PDA

View Full Version : Mickael Pietrus Is Nice.



Naptown Seth
12-14-2005, 07:42 AM
Just checking out some of the Warriors young guns, and I must say, after taking a close look at Mickael Pietrus, I really like what I see. His per minute overall numbers are comparable to Ron's, he's reputedly a great defender, and the icing on the cake, he's only 23 which means he'll only get better. Looks like a potential future All-Star to me.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/artestaholic/pietrus.png

if Golden State offers a deal of Pietrus + nice filler (Biedrins preferably) i think it will be too good to pass up. And a trio of Baron Davis, Jason Richardson, and Ron Artest would have to scare the rest of the west (if not the entire league) ****less.

indygeezer
12-14-2005, 08:07 AM
I keep hearing his name and must admit I havn't paid much attention to him. Where did you get those stats for there seems to be a disconnect with what RealGM is saying

http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/838/mickael_pietrus/

Recent Trend
Stat Last 5 Games Last 10 Games Last 20 Games Season
PPG 10.4 (-0.1) 9.8 (-0.7) 10.5 (+0.0) 10.5
RPG 3.0 (+0.2) 3.2 (+0.4) 2.8 (+0.0) 2.8
APG 1.2 (+0.4) 0.9 (+0.1) 0.8 (+0.0) 0.8
SPG 0.6 (+0.1) 0.4 (-0.1) 0.5 (+0.0) 0.5
BPG 0.6 (+0.3) 0.4 (+0.1) 0.3 (+0.0) 0.3

Last 5 Games
Date Opp Min FGM-A 3GM-A FTM-A OFF DEF TOT AST PF ST TO BS PTS
11/14 Chicago 19:39 3-9 1-4 5-7 1 2 3 1 0 0 1 1 12
11/16 Milwaukee 31:12 6-9 2-5 4-8 1 3 4 2 4 3 2 1 18
11/18 @ Portland 18:24 3-8 2-4 0-0 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 8
11/20 @ L.A. Clippers 26:10 3-11 1-6 4-4 0 5 5 1 4 0 0 1 11
11/21 New Jersey 10:12 1-3 1-3 0-0 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 3

Stats
Year Team GMs MPG FG% FT% 3PT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
03-04 GSW 53 14.1 41.6 69.3 33.3 2.3 0.5 0.6 0.2 5.3
04-05 GSW 67 20.0 42.7 69.8 34.4 2.8 1.2 0.7 0.3 9.5
04-05 GSW 12 22.1 44.9 62.8 31.8 2.8 0.8 0.5 0.3 10.5
CAREER 120 17.4 42.3 69.7 34.0 2.6 0.9 0.7 0.3 7.6
Year Team G Min FGM-A FTM-A 3PTM-A REB AS ST BK PTS
03-04 GSW 53 748 96-231 52-75 35-105 119 27 32 12 279
04-05 GSW 67 1340 214-501 141-202 67-195 189 82 46 18 636
04-05 GSW 12 265 40-89 32-51 14-44 34 9 6 4 126
CAREER 120 2088 310-732 193-277 102-300 308 109 78 30 915

Naptown Seth
12-14-2005, 08:17 AM
Sorry, forgot to say in the original post. Those are Pietrus' stats stretched out to Ron's number of minutes in order to equally compare them.
I just took Ron's mpg (37.8), divided them by Mickaels mpg (22.1) then multiplied that number (1.7104072398190045248868778280543) by Pietrus' stats.

Unclebuck
12-14-2005, 08:25 AM
I don't care about the stats, but I like Pietras, although it does concern me that he isn't playing more. Two seasons ago he had a great game agaisnt the Pacers, his defense is steller and it looked like he had an offensive game. So I wonder why he isn't playing more. But he would be a nice addition.

Naptown Seth
12-14-2005, 08:38 AM
Pietrus plays behind Jason Richardson and Mike Dunleavy. Richardson plays 39 minutes a game, so theres only 9 minutes a game for Pietrus there, so I'd imagine his other 13 minutes come from backing up Dunleavy at small forward. If Pietrus was a little bigger I'm sure the Warriors would start him at SF over Dunleavy since he looks to be the better player i.m.o.

Naptown Seth
12-14-2005, 08:41 AM
Looks like Pietrus has been out the past 3 weeks with a knee injury. (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=rotowire-ickaelietrusidelined&prov=rotowire&type=lgns)
According to the Warriors fans on RealGM, he may be out another 2 weeks. (http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=448034) Seems one of their concerns is MP2 being "burnt out" on basketball due to playing it all through the summer for his home country of France. Ruh roh. Definantly not a good sign.

Antonio
12-14-2005, 10:18 AM
I leave in France (and left in Pau, town where Pietrus played in France)
I know that Pietrus is a very very good player and will improve very much but I know also that he's quiet induividualist and that he wants to be a star.
Trade Artest for Pietrus could be a good deal only if we get a regular guy like Murphy + Pietrus...

