# LaMarcus > Andrea



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

And it's not even close...hell even Brandon outrebounds Bargnani. There is nothing outside of shooting 3 consistently that this kid can not do. He is simply amazing and is going to be the best big man we have ever seen rock the scarlet and black. Pairing him up with Roy can only lead to greatness...now if only Nate will realize Surge needs more pt, we'd be onto something:yay:


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

Seriously - I know Denver isn't a strong defensive club, but LA murdered them tonight inside.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

I don't know about that. I've watched a few Raptors games where Bargnani has looked like a guard with his quick first step and ball handling. Again, it's like comparing apples to oranges. Aldridge plays more inside and has a decent post-up game, whereas Andrea has a better perimeter and face-up game. Nevertheless, combining Roy, LmA, and Sergio, we thwart anyone else's rookies.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Bargnani is nice, but I don't want my 7 footers out on the perimeter. They are there to rebound, block shots (btw did yo usee LMA come from no where to check melo or smith, then run back and put in a tip-in?), and control the paint. If AB can learn to play some D, like Dirk is finally doing and rebounding more, he'll be great, but if he just progresses his outside game, he'll be a semi-star, but possess no all-around game. Toronto really should have taken LMA..he and Bosh would have been scary good.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I'm not sure I'd trade Roy and Aldridge for any other two players in the league right now. There are certainly better players, but none with brighter futures. And Aldridge could turn out to be even better than Roy!


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Talkhard said:


> I'm not sure I'd trade Roy and Aldridge for any other two players in the league right now. There are certainly better players, but none with brighter futures. And Aldridge could turn out to be even better than Roy!




LOL, Homer alert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> I'm not sure I'd trade Roy and Aldridge for any other two players in the league right now. There are certainly better players, but none with brighter futures. And Aldridge could turn out to be even better than Roy!


How about Oden and Durant?


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

^ in the league right now 

lamarcus > roy


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

you guys know that LA gets .2 more bpg and .5 rpg than AB right?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

MAS RipCity said:


> He is simply amazing and is going to be the best big man we have ever seen rock the scarlet and black.


The chances of Aldridge being as good or better than a pre-injury Bill Walton are pretty tiny. But Aldridge does look good.



Talkhard said:


> I'm not sure I'd trade Roy and Aldridge for any other two players in the league right now. There are certainly better players, but none with brighter futures.


Dwight Howard, LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Gilbert Arenas, among others, are not only much better but also have much brighter futures.

Roy and Aldridge were good snags, but they're hardly at the top of the list of the best young talents in the game.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Roy and Aldridge were good snags, but they're hardly at the top of the list of the best young talents in the game.


2 of the very best from this last draft and I'm truely happy that they're with the club, but lets stay in touch with reality... they are amoung the bright young players in the league, but some young players are already established superstars. With a year of training 24/7 under their belts, I expect them to show even better next season, which is why this upcoming draft is going to be so important. This should be the last Blazer lotto appearance for a while. Adding one more ringer could make the difference between being the next Wizards or the Pistons. I don't see Aldridge or Roy as a dominant superstar, but I'm very hopeful of fielding a complete team of quality players that competes deep into the playoffs. 

STOMP


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> The chances of Aldridge being as good or better than a pre-injury Bill Walton are pretty tiny. But Aldridge does look good.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll pass on one trick pony's agent zero and sir whines alot(melo)..neither play any D nor make their teammates better. Portland is much better off without them..Bosh is nice, but I like LMA's potential to be better,esp on the defensive end of the court.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

shookem said:


> you guys know that LA gets .2 more bpg and .5 rpg than AB right?


Actually, he get's 0.6 more rpg and 0.3 more bpg - and that's in fewer minutes per game.

In terms of rebounds and blocks per-48 minutes:

Aldridge = 10.59 reb/48, 2.53 blk/48

Bargnani: 7.47 reb/48, 1.49 blk/48

Bargnani grabs fewer rebounds per 48 minutes than 6'1" rookie point guard Rajon Rondo. Pretty weak for a 7-footer.

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Just FYI, Aldridge's EFF = 37 tonight is the single most impressive stat line for ANY rookie this year. He also became the ONLY rookie to have two EFF ≥ 30 games this season - and he's done it twice in the last five games.

