Warriors 2nd round pick = Kosta Perovic?

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">Pietrus isn't paid 40 million, wasn't drafted 3rd and continues to eat away at Dunleavy's minutes. For a guy with that so many warts, he sure does manage to eat Dunleavy's minutes. What does that say about Dunleavy?

Face it, Dunleavy laid a fat egg. If you want to shift the blame to Pietrus for Dunleavy's shortcoming, go ahead. Don't expect me to follow.</div>
I'd say the blame is pretty equal for Pietrus and Dunleavy if we're going that route. Pietrus could have taken the small forward spot but the guy is dumb one vs. one, the guy is dumb moving off the ball, the guy picks up stupid fouls, and he sucks even worse than Jrich or Baron Davis when it comes to free throws and shot selection. He's a liability to others and he's just as bad as Dunleavy's inability to raise his level of play by not making smart plays. This isn't a one on one game and if it were, the guy would just be running over more defenders who know how to play defense. Guys know by now that Pietrus only relies on his athleticism to get by and not his brains. If we want numbers from him, we have to go back to building a better running team when we had Dampier and Clif Robinson and pure point guards delivering him the ball. We need the high post passing, the low post passing, and lots of setup guys because Pietrus just doesn't set the table for himself or for others. If he did Dunleavy's butt would be parked on the bench permanently.

Both Pietrus and Dunleavy aren't getting it done at small forward. There's no excellent defacto guy at the 3 after Dunleavy and Dunleavy is that horrible for what I think Mullin should be trying to do.

edit: run on sentences...

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">Foyle is a lost cause so comparing him is irrelevant.

Dunleavy has the potential to be a good player. If every player followed that logic they would never assert themselves, hide behind their contracts and blame the GM for signing them. Then why go to work?

No, he failed to step up.</div>
Dunleavy had the potential to be a good player? Not as starter. Hell no. He was a safe, consensus pick whose 6'10 mismatch and ballhandling was a mismatch only on paper. If his shot didn't define him, he'd be a bust. The GMs picked him rather than trade down for a power forward or a big guy at center.

He was hyped that was all. I don't think it's his fault people were misguided by a 6'10 jumpshooting Dukie surrounded by lots of good Duke players also going to the NBA...

Dude, I don't even understand your logic... wha? I mean the guy hasn't stepped up before so why not rate him as another Foyle lost cause in the same light? I'm not sure what you expected out of him. He was the nba ready small forward and he wasn't even ready for 3 years. What you see is what you get.

 

Let's also not forget that even though Pietrus got less minutes than Dunleavy, there were countless times where this guy underperformed as well. He didn't know where to be, he couldn't rotate on defensive assignments, these are things you expect your supporting wing to do for the backcourt.

We need to operate some basic team fundamentals rather than make excuses like he wasn't coached properly at a young age and therefore be patient with him because he was so great scoring a point per minute in a few games. I guess dunks and 3-pointers make a guy forget just how disruptive and blackholish he can be on offense most of the time. So both Dun and Pietrus are both pretty bad in their separate ways, which was why I was hoping for Brewer or Gay as much as I wanted a big man prospect (smarts + athleticism). Our small forward situation can't be uglier than this though...

And we'll never have a chance at a good center unless we draft or start winning to attract FA's, but then you need centers or an Amare/Duncan like PF in order to win.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">Pietrus isn't paid 40 million, wasn't drafted 3rd and continues to eat away at Dunleavy's minutes. For a guy with that so many warts, he sure does manage to eat Dunleavy's minutes. What does that say about Dunleavy?

Face it, Dunleavy laid a fat egg. If you want to shift the blame to Pietrus for Dunleavy's shortcoming, go ahead. Don't expect me to follow.</div>
How on EARTH is what I said shifting blame for Dunleavy's shortcomings onto Pietrus?!?

What

The

F***

I admit the Dunleavy has underperformed. I was just as unhappy that Mullin signed him last year as everyone else. It was totally unneccesary. I just asked for a little consistency out of people who bash Dunleavy. If you're going to say he's a bad shooter, you have to say Pietrus is worse (as I said, that's in every category every year except from 3 point land last year). If you're going to criticize any of his other shortcomings, you should criticize any players who perform worse.

