Reasons to Keep Bargnani

[Local_NG_Idiot]

Bargnani's efficiency at that volume IS reasonable. It's exactly "reasonable".

Not if reasonable = productive and useful over the long haul. You don't build a team around a guy who takes over 20% of the team's shots while being 20 points below the league average in TS%. Any team worth anything is going to have better scorers than that, and thus put Bargs out of a role.

All this league average talk about TS% is irrelevant though, Schad. It's been discussed in this thread a lot but are you really going to compare guys who are asked to take 15+ FGAs per game with scrubs shooting .600+% on 4 FGAs per game?

The league average is massively inflated due to low volume scorers. The following list seems reasonable. It's players playing 25 minutes per game who take at least 10 FGAs per game.

http://bkref.com/tiny/dTsEt

That's reasonable for a third banana type, no?

Even when he's compared to some of the highest volume scorers in the NBA (players who average more that 16 FGAs per game) he's not looking awful and these are the best scorers in all of the NBA we're talking about here.

http://bkref.com/tiny/tSDGf

He's .03 off from being the 13th best TS% player of the 21 players currently averaging more than 16 FGAs per game and also the 11th youngest. It's certainly nothing to write home about and it doesn't excuse his flaws and allow us to be excited about the idea of him as a team's best player but I think it's reasonable to expect that percentage to climb if he was to play with a star SG, PG or SF due to all the open looks he'd get. His PER, his TS%, his role as a scorer all scream third banana type to me.

Lumping him in with players that play every position is wrong. There is plenty of historic data to show that guards and wing players historically have lower TS% and offensive efficiency because of how/where the game is played for their role on offense. (Please don't make me hunt these numbers down, I think this is a common knowledge thing but I will if I have to).

So technically, unless you can play Bargs at a wing position so that the team can still benefit from the higher efficiency front court scoring teammates (or if Bargs is that good that he elevates his teammates efficiency to that type of level), the team he plays for will always be at a disadvantage when it comes to overall team efficiency.

Compound that with his inability to competently defend at any position and that his rebounding rate is that of a good rebounding guard and you now have a player who really is a man without an identity.

[Double Helix]

Somewhere around here Eric Smith and Paul Jones have graced us with their presence. They are as big of a Bargnani apologist as anyone on this board. I'm so sick of hearing, stop looking at what a guy CAN'T do and start looking at what a guy CAN do. Sorry, but I'm not interested in what Bargnani can do. Whatever he can do doesn't cover up for what he can't do. Bargnani is a negative with all things considered and hurts the team more than he helps.

With Bargnani
Offense: pts per 100 possessions = 107.7
Defense: pts per 100 possessions = 115.6
Net = -7.9

Without Bargnani
Offense: pts per 100 possessions = 104.2
Defense: pts per 100 possessions = 109.5
Net = -5.3

Many other factors involved, and since Bargnani has played major minutes all season long it's going to be a small sample. With that said, it's still an indicator that Bargnani hurts the team more than he helps. When assembling a good team, players should be brought in to compliment each other, not compensate for one another. With Bargnani, the Raptors will forever be trying to bring in players to compensate for his deficiencies, rather than compliment him. Quite frankly that is a task associated with the word treadmill.

DK, you of all people know on/off stats are a complicated mess and as a result a bit of a joke. Think about it. The Raptors have one of the worst starting lineups in the entire NBA and not too bad of a bench. Colangelo's always built strong benches since he's been here. He's a master of picking up above average role players and this year was no different. Many of the players on the bench this year could just as easily be starters. That's how bad our starting lineup is so you put a below average starting lineup out against most of the NBA and many of our starters come out looking poorly and Bargnani's one of the only ones who's been in there for big minutes most of the way. You put our bench in there against many other benches and they actually look pretty good because our benches have consistently outperformed other benches since Colangelo took over the top spot.

