Monta Ellis is Not a Point Guard

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes


Starting Lineup
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 10:24 am
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:15 pm
aletha33 wrote:
ReginaldLewis wrote: He is quickly turning into one of the most unstoppable players off the dribble in the league.


i agree with you here up to a point...in the open court the dude's a blur...off a screen, he's pretty good...

but being covered mano y mano in a half court set, monta doesn't quite have the ability to create off the dribble like say BD...

but give the guy an inch, he's gone.


I agree. What I see happening is that when Monta still has his dribble outside the three point line, his opponent just sags way off because he know's Monta's not going to rise and shoot or make a three pointer.

Since his defender is laying back, Monta has to start his dribble and head to the basket. He hasn't learned a killer crossover dribble yet to get his man turned sideways so he can either pull up or finish on the left hand side of the backboard.

He seems to learn things very quickly so I'm sure by next year he'll better able to take guys, face up, to the rim.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 1221
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:54 pm
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:26 pm
jsw548 wrote:
aletha33 wrote:
ReginaldLewis wrote: He is quickly turning into one of the most unstoppable players off the dribble in the league.


i agree with you here up to a point...in the open court the dude's a blur...off a screen, he's pretty good...

but being covered mano y mano in a half court set, monta doesn't quite have the ability to create off the dribble like say BD...

but give the guy an inch, he's gone.


I agree. What I see happening is that when Monta still has his dribble outside the three point line, his opponent just sags way off because he know's Monta's not going to rise and shoot or make a three pointer.

Since his defender is laying back, Monta has to start his dribble and head to the basket. He hasn't learned a killer crossover dribble yet to get his man turned sideways so he can either pull up or finish on the left hand side of the backboard.

He seems to learn things very quickly so I'm sure by next year he'll better able to take guys, face up, to the rim.


very good point about the defender laying off...almost impossible to penetrate when the defender knows you're going to do that...

he's afraid to use his current crossover, not b/c he doesn't have the ability, but because the refs were calling the carry in the beginning of the year...

i'd have to say for one thing, he needs to be lower to the ground... i think generally speaking, he's too straight up when handling the ball (same w/ jrich)...

the lower to the ground he is, the lower his cross-over will be.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 9202
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 pm
Location: Land of the Lacob.
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:18 pm
Monta hasn't seemed to develop those type of dribbles yet such as the cross over because he usually is spinning to the whole or going straight to the hoop. I'd like him to develop those types of dribbles. He's showing signs of progression after the dimes he dished out. If he could add the special dribbling, he'd be a complete player for a 20 year old.
Don't hate yourself in the morning... sleep 'til noon.

Starting Lineup
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 10:24 am
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:08 am
aletha33 wrote:
jsw548 wrote:
aletha33 wrote:
ReginaldLewis wrote: He is quickly turning into one of the most unstoppable players off the dribble in the league.


i agree with you here up to a point...in the open court the dude's a blur...off a screen, he's pretty good...

but being covered mano y mano in a half court set, monta doesn't quite have the ability to create off the dribble like say BD...

but give the guy an inch, he's gone.


I agree. What I see happening is that when Monta still has his dribble outside the three point line, his opponent just sags way off because he know's Monta's not going to rise and shoot or make a three pointer.

Since his defender is laying back, Monta has to start his dribble and head to the basket. He hasn't learned a killer crossover dribble yet to get his man turned sideways so he can either pull up or finish on the left hand side of the backboard.

He seems to learn things very quickly so I'm sure by next year he'll better able to take guys, face up, to the rim.


very good point about the defender laying off...almost impossible to penetrate when the defender knows you're going to do that...

he's afraid to use his current crossover, not b/c he doesn't have the ability, but because the refs were calling the carry in the beginning of the year...

i'd have to say for one thing, he needs to be lower to the ground... i think generally speaking, he's too straight up when handling the ball (same w/ jrich)...

the lower to the ground he is, the lower his cross-over will be.


I think JRich has a different problem than Monta when he tries to go one on one. It starts when JRich has the ball (still with his dribble) in his favorite spot, about 18 to 20 feet out on the right side. His problem is that he tries to juke the defender by faking side to side (even before he dribbles).

Fundamentally you should take a jab step at an angle right at your guy to get him to commit to the way you want him to go. This way you've created a little space so you can step back and shoot (or pump fake to get him in the air and take the foul), or swing the ball to the opposite side of your jab step and go right by him. It works even better if you haven't established a pivot foot yet so you can jab step forward in either direction and then either keep going or bounce the other way. It's way too easy to guard you if you are trying to fake someone out by just side to side action. Just my observation.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 4:27 am
coltraning wrote:
32 wrote:I hope to God you're wrong about that Iverson, Arenas comparison... shoot-first, shoot-second, pass-3rd-only-to-beef-up-assist-stats PG's never take their teams anywhere. I can't name ONE, single time in recent memory when a PG like that won the NBA finals. :oops:

I seriously hopes Baron tutors him to be more like himself, than an Iverson or Arenas. Baron's a better pure playmaker than either of those guys.


actually, Wade was completely a shoot first guard, and certainly was as much of a PG on the Heat as Arenas and Iverson were, and he got the ring. And Iverson took a woefully overmatched team to the finals in 2001...


