9 ms·

What Happened When Venture Capitalists Took Over the Golden State Warriors

102 points by rm2889 11y ago

e40 11y ago
There's a lot of fluff in that article. I'd say it's a combination of two things: what the owners are doing, outlined in the article and something you can't get through management: a group of players that are humble and truly want to work together as a team. I stopped watching the NBA in the 90's after the Warrior's "run TMC" was broken up and Jordan and Magic retired. The egos and attitudes of the players really turned me off. Curry and his teammates have turned me on again to the game, in a big way. The games are a joy to watch. The pure excitement generated by the team is just amazing. Even in the 90's I would rarely watch every minute of a game. I watch EVERY minute of each Warrior's game and love every bit of it. They are that good.
- sehr 11y ago
  Could have been watching the Spurs for decades if that's what you like, minus the excitement until recently :)
  - e40 11y ago
    I've watched them a few times over the season and their players just don't do the same thing for me. Technically they are very good, I agree. There's an intangible in the way the Warriors play together that really increases enjoyment. It's not just about winning. It's how they win. Of course, the other thing is watching Steph Curry change the game. It's a wonder to behold.
    - the_watcher 11y ago
      > There's an intangible in the way the Warriors play together that really increases enjoyment. > It's not just about winning. It's how they win. You realize you just described the case for the Spurs for the past decade, right?
      - maehwasu 11y ago
        Spurs are fun to watch, but don't have Steph launching ridiculous bombs from anywhere. It's barely basketball anymore, and it's amazing.
    - DerekH 11y ago
      On an interesting note, Kawhi Leonard's advanced stats were marginally better than Curry's as of two weeks ago. They're both equally exciting players in my eyes. Also, have you seen the size of Leonard's hands?!
  - sharkweek 11y ago
    LOVE watching Kawhi Leonard - the guy is so entertaining from a strictly "that guy knows how to play basketball" kind of way
- trowawee 11y ago
  Hahahahaha. Ok. Sure. You loved watching Jordan, but you dislike "egos and attitudes"? C'mon, man. Gettin' a little dog-whistle-y there. And the idea that Steph (or Dray) doesn't/don't have an ego or an attitude - the man rains conscience-less bombs from 40 feet out, turns and runs after shots because he knows they'll hit, and talks shit to other teams' bench while his shot falls. And that's before we start talking about Iggy or Dray.
  - Ensorceled 11y ago
    TIL I stopped watching the NBA because I'm a racist.
  - the_watcher 11y ago
    > Gettin' a little dog-whistle-y there. What are you talking about?
    - jessaustin 11y ago
      There's always at least a bit of racist motivation for complaints about NBA players' "egos and attitudes". In this case that's probably not even most of what OP was saying. But when white American racists read complaints like that, they accurately assume that racism is part of it. Those who don't think that way, don't make that assumption. It's like a dog whistle in that certain audiences hear the message, and others don't.
      - oldmanjay 11y ago
        Or it's the usual inference-sans-implication that makes for fun eggshell-walking discourse.
      - adventured 11y ago
        > There's always at least a bit of racist motivation for complaints about NBA players' "egos and attitudes". First of all, you just called someone on here racist. That's very insulting if you're wrong about the person in question. Second, you just said that I can never complain about NBA player egos and attitudes, otherwise I'm a racist no matter what. I'm sure your premise must equally apply to all sports then: complain about hockey player egos, you're a racist; complain about baseball player egos, you're a racist; complain about football player egos, you're a racist. No? You're building a wall against any criticism by elaborately abusing the concept of racism. Is it racist to artificially shield one group of players from criticism based on race, while not shielding players of every of race from identical criticism across every other sport?
- TwoBit 11y ago
  Does the last minute of basketball still take 15 minutes? If so then I'm not coming back.
chrisgd 11y ago
Hagiography masquerading as reporting.
- throwawaymaroon 11y ago
  That was my initial reaction, too, but there's something weird about sports and sports reporting that is only accurate when it's hagiographical. I hate VCs reflexively as much as the next relatively sane developer, but either games are won on a boring mathematical basis or there really is something spiritual involved, in which case reporting can only be hagiography.
esturk 11y ago
Its more coincidental that the warriors got all the pieces in place. Curry was injured the year he had to sign the current contract which is way undervalued. This is the key that allowed them to have signings like Iggy. Curry is easily worth 2x what he's being paid now which would eat up Iggy's contract. http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/GSW.html?lid=standings_payroll http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/GSW.html?lid=s...
sharkweek 11y ago
Fun fact - 1/4th of the NBA is owned by big names in private equity - http://pitchbook.com/news/articles/barbarians-at-the-ticket-gate-the-pe-moguls-who-own-14-of-the-nba http://pitchbook.com/news/articles/barbarians-at-the-ticket-...
- mtanski 11y ago
  They've spend a money not only on the players but things in & around the arenas they play in (concessions, upgrading booths) and as a result they've been able to extract more money out of the franchises. I'm also sure owning a team is fun if you're into that.
swang 11y ago
Yes, Luck into Steph Curry and his contract, it's this smart silicon valley owner. NONE OF THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT. Except, for how the Warriors even "lucked" into Steph Curry during the draft. It's because David Kahn of the Timberwolves drafted both Johnny Flynn and Ricky Rubio two spots ahead of Curry. Flynn lasted 2 seasons, Rubio didn't even play in the league until after Flynn had left. Nevermind the fact that the Sacramento Kings essentially screwed themselves over when they got upset that Andre Iguodala didn't sign with them fast enough, which opened the door for the Warriors to sign him, then David Lee being injured at the beginning of last season which forced them to play Draymond Green (and finding out how great he was). No it's, "all skill" man. Talk about drinking the koolaid. The Warriors are playing out of their minds this year, overshadowing a Spurs team that is playing out of their minds as well. The big difference right now is Pop is willing to rest his starters, Kerr has been playing his starters extra minutes trying to win 73 games. If anything that will be their downfall (I still think they're going to win). "It's not just Steph Curry.", Are you out of your mind? If Steph Curry wasn't there they'd still be a good team, but not a team on the brink of winning 73 games.
