Latest Yahoo Warriors Team Report
by callahan on May 25, 2011 11:40 AM PDT
Email
PrintI've been away from this board, so excuse if already posted. Anyway, the Yahoo Team Report. My comments in bold.
Warriors Team Report
Yahoo! Sports 11 hours, 45 minutes ago
GETTING INSIDE
The Warriors hired Hall of Famer Jerry West to become an adviser in the franchise’s front office and a member of the executive board. Yahoo!
West will work with the basketball operations staff and report directly to Warriors owners Joe Lacob and Peter Guber.
West, 72, spent 18 seasons as the Lakers’ general manager and seven in Memphis’ front office. He is a two-time NBA executive of the year.
“We are elated to add Jerry West and his incredible list of credentials to our Executive Board,” Lacob said. “His accomplishments in this business as both a player and executive are almost beyond comprehension and certainly well-documented. He’s simply a winner and, quite honestly, you can never have too many of those in your organization.”
West is better known for his accolades on the court, where he was a 14-time All-Star with the Los Angeles Lakers and the inspiration for the NBA’s logo. He is one of only seven players in NBA history to play at least 14 seasons in the league and be selected as a member of the All-Star team every year.
The Warriors are in the process of looking for a coach to replace Keith Smart, whose contract was not renewed in April. Under Smart, the Warriors finished the 2010-11 season 36-46, improving their record by 10 games from the year before, but management felt the need to go in a different direction.
Larry Riley was retained as the Warriors’ general manager last month, and the team also hired former NBA agent Bob Myers to be the assistant general manager and Riley’s eventual successor.
• The Warriors haven’t offered their head-coaching position to anyone, but already three leading candidates have said no.
According to various news sources, longtime head coaches Jerry Sloan and Jeff Van Gundy and Spurs assistant Mike Budenholzer turned down Warriors requests to be interviewed for the position. Ouch on Jerry Sloan and I hear Budenholzer would have been a good pick.
They were far from the only three men contacted by Warriors co-owner Joe Lacob and general manager Larry Riley.
Even before the second round of the playoffs had ended, the Warriors had interviewed Lakers assistants Brian Shaw and Chuck Person, former Cavaliers head coach Mike Brown and two other current assistants, Lawrence Frank of the Celtics and Dwane Casey of the Mavericks.
The Warriors appear to be in competition for some of the candidates with other teams whose offseasons have begun with coaching vacancies.
Shaw, who grew up in the Oakland area, is considered a candidate to replace Phil Jackson in Los Angeles. Frank and Casey are said to be on the Rockets’ short list to replace Rick Adelman.
Hornets assistant Michael Malone is another name that has been linked to the Warriors’ search.
Season Highlight: The Warriors finished the season on an upbeat, beating the Mavericks, Trail Blazers and Lakers in consecutive games in April. But no doubt the most encouraging thing that occurred all season in fact didn’t happen during the season at all. When a group led by Joe Lacob acquired the Warriors from Chris Cohan last summer, Golden State fans began to believe again. Adding David Lee and Dorell Wright along the way helped in the rebirth as well.
Turning Point: As with the Season Highlight, this occurred in the offseason as well. When Stephen Curry sprained his ankle in the lead-up to the World Championships, Warriors fans held their collective breath. It appeared he would have time to make a full recovery before Opening Night, but Curry reinjured the ankle in the final preseason game, a precursor to having to sit out games in two stretches early in the season because of subsequent flare-ups. Curry’s minutes were limited most of the season and he never really recaptured his rookie season’s magic, which many attribute to an ankle that was never 100 percent. Speaks for itself.
NOTES, QUOTES
• Even though they had less than a one percent chance of winning the NBA Draft Lottery, the Warriors walked away a bit disappointed.
Why? Because the first two ping-pong balls to come out of the chute were 14-13, a starting combination the Warriors had on two “tickets.”
The final two balls were numbered 7-8, however. The Warriors’ tickets had numbers 9-8 and 10-8.
“One number away from getting the No. 1 pick. One number,” Warriors representative Joe Lacob muttered to Warriors.com. Ooooooh...
The Warriors wound up right where they began the evening—picking 11th.
• The Warriors are expected to think big on draft night, especially with the 11th pick in the draft. So early speculation on the selection focused on Lithuanians Donatas Motiejunas and Jonas Valanciunas, Kansas’ Marcus and Markleff Morris, Texas’ Tristan Thompson, Morehead State’s Kenneth Faried and The Congo’s Bismack Biyombo. I like Jonas V and then Donatas M in that order. Also, high on Kawhi Leonard. Pass on Kanter. Intrigued by Morris if they trade down.
The Warriors went big seven years ago with the 11th pick and the results were pretty good … a least for a while. Andris Biedrins, the No. 11 overall selection of the 2004 draft, blossomed into one of the most consistent big men in the league early in his career, but he has since slumped into one of the most disappointing.
The Warriors also had the 11th pick in 2003 and selected another foreigner who’s still in the league—guard Mickael Pietrus.
• The San Francisco Chronicle reported the Warriors’ new ownership will not be retaining director of athletic development Mark Grabow, strength and conditioning coach John Murray, director of scouting Scott Pruneau and scout Jim Mitchell.
The report noted that Troy Wenzel, who replaced longtime athletic trainer Tom Abdenour on an interim basis late in the season, will remain with the team.
Quote To Note: “Changes are taking place within the organization from top to bottom. We’ve talked at length about improvement and a new direction. Joe Lacob’s goal is to get every piece of this organization to be top-notch.”—General manager Larry Riley.
ROSTER REPORT
Most Valuable Player: Monta Ellis. The Warriors haven’t had an All-Star since 1997. In fact, they haven’t even been in the conversation much. The latter changed this season. Ellis, who ranked among the league leaders in scoring all season, was considered by many to have been snubbed when he was not selected to make the trip to Los Angeles. Ellis played 80 of the 82 games, scored 20 or more points more times than not, moved over to point guard when Stephen Curry was on the bench or injured, and was almost always called upon to take the big shots at crunch time. He not only had his best season, but also solidified his position as a foundation block in the Warriors’ future. Yup. I agree.
Most Disappointing Player: Stephen Curry. It would be easy to pick Andris Biedrins, who not all that long ago was deemed good enough to get a $54 million contract extension. But the big left-hander was just as ineffective last season, so at least his poor play could have been predicted. Curry wasn’t nearly as embarrassingly bad, but he certainly rated as a disappointment. Here’s how far the second-year guard fell: He entered the season as an untouchable in the team’s rebuilding effort; he ended it as the most likely player to be dealt in the club’s effort to find an upgrade for Biedrins. I would have picked Biedrins.
Biggest Needs: The Warriors fixed half their frontcourt problem with the addition of David Lee last offseason. He’s a top-flight rebounder who can step away from the basket and keep his defender honest. So now the Warriors need to solve the other half of the equation—finding a complement for Lee. That guy ideally would be a low-post scorer and low-post defender. The Warriors might have to trade Stephen Curry to get this guy, which in turn would make finding a guard complement for Monta Ellis their greatest need. Whether Curry is traded or not, drafting a backup point guard is a must. Trade Curry and not Monta. LOL. I'm not advocating trading Curry unless it's for Chris Paul or Deron Williams. I doubt Cleveland would give up #1 Kyrie for Curry. That said, I've stated build around Monta, Lee and Curry.
