Matt52 wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Bargnani
Collapse
X
-
GarbageTime wrote: View PostI'm assuming the sarcasm was missed.Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
Comment
-
Tim W. wrote: View PostOkay. 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.
Tim W. wrote: View PostI 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?
But most important of all, there is a big difference between saying "can you really not reach a conclusion on a player WITHOUT advanced stats?" and saying "it's pretty obvious. At least to anyone who knows basketball." That's not reaching a conlusion based on anything. And that's a pretty obivious difference, at least to anyone who knows anything about argumentation.
Tim W. wrote: View PostDoes it make me a dick for saying it's obvious? Maybe. But it doesn't make me wrong.Last edited by Soft Euro; Sat Aug 6, 2011, 01:35 PM.
Comment
-
Tim W. wrote: View PostOkay. 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.
And then you get E.Coli.
And all you had to do was run some numbers, with some very simple tests to PROVE whether or not said water is clean.
I am not using this as a defense of Bargnani, but there are times, when simple "Opinion Facts" are not exactly what the rest of the world is seeing.
The two NEED to go Hand in Hand, as anything based on "The Eye test" is still Subjective, and thus, mostly based on Opinion.
That opinion may be based in fact, but one should then use the FACTS to back up the Subjective "truths".
Comment
-
Tim W. wrote: View PostI 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.
the way i interpret your arguments, and i re-iterate, this is my interpretation, you seem to "branch out" everytime. You say Bargnani is an overall bad defender, but decent in specific areas, against specific opponents, in specific situations. but overall bad. not sure if this is a logical comparison, but its like a student getting a B in math, a C science, a B in Reading, but overall, he's a D student. I dont see the logic in that.
Comment
-
planetmars wrote: View PostBargnani could land a really good veteran who can teach the young guys what it means to win (ie, a coach on the floor), or it can land some more picks which could add to our future core. Keeping him on the roster for 2-3 years while we continue to develop that core is not good in the long term in my opinion.
The smarter move might be to find another good big defender, without Andre's scoring punch, and pair the two of them together so Andre's deficiencies look less obvious than they are now. Maybe his help defense would improve with someone else filling some holes. Maybe Casey can actually teach him a few things. It might be easier to move him then.
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostHere's the problem. Bargnani's deficiencies are clear to everyone reading these posts. Why would you think that they would not be obvious to the organization the Raptors would be trying to get said "really good veteran" from?
The smarter move might be to find another good big defender, without Andre's scoring punch, and pair the two of them together so Andre's deficiencies look less obvious than they are now. Maybe his help defense would improve with someone else filling some holes. Maybe Casey can actually teach him a few things. It might be easier to move him then.
Toronto has given Bargnani 5 solid years to develop. That's a long time in a professional league. Assuming Bargnani doesn't improve next season (and this is very possibly since he has regressed last year), then his stock will really plummet, and then it would be very difficult to trade him for the right pieces.
If a defensive minded center comes in (and by the way - these don't grow on trees, and every team in the NBA needs one), it can help, but would you really still want Bargnani to be a starting PF for the team? He would take minutes away from both Davis and Amir, and teams could still game plan and use Bargnani's deficiencies on defense against the Raptors. Outside of maybe Dwight Howard, I can't really see a center that can work optimally with Bargnani.
The biggest issue with Bargnani's defensive voes is his help defense. That is a skill that is needed, especially within a defensive system. I didn't watch a lot of Dallas ball during the regular season, but in the playoffs (especially the finals), Dallas played a lot of zone to 'hide' Nowitski's defense. That requires a lot of switching and help on defense, which we already know is a problem with Bargnani, and has been ever since he was a rookie. If Casey can teach Bargnani a thing or two about help defense, that would be great - but would it stick? Is help defense/rebounding something you can learn, or is it an innate skill that you are born with?
Also is Bargnani even motivated to get better defensively? He hasn't really shown the desire to me anyways in the past few seasons. Casey doesn't seem like the guy that would coddle you. He seems to be under the Smith philosophy of coaching, and Bargnani really didn't do well under his system. Maybe I just don't have as much faith in you that Casey could actually help Bargnani, and that would mean his stock would fall - which would mean that we had lost an opportunity to gain more pieces for the future.
