Looking Forward Part 2: A Backcourt Problem?

     (*)

As I tried to argue in my last fanpost Looking Forward Part 1: A Philosophy, for this team as constructed to succeed, the team has two years to put a good young core around Stephen Curry before he signs a big contract extension and they likely cap out and lose flexibility.

So in this article and the next I'm going to start talking about what each of the core players brings to the team, and give an idea of what should be done with them.

I'll warn you that this is a very long article, but hopefully it will give anyone who reads it an understanding of the intricacies of how to take this team forward.

For those who didn't read it as I summarised in my previous post:

 

...in two summers the team will most likely be capped out when re-signing Stephen Curry.

 

So the clock is ticking and this team has a two year window in which to construct the core of a team which will have a lot less flexibility from then on to improve. If the team does not have a couple of star players by then, or young players with the potential to become one or be traded for one, then unfortunately the team will be stuck in a position similar to he Nuggets now, except they might not even be making the playoffs.

 

The stark reality is that this is a 36 win team and as such it would be fruitless to try to address it's specific weaknesses such as depth, rebounding and defense now ... It needs some young players the team can build a core of, that pushes into or towards the playoffs that then allows it to acquire the specific parts that will make the team better. This has started with Curry, Klay and Udoh and should continue at least until Curry signs his extension. Hopefully management does not get ahead of itself, and completes this phase before addressing the team's specific weaknesses and most likely losing the financial flexibility to improve rapidly and significantly after that.

 

Just remember in my mind the team should be:

Focusing on players as values in trades and as assets because ultimately they may not be a part of the roster if it contends for a championship

What to do with the backcourt to fit into this philosophy?

As has been discussed in much detail the Warriors have one of the most productive (stats-wise) backcourts in the league and are in an interesting position with two quality players who may not fit together and appear to be flawed defensively. 

In this post I'm going to analyse: The abilities of both players. Which player should be kept if one has to go. How effectively could Monta be if he played off-the-ball next to Curry. What should the team do if it decides to trade Monta Ellis and much more.

This is probably the most profound decision management will have to make in the near future to try and improve the team as the it has little cap space and yet probably won't make the playoffs next season without big changes. 

So onto the players...

Stephen Curry

                (1)

For the reasons stated in the previous article, Curry has to stay. He's very productive with a +/- of +4.8 per 100 possessions(1), he's young, on a rookie contract, and really popular and well regarded around the league. Now if a trade could occur to get someone like Chris Paul then of course you do it though that's dream thinking.

It's a shame he never got the chance to push on from his rookie season where he averaged 20.6 points, 6.7 assists and 4.8 rebounds in his 48 starts after January 1st as Keith Smart placed the offense in the hands of Monta Ellis to little effect. Hopefully next season he gets to truly shine and finally run some pick and rolls with David Lee.

I'm not going to focus on him at all. Everyone knows what he brings and at least 90% of people here would prefer him to be the team's primary ball-handler (point guard) next season. 

The real debate revolves around this man.

Monta Ellis

Now firstly I love Monta and last season I proposed keeping him and giving him another chance.

So Stephen Curry Is Our Future, But What Do We Need At Each Starting Position To Build Around Him

He clearly has a lot of talent and can do things few other players in the NBA can do. His ability has led him to become a 24 ppg scorer who gets his points at a relatively efficient percentage compared to other players who play a ball dominating, scoring role like him. These stats are from ESPN and reference the 2010-11 season.

                   PPG      Pper40   FG%    3P%    FTA      TS%     APG     ASper40 Usage Rate

Monta -       24.1       23.9       45.1      36.1     5.4       53.6       5.6       5.6             26.5

Kobe -        25.3        29.9       45.1     32.3     7.1       54.8       4.7       5.6              33.0

Melo -         25.6       28.6        45.5     37.8    7.9        55.7       2.9       3.2              29.1

Wade -       25.5        27.5       50.0     30.6     8.6       58.1       4.6       4.9              29.1

By the way Wade is clearly in another level compared to the other players, I just put him in here to make a point that he is by far and away the best SG in the league.