Free Agent Focus: The Warriors have their top four players (Monta Ellis, David Lee, Stephen Curry and Dorell Wright) locked up, and they’re stuck with Andris Biedrins, so their pending free agents aren’t big-name guys. Louis Amundson, a disappointment this season as a first-year Warrior, has a player option on a $2.4 million second season. It’s possible he’s as interested in leaving a bad situation as the Warriors are in erasing a signing mistake. It would be a surprise if both Reggie Williams and Al Thornton, a pair of free agent swingmen, are retained. With $49 million in guaranteed contracts, the club figures to be at least a small-time player in the free agent market, depending upon where the salary cap lands in the new Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Player Notes:
• F/C Ekpe Udoh didn’t exactly have a stellar rookie season, but that could be blamed on a thumb injury that cost him much of training camp and almost the entire first half of the season. Most people expect the Warriors to draft a big man with the 11th selection in June, but that might be considered a slap in the face to Udoh, last year’s lottery pick. The Warriors finished the year expecting Udoh to be their starting center of the future. With David Lee set at power forward, you might conclude a team that missed the playoffs by 10 games has greater needs than a backup big man.
• G Jeremy Lin was a great story coming out of the Warriors’ training camp. News that he had signed a two-year deal delighted most fans. But recently it has been reported that the second year of his contract is not guaranteed, rendering him to just another player at training camp this fall. I was rooting for him, but JL is gone next season if we can get a bench.
• G Acie Law has been the Warriors’ backup point guard at the end of each of the last two seasons despite never holding the position at the end of training camp. Considering that he’s a free agent again, it’s possible his status will be the same—not on the roster—come opening night next season. If the Warriors go big with their lottery pick in June, they might look for their backup point guard of the future with the No. 44 selection of the second round.
Medical Watch:
• G Stephen Curry (sprained right ankle) played the Warriors’ final 54 games, so obviously the injury wasn’t serious. Or at least Curry never told anybody it was. But he didn’t play nearly as well in 2010-11 as he had the previous season, after having injured the ankle in the offseason. After playing for the United States team in the World Championships last summer, what Curry needs now is a long vacation. That should assure his ankle is 100 percent for the start of training camp in October.
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!
145 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
i hope we can keep reggie williams..
and trade ellis and beans….
and aquire more players at the 2 and 5 spots.
and jeremy lin improves this offseason by leaps and bounds…
Um... West said he wanted size.
Reggie is 6’ 3.25," but he does have a 6’ 9.25" wing going for him. It depends on what the bench needs. He’s not a good defender, but can score a bunch and get to the line.
"Go ahead. Make my day."
Most Valuable Player: Monta Ellis. The Warriors haven’t had an All-Star since 1997. In fact, they haven’t even been in the conversation much. The latter changed this season. Ellis, who ranked among the league leaders in scoring all season, was considered by many to have been snubbed when he was not selected to make the trip to Los Angeles. Ellis played 80 of the 82 games, scored 20 or more points more times than not, moved over to point guard when Stephen Curry was on the bench or injured, and was almost always called upon to take the big shots at crunch time. He not only had his best season, but also solidified his position as a foundation block in the Warriors’ future. Yup. I agree.
this is laughable
That said, I’ve stated build around Monta, Lee and Curry.
once again…noooooooooooo
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 11:53 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Let me qualify that. That was last season and before Bob Myers and Jerry West came. West said we need size at two positions.
I have to guess he was talking about C and then SG, so Ellis could be up on the block. Of course, it would a surprise if Curry got dealt.
"Go ahead. Make my day."
West was talking about the center and guard position. However, in regards to the guard position, he did not make mention of having to move either Steph or Monta. He mentioned that the Warriors could bring in a player with size to add depth in the back court.
Big if, but could work, especially if your cutting Monta’s minutes and the player backing up is a strong defender.
Yup. Monta played too many minutes.
That was my thinking last season after finding out Ellis was still playing a lot of minutes under Smart, i.e. not Nelson. That said, the Warriors needed Monta in there.
I was thinking getting Ronnie Brewer last season, but he’s been a mixed bag.
"Go ahead. Make my day."
We needed Monta? Why? Reggie’s a more efficient scorer and has better length. He at least has the potential to be a decent defender, if he can utilize that properly.
I'm the soul brotha' like no other!
We did do better when Monta was not in the game than when he was in…..
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
you honestly cant say that we were better off with monta in clutch time
because he was literally ALWAYS in during clutch time. there are not enough minutes of clutch time that monta was not in to definitively determine that we were better off with him. your argument makes no sense and i don’t know where these “stats” are that support your statement
Well by that theory wouldn't we have a limited amount of time with him off and Reggie on?
Since Monta was nearly always out there?
"There is nothing like a wise phrase or quote to help convince others that your decision makes sense." - Anon
"If you're ever in a fair fight, then your tactics suck." ಠ_ಠ
monta didnt play every minute of every game, so there is some time when reggie is on and monta is off
but i would almost bet that monta played every single minute of clutch time, so there is absolutely nothing to compare
Well, a couple of points. First, not only does sample size matter, but also how large the coefficient is. Monta’s +/- coefficient is very largely negative. Second, Monta’s results from last year tell a similar story, which helps us increase our sample size. We’d still like a bigger sample, but I think we’re at the point where we can’t deny the negative overall affect he’s had.
by Missing Barry on May 31, 2011 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m legitimately curious what stats you’re referring to?
Honestly, I’ve never been a big fan of “clutch” stats, almost entirely for sample size reasons. If we had years and years of data to look at (like we do for Kobe, conveniently enough!), I could find them convincing….but looking at the limited data from a season or two where the sample size is legitimately tiny, especially when it contradicts what our much larger whole season sample is saying….I just don’t think it’s worth looking at. Heck, I can even identify multiple clutch shots Monta hit this past season that directly lead to us winning games (Kings, Pacers come to mind), and I’m not opposed at all to the idea he was clutch this past season. I’m extremely wary of the idea that it’s predictive of the future, though. Random variation – it happens.
by Missing Barry on May 31, 2011 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Calling Monta MVP and Curry most disappointing is insane.
It’s moronic.
Curry improved in most categories. The only way he was “disappointing” is if you had unreasonable expectations.
Monta didn’t have his best season. He was better than last season, but he was far, far better in Baron’s last year here. And the only way you don’t understand that is if you’re a slave to PPG.
by Ronaldinho on May 25, 2011 12:06 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
So you were watching the game where missed shots don't hurt the team?
Where ball movement – one of this team’s strengths, otherwise – didn’t stop dead when Monta took an early-in-the-shot-clock long two?
Where Monta didn’t drive into traffic, unsure of what to do with the ball once he got in the air?
Where defense didn’t affect the final score?
THose must have been fun games to watch.
by Ronaldinho on May 25, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Don't forget. Curry was benched by Smart in the 4Q.
It’s not just a few peoples’ opinion including mine that Curry wasn’t doing what he was supposed to.
"Go ahead. Make my day."
smart aint coming back either...
by PIRATEWARRIOR on May 25, 2011 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
True. But Jerry said he wouldn't mind keeping the backcourt despite his size, size comments.
I’d like to know who Jerry and Bob Myers think is the best player.
"Go ahead. Make my day."
My question to people who want both to stay is simple:
What’s your plan for making this team work defensively?
by Ronaldinho on May 25, 2011 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
what bojangles said
Lets get a proven Center first and see how well that improves our D before ruining what we have.
That being said if we get a good deal, I’m all for it.
to bad we cant just rent howard for a year to see if monta and curry can work together.
one day we shall have our center… one day…
by PIRATEWARRIOR on May 25, 2011 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow, that's brilliant
And way outside the box thinking. I like it.
It’s too bad teams can’t do a rental-trade, with option to make for keeps.
by supersugarCrisp on May 25, 2011 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
How many "proven" centers are there?
Look, on one hand, I agree with you. If you’re going to keep Monta, you need a frontcourt that’s full of great help defenders.
