Everything Bargnani: Grumble, Grumble, Grumble

[Tim W.]

Billups is the one that torments me, because he's the perfect example of a guy everyone wrote off who became a world class player, and because he did I hold out hope way too way long on a lot of flops.

Billups is an exception, and he struggled because he had to make the transition from shoot first PG to pass first PG. And for every Billups, who does it successfully, there are dozens of Rodney Stuckeys who never learn to actually run a team. Bargnani isn't trying to make a transition to any position. He's attempting to become a type of player which he previously never was.

[TheGloveinRapsUniform]

Even if he improves, another important question that we need to ask, is: Does he fit in, and play well with the team?
I did not see the game, so Im not sure how well he actually played with the other players.
If he improves, I would be thrilled, and not saying that he wont, but he would still need to work well with other players in his new form.

IF he plays like that every single game for the whole season, i mean with effort and aggressiveness, then I think the Raptors should keep him, just because thats what they asked of him, and he complied. Eventhough its a business, i think words still mean something. If he continues to show improvement and becomes a credible contributor both offensively and defensively, and still gets traded, thats just disrespect to the him and im pretty sure it wont sit well with the other players either.

[JoePanini]

Yes. The type of frozen dessert was the only thing wrong with that statement - lol.

I was kidding Matt, didn't really want to cause a mini argument out of such a small thing.

[JoePanini]

Joe I'm not exactly sure what you expect. An advanced stat is a bunch of data put into a model and has a value thrown out. That model is tested, reviewed, challenged and critiqued. The reason you are giving me that it 'doesn't work' is because your opinion won't allow you to believe that Allen Iverson wasn't the best player on the 76ers.... I am not trying to change that opinion... I'm trying to roughly explain why Iverson got the ranking he did.

Iverson's greatest basketball ability is scoring. Which is one of the most common 'talent's in the NBA. He did it with quantity over quality.... but every shot he took is a shot some else could have taken aswell. Statistically speaking, if someone else (or combination of others) took the shots Iverson did the team had a better chance of scoring as his FG% was very low. Thats why his WP number is low. You can tell me he was a better scorer than his teammates but he still shot 42%on 25.5 sots. You can tell me he was quick and talented and hit amazing shots, but he still shot 42% on 25.5 shots. You can tell me he scored 30 pts a game, won an mvp and made it to the finals, but he still shot 42% of 25.5 shots.

I think we should conclude this discussion here, as it's clearly going nowhere. We have very different opinions on the topic matter, which I might remind you was "Allen Iverson in 2001 as an example for the successful usage of the WS statistic was a bad choice". From what you've responded you clearly believe that Allen Iverson wasn't the best player on his team, and I believe he was. Let's leave it at that.

[Matt52]

I was kidding Matt, didn't really want to cause a mini argument out of such a small thing.

My reply was a joke. Sorry it didn't come across that way. For what it is worth, people rarely find my jokes funny in person either

[GarbageTime]

I think we should conclude this discussion here, as it's clearly going nowhere. We have very different opinions on the topic matter, which I might remind you was "Allen Iverson in 2001 as an example for the successful usage of the WS statistic was a bad choice". From what you've responded you clearly believe that Allen Iverson wasn't the best player on his team, and I believe he was. Let's leave it at that.

actually Joe I want to point you to my initial statement on the subject in response to Soft Euro:

have you ever done any reading on WP and why and how its modelled? Its not a 'player ranking' per se, but rather a measure of production.

The irony in your statement is that the book was written (if I'm not mistaken), pretty much based on the statement you just made. Everyone applauded Allen Iverson for what he did and called him an MVP, yet his team went very much overlooked. The idea behind WP is looking beyond, and within, scoring.... which history shows us is the most common value people use (and get paid for) to base the 'worth' of a player, while ignoring the multiple other areas players help, or hurt, to 'produce wins' for a team.

I already said I believe that Iverson was the 'best' player on the team. But I also don't think he was the most 'productive'. I think there was a lot he did wrong (namely inefficient offense) that the rest of his team compensated for through their excellent defense (which Iverson did have a part in to). Had Iverson not had that great defense team, the team would not have been as successful (and from which the way the league MVP is handed out, Iverson would also not have won the MVP either).

