View Poll Results: Grade Bargnani's game.

Voters
128. You may not vote on this poll
  • A

    9 7.03%
  • B

    47 36.72%
  • C

    30 23.44%
  • D

    19 14.84%
  • F

    23 17.97%
Page 282 of 527 FirstFirst ... 182 232 272 280 281 282 283 284 292 332 382 ... LastLast
Results 5,621 to 5,640 of 10537

Thread: Everything Bargnani: The Legend Continues

  1. #5621
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    In fact when Michael finally played for a different team he wasn't good, and neither was his team. Was it actually Michael Jordan's team that made him that 'good' then?
    Michael Jordan was 38 years old and had been playing golf for four years. I think that probably was the main difference. And he was still an All-Star. How many other 38 year olds have been All-Stars?
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  2. #5622
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Michael Jordan was 38 years old and had been playing golf for four years. I think that probably was the main difference. And he was still an All-Star. How many other 38 year olds have been All-Stars?
    I'm assuming the sarcasm was missed.

  3. #5623
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Soft Euro wrote: View Post
    Mr W., in an earlier post you said:

    But now you do it again:

    This is pretty much a rhetorical fallacy and I'd appreciate if you would refrain from adding this to your statements. Because now what, if I disagree with you do I first have to prove that I know something about basketball or should I just stop from disagreeing with you because if I do I know little to nothing about basketball? I'm certainly not the best basketballbrain around but I'd prefer it if I could make my arguments without knowing that what I'm going to say is based upon my complete lack of basketball acumen.
    Okay. I'm assuming you know someone who's not very bright, right? Most everyone does. You don't need to have this person take an IQ test to know they are not smart. It's fairly obvious, right? Especially if you've spent a lot of time with this person. It's the same with Bargnani and defense.

    I don't know about you, but for most of the time I've played and followed basketball, there were no advanced stats. We had to rely on actually watching players play in order to make judgements about them. Even back then you were able to discern a good defender from a bad defender.

    Advanced stats are a great tool, especially when trying to back up an argument. But can you really not reach a conclusion on a player WITHOUT advanced stats? Is that what it's come to?

    Watching Jose Calderon play, it's apparent to me that the team simply runs better with him and that he makes a positive impact. I reached this conclusion without any advanced stats, but they do back me up on this.

    Watching Bargnani, is incredibly apparent to me that he has a negative impact on the defensive end. JUst as I can see that Dwight Howard has a positive impact, I can see Bargnani has a negative impact.

    Does it make me a dick for saying it's obvious? Maybe. But it doesn't make me wrong.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  4. #5624
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote tbihis wrote: View Post
    When it comes to Bargnani, Tim concocts a million different arguments. Sometimes he says he's an overall bad defender, then sometimes he says he's a decent one on one defender but a terrible help defender. If you try and challenge him, he always challenges you back by telling you to show evidence that he said such a thing, but i think its a bit time consuming to dig thru all his posts just to "prove him wrong". But i admire his tenacity on getting it out there that Bargnani is in no way shape or form a capable defender. And i respect that coz thats his opinion. But mine and other's opinion i think should be respected just the same. Doesnt mean he doesnt agree with us that we dont know anything about basketball.
    I have NEVER once said anything contradictory about Bargnani's defense and I'd appreciate you not making things up to make it seem like I do. I have CONSISTENTLY said that Bargnani is decent (not good, but decent) in certain specific situations. I can point to probably a dozen comments as well as posts on my own website to back me up on this.

    WHat I have ALWAYS said is that Bargnani is a decent post defender in certain situations against certain types of player. This has ALWAYS been my argument. I have never once deviated from it or contradicted it once. This has been my argument about why moving him from center to PF makes little sense. I've never said he's a decent one on one defender, because it's not true. And I"ve always said he's an overall bad defender.

    Again, please don't say things about me that are not true.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  5. #5625
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    While I agree Tim may at times have problems accepting others opinions and b-ball knowledge (although I think you can say that about every person who posts regularily), he has NEVER been anything but consistent on his opinion, beliefs, expressions and arguments of Andrea Bargnani. I don't think I have ever read an individual who wavered any less over the years in regards to AB, than Tim.
    Thank you. I guess I didn't need to write the above post.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  6. #5626
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Should we start an "Everything Tim" thread?
    Which would fill up faster, the "Everything Tim" thread or the "Everything Bargnani" thread?
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  7. #5627
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Which would fill up faster, the "Everything Tim" thread or the "Everything Bargnani" thread?
    In the past I would have sworn Bargnani, but now I have my doubts.

