Wright vs. Morrow
by Nither on Jul 10, 2010 8:45 PM PDT
Email
PrintNow most people are probably thinking this is going to be some crazy case to keep one of them. To be honest, that title was to get some of the GSoMers to read this carefully.
I don't know how to be any more clear: we DO NOT have to lose Anthony Morrow in exchange for Dorell Wright. We could still match the Net's offer for Morrow, sign Wright, AND still be under the salary cap. The one fallout might be that we lose CJ Watson, but there are many scoring-first type point guards in the league and probably plenty more to come so CJ would be the best man to lose unfortunately.
I would personally rather lose Watson than Morrow, who has way more upside, a smooth 3pt shot, and has shown growth in his ability to play basketball. He is predominately a set shooter, but if you watched the past few games he's worked on a baseline fade and other driving moves.
So let me repeat myself. I address everyone who thinks we are forced to choose between Morrow and Wright.
WE CAN KEEP THEM BOTH AND STILL REMAIN UNDER THE SALARY CAP. So essentially, if the Warriors do not match the Net's offer, it'll be a horrible mistake by Riley and the rest of the front office.
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
120 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Match the offer to Morrow, let CJ walk if he gets an offer, and then replace him with the best available point guard for cheap.
by duballers23 on Jul 10, 2010 8:47 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
In some ways:
Morrow shoots 3-pt-shots at almost .100 better a clip. Overall, his TS is slightly better (.009, probably not enough to worry about).
Reggie Williams is a slightly better rebounder, a better passer, and turns the ball over less despite doing more with it. I’d give Williams an edge in defense as well.
The primary difference is that Morrow does one thing (shoot 3s) at an elite level, whereas Reggie does a lot of things well, and probably has more scope to improve. They’re really different players so which you prefer is almost a philosophical decision about how you want to build your team.
the reason we may not match is...
warriors may want the flexibility to make other moves – such as sign a back up center not named Gadzuric or have wiggle room to trade Monta if they can free themselves of that contract. Not saying they should do those things – but if they want the option then they likely say goodbye to morrow. tomorrow, perhaps? sorry.
I also think that they feel they have the best 3 pt shooter still on the team in Curry, lots of other guys with decent range – scoring is not our problem.
I love Morrow – but like he said, its a business.
also add $4M to $13M in expiring contracts next season
and we have a shot at another big-time free agent or trade
What if we could add Melo?
Curry
Ellis
Melo
Lee
Biedrins
That’s a potentially very formidable lineup.
not the same
as many of us told you before the acquisition your doubt in Lee’s willingness to come here was totally unjustified, dubballers23’s doubt about Melo’s willingness to come here is far more understandable.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
I agree
but maybe there is hope that the new ownership regime will make the Warriors a more attractive free agent destination. Also, I’m not sure we will be good enough for Melo to want to leave Denver for us unfortunately.
Denver has reached its peak IMHO
If they haven’t won by now, I don’t see that team getting better. Billups is 33 now. Birdman is 32. Nene is fine, but I don’t think they have enough talent. Going forward, I think the Warriors can actually be the more competitive team, and we are quite a bit younger.
They'd need JR Smith to turn into a good player suddenly
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 11, 2010 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions
oh yea
I’m not saying there’s zero chance. I think the right ownership group could make us the equivalent of the New Jersey Nets in the LeBron chase, but I still don’t think we could be among the two or three favorites to land Carmelo.
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
And Melo isn’t that good.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s good, but not great.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 10, 2010 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions
curry needs someone on the perimeter to hit 3s
CJ, Morrow and buike used to the those guys. Now we have reggie and possibly the new wright (and vladrad I guess).
Free themselves of Monta's contract?
Monta’s no longer looking like he’s overpaid.
What?
He’s looking more overpaid than ever.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 10, 2010 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions
The team is looking "better" than it was with the moves including Udoh.
Have to say that now I would hate to see AR turn into Durant in 2 years.
by Only In Fairfax on Jul 10, 2010 8:59 PM PDT reply actions
agreed
Durant is going to be a superstar. I love Randolph potential, but it was never to be as good as the durantula.
