Im not defending Bargnani here
you guys are still talking about Bargnani's rebounding. I think that's just sad
he wants him not to be a great rebounder, but rather a consistent one. And how he doesnt expect Bargnani to be a great defender, but rather a decent one. And then he says, but i dont think he'll ever be able to be consistent or decent. so i said, wow, you extend your hand in friendship and then kick sand on his face. started interesting then back to the usual
I hear... "I'm a Bargnani fan but I don't want to admit it, so I'll try to lead away from the issues and put the onus on the commenters instead."
Honestly, one has the option of reading what they want, responding to what they want, and/or creating a new topic at will, and is not responsible to jump into a Bargnani thread.
What is "sad" is fans are still in a position to talk about his weaknesses because the team has, to date, been unwilling to address them, but rather has emphasized them by giving him more influence and playing time.
Don't blame the fans for talking about the teams weaknesses... blame the team for allowing those weaknesses to grow.
I think it's time for Bargnani fans to realize that Bargnani is not a star player and never will be. The excuse that comes up the most is that bigs develops late, yet Bargnani is this star in the making. If he had star talent we would have seen it in his rookie year or by his third year at the latest. Look at all the star big men in the league and look at their stats in the first three years they were in the league. Each one of them were already putting up impressive numbers from an early age even if they didn't have the right players around them. Yet none of Andrea's fans look at this at all. They say your a hater Bargnani will be a star he just needs this or that for it too happen. No if he had the talent he would be producing at a higher level than he does now. After 5 years going to 6 we've got a good idea of what he is as a player. A high volume low efficient scorer, a decent man defender, a terrible help defender, a terrible rebounder, who is inconsistent with a nonchalant attitude towards the game. The thing that bugs me the most is that he's got 4 more years on his contract averaging out to 10+ million dollars for all the attributes listed above. If he was getting paid 8 million for a 6th man role I wouldn't have a problem but BC thought that after his third year where he made some improvement that oh he is a star player dishes out a 5 year $50 million dollar contract. This is without finding out Bargnani's market value. The only position that makes sense for him is a gunner of the bench, where he can worry about his more complicated offense.
If this team wants to move forward and become a winning team Bargnani needs to go, he's just an anchor holding our ship from sailing. Now he isn't the only one that needs to go Calderon is another but he's still valuable because he can run an offense and will be expiring next year. This is the end to my rant I needed to get it off my chest.
Sure, if you think of it that way. I remember somebody posted about Bargnani's performance at Fiba and you said thats how he teases fans during the offseason. Wasnt that finding fault in an otherwise "positive" performance on Bargnani's part? I think i know what you're going to say, that historically, this is how Bargnani performs in the offseason then falters in the reg. season. Is that correct? IMO, its still finding fault.
Believe me or not, i was never a Bargnani fan, and i never said i was. What annoys me is not the fact that Bargnani is being criticized, but the fact that the same things are being said, over and over and over and over again. Like a broken record, or a high pitch noise that wont go away. And im not telling people to stop saying it, im just expressing my annoyance. Coz even if i tell them to stop, i know that would just lead to my insanity.
3rd paragraph i agree with. And this is actually an interesting part. See, its one of the rare statements that ive seen that the team is being blamed for his weakness, which ive alluded to numerous times before. See, its an interesting point of discussion, without detailing his rebounding and defense, which I know, I know is what is being referred to by the word "weakness" but the premise of the statement is the team is to blame and not just him. I wholeheartedly agree with.
By saying that he was teasing us, it's simply a statement based on experience.
Is it finding fault in Eddy Curry to believe that despite losing weight again, that it's doubtful he'll finally reach his potential? Or that this time probably won't be different for Lindsey Lohan? It's simply being realistic based on experience.
I dont think its being realistic, youre making an assumption. Coz you cant foretell whats going to happen, unless you can see the future. Jordan had 7 straight seasons avg 30pts per game, im sure people were assuming that on the 8th season he would avg the same since "historically" he was doing that, but he got injured and avg only 26. the next season he avg 30 so people probably assumed again he was back on track but ever since then, he never avg over 30pts up until he retired. Amare had microfracture surgery and people assumed he was done since "historically", NBA players who had that type of injury was never the same when they came back. But last time i checked, Amare's been averaging 20+pts and 8rebs for the past couple of seasons. Curry avg almost 20pts and 8rebs for knicks when he was 285lbs. but the season before that, he avg 13pts and 6rebs at 295lbs. So yes, by saying Curry wont live to his potential even if he loses weight IS finding fault.
if the raptors have been in mediocrity pretty much since the franchise started, then why should we assume that sooner or later, theyd be a better team? shouldnt they just call it quits since season after season they disappoint anyways? im just using the same argument as with bargnani's "historical" performance.
anyways, back to the real discussion. Im just annoyed that people keep saying things about Bargnani over and over and over again. Time to move on.
thats why i said im just annoyed with the repetitive nature of discussions. im not out to change people. im just saying im annoyed.
youre on DL?? what happened? like DL on basketball or in general?
If there was any chance an injury would make Bargnani a better rebounder, a better defender, more efficient on offense or more dedicated to the game I would personally run him over. Seeing how thats unlikely to happen, I'll let him cross the street for now.
Im pointing out here the "historical" factor. Not just because it happened in the past, that the exact same thing WILL happen in the future. Its not about injury, its about history.
Sure you can gauge, but you cant assume.
Otherwise why not start a line up of Joey Graham, POB, bring Hakeem out of retirement, Roko Ukic and Jalen Rose.... using your reasoning they COULD turn out to be the best starting 5 of all time.
Miami should break up the big 3 because they could all get injured next season.
Just because we can't predict the future, doesn't mean we shouldn't use the knowledge, experience and history available to us to plan for it.
Miami should break up, period. Coz i dont like them. hehehe
I agree entirely. But in the same token, just because "historically" something is not your best product, doesnt mean you cant improve it.
As for your Jordan analogy, you don't take into consideration other factors, such as age. Once a player, especially a SG, hits 30 their production tends to go down. Along the same lines, it's reasonable to predict that Steve Nash's production will decline.
And your Amare analogy doesn't take into consideration improvements in medical science, so you're not looking at all the evidence. Still, it was certainly a reasonable prediction to say that there was a good chance Amare would never get back to the production he did, pre-injury.
Your Raptors analogy doesn't make sense for several reasons. The first is that the franchise is constantly changing. Players, coaches and management have changed throughout the years. It's not reasonable to make a prediction when there are so many factors that continue to change. There's simply no baseline except for the team name and city they play in, neither of which affect the quality of the team.
On the matter of Bargnani, there IS a baseline. We've seen his development for 5 years. That's a long time in the NBA. The weaknesses which he has are not ones that players generally make big improvements on after so long in the NBA.
These are the factors:
- 5 years of play in the NBA (and several before that) that have shown an inherent inability to defend or rebound on a consistent basis.
- 5 years of development in which we have seen little to no improvement in these areas.
- 5 years of play that have indicated a somewhat lackadaisical attitude on the court.
- Overwhelming evidence that players don't tend to change core aspects of their game (such as desire) after a certain point.
Now Bargnani obviously COULD change, but there is simply too much evidence to support a prediction that he will, and in fact overwhelming evidence to support a prediction that he won't.
Based on the evidence, I can predict that if I go out and buy a lottery ticket, I won't win the jackpot. It doesn't mean there's not a chance I will. But it's a prediction based on reality.
And I injured my knee about a year ago (not operable and unfortunately chronic, due to my, er, age), but I've rested and strengthened it enough I'm hoping to return in the next couple of months. Who knows for how long.