Interior defense: Bargnani has second lowest opp percentage.

[team edward]

Let's be honest. Bargnani's problem for the Raptors is no longer that he can't defend or rebound - he can cover one-on-one, and everyone else is a decent rebounder.

The problem is that he's chronically out of shape, and is no longer a good shooter. Oh, and also that he's constantly injured and can't play, although many would say that's not so much of a "problem" for the Raptors.

[The_Hater]

Let's be honest. Bargnani's problem for the Raptors is no longer that he can't defend or rebound - he can cover one-on-one, and everyone else is a decent rebounder.

The problem is that he's chronically out of shape, and is no longer a good shooter. Oh, and also that he's constantly injured and can't play, although many would say that's not so much of a "problem" for the Raptors.

He's still a dreadful help defender too. And his rebounding rate is at an all-time low this season, likely do to being more out of shape than usual.

His shooting has always been overrated but you're right, it's worse now than it ever was. His shot always looked great leaving his hand and he can get it off almost anytime he wants but his overall efficiency has ranged from mediocre to poor every season he's been in the league. The 41% he shot from the arc his 3rd season looks more like an aberration than the standard we thought it would be.

[Schad]

He's still a dreadful help defender too. And his rebounding rate is at an all-time low this season, likely do to being more out of shape than usual.

His shooting has always been overrated but you're right, it's worse now than it ever was. His shot always looked great leaving his hand and he can get it off almost anytime he wants but his overall efficiency has ranged from mediocre to poor every season he's been in the league. The 41% he shot from the arc his 3rd season looks more like an aberration than the standard we thought it would be.

From watching the handful of games recently where he's actually been making threes, I think it's because his shot has changed over time...this month, he suddenly altered his three-point stroke to be less of a quick-release line drive and more of a deliberate legs-involved jump, and started hitting them.

Problem is twofold. One, his release is noticeably slower that way, which means that he needs more space to get it off from three...something that is perfectly fine if knocking down open jumpers, but makes it a bit less likely that he'll get a shot off uncontested if a defender is running out. Two, he can't get that shot off the bounce, which hinders his overall effectiveness.

Does mean that he might be a borderline useful shooter on a team where someone else can draw a tonne of attention, but why you'd take his considerable flaws at that price for that reason, rather than a Steve Novak-type for half the price, I don't know.

[The_Hater]

From watching the handful of games recently where he's actually been making threes, I think it's because his shot has changed over time...this month, he suddenly altered his three-point stroke to be less of a quick-release line drive and more of a deliberate legs-involved jump, and started hitting them.

Problem is twofold. One, his release is noticeably slower that way, which means that he needs more space to get it off from three...something that is perfectly fine if knocking down open jumpers, but makes it a bit less likely that he'll get a shot off uncontested if a defender is running out. Two, he can't get that shot off the bounce, which hinders his overall effectiveness.

Does mean that he might be a borderline useful shooter on a team where someone else can draw a tonne of attention, but why you'd take his considerable flaws at that price for that reason, rather than a Steve Novak-type for half the price, I don't know.

Someone mentioned earlier this season that he shoots well when the ball leaves his hands with arc but far too often he shoots it flat. I've been watching for that in games this season, it's obviously not scientific but there seems to be a ton of truth to that.

[CCHS_22]

I was at at Economic summit once, and one economist said:

"Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is nice, but what they conceal is even more important!"

I think we are still far away from completely commoditizing the NBA player attributes

[Big Shot]

Stats only say so much and are meaningless if you don't look at the whole picture.

Someone said Jose is the top 5 PG offensively and threw out all numbers to justify. So what? It's not like he is a hot commodity every GM will kill to get him on their team. Instead his weaknesses outweigh his strengths so much that most GM's would like to stay away from.

[FluLikeSymptoms]

I'll bite on a Bargument every few months. I haven't heard anyone criticize AB's man D in years, back when the refs called him for breathing. For me, his only issue is letting his man get to wherever he wants before he receives the ball (his man D can be a bit late, too). But he's approaching elite as a 1v1 defender and I never worry about him switching onto smaller players. Using him as an anchor at the back is preposterous, I'd rather we switched everything unless a big needed cooling.