Other EFF ≥ 30 Games by Rookies this Season:

Rudy Gay - EFF = 33 on 2/14/07
Sergio Rodriguez - EFF = 33 on 1/14/07
Brandon Roy - EFF = 31 on 1/21/07
LaMarcus Aldrdge - EFF = 30 on 3/1/07

BNM


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

Gotta like having 4 of the 5 best rookie performances (by EFF) on the season!

Dan


----------



## hirschmanz (Jun 3, 2005)

for what the raptors are doing with their team, bargniani is much better. Their european style will keep them fighting at least for the top of the atlantic for many years. Bargniani fits the system perfectly. 

Aldridge is a more traditional center. Imagine if he had stayed one more year at texas?


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> And it's not even close...hell even Brandon outrebounds Bargnani. There is nothing outside of shooting 3 consistently that this kid can not do. *He is simply amazing and is going to be the best big man we have ever seen rock the scarlet and black.* Pairing him up with Roy can only lead to greatness...now if only Nate will realize Surge needs more pt, we'd be onto something:yay:


OLD MAN ALERT!! You must be too young to remember how GREAT Walton was in 1976-1978. Led the league in rebounds and blocks, anchoring our defense. Could shoot the jump-hook, free-throws and was a good assist man from the high-post too. He was NBA League MVP.

I hope its the case of you being too young to have not literally "seen" Walton play. Otherwise, Aldridge has a ways to go. He is showing great promise. We agree on that!!!


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Walton set a record with 20 D rebounds in the finals and then went out and duplicated the feat the next game. That's dominant!


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Has any rookie besides Aldridge had 17 rebounds in a game this year?


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Millsap has had 17 boards at least once. I'd have to check to see if there have been any others.

BNM


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Actually, he get's 0.6 more rpg and 0.3 more bpg - and that's in fewer minutes per game.
> 
> In terms of rebounds and blocks per-48 minutes:
> 
> ...


I am certainly a basher of AB's rebounding abilities. But at the same Aldridge's rebound rate is also nothing to crow about.

The premise that One or the other is clearly better oe will be clearly better then the other smacks of homerism (and it has come from both sides).

I like AB for our system, and hope he can improve his weak rebounding. But by no way is LA a beast rebounder (Certainly not statistically) as is implied in this thread.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Boob-No-More said:


> Actually, he get's 0.6 more rpg and 0.3 more bpg - and that's in fewer minutes per game.
> 
> In terms of rebounds and blocks per-48 minutes:
> 
> ...


But which rookie has had a bigger impact on their teams record?

Stats are only has good as the most important one.

W's


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

I like AB a lot. A lot better than what I thought he would be. But to be honest, so is Lamarcus. We were sold on the idea that he is a long term project. If half a year is long term - I want all the rookies we get to be this long term.

I have no clue if AB will be better than Lamarcus or the other way around - but I remember reading that KP had both Lamarcus and AB on his board as targets - which tells you that we would probably have been happy with either.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Both players are future stars in this league. I would take LaMarcus over Andrea on this team, due mostly because we do not have a Chris Bosh type player. We needed the athlecism and defense LA brings while Toronto needed versatility.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

shookem said:


> But which rookie has had a bigger impact on their teams record?


If you change the question, the answer changes (funny how that works). And the answer to your latest question would be Brandon Roy. 

Yes, Bargnani's team has a better record, but Toronto has four new starters in the rotation in front of Bargnani - might that not have something to do with their improvement over last year? Toronto has won eight more games (in the weakest division in the NBA) already this year than they did last - with four new starters + Bargnani coming off the bench. Portland has won five more games than they did all of last year - and much of that improvement comes from Brandon Roy in our starting line-up.

So, Toronto = 8 more wins with 4 new starters + Bargnani
Portland = 5 more wins with 2 new starters INCLUDING Brandon Roy

BNM


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

andalusian said:


> I like AB a lot. A lot better than what I thought he would be. But to be honest, so is Lamarcus. We were sold on the idea that he is a long term project. If half a year is long term - I want all the rookies we get to be this long term.
> 
> I have no clue if AB will be better than Lamarcus or the other way around - but I remember reading that KP had both Lamarcus and AB on his board as targets - which tells you that we would probably have been happy with either.


I seem to recall Pritchard quoted right after the draft as saying they wanted a big and a small from the lottery and their draft board was: Big: Bargnani then Aldridge; Small: Roy. And that's who they targeted. He implied that if we had won the lottery and had the #1, we would have just taken Bargnani, though said Aldridge was a very close 2nd. I guess Pritchard was as impressed with the ridiculous shooting range and consistency of Bargnani as Coangelo was. But, who knows who the Blazers would have picked at the time Stern walked up to the podium. What if Toronto offered something juicy for Barngani? 