Here is Iverson's team's record over the years:

1996/97 22-60
1997/98 31-51
1998/99 28-22 (shortened season)
1999/00 49-33
2000/01 56-26* (season this discussion is based on)
2001/02 43-39
2002/03 48-34
2003/04 33-49
2004/05 43-39
2005/06 38-44
2006/07 5 -10 (with Philly)
2006/07 26-24 (with Denver)
2007/08 50-32
2008/09 39-43 (Detroit)


Can you tell me that the 2000/01 season doesn't stand out compared to the others?

[JoePanini]

actually Joe I want to point you to my initial statement on the subject in response to Soft Euro:



I already said I believe that Iverson was the 'best' player on the team. But I also don't think he was the most 'productive'. I think there was a lot he did wrong (namely inefficient offense) that the rest of his team compensated for through their excellent defense (which Iverson did have a part in to). Had Iverson not had that great defense team, the team would not have been as successful (and from which the way the league MVP is handed out, Iverson would also not have won the MVP either).

Here is Iverson's team's record over the years:

1996/97 22-60
1997/98 31-51
1998/99 28-22 (shortened season)
1999/00 49-33
2000/01 56-26* (season this discussion is based on)
2001/02 43-39
2002/03 48-34
2003/04 33-49
2004/05 43-39
2005/06 38-44
2006/07 5 -10 (with Philly)
2006/07 26-24 (with Denver)
2007/08 50-32
2008/09 39-43 (Detroit)


Can you tell me that the 2000/01 season doesn't stand out compared to the others?

Then you've got this whole discussion wrong. I brought up how I felt that Allen Iverson was a bad example if you wanted to "advertise" WS. That was what I was discussing about, if you look at my first post that's what I said.

[GarbageTime]

Then you've got this whole discussion wrong. I brought up how I felt that Allen Iverson was a bad example if you wanted to "advertise" WS. That was what I was discussing about, if you look at my first post that's what I said.

and I've said twice now that I didn't bring up Iverson. Soft Euro did.

[RaptorsFan4Life]

[Nilanka]

Bargnani's the new Karl Malone...

[Matt52]

Bargnani's the new Karl Malone...

Bargs is wearing cowboy boots and cowboy hats now?

[Nilanka]

Bargs is wearing cowboy boots and cowboy hats now?

Yes, and riding horses (in this case, named Reggie Evans).

[Apollo]

Bargs is wearing cowboy boots and cowboy hats now?

Cowboys call them Western boots and western hats. Just saying. Been to the rodeo you know.

[JoePanini]

and I've said twice now that I didn't bring up Iverson. Soft Euro did.

Yes I know that, and I even apologized for thinking you did. But you still continued saying that you felt like it was a good example to show the effectiveness of WS, when I thought it wasn't. That was pretty much our extremely off topic discussion. I think we both kinda discussed different things, which is why when I read back I realize why we're so far off on what we're talking about (you constantly changing topic, and me constantly talking about something you probably thought was random and irrelevant).

[irgigi]

You know, but while Iverson managed to get his team to the finals while scoring uneficiently, why Bargs can't to that as well ? All we need is Mutombo to absorb every shit trying to reach our basket

[Nilanka]

After being told about an idea that would allow the Nets guards to crash the boards while the bigs made a dash up the floor, Carlesimo, who served as an assistant under Triano last season, had this to say, according to Abrams:

“That’s what I wanted to do with [Andrea] Bargnani last year, but [former Raptors coach Jay] Triano wouldn’t let me,” Carlesimo says. “He said it was demeaning. At least our smalls had a chance of getting the rebound.”

http://blogs.thescore.com/raptorblog...rianobargnani/

Is it surprising to hear that Triano protected Bargnani? I think not.

[e2thed]

Lol finally someone who will openly diss Bargs and Triano, Haha now Jay has no medium to speak his peace because hes irrelevant and Bargs won't even talk smack back to reporters who ask him why he sucks at defending.

Score one: P.J

[stretch]

Wasn't it Leo Durocher that said nice guys finish last. That's Jay as far as coaching the Raptors went. As for Bargnani, if he is as sensitive as that article suggests, I'll bet he doesn't come sniffing around this forum much.

[LBF]

yes, because that around christmas all the way to all-star break team had nothing to do with triano. GTFO

we are talking about this triano, right?

[Arsenalist]

yes, because that around christmas all the way to all-star break team had nothing to do with triano. GTFO

we are talking about this triano, right?

It would've been awesome if he did that and it didn't break.