If you take every off guard in the game, add up all their rebounds, then add up all their minutes, then divide the rebounds by minutes, you get the average number of rebounds per minute for the position.  If you do this for Monta, you'll see that his rebound rate is below this.   If you do it for point guards, you get the same result-Monta is below average.  

Whether or not there are taller guards who are not better than him doesn't somehow raise him above average.

I don't dispute that he can (and has been) a valuable player, that he can score, that he can at times pass well.  None of this has any bearing at all on the fact that he's a below average rebounder.  He's a below average rebounder for either position he plays.  That's not an opinion. That's a fact.   Unless you want to pervert the meaning of average to mean something other than what it actually means, this indicates that he's below average.  Sorry.  It really does.

I did not say that 'dynamic scorers, tweener gaurds, cant [sic] carry ball clubs.' That's what you said.  I said, and these are my exact words "Small guards who aren't electric distributors and are below average rebounders for their position are rarely the difference between good and bad teams."  Please note those words because they have real meaning while your interpretation of what I wrote has far, far less relevance.  I meant that it's rare for a small guard who isn't a guy who gets everyone else involved and/or is substandard at rebounding for his position aren't likely to be a solid foundation for a club.  They tend to be dynamic scorers on bad teams.  This is somewhat subjective, but it seems to be the case.  

You can dispute this, but I'd suggest if you do, you chose a better counter, one that actually supports your position rather than one that doesn't.  Your "echem" about Arenas would have been better had you not used as an example a guy who is an above average rebounder for his position.  No, he's not a great rebounder, but he's above average for a point guard (and just a shade below average for an off guard to boot).  

Whether or not Monta is an electric passer, whether or not his passing is up to standard is more subjective, but his assist to turnover ratio (1.44) is below average for a point guard (average is 2.36) or an off guard (1.51).   Arenas falls right in the middle of these two, which seems fair if he's used, as he is, as both an off guard and a point guard.  His passing seems to be a big plus if he's acting as your primary scorer, less so if you have to rely on him to involve everyone else.  Again, that's not an opinion.  It's a fact. (You can dispute it, but it's not much different than disputing that water's wet.)   Can he improve here?  Maybe.  I certainly hope so.  But it doesn't indicate at this point that it's a strength of his game.

Value Nelson's opinion over mine all you want.  I'm sure he knows more about the game than I do, and positive he knows much more about the game than you do.  I do know that Nelson has worked specifically on Monta's passing in practice because he's found the turnovers too high and the assists too low and had practices where he forbade him from shooting because he needs work on it. That doesn't sound like a situation where Nelson was particularly pleased.  Perhaps he does believe in his potential but it does appear that he has problems with the execution at this point. Neither you nor I know what Nelson thinks about Monta's rebounding. But based on the rest of your 'reasoning' I'm inclined to think that your conjecture and $3 leaves you short on the cost of a Starbuck's coffee, nothing more and that you have no factual basis for believing that Nelson's "happy" with it.

That he's a below average rebounder for his position isn't an opinion.  It's a fact.  Perhaps you don't believe that this is important.  You're entitled to your opinion, though it's counter to a mountain of evidence that shows that having better rebounders regardless of position correlates with winning more often than not.  It's unfair to expect him to be Oscar Robertson.  Never expected him to.  It's not unfair to say that a) he's not average for his position because this is an empirical fact and b) rebounds help your team win because this is an empirical fact.  He has to do something to compensate for the aspects of his game that are below average and there are aspects of his game--real important ones-- that are below average.  The NBA doesn't grade on a curve where he gets bonus points because he's shorter and thus his lack of rebounding somehow doesn't hurt as much as if he were taller.  

I like him as a player, and tend to think that he is more of an asset than otherwise.  Perhaps this whole "reading for comprehension" thing got lost on you when you became obsessed with typing in all-caps to make points.  Perhaps this would serve you better than making up an opinion that I said he was useless and anything would be better.  It would very likely be better since I never said such a thing.  Again, it appears that you're more adept at trying to rail against what you think I wrote that what I actually wrote, but this fault rests with you, not with me.

(Worthless diatribe about what I know about the game of basketball ignored.  If you can't follow one coherent line of thinking and insist on deciding what you thought I said rather than dealing with what I actually posted, it's really neither my fault nor my problem.)