  8. #5628
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    I'm assuming the sarcasm was missed.
    What? You want me to read the WHOLE comment? That would take time away from me responding!
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  9. #5629
    Raptors Republic All-Star Soft Euro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Utrecht, The Netherlands (Yes, that's Europe!)
    Posts
    1,920
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Okay. I'm assuming you know someone who's not very bright, right? Most everyone does. You don't need to have this person take an IQ test to know they are not smart. It's fairly obvious, right? Especially if you've spent a lot of time with this person. It's the same with Bargnani and defense.
    Not the best comparison, but ok I'll go along. If someone isn't very bright, it would really not take much to explain why he isn't bright. Even if I didn't feel like explaining it, I would not say to people something like "if you don't see that he isn't very bright you must be pretty stupid yourself."

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    I don't know about you, but for most of the time I've played and followed basketball, there were no advanced stats. We had to rely on actually watching players play in order to make judgements about them. Even back then you were able to discern a good defender from a bad defender.

    Advanced stats are a great tool, especially when trying to back up an argument. But can you really not reach a conclusion on a player WITHOUT advanced stats? Is that what it's come to?
    I have some problems with this: primarily you making a mockery of my arguments. I consider things like PER and Wins Produced amongst others as advanced stats. I've seen these fly around regularly in discussions about Bargnani. And I'm pretty sure you've used them in your blog and posts to demonstrate certain arguments. I rarely use those stats precisly because of the reason you give (true on this forum that's about 4000 posts less than you). Considering the complexity of basketball I really can't do much with those (but that doesn't mean I think they're useless btw and that I'll never use them). I like looking at the possessions themselves and in fact that's what I did. And just like you can take a fieldgoal percentage and not call it an advanced stat I think you can take percentages of certain types of plays. I kinda made them advanced to incorporate the level of the opponents because some people on here questioned the quality of the opposing players. I did not know what the outcome would be of course, for all i cared it could have come out otherwise, but it didn't. This is not some advanced wishy washy which you divide and add and where you take position into account etc like some of the advanced stats out there, it's percentages of actual plays just like a fieldgoal 3FG% says something about a players ability to shoot threes. It's not comparable to e.g. comparing someones PER with the PER of his direct opponent who may be defended by someone else a lot of the game because of switches etc., it's looking directly at the performance of someone when he defends in a certain situation.

    But most important of all, there is a big difference between saying "can you really not reach a conclusion on a player WITHOUT advanced stats?" and saying "it's pretty obvious. At least to anyone who knows basketball." That's not reaching a conlusion based on anything. And that's a pretty obivious difference, at least to anyone who knows anything about argumentation.

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Does it make me a dick for saying it's obvious? Maybe. But it doesn't make me wrong.
    At the very least it makes debate near impossible. In Dutch we call this a "deathdo-er," I don't know if there is an English word for this, but it means something like 'a statement which cuts of further exchanges of ideas/arguments'.
    Last edited by Soft Euro; Sat Aug 6th, 2011 at 01:35 PM.

  10. #5630
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,783
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Okay. I'm assuming you know someone who's not very bright, right? Most everyone does. You don't need to have this person take an IQ test to know they are not smart. It's fairly obvious, right? Especially if you've spent a lot of time with this person. It's the same with Bargnani and defense.
    An alternative to this analogy could be, you come across a glass of water. Just looking at the water, it seems clean enough. You smell it, and it smells clean enough ... you take a small taste, it tastes clean. So by ALL accounts, its clean water.

    And then you get E.Coli.

    And all you had to do was run some numbers, with some very simple tests to PROVE whether or not said water is clean.
    I am not using this as a defense of Bargnani, but there are times, when simple "Opinion Facts" are not exactly what the rest of the world is seeing.


    The two NEED to go Hand in Hand, as anything based on "The Eye test" is still Subjective, and thus, mostly based on Opinion.
    That opinion may be based in fact, but one should then use the FACTS to back up the Subjective "truths".
    In Masai we Trust.

  11. #5631
    Raptors Republic Superstar TheGloveinRapsUniform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Markham, Ontario
    Posts
    2,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    I have NEVER once said anything contradictory about Bargnani's defense and I'd appreciate you not making things up to make it seem like I do. I have CONSISTENTLY said that Bargnani is decent (not good, but decent) in certain specific situations. I can point to probably a dozen comments as well as posts on my own website to back me up on this.