Comment
-
planetmars wrote: View PostI believe that Andrea's stock is worth the most right now. If Andrea does not improve under Casey then his stock will drop much further down, as the one thing that makes Bargnani's value high is that most believe that under the right system he would flourish. I personally am not willing to gamble on Bargnani. Not after 5 years.
Toronto has given Bargnani 5 solid years to develop. That's a long time in a professional league. Assuming Bargnani doesn't improve next season (and this is very possibly since he has regressed last year), then his stock will really plummet, and then it would be very difficult to trade him for the right pieces.
If a defensive minded center comes in (and by the way - these don't grow on trees, and every team in the NBA needs one), it can help, but would you really still want Bargnani to be a starting PF for the team? He would take minutes away from both Davis and Amir, and teams could still game plan and use Bargnani's deficiencies on defense against the Raptors. Outside of maybe Dwight Howard, I can't really see a center that can work optimally with Bargnani.
The biggest issue with Bargnani's defensive voes is his help defense. That is a skill that is needed, especially within a defensive system. I didn't watch a lot of Dallas ball during the regular season, but in the playoffs (especially the finals), Dallas played a lot of zone to 'hide' Nowitski's defense. That requires a lot of switching and help on defense, which we already know is a problem with Bargnani, and has been ever since he was a rookie. If Casey can teach Bargnani a thing or two about help defense, that would be great - but would it stick? Is help defense/rebounding something you can learn, or is it an innate skill that you are born with?
Also is Bargnani even motivated to get better defensively? He hasn't really shown the desire to me anyways in the past few seasons. Casey doesn't seem like the guy that would coddle you. He seems to be under the Smith philosophy of coaching, and Bargnani really didn't do well under his system. Maybe I just don't have as much faith in you that Casey could actually help Bargnani, and that would mean his stock would fall - which would mean that we had lost an opportunity to gain more pieces for the future.
Bogut can take just about any centre in the league 1 on 1. A double team sent leaves Andrea wide open and Bogut is one of, if not the best, passing C's in the league.
I am struggling to think of any other C I would be confident about though. My two cents. Oh yeah, and Bogut would have to stay healthy - a big IF there.
I agree with the 5 years and his motivation.
The only thing that gives me hope, assuming Casey is a man of his word, is accountability. I remember the game versus Detroit last year when Bargnani was actually benched for a stretch in the 2nd half - he played like a beast (no exaggeration).
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostHere's the problem. Bargnani's deficiencies are clear to everyone reading these posts. Why would you think that they would not be obvious to the organization the Raptors would be trying to get said "really good veteran" from?
The smarter move might be to find another good big defender, without Andre's scoring punch, and pair the two of them together so Andre's deficiencies look less obvious than they are now. Maybe his help defense would improve with someone else filling some holes. Maybe Casey can actually teach him a few things. It might be easier to move him then.
Comment
-
tbihis wrote: View PostUnfortunately, our arguments can only come down to a "he said, he said" outcome. Id love to go in to every post youve made but i dont have the time of day to do that nor anybody does, so its fairly easy to say "i didnt say that". and i am guilty of this as well i admit. i may have said stuff that i contradicted before, but if you feel like you never, ever contradicted yourself then i cant really force anything on that. but im sticking to my posts and my opinions.
the way i interpret your arguments, and i re-iterate, this is my interpretation, you seem to "branch out" everytime. You say Bargnani is an overall bad defender, but decent in specific areas, against specific opponents, in specific situations. but overall bad. not sure if this is a logical comparison, but its like a student getting a B in math, a C science, a B in Reading, but overall, he's a D student. I dont see the logic in that.
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.
And my argument is, and always has been:
Bargnani is a terrible team defender, a terrible pick and roll defender, very bad at defending faceup big men who can put the ball on the floor, bad at defending active post men who have good footwork, and decent at defending slower, more methodical back to the basket big men when they post up. If you can prove I have EVER said anything other than that, please point to the post or comment. Otherwise, you're simply making things up to try and negate my argument.Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
Comment
-
Players do improve on help defense. It is really not uncommon at all -- actually, it's expected.
Also, Dallas did not generally play zone to hide Nowitzky. He has improved a lot on defense over the years. They play zone for a variety of reasons, but if it's to hide anyone, it's Terry or Barea.