ChicagoJ
12-14-2005, 10:54 AM
Just checking out some of the Warriors young guns, and I must say, after taking a close look at Mickael Pietrus, I really like what I see. His per minute overall numbers are comparable to Ron's, he's reputedly a great defender, and the icing on the cake, he's only 23 which means he'll only get better. Looks like a potential future All-Star to me.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/artestaholic/pietrus.png

if Golden State offers a deal of Pietrus + nice filler (Biedrins preferably) i think it will be too good to pass up. And a trio of Baron Davis, Jason Richardson, and Ron Artest would have to scare the rest of the west (if not the entire league) ****less.

Do you ever watch these guys play ball, or do you just look up stats?

In my world, "taking a close look at Mickael Pietrus" means watching him with my own two eyes on every possession for a number of games. I guess you define it differently, and I'm beginning to understand why so many of your so-called player evaluations are mocked.

BTW, acquiring Pietrus is certainly one of my top-five choices as of right now, but for a different reason.

I really like the idea of a Pietrus/ Granger tandem at the 2/3 spots. It may take them a little time to develop, but I think they'd be a great compliment to JO at both ends of the court.

NPFII
12-14-2005, 11:06 AM
I've seen Pietrus play and I have to say that if that's the best you guys think we can get for Ron Artest then you're aiming way too low.

He's a "nice" player - a solid backup, with some potential. Not more. He'll never make it to be a starter on a playoff team, let alone a legit star. Taking him for Artest is a really bad deal, IMO.

I think a deal with Seattle is much better. Something along the line of Artest+Tinsley for Rashard+Flip. That would be a classic.

Jermaniac
12-14-2005, 11:10 AM
I wouldnt be mad if we traded Ron for him, but if we trade Ron for Foyle and Dunleavy I may kill myself

ChicagoJ
12-14-2005, 11:22 AM
Peitrus is obviously quite raw, still.

What I've seen from him that I've liked is his aggressiveness, and he's become more polished. He needs some minutes, and a clearly defined role.

I don't think he'll ever be an allstar (but neither will Stephen Jackson for that matter) and he'll never be a #2 option.

I think we're looking to get a guy that compliments the players DW and Bird intend to keep, I think the "young future star" is a smokescreen. There might be so-called "better" players we pass over because they won't mesh as well with JO, Granger, Saras, whoever else is staying.

Naptown Seth
12-14-2005, 11:42 AM
Do you ever watch these guys play ball, or do you just look up stats?

In my world, "taking a close look at Mickael Pietrus" means watching him with my own two eyes on every possession for a number of games. I guess you define it differently, and I'm beginning to understand why so many of your so-called player evaluations are mocked.

BTW, acquiring Pietrus is certainly one of my top-five choices as of right now, but for a different reason.

I really like the idea of a Pietrus/ Granger tandem at the 2/3 spots. It may take them a little time to develop, but I think they'd be a great compliment to JO at both ends of the court.
No. No. No. No. No.
You're not gonna learn enough from 1 game, 2 games, 5 games. The player could be in a slump. The player could be on a hot streak. Stats are measured for a reason, you understand that right? Stats measure performance. Performance = very, very important. Its what seperates KG from John Edwards.
Mickael Pietrus, good production, not great production. Potential for great production. I can tell that by reading his stats, you couldn't by watching him play less then 20 games.

Shade
12-14-2005, 11:45 AM
Knee problems = no thanks

We need to avoid players with baggage and/or who are injury-prone (especially knee problems).

Shade
12-14-2005, 11:47 AM
No. No. No. No. No.
You're not gonna learn enough from 1 game, 2 games, 5 games. The player could be in a slump. The player could be on a hot streak. Stats are measured for a reason, you understand that right? Stats measure performance. Performance = very, very important. Its what seperates KG from John Edwards.
Mickael Pietrus, good production, not great production. Potential for great production. I can tell that by reading his stats, you couldn't by watching him play less then 20 games.

Stats are a good indicator of offensive production, but are not so hot on the other end. You also have to take into account what kind of teammates the player plays with, and what his role on the team is (2nd, 3rd option, etc.). Stats are far from a be-all, end-all. That's why there are player scouts who go to watch the player in person.

Fool
12-14-2005, 11:48 AM
No. No. No. No. No.
You're not gonna learn enough from 1 game, 2 games, 5 games. The player could be in a slump. The player could be on a hot streak. Stats are measured for a reason, you understand that right? Stats measure performance. Performance = very, very important. Its what seperates KG from John Edwards.
Mickael Pietrus, good production, not great production. Potential for great production. I can tell that by reading his stats, you couldn't by watching him play less then 20 games.

