# Bargnani year over year comparison



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

I was just looking over Bargs stats for the year and I was shocked at just how bad they are.

Then I look at last years stats and realize they are almost exactly the same!! I know Bargs came on strong to end the season and was pretty oonsistent for a few months but was that just a tease?

Sam has kept him right at the 25 minute mark as if he were on a strict program. The shooting was slightly better last year but that was without any low post plays and shooting mainly 3s. You would think that would go up this year but he is now under 40%, which is shameful.

3pt shooting is about the same, rebounding same, ast same. Statistically there is absolutely zero improvement in his game. That is scary. His biggest talent is his shooting, and his percentages are horrible.

I am the biggest Bargs fan here, calling for him 2 years before his draft year, but I am really worried now. Last year he was a spark off the bench. he brought excitement to our team. This year he is lifeless. Its horrible to watch.

He was my pick and Ill never deny that, but at this point I wonder if the future will get any brighter with him. Last year he was even dunking on people for a stretch there and showing some killer instinct. Why is he getting softer now?

I would love to see Bargs just go right through somebody and dunk on them to start the next game. Take the offensive foul, put a knee right into their chest/jaw, scowl at the guy on the ground you just ran over, and tell him youll be right back to do it again. That would show me he has a future.

I know he is young, but that means nothing. It doesnt mean he WILL improve.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

i believe we're wasting our time developing him as a 5. you can teach some players skills outside of their comfort zone, but not all of them. andrea appears to be among the latter group. imo, unless our perimeter defense becomes lights-out, andrea will have a tough time inside, always battle foul trouble and may never get into a groove offensively either.

we talk about nowitzki but dirk is one in a billion. there are things beyond his outside shooting that make him dirk. and he's not a center, anyway.

we talk about andrea's jumpshot as a weapon to pull the opposing 5 out of the paint but: #1, the opposing team's 5 rarely covers him; #2, even when he does, we have no wing slashers who can make use of the extra space inside so it matters not. it does not help our team. andrea just stands out there with everyone else until he decides to hoist one up. and there's no one inside for the offensive board. and there are even times when he's 20 ft out and the 5 is right up on him, and he's still reluctant to take the ball to the hole.

in fact, all of our players with one key exception are like that: we could be 25 ft from the basket and the defense has no fear but to step up and contest our jumpshot- if only because we won't do anything else. this is not just bargnani, this is everyone but chris. this is a cultural issue and, imo, it is where our coaching lacks.

when it comes to andrea, we are stuck between a rock and a hard place:

1) for a player with his skillset, he will be effective eventually... somewhere. but he's not now. his stock is low and it's tough to sell low, to say nothing of the pr commitment we've made to him.

2) i honestly wonder how much more he can endure. he does not look like he's enjoying his 20's in the nba and i could just as soon see him moving back overseas. if he were to get traded to a team without his de facto father as management apprentice, i could see it happening even sooner.

3) if we then keep him as our starting centre, we need to make do with the other pieces, namely improving our perimeter defense and bringing in showstoppers for the assignment. that's expensive and who knows if anyone's even available. or we keep him and move him to the wing and find a serviceable big with our most lucrative trade pieces (kapono, ford/calderon). i think the last option has the most potential but for some reason we can't seem to justify playing a natural 3 (bargnani) at the 3 because he's... tall. he's 7 feet. 7 footers are centres. we'll see where that takes us but that's sort of a microcosm of our team-wide approach to virtually everything.

i believe those are our only options. maybe mitchell and the staff are the biggest problem but mitchell is not going anywhere, if only on account of his contract. 

it's not his fault but bargnani is, whether directly or indirectly, critical to this team next year.

peace


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

it still took dirk about 4-5 years to develop.

Bargs has still shown flashes that warrant the #1 overall pick, the biggest problems are consistancy & confidence IMO

he had a great 1st half in lastnights game, then smitch benched him.


----------



## george (Aug 8, 2003)

Man, I knew when we drafted him he would be a scrub, I wanted Gay or Aldridge.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Now he is a scrub?


----------



## Balzac (Jun 29, 2006)

He's not a scrub. And his stats are not merely a slight drop from last year, when you factor in the lower fg% and lower ppg. Besides, he should be MUCH better this year, not regressing from last.

To reiterate: he is not, and will never be, a center. He is either going to play the 3 or the 4.


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

Here is the biggest difference...last year he was coming off the bench and mostly going up against the other team's scrubs...u know players at his own level.

This year, they tried starting him and getting him to play against other teams starters and its pretty obvious he can't hang with starter calibre players in the NBA.

We should relegate him to the bench and use him as a scorer in relief of Bosh. I know this isn't what you'd want from a #1 pick, but seriously he can do some damage against the 2nd unit of other teams and help keep our production from dropping off whenever Bosh is off the court. This is unfortunately the best case I see for him.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

to keep it short and sweet

he is not a 5, and him and i believe he and Bosh will never form a formidable frontcourt. the quicker BC gets over his honeymoon with Andrea and realizes that, the better. or maybe he already has and is just waiting for his value to go up.

next year i do expect improvement, but regardless, he will be gone within two years, unless we plan on making him our scoring punch off the bench in the frontcourt.

i believe he'll be a star one day. just not here. unless bosh dies.


----------



## kirk_2003 (Jun 23, 2003)

I too have to be one of Bargnani biggest believers..
I'd love to see him come around.. hopefully he'll show up when we need him most..
playoffs.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

The guy is defending 5s and that's all that matters...

He just has to hit shots...

I don't want to agree with LEO but that's the truth of it...

Il Mago is not shooting like he should be

He has altered his shot (finally getting his legs into it) and we're only just startingto see results.

Do you really think that Bargnani will be a 40% career shooter?


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

This is almost like Bargs is having another rookie year as we have made him play the 5 when he did not play that spot at all last year. We put him in a tough second year after a dismal summer with his national team and ask him to change his game.....I am not happy with his progress, but I will wait until next year to really make a judgment on what type of player he will end up being. Right now I still have faith in him!


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

How many stars regress and then come back?....None, there is always a progression, or at least some kind of consistency...lets face it...he just doesn't have it. He is going to be one of those guys that can score lights out and drop 20 one day, then miss everything and foul out the next. He's way too inconsistent to be a reliable starter. Now that doesn't mean he can't be a serviceable backup, like a spark plug off the bench, but that is about it. 

He is like a 6'10 version of Juan Dixon...

BTW NO WAY he is 7ft tall, that is all media hype and BS...Bosh is taller then him in real life, in pictures, and on TV


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

now he's not 7 foot? give me a break.


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

SkywalkerAC said:


> now he's not 7 foot? give me a break.


http://www.usbasket.com/player.asp?Cntry=USA&PlayerID=42200

Why is he listed at 6'10 by his own national team....and why did all of the pre-draft sites list him at 6'10 and some sources still do? I mean maybe he coulda grown...but why does Bosh look taller then him whenever they stand next to each other...?


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

RX said:


> http://www.usbasket.com/player.asp?Cntry=USA&PlayerID=42200
> 
> Why is he listed at 6'10 by his own national team....and why did all of the pre-draft sites list him at 6'10 and some sources still do? I mean maybe he coulda grown...but why does Bosh look taller then him whenever they stand next to each other...?


I don't know but they're not correct. BC had him measured before he drafted him and he came in at 7 feet, in socks.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

listed as a 7 footer here http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andrea-Bargnani-154/


----------



## Balzac (Jun 29, 2006)

RX said:


> How many stars regress and then come back?....None, there is always a progression, or at least some kind of consistency...lets face it...he


Steve Nash.


----------



## kirk_2003 (Jun 23, 2003)

RX said:


> *How many stars regress and then come back?....None, there is always a progression, or at least some kind of consistency...lets face it...he just doesn't have it.* He is going to be one of those guys that can score lights out and drop 20 one day, then miss everything and foul out the next. He's way too inconsistent to be a reliable starter. Now that doesn't mean he can't be a serviceable backup, like a spark plug off the bench, but that is about it.
> 
> He is like a 6'10 version of Juan Dixon...
> 
> BTW NO WAY he is 7ft tall, that is all media hype and BS...Bosh is taller then him in real life, in pictures, and on TV


you think he was a star last year?! you must have very low expectations.. Chris Bosh is a prophet then..



...and he is a legit 7footer.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

problem #1 is his shooting. i guess teams have "figured him out" to an extent but he's still getting open shots. he just isn't hitting them. his shot has changed a little since he joined the team but i've commented recently that he finally seems to be getting his legs into his shot but the fact is that he's not a great shooter right now. if he were hitting shots at a better clip he'd be in the 13-14 ppg range and we'd be a whole lot happier. 

i really hope he goes to newell's big man camp next summer.


----------



## Balzac (Jun 29, 2006)

I think he meant which star player started with a good 1st year and then regressed.


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

I meant how many current stars truly regressed and then came back to become stars? There were alot of guys who were never given a chance, and then blew up given playing time, and then there are guys who were solid (Nash for example) that weren't really considered stars...but never really had a "regression"...of course not counting injuries

As for his height...
Eurobasket 2007 Italian Roster
Pre-draft Scouting Report

Random pics
http://www.dunk.com.au/dunk/images/stories/news/rapswhite.jpg
http://flickr.com/photos/nero88/1507161224/
http://flickr.com/photos/marcuswilliams/1156290873/

He was listed at 6'10 everywhere before this last year with the Raptors....he's probably about the same height as Bosh just shy of 6'11...there seems to be this marketing spin on him being this 7ft 250lbs shooting specialist (similar to Dirk who isn't actually 7ft tall)


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

southeasy said:


> *it still took dirk about 4-5 years to develop*.
> 
> Bargs has still shown flashes that warrant the #1 overall pick, the biggest problems are consistancy & confidence IMO
> 
> he had a great 1st half in lastnights game, then smitch benched him.


4-5 years? Dirk was averaging 18 ppg in his second season which bargs is in. and in his rookie season he only played 47 games, started 24 and avergaed 8 ppg. 

Bargnani is a bust, theres nothing else to say. He will always be that 8-12 ppg scorer off the bench.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

he hasn't really regressed IMO. he just hasn't gotten much better.


