Soft Euro wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Bargnani
Collapse
X
-
-
jimmie wrote: View PostMy 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.
Since 1946, there have been a total of 109 players who were 6'11 or taller and averaged 20 or more minutes per game over the span of their careers.
Amongst those, guess where Bargnani ranks:
In rebounds per game? #100
In player efficiency? #80
In field goal percentage? #96
In blocks per game? #82
In Defensive rating? #109your pal,
ebrian
Comment
-
Hmm. I just ran it again and it seems it's changed.. I must've done something in the filter. But anyway, here's the rehash:
On a search for all players 6'11+ with 22+ mpg averaged over their careers. Totals are different because some stats didn't exist until certain times, or if they don't have the stat the player doesn't show up on the ranking:
In rebounds per game? #106 (out of 108)
In player efficiency? #82 (out of 109)
In field goal percentage? #101 (out of 108)
In blocks per game? #70 (out of 103)
In Defensive rating? #103 (out of 103)
Why defend a guy like this? Apparently this thread is about giving this guy more minutes.your pal,
ebrian
Comment
-
Btw, if you bring it up to 30+ mpg, 35 total guys on the list and where Bargnani ranks:
Per game --
Total rebounds: 35th
Field Goal Percentage: 34th (Nate Thurmond last)
PER: 32nd
Blocks: 30th
Assists: 34th
Steals: 33rd
Total Rebound %: 35th
Offensive Rating: 29th
Defensive Rating: 35th
Offensive Win Shares: 33rd
Defensive Win Shares: 32nd
Usage Percentage: 13thyour pal,
ebrian
Comment
-
ebrian wrote: View PostBtw, if you bring it up to 30+ mpg, 35 total guys on the list and where Bargnani ranks:
Per game --
Total rebounds: 35th
Field Goal Percentage: 34th (Nate Thurmond last)
PER: 32nd
Blocks: 30th
Assists: 34th
Steals: 33rd
Total Rebound %: 35th
Offensive Rating: 29th
Defensive Rating: 35th
Offensive Win Shares: 33rd
Defensive Win Shares: 32nd
Usage Percentage: 13th
Comment
-
ebrian wrote: View PostBtw, if you bring it up to 30+ mpg, 35 total guys on the list and where Bargnani ranks:
Per game --
Total rebounds: 35th
Field Goal Percentage: 34th (Nate Thurmond last)
PER: 32nd
Blocks: 30th
Assists: 34th
Steals: 33rd
Total Rebound %: 35th
Offensive Rating: 29th
Defensive Rating: 35th
Offensive Win Shares: 33rd
Defensive Win Shares: 32nd
Usage Percentage: 13th
Bargnani's rebounding numbers and offensive efficiencies have often been excused due to his style of play, while the intangible benefits of things like 'spreading the floor' are pointed out as advantages that aren't captured by stats. It would be very telling to see where Dirk falls, relative to Bargnani.
Thanks!
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostOut of morbid curiosity, could you run the same report and show where Dirk falls. The only reason I ask is that we know that Bargnani isn't a 'traditional' big, so I'm interested in a comparison to a big with a similar style (especially the player he's most often been compared to).
Bargnani's rebounding numbers and offensive efficiencies have often been excused due to his style of play, while the intangible benefits of things like 'spreading the floor' are pointed out as advantages that aren't captured by stats. It would be very telling to see where Dirk falls, relative to Bargnani.
Thanks!
Dirk Nowitzki (Andrea in brackets):
Per game --
PER: 7th (32nd)
Offensive Rating: 2nd (29th)
Offensive Win Shares: 2nd (33rd)
Field Goal Percentage: 29th (34th)
Assists: 11th (34th)
Total rebounds: 26th (35th)
Blocks: 22nd (30th)
Steals: 13th (33rd)
Total Rebound %: 33rd (35th)
Defensive Rating: 23rd (35th)
Defensive Win Shares: 13th (32nd)
Usage Percentage: 5th (13th)your pal,
ebrian
Comment
-
ebrian wrote: View PostIt's a good point actually, since Bargnani is really known for his offense... or at least, he's supposed to be. I've moved up the offensive categories and defensive have been pushed down. I've also bolded the ones where Dirk is significantly better than Bargnani.
Dirk Nowitzki (Andrea in brackets):
Per game --
PER: 7th (32nd)
Offensive Rating: 2nd (29th)
Offensive Win Shares: 2nd (33rd)
Field Goal Percentage: 29th (34th)
Assists: 11th (34th)
Total rebounds: 26th (35th)
Blocks: 22nd (30th)
Steals: 13th (33rd)
Total Rebound %: 33rd (35th)
Defensive Rating: 23rd (35th)
Defensive Win Shares: 13th (32nd)
Usage Percentage: 5th (13th)
Comment
-
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostCan anyone tell me how to explain the Raptors are better without Bargnani besides using wins/losses and statistics?
I am still waiting for a response as to how to properly explain this.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostCan anyone tell me how to explain the Raptors are better without Bargnani besides using wins/losses and statistics?
I am still waiting for a response as to how to properly explain this.
I also think I should start by saying that my assumption is based on the fact that so much blame & "hate" has been dumped on Bargnani over the years - some well deserved and some well beyond his control (ie: draft position, salary) - that the "piling on" can get frustrating to take, even when the bulk of the pile is quite legit.
Basically, I think the personal stats (like those in ebrian's recent posts) and unbiased observations of game action are accepted as factual evidenciary proof of Bargnani's "suckage". By this, I mean stats like PER, Offensive Rating, Offensive Win Share, Defensive Win Share, as examples, and observations such as poor help defense. Those stats are based purely on the indivdual and all pass the eye-test, without bias.
However, I think people take issue with circumstantial evidence, such as the team's record in games when he scores a certain # of points, for example. These sorts of coincidental stats show no direct correlation between Bargnani and the outcome. These sorts of 'stats' can be found to support any argument about any player, good or bad. For example, there might be a statline that shows the team is 8-0 all-time when Bargnani scores 7 points and has 3 rebounds, but that doesn't mean the team should adopt a strategy to ensure Bargnani hits exactly that statline and then gets benched, since it's purely coincidental; no game is ever decided by a single player's statline.
Even the most vocal Bargnani supporter, past or present, can accept irrefutable evidence based on stats that observation can validate. However, after all the years of "Bargnani bashing", it can get frustrating to have that compounded by purely circumstantial evidence, be it hand-picked coincidental statlines or factors beyond Bargnani's control.
Hopefully that makes sense and helps shed some light on the ongoing discussion...Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Fri Mar 8, 2013, 02:05 PM.
Comment
Comment