Durant is already a superstar.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 11, 2010 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
If he starts hanging out on the perimeter trying to emulate Durant, he could end up playing in Europe at the end of his rookie contract. If he has a future as a starter in this league (and I suspect he does), he needs to model his game after Kevin Garnett’s, not Kevin Durant’s.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jul 10, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions
no worries there. AR’s real potential in terms of actually having a possibility of occurring was always in his ability to be a dynamic versatile defender who could switch & guard multiple positions, rebound & blocked shots.
maybe a Josh Smith type on offense was his potential. though it looks unlikely that he’s as good a passer at least looking at stats like assist rate, a:t ratio & ppr.
by the evil monkey on Jul 10, 2010 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Correlation of inability to use the reply button…
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jul 10, 2010 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Haha, correlates with inability to make quality commentary.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 10, 2010 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions
…
Thing A
"Correlation between inability to use the reply button and general crappiness of analysis: pretty high." -Sleepy Freud
I was confused at first, but then I read your signature.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jul 11, 2010 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Correlation of number of Sleepy Freud posts on a thread
Correlates inversely with overall intelligence of thread’s discussion.
Haha. You gotta love random ad-homs from Zombie GSoMers on their 15th user name.
Remind me who you were in your previous life, your highness?
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jul 11, 2010 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Randolph bless his heart but
Garnett and Durant are in a whole nother stratosphere than Randolph. Maybe he could be Lamar Odom?? And he’s still not close to that…someday but I’m comfortable letting NY figure that
by Brothaplease09 on Jul 10, 2010 10:00 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
One of TK's arguments was that we should keep AR because he could become like Odom
If so I’m glad we traded him for a better more consistent big man in David Lee
"Some of my finest hours have been spent on my back veranda,
smoking hemp and observing as far as my eye can see."
- Thomas Jefferson
by DaymanCometh on Jul 11, 2010 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
see, my Monta for Granger idea was genius after all. LOL
where do we get shooting from now besides Steph? Kellena, gone. Maggs, gone. AMmo, potentially gone. CJ, potentially gone. no bueno.
We Believe!!!
see, my Monta for Granger idea was genius after all
My VladRad and Maggs for LeBron idea was genius, too. Why won’t the Warriors’ FO listen to me???
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jul 11, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Keep Morrow and let CJ walk
If Cj doesn’t get an offer we automatically keep him for the minimum, but if he does get an offer, we shouldnt match. We should let Bell play alot of backup PG and hope he does well to up his trade value or make him want to opt out for a longer deal for financial security.
If Bell opts out and we match morrow and finalize the Wright contract we will have only 43 million on the books. that means 13 million to spend on a FA with some very good SFs
Melo, Battier, Prince, Thornton, AK, Butler, Dudley, Pietrus, Hill and J-rich are all available.
Also if Biedrins isnt back to 08 form we can go after Landry, Oden, Pryzbilla, Hawes, Dalembert, Yao, Hayes, Nene, Chandler, Perkins, Noah and Horford
J-RICH!
J-Rich back in the bay would be epic.
As far as Morrow vs. CJ:
I think CJ and Curry work really well together. Morrow is just a 3 pt shot. It seems like we could get a cheap 3 pt shooter or have D.Wright or VladRad step up to the plate…. I hope….
I wonder
how much it will take to sign J Rich. He knows how much we love him here though, maybe, just maybe, he will want to be surrounded by that again. I wonder who would be the fan favorite between him and Curry. There are definitely sentimental reasons to bring J Rich back. Would have to be for the right price though. I was very unhappy the day we traded him.
J-Rich might work
The suns are gonna struggle, they might want to trade for youth or draft picks. J-Rich has turned into a great 3 pt shooter and he can play the 2 or the 3 spot. He’d be happy coming off the bench is my guess. He’d bring veteran leadership which would help us in the playoffs
Why Trade Monta???
Some of you are ALWAYS talking about trade Monta. No he isn’t perfect, but neither is LBJ, you, me or anyone else on earth! Last year should not be the year you judge Monta by. Why?
1. Returning year from a very stupid injury (be uptight about this, that’s reasonable); but he showed last year that it’s a good chance he recovered from the accident.
2. Bad vibes early in season because of Jack’s influence; feeling betrayed by Nellie and Riley. Remember they visited him in Memphis; TOLD HIM HE HAD TO BE THE POINT GUARD; sent an assistant coach to the South to work with him; he gets to camp mentally frustrated, and finds that he is not the point guard.
NOTE: After Jack left; his attitude began to change. See his interview with Fritz I think, at the end of last year. He talks about the change in his maturity since having a son and a wife. He talks about how good Curry is, and how amazed he was a Curry’s skill and leadership level. (By the way he has a very cute little boy.)
Monta does not run with the boys in the hood anymore, he is working to be a family man, and work on his craft. If he is traded it will be the Warriors lost!
Final: He and Curry were ranked what? as a back court twosome last season? He and Curry as partners scored from 50-70 points when playing together
Give them a full non-emotional healthy team year before calling for Monta to be traded!
Herp derp.