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

I'm not saying he isn't a good player...but he's not a "star" level talent, he doesn't have the consistency. He can get hot and score in bunches which we could use off the bench. Unfortunately, using your #1 pick as a sparkplug off the bench ain't gonna fly


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

RX said:


> I meant how many current stars truly regressed and then came back to become stars? There were alot of guys who were never given a chance, and then blew up given playing time, and then there are guys who were solid (Nash for example) that weren't really considered stars...but never really had a "regression"...of course not counting injuries
> 
> As for his height...
> Eurobasket 2007 Italian Roster
> ...


that eurobasket site lists him as 2.11 m which is 6'11. that is most likely in bare feet, which puts him at 7'.25" in shoes, which is how nba heights are listed.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

The problem seems to be that he needs to be a PF to be effective. A position that Bosh already plays. He is not an effective center on offense, he can not guard small forwards on defense. I am not really seeing how the two of them can play together and be effective.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

i'd say he's pushing 7'1 actually. theres no way he's not at least 7 feet. he looks at least an inch bigger than Bosh.

the thing about the Bosh-Bargnani combination is that they both need a rebounding, defense oriented centre beside them to mask there weaknesses.. thats why they both tend to play better with Rasho in the game


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

Andrea on Kamla's top 5 players to have a breakout third season, calling him no bust but also calling him out. I'm inclined to agree. Expect his percentages to go back up and his impact with them.

And how good is Kamla for the NBA? man I love that guy.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Bargs game vs New Jersey was an example of how his game is starting to come around. He rebounded and got to the line. He showed some grit and it looked good.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

6-10, 6-11. 7-0, who the hell cares, when you play like a pansy.


----------



## george (Aug 8, 2003)

JuniorNoboa said:


> 6-10, 6-11. 7-0, who the hell cares, when you play like a pansy.


haha, yea if you suck you suck.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

****ing guy's 3 point shot is horrible this year. Great shooters should miss off the back of the rim (producing the "shooters bounce") and Bargs is missing everything short. I can't wait for Lucase to whip him into shape.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

like, what is it, 14 3-point misses in a row for Il Mago? CB4 is the better 3-point shooter right now. this should not be the case.


----------



## alex (Jan 7, 2003)

RX said:


> http://www.usbasket.com/player.asp?Cntry=USA&PlayerID=42200
> 
> Why is he listed at 6'10 by his own national team....and why did all of the pre-draft sites list him at 6'10 and some sources still do? I mean maybe he coulda grown...but why does Bosh look taller then him whenever they stand next to each other...?



In most Italian pubblications, he's listed at 211 or 212 cm. I lived in Italy in 200-2006, and saw him play live against Virtus Roma, and he was listed at I believe 211 cm. In Europe, heights are done without shoes, so you'd add a little more than an inch, or about three-4 cm, to that. Bargnani is, with shoes on, which is how the NBA measures players' height, 214-216 cm, making him at or just above 7'1". Bosh with shoes on was measured at the 2003 predraft camp at 6'11 1/2", which was an inch and a half taller than he was previously measured by G-Tech. I assume Bosh, who was nineteen by just a few months, now is between 7'0" and 7'1" as well, so it shouldn't be surprising that he seems about as big as Bargnani.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

another ineffective night for il mago. painful to watch.

this is game 80 and he's pretty much playing worse than he has all year- is that his fault or is it a bigger issue? 

i don't know about you but when i see him after a shot goes up and he's backpedalling out of the screen while bosh and maybe one other guy crash the glass, i get lumps in my stomach. where are you going, mago? when the defense then corrals the rebound and beats andrea down the floor for an easy two anyway, you wonder: what exactly were you leaking out for, mago? he's either a horrible safety net in transition defense or he's a horrible offensive rebounder. 

but again, whose fault is this? i can barely watch the man play anymore.

peace


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Its pretty shocking to look at his stats and see that he has regressed from his first year in the league. Thats very disturbing. Maybe he has some injury that hasn't been diagnosed yet.


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

HB said:


> Its pretty shocking to look at his stats and see that he has regressed from his first year in the league. Thats very disturbing. *Maybe he has some injury that hasn't been diagnosed yet*.


Its pretty obvious he has a clear case of suck-itis or bust-osis as the american's say


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

9 FT attempts in that win over NJ the other night from Bargs.

remember the 26pt game he lead us to in the win over Cleveland, and the 20pt, 7 rebound, 7 assist night in the win over Boston.

played some pretty solid defensive low post skill on al jefferson, yao ming & tim duncan this year, aswell as improved awareness to the rebounding aspect of playing center, despite the stats.

thats IMO what he's improved on this season that we didn't see last

two many flashes to be a bust


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Bargs is fine....year 3 will be his!


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

He better work his *** off this summer. He hasnt impressed me at all this year. He has been garbage. Defend him all you want but its true. I know he's still young but I have never seen anyone waste their size like Bargnani has.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Knick_Killer31 said:


> He better work his *** off this summer. He hasnt impressed me at all this year. He has been garbage. Defend him all you want but its true. I know he's still young but *I have never seen anyone waste their size like Bargnani has.*


*
*

The Candi Man?


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

Knick_Killer31 said:


> He better work his *** off this summer. He hasnt impressed me at all this year. He has been garbage. Defend him all you want but its true. I know he's still young but I have never seen anyone waste their size like Bargnani has.


Eddy Curry is a nominee in that regard but at least he can finish around the hoop (extremely well).


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

SkywalkerAC said:


> Eddy Curry is a nominee in that regard but at least he can finish around the hoop (extremely well).


Curry was always a center, Bargnani is just learning the position. I have confidence that he will turn it around in year 3. This off season he will be able to work on his game and the things that will help him make(take)the next step. The 3 point shot will not be the focal point of his offense next year, but will still be a weapon that he has in his back pocket.


----------



## Mr_B (Mar 6, 2004)

Softmore slump


----------



## Balzac (Jun 29, 2006)

billfindlay10 said:


> Curry was always a center, Bargnani is just learning the position. I have confidence that he will turn it around in year 3. This off season he will be able to work on his game and the things that will help him make(take)the next step. The 3 point shot will not be the focal point of his offense next year, but will still be a weapon that he has in his back pocket.


He still spends 80% of his time out of the paint. You honestly think he will just start playing like an actual center? Even now, near the end of the regular season, Bargnani doesn't fight for rebounds. Instead, he runs back on defense, only to do nothing or commit a weak foul. Two of the most popular comparisons with AB are Okur and Nowitzki. Let's be "pessimistic" and call him an Okur. Even as a rookie Okur was a much better rebounder (4.7 rebs in 19 mins) than Bargnani (3.9 in 25 mins). To be fair, Okur didn't attempt many 3s in his first few years; his game has shifted towards the perimeter the last two years. Still, he's averaging almost 8 boards a game. 

It's not like Bargnani seriously altered his game this year. Last year he was defending Cs, and then camping on the perimeter on offense. The only difference I see this year is him trying hard to post up. I don't think he'll be a bad player at all, BUT, when a shooter can't shoot and you try to convert him into a post player, well, the odds are against you for the experiment. He has shown nothing this year to convince me he'll ever play the 5. To me, I think the key is just to give up on the center experiment and let him refocus on being a shooter.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

"He has shown me nothing this year he will ever play the 5." But he's already playing the 5! That's the position he's guarding and he does a passable job for a second year euro converted-center. Rebounding is very poor but he actually doesn't blow his rebounding assignment very often - he boxes out but doesn't go out of his area to grab any boards. He's not a guy you want anchoring your defense but hey, neither is Aldridge. 

Again, as much as I hate to agree with Leo, it comes down to hitting shots. If he were hitting his open shots at a decent clip, he'd be playing fine and the team would be significantly better IMO. I don't think BC wants to change him into a post player, he wants AB to change the rules of the game.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Bargs has shot the 3 ball very poorly this year, but his mid range game has looked decent. He uses the ball fake and one dribble very well and makes a good number of those shots. His drives to the hoop have improved and he has shown he can finish with the dunk....although he needs to improve body control to finish layups. He has worked on getting post-up position but the ball rarely gets passed to him....hopefully the guards can gain some confidence in him over the offseason. He can and will be a 5 in the NBA....maybe not a low block guy, but picture guys like Vlade and Rasheed...the occasional post up with a strong face up game and range on the shot. Andrea brings great court vision to the table and has improved chemistry with Bosh in that regards. Andrea will be a solid starter for most of his NBA career, this is only year two for the 22 year old!


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Take out the games from December 1st to Jan 19th and Andrea's number would look much better, not great but better (42%)....his consistency has been poor all season, but that month and a half was terrible.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

If he were shooting just a little better, hitting that one more open 3 a game like he should be, his numbers would be up! but he's not. time to fix that shot.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

True...his 3 point shot has looked very flat and he takes many that look rushed... this can be worked on very easily in the off season. I am convinced we will see a change in offensive sets next year that put Andrea in better positions to take advantage of skill set, right now he is taking to many 3's


----------



## lucc19 (Feb 24, 2005)

Aldridge... we passed on him so we could have Italian day at the ACC!!!

hhahhaha i have been sayin it for too long, should have never taken this clown... BC is a whack GM. he is tryin to do the same thing he did for the sun's, in toronto. it did not work there and it won't work here. draft a guy 7 foot to shoot 3's!!! what a joke... Aldridge is a all around better player and i dont care about the 3's thats why u have a SG. the fact is aldridge wanted to come to toronto and we punked him cuz like i said, so we can have italian day at the ACC!!

but if we would have taken aldridge we would be one of the best teams in the east, with a nice young core upfront

so to everyone, Aldridge is the man!!!! and that bargnani is trash!!!


said it since day 1


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Well it will be interesting to see what Aldridge does next year with a legit big man playing beside him....will his numbers go up or down? As for Bargnani being drafted to shoot 3's....that is not why he was drafted, it is just part of his game. 

Aldridge is averaging 11 more minutes per game and his numbers are solid....but they are not all world and his touches will go down with Oden in the mix next year.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Aldridge wouldn't have been a good match in Toronto either. His game and Bosh's game are too similar, it would be like a better rebounding version of what we have right now. The better choice for TO would be Roy or Gay, since that solves our problem at the wing.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

Am I the only guy that would take Gay over Roy. I know Roy is a player and a leader but Gay is in the VC, Iguodala mold. He was my guy before we won the lotto and BC likely would have drafted him if we hadn't. 

Aldridge is looking like the better big man prospect right now. Hell, he might even be a better perimeter shooter than Bargs. He's going to be a terror next to Oden but so would many bigs, Andrea included.

Andrea shoots the basket than shooting the arc of the shot, the opposite to how Dirk shoots. I wouldn't be surprised if he had better accuracy when fading away, forcing him to shoot up. 

I'm really quite worried about Andrea's coachability which is why I'm so excited about John Lucas, who has legendary ability in getting through to players. Andrea's isolated, uncaring persona (demonstrated by his caliper test results) is a tough one to break but it comes down to inspiring hard work and confidence and I think Lucas can do that. 