    WHat I have ALWAYS said is that Bargnani is a decent post defender in certain situations against certain types of player. This has ALWAYS been my argument. I have never once deviated from it or contradicted it once. This has been my argument about why moving him from center to PF makes little sense. I've never said he's a decent one on one defender, because it's not true. And I"ve always said he's an overall bad defender.

    Again, please don't say things about me that are not true.
    Unfortunately, our arguments can only come down to a "he said, he said" outcome. Id love to go in to every post youve made but i dont have the time of day to do that nor anybody does, so its fairly easy to say "i didnt say that". and i am guilty of this as well i admit. i may have said stuff that i contradicted before, but if you feel like you never, ever contradicted yourself then i cant really force anything on that. but im sticking to my posts and my opinions.

    the way i interpret your arguments, and i re-iterate, this is my interpretation, you seem to "branch out" everytime. You say Bargnani is an overall bad defender, but decent in specific areas, against specific opponents, in specific situations. but overall bad. not sure if this is a logical comparison, but its like a student getting a B in math, a C science, a B in Reading, but overall, he's a D student. I dont see the logic in that.

  12. #5632
    Raptors Republic Superstar Puffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,693
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote planetmars wrote: View Post
    Bargnani could land a really good veteran who can teach the young guys what it means to win (ie, a coach on the floor), or it can land some more picks which could add to our future core. Keeping him on the roster for 2-3 years while we continue to develop that core is not good in the long term in my opinion.
    Here's the problem. Bargnani's deficiencies are clear to everyone reading these posts. Why would you think that they would not be obvious to the organization the Raptors would be trying to get said "really good veteran" from?

    The smarter move might be to find another good big defender, without Andre's scoring punch, and pair the two of them together so Andre's deficiencies look less obvious than they are now. Maybe his help defense would improve with someone else filling some holes. Maybe Casey can actually teach him a few things. It might be easier to move him then.

  13. #5633
    Raptors Republic Superstar planetmars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Puffer wrote: View Post
    Here's the problem. Bargnani's deficiencies are clear to everyone reading these posts. Why would you think that they would not be obvious to the organization the Raptors would be trying to get said "really good veteran" from?

    The smarter move might be to find another good big defender, without Andre's scoring punch, and pair the two of them together so Andre's deficiencies look less obvious than they are now. Maybe his help defense would improve with someone else filling some holes. Maybe Casey can actually teach him a few things. It might be easier to move him then.
    I believe that Andrea's stock is worth the most right now. If Andrea does not improve under Casey then his stock will drop much further down, as the one thing that makes Bargnani's value high is that most believe that under the right system he would flourish. I personally am not willing to gamble on Bargnani. Not after 5 years.

    Toronto has given Bargnani 5 solid years to develop. That's a long time in a professional league. Assuming Bargnani doesn't improve next season (and this is very possibly since he has regressed last year), then his stock will really plummet, and then it would be very difficult to trade him for the right pieces.

    If a defensive minded center comes in (and by the way - these don't grow on trees, and every team in the NBA needs one), it can help, but would you really still want Bargnani to be a starting PF for the team? He would take minutes away from both Davis and Amir, and teams could still game plan and use Bargnani's deficiencies on defense against the Raptors. Outside of maybe Dwight Howard, I can't really see a center that can work optimally with Bargnani.

    The biggest issue with Bargnani's defensive voes is his help defense. That is a skill that is needed, especially within a defensive system. I didn't watch a lot of Dallas ball during the regular season, but in the playoffs (especially the finals), Dallas played a lot of zone to 'hide' Nowitski's defense. That requires a lot of switching and help on defense, which we already know is a problem with Bargnani, and has been ever since he was a rookie. If Casey can teach Bargnani a thing or two about help defense, that would be great - but would it stick? Is help defense/rebounding something you can learn, or is it an innate skill that you are born with?

    Also is Bargnani even motivated to get better defensively? He hasn't really shown the desire to me anyways in the past few seasons. Casey doesn't seem like the guy that would coddle you. He seems to be under the Smith philosophy of coaching, and Bargnani really didn't do well under his system. Maybe I just don't have as much faith in you that Casey could actually help Bargnani, and that would mean his stock would fall - which would mean that we had lost an opportunity to gain more pieces for the future.

  14. #5634
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote planetmars wrote: View Post
    I believe that Andrea's stock is worth the most right now. If Andrea does not improve under Casey then his stock will drop much further down, as the one thing that makes Bargnani's value high is that most believe that under the right system he would flourish. I personally am not willing to gamble on Bargnani. Not after 5 years.

