RealGM

Bogut averages 13.5 points with 9.2 rebounds this season.
He has 0.507 FG% and 0.566 FT%. His team is 23-40.

Dalembert averages 11 points with 10 rebounds this season.
He has 0.513 FG% and 0.721 FT%. His team is 30-33.

Bucks played 4 games against Sixers this season. This is how Bogut & Dalembert did head to head:

Nov 27
Bogut 6 points and 8 rebounds
Dalembert 22 points and 8 rebounds
Sixers won

Jan 08
Bogut 13 points and 12 rebounds
Dalembert 16 points and 16 rebounds
Bucks won

Jan 30
Bogut 5 points and 4 rebounds
Dalembert 12 points and 6 rebounds
Sixers won

Mar 09
Bogut 1 point and 2 rebounds
Dalembert 18 points and 10 rebounds
Sixers won

So Bogut averages 6 points and 6.5 rebounds against Dalembert
Dalembert averages 17 points and 10 rebounds against Bogut
And Sixers won 3 of 4

Dalembert OWNS Bogut

Dalemert is also better blocker and hit jump shots without problems (also hit free throws without problems)

Who is better?

Right now Dalembert is better.....

Until Bogut learns how to hit FT's or he learns how to make a 10-15 foot jumper, I think Dalembert will be the better player.

I think of all the great games that Bogut has played here the last two months and wonder why I'd even consider Dalembert......but then you watch some Sixer's games and you see Dalembert also has some damn great games.

Both guys are inconsistent. But if I have a center who can't hit a jump shot, I'd sure like that guy to be a nasty rebounder and shot-blocker. Dalembert can do that.

I forgot to say what advantages Bogut has. So here we go:

1. Bogut is better passer
2. Bogut is better one on one IF he feels good and IF everything else is perfectly set for him to work one on one close to the basket.

Dalembert is better in everything else. And Dalembert has better head as well.

Dalembert is better for now. Bogut can correct that by shooting 500 free throws and 10 ft jumpers a day, for a year straight (or as long as it takes to develop consistency).

Why the hell have the Bucks allowed Bogut to exist for three years without developing such basic skills?

Nothing against Bogut. But Dalembert don't complain about touches and is very consistent rebounder and shot blocker. Dalembert would be a better fit for the Bucks. Thats if we still have the chuck brothers. Can Dalembert play some PF? Him and Bogut would be a nice rebounding tendem.

Does anyone want to apologize for the harsh things they said to me when this comparison was first brought up about two years ago?

Sigra wrote:I forgot to say what advantages Bogut has. So here we go:

1. Bogut is better passer
2. Bogut is better one on one IF he feels good and IF everything else is perfectly set for him to work one on one close to the basket.

Dalembert is better in everything else. And Dalembert has better head as well.

It's a good thing we can not sense any bias here??? Not that I would necessarily disagree with the comparison, just that I would be more impartial as to how the questions and comparisons are stated.

You can clearly see that you have an anti bogut agenda.

smacks1 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



It's a good thing we can not sense any bias here??? Not that I would necessarily disagree with the comparison, just that I would be more impartial as to how the questions and comparisons are stated.

You can clearly see that you have an anti bogut agenda.

... Are you serious?

You know that Sigra is the one that compared Bogut to both Bill Walton and Tim Duncan earlier this season, don't you?

LukePliska wrote:Does anyone want to apologize for the harsh things they said to me when this comparison was first brought up about two years ago?

I have no idea whether I said anything harsh. I might have. If so, I'm sorry.

You also have to take into consideration Dalembert is 3 years older than Bogut and Dalembert has been in the league 4 years longer than Bogut.

Had Bogut played 4 years of college ball this would be his rookie season.

When you take those things into consideration and realize their numbers are pretty even as of right now you definatly go with Bogut.

As for right now its debatable,I'd still go with Bogut.

Bogut is a better scorer,Dalembert is a better defender but not by a huge margin,rebounding wise there isnt a huge difference.

Bogut is at 9.3

Dalembert is at 10.0

You also have to realize Dalembert's teammates are better defenders than Bogut's teammates by a wide margin so Dalembert has more rebound oppritunites than Bogut has.