If Lucas can give TJ a jumper, Bargnani should become automatic. I thought he was already but no.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

Apart from the woeful shooting, Bargnani looked half decent today. Some rebounds, blocks, steals, and his misses were close. But it was against the Heat.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

I would definetly think long and hard about taking Gay over Roy.

I mean its easy to say that I'd take Roy right now, because he's simply the better player. But Rudy has amazing potential, him beside Bosh would just be downright scary.

As for Aldridge, he is not a 5 either. And like seifer said, him and Bosh play a similar offensive game, which would cause a lot of crowding.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

billfindlay10 said:


> Well it will be interesting to see what Aldridge does next year with a legit big man playing beside him....will his numbers go up or down? As for Bargnani being drafted to shoot 3's....that is not why he was drafted, it is just part of his game.
> 
> *Aldridge is averaging 11 more minutes per game and his numbers are solid....but they are not all world and his touches will go down with Oden in the mix next year*.


I may be a Portland fan but, did it occur to you that Bargnani shoots at 38.8% while Aldridge shoots at 48.5%? If Bargnani just shot a bit better his numbers would increase by at least 4 points. Not to mention how soft of a rebounder he is.

With Oden next year, it's going to even easier for Aldridge to score. Similar to what happened with Shaq and Amare, you're going to have to double team one of them, leaving the other open for the easy bucket. Aldridge being able to hit the outside jumper is an added bonus.


----------



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

billfindlay10 said:


> Aldridge is averaging 11 more minutes per game and his numbers are solid....but they are not all world and his touches will go down with Oden in the mix next year.


Of course Aldridge gets more minutes - HE DESERVES THEM. If you look at their PER numbers, Aldridge finished the season at PER = 18.5 and Bargnani had a PER = 10.6. Hollinger set up the PER scale such that the league average PER is 15.00 every year. To see how Aldridge and Bargnani fit into Hollinger's PER scheme, here's come comments from Hollinger himself on his PER scale:



John Hollinger said:


> Borderline All-Star: 20.0
> 
> Solid 2nd option: 18.0
> 
> ...


So, Aldridge is slightly better than a "solid 2nd option" and Bargnani is a little worse than "scrounging for minutes". It's pretty obvious why Aldridge gets 11 more minutes per game. If anything, Bargnani gets more minutes than he deserves based on his actual production.

BNM


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Of course Aldridge gets more minutes - HE DESERVES THEM. If you look at their PER numbers, Aldridge finished the season at PER = 18.5 and Bargnani had a PER = 10.6. Hollinger set up the PER scale such that the league average PER is 15.00 every year. To see how Aldridge and Bargnani fit into Hollinger's PER scheme, here's come comments from Hollinger himself on his PER scale:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Per does not mean squat!


----------



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

billfindlay10 said:


> Per does not mean squat!


Says the fan whose player has a PER = 10.6. Here's a list of this season's top 20 in PER:

```
1.	LeBron James-CLE	29.1
2.	Chris Paul-NOH	        28.3
3.	Amare Stoudemire-PHO	27.6
4.	Kevin Garnett-BOS	25.2
5.	Dirk Nowitzki-DAL	24.6
6.	Tim Duncan-SAS	        24.3
7.	Manu Ginobili-SAS	24.3
8.	Kobe Bryant-LAL	        24.2
9.	Chris Bosh-TOR	        23.8
10.	Chauncey Billups-DET	23.6
11.	Dwight Howard-ORL	22.9
12.	Al Jefferson-MIN	22.7
13.	Yao Ming-HOU	        22.5
14.	Carlos Boozer-UTA	21.9
15.	Pau Gasol-TOT	        21.6
16.	Steve Nash-PHO	        21.1
17.	Carmelo Anthony-DEN	21.1
18.	Kevin Martin-SAC	21.0
19.	Allen Iverson-DEN	20.9
20.	Deron Williams-UTA	20.8
```
Yeah, those guys stink. Meaningless stat. Seriously, while PER doesn't tell the whole story, if you take the top 20 in PER in any given season, about 90% of the guys on the list are all-stars. The biggest knock on PER (or any similar stat) is it's primarily a measure of offensive performance. But, then it's not like Bargnani is going to be making any all-defense teams any time soon.

Fine, don't like PER, choose any other method of comparing Aldridge and Bargnani. Look at raw stats - Aldridge wins. Look at per 36 minute stats - Aldridge wins. Look at impact on their teams - Aldridge wins. Offense - Aldridge wins. Defense - Aldridge wins. Rebounding - Aldridge wins. Are you starting to get the picture?

Your team had a chance to draft Aldridge, Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay, and you passed on them all and took Bargnani. In fact, with the No. 1 pick in the draft, you probably could have had any TWO of those three. Remember, even though Portland had the worst record in the league, they ended up with the 4th pick in the draft and managed to walk away with BOTH Aldridge and Roy. 

While it's not quite as big a blunder as the Pistons taking Darko over Melo, Bosh and D-Wade, the results are eerily similar . Like the Pistons, the Raptors chose the big young Euro based totally on "upside" and passed on a high scoring small forward, a tall, lanky, very productive power forward, and a very versatile, future all-star who can play either guard spot. Unless Bargnani can show a TON of improvement, he's destined to be a career role player, just like Darko, while the guys taken after him are looking like future all-stars. Of course, the big difference was the Pistons were good enough that wiffing on Darko wasn't a huge set back. Wiffing on Bargnani definitely cost the Raptors a big chance to get better. They'd be better right now, and in the long run, if they'd taken Roy, Gay or Aldridge. Imagine how good they'd be right now if they'd managed to turn the No. 1 pick into two of those three the way Portland did with the No. 4 pick. Oh well, at least they didn't pull a Charlotte and take Adam Morrison. They opted for the younger, taller, European equivalent instead.

BNM


----------



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

SkywalkerAC said:


> "Rebounding is very poor but he actually doesn't blow his rebounding assignment very often - he boxes out but doesn't go out of his area to grab any boards.


Oh please, he averages 5.6 reb/36. That's pathetic. There are tons of guards in the league who are better rebounders than that. Aldridge gets criticized for his rebounding, but he pulls down 7.9 reb/36 - 41% more than Bargnani. Is there a worst rebounding center in the entire league? Is there a worst rebounding 7-footer? I sure can't think of one off the top of my head. I mean, Bargnani's rebounding is Brad Sellers bad (career reb/36 - 5.4). 

Unfortunately, for Raps fans the similarities between Brad Sellers and Andrea Bargnani don't end there. Both are weak rebounding, 7-foot center-forwards who'd rather play on the perimeter than in the post. They both had promising, but unspectacular rookie years. Both played significant minutes off the bench as rookies and started a few games. Rookie year PER: Sellers = 13.4, Bargnani = 12.8. In their second season, both players were given more significant roles and started the majority of their team's games, but saw their production decrease significantly. Second year PER: Sellers = 10.7, Bargnani = 10.6. Ouch! After two seasons, Sellers actually had a slightly better NBA career than Andrea Bargnani. 



SkywalkerAC said:


> He's not a guy you want anchoring your defense but hey, neither is Aldridge.


We'll have Oden for that, but Aldridge is a MUCH better defender than Bargnani. He's a better perimeter defender and a better post defender. Remember, Aldridge spent the entire season as a starting power forward in the Western Conference guarding guys like Tim Duncan, Amare Stoudemire and Carlos Boozer on a nightly basis, and managed to hold his own quite well. 



SkywalkerAC said:


> I don't think BC wants to change him into a post player, he wants AB to change the rules of the game.


Oh, please (again). It's not like he's the next Wilt. I doubt if they'll be re-writing the NBA rule book any time soon because it'll be the only way to keep Andrea Bargnani from totally dominating the league and averaging over 50 PPG.

BNM


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Hey Boob you don't like like Bargnani....good for you, now take your PER ratings and beat it!


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

Bargnani is one of the better big man post-defenders on the team. to realize this, all you had to do was watch him defend tim duncan/yao ming/al jefferson earlier this season.

and actually, he's pretty improved at boxing out and going after rebounds (as opposed to standing around looking for teammates to grab them) compared to last season, Despite these statistics.


----------



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

billfindlay10 said:


> Hey Boob you don't like like Bargnani....good for you, now take your PER ratings and beat it!


Nice. Don't like the message, so attack the messenger.

You may not remember it, but earlier in the season when so-called Raptors fans on this board suggested booing Bargnani, I said give the kid a break. I'm not a Bargnani hater, but he did regress and had a really bad second year. Anybody who can't see than has their head buried in the sand. I'm just telling it like it is.

If you disagree with anything I wrote, let's hear your counterarguments. Otherwise, I think I'll take your advice and "beat it". I expected better from this board.

BNM


----------



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

southeasy said:


> and actually, he's pretty improved at boxing out and going after rebounds (as opposed to standing around looking for teammates to grab them) compared to last season, Despite these statistics.


So, other than the fact that he doesn't get hardly any rebounds, he's a pretty good rebounder.

BNM


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

no, but as far as season 1 to season 2.. yeah he has improved as a rebounder. all you have to do is watch the guy from rookie to soph; to notice the improvement & change in philosophy from the kid in regards to boxing out/rebounding.

numbers don't show it. it's similar to when your playing hard, and not getting the results.

atleast you can hang your hat on the fact your trying to show noticeable improvement on a lacking facet of your game. Bargs lacks consistancy for your casual observer to give him respect by looking at stats.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> While it's not quite as big a blunder as the Pistons taking Darko over Melo, Bosh and D-Wade, the results are eerily similar . Like the Pistons, the Raptors chose the big young Euro based totally on "upside" and passed on a high scoring small forward, a tall, lanky, very productive power forward, and a very versatile, future all-star who can play either guard spot. Unless Bargnani can show a TON of improvement, he's destined to be a career role player, just like Darko, while the guys taken after him are looking like future all-stars. Of course, the big difference was the Pistons were good enough that wiffing on Darko wasn't a huge set back. Wiffing on Bargnani definitely cost the Raptors a big chance to get better. They'd be better right now, and in the long run, if they'd taken Roy, Gay or Aldridge. Imagine how good they'd be right now if they'd managed to turn the No. 1 pick into two of those three the way Portland did with the No. 4 pick. Oh well, at least they didn't pull a Charlotte and take Adam Morrison. They opted for the younger, taller, European equivalent instead.
> 
> BNM


It's also not as big of a blunder as passing up on both Deron Williams and Chris Paul for Martell Webster, sorry, couldn't resist. That's a MVP and 2 potential HOFamers that the Blazers passed up. One can argue that outside of drafting Darko over Melo, Bosh, and Wade, the Blazers 2005 draft decision along with the Hawks before them is the 2nd worst draft day decision this decade, just narrowly beating Denver's Skita over Amare. 