Pritchard went on to imply that with only the No. 4 pick, they knew they had to move up, they went looking for a deal. Toronto wanted a LOT for the #1 as they really wanted Bargnani and didn't like the other top guys nearly as much. Chicago wanted virtually nothing (Khryapa) for their #2. Thus we got Aldridge.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

JuniorNoboa said:


> I am certainly a basher of AB's rebounding abilities. But at the same Aldridge's rebound rate is also nothing to crow about.
> 
> The premise that One or the other is clearly better oe will be clearly better then the other smacks of homerism (and it has come from both sides).
> 
> I like AB for our system, and hope he can improve his weak rebounding. But by no way is LA a beast rebounder (Certainly not statistically) as is implied in this thread.


Who implied that Aldridge is a beast rebounder? The only "implication" I made is that he's a better rebounder (and shot blocker) than Bargnani - which, as you say, is nothing to crow about. When it comes to rebounding, Aldridge isn't exactly Dennis Rodman, but still, he averages 42% more rebounds and 70% more blocks per-48 minutes than Bargnani. Aldridge is an average rebounder and an above average shot blocker. Bargnani is below average in both categories.

Both players have a long way to go to realize their full potential, but when it comes to rebounding and shot blocking, Aldridge is ahead of Bargnani in their respective developments.

BNM


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Boob-No-More said:


> If you change the question, the answer changes (funny how that works). And the answer to your latest question would be Brandon Roy.
> 
> Yes, Bargnani's team has a better record, but Toronto has four new starters in the rotation in front of Bargnani - might that not have something to do with their improvement over last year? Toronto has won eight more games (in the weakest division in the NBA) already this year than they did last - with four new starters + Bargnani coming off the bench. Portland has won five more games than they did all of last year - and much of that improvement comes from Brandon Roy in our starting line-up.
> 
> ...


I thought this thread was about AB and LA not Roy.

Sure Roy has probably had the biggest impact of any rookie in the league. By from the title of the thread and the other posts I thought everyone was comparing AB and LA, not Roy.

Between AB and LA, who has made the greater impact on their team?


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Boob-No-More said:


> Millsap has had 17 boards at least once. I'd have to check to see if there have been any others.
> 
> BNM


I just checked. Here's the top rebounding performances by rookies this season:

LaMarcus Aldridge - 17 reb 3/13/07
Paul Millsap - 17 reb 1/27/07
Shelden Williams - 15 reb 12/23/06
Shelden Williams - 15 reb 11/14/06

BNM


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

I know this is a foreign concept to some, but we don't need to try and make other rookies look bad in order to be proud of our rookies.

Both Bargnani and Aldridge are likely to have very bright futures based on what they have shown this season. 

If you really want to argue that one is better then the other, be my guest, but try to avoid saying that it's "not even close" as hyperbole such as that doesn't really help your arguement.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

shookem said:


> But which rookie has had a bigger impact on their teams record?
> 
> Stats are only has good as the most important one.
> 
> W's



So in your world Luc Longley is more valuable than somone like Patrick Ewing or Charles Barkley because he won more titles?


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> So in your world Luc Longley is more valuable than somone like Patrick Ewing or Charles Barkley because he won more titles?


Wow. That's taking things to the extreme. I could go on but it looks like Foulzilla is right and some posters seem to get a little wild in order to support what they're saying.

-peace.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

shookem said:


> I thought this thread was about AB and LA not Roy.


It was, until you asked the question: "But which rookie has had a bigger impact on their teams record?"

Sorry if I misunderstood the question. Of Aldridge and Bargnani, so far this year, I'd agree that Bargnani has had more impact on his team's success. However, that is subject to change if Aldridge keeps starting and playng like he has since March 1. Time will tell. Of course, Bargnani was drafted ahead of Aldridge and Aldridge started the season on the injured list recovering from off-season shoulder surgery. So, I would expect Bargnani to have had a bigger impact to date.