Things to remember when looking at the stats:

1. Just as fans often complain that Curry's stats are hindered by Monta, the same applies vice versa.

2. He has the lowest usage rate of them all. For example taking into account the extra 25% of possessions Kobe uses compared to Monta, the extra 25% of points per 40 minutes he scores is less relevant.

3. If Monta could just shoot a couple more free throws per game his True Shooting percentage would be right on track with these guys. Consider that 23.9% of his possessions come on isolations. He shoots 40.4% on 3's in these situations but only has a 37.3% FG% overall. Why is this? From watching games it appears that while he beats his man with ease, in isolation opposing big men in the lane are ready to collapse on him and so he often puts up a high difficulty shot. In an offense which didn't put him in iso so regularly he would be put in a better position to score and get an extra step ahead of those big men who wouldn't be ready for him, meaning he should be fouled more.

He has also become a worse mid-range shooter statistically (at 38% overall) which greatly hurts his percentages because he is assisted on few of them compared to previous years, and thus a lot are contested. If this changed his true shooting percentage would rise significantly.

My point in all this is that he is actually producing similarly to some of the biggest stars in the league and I think the reason people are interested in trading for him is that they hope just like the Warriors do, that his defensive problems can be overcome with proper coaching and that he can be more efficient if put in a more disciplined system. 

However while there is a lot of debate about whether he can fit with Curry offensively, it is on the defensive side of the floor that his abilities are questioned and his future on the team is primarily assessed. Here's a quote from the SI.com article 'Ellis’ defense is red flag for interested teams'.

The hope, according to this scout and others, would be that Ellis becomes a neutral defensive presence on a team with a rigid system and under a coach who holds players accountable to that system.

But, man, those bad habits. Let’s start with the blow-bys. Watch enough of them, and it becomes clear that Ellis suffers from shaky footwork and a defensive stance that is far too upright. Opponents can use his momentum against him, but they often don’t even need to do that because Ellis is almost standing straight up, vulnerable to a speedy drive. Smart said he noticed the same thing and tried to correct it.

Ultimately the problem here is that the team's poor defense can be blamed for some of his defensive frailties, but they were -6.4 net points per 100 possessions worse with him on the floor on defense last season (1). So even if the team's defense improves with Mike Malone coming on board and Marc Jackson preaching defense the past suggests he will always be a massive liability.

So what should the team do with Monta Ellis?

Firstly there is the common assumption that him and Steph cannot play together so ultimately one of them has to go. I don't think one has to go for the reason that they're undersized because in the end there are few instances in each game where Ellis is at a disadvantage when matched up against other shooting guards because of the extra 2 inches he gives up. The only times he's really hurt is when he's posted up, but that is relatively rare. He hurts the team on defense because he is simply a bad defender. So if he did sort out his technique and his effort level I would not trade him solely because of the 2 inches he gives up on most SG's.

I think it's as simple as the fact that Curry makes the team better with the ball in his hands compared to Ellis who makes it worse, whilst Ellis also appears to be holding Curry back. So I think Monta has to go if one does, but I've read many arguments for keeping Monta so I'm going to evaluate them.

1. Monta Ellis is the only player on the team who can create his own shot whenever he wants

Beyond the visually pleasing plays such as his acrobatic drives and layups, what this should essentially mean is that he is the team's best player in isolation situations who can be trusted with the ball in his hands on the perimeter. To investigate this I'm going to look at a pretty simple stat: points per possession (PPP) in isolation.

Surprisingly I found a very big difference between him and Stephen Curry.

One scores 0.83 PPP with a FG% of 37.3%, the other 0.93 PPP converting 43.1% of his field goals.

Unfortunately the first person is Monta and the last Steph suggesting that Stephen Curry is a much more reliable player to put the ball in the hands of and trust to create a good shoot. This difference is fairly easy to account for by looking at their shooting numbers. Curry shoots 49% from mid-range and Monta shoots 38%. Seeing as a lot of their isolation plays end in mid-range pull ups it seems counterintuitive to think that the worse shooter (Monta) would do better.