Frankly, I wouldn't even rank the Raptors decision to draft Bargnani in the top 10 draft day mishaps this decade, but then since I'm a Raptor fan this statement isn't going to be that convincing.

I really don't know what is your infatuation with Bargnani. It seems that everytime you post on these Raptor boards it is either to point out what a bad player he is or how Roy and Aldridge are better players. Did Chuck Swirsky scar you guys that deeply? Just remember, people on these boards watch Bargnani every single game. We know his strengths and the part you're most interested in, his weaknesses much better than most people that don't follow the Raptors. 

But to put a wrap on what a typical "Raptor fan" is thinking at this moment regarding Bargnani, it is the following.

- The Raptors should have drafted Roy or Gay. If the Raptors have either one right now they will be considered a 2nd tier team in the East along with Orlando and below teams like Pistons and Celtics. Raptors will also have perhaps the most talent in the East with either picks.

- Bargnani and Bosh frontcourt have failed in the first 2 seasons and poses the question of whether the Raptors should give up on it. The most obvious problem as you pointed out is the lack of rebounding from both players, Bargnani being the major problem. Both players also missed quite a bit of games and it sometime seems that as soon as the Raptors get into some sort of rhythm with the duo, one of them would get injured. Could be bad luck, could be durability issues, but the bottom line is that it hasn't worked.

- Bargnani's transition to playing C has not been successful. Albeit as Southeasy pointed out, Bargnani's rebounding and low-post defense have improved by quite a bit since his rookie year. In fact, if you watch the games early on in the season, there are some obvious improvements. We are talking about someone who always seemed to be at the wrong place at the wrong time earlier on this season and constantly losing his assignment on rebounding. Nowadays at least Bargnani is doing the things and going to the places that he should be doing/going. The results might not show it, but the improvement is there. Obviously there are still tons of room for improvement, but at least it shows that he is working on these areas and getting some result. He still has long ways to go from becoming a legitimate center and one questions whether he will ever get there, but even if he doesn't, he still has a chance to be a pretty good player even if it's not with the Raptors. Which brings us to the next point.

- Bargnani's trade value if we do end up trading him. Colangelo has said, which I don't believe 100%, that many teams have inquired about Bargnani's availability this season. Despite that Bargnani's first 2 seasons have been quite disappointing, the fact that he is an agile seven footer and being only 23 still gives him decent trade value. I mean heck, Washington got Caron Butler for Kwame Brown, who knows what will happen with Bargnani. Colangelo has also hinted that he isn't ready to give up on the guy, but if and when he does, the Raptors will get an useful piece in return. Therefore if we really want to compare Bargnani to Darko, it's likely that the Raptors will get a lot more than what the Pistons got for Darko. I do think Bargnani is a better player than Darko simply from a maturity standpoint. Both have struggled the first few seasons in the league, but as I've said earlier, with Bargnani it is quite clear that the guy is trying hard to improve his game. There is also the difference of Darko working towards playing his natural position, whereas the Raptors may have been forcing Bargnani to play a position that he just isn't capable of.

- Lastly, regarding passing up on guys not named Roy or Gay. As I have said, Aldridge may be a better (much better just for you) player than Bargnani, him and Bosh would only be a better rebounding version of what we have right now. The question would be whether Aldridge can learn how to play center in the league, but that question won't be answered now because he will be playing along with Greg Oden. Besides Roy and Gay, the Raptors didn't really pass up on anyone else in the entire lottery. Tyrus Thomas wouldn't work because he can't play the 3, Adam Morrison sucks, Shelden Williams sucks, Foye is a combo guard that we don't need, O'Bryant can be signed as a free agent this summer, and the rest of them aren't players that you would waste a number 1 pick on. Eventually when we look back at this draft 10 years from now, the Raptors would have passed up on 2 allstar caliber players and that's it. It's not going to be a major factor on whether or not the team progresses into something special and should not be used as a scapegoat if the team goes nowhere.

To wrap this up, my outlook on Bargnani for the next 2 years is this. He will have next season to prove his worth as a Raptor, only until the trade deadline if he struggles mightily. If he shows significant improvement, he will likely still come off the bench until he shows that he can successfully play the center position. If he doesn't, it will be the end of him in Toronto. Colangelo has shown in the past that he is willing to correct his mistakes and not just drag them on in order to save face. As for Bargnani, if he goes to a team that allows him to play in the high post and as a fulltime 4, it will put him in a much better situation to succeed as oppose to the Raptors.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

Don't you get in your stomach the feeling that Andrea is a future 6th man of the year? Maybe that's not the way one should view their allmighty #1 pick but that's what I see. Thing is I see it next season. Rasho will be here till the trade deadline and Il Mago will be coming off the bench. The difference will be that he'll making shots. All very well and good to say that a player will shoot well but if there's anyone in the league that you'd bet on turning around their jumper, the even money HAS to be on AB. 

That's why he's the wildcard in this series. Everyone - SVG, Sam, Stern, Flip - is waiting to see if Il Mago will start hitting shots like he should be now that the games mean something. This isn't Shaq-hitting-free-throws that we're waiting on, it's Bargnani hitting 3s. What is so upsetting is that this is what he was born to do, in his eyes at least.

Turkoglu has (finally) evolved into the player that Andrea is patterned after. Thing is that Il Mago has the potential to be so much more. Do you really think that Andrea will be content with his current level of play? 

Right now Andrea's a shooter that can't shoot and I don't know if there's anything more sad in basketball. Does anyone honestly think that Andrea will not come out of this shooting slump? Every shot I expect him to make it and he doesn't. He's only just learning to shoot! what the **** is that? is rome not a city of ARCHES?

Make that **** Andrea! get it together man. you were born to make shots you Italian freak. we all know you can stick these shots - you're not going to be contested.

I'm honestly not worried about this kid's rebounding in the playoffs. Is that ****ed up or what? Something tells me he's going to be able to hold his own against Turk and Lewis. They'll grab more, no doubt, but Andrea won't be embarassed. Thing is, you can pretty much guarantee they'll be making shots. will il mago show up and flick fire from his fingers? cause he'll be getting open shots when he comes in. that's a given. 

we all expected Andrea to hit shots in the playoffs last year. why wouldn't he be able to hit them this year? this bargnani phenomenon - the shooter's slump - is going to last this man's career. could he catch fire in the playoffs? of course he could. he could break the series wide open and we all know it. 

i honestly don't know why no one is covering the story of AB at the 3 after our last game. how on earth did not one reporter think to inquire sam on this blatantly posturing substitution pattern? was i the only watching andrea come off screens on the weak side? 

is anyone else seeing andrea getting wide open jumpers when jamario goes to the bench? 

i expecct both of them to get open shots and sink them against the Magic. 

i don't know that i'd choose aldridge to be taking these shots over andrea. they're both fantastic big man shooters. lamarcus has been the better of the two over the course of the season but when it comes down to it, the big shot, i'll take my chances with il mago, the italian harry potter little priss that he is. deep down i know he's a stone faced killer and can get his shot off against hedo.

call me crazy. there's no greater wildcard than bargnani as we head into these legendary playoffs. who else in a playoff rotation has a greater potential to turn around their efficiency? i challenge you to name one player with a greater scope to turn around their numbers.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Thanks guys....you said the things I did want to take the time to do!


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

you can't. that's how ****ing horribly he's been shooting. ****.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

no problem. yes i have to work in six hours (and haven't slept) but this **** is important. thank goodness i'm a bartender and fully intend on pulling down the screens and switching the sound over to the nba tomorrow. 

here we go. playoff time baby.


----------



## NCR (Nov 28, 2007)

seifer0406 said:


> *It's also not as big of a blunder as passing up on both Deron Williams and Chris Paul for Martell Webster, sorry, couldn't resist.* That's a MVP and 2 potential HOFamers that the Blazers passed up. One can argue that outside of drafting Darko over Melo, Bosh, and Wade, the Blazers 2005 draft decision along with the Hawks before them is the 2nd worst draft day decision this decade, just narrowly beating Denver's Skita over Amare.


This never happened. Webster was taken 6th, 3 picks after Williams and 2 picks after Paul. Can't criticize something that never happened.:thinking2:


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

NCR said:


> This never happened. Webster was taken 6th, 3 picks after Williams and 2 picks after Paul. Can't criticize something that never happened.:thinking2:


Portland traded their #3 pick to Utah Jazz for their #6 pick (Martell Webster) and their #27 pick (Linas Kleiza) and 2006 first round pick that turned out to be Joel Freeland. Oddly enough, Linas Kleiza is turning out to be a better player than Webster but it's too bad the Blazers traded him to the Nuggets on draft day as well.


----------



## NCR (Nov 28, 2007)

seifer0406 said:


> Portland traded their #3 pick to Utah Jazz for their #6 pick (Martell Webster) and their #27 pick (Linas Kleiza) and 2006 first round pick that turned out to be Joel Freeland. Oddly enough, Linas Kleiza is turning out to be a better player than Webster but it's too bad the Blazers traded him to the Nuggets on draft day as well.


My bad, completely forgot about that one. That was a huge steal by the Jazz.


----------



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

seifer0406 said:


> It's also not as big of a blunder as passing up on both Deron Williams and Chris Paul for Martell Webster, sorry, couldn't resist. That's a MVP and 2 potential HOFamers that the Blazers passed up.


No debate here. It was a monumental blunder and it cost John Nash his job - rightfully so. Current Blazer GM Kevin Pritchard lobbied HARD for the Blazers to take Paul, but since he was the new guy and only director of player personnel, he was overruled by Nash and then president Steve Patterson. Now Nash and Patterson are both gone and Pritchard is GM and the Blazers have drafted much better. Nash was horrible at evaluating young talent. He also made Sebastian Telfair a lottery pick.

Of course, you could argue that if the Blazers had taken Chris Paul in 2005 they probably wouldn't have Roy, Aldridge and Oden. After taking Webster in 2005 they finished with the worst record in the league in 2006, got screwed by the ping pong balls, and ended up with the 4th pick, which Pritchard managed to parlay into both Roy and Aldridge. Had they drafted Paul over Webster, they would have won at least 10 more games in 2005-06 and would have had a lower draft pick. With trades, they might have been able to get one of Aldridge or Roy, but probably not both. After that, who knows what would have happened in the 2007 draft. They might have even made the play-offs with line-up of Paul, Roy and Zach Randolph. They certainly would have won more games that they did without Chris Paul. So, probably no Greg Oden. 