[sanity]

Bargnani won't ever be a major cog to a decent team in this league, and what I mean by decent, is one that has championship aspirations. Its fine now, seeing as how we get a proper glimpse at how terrible he actually is when force-feed touches on offense.

So whats the conclusion? We keep him because the team sucks so bad there's really no one else to trot out there to make an ass of himself for ~35mpg. But hey, at least Andrea is okay with it. Lets see how he'll accept a reduced role off the bench. Hopefully it won't make him any less unmotivated to battle in the paint or play defense (which is still important for bench players-oddly enough!)

[Kabookalu]

DK, you of all people know on/off stats are a complicated mess and as a result a bit of a joke. Think about it. The Raptors have one of the worst starting lineups in the entire NBA and not too bad of a bench. Colangelo's always built strong benches since he's been here. He's a master of picking up above average role players and this year was no different. Many of the players on the bench this year could just as easily be starters. That's how bad our starting lineup is so you put a below average starting lineup out against most of the NBA and many of our starters come out looking poorly and Bargnani's one of the only ones who's been in there for big minutes most of the way. You put our bench in there against many other benches and they actually look pretty good because our benches have consistently outperformed other benches since Colangelo took over the top spot.

You know I'd never thought about this all these years being on Bargnani's side. Although I will always support Bargnani, just to play devil's advocate, although we've always had strong benches (strong as in that our bench players are almost as good as our starting lineup), kind of disappointing that Bargnani isn't good enough to distinguish himself from those bench players.

[LodzBaluty]

DK, you of all people know on/off stats are a complicated mess and as a result a bit of a joke. Think about it. The Raptors have one of the worst starting lineups in the entire NBA and not too bad of a bench. Colangelo's always built strong benches since he's been here. He's a master of picking up above average role players and this year was no different. Many of the players on the bench this year could just as easily be starters. That's how bad our starting lineup is so you put a below average starting lineup out against most of the NBA and many of our starters come out looking poorly and Bargnani's one of the only ones who's been in there for big minutes most of the way. You put our bench in there against many other benches and they actually look pretty good because our benches have consistently outperformed other benches since Colangelo took over the top spot.

Not to nit pick, but he compared the raptors starters and bench to each other. The only one taken out of the equation was Andrea. So I don't really get your point. This is not a comparison to other teams, instead its about how our team fares with Andrea and without.

And our team sucks balls... so you would think Andrea being taken out would make it even worse. (We are not exactly world beaters and Andrea still cant peecock next to our lottery roster.)

[DreamTeam09]

Ummmm Ino fa sure the perception of him around here is that he isn't doing much and we suck. I guess ppl though he would be the saviour this season and because we are a lottery team it obviously is the best players fault.(yea right). If Bargs was putting up these same stats and we were like top 6 in the east he would be an All-star most likely and no1 would be complaining b/c we are winning. So it doesn't matter for all those ppl that say Bargs can't be a starter on a championship team. Theres plenty of teams out there at the top that would love to have bargs and what he brings and would be able to make up for what he doesn't bring. To all his detractors out there, if he did more of the things that ya'all would want him to do, he'd be a top 10 player in the league. As of ri now, we have a pretty good player....

[Kabookalu]

Ummmm Ino fa sure the perception of him around here is that he isn't doing much and we suck. I guess ppl though he would be the saviour this season and because we are a lottery team it obviously is the best players fault.(yea right). If Bargs was putting up these same stats and we were like top 6 in the east he would be an All-star most likely and no1 would be complaining b/c we are winning. So it doesn't matter for all those ppl that say Bargs can't be a starter on a championship team. Theres plenty of teams out there at the top that would love to have bargs and what he brings and would be able to make up for what he doesn't bring. To all his detractors out there, if he did more of the things that ya'all would want him to do, he'd be a top 10 player in the league. As of ri now, we have a pretty good player....

