Let's screen these scrumptious scrubs. Who should the Warriors retain? Who will they retain?
Chris Hunter
Per 36: 12.1 points (.501 TS%), 7.6 rebounds, 1.5 assists, 1.2 turnovers, 0.5 steals, 1.7 blocks, 6.8 fouls
Positives: Hunter's been able and willing to mix it up underneath, on a team that's sorely needed that -- his shot-blocking numbers are solid. His foul frequency is not necessarily a negative, as he's been explicitly deployed as an enforcer at times; if any Warrior should have a high foul rate, it's Hunter. He's passed pretty well for an inexperienced big, and he gets to the line decently often given how rarely he shoots. He seems like a prince of a guy. And his on-court/off-court stats and his RAPM showing indicate that the Warriors have been more effective on both ends when Hunter has played...
Negatives: ...in minutes too scant and context-dependent to draw any conclusions with confidence. Things we can conclude with confidence: Hunter is neither a frequent nor an efficient scorer, and he's a significantly below-average rebounder for a center. That's not a combo you like to see in a big man.
Should They Re-Sign Him? Probably not. The plus-minus data suggests that he may be a bit better than his production, but no bigs with production like this ever rise to the level of "good". It wouldn't be a tragedy to plant him at the very end of the bench... there are worse players in the league. There are also better ways to spend a million bucks.
Will They Re-Sign Him? Doubtful. Expect his bench big spot to go to a big, for better or (in the case of another Mikki type) for worse.
Anthony Tolliver
Per 36: 12.5 points (.502 TS%), 7.5 rebounds, 2.2 assists, 1.1 turnovers, 0.7 steals, 0.8 blocks, 2.9 fouls
Positives: Tolliver is a stretch four, an extremely valuable type of player in the current NBA. Like Hunter, he seems to be a well-liked and high-character guy; like Hunter, he fares quite by plus-minus. And he boasts some surprisingly good results in small areas: he's done an impressive job of avoiding fouls for a big man, and his 1.96 assist/turnover ratio is the second-best on the best behind CJ's. Tolliver is a piece that seems to fit the Warriors well.
Negatives: Trouble is, he's really not much of a piece; even with his occasional big games, he posts scoring and rebounding numbers that are essentially identical to Hunter's (though as a four, the rebounding bar for Tolliver is not quite as high). Tolliver would need to be an elite three-point shooter to be really interesting, and with a .333 mark in college, a .371 mark in the D-League and a .338 mark in the NBA, there's no real indication that he is one.
Should They Re-Sign Him? An unenthusiastic yes. Floor-stretching bigs, even bad ones, have their uses.
Will They Re-Sign Him? Yes. And given the risk that he'll get playing time over superior players in Randolph and Wright, it may be a re-signing Warriors fans come to despise.
Reggie Williams
Per 36: 19.4 points (.595 TS%), 4.6 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 1.5 turnovers, 0.6 steals, 0.3 blocks, 1.8 fouls
Positives: THIS GUY'S FUCKING AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!
Negatives: It's only been five games. There's no indication that he can play any defense whatsoever. The Warriors have over eighty other swingmen, all of whom can score.
Should They Re-Sign Him? Without question. All of the quibbles above are relevant: the sample size is tiny, he looks to be a horrible defender, and he plays a position that's already laughably overstocked as it stands. But bad teams need to stockpile assets, and Williams, a guy who has excelled and over-achieved at every level in Curry-like fashion, looks for all the world like an asset. The Warriors should lock him in for next season and worry about the details later.
Will They Re-Sign Him? Probably... he plays the style that the team (over)values. However, we can't rule out the possibility that the front office will idiotically refuse to renounce the rights to Devean George or Raja Bell, forcing Williams back into the minors (and, in short order, onto another NBA roster).
Posts