As much as I'd LOVE to have Chris Paul on the Blazers, in spite of John Nash's stupidity, it's all worked out pretty well here in Portland (thanks to Kevin Pritchard). Next year, we add Oden, Rudy Fernandez and perhaps another lottery pick to the youngest team in the league - the third youngest in league history, that just managed to win 41 games, without Greg Oden, in the highly competitive Western Conference.

Besides, Martell Webster, take 6th is already a better player than Andrea Bargnani taken 1st - and Webster is over a year YOUNGER than Bargnani. I know a lot of Raps fans are still clinging desperately to the Bargnani, "upside" fantasy, but truth be told, he'll be lucky to someday be a 7-foot tall version of Martell Webster. So, feel free to call Martell Webster a bust if you wish, but if he's a bust, what's that make Bargnani?

Of course, this was all a red herring on your part and has NOTHING to do with Andrea Bargnani, but nice try to derail the discussion.



seifer0406 said:


> I really don't know what is your infatuation with Bargnani. It seems that everytime you post on these Raptor boards it is either to point out what a bad player he is or how Roy and Aldridge are better players. Did Chuck Swirsky scar you guys that deeply? Just remember, people on these boards watch Bargnani every single game. We know his strengths and the part you're most interested in, his weaknesses much better than most people that don't follow the Raptors.


I don't start these threads about Bargnani, but because I don't spout the party line sunshine and rainbows about him, I'm told to beat it. Sorry, I thought that was what DISCUSSION boards were supposed to be about - you know, discussing things. I try to provide an outsider's, detached, objective opinion, and you guys don't want to hear it, so I'm villified and told to leave. If you don't want a dissenting opinion, next time just title the thread "Bargnani Lovefest". Then you can all blather on about what a difference maker he's going to be against Orlando (yeah right) and how he's a likely future 6th man of the year without fear of anyone injecting a dose of reality into the "discussion".



seifer0406 said:


> - Lastly, regarding passing up on guys not named Roy or Gay. As I have said, Aldridge may be a better (much better just for you) player than Bargnani,


Aldridge MAY be better??? Aldridge IS better. If that's not clear to you, you have lost all objectivity.



seifer0406 said:


> him and Bosh would only be a better rebounding version of what we have right now.


Only a better rebounding version of what you have now? Are you serious? Aldrige is also a better defender than Bargnani, he's a better low post scorer and while he doesn't have 3-point range on his shot, he's a much better shooter from 20-feet, and in, than Bargnani. He's improved his passing to the point where he averages as many assists/36 as Bargnani. He gets to the line more, gets more steals and more blocks. He's just flat out better than Bargnani. I know you don't like hearing that, but before you start another red herring argument or tell me to beat it, how about explaining to me exactly how Bargnani is even close to the player Aldridge is?



seifer0406 said:


> The question would be whether Aldridge can learn how to play center in the league, but that question won't be answered now because he will be playing along with Greg Oden.


That question has been asked and answered. Aldridge played almost all his minutes his rookie year at center next to Zach Randolph at power forward - and he did just fine. Yes, power forward is his best position, but he showed his rookie year he is more than capable of playing center in the NBA - something Bargnani has shown he CAN'T do. With Randolph gone, Aldridge really blossomed this year playing the 4, but a lot of the skills he improved, especially his low post offensive game, would also serve him well if he was playing center. Of course, playing alongside Gred Oden is the perfect situation for Aldridge. So, that all worked out quite nicely.



seifer0406 said:


> Besides Roy and Gay, the Raptors didn't really pass up on anyone else in the entire lottery. Tyrus Thomas wouldn't work because he can't play the 3, Adam Morrison sucks, Shelden Williams sucks, Foye is a combo guard that we don't need, O'Bryant can be signed as a free agent this summer, and the rest of them aren't players that you would waste a number 1 pick on. Eventually when we look back at this draft 10 years from now, the Raptors would have passed up on 2 allstar caliber players and that's it. It's not going to be a major factor on whether or not the team progresses into something special and should not be used as a scapegoat if the team goes nowhere.


Likely three all-stars, and several solid starters. When you're lucky enough to get the number one pick in the draft, you expect to get a future all-star, or at the very least, a solid starter. Right now, Bargnani is neither. He might, on the right team, someday become a solid starter, but at this point that's really the best case scenario.

BNM

P.S. You guys just got a first hand look at what a REAL No. 1 pick is capable of doing.


----------



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

seifer0406 said:


> Portland traded their #3 pick to Utah Jazz for their #6 pick (Martell Webster) and their #27 pick (Linas Kleiza) and 2006 first round pick that turned out to be Joel Freeland. Oddly enough, Linas Kleiza is turning out to be a better player than Webster but it's too bad the Blazers traded him to the Nuggets on draft day as well.


You forgot to mention the Blazers got Jarrett Jack in the deal that sent Linas Kleiza to Denver. And, no Kleiza is NOT a better player than Martell Webster. Kleiza is a one dimensional gunner - yeah, just what Denver needs.

And yes, if I had a time machine, I'd rather have Chris Paul over Martell Webster and Jarrett Jack. But, I don't, and am quite happy "settling" for Martell Webster, Jarrett Jack, Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge and Greg Oden. Paul I covet, but Denver can have Kleiza.

BNM


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> I don't start these threads about Bargnani, but because I don't spout the party line sunshine and rainbows about him, I'm told to beat it. Sorry, I thought that was what DISCUSSION boards were supposed to be about - you know, discussing things. I try to provide an outsider's, detached, objective opinion, and you guys don't want to hear it, so I'm villified and told to leave. If you don't want a dissenting opinion, next time just title the thread "Bargnani Lovefest". Then you can all blather on about what a difference maker he's going to be against Orlando (yeah right) and how he's a likely future 6th man of the year without fear of anyone injecting a dose of reality into the "discussion".


It doesn't change the fact that you are infatuated with him. As I said, whenever there is a thread about Bargnani, good or bad, you would be there pointing out how the Raptors passed up Aldridge and Roy for him. In fact, I remember in an April Fools thread not long ago, you even attacked him when nobody was talking about him. You can say what you want about "injecting reality" as if Raptor fans are delusional, but it's quite obvious that you're getting some sort of joy from seeing Bargnani fail.



Boob-No-More said:


> Of course, this was all a red herring on your part and has NOTHING to do with Andrea Bargnani, but nice try to derail the discussion.


Of course it has something to do with this argument. I just pointed out that drafting Bargnani first wasn't even that big of a blunder compare to other mistakes in recent years. Is that not a part of your post originally?



Boob-No-More said:


> Aldridge MAY be better??? Aldridge IS better. If that's not clear to you, you have lost all objectivity.


Way to go with arguing the semantics, I did say "way better". And both players are 2 years into their careers and there is no reason to say anything about either without any space for doubt.



Boob-No-More said:


> Only a better rebounding version of what you have now? Are you serious? Aldrige is also a better defender than Bargnani, he's a better low post scorer and while he doesn't have 3-point range on his shot, he's a much better shooter from 20-feet, and in, than Bargnani. He's improved his passing to the point where he averages as many assists/36 as Bargnani. He gets to the line more, gets more steals and more blocks. He's just flat out better than Bargnani. I know you don't like hearing that, but before you start another red herring argument or tell me to beat it, how about explaining to me exactly how Bargnani is even close to the player Aldridge is?


Nobody is saying that they are similar players. Bosh and Aldridge have almost exact same offensive repertoire. If the 2 of them played on the same team, his offensive skills wouldn't be utilized as well as they are utilized in Portland. Defensively when guarding centers, the 2 are not miles apart, and the difference certainly doesn't make the duo of Bosh and Aldridge any more of a long term plan than Bosh and Bargnani given that neither becomes centers.



Boob-No-More said:


> That question has been asked and answered. Aldridge played almost all his minutes his rookie year at center next to Zach Randolph at power forward - and he did just fine. Yes, power forward is his best position, but he showed his rookie year he is more than capable of playing center in the NBA - something Bargnani has shown he CAN'T do. With Randolph gone, Aldridge really blossomed this year playing the 4, but a lot of the skills he improved, especially his low post offensive game, would also serve him well if he was playing center. Of course, playing alongside Gred Oden is the perfect situation for Aldridge. So, that all worked out quite nicely.


Your standard of "prove" must be very different from mine. Aldridge played limited minutes in his rookie year and was injured for almost 20 games. When he played he has shown that he isn't a shotblocker nor a rebounder, and he sure isn't physical, the 3 things that the Raptors desperately need at the center. As I said, it is no knock on Aldridge by any means, but the point I'm trying to get across is that a Bosh and Aldridge still isn't that good of a solution, despite that it is better than the one we have right now.



Boob-No-More said:


> Likely three all-stars, and several solid starters. When you're lucky enough to get the number one pick in the draft, you expect to get a future all-star, or at the very least, a solid starter. Right now, Bargnani is neither. He might, on the right team, someday become a solid starter, but at this point that's really the best case scenario.


Nobody is going to look back at the draft 10 years from now and say that the Raptors should have drafted Paul Milisap with the #1. You're suppose to draft the best talent possible with the first pick. The Raptors swung for the fences and unfortunately they have missed. But as I said, when you look at the result, they only passed up on 2-3 allstars from the group of players that deserved to be gambled as #1. I would love to get someone like Paul Milisap, but his type of players are always available every year and each year some team does pick up a solid player with a late pick. The Raptors will have that chance every year, but with the #1 you're suppose to go for the big prize.



Boob-No-More said:


> P.S. You guys just got a first hand look at what a REAL No. 1 pick is capable of doing.


The talent level varies year to year. There are only 3 #1 picks in the past 2 decades that can duplicate the shock and awe factor of Dwight Howard. One is Dwight, other is Lebron, and the last one is Shaq. Should the Nets drool over Dwight Howard because they drafted Kenyon Martin? Is there a better player from that year that they should have drafted with the #1? They are not comparable. In fact, the Raptors could have drafted Roy, Gay, and Aldridge and still be thinking that they wish that Howard came out that year.



Boob-No-More said:


> You forgot to mention the Blazers got Jarrett Jack in the deal that sent Linas Kleiza to Denver. And, no Kleiza is NOT a better player than Martell Webster. Kleiza is a one dimensional gunner - yeah, just what Denver needs.
> 
> BNM


And Martell Webster isn't an one dimensional player? In fact, I would say Kleiza's game brings more to the table than Webster. Kleiza has an inch and about 20 pounds on Webster. He has more toughness and can actually finish inside. Both can shoot the long ball but Kleiza at least in the first 3 years of his career has done more than what Webster has done. 