I'm pretty sure deep down the haters know that Bargnani is a good player. The problem many have with him is all mental. He's doesn't try, and with a fanbase that is enamored with energy players that hustles and play the game with passion, Bargnani is the complete opposite of what they've grown to love all these years.

[Double Helix]

All this league average talk about TS% is irrelevant though, Schad. It's been discussed in this thread a lot but are you really going to compare guys who are asked to take 15+ FGAs per game with scrubs shooting .600+% on 4 FGAs per game?

The league average is massively inflated due to low volume scorers.

Uh, not really...I didn't take the average TS% on a player-by-player basis, I plugged the league-wide numbers in, so saying that they're inflated by low-volume scorers is silly.

http://bkref.com/tiny/dTsEt

That's reasonable for a third banana type, no?

His defense and rebounding aren't good enough to justify playing him as a third banana.

Even when he's compared to some of the highest volume scorers in the NBA (players who average more that 16 FGAs per game) he's not looking awful and these are the best scorers in all of the NBA we're talking about here.

http://bkref.com/tiny/tSDGf

He's .03 off from being the 13th best TS% player of the 21 players currently averaging more than 16 FGAs per game and also the 11th youngest. It's certainly nothing to write home about but I think it's reasonable to expect that percentage to climb if he was to play with a star SG, PG or SF due to all the open looks he'd get.

Heh, he's also .03 off from being 17th out of 21, and being 11th-youngest out of 21 means that he's mid-pack and thus one can't exactly make the "he's still young!" argument. Fact of the matter is that being 15th out of 21 is not at all good, and this is his best attribute.

As for getting more open looks, his shooting percentages might rise. They were better under Bosh, after all. But then he wouldn't get as many shots, and thus the reason for keeping him on the floor diminishes. Remember when all of this increased volume without Bosh was going to show his value as a lead scorer? Now we're pining for the good ol' days when he was a secondary piece...except that we've apparently forgotten that he was a terrible secondary piece because of his utter lack of tangible skill beyond shooting.

RE: League-wide averages...

The league-wide average includes names like Steve Novak, (TS% of .784), Jeremy Evans (.700) and plenty more. Those big numbers have dramatic impacts on the overall league average. What you'd want to do is get the average TS% of players taking at least 10 or more FGAs and see where Bargnani ranks in comparison. That's more reflective of his peer group.

RE: The age thing...

I only brought up age to indicate that over the length of his contract, barring serious injury, he'll probably always be a productive offensive weapon because his contract runs until he's 29-30.

Re: the 0.03 % difference

I brought up the slight % difference to showcase just how tight it is in that middle of the pack. I agree 15th out of 21 isn't good when it's his best attribute but it is interesting to see some of the other names in his range for frame of reference.

Re: Comparing him to other scorers...

I don't really see why comparing him to other high volume scorers that play other positions is wrong. Scoring is scoring. Every team has somebody that count on for lots of shots, last minute shot clock situations, etc... We shouldn't have to compare Bargnani to guys like DeAndre Jordan and Tyson Chandler who throw down 4-5 dunks a game just because they're relatively the same height. High volume scorers should be compared with other high volume scorers regardless of height, speed, athleticism... I don't care how the baskets going in but I want to compare people who are relied on for scoring of a similar degree.

[LodzBaluty]

Ummmm Ino fa sure the perception of him around here is that he isn't doing much and we suck. I guess ppl though he would be the saviour this season and because we are a lottery team it obviously is the best players fault.(yea right). If Bargs was putting up these same stats and we were like top 6 in the east he would be an All-star most likely and no1 would be complaining b/c we are winning. So it doesn't matter for all those ppl that say Bargs can't be a starter on a championship team. Theres plenty of teams out there at the top that would love to have bargs and what he brings and would be able to make up for what he doesn't bring. To all his detractors out there, if he did more of the things that ya'all would want him to do, he'd be a top 10 player in the league. As of ri now, we have a pretty good player....

