BayAreaHoopz wrote:What David Lee attributes to this team can be repeated night in and night out. He's a rebounder thats going to score in a variety of ways. Curry, on the other hand, is only as effective as his jumper falling in. He isn't showing that he could do much more. He's not that Derrick Rose type point guard where he's going to attack the rim. Most of what Curry does, relies on hiding behind screens and shooting open jumpers. He could shoot the team right out of the game like he did against the Rockets when he went 8 for 21 and 3 of 8 from 3 point land. Even though he ended up with 24 points, it wasn't exactly an efficient night. I felt this should of been Lee's team the moment they traded for him. He was an All-Star that averaged 20 points and 11 rebounds, yet Monta Ellis refused to relinquish his hold on the franchise. If he doesn't score, he's chipping in on the boards and dishes the ball such as the game against the Mavs where he only took 13 shots. He ended up with 15 points, 20 rebounds and 7 assists in a Warriors win.

Absolutely. Agree 100%.

And, riddle me this, if Lee is turned into a more prevelant part of this offense, whom the team can feed constantly, where he can dominate in man coverage or find open players out of virtually any situation, and the defense feels the need to adjust based on the fact that he hits 52% of his shots...

What's that do for our shooters?

Hurt or hinder?

I think any offensive plan thats gets the ball out of the hands of Curry and Thompson is going to be lethal. If Lee can constantly get double teamed, he has the passing ability and vision to find the open men. Shooters could have a field day. The way this offense is now, is the guards dominating the ball. Jack, off the bench, its turning into another Monta Ellis where he just dribbles the ball up court and jacks up a shot and thats fine. Its the role I wanted Ellis in as a sixth man. Someone who can come in off the bench and score. Unfortunately, he's more times than not, playing next to Curry. The players on this team needs to find their roles. Right now, they think they're all players that should shoot the ball 15-20 times. and there just isn't enough of the ball to go around, let alone for David Lee to be major factor. He shouldn't be getting 20 shots in one game and then 9 in the next. A lot of that falls on Mark Jackson and his inability to come up with plays to accommodate their best all around player.

lol

Jack > Ellis

Not close.

JJ's TS percentage is 540 and keep in mind Ellis' true shooting percentage is 488, so they aren't very near each other at all. If bad shot selection leads to that I will take that every day of the week. And he has a terrific assist percentage to boot.

Blackfoot wrote:lol

Jack > Ellis

Not close.
JJ's TS percentage is 540 and keep in mind Ellis' true shooting percentage is 488, so they aren't very near each other at all. If bad shot selection leads to that I will take that every day of the week. And he has a terrific assist percentage to boot.

I love Jack and what he brings to the team, but Montas play of late, his ability to slash, and his ability to find his teamates is what the team needs badly, and truth is Jack has cooled off this past month. In month of March Monta is putting up 27 points, and 6.5 assists this month shooting close to 55%, including 26/5/5 against us recently, I would take those type of number any day of the bench.

Pretty much in agreement, David Lee make the game much easier for the rest of the teammates, been saying it all year, warriors need some sort of inside/outside game. Lee does get doubled and when he does he usually finds the open shooter, if he is patient enough. That spreads the floor more, and opens up offense, so more touches for Lee simple as that.

warriorsstepup wrote:

Blackfoot wrote:lol

Jack > Ellis

Not close.
JJ's TS percentage is 540 and keep in mind Ellis' true shooting percentage is 488, so they aren't very near each other at all. If bad shot selection leads to that I will take that every day of the week. And he has a terrific assist percentage to boot.

I love Jack and what he brings to the team, but Montas play of late, his ability to slash, and his ability to find his teamates is what the team needs badly, and truth is Jack has cooled off this past month. In month of March Monta is putting up 27 points, and 6.5 assists this month shooting close to 55%, including 26/5/5 against us recently, I would take those type of number any day of the bench.

A season is a season for a reason. It's not a "I'd take this guys best offensive month over this guys subpar offensive month" game.

Edit: Curry gets double a lot as well. Not sure who gets doubled more, but they both are at high rates.

Blackfoot wrote:

warriorsstepup wrote:

Blackfoot wrote:lol

Jack > Ellis

Not close.
JJ's TS percentage is 540 and keep in mind Ellis' true shooting percentage is 488, so they aren't very near each other at all. If bad shot selection leads to that I will take that every day of the week. And he has a terrific assist percentage to boot.

I love Jack and what he brings to the team, but Montas play of late, his ability to slash, and his ability to find his teamates is what the team needs badly, and truth is Jack has cooled off this past month. In month of March Monta is putting up 27 points, and 6.5 assists this month shooting close to 55%, including 26/5/5 against us recently, I would take those type of number any day of the bench.

A season is a season for a reason. It's not a "I'd take this guys best offensive month over this guys subpar offensive month" game.

Edit: Curry gets double a lot as well. Not sure who gets doubled more, but they both are at high rates.

The past month shows the ability and capibilty, and I know Jack had sperts were he went off as well but not like this. And the crazy thing is due to the fact Monta was moved over to play point more than usual since thier back up was traded. We all have our preference but the statement Jack>Monta, not even being close is far fetched from reality.

Getting doubled team in the post allows the floor to be stretched much more so, than from the perimeter. In the post there is much more time to access who is open, minus being in the perimeter were i think things are rushed, and angles to pass the ball are a bit tough.

