Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

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

  • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    so some one criticizing the 'premise' of the thread is not adding anything? You only add if you just assume what everyone else is assuming? (by the way the thread started as a, technically, comparison of Bargnani and Nowitzki, made by Casey, and NOT "what if Bargnani is awesome?" thread)


    I think some people need to find Doug Smith's blog. Everything is always sunshine over there and you don't have to worry about Bargnani being criticized as anything BC does is gold.
    Didn't tbhibis start the thread with the stated assumption that Bargnani would improve under Casey and this discussion was what people would feel/say once that happened?? Or was that just an early post in the thread? If so, my bad!

    Comment


    • GT, in regards to the statment directing people to Doug Smith. The problem here is that good critics value both positive and negative information. They don't focus on solely the negative and try to discredit the positives. That's in the realm of theory debunkers. That's not to say you're a debunker, because I don't feel that way but there certainly are "Bargnani debunkers" around here just waiting to pounce on any shred of positive information with the same generic statements over and over again.

      One more thing. As a poster, I don't like this telling people "if you don't like it, get out" and that goes for people on both sides of the fence. I think we should alway try to stick to the topic though. I am guilty as charge when it come to getting off topic myself at times and I realize it's easy to do but I do my best not to go there.

      Comment


      • Nilanka wrote: View Post
        Have you ever read Moneyball, or any book for that matter (just poking fun )? You would think decades of coaching experience equates to having all the angles covered. But believe it or not, there is dogma in professional sports that can sometimes prevent people from thinking outside the box, and adapting to the game as it evolves.

        Some coaches have an old school mentality, where sticking a small forward on a center would be unheard of. 7 foot jump shooters didn't exist 30 years ago, but times have changed, yet strategies may not have necessarily caught up.
        No, I have not read Moneyball but I can recommend Science Fiction and Fantasy books if you like the genres.

        As to your old school mentality comment, that's your opinion and I do not share it. Unlike baseball where outside entities took the lead in sabermetrics, basketball teams embraced analytics early and seriously.

        Comment


        • Hugmenot wrote: View Post
          No, I have not read Moneyball but I can recommend Science Fiction and Fantasy books if you like the genres.

          As to your old school mentality comment, that's your opinion and I do not share it. Unlike baseball where outside entities took the lead in sabermetrics, basketball teams embraced analytics early and seriously.
          Although the movie starred Brad Pitt, Moneyball was a true story.

          As for basketball and analytics, some teams embrace it, not all.

          Comment


          • Apollo wrote: View Post
            Right and they're not viewed as lazy.
            I really have no idea what you're talking about. Carter is pretty renowned for not being the hardest worker, which is why he never achieved the level he could. Being an outside shooter doesn't mean one is lazy and I never implied that. Carter changed his style of play, in part, due to laziness. Neither Allen or Miller changed their game.

            Apollo wrote: View Post
            He doesn't even need to "breakout" He just needs to raise his defense from mediocrity to average. I don't know if he'll do it but I'm certainly not going to completely blow off positive information because he's yet to improve his defense to date. I'm trying to approach this from a neutral perspective.
            You're the one who mentioned the "breakout". And why, when people argue in Bargnani's favour, his defense goes from poor to mediocre? Mediocre would be a step up.

            Apollo wrote: View Post
            So you're implying that the new Raptors coach could be telling us lies? Why do you feel he would start off his career like that in Toronto? Casey has a very good reputation.
            I'm implying that coaches say things in order to achieve results. That's it. I haven't seen a coach who hasn't said something that wasn't completely true, at some point.

            Apollo wrote: View Post
            I'm not going to get into complaints here. You can PM me if you see something wrong. I will say that you can post what you want as long as you abide by the rules.
            It was a joke. Maybe I'm not taking this as seriously as others.

            Apollo wrote: View Post
            Right and maybe he will, maybe he won't. We'll find out in 2012 I'm sure.
            Yes we will. Unless people start saying they need to see how they see how he plays beside Valanciunas....
            Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
            Follow me on Twitter.

            Comment


            • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
              Therein lies the frustration that I sense many people have when discussing Bargnani with you.

