Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

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

  • GarbageTime wrote: View Post

    tbihis wrote: View Post
    When it comes to Bargnani, Tim concocts a million different arguments. Sometimes he says he's an overall bad defender, then sometimes he says he's a decent one on one defender but a terrible help defender. If you try and challenge him, he always challenges you back by telling you to show evidence that he said such a thing, but i think its a bit time consuming to dig thru all his posts just to "prove him wrong". But i admire his tenacity on getting it out there that Bargnani is in no way shape or form a capable defender. And i respect that coz thats his opinion. But mine and other's opinion i think should be respected just the same. Doesnt mean he doesnt agree with us that we dont know anything about basketball.
    While I agree Tim may at times have problems accepting others opinions and b-ball knowledge (although I think you can say that about every person who posts regularily), he has NEVER been anything but consistent on his opinion, beliefs, expressions and arguments of Andrea Bargnani. I don't think I have ever read an individual who wavered any less over the years in regards to AB, than Tim.
    I agree with mostly GarbageTime here. I did not intend to offend Tim or anything like that, but I did not like what he did in this thread (and this thread alone). Also saying that "he's says he's an overall bad defender" is not in contradiction with saying "he's a decent one on one defender but a terrible help defender." It's just averaging it out. I don't think Tim is always consistent (neither am I as I happen to change opinions sometimes, thus becoming inconsistent. But if I were called upon it I'd deliver some proof because I don't favor arguing and saying things without being able to proof it or delivering a line of argumentation.

    Comment


    • ezz_bee wrote: View Post
      This is from the beginning of the above article. I think it's hilarious and telling that he has bargs at 66
      Yeah, that was funny. But kinda shocking to find Crawford at exactly nr. 65...

      Comment


      • ezz_bee wrote: View Post
        This is from the beginning of the above article. I think it's hilarious and telling that he has bargs at 66
        Great find. I saw that as well.
        After I read that intro, I fully expected to find Bargnani within the 65-70 range.
        And there he was. JUST on the outside of being a Top 65 two-way player. haha

        Comment


        • Soft Euro wrote: View Post
          I have to admit that I don't know Lowe, but he sounds like a more talented twinbrother of me as he described better than I did my exact opinion about Bargnani and this situation.



          bold added by me

          I might be wrong, but as far as I know you don't think Bargnani is a good player... However, in your commentary you first put forward the idea that he is a viewed as a franchise cornerstone and a great player and this just isn't the case (anymore). He is not, and as a member of the "Bargnani isn't as terrible on D as you might think"-movement (I like this one, my compliments) I have to tell you that even we in the movement don't consider him as such (and we had long meetings to decide on our public position). He's is at most a piece of the puzzle and if he would get traded I think we would all say "oh well, let's see what we got in return and what are we going to do now." We would not pick fights or get mad or be 'done with this organization'. We are only interested to see what's going to happen with a good defensive player next to him (which we need anyway!) and Casey as the headcoach.

          So, I don't think you have to convince anyone anymore that Bargnani isn't a great player or franchiseplayer, he's just a piece with some very interesting skills and some ugh-I-want-to-look-away deficiencies.
          I'd argue that Bargnani is still viewed as a cornerstone moving forward within the organization (read: Colangelo), whether that's the general consensus of the RaptorsRepublic forums or not.

          My evidence to suggest this is that they're accomodating him by moving him to the starting PF spot, and squeezing two of their other young, important pieces for playing time in the process. He led the team in minutes and shot attempts last season, partially by default I admit, but there's something to be said about his accountability when he is so poor on defense at times and such a lousy judge of shot selection at others.

          Even the hiring of a defensive coach like Casey or the talk about bringing in a defensive minded player at center can be interpreted as moves to help accomodate AB. The natural argument to that point is that the Raptors need help in those departments anyway, but the counter to that point is whether those holes would be so glaring if we weren't giving 35 minutes a night to a seven footer who can't defend very well (very often) and is one of the worst rebounders of all time for his position.
          Last edited by Fully; Fri Aug 5th, 2011, 12:39 PM.

