PDA

View Full Version : Monta Ellis or Wes Mathews



Goose17
02-05-2015, 04:59 PM
Forget about fitting with teams etc, who is the more talented individual right now?

Ellis is averaging; 20 PPG, 4.5 APG, 2.4 RPG, 1.8 SPG, TS% .52

Wes is averaging; 16.5 PPG, 2.3 APG, 3.4 RPG, 1.1 SPG, TS% .59

ClutchTime
02-05-2015, 05:05 PM
Should be under the "NBA Comparison" topic but I would go with Ellis. He's shown great talent going back to his Golden State days.

albertajaysfan
02-05-2015, 05:16 PM
Offensively it is easily Ellis. On both ends of the floor however I have to go with Matthews. But it is neck and neck in my opinion.

Chronz
02-05-2015, 05:36 PM
It obviously depends on the team, but I think most championship aspiring teams would want Mathews. I'd rather have a championship caliber "role player" than a flawed go-to guy.

Goose17
02-05-2015, 05:37 PM
It obviously depends on the team

Due to chemistry? or...

Chronz
02-05-2015, 05:39 PM
Due to chemistry? or...

Possession distribution and efficiency.

Procision
02-05-2015, 05:46 PM
Mathews easily, great 2 way player. Ellis greatly benefits from his teamates around him on offense and coaching. When dirk retires Ellis efficiency will drop back down.

mngopher35
02-05-2015, 05:53 PM
I'd take Mathews but it is pretty close just comparing talent level. I think that he is the better overall player when you consider both sides of the ball. If I had a team that was only lacking a scorer and playmaker I would take Ellis, otherwise Wes.

D-Leethal
02-05-2015, 06:00 PM
Possession distribution and efficiency.

Skillset at respective filled positions has zero effect?

Size of your PG and ability to guard 2s perhaps? Pick and roll big man for Ellis to wreak havoc on screens with? If you have a George Hill type PG who doesn't do much to collapse the D but brings it on D and can guard 2s - you'd rather have Wes?

This post is EXACTLY the type of post that comes off as a joke to me - its like you don't even care what actually goes on the court when it comes to your analyses, you'd rather take a look at the spreadsheet and draw up some pivot tables. Pretty sad actually, you're completely ignoring the beauty of read and react 5-man basketball.

Monta is more dynamic with the ball in his hands, Wes is smooth and steady 3 and D who needs a dynamic triple threat like Monta (or Lillard) to thrive. You put Wes next to George Hill without LeBron James at the 3 and he will be asked to do plenty of things he isn't capable of, than his efficiency goes in the toilet.

You have a dynamic PG, you go with Wes, you have a defense + 3 ball type PG - Brandon Knight/George Hill type you take Monta at the 2. You have a great pick and roll big man without any pick and roll guards? You take Monta. You have a big man who likes to post and run the offense through him and hit shooters? You take Wes.

D-Leethal
02-05-2015, 06:04 PM
Mathews easily, great 2 way player. Ellis greatly benefits from his teamates around him on offense and coaching. When dirk retires Ellis efficiency will drop back down.

Gee whiz, a scoring guard's efficiency rises when they have guys like Dirk to eat up the defensive attention?

What do you think Matthews efficiency would be like if he was asked to actually make plays with the ball and do more than catch and shoot wide open, spoonfed buckets produced by his teammates?

D-Leethal
02-05-2015, 06:06 PM
Chronz, I really do wonder what you even look for when watching a basketball game. Do you just wait until the end so you can check the statlines and get all giddy?

D-Leethal
02-05-2015, 06:08 PM
Sometimes I wonder if you guys even know what a triple threat is, and how having it benefits everyone around you. Efficiency of a catch and shoot guy doesn't mean jack **** if you don't have a triple threat to make it happen for them.

You salivate over the guys getting spoon fed and hate on the guys busting their *** to do the feeding.

J_M_B
02-05-2015, 06:12 PM
Matthews.

Two-way player with better efficiency

D-Leethal
02-05-2015, 06:15 PM
Matthews.

Two-way player with better efficiency

Zero other factors go into it, aye?

Would be nice to have an NBA forum where basketball is actually discussed. Ya know, what actually goes on on the court and stuff.

D-Leethal
02-05-2015, 06:15 PM
I like Matthews better than Monta btw, but you cannot simplify the game down to that.