Because he turns the ball over way too much, he’s terrible defensively, and putting a bigger SG next to Curry makes this team better INSTANTLY. As we’ve proven the last 2 seasons, it’s hard to win scoring over 100 every night if you’re giving up over 100 every night.
'Like' my band. I mean, it'd be awesome if you did that.
Whether we call for a trade or not, Monta’s probably not long for this team. Riley’s not messin’ around.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Jul 11, 2010 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Some of you are ALWAYS talking about trade Monta. No he isn’t perfect, but neither is LBJ
Lebron is a whole lot closer to perfect on a basketball court than Monta.
NOTE: After Jack left; his attitude began to change.
Unfortunately, his actual performance didn’t change in the same manner that you claim his attitude did. He was a ball hog whose shot volume was too high and efficiency was too low and hurt the team repeatedly as a result. That didn’t change once Jax was gone.
what slapchop said...
yeah, he’s an exciting player and an explosive scorer who can drive to the hoop at will, but what is that when: 1) you don’t make the teammates around you better, 2) you don’t play D, and 3) you’re more about your stats and riding mopeds and making crazy shots to post on youtube than having that killer instinct to want to win.
Not hatin….just tellin it how it is.
We Believe!!!
yup
Also, I know there are problems with the +/- stat, but when Monta’s is -397 in 2646:36 minutes on the court while Curry’s is -184 in 2896:12, there is something to be said. Monta fills up the stat sheet, but it is not necessarily for the benefit of the team.
I support Monta
He had a rough year and his poor performance was related to several variables that I don’t think exist this coming season. There’s been enough roster re-shuffling to give Monta a more defined role than just “go and get em.”
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
Ode to Tim Kawakami
by Doctor Kajita on Jul 12, 2010 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Agree... can't name 5 better SGs
1 – his defense used to be weak, but he was our best defender last year. He’s stronger and smarter than he used to be, and his size is only a disadvantage against Kobe and a couple others who have top-level post games.
2 – don’t underestimate the positive benefit of a wife and kids on a man’s maturity and focus to his career (as opposed to getting @$$). Seriously.
3 – Monta and Curry will benefit from playing with a bigger lineup that provides weak-side shot blocking and rebounds. You can’t fast-break when you’re taking the ball out of the basket every possession. Note: Nelson still doesn’t understand this concept.
4 – his 3-ball was actually decent last year. His ball handling wasn’t too shabby. He has a complete game now. By the way, he was 11th overall in pts/48, and 3rd behind Kobe and Wade for SGs. Suck on that, haters
1. No, his defense still sucks. He’s shown that he has the ability to be a very good defender when he tries, however … but like so many other things with Monta, it’s hard to doubt his ability, but he just doesn’t turn that ability into consistent production.
2. Maybe. Maybe not. People grow up. Sometimes they get married. Sometimes those things correlate, sometimes they don’t.
3. Yes, Monta is a good player on the fast break. Yes, being a better-rebounding team should help us get more fast breaks. Yes, this should help Monta’s production.
4. No, actually, his three-point shooting was still a net negative. In fact, given how rarely players are fouled when taking three-point shots, it seems very likely that Monta taking 3-pt shots was LESS effective than shooting overall for him – and since his overall shooting was abysmal, you can’t call this a strength.
(His TS% was .517. 3/2*his 3pt% was .507.)
He HAS improved his 3-pt shooting, no question. But it’s still bad. It is still a weakness in his game, and its absurd that a player who shoots 3-pt shots so badly should shoot 3.6 a game.
11th overall in pts/48, and 3rd behind Kobe and Wade for SGs.
Tell me, where was he in missed shots/48?
Agree… can’t name 5 better SGs
Really? You can’t?
Kobe Bryant, Brandon Roy, Dwyane Wade, Joe Johnson, Ginobili, Ray Allen and Richardson were quite a bit better than him. You have to start getting into some rather absurdly stupid arguments to put his play last year as being anywhere close to anyone on that list. That’s 7. There are quite a few more that you have to start constructing arguments for why Monta is better, but at least the arguments don’t have to be ridiculous.
his 3-ball was actually decent last year.
Not if by ‘decent’ you mean ‘at least average by NBA standards. It was below average. His TS% on 3 point shots was worse than his TS% overall, meaning that every 3 pointer he took dragged his overall scoring efficiency down. He wasn’t decent on 3’s. He was pretty lousy, albeit better than he’d been in the past.
His ball handling wasn’t too shabby.
Not too good either.
By the way, he was 11th overall in pts/48
Meaning he chucked it a bunch. Points per minute without considering efficiency is a fundamentally flawed way of evaluating a player.
I take it that you don't pay attention to how many shots a player misses.