Because Monta is basically so bad defensively that you can’t put him out there without substantial backup. (And even then, you’re creating problems because the help defenders are going to have to leave their men, a lot … which opens up a lot for the defense).
Since there are very few great help defenders who are also strong offensive players at the big positions (Howard … McGee … Bynum who else?) you’re saying that you want to build an offense around Monta.
And even if you think Monta is good, do you really think he’s good enough to build an offense around? Haven’t the last two seasons shown us that Monta ISN’T good enough to build an offense around?
Sure, if we got Dwight Howard, that’d be great. But when your plan for keeping Monta requires getting the second best player in the league, it might not be the most realistic plan.
Ultimately, I’ve come to the conclusion that Monta and Lee can’t coexist, no matter who the other big man is. The problem is that Lee – who’s a below-average man defender – is an absolutely horrid help defender. And Monta needs to be protected by strong help defenders at all times.
But we also know that, look, even when you’ve got great help defenders, it’s better when you’re not asking those help defenders to constantly cover for other players. The problem with the “see what happens” approach is that we already know. We know that it’s impossible to be a good defensive team when you’re constantly giving up penetration from the wings. So to cover Monta, we bring in a bunch of strong defending bigs … limiting out offense and still not turning us into a great defensive team.
It requires a fairly large dose of fairy dust to imagine that’s a winning strategy.
McGee a good defender????
lol
"I ain't havin it!"
good HELP defender.
not good defender. there is a difference
You're right, misread it.
But I still dont believe he’s as great of a help defender as much as a person who loves going for/getting blocks (when unsuccessful leaving his man wide open for a dunk)
"I ain't havin it!"
You may be right.
Nor do I think he’s a great offensive player.
My point is simply – the kind of guys you need to surround Monta with defensively, who also have some reasonable offensive skillset, are pretty few and far between.
That’s a problem if you want to keep Monta.
What do we have, though? A team that we hope can improve enough to maybe be in competition for the 8th seed? A team with 3 legitimate defensive liabilities forming its core (with two of those liabilities being really, really bad)? We have serious defensive issues as we’re currently assembled. One good defender can’t solve it by himself.
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah we need some above average defense from the front court to make up for monta and curry getting broke all the time. and I think dubs need at least one defensive specialist at the guard position. If theres no improvement, then i say trade Monta for somebody like iggy or with the same value(if not more). Id rather trade Monta than Curry. Curry’s shooting is too unique and is something to build around. His vision is also way better.
I think you could be “disappointed” without having unreasonable expectations. Curry played really well at the end of his rookie season. It’s not unreasonable to expect his development to continue. I think I’m a little disappointed by it, but honestly, I put the blame squarely on Keith Smart. And of course, Biedrins playing like the worst playing in the league was far, far, far more disappointing.
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Monta is a beast.
All this losing is just getting to Warriors fans’ head causing them to use Monta as a scapegoat for all their problems.
Keep Monta unless we can trade him for an All-Star big man (highly unlikely, though, so just keep him). None of that “Monta for OJ Mayo” crap.
by Precise Films Productions on May 25, 2011 12:48 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
i would trade monta for mayo right now
i really would. hes that bad defensively and mayo has a much better contract
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’d rather have expirings than Mayo, to be honest. Mayo kind of sucks.
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
and isnt he on a team option?
so he technically could be an expiring contract.
Well, it’s also that the team is a lot better when Monta is on the bench than when he’s in the game….
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
lets not forget MONTA IS AWESOME for a team such as minnesota or philidelphia,
he just doesnt fit our system or personnel, but on another team can reach his all star caliber self! im gonna be happy for whatever team finally gives us something decent in return and i will root for monta to “light it up” for them. hopefully he fits well with the personell there and is more efficient
by PIRATEWARRIOR on May 25, 2011 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait, how does he fit on other teams better than us? We put him on a fast pace team where he got to dominate the ball whenever he wanted, surrounded by talented offensive players. What more could you possible ask for?
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions
We put him on a fast pace team where he got to dominate the ball whenever he wanted,
i.e. we gave him enough rope to hang himself.
A team with a better fit for Monta would have at least one All Star level player who is clearly more the “alpha” on the team than monta, and a pg/offense that is not obligated to feed the Monta machine.
by WestCoastWarrior on May 25, 2011 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree, though I’d change it slightly to say they need a star player who’s also the primary ballhandler. But anyways, I guess I’m still wondering how teams like Minnesota and Philadelphia fit that bill?
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions
i was just eyeing iggy and eyeing the #2 pick lol...
once they pick him up i would actually kinda laugh because now they are stuck with him.. i think we should create a monta super thread to promote his trade value and we only say nice things about him… like evans “positive spin”
by PIRATEWARRIOR on May 26, 2011 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions
lol
The Warriors should pay us, if we do that. I’d have to get paid, honestly. I couldn’t stomach promoting such an awful defender and a historically selfish player.
I'm the soul brotha' like no other!
YES... yes the money would make it palatable.
we could even create false log in names and infiltrate minny and phillys blog sites demanding the trade and why… heheh haha muhahaahaha im feeling very evil.
by PIRATEWARRIOR on May 27, 2011 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
All this losing is just getting to Warriors fans’ head causing them to use Monta as a scapegoat for all their problems.
Alternatively, all this losing may be making Warriors fans realize that good teams tend to be built around players who score efficiently and rebound and defend their positions adequately.
As exciting and inspiring and competitive as Monta is, he fails on all three of these counts.
Jerry West, whose mind is clearly not addled from losing, put it beautifully:
Monta Ellis, a fierce competitor. He competes his fanny off every night. Love to watch him to play. But to me, size helps. Size helps."
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on May 25, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
My respect for Yahoo
has gone down after reading their take on Monta and Curry. Or at least the writer who wrote that.
Wow, is it really possible for modern sports writers to be that oblivious? Do they not notice:
1. The overvaluation of PPG?
2. Their own setting Curry up for looking bad in their eyes by expecting his end of last year stats to match this years? Despite how open run and gun he was playing with D leaguers under Nelson vs how Smart yanked him around (foolishly, not due to Curry…he isn’t stupid, he knows he turns it over too much and is growing on the job.)
3. That all the advanced stats disagree with them, strongly.
Never ceases to amaze.
by supersugarCrisp on May 25, 2011 2:53 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
two of Yahoo's principal hoops scribes
are Spears and Wojnaroski, but no one is accredited with this piece. It sounds like it was cobbled together with advice from the GS marketing department, for whom Ellis would indeed be the most valuable, and Curry the most disappointing because he didn’t elevate his hype-ability from his rookie season. There were other opinions that sounded like they were pitched to the average, casual fan. like the suggestion they might need to trade Curry rather than Ellis, and that Udoh looks like the center heir-apparent, with a back-up on the shopping list (? would anyone who knows the team really believe that?), and that’s what marketing departments strive for.
An argument could be made that Lee is the team’s most valuable guy, with his salary and status as an articulate, team first , vet to whom the players will listen, and he was also the most disappointing, because of his limited impact on the team’s performance (combination of his injury and how Smart preferred to misuse him). If ‘most valuable’ is based on effectiveness in helping the team win, neither Ellis nor Lee qualify, of course.
Music is the Healing Force of the Universe (a.ayler)
/Close tab
Most Valuable Player: Monta Ellis. The Warriors haven’t had an All-Star since 1997. In fact, they haven’t even been in the conversation much. The latter changed this season. Ellis, who ranked among the league leaders in scoring all season, was considered by many to have been snubbed when he was not selected to make the trip to Los Angeles. Ellis played 80 of the 82 games, scored 20 or more points more times than not, moved over to point guard when Stephen Curry was on the bench or injured, and was almost always called upon to take the big shots at crunch time. He not only had his best season, but also solidified his position as a foundation block in the Warriors’ future. Yup. I agree.