Even the God Morey seems to get that, but his cult followers surely do not.

valade16
02-05-2015, 06:17 PM
D-Leethal,

Maybe everyone is simply reading the OPs post:

Forget about fitting with teams etc, who is the more talented individual right now?

He basically says "Do not use team fit when deciding". So in a vacuum, not knowing anything about the team or team fit, who would you take?

Goose17
02-05-2015, 06:19 PM
D-Leethal,

Maybe everyone is simply reading the OPs post:

Forget about fitting with teams etc, who is the more talented individual right now?

He basically says "Do not use team fit when deciding". So in a vacuum, not knowing anything about the team or team fit, who would you take?

This is correct^

Although I do agree with D-Leethal about people on here over simplifying things or dumbing them down. He has a valid point. But this one time, I'm just looking for, as you said, who would you take, blind, without knowing anything about the team or fit.

Goose17
02-05-2015, 06:20 PM
I'm glad to see Wes getting so much love.

Hawkeye15
02-05-2015, 06:30 PM
D-Leethal,

Maybe everyone is simply reading the OPs post:

Forget about fitting with teams etc, who is the more talented individual right now?

He basically says "Do not use team fit when deciding". So in a vacuum, not knowing anything about the team or team fit, who would you take?

well that is what I read. If we had his surrounding players, a case could be made for both, depending.

In a straight up evaluation of talent and game, I think Wes would fit more scenarios than Monta.

Redrum187
02-05-2015, 06:32 PM
Monta Ellis is the better talent. He makes everyone better and doesn't rely on anyone to make his shot.

Having said that, I'd rather have Matthews. I value 3 and D for a SG. I'd want a PG to do the majority of the ball handling.

Chronz
02-05-2015, 06:32 PM
Mathews easily, great 2 way player. Ellis greatly benefits from his teamates around him on offense and coaching. When dirk retires Ellis efficiency will drop back down.
Thats the most damning thing about it, Monta isn't even efficient and the difference in his production has been overstated. For all the talk about his improved performance, hes still essentially the same player and has played better outside of a Mavericks uniform in the past. Dont get me wrong, hes played better than the **** storm we saw in Milwaukee but that should be expected, it hasn't been this demonstrative difference either way.


Skillset at respective filled positions has zero effect?

Size of your PG and ability to guard 2s perhaps? Pick and roll big man for Ellis to wreak havoc on screens with? If you have a George Hill type PG who doesn't do much to collapse the D but brings it on D and can guard 2s - you'd rather have Wes?
All that falls under "depends on the team". He then asked if it was due to chemistry, sorry for not going full bore and giving a deep breakdown to the guy who has admitted to not reading my bricks of text. I gave him my most important aspects because it should go without saying that chemistry matters as well, just like fit matters, but those arent at the top of my list. Efficiency is what wins, therefore its at the TOP of my list.


This post is EXACTLY the type of post that comes off as a joke to me - its like you don't even care what actually goes on the court when it comes to your analyses, you'd rather take a look at the spreadsheet and draw up some pivot tables. Pretty sad actually, you're completely ignoring the beauty of read and react 5-man basketball.
Sounds more like you jumping the gun and not understanding the scope of the argument. Are you insinuating that I dont think chemistry matters just because I didn't list it either? Get a grip D.



Monta is more dynamic with the ball in his hands, Wes is smooth and steady 3 and D who needs a dynamic triple threat like Monta (or Lillard) to thrive. You put Wes next to George Hill without LeBron James at the 3 and he will be asked to do plenty of things he isn't capable of, than his efficiency goes in the toilet.
Hence my first post;
It obviously depends on the team, but I think most championship aspiring teams would want Mathews. I'd rather have a championship caliber "role player" than a flawed go-to guy.

The reason I said this was because the OP asks us directly to ignore the fit aspects.
Ill explain further in your next paragraph.


You have a dynamic PG, you go with Wes, you have a defense + 3 ball type PG - Brandon Knight/George Hill type you take Monta at the 2. You have a great pick and roll big man without any pick and roll guards? You take Monta. You have a big man who likes to post and run the offense through him and hit shooters? You take Wes.
See, if Im building a team, I look to construct it from the ground up by dealing whatever assets I already have. Id rather not build a flawed construct, albeit one thats the best for my team, over acquiring players that fit my blue print. Mathews excels at his role much better than Monta excels at his. If I need someone to be dynamic with the ball, I would hope to do better than Monta. Acquiring a role player like Mathews is scarce IMO.