              There have been threads about how Bargnani could improve to become a better player, or this thread talking about IF Bargnani DOES improve (ie: debate about candidates), but you always seem to take it back to "who cares, Bargnani should be traded" or "Amir is better than Bargnani" (ie: all the candidates are bad). People know your perspective on Bargnani quite well, that you would prefer him traded. BUT, if the thread is based on the assumption that Bargnani will be on the Raptors 2012 roster (like this one), it's frustrating when your input continues to be one-dimensional and falls outside that thread's frame of reference.

              This thread is NOT discussing whether or not Bargnani should be traded. This thread is NOT discussing whether or not you think Bargnani will be traded. This thread is NOT discussing whether you think Bargnani can or will improve his defense/rebounding this season. The thread IS based on these two assumptions: 1) Bargnani will be a Raptor in 2012 2) Bargnani will improve defense/rebounding at least up to a respectable level under Casey. If you disagree with those two assumptions and therefore the entire premise of the thread, don't comment. We know you want Bargnani traded and doubt in his ability and/or desire to improve his defense/rebounding - but if you're not going to comment and add to the discussion within the definition of the thread, then there's no point reading/commenting on this particular thread.

              It's like having a debate about whether black or white is the best color, and somebody comes along and posts a diatribe about why purple is the superior color and that anybody who continues the black/white debate is stupid because they are shades anyway, not colors. Who cares? For better or worse, the debate is whether black or white is the best color... respect the debate and stay on topic, or stay on the sideline.
              Go back and look over the comments. I almost never change the topic of discussion. I wait until someone else does and then I say something. And I do that because I know what my reputation is. I didn't post on this thread at first for that very reason. In fact,, a while ago when there was a Bargnani appreciation thread, I didn't post on it at all. I didn't come in and start criticizing because I didn't feel the thread was the appropriate place to do that.

              Like it or not, Bargnani is a lightening rod for discussion. I don't have to change the topic for it to change. I'm not the reason that Bargnani gets criticized.

              And if are frustrated because you feel my input on Bargnani is one-dimensional, that's exactly how I feel watching him. Ironic, isn't it?
              Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
              Follow me on Twitter.

              Comment


              • Tim W. wrote: View Post
                I really have no idea what you're talking about. Carter is pretty renowned for not being the hardest worker, which is why he never achieved the level he could. Being an outside shooter doesn't mean one is lazy and I never implied that. Carter changed his style of play, in part, due to laziness. Neither Allen or Miller changed their game.



                You're the one who mentioned the "breakout". And why, when people argue in Bargnani's favour, his defense goes from poor to mediocre? Mediocre would be a step up.



                I'm implying that coaches say things in order to achieve results. That's it. I haven't seen a coach who hasn't said something that wasn't completely true, at some point.



                It was a joke. Maybe I'm not taking this as seriously as others.



                Yes we will. Unless people start saying they need to see how they see how he plays beside Valanciunas....
                Shhhhhh.... this is April through draft talk. You're early.

                Seriously though, I don't think that happens without noticeable and significant improvements in rebounding and defensive effort this season.

                I truly believe, and obviously this is just my opinion, this is his last crack in Toronto.

                Comment


                • sleepz wrote: View Post
                  ...We laud his scoring ability because we know he can shoot but the facts remain 21pts on 17 shots. Thats not highly efficient by any measurements so if there is an opportunity to get a better player or better assets for him I'd be all for it. ...
                  I've seen this mentioned before and am a little surprised by it. If he hit all 17 shots, and they were all 2 pointers he could have 34 points. So getting 21 points means he was shooting 61%. If they were all 3 point attempts, then he could have scored 51 points, so he would have been shooting 41%. If he mixed it up it would be someplace in between. For a big man who playe soutside as much as Bargs does, those are good percentages.

                  Comment


                  • Puffer wrote: View Post
                    I've seen this mentioned before and am a little surprised by it. If he hit all 17 shots, and they were all 2 pointers he could have 34 points. So getting 21 points means he was shooting 61%. If they were all 3 point attempts, then he could have scored 51 points, so he would have been shooting 41%. If he mixed it up it would be someplace in between. For a big man who playe soutside as much as Bargs does, those are good percentages.
                    but he shot 44.7%........ not 61%

                    Big men who took atleast 1 3pt a game

                    K.Love 47%
                    Dirk 51.7%
                    Odom 53%
                    J.Smith 47.7%
                    J.Green 44.9%
                    Diaw 49.2%
                    Charlie V 44.2%
                    Harrington 41.6%
                    Frye 43.2%

                    Comment


                    • Tim.W have you EVER admitted you were wrong or accepted any points not in your favour?

