@Gil Scott-Heroin
The bulk of Green's value comes on the defensive end of the floor and thats where the Mavericks are most vulnerable. It only stands to reason that its the area where he'd create the most impact for the team in replace of Ellis. The three point shooting is a given, and his off ball play can be of more impact if the Mavericks find another creating guard. The original post was created under the assumption they would aggressively look to replace Ellis with another ball handler. Tyson Chandler is a free agent. I haven't heard anything about him returning to the Mavs. He's not on the team so Green leading them in blocks would be correct, not disingenuous. If they signed LMA and Robin Lopez he would still be the leader in total blocks for 2015
Not sure where you're getting those figures from. Dirk shot better from three without Monta on the court in 2014 (38.9%--->42.7%) and hit 47.6% of his mid range jumpers without Monta on the court in 2014 which is good enough to rank him among the top in the NBA and is only 3% less than his season average of 50.9%. I'm not seeing how Ellis was the key reason behind Dirk's resurgent season, in reality the biggest thing that helped him was simply being healthy. If you watched Nowitzki around the end of the 2013 he began showing flashes of the elite play we'd been used to seeing for the better part of a decade. Shooting 54% from the field in the month of March and 46.8% from three highlighted by his 35 point performance against a great Bulls defense only missing three shots from the field. From February 4th (where he began to regain his form) to the end of the season the Mavericks had the eighth best offense in the NBA which is in stark contrast to the twenty seven games he missed with injury to begin the year where the Mavs ranked twentieth. You can't seriously expect me to believe that Monta, not a healthy Dirk, was the catalyst for the turnaround. In reality the turnaround already happened before 2014 began. And this is before the Jose Calderon addition who along with Monta (Not a footnote, he deserves some props) boosted the Mavericks backcourt and gave them value offensively. Wouldn't say the Mavericks offense functioned purely around Monta's driving, for one they did set up a good portion of their offense through Dirk in the post and second those drives aren't as productive without great P&R big men or the shooters that surround him. His production on drives is certainly a testament to his slashing ability and it is what makes him a valuable player in this league, but its also a result of feeding one of the best three point offenses in the NBA and a tandem of elite P&R bigs. Thats a testament to how good the Mavericks offense is as a whole. Also to your point about Monta only being 2nd to Dirk by 2.7 points, its important to note the monumental efficiency gap. They weren't that close in actual scoring ability. Dirk was the offensive anchor for that team, not Monta. He was the most impactful player on a team that suffered most when he wasn't on the floor, not Monta. The only thing undebatable here is that the best high/mid post player in the NBA, one of the top shooters in the league a mere tenths away from his third 50/40/90 season and the player defenses were most concerned in stopping when playing the Dallas Mavericks in 2014 was Dirk Nowitzki. That was one of the best regular seasons of his hall of fame career from an offensive standpoint. No I don't think Monta Ellis has any campaigns that compare well to prime Dirk
You say they were playing against bench units 90% of the time but I don't see any evidence of that figure, there were starters on the floor for the opposition. The fact that the Mavericks managed to produce at such a high rate with Nowitzki as the pure focal point while surrounded by by bench players without Ellis should not be summarily dismissed. There is a reason Carlisle had him in those lineups and its clear that he was the key to their offense as the Mavericks were able to sustain their elite production even without Monta in the lineup. There's a reason Brandan Wright, one of the top P&R bigs in the league, efficiency did not see a significant drop without Monta on the floor as other Mavericks guards were able to get him involved in the offense. Also shouldn't overlook the fact that all the high usage lineups with Monta in the game sans DIrk weren't performing well offensively in '14. Not sure that should happen if you're the anchor of a great offense. Don't really get why you omitted Chandler Parsons from the '15 lineups there
Sure the Mavericks can have a good defense with Ellis. But it a hell of alot harder to establish it around him than Danny Green. I'm not so sure thats its much harder to find good dribble penetrators than 3&D players. Tyreke Evans, Ty Lawson, Eric Bledsoe, Goran Dragic, Reggie Jackson, Jeff Teague, Jrue Holiday, and the list goes on as there's a surplus of guys with that ability who the Mavericks can acquire. Some of them actually happen to play defense or can score at a not subpar efficiency rate. Playing strong defense and shooting an elite rate from three isn't all that common for wings. Reke and Lawson btw are no less skilled at getting penetration that Monta. They actually produced more ppg for their teams on drives this year than Monta did last.
