8th ave wrote:the morning of the day after the draft...

so i've slept on it, and the only way the klay thompson pick would make sense to me is if we traded stephen curry, who some believe has more stock value than monta ellis... here are my reasons...

1. my biggest concern is that if we trade ellis, we won't have the ability to get into the lane... one thing that monta can do that both thompson and curry isn't capable of is getting to the rim with ease and finishing in spectacular fashion...

2. if we kept curry and traded monta, i would assume that our scorers, in no particular scoring option order, would be curry, thompson, wright, and lee... ALL of those guys are jump shooters, and the days that the shots arent falling, we'd be doomed... i think we can all agree that points in the paint is one of the important keys/stat to winning a game outside of rebounding and opponent ppg

3. we should trade curry because it will solve the small backcourt issue of size because thompson is basically a taller stephen curry! we could slide monta to the 1, insert klay at the 2, and tadao.... no more small backcourt issue and we still have a lightsout shooter in thompson

4. i've already stated this earlier, but curry probably has more trade value than ellis.... if we could package andris with curry to make salaries work, maybe we could acquire a legitimate big man like andrew bynum or pau gasol with recent rumors suggesting they are available... would make sense to both sides since the lakers are crazily over the cap and have a big need at the pg position...

lineup?

monta
thompson
wright
lee
bynum

lakers:

curry
bryant
artest
gasol
whocares

fine wrote:
For points 1 & 2 you didn't take into account who we would have traded Monta for. It's reasonable to assume he is worth in value a Deng or Iggy type, who are #2 scorers who excel as slashers. A backcourt of Curry and Thompson with Iggy (for example) at SF is pretty complete and covers most facets of the game. But getting Chicago or Philly to want Monta seems less and less likely.

Overall I agree with your point that if we want a legit C it's going to take trading Curry. I just don't personally trust Monta as a PG. It'll solve one position problem but create another.

rockyBeli wrote:

fine wrote:
For points 1 & 2 you didn't take into account who we would have traded Monta for. It's reasonable to assume he is worth in value a Deng or Iggy type, who are #2 scorers who excel as slashers. A backcourt of Curry and Thompson with Iggy (for example) at SF is pretty complete and covers most facets of the game. But getting Chicago or Philly to want Monta seems less and less likely.

Overall I agree with your point that if we want a legit C it's going to take trading Curry. I just don't personally trust Monta as a PG. It'll solve one position problem but create another.

+1

Monta at PG = fail. remember the pre-Steph Curry roster of Monta Crawford Maggette lineup....horrid horrid black hole basketball. Klay Thompson can pass, but he wouldn't make up for the void if Steph was traded.

I do think the Bulls have interest in Ellis, a scoring SG is exactly what they need. an Ellis trade that could bring Deng + Noah is intriguing..

David Aldridge of NBA.com adds some more context to whether or not Ellis has asked out, writing he didn't quite demand a trade.

"During the hour-long chat (with Warriors' brass Thursday) he did make it clear that he didn't want to be around for the meat of his prime if Golden State's new ownership group was no more committed to making the roster better than the old regime," wrote Aldridge. "He did say that if the team wasn't doing any better by the trade deadline next February, he'd like to be sent somewhere where he'd have a chance to compete. In the meantime, he's all in with the Warriors and Mark Jackson, who reportedly has called him twice already to insist he'll be on the roster next season ... Call it a demand with an asterisk."

So while Ellis remains for the here and now, don't be surprised if trade chatter for him picks up again at some point.

---

On Thursday, we noted that though it appeared the Warriors had been fielding offers for Monta Ellis of late, the most recent word was the team is likely to hang onto him through the summer, and could potentially look to deal him next season.

But Peter Vescey of the New York Post offers this Friday: "A few days ago, it appeared as if the Warriors had decided to keep Ellis despite some very attractive propositions. However, late yesterday, they were back to giving serious thought to moving him if the pitch blew them away. Word has it Ellis' agent, Jeff Fried, who did not return my call, informed management his client wants to be dealt."

Whether or not the Warriors begin to field offers for Ellis before the likely lockout remains to be seen.