You do understand that missed shots hurt your team, right?
i take it everyone who thinks monta is not a good player has never played basketball competitively and is one of those nerds who looks at the box score at the end of the game to judge. He shot so many shots because he had no one on his team last year. why are people so blind to see that? He was on a team filled with d leaguers. Of course he is going to take a lot of shots, he had no one to give the ball to except steph…btw if you are so keen are numbers, he was 6th in the league in scoring behind superstars.
I was unaware Maggette and Curry weren't shooting much.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
or Morrow
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
so do you watch the games? or do you just look at the FG% after and base how good a player is on that? Monta carried this team every night, he might not have had the best percentage but he still was a leading scorer and led the team in minutes. Do you know how demanding it is to play the types of minutes he played and have the best defender D you up every single night? Stop talking about efficiency so much because that is not what basketball is all about. He was our star last year. He was constantly dropping 30 on tough defenders every night…Morrow could never do that
so do you watch the games? or do you just look at the FG% after and base how good a player is on that?
The typical “Do you even watch games?” claim. I was expecting this to pop up eventually after the “He has no help!” argument. It’s like there’s a formula to figuring out these guys.
Yes, we all watch the games. And quite frankly, what we see in the game correlates very well to what’s shown on the box score. The typical Monta statline consists of a ton of shot attempts with few makes, few assists, few rebounds, a couple steals, a ton of turnovers, and a bunch of empty points. Monta’s train-wreck play on the court as our “best player” shows exactly that, and it is a recipe for a losing season. His occasional good nights are the only things keeping him from looking even worse.
Do you know how demanding it is to play the types of minutes he played and have the best defender D you up every single night?
Good players won’t let the defender determine how well they play on a given night, so that’s a moot point. The fact that Monta consistently played poorly against good defenses (and sometimes even against terrible defenses) shows just how bad he was last season.
Stop talking about efficiency so much because that is not what basketball is all about.
Right. Only that besides efficiency, Monta’s been either average or below average in every category except points per game.
He was our star last year.
After last season’s debacle, I wish he wasn’t.
He was constantly dropping 30 on tough defenders every night…
No he wasn’t. Nobody dropped 30 every night last season. Durant was the closest, but only because he averaged 30 a game. Big difference.
I was technically just referring to the whole arguement that he was the only one shooting. I didn't say one thing about efficiency.
That being said though, I am a bit baffled as to why you think he is a star though. Even if I were to assume your premise that “Monta carried this team every night” and that it was very “demanding to play the type of minutes he played (this part by the way I agree with you on) and have the best defender D you every single night (this not so much)” I still don’t get how that makes him a star player. Your star player always goes up against the best defenders the other team throws out there. Plus, Ellis hasn’t been really known as a guy who distributes anyway even when his teammates are healthy.
I like the guy, just not at the price he is being paid and not with the ego. When he gets older, hopefully he will figure it out because I think he could be the best 6th man in the league.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not a huge Tyreke Evans fan
but man, I would have rather had rookie Tyreke than Monta last season. It’s not even close.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 12, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Stop talking about efficiency so much because that is not what basketball is all about.
It’s remarkably important. It’s a pity you’re so clueless on this point, but it seems consistent with the rest of your formulaic apologist presentation.
Where did i say its not important…anywhere? no. I said its not everything that basketball about and there are other factors. So do not infer, because now your argument is flawed
Efficiency is more important than PPG
but no one was trying to imply that scoring efficiency is the only thing. How about that he’s a below average rebounder, defender and turns the ball over at a very high rate?
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 12, 2010 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions
i take it everyone who thinks monta is not a good player has never played basketball competitively and is one of those nerds who looks at the box score at the end of the game to judge.
And I take it everyone who thinks Monta is a good player doesn’t give a crap about winning basketball and only gets off on watching ESPN highlight reel plays all day. See what I did there?
He shot so many shots because he had no one on his team last year. why are people so blind to see that? He was on a team filled with d leaguers. Of course he is going to take a lot of shots, he had no one to give the ball to except steph…
I wasn’t aware that Maggette and Morrow didn’t exist. And if what you say were to be true, keep in mind that he almost never looked to set up a shot for Curry, if he bothered to set up plays for people other than himself at all.
btw if you are so keen are numbers, he was 6th in the league in scoring behind superstars.
So what’s your point? The fact that he scores a lot makes him a superstar? Use of just PPG as a measure is the worst use of statistics in evaluating talent.
And I take it everyone who thinks Monta is a good player doesn’t give a crap about winning basketball and only gets off on watching ESPN highlight reel plays all day.