This doesn't mean you have to think Curry is good enough to be that guy to have the ball at the end of the shot clock, it just gives some evidence that Monta shouldn't be that guy on this roster as they already have a better alternative. 

It's pretty simple really. All Curry needs is Lee to set him a screen while he's on the ball and he can get off a quality shot from 16-23 feet out that he hits around 48% of the time (probably more often with the screen). Whereas Monta just likes to pull up constantly from the same range (attempting 6.5 shots per 40 mins to Curry's 5.2 per 40 mins) even though he only hits 38% of them. Seeing as more of Monta's attempts from this range are assisted than Curry's (35.4% to 32.3%) it is even more impressive that Curry has such a significantly better percentage.

2. He's never been held accountable

Maybe true maybe not. It's pretty hard to prove what difference this would do to his game. If this is going to be used as an excuse for his performances and effort on defense you've got to really question whether you want this guy on your team considering other players have done well under the same coaching circumstances.

If he was held accountable maybe his defensive deficiencies would be so bad that he'd end up losing playing time and his value would drop further. However I do think that ultimately if Marc Jackson lives up to his words Monta's defense will improve and so will his efficiency, hence his value will rise slightly and we will get more from him.

3. Defense

The argument goes that if management traded Curry, Monta could move over to point guard where he wouldn't be undersized and would be a better defender than Curry there. I guess if you believe that then you believe that the main problem Ellis has on defense is his size. Unfortunately as pointed out in this article he has problems that will make him a poor defender whatever position he plays.

On synergy which breaks down NBA players defense individually, Curry ranks ahead of Ellis in defending every single type of play except when defending the pick and roll ball handler (and in this situation both are very good).

                                              (*)

Overall Curry is ranked 143rd out of all players on the defensive side of the ball and gives up 0.86 PPP whilst Ellis is ranked 264th and gives up 0.91 PPP. Obviously the ranking's aren't very useful as they include every player in the NBA no matter how few or how many minutes they played. (For example Dwight Howard only ranks 42nd but is widely regarded as the best defender in the NBA) [as an aside Kobe Bryant who in my mind is a very overrated defender nowadays ranks 216th]

This PPP stat actually presents a very useful illustration of the difference in quality individually between the two players' scoring and defense (it doesn't take into account passing and rebounding of which Curry is ahead of Monta in both by a long way).

• Curry scores 0.99 PPP and gives up 0.86 PPP on defense 
• Ellis scores 0.94 PPP but gives up 0.91 PPP on defense

I know the defense numbers especially aren't conclusively related to a players ability, but this provides a stark reminder of the difference in value of both players on each side of the court.

I thought I'd leave the most fundamental stat until last. The team gives up 112.9 points per 100 possessions (pPts) with Monta Ellis on the floor which is 6.4 pPts worse than without him on the floor. No matter whichever way this number is analysed it's very worrying.

4. Rebounding

The same arguments are occasionally put forward that as a point guard Monta would be a better rebounder for the position than Stephen Curry.

For those interested in comparing their rebounding:

• Ellis collects 7.7% of the teams defensive rebounds when he's on the court, whilst Curry collects 9.8% of them when he's on the court. 
• Most importantly the team rebounds significantly better with Ellis off the court, collecting a measly 47.5% of available rebounds when he's on the court and 49.7% when he's off, whereas the team rebounds slightly better with Curry on the court.

Ultimately the argument that if the team wants to play better it should play Monta at PG is extremely short sighted and wrong in 2 very important aspects. As explained above, he just isn't a better defender than Curry regardless of his athletic advantage. I'm sure he may have the potential to be better than Curry at guarding 1's but seems unlikely to actually happen. Secondly he can't play PG on offense...

Have a look at what happens when the team goes from a lineup of Curry - Ellis - D. Wright - Lee - Biedrins (Lineup 1) and subs in Reggie Williams for Curry whilst playing Ellis at the point (Lineup 2).

