Official Bargnani Discussion Thread

[Fortinos2008]

-= original quote snipped =-



Nope, not me, am not even Thai, if that's what the site title implies. Harry Palmer is a reasonably well known fictional character, though, with several books and movies made about him, so not too surprising.

As for Gay, you are again applying completely arbitrary subjectives. It's not that he's playing 'as well as I say he is.' It's that he's playing as well as the objective data says he is. Not sure why you have a problem with that.

I dont have a problem with Gay scoring and I dont have a problem with agreeing on Gay becoming a good player. I do however have a problem with you drooling about Gay as if he is blossoming into a star because he is scoring points all the while dismissing what he is not doing well. With Bargs all you got to say is he can score but if he doesnt do this or that he is useless and not worth the number one pick. With Gay now he is scoring on a bad team and not doing much of anything else but yet he should of been # in your mind.

I also have a problem with players on losing teams putting up points and people suggesting its because he is great rather than being just another avg Joe pro given the green light to shoot. I remember guys like Mike jameds doing simular with the Raptors and guys like Mo Pete among many others in the past who were scorers on bad teams and avg to below avg when they were moved to a winner.

I again ask you why are the Grizzlies struggling if this kid is having such a spectacular season. Again I look at their starting five and I say to myself they are just as good if not better on paper according to some but yet they cant win.

I feel as if im in discussion with a fanatasy stats league nut who completely tosses aside the reality of the team and players situation.

Why do you highlight Gays strengths this season but highlight Bargs weaknesses throughout his career?

Im sorry if that wasnt you on thai and its not all about thai stuff either, i got the idea that it was you because I seen you got banned or someone using your name got banned on a hoops forum and then was asked to leave another hoops forum all for the same reasons the harry plamer was chased out of the thai board. I also learned that you used to use that exact same avatar on this site so i thought id come and check it out.

Glad its not you, or hope so anyways because that guys was a lunatic

[MacDaddy]

-= original quote snipped =-



Nope, not me, am not even Thai, if that's what the site title implies. Harry Palmer is a reasonably well known fictional character, though, with several books and movies made about him, so not too surprising.

As for Gay, you are again applying completely arbitrary subjectives. It's not that he's playing 'as well as I say he is.' It's that he's playing as well as the objective data says he is. Not sure why you have a problem with that.

I dont have a problem with Gay scoring and I dont have a problem with agreeing on Gay becoming a good player. I do however have a problem with you drooling about Gay as if he is blossoming into a star because he is scoring points all the while dismissing what he is not doing well. With Bargs all you got to say is he can score but if he doesnt do this or that he is useless and not worth the number one pick. With Gay now he is scoring on a bad team and not doing much of anything else but yet he should of been # in your mind.

I also have a problem with players on losing teams putting up points and people suggesting its because he is great rather than being just another avg Joe pro given the green light to shoot. I remember guys like Mike jameds doing simular with the Raptors and guys like Mo Pete among many others in the past who were scorers on bad teams and avg to below avg when they were moved to a winner.

I again ask you why are the Grizzlies struggling if this kid is having such a spectacular season. Again I look at their starting five and I say to myself they are just as good if not better on paper according to some but yet they cant win.

I feel as if im in discussion with a fanatasy stats league nut who completely tosses aside the reality of the team and players situation.

Why do you highlight Gays strengths this season but highlight Bargs weaknesses throughout his career?

Im sorry if that wasnt you on thai and its not all about thai stuff either, i got the idea that it was you because I seen you got banned or someone using your name got banned on a hoops forum and then was asked to leave another hoops forum all for the same reasons the harry plamer was chased out of the thai board. I also learned that you used to use that exact same avatar on this site so i thought id come and check it out.

Glad its not you, or hope so anyways because that guys was a lunatic

Wow it didn't take long for you to come back again. I can't believe you went to all the trouble to come up with an elaborate "Are you the same Harry Palmer blah, blah, blah" cover story.

Get help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis

[Econgrad]

From Doug Smith blog last week:

You can

[Harry Palmer]

-= original quote snipped =-



I dont have a problem with Gay scoring and I dont have a problem with agreeing on Gay becoming a good player. I do however have a problem with you glouting about Gay as if he is blossoming into a star because he is scoring points all the while dismissing what he is not doing well. With Bargs all you got to say is he can score but if he doesnt do this or that he is useless and not worth the number one pick.

I also have a problem with players on losing teams putting up points and peopel suggesting its because he is great rather than being just another avg Joe pro given the green light to shoot. I remember guys like Mike jameds doing simular with the Raptors and guys like Mo Pete among many others in the past who were scorers on bad teams and avg to below avg when they were moved to a winner.