Nothing wrong with being tightly guarded behind the three point line. That means teams would be ill advised to help off you and will need to be aware of your movements off ball. And if the Mavericks do wind up getting a LaMarcus Aldridge, he's the type of player thats better suited to play opposite him. I never said that teams pay more attention to him defensively and I brought it up in order to reiterate the point that he does add something on that end of the floor that Ellis does not. So in addition to the enormous difference in defensive capabilities he's a lights out three point shooter that will provide his points at a more efficient rate. Not sure whats up with your use of the term baroque there but it doesn't apply here, I'm simply providing a detailed description as to what it is Green does well and why he shouldn't just be labeled a three point shooter. In general more attention should be paid to how these guys manage to get open
Not sure why you listed the box score of a single playoff series. That was literally the best he's ever performed in the postseason. He has been far from reliable on the next stage evidenced by subpar series after subpar series in his past playoff appearances. And you see, the great thing about Danny Green is that even if his shot is off he's still playing great defense. Its a rarity that his shot will be off as he's been a 40% three point shooter on average over a large sample size of games in the past couple of seasons (Including a 47.9 3PT% in the '13 and '14 postseasons, but if it is he can man up with the best perimeter option on the opposing team or be a disruptive team defender blocking shots at a absurd rate for a guard. And I'd say the real reason the Spurs lost that series is because Kawhi shot below 30% from the field in the last couple of games and TP9/Manu were awful. The players that Green was intended to support offensively aside from Duncan did not play up to their capabilities.
No, you really can't use synergy in that manner. Not saying that to reinforce any point but those statistics are heavily influenced by factors that have nothing to do with the perimeter defender in question which is the case on every single team in this league. If Tyson Chandler/Brandan Wright/Samuel Dalembert blocks the shot of X player that blows by Monta Ellis he gets credited with the stop. If the Mavs opt to double the man Monta is guarding because he needs help and they miss the shot, Monta gets credit for the stop. If a player shoots, misses, Monta happens to be around the shooter he will get credit for forcing the stop. I was a synergy subscriber for a year before they transferred to NBA.com. I've watched 100's of those videos and written articles using the clips in order to highlight plays. Trust, I know how misleading they can be. Unless you actually watch the highlight videos and can give a description of what Ellis actually does well defensively to merit that stat its useless. I can tell you what Monta Ellis struggles with defensively with actual basketball terminology and a detailed explanation. A single statistic with zero context is not more valuable than a good explanation from an educated basketball mind using the eye test
Sure I'd say that for alot of playmakers in this league many of which are ball dominant. Ty Lawson being a pretty good example. But its different for a James Harden, LeBron James, Russell Westbrook, guys that are actual superstar offensive players who are an offense in and of themselves. No problem with placing a limit on the players you can put around them because they're so great. But with Monta you have to question if its really worth restricting the type of players you can add to your roster just because of his shortcomings. Replacing him with Green removes that restriction for the Mavs. Everything is open. There's not a single team situation that he doesn't really fit with. With Monta, the options are limited. Its a wonder who's even going to sign him because of the problems he may pose defensively and the fact that he'll clash with a ball dominant player. Just looking at the teams who have cap space I don't see any he'd be a good fit for outside of Dallas, but they look resigned to letting him go and I wonder why that is. Sure maybe if they didn't sign Parsons and signed someone like Ariza this wouldn't be a problem but it didn't turn out that way. So it was and is a problem.