                    Minutes      Off pp100 possessions     Def pp100 possessions      Win percentage

Lineup 1 -   687             1.07                                       1.11                                          46%

Lineup 2 -   155             1.00                                       1.16                                          16%

                                           (*)

5. He could play well off the ball next to Stephen Curry

This would clearly be his best role on the team if he was ever going to turn it into a winner. It would give Curry every chance to achieve his potential by putting the ball in his hands whilst also giving Ellis a chance to score more efficiently. The shining light on this theory is his performance during the 2008 season when he scored 21.3 points per game in 37.9 minutes with a FG% of 53.1% (TS% of 58%). In the context that his jumpshot has improved considerably since, the numbers are quite surprising and really suggest that he could be a very very effective player offensively if used correctly. (Here are the values on Hoopdata.com)

Here are some interesting numbers concerning last season and the 2008 gold-standard season:

1. His three point percentage has improved considerably since, improving from 23.1% to 36.1%. However in 08 he was assisted on 92% of them and now he is assisted on only 65.7%. This suggests that fundamentally he is a better shooter now.
2. Even though he is a better shooter now he shot a worse percentage from every area of the floor (3-9 ft, 10-15ft, 16-23ft) but 3 pointers and at the rim last season compared to that season and even the 2009-2010 season when he got his reputation as an inefficient gunner. In fact even though he was praised for being a better player this season than last and for accepting Curry's role on the team he was basically the same player but with a better 3 point shot and slightly better decision making whilst attacking the rim.
3. Monta was assisted on less of his field goals from every area of the floor this season compared to the 2008 season. 
4. He became a much better player at the rim this season connecting on 69% of his field goal attempts compared to 61.2% the season before and 66% in 2008. This further emphasises that his actual ability significantly improved as he was assisted on only 39.1% of those this year compared to 48.8% of them in 2008, yet hit them at a much better rate.

In my opinion these numbers really are a promising sign that he could be excellent if played off the ball. He is undoubtedly a better offensive player (ability-wise) now, with a much better jump-shot and ability when attacking the basket. 

The only area that his game has dropped off statistically is his mid range shooting which if you watched the games this year is pretty easily explained by the number of quick, often contested pull-up jumpers he took. This suggests that if he was actually played off the ball he would be able to exceed his efficiency from the 2008 season seeing as he is a much better shooter now. All he has to do is shoot the same percentages he shot from mid-range when he was a comparatively poorer shooter and he is suddenly a phenomenally efficient player.

Now onto the team's new prized possession...

Klay Thompson

I like this pickup. At No11 in a weak draft management not only picked up the consensus best player available (maybe second best if you include Kawhi Leonard) but also a player who fits into the team perfectly. Now personally I would rather have taken Alec Burks as I think he has more potential and could be a better overall player but I see the thinking here. 

Ultimately it's normally impossible to predict how a player's game will translate to the NBA. However that is because most college stars coming into the NBA dominated the ball and therefore looked like world beaters and will most likely have to accept a much reduced role in the NBA. Klay on the other hand showed that he can play successfully off the ball and that this is in fact the best way to use him, thus there's no reason to believe his game and his main skills can't translate to the NBA. From nbadraft.net:

Understands his limitations and plays within his game well ... Plays well off the ball. Stays active. Works hard to create scoring opportunities. Understands how to create shots for himself off the ball coming off screens ... Very good spot up shooter ... Comfortable handling the ball and can use the dribble to create shots ... Can use his left hand effectively ... Shows an advanced in between game with tear drops and the use of the glass ... Gets his shot off quickly and can do so without needing much space ... Exhibits prudent shot selection 

In my opinion Klay is in a rare position where a rookie has to do so little to succeed and yet will be put in a position where he can be so valuable and bring so much to the team playing off Curry. He just has to play to his strengths and play an acceptable level of defense to improve the team assuming Monta is traded or doesn't change how he plays next season.

Seeing as currently Monta significantly worsens the team when he's on the court and his ball-dominating style is really hurting Curry's chances to reach his potential, it's hard to see Klay not improving the team if he were to come in for Monta next season.