Yep. Isiah Thomas was also a me-first pg, and he was pretty succesful at that He even forced Adrian Dantley's trade for Mark Aguirre because Dantley took too many shots (that weren't available for him).

I also believe Arenas will make something important in the playoffs in the next few years. Just give him time...
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 52
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:13 am
coltraning wrote:
32 wrote:I hope to God you're wrong about that Iverson, Arenas comparison... shoot-first, shoot-second, pass-3rd-only-to-beef-up-assist-stats PG's never take their teams anywhere. I can't name ONE, single time in recent memory when a PG like that won the NBA finals. :oops:

I seriously hopes Baron tutors him to be more like himself, than an Iverson or Arenas. Baron's a better pure playmaker than either of those guys.


actually, Wade was completely a shoot first guard, and certainly was as much of a PG on the Heat as Arenas and Iverson were, and he got the ring. And Iverson took a woefully overmatched team to the finals in 2001...

Wade was definately not a PG in last year's series. He brought the ball up as often as Harrington brings it up for us. Wade is an especially talented SG because he gets a lot of assists for a 2, but if he were a PG, they wouldn't have made it to the Finals. Wade's contributions were key in the Heat's championship, but he was most definately never a PG for them (at least, not for more than 1 or 2 minutes at a time).

Iverson never got a ring. He just proves my point. Arenas and AI get their stats, but they'll never win a ring so long as they're the focal point of their team's offensive system. Do-it-all-PG's don't work when they're shoot-first. Magic was a do-it-all-PG, but he always looked to pass before looking for his own shot (which is what made him great).
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:41 am
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:22 am
32 wrote:
coltraning wrote:
32 wrote:I hope to God you're wrong about that Iverson, Arenas comparison... shoot-first, shoot-second, pass-3rd-only-to-beef-up-assist-stats PG's never take their teams anywhere. I can't name ONE, single time in recent memory when a PG like that won the NBA finals. :oops:

I seriously hopes Baron tutors him to be more like himself, than an Iverson or Arenas. Baron's a better pure playmaker than either of those guys.


actually, Wade was completely a shoot first guard, and certainly was as much of a PG on the Heat as Arenas and Iverson were, and he got the ring. And Iverson took a woefully overmatched team to the finals in 2001...

Wade was definately not a PG in last year's series. He brought the ball up as often as Harrington brings it up for us. Wade is an especially talented SG because he gets a lot of assists for a 2, but if he were a PG, they wouldn't have made it to the Finals. Wade's contributions were key in the Heat's championship, but he was most definately never a PG for them (at least, not for more than 1 or 2 minutes at a time).

Iverson never got a ring. He just proves my point. Arenas and AI get their stats, but they'll never win a ring so long as they're the focal point of their team's offensive system. Do-it-all-PG's don't work when they're shoot-first. Magic was a do-it-all-PG, but he always looked to pass before looking for his own shot (which is what made him great).


Again 32, how about Isiah Thomas? He won a couple of championships. Who was the point guards on the great Chicago team. The answer is that they did not really have a point guard who brought up the ball and distribute. Pippen and Jordan were the distributors on those teams. Armstrong and Paxon were spot up shooters. I don't think the classic point guards are as important as you think. How many titles have John Stockton :?:
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:19 am
ReginaldLewis wrote: I don't think the classic point guards are as important as you think. How many titles have John Stockton :?:


Exactly what I was going to post, Reggie. :D

Pure PGs are an object of infatuation I can't completely understand... the point is winning, no matter how you do it.

All Star
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:43 pm
Location: Union City/Torrance, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:49 am
tHe_pEsTiLeNcE wrote:Josh, Monta was the only competent player on the court against the lakers. He is looking more and more like a PG every day (like Iverson, Arenas, etc). Give him time, the PG position takes a while to learn


Comparing Monta to iverson and Arenas aren't really giving me the impression of a Jason kidd or Steve Nash (in which i'd like monta to develop into). There are two types and if monta is developing into the former, then why not get rid of JRich?
"The only yardstick for success our society has is being a champion. No one remembers anything else."
-John Madden

All Star
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:43 pm
Location: Union City/Torrance, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:01 am
If you guys want to compare championship teams over the past decade, they were mainly:

