View Full Version : Can someone please tell me why the Warriors get so much TV coverage?
Imposter
03-15-2010, 09:02 PM
Every other game of theirs is nationally televised with a 18-47 record while teams like OKC are playing good ball don't get shit? I get Steph Curry is an up and comer and I get that they upset the almighty Mavs a few years back but is anyone else tired of this shit?
alchemist
03-15-2010, 09:05 PM
They don't play defense?
their home market is the 4th biggest metropolitan area in the US, and all of america loves them for humiliating the gay dallas mavericks in the 1st round in the greatest upset in NBA history haha.
PGDynasty24
03-15-2010, 09:17 PM
cause they are entertaining and actually in a somehat big market. and they anal rape dallas
HarlemHeat37
03-15-2010, 09:23 PM
Warriors games are the most exciting games in the NBA from a simple entertainment standpoint..not just from a highlight standpoint, but for the fact that a lot of their games come down until the last minutes, and a team is never out of it against them..they also have a great crowd, makes it more exciting..
Imposter
03-15-2010, 09:26 PM
The big market excuse doesn't fly, can you guys tell me how many games the Knicks have on national TV? The Warriors are decently entertaining but don't win games. It gets stale pretty quick.
Imposter
03-15-2010, 09:27 PM
Warriors games are the most exciting games in the NBA from a simple entertainment standpoint..not just from a highlight standpoint, but for the fact that a lot of their games come down until the last minutes, and a team is never out of it against them
Resulting in 18 whole wins to date....
HarlemHeat37
03-15-2010, 09:28 PM
Did I say they were a good team?..
they dont broadcast Knicks games cause the entire NBA is embarassed by the Debacle that has been their franchise in the last decade, and everyone outside of phoenix hates 'D'Anto'n'i' and knows he sucks ass.
the knicks were one of my favorite teams during the pat riley era but since then they have been a letdown/humiliation of the highest order due only to an epically mediocre and retarded owner and GM(thomas)
Steve_Nash
03-15-2010, 09:46 PM
They're a team that can appreciate the fun in losing. People criticize Don Nelson for having fun losing and not developing young players, but I wish more would appreciate the kind of fun me and Alvan have losing.
mogrovejo
03-15-2010, 09:53 PM
Because the NBA wants to pump-up the D-League. True story.
Reggie Williams, Anthony Tolliver and Chris Hunter once again in action. Tough game for the big guys today.
ok Celtics fan, the NBA practically gift wrapped you guys a title in '08 (in an effort to rekindle ratings following years of Spurs-Pistons dominance), you have no room to complain.
DJ Mbenga
03-15-2010, 10:07 PM
50 seconds to go the score is already 36-30. how much time did it take the pistons to get to that score?
phxspurfan
03-15-2010, 10:14 PM
Because Del Curry, Jr. is the sh*t. These guys are wayy more fun to watch than the asswipe Celtics
yes the Celtics' Manufactured team and all their gay Cockiness needs to finally bite the dust, stupid garnett needed to abandon his franchise of like ten years of failure and join 2 other hall-of-famers and a selection of perfectly assembled role players coincedently placed together at the same exact time as LA coinicidently recieved a miraculous trade to rekindle the Lakers-celtics rivary at exactly the same time following years of mediocrity(im sure it was all just a coincidence) to win anything, just enjoy what the league Gifted you turds and go away.
tim Duncan will always be vastly superior to gaynett.
alchemist
03-15-2010, 10:20 PM
Lakerfags getting ref love.
Mostly because of the time slot most of thier games fall on.
yes the Celtics' Manufactured team and all their gay Cockiness needs to finally bite the dust, stupid garnett needed to abandon his franchise of like ten years of failure and join 2 other hall-of-famers and a selection of perfectly assembled role players coincedently placed together at the same exact time as LA coinicidently recieved a miraculous trade to rekindle the Lakers-celtics rivary at exactly the same time following years of mediocrity(im sure it was all just a coincidence) to win anything, just enjoy what the league Gifted you turds and go away.
tim Duncan will always be vastly superior to gaynett.
ha, no one can challenge this.
DJ Mbenga
03-16-2010, 12:15 AM
lol so you were asking why?
Kori Ellis
03-16-2010, 02:44 AM
The franchise earned a decade of TV time a couple years back
Kbn72J8ass4
Fun n Gun
03-16-2010, 05:55 AM
Because they're fun to watch. They on't have as much fun as phx but some fanbases just on't give a fuck about anything else.
Steve Jobs
03-16-2010, 07:31 AM
Don't underestimate my influence.