    Toronto has given Bargnani 5 solid years to develop. That's a long time in a professional league. Assuming Bargnani doesn't improve next season (and this is very possibly since he has regressed last year), then his stock will really plummet, and then it would be very difficult to trade him for the right pieces.

    If a defensive minded center comes in (and by the way - these don't grow on trees, and every team in the NBA needs one), it can help, but would you really still want Bargnani to be a starting PF for the team? He would take minutes away from both Davis and Amir, and teams could still game plan and use Bargnani's deficiencies on defense against the Raptors. Outside of maybe Dwight Howard, I can't really see a center that can work optimally with Bargnani.

    The biggest issue with Bargnani's defensive voes is his help defense. That is a skill that is needed, especially within a defensive system. I didn't watch a lot of Dallas ball during the regular season, but in the playoffs (especially the finals), Dallas played a lot of zone to 'hide' Nowitski's defense. That requires a lot of switching and help on defense, which we already know is a problem with Bargnani, and has been ever since he was a rookie. If Casey can teach Bargnani a thing or two about help defense, that would be great - but would it stick? Is help defense/rebounding something you can learn, or is it an innate skill that you are born with?

    Also is Bargnani even motivated to get better defensively? He hasn't really shown the desire to me anyways in the past few seasons. Casey doesn't seem like the guy that would coddle you. He seems to be under the Smith philosophy of coaching, and Bargnani really didn't do well under his system. Maybe I just don't have as much faith in you that Casey could actually help Bargnani, and that would mean his stock would fall - which would mean that we had lost an opportunity to gain more pieces for the future.
    Bogut.

    Bogut can take just about any centre in the league 1 on 1. A double team sent leaves Andrea wide open and Bogut is one of, if not the best, passing C's in the league.

    I am struggling to think of any other C I would be confident about though. My two cents. Oh yeah, and Bogut would have to stay healthy - a big IF there.

    I agree with the 5 years and his motivation.

    The only thing that gives me hope, assuming Casey is a man of his word, is accountability. I remember the game versus Detroit last year when Bargnani was actually benched for a stretch in the 2nd half - he played like a beast (no exaggeration).

  15. #5635
    Raptors Republic Rookie
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    96
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Puffer wrote: View Post
    Here's the problem. Bargnani's deficiencies are clear to everyone reading these posts. Why would you think that they would not be obvious to the organization the Raptors would be trying to get said "really good veteran" from?

    The smarter move might be to find another good big defender, without Andre's scoring punch, and pair the two of them together so Andre's deficiencies look less obvious than they are now. Maybe his help defense would improve with someone else filling some holes. Maybe Casey can actually teach him a few things. It might be easier to move him then.
    Help defense depends on a players awareness level on the court. Bargnani has shown that he can only be aware on defense when he defends his man 1 on 1. Regardless if you get a defensive C beside Bargs he'd still have to play help defense, because everyone on the court has too. It's not subjected to one position on the court. Dwane Casey isn't Jesus here and can't change Bargnani's habits on defense. These habits have been instill in Bargnani for 10 years now (5 years in the Euroleague, 5 years in the NBA), asking Dwane Casey to break his habits is like trying to bend an iron girder with your bare hands. He can try to hold him more accountable but that's the only thing that he can do, the rest is on Bargnani to accept the challenge. If we change his role to that of a Ryan Anderson then that would benefit us more. Then again if we had an established core it would make sense. Bargnani right now is a piece we can use to help our future in the means of a trade.

  16. #5636
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote tbihis wrote: View Post
    Unfortunately, our arguments can only come down to a "he said, he said" outcome. Id love to go in to every post youve made but i dont have the time of day to do that nor anybody does, so its fairly easy to say "i didnt say that". and i am guilty of this as well i admit. i may have said stuff that i contradicted before, but if you feel like you never, ever contradicted yourself then i cant really force anything on that. but im sticking to my posts and my opinions.

    the way i interpret your arguments, and i re-iterate, this is my interpretation, you seem to "branch out" everytime. You say Bargnani is an overall bad defender, but decent in specific areas, against specific opponents, in specific situations. but overall bad. not sure if this is a logical comparison, but its like a student getting a B in math, a C science, a B in Reading, but overall, he's a D student. I dont see the logic in that.
    Well, I have others to back me up on this, as well.