And what do you mean "eating into Dunleavy's minutes"? Dunleavy played .6 minutes less this year (31.9) than last and Pietrus played 2.7 more minutes (22.7) than last year. Do you even look at stats before you make these claims or did you consider a < 1% drop in Dunleavy's minutes significant?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">

And what do you mean "eating into Dunleavy's minutes"? Dunleavy played .6 minutes less this year (31.9) than last and Pietrus played 2.7 more minutes (22.7) than last year. Do you even look at stats before you make these claims or did you consider a < 1% drop in Dunleavy's minutes significant?</div>

"But if you're going to be critical of him for that, you have to be even more critical of Pietrus because he puts up worse numbers across the boar PER MINUTE than Dunleavy and has lower shooting percentages in every category every year except 3 point % last year."

What does one have to do with the other? Dunleavy sux and Pietrus sucked. Like I said Dunleavy has a higher degree of responsibility to the warriors. Crapping on Pietrus to make Dunleavy look good doesn't help you dude.

Dunleavy was benched in favor of Pietrus therefore Pietrus took Dunleavy's minutes. oops.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">"But if you're going to be critical of him for that, you have to be even more critical of Pietrus because he puts up worse numbers across the boar PER MINUTE than Dunleavy and has lower shooting percentages in every category every year except 3 point % last year."

What does one have to do with the other? Dunleavy sux and Pietrus sucked. Like I said Dunleavy has a higher degree of responsibility to the warriors. Crapping on Pietrus to make Dunleavy look good doesn't help you dude.

Dunleavy was benched in favor of Pietrus therefore Pietrus took Dunleavy's minutes. oops.</div>
and...then...Pietrus...was...benched...in favor...of...Dunleavy...right? I really don't understand you sometimes.

I just brought up the thing about being equally critical of Pietrus because you always seem to knock Dunleavy for his low shooting percentages and the fact that he didn't step up this year, when Pietrus shot as bad or worse, had a lower PER, and a bigger drop in PER from '04-'05 to '05-'06 than Dunleavy.

If you'll notice, I never start out knocking Pietrus, I just bring it up in response to you or other posters knocking Dunleavy. That's what one has to do with the other.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">
If you'll notice, I never start out knocking Pietrus, I just bring it up in response to you or other posters knocking Dunleavy. That's what one has to do with the other.</div>
Just like the mismatched, unbalanced team put together by the general manager (Mullin) and Montgomery's coaching (Also hired by Mullin). It's starting to look like the Knicks, with the way some fans unquestionably stuck by Isiah and blamed the players or Larry Brown more instead. Well... how did they arrive at that situation to really blame one or the other, more than the other?

And then I perceive, with us, few fans hardly ever blame Mullin or any GM for something that happens in a game all season long. The knee jerk reaction type of stuff is what they see directly on the court or whatever they can react immediately to. It's like any situation until the instant something happens. Like draft day for instance, where it is different from watching actual basketball games where we can pick out players or coaching incidents, we look directly at Gms. Draft day, however, it's all based on speculation on who we think will pan out better than the other guy we should have taken. Anyway I'm saying everything that we're unhappy about can be tied to moves Mullin made since '04. Mullin made like a few good drafts in principle last year and one good move with Baron Davis and some other financial/low risk moves that didn't make much impact in terms of a winning season and some very bad ones with the Foyle/Fish/Dunleavy trifecta. This whole thing culminated into some bad mojo so far with guys insisting we were only one player away from the playoffs. I'm not saying fire Mullin because the situation can be salvagable, but his vision of a playoff team is looking pretty shtty right now. If it continues and it's obvious he's not doing a good job of having sound judgement about a realistic playoff team, then I want him gone. But I hold Dunleavy, Foyle or all these underachieving guys which he re-signed accountable as the guy who signed them. The past three years weren't that great so far...

So, I want to rescind that statement earlier when I said players aren't as at fault as the GM that signed them. I would like to say yeah it is their fault. I wish the players and their greedy agents said something like, "I don't care about money I want to go to a winning team." But only our good players say that and our role players want to stay and get overpaid.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">and...then...Pietrus...was...benched...in favor...of...Dunleavy...right? I really don't understand you sometimes.