Most Disappointing Player: Stephen Curry. It would be easy to pick Andris Biedrins, who not all that long ago was deemed good enough to get a $54 million contract extension. But the big left-hander was just as ineffective last season, so at least his poor play could have been predicted. Curry wasn’t nearly as embarrassingly bad, but he certainly rated as a disappointment. Here’s how far the second-year guard fell: He entered the season as an untouchable in the team’s rebuilding effort; he ended it as the most likely player to be dealt in the club’s effort to find an upgrade for Biedrins.
"If you meet the Buddha in the lane, feed him the ball." - Phil Jackson
by GovernorStephCurry on May 25, 2011 3:00 PM PDT reply actions
Hope this is the way the rest of the league feels
Higher trade value for Monta, and less compitetion for Curry’s “services.”
by WestCoastWarrior on May 25, 2011 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yes please
At least if a key few feel somewhat this way things can be done.
by supersugarCrisp on May 25, 2011 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
sigh
that’s too sad
_______________________________________________________________
The City: A Golden State Warriors-Centric NBA Blog
"It’s not all about stats…you’ve probably never played basketball in your life. There are things called intangibles. He is what you call a winner. Led his team to a national title. We need people who know how to win. He obviously has to be doing something right." (dhod)
"When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in your thoughts advanced to the state of science." (Lord Kelvin)
Enough with this Monta BASHING! im sick of this and cant hold my tongue anymore
You guys are absolutely ridiculous, his jacking up 40 shots a game habit died before last season, people wont listen. At this point Monta is the better player I DONT GIVE A SHIT WHAT YOU SAY, im not just talking about points per game or scoring but steals and assists, check curry’s assist numbers and Monta’s and see how they compare. Im sick of the Curry’s better because he gets more assists, not really. And im sick of this Monta’s so horrible at defense, who beats Monta, the other teams best player, who beats Curry, the other teams SLOWASS POINTGUARD!! CURRY is the worse defender of the 2 and if you argue that Id rather a blind man give me driving lessons over you because your sight must be beyond HORRIBLE! At least Monta can guard 1’s and struggles versus 2’s, CURRY CANT GUARD 1’s or 2’s!! And if you’re gonna bring up the Rose game, MONTA GUARDED ROSE THE ENTIRE NIGHT! TRUST ME I WAS THERE! All Curry did was get his ass handed to him left and right by Nash when we played Phoenix, so monta guards Derrick Rose and stops him and Curry can stay in front of a 40 year old white boy whose slow and cant jump…oh curry’s a better defender by far, you guys are ridiculous! And to whatever idiot that put great teams win with efficient scorers?? HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA u deserve your own show on comedy central!!! Durant .462 FG .350 3PT, Kobe .451 FG .323 3PT, Derrick Rose .445 FG .332 3PT, Westbrook .442 FG .330 3PT, MONTA .451 FG .361 3PT Granger .425 FG .386 3PT, IGUODALA (WHO YOU ALL LOVE!) .445 FG .337 3 PT. YOU GUYS WHO HATE MONTA LOVE STATS! WELL THERE YOU GO! you say we are in love with PPG no we arent but we understand that TS% doesnt win games like you guys love!! they dont average out your teams TS% at the end of the game and whoever had the highest average wins! no! ITS WHO HAS MORE POINTS ON THE SCOREBOARD!!! You all are too in love with your TS% shit, I could take 800 shots and only make 45 and end up with 110 points while you take 90 shots and make 44 and end up with 108 points but tell me who wins that game? ME!! so stop with your efficiency shit! this is reality ! Monta is the better player, I dont hate Curry and do want to see the two of them with a legitimate center or a bench since theyre so dynamic together but if one HAS to go it should be Curry. Not in favor of trading either tho, just sick of this Monta BASHING! if you hate him so much, you cant cheer when he scores and if we win by less than the 26 points a game he scores, you CANT CHEER! stop hating!!
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 4:41 PM PDT reply actions
check curry’s assist numbers and Monta’s and see how they compare.
Curry’s are better.
And im sick of this Monta’s so horrible at defense, who beats Monta, the other teams best player, who beats Curry, the other teams SLOWASS POINTGUARD
Actually, if you actually watched the game you saw that, after about November, Curry consistently guarded the other team’s point guard, whether or not that player was better than the shooting guard.
Paul. D-Will. Guarded by Curry. This idea that Curry only guarded scrubs may have been true last year, but the team has protected him less and less in that way as he’s gained experience.
Durant .462 FG .350 3PT, Kobe .451 FG .323 3PT, Derrick Rose .445 FG .332 3PT, Westbrook .442 FG .330 3PT, MONTA .451 FG .361 3PT Granger .425 FG .386 3PT, IGUODALA (WHO YOU ALL LOVE!) .445 FG .337 3 PT. YOU GUYS WHO HATE MONTA LOVE STATS! WELL THERE YOU GO!
Curious if you have the brainpower to understand why FG% is the wrong measure to use, here?
I could take 800 shots and only make 45 and end up with 110 points while you take 90 shots and make 44 and end up with 108 points but tell me who wins that game?
Certainly. But for you to get 16x as many shots as the other team would be impressive. It’s great that Monta’s so good at generating possessions that he makes up for his missess …
oh, wait, he doesn’t. Monta’s BAD at generating possessions because he’s a crappy rebounder.
So, yes, I’ll grant you have a point here: if you are so good at generating possessions that you can take 16x as many shots as your opponent, then your efficiency does not matter very much.
Now if you could explain how that applies to Monta …
by Ronaldinho on May 25, 2011 4:48 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
Curious if you have the brainpower to understand why FG% is the wrong measure to use, here?
Maybe you can explain it simply and clearly.
by WestCoastWarrior on May 25, 2011 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions
every player he named outside of iguodala
shoots more fts than monta at a higher percentage
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
And its Monta's fault he doesnt get calls like we all complain about game in and game out
Yeah okay, and if monta’s that bad, IGGYS WORSE! and you want him?? HYPOCRITS!
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions
oh hey he learned how to hit the reply button
once again, iguodala plays defense
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
dont try to talk down to me lol but its okay I know curry fans get sensitive
So tell me this…he plays such great defense and helps his team win, why does nobody want him there anymore? You can try to say it’s the same with Monta but that’s because you all are busy riding curry’s nuts, who is Iggy competing with? nobody and they still dont want him!
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Curry is better. His stats are way better.
I'm the soul brotha' like no other!
by Naticus on May 25, 2011 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
They don’t want the contract, not the player. Sixes have a lot of money tied up in iggy and brand and a lot of holes to fill.
I don’t see anyone wanting to take on brand’s contract, so their best option is to trade iguadola to help fill those holes. Doesn’t take away from the fact that he is a better defender than monta and with what we lose in scoring, we should be giving up less as well.
by ajtrinc on May 26, 2011 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
So FTs are how we evaluate to keep someone or trade them?
by WestCoastWarrior on May 26, 2011 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions
They are a part of how you evaluate whether to keep someone or trade them.
Why would you ignore them?
FTs are the easiest points in the game. For all but a small handful of players, you expect to score far more points from a pair of shots from the charity stripe than you do from a regular FGA.
Getting foul shots is a basketball skill that correlates a lot with winning. It’s not the only skill – and nobody’s looking at it in a void.
But to ignore it seems strange.