Agreed.

Watching a player play 1/2/5 games < Never watching a player play.

Mordecaii
12-14-2005, 11:48 AM
But there's also those players that bring something special to a team that doesn't show up in the stats. Oh sure, they can still get great stat lines, but they also could do a lot more than that or be good for only filling the stats.

Plus, the stats do not show effort. Defense is oftentimes based solely on effort. Then there's leadership, fitting into the offense, hustling for balls, etc... You cannot purely look at a stat sheet and get a good idea of a guy.

If you want a decent perspective, you're going to have to check the stats BUT ALSO watch quite a few games they are in. That is why the NBA has scouts, because they know that just looking at someone's points per game does not even come close to telling them the whole story.

I'm not even close to sold on Pietrus basically because I haven't been able to see him play enough. Does he hustle on defense and go after boards? Does he knock the ball away from people? Does he share the ball? Does he move around on offense? Can he handle the ball well? I have no idea about any of those questions. The fact that he isn't a starter and only plays around 20 minutes a game does tell me that the coach at GS doesn't trust him enough to have him start a game and play big minutes yet, but is that purely because he's young and still growing or does he have a flaw? Until you can answer these questions then you really don't have any kind of grasp on the player at all.

ChicagoJ
12-14-2005, 11:56 AM
Are you kidding me? Sorry, but that's absurd.

Describe Petrius' game. Tell me what he actually does on the court. I don't think you can. Heck, I haven't watched him enough recently to answer these questions either, but I've watched him enough to have a gut reaction that his game would compliment the remaining the Pacers.

What's his 'pet' move? How good is his shooting form? Does he use the proper hand near the basket? Can he handle the ball with either hand? If you were defending him, would you crowd him (take away his jumper), sag off him (take away his dribble penetration), play him straight up, or double-team somebody else? How does he get open - on his own or does he need three screens like Reggie? Does he set good screens? Can he handle the ball in traffic?

Defensively, does he pressure the ball? How well does he play the passing lanes? How crisp are his rotations? (IOW, does he get caught in no-man's land?) Does he even know when/ where to rotate to?

I don't need to see him put the ball in the basket to evaluate him. I can learn what I need to know *even* if he's in a slump or hotstreak (and have a better chance of understanding whether its a slump or weakness of his game.)

You place way too much reliance on stats. I'm a CPA with an MBA in finance. I can make stats do whatever I want, but I don't trust them one bit. So I rarely even look at boxscores and do you know what stats I look at most when I do look at the boxscores? It ain't scoring or assists.

BTW, when I said "a number of games", twenty was the number I was thinking of. Clearly I agree that anything less than ten just wouldn't give you enough possessions to reach any useful conclusions.

Hoop
12-14-2005, 03:11 PM
Ron for Petrius makes me physically ill.

ChicagoJ
12-14-2005, 03:25 PM
Ron for Petrius makes me physically ill.

What would you prefer?

We're clearly not getting an all-star caliber player in return, so I suppose that no matter what trade DW thinks is best, there will be lots of capacity to complain about it.

Of course, its nobody but Ron's own fault that we have to be talking about a Ron-for-Petrius swap as one of the better (rumored) alternatives.

Hoop
12-14-2005, 04:30 PM
What would you prefer?

We're clearly not getting an all-star caliber player in return, so I suppose that no matter what trade DW thinks is best, there will be lots of capacity to complain about it.

Of course, its nobody but Ron's own fault that we have to be talking about a Ron-for-Petrius swap as one of the better (rumored) alternatives.Petrius will never be more than a 8th or 9th best player on a good NBA team. If he is ever better than that feel free to bring this post back up and I'll say I was wrong and apologize to any Petrius fans.

I'd rather get a draft pick for Ron than Petrius. Jax and Fred are better and would always play a head of him.

ChicagoJ
12-14-2005, 04:36 PM
Petrius will never be more than a 8th or 9th best player on a good NBA team. If he is ever better than that feel free to bring this post back up and I'll say I was wrong and apologize to any Petrius fans.

I'd rather get a draft pick for Ron than Petrius. Jax and Fred are better and would always play a head of him.

Fair enough...

I could see him playing a decent-size role in the right situation, or not at all in other situations. I think he's the type of player, in terms of what he can and can't do, that could complement JO and Granger in the future, but I'm also not sure if he's good enough at what he can do to really make an impact. Did that even make sense?

I'm not sure I agree that Fred's better than Petrius, but its no secret that I don't see any upside to Fred's game so take that with a grain of salt. Still, I'd agree that Fred - who also will never be better than an eighth-ninth man on a good team - is currently more polished than Petrius. Key word is currently.

Naptown Seth
12-14-2005, 05:20 PM
Agreed.

