Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

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

  • Soft Euro wrote: View Post
    Three...
    Is one of them Reggie Evans?

    Comment


    • Nilanka wrote: View Post
      Is one of them Reggie Evans?
      Haha

      Well, of all things, Bargnani isn't responsible for his number one selection, his contract and his playing time. If those things had been different, he wouldn't be a target right now (and maybe not even in the league anymore).

      Comment


      • jimmie wrote: View Post
        My guess is it's because pooka thinks math and facts actually matter, even when what you are presenting is just an "opinion". You can argue that Bargnani sucks for a ton of reasons, but when you bring "facts" and stats into your argument, they really should actually, you know, mean something. And the ones being presented don't actually mean anything because you can't prove causality or correlation between Bargnani's individual stats and those of the team as a whole. Mathematically speaking, I mean.

        If you're just trying to add to a narrative, it's fine, but there's no actual value to using those stats the way people are using them here. They are completely meaningless as related to the argument at hand.
        Fine, but again -- why bother? Who cares if people are arguing with inappropriate stats -- fact remains that Bargnani is terrible. He's not a man who deserves defense from any of us who care about this team. Here, I'll quote some research I did in the Boo Bargnani thread:

        Since 1946, there have been a total of 109 players who were 6'11 or taller and averaged 20 or more minutes per game over the span of their careers.

        Amongst those, guess where Bargnani ranks:

        In rebounds per game? #100
        In player efficiency? #80
        In field goal percentage? #96
        In blocks per game? #82
        In Defensive rating? #109
        your pal,
        ebrian

        Comment


        • ebrian wrote: View Post
          Fine, but again -- why bother? Who cares if people are arguing with inappropriate stats -- fact remains that Bargnani is terrible. He's not a man who deserves defense from any of us who care about this team. Here, I'll quote some research I did in the Boo Bargnani thread:
          Wow.. there were 9 worse rebounders then Bargnani? That I find shocking!

          Comment


          • Hmm. I just ran it again and it seems it's changed.. I must've done something in the filter. But anyway, here's the rehash:

            On a search for all players 6'11+ with 22+ mpg averaged over their careers. Totals are different because some stats didn't exist until certain times, or if they don't have the stat the player doesn't show up on the ranking:

            In rebounds per game? #106 (out of 108)
            In player efficiency? #82 (out of 109)
            In field goal percentage? #101 (out of 108)
            In blocks per game? #70 (out of 103)
            In Defensive rating? #103 (out of 103)

            Why defend a guy like this? Apparently this thread is about giving this guy more minutes.
            your pal,
            ebrian

            Comment


            • Btw, if you bring it up to 30+ mpg, 35 total guys on the list and where Bargnani ranks:

              Per game --
              Total rebounds: 35th
              Field Goal Percentage: 34th (Nate Thurmond last)
              PER: 32nd
              Blocks: 30th
              Assists: 34th
              Steals: 33rd
              Total Rebound %: 35th
              Offensive Rating: 29th
              Defensive Rating: 35th
              Offensive Win Shares: 33rd
              Defensive Win Shares: 32nd

              Usage Percentage: 13th
              your pal,
              ebrian

              Comment


              • ebrian wrote: View Post
                Btw, if you bring it up to 30+ mpg, 35 total guys on the list and where Bargnani ranks:

                Per game --
                Total rebounds: 35th
                Field Goal Percentage: 34th (Nate Thurmond last)
                PER: 32nd
                Blocks: 30th
                Assists: 34th
                Steals: 33rd
                Total Rebound %: 35th
                Offensive Rating: 29th
                Defensive Rating: 35th
                Offensive Win Shares: 33rd
                Defensive Win Shares: 32nd

                Usage Percentage: 13th
                I wish someone would show D.Casey this stuff.

                Comment


                • ebrian wrote: View Post
                  Btw, if you bring it up to 30+ mpg, 35 total guys on the list and where Bargnani ranks:

                  Per game --
                  Total rebounds: 35th
                  Field Goal Percentage: 34th (Nate Thurmond last)
                  PER: 32nd
                  Blocks: 30th
                  Assists: 34th
                  Steals: 33rd
                  Total Rebound %: 35th
                  Offensive Rating: 29th
                  Defensive Rating: 35th
                  Offensive Win Shares: 33rd
                  Defensive Win Shares: 32nd

                  Usage Percentage: 13th
                  Out of morbid curiosity, could you run the same report and show where Dirk falls. The only reason I ask is that we know that Bargnani isn't a 'traditional' big, so I'm interested in a comparison to a big with a similar style (especially the player he's most often been compared to).

                  Bargnani's rebounding numbers and offensive efficiencies have often been excused due to his style of play, while the intangible benefits of things like 'spreading the floor' are pointed out as advantages that aren't captured by stats. It would be very telling to see where Dirk falls, relative to Bargnani.

                  Thanks!

                  Comment


                  • Casey has a built-in rebuttal that instantly quiets the mob. Something about hell and water....

                    Comment


                    • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                      Out of morbid curiosity, could you run the same report and show where Dirk falls. The only reason I ask is that we know that Bargnani isn't a 'traditional' big, so I'm interested in a comparison to a big with a similar style (especially the player he's most often been compared to).

