Page 2 of 5
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:18 am
Yes his minutes are 22.1 so far this season but he averages =
10.8pts, 2.8rbs, 0.8asts, 44.9%FG and 31.8%3FG
compare that to Dunleavy
9.2pts, 3.8rbs, 2.5asts, 37.6%FG and 22.0%3FG
Pietrus is not that great but has done the job scoring, dun has done nothing worth writing about
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:47 am
i know i'm one of the few dunleavy backers, i just love all my warriors...anyways...someone said it earlier, but by far the biggest surprise is the improved overall team Defense! how is it that whenever we shoot +40% we're undefeated!? 40% isn't THAT good. defense has been there every game ('cept for the spurs cuz they're tore apart our zone)
and taft has been surprisingly good too. i kind of expected to see him do well cuz he handled double teams so well in college. and i dunno why people (at least at another board) are so down on miles. he's been a plus too...how many undrafted rookies actually get playing time and don't f up?
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:56 am
Migya & Newman - Chiiiiiill.... saying Pietrus was a big disappointment isn't far from the truth. Read what I wrote above; we EXPECTED more from him than we did out of Dunleavy. Even in his limited minutes, he showed plenty of promise last year that seemed to dry up. Very European was his style of play this year: "as long as I put the ball in the hole, I'm doing good." No, not true. His defense lacked (especially compared to last year... he showed NO advantage over Mike this season on D), his attrocious passing got EVEN WORSE, his rebounding stayed the same (in two more minutes of play), and his percentages (for the most part) plummeted. He's been more disappointing than Dunleavy because we expected improvement and got recession. Dunleavy, on the other hand, aside from a monstrous drop in scoring, is doing basically the same.
All I'm trying to say is basically what TMC confirmed; Pietrus has been more disappointing this season than Dunleavy has, solely because we expected more. Most of your rants about Mike come from expectations you had about him (being the #3 pick, being in the league 3 years, being our #3 option... do i see a pattern), but the minute someone turns expectation around and nails your boy, Pietrus, with it, you flip? Come on, you can't deny Pietrus has been playing worse and his drop is a more disappointing one than Mike's...
Re: Biggest Bonus
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:28 pm
migya wrote:NO - Pietrus does not get anywhere near 30mins per game. He should but he gets about half of that.
False. He has averaged 22 minutes this season. When he comes back from his injury, they'll work him slowly--because during the time he is out, Diogu has been getting minutes and Dun has been playing better. So you don't just go back to playing Pietrus for 22 minutes all at once and shake up a mix that has been pretty successful. But they will have to find minutes for him. By February, I'd like to see him averaging about 25 minutes if he's healthy and sharp. Fish's minutes will probably come down a bit, even though he has been doing well. There are a lot of players on this team who deserve to play more minutes than they are going to get. That is a good problem to have--up to a point. I would hate to lose Pietrus to another team just because we can't get him as many minutes as he should get.
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:48 am
#32 wrote:All I'm trying to say is basically what TMC confirmed; Pietrus has been more disappointing this season than Dunleavy has, solely because we expected more. Most of your rants about Mike come from expectations you had about him (being the #3 pick, being in the league 3 years, being our #3 option... do i see a pattern), but the minute someone turns expectation around and nails your boy, Pietrus, with it, you flip? Come on, you can't deny Pietrus has been playing worse and his drop is a more disappointing one than Mike's...
I know that Pietrus hasn't improved so far from last season. That is a true statement, it is just that Dunleavy has been so awful that it is really hard to digest. Pietrus needs to do more of the other things, rebounding (which he did his last two games), passing and playing the defense we all know he has before.
I still think he has been a bright spot for the Warriors so far when he has played
Re: Biggest Bonus
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:55 am
rise, Purvis, rise wrote:There are a lot of players on this team who deserve to play more minutes than they are going to get. That is a good problem to have--up to a point. I would hate to lose Pietrus to another team just because we can't get him as many minutes as he should get.
As much as I would like to see Pietrus play alot so he can develop and flourish, the players who are playing better at any given time should be the ones that get the minutes, that is just logic. Right now, Fisher deserves alot of minutes as does Diogu. I'd even like the team to try going big with Diogu, Murphy and either Foyle or Biedrins in the frontline for just a few minutes in a game. I'd like to see Baron, JRich and/or Fisher get the open shots and drives with the big players inside threatening to score and rebound at will. Just something I'd like to see tried and it may end up being a success and something the team can do do really punish opponents
Re: Biggest Bonus
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:50 am
migya wrote:As much as I would like to see Pietrus play alot so he can develop and flourish, the players who are playing better at any given time should be the ones that get the minutes, that is just logic. Right now, Fisher deserves alot of minutes as does Diogu.
I dunno if I'd increase Fisher's minutes. He's doing great in his role as a backup. Putting him in for over 30 minutes may screw with him. I'm sure he'd step up if called upon (ala Zo for Shaq this past month), but I like where he's at now. Diogu, however, being younger (with the possibility of starting) should be given every opportunity to succeed, just like Pietrus has been. I just think players like Ike make more out of their minutes than Mickael has been this season.
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:31 pm
yes Dun Jr started awful but has come up BIG the last few games
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:15 pm
maybe i'm a dun apologist, but has dun really come up "big"? i admit he hit a couple of big 3's last game, but that's what he should be expected to do, hit the open jump shot as our 3rd or 4th option.
I like Dun's game (for all it's +'s and -'s) but i won't say he plays big until he consistently hits open J's and starts to create more than a couple of times a game (which i do think he should be capable of doing)
If anything, he's too fundamental and too willing to pass to others for him to ever get huge numbers. Instead of backing down and posting up a smaller guard, he'll pass out to an open man for a 3
man, there i go again arguing against myself..
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:45 pm
You're not arguing with yourself; you're acknowledging both sides like a true fan should. Dunleavy's capable and totally able, but at the moment he's not achieving quite up to his level of play. Everything you said was pretty on target.
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:48 pm
For someone who has been playing like........ well........ a tosser, dun has played big, at least the last game. You see, when a player is playing at such a low level as he has this season (so far), just making one or two shots at the end of the game is coming up big. If either Baron or JRich do that, it is just seen as normal because they play at that level often.
By the way - Dunleavy should be playing the way he did last game nearly every game! That is what alot of SFs do and guys that get PAID as mush as he does
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 11:20 am
"A watched pot never boils", migya...
Seems like everytime I dismiss Dunleavy as one of the most disappointing things on the team, he turns around and starts playing well... but when I begin to expect it out of him, he disappoints me again. Maybe you should do the same. If you expect big games out of him, you'll always be sorrily disappointed. Just let him play and give the guy a pat on the back when he does well. Anything else won't be satisfying.
Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 7:04 am
What you mean #32 is that there is no point in expecting anything from Dunleavy because he always disappoints! Well said!
He should be expected to play well because he has been trusted to (by Mullin) with that contract or should I say mistake
Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:45 pm
What I'm saying is that expecting anything out of him puts pressure on him and (if his rookie and contract years are any sign) he doesn't respond well to pressure at all! Just let him be and you'll start to be impressed. When no one's looking, Mike usually shines.
It's like a shy cat who's gonna rub against your leg and jump in front of you, but the moment you look at him at try to pet him, he runs away. That's basically Mike, over-simplified.
Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 3:47 am
#32 wrote:When no one's looking, Mike usually shines.
Trade him to the Hawks. Not even their own fans go to the games. If you're right, he'd be a star there.