OK, they are a part of how you evaluate whether to keep someone or trade them
So how much importance do they have compared to other measures?
by WestCoastWarrior on May 26, 2011 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions
It's a component of shooting efficiency.
When you look at how well someone shoots the ball, you average it in to the equation to get a sense of how many possessions they take to score their points.
The generally accepted number for the relative important of a FTA is that it’s .44 of a FGA. You use that on the denominator with points scored in the numerator.
.44 is used because, just like a FGA ends a possession, a pair of FTs do, too, but you have to adjust for “and 1’s” where a player gets a free throw without using up an additional possession.
Got it
So a FTA is 0.44 as important as a FGA.
Does that mean a pair of FTAs are 0.88 (0.44+0.44) as important as a FGA, 0.1936 as important (0.44×0.44), or some other number?
by WestCoastWarrior on May 26, 2011 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
.88.
But remember, what you care about is the total number.
FTAs are important because they’re easy shots.
eg, let’s hypothesize that you have two players who shoot 80% on FTs, 45% on two-point FGAs, and 35% on 3-pg FGAs.
If he ends a possession by drawing a shooting foul, you expect him to score 1.6 pts, on average. If he ends it with a 2-pt shot, he’ll score .9 pts, on average, and if he ends with a 3-pt shot, he’ll score 1.05 points, on average.
When you look at it like that, is becomes pretty clear why getting to the foul line is a really valuable skill.
And you’ll notice that the relative value of FTAs is high even if you’re a really FG% player and a really bad FT% player – if you shoot 55% from the field (which is great) and 60% from the line (which is bad) you’re still better off getting FTAs.
Spinning this back to Monta – Monta is a high FG% player, for a two-guard. He’s one of the better ones. The problem is that he doesn’t get those “easy” points that better offensive players do, so despite the fact that he may be better than them at finishing without a whistle, the overall effect is that he’s a below-average-efficiency player.
let’s hypothesize that you have two players who shoot 80% on FTs, 45% on two-point FGAs, and 35% on 3-pg FGAs.
If he ends a possession by drawing a shooting foul, you expect him to score 1.6 pts, on average. If he ends it with a 2-pt shot, he’ll score .9 pts, on average, and if he ends with a 3-pt shot, he’ll score 1.05 points, on average.
in case you got lost here with the part about the 2 players, i think basically what hes trying to say is that if 2 people shoot the exact same percentages for fg%, 3%, and ft%, the one who gets to a line much more often is the much more efficient one
Ha. Sorry. Changed what I wanted to say halfway through, didn't clean it up.
But it’s worth potinting out how you can be worse at FG%, FT%, and 3-pt% … and still be a more efficient scorer if you get more FTs.
he is right though
if you had a big man capable of rebounding every single one of his misses, he could be as inefficient as he wants and still score more points
Did you check 82games.com and clutch stats?
Then there are the stats that don’t show up like which player the other teams key on.
"Go ahead. Make my day."
all those "clutch" stats tell me
is that monta hogs the ball during close games with less than 5 minutes left.
I could take 800 shots and only make 45 and end up with 110 points while you take 90 shots and make 44 and end up with 108 points but tell me who wins that game? ME!! so stop with your efficiency shit! this is reality !
How in the hell are you getting 800 possessions while we get 90? The only way this argument would make sense is if the Warriors got 9x more possessions per game than the opposing team, which is completely unreasonable. Troll
Wanna feel real torture? Try being a Warrior fan.
I could take 800 shots and only make 45 and end up with 110 points while you take 90 shots and make 44 and end up with 108 points but tell me who wins that game?
Interesting. I think we might have to go back to the very basics of basketball here, as it doesn’t appear everyone’s aware of what happens in the game. So when one team shoots and makes a shot, the other team gets the ball. Very important thing to keep in mind. When they miss, the other team gets the rebound the majority of the time. So if you play a game where you take 800 shots (impressive endurance), the other team is going to end up with the ball after most of those shots. They will also get somewhere in the vicinity of 800 shots. So when two teams take a similar number of shots…..well, yeah, TS% matters. If you could get the NBA to change their rules to make it, take it….well, TS% might start to matter less.
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not kidding. I laughed pretty hard, thanks man.
"If you meet the Buddha in the lane, feed him the ball." - Phil Jackson
by GovernorStephCurry on May 25, 2011 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
"and Curry can stay in front of a 40 year old white boy whose slow and cant jump…"
I do notice how casually you use the phrase “white boy.” Derogatorily.
I notice nobody else even flinching, we’re all, whatever color we are, so used to the use of this derogatory term being thrown around like this. (White guys too, use it, as if doing so makes them cool, even though they know it’s tinged, or more, with straight up racism.)
I’m used to it (mid 40s, raised in Berkeley, messed with while being called this with much venom all my young life and some during my older life.) But i cannot help notice the double standard.
If any other “group” was talked about like how white boy is tossed around, and done so with dissing etc in the users mind/heart, then it would be called out and the person using it would be ripped and torn down, at the least.
How much longer folks? How much longer do people who aren’t white guys need to freely use this derogatory term against white guys as a “leveler” to the beyond F’ed up HIStory of this racist, yes still, nation?
Does it make you feel better? Do you see the double standard yourself too, but just don’t care? See it as one little thing you can do to make white guys feel what, to a small degree, you go through, or used to (often not even you, you’re just keeping the vibe alive?)
The fact is most white guys around places like the Bay Area are beyond aware of their built in white privilege, have been so psychologically put through coming to terms with it that they bend over backwards in ways that go beyond what you’d ever know. It’s not a healthy place to be, a modern white guy. You have no idea the weird psychology of it, today, in liberal areas such as this. Everybody else, including white women, can lay some legit claim to being a victim of racist/sexist ameriKa. So white guys are in a unique mentality. We’re the one “group” that everyone can agree needs to be taught a lesson, ripped a bit without care, torn down, challenged, the one group everyone can agree they in unison need to keep in check.
Oh, it’s so great being white today, thanks old white dudes (and current non white dudes who can’t see this shit.)
I’ve said it before, i’ll say it now: White guys of today are paying the karmic price for what other white guys did for hundreds of years. We did nothing but live with the legacy of hatred, revenge, etc etc etc, from a deep subconscious level to acts of violence and hatred…and including the constant social hypocrisy, such as the use of white boy at us.
The institutional racism that this country was built on, is today balanced to some degree by the social racism against “white boys,” especially, ironically, in places where white guys are more aware, like the Bay Area. Profiled as a profiler is common, and the person profiling you as a profiler doesn’t have the training white boys do for catching themselves and teaching themselves when they’re wrong. And that’s because it’s easy to say to yourself "well, even if i’m wrong, this white boy needs to learn, or “F this white boy,” or etc etc etc, history.
Take that shit to the white boys who DESERVE that kind of crap, the unaware white boys from truly racist backgrounds, not white guys on a hoops forum, from an ultra liberal, aware (even if often hypocritical) Bay Area.
It’s a small thing, but it’s really offensive, and it’s time brothers from non white mothers stopped the easy use of it. Just because many younger white guys use it too, and will tell me/you i’m out of line for caring, it’s no big deal, doesn’t mean it is healthy if we’re all trying to live together.
It’s a way for racists who can’t be racist (‘cause they’re not white.and yes, this guy who used it, i wouldn’t be surprised if he’s white) to be racist because the bigger picture still sees white privilege, racism and a largely unaware of these realities white population (but not here, or not here nearly as much as most of “white america.”)
I’m tired of it. Grow up. Realize hateful talk reflects hateful thinking. To use white boy so freely, without anybody ever calling those who use it so freely out….it’s time we all grow up and stop, it’s not cool anymore.
by supersugarCrisp on May 25, 2011 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions 7 recs
Interesting food for thought....