          Comment


          • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
            While I agree Tim may at times have problems accepting others opinions and b-ball knowledge (although I think you can say that about every person who posts regularily), he has NEVER been anything but consistent on his opinion, beliefs, expressions and arguments of Andrea Bargnani. I don't think I have ever read an individual who wavered any less over the years in regards to AB, than Tim.
            I agree, consistent in his goal to always prove that Bargnani is not a capable defender. But the arguments leading to that goal? Im not so sure. But anyways, lets not make this thread about Tim. My apologies Tim!!

            Comment


            • Should we start an "Everything Tim" thread?

              Comment


              • Fully wrote: View Post
                You can make the argument that Bargnani is still viewed as a cornerstone moving forward within the organization (read: Colangelo), whether that's the general consensus of the RaptorsRepublic forums or not.
                I don't know about this; being in Europe I guess I miss out on a lot of mediacoverage around the Raptors, so I normally don't know much more about the views of Colangelo than what happens to posted on here or what I pick up from sites like hoopshype. You could be right there, I'll leave that to others if they know more about it. But in any case it's not the general consensus on this forum.

                Fully wrote: View Post
                My evidence to suggest this is that they're accomodating him by moving him to the starting PF spot, and squeezing two of their other young, important pieces for playing time in the process.
                That's what's being said or implied about next year, but they did not do this last year. So the accomodating is in the future and not based upon last years makeup of the team.

                Fully wrote: View Post
                Even the hiring of a defensive coach like Casey or the talk about bringing in a defensive minded player at center can be interpreted as moves to help accomodate AB. The natural argument to that point is that the Raptors need help in those departments anyway, but the counter to that point is whether those holes would be so glaring if we weren't giving 35 minutes a night to a seven footer who can't defend very well (very often) and is one of the worst rebounders of all time for his position.
                I'd be in favor of those moves if we trade Bargnani before the season as well (as you expected). Mind you, the defensive center isn't here yet, so that accomodation is still in the future as well.

                It's a good question if the defensive holes would be this big without Andrea. I have to say, based upon the games we played without Bargnani, that we would still be piece of swiss cheese. Our perimeter defense is not really up to par and we still lack a good defensive force in the paint. The without Bargnani part would have to include swapping him for a better defensive big man.

                Comment


                • Fully wrote: View Post
                  The one thing I agree on is that it's a matter of perspective. I think the biggest gap in our views is just how valuable Bargnani would be if he was placed in his "best case scenario". That's a matter of personal opinion so I won't discredit anyone's basketball knowledge if they don't see it the same way as I do. I appreciate that you were willing to grant me the same respect, even though you're on the other side of the fence.

                  I've been enlightened by some of the findings you've brought forward in the thread, and I'll admit that I was wrong regarding the Speights game. However, I still maintain that Bargnani is an overall very bad defender after watching literally almost every Raptor game over the past five seasons. But once again, terms like bad, very bad, terrible, etc. are all extremely subjective so it's really about where you personally draw the line.
                  Well put. Ive said before, i dont at all think Bargnani is an awesome defender, i never said that. But i dont think he is a terrible defender either. Like i said, the times ive seen him play, sometimes he's decent, sometimes he's good, and sometimes not so good. But to label him as a terrible or bad defender, i dont agree with. And thats my opinion. Maybe it was just so that the games i saw he was in the mood to defend, and i missed the games where he was just awful, but i cant formulate analysis on games i didnt see. And to say i dont know anything about basketball just because i dont have the same analysis as you, is a bit iffy to me.

                  I remember when Tim and Multipaul (i think this user got banned because of his arguments with Tim) were having discussions before, Multipaul kept insisting that because Tim kept criticizing Bargnani that he wasnt a Raptor fan, or something to that effect. And Tim was saying that just because i dont favor Bargnani doesnt me im not a Raps fan, or something like that. I think this is quite the same situation, not because we dont agree on things, doesnt make me know less about basketball.
                  Last edited by TheGloveinRapsUniform; Fri Aug 5th, 2011, 12:11 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                    Should we start an "Everything Tim" thread?
                    He'll love that! hahaha.