So basically you are saying that if Andrea played better no one would be complaining. I think you hit the nail on the head. It just proves its not about hate, but performance.

[DreamTeam09]

Ummmm Ino fa sure the perception of him around here is that he isn't doing much and we suck. I guess ppl though he would be the saviour this season and because we are a lottery team it obviously is the best players fault.(yea right). If Bargs was putting up these same stats and we were like top 6 in the east he would be an All-star most likely and no1 would be complaining b/c we are winning. So it doesn't matter for all those ppl that say Bargs can't be a starter on a championship team. Theres plenty of teams out there at the top that would love to have bargs and what he brings and would be able to make up for what he doesn't bring. To all his detractors out there, if he did more of the things that ya'all would want him to do, he'd be a top 10 player in the league. As of ri now, we have a pretty good player....

I'm pretty sure deep down the haters know that Bargnani is a good player. The problem many have with him is all mental. He's doesn't try, and with a fanbase that is enamored with energy players that hustles and play the game with passion, Bargnani is the complete opposite of what they've grown to love all these years.

Thats BS to say that he doesn't try. How can any1 of us sit here and really say that the man doesn't try!!!. We've actually seen players here in Toronto with out of this world talent and never try for us!!! Bargnani is not one of those players, remember he is foriegn so all those looks and body language that he gives off that has ppl thinking that he isn't trying is faluse imho!!!! He's going to look strange out there at times, hes a mobile 7footer. Thats akward enough as it is already...

[Double Helix]

DK, you of all people know on/off stats are a complicated mess and as a result a bit of a joke. Think about it. The Raptors have one of the worst starting lineups in the entire NBA and not too bad of a bench. Colangelo's always built strong benches since he's been here. He's a master of picking up above average role players and this year was no different. Many of the players on the bench this year could just as easily be starters. That's how bad our starting lineup is so you put a below average starting lineup out against most of the NBA and many of our starters come out looking poorly and Bargnani's one of the only ones who's been in there for big minutes most of the way. You put our bench in there against many other benches and they actually look pretty good because our benches have consistently outperformed other benches since Colangelo took over the top spot.

Not to nit pick, but he compared the raptors starters and bench to each other. The only one taken out of the equation was Andrea. So I don't really get your point. This is not a comparison to other teams, instead its about how our team fares with Andrea and without.

And our team sucks balls... so you would think Andrea being taken out would make it even worse. (We are not exactly world beaters and Andrea still cant peecock next to our lottery roster.)

I know how it works and I'm assuming he got his data from 82 games. My critique was with this knowledge in mind. Think about it. The data being collected without Andrea includes moments where he and many other starters are out and the bench is in playing against another team's bench and lighting them up. As I said before, Colangelo's always assembled strong benches that compete with our starters and as a result much of the starting +/- data looks a little funny. In other words, starters on the Raptors are regularly out performed as a team by other starting lineups but our bench which doesn't feature Bargnani and some other starters (like Calderon) does not because Colangelo's always been better at building competitive benches than starting lineups so our bench outperforms many benches and our starters do not.

I hope this makes more sense.

[DreamTeam09]

Ummmm Ino fa sure the perception of him around here is that he isn't doing much and we suck. I guess ppl though he would be the saviour this season and because we are a lottery team it obviously is the best players fault.(yea right). If Bargs was putting up these same stats and we were like top 6 in the east he would be an All-star most likely and no1 would be complaining b/c we are winning. So it doesn't matter for all those ppl that say Bargs can't be a starter on a championship team. Theres plenty of teams out there at the top that would love to have bargs and what he brings and would be able to make up for what he doesn't bring. To all his detractors out there, if he did more of the things that ya'all would want him to do, he'd be a top 10 player in the league. As of ri now, we have a pretty good player....

So basically you are saying that if Andrea played better no one would be complaining. I think you hit the nail on the head. It just proves its not about hate, but performance.