                      Bargnani's rebounding numbers and offensive efficiencies have often been excused due to his style of play, while the intangible benefits of things like 'spreading the floor' are pointed out as advantages that aren't captured by stats. It would be very telling to see where Dirk falls, relative to Bargnani.

                      Thanks!
                      It's a good point actually, since Bargnani is really known for his offense... or at least, he's supposed to be. I've moved up the offensive categories and defensive have been pushed down. I've also bolded the ones where Dirk is significantly better than Bargnani.

                      Dirk Nowitzki (Andrea in brackets):

                      Per game --
                      PER: 7th (32nd)
                      Offensive Rating: 2nd (29th)
                      Offensive Win Shares: 2nd (33rd)
                      Field Goal Percentage: 29th (34th)
                      Assists: 11th (34th)
                      Total rebounds: 26th (35th)
                      Blocks: 22nd (30th)
                      Steals: 13th (33rd)
                      Total Rebound %: 33rd (35th)
                      Defensive Rating: 23rd (35th)
                      Defensive Win Shares: 13th (32nd)

                      Usage Percentage: 5th (13th)
                      your pal,
                      ebrian

                      Comment


                      • ebrian wrote: View Post
                        It's a good point actually, since Bargnani is really known for his offense... or at least, he's supposed to be. I've moved up the offensive categories and defensive have been pushed down. I've also bolded the ones where Dirk is significantly better than Bargnani.

                        Dirk Nowitzki (Andrea in brackets):

                        Per game --
                        PER: 7th (32nd)
                        Offensive Rating: 2nd (29th)
                        Offensive Win Shares: 2nd (33rd)
                        Field Goal Percentage: 29th (34th)
                        Assists: 11th (34th)
                        Total rebounds: 26th (35th)
                        Blocks: 22nd (30th)
                        Steals: 13th (33rd)
                        Total Rebound %: 33rd (35th)
                        Defensive Rating: 23rd (35th)
                        Defensive Win Shares: 13th (32nd)

                        Usage Percentage: 5th (13th)
                        Yikes, thanks for that. For me, those stats are even more gruesome with the Dirk comparisons. I've never been as hard on his rebounding numbers as others, simply because his style of play, nor am I a big fan of defensive stats in general. However, the win-share stats, PER, offensive rating, assists & steals really point out 2 things for me: just how ineffcient a scorer he is and how little he contributes besides scoring.

                        Comment


                        • Can anyone tell me how to explain the Raptors are better without Bargnani besides using wins/losses and statistics?

                          I am still waiting for a response as to how to properly explain this.

                          Comment


                          • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                            Can anyone tell me how to explain the Raptors are better without Bargnani besides using wins/losses and statistics?

                            I am still waiting for a response as to how to properly explain this.
                            Other than stats, crowd reaction is the only true indicator

                            Comment


                            • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              Can anyone tell me how to explain the Raptors are better without Bargnani besides using wins/losses and statistics?

                              I am still waiting for a response as to how to properly explain this.
                              I don't think there are many people, if any, who (still) think that. I don't think anybody argued that here either.

                              Comment


                              • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                                Can anyone tell me how to explain the Raptors are better without Bargnani besides using wins/losses and statistics?

                                I am still waiting for a response as to how to properly explain this.
                                As I've read through this thread, I think I've come up with a way to explain the issues that some people have had with various arguments made by various posters on both sides of the debate - for the record, I thought Jimmie did a good job trying to explain it yesterday.

                                I also think I should start by saying that my assumption is based on the fact that so much blame & "hate" has been dumped on Bargnani over the years - some well deserved and some well beyond his control (ie: draft position, salary) - that the "piling on" can get frustrating to take, even when the bulk of the pile is quite legit.

                                Basically, I think the personal stats (like those in ebrian's recent posts) and unbiased observations of game action are accepted as factual evidenciary proof of Bargnani's "suckage". By this, I mean stats like PER, Offensive Rating, Offensive Win Share, Defensive Win Share, as examples, and observations such as poor help defense. Those stats are based purely on the indivdual and all pass the eye-test, without bias.

                                However, I think people take issue with circumstantial evidence, such as the team's record in games when he scores a certain # of points, for example. These sorts of coincidental stats show no direct correlation between Bargnani and the outcome. These sorts of 'stats' can be found to support any argument about any player, good or bad. For example, there might be a statline that shows the team is 8-0 all-time when Bargnani scores 7 points and has 3 rebounds, but that doesn't mean the team should adopt a strategy to ensure Bargnani hits exactly that statline and then gets benched, since it's purely coincidental; no game is ever decided by a single player's statline.

                                Even the most vocal Bargnani supporter, past or present, can accept irrefutable evidence based on stats that observation can validate. However, after all the years of "Bargnani bashing", it can get frustrating to have that compounded by purely circumstantial evidence, be it hand-picked coincidental statlines or factors beyond Bargnani's control.

                                Hopefully that makes sense and helps shed some light on the ongoing discussion...
                                Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Fri Mar 8, 2013, 02:05 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X