Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Liston wrote: View Post
    Everyone has turned this simple example into an "attack" or "you're blaming Bargnani for the loss"

    There are improvements to Bargnani's game which deserve praise this year. There are also basic things that need to be improved upon. I simply pointed out one area. This is what we do.
    In using the word "attack" I was making reference to the posts following the original (which is just... I mean a series of pictures. Why would I equate that to an attack?) - more specifically, I felt that here, elsewhere on the internet and in my personal conversation people were using your pictures to say, "SEE HE SUCKS WE LOST BECAUSE OF HIM!!!" (something I never accused you of suggesting).

    I posed a series of questions like "Where are the pictures of..." just to make the larger point that, amongst the most vocal anyway, it's very rare people go out of their way like this to credit Bargs for the good he does in game. (keeping in mind I'm on the TRADE HIM WHILE PEOPLE STILL THINK HE'S VALUABLE! bandwagon)

    To me it just seems like tired, treaded ground: did we really need a shot for shot breakdown of something like this again? The "3" under "Rebs" didn't tell us that? After a game in which he played well? Maybe I've just stopped hoping he'd improve, but I felt this illuminated nothing.

    It's like if after John Wall's near triple double someone posted a breakdown of all 8 turnovers - sure, it's a valid criticism but it misses the larger context of that player's contribution and casts an otherwise good performance in an unfairly dim light. It seems doubly silly because Bargs has been a terrible rebounder forever, Triano basically told us it hadn't improved, so what did you expect?

    So I have no problem with the criticism itself - which is more than fair - it's just the context and timing of it's presentation seemed silly.
    Last edited by theshareef; Thu Nov 4, 2010, 11:31 PM. Reason: typo

    Comment


    • This thread should be closed

      Comment


      • theshareef wrote: View Post
        ...amongst the most vocal anyway, it's very rare people go out of their way like this to credit Bargs for the good he does in game.
        I wrote an entire piece on his improvement last year. I'll likely point out strengths again this year over the course of the season.
        http://raptorsrepublic.com/2010/02/0...tter-bargnani/
        http://twitter.com/Liston

        Comment


        • funny line. Trife if you could just be funny then we could except your stubborn point of view. But your not funny so we have to say funny things so people come to the forum. Next time your forum will be empty. Good luck and enjoy the rebuilding year. I do think we win 30 games min.. TO many crap teams in the east phil, new jersey, new york, wash, detroit, charlotte, cleveland. Were better then at least 4 of these teams

          matt wrote: View Post
          And I'm six inches aways from being a Porn star......

          Comment


          • Liston wrote: View Post
            I wrote an entire piece on his improvement last year. I'll likely point out strengths again this year over the course of the season.
            http://raptorsrepublic.com/2010/02/0...tter-bargnani/
            Cool, man. I wasn't really trying to make direct reference to you with that particular comment - the RR staff is mostly great about keeping things in perspective. Keep the stat breakdowns coming I always enjoy those.
            Last edited by theshareef; Fri Nov 5, 2010, 12:11 PM.

            Comment


            • Frankthetank wrote: View Post
              Trife your a waste of bandwidth and you will see by how little action you get on your next blog. All the things you said about ANdrea were said about Paul Gasol when he was with Memphis. He's turned out alright. We will just take what you say to be fact your so smart TRIFE
              did you seriously just compare bargs to pau gasol

              Comment


              • phez wrote: View Post
                did you seriously just compare bargs to pau gasol
                lol lol you seeeeee it....but im the one whos clueless apparently...

                Comment


                • Captain Haddock wrote: View Post
                  Bargnani's 3 inches away from being one of the best SF's in the league.
                  i still dont get why triano doesnt play him sg/sf

                  Comment


                  • Tim W. wrote: View Post
                    Actually, Bargnani's inability to box out and grab rebounds WAS a major factor in the loss to the Kings. The problem when your big man isn't expected, or doesn't want to, rebound, when he has to and doesn't, it's a big problem.
                    Actually Bargnani was also the main reason they still had a chance to win in Sacramento!
                    Funny how sirchilly and you cannot stop slamming Bargs for his faults but see mostly strengths in the guys you like. I will not get into who was worse because I'm tired of that but Bargs is far from the problem on this squad.

                    Comment


                    • Tim W. wrote: View Post
                      The only logical option is to trade him and try and find a team is entranced by his offensive skills. You can only hide a player's liabilities for so long, but they're often exposed during crunch time, like they were against Sacramento. No matter who you put him beside, it doesn't eliminate his weaknesses. They always rear their ugly head, and often at the worst times.

                      As for those who feel the criticism is unwarranted, maybe we're all just sick and tired of seeing the same goddamn problems from the same player year after year, and sick of so many Raptor fans trying to tell us that the piece of junk jewelry they found is really a priceless diamond neckless.
                      Have you even watched the team play when Bargnani is not on the floor. Their offence pretty much goes stagnant... pretty much what I wish you and the other guys who have nothing better to do would...also the slam taking God's name in vane is unbecoming of you who always try to be so professional and blame others constantly for getting personal. It's also frankly more offensive than your hate for Bargnani so I hope you don't use that mouth around your kids

                      Comment


                      • Dan wrote: View Post
                        Trife, you see advanced statistics and don't have the brainpower to understand how it works... hence just saying it's crap from "nerds."