I just brought up the thing about being equally critical of Pietrus because you always seem to knock Dunleavy for his low shooting percentages and the fact that he didn't step up this year, when Pietrus shot as bad or worse, had a lower PER, and a bigger drop in PER from '04-'05 to '05-'06 than Dunleavy.

If you'll notice, I never start out knocking Pietrus, I just bring it up in response to you or other posters knocking Dunleavy. That's what one has to do with the other.</div>

"and...then...Pietrus...was...benched...in favor...of...Dunleavy...right? I really don't understand you sometimes."

which supports what I was saying. Dunleavy was playing so poorly they gave Pietrus his spot for 6 games. Pietrus screwed up his chance and they gave the spot back to Dunleavy. It wasn't due to injury or Pietrus' great play, they simply sat Dun on the bench and gave Pietrus the spot. That doesn't show in the stats.

" just brought up the thing about being equally critical of Pietrus because you always seem to knock Dunleavy for his low shooting percentages and the fact that he didn't step up this year, when Pietrus shot as bad or worse, had a lower PER, and a bigger drop in PER from '04-'05 to '05-'06 than Dunleavy. "

Dunleavy laid an egg and you brought up Pietrus. I didn't. I never claimed Pietrus had a great field goal % either but you forgot to post this...

Dunleavy shot .406% for the year and Pietrus shot .404
Pietrus shot .318 from the point line while Dunleavy shot .285
http://www.nba.com/warriors/stats/index.html

Dunleavy is marginally better due to his passing and rebounding but bringing up Pietrus' shortcoming doesn't hide Dun's shooting .285% from three when Baron and JRich are getting double teams.

But hey, you brought up Pietrus so I'll leave you to wrestle with that issue alone.

 

Damnit what is with my typing tonight??? It's all typos and long sentences and all sorts of stuff. gahhhhhh. I can think clearly, but typing is another thing...

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">"and...then...Pietrus...was...benched...in favor...of...Dunleavy...right? I really don't understand you sometimes."

which supports what I was saying. Dunleavy was playing so poorly they gave Pietrus his spot for 6 games. Pietrus screwed up his chance and they gave the spot back to Dunleavy. It wasn't due to injury or Pietrus' great play, they simply sat Dun on the bench and gave Pietrus the spot. That doesn't show in the stats.</div>

Again, I really don't understand you. I kind of got it the last time, but this I totally don't get. Maybe it's because it's late, but just what the heck are you saying?

First you said Pietrus is taking Dunleavy's minutes, so I pointed out that Dunleavy's minutes decreased by less than 1% last year from the previous year. Then, you said that the taking of the minutes doesn't show up in the stats because Pietrus started for awhile and Dunleavy came off the bench (I think this is what you're saying). Well...so? Pietrus played poorly as a starter so Dunleavy became the starter again. Just like Dunleavy had played poorly as a starter which was why Pietrus was originally promoted.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">" just brought up the thing about being equally critical of Pietrus because you always seem to knock Dunleavy for his low shooting percentages and the fact that he didn't step up this year, when Pietrus shot as bad or worse, had a lower PER, and a bigger drop in PER from '04-'05 to '05-'06 than Dunleavy. "

Dunleavy laid an egg and you brought up Pietrus. I didn't.</div>

Yes, I brought up Pietrus...that's my point...I always have to bring up Pietrus with you. Every time you haul out the same old criticisms of Dunleavy (shooting %, poor overall production, regression) I have to point out that Pietrus is doing as bad or worse in all those categories, yet you want Dunleavy benched in favor of him. Every time you say Dunleavy laid an egg, I'm going to point to the facts and tell you that Pietrus laid an equally big egg. If you're going to criticize Dunleavy, criticize Pietrus.

My point was that, unlike you with Dunleavy, I don't randomly bring up Pietrus' faults and call him a bust and say he should be moved at all costs so that Dunleavy can have the sf spot all to himself.

