GarbageTime wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Bargnani
Collapse
X
-
-
ezz_bee wrote: View PostThis is from the beginning of the above article. I think it's hilarious and telling that he has bargs at 66
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 PostI 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.
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 5, 2011, 12:39 PM.
Comment
-
GarbageTime wrote: View PostWhile 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.
Comment
-
Fully wrote: View PostYou 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.
Fully wrote: View PostMy 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.
Fully wrote: View PostEven 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.
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 PostThe 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.
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 5, 2011, 12:11 PM.
Comment
-
GarbageTime wrote: View PostIn 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?Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
Comment
-
Soft Euro wrote: View PostMr 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.
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 PostWhen 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.
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 PostWhile 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.Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
Comment
Comment