A quick comparison of the value of Klay and Monta to the team:

A basic way of putting it right now is that Monta has the ability but Klay's has the game. Ultimately Monta is the one with the potential to be the more valuable player because he can improve his off the ball skills, but Klay will never have his speed and overall offensive ability. However the team may decide that if Monta's game continues to hold back Curry and the team on offense, whilst still badly damaging the teams defense, that Klay is the more solid and better overall player to take this team forward. When you then weigh into the equation that Ellis has much more trade value right now and Klay is on a rookie contract the obvious move seems to be to trade Monta.

Trade?

This is where things get confusing and other factors come into play.

As I said in my previous post, my philsophy for taking the Warriors towards contention for a championship requires:

Focusing on players as values in trades and as assets because ultimately they may not be a part of a roster that contends for a championship

To win big in the future management shouldn't be focused on who his on the team right now, rather what their value will bes so the roster remains in a flexible position going forward. Luckily with Klay Thompson on the roster the team has a rookie backup who can be put in a position to really succeed and become a valuable player. Unlike Monta his natural role will be to play off the ball next to Curry who should be able to get him many open looks and allow him to score efficiently coming off screens etc. Maybe he can play defense, maybe he can't, but there is no doubt that keeping Monta long term will hurt his value.

So how to explain all this?

OPTION 1: MONTA STAYS

I think the most likely scenario next season is that Monta scores less but at a slightly higher FG% although he really does have the potential to be a phenomenal offensive player next to Curry. However he will still be a poor defender unless a lot changes. 

So in this situation I assume that Curry plays point guard and Monta no longer dominates the ball.

                                                    (*)

           How do the values of the players change?

Curry's value will probably improve regardless as the team begins to run its offense through him as Marc Jackson has intimated. I see Monta's value most likely rising, however it's there's a good chance that he remains a defensive sieve and scores less but at a higher efficiency thus not really improving his value. However if he truly did turn into the off the ball player his stats suggest he could easily be he could become an offensive superstar.

            But what happens to Klay Thompson?

It's unlikely his value really changes as a backup getting around 20-30 minutes a night depending on whether he is too much of a liability playing as a small forward. If he does get enough minutes to improve his value and produce at a good level this is likely to come at the detriment of Monta's value.

Also remember that in this case Reggie Williams will probably be allowed to walk as he is currently a restricted free agent, and considering he has shown the potential to be a decent role player and possibly a sixth man it would be a shame to squeeze him out for a player like Monta who doesn't actually help us win at the moment.

NET CHANGE: Curry -  value increases, Monta - value increases slightly (although it could increase massively), Klay - likely little worthwhile change.

OPTION 2: MONTA TRADED

        (1)

So Curry probably gets to have the ball in his hands even more as he is the team's clear cut primary ball-handler and Klay gets a chance to show what he can do and seeing as he fits in perfectly with the team on offense will in my opinion definitely be very valuable.  

Most importantly Klay is exactly the kind of player that can maximise his talents on the floor whilst also giving Curry a chance to shine even more. (If anyone wants to get a bit more in depth info on Klay Thompson's game read this thoughtful post: Analysis of Klay Thompson's game)

So because I'd rather not be overly optimistic I'm going to assume Curry's value improves a bit more than if Monta stays. There's no reason he can't average the 22 and 8 he was getting post Allstar break in his rookie season. Klay's value could approach Monta's now seeing as he'd likely help the team more, make up a good portion of Monta's scoring but at a better efficiency and defend better, plus he's on a rookie contract being paid 9m less than Monta per year. 

NET CHANGE: Curry - value increases (more than if Monta stayed), Klay Thompson - value increases, plus whatever value the player acquired for Monta has.

SOLUTION?

Overall the team doesn't need to get an amazing player back in a deal for Monta to improve the value of the roster and its flexibility going forward. That is because at this moment the extra trade value Monta has compared to Klay would probably almost be made up by the extra value Klay has if he gets good minutes and the extra value of Curry if he gets to dominate the ball and play as a proper point guard. In my mind this suggests that management can afford to take a risk in a deal of Monta on a younger player as this will give Klay and Curry a chance to significantly increase their value enough that there will only be a little net loss if this player isn't a success yet they will be in a much better financial position.