I'm critical of Dunleavy. He's not aggressive enough, he regressed this year, for whatever reason his 3 point shooting took a huge drop, he's not progressing as quickly as I want him to. These are all very valid criticisms of Dunleavy, and ones that I have made myself. But, when you bring up things like "#3 picks who are making $40 mil, and handed the starting spot, and haven't had to compete with other small forwards who the Warriors could have potentially drafted" as things Dunleavy should be critcized for...well that's just not right. When I read things like that I think you either aren't thinking clearly or you aren't thinking at all.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">I never claimed Pietrus had a great field goal % either but you forgot to post this...

Dunleavy shot .406% for the year and Pietrus shot .404
Pietrus shot .318 from the point line while Dunleavy shot .285
http://www.nba.com/warriors/stats/index.html

Dunleavy is marginally better due to his passing and rebounding but bringing up Pietrus' shortcoming doesn't hide Dun's shooting .285% from three when Baron and JRich are getting double teams.</div>

What, do you mean I forgot to post that??? Every time I said Dunleavy had better shooting percentages, I always said that he did, except for 3 point shooting last year. I didn't post the actual percentages in this thread, but I have posted them many times before, and since I was generally arguing with you about this same issue, I figured you would have remembered them.

Btw, you forgot to mention that Dunleavy shot 77.8% from the foul line last year while Pietrus shot 60.8%. C'mon upsidedownside7, don't run away from the bad facts, because I'm certainly going to bring them up.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting upsidedownside7:</div><div class="quote_post">But hey, you brought up Pietrus so I'll leave you to wrestle with that issue alone. </div>

What the fact that Pietrus shot 3.3% higher from 3 than Dunleavy? That's what I'm supposed to wrestle with? Thanks, but I think I'll manage to get to sleep tonight. Afterall, even after that absymal shooting season by Dunleavy, he still has a career average of 34.8% from 3 as opposed to Pietrus' 33.2% career 3 point average. (oh and his 43.0% career fg% and 76.9% career ft % are both higher than Pietrus' 41.7% fg and 66.7% ft career percentages.)

Any other myths you would like me to expose for you or arguments you'd like me to shoot holes through? Seriously, is it possible for you to look at Dunleavy and Pietrus with an unbiased eye anymore, or is it too late?

 

Man I love both wtwalker and upsidedownside, so don't anyone view me taking Wtwalker's side on this issue as favoritism. I just think Piet and Dun are both crap small forwards for one reason or the other. Whether one stinks less than the other, they are still both crap.

I wholeheartedly believe that both Pietrus and Dunleavy are ineffective players last year and they better shape up. It's also maybe Montgomery isn't finding the best way to play to all these guys strengths and without exposing weaknesses. But this is debatable because we don't even know if there even is a way to play to everyone's strengths and have it still be a team game with few weaknesses. But in the end, the GM is responsible for these moves since the start of '04. Emotions running high are a result of the high personal demands from warriors fanatics to turn this around quickly as possible. Even though the reality is that rebuilding a team with no player to build around, takes as long as the Warriors don't have a real balance of teamplay or direction. Right now, it's just a bunch of individuals collected that can't play together as a team. You can try coach after coach after coach, but there's no direction or foundation in place to call this a team.

I think a lot of fans get burdeoned by having to acknowledge all these problems with our starters they often overlook that our bench for C/SF ain't getting it done either. I don't know if some fans know this, but teams generally win because they have something good in the middle, some honest defense, team experience + depth. What we have is neither of those things.

When ESPN critics rip the Warriors they are right. When local bay area sports writers rip the Warriors, the only person I really listen to is Janny Hu. The rest are bunch of writers who use emotions to connect to what fans are feeling and not necessarily point out things in reality. I saw a lot of kneejerkers in draftforums all over the internet and it somehow turned into anti-dunleavy rantings without Pietrus being mentioned as equally bad because he was "under-utilized by Monty". Please, if anybody was paying attention to Pietrus the guy was screwing up even simple inbounds plays and being more dumb than normal. He was also missing just as many shots as Dunleavy. If not from the field, from the foul line where he insists on dunking everything rather than try to go for a finesse move and get a better chance at an and1 play. It's all pretty disturbing. Wait till Dunleavy goes, and Pietrus will be the next scapegoat because he was equally as bad as Dunleavy (just in other very noticeable ways if one wasn't enamored with just dunks and scoring bursts).