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    While I agree Tim may at times have problems accepting others opinions and b-ball knowledge (although I think you can say that about every person who posts regularily), he has NEVER been anything but consistent on his opinion, beliefs, expressions and arguments of Andrea Bargnani. I don't think I have ever read an individual who wavered any less over the years in regards to AB, than Tim.
    And unless you can prove that I have changed what I've said about Bargnani, just saying so is pretty damn close to lying. And it's not appreciated.

    And my argument is, and always has been:

    Bargnani is a terrible team defender, a terrible pick and roll defender, very bad at defending faceup big men who can put the ball on the floor, bad at defending active post men who have good footwork, and decent at defending slower, more methodical back to the basket big men when they post up. If you can prove I have EVER said anything other than that, please point to the post or comment. Otherwise, you're simply making things up to try and negate my argument.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

  17. #5637
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    289
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Players do improve on help defense. It is really not uncommon at all -- actually, it's expected.

    Also, Dallas did not generally play zone to hide Nowitzky. He has improved a lot on defense over the years. They play zone for a variety of reasons, but if it's to hide anyone, it's Terry or Barea.

  18. #5638
    Raptors Republic Superstar TheGloveinRapsUniform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Markham, Ontario
    Posts
    2,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    Umm the schedules are pretty consistent. You play every team atleast twice. You play your conference opponents atleast 3 times (there are 4 teams in your division you play 3 times) . You play your divisional opponents 4 times.
    Unfortunately, you just picked a phrase from my whole argument and made it seem detached from the premise of my whole argument. what i was getting at was there are to many variables, and schedule is just one of them.

    The numbers aren't really that far off from one another. Plus its not like Bargnani is a rookie... people have 5 seasons, 367 games and 11k minutes to make a conclusion from. Over that time he has played/covered/been covered by a myraid of opponents from some of the worst in the league to the best. Statistics are best used with a large and varied sample to work from. Andrea has that. (by the way if Andrea's opponent was Dwight and only played him once that would be 1.2% of a season. If he played him 3 times that would be 3.6% of a season. Do you really believe that 2.4% of a season is going to make a significant difference to an individuals statistics?)
    See thats the thing, IMO, you cant, and should not formulate conclusions based on a compilation of every game. You just cant. Each game is different, each minute is different, each scenario is different. An offensive foul last game, can be an exact same move the next game but a referee can call it as a foul on the defensive player. He maybe guarding Howard one game and he does a bad job defensively, and the next game he's playing against Howard and he's got a minor injury, or flu-like symptoms, and he does another bad job defensively, is it fair to assess him as a bad defender when it comes to Howard when one game doesnt have the same conditions as the other?

    But if we are going to say there are too many variables to judge him defensively using stats, than the same argument should be made to his offense. Therefore we don't know if he is actually a good or bad offensive player until he plays on a good offensive team that either wins or losses right? In fact the same argument should also be made about every player to play the game as they have had more, less or the same amount of variables effecting their game/stats. Michael Jordan is no longer one of the best players to ever play... he can't be. Too many variables to judge it. In fact when Michael finally played for a different team he wasn't good, and neither was his team. Was it actually Michael Jordan's team that made him that 'good' then? Its not fair to say that POB is any worse than Michael as the number of variables between the two players career is off the charts.

    Every player just is......
    I definitely agree. I never said in this thread that Bargnani was a superior offensive player based on his offensive stats. And you are definitely right, you cant actually tell if he is a good offensive player up until he plays on a good offensive team. Tim has made numerous examples on this, from Magette to Campbell, etc. The thing that you failed to notice is good defense is hard to quantify. An offensive player makes a shot against a defensive player. The defensive player played really good defense, sticking to his man, blocking his path, hands high up in the air, but still the offensive player makes the shot. Just because the shot went in, does that mean the defensive player did a bad job? Of course not. if he stood his ground, waved his arms like a lunatic and made the shot as difficult as possible, then he did a good job defensively. But you cant put a stat to that. But on the other hand, the offensive player, doesnt matter how stupid his shot looked, if it went in, thats a good offensive sequence. MJ was privileged to have both talent and good teammates. And when he played for the Wizards, was he good? Nope. In fact, with the Wizards was when he had his worst performance his entire career - http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2001/...dan011227.html.