TheMACHINE
03-16-2010, 09:36 AM
dude that game was so fun to watch, i wanted Ellis's three to bounce in so i can watch 5 more minutes.
not too many west coast teams playing at that time of the night ?
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 09:50 AM
Man, the Warriors are the shit. They're always fun to watch, its great to Stephen Curry develop more and more as the season progresses. Curry is gunna be a beast for years to come. They have the potential to be a good team in the future, but their management is horrible. I don't think they're gunna take the right steps in improving that team. What a shame.
Allanon
03-16-2010, 09:55 AM
Stephen Curry's an impressive little dude; damn that boy can shoot and he can play the PG perfectly well despite all Monta said.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 10:01 AM
Funny thing is I think its Monta that actually needs to go, dude's a ball hog, he shoots too much, and the guy is a turnover king. Monta should be traded. Warriors management ought to build around Curry, Randolph, and Morrow. Nuff said.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 10:01 AM
And btw why the hell wasn't Monta traded after the moped incident?
Chieflion
03-16-2010, 10:02 AM
Fast pace plus Stephen Curry plus high scoring equals ratings. Trade that little loser, Monta Ellis away, please.
SomeCallMeTim
03-16-2010, 11:30 AM
Funny thing is I think its Monta that actually needs to go, dude's a ball hog, he shoots too much, and the guy is a turnover king. Monta should be traded. Warriors management ought to build around Curry, Randolph, and Morrow. Nuff said.
Good call. Interesting that there seems to be a real revolt among mainstream NBA fans against these Ellis/Arenas/Iverson shoot shoot shoot and threaten to lead the league in scoring but with a mediocre TS% types. Maybe people really are starting to get what makes a player great (hint: it isn't necessarily scoring 25PPG).
BTW how do the Warriors find all these 2nd round SGs who turn out to be awesome scorers? They sure know how to find talent low in the draft, too bad they can't figure out what to do with it.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 11:42 AM
Good call. Interesting that there seems to be a real revolt among mainstream NBA fans against these Ellis/Arenas/Iverson shoot shoot shoot and threaten to lead the league in scoring but with a mediocre TS% types. Maybe people really are starting to get what makes a player great (hint: it isn't necessarily scoring 25PPG).
BTW how do the Warriors find all these 2nd round SGs who turn out to be awesome scorers? They sure know how to find talent low in the draft, too bad they can't figure out what to do with it.
It just pisses me off sometimes how Ellis called Curry out when the reality is that he's one of the problems on that team and not Curry. And Don Nelson has always been a genius at drafting good players late in the draft, problem is he's also a moron at running teams. How can you coach the run 'n' gun style for so long and not realize it doesn't work?! Yes, its exciting basketball but you're not gunna win shit with that style. Nelson has had teams play this style for years and still has not changed. If "Insanity" is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result then Nelson is clearly insane.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 11:44 AM
You know what? Don Nelson isn't insane, he probably just doesn't give a fuck anymore. At his age he probably just wants to cash his checks and drink his beer, fuck it when I'm his age I'll probably act the same way.
SomeCallMeTim
03-16-2010, 02:59 PM
It just pisses me off sometimes how Ellis called Curry out when the reality is that he's one of the problems on that team and not Curry. And Don Nelson has always been a genius at drafting good players late in the draft, problem is he's also a moron at running teams. How can you coach the run 'n' gun style for so long and not realize it doesn't work?! Yes, its exciting basketball but you're not gunna win shit with that style. Nelson has had teams play this style for years and still has not changed. If "Insanity" is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result then Nelson is clearly insane.
The 80s Lakers won plenty with run-n-gun. Of course, they had an insanely talented team as well as a couple guys who were game changers on the defensive end. But they were definitely still run-n-gun.
You can say the league has changed since then, and that's true. But I don't think there's anything innately wrong with the run-n-gun philosophy. With the right talent, it could definitely win multiple championships again. I'd like to see it again... Showtime was some of the most entertaining basketball ever played.
mogrovejo
03-16-2010, 04:48 PM
Funny thing is I think its Monta that actually needs to go, dude's a ball hog, he shoots too much, and the guy is a turnover king. Monta should be traded. Warriors management ought to build around Curry, Randolph, and Morrow. Nuff said.
I've been saying that for months.
The 80s Lakers won plenty with run-n-gun. Of course, they had an insanely talented team as well as a couple guys who were game changers on the defensive end. But they were definitely still run-n-gun.