                    Comment


                    • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                      Should we start an "Everything Tim" thread?
                      !
                      Better make it 'sticky' as well.

                      Comment


                      • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
                        In fact when Michael finally played for a different team he wasn't good, and neither was his team. Was it actually Michael Jordan's team that made him that 'good' then?
                        Michael Jordan was 38 years old and had been playing golf for four years. I think that probably was the main difference. And he was still an All-Star. How many other 38 year olds have been All-Stars?
                        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
                          Michael Jordan was 38 years old and had been playing golf for four years. I think that probably was the main difference. And he was still an All-Star. How many other 38 year olds have been All-Stars?
                          I'm assuming the sarcasm was missed.

                          Comment


                          • Soft Euro wrote: View Post
                            Mr W., in an earlier post you said:

                            But now you do it again:

                            This is pretty much a rhetorical fallacy and I'd appreciate if you would refrain from adding this to your statements. Because now what, if I disagree with you do I first have to prove that I know something about basketball or should I just stop from disagreeing with you because if I do I know little to nothing about basketball? I'm certainly not the best basketballbrain around but I'd prefer it if I could make my arguments without knowing that what I'm going to say is based upon my complete lack of basketball acumen.
                            Okay. I'm assuming you know someone who's not very bright, right? Most everyone does. You don't need to have this person take an IQ test to know they are not smart. It's fairly obvious, right? Especially if you've spent a lot of time with this person. It's the same with Bargnani and defense.

                            I don't know about you, but for most of the time I've played and followed basketball, there were no advanced stats. We had to rely on actually watching players play in order to make judgements about them. Even back then you were able to discern a good defender from a bad defender.

                            Advanced stats are a great tool, especially when trying to back up an argument. But can you really not reach a conclusion on a player WITHOUT advanced stats? Is that what it's come to?

                            Watching Jose Calderon play, it's apparent to me that the team simply runs better with him and that he makes a positive impact. I reached this conclusion without any advanced stats, but they do back me up on this.

                            Watching Bargnani, is incredibly apparent to me that he has a negative impact on the defensive end. JUst as I can see that Dwight Howard has a positive impact, I can see Bargnani has a negative impact.

                            Does it make me a dick for saying it's obvious? Maybe. But it doesn't make me wrong.
                            Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                            Follow me on Twitter.

                            Comment


                            • tbihis wrote: View Post
                              When it comes to Bargnani, Tim concocts a million different arguments. Sometimes he says he's an overall bad defender, then sometimes he says he's a decent one on one defender but a terrible help defender. If you try and challenge him, he always challenges you back by telling you to show evidence that he said such a thing, but i think its a bit time consuming to dig thru all his posts just to "prove him wrong". But i admire his tenacity on getting it out there that Bargnani is in no way shape or form a capable defender. And i respect that coz thats his opinion. But mine and other's opinion i think should be respected just the same. Doesnt mean he doesnt agree with us that we dont know anything about basketball.
                              I have NEVER once said anything contradictory about Bargnani's defense and I'd appreciate you not making things up to make it seem like I do. I have CONSISTENTLY said that Bargnani is decent (not good, but decent) in certain specific situations. I can point to probably a dozen comments as well as posts on my own website to back me up on this.

                              WHat I have ALWAYS said is that Bargnani is a decent post defender in certain situations against certain types of player. This has ALWAYS been my argument. I have never once deviated from it or contradicted it once. This has been my argument about why moving him from center to PF makes little sense. I've never said he's a decent one on one defender, because it's not true. And I"ve always said he's an overall bad defender.

                              Again, please don't say things about me that are not true.
                              Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                              Follow me on Twitter.

                              Comment


                              • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
                                While I agree Tim may at times have problems accepting others opinions and b-ball knowledge (although I think you can say that about every person who posts regularily), he has NEVER been anything but consistent on his opinion, beliefs, expressions and arguments of Andrea Bargnani. I don't think I have ever read an individual who wavered any less over the years in regards to AB, than Tim.
                                Thank you. I guess I didn't need to write the above post.
                                Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                                Follow me on Twitter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X