I can see where the phrase is being used in a derogatory manner, especially in a basketball reference where a white player is assumed to be inferior because of his skin color.
Can’t really say it is hateful talk, but it is a lazy way to refer to someone that automatically stereotypes a group of people.
So I do applaud your effort to try and make others refrain from using that term as I’m sure those who have read your post will think twice before using that term again.
This
is easily the most interesting comment in this fanpost.
by WestCoastWarrior on May 26, 2011 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions
You are trying to fight hate with hate.
I think your negative anti racism passion feeds the problem. How can there be diversity without racism? Racists are needed to even have races. If human beings lost the ability to distinguish races there could be only one race. And if you are anti diversity then you share the worst trait associated with racists (hate of other races). See how it becomes a silly circular problem. It is the negative factors associated with racism, like crime, that should be condemned. In this case the crime is the ridiculous assumption that Nash is easy to guard by anybody.
With all due respect, I am a Analyst Hall of Fame candidate. If you are offended by my comment, I did write "With all due respect".
by KillaContract on May 26, 2011 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions
With all due respect
Ironically, i find the common use of white boy, so freely and obviously with dissing at the least intended, to be fighting hate with hate, in a very real sense.
You’re inadvertently asking more, intellectually, from white guys. You’re insulting the intelligence of minorities.
How? You want one group to be “bigger than that.” You expect white guys to just sit and take it, take the hate, the anger, the hypocrisy…in the name of? The bigger picture?
Yes, there are bad, average and amazing of all races. Yes racism will always sadly be with us. But if you’re white it’s seen where it’s not there, or there in no way different than the average human being of any race. If you’re not white, you don’t even know the ways you’re covered in this realm by not being of the “dominant culture.” (Think of the minorities can’t be racist claim.) Think about the vast numbers of black men who are over the top homophobic (the numbers on this are clear.) You cannot be white and hold those views without being called on it. Black guys are often hypocritical in this realm, but are never called on it (learn) because we just don’t ask as much in the learning of ones own inner biases from folks who aren’t white men.
There have been controlled studies done that show white people just “take it” when it comes to random racism on the street. Whole groups where every other group reported the racism, but white groups wouldn’t say it due to fear and training to just take it/think somehow taking it equals being “down.”
I would also point out to you, that on a social level, this points to it likely being true that due to the realities we speak of, white people are actually more aware and more checking of themselves for what they’re thinking about “others” than minorities are, who’ve more focused, rightfully so, on perceived and real racism against them.
None of us asked to be born. We were all born sweet (most of us) innocent babies, who if taken up and moved/adopted into another family, culture or whatever, would be like that family, that culture. We take on the cultural realities of our times, and that means if you’re anything but a white man (because white women like to think of themselves, not all, as also kept down by the man) you exist in a psychological reality that is of the fighter of these injustices, the teacher to those who need to learn what that deep wrong really is and how it manifests itself. If you’re a white man of our times, you are at the receiving end of a myriad of legit gripes that have real time meaning for most folks, and that you do get some sort of privilege for, but never were the source of, never asked for. And you always just take it, because that’s all we can do, take it, learn, listen, shut up.
All i’m saying is on this one issue, the clearly derogatory use of white boy, and how rampant it is now in our culture, we are insulting everyone of every race to not clearly look at this use of language and not point out the hypocrisy or better yet, stop using it.
by supersugarCrisp on May 27, 2011 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions
By the way
I do notice/have empathy for how confusing and maddening it must be for minorities to have to deal with never knowing for sure, in many cases, whether they’re receiving real racism or it’s just perceived. Even just having to go through that bullshit (on street, in bank, getting an interview or not…AND in your own head) is totally uncool, and something i can’t likely understand. I’ve lived in Hawaii (not Honolulu) where i did experience that a bit. Hey, i’m just saying “a bit” so don’t overreact to that one point.
If anyone wants to really get into it, go ahead and email me. (A good starting point for other white guys is to read up on some Tim Wise. He’s good for non white guys to read too.)
Point is, i think good, aware white guys like myself, of my place, family, community and time, are more aware of “others’” issues with race than anyone even starts to be of ours. And what’s more i GET THAT, understand why of course that’s so. But we should have evolved now to the point where at least every now and then some particularly easy to point out cases of hypocrisy and hateful speech can be pointed out by a white guy and heard, like we have done so for others all our lives, to a level you couldn’t understand just like we can’t understand what you go through.
Hence the unique psychology i speak of for today’s white guys. Most/all humans throughout time have concerned themselves with their issues, their perspective, fought for themselves, used advantages they had without guilt or even noticing it. Only today’s white guys in history have so, in their own minds, “given ground” to everyone else’s concerns, given up their own advantage, in their own lives, minds and in law. And we want to. Get that? We want things to be equal, or as much so as possible. But while we’ve done that, we get in return, often, what those past white guys rued. It’s a weird place to be and all i’m asking is that you be open to it’s possible legitimacy, to hear my concern without criticism and using it as a teaching moment for your take on race.
by supersugarCrisp on May 27, 2011 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Considering the word [i]boy[/i] was/is used as a derogatory term toward black men, it seems especially low. I have to agree with you in your opposition to use of the term. It’s really an ugly thing to say.
I'm the soul brotha' like no other!
One more thing
Nobody seems to mention that Curry played all year with a seriously bum ankle.
We’re making all these comparisons, but Curry was not at 100%, ever, this season.
He’s learning PG, already incredibly efficient (as his TOs get less even moreso,) and with health and experience to go with his skill set and good for PG size, the arguments for him regarding him and Monta get even better.
by supersugarCrisp on May 27, 2011 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions
*curry cant stay in front of a 40 year old nash
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 4:43 PM PDT reply actions
Woah dude...seems like a problem for everyone.
"If you meet the Buddha in the lane, feed him the ball." - Phil Jackson
by GovernorStephCurry on May 25, 2011 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Why do you think a 40 year old Nash is still in the game
because he’s beasting EVERYONE not just Curry pick your fights and use the right ammo
'Oh low' 'I think it's pronounced hello'
Patatoe tomato patatoe tomato
Minion Code get the car
Ammo!
I miss him =(
Wanna feel real torture? Try being a Warrior fan.
Also curry 3.9 RPG monta 3.5 RPG
Oh curry’s such a superior rebounder!
Now im sure ur gonna throw some khgiushrt% and shtilht% proving that curry is better or whatever but the way you try to say we are blinded by PPG, you are blinded by TS%. Play the game and you’ll learn it’s not how efficient you score it’s can your team score more than the others. And I understand what TS% is but its not basically just averaging it up it’s True Shooting Percentage; the formula is PTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA)). Already putting Monta at an unfair advantage seeing he doesnt get to the line very often. But its okay, keep hating monta until the season rolls around and he’s putting us in a position to win and you all are cheering. Hypocrits are so funny. He sucks I hate him, but he scores and we win and all that tough guy shit goes out the window huh? I also understand defense counts, but curry cant play it either, why is he held at a different standard? Curry cant guard ANYONE!? but thats ok?
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 5:11 PM PDT reply actions
Also curry 3.9 RPG monta 3.5 RPG
you keep think people are going to buy your per game stats when monta plays way more minutes
Already putting Monta at an unfair advantage seeing he doesnt get to the line very often.
maybe he should work on that
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah because he's never getting bumped around or thrown on the floor during games, he just plays it safe
and never goes to the rim at all.
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions
he goes to the rim
and then tries to finesse his way to the basket by avoiding contact
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
unlike this punk shit people are trying to call basketball now a days
Monta actually tries to make this basket when he’s fouled….hmmm what a concept.