This isn't actually a quote from anyone I just want this to stand out.

It needs to be understood that with Monta off the court we go from a team losing by 4.2 points per 100 possessions to a winning team that scores more and gives up a whole lot less with a +/- of +2.5 over 100 possessions.

Thus unless Monta changes how he applies his abilities considerably whatever management does with Monta fans should be comforted in the fact that most likely the team will get better. The extra playing time and development opportunities for Curry, Jenkins and Thompson should be seen as a bonus.

However there is always the chance Monta could be a star next season if played properly and so in my mind whether he gets traded really depends on what the team gets back for him as the team needs to maximise the value from this trade.

So what are the options?

First a caveat, whatever player the Warriors might be able to acquire for Monta at this moment who earns a similar amount is not going to make this team a contender and will likely reduce the capability of the team to improve in the future like Monta's contract is doing right now. For management to keep the teams options open going forward they should in my opinion acquire a player that maximise the rosters value in the future by not getting in the way too much of the young players. He shouldn't get in the way of Klay, Steph or Udoh unless he really is a star, there's no point in acquiring another player who's going to hold back the teams most valuable pieces unless he allows it to contend.

I don't really want to get into specific trades because ultimately what do I know, I just want to give an idea of the kind of player that management should try and acquire to improve the team and most importantly maintain flexibility, keeping it's future trade and free agency options open.

Firstly the trade that seems to be at the front of everyone's mind...

                 (*)

Monta Ellis for Andre Iguodala

Now on one hand this trade is literally a perfect fit for the team in the short term. Iguodala brings a lot of what it needs from the three spot. Brilliant defense, selflessness, size, versatility in guarding multiple positions. He'd be the player on the team who could shut down another team's best perimeter player, exactly the kind of thing you really need to contend at the top.

However he does have problems. His true shooting percentage is around 53%, he is a poor to average 3pt shooter and overall a below average offensive player. While he is a good passer he wouldn't be a perfect fit on offense next to Curry as he can't shoot well (though how many shooters do we need...).

In my opinion this would feel like a trade more on the spectrum of a lateral move and one that buys into the first philosophy of improving the team. This will definitely improve the team now, but beyond improvement from within the current roster the team won't improve beyond that and it puts it in a worse position to improve and acquire better players in the future.

If they somehow dump Biedrins in time for this seasons free agent period and end up with the cap space to get Nene or Gasol (dreams of course), you definitely consider this move as it completes a formidable starting lineup. Yet ultimately I see no point in losing some flexibility going forward for the sake of a 4-5 win improvement that won't get the team into the playoffs on its own. Remember he will be earning $2.5m more than Ellis next year, $3.7m more the next and $5m more after that in their final years. 

Surely with Iguodala, come the end of next season the team will just end up in a similar position to this year with an overpaid player and a roster that isn't contending yet lacks flexibility and fans will hope Iguodala is traded for an actual star.

There are some other factors as to why I wouldn't trade Monta for Iguodala right now:

1. Media reports indicate that Phily is very eager to get rid of his contract. This means firstly that he might be easy to acquire next season if that is still the best deal for the Sixers on the table. Secondly it might simply suggest that we are overvaluing him.
2. Defensive players are easier to acquire in free agency for comparatively little money. Considering Iguodala's defence would be the primary reason the team would be acquiring him I don't think it would be wise to use up $12.5-15m of the team's cap on him when they could get a good defender (not great like Iggy) for significantly less.
3. Iguodala has most likely reached his potential and especially with his huge contract won't have any extra trade value if acquired, thus likely inhibiting the team from improving further in the future. Ellis on the other hand could have a lot more trade value in the future as he has not been performing to the level his abilities say he should have. Considering he has a smaller contract and this team is nowhere near contending for a championship, it seems vigilant to keep the player that should provide potentially more options in the future.