Also Lee has the length to pass through a double team because of his height (most likely the double would be coming from a smaller player ex: Guard/sf), minus Curry being smothered by bigger defender.

Plus more importantly Lee gettting doubled get Curry/Klay open looks on the perimeter which is usually money.

Monta sucks and even when he goes off offensively he still allows the players against him to go for 26+. Jack shuts downs opposing PG's. Both temple and Wall were able to go off against the Bucks because of Ellis' defense. During that game he get lost a couple of times allowing for wide open shots as well half heartedly going for a steal and than just standing there afterwards as the Wizards shoot the ball.

If you'd rather have Monta over Jack because there is one month that Ellis isn't extremely inefficient on offense than you are wrong. Jack is better offensively and defensively.

It's hard to be the better player when you don't play 50 percent of the game.

Blackfoot wrote:Monta sucks and even when he goes off offensively he still allows the players against him to go for 26+. Jack shuts downs opposing PG's. Both temple and Wall were able to go off against the Bucks because of Ellis' defense. During that game he get lost a couple of times allowing for wide open shots as well half heartedly going for a steal and than just standing there afterwards as the Wizards shoot the ball.

If you'd rather have Monta over Jack because there is one month that Ellis isn't extremely inefficient on offense than you are wrong. Jack is better offensively and defensively.

It's hard to be the better player when you don't play 50 percent of the game.

True but we some how lost, but to you Monta had nothing to do with it. Thats great logic right let me guess lucky game right ?

A player having a good game and contributing to a win doesn't make a player not shitty.

You use the full season as a sample, not one game. It amazes me even though Ellis is gone that Warrior fans are the only fangroup that respects Monta Ellis game and compare him to actually productive/good players, such as Jack.

I might of started this Ellis vs. Jack subject and I don't want to hi-jack the OP's original post, but just to add my opinions on the whole thing. Ellis is more talented on the offensive end. I was never a fan of Ellis, not because of his lack of skills, but his mentality. He had a very "ME" type attitude and it showed on the court. Jumping up and down when he didn't get the ball, taking 30 shots in games, not playing defense although he could if he wanted and just a lack of basketball knowledge. Jack isn't that speed, athletic guy like Ellis that can drive to the hoop on a consistent basis, even though he's a better ball handler than Ellis. Jack is also a better defender with more PG instincts than Ellis. In the end, they're two players with 2 different types of games. Jack is better for this team because he's willing to come off the bench and has the "do whatever it takes to help this team win" attitude which is the type of veteran leadership this team needs. Ellis made his own bed as an undersized shooting guard, but should of been honing his skills as a point guard throughout his career, but didn't.

Alright, I agree. He's talented physically.

I just thought it was disrespectful to Jack to compare his production to Monta's.

Ellis plays nearly 10 more minutes per game than Jack.

NBA players' efficiency numbers almost always decrease with minutes. So that comparison isn't fair. Especially because TS% integrates field goal percentage heavily into the data, but barely takes free throw attempts into account (of which, Ellis takes twice as many as Jack). Slashers usually have poorer TS%'s than jump-shooters, but it's apples and oranges. JJ Reddick has a higher TS% than Ellis, but who starts?

I also attribute Ellis' high turnover numbers to the slasher style. He simply has the ball in his hands a LOT more than Jack, as evident by their usage rates. There are pro's and con's of course. BF has pretty much listed the cons accurately; slashers aren't typically efficient and can cough up a lot of turnovers (see Westbrook, Wade, MKG, etc). But the pro's of a slasher are harder to identify when you strictly use TS% because the stat isn't built for them. Free throw attempts and points are traditional products of slashers, but abstractly, you simply can't quantify the value of a guy who can create his own shot when the offense is stagnant. And as WSU pointed out above, we could have desperately used a shot-creator like Ellis during our January-February cold spell. Curry and Thompson are terrific, but usually they become more dangerous when you have a distributor like Jack or a screen-setter like Lee/Bogut to set them up for perimeter bombs. Ellis can get his offense in single coverage EVERY game. That's valuable, even if his style of play can be mathematically quantified as "inefficient." Such is life.

As far as the Jack-vs-Ellis debate... Come on now. I know you dislike ME11, BF... But this one's not even close.

Ever since the trade that brought in Redick, Ellis switched to more of a point guard role, that he is relishing at. As far as a selfish argument that was a role placed on a player who never had help from management . At this point in Mil he is looked at as a distributor/scorer. He became more of a slasher/attacker/distributor, at his speed he is few NBA player that can get to the rim at will, and that opens up/breaks down the defense to find the open man, so it is important to now the change/new form of play as it is attributed to a switch of style.

This team with Monta coming off the bench, playing the back-up PG role, attacking the hoop, dishing out, is exactly what we need, and you admitting or not, has no merit because his numbers with the ball in his hand are showing the results.

The only reason I joined this particular Monta debate is to show BF bias take. Its so obvious a slasher/attacker/play-maker is what this team needs badly of the bench, and Monta would've met that role nicely, to say otherwise just shows the bias. And I am talking about a particular role for Monta, off the bench, playing the way he has been the last 10 games or so. Ive said it before players have certain roles they can excelling, its up to coaching to figure things like that out and maximize the opportunity.

Blackfoot wrote:Alright, I agree. He's talented physically.

I just thought it was disrespectful to Jack to compare his production to Monta's.

Because Jack is putting up all-star like numbers, especially lately, lets get real man.