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions
wrong
he tries to make the basket without getting fouled
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I do see the argument for Monta probably deserving more credit for his abilities. If he actually did shoot FT’s like Kobe or Wade, he’d be amazing on offense. The sorry fact is, he doesn’t. That’s just a reality you have to deal with, if your priority is winning. Since most people here are about winning and since Monta is not only a horrendous defender but an inefficient scorer, he can’t help us. We have to frown on him as a shooter and a defender. So what’s left? Trade him.
I'm the soul brotha' like no other!
by Naticus on May 25, 2011 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Getting to the line is a good thing. Not getting to the line is a bad thing. It’s not putting anyone at a fair/unfair advantage, it’s just taking into account all the shots someone takes. Considering that points you don’t score at the FT line don’t help your team win….what’s “unfair” about it, exactly? (Reply button helps)
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 8:19 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
wade, kobe, westbrook, rose, kevin martin, chauncey, matthews, stuckey, harris
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
paul, harden, lou williams, manu, sessions, bayless
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
We must be watching a different monta ellis then huh? especially if you are gonna put
Devin harris, james harden, lou williams, ramon sessions, and jared bayless on a list saying they dont try to avoid contact haha ur a funny guy
by NATIONSGREATEST on May 25, 2011 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions
per 48 minutes
fta per 48 / fga per 48
monta 6.4 / 24.0
harris 8.6 / 17.3
harden 7.5 / 15.0
williams 9.8 / 21.8
sessions 9.5 / 17.5
bayless 6.6 / 16.6
clearly all of those players are better at getting to the line than monta
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
holy epic fail on the roser report batman
i thought everything up to that point was ok, but once i got there i laughed my ass of and stopped reading as i watched all of the author’s credibility fly out the window
by AJC3317 on May 25, 2011 5:53 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
i had to continue reading
merely for comedic purposes
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
If you asked every player and coach from the Warriors last season who the team MVP was, the anwer would be unanimous.
Monta Ellis.
That’s a fact. Who else could it be?
When opposing teams are preparing to play the Warriors which player do you think they focus on defensively?
Monta was our MVP. Now if you want to acknowledge that and then suggest that was the problem, then you sound credible and intelligent. If you just dispute that because you think Monta is overrated or that Curry is better and underused, than you’re an idiot. Because that opinion doesn’t mean that Monta wasn’t our MVP, it just means our coach could have done better. But it’s pretty apparent Curry’s ankle was an issue for him and the coach.
My next point.
“A small backcourt can’t win in this league!” “We need to trade Monta or Curry!” What about the Dallas Mavericks. Or how about the 07-08 Warriors who won 48 games with Monta and Baron in the backcourt?
It’s all about the coach, the system, and the supporting cast. Seriously. this team is like 2 FA’s away from being a serious player in the Western Conference.
Curry
JRich or Afflalo
DWright
Lee
D.Jordan
6th man: Monta. That is a top 15 team in this league.
The people who are saying Monta and Steph can’t work must not be watching the playoffs. I’ve seen Dallas rolling with Barea Kidd and Terry on the floor at the same time for some good minutes in the 4th quarter against the Lakers, and they won.
These two can work.
Haters gon’ hate though
The people who are saying Monta and Steph can’t work must not be watching the playoffs. I’ve seen Dallas rolling with Barea Kidd and Terry on the floor at the same time for some good minutes in the 4th quarter against the Lakers, and they won.
Well, Kidd was very good defensively on Kobe.
The other two guys out there, often, for the Lakers were Derek Fisher (over the hill) and Steve Blake (not any good), with a little Shannon Brown thrown out there, too.
That’s who Barea and Terry were guarding.
Here’s the other thing, too:
None of those guys were as bad as Monta was on defense this year. Terry and Kidd were bad defensive players this year – worse than Curry.
Monta was worse.
by Ronaldinho on May 25, 2011 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Kidd has an edge because he reads the game better than Curry, Ellis, Terry, and Barrea put together.
Maybe it was Steph’s ankle, but Monta was clearly faster, stronger, and out of the 60 so odd games I watched he also appeared to have better vision when it came to stepping into passing lanes at the right time.
Not saying that Monta is defintively better than Steph at D, they guard very different players. But you have to be drinking some piss rotten haterade to suggest that Steph is better, or that Terry and Barrea are better than Monta defensively.
out of the 60 so odd games I watched he also appeared to have better vision when it came to stepping into passing lanes at the right time.
monta literally always gambles jumping into passing lanes. of course its going to appear that he has better vision of stepping into passing lanes because he will get the steal more often than the others (by trying more). this however, is in no way good defense, as every time he doesn’t get it, he forces his teammates to help.
by bigkino217 on May 25, 2011 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, Monta Ellis had the 5th worst defensive +/- in all of the NBA. Al Jefferson, DJ Augustin, Aaron Brooks, and Derrick Rose were the only ones worse than him in that regard. It’s not like Monta had a really strong defender subbing in from him. So….maybe you disagree with that, but how do you explain that away to the point where any person who thinks Monta’s D is incredibly hurtful doesn’t have a rational argument?
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 8:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe it was Steph’s ankle, but Monta was clearly faster, stronger, and out of the 60 so odd games I watched he also appeared to have better vision when it came to stepping into passing lanes at the right time.
As has been pointed out, Monta gambles more for steals. This gives you better highlight plays but is almost always bad defense.
The Warriors gave up 6.88 more points per 100 possessions when Monta was off the floor than when he was on this year. For Curry, the number is .94.
Last year, their numbers were 4.05 points worse with Monta on the floor, and 1.07 worse with Curry on the floor.
These numbers punch a pretty big hole in our subjective sense that Monta is somehow a better defender. Monta’s number is among the very worst among players who see significant minutes. It’s really, really, really bad.
Or, if you like, look at opponent TS% against – Monta and Curry were very similar when playing point guard. (Monta’s TS% was a littlebetter, but CUrry generated a few more TOs). The problem comes because Monta plays SG. His efg% against is TERRIBLE at two-guard.
And that it, ultimately, the problem. If Monta were a point guard, offensively, nobody would be picking on his defense. But he’s not. He’s a two-guard. And as a two-guard, his defense is god-awful. Much, much worse than Steph’s is at the point.
Barrea is a point guard. That’s all he plays. His defensive +/- is better than Monta’s. His opponent EFG% against PGs is MUCH better. It’s not even close. Now, Barea has the luxury of never having to defend two-guards … but again, Monta doesn’t have that luxury because Monta is not a point guard.
Ellis EFG% as a two gaurd is .534. Terry’s and Kidds are .485 and .507 … and they both give up fewer FTA, too.
In other words, no, I’m not drinking haterate. The facts are unambiguous. Guys who play against Monta as a two guard do really, really well.
I’d suggest you ask yourself why you’re so convinced that Monta is a better defender than these guys when all of the numbers suggest the opposite.
by Ronaldinho on May 25, 2011 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
My two favorite professional North American sports are Hockey and Basketball.
+/- works in Hockey. It’s flawed in basketball.
Lets compare someone like Joe Thornton to Monta Ellis. Not fair I know, Joe Thornton is one of the best defensive fowards in the game.
Joe Thornton does not attack a simple total of 11 players all night, and he certainly doesn’t only defend 2-3 guys all night. like Monta would.
Joe Thornton’s line will play 4 opposing offensive lines multiple times a night. That’s 12 different players. He also faces 3 different defensive lines all night, that’s another 6 players. So in a course of 1 night, Thornton’s +/- is affected by his performance against 18 different opponents. Thornton gets to play against superior and inferior offensive and defensive talent all night. Add to the fact that Jumbo Joe plays both the PK and PP, and the situational affect of on ice personnel is wiped out.