BNM


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Who implied that Aldridge is a beast rebounder? The only "implication" I made is that he's a better rebounder (and shot blocker) than Bargnani - which, as you say, is nothing to crow about. When it comes to rebounding, Aldridge isn't exactly Dennis Rodman, but still, he averages 42% more rebounds and 70% more blocks per-48 minutes than Bargnani. Aldridge is an average rebounder and an above average shot blocker. Bargnani is below average in both categories.
> 
> Both players have a long way to go to realize their full potential, but when it comes to rebounding and shot blocking, Aldridge is ahead of Bargnani in their respective developments.
> 
> BNM


Hey BNM, I was just using your stats. You certainly did not make any conclusions on them, but I know some others on this thread had implied that LA was a great rebounder, and it was more a response to the overall thread.

Statistically, Bargnani would be considered an average shot blocker at this stage, not below average, but I don't think any one will argue your conclusions on LA being a much better rebounder and shot blocker. Similarly, I don't expect much argument to the fact that AB has more potential to be an efficient volume scorer (efficeint being the key)


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

It's also really not fair to judge LMA based on the team's success, because most fans kow he should have been getting this type of playing time a long time ago. If he had consistent minutes this year, I think Portland could add around 3-4 more wins this year..putting us at about the 8th spot, in the West, which is really remarkable. I am not trying to put Bargnani down. I like his skill set and ability, but I don't like big men out on the perimeter, bring back too many memories of Sheed chucking up 3 after 3. AB will be good, but before we can call him great, he needs to show me some defensive and rebounding potential. Aldrdige is already there, as long as the minutes increase, so will his rebounding and blocks. Plus, whens the last time you've seen a big run the floor like LMA? I value shot blocking, rebounding, and ability to play man defense more than otuside shooting for my big. Not to mention, LMA has a repitour(sp?) of low post moves as well, and is no slouch from 18 ft and in. When it's all said and done, Aldridge will be considered the best big out of this draft.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

This is really a situation of comparing two very good prospects that, although they play the same position, are very different players. If I had to choose one right not I would want Aldridge, but I have also seen him play more and have a bad case of the Blazers. AB has a slightly higher EFF, which on this board seems to count for a lot. I think AB has tons of potential and he seems like a smart player with a great skillset on offense, especially on the outside. LMA has a vastly superior defensive skillset and a better interrior game. I prefer LMA's game but I certainly don't think he or AB can accuratly be labled as better yet. In one more year, then I will be able to make a better judgement, but even that will be a little premature.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Bargnani's rebounding numbers are actually worse than they seem...

Rebound rating takes into account pace (we're among the slowest) and shooting percentages.

Looking at rebound ratings, Bargnani plays with only 1 good rebounder, Chris Bosh (rebound rating 16.2) Garbajosa and Nesterovic are two of the poorest rebounding big men around, yet Bargnani can't even collect rebounds along side those two. Kris Humphries is the only other decent rebounder on the team (13.5 rating) but he gets just 8 minutes per game.

Aldridge plays with 1 outstanding rebounder (Zach Randolph - rebound rating 17.7)
and two part time players who are very good to outstanding rebounders when they are in the game (Magloire - 17.4 rebound rating in 19 minutes per game and Joel Przybilla - 15 rebound rating in 16 minutes per game) Those two combine to create one very good rebounding big man. And Aldridge's minutes generally come with one of those other players on the floor. 

Bargnani rebounds like a small forward. Maybe that's his long term position, but you can't argue that his rebounding is even close to Aldridges. 

Rebound rating:
Aldridge 13.7 >> Bargnani 9.2

Aldridge's rating is comparable to Nene, Brad Miller and Troy Murphy.
Bargnani's is comparable to Vince Carter, Manu Ginobili and Devin Brown. (Ouch!)

PS - check out the PER ratings too.

Aldridge 16.02 >> Bargnani 12.9

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2007/Raptors.htm

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2007/Blazers.htm


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Aldridge is looking very, very good. I'm excited about him.

But man... the hyperbole in this thread! 

Am I glad we have Aldridge and Roy? Yes. If the draft were redone would they be the top 2 picks at the moment? I would say so, yes.

But Bargnani has been pretty good, has played more minutes for a better team, and I can totally see the argument that he's a better fit for Toronto.

Ed O.


----------



## Darman (Jun 29, 2006)

Boob-No-More said:


> Who implied that Aldridge is a beast rebounder? The only "implication" I made is that he's a better rebounder (and shot blocker) than Bargnani - which, as you say, is nothing to crow about. When it comes to rebounding, Aldridge isn't exactly Dennis Rodman, but still, he averages 42% more rebounds and 70% more blocks per-48 minutes than Bargnani. Aldridge is an average rebounder and an above average shot blocker. Bargnani is below average in both categories.
> 
> Both players have a long way to go to realize their full potential, but when it comes to rebounding and shot blocking, Aldridge is ahead of Bargnani in their respective developments.
> 
> BNM


You should watch Andrea's number of rebounds when Bosh is on the bench (or out for injury). When Chris is on the court Andrea is only boxing out his man letting Chris to take the ball.