You can say the league has changed since then, and that's true. But I don't think there's anything innately wrong with the run-n-gun philosophy. With the right talent, it could definitely win multiple championships again. I'd like to see it again... Showtime was some of the most entertaining basketball ever played.
It's not only the Lakers. The 80s Celtics played at a faster pace than the Warriors. Until the 90s pretty much every team winning the league was a run'n'gun team. In fact, that's the more successful philosophy in the grand scheme of things.
I agree, there's no reason why a run'n'gun team can't win. That's a myth because only a couple of teams have adopted that philosophy and those teams didn't have much talent/were unlucky. But things changed a bit recently: the Lakers won the championship last season playing at a top-5 pace in the league and not particularly slower than the Warriors.
Anyone who thinks the Warriors would be more successful slowing down the game should be on meds.
mogrovejo
03-16-2010, 04:49 PM
You know what? Don Nelson isn't insane, he probably just doesn't give a fuck anymore. At his age he probably just wants to cash his checks and drink his beer, fuck it when I'm his age I'll probably act the same way.
Don Nelson is hte best asset the Warriors franchise have if they want to build a winner. Don Nelson has been wanting to ship out Ellis and Biedrins for a year. He loves the Curry/Morrow backcourt. But Don Nelson isn't the Warriors owner.
mavsfan1000
03-16-2010, 04:50 PM
They don't play any defense. It makes for some interesting basketball with stars going off.
Darthkiller
03-16-2010, 08:10 PM
Fast pace plus Stephen Curry plus high scoring equals ratings. Trade that little loser, Monta Ellis away, please.
they could have gotten mayo+thabeet for him. rofl warriors
Jacob1983
03-16-2010, 08:57 PM
You won't have to worry about seeing them that much on national tv that much for the rest of the season. They have only have one more game this season on national tv. I think some reasons why they are on national tv is because of the bandwagon that was created after they butt raped the Mavs in the 1st round in 2007. Their timezone helps too. However, you could say that they when they are on national tv they are usually playing a contender or elite team like the Nuggets, Blazers, Jazz, or Lakers or some good team from the East.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 09:23 PM
You guys are funny, the Lakers and Celtics teams that won championships playing at a fast pace had hall of famers on their team. They could play any style of basketball and still find ways to win. They were super talented, they played physical and they played defense. Please let us not disrespect those guys by bringing up the 18-48 Warriors into the same sentence as them.
mogrovejo
03-16-2010, 09:39 PM
You guys are funny, the Lakers and Celtics teams that won championships playing at a fast pace had hall of famers on their team. They could play any style of basketball and still find ways to win. They were super talented, they played physical and they played defense. Please let us not disrespect those guys by bringing up the 18-48 Warriors into the same sentence as them.
Your problem is with the talent, not the style of play.
If you want to say that you can't win without talent, then sure, you're right.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 10:00 PM
Your problem is with the talent, not the style of play.
If you want to say that you can't win without talent, then sure, you're right.
Idk I'm just not convinced about running and gunning, you have to go back to the 80s to find teams that won championships with this style. The teams that won with Run N Gun had Hall of Fame players and played defense. And besides the league has changed since those days, in the playoffs the games slow down no matter how much a team tries to run. That's when your inside game, defense, and rebounding come into play. Maybe a team can win playing with that style but I simply don't believe in it. I do think a team should try to run when they get the chance, why not try and get an easy two points if you can? No problem with that, but to make your whole team strategy just running and jacking up shots is NOT championship basketball.
Chieflion
03-16-2010, 10:01 PM
Your problem is with the talent, not the style of play.
If you want to say that you can't win without talent, then sure, you're right.
It is the talent of the Warriors' frontcourt that translates into this Warriors style. No one wants to see the Warriors dump the ball to Chris Hunter in the post. The Warriors would suck more if this happens.
SomeCallMeTim
03-16-2010, 10:06 PM
Idk I'm just not convinced about running and gunning, you have to go back to the 80s to find teams that won championships with this style. The teams that won with Run N Gun had Hall of Fame players and played defense. And besides the league has changed since those days, in the playoffs the games slow down no matter how much a team tries to run. That's when your inside game, defense, and rebounding come into play. Maybe a team can win playing with that style but I simply don't believe in it. I do think a team should try to run when they get the chance, why not try and get an easy two points if you can? No problem with that, but to make your whole team strategy just running and jacking up shots is NOT championship basketball.
The league changed, it can and will change again. Fans in the 80s probably thought the game would always look like it did then. The 90s defense-first dominant philosophy (started by the Pistons' success 88-90) changed that though. And then in the 00s the emergence of the three-point shot has changed it again.
