- 8,485
- 1,318
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2010
Rudy Gay 3-10 for 14 points.. those 10 boards doe
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Rudy Gay 3-10 for 14 points.. those 10 boards doe
I was pretty anti-signing Monta Ellis in the offseason, outside of the Bucks getting washed in the playoffs I hadn't watched a game he had played in maybe two or three years.
Dude is a joy to watch.
Good situations and good coaching can change things for talented players.
I see Monta averaging 23-26 with good efficiency and assist numbers for the next two or three years. He needs to stop the turnovers but I see that as a function of not knowing his teammates yet because he isn't throwing the all to the other team.
#MontaEllishaveitall
Last year the league average was 1.06. The Thunder led the league at 1.12. The Wizards were the worst at 1.00.What's a good point per possession average for a team?
I have been arguing about Monta Ellis ad nauseam on Niketalk for years. All anyone ever said was "inefficient scorer," "ballhog," or something to that degree. I constantly have tried to remind people that early in Monta's career (when he was on the We Believe Warriors with Baron, Jrich, Jax, etc.) that he was one of the MOST efficient scorers in the NBA. He shot 60% for an entire month!!
What most people cant seem to get past is the years where Monta was the primary option on terrible teams. Of course, this is where the labels came from. That is why I was hoping Monta was going to sign with a top team. Because, based solely on how he has played on good teams, the labels he has are completely unjustified.
Let's not be ridiculous.monta>wade
monta>steph (and im a big W's fan)
Yeah they were horrendous. Had no scorers, no one who could create....just terrible all around teams. The entire weight of the offense rested on Monta's shoulders. And people wonder why his turnovers were up, his shooting percentage was down, and his assist numbers were down.no knock on rob kurz, chris hunter, anthony tolliver, but those w's roster were pretty bad after that We Believe TeamsI have been arguing about Monta Ellis ad nauseam on Niketalk for years. All anyone ever said was "inefficient scorer," "ballhog," or something to that degree. I constantly have tried to remind people that early in Monta's career (when he was on the We Believe Warriors with Baron, Jrich, Jax, etc.) that he was one of the MOST efficient scorers in the NBA. He shot 60% for an entire month!!
What most people cant seem to get past is the years where Monta was the primary option on terrible teams. Of course, this is where the labels came from. That is why I was hoping Monta was going to sign with a top team. Because, based solely on how he has played on good teams, the labels he has are completely unjustified.
The problem with this sentiment is that they were good, though not great offensively in the post-Baron years with Monta:Yeah they were horrendous. Had no scorers, no one who could create....just terrible all around teams. The entire weight of the offense rested on Monta's shoulders. And people wonder why his turnovers were up, his shooting percentage was down, and his assist numbers were down.
I have been arguing about Monta Ellis ad nauseam on Niketalk for years. All anyone ever said was "inefficient scorer," "ballhog," or something to that degree. I constantly have tried to remind people that early in Monta's career (when he was on the We Believe Warriors with Baron, Jrich, Jax, etc.) that he was one of the MOST efficient scorers in the NBA. He shot 60% for an entire month!!
What most people cant seem to get past is the years where Monta was the primary option on terrible teams. Of course, this is where the labels came from. That is why I was hoping Monta was going to sign with a top team. Because, based solely on how he has played on good teams, the labels he has are completely unjustified.
no knock on rob kurz, chris hunter, anthony tolliver, but those w's roster were pretty bad after that We Believe Teams
If we had players who could knock down open shots, you would have seen Ellis' assist total skyrocket. And because he would have actually had competent basketball players around him and he wouldnt have to do EVERYTHING, you would have seen his shooting percentage go up, and his turnovers go down.
The problem with this sentiment is that they were good, though not great offensively in the post-Baron years with Monta:Yeah they were horrendous. Had no scorers, no one who could create....just terrible all around teams. The entire weight of the offense rested on Monta's shoulders. And people wonder why his turnovers were up, his shooting percentage was down, and his assist numbers were down.
I have been arguing about Monta Ellis ad nauseam on Niketalk for years. All anyone ever said was "inefficient scorer," "ballhog," or something to that degree. I constantly have tried to remind people that early in Monta's career (when he was on the We Believe Warriors with Baron, Jrich, Jax, etc.) that he was one of the MOST efficient scorers in the NBA. He shot 60% for an entire month!!
What most people cant seem to get past is the years where Monta was the primary option on terrible teams. Of course, this is where the labels came from. That is why I was hoping Monta was going to sign with a top team. Because, based solely on how he has played on good teams, the labels he has are completely unjustified.
no knock on rob kurz, chris hunter, anthony tolliver, but those w's roster were pretty bad after that We Believe Teams
If we had players who could knock down open shots, you would have seen Ellis' assist total skyrocket. And because he would have actually had competent basketball players around him and he wouldnt have to do EVERYTHING, you would have seen his shooting percentage go up, and his turnovers go down.
08-09: 106.6 Off Eff (10th)
09-10: 105.4 Off Eff (13th)
10-11: 105.5 Off Eff (13th)
11-12: 103.9 Off Eff (only 26 games)
I'll give you that.The problem with this sentiment is that they were good, though not great offensively in the post-Baron years with Monta:Yeah they were horrendous. Had no scorers, no one who could create....just terrible all around teams. The entire weight of the offense rested on Monta's shoulders. And people wonder why his turnovers were up, his shooting percentage was down, and his assist numbers were down.
I have been arguing about Monta Ellis ad nauseam on Niketalk for years. All anyone ever said was "inefficient scorer," "ballhog," or something to that degree. I constantly have tried to remind people that early in Monta's career (when he was on the We Believe Warriors with Baron, Jrich, Jax, etc.) that he was one of the MOST efficient scorers in the NBA. He shot 60% for an entire month!!
What most people cant seem to get past is the years where Monta was the primary option on terrible teams. Of course, this is where the labels came from. That is why I was hoping Monta was going to sign with a top team. Because, based solely on how he has played on good teams, the labels he has are completely unjustified.
no knock on rob kurz, chris hunter, anthony tolliver, but those w's roster were pretty bad after that We Believe Teams
If we had players who could knock down open shots, you would have seen Ellis' assist total skyrocket. And because he would have actually had competent basketball players around him and he wouldnt have to do EVERYTHING, you would have seen his shooting percentage go up, and his turnovers go down.
08-09: 106.6 Off Eff (10th)
09-10: 105.4 Off Eff (13th)
10-11: 105.5 Off Eff (13th)
11-12: 103.9 Off Eff (only 26 games)
im going of with that eyeball test. those w's teams werent that talented. i watched almost all those gms and always said, monta should be a number two/three option. he was basically put into a primary position and wasnt that type of guy.
Dion Waiters.
101 points. 99 field goal attempts.
John Wall is shooting 8-19 from distance through four games this season.
To put that in perspective, he shot 15-87 over the past two seasons combined
Another stat to chew on that I just found.. Ricky Rubio's FG% through 5 games = 28.6% :x
Ricky Rubio career FG% = 35.5% :x :x