BTW Andrea defense is improved a lot and nowhere you'll find a 7 guy with his first step, ballhandling and passing skill.

He doesn't play inside very much, it's true, but do you think he never will? He has no plays called for him and still is averaging more then 10 points at game... Like somebody said before, comparing LA with Andrea is like comparing apple with orange.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

if the draft were redone, raptors would still pick bargnani. brian colangelo told me so.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

MAS RipCity said:


> When is the last time you've seen a big run the floor like LMA?


Absolutely. The guy flat out sprints down the floor. Last night he missed a shot, then ran down to the other end in time to block a shot attempt by Denver, then got back down the floor quickly enough to tip in a missed shot. When he's defending around the basket, he gets from one side of the key to the other very quickly. If he gains weight this summer, I hope he doesn't lose any of his mobility and speed.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Ed O said:


> But man... the hyperbole in this thread!
> 
> Am I glad we have Aldridge and Roy? Yes. If the draft were redone would they be the top 2 picks at the moment? I would say so, yes.


Nah, BC would probably still pick AB, I don't think either has showed enough (Or more accurately in this case not showed enough) to change the potential assessments made by BC and SP?.


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

I think both teams got what they needed and you could argue that the two rookies wouldn't fit in as well with their new teams if they were switched. Portland needs more of a defensive presence because they play in the west with all the dominant forwards. The eastern conference has more of the dominant guards and Toronto has obviously benefitted from the additional scoring threat. LMA and AB are really different players... bottom line, Portland and Toronto should both be thrilled with their picks.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Spud147 said:


> LMA and AB are really different players... bottom line, Portland and Toronto should both be thrilled with their picks.


Agreed. Aldridge is more of a Bosh clone than Bargnani. Why would Toronto want a Bosh clone when they have the original? Both players are doing well and have very bright futures. I'm very happy we got Aldridge (I like him much better than Tyrus Thomas or Adam Morrison), Roy and Rodriguez. Not bad considering we started the day with just the 4th pick.

Toronto is thrilled with Bargnani. When you get to pick first you're guaranteed to get your guy. They did, and he's a good fit on their team. In addition to drafting Bargnani, Colangelo totally re-built the top half of their roster (other than Bosh) - and has the team in the play-offs. Assembling a team that fast and getting all the pieces to fit together is an amazing feat. He gets my vote for exec of the year (with KP a close second).

BNM


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Well, it's kind of funny how the guy reaches the conclusion that "Bargnani is not even close to being the player Aldrige is" due to his personal preference of how a 7 footer should play basketball. You probably don't like your 7 footers putting the ball on the floor outside 25 feet and taking it to the hoop in 3 steps. But then again, the closest thing you guys have to someone that can do that is Darius Miles wearing 5 inch tall Nike Shox's, and we all know how he turned out.

All jokes aside, they are completely different players. Can someone look up Dirk's rebound per 48 min stat or whatever stat you guys were using, I'm quite sure his stat is probably not that much better or probably worse than Lamarcus. So that must mean Dirk will never become as good of a player Aldrige is. Again, Dirk only averages what, 1 block per game? That just further proves your point then.

The Raps fans will be happy if Bargnani becomes a 3/4 Dirk somewhere down the road. I'm sure you guys will be thrilled too if Aldrige becomes the next Amare, Dwight Howard, Chris Bosh, Emeka Okafor, Al Jefferson, Pau Gasol, Zach Randolph, or any other big guy that runs the floor faster than Will Purdue. Rare talent fellas. If I'm re-doing the draft right now, I would still draft Bargnani at #1 with Aldrige and Roy going after him at #2-3.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

I had to check to make sure I wasn't on Realgm after reading this thread.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:
 

> Why would Toronto want a Bosh clone when they have the original?


because having two bigs who can play inside and outside and defend a variety of bigs well would have been a good thing to have?

I think that LA, like Bargnani, would have been an excellent choise to have lined up next to Bosh. Bargnani is a little bit bigger, so maybe thats why both Portland and Toronto management valued him more on draft day. I'd guess the percieved gap has probably closed to a dead heat.

STOMP


----------