- jmspring 11y ago
  I can't recall specifics, but indications of bubble one, the media was comparing or attributing things to the "ethos" that is Silicon Valley during the ramp up. The article was hard to take with much seriousness.
- jonesb6 11y ago
  Didn't you see how much credit was given to the investment group during the parade last Summer? They're going to have to install tables for the new courtside seating so that handjobs can be given out under them.
- hariananth 11y ago
  > "It's not just Steph Curry.", Are you out of your mind? If Steph Curry wasn't there they'd still be a good team, but not a team on the brink of winning 73 games. Are you saying it IS "just" Steph Curry? Even if he's the majority of the reason that they win 73 games, it's very unlikely he'd win 73 with a different supporting cast (i.e. a cast other superstars have). I agree on a few of your points, but tone it down, man.
howlingfantods 11y ago
Lacob gives himself too much credit for the fact that his injured point guard trained himself into the greatest shooter in NBA history.
- howlingfantods 11y ago
  BTW, this warriors-jazz game is crazy right now.
- kin 11y ago
  He got lucky and he's arrogant because his gamble paid off. I really do hate this Silicon Valley mentality where when a decision leads to a success, they actually believe that there was a 0% chance the decision could have led to a failure.
bhaumik 11y ago
Players, coaches, trainers, and assistant + GMs do most of the work in any NBA franchise. Owners mostly give a final approval or veto on major decisions.
bretthopper 11y ago
Other comments have already accurately described how this is mostly fluff since the Warriors success is mostly due to lucky random events with Steph Curry. But one more clarification: > So when Lacob fired him in 2014, after a 51-31 season, and replaced him with Steve Kerr, the basketball world was shocked. Not many people were shocked. Jackson was a disaster despite their record and was poisonous to the team. Here's a taste of what he did: > Jackson demoted Brian Scalabrine, an assistant coach, to the D-League after initially firing him without cause in front of players. The team fired another assistant, Darren Erman, after learning he had been secretly recording conversations Jackson had with other coaches. Erman was concerned Jackson was bad-mouthing him behind his back, multiple sources have said, and poisoning his relationship with players. The team changed the location of Erman’s parking spot without warning, sources say. Jackson also made it known he preferred that Jerry West, a senior adviser to the Warriors, stay away from practices. from: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mark-jackson-fired-golden-state-warriors/ http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mark-jackson-fired-golden-...
- the_watcher 11y ago
  > Other comments have already accurately described how this is mostly fluff since the Warriors success is mostly due to lucky random events with Steph Curry Lucky stuff like drafting Klay Thompson and Draymond Green? Lucky stuff like hiring Steve Kerr? Lucky stuff like investing in a training staff that has successfully solved Steph's recurring ankle issues? They got lucky with Steph falling to them, and with his injuries coinciding with his free agency. Welcome to sports, the winners always have luck. Stop trying to take away the essentially endless list of things they irrefutably did well just because HN commenters don't like VC's promoting themselves.
- ritchiea 11y ago
  Jackson alienated a lot of people but objectively he did a good job. The team had been floundering and he turned them into a top tier defense. If anything he failed on soft skills alienating some of his players and failing as a manger. But objectively the team improved under Jackson and impressively as as defensive team.
rmason 11y ago
Love it how Lacob says he 'started' 70 companies. Funny I bet those guys seeking funding from his firm thought they were the founders. I am not begrudging that he might have helped but I thought that was a bit rich. Also left wondering how many of those founders got replaced along the way?
- stephengillie 11y ago
  Is this wordplay similar to a minister "marrying 70 people" throughout a career?
- olb 11y ago
  I came here to make this comment. I found that quote offensive, as both a founder (I’ve started two companies) and angel investor (I “started” zero of these companies!). According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lacob https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lacob), Joe Lacob has never started a company.
- whbk 11y ago
  Yeah, that is very far from the way most VCs view their role in the ecosystem, and I gather that was the case even before the recent "founder-friendly" era. Tells you something about this guy in particular and his version of the Warriors story. I don't doubt that he's made a lot of good moves with the Warriors, but this piece is so over the top.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
chiliap2 11y ago
I thought this article was a pretty good overview of the team, and it did at least acknowledge the difficulty in separating the ownership from the start player, in terms of success. But one part at the end seemed super out of place. > He confided that he figures he’s one of the 10 best blackjack players in the worl What? How can this man be thought of as a shrewd businessman by anyone after saying something like that. The only possibly explanation could be that he's referring to card counting, but I doubt he's playing million dollar games against people that don't realize what he's doing.
realdlee 11y ago
What's happened with the Warriors reminds me a lot of the Dallas Mavericks' transformation after Mark Cuban bought the team in 2000. Pre-Cuban, the Mavs were terrible, a perennial bottom-tier team. Cuban changed the culture and the Mavs have been more successful than most fans could have dreamed of (even winning the championship in 2011 and runner-ups in 2006). The Warriors didn't just get "lucky" by drafting Green, Klay, Barnes, and Curry. It's hard drafting well; just ask the 76ers, the Cavs (before Lebron came back, they weren't making the playoffs despite multiple #1 overall picks), and 20+ other teams in the NBA. With the exception of the Spurs, no other team has been better at building a team lately. Many parties deserve recognition for the Warriors' outstanding success over the last few years and the owners are certainly included.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

