Steinmetz: If it's about defense, why trade Monta?
Says Monta is a better defender than Steph
12 months ago
dhod
79 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
LOL
wait he’s not joking…
Wanna feel real torture? Try being a Warrior fan.
Gee, let’s not take into account who has been in the league longer, who has to guard what position, and that the NBA has hardly any really good defenders at point guard. So he really thinks that we should go with Monta at the point? Uggh Steinmetz is just getting worse and worse. This makes no sense at all. Does he even watch the games? Are people that oblivious to waht happens on the court? Totally disregards the fact that the team does best when Curry is on the floor.
curry trying to guard kobe would but a lot worse then when monta does.
by Belinelli's the savior on Jun 10, 2011 9:21 PM PDT reply actions
So what? You guard your own position. I don’t see the need of Curry guarding any player on the Lakers except Fisher and Blake.
monta and him are the same size. monta used to play point and plays point when curry is out
by Belinelli's the savior on Jun 10, 2011 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions
im basically just sayin what is in the article
by Belinelli's the savior on Jun 10, 2011 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions
The article doesn't really make sense.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Monta can't play point in the NBA.
Matt Steinmetz is under the assumption that both of our guys are more true shooting guards than point guards, but I think it’s pretty obvious that Curry is the better passer and ballhandler of the two.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Still doesn't make him a PG in my book.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions
No
but he’s a lot closer than Monta and has demonstrated a lot of upside in that department. He occasionally flashes elite passing ability. His AR (assist rate) is perfectly in line with that of a point guard’s.
My big thing is that he has a solid foundation to build on. I think it’s entirely reasonable to think he could get up to 7-8 assists per 36.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Assists aren't everything, but okay.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Reading is a big deal, though. Try again.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Haha what did I miss?
he has upside and can avereage 7-8 assists? Yah I read that the first time.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh, you did get it. You’re not dumb, you just wanted to misrepresent my argument. He has shown himself to be a willing passer. About 30% of his possessions ended up in assists last year and most of his turnovers come on passing plays. That’s both a bad and a good thing.
He never has to be a pure point guard for him to be an asset. Shit, he could never assist on another player’s shot and he would be a pretty good asset because of his shooting.
And still- he is by far the best option we have right now.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
You tryna get me to say something unneccasary and get me kicked off GSoM?
what are your intentions here?
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
dang
I do this thing where I write in insults, leave the page, and think that I deleted it. I always regret sticking stuff like that in there, even if nothing comes of it. Sorry. I try not to be that kind of guy (unless they’re really asking for it.)
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
And how is he not a PG? He has good ball handling skills, finds open guys, and the flow of the offense seems better when the ball is in his hands. He will do fine as a starting PG. Yes, he has dumb turnovers, that will get better as he becomes more experienced.
Everytime I say something questioning Steph Curry it hits a soft spot, huh?
lol but in all honesty, I’m hoping for the best but I just call em like I seem em and Steph isn’t a prototypical PG and that’s fine.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I have the same question.
It was kind of a strong statement considering what we’ve seen of him. He still has a lot of room to improve as a player.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Let me rephrase what I said, because here is honestly what I believe.. Steph can evolve into a great PG but he isn’t a PG right now, he will always be a shoot first type of guy because shooting is his main strength. It’s not that I don’t think Steph can’t be a PG, I just think it will take some time and there will be quite a few growing pains. I want Steph to succeed because if he does that’s great for all of us.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions
steph doesn't shoot nearly as much as you think
its just the fact that he scores so efficiently, that his pts are high for a pg, which gives the impression that he’s a shoot first guy.
I never said anything about Steph shootin too much.
I actually think it would be great if he shoots more. I watched every Warriors game last year and saying Steph isn’t a shoot-first point guard is silly.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions
so you're saying
that steph is a shoot-first PG that should shoot more? you can see how this is confusing right?
Yes I can see how it could confuse people
but here me out, Steph is a terrific shooter and the one thing he does better then a lot of other people is shoot the basketball. He needs to watch Steve Nash, for example Nash could take 15-20 shots a game and still be very efficient but he chooses not top because he likes to distribute the ball. I want Steph too shoot more because he is amazing at putting the ball in the basket. He is a shoot-first point guard so that should make sense.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Like I say below, I guess I just don’t understand why that precludes him from being a PG.
by Missing Barry on Jun 11, 2011 5:15 AM PDT up reply actions
Hmmm, so who are the guys that you classify as point guards? Obviously Paul, D-Will, Rondo, Nash, Wall and Kidd are pure point guards. But do you think Rose and Westbrook for instance, aren’t PGs?
Derrick Rose is the most overrated player today.
He and Westbrook are shooting guards in a point guards body, but they’re both great facilators and will both keep improving at becoming elite NBA players.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 10, 2011 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that's my opinion on Rose.
Good player, not great yet.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 11:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I agree.