Boob-No-More said:


> And yes, if I had a time machine, I'd rather have Chris Paul over Martell Webster and Jarrett Jack. But, I don't, and am quite happy "settling" for Martell Webster, Jarrett Jack, Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge and Greg Oden. Paul I covet, but Denver can have Kleiza.


Who knows, maybe drafting Bargnani would bring something special to the Raptors. Luck is something that you don't depend on. It's great that it has worked out for the Blazers, but again, we are talking about the decision making at the time of the draft. Theres no way that the Blazers even took any of these players in consideration when they made that trade. If the Raptors get lucky later on, I certainly wouldn't relate that to Bargnani because it wouldn't make drafting him more or less of a success/failure. I mean heck, what if the Raptors decided to draft Roy with the #1 and another team goes with Aldridge at the #2, then would that make passing up Paul for Webster any good of a decision? This shouldn't even be discussed in my opinion.


----------



## george (Aug 8, 2003)

SkywalkerAC said:


> Am I the only guy that would take Gay over Roy. I know Roy is a player and a leader but Gay is in the VC, Iguodala mold. He was my guy before we won the lotto and BC likely would have drafted him if we hadn't.
> 
> Aldridge is looking like the better big man prospect right now. Hell, he might even be a better perimeter shooter than Bargs. He's going to be a terror next to Oden but so would many bigs, Andrea included.
> 
> ...


Same, I wanted Gay as well. We got stuck with the one pick, the year we get it there is no clear cut 1#. I still wanted Gay at 1 pick though. Him and Bargs had the most potential at the time. Out of the two I had only seen Gay play and wanted him.


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

i was an aldridge guy. I think bosh & tj probably prefered aldridge too. 

but i'm not giving up on bargs when there is guys like okur, turkoglu & dirk developing late.


----------



## trick (Aug 23, 2002)

Bargnani still continues to have shooting woes, carrying over from the regular season into the post season where he presumably steps up. I mean, for a guy who's money from anywhere on the floor and was highly coveted as a shooter he's been in a really long slump. If he's not reliable enough to hit that baseline jumper that Rasho does oh so well, why even be on the floor to begin with?

oh, and props to mitchell for experimenting with bargnani at SF right when the playoffs start.

:nonono:


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

despite the numbers he put up today, i thought he looked like a real basketball player, starting his first game of the year (nba career?) at small forward. yes he got burnt a few times by turk but his lateral quicks and ability to close out and challenge shots are there. i don't know if Sam should start him in game 2 (that's the chess match) but having another big that can switch onto Howard could be extremely important in this series, important enough to start him in game 1. 

he's got a damn tough cover in hedo but hedo plays Andrea's style of game. Is there a more comparable player? Hedo was 10/4.5/2 when he was Bargnani's age.

Dude still has to get bangin those ****ing shots.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

I'd love to hear him try to break down what is wrong with his own shot.


----------



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

seifer0406 said:


> It doesn't change the fact that you are infatuated with him. As I said, whenever there is a thread about Bargnani, good or bad, you would be there pointing out how the Raptors passed up Aldridge and Roy for him.


You do realize I didn't enter this discussion until it was nearly five pages long? There was plenty of Bargs bashing, by fans of his own team, going on here before I joined the thread. And the only reason I joined was when a poster tried to claim Aldridge's numbers aren't very impressive and he only gets those numbers because he plays 11 more MPG than Bargnani. You defend your guy and I'll defend mine.

As far as the Blazers passing on Paul and Williams to take Webster, I already admitted that was a monumental mistake. What more do you want. I see little point in arguing about it when we both agree it as a stupid move. In fact, pretty much every move John Nash made as Blazers GM was a monumental mistake. Making Sebastian Telfair a lottery pick - monumental mistake. Passing on Paul and Williams because we already had Telfair - monumental mistake. Re-signing Darius Miles to a huge, long term contact - monumental mistake. I could go on, but I think you get the idea. Thank god we have Kevin Pritchad to undo all of Nash's monumental blunders.

BNM


----------



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

SkywalkerAC said:


> I'd love to hear him try to break down what is wrong with his own shot.


It no go in.

BNM


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

i could see andrea saying that. "we just don't hit our shots" seems to be the excuse for every loss.

anyways, as i said earlier, you can never prematurely startin doggin on a guy. Okur/Dirk/Turk, all late developing.


----------



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

southeasy said:


> Okur/Dirk/Turk, all late developing.


Dirk, late developing???? He averaged 17.5 ppg his second season in the league. Memo's problem is Detroit was a lack of minutes on a team that was deep with solid, veteran bigs, but he was very productive in the limited minutes he got. Hedo was the slowest to develop of the three, but he's a 2/3 and not a big man. Still, after two seasons he was more productive than Bargnani.

Second Season PER:

Bargnani = 10.6
Dirk = 17.5
Memo = 18.3
Hedo = 14.2

The other difference is all three of the others showed significant improvement from their rookie to sophomore seasons. Bargnani regressed.

Rookie Season PER:

Bargnani = 12.8
Dirk = 12.8
Memo = 14.7
Hedo = 11.7

Change First Year to Second Year PER:

Bargnani = -2.2
Dirk = +4.7
Memo = +3.6
Hedo = +2.5

BNM


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

back to the per.....here we go again.


----------



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

billfindlay10 said:


> back to the per.....here we go again.


You know, a lot of people who know a lot about basketball use PER as a valid measure of player performance. But hey, you don't like it. That's fine. Come up with another comparison using any measure you want that disputes my point. Use raw numbers, per 36 minute numbers, anything you want. Go ahead, do it. I'm waiting...

Or do you actually think second year Bargnani was better than second year Dirk? If so, fine. Convince me. I'm still waiting...

Yeah, it's a lot easier to hide behind the "I don't like PER" stance than to actually make a valid point and a convincing argument. Isn't it? Waiting, waiting, waiting...

BNM


----------



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

And why is it the guys who don't like PER are always the guys whose players have terrible PER numbers? Do you just think it's a coincidence that guys like LeBron James, Kevin Garnett and Dirk Nowitski are consistently in the top five in the league in PER. And is it also coincidence that guys who are consistently above PER = 20.0 are perennial all-stars?

I'm not saying you have to like PER. Like any stat, it has it's limitations. But if you don't like it, at least come up with a counter argument based on SOMETHING. Not just another I hate PER blanket statement. We know you don't like PER. Saying it again doesn't add anything to the discussion.

If you think 2nd year Bargs is better than 2nd year Dirk, 2nd year Memo and 2nd year Hedo, tell us why.

BNM


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

you use the per numbers that support your argument....you can find some that support the other side as well....what was Jermain O'Neal's per in his second year, third year fourth year....how about Tyson Chandlers first few years....he regressed in some sats as well. Bargnani increased his free throw percentage cut down his turnovers and fouls per game and also increased....ya thats right increased his defensive rebounding per 48 minutes....but hey lets just keep pointing out all the negatives, not that he played a new position this year, not that he had a long off season with his national team, not that lots of European players, especially young ones, take longer to adjust to the NBA than American raised players.....but hey, I know nothing about ball so I guess I should not hold on to any hope that Andrea will improve and become a decent NBA player. 

How does per measure intangibles? We all know what Garbajosa brought to the team last year, what was his per.....not all world I am sure, but he was very valuable to the team.....see why I want more than just per numbers.


----------



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

I didn't cherry pick Dirk, Memo and Hedo to show how bad Bargnani's second year performance was by comparison. I was responding to southeasy. He's the one cited them as examples as guys who started off slow. Don't accuse me of cherry pocking those guys when I didn't. I was simply disputing his claim that those guys, like Bargnani were slow starters.

PER has it's limitations. Like most stats, it heavily favors offense over defense. And also, like most stats, you need a sufficient sample size for the stat to be meaningful. Jermaine O'Neal's biggest problem in Portland was a lack of opportunity. He was on a roster full of veteran big men. He simply didn't get the minutes he needed to develop until he left Portland.

You can't claim the same for Bargnani. He's gotten plenty of minutes (almost 3500 minutes in his first *two seasons*). He's been given the opportunity (started 53 games this year), he just hasn't been very productive, or shown marked improvement. By comparison, in *four seasons* in Portland, Jermaine O'Neal played to total of 2435 minutes. So, Bargnani's been getting an average of over 1700 minutes per season and O'Neal only averaged a little over 600 minutes per season.

And, nowhere have I said Bargnani CAN'T improve and become successful. I've merely stated that so far, he's not shown significant improvement, and mentioned the areas he needs to improve to become a decent NBA starter.

BNM


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> You do realize I didn't enter this discussion until it was nearly five pages long? There was plenty of Bargs bashing, by fans of his own team, going on here before I joined the thread. And the only reason I joined was when a poster tried to claim Aldridge's numbers aren't very impressive and he only gets those numbers because he plays 11 more MPG than Bargnani. You defend your guy and I'll defend mine.


I don't think you understand the word "infatuated". Why does what other people say around these forums have anything to do with it? The fact is when you post around here, 95% of the time you're talking about Bargnani or something that's related to Bargnani in a negative way. Did you not attack Bargnani in that April Fools thread? Was that thread about Bargnani? Does anyone else do that around here?



Boob-No-More said:


> As far as the Blazers passing on Paul and Williams to take Webster, I already admitted that was a monumental mistake. What more do you want.


Nothing, but it would be nice if you stop trying to nullify the mistake by pulling all that Roy/Aldridge/Oden/Kleiza suck nonsense. My original point was that the choice of Bargnani doesn't hold a candle to the Webster pick on the scale of mistakes, you're the one that had to get all sensitive and retreat to some sort of defensive shell by launching nonsense.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

seifer0406 said:


> I don't think you understand the word "infatuated". Why does what other people say around these forums have anything to do with it? The fact is when you post around here, 95% of the time you're talking about Bargnani or something that's related to Bargnani in a negative way. Did you not attack Bargnani in that April Fools thread? Was that thread about Bargnani? Does anyone else do that around here?
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing, but it would be nice if you stop trying to nullify the mistake by pulling all that Roy/Aldridge/Oden/Kleiza suck nonsense. My original point was that the choice of Bargnani doesn't hold a candle to the Webster pick on the scale of mistakes, you're the one that had to get all sensitive and retreat to some sort of defensive shell by launching nonsense.