 

The reason why we bash on Dunleavy more is because he had more responsibility than Pietrus. Dunleavy was the starter, got a huge friggin contract, and is key to the warriors winning. And he stunk it up. Sure Pietrus stinks also, but he came off the bench. Both SUCK, but I put more blame on Dunleavy for our misfortunes.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AnimeFANatic:</div><div class="quote_post">The reason why we bash on Dunleavy more is because he had more responsibility than Pietrus. Dunleavy was the starter, got a huge friggin contract, and is key to the warriors winning. And he stunk it up. Sure Pietrus stinks also, but he came off the bench. Both SUCK, but I put more blame on Dunleavy for our misfortunes.</div>
But it was Mullin's fault for re-signing this panty-waste after 3 uneventful seasons. The only worse signings were Foyle-Fish. Well... maybe Dun didn't have uneventful seasons because he improved each year, but he still wasn't good. He was everything we hoped he wasn't, but kinda knew he would be...

Face it, when you're a pure shooter, all around guy playing at Duke with several high recruits in the nation, you look good, especially after winning the NCAA tourney. The Dunleavy lack of strength, the aggressiveness issue, lack of quickness, and his mediocre free throw shooting for somebody that supposedly was a pure shooter, did not look good for many from the very start. I think some fans were booing on draft night because they knew it was either Jamison's backup or his replacement. Either way... you don't solve the softness going inside or on defense. Ugh... I don't like Dunleavy that much, but without a suitable replacement, I'd rather have him making basketball decisions. I think choosing Fisher and Foyle were the real disaster in '04 because you make or break your franchise upon your bigs and your playmakers.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Again, I really don't understand you. I kind of got it the last time, but this I totally don't get. Maybe it's because it's late, but just what the heck are you saying?

First you said Pietrus is taking Dunleavy's minutes, so I pointed out that Dunleavy's minutes decreased by less than 1% last year from the previous year. Then, you said that the taking of the minutes doesn't show up in the stats because Pietrus started for awhile and Dunleavy came off the bench (I think this is what you're saying). Well...so? Pietrus played poorly as a starter so Dunleavy became the starter again. Just like Dunleavy had played poorly as a starter which was why Pietrus was originally promoted.



Yes, I brought up Pietrus...that's my point...I always have to bring up Pietrus with you. Every time you haul out the same old criticisms of Dunleavy (shooting %, poor overall production, regression) I have to point out that Pietrus is doing as bad or worse in all those categories, yet you want Dunleavy benched in favor of him. Every time you say Dunleavy laid an egg, I'm going to point to the facts and tell you that Pietrus laid an equally big egg. If you're going to criticize Dunleavy, criticize Pietrus.

My point was that, unlike you with Dunleavy, I don't randomly bring up Pietrus' faults and call him a bust and say he should be moved at all costs so that Dunleavy can have the sf spot all to himself.

I'm critical of Dunleavy. He's not aggressive enough, he regressed this year, for whatever reason his 3 point shooting took a huge drop, he's not progressing as quickly as I want him to. These are all very valid criticisms of Dunleavy, and ones that I have made myself. But, when you bring up things like "#3 picks who are making $40 mil, and handed the starting spot, and haven't had to compete with other small forwards who the Warriors could have potentially drafted" as things Dunleavy should be critcized for...well that's just not right. When I read things like that I think you either aren't thinking clearly or you aren't thinking at all.



What, do you mean I forgot to post that??? Every time I said Dunleavy had better shooting percentages, I always said that he did, except for 3 point shooting last year. I didn't post the actual percentages in this thread, but I have posted them many times before, and since I was generally arguing with you about this same issue, I figured you would have remembered them.

Btw, you forgot to mention that Dunleavy shot 77.8% from the foul line last year while Pietrus shot 60.8%. C'mon upsidedownside7, don't run away from the bad facts, because I'm certainly going to bring them up.