                      Your always contribute really well to discussions but you word things in a way that doesnt often 'directly' state anything, and then later take credit for things youve never strongly stated.

                      What im trying to say is, you say things on either side of arguements and then when one side favours, you claim youve always said it, seemingly in a way of never being able to be wrong.
                      Sorry im terrible at wording things haha but its just irritates me
                      No offense, not trying to personally attack. But your posts are too smug lol

                      Comment


                      • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
                        There is no reason that Bargnani shouldn't be expected to average right around where every other big man averages.
                        You may want to listen to the coach's interview starting around the 6 minute mark for Casey's opinion. He apparently will set the bar around 8.0 rpg.

                        http://raptorsrepublic.com/forums/sh...views-Dec-14th

                        Based upon (and thanks to) your explanation about Nowitzski's rebounding abilities, I think it's clear we will not agree on rebounding. Fair enough.

                        Comment


                        • The Rawth wrote: View Post
                          Tim.W have you EVER admitted you were wrong or accepted any points not in your favour?
                          Yes, when I'm wrong I do. Thankfully, that doesn't happen very often.

                          The Rawth wrote: View Post
                          Your always contribute really well to discussions but you word things in a way that doesnt often 'directly' state anything, and then later take credit for things youve never strongly stated.
                          It' called talent.

                          The Rawth wrote: View Post
                          What im trying to say is, you say things on either side of arguements and then when one side favours, you claim youve always said it, seemingly in a way of never being able to be wrong.
                          Sorry im terrible at wording things haha but its just irritates me
                          No offense, not trying to personally attack. But your posts are too smug lol
                          Seriously, though, I don't know how you can say I say things on either side of an argument. Not according to a lot of people around here. I think sometimes my arguments might seem inconsistent if you aren't paying close attention to what I'm saying. Take for example the Bargnani scoring efficiency argument. BY me arguing that he's not an efficient scorer, it might seem by some I'm complaining about how he scores. I'm not. I'm simply arguing something I believe is true. He's NOT an efficient scorer. And if he's going to be your #1 or #2 option, then that is something I would argue against for that very reason.

                          I HAVE a problem with the argument that he's an elite scorer. He IS, however, a very good complimentary scorer, much like Ray Allen is. On offense, he would be a terrific third option. The problem, though is that he's so poor in other areas that it makes his ability to score moot.
                          Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                          Follow me on Twitter.

                          Comment


                          • Just listened to the Casey interview on the fan. He says that Dirk up until a couple of years ago played a softer game much like Andrea. He got sick of being pushed around and has transformed his game into the Dirk that just led his team to the championship.
                            He is saying he is happy with the effort Andrea is putting in to break some bad habits of not being involved and using his size inside. I know it's only talk but I get the sense there will be no let up on Andrea until he has developed a habitual tenacity in his game.

                            Comment


                            • j bean wrote: View Post
                              Just listened to the Casey interview on the fan. He says that Dirk up until a couple of years ago played a softer game much like Andrea. He got sick of being pushed around and has transformed his game into the Dirk that just led his team to the championship.
                              Dirk was averaging over 9 rpg ten years ago, which was his 3rd year in the league. This is hardly a believable story, or an accurate comparison, even if coming from Casey's mouth, and just adds more weight to the idea that he's just trying to put a positive spin on the situation for the benefit of the local fans/media (and perhaps Bargnani's confidence).
                              Last edited by Nilanka; Thu Dec 15, 2011, 11:29 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Nilanka wrote: View Post
                                Dirk was averaging over 9 rpg ten years ago, which was his 3rd year in the league. This is hardly a believable story, or an accurate comparison, even if coming from Casey's mouth, and just adds more weight to the idea that he's just trying to put a positive spin on the situation for the benefit of the local fans/media (and perhaps Bargnani's confidence).
                                Not only that, Dirk's 2nd season was better than any season that Bargnani had. If Bargnani had a season comparable to Dirk's second season offensively, everyone would be screaming to keep him but I still think that he'll go all Boozer on us in the playoffs.

                                Also, in his 3rd season, it looks like he toughen up considerably. Dirk, from his 3rd season on, never had a PER below 22(!), nor had his DRB% gone below 20%.

                                We honestly should have stopped this "experiment" and have trading Bargnani yesterday.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X