I am glad that I am not the only one that takes it this way.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

what's the argument here again? it certainly isn't on whether Bargnani has had a good second season. so it has to be whether or not Andrea stands to have a significant improvement in production next season. i think he will. i think he'll fix his jumper. i think he'll rebound better and generally find a comfort level on the court.

i think he'll find that comfort level in this series. i thought the same to be true exactly one year ago and he disappointed me, his team, his country, and most of all himself. i'm confident that il mago will not be content with this kind of production and will make significant improvements in the years to come. he's got the tools to be a great player in the NBA; he's shown me that much this season, through all the struggles. 

andrea isn't a finished product and it wasn't pretty watching him to contain the big men of the nba but he was in there competing. he rarely won his matchup most nights it often felt like he could have.


----------



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

seifer0406 said:


> I don't think you understand the word "infatuated".


Then I guess that means you and billfindlay10 are infatuated with me, because both of you keep trying to make this thread about me. Rather than concern yourselves about why I post, how about we concentrate on what I post. I've tried to keep this on topic by posting about Bargnani's performance, but both of you keep insisting on making it about me. You don't agree with what I say, or don't like how I say it, so you question my motivation and try to chase me away. Nice.



seifer0406 said:


> Nothing, but it would be nice if you stop trying to nullify the mistake by pulling all that Roy/Aldridge/Oden/Kleiza suck nonsense. My original point was that the choice of Bargnani doesn't hold a candle to the Webster pick on the scale of mistakes, you're the one that had to get all sensitive and retreat to some sort of defensive shell by launching nonsense.


Again, what does Webster have to do with Bargnani's second year performance. They weren't part of the same draft class. Does John Nash making a mistake somehow nullify Brian Colangelo's mistake in your mind? The two are totally unrelated events. Remember, the topic of this thread is Bargnani's second year performance, not monumental draft blunders of the last decade.

Comparing Bargnani's performance to others who were drafted after him from the same draft class is certainly valid. It helps illustrate how his progress has been less than others, who were drafted after him with the same level of NBA experience. Besides, I didn't bring up the Aldridge comparison. I merely supplied some data to show that Aldridge's superior second year performance not simply a function of him getting 11 more minutes of PT per game. To which I'm told to take my PER ratings and beat it. Don't like the message, attack the messenger.

In spite of all the responses I've gotten, no one has yet to tell me how or why Bargnani is better than Aldridge now, or how he'll be better than him in the future. No one has told me how a 7-footer who starts 53 games at center and averages 5.6 reb/36 is not the weakest rebounding big man in the league. No one has yet provided an example of a current starting center, or any current 7-footer who is a worse rebounder than Bargnani. You guys may not like hearing that, but is it not the truth? If it's not the truth, please tell my why it's wrong. And if it is the truth, why am I attacked and told to leave for saying it?

BNM


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Then I guess that means you and billfindlay10 are infatuated with me, because both of you keep trying to make this thread about me. Rather than concern yourselves about why I post, how about we concentrate on what I post. I've tried to keep this on topic by posting about Bargnani's performance, but both of you keep insisting on making it about me. You don't agree with what I say, or don't like how I say it, so you question my motivation and try to chase me away. Nice.


Then I guess you fail at logic. Do I talk about you in most of my posts? You posted in the thread and I'm replying to you, that's infatuation? Do you not have a dictionary?



Boob-No-More said:


> Again, what does Webster have to do with Bargnani's second year performance. They weren't part of the same draft class. Does John Nash making a mistake somehow nullify Brian Colangelo's mistake in your mind? The two are totally unrelated events. Remember, the topic of this thread is Bargnani's second year performance, not monumental draft blunders of the last decade.


Maybe you should read the original posts and tell me why this conversation got to where it is right now. It seems like you have a short memory or you selectively block out certain parts of it. Let me give you a hint, you were talking about draft blunders, I compared it to another blunder. You were the one that brought up draft mistakes, and you're complaining about people bringing up another draft mistake? Not to mention all I did was point it out and left it there, you were the one that prolonged the discussion by throwing out a page of nonsense regarding Kleiza and Roy/Aldridge/Oden draft results.



Boob-No-More said:


> In spite of all the responses I've gotten, no one has yet to tell me how or why Bargnani is better than Aldridge now, or how he'll be better than him in the future.


I don't know who said that Bargnani is a better player than Aldridge right now. Whoever he is sure isn't the majority amongst Raptor fans. Since you're so interested in him, why not bring him out and we can ask him together.


----------



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

seifer0406 said:


> Do I talk about you in most of my posts?
> 
> No, but why talk about me at all? This topic and this forum aren't about me. Why try to derial the discussion by making it about me personally? Why even mention me at all? Why not just address my points without bringing me into the discussion?
> 
> ...


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

the actual general consensus on the T.O. board before the draft (06) (especially with myself) was we take Lamarcus Aldridge with the #1 pick.. i don't see anyone here saying bargnani is better now, or even in the future.

BTW bargnani & turkoglu are actually the same type of player, especially starting with bargs back in italy, where he was a SF type player for his team. his body is just oversized for his natural position. if you look at bargnani in italy vs. bargnani in his first season, the style of play actually differs more then you might think & i believe that's attributed to his level of comfort.

on top of learning a new position his 2nd year against the most skilled & strongest centers in the world, on top of various injuries, confidence issues & that open mouth breathing issue, i see no reason why he couldn't & won't improve next season. he has flashed near triple-double ability, i can't discount the skill he has shown at different stages.

keyword for bargnani next season: consistancy

for a 5-6 game stretch this season he was avg 18.5ppg & 5.4 rpg or something, he has ability, he lacks the confidence.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Do I talk about you in most of my posts?
> 
> No, but why talk about me at all? This topic and this forum aren't about me. Why try to derial the discussion by making it about me personally? Why even mention me at all? Why not just address my points without bringing me into the discussion?


As someone pointed out, you are the one that talks about Bargnani 95% of the time when you visit this board while the 2 of us only talk about you when replying to you. How is that the same thing?

Let me give you an analogy so you understand this a little bit better. I once told a friend of mine that he shouldn't get drunk everyday. He told me that there are parties out there that serve alcohol, and it's difficult to not get drunk at those parties. I then told him that he goes to too many parties out there and get drunk everytime and sometimes he even bring his own alcohol to parties that don't even serve alcohol, and that's his problem.




Boob-No-More said:


> Yes, I do. Do you? Here's the definition of infatuation from my dictionary:
> 
> "to inspire with a foolish or extravagant love or admiration"
> 
> ...


Isn't it much easier now that you've looked up the word. You are infatuated with his failures, which is a softer way of calling you a hater. Why would anyone posts essays talking negatively about Bargnani at every opportunity? I'm glad you see how obvious it is for people to point that out to you.


----------



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

southeasy said:


> for a 5-6 game stretch this season he was avg 18.5ppg & 5.4 rpg or something, he has ability, he lacks the confidence.


The 18.5 ppg is nice, but the 5.4 rpg is still pretty pathetic for a 7-foot starting center.

Consistency is the key for any NBA player. Even guy in this league has talent or they wouldn't be here. Most guys in the league can pull off an occasional high scoring game. The great ones do it night in and night out, and when their shot isn't falling, find other ways to help their team win. While that last but is a hackneyed cliche, it really is the difference between good players and journeymen. 

Since Seifer brought up Martell Webster several posts ago, I'll add that Webster and Bargnani are a lot alike in several ways. They have both shown flashes of brilliance. They are both young and some would say they haven't lived up to their lofty draft positions. Fans of both are still clinging desperately to the hope that these two players will someday reach their potential - the "upside" that made them such high draft picks.

Like Bargnani, Webster's two biggest problems are confidence and consistency. He looks absolutely unstoppable at times (I was at the Utah game when he scored 24 points in the 3rd quarter and basically won that game single handedly with Roy sitting out the second half with an injury) and totally lost at others. Like Bargnani, he tends to rely too much on the outside shot and doesn't take the ball to the rim often enough. When he mixes up dribble drives with outside shooting he is much more effective. I will dispute Seifer's claim that Webster has trouble finishing at the rim. Him and Outlaw are the Blazers two most spectacular dunkers. The kid is very athletic and has had some monster throw downs over bigger players. Finishing isn't his problem. The problem is he doesn't take it to the basket often enough - sound familiar?

So, I don't fault Raptors fans for holding out hope for Bargnani. Blazers fans do the same for Webster. Only time will tell if either, or both, ever live up to their potential - and their team's fan's expectations.

BNM


----------



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

seifer0406 said:


> As someone pointed out, you are the one...


Sorry Seifer, I'm done talking about me. Feel free to keep discussing me all you want, but I won't take the bait.

BNM


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Sorry Seifer, I'm done talking about me. Feel free to keep discussing me all you want, but I won't take the bait.
> 
> BNM


Hey, can't expect everyone to be on that bus of logic. Theres always the next one available eventhough some people sees it as a bit shorter.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> In spite of all the responses I've gotten, no one has yet to tell me how or why Bargnani is better than Aldridge now, or how he'll be better than him in the future. No one has told me how a 7-footer who starts 53 games at center and averages 5.6 reb/36 is not the weakest rebounding big man in the league. No one has yet provided an example of a current starting center, or any current 7-footer who is a worse rebounder than Bargnani. You guys may not like hearing that, but is it not the truth? If it's not the truth, please tell my why it's wrong. And if it is the truth, why am I attacked and told to leave for saying it?
> 
> BNM


If you want to see successful teams with weak rebounding starting centers.....take a look at Luc Longley, career 4.9 in 22 minutes and 362 games out of 567 started. 64 % of games started. Bill Cartwright did not rebound all that well with the bulls as well. Big reason, they had Horace Grant, Scottie Pippin and Jordan all rebounding very well.

Toronto has Bosh as a 10 rebound type and Moon who puts up 6.2 per from the small forward spot. Do I think Andrea will have a higher career average than Longley, yes. I am not comparing them as players, just in the position they play. It is only one example but I don't have time to look up more.....well one more, Rasheed Wallace 6.6 per in over 30 minutes....and he is an allstart!


----------



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

billfindlay10 said:


> If you want to see successful teams with weak rebounding starting centers.....take a look at Luc Longley, career 4.9 in 22 minutes and 362 games out of 567 started. 64 % of games started.


Luc Longley - career reb/36 = 8.4 never averaged below 7.0 reb/36
Andrea Bargnani - career reb/36 = 5.6

Bargnani has a long way to go to be as weak a rebounder as Luc Longley. 



billfindlay10 said:


> Bill Cartwright did not rebound all that well with the bulls as well.