Umm im proud to say i either attended or watched every game on TV last year. Now try and ask yourself this…what team would ever have a winning record having 6 d leaguers on your team, a couple undrafted players, a rookie, and half your contract guys injured
I wasn’t aware that Maggette and Morrow didn’t exist. And if what you say were to be true, keep in mind that he almost never looked to set up a shot for Curry, if he bothered to set up plays for people other than himself at all.
Im going to laugh because this is funny to me. The same people that bash on Monta were bashing on Maggs, and now your using him in your argument? lol. Something else, Ammo is a one trick pony. He is not a scorer, he never will be, so dont try to use him as another scoring option.
So what’s your point? The fact that he scores a lot makes him a superstar? Use of just PPG as a measure is the worst use of statistics in evaluating talent.
Yeah scoring doesnt matter at all. Someone who is very efficient and averages 5 points a game is much more valuable then someone averaging 26. lol
Umm im proud to say i either attended or watched every game on TV last year
Good for you. Now learn to pay attention and notice the things that actually win games … like not missing shots.
hat team would ever have a winning record having 6 d leaguers on your team, a couple undrafted players, a rookie, and half your contract guys injured
Nobody is saying the team would have had a winning record without Monta. But you might have noticed that there was a lot of room for this team to be better and yet to still not have a winning record.
The same people that bash on Monta were bashing on Maggs, and now your using him in your argument?
People “bash” on Mags for very different things. THe truth is that Maggette is very good at one thing: scoring a lot of points on a reasonable number of shots. He is MUCH better than Monta at that. The reasons people “bashed” Mags had nothing to do with that.
Ammo is a one trick pony. He is not a scorer, he never will be, so dont try to use him as another scoring option.
Nobody has ever suggested that Morrow should attempt to emulate Monta’s game, or that he would perform as well as Monta performed if he tried to. This is another straw-man argument that keeps coming up in these games. There isn’t a single person on this board who has said that they want to see Morrow try to get 30 a night.
There are lots of people who have said they want to see Monta dish the ball to Morrow more consistently when Monta’s man doubles … now if you watched every game, like you say you did, then here’s something you saw A LOT of:
Morrow’s man sags off him to protect Morrow, Monta doesn’t pass the ball to Morrow, and instead takes a low-percentage, high-degree-of-difficulty shot.
And that’s losing basketball.
Umm im proud to say i either attended or watched every game on TV last year.
And what does this have to do with anything? I’m pretty sure most of the people who post here have done the same and then some.
Now try and ask yourself this…what team would ever have a winning record having 6 d leaguers on your team, a couple undrafted players, a rookie, and half your contract guys injured
The Blazers did very well despite having half of their guys (including Roy and most of their big men) and their coach lost to injuries at some point during the season. And they didn’t have the luxury of bringing in D-League bodies to stabilize their rotation because they didn’t have any expiring contracts to cut like we did.
Not saying the Warriors are as good as the Blazers, but Portland made due with what they had. It certainly helps that their best player is leagues better than our “best player.”
The same people that bash on Monta were bashing on Maggs, and now your using him in your argument? lol.
Where did I bash Maggette? People bash Maggette for different things, like his oversized contract and his tendency to slow ball movement. Monta is bashed because he just played poorly overall last season. Huge difference.
Something else, Ammo is a one trick pony. He is not a scorer, he never will be, so dont try to use him as another scoring option.
Ignoring that you’re wrong about Morrow being a “one-trick pony:” so you’re saying great shooting isn’t a “scoring option?” I guess people can only score points on layups and dunks then?
Nobody is saying that Morrow should shoot 20 shots a game, but he’s certainly available for a wide-open jumper whenever Monta gets double and triple-teamed. Instead of passing though, Monta decides to take a contested and high-difficulty shot and misses, or he turns the ball over for an easy layup on the other end.
Yeah scoring doesnt matter at all. Someone who is very efficient and averages 5 points a game is much more valuable then someone averaging 26. lol
You’re just pulling out strawman after strawman. Nobody says scoring doesn’t matter at all. The argument is that scoring needs efficiency, especially at a high volume, in order to help with winning basketball. Monta has high volume but terrible efficiency, and that’s why he’s a bad scorer.
Yeah scoring doesn’t matter at all.
That’s your strawman. It’s the sort of short-bus sarcastic rebuttal I’ve grown to expect. It tends to come wrapped with the standard “he had to score because no one else could” an argumen that comes wthout reference to the other players on the team who somehow managed to score without being low efficiency chuck-it-up artists for purposes of making the illogical argument look less moronic than it actually is. It comes with the obligatory, meaningless and baseless charge that anyone who actually understands how to use a number must never actually watch a game.