No bud, ya'all wanna act like 22 & 5 on 45% is horrible/can't win with, what ya'all want is like 22 & 8+ 1blk on 50% right... Well if he was doing those #s, he'd be top 10 arguably. Because he isn't putting up top 10 stats in his 7th yr on a team thats tanking makes him crap, gimmie a break. Ya'all want too much.

[Schad]

The league-wide average includes names like Steve Novak, (TS% of .784), Jeremy Evans (.700) and plenty more. Those big numbers have dramatic impacts on the overall league average. What you'd want to do is get the average TS% of players taking at least 10 or more FGAs and see where Bargnani ranks in comparison. That's more reflective of his peer group.

Heh, they register almost no impact at all. Again, I'm not averaging the few hundred players, I'm averaging the 170,000 field goal attempts and 50,000 free throw attempts taken in the league this season. Steve Novak's 49 FGA wouldn't move it even a thousandth of a percent.

I only brought up age to indicate that over the length of his contract, barring serious injury, he'll probably always be a productive offensive weapon because his contract runs until he's 29-30.

But he's not really a productive offensive weapon now.

I brought up the slight % difference to showcase just how tight it is in that middle of the pack. I agree 15th out of 21 isn't good when it's his best attribute but it is interesting to see some of the other names in his range for frame of reference.

Indeed, and a good many of the names in his range are inveterate chuckers or guys who do far more on the floor. Rose and Westbrook are the latter; Randolph, Ellis and Beasley the former.

[Kabookalu]

Thats BS to say that he doesn't try. How can any1 of us sit here and really say that the man doesn't try!!!. We've actually seen players here in Toronto with out of this world talent and never try for us!!! Bargnani is not one of those players, remember he is foriegn so all those looks and body language that he gives off that has ppl thinking that he isn't trying is faluse imho!!!! He's going to look strange out there at times, hes a mobile 7footer. Thats akward enough as it is already...

Scoring he doesn't have a problem, it's the other things that people are more concerned about. Rebounding and defending most notably. He doesn't have much hope as a rebounder because contrary to popular belief, there are more important things to rebounding than height, but defensively he could be an average interior defender with his length and mobility. A lot of times when someone makes a lay up over him, he puts up little resistance only putting up his hand to try and intercept the shot which almost always fails.

Contrary to popular belief Bargnani's basketball IQ really isn't as low as people think; people love confusing decision making and basketball IQ. His decision making, not just as a passer but stuff like when to shoot, when to move over to rotate, is pretty bad. His basketball IQ on the other hand is actually pretty high. He always looks a whole second slower than everyone else on the court but he does have a good feel for the game; the problem is exerting the necessary energy to live up to his abilities.

[LodzBaluty]

I know how it works and I'm assuming he got his data from 82 games. My critique was with this knowledge in mind. Think about it. The data being collected without Andrea includes moments where he and many other starters are out and the bench is in playing against another team's bench and lighting them up. As I said before, Colangelo's always assembled strong benches that compete with our starters and as a result much of the starting +/- data looks a little funny. In other words, starters on the Raptors are regularly out performed as a team by other starting lineups but our bench which doesn't feature Bargnani and some other starters (like Calderon) does not because Colangelo's always been better at building competitive benches than starting lineups so our bench outperforms many benches and our starters do not.

I hope this makes more sense.

I understand what you are saying, but I think you are over estimating the impact. Andrea gets a lot of minutes, and often plays with the better bench players himself.

The numbers quoted only take out Andrea, so the rest of "the bad starters" are still in the game.

So the comparison is with "bad starters" with Andrea, and "bad starters" without Andrea.

[Kabookalu]

I understand what you are saying, but I think you are over estimating the impact. Andrea gets a lot of minutes, and often plays with the better bench players himself.

The numbers quoted only take out Andrea, so the rest of "the bad starters" are still in the game.

So the comparison is with "bad starters" with Andrea, and "bad starters" without Andrea.

