PDA

View Full Version : NBA.com poll has Monta Ellis as one of 4 people



asandhu23
03-03-2012, 09:36 PM
as options to score 100 in a game..


I am a Monta fan but come on...


http://www.nba.com/


others are LeBron, Durant and Kobe

justinnum1
03-03-2012, 09:38 PM
how is durant not winning that poll?

Lloyd Christmas
03-03-2012, 09:39 PM
I would put Lin at the top.

Chill_Will_24
03-03-2012, 09:42 PM
I dont think it can be done. The game is played at a different pace nowadays. Scoring 100 back then is the equivalent of like 50 today or something idk...

Kobe and his 81 is as close as it ever will get imho and Kobe is the ultimate ball hog so if he couldnt reach the mark nobody will.

Lebron wont cuz thats not his game and neither will Kobe at this point. Monta? Pleeeease... so i guess i would go Drant but Durant is not a selfish player so he cant either.

Monta is beast
03-03-2012, 09:43 PM
No one will ever do it again. But Monta is one of the prolific scorers in the game, so I can see why he's on there. Just didn't think he had that much respect around the league.

justinnum1
03-03-2012, 09:44 PM
I dont think it can be done. The game is played at a different pace nowadays. Scoring 100 back then is the equivalent of like 50 today or something idk...

Kobe and his 81 is as close as it ever will get imho and Kobe is the ultimate ball hog so if he couldnt reach the mark nobody will.

Lebron wont cuz thats not his game and neither will Kobe at this point. Monta? Pleeeease... so i guess i would go Drant but Durant is not a selfish player so he cant either.

oh it wont be done for sure, but still surprised durant is not leading that poll

smith&wesson
03-03-2012, 09:44 PM
81 is pretty dam close. being a raptor fan i remembe that game. kobe could have scored even more if he wanted too.

Avenged
03-03-2012, 09:45 PM
Ellis is a scorer who shoots near 20 FGA, not surprised he's up there. I think he has the least chance of the options though and so do the majority of voters (4%)

Corey
03-03-2012, 09:47 PM
as options to score 100 in a game..


I am a Monta fan but come on...


http://www.nba.com/


others are LeBron, Durant and Kobe

At the time the poll was posted, weren't those the top 4 in the league in PPG?

I'm sure that's the only reason he was included.

asandhu23
03-03-2012, 09:51 PM
Ellis is a scorer who shoots near 20 FGA, not surprised he's up there. I think he has the least chance of the options though and so do the majority of voters (4%)

So do Kobe, LeBron and Durant. Why do we choose to mention it with Monta only as if he is the only starter to do this?

bholly
03-03-2012, 09:54 PM
So do Kobe, LeBron and Durant. Why do we choose to mention it with Monta only as if he is the only starter to do this?

lol. He's explaining why Monta might've been included in this poll WITH KOBE, LEBRON AND DURANT. That's what this whole thread is about - Monta being in the poll. His name is in the title and everything.

Avenged
03-03-2012, 10:01 PM
So do Kobe, LeBron and Durant. Why do we choose to mention it with Monta only as if he is the only starter to do this?

I said that because of your comment "I am a Monta fan but come on..."

You insinuated (at least to me) that Monta shouldn't be up there. I think it's not surprising that he is since he's a scorer.

asandhu23
03-03-2012, 10:01 PM
lol. He's explaining why Monta might've been included in this poll WITH KOBE, LEBRON AND DURANT. That's what this whole thread is about - Monta being in the poll. His name is in the title and everything.

and I am curious as to why people only mention FGA when it comes to Ellis when other starting main scoring options take just as many shots per game.

This, btw, isn't limited to this thread.

FlakeyFool
03-03-2012, 10:03 PM
I dont think it can be done. The game is played at a different pace nowadays. Scoring 100 back then is the equivalent of like 50 today or something idk...



:rolleyes: If it was equivalent, then more players would have scored 100pts

Vincent33
03-03-2012, 10:11 PM
Spot any of those 4 fools 99 points against White Mamba himself and he will absolutely embarrass them.