Hell, the Mavs just got Rondo and we're seeing why their games dont mesh, imagine if they had Mathews on the squad. He and Monta or Rondo would be playing better.

Cmon man, look I know you're on a losing streak but how often have you heard me mention "Skill set overlap".

Here, I googled it (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Chronz+%22Skillset+overlap%22&safe=off) for you:

If you see endless examples of me obviously considering the aspects you mention, maybe you should think about whats being argued rather than trying to pigeonhole me into your perceived paradigm but unless you suffer from Alzheimer, you shouldn't jump the gun like this, EVER.

lol at an old post from clublakers:

Tmac and Kobe, better than Bron-Wade IMO, even if those 2 are better individually, collectively this duo has much less of a skillset overlap and would terrorize any defense thrown at them. ANY DEFENSE

Chronz
02-05-2015, 06:38 PM
Gee whiz, a scoring guard's efficiency rises when they have guys like Dirk to eat up the defensive attention?
Its actually stayed in line with the expected "skill curve" range. Hes not doing anything special or out of line with his career norms(after the moped incident).


What do you think Matthews efficiency would be like if he was asked to actually make plays with the ball and do more than catch and shoot wide open, spoonfed buckets produced by his teammates?
They would never ask him to just like nobody expects Monta to mesh with guys like Jennings/Curry. They are hoping he meshes with Rondo but that seems like a poor fit as well.

If Mathews was expected to carry more of a scoring load Im guessing his team would do what they've done in the past (when he was younger and less talented) and run more flex action + give him more post touches (where hes been beastly in the past). Really depends on the team. Now a moron would use this post as a sign that you dont consider enough variables but I know you better than that so I wont jump the gun. C wat I did there

Chronz
02-05-2015, 06:50 PM
Chronz, I really do wonder what you even look for when watching a basketball game. Do you just wait until the end so you can check the statlines and get all giddy?
Yes D, I pay for league pass just to look at boxscores and totally not to see how they influence each other.

You want me to screenshot my ****ing library broseph? How many books you got on the sport you claim to love?

Another reason I cant just outright ignore statistics the way you seem to is because I need to broaden my horizon if Im to gamble on this sport. For some people, they dont need stats to have fun gambling, for me, I look for illumination outside my own perspective but if Im to do that, I need to rely on the most telling data.

Like younger me would have focused on wins and losses more than team/lineup efficiency and would have made more mistakes than successes. Thats me tho


Sometimes I wonder if you guys even know what a triple threat is, and how having it benefits everyone around you. Efficiency of a catch and shoot guy doesn't mean jack **** if you don't have a triple threat to make it happen for them.

You salivate over the guys getting spoon fed and hate on the guys busting their *** to do the feeding.

I think you oversimplify this and ignoring the symbiotic relationship the guy who catches and shoots has with the guy whos busting his ***. I just think you can find guys who can penetrate defenses alot easier than guys who can maintain such high efficiency. Unless you're a star, people should value efficiency over shot creation.

Hell, the Mavs won a chip with the likes of JJ Barea as their primary driver. But as you've said in the past, there is more than 1 way to skin a cat.

flea
02-05-2015, 06:58 PM
I think you oversimplify this and ignoring the symbiotic relationship the guy who catches and shoots has with the guy whos busting his ***. I just think you can find guys who can penetrate defenses alot easier than guys who can maintain such high efficiency. Unless you're a star, people should value efficiency over shot creation.

Astute point, and I agree for the most part. Guys who can penetrate and make good decisions consistently I think are harder to find, and sometimes get underrated if they can't do other things well like shoot or finish. But Thibs has proven year after year that the NBA is not lacking in guards who can break down defenses.

If you watch the college game at all you know this too. DJ Augustin, Aaron Brooks, Mario Chalmers, etc. all do pretty good things with the basketball in the right situation. There are tons of guards playing overseas with the same ability that could probably make it in the NBA in the perfect situation. Only problem is that you need to play D, make good decisions consistently, and shoot the ball in the NBA too. If not, Marquis Teague would have a job. And TBH, the lesser Teague certainly has enough raw ability to make it as a rotation player - and probably will one day like his big bro. People forget it took Teague a while to really get his decision-making down. He was always one of the fastest players in the league.