I would not bet my retirement on a run-n-gun team not winning a chip in the foreseeable future.
Red Hawk #21
03-16-2010, 10:30 PM
The league changed, it can and will change again. Fans in the 80s probably thought the game would always look like it did then. The 90s defense-first dominant philosophy (started by the Pistons' success 88-90) changed that though. And then in the 00s the emergence of the three-point shot has changed it again.
I would not bet my retirement on a run-n-gun team not winning a chip in the foreseeable future.
Well if the Run n Gun team has enough talent and can defend then they can probably win it. Problem is that most Run n Gun teams nowadays jack up shots, and they don't defend their hardest because they just wanna get the ball back so they can jack up more shots. :downspin:
Bob Lanier
03-16-2010, 11:12 PM
The 80s Lakers won plenty with run-n-gun. Of course, they had an insanely talented team as well as a couple guys who were game changers on the defensive end. But they were definitely still run-n-gun.
You can say the league has changed since then, and that's true. But I don't think there's anything innately wrong with the run-n-gun philosophy. With the right talent, it could definitely win multiple championships again. I'd like to see it again... Showtime was some of the most entertaining basketball ever played.
Are you seriously saying Nellieball is something Pat Riley would countenance? If Don Nelson had Kareem on his team he'd start James Worthy at center.
mogrovejo
03-16-2010, 11:41 PM
Well if the Run n Gun team has enough talent and can defend then they can probably win it. Problem is that most Run n Gun teams nowadays jack up shots, and they don't defend their hardest because they just wanna get the ball back so they can jack up more shots. :downspin:
I doubt it. If so, it's a coincidence. That's basically a variation of the myth that D'Antoni's Suns were a terrible defensive team.
There's no older trick in the coaching job that slowing down the pace in order to make it look like the games are closer/your team defends better than it actually does.
mogrovejo
03-16-2010, 11:56 PM
Are you seriously saying Nellieball is something Pat Riley would countenance? If Don Nelson had Kareem on his team he'd start James Worthy at center.
The same Nelson who was the first believer in a 7footer from Germany? The guy who made Terry Cummings one of the best scorers in the league? Or the one who traded for a washed-up Bob Lanier?
Yeah, he'd never play Kareem, he obviously hates skilled big men.
DUNCANownsKOBE2
03-16-2010, 11:59 PM
The same Nelson who was the first believer in a 7footer from Germany? The guy who made Terry Cummings one of the best scorers in the league? Or the one who traded for a washed-up Bob Lanier?
Yeah, he'd never play Kareem, he obviously hates skilled big men.
He'd try to turn Kareem into a 3 point shooter.
JoeTait75
03-17-2010, 12:04 AM
Nellieball = 1-12 in conference championship games against teams with big men.
mogrovejo
03-17-2010, 12:06 AM
He'd try to turn Kareem into a 3 point shooter.
I doubt it. He didn't turn Lanier, Cummings or Nowitzki a 3 pt shooter - Nowitzki was already one. Or Seikaly. That's another myth. Even this season Warriors, who are nothing but a bunch of jump-shooting guards, are barely a top-10 team in 3pt attempts - even though they play at a frenetic pace compared to the rest of the league.
mogrovejo
03-17-2010, 12:12 AM
Nellieball = 1-12 in conference championship games against teams with big men.
Bird and Duncan are overrated. If Nellie had played Shaun Bradley and Alton Lister more they'd never have won anything.
mojorizen7
03-17-2010, 01:06 AM
Run n Gun never won dick.
The concept for this gimmicky-fan friendly-style dictates that you DO NOT put the emphasis on doing the little things it takes to win titles.....and conversely it DOES DICTATE that you put smaller,quicker shooters on the floor....which renders your squad ineffective to do the little things it takes to win titles even if you tried.
The 80's Champion LAKERS being run n gun is a fallacy. First of all,they had a PG who could guard 4 positions on the floor. Second,(and pay attention here)...they played defense and they played it well. Sure they got alot of transistion points but they also knew how to get stops when asked to do so.
I watched the games & unfortunately i remember. :hat
mojorizen7
03-17-2010, 01:10 AM
Bird and Duncan are overrated. If Nellie had played Shaun Bradley and Alton Lister more they'd never have won anything.
Really?
mogrovejo
03-17-2010, 07:02 PM
Really?
I was being sarcastic. Every time Nelson had quality bigs he played them. Of course he'd play Kareena.
Run n Gun never won dick.