Brian Scalabrine. Legend. Champion of Champions. Success at success at success.

bholly
03-03-2012, 10:18 PM
and I am curious as to why people only mention FGA when it comes to Ellis when other starting main scoring options take just as many shots per game.

This, btw, isn't limited to this thread.

You're curious about something that's been explained on this forum (and elsewhere) ad nauseam?

In this thread it's entirely 100% justified and it's ridiculous for you to ask the question and then get upset about the other obvious answer.

In other threads you know why too - because guys like LBJ, Durant, etc put up highly efficient shots, and more good shots is a good thing, so a high FGA isn't a criticism there.
Ellis, on the other hand, scores at a low efficiency, so putting up more and more shots in that case is a bad thing.

Good efficient shots = good, so more is a good thing.
Bad inefficient shots = bad, so more is a bad thing.

The other guys with low efficiencies - Kobe (this year), Melo (this year), Westbrook (less so this year), etc - absolutely get criticized for it.

The simple reason Monta gets criticized for it the most is that he's been putting up low efficiency shots at high volumes for years, in ways those guys don't even come close to.

bklynny67
03-03-2012, 10:20 PM
I dont think it can be done. The game is played at a different pace nowadays. Scoring 100 back then is the equivalent of like 50 today or something idk...

Kobe and his 81 is as close as it ever will get imho and Kobe is the ultimate ball hog so if he couldnt reach the mark nobody will.

Lebron wont cuz thats not his game and neither will Kobe at this point. Monta? Pleeeease... so i guess i would go Drant but Durant is not a selfish player so he cant either.

LOL no :facepalm:

Not even close man.. ONE player scored 100 pts back then and no one else came close.. MANY players have scored 50 nowadays and many players did it multiple times. There's been over fifty 50 pt games since 1990. That statement would be true if there was like 50 instances of a 100 pt game back then.

shizzle09
03-03-2012, 10:22 PM
lol. He's explaining why Monta might've been included in this poll WITH KOBE, LEBRON AND DURANT. That's what this whole thread is about - Monta being in the poll. His name is in the title and everything.

and I am curious as to why people only mention FGA when it comes to Ellis when other starting main scoring options take just as many shots per game.

This, btw, isn't limited to this thread.

Yeah, people who hate on monta like that are the ones that go to bed when monta's games tip off. He is a great scorer period. Rose, durant, Westbrook melo and Kobe all shoot around the same amount but that's never mentioned like it is with monta.

Gritz
03-03-2012, 10:29 PM
Spot any of those 4 fools 99 points against White Mamba himself and he will absolutely embarrass them.

Brian Scalabrine. Legend. Champion of Champions. Success at success at success.

k

bklynny67
03-03-2012, 10:35 PM
Spot any of those 4 fools 99 points against White Mamba himself and he will absolutely embarrass them.

Brian Scalabrine. Legend. Champion of Champions. Success at success at success.

How does someone even respond to this? :facepalm:

Your statement is ridiculous and untrue. And dumb. And lame.

asandhu23
03-03-2012, 10:37 PM
how does someone even respond to this? :facepalm:

Your statement is ridiculous and untrue. And dumb. And lame.

You. Shall. Not. Insult. The. Almighty. Brian. Scalabrine!

VCaintdead17
03-03-2012, 10:38 PM
You're curious about something that's been explained on this forum (and elsewhere) ad nauseam?

In this thread it's entirely 100% justified and it's ridiculous for you to ask the question and then get upset about the other obvious answer.

In other threads you know why too - because guys like LBJ, Durant, etc put up highly efficient shots, and more good shots is a good thing, so a high FGA isn't a criticism there.
Ellis, on the other hand, scores at a low efficiency, so putting up more and more shots in that case is a bad thing.

Good efficient shots = good, so more is a good thing.
Bad inefficient shots = bad, so more is a bad thing.

The other guys with low efficiencies - Kobe (this year), Melo (this year), Westbrook (less so this year), etc - absolutely get criticized for it.

The simple reason Monta gets criticized for it the most is that he's been putting up low efficiency shots at high volumes for years, in ways those guys don't even come close to.