Scoring matters. Scoring inefficiently matters too, but it matters in the sense that it makes your team more likely to lose.
The great irony in your textbook anti-stats stance is that you inevitably wound up resorting to a statistic to try to show that Monta was playing well. I suspect that you don’t actually “just watch games” but you instead rely on what others tell you, much of which is fed to them by statistics. Unfortunately, it’s fed by a poor understanding of a limited cross section of statistics, one that those who, in addition to “watching games” take time to actually understand complexities, know to be flawed.
Ah, yes, the "no help" argument.
The funny thing is, if you watched the games you saw – repeatedly – Monta shoot over two or three opponents when he had wide open teammates.
That’s just bad basketball. It’s pretty when he makes the shot, but he doesn’t make the shot often enough for it to be winning basketball.
You say he was “constantly dropping 30 on tough defenders every night.” You either have selective memory or you’re engaging in hyperbole. He actually scored 30 or more points on 26 occasions. Slight difference.
Also I find it interesting that you don’t like people who count stats but you focus your argument on one statistic (points per game). Funny how that works.
You say he was "constantly dropping 30 on tough defenders every night." You either have selective memory or you’re engaging in hyperbole. He actually scored 30 or more points on 26 occasions. Slight difference.
yeah scoring over 30 points 26 out of 62 games is terrible. you should be doing it more since you are close to leading the league in minutes. Yeah you are coming off a serious injury a year ago, but you should be fine playing all 48 several times.
Also I find it interesting that you don’t like people who count stats but you focus your argument on one statistic (points per game). Funny how that works.
Stats are important, but thats only what all the monta haters look at. There are more factors than just that. PPG is kind of important, because last time i checked the team who scores more normally wins. But correct me if im wrong
Is scoring over 30 points 26 out of 62 games really all that great for a star shooting guard?
You do realize his defense competely and utterly negated his scoring right? I know his defense under Synergy was if not worst then second or third worst in the league. His offensive rating is not even that great and his defensive rating is dreadful, which combined often means the guy is an absolute sieve on the defensive end (I mean, Nate Robinson looks good compared to Monta). Oh and his +/- rating was pretty darn awful too.
Yeah those twenty six 30 point games don’t look all that impressive at all to me.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
His scoring utterly negated his scoring
he was so inefficient last season.
His offensive rating is not only “not great”, it’s not even good. It’s not even average, I think.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 12, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
LOL! Yeah I was trying to be polite about the offensive rate.
His scoring utterly negated his scoring
That kind of cracked me up
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah scoring over 30 points 26 out of 62 games is terrible. you should be doing it more since you are close to leading the league in minutes. Yeah you are coming off a serious injury a year ago, but you should be fine playing all 48 several times.
Hold on a second – are you agreeing that his performance was bad, because he played so many minutes? I mean, ultimately, the too-many-minutes argument (which I agree with, by the way, as being a problem) is an excuse for bad performance … but you don’t seem to agree his performance was bad. So I’m confused.
Stats are important, but thats only what all the monta haters look at.
Not at all. I’ve actually discussed, in a non-statistical way, what he did on the floor which was a problem. No statistics required. Taking a difficult shot when your opponent has an easier one is bad basketball. It’s bad basketball if you’re a d-leaguer, it’s bad basketball if your name is Michael Jordan.
But no, keep talking about how I’m only talking about statistics if that makes you happy.
is kind of important, because last time i checked the team who scores more normally wins. But correct me if im wrong
Are you familiar with the connection between missed shots and easy baskets for your opposition?
Just curious here.
I'm sorry but I have to ask
Stats are important, but thats only what all the monta haters look at
It seems that the only thing you have said supporting Monta is that he scored a lot of points. Everything else is just mearly an excuse for other people arguing he didn’t play well. You haven’t really said anything to back up Monta other than he scores points.
And by the way, if you are only going to defend the guy with a static, it is perfectly reasonable for other people to use statistics to show how hollow those points per game are. Don’t go around using a stat and then tell others they are basing their argument too much on stats.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Monta Haters
There are big holes in his game, but does anyone else think we should give him a full year to play with Steph and David Lee? I think he can adjust his game and become the kind of SG we need. He has proven that he can play defense if he wants/has the energy to do so. With this team he wont have to spend so much energy scoring so he will at least have the energy to play defense if he chooses to do so unlike last year when he averaged 41.4 minutes a game. He has also proven he can be an efficient scorer like in 07/08 where he shot .531% from the field. Also in 07/08 he only turned the ball over 2.1 times a game as opposed to 3.8. Lets get the ball out of his hands and let him do what he is good at.