Procision
02-05-2015, 10:02 PM
Gee whiz, a scoring guard's efficiency rises when they have guys like Dirk to eat up the defensive attention?

What do you think Matthews efficiency would be like if he was asked to actually make plays with the ball and do more than catch and shoot wide open, spoonfed buckets produced by his teammates?

Matthews is elite at his job, ellis isn't even close.

Redrum187
02-05-2015, 10:18 PM
Matthews is elite at his job, ellis isn't even close.

Mattews is elite at 3 and D... something I look for in a traditional SG. However, Ellis is clearly more talented in that his skillset is far more rare for a SG ( play the 1 & 2, isn't a liability on defense like some might think, ultra quick, mentally tough, great passer, great penetrator, dynamic scorer, clutch shooter, etc...). I'm not a huge fan of Ellis' game, but it's undeniable that he is more "talented" than Matthews.

KnicksorBust
02-06-2015, 12:32 PM
Chronz, I really do wonder what you even look for when watching a basketball game. Do you just wait until the end so you can check the statlines and get all giddy?

:laugh: The idea of someone sitting awkwardly fidgeting in a chair while the clock ticks down and then immediately checking the final box score with glee made me chuckle.


Sometimes I wonder if you guys even know what a triple threat is, and how having it benefits everyone around you. Efficiency of a catch and shoot guy doesn't mean jack **** if you don't have a triple threat to make it happen for them.

You salivate over the guys getting spoon fed and hate on the guys busting their *** to do the feeding.

Can't a conversation have both? Discussion of skill sets (triple threat players) and their impact + statistics?

kingkenny01
02-06-2015, 01:04 PM
Really depends on situation, but I think Ellis would be better for more teams than Wes Mathews

D-Leethal
02-06-2015, 01:57 PM
D-Leethal,

Maybe everyone is simply reading the OPs post:

Forget about fitting with teams etc, who is the more talented individual right now?

He basically says "Do not use team fit when deciding". So in a vacuum, not knowing anything about the team or team fit, who would you take?

Meh, basketball players can't be analyzed in a vaccum when theres 4 other guys on the court at all times.

I like Wes better, but I think its 50-50 who I would take depending on fit. I think Monta has shown in Dallas he can be a difference maker with the right roster around him.

Hawkeye15
02-06-2015, 02:06 PM
Meh, basketball players can't be analyzed in a vaccum when theres 4 other guys on the court at all times.

I like Wes better, but I think its 50-50 who I would take depending on fit. I think Monta has shown in Dallas he can be a difference maker with the right roster around him.

yes, fit matters. Monta was good in GS when he had Baron and Jax with him, because his usage could be controlled, and he could be hidden on defense. But the problem with Monta is, he NEEDS that around him to succeed. Wes can probably fit into more scenarios, and still play well.

valade16
02-06-2015, 02:08 PM
D-Leethal - Are you saying we can never debate between which to players we think are better?

To you, no one can say "who is better: Michael Jordan or LeBron James" because we can't possibly answer any question like that without discussing fit?

Blink
02-06-2015, 03:05 PM
yes, fit matters. Monta was good in GS when he had Baron and Jax with him, because his usage could be controlled, and he could be hidden on defense. But the problem with Monta is, he NEEDS that around him to succeed. Wes can probably fit into more scenarios, and still play well.

Man that GS team was so fun to watch. Baron Davis was one of my all time favorite players.

Hawkeye15
02-06-2015, 03:12 PM
Man that GS team was so fun to watch. Baron Davis was one of my all time favorite players.

a motivated Baron was always fun to watch. Baron on a bad team seemed to only be motivated by lunch buffets...

kingsdelez24
02-06-2015, 04:03 PM
Sometimes I wonder if you guys even know what a triple threat is, and how having it benefits everyone around you. Efficiency of a catch and shoot guy doesn't mean jack **** if you don't have a triple threat to make it happen for them.

You salivate over the guys getting spoon fed and hate on the guys busting their *** to do the feeding.

This and every post you made before this. There's no way Wes Matthews contributes the way he does without lillard and aldridge commanding a majority of the defensive attention.