His help D is bad, but the way he gets blamed for every hoop when he's on the court is just dumb. Probably a third of the heat he gets is deserved (and weird, and ugly), a third can be chalked up to appalling perimeter D and a third goes to rotations that aren't even his to make or failed strategy. The game threads are messy.

I think AB's shot/lift is all tied to conditioning/legs and, of course, the rim is wider if the angle of descent is steeper. Flat is never better. I like the pull-ups and trailers, he can use the momentum in his lift when he drives in his front foot.

I still believe there's a place for AB on this team in a tight rotation, especially if the option is trading him for stale peanuts. I don't care about his money. He, Amir and JV will make $21m combined next season, that's fine for a 3-big rotation and AB is completely different from the other 2. Add Acy and Gray and we're still under $25m for the 5. The wing budget/mix is the problem going into next season, we owe about $41m on 5 of them and the group trips over itself and limits the PGs and bigs on offence while the tragic guard defence exacerbates the help/fouling problems of our bigs.

Replacing Bargnani with a different, especially attainable big won't magically improve our team. It won't make KL sensible on the defensive end, DD passable there or give Amir/JV more time to rotate- and it surely won't help our clusterfracking offence. I don't know how we're going to get a big who can shoot/score and defend/rebound better than AB. Good luck.

[Schad]

Replacing Bargnani with a different, especially attainable big won't magically improve our team.

Actually, it likely will. Not the 'magically' bit, but the fact that we're better when he's not playing is pretty much indisputable at this point, because we have a six-year sample from which to work, and the on/off splits tell only one story.

[Trianoball]

How often does Bargnani get the tough assignment on D though?

I'm not saying I'm certain that he doesn't, but I feel as though he is usually not the one to guard the most talented big.

Part of the problem for me is that this team has been so hard to watch for so long, that I have a limited sample size in the old memory bank.

[Kabookalu]

How often does Bargnani get the tough assignment on D though?

I'm not saying I'm certain that he doesn't, but I feel as though he is usually not the one to guard the most talented big.

Part of the problem for me is that this team has been so hard to watch for so long, that I have a limited sample size in the old memory bank.

The team has this weird habit of doing things backwards. Sometimes it's Valanciunas or Amir that's taking the tough post player and it's Bargnani that's regulated to helping out and rebounding. Unlike most I respect Casey and can reason out a lot of his decisions. For that one I'm completely dumbfounded.

[FluLikeSymptoms]

Replacing Bargnani with a different, especially attainable big won't magically improve our team.

Actually, it likely will. Not the 'magically' bit, but the fact that we're better when he's not playing is pretty much indisputable at this point, because we have a six-year sample from which to work, and the on/off splits tell only one story.

I think you might have intentionally missed my point, but, if you didn't, consider the role and roster changes and what we could actually get for him via trade or FA. He's our best big individual defender and only big shooter, slip in % or no, and he's still guarded out to 3pt. This team can use him. If you think you could replace him and dramatically (if you don't like magically) improve this roster, great.

[Neutral 123]

Replacing Bargnani with a different, especially attainable big won't magically improve our team.

Actually, it likely will. Not the 'magically' bit, but the fact that we're better when he's not playing is pretty much indisputable at this point, because we have a six-year sample from which to work, and the on/off splits tell only one story.

I think you might have intentionally missed my point, but, if you didn't, consider the role and roster changes and what we could actually get for him via trade or FA. He's our best big individual defender and only big shooter, slip in % or no, and he's still guarded out to 3pt. This team can use him. If you think you could replace him and dramatically (if you don't like magically) improve this roster, great.

I hope that opinion isn't based on the study in this thread. It says no such thing.

[Undefeated]

From watching the handful of games recently where he's actually been making threes, I think it's because his shot has changed over time...this month, he suddenly altered his three-point stroke to be less of a quick-release line drive and more of a deliberate legs-involved jump, and started hitting them.

Problem is twofold. One, his release is noticeably slower that way, which means that he needs more space to get it off from three...something that is perfectly fine if knocking down open jumpers, but makes it a bit less likely that he'll get a shot off uncontested if a defender is running out. Two, he can't get that shot off the bounce, which hinders his overall effectiveness.