When you (The Bucks) let your opponet shoot over 50% almost every night there arent going to be a ton of rebounds.

Put Dalembert on a team as bad defensively as the Bucks and see if he still grabs 10 a game.

At the same time put Bogut os a team that plays decent defense and see if he grabs more than 9.3 a game.

rilamann wrote:You also have to take into consideration Dalembert is 3 years older than Bogut and Dalembert has been in the league 4 years longer than Bogut.

Had Bogut played 4 years of college ball this would be his rookie season.

When you take those things into consideration and realize their numbers are pretty even as of right now you definatly go with Bogut.

As for right now its debatable,I'd still go with Bogut.

Bogut is a better scorer,Dalembert is a better defender but not by a huge margin,rebounding wise there isnt a huge difference.

Bogut is at 9.3

Dalembert is at 10.0

You also have to realize Dalembert's teammates are better defenders than Bogut's teammates by a wide margin so Dalembert has more rebound oppritunites than Bogut has.

When you (The Bucks) let your opponet shoot over 50% almost every night there arent going to be a ton of rebounds.

Put Dalembert on a team as bad defensively as the Bucks and see if he still grabs 10 a game.

At the same time put Bogut os a team that plays decent defense and see if he grabs more than 9.3 a game.

Dalembert has a better rebound rate which accounts for poor or good defense, just factors in grabbing a percentage of available rebounds.

Dalembert also doesn't quit in games where he's in a pissy mood

El Duderino wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Dalembert has a better rebound rate which accounts for poor or good defense, just factors in grabbing a percentage of available rebounds.

Dalembert also doesn't quit in games where he's in a pissy mood

I realy dont put much stock into rebounding rates and things of that nature,you could tell me how great of a stat it is 20 times a day and its not going to change my mind.

I watch the games and use basic logic.

Bogut on the worst defensive team in the league is grabbing 9.3 rebounds per game in 34 minutes per game.

Dalembert is playing on a good defensive team and is grabbing 10.0 rebounds per game in 32 minutes per game.

Im not saying Bogut would grab 15 boards a game on the Sixers or would on any good defensive team.

The point im making is that both guys are about equal in terms of grabbing rebounds and im only making that point because of the comedy that is going on here with some people who think Bogut is a medicore rebounder while acting as if Dalmbert is an elite rebounder.

Their differential is 0.7,not a big differential ecpsecially when you consider the differential in terms of overall team defense between the Sixers & Bucks.

If someone thinks Bogut is a bad/mediocre rebounder fine,he could imrpove in that area but dont turn around and act as if Dalembert is the 2nd comming of Dennis Rodman.

That screams AGENDA loud and clear.

Sigra wrote:Bogut averages 13.5 points with 9.2 rebounds this season.
He has 0.507 FG% and 0.566 FT%. His team is 23-40.

Dalembert averages 11 points with 10 rebounds this season.
He has 0.513 FG% and 0.721 FT%. His team is 30-33.

Bucks played 4 games against Sixers this season. This is how Bogut & Dalembert did head to head:

Nov 27
Bogut 6 points and 8 rebounds
Dalembert 22 points and 8 rebounds
Sixers won

Jan 08
Bogut 13 points and 12 rebounds
Dalembert 16 points and 16 rebounds
Bucks won

Jan 30
Bogut 5 points and 4 rebounds
Dalembert 12 points and 6 rebounds
Sixers won

Mar 09
Bogut 1 point and 2 rebounds
Dalembert 18 points and 10 rebounds
Sixers won

So Bogut averages 6 points and 6.5 rebounds against Dalembert
Dalembert averages 17 points and 10 rebounds against Bogut
And Sixers won 3 of 4

Dalembert OWNS Bogut

Dalemert is also better blocker and hit jump shots without problems (also hit free throws without problems)

Who is better?

Not the poll you wanted ???????

I will ask you in 4 years time again the same question, what a senseless thing to poll them so unequal.
My vote is Bogut , and I am not not the only one.