This. You know something is wrong if a player averages 26 ppg but is only worth 1.3 win shares. His WS/48 minutes has simply abysmal the past four seasons as well. Points per game don't equate to success.

Monta is beast
03-03-2012, 10:40 PM
Advanced stats suck.

asandhu23
03-03-2012, 10:43 PM
This. You know something is wrong if a player averages 26 ppg but is only worth 1.3 win shares. His WS/48 minutes has simply abysmal the past four seasons as well. Points per game don't equate to success.

How are win shares determined? Can the results be skewed by the fact that team still has a no defense policy and that Lee is the only good big man on the team. How about reliability of team's other players? How about level of injuries? Monta hasn't had a healthy team to work with since... 2007.

VCaintdead17
03-03-2012, 10:50 PM
How are win shares determined? Can the results be skewed by the fact that team still has a no defense policy and that Lee is the only good big man on the team. How about reliability of team's other players? How about level of injuries? Monta hasn't had a healthy team to work with since... 2007.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Win Shares is a solely based on the individual player and is determined by how efficient they are as well as how good of a teammate they are and good of a defender they are. Obviously, the stat isn't flawless but it is definitely one of the more telling stats out there. It doesn't take into consideration how talented your teammates are, or injuries, or coaching philosophies, but there is simply NO excuse for Monta to have that low amount of win shares, it's simply inexcusable.

bholly
03-03-2012, 10:53 PM
Win shares are pretty opaque, but there's info here (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html) if you want.

To be clear, though, the entire argument I made, which is the usual argument about Monta, doesn't rely on Win Shares or any other advanced stats. You can see him putting up bad shots just by watching him, and can see just about everything you need to know statistically with something as simple as true shooting percentage.

This isn't just some advanced stats wizardry where you find the numbers to show anything - this is just incredibly basic and obvious observation about his game. On average his shots are inefficient - so he gets criticized for putting up a lot of them.

jrm2054
03-03-2012, 10:58 PM
I think Kobe had the best shot

shizzle09
03-04-2012, 12:00 AM
This. You know something is wrong if a player averages 26 ppg but is only worth 1.3 win shares. His WS/48 minutes has simply abysmal the past four seasons as well. Points per game don't equate to success.

it's called playing on the warriors. Slap monta on a good team and none of this jargon you guys spit would even exsist. 45% career FG% shooting as much as he does and he's not good? Im not even a warrior fan but at least i watch the games and can see that Monta is a good player period. Lets not even mention the fact that he was ran out there almost 45 minutes a game for a few years and had to carry the load. its hard to stay efficient when your playing as many minutes as they played him. 22 points and 6 apg is good period.

bholly
03-04-2012, 12:12 AM
it's called playing on the warriors. Slap monta on a good team and none of this jargon you guys spit would even exsist. 45% career FG% shooting as much as he does and he's not good? Im not even a warrior fan but at least i watch the games and can see that Monta is a good player period. Lets not even mention the fact that he was ran out there almost 45 minutes a game for a few years and had to carry the load. its hard to stay efficient when your playing as many minutes as they played him. 22 points and 6 apg is good period.

Wright, Curry, Lee all have higher win shares and WAY higher win shares per 48. Being on the Warriors isn't the reason. Lee plays as many minutes, too.

Aust
03-04-2012, 12:19 AM
I don't see Durant taking enough shots. The highest I can see him go is in the low 60's, which is still somethin
I think Kobe can still explode, so I'd put him 2nd
I don't think Monta has it in him, for lack of a better explanation
And I don't believe that's Lebron's style. High 50's is all I can see him doing

Chill_Will_24
03-04-2012, 12:20 AM
LOL no :facepalm:

Not even close man.. ONE player scored 100 pts back then and no one else came close.. MANY players have scored 50 nowadays and many players did it multiple times. There's been over fifty 50 pt games since 1990. That statement would be true if there was like 50 instances of a 100 pt game back then.