Bill Cartwright - career reb/36 = 8.0 never averaged below 6.7 reb/36 (and that was at 35 years old when he could barely move)

As a rookie, Bill Cartwright averaged 21.7 ppg and 8.9 rpg. Second year averages, 20.1 ppg, 7.5 rpg. Those were his two best years. Injuries started to be a problem after that, but he still had a couple pretty decent seasons in his late 20s (17.0 ppg, 8.4 rpg and 17.5 ppg, 7.7 rpg). And, of course, he was the starting center on three straight championship teams with the Bulls. His career started off great and he gradually declined, but finished his 15 year NBA career with averages of 13.2 ppg and 6.3 rpg. So, as a Raptors fan would you be happy if Bargnani had similar career numbers to Cartwright - only perhaps in reverse (starts slower and gradually improves, as opposed to starting great and steadily declining)?



billfindlay10 said:


> Big reason, they had Horace Grant, Scottie Pippin and Jordan all rebounding very well.


And the only time Luc Longley averaged below 8.0 reb/36 was the years he was starting alongside Dennis Rodman who led the league in rebounding all three years with between 14.9 and 16.1 reb/game. So, playing next to Rodman, Jordan and Pippen, Longley still averaged significantly more reb/game and more reb/36 than Bargnani.



billfindlay10 said:


> Toronto has Bosh as a 10 rebound type


Who averaged 8.7 reb/game this season - a little over half what Rodman averaged starting alongside Longley.



billfindlay10 said:


> Do I think Andrea will have a higher career average than Longley, yes. I am not comparing them as players, just in the position they play.


Really? Again, Longley averaged 8.4 reb/36 for his career and Bargnani is averaging 5.6 reb/36. It's possible Bargnani could one day be a "better" rebounder than Luc Longley, but he has a LONG way to go.



billfindlay10 said:


> It is only one example but I don't have time to look up more.....well one more, Rasheed Wallace 6.6 per in over 30 minutes....and he is an allstart!


Sheed's not a 7-footer.

Rasheed Wallace - career reb/36 = 7.3 Sheed's career low was 5.9 reb/36 the year year he started at SF next to Sabonis and Brian Grant, two pretty good rebounders. Sheed didn't move to center until Ben Wallace left Detroit. As a starting center, Sheed has averaged 8.1 reb/36 and 7.8 reb/36. Not very impressive for a starting center, but still a lot better than Bargnani's 5.6 reb/36.

I asked for examples or current starting centers or current 7-footers who were worse rebounders than Bargnani. You've gone back over a decade for Longley and Cartwright - and they were still far better rebounders than Bargnani. The best example of a worse rebounding 7-foot forward-center I've been able to find is Brad Sellers (career reb/36 = 5.4) - and like you, I had to go back over a decade to find him.

Call me a Bargnani hater for pointing it out, but Bargnani is an incredibly bad rebounder for a 7-footer who started 53 games at center this season. Can he improve? One would hope so, but he needs to improve a LOT just to be a mediocre rebounder.

BNM


----------



## A.W.#8 (Sep 8, 2003)

You've wasted a lot of your time proving that he's a weak rebounder. Big waste. Why do you care so much. Sickening posts.


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

everybody knows andrea, he's a terrible rebounder... he's a finesse player.

the offensive talent & potential that bargnani possesses in a 7'foot frame is far more then any of those guys named could even imagine containing.

brendan haywood & tyson chandler their first two seasons in the league, up until they've shown great rebounding improvement recently were two 7 footers playing starter type minutes with pretty damn poor/similar rebounding numbers, and these guys couldn't hold a candle to bargnani in terms of offensive skill, meaning they were focused on one-end of the court & still didn't get the results.


----------



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

southeasy said:


> brendan haywood & tyson chandler their first two seasons in the league, up until they've shown great rebounding improvement recently were two 7 footers playing starter type minutes with pretty damn poor/similar rebounding numbers


Wrong.

Andrea Bargnani:
Rookie Year - Reb/36 = 5.6
Second Year - Reb/36 = 5.6

Brendan Haywood:
Rookie Year - Reb/36 = 9.2
Second Year - Reb/36 = 7.6 (the lowest of his career, every other year has been 8.9 reb/36 or greater)

Tyson Chandler:
Rookie Year - Reb/36 = 8.9
Second Year - Reb/36 = 10.1 (and 12.0 or higher every year since)

Bargnani isn't close to the rebounder these guys were early in their careers.

Still no examples of a current, or recent starting center, or 7-footer, that is/was as weak at rebounding as Andrea Bargnani. Looks like we have to go back 20 years to Brad Sellers to find a comparably weak rebounding 7-foot center-forward. Keep trying there HAS to be someone else in the last 20 years.

BNM


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

Curry has had some poor rebounding years. This year he was 4.7 reb in 26 minutes vs 3.7 in 24 minutes for Andrea. Given his size, this has to be considered just as weak as Andrea.

The numbers didn't show it but Andrea showed progress as a rebounder this year. He ususally boxed out pretty well and he started going up with two hands. He demonstrated some desire to posisiton himself and even move to get rebounds (gasp).

Rebounding really isn't what I'm worried about with Andrea any more. I'm confident he'll get 6-8 rpg next season. It's his offensive efficiency that needs the most work right now.


----------



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

SkywalkerAC said:


> Curry has had some poor rebounding years. This year he was 4.7 reb in 26 minutes vs 3.7 in 24 minutes for Andrea. Given his size, this has to be considered just as weak as Andrea.


You're getting closer. Curry has always been a weak rebounder. When Curry played for the Bulls and Scott Skiles was his coach, a reporter asked Skiles what Curry could do to improve his rebounding. Skiles responded, "Jump".

Even Curry is a better rebounder than Bargnani. This year, his worst, he averaged 6.5 reb/36. His career reb/36 is 7.5. His rookie year he pulled down 8.5 reb/36 and his second year he was at 8.1 reb/36. Still, far better than Bargnani's 5.6 reb/36 each of his first two seasons. Good try though.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Nikoloz Tskitishvili. Tskitishvili's career reb/36 is 5.7, very close to Bargnani's 5.6. Of course, Tskitishvili only started 16 games his entire career and played less minutes in four seasons than Bargnani played this year alone, but he was another weak rebounding 7' Euro that was drafted young and didn't have a clear cut position in the NBA (is he a center, or is he a small forward?). Tskitishvili's rookie year he pulled down an embarrassing 4.9 reb/36. His second season, in far fewer minutes, he managed to improve to 7.4 reb/36.

BNM


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

I don't care what a guy pulls down in adjusted for rebounds, I care what he actually pulls down.....is Bargs poor, yes, but so are all the players we have given as examples...and they all have more than a 2 year sample size....lets re-look at this in 3-4 years.


----------



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

billfindlay10 said:


> I don't care what a guy pulls down in adjusted for rebounds, I care what he actually pulls down.....


Sorry, in most cases it looks even worse then. I actually used reb/36 to compensate for the fact that Bargnani only averages 20 - 24 MPG. Believe me, his actual 3.8 RPG are no more "impressive" than his 5.6 reb/36. Do you know of another starting center that averaged less than Bargnani's 3.7 RPG this season? Last season? Any time in the last 20 years?




billfindlay10 said:


> is Bargs poor, yes, but so are all the players we have given as examples...


And other than my Brad Sellers and Nikoloz Tskitishvili examples, he's far worse than anybody else mentioned in this thread.



billfindlay10 said:


> and they all have more than a 2 year sample size....lets re-look at this in 3-4 years.


And, in the sake of fairness, I listed first and second year reb/36 for the others to get a valid comparison to where Bargnani is now. If it's sample size you're after Bargnani has played a lot more minutes in his first two season (3500) than many of the others. But, I'm cool with checking back in the future to see how he compares and if he's shown any significant improvement. One would hope he would, but only time will tell. It's actually rather uncommon for someone to dramatically improve their reb/36 rate. Some players, like Tyson Chandler show about 20 - 25% improvement over the course of their careers, but most big men maintain a fairly steady reb/36 over the first several years of their careers, and then decline as they get old and slow. Perhaps Bargnani will be an exception. I guess we'll see.

BNM


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

*Bargnani not worried about offensive game*
In his rookie year, Bargnani shot 43% from the field and 37% from beyond the arc. When the dropoff was raised yesterday, Bargnani admitted he has been trying to fix it, but then seemed to say he is much more concerned with defence and rebounding than he is with his shot. 

_"Actually I don't think about my shot, how I'm shooting or what I should be doing. I just shoot the ball," Bargnani initially said. "That's what I have always done. If the ball doesn't go in, I am never worried. I'm more worried about other things like defence or if I don't go to for rebound. But the shots? If it's a good shot, I can shoot one of twenty and I don't really care, because I am not worried about my offensive game."_ 

Minutes later he revised his statement. 

_"Come on, I'm not saying that I don't care if I don't score," he said. "I'm saying I don't lose confidence if it's a good shot and the ball doesn't go in. I'm not saying I don't care if the team loses because I'm not scoring. Of course I know I have to score."_

http://www.edmontonsun.com/Sports/OtherSports/2008/04/23/5363776-sun.html

thoughts? right attitude?


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

southeasy said:


> thoughts? right attitude?


Thoughts: BUST


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

george said:


> Man, I knew when we drafted him he would be a scrub, I wanted Gay or Aldridge.


Boy am I glad you guys didn't take Aldridge.


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

i still have faith that we could have an unblockable scoring threat from anywhere on the floor; ie AB

from the globe&mail

*"Colangelo went on to say that the Raptors have mapped out an extensive off-season program for the 22-year-old. 
-It will begin with surgery for a sinus condition and some rest
-followed by a strength and conditioning portion.
-a session at Tim Grgurich's renowned training camp in Las Vegas
-work with the Raptors' coaches in advance of the NBA's summer league.
-finally a session of boot camp with Raptors player development consultant John Lucas in Houston.*

good to see there is actually a method to the madness, or atleast hopes to correct it.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

southeasy said:


> *Bargnani not worried about offensive game*
> In his rookie year, Bargnani shot 43% from the field and 37% from beyond the arc. When the dropoff was raised yesterday, Bargnani admitted he has been trying to fix it, but then seemed to say he is much more concerned with defence and rebounding than he is with his shot.
> 
> _"Actually I don't think about my shot, how I'm shooting or what I should be doing. I just shoot the ball," Bargnani initially said. "That's what I have always done. If the ball doesn't go in, I am never worried. I'm more worried about other things like defence or if I don't go to for rebound. But the shots? If it's a good shot, I can shoot one of twenty and I don't really care, because I am not worried about my offensive game."_
> ...


Ouch...


----------