I realy dont put much stock into rebounding rates and things of that nature,you could tell me how great of a stat it is 20 times a day and its not going to change my mind.

Just because you choose to ignore advanced and better stats doesn't make you right. For a long time people just looked at batting average, homers, RBI's, when evaluating hitters in baseball.

Then smartly people looked deeper and found more telling stats that told a better story. On base percentage was obviously shown to be a better metric than batting average, players can't score a run from the dugout.
If you choose to look at the more crude stat over ones that actually take into account variables that exist in the NBA, that's your call. I've seen this same thought process from Brewers fans who think Rickie Weeks shouldn't bat leadoff because his batting average usually isn't high, all the while ignoring his high on base percentage.

if someone thinks Bogut is a bad/mediocre rebounder fine,he could imrpove in that area but dont turn around and act as if Dalembert is the 2nd comming of Dennis Rodman.

That screams AGENDA loud and clear.

Nobody said Dalembert is Rodman on the glass and Bogut is a terrible rebounder, just that he's a better rebounder, which he is.

As for an agenda, you can't be serious rilaman. You could see a video of Bogut beating up an old lady and you'd blame the old lady for not moving out of Andrew's way as he tried to walk by.

El Duderino wrote:

I realy dont put much stock into rebounding rates and things of that nature,you could tell me how great of a stat it is 20 times a day and its not going to change my mind.

Just because you choose to ignore advanced and better stats doesn't make you right. For a long time people just looked at batting average, homers, RBI's, when evaluating hitters in baseball.

Then smartly people looked deeper and found more telling stats that told a better story. On base percentage was obviously shown to be a better metric than batting average, players can't score a run from the dugout.
If you choose to look at the more crude stat over ones that actually take into account variables that exist in the NBA, that's your call. I've seen this same thought process from Brewers fans who think Rickie Weeks shouldn't bat leadoff because his batting average usually isn't high, all the while ignoring his high on base percentage.

if someone thinks Bogut is a bad/mediocre rebounder fine,he could imrpove in that area but dont turn around and act as if Dalembert is the 2nd comming of Dennis Rodman.

That screams AGENDA loud and clear.

Nobody said Dalembert is Rodman on the glass and Bogut is a terrible rebounder, just that he's a better rebounder, which he is.

As for an agenda, you can't be serious rilaman. You could see a video of Bogut beating up an old lady and you'd blame the old lady for not moving out of Andrew's way as he tried to walk by.

Let me guess you love that new +/- thing.

Breaking down numbers with rebound rates and things of that nature might give you a little extra info or whatever but I dont put a ton of stock into that stuff.

I look at raw numbers and averages and simple logic/common sense that comes from watching the games to form my opinions.

I think all that breaking down numbers 101 different ways stuff is primarily used by people on the internet to make themselves look smarter than they realy are or try to prove they are smarter than the next guy.

I mean have you ever heard Charles & Kenny on inside the NBA argue about a player and then one them brings up rebound rates or things of that nature?

If Kenny did that to Charles,Charles would be like ''wtf'' and probably backhand him.



I dont think I have heard any NBA anaylst ever bring up rebound rates or things of that nature.

I've also never got into all that stuff when talking sports in real life,only on the internet with people who probably play fantasy sports all day.

More power to the people who like breaking down numbers you guys seem realy smart and you rock lol.

I just think that is flawed and over anaylizing,call me old school I'll stick to watching games and raw numbers.

As for me having an agenda the only agenda I have is that I want to see the Bucks win.

The fact you accuse me of having an agenda and quote every post I make related to Bogut makes me think you are actually the one with an agenda.

I think Bogut is a solid young player who is improving and is a player that can be a major part of a winning NBA team.

I never have said he doesnt have room for improvment or that he is a superstar or ever will be.

Go back and check my posts.

The highest praise I have ever given Bogut is that I think he could max out around 18/12 and play in a couple all star games in the future.

Go back and check my posts.

You act as if I said the dude is perfect and is the next Tim Duncan.

I cut Bogut some slack because I like his attitude and I can see he is a player frustrated with losing and frustrated with his me-first teammates.

Just like I am as a fan.