Damn i just threw a number out there i wasnt really thinking about it that hard, Throwing out facepalms SMH

VCaintdead17
03-04-2012, 01:06 AM
it's called playing on the warriors. Slap monta on a good team and none of this jargon you guys spit would even exsist. 45% career FG% shooting as much as he does and he's not good? Im not even a warrior fan but at least i watch the games and can see that Monta is a good player period. Lets not even mention the fact that he was ran out there almost 45 minutes a game for a few years and had to carry the load. its hard to stay efficient when your playing as many minutes as they played him. 22 points and 6 apg is good period.

So because he plays a lot of minutes he gets a free pass for taking terrible shots? I'm not buying it, not for one minute. Curry, Lee, Rush and Wright all have better TS% than Monta and all of them get 25+ MPG.

Bruno
03-04-2012, 01:42 AM
in 2006, kobe dropped 55 in the second half...

i don't think anyone can crack 100, with todays pace.

PacersForLife
03-04-2012, 01:45 AM
I see why Monta is included.... the guy is a prolific scorer. Melo could take his place though.

CityofChaos
03-04-2012, 01:50 AM
Who gives a ****?? Monta has missed so many game winning shots this season that you failed to mention but I dont blame you cuz youre a homer.

The Warriors are a bad team, Monta deserves no credit for anything imo.

They play better WITHOUT him on the floor and there are stats to support that claim

Giraffes Rule
03-04-2012, 11:02 AM
Kevin Martin has a better shot at scoring 100 than Monta Ellis.

49warriors
03-04-2012, 01:41 PM
Every hating comment dont watch Ellis play daily.
The offense is designed around Ellis. Thats why he shoots over 20fg.
He scored 77 points in a HS game before so he has the the will and the green light. Westbrook wont let Durant score 100 & Stoudemire wont let Anthony score 100.....Haters understand the system and game more....

waveycrockett
03-04-2012, 01:57 PM
I definitely would put Dirk and Carmelo up there before Monta. They can't be serious.

Corey
03-04-2012, 01:59 PM
Advanced stats suck.
False

MickeyMgl
03-04-2012, 02:12 PM
81 is pretty dam close. being a raptor fan i remembe that game. kobe could have scored even more if he wanted too.

It's funny that people use that game to justify calling him a "ball hog". He didn't even go for it in the first half.

If I guy like Kobe can score 55 points in one half, that tells me that a guy like Kobe could have scored 100 points in a game if he went for it from start to finish. But when will the NBA see a guy like Kobe again? Not for a while, probably.

sunsfan88
03-04-2012, 03:03 PM
And people still say Monta Ellis is "underrated" or "not given enough respect around the league"

kozelkid
03-04-2012, 03:24 PM
Advanced stats suck.

Says the Monta Ellis fan.
Maybe there's a reason Ellis can't seem to lead his team to the freaking playoffs.

TheNumber37
03-04-2012, 03:37 PM
I think Durant could hit 80, I don't know about 100, though.

iFYouSeekAmy
03-04-2012, 03:48 PM
There's a reason why Ellis threads shouldn't be made. Stats don't tell the story without actually watching every game.

To say the team would be a lot better without Ellis proves that people don't watch the games. The team would get blown out without Ellis. Him and David Lee are the only ones who are capable of creating for themselves. Teams double up on Monta, so he passes the ball to other players who are nothing but perimeter shooters. Yeah he shoots a lot, but he's the only one who can create for himself. Not to mention he averages over 5 assists a game. Truth is, without Ellis, there's no one who is determined enough to make shots down the stretch in close games.

Let it be a lesson for all Warrior fans who still don't get it- Warriors threads and Ellis threads stay in the Warriors forum.

asandhu23
03-04-2012, 03:57 PM
Says the Monta Ellis fan.
Maybe there's a reason Ellis can't seem to lead his team to the freaking playoffs.

Yeah.

let's all forget that he has a rookie coach who has no prior coaching experience. Last year he had a rookie coach in Keith Smart. The Year before he had Don Nelson who didn't give a **** anymore. That's the coaching in his career.