The First bulls team with the triangle

1.) Solid
2.) Superstar/HOF/arguably the best player ever?
3.) HOF draggin off of Jordans coattails
4.) Solid
5.) Solid

or in the lakers mold

1.) Solid
2.) Superstar (HOF?)
3.) Some throw in
4.) Some throw in (Madsen)
5.) SUperstar/HOF

or maybe the rockets

1.) Solid
2.) Solid
3.) Solid
4.) Superstar/HOF (was drexler SF or PF? or was he SG?)
5.) SUperstar?HOF


Point is, there hasn't been a team yet who won the championship with a me first point guard. As far as im concerned right now, I don't care as long as we get into the playoffs. Then we can start worrying about the petty stuff. As long as the PG plays within the flow of the offense and can lead the team, we can have JRich develop into a monster or have JRich and Biedrins develop into monsters and have them carry the team. Thats why I want monta to develop into a Kidd type or Nash type.
"The only yardstick for success our society has is being a champion. No one remembers anything else."
-John Madden
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 755
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:28 pm
Location: Hayward, CA
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:06 am
Just to reiterate so no one's confused about my thoughts here...

I think Monta Ellis is a great player and shows great promise and I'm glad to have him on the Warriors... I just wanted to depict him as a point guard and compare him to BD. I'm not mad at him at all for the way he plays. He's young and he'll only get better. He's more mature with his game than many veterans today! I just wanted to discuss his point guard ability, which I don't think is there yet, but I really hope in time it will be there.
Last edited by Josh Jamison on Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:13 am, edited 3 times in total.
Josh Jamison a.k.a. Adonal's The Man!
Image
User avatar
Starting Lineup
Posts: 755
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:28 pm
Location: Hayward, CA
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:11 am
ReginaldLewis wrote:I think you should re-think what you are saying Josh. Monta is not the reason why the Warriors are losing. All praise to Monta. :D

Also... I never said that Monta is the reason why the Warriors are losing. Where did that come from?
Josh Jamison a.k.a. Adonal's The Man!
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:39 am
tkono wrote:If you guys want to compare championship teams over the past decade, they were mainly:

The First bulls team with the triangle

1.) Solid
2.) Superstar/HOF/arguably the best player ever?
3.) HOF draggin off of Jordans coattails
4.) Solid
5.) Solid

or in the lakers mold

1.) Solid
2.) Superstar (HOF?)
3.) Some throw in
4.) Some throw in (Madsen)
5.) SUperstar/HOF

or maybe the rockets

1.) Solid
2.) Solid
3.) Solid
4.) Superstar/HOF (was drexler SF or PF? or was he SG?)
5.) SUperstar?HOF


If anything, all that proves that any championship team needs two superstars, no matter the position.

btw, Drexler played mostly SG. If I'm not wrong, Horry played SF for that Rockets team...

A couple more:

Spurs:
1.) Solid
2.) Solid
3.) Solid
4.) Superstar/HOF
5.) SUperstar?HOF (Robinson)

Pistons: (Weirdest champions ever... I don't think any of those players can be called a superstar)
1.) Solid
2.) Solid
3.) Solid
4.) Solid
5.) Solid

All Star
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:43 pm
Location: Union City/Torrance, CA
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:06 pm
you're right. it proves that too. But it goes to show that teams don't need (and haven't had) a superstar PG to guide a team to a championship. We just want someone decent to call plays make the passes and "fill in". To be honest, right now, i don't careas long as we have one superstar on the team. As long as he is on that level, the team will win games. Then we will see where the team will go from there.
"The only yardstick for success our society has is being a champion. No one remembers anything else."
-John Madden

All Star
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:41 am
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:40 pm
tkono wrote:If you guys want to compare championship teams over the past decade, they were mainly:

The First bulls team with the triangle

1.) Solid
2.) Superstar/HOF/arguably the best player ever?
3.) HOF draggin off of Jordans coattails
4.) Solid
5.) Solid

or in the lakers mold

1.) Solid
2.) Superstar (HOF?)
3.) Some throw in
4.) Some throw in (Madsen)
5.) SUperstar/HOF

or maybe the rockets

1.) Solid
2.) Solid
3.) Solid
4.) Superstar/HOF (was drexler SF or PF? or was he SG?)
5.) SUperstar?HOF


Point is, there hasn't been a team yet who won the championship with a me first point guard. As far as im concerned right now, I don't care as long as we get into the playoffs. Then we can start worrying about the petty stuff. As long as the PG plays within the flow of the offense and can lead the team, we can have JRich develop into a monster or have JRich and Biedrins develop into monsters and have them carry the team. Thats why I want monta to develop into a Kidd type or Nash type.


You still will not acknowledge the Detroit Pistons. Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars were the stara od the team, with Thomas being a "me first" point guard. Could you please acknowlege that?

PS: I concsider Thomas a superstar and Dumars a little bit more than just solid.
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests

cron