Basketball is totally about the matchups and situations.
If Monta has to play 42 minutes a night and Steph plays 34, it means that Monta plays 8 minutes with an inferior player on the court while steph sits. A less productive offensive, and probably less efficient defensive player. Monta has to play more time with the Warriors bench then Steph would. And we can all agree that the Warriors bench was among the worst in the league in both offense and defense. Keith Smart usually rested Monta while other opposing teams stars were resting. Which means that Steph was on the floor against the bench of the other team, which contains lesser opponents in terms of offense and defense, generally.
In hockey, the ability for one of the players from one of the top 2 lines to be favored in the +/- column due to the matchups they face is almost impossible because they play the face the same array of 18 players for almost the same amount of ice time. They are both on the ice for 30-50 seconds at a time, where as in basketball you have large minute samples where Monta can be on the floor against DWade, Bosh, and LeBron while Keith Smart gets pissed at Steph and sits him during that stretch where Miami goes on a 15 point run. Which given the porous defense of the Warriors as a squad, having Monta or Steph in at PG during that run wouldn’t make a difference.
If Monta and Terry were to switch teams their EFG% would change with them because Dallas is a better team than the Warriors. They play a superior style of rotation defense and they have a better offense.
My point:
Monta and Steph are both bad defenders. Nitpicking between which one is worse is incredibly petty, because unfortunately one of them has to guard the stronger offensive player. And for 2 years 2 different coaches have decided that Monta is more up for the task
Well, how do you explain those other stats?
The thing about +/- is this:
Your comments about playing time have been addressed before – but for what it’s worth, I’ll bring it up again. Please explain Dorell Wright. All the arguments that “explain away” Monta’s horrid +/- should also indicate that Dorell’s +/- is horrible.
And yet it’s not. His defensive +/- is over 4pts better than Monta’s.
“Keith Smart usually rested Monta while other opposing teams stars were resting. "
We’ve heard every possible permutation of this argument trying to defend Monta. In fact, the facts support the OPPOSITE of this (see Evanz’s post about EZPM) but in any event:
If Monta was rested when other team’s stars were resting, then he’d be facing inferior opponents, which would make him look better in comparison. I look forward to you using that argument now that you know which version of this argument makes some small amount of sense to defend Monta.
Of course, when you look at adjusted and regulated +/-, which control for this sort of thing … it also shows Monta to be a much, much worse. Again, among the worst full-time starters in the league. And Dorell and Curry are positive.
f Monta and Terry were to switch teams their EFG% would change with them because Dallas is a better team than the Warriors. They play a superior style of rotation defense and they have a better offense.
Part of the reason they play a better team defense is because Terry doesn’t gamble for steals the way that Monta does.
Part of the reason they have a better offense is because Terry doesn’t jack up lots of long twos early in the shot clock, or drive into a set defense.
Part of the reason why they have a better offense is because when Terry shoots the ball, it has a better-than-average chance of scoring points.
unfortunately one of them has to guard the stronger offensive player. And for 2 years 2 different coaches have decided that Monta is more up for the task
People keep saying this, but it’s just not true. Steph was protected defensively as a rookie. In his second year, he’s been protected less and less, including guarding guys like Chris Paul and Derron Williams.
At a certain point, people continuing to make this claim goes from being “ignorant” to being “dishonest.”
In any event, I suspect that Curry and Monta’s overall skill level for defense is similar. The problem is that they don’t play the same position. Curry is capable of defending his position adequately. Not well, but adequately. Monta, to be fair, is also capable of defending Curry’s position adequately. Not well, but adequately.
The only problem is, that’s not the position he plays.
As one who prefers Curry over Monta
I freely admit Monta is a better defensive player one on one, everything being equal. Neither can guard SGs well, but Monta can at least fake that where Curry would get burned completely.
However, Curry is growing into what should be an efficient, ball distributing, truly over the top great shooting PG, where Monta is a scorer, doesn’t promote flow with his style, isn’t and never will be a real PG.
So for all our purposes, the fact Monta is “a better defender” (regardless of what pro-Curry stats show with Curry having the easier assignments against guys closer to his size than Monta guarding SGs) doesn’t mean much.
Yes, they’re both bad defenders. But Curry’s poor D at PG can be worked with moreso than Monta’s tweener status of being PG sized and only able to really play SG.
by supersugarCrisp on May 27, 2011 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Good post.
I’m not as convinced as you are that Monta’s fundamentally a better defender of PGs – I think it’s a lot closer than some make it out to be – but that’s not the real issue. If Monta had a PG’s offensive game it would be, but he doesn’t.
offense affects the defense
especially for a team with terrible transition d, namely GS. When Ellis stifles ball movement and misses from the perimeter, he handicaps the defense, and the poor defensive performance when he’s on the floor reflects this. It isn’t just a matter of his individual d, or Curry’s ; if a superior perimeter defender like Lin was Ellis’ principal sub, then perhaps the effect of one guy’s individual d could be more readily isolated. (of course, the coach in his wisdom rarely or never put in Lin specifically to try to slow down the opponents’ best guards). If you compare what Ellis and Curry are doing on the defensive end, Curry has a much better court awareness, paying attention to ball, his man, the other players, while Ellis can focus either on his man or the ball and can lose either pretty quickly. Ellis can summon up occasional spurts of decent man to man d, but will never be the team defender that Curry can be.
Music is the Healing Force of the Universe (a.ayler)
I freely admit Monta is a better defensive player one on one, everything being equal
Let’s also keep in mind basketball defense isn’t just one on one, everything equal. Being the better on ball, one on one defender, does not necessarily make a player better defensively. Help defense, forcing turnovers, not blowing your assignment, how quickly you rotate…..there are lots of subtle things that matter.
by Missing Barry on May 31, 2011 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Do you know about adjusted +/-? It addresses a lot of what you’re talking about. And of course, you always have to keep in mind a players role on his team. I don’t think you’ve provided good support why it’s “flawed”, just some ideas to be concerned about, some of which can be addressed in other ways.
by Missing Barry on May 31, 2011 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Yikes!!! If a team's top 2 guards can be worse than Curry was this season and still win 50 games
Then there is hope yet!!!
Hmmm…..so how do we acquire a Dirk Nowitzki caliber player?
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Or Tyson Chandler + Brendan Haywood.
by Spider Jerusalem on May 25, 2011 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions
So we can compete to maybe slip into the playoffs as the 8th seed? Pardon me for my lack of enthusiasm….
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe my 'or' should've been an 'and'.
My point was that they’ve got two defensive centers that cover a lot of mistakes.
by Spider Jerusalem on May 25, 2011 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions
True, it’s definitely an improvement for us, I just don’t see it as enough of an improvement to make us relevant. Now, if we could swap Lee for Dirk, AND add those two, I’d be pretty content. ;)
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Or how about the 07-08 Warriors who won 48 games with Monta and Baron in the backcourt?
Baron is in no way a small guard
Yeah I dunno what we’re talking about right now. If it’s size….Baron’s definitely bigger than Westbrook. Deron might be a little bigger, but Baron is definitely a lot longer than Deron is. At the very least they’re comparable.
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 8:23 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t necessarily think a small backcourt has to be a big problem. It is a problem, though, when both small guys are bad at defense, and the other best player on the team is named David Lee. If we had Dwight Howard, or Dirk instead of Lee, etc., it could be fine. The problem is our core right now is Curry, Monta and Lee, and that core just isn’t good enough, especially since they’re all defensive liabilities.
by Missing Barry on May 25, 2011 8:22 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
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- 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