Why people are giving up on him so quickly. Last year he had a rough year he didn’t have the supporting cast he had in 07/08 or the supporting cast he will have in 10/11. No one that we could acquire (except Danny Granger) has the potential to do what Monta can do. Now if he doesn’t start playing the defense we know he can and stays inefficient that is a different story. Lets give the kid a full year on a team with playoff potential and see if he can capitalize.
by Back2Believe on Jul 12, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions
You make valid points.
I think whether or not Monta is worth keeping depends on if you are right about this:
I think he can adjust his game and become the kind of SG we need.
I would go so far to say that if he does adjust his style and play smarter, then he absolutely, positively, can be a good contributor on a winning team because there’s no question that he has an elite-level ability to beat his man to the rim.
I’m more pessimistic than you are primarily because I don’t like what I’ve seen on his attitude. I don’t like his body language on the floor. I don’t like his public statements.
Monta looks, to me, like he thinks he’s the man, like he thinks his PPG is something praiseworthy, regardless of how he achieved it. He doesn’t appear, to me, to be a player who is capable of the proper self-assessment to figure out how to channel his immense talent into winning basketball, and I don’t think Nellie is willing to push him to do it.
I hope I’m wrong here. I would LOVE to be wrong here. Monta plays like he did in our 48-win season, that’s probably 5-7 more wins for the Warriors next season.
But I’m not optimistic.
This is much better.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions
He only 24. Give him a break. He has so much potential left. He can improve his passing, shooting, and defense. But someone else his same age can’t improve on some of his attributes, like speed quickness and finishing ability around the basket. Have you seen some of the shots he made? He has to be one of the people with most and 1’s last year. Being only 6’3, it amazes me how he has the touch around the basket with how fast he is getting there.
24 isn't that "only" age
he’s not 20. He could get better, and he probably will, but it’s not likely to be a night and day difference.
And no, I’m pretty damn sure that Monta didn’t have the most and 1s, or at least on a per-shot basis. I know that LeBron did for sure. Maggette and Dwyane Wade probably even had more.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 12, 2010 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m having fun reading dhod’s stuff if only because he epitomizes not just a few misconceptions, but he seems to embody all of them.
It's like he's been reading the site
and is making these posts on purpose.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 12, 2010 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions
haha
the funny thing is that you guys will never be in the FO of any organization hopefully. RIley’s most recent interview sounds like he has no intentions on dishing Monta. Guess the only guy that matter’s agrees with me about Monta. So go head and try to disagree but until he gets traded or something drastic happens you guys are the ones with the misconceptions.
drastic happens you guys are the ones with the misconceptions.
That’s not how it works. It would take quite a while to really explain it so I won’t bother. You wouldn’t listen anyway.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 12, 2010 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Why are you getting so worked up?
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 12, 2010 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Couple of points:
First of all, while I agree with you that he made some of the most amazing shots in the league last year, unfortunately, amazing shots still only count for two points. Amazing shots where you get the “and 1” only count for three.
As for his number of “and 1s” it’s funny to me that, after railing against the use of statistics, again you use a statistic but you use it in a sloppy manner.
Ellis shot 388 fta last season. THe lead leader: Kevin Durant with 840. To give you some perspective, Ellis had 1406 FGA, whereas Durant had 1668. Do a little math and you see that Durant earned a FTA for every 2 FGA, whereas Ellis earned a FTA for every 3.6 FGA.
Not even close. If you look at the stats some more, you’ll basically realize that, given how much he shoots, Monta is actually not very good at getting to the line. He’s 8th in FGA but only 28th in FTA.
This is a great example of why statistics are useful – because people are really bad at remembering things accurately. You’re practically exhibit A in this scenario. You think Monta is good at getting to the line. You, no doubt, remember a bunch of spectacular “and 1s” from last season, and I’m sure they all really happened.
But you don’t remember all the times he missed the shot and didn’t get the whistle. There were lots and lots and lots of them. Getting to the line is an important skill, and Monta isn’t very good at it.
i take it everyone who thinks monta is not a good player has never played basketball competitively and is one of those nerds who looks at the box score at the end of the game to judge.
You take it wrong.
btw if you are so keen are numbers, he was 6th in the league in scoring behind superstars.