What the fact that Pietrus shot 3.3% higher from 3 than Dunleavy? That's what I'm supposed to wrestle with? Thanks, but I think I'll manage to get to sleep tonight. Afterall, even after that absymal shooting season by Dunleavy, he still has a career average of 34.8% from 3 as opposed to Pietrus' 33.2% career 3 point average. (oh and his 43.0% career fg% and 76.9% career ft % are both higher than Pietrus' 41.7% fg and 66.7% ft career percentages.)

Any other myths you would like me to expose for you or arguments you'd like me to shoot holes through? Seriously, is it possible for you to look at Dunleavy and Pietrus with an unbiased eye anymore, or is it too late?</div>

Dunleavy is marginally better than Pietrus. Dunleavy sucking has no bearing on Pietrus' sucking. It's funny you continue to bring up Pietrus considering I never brought him into the equation and don't want either starting. Let's trade or draft someone that can handle the position. kthnx.

For as bad Pietrus has played and any stat you continue to mention, Dunleavy can't seem to completely beat the french bone headed Dummy for minutes. For my perspective it isn't a Dunleavy vs. Pietrus argument. It's a look how crappy Dunleavy is doing, he can't even fully beat a stupid bone headed 2 guard playing out of position.

You can assume I want Pietrus to start if it makes you feel better, but I don't. Feel free to bring up more stats about Pietrus Vs. Dunleavy even though there's no point bringing up an argument for the sake of making Dunleavy look somewhat good. It doesn't dispute the point that Dunleavy has had every chance given to him possible and hasn't done a damn thing in the league which was the initial point before YOU mentioned Pietrus. Like I said Dunleavy has a higher degree of responsibility to the organization than Pietrus and crumbled yet you continue to bring up Pietrus, right.....

 

My take-Dunleavy got 4 years to convince me he's an adequate starter,and he proved otherwise. Pietrus got someting less than 10 games. Pietrus was picked as a raw Carribean kid who played PT minutes in Europe-needed SOME break-in miles as an NBA starter...which he's yet to get. Dun played as a son of an NBA/coach-player at the elite level-Duke.

Pietrus has recieved less coaching,less of a defined role,less opportunity than Dun had by the end of his Freshman year.

If nobody on the team is making the Monty offense-defense look good....CHANGE IT. With about 10 lotto picks here...I suspect SOME could do well if the tactics were an asset rather than a liability.

I don't recall the players unable to execute plays at UCLA,Duke,Notre Dame,Ariz St,Mich St....they seemed not only able...but able enough to be lotto picks. Does Monty write it up in Latin? Chinese?
I suspect that a bad system well executed..sucks.

 

If you need a guy to come in as a rookie who got veteran skills-polish...draft that. Don't draft a guy who NEEDS to be coached-to learn on the floor..and write him off in haste. Give Pietrus 1/8th the training and opportunity Dun has had and he will be better. I think overall-he's better now with half that.

 

I disagree about Pietrus being Monty's fault. The guy only does well when he's relying on his athleticism or another guy to set him up. A good team plays team basketball and every guy who gets touches generally knows what to do with the ball to either 1.) to set themselves up or 2.) to make the right decision for others

How many times with the ball has this French guy driven right into Shane Battier or Jon Barry or any competent defender for a turnover? How many times off the ball has he been out of position on the inbounds play or a simple play set? How many times has this guy been able to keep track of the foul situation on his own? And you're saying you want to give this guy more minutes? Hell, I don't trust this guy unless he's just catch and shoot or transition scorer. And until Baron gets healthy and we unload Fisher and his stupid contract for a fast pure point, we ain't playing any transition game.

You can't fix stupid, REREM.

It's like when Webber called timeout in the NCAA championship when the coach told him there's no more timeouts left. What did he do? He called timeout like an idiot. Cost his teammates the chamionship game. Now that is something Pietrus would do because he's like that.

Now Webber was an awesome player and that incident is behind him, but it just goes to show that sometimes you can't teach or fix stupid. These players have to get smarter on their own. So hopefully Pietrus proves something this year and earns those minutes and actually takes that starting spot by playing smarter and not doing so many stupid things. Right now he hasn't proved anything but unreliability. The same unreliability that we have in a lot of starting positions.