You're still missing his point though, "bad starters" without Andrea don't necessarily still play against the other team's starting lineup; they play a mix of starters and bench players. Andrea the majority of the time plays against starting lineups. A better comparison would be stats where Andrea didn't play at all.

[ballocks]

imo, andrea bargnani has become toronto's shareef abdur-rahim. he's the butt of the joke, but he'll keep scoring just to give his apologists some ammunition. next thing you know, he'll retire- and raptor fans will stay waiting for his development. i don't know if there's a player on earth who's worth this kind of pain.

for me, his greatest weakness continues to be his transition defense. he's just soooooo LA-ZY, i don't know if i'm even surprised. can you really expect this guy to run hard if nobody demands it from him? his lethargic jog... ugh... resulting in a dunk the other way. UGH. lather rinse repeat. UGGGGGHHHHH!!!

saw it last night on consecutive possessions with nene. like, how many times do you need to get burned before you clue in, andrea? always behind the play, always a step slow? do you really need someone to tell you that that's not helping the team? it's unbelievable.

mind you, he does run the floor hard on offense from time to time. i saw him rip it like frankie fredericks last week versus detroit when bayless was leading the break. but then returned to his ol' lazy self when the ball came back the other way.

so lazy. unbelievable. i don't have a hate on for any raptor, ever, but i'm embarrassed by how bargnani gets away with murder over and again. i want to get rid of him just so i don't have to watch this double-standard/special treatment anymore. i'm sure i'm not alone.

but i must be a hater.

peace

[LodzBaluty]

No bud, ya'all wanna act like 22 & 5 on 45% is horrible/can't win with, what ya'all want is like 22 & 8+ 1blk on 50% right... Well if he was doing those #s, he'd be top 10 arguably. Because he isn't putting up top 10 stats in his 7th yr on a team thats tanking makes him crap, gimmie a break. Ya'all want too much.

Bud, just so' u' no, I don't care about his stats. Never have. I don't care about anyone's stats. All I care about is W's. If Andrea can brign us some of those and score 12 and 6 I am as happy as pig in ****.

[Kabookalu]

imo, andrea bargnani has become toronto's shareef abdur-rahim. he's the butt of the joke, but he'll keep scoring just to give his apologists some ammunition. next thing you know, he'll retire- and raptor fans will stay waiting for his development. i don't know if there's a player on earth who's worth this kind of pain.

for me, his greatest weakness continues to be his transition defense. he's just soooooo LA-ZY, i don't know if i'm even surprised. can you really expect this guy to run hard if nobody demands it from him? his lethargic jog... ugh... resulting in a dunk the other way. UGH. lather rinse repeat. UGGGGGHHHHH!!!

saw it last night on consecutive possessions with nene. like, how many times do you need to get burned before you clue in, andrea? always behind the play, always a step slow? do you really need someone to tell you that that's not helping the team? it's unbelievable.

mind you, he does run the floor hard on offense from time to time. i saw him rip it like frankie fredericks last week versus detroit when bayless was leading the break. but then returned to his ol' lazy self when the ball came back the other way.

so lazy. unbelievable. i don't have a hate on for any raptor, ever, but i'm embarrassed by how bargnani gets away with murder over and again. i want to get rid of him just so i don't have to watch this double-standard/special treatment anymore. i'm sure i'm not alone.

but i must be a hater.

peace

Definitely a hater.

[Schad]

On the averaging thing, to explain it a different way...

What you think I'm doing:

Player A takes 4 shots and makes all 4, for a 100% shooting percentage.
Player B takes 1000 shots and makes 500, for a 50% shooting percentage.

Thus, the average of the two is 75%.


What I'm actually doing:


Player A takes 4 shots and makes all 4, for a 100% shooting percentage.
Player B takes 1000 shots and makes 500, for a 50% shooting percentage.

Thus, the average of the two is 50.2%, or 504/1004.