But such a report will likely only continue to fuel the speculation that Ellis -- especially now that the Warriors drafted SG Clay Thompson on Thursday night -- may not be long for Golden State.

rockyBeli wrote:
+1

Monta at PG = fail. remember the pre-Steph Curry roster of Monta Crawford Maggette lineup....horrid horrid black hole basketball. Klay Thompson can pass, but he wouldn't make up for the void if Steph was traded.

.

PAWNO wrote:

rockyBeli wrote:
+1

Monta at PG = fail. remember the pre-Steph Curry roster of Monta Crawford Maggette lineup....horrid horrid black hole basketball. Klay Thompson can pass, but he wouldn't make up for the void if Steph was traded.

.

are u serious bro... Your telling me Monta Ellis is a bad point guard and asking me to jog my memory back to a time when the Warriors had arguably the most selfish ballhogging guard rotation in the history of kthe game? Ellis, Magette & Crawford are all extremely gifted ISO players.. But having a JJ Barea or Steve Nash playing alongside a Crawford or Magette is going to diminish their playmaking skills.

whilst I would prefer Steph Curry... I Certainly have a lot more faith in Monta Ellis is running the point with Mark Jackson at the helm.

GSW Hoops Fan wrote:

PAWNO wrote:

rockyBeli wrote:
+1

Monta at PG = fail. remember the pre-Steph Curry roster of Monta Crawford Maggette lineup....horrid horrid black hole basketball. Klay Thompson can pass, but he wouldn't make up for the void if Steph was traded.

.

are u serious bro... Your telling me Monta Ellis is a bad point guard and asking me to jog my memory back to a time when the Warriors had arguably the most selfish ballhogging guard rotation in the history of kthe game? Ellis, Magette & Crawford are all extremely gifted ISO players.. But having a JJ Barea or Steve Nash playing alongside a Crawford or Magette is going to diminish their playmaking skills.

whilst I would prefer Steph Curry... I Certainly have a lot more faith in Monta Ellis is running the point with Mark Jackson at the helm.

Wasn't that the season where Monta had the moped accident and didn't even play until the last 20 games or so?

Let me look it up:
08-09 GSW 25 25 35.7 0.451 0.308 0.830 0.6 3.8 4.3 3.7 1.6 0.3 2.68 2.68 19.0
09-10 GSW 64 64 41.4 0.449 0.338 0.753 0.7 3.3 4.0 5.3 2.2 0.4 3.81 2.95 25.5
10-11 GSW 80 80 40.3 0.451 0.361 0.789 0.6 3.0 3.5 5.6 2.1 0.3 3.15 2.54 24.1


he played 25 games that season.... and then 09-10 is when curry played. 10-11 is curry also.... so... when did Monta really have a chance at PG?

Dr. Spaceman wrote:

GSW Hoops Fan wrote:

PAWNO wrote:

rockyBeli wrote:
+1

Monta at PG = fail. remember the pre-Steph Curry roster of Monta Crawford Maggette lineup....horrid horrid black hole basketball. Klay Thompson can pass, but he wouldn't make up for the void if Steph was traded.

.

are u serious bro... Your telling me Monta Ellis is a bad point guard and asking me to jog my memory back to a time when the Warriors had arguably the most selfish ballhogging guard rotation in the history of kthe game? Ellis, Magette & Crawford are all extremely gifted ISO players.. But having a JJ Barea or Steve Nash playing alongside a Crawford or Magette is going to diminish their playmaking skills.

whilst I would prefer Steph Curry... I Certainly have a lot more faith in Monta Ellis is running the point with Mark Jackson at the helm.

Wasn't that the season where Monta had the moped accident and didn't even play until the last 20 games or so?

Let me look it up:
08-09 GSW 25 25 35.7 0.451 0.308 0.830 0.6 3.8 4.3 3.7 1.6 0.3 2.68 2.68 19.0
09-10 GSW 64 64 41.4 0.449 0.338 0.753 0.7 3.3 4.0 5.3 2.2 0.4 3.81 2.95 25.5
10-11 GSW 80 80 40.3 0.451 0.361 0.789 0.6 3.0 3.5 5.6 2.1 0.3 3.15 2.54 24.1


he played 25 games that season.... and then 09-10 is when curry played. 10-11 is curry also.... so... when did Monta really have a chance at PG?