Disagree with Green not being able to be more impactful and that it doesn't matter who the Mavericks sign. My original post, whether you chose to accept the intent that I am telling you I intended to be put across, is that if the Mavericks can build a certain type of team which is highly plausible given their cap space Green can be of more use for them as SG than Monta would be. There is nothing wrong with that statement. If the Mavericks traded for Kyle Lowry is Danny Green not a better fit next to him and would he not be of more impact for the Mavericks than Monta Ellis. The answer is yes. If the Mavericks traded for Ty Lawson or Eric Bledsoe (These aren't random names but guys actually on the block) who is the better fit? Who is the better guy working opposite the basketball and capably guarding wings or explosive point guards so these guys can hide on lesser threatening offensive players? These are all things you should think about in the offseason. Not just about who plays better in a vacuum, and keep note that I have not once said that Green is better than Ellis in a direct comparison ignoring team factors, but who can filt the mold of a team better provided a particular context. Its a little similar to Kawhi Leonard of lets say last season before he became a stronger offensive player and '14 Carmelo Anthony. Obviously Melo is the better player, but could several teams use Kawhi instead and can he be a more impactful player? Yeah. B/c wing defense is very important and he's arguably the best in the game while being able to shoot capably from the perimeter on the other end of the court and work opposite the ball not taking away touches from other players. Of course Ellis is not remotely close to being remotely close to the offensive player that Melo is, but the same line of thinking still applies. I am expecting the Mavericks to be very active in FA this summer and suggested that Green could be of higher impact with those potential moves in mind
No, Dirk had the most influence in their improvement on offense. To me its kinda crazy to suggest that Monta was a more impactful offensive player than a prime DIrk Nowitzki, maybe I just fully appreciate his greatness as one of the most skilled big men in NBA history more than most. You just insinuated that he was an impactful defender by saying he has tangible defensive value. That means he has impact. Your point about him holding players to that percentage directly implies that he's a good defensive player. Do you honestly believe this? You seem smart, I don't think you do, so why are you using that? Can you explain what it is that Monta does well defensively that would lead to him holding defensive players below their percentages? The only positive thing you said about him was steals which cause turnovers and are not counted in that percentage. Or can you acknowledge that its clearly influenced by other players on his team helping to cover for him and the obvious inconsistencies that come with trying to attribute a number to a player's defensive impact
The bulk of Green's value comes on the defensive end of the floor and thats where the Mavericks are most vulnerable. It only stands to reason that its the area where he'd create the most impact for the team in replace of Ellis. The three point shooting is a given, and his off ball play can be of more impact if the Mavericks find another creating guard. The original post was created under the assumption they would aggressively look to replace Ellis with another ball handler. Tyson Chandler is a free agent. I haven't heard anything about him returning to the Mavs. He's not on the team so Green leading them in blocks would be correct, not disingenuous. If they signed LMA and Robin Lopez he would still be the leader in total blocks for 2015
Not sure where you're getting those figures from. Dirk shot better from three without Monta on the court in 2014 (38.9%--->42.7%) and hit 47.6% of his mid range jumpers without Monta on the court in 2014 which is good enough to rank him among the top in the NBA and is only 3% less than his season average of 50.9%. I'm not seeing how Ellis was the key reason behind Dirk's resurgent season, in reality the biggest thing that helped him was simply being healthy. If you watched Nowitzki around the end of the 2013 he began showing flashes of the elite play we'd been used to seeing for the better part of a decade. Shooting 54% from the field in the month of March and 46.8% from three highlighted by his 35 point performance against a great Bulls defense only missing three shots from the field. From February 4th (where he began to regain his form) to the end of the season the Mavericks had the eighth best offense in the NBA which is in stark contrast to the twenty seven games he missed with injury to begin the year where the Mavs ranked twentieth. You can't seriously expect me to believe that Monta, not a healthy Dirk, was the catalyst for the turnaround. In reality the turnaround already happened before 2014 began. And this is before the Jose Calderon addition who along with Monta (Not a footnote, he deserves some props) boosted the Mavericks backcourt and