As I said in my previous post, I recommend giving this article a read: The Accelerated Rebuild. It explains the benefit of starting a fresh when your about to get rid of one of your best players and not acquiring a player deemed of equal ability at that moment. This lessens the likelihood of a team getting stuck in a middle to low playoff position (in the case of the Nuggets), or in the Warriors case stuck in a position that at best most likely gets it the 8th seed.

Unlike their contemporaries, Utah understood that sometimes you have to take two steps backward to take a step forward. Compare them with their division rival in Denver, who tried to reload instead of rebuild when dealing Carmelo Anthony. They were able to stay in the playoff picture, but now they have a roster full of young players coming up for free agency who don’t have All-NBA upsides. As a result, the Nuggets are going to be stuck in the 5-8 playoff range the next few years while the Jazz eventually rocket past them, in much the same way as the Thunder did. 

With a player like Iguodala I fear the team would be in a position where it's still not making the playoffs bar a significant upgrade, just like now. However most importantly it would probably be in a worse position to try and improve the team via free agency or trades. 

So what else?

This is where it gets hard. In my opinion to significantly improve the team management would be best served trying to acquire a young player with good potential who can get some heavy minutes and expiring contracts or draft picks, thus essentially being on the other end of a trade like it made last year for David Lee. (Enlighten yourself by reading this article 'What Might Have Been' from realgm.com)

As I roughly tried to explain earlier, the value of the backcourt would probably increase if Monta left enough for the Warriors to be comfortable acquiring a player that would be a risk.

Derrick Williams

In dream world I like to think management is ringing up Minnesota every day offering Ellis for Derrick Williams, and rumours suggest a trade of this kind MIGHT have been on the table.

Firstly this guy is exactly what the team needs from the 3 or 4 offensively and has the size to play both defensively though won't be great in that area at the start. For those who need convincing that he is worth Monta here is some analysis from nbadraft.net:

In terms of physical tools, Williams has very good size for a combo forward, boasting a very strong 6’9 248 lb frame with a long 7’1 wingspan added for good measure … Very fluid and smooth athlete, who also flashes explosiveness leaping off of 2 feet … A true matchup problem for defenders, Williams uses his strong footwork and soft touch to score the ball with very good effectiveness in the post or facing up … His shooting ability is good, as evidenced by his 57% 3-point percentage...

Won’t take very many bad shots, which is a great sign due to the go-to role he embraced for 2 years … Got to the foul line a lot due to his ability to be a mismatch, shot an OK percentage (74%) once there, and this aspect of his game will very likely translate to the NBA as well … Super efficient, and scored 19.5 ppg on just 10 FG attempts a game … 

Unfortunately right now he is probably a slightly more valuable player than Monta because of his high draft pick and contract and in most situations a team wouldn't trade him for Monta.

Why he might be obtainable

Minnesota has 5 forwards: Kevin Love, Anthony Randolph, Wesley Johnson, Michael Beasley and D Williams

How many SG's do they have............................................................... Wayne Ellington

Assuming Kevin Love is going to get about 38mpg as he is their clearcut best player, there is then 50 minutes left to split between 4 other players unless they play some of them drastically out of position (they may play Randolph a bit at center and Wes Johnson a bit at SG) 

Considering their team is nowhere near winning, it needs to maximise the value of its players and help them reach their potential. Thus it would be naive not to maximise what value they have now if they're not all going to get good minutes. The value of players like Beasley, Randolph and Williams will fall massively during the season as it becomes clear to other execs that they can get them for about 50 cents on the dollar as Minessota doesn't need them all and they're not getting to showcase their skills.

Secondly

They traded a first round draft pick which becomes unprotected next year to the Clippers in a trade for Sam Cassel back in 2006. They have to get better and maximise their squad next season as there's no point in them tanking. So there's definitely some sense in them using one of their spare forwards to acquire a shooting guard, and I can't really think of any better offers they might get.

Thirdly

                          (*)

This is one of the best places for Monta to could go and play off the ball with Rubio as the PG, and Love as a great passing big man. Maybe Rubio can even shuffle over and guard 2's mitigating some of Monta's defensive weaknesses.