You think he's going to actually play more minutes if we get a "good" coach. F no. They're going to ask him to do stuff that a baketball player should know and he'll probably still f-it up because he's stupid. Whether it's Jeff van Gundy, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, they're going to want their players to play smart on their own or they're going to want them to do specifics. If he can't even keep track of the foul situation or know the routes on an inbounds play, he can't be trusted.

Now if we play pickup ball, that's different.


BTW comparing college to nba ball, college ball players are a lot smarter but not all that gifted. Not all of them go to the NBA because the NBA is about entertainment, money, and athleticism. Apparently all the good teams have the guys that are both athletic and smart, we either have one or the other.

C'mon REREM, you've watched basketball for how long? This is the Warriors here with neither franchise talent nor teamwork nor the ability to prove their stuff in an 82 game season rather than showing up near the end.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">And you're saying you want to give this guy more minutes? Hell, I don't trust this guy unless he's just catch and shoot or transition scorer.</div>

I disagree. Well, partially. I'll agree with Walker and CR2 that Pietrus is bone-headed at times. He just doesn't understand fundamentals. He makes too many poor decisions, bad passes, and "over-anxious" plays. Often when he catches the ball he's already going left before he even puts it on the floor. It's his pet move and there were a few humorous plays last year when defenders who had done their homework (like Bruce Bowen) actually anticipated his pet move and slid over into the lane before Pietrus even caught the ball, and just sat there waiting for the charge. Sure enough, he caught it, put his head down, and went full-steam ahead to his left, right into the defender's chest.

But I'd like to bring up a point. Even from his rookie year, Mickael Pietrus has been one of the best, if not the best on-ball defenders on the team. He's given star players -- including Kobe, Jason Kidd, T-mAc, you name it -- fits at times with his hard-nosed in your face defense. He doesn't understand all of the team-defense concepts, but one on one, he can guard point-guards on down to power-forwards. Why? He has heart. The kid has energy, desire, and heart. The mistakes he makes are usually because he's trying to do too much. He rarely seems to make a mistake due to lack of hustle or desire.

Pietrus is tough, supremely athletic, and takes pride in his defense. Those three qualities are rare, and to be commended. I have said all along that Pietrus has underachieved, simply because he hasn't progressed quickly enough. I even started a "Pietrus' time is up" thread.

But, for the sake of this debate, no converasation of the Warriors SF players can be complete without calling to attention Pietrus' stellar on-ball defense. That is an area no numbers can really quantify.

 

Let me settle this argument. Pietrus should've been this team's answer at the backup 2 and some minutes at the 3 when Dunleavy rests, but it turns out that Ellis has potential to play the backup 1,2, and 3. It's clear that Pietrus was never a 3, and everyone knows that Dunleavy is not cutting it at the starting 3.

In light of the Ellis discovery, and the fact that Fisher is not really a backup 1, Mullin should be looking to use Pietrus and Dunleavy (If possible) to get a legitimate starting 3, and pick up a veteran for the minimum to back him up (Cheaney would've been perfect here...) As for the backup 1, Ellis should get some minutes here and hopefully one of the undrafted kids is competent enough to get a few minutes.

Biedrins and Ike look like they can carry the PF position (Murphy needs to be moved as well) if the 3 that Mullin gets can really play, and the 5 is still a weakness, but POB and Foyle can probably do the job with random minutes going to Biedrins and Ike if necessary)... Zarko can be inserted pretty much anywhere when matchups are screwy. This means that Davis, JRich, the new 3, and Ellis should be counted on to take this team to the playoffs. If Mullin can't get that 3, then the team has no balance, and will not sniff the playoffs this season.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">But, for the sake of this debate, no converasation of the Warriors SF players can be complete without calling to attention Pietrus' stellar on-ball defense. That is an area no numbers can really quantify</div>

If you agree that this part of his game regressed immensly than I aggree that you should mention it, ha... I think Ellis is going to fill that role well in the upcoming years

 

Thank you for settling this argument.