gave them value offensively. Wouldn't say the Mavericks offense functioned purely around Monta's driving, for one they did set up a good portion of their offense through Dirk in the post and second those drives aren't as productive without great P&R big men or the shooters that surround him. His production on drives is certainly a testament to his slashing ability and it is what makes him a valuable player in this league, but its also a result of feeding one of the best three point offenses in the NBA and a tandem of elite P&R bigs. Thats a testament to how good the Mavericks offense is as a whole. Also to your point about Monta only being 2nd to Dirk by 2.7 points, its important to note the monumental efficiency gap. They weren't that close in actual scoring ability. Dirk was the offensive anchor for that team, not Monta. He was the most impactful player on a team that suffered most when he wasn't on the floor, not Monta. The only thing undebatable here is that the best high/mid post player in the NBA, one of the top shooters in the league a mere tenths away from his third 50/40/90 season and the player defenses were most concerned in stopping when playing the Dallas Mavericks in 2014 was Dirk Nowitzki. That was one of the best regular seasons of his hall of fame career from an offensive standpoint. No I don't think Monta Ellis has any campaigns that compare well to prime Dirk
You say they were playing against bench units 90% of the time but I don't see any evidence of that figure, there were starters on the floor for the opposition. The fact that the Mavericks managed to produce at such a high rate with Nowitzki as the pure focal point while surrounded by by bench players without Ellis should not be summarily dismissed. There is a reason Carlisle had him in those lineups and its clear that he was the key to their offense as the Mavericks were able to sustain their elite production even without Monta in the lineup. There's a reason Brandan Wright, one of the top P&R bigs in the league, efficiency did not see a significant drop without Monta on the floor as other Mavericks guards were able to get him involved in the offense. Also shouldn't overlook the fact that all the high usage lineups with Monta in the game sans DIrk weren't performing well offensively in '14. Not sure that should happen if you're the anchor of a great offense. Don't really get why you omitted Chandler Parsons from the '15 lineups there
Sure the Mavericks can have a good defense with Ellis. But it a hell of alot harder to establish it around him than Danny Green. I'm not so sure thats its much harder to find good dribble penetrators than 3&D players. Tyreke Evans, Ty Lawson, Eric Bledsoe, Goran Dragic, Reggie Jackson, Jeff Teague, Jrue Holiday, and the list goes on as there's a surplus of guys with that ability who the Mavericks can acquire. Some of them actually happen to play defense or can score at a not subpar efficiency rate. Playing strong defense and shooting an elite rate from three isn't all that common for wings. Reke and Lawson btw are no less skilled at getting penetration that Monta. They actually produced more ppg for their teams on drives this year than Monta did last.
Nothing wrong with being tightly guarded behind the three point line. That means teams would be ill advised to help off you and will need to be aware of your movements off ball. And if the Mavericks do wind up getting a LaMarcus Aldridge, he's the type of player thats better suited to play opposite him. I never said that teams pay more attention to him defensively and I brought it up in order to reiterate the point that he does add something on that end of the floor that Ellis does not. So in addition to the enormous difference in defensive capabilities he's a lights out three point shooter that will provide his points at a more efficient rate. Not sure whats up with your use of the term baroque there but it doesn't apply here, I'm simply providing a detailed description as to what it is Green does well and why he shouldn't just be labeled a three point shooter. In general more attention should be paid to how these guys manage to get open
Not sure why you listed the box score of a single playoff series. That was literally the best he's ever performed in the postseason. He has been far from reliable on the next stage evidenced by subpar series after subpar series in his past playoff appearances. And you see, the great thing about Danny Green is that even if his shot is off he's still playing great defense. Its a rarity that his shot will be off as he's been a 40% three point shooter on average over a large sample size of games in the past couple of seasons (Including a 47.9 3PT% in the '13 and '14 postseasons, but if it is he can man up with the best perimeter option on the opposing team or be a disruptive team defender blocking shots at a absurd rate for a guard. And I'd say the real reason the Spurs lost that series is because Kawhi shot below 30% from the field in the last couple of games and TP9/Manu were awful. The players that Green was intended to support offensively aside from Duncan did not play up to their capabilities.