102 points by rm2889 11y ago

e40 11y ago

There's a lot of fluff in that article. I'd say it's a combination of two things: what the owners are doing, outlined in the article and something you can't get through management: a group of players that are humble and truly want to work together as a team. I stopped watching the NBA in the 90's after the Warrior's "run TMC" was broken up and Jordan and Magic retired. The egos and attitudes of the players really turned me off. Curry and his teammates have turned me on again to the game, in a big way. The games are a joy to watch. The pure excitement generated by the team is just amazing. Even in the 90's I would rarely watch every minute of a game. I watch EVERY minute of each Warrior's game and love every bit of it. They are that good.

sehr 11y ago
Could have been watching the Spurs for decades if that's what you like, minus the excitement until recently :)
- e40 11y ago
  I've watched them a few times over the season and their players just don't do the same thing for me. Technically they are very good, I agree. There's an intangible in the way the Warriors play together that really increases enjoyment. It's not just about winning. It's how they win. Of course, the other thing is watching Steph Curry change the game. It's a wonder to behold.
  - the_watcher 11y ago
    > There's an intangible in the way the Warriors play together that really increases enjoyment. > It's not just about winning. It's how they win. You realize you just described the case for the Spurs for the past decade, right?
    - maehwasu 11y ago
      Spurs are fun to watch, but don't have Steph launching ridiculous bombs from anywhere. It's barely basketball anymore, and it's amazing.
  - DerekH 11y ago
    On an interesting note, Kawhi Leonard's advanced stats were marginally better than Curry's as of two weeks ago. They're both equally exciting players in my eyes. Also, have you seen the size of Leonard's hands?!
- sharkweek 11y ago
  LOVE watching Kawhi Leonard - the guy is so entertaining from a strictly "that guy knows how to play basketball" kind of way
trowawee 11y ago
Hahahahaha. Ok. Sure. You loved watching Jordan, but you dislike "egos and attitudes"? C'mon, man. Gettin' a little dog-whistle-y there. And the idea that Steph (or Dray) doesn't/don't have an ego or an attitude - the man rains conscience-less bombs from 40 feet out, turns and runs after shots because he knows they'll hit, and talks shit to other teams' bench while his shot falls. And that's before we start talking about Iggy or Dray.
- Ensorceled 11y ago
  TIL I stopped watching the NBA because I'm a racist.
- the_watcher 11y ago
  > Gettin' a little dog-whistle-y there. What are you talking about?
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    There's always at least a bit of racist motivation for complaints about NBA players' "egos and attitudes". In this case that's probably not even most of what OP was saying. But when white American racists read complaints like that, they accurately assume that racism is part of it. Those who don't think that way, don't make that assumption. It's like a dog whistle in that certain audiences hear the message, and others don't.
    - oldmanjay 11y ago
      Or it's the usual inference-sans-implication that makes for fun eggshell-walking discourse.
    - adventured 11y ago
      > There's always at least a bit of racist motivation for complaints about NBA players' "egos and attitudes". First of all, you just called someone on here racist. That's very insulting if you're wrong about the person in question. Second, you just said that I can never complain about NBA player egos and attitudes, otherwise I'm a racist no matter what. I'm sure your premise must equally apply to all sports then: complain about hockey player egos, you're a racist; complain about baseball player egos, you're a racist; complain about football player egos, you're a racist. No? You're building a wall against any criticism by elaborately abusing the concept of racism. Is it racist to artificially shield one group of players from criticism based on race, while not shielding players of every of race from identical criticism across every other sport?
TwoBit 11y ago
Does the last minute of basketball still take 15 minutes? If so then I'm not coming back.