Seriously. And since then Ellis has averaged roughly the same amount of assists per game as Curry. I think the edition of Thompson could allow us to see which group of players can form the best combination in our backcourt. And if Curry gets all of these calls about his availability, maybe he can be used to acquire a legit C. Neither player is a pure PG and Curry may be a better prospect at the position, but the difference between Monta and Curry at PG is not currently as extreme as many of you think. Monta's ability to get to the hoop and kick it out is one of the major reasons were a top 10 team in assists. And some of Curry's assists come from simply making the next pass after one of these kickouts.

rockyBeli wrote:

Dr. Spaceman wrote:

GSW Hoops Fan wrote:

PAWNO wrote:

rockyBeli wrote:
+1

Monta at PG = fail. remember the pre-Steph Curry roster of Monta Crawford Maggette lineup....horrid horrid black hole basketball. Klay Thompson can pass, but he wouldn't make up for the void if Steph was traded.

.

are u serious bro... Your telling me Monta Ellis is a bad point guard and asking me to jog my memory back to a time when the Warriors had arguably the most selfish ballhogging guard rotation in the history of kthe game? Ellis, Magette & Crawford are all extremely gifted ISO players.. But having a JJ Barea or Steve Nash playing alongside a Crawford or Magette is going to diminish their playmaking skills.

whilst I would prefer Steph Curry... I Certainly have a lot more faith in Monta Ellis is running the point with Mark Jackson at the helm.

Wasn't that the season where Monta had the moped accident and didn't even play until the last 20 games or so?

Let me look it up:
08-09 GSW 25 25 35.7 0.451 0.308 0.830 0.6 3.8 4.3 3.7 1.6 0.3 2.68 2.68 19.0
09-10 GSW 64 64 41.4 0.449 0.338 0.753 0.7 3.3 4.0 5.3 2.2 0.4 3.81 2.95 25.5
10-11 GSW 80 80 40.3 0.451 0.361 0.789 0.6 3.0 3.5 5.6 2.1 0.3 3.15 2.54 24.1


he played 25 games that season.... and then 09-10 is when curry played. 10-11 is curry also.... so... when did Monta really have a chance at PG?

Seriously. And since then Ellis has averaged roughly the same amount of assists per game as Curry. I think the edition of Thompson could allow us to see which group of players can form the best combination in our backcourt. And if Curry gets all of these calls about his availability, maybe he can be used to acquire a legit C. Neither player is a pure PG and Curry may be a better prospect at the position, but the difference between Monta and Curry at PG is not currently as extreme as many of you think. Monta's ability to get to the hoop and kick it out is one of the major reasons were a top 10 team in assists. And some of Curry's assists come from simply making the next pass after one of these kickouts.

so 25 games @ PG isn't a long enough sample size? in those 25 games, Monta was not a playmaker for his teammates and he wasn't the post-moped 'savior' that so many hoped for. he was about 'getting his'... as he's been for most of his career. I'm not just looking at those 25 games, I'm looking at what he's demonstrated throughout his career. but even in Curry's first 25 games, he demonstrated he had WAAAY better court vision, passing skills, and understanding of the game than Ellis ever did or ever has. ball movement & teamwork was noticeably better as soon as Curry arrived. the nature of how Ellis plays is not a PG. your PG shouldn't have one of the lowest bball iq's on the court and be known for being a ballhog and lacking the ability of making his teammates better.

uptempo wrote:

rockyBeli wrote:

Dr. Spaceman wrote:

GSW Hoops Fan wrote:

PAWNO wrote:
are u serious bro... Your telling me Monta Ellis is a bad point guard and asking me to jog my memory back to a time when the Warriors had arguably the most selfish ballhogging guard rotation in the history of kthe game? Ellis, Magette & Crawford are all extremely gifted ISO players.. But having a JJ Barea or Steve Nash playing alongside a Crawford or Magette is going to diminish their playmaking skills.

whilst I would prefer Steph Curry... I Certainly have a lot more faith in Monta Ellis is running the point with Mark Jackson at the helm.

Wasn't that the season where Monta had the moped accident and didn't even play until the last 20 games or so?