The concept for this gimmicky-fan friendly-style dictates that you DO NOT put the emphasis on doing the little things it takes to win titles.....and conversely it DOES DICTATE that you put smaller,quicker shooters on the floor....which renders your squad ineffective to do the little things it takes to win titles even if you tried.
The 80's Champion LAKERS being run n gun is a fallacy. First of all,they had a PG who could guard 4 positions on the floor. Second,(and pay attention here)...they played defense and they played it well. Sure they got alot of transistion points but they also knew how to get stops when asked to do so.
I watched the games & unfortunately i remember. :hat
Magic never played defence at his position, let alone at 4 different ones.
What is a fallacy is to equate "fast pace offence" to "no defence".
EmptyMan
03-17-2010, 07:21 PM
The franchise earned a decade of TV time a couple years back
Kbn72J8ass4
This.
lol mavs
mojorizen7
03-17-2010, 08:31 PM
I was being sarcastic. Every time Nelson had quality bigs he played them. Of course he'd play Kareena.
Magic never played defence at his position, let alone at 4 different ones.
What is a fallacy is to equate "fast pace offence" to "no defence".
It's in my post. The part that isn't about Magic Johnson.
Here:
The concept for this gimmicky-fan friendly-style dictates that you DO NOT put the emphasis on doing the little things it takes to win titles.....and conversely it DOES DICTATE that you put smaller,quicker shooters on the floor....which renders your squad ineffective to do the little things it takes to win titles even if you tried.
Magic never played any defense? Again...really? He didn't take home any DPOY awards but I was referring to his size and relitive agility for such a big man..... which allowed him to guard many players on the floor at any particular time. Just because i said he can guard 4 positions on the floor isn't a statement that he was a defensive juggernaut.
In reference to fun n gun and PG's.....having a 6'9" Magic as opposed to say.....Steve Nash or Tim Hardaway is an obvious advantage defensively whether or not he's a dfensive stopper wouldn't you say?
For anyone to say that the 80's LakeShow teams weren't solid defensively is probably just locked into the highlight reels of the era IMO.
SomeCallMeTim
03-17-2010, 10:23 PM
Run n Gun never won dick.
The concept for this gimmicky-fan friendly-style dictates that you DO NOT put the emphasis on doing the little things it takes to win titles.....and conversely it DOES DICTATE that you put smaller,quicker shooters on the floor....which renders your squad ineffective to do the little things it takes to win titles even if you tried.
The 80's Champion LAKERS being run n gun is a fallacy. First of all,they had a PG who could guard 4 positions on the floor. Second,(and pay attention here)...they played defense and they played it well. Sure they got alot of transistion points but they also knew how to get stops when asked to do so.
I watched the games & unfortunately i remember. :hat
The 80s championship Lakers teams were generally awesome offensive teams, OK defensive teams:
87-88: #2 ORtg, #9 DRtg
86-87: #1 ORtg, #7 DRtg
84-85: #1 ORtg, #7 DRtg
81-82: #2 ORtg, #10 DRtg
79-80: #1 ORtg, #9 DRtg
Those rankings are very similar to the great Suns teams of a few years ago.
SomeCallMeTim
03-17-2010, 10:26 PM
For anyone to say that the 80's LakeShow teams weren't solid defensively is probably just locked into the highlight reels of the era IMO.
They were solid, just not great defensively. Their unstoppable offense is what set them apart. Run-n-gun philosophy definitely a big part of that.
mogrovejo
03-17-2010, 10:54 PM
It's in my post. The part that isn't about Magic Johnson.
Here:
Magic never played any defense? Again...really? He didn't take home any DPOY awards but I was referring to his size and relitive agility for such a big man..... which allowed him to guard many players on the floor at any particular time. Just because i said he can guard 4 positions on the floor isn't a statement that he was a defensive juggernaut.
In reference to fun n gun and PG's.....having a 6'9" Magic as opposed to say.....Steve Nash or Tim Hardaway is an obvious advantage defensively whether or not he's a dfensive stopper wouldn't you say?
For anyone to say that the 80's LakeShow teams weren't solid defensively is probably just locked into the highlight reels of the era IMO.
Dude, Magic was a sieve. Like one of the worst defenders in the league bad. There wasn't an ounce of defensive awareness in Magic. Hardaway was miles better than him, in spite of his height (plus Hardaway is underrated defensively because he played in an era with plenty of great defensive 1-guards).
The Lakers defence was average, like the Suns defence. Even their points per possession allowed is similar.
Anyway, this is beyond the point: when Nelson had good defensive players playing for him, guys like Moncrief and Pressey, he coached some of the best defensive teams in the history of the league.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.