Watching a player play 1/2/5 games < Never watching a player play.
Studying a players stats > watching a player play 1/2/5 games, and it's not even close. Anyone who says it is is 100% wrong.

Take for example Ben Wallace. If I were to judge Ben Wallace based off of his past 5 games, I'd come to the conclusion that he's an average rebounder, average shot blocker, and an average scorer. If I were to go by stats, I'd come to the conclusion that he's a great rebounder, a very good shot blocker, and a below average scorer.
Which sounds more accurate to you? I rest my case.

You just can't get enough of an idea how good a player is based on 5 measely games. Jonathan Bender had 5 games where he looked like a future All-Star, and look how that turned out. Stats give you a solid in-depth analysis over a worthy period of time, and thats something being a casual viewer of a player can't give you.

Mordecaii
12-14-2005, 05:44 PM
Hey Naptown, Fool was agreeing with you.

ChicagoJ
12-14-2005, 05:50 PM
You're either missing the point or you're utterly clueless. I think it might be a bit of both so I'm trying to give you some friendly advise so that you'll stop embarassing yourself so often.

Reaching a conclusion based solely on studying stats < Reaching a conclusion based on watching a player play the game. Anybody that believes studying stats alone is 100% out-of-touch with reality.

Study them all you want.

But don't rely solely on stats as an indication of whether something is any good or not. Whether you're talking about a basketball player or a stock in your portfolio or whatever.

Stats are just numbers that can be easily manipulated.

What do you think scouts do, spend all day looking at spreadsheets with players' stats on them, or watching game film?

They don't neglect either one, but when in-doubt, they'll concentrate their efforts on the game film and base their evaluations on what they've seen with their own two eyes, not what they read off the box scores.

Just in case you really don't get it, let me spell this out.

I have never advocated a casual observation. Re-read those questions I asked above - you can't possibly answer any of them from either analyzing stats or a casual observation.

You've got a chicken-and-egg problem with this logic, by the way. For example, lets pick an easy one: Was Jordan a great player because he averaged 30 points per game over a long period of time?

Or was Jordan able to get 30 ppg reguarly because he had an explosive first step, could use either hand, was able to extend the range of his jumper, had an uncanny ability to finish at the rim AND get to the line AND hit his FTs, especially at crunch time, and *that* made him a great player?

CableKC
12-14-2005, 07:20 PM
Fair enough...

I could see him playing a decent-size role in the right situation, or not at all in other situations. I think he's the type of player, in terms of what he can and can't do, that could complement JO and Granger in the future, but I'm also not sure if he's good enough at what he can do to really make an impact. Did that even make sense?

I'm not sure I agree that Fred's better than Petrius, but its no secret that I don't see any upside to Fred's game so take that with a grain of salt. Still, I'd agree that Fred - who also will never be better than an eighth-ninth man on a good team - is currently more polished than Petrius. Key word is currently.
I'm in your camp on this one.....Pietrus is the type of role player that we need to make a run now....one who can provide solid perimeter defend, doesn't complain and most of all won't mind getting less shots then SJax/JONeal.

I have a sinking feeling that we are not going to get the starting quality palyer that many of you guys are hoping for. I think that Walsh will be able to gain a little bit of ground in the negotiations....but not enough to get back a player on the level of Odom/Peja/Lewis or even Baby Al. Looking at the way things are right now.......unless Walsh/Bird are considering trading SJax and Tinsley before the trade deadline.....I would much rather get the role players/3rd/4th scoring options that we need to make a run for the championship this season.

Also.....if you consider the Warriors a decent team....Pietrus ( before he got injured ) was the 6th scoring option on a team that has scorers like Baron, JRich, Dunleavy, Murphy and Fisher. But you can't judge a player based solely on his offensive performance......just like Freddie....you have to judge him on his defense. Pietrus IMHO is a better defender then Freddie is right now.

Young
12-14-2005, 10:04 PM
Found this idea on a Golden State board.

Indiana Gets:
- Pieatrus
- Fisher
- Chaney

Golden State Gets:
- Artest
- Johnson
- Gill or Walker would also have to go to GS I think.

I think that Pieatrus would be a very nice addition. I like his defense. His offenseive game is better for a up tempo team, IMO, but he is young and still improving and would be a great addition nevertheless.

Fish can shoot and gives effort every night. He is pretty good at drawing charges too. He has a bad contract but it is worth it IMO because we would be getting a talent like MP and getting rid of Artest.

Chaney is a cheap roleplayer who can shoot from mid range. He doesn't have 3 point range but I like that he doesn't seem to shoot 3s to often. Like I said he is a decent shooter from mid range though and would be a nice veteran guy to rely on.

Gamble
12-14-2005, 11:46 PM
Knee problems = no thanks

We need to avoid players with baggage and/or who are injury-prone (especially knee problems).
So we shouldn't get equal value.