Im much more critical of Mo & Redd and i'll be the first to admit that but I have good reason to be critical of them,more so Mo.

We have went with the Mo & Redd backcourt 3 out of the last 4 years now and have had zero success.

Keep in mind Redd & Mo where the focal points of our offense in all of those years.

Had we had even a sliver of sucess,even an 8th seed in 1 of those 3 years I wouldnt be nearly as critical of Redd & Mo.

And if either guy maybe once in awhile showed an interest in at least trying to play defense I would cut them some slack.

Trust me I have been as loyal and die hard for the Bucks in the last 20 years as anyone,I just want to see the team win and they havent done that in the 3 out of 4 years we have had the Redd & Mo backcourt.

To say I have an agenda is comical.

Its not like im asking for much,I would cut both guys a ton of slack if theyhad lead us to even 8th seed one time in those 3 years.

People act like im being critical of two guys who have been the catalist(sp) of multiple 50 win seasons.

I would say it would be an agenda if we where winning big and playing great behind Redd & Mo and both guys where playing great defense and here I was being critical of them saying Bogut should be more involved and defending him saying he like a lot of big men needs better teammates to be successful.

Yea then that would be having an agenda.

Now if Dalembert>Bogut and Bogut>Walton then Dalembert=Kareem?

rilamann wrote:

El Duderino wrote:

I realy dont put much stock into rebounding rates and things of that nature,you could tell me how great of a stat it is 20 times a day and its not going to change my mind.

if someone thinks Bogut is a bad/mediocre rebounder fine,he could imrpove in that area but dont turn around and act as if Dalembert is the 2nd comming of Dennis Rodman.

That screams AGENDA loud and clear.

Nobody said Dalembert is Rodman on the glass and Bogut is a terrible rebounder, just that he's a better rebounder, which he is.

As for an agenda, you can't be serious rilaman. You could see a video of Bogut beating up an old lady and you'd blame the old lady for not moving out of Andrew's way as he tried to walk by.

As for me having an agenda the only agenda I have is that I want to see the Bucks win.

The fact you accuse me of having an agenda and quote every post I make related to Bogut makes me think you are actually the one with an agenda.


I cut Bogut some slack because I like his attitude and I can see he is a player frustrated with losing and frustrated with his me-first teammates

To say I have an agenda is comical.

I also only want the Bucks to win, yet when Mo or Redd play terrible, you blast, mock, and knock them to no end. When Bogut plays like crap or even gives up during a game and there is a thread about it, you almost always look to find some other player or coach to blame for Andrew's terrible play and/or attitude.

Then if there is a thread calling out Bogut for his terrible play/attitude, the people calling him out for it are Bogut haters with an agenda according to you, but of course you claim to have no agenda when ripping on Mo/Redd for doing the exact same thing in playing poor like Andrew.

Somehow in your world quitting in games or playing lazy is a sign he's a winner and not me first, anyone not agreeing is a Bogut hater with an agenda. Basically for you it's, rip on anyone except Bogut, that equals just seeing things objectively. God forbid rip on Andrew though, you're a biased Bogut hater with an agenda.

BTW, i never brought up anything about your or any agenda in this thread. All i said was Dalembert is a better rebounder, that's it. You then were the one who claimed, "That screams AGENDA loud and clear". As if somehow it's "comical that you could have an agenda" about anyone on the Bucks, but those that don't agree with your views of course have to have one.

LukePliska wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



... Are you serious?

You know that Sigra is the one that compared Bogut to both Bill Walton and Tim Duncan earlier this season, don't you?

Ha ha, he's also the one who's wanted to trade him for anything with a heartbeat at various times this year, u don't know about Sigra's backflips?

For my part Bogut is the better player but Dalambert seems to own him in head to head matchups, so make of that what you will.

adamcz wrote:Dalembert is better for now. Bogut can correct that by shooting 500 free throws and 10 ft jumpers a day, for a year straight (or as long as it takes to develop consistency).

Why the hell have the Bucks allowed Bogut to exist for three years without developing such basic skills?

I don't understand why they haven't, either. ****ing idiots.