I again ask you why are the Grizzlies struggling if this kid is having such a spectacular season. Again I look at their starting five and I say to myself they are just as good if not better on paper according to some but yet they cant win.

I feel as if im in discussion with a fanatasy stats league nut who completely tosses aside the reality of the team and players situation.

Why do you highlight Gays strengths this season but highlight Bargs weaknesses throughout his career?

You are drawing a false dynamic, though.

One guy is putting up 9.6/3.5/1/0.2/0.6 while shooting .390 with an efficiency of 7.58 , and EFG of .453 and a PER of 9.7.

The other guy is putting up 19.6/5.6/1.8/1.4/0.9/ while shooting .477 with an efficiency of 18.11, an EFG of .531 and a PER of 18.2.

IOW, your premise, that I am skewing the view by concentrating on the strengths of one and the weaknesses of the other, is not supported by the whole, because it is in no way needed to make the point to any but a die-hard pro-Bargs/anti-Gay person.

It's not like it's close and I am stressing that which favors Gay. Basically everything favors Gay, by a huge margin. Your response doesn't address anything, and just attempts to build a false construct which bears no relation to the reality of the situation.

As for why the Grizz are struggling, how are you concluding that that says something about Gay? Did it say something about Jordan? Isiah? Etc.

It's a false premise.

[Prop]

-= original quote snipped =-



Excuses? What excuses? Irrelevant nor does your comparison make any sense especially with regards to Andrea's predicament. If those "people" choose to make excuses, then that's them. And especially in Andrea's case, it's perfectly normal for him to struggle the way he has. He accepts a position he's never played and yet all of a sudden, he gets called a bust and ripped because he's not putting center-like numbers.

Silly? Not really... but if that's what you think, then that's you. When someone has a specific intent before an outcome of a game to focus on a players weakness, the only good word that fits such people are simply put: "agenda-driven posters". They do NOT care about the situation the players in, whether or not he plays well and just decide to hate on one of his weak attributes.

There's no "sides", as this is really not even a debate that one would pick a side. It's really just a person who just picks a players weakness and wrongfully rip him regardless of the players peformance and outcome on the game... hence "agenda-driven posters". Sure it may not sound friendly, but that's just proper term to define such actions... I hope you now get a sense of what and why we use it.

Yeah, it may also be that they don't like that player, in most cases, that's actually true, especially considering the person who made/makes these Andrea threads. What's their intention? Simply telling us, I assume that we should have drafted someone else. Why pointing out the same thing over, and over again, even though it's obvious? I don't know.

yeah it's irrelevant to your side of the coin. like we didn't see dagger say the bargs' rebounding numbers are low because moon is stealing them (not to paint him with that brush, just the most recent example i could think of). but there are people who are big proponents of certain players and go to great lengths to excuse their fav players deficiencies. same difference as someone being overtly negative about a player they don't like.

people aren't criticizing bargs for not putting up center numbers, they are criticizing him because he's not playing well. people can come up with many reason to explain it but the fact remains, he's a #1 pick who seems to be regressing at times..and on the whole he's not playing well at all. it's warranted at any age and at any time, especially considering the lack of effort he's putting in.

of course i think it's silly. it's stupid to get your feathers ruffled over people that essentially say "x sucks for x reason" blah blah blah. so effing what? honestly...if someone wants to hate on a player x, big deal.

and what diference does the outcome of a game make when addressing a player's weaknesses? winning a game doesn't excuse someone from being a terrible shooter/rebounder/defender/etc.

anyways, agenda-driven is a complete misnomer considering the fact that having an agenda implies you have some sort of objective. harping on something over and over isn't going to change anything on this board or with the team itself and im sure ss and whoever else you wanna call agenda-driven knows that. if you want to call them something, "hater" seems more sensible. either way, people who keep coming in their threads are just feeding fuel to the fire. ignore it and move on. we're grown men here.

don't like it, don't read it. simple.

[Harry Palmer]

BTW, in a completely coincidental outtake, the Warriors crew just did a half-time bit on why they think the Grizz are struggling, and it was reasonably logical. They essentially said it comes down to 2 things in combination: a high paced running team, and very young point guards.

They had a chart showing all the top paced teams, and all of them had veteran points, except the Grizz, who are using a rookie and a second year guy who missed almost his entire rookie season. Their essential point was that running teams are very dependent on reliable point guard play, and that while the Grizz do have a lot of talent, until their very talented but very young points mature, they're really going to struggle with consistency.

It makes pretty good sense, actually.