Let me look it up:
08-09 GSW 25 25 35.7 0.451 0.308 0.830 0.6 3.8 4.3 3.7 1.6 0.3 2.68 2.68 19.0
09-10 GSW 64 64 41.4 0.449 0.338 0.753 0.7 3.3 4.0 5.3 2.2 0.4 3.81 2.95 25.5
10-11 GSW 80 80 40.3 0.451 0.361 0.789 0.6 3.0 3.5 5.6 2.1 0.3 3.15 2.54 24.1


he played 25 games that season.... and then 09-10 is when curry played. 10-11 is curry also.... so... when did Monta really have a chance at PG?

Seriously. And since then Ellis has averaged roughly the same amount of assists per game as Curry. I think the edition of Thompson could allow us to see which group of players can form the best combination in our backcourt. And if Curry gets all of these calls about his availability, maybe he can be used to acquire a legit C. Neither player is a pure PG and Curry may be a better prospect at the position, but the difference between Monta and Curry at PG is not currently as extreme as many of you think. Monta's ability to get to the hoop and kick it out is one of the major reasons were a top 10 team in assists. And some of Curry's assists come from simply making the next pass after one of these kickouts.

so 25 games @ PG isn't a long enough sample size? in those 25 games, Monta was not a playmaker for his teammates and he wasn't the post-moped 'savior' that so many hoped for. he was about 'getting his'... as he's been for most of his career. I'm not just looking at those 25 games, I'm looking at what he's demonstrated throughout his career. but even in Curry's first 25 games, he demonstrated he had WAAAY better court vision, passing skills, and understanding of the game than Ellis ever did or ever has. ball movement & teamwork was noticeably better as soon as Curry arrived. the nature of how Ellis plays is not a PG. your PG shouldn't have one of the lowest bball iq's on the court and be known for being a ballhog and lacking the ability of making his teammates better.

This thread again demonstrates why we Warrior fans are special; we are constantly analyzing, arguing, debating, and trying to figure out a way to improve this basketball team.

Neither Curry nor Ellis, unfortunately, are not suited to play point guard. Both are special players; however, both need to be and both should be paired up with a true point guard; both would flourish if this were to happen.

So, what is the answer to this dilemma? How about moving both of them out of here for a point guard to pair up with our new rookie and possibly a big man? Why are we only thinking about trading one away? Perhaps it is time to really rebuild this team, especially now that we have some real leadership in the ownership group and the front office (read: not the Cohan, Rowell, St. Jean, Mullin losers which we have had to endure for too long).

TRON wrote:Here is a crazy idea.
Trade Monta and Curry for Howard (Orlando want to trade him because they will lose him.
Trade Lee for Sessions (Cleveland want to trade him because of Irving).
Sign Prince from FA

Team

pg Sessions, Jenkins
sg Thompson, Williams
sf Prince, Wright
pf Udoh, Tyler
c Howard, Biendrish

It's a team lot better in D than today, tougher, bigger, younger and will ensure lot of minutes to our rookies.
Probably Playoff right know and tittle contender in 2-3 years if all goes well.

TRON wrote:Thinking of Paul maybe? And maybe Howard? Im all in for this. But. Can Monta bring Paul? Can Curry bring Howard?
What about the fillers for those trades?? We may need to move 6 players to make this trades, possibly some of the rookies. Maybe it is more realistic to throw one bomb at the time.

migya wrote:

TRON wrote:Here is a crazy idea.
Trade Monta and Curry for Howard (Orlando want to trade him because they will lose him.
Trade Lee for Sessions (Cleveland want to trade him because of Irving).
Sign Prince from FA

Team

pg Sessions, Jenkins
sg Thompson, Williams
sf Prince, Wright
pf Udoh, Tyler
c Howard, Biendrish

It's a team lot better in D than today, tougher, bigger, younger and will ensure lot of minutes to our rookies.
Probably Playoff right know and tittle contender in 2-3 years if all goes well.

A big NO from me.

You see, Dwight could leave after just one year, right there the aswer is no to this trade. Also, Monta and Curry can get alot more than that, Sessions not being any good either.

Trades something like:
Monta and CBell for Paul (likely wanting to leave now that DWest is likely not returning there) could work.
Curry and AB to Utah for AJefferson or to Utah for Millsap and RBell.

Team gets a great PG and PF/C for Curry, Monta, AB and fillers