I think the media is a year or so ahead of Rose. I thought he was named to the All Star team too quickly, but he probably is one now.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I would have voted for Dwight. Also see a case for Lebron and Dirk.
by Missing Barry on Jun 11, 2011 5:16 AM PDT up reply actions
I just don’t see why a guy like Steph can’t shoot first (which he should do because he’s so awesome at it!) AND be a PG?
by Missing Barry on Jun 11, 2011 5:14 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh boy,
If Ellis isn’t traded this offseason I will be very disappointed.
If, then, Curry is traded…I’m not sure how I would react. It would be an absolute disaster.
Serving it up night in and night out -Steph "The Chef" Curry
by dont_stop_believin' on Jun 10, 2011 9:23 PM PDT reply actions
Steinmetz is well-educated
you’d think he would understand the complexity here, that it’s not just about defense. Defense is a large part of it, but obviously offense is important. What’s important is maximizing both.
_______________________________________________________________
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)
He's just being a contrarian
But to your point, Steinmetz is also ignoring Monta’s failures on defense seem to be more abundant than his successes.
Again, like it’s easy to point to Monta’s highlights on offense and volume of points, it’s easy to point to highlights of Monta’s defense such as his games against Brandon Roy, Kobe, Derrick Rose, and Kevin Durant. But that’s just a handful, not “stretches during his career.”
Yeah, Monta was asked to be a pest on defense early in his career—actually, I think just his first year in the league—because that was the only role that was allowed.
According to your Synergy blog post, Ellis is a worse defensive player in almost every category compared to Curry.
So, Monta is worse on offense and worse on defense, as certain evidence shows.
What gives, Steinmetz?
@DoctorKajita
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 10, 2011 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
SG's are harder to guard than PG's
F the Po Po
by bojangles408 on Jun 11, 2011 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions
SG’s are harder to guard than PG’s
Evanz research suggests that, at least on pick-n-roll situations, Ellis guarded the PG quite a bit, probably on switches when the roll/slip was executed. And, the team did quite well. But that’s just one situation where having a SG in a PG’s body works out.
When you’re perpetually undersized and form bad habits to try to make-up for that, you’ll have a harder time guarding your position; and Ellis’ position was clearly defined as SG, at least on paper. Most of us believe Ellis would do much better playing alongside a bigger guard (like Baron Davis), but the Warriors don’t have that luxury and it would be foolish to try to accommodate because I just don’t see many big PG’s out there that can help hide Ellis’ deficiencies.
Which brings up the point, do you then to keep the player that’s younger, cheaper (for now), plays a tougher position better, and can score much more efficiently or do you keep the other player that’s none of the above?
@DoctorKajita
by Doctor Kajita on Jun 11, 2011 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
It's true, though.
Curry sucks at defense. Lol @ people in denial.
by Precise Films Productions on Jun 10, 2011 9:55 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
And Monta doesn’t? Lol @ people who doesn’t face the facts.
by DubsFan408 on Jun 10, 2011 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Uh
no one is denying this. The main thing is that Monta at the PG position is just about the worst thing ever, whereas it’s pretty clear that Curry has a lot of upside in that department.
Monta is also a sucky defender, but has the distinction of being too unskilled to play the position he can defend on offense.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm denying it.
I think Curry is an average defender.
by Spider Jerusalem on Jun 11, 2011 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I think his early ankle injuries skewed a lot of people’s opinion of his defense. He was horrendous during that time. But near the end of the season, Monta’s bad defense started showing more than Curry’s. But that could be because of all the minutes he’s played, I don’t really know. I’ll wait for the season to start again (if we have Monta) and look carefully at it again.
by Prince.Charming on Jun 11, 2011 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Ehh, I’ve always had an iffy opinion on what Steinmetz says
With the 11th pick in the 2011 NBA Draft, the Golden State Warriors select...Jimmer Fredette!
by We Still Believe on Jun 10, 2011 10:19 PM PDT reply actions
But you cant neglect the fact that Monta IS the better defender.
Steinmetz is right, Monta on OCCASION (I emphasize this strongly) has been known to lockdown defensively on opposing teams best scorers ala Roy, Bryant, and Durant. Curry on the other hand has the slowest lateral movement ( due to the fact that his feet are slow in general) compared to any point guard. He had a hard time guarding DJ Augustine for christs sake.
When Monta decides to focus on defense and TRY to defend, his defense isnt bad at all. Plus, the fact that he is a 6’3 shooting guard doesnt help his case when he has to defend bulkier and more athletic 2’s.