Does mean that he might be a borderline useful shooter on a team where someone else can draw a tonne of attention, but why you'd take his considerable flaws at that price for that reason, rather than a Steve Novak-type for half the price, I don't know.

Someone mentioned earlier this season that he shoots well when the ball leaves his hands with arc but far too often he shoots it flat. I've been watching for that in games this season, it's obviously not scientific but there seems to be a ton of truth to that.

He has been using a lot more legs on his shot to get that rainbow on his arc instead of using all arms.

I still think his mechanics on his one dribble pullup jumper isn't quite effective creating that necessary space to escape his defender because instead of dribbling the ball forward in front of his body he'll just dribble to the side of his body at an angle and that gives his man an easy time to recover and contest. I remember Klay Thompson easily recovering last week when he did this exact move when he had an open lane to drive after forcing Klay to leave his feet, but was bailed out with a foul call. He doesn't have a good feel of where to go and the in-between stuff before the release like his pickup after the dribble is very slow. He's not really ball quick transferring the ball from the floor to his hands either.

[Schad]

Replacing Bargnani with a different, especially attainable big won't magically improve our team.

Actually, it likely will. Not the 'magically' bit, but the fact that we're better when he's not playing is pretty much indisputable at this point, because we have a six-year sample from which to work, and the on/off splits tell only one story.

I think you might have intentionally missed my point, but, if you didn't, consider the role and roster changes and what we could actually get for him via trade or FA. He's our best big individual defender and only big shooter, slip in % or no, and he's still guarded out to 3pt. This team can use him. If you think you could replace him and dramatically (if you don't like magically) improve this roster, great.

No, what I'm saying is this: while you can point to little things that he does well, the totality of his effect on the team is extremely negative, as evidenced by the fact that -- over the years -- we are a much, much better team when he is not playing. As such, he will not be a difficult player to replace, because he is what in baseball is termed below-replacement level: a player whose minutes can be filled by your average eleventh man without hurting the team's performance.

[Spacing]

I've always said that Bargnani is just an over sized Jason Kapono... at least he plays that way.

[FluLikeSymptoms]

Actually (Replacing Bargnani with a different, especially attainable big won't magically improve our team -FLS), it likely will. Not the 'magically' bit, but the fact that we're better when he's not playing is pretty much indisputable at this point, because we have a six-year sample from which to work, and the on/off splits tell only one story.

I think you might have intentionally missed my point, but, if you didn't, consider the role and roster changes and what we could actually get for him via trade or FA. He's our best big individual defender and only big shooter, slip in % or no, and he's still guarded out to 3pt. This team can use him. If you think you could replace him and dramatically (if you don't like magically) improve this roster, great.

No, what I'm saying is this: while you can point to little things that he does well, the totality of his effect on the team is extremely negative, as evidenced by the fact that -- over the years -- we are a much, much better team when he is not playing. As such, he will not be a difficult player to replace, because he is what in baseball is termed below-replacement level: a player whose minutes can be filled by your average eleventh man without hurting the team's performance.

Little things like post defence and shooting? Good grief.

You sound like a fan of baseball, a sport of endless, easily-tracked 1v1 outcomes. But presenting broad stats like on/off as proof of anything in a sport like basketball is silly. You're not proving anything, 10 players and 2 coaches can dictate the outcome of each play. There's a reason guys like Goldsberry are coming up with new ways to analyze basketball by breaking it down to the smallest number of factors possible and in identified conditions, such as 1v1 outcomes 5ft from the hoop. It's fair to question the study, but to rebut with substantially less conclusive evidence is about as smart as that sounds, as is treating those stats as indicators of future success in different conditions.

In all honesty, I don't consider you a contributor and I would put you on ignore if I could. We get it, you think that Bargnani is a negative-impact player no matter what, and that you have the right to attack anyone who says otherwise, with weak statistical arguments (not even numbers, this time, but it doesn't matter) and venom- that's all I've ever seen you do. You came into a possibly positive thread on Bargnani and did your little dance, great job. You snipped a sentence and did your thing. We do not share an idea of fun. You're boring. Put me on ignore if you can.