[WD-40]

-
no no no...ok about the fact that maurizio is closer to bargnani than colangelo and his staff, ok considering the NT issue...

but, man, GHERARDINI:

1) isn't a stupid man, he's able to recognize the "Talent"

2) maurizio with "that" choice puts a sword over his head ...i mean, he was at the first appearance in the nba as assistant general manager, he made a choice selecting andrea, gherardini's future is strictly chained with the andrea's one...

For sure, he put his name on the line. And BC is no fool. Some posters make him seem like an idiot. BC + MG = smart dudes. They bet on Bargs and are waiting to see how he develops. His progress has been disappointing but lets wait and see.

I dont' agree blaming Sam though, as Bargs should prove his worth regardless of the coach.

[WD-40]

HP stirs the sh*t deep, but he can take it. I'm impressed.



Anyway: I don't give a damn what any of you think. I want to see him play. He's a number one pick. Even if a dud, he can be worth something: Kwame turned into Butler. CHILL!

[Kurtz]

. Their essential point was that running teams are very dependent on reliable point guard play, and that while the Grizz do have a lot of talent, until their very talented but very young points mature, they're really going to struggle with consistency.

It makes pretty good sense, actually.

So until young players mature they WILL in fact struggle with consistancy? Boy, imagine that . If only this principle applied to teams other than the Grizzlies.


Having said that, Damon started for most of the year for them, and they looked worse with him than with Conley, so the veteran guard theory is peculiar...

[bargs]

again foul troubles ....damn, i'm being disgusted by andrea, how he can be so stupid not recognizing that his main problem in foul troubles!!...i'm negatively impressed of his INABILITY to recognize his lack of "good positioning" and "body control".

even if you're playing well (from stats point of view), foul troubles catch you out of the game suddenly!!..man, are you so stupid to not recognize YOUR MAIN PROBLEM?!?!?

ANDREA: YOU HAVE FOUL TROUBLES PERIOD

I DON'T WANT to listen anymore interview where you're going to say:" foul troubles? ..i don't have foul troubles!"

....you have to begin from your INCAPACITY(INABILITY) to STAY on the floor without FOULS!!

[Harry Palmer]

-= original quote snipped =-




So until young players mature they WILL in fact struggle with consistancy? Boy, imagine that . If only this principle applied to teams other than the Grizzlies.

No, that's not what the comment was. It was specific to position, and a play style contingent upon that position.

Having said that, Damon started for most of the year for them, and they looked worse with him than with Conley, so the veteran guard theory is peculiar...

Not really. Even with the injuries, Damon has accounted for fewer minutes at the point than the kids. He has totaled 624 minutes, some of them off the ball, whereas Conley and Lowry have played 1152 minutes, or about 2/3. And even that was not by design. Add to that the fact that Damon has sucked so much he might as well be a rookie (.397 fg%, barely 2-1 A/TO ratio, horrible defense) and the point remains. You have a running team with horrible point play, when point play is the key to being a running team.

[Toxicity]

again foul troubles ....damn, i'm being disgusted by andrea, how he can be so stupid not recognizing that his main problem in foul troubles!!...i'm negatively impressed of his INABILITY to recognize his lack of "good positioning" and "body control".

even if you're playing well (from stats point of view), foul troubles catch you out of the game suddenly!!..man, are you so stupid to not recognize YOUR MAIN PROBLEM?!?!?

ANDREA: YOU HAVE FOUL TROUBLES PERIOD

I DON'T WANT to listen anymore interview where you're going to say:" foul troubles? ..i don't have foul troubles!"

....you have to begin from your INCAPACITY(INABILITY) to STAY on the floor without FOULS!!

Ma dove cazzo le hai sentite queste interviste?!?

p.s.= yesterday 2-3 fouls weren't fouls...

[wille-dynamite]

Im having a hard time watching Raps games with Andrea out there. I would rather have Kwame Brown out there than his clumsy ass out on the floor.
I think I'm gonna call this season a wrap and watch only during the playoffs or until his candy ass is traded.

Im out go Raps!

[Vorticity]

again foul troubles ....damn, i'm being disgusted by andrea, how he can be so stupid not recognizing that his main problem in foul troubles!!...i'm negatively impressed of his INABILITY to recognize his lack of "good positioning" and "body control".

even if you're playing well (from stats point of view), foul troubles catch you out of the game suddenly!!..man, are you so stupid to not recognize YOUR MAIN PROBLEM?!?!?

ANDREA: YOU HAVE FOUL TROUBLES PERIOD

I DON'T WANT to listen anymore interview where you're going to say:" foul troubles? ..i don't have foul troubles!"

....you have to begin from your INCAPACITY(INABILITY) to STAY on the floor without FOULS!!

How do you say "Take a Chill Pill!" in Italian?