Let's go to injuries. Stephen Curry this year. Last two years, everyone on the team was injured. In fact, it got so bad W's literally didn't have enough players to finish the game. Before that was the Moped Gate. Last few years, not only did W's have injuries, they had D League players like Tolliver playing.

This year, the team has no one besides Ellis and Lee who has been consistent. Curry can't get over his ankle issues. Bench, while it is decent, can not score at will. Rush might be the only one there but he plays with Nate and all Nate does is shoot.

bholly
03-04-2012, 04:08 PM
^^ Funny how you twice asked for an explanation for FGAs being brought up, even quoting me directly, then didn't respond or even acknowledge when I told you.

MickeyMgl
03-04-2012, 09:35 PM
I think Durant could hit 80, I don't know about 100, though.

There is a fatigue factor with those big scoring games, and I don't think Durant would fare well with the number of shots that would be required.

Daunter
03-04-2012, 11:45 PM
Yeah, people who hate on monta like that are the ones that go to bed when monta's games tip off. He is a great scorer period. Rose, durant, Westbrook melo and Kobe all shoot around the same amount but that's never mentioned like it is with monta.

I agree with this

IndyRealist
03-05-2012, 11:40 AM
I dont think it can be done. The game is played at a different pace nowadays. Scoring 100 back then is the equivalent of like 50 today or something idk...


You do realize that Wilt played every minute of every game except the one game he got thrown out, right? He had a game of 55 rebounds. He AVERAGED 50ppg that year. And he didn't have a 3pt line to get extra points off of.

He got to 100 two points at a time. By the 4th they had to force feed him the ball to keep it going, because the defense was beating the **** out of him to keep him from getting 100. Not pansy fouls like now, but serious "we're trying to break something" fouls.

Kobe and his 81 is as close as it ever will get imho and Kobe is the ultimate ball hog so if he couldnt reach the mark nobody will.

Lebron wont cuz thats not his game and neither will Kobe at this point. Monta? Pleeeease... so i guess i would go Drant but Durant is not a selfish player so he cant either
No one gets that many shots up without being fed the ball by their teammates. It's not being a ball hog if your teammates are giving it to you every time down the court. Not a Kobe fan at all, but that's just a ridiculous statement.

IndyRealist
03-05-2012, 11:51 AM
in 2006, kobe dropped 55 in the second half...

i don't think anyone can crack 100, with todays pace.

Defenses aren't allowed to touch a perimeter player outside of the paint anymore. I think a 3pt shooter who can also drive to 12ft and take the shot could get there. But again, your teammates would have to force feed you the ball. And you would have to be capable of playing every single minute of the game. If Durant could play all 48 and got hot, maybe.

MagicHero3
03-05-2012, 12:18 PM
i dont think anyone will get near 100 these days

Rockice_8
03-05-2012, 05:13 PM
The only reason he's on there is cause he's a chucker.

MagicHero3
03-05-2012, 05:14 PM
i was watchin his game yesterday and i agree, he is a chucker

49warriors
03-09-2012, 08:04 PM
No need to explain thats really Cohan...
Hes fake like the sport hes reppn:clap:

Alayla
03-10-2012, 12:10 AM
I dont think it can be done. The game is played at a different pace nowadays. Scoring 100 back then is the equivalent of like 50 today or something idk...

Kobe and his 81 is as close as it ever will get imho and Kobe is the ultimate ball hog so if he couldnt reach the mark nobody will.

Lebron wont cuz thats not his game and neither will Kobe at this point. Monta? Pleeeease... so i guess i would go Drant but Durant is not a selfish player so he cant either.

i take that back i cant even humer this

bulldog312
03-10-2012, 12:43 AM
Scoring 100 certainly was completely different back then. Just look at the final score of that game (169-147). Hell, Wilt's teammates were all fouling so they could get the ball back and try and get him 100. He took 63 shots and 32 more free throws. New York's starting center was out, so the guys that spent the most time on him were 6'9" 210 and 6'6" 225 (Wilt is about 7'1" 275). The talent/size/athleticism difference was so much greater than anything you will see in today's game. It would be like force feeding Dwight Howard the ball against a college team (one without a future lottery pick center).