  19. #5639
    Raptors Republic Superstar TheGloveinRapsUniform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Markham, Ontario
    Posts
    2,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Tim W. wrote: View Post
    Well, I have others to back me up on this, as well.
    And unless you can prove that I have changed what I've said about Bargnani, just saying so is pretty damn close to lying. And it's not appreciated.
    Not sure what you mean by others, other people, or other data?
    No one's really contested your argument Tim. Youve pretty much sent your message across loud and clear, that you think Bargnani is an overall bad/terrible defender, but with certain situations, certain players, to some degree, to some extent. Whew. What me, personally, is trying to say, is that IMO, Bargnani is not a bad defender, all the time. Im not trying to change what you think, im just letting people know what i think, and that how you arrived at your conclusion on Bargnani as a defender is quite unrealistic. But im not letting people know that just because your opinion is different from mine, that i know more about basketball than you do.
    And my argument is, and always has been:
    Bargnani is a terrible team defender, a terrible pick and roll defender, very bad at defending faceup big men who can put the ball on the floor, bad at defending active post men who have good footwork, and decent at defending slower, more methodical back to the basket big men when they post up. If you can prove I have EVER said anything other than that, please point to the post or comment. Otherwise, you're simply making things up to try and negate my argument.
    IMO, this is not a fair assessment. Youd have to review each and every defensive play that Bargnani has ever been in, with each player he is guarding, every minute of every game. I mean if you reviewed each Bargnani defensive play against opponents who dont have good footwork, then i think you should be hired as a Raps assistant coach, no sarcasm here, because the time and effort youre putting reviewing each play is going uncompensated. But if youre satisfied doing this and just knowing that youve done it, then kudos to you. But IMO, no poster here, in their right mind would go over each Bargnani defensive play for every minute he's on the floor of every game. I dont think making a conclusion like this from watching him guard 2 or 3 players is enough of a sample size. My point is, support your arguments with proof, like what Soft Euro has done, otherwise, dont generalize. Dont tell us youve seen most if not all of Bargnani's games and came up with such conclusions. If you are telling the truth, then your attention to detail is quite uncanny, Rainman-esque IMO.

  20. #5640
    Raptors Republic Superstar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,942
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote tbihis wrote: View Post
    Not sure what you mean by others, other people, or other data?
    No one's really contested your argument Tim. Youve pretty much sent your message across loud and clear, that you think Bargnani is an overall bad/terrible defender, but with certain situations, certain players, to some degree, to some extent. Whew. What me, personally, is trying to say, is that IMO, Bargnani is not a bad defender, all the time. Im not trying to change what you think, im just letting people know what i think, and that how you arrived at your conclusion on Bargnani as a defender is quite unrealistic. But im not letting people know that just because your opinion is different from mine, that i know more about basketball than you do.
    My argument was about your assertion that I have changed my argument about Bargnani defense, not about Bargnani's defense itself. You claimed...
    When it comes to Bargnani, Tim concocts a million different arguments. Sometimes he says he's an overall bad defender, then sometimes he says he's a decent one on one defender but a terrible help defender.
    And my whole point, one backed up by Garbagetime, was that I have been incredibly consistent in my criticism of Bargnani.

    And I really have no idea why you think that my conclusion of his defense is unrealistic. I don't even understand what that even means.

    Quote tbihis wrote: View Post
    IMO, this is not a fair assessment. Youd have to review each and every defensive play that Bargnani has ever been in, with each player he is guarding, every minute of every game. I mean if you reviewed each Bargnani defensive play against opponents who dont have good footwork, then i think you should be hired as a Raps assistant coach, no sarcasm here, because the time and effort youre putting reviewing each play is going uncompensated. But if youre satisfied doing this and just knowing that youve done it, then kudos to you. But IMO, no poster here, in their right mind would go over each Bargnani defensive play for every minute he's on the floor of every game. I dont think making a conclusion like this from watching him guard 2 or 3 players is enough of a sample size. My point is, support your arguments with proof, like what Soft Euro has done, otherwise, dont generalize. Dont tell us youve seen most if not all of Bargnani's games and came up with such conclusions. If you are telling the truth, then your attention to detail is quite uncanny, Rainman-esque IMO.
    I don't think you understand what I'm talking about, here. Have you never scouted a player or team before? Even on the playground? It's something my buddy and I almost always do when we play against a player or team. You watch them and look for patterns. Where does he seem to struggle. What are his strengths. Where do you think these scouting reports come from? You think all these scouts are like Rain Man? What do you think coaching is?

    After watching Bargnani for hundreds of games, it's not difficult to start seeing patterns with him. You start to see that he plays well against this type of player and struggle against this type of player. Then you ask questions and look for answers. Maybe I watch games differently than you do but I'm certainly not that unique.
    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
    Follow me on Twitter.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •