Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

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

  • Here's the fact that bothers me the most about Bargnani. Excluding his rookie year, he has started 85% of games he's played in.
    Year 2 67.9%
    Year 3 75.6%
    Years 4,5,6 100%
    Year 7 70.6%

    Despite Bargnani's career never taking off, declining FG%, 3pt% and points in the past 3 years, he continues to be a key player on this team that hasn't been to the playoffs since Bargnani's sophomore year.
    Heir, Prince of Cambridge

    If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

    Comment


    • Nilanka wrote: View Post
      p00ka, I think the issue is that most here (myself included) don't understand why you would spend this much time trying to show that anecdotal stats aren't worth much, without any care for what these stats are trying to show.

      In other words, if you believe that Bargnani is indeed a net-negative player, why do you care how that message is conveyed, if you concur with the overall message? It comes across as arguing for the sake of argument.

      Or, if you believe that Bargnani indeed has value as a basketball player, why hide around the idea that you're simply pointing out statistical flaws?
      Well, that hasn't been "the issue", not even "an issue" being discussed up to now, but isn't that a question that could apply to anyone who puts in time here? (why spend so much time doing what you do? as in the "you" being anybody). We all have our different focuses here, often heavily influenced by what else we encounter here, and mostly to fill a void.

      My original intent in coming here was to find a place to engage in knowledgeable and objective (yes that includes being reasonably critical) discussion about the team I love to follow. That's been difficult to find, imo, and I've somewhat found myself in a bit of a rut trying to combat what I feel is over the top negativism that feeds off, and grows, from shit like this. I guess I've become almost as stubborn about presenting an alternative view here, and maybe helping to change some mindsets, as I am about my passion for a team that loses so much.

      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.
        Exactly what my point has been, and I thought I made it quite clear. If your summary helps clear it up, I thank you.

        Comment


        • Matt, if you wish to carry on using "facts" that are meaningless to the argument you wish to make, what can I say, but have a nice day, and have fun, eh.

          Comment


          • p00ka wrote: View Post
            Well, that hasn't been "the issue", not even "an issue" being discussed up to now, but isn't that a question that could apply to anyone who puts in time here? (why spend so much time doing what you do? as in the "you" being anybody). We all have our different focuses here, often heavily influenced by what else we encounter here, and mostly to fill a void.

            My original intent in coming here was to find a place to engage in knowledgeable and objective (yes that includes being reasonably critical) discussion about the team I love to follow. That's been difficult to find, imo, and I've somewhat found myself in a bit of a rut trying to combat what I feel is over the top negativism that feeds off, and grows, from shit like this. I guess I've become almost as stubborn about presenting an alternative view here, and maybe helping to change some mindsets, as I am about my passion for a team that loses so much.
            I get what you're saying. It just seems odd that while some are using stats to discuss/argue (in this case) Bargnani, you're using stats to discuss/argue statistical integrity. It seems rather off-topic.
            Last edited by Nilanka; Thu Mar 7, 2013, 02:57 PM. Reason: Type-o

            Comment


            • Nilanka wrote: View Post
              I get what you're saying. It just seems odds that while some are using stats to discuss/argue (in this case) Bargnani, you're using stats to discuss/argue statistical integrity. It seems rather off-topic.
              I don't know how it could be more on-topic, actually. By using meaningless stats to discuss/argue a point, you render the discussion/argument meaningless. No statistical integrity = no meaning and no use to the argument. There has to be some validity to the points on either side of a debate, doesn't there? In this debate, one side is arguing that their meaningless data points have actual merit, and the other side is arguing that they don't.

              It's not really a debate about Bargnani at all, anymore.
              Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

              Comment


              • jimmie wrote: View Post
                I don't know how it could be more on-topic, actually. By using meaningless stats to discuss/argue a point, you render the discussion/argument meaningless. No statistical integrity = no meaning and no use to the argument. There has to be some validity to the points on either side of a debate, doesn't there? In this debate, one side is arguing that their meaningless data points have actual merit, and the other side is arguing that they don't.

                It's not really a debate about Bargnani at all, anymore.
                That's exactly why it's off topic.

                Comment


                • Nilanka wrote: View Post
                  That's exactly why it's off topic.
                  I don't think I've ever seen a thread that became so stupid

                  The original point was: we should start bargnani so we can get more out of him.

                  Everyone agrees that this is a bad idea, but are willing to insult each oother over the methodologies of arriving at that conclusion.... Retarded

                  Comment


                  • Very close to closing this. This thread has strayed it's course.

                    Is Bargnani better starting? He's had 3 solid games since coming back into the first five.
                    Twitter: @ReubenJRD • NBA, Raptors writer for Daily Hive Vancouver, Toronto.

                    Comment


                    • BallaBalla wrote: View Post
                      I don't think I've ever seen a thread that became so stupid

                      The original point was: we should start bargnani so we can get more out of him.

                      Everyone agrees that this is a bad idea, but are willing to insult each oother over the methodologies of arriving at that conclusion.... Retarded
                      yep... somehow my stripper analogy a few pages back became one of the most constructive arguments in the thread.....

                      Comment


                      • p00ka wrote: View Post
                        Matt, if you wish to carry on using "facts" that are meaningless to the argument you wish to make, what can I say, but have a nice day, and have fun, eh.
                        Enjoy your day as well.

                        Comment


                        • jimmie wrote: View Post
                          I don't know how it could be more on-topic, actually. By using meaningless stats to discuss/argue a point, you render the discussion/argument meaningless. No statistical integrity = no meaning and no use to the argument. There has to be some validity to the points on either side of a debate, doesn't there? In this debate, one side is arguing that their meaningless data points have actual merit, and the other side is arguing that they don't.

                          It's not really a debate about Bargnani at all, anymore.
                          It has always been about Bargnani on my end - specifically the Raptors are worse with him.

                          If there is any way to show how the Raptors are better with him, please enlighten me. I asked p00ka but all I got was theoretical jibberish.

                          We can look at win shares, defensive rating, +/-.... whatever you choose which all show credible reasons for the state of wins and losses with a whole load of variables but they all have the one constant: Bargnani.


                          Can anyone support this claim:

                          This season, the Raptors are better WITH Bargnani.

                          Comment


                          • wow, i had to take tums after reading the back and forth between pooka, matt and nilanka. and im still confused as to where pooka stands.

                            Comment


                            • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              It has always been about Bargnani on my end - specifically the Raptors are worse with him.

                              If there is any way to show how the Raptors are better with him, please enlighten me. I asked p00ka but all I got was theoretical jibberish.

                              We can look at win shares, defensive rating, +/-.... whatever you choose which all show credible reasons for the state of wins and losses with a whole load of variables but they all have the one constant: Bargnani.


                              Can anyone support this claim:

                              This season, the Raptors are better WITH Bargnani.
                              Pooka didn't agree with one of your subarguments. That doesn't mean he has to provide arguments in favour of the complete opposite view, which somehow, quite weirdly, you appear to want him to do. I didn't see any theoretical jibberish as well; the only problem with his argument I see (in this debate) is the confrontational (frontpage comment section) attitude he brings to the debate.

                              Challenging a subargument isn't going off topic as well. That the thread isn't going anywhere anymore is, as with most debates on a forum, simply because no side is going to acknowledge being wrong or even acknowledge the point being made is not an unreasonable one.

                              Comment


                              • TheGloveinRapsUniform wrote: View Post
                                wow, i had to take tums after reading the back and forth between pooka, matt and nilanka. and im still confused as to where pooka stands.
                                Read what Jimmie said and you'll get it. When in doubt, go with Jimmie, one of the most sensible posters on the site in any discussion. There's no reason to side against pooka's argument just because he's, well ... pooka.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X