No, you really can't use synergy in that manner. Not saying that to reinforce any point but those statistics are heavily influenced by factors that have nothing to do with the perimeter defender in question which is the case on every single team in this league. If Tyson Chandler/Brandan Wright/Samuel Dalembert blocks the shot of X player that blows by Monta Ellis he gets credited with the stop. If the Mavs opt to double the man Monta is guarding because he needs help and they miss the shot, Monta gets credit for the stop. If a player shoots, misses, Monta happens to be around the shooter he will get credit for forcing the stop. I was a synergy subscriber for a year before they transferred to NBA.com. I've watched 100's of those videos and written articles using the clips in order to highlight plays. Trust, I know how misleading they can be. Unless you actually watch the highlight videos and can give a description of what Ellis actually does well defensively to merit that stat its useless. I can tell you what Monta Ellis struggles with defensively with actual basketball terminology and a detailed explanation. A single statistic with zero context is not more valuable than a good explanation from an educated basketball mind using the eye test
Sure I'd say that for alot of playmakers in this league many of which are ball dominant. Ty Lawson being a pretty good example. But its different for a James Harden, LeBron James, Russell Westbrook, guys that are actual superstar offensive players who are an offense in and of themselves. No problem with placing a limit on the players you can put around them because they're so great. But with Monta you have to question if its really worth restricting the type of players you can add to your roster just because of his shortcomings. Replacing him with Green removes that restriction for the Mavs. Everything is open. There's not a single team situation that he doesn't really fit with. With Monta, the options are limited. Its a wonder who's even going to sign him because of the problems he may pose defensively and the fact that he'll clash with a ball dominant player. Just looking at the teams who have cap space I don't see any he'd be a good fit for outside of Dallas, but they look resigned to letting him go and I wonder why that is. Sure maybe if they didn't sign Parsons and signed someone like Ariza this wouldn't be a problem but it didn't turn out that way. So it was and is a problem.
Disagree with Green not being able to be more impactful and that it doesn't matter who the Mavericks sign. My original post, whether you chose to accept the intent that I am telling you I intended to be put across, is that if the Mavericks can build a certain type of team which is highly plausible given their cap space Green can be of more use for them as SG than Monta would be. There is nothing wrong with that statement. If the Mavericks traded for Kyle Lowry is Danny Green not a better fit next to him and would he not be of more impact for the Mavericks than Monta Ellis. The answer is yes. If the Mavericks traded for Ty Lawson or Eric Bledsoe (These aren't random names but guys actually on the block) who is the better fit? Who is the better guy working opposite the basketball and capably guarding wings or explosive point guards so these guys can hide on lesser threatening offensive players? These are all things you should think about in the offseason. Not just about who plays better in a vacuum, and keep note that I have not once said that Green is better than Ellis in a direct comparison ignoring team factors, but who can filt the mold of a team better provided a particular context. Its a little similar to Kawhi Leonard of lets say last season before he became a stronger offensive player and '14 Carmelo Anthony. Obviously Melo is the better player, but could several teams use Kawhi instead and can he be a more impactful player? Yeah. B/c wing defense is very important and he's arguably the best in the game while being able to shoot capably from the perimeter on the other end of the court and work opposite the ball not taking away touches from other players. Of course Ellis is not remotely close to being remotely close to the offensive player that Melo is, but the same line of thinking still applies. I am expecting the Mavericks to be very active in FA this summer and suggested that Green could be of higher impact with those potential moves in mind
No, Dirk had the most influence in their improvement on offense. To me its kinda crazy to suggest that Monta was a more impactful offensive player than a prime DIrk Nowitzki, maybe I just fully appreciate his greatness as one of the most skilled big men in NBA history more than most. You just insinuated that he was an impactful defender by saying he has tangible defensive value. That means he has impact. Your point about him holding players to that percentage directly implies that he's a good defensive player. Do you honestly believe this? You seem smart, I don't think you do, so why are you using that? Can you explain what it is that Monta does well defensively that would lead to him holding defensive players below their percentages? The only positive thing you said about him was steals which cause turnovers and are not counted in that percentage. Or can you acknowledge that its clearly influenced by other players on his team helping to cover for him and the obvious inconsistencies that come with trying to attribute a number to a player's defensive impact