Bottomline is I would take Montas defense over Currys in a HEARTBEAT. Watching steph struggle to stay on his man or fight a screen is embarrasing to watch.
by Spreefor3!!! on Jun 10, 2011 10:24 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
The thing is that
Ellis can never be a point guard on offense. The other thing is that point guard defense just doesn’t matter in the NBA. Just about every point guard gets beat. That just isn’t true about shooting guards, who are truly capable of being shut down. See: Iguodala, Andre
I think part of Steinmetz’s assumption is that Monta can play the point on offense, but that just isn’t true.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions
When Monta decides to focus on defense and TRY to defend, his defense isnt bad at all. Plus, the fact that he is a 6’3 shooting guard doesnt help his case when he has to defend bulkier and more athletic 2’s
Just don’t agree with that at all. Basically, to come to this conclusion, you’re saying that his good defensive performances were because he tried, and his bad ones (which is almost all of them) he just didn’t try. I disagree. I think it’s no more than players having good games and bad games, which we all know happens, and fans are just desperate to believe he can play D. He can’t. He regularly gets torched. That list of players who had bad games against us? Go check what they did in the other games they played against us. As for Monta guarding SG’s, Monta’s a SG, like every other player in the NBA, we expect him to guard his position. What’s the issue? He doesn’t get bonus points for being small.
by Missing Barry on Jun 11, 2011 5:19 AM PDT up reply actions
They are both below par defenders
I agree with Matt to some extent. However, you have to look at the entire range of each players game; and it is clear that Curry is a better player. You cannot have to sub par defenders in the back court when going against the likes of Chris Paul and Kobe Bryant. The decision is one or the other, and the decision is clear in my mind; Monte Ellis needs to go.
Mila "Sweet Lips" Kunis, as stated by Scarlett Johansson. I couldn't agree more. Reverse would be true too!!!!
by nocal81(Vincent) on Jun 10, 2011 10:33 PM PDT reply actions
Monta Ellis, too.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Too much is being made of this
Matt’s point was in case of JUST Defense, Monta can guard the modern day point guard better than Curry in that he’s faster, stronger and more athletic than Curry. He didn’t say he’s a better point guard than Curry. Curry jock riders get soo defensive.
by Xtremelink on Jun 10, 2011 10:47 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Hey
no one disagrees with that point. The whole thing is idiotic, though, because Monta isn’t a point guard. Very few situations in the league would actually let him defend point guards.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 10, 2011 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Too bad there's not a big PG that Warriors can trade for Steph
I know that’s not the case, and I’m for the Iggy trade. As for Steinmettz’ point of view, I think this roots from a fear of Iggy’s contract and recent achillis injury.
But Monta has to guard SGs, not PGs. And Monta does a worse job defending opponents of his position.
by Prince.Charming on Jun 10, 2011 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
i mean if steinmetz is going to nitpick
even though i love steinmetz for his views on some issues, this one i have to argue against. look monta has had his handful of defensive stops. but so has curry. if i can recall, curry played especially well before the all-star game where he had a stretch to defend, rose, westbrook, deron williams…and i think curry actually defended them pretty well.
look both are disastrous on Defense. monta seems to have some athleticism that can help, but curry has the skill set that can help. i can certainly see curry bulking up this summer and actually play decent D.
curry & iggy TEAM USA buddies.
stienmetz
first of all i think he’s pretty much a putz. but beyond that, he’s proven to be a monta lover and a curry basher. this does not surprise me at all
He's not a Curry basher
He says he doesn’t think Curry is that awesome but doesn’t dislike him.
"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
Can we all just say it
Monta is a better defender than curry. Monta has the harder task in guarding 2’s and being undersized. But he has shown way more “flashes” defensively than curry. If Monta was to guard PG he would be a superior defender.
But let’s be honest with ourselves again. They both suck at perimeter defense. They get blown by all the time, which is part of the reason our bigs have such a hard time. The bigs have to try to contest after our perimeter defense breaks down. And then on top of that they are asked to try to out rebound the other bigs, despite having to help our guards.
Look at the great defensive PG’s. Like CP3, he is lockdown on the perimeter despite being undersized. Defense is a mindset and a skill you can’t just learn at the NBA level. Either you are lockdown or you are not. Are guards are not, and until we get better on the perimeter, we will always lose. If Monta stays or if Curry stays it wont change a thing unless we can get a better perimeter defender at the 2. (and curry or monta will then take the PG)
If Monta was to guard PG he would be a superior defender"
Im one of his biggest supporters and I want him to wary on the te but that is completely false. lol
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 11, 2011 4:52 AM PDT reply actions
Lol my bad on the spelling
And I want him to stay on the warriors but that I’d completely false.
by OaklandsFinest30 on Jun 11, 2011 4:54 AM PDT reply actions
Talked about how you can’t be a good team if you don’t defend. Warriors coaches have mentioned defense in the past, but for Jackson it was a theme.
Why then are the Warriors supposedly talking about trading Monta Ellis?
Really, Matt? A team has multiple defensive liabilities, wants to get better on D, and they’re talking about trading one of those liabilities away, presumably for a better defender. That doesn’t make sense? How do you figure?
I don't get Steinmetz
He says Monta is a better defender, then says they’re not good defenders. He acknowledges Monta has “potential” to be better, but if we get an adequate trade in bigger or defensive 2 or a center, then it doesn’t matter.
"I'm not a big vegetable guy'' he says. -Tim Lincecum
The flaws with his argument were laid out pretty clearly in the thread.
You are not a warrior; you're a beginner!
by Reverend_Randy on Jun 11, 2011 7:54 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