chrisgd 11y ago

Hagiography masquerading as reporting.

throwawaymaroon 11y ago
That was my initial reaction, too, but there's something weird about sports and sports reporting that is only accurate when it's hagiographical. I hate VCs reflexively as much as the next relatively sane developer, but either games are won on a boring mathematical basis or there really is something spiritual involved, in which case reporting can only be hagiography.

esturk 11y ago

Its more coincidental that the warriors got all the pieces in place. Curry was injured the year he had to sign the current contract which is way undervalued. This is the key that allowed them to have signings like Iggy. Curry is easily worth 2x what he's being paid now which would eat up Iggy's contract. http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/GSW.html?lid=standings_payroll http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/GSW.html?lid=s...

sharkweek 11y ago

Fun fact - 1/4th of the NBA is owned by big names in private equity - http://pitchbook.com/news/articles/barbarians-at-the-ticket-gate-the-pe-moguls-who-own-14-of-the-nba http://pitchbook.com/news/articles/barbarians-at-the-ticket-...

mtanski 11y ago
They've spend a money not only on the players but things in & around the arenas they play in (concessions, upgrading booths) and as a result they've been able to extract more money out of the franchises. I'm also sure owning a team is fun if you're into that.

swang 11y ago

Yes, Luck into Steph Curry and his contract, it's this smart silicon valley owner. NONE OF THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT. Except, for how the Warriors even "lucked" into Steph Curry during the draft. It's because David Kahn of the Timberwolves drafted both Johnny Flynn and Ricky Rubio two spots ahead of Curry. Flynn lasted 2 seasons, Rubio didn't even play in the league until after Flynn had left. Nevermind the fact that the Sacramento Kings essentially screwed themselves over when they got upset that Andre Iguodala didn't sign with them fast enough, which opened the door for the Warriors to sign him, then David Lee being injured at the beginning of last season which forced them to play Draymond Green (and finding out how great he was). No it's, "all skill" man. Talk about drinking the koolaid. The Warriors are playing out of their minds this year, overshadowing a Spurs team that is playing out of their minds as well. The big difference right now is Pop is willing to rest his starters, Kerr has been playing his starters extra minutes trying to win 73 games. If anything that will be their downfall (I still think they're going to win). "It's not just Steph Curry.", Are you out of your mind? If Steph Curry wasn't there they'd still be a good team, but not a team on the brink of winning 73 games.

jmspring 11y ago
I can't recall specifics, but indications of bubble one, the media was comparing or attributing things to the "ethos" that is Silicon Valley during the ramp up. The article was hard to take with much seriousness.
jonesb6 11y ago
Didn't you see how much credit was given to the investment group during the parade last Summer? They're going to have to install tables for the new courtside seating so that handjobs can be given out under them.
hariananth 11y ago
> "It's not just Steph Curry.", Are you out of your mind? If Steph Curry wasn't there they'd still be a good team, but not a team on the brink of winning 73 games. Are you saying it IS "just" Steph Curry? Even if he's the majority of the reason that they win 73 games, it's very unlikely he'd win 73 with a different supporting cast (i.e. a cast other superstars have). I agree on a few of your points, but tone it down, man.