I’m keen on understanding numbers. It is evidence that you are not.
there is absolutely Jason Richardson and Ray Allen are even close to Monta’s caliber
They are if you value things like playing basketball in a manner that is conducive to winning. If you’re a homer who is near totally clueless and hasn’t a half an iota of an inkling as to why being a more efficient player matters, then I guess I can see how you’ve be so blindingly confused and that Monta was better and feel that if you prefaced your statement that you were laughing your ass off would somehow hide your rather poor, hype-heavy understanding of the game. If you believe that playing in a manner that gives a team a better chance of winning matters, then there’s not any way you can intelligently say that Monta played better last year than either of those players.
im sure you think we’d do a hell of a lot better if we had ersan illyasova since his eff rating was higher lol
Is there a way to keep
morrow, wright AND CJ Watson, then dump (trade/release/kill) Charlie Bell? In order to still be under the cap, would it be possible to dump Chris Hunter and/or Anthony Tolliver?
=Gaucho=
This post makes me feel good.
I hope this happens. Morrow NEEDS to stay! CJ’s paid his dues but I wouldn’t be mad to see him go.
Type the words RUN TMC in Ebay!
Type the words RUN TMC in Ebay!
Type the words RUN TMC in Ebay!
Type the words RUN TMC in Ebay!
Pacquiao fans type MANNY CHANT in Ebay!
I guess I tend to think Morrow is as good as gone.
If that’s the case, we chose to get Wright at 3 years @11 million, and decided not to go after Morrow with 3 years @ 12 million. Riley knew the Lee trade would make him look effectual and now that he’ got his feet wet, he’s going to get cute on us. I think with AZ, we needed that 3 point shooting. So I’m not very enthused.
by War Years Legacy on Jul 12, 2010 1:56 PM PDT reply actions
Well, the reality is that Morrow isn't really a 3. He's undersized.
I want to see the team re-sign Morrow, but I think the team needs rebounding, defense, and length at the 3 more than it needs 3-pt shooting.
Here's a question
With Wright, Lee, and Biedrins as our front line, what’s the chance that Nellie allows them to regularly play together as a somewhat “normal” NBA front line? I mean, both Wright and Lee are decent and improving jump shooters (with Wright appropriately having a bit more range)… that should be sufficient to “spread the floor” like Nellie supposedly wants.
The only albatross there is Biedrins, but he’s earned minutes before. Do you think Nellie relegates him to the bench because Lee is a better P&R player? If so, Brandan doesn’t replace Biedrins, Reggie would.
Curry
Ellis
Williams
D. Wright
Lee
That’s our undersized lineup.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 12, 2010 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions
I hate this lineup with a passion.
We need to have at least 2 of these 3 players in at all times: Lee, Biedrins, Wright
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 12, 2010 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions
You just explained why I want Nellie fired.
I want to see Beans and Lee and D. Wright out there together.
Small lineups are great ways to exploit the situation when you’re overmatched at the big positions. It’s a great way to try to overcome a talent gap. But when you actually have the talent to match up – and we do, with Beans, Lee, and Wright, if Beans is healthy – then we should trust in our players ability to beat the opposition rather than try to out-gimmick them.
I want the new ownership to take over before training camp at least in part so they can jettison Nellie as a coach.
And I have every confidence that Nellie will do play those three together
With Randolph, or Brandan Wright… not so much. With David Lee and Andris? Yes, the talent is there. He hasn’t taken Andris off the floor because he can’t shoot jumpers before, I don’t see any reason for him to stop now. We have legitimate shooters at every position other than Center.
In the past, we’ve been easily overmatched at the big positions. In the past, we’ve always had to overcome a huge talent deficit down low. This year, with Lee & Biedrins, we have the talent to match up. We have an effective offensive player in Lee, and an efficient offensive player in Biedrins. Biedrins is certainly effective enough both from a scoring and an offensive rebounding side to keep his defender honest if Lee is running the P&R.
Trust me, learning english isn’t a waste of time. It is actually sort of useful.
-randolphforpresident
by Dubs fan in Boston on Jul 12, 2010 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the great thing about next season
is that going into it, it’s very clear who the starting 5 are.
Nellie is only half the problem
there is a really clear need for better strength and conditioning coaching, and training staff. I don’t understand why this hasn’t been addressed, because all the personnel changes in the world, no matter who they are, don’t mean squat if you’re out with injuries. So I’d put the current team needs at
Strength and Conditioning Coach
Head Coach
Backup Center
Trainer
3 point shooter
by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 12, 2010 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Beans health more than Nellie is what will dictate whether we small ball a lot next season.
Take my bags, not my top 3 pick!
"Winning is not enough. All others must lose." - Larry Ellison
by Badly Browned on Jul 14, 2010 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, Beans health meaning if he plays like healthy Beans from 08-09
Take my bags, not my top 3 pick!
"Winning is not enough. All others must lose." - Larry Ellison
by Badly Browned on Jul 14, 2010 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Golden State Of Mind
Related FanShots on Golden State Of Mind
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