[Schad]

Little things like post defence and shooting? Good grief.

Yes. Because if his post defense is more than cancelled out by his lack of rebounding and help defense -- and it is -- and he makes his shots at a rate well below the league average, then yes: they are, in the grand scheme, little things.

You sound like a fan of baseball, a sport of endless, easily-tracked 1v1 outcomes. But presenting broad stats like on/off as proof of anything in a sport like basketball is silly.

Actually, and there's the great irony, people are pointing to easily-tracked 1v1 outcomes as a way to tout Bargnani's defense, while the 5v5 numbers are considerably less favourable.

You're not proving anything, 10 players and 2 coaches can dictate the outcome of each play. There's a reason guys like Goldsberry are coming up with new ways to analyze basketball by breaking it down to the smallest number of factors possible and in identified conditions, such as 1v1 outcomes 5ft from the hoop. It's fair to question the study, but to rebut with substantially less conclusive evidence is about as smart as that sounds, as is treating those stats as indicators of future success in different conditions.

And from that granular accounting we have a pretty clear picture: Bargs does well 1v1 with his man. However, he also frequently loses his man or allows them to get to positions where they can do damage free of his influence, and he provides very little by way of help. Thus why he was a topic of conversation at Sloan.

In all honesty, I don't consider you a contributor and I would put you on ignore if I could. We get it, you think that Bargnani is a negative-impact player no matter what, and that you have the right to attack anyone who says otherwise, with weak statistical arguments (not even numbers, this time, but it doesn't matter) and venom- that's all I've ever seen you do. You came into a possibly positive thread on Bargnani and did your little dance, great job. You snipped a sentence and did your thing. We do not share an idea of fun. You're boring. Put me on ignore if you can.

Point me in the direction of attacking that I've done here.

[S.W.A.N]

I think the thing about bargnani that makes these kind of threads interesting is that he is so god awful yet has aspects of his game that are so good that at times you can see why he was drafted first with the potential to be a dominant big man.

He's a guy that could fade into oblivion if he doesn't adjust his mind set, or could be an all-star or near all-star level big man if someone gets through to him and gets him to grasp the aspects of the game that he is so terrible at.

Reboundball is a foreign concept, and the fact that he really makes no effort to improve his stats in this area is mind boggling at times.

Help defense is another foreign concept, which is so strange considering how good of man defender he is. It really must be a mental thing with him about the whole team concept.

But the reality is that while he has amazing potential to be a good player the consistent story with him has been that he is not good and that when his minutes go to bench players we are a better team.So unless we hire phil jackson he does a mind meld with him its probably time to part ways.

Casey has tried, he obviously sees what bargs could be, but the results have stayed the same. So unless over the course of the remaining games we see an amazing transformation I think this is finally the end of the bargnani era in raptor land.

[Danny1616]

We all know he has a good interior man to man defender.

But he pretty much is terrible at everything else and is detrimental to the team as a whole. He is the game for his scoring capabilities and he is getting less efficient every year in that category.

I am not okay with our big man getting 3 rebounds per game and getting 3 free throw attempts per game. That is not what helps a team win.

[Dalek]

I have always liked his man-defense. He is a weird player in that he moves like a giraffe at times, but he has quick feet and can move well laterally. I also like how willing he is to take a charge. I thought from the early going he would average more blocks, because he has a bit of that Tim Duncan blocking without biting for fakes, but he has slowed up in block numbers.

I will say, I like him better than Boozer right now. Boozer's defense is actually worse than Bargnani's is, but it is masked by Noah and Taj Gibson (when he's around). I am glad we didn't pull that trade.

Bargnani does do well with Amir when they play together. I think you need to always have two plus defenders and rebounders around him (Amir/Fields/Lowry combinations). It could all work except for a couple facts:

Fans are booing him at home, so he may not get another chance to prove himself.
His recent slew of injuries. Calf and now elbow injuries makes me think he could injury-prone. At least we now have several that could be troublesome his whole career.

It's a tough stretch for him this year, but I do see some positives that some GM will be willing to take a chance on. Just don't expect to get much in return.