This is actually a brilliant spot for Monta oddly enough, though it seems like this might be a trade that neither side deems quite good enough to undertake ability wise. Considering Minnesota are way under the cap this trade would be a good fit for the Warriors right now as they could lose salary and gain a promising young player.

So what kind of players should they be looking to acquire?

To be honest I have no idea because there are so few players that bring the sort of flexibility and potential management should be trying to get for Monta. Here's an idea of that kind of player a trade package could be built around that may be worth it.

Paul George                                  

Nicolas Batum

You may notice many similar traits in these two players. Both have similar fundamental characteristics due to:

• Being on very good value rookie contracts
• Having the potential to be stars 
• Having the ability knock down shots and being improving offensive players
• Being already good defensive players at a very young age 
• Currently being backups to players that are better in Danny Granger and Gerald Wallace who are very unlikely to be traded

Draft picks

Next years draft is looking very promising throughout the entire lottery at the moment. Thus any trade that involved acquiring a high lottery pick, or even a good young player and a middle-late lottery pick would be a very good result. Seeing as it has been said that a player like Derrick Williams wouldn't even have been picked in the top 10 or so in this draft, any pick in this range could be considered an excellent result from a trade.

Considering the Warriors only have a 2012 first round pick if they are slated to pick in the top 7 realistically this would be there only way of getting into this draft. 

Just have a read of some of the profiles for these players at nbadraft.net.

Conclusion

To be honest I've been scanning through lists of young NBA players and I've just realised how difficult it will be to make a trade that doesn't take the team laterally.

So where does that leave the team?

Right now hopefully management appreciates that they are in the position where dealing Ellis won't take the team two steps back, it will most likely take it a couple forward. As such any young player with All-star upside would be a bonus. However Ellis is the most valuable trade chip they are going to have for a while, assuming it doesn't trade Curry and so they need to make sure this trade sets the team up for the future.

At first I'd have absolutely loved for him to be traded for a good young player with potential and some flexibility. However I was having a look through this article ranking the top 25 players at every position in the NBA. It got me thinking, he is actually at least the 6th best SG in the NBA and really could provide a lot more trade value than Iguodala or an unproven young player if put in a position to maximise his value. Just look at the list:

Shooting Guards

1. Kobe Bryant
2. Dwyane Wade
3. Manu Ginobili
4. Joe Johnson
5. Ray Allen
6. Monta Ellis
7. Kevin Martin
8. Jason Terry
9. Eric Gordon

I'd rather have Ellis than all those guys except  Dwayne Wade and maybe Eric Gordon if he was to pick one for the future. It got me thinking, maybe he will never fit in here but this guy should have a lot more value than Igoudala and enough to get more than the 2nd pick in a poor draft (Derrick Williams).  

Considering as I said earlier, Ellis has the potential to play phenomenally offensively for the team I feel that while he ultimately will probably have to go, he could have a lot more value and get the team something better if he stayed.

                      (*)

To be honest I came into this article thinking that management should definitely trade Monta and I'd still probably trade him now for a very promising youngster and some expiring contracts. However I've come out of it thinking that unless the team gets an offer that is too good to turn down like Derrick Williams + Anthony Randolph + (cap filler) I wouldn't do it and I would wait until next seasons trade deadline. Playing at his potential he is one of the top top SG's in the league. He may always hurt this team, he may never help the team win, he may hold back some of it's players slightly, and ultimately Curry should come first. But this can all be put on the back-burner until next seasons trade deadline without any negative long term effects.

Unless a trade arises that significantly improves the teams roster and cap situation, this guy should be given another chance with new coaching to maximise his value because he really could be getting the team a lot more in a trade and who knows, he might prove to be just too good to let go.Luckily the team did a brilliant job getting Klay Thompson as he is a player that can fill in straight away for him if he's traded, but can also get some minutes as a backup while Monta potentially improves his value and then come in whatever happens.

Anyway if you've read this far well done and I appreciate it and I'll have an article up on the frontcourt any day.