Comment
-
GarbageTime wrote: View PostUmm the schedules are pretty consistent. You play every team atleast twice. You play your conference opponents atleast 3 times (there are 4 teams in your division you play 3 times) . You play your divisional opponents 4 times.
The numbers aren't really that far off from one another. Plus its not like Bargnani is a rookie... people have 5 seasons, 367 games and 11k minutes to make a conclusion from. Over that time he has played/covered/been covered by a myraid of opponents from some of the worst in the league to the best. Statistics are best used with a large and varied sample to work from. Andrea has that. (by the way if Andrea's opponent was Dwight and only played him once that would be 1.2% of a season. If he played him 3 times that would be 3.6% of a season. Do you really believe that 2.4% of a season is going to make a significant difference to an individuals statistics?)
But if we are going to say there are too many variables to judge him defensively using stats, than the same argument should be made to his offense. Therefore we don't know if he is actually a good or bad offensive player until he plays on a good offensive team that either wins or losses right? In fact the same argument should also be made about every player to play the game as they have had more, less or the same amount of variables effecting their game/stats. Michael Jordan is no longer one of the best players to ever play... he can't be. Too many variables to judge it. 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? Its not fair to say that POB is any worse than Michael as the number of variables between the two players career is off the charts.
Every player just is......
Comment
-
Tim W. wrote: View PostWell, I have others to back me up on this, as well.
And unless you can prove that I have changed what I've said about Bargnani, just saying so is pretty damn close to lying. And it's not appreciated.
No one's really contested your argument Tim. Youve pretty much sent your message across loud and clear, that you think Bargnani is an overall bad/terrible defender, but with certain situations, certain players, to some degree, to some extent. Whew. What me, personally, is trying to say, is that IMO, Bargnani is not a bad defender, all the time. Im not trying to change what you think, im just letting people know what i think, and that how you arrived at your conclusion on Bargnani as a defender is quite unrealistic. But im not letting people know that just because your opinion is different from mine, that i know more about basketball than you do.
And my argument is, and always has been:
Bargnani is a terrible team defender, a terrible pick and roll defender, very bad at defending faceup big men who can put the ball on the floor, bad at defending active post men who have good footwork, and decent at defending slower, more methodical back to the basket big men when they post up. If you can prove I have EVER said anything other than that, please point to the post or comment. Otherwise, you're simply making things up to try and negate my argument.
Comment
-
tbihis wrote: View PostNot sure what you mean by others, other people, or other data?
No one's really contested your argument Tim. Youve pretty much sent your message across loud and clear, that you think Bargnani is an overall bad/terrible defender, but with certain situations, certain players, to some degree, to some extent. Whew. What me, personally, is trying to say, is that IMO, Bargnani is not a bad defender, all the time. Im not trying to change what you think, im just letting people know what i think, and that how you arrived at your conclusion on Bargnani as a defender is quite unrealistic. But im not letting people know that just because your opinion is different from mine, that i know more about basketball than you do.
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.
And I really have no idea why you think that my conclusion of his defense is unrealistic. I don't even understand what that even means.
tbihis wrote: View PostIMO, this is not a fair assessment. Youd have to review each and every defensive play that Bargnani has ever been in, with each player he is guarding, every minute of every game. I mean if you reviewed each Bargnani defensive play against opponents who dont have good footwork, then i think you should be hired as a Raps assistant coach, no sarcasm here, because the time and effort youre putting reviewing each play is going uncompensated. But if youre satisfied doing this and just knowing that youve done it, then kudos to you. But IMO, no poster here, in their right mind would go over each Bargnani defensive play for every minute he's on the floor of every game. I dont think making a conclusion like this from watching him guard 2 or 3 players is enough of a sample size. My point is, support your arguments with proof, like what Soft Euro has done, otherwise, dont generalize. Dont tell us youve seen most if not all of Bargnani's games and came up with such conclusions. If you are telling the truth, then your attention to detail is quite uncanny, Rainman-esque IMO.
After watching Bargnani for hundreds of games, it's not difficult to start seeing patterns with him. You start to see that he plays well against this type of player and struggle against this type of player. Then you ask questions and look for answers. Maybe I watch games differently than you do but I'm certainly not that unique.Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
Follow me on Twitter.
Comment
Comment