                        As a decently intelligent guy, I've seen that before - it's code for "I don't really understand how this formula works, so I can't actually disprove it or its relevance... I'll just say it's matrix crap from nerds!"

                        You're a clown, dude. It's not about co-signing - I can disagree with someone but respect their opinion. I don't think anyone here even respects what you're saying... so, quit being a tool and learn how to engage people properly.

                        or stop talking on message boards since you know everything already and won't listen to alternative opinions. actually, great idea!
                        I agree great idea!!!

                        Comment


                        • Pizzaman wrote: View Post
                          Actually Bargnani was also the main reason they still had a chance to win in Sacramento!
                          Funny how sirchilly and you cannot stop slamming Bargs for his faults but see mostly strengths in the guys you like. I will not get into who was worse because I'm tired of that but Bargs is far from the problem on this squad.
                          lol @ only reason they had a chance to win...

                          I guess you missed that they were up by 11 at halftime lol...

                          lol @ praising scoring prowess in a loss...Bargnani not rebounding is a problem to this team whether you want to see it or not...

                          Comment


                          • Pizzaman wrote: View Post
                            Actually Bargnani was also the main reason they still had a chance to win in Sacramento!
                            Funny how sirchilly and you cannot stop slamming Bargs for his faults but see mostly strengths in the guys you like. I will not get into who was worse because I'm tired of that but Bargs is far from the problem on this squad.
                            I've already discussed this ad nauseum. Bargnani WAS a big part of the Raptors being in the Sacramento game, and he was also a very, very big part of why they lost. As I said, you can live with losing because of missed shots or an opponent having a good night. What's not acceptable is for your big man to allow a rookie playing his third game to grab two crunch time offensive rebound out from under your nose. Period. If you don't believe that than we have two completely different view of how to play basketball.
                            Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                            Follow me on Twitter.

                            Comment


                            • Buddahfan wrote: View Post
                              Triano and Carlesimo have designed the Raptors defense for Evans to get most of the rebounds.

                              As a team the Raptors are +4 in rebound differential per game. They are ranked 10th in this category.

                              Last season the Raptors were a -1.8 rebound differential per game. That ranked them 19th in this category.

                              A very nice team improvement so far.


                              Last time I checked basketball was still a team sport

                              http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/by...ar=season_2010
                              They are now 3rd with +6.0, right behind the Bulls with +6.2

                              This is a significant improvement, even if only the season just started. Most likely this trend will continue since rebounding numbers tend to stay pretty constant throughout the season.

                              Comment


                              • NBeh?: Another "Bargnani Is A Bust" Post

                                http://thenbehteam.blogspot.com/2010...=Google+Reader

                                In a previous post, I compared Bargnani's Wins Produced numbers to the last 12 years of first overall picks. This time, I've added all the advanced numbers, such as PPS, per 48 minute stats, and even PER and Win Shares (note: I do not condone use of Win Shares or PER - especially PER). I've also extended the comparison down to Olowokandi and included Darko Milicic (who was actually a second overall pick), because those are the two players Bargnani apologists inevitably claim were worse than picks than Bargnani. And remember: these numbers only include the first four seasons of each player's career. Here are the more complete numbers (spreadsheet here), this time in the form of a handy little gadget which (if it works correctly) should allow you to sort by whatever category you want.
                                What do the numbers tell us? Well for one, Andrea Bargnani does not compare very favourably to the rest of these players. Ranked by WP48 he is dead last behind Olowokandi, Milicic, and Brown. If for some reason you don't "agree" with Wins Produced, ranked by PER (worth repeating: I do not condone use of PER) he is 11th (ahead of Brown, Milicic, and Olowokandi), and ranked by Win Shares (worth repeating: I do not condone use of Win Shares) he is 12th, ahead of Olowokandi and the small sample size of John Wall. If you weigh all three metrics (WP, WS, and PER) equally (which, again, I do not) and take the cumulative rank - 'Combo Rank' - Bargnani comes out 2nd last, behind Milicic and ahead of Olowokandi. Regardless of how you slice it, Bargnani was bad for a first overall pick.
                                But something interesting happens when you sort these players by points per 48 minutes; all of the sudden Bargnani moves up to 7th place, ahead of notably better players like Dwight Howard, Greg Oden, and Andrew Bogut. As David Berri has mentioned over and over, the popular way of evaluating NBA players is by points scored, so it should be no surprise that so many fans (and certain GMs) have problems recognizing that Bargnani is not very productive. Casual fans are blinded by the relatively large amounts of points that Bargnani scores, failing to notice his lack of production in other areas - such as rebounding - or his shooting efficiency (Bargnani is also 4th in FG attempts.
                                As the most comprehensive 'Bargnani is a bust' post I've written to date, hopefully it will help more people realize that Bargnani is not a very productive player. The Raptors need to trade Bargnani as soon as possible, before the rest of the league catch on to his lack of production and while his value is at its highest. Exchanging Bargnani for a more productive Centre would do wonders for the franchise and is something that should be GM Bryan Colangelo's number one priority.
                                For all you stat heads out there the OP uses advance stats (PPS, PER, PER 48, WinShare) even though he, like I, doesn't condone their (PER, WinShare) use to convincingly back up his claims on the Bargnani illusion.

                                Any thoughts?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X