howlingfantods 11y ago

Lacob gives himself too much credit for the fact that his injured point guard trained himself into the greatest shooter in NBA history.

howlingfantods 11y ago
BTW, this warriors-jazz game is crazy right now.
kin 11y ago
He got lucky and he's arrogant because his gamble paid off. I really do hate this Silicon Valley mentality where when a decision leads to a success, they actually believe that there was a 0% chance the decision could have led to a failure.

bhaumik 11y ago

Players, coaches, trainers, and assistant + GMs do most of the work in any NBA franchise. Owners mostly give a final approval or veto on major decisions.

bretthopper 11y ago

Other comments have already accurately described how this is mostly fluff since the Warriors success is mostly due to lucky random events with Steph Curry. But one more clarification: > So when Lacob fired him in 2014, after a 51-31 season, and replaced him with Steve Kerr, the basketball world was shocked. Not many people were shocked. Jackson was a disaster despite their record and was poisonous to the team. Here's a taste of what he did: > Jackson demoted Brian Scalabrine, an assistant coach, to the D-League after initially firing him without cause in front of players. The team fired another assistant, Darren Erman, after learning he had been secretly recording conversations Jackson had with other coaches. Erman was concerned Jackson was bad-mouthing him behind his back, multiple sources have said, and poisoning his relationship with players. The team changed the location of Erman’s parking spot without warning, sources say. Jackson also made it known he preferred that Jerry West, a senior adviser to the Warriors, stay away from practices. from: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mark-jackson-fired-golden-state-warriors/ http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mark-jackson-fired-golden-...

the_watcher 11y ago
> Other comments have already accurately described how this is mostly fluff since the Warriors success is mostly due to lucky random events with Steph Curry Lucky stuff like drafting Klay Thompson and Draymond Green? Lucky stuff like hiring Steve Kerr? Lucky stuff like investing in a training staff that has successfully solved Steph's recurring ankle issues? They got lucky with Steph falling to them, and with his injuries coinciding with his free agency. Welcome to sports, the winners always have luck. Stop trying to take away the essentially endless list of things they irrefutably did well just because HN commenters don't like VC's promoting themselves.
ritchiea 11y ago
Jackson alienated a lot of people but objectively he did a good job. The team had been floundering and he turned them into a top tier defense. If anything he failed on soft skills alienating some of his players and failing as a manger. But objectively the team improved under Jackson and impressively as as defensive team.

rmason 11y ago

Love it how Lacob says he 'started' 70 companies. Funny I bet those guys seeking funding from his firm thought they were the founders. I am not begrudging that he might have helped but I thought that was a bit rich. Also left wondering how many of those founders got replaced along the way?

stephengillie 11y ago
Is this wordplay similar to a minister "marrying 70 people" throughout a career?
olb 11y ago
I came here to make this comment. I found that quote offensive, as both a founder (I’ve started two companies) and angel investor (I “started” zero of these companies!). According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lacob https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lacob), Joe Lacob has never started a company.
whbk 11y ago
Yeah, that is very far from the way most VCs view their role in the ecosystem, and I gather that was the case even before the recent "founder-friendly" era. Tells you something about this guy in particular and his version of the Warriors story. I don't doubt that he's made a lot of good moves with the Warriors, but this piece is so over the top.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

chiliap2 11y ago

I thought this article was a pretty good overview of the team, and it did at least acknowledge the difficulty in separating the ownership from the start player, in terms of success. But one part at the end seemed super out of place. > He confided that he figures he’s one of the 10 best blackjack players in the worl What? How can this man be thought of as a shrewd businessman by anyone after saying something like that. The only possibly explanation could be that he's referring to card counting, but I doubt he's playing million dollar games against people that don't realize what he's doing.

realdlee 11y ago

What's happened with the Warriors reminds me a lot of the Dallas Mavericks' transformation after Mark Cuban bought the team in 2000. Pre-Cuban, the Mavs were terrible, a perennial bottom-tier team. Cuban changed the culture and the Mavs have been more successful than most fans could have dreamed of (even winning the championship in 2011 and runner-ups in 2006). The Warriors didn't just get "lucky" by drafting Green, Klay, Barnes, and Curry. It's hard drafting well; just ask the 76ers, the Cavs (before Lebron came back, they weren't making the playoffs despite multiple #1 overall picks), and 20+ other teams in the NBA. With the exception of the Spurs, no other team has been better at building a team lately. Many parties deserve recognition for the Warriors' outstanding success over the last few years and the owners are certainly included.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]