting by on the players' talents.
This still doesn't disprove the point about Kerr inheriting an excellent team. Because he did. In fact, he's in a better situation than David Blatt since all of his key players have been together for the last few years. That doesn't mean Kerr's not a good coach. But this team has been good for a few years now. At this point success for the Warriors is what happens in the playoffs. That is when you will be able to make an accurate judgement of of the team's coaching.
No, ownership built the team, and Jackson inherited one which had a completely new starting five from two years before he was hired. Jax refused to be an "x's and o's" coach and fired any assistant (like Scalabrine) or banished any advisor (like West) who tried to create plays. He does get credit for turning them into a defensive-minded team, but otherwise he was a purely motivational coach who was getting by on the players' talents.
The previous three seasons before Jackson arrived the Warriors had records of 29-53, 26-56, and 36-46. In Jackson's first season they went 23-43, mostly due to the mess he inherited. It wasn't until his second season that they finished 47-35 and made the playoffs. In his third year they continued to improve and finished at 51-31. Then of course he was fired. His "footprint" in the franchise is probably a better word than "built", but the point being is that under his watch he turned around this franchise and made it into a playoff team. Steve Kerr has also been quoted as saying that he inherited a great team. The next goal should be to get into the Western Conference Finals and ultimately the Finals. So far they show a lot of promise, something that didn't just happen overnight.
I hated how Mark Jackson was treated so I haven't been wishing this team well. I predicted that they wouldn't do nearly as well under Kerr as they did under Jackson, but Kerr and Co are proving me wrong. It will be interesting to see how the season unfolds, whether injuries make an impact, and if they can keep this domination up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.