Page 6 of 9
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:53 pm
by reck0n3r
vulture wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
So let's hear your speculation as to what has happened here.
Well some of it has already been mentioned, as far as bargnani being "arrogant" and such, which plays a big part, I imagine, as to why smitch and him don't get along. I had a feeling this would happen pretty much since last year, since we all know how smitch is, and some of us can sense that Andrea doesn't exactly go out of his way to be nice to people. Something/someone had to give in, and it looks like smitch had to give in, mainly because of BC stepping in last season, to get bargs more playing time (I strongly believe if it was up to smitch, he wouldn't have averaged more than 8-10mpg last season)
Sam was probably given a little more leeway this season due how well the team did last season, as well as the fact thatwe haven't been all that bad this season. I'm still confident in saying that it was BC that ordered bargs to be put back into the starting lineup, as opposed to what had been said in the media. If sam and bargs aren't getting along at all (mostly bargnani's fault for being stubborn and having the ego) , why would smitch throw him back into the lineup after lacklustre play? By the same token, if BC did order him to start bargs, why would smitch continue to play him few minutes? I'm not quite sure why that's the case...there could be something else.
But yeah, two things need to happen, bargs needs to smarten up, and smitch needs to remember he's dealing with a number 1 draft pick, not some castaway. I mentioned in the past that there's most likely some sort of language/cultural barrier between the two and that its probably a catalyst in all of this. At the same time, bargs needs to realize he's not 'the man' over here and he should be taking criticism a little more constructively...but again, the culture/language thing comes into play.
I don't think that was an issue with Jose/Garbo because they seem like the nice guy types, as well as the both of them not being high lottery picks, so smitch doesn't see them in a certain light.
Whatever the case may be, smitch and bargs need to work it out.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
by tosi
Is the Smitch going to have to smack a...
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:05 pm
by Shaazzam
I love it.
The coach always needs to be the biggest dog in the room, and the players need to understand that. Until they do, they won't really move forward as players, and it hinders the team as a whole, because all 15 guys really should be on the same page.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:05 pm
by elephunk
Sam just earned more bonus points. People can think whatever they want whether he may or may not be the coach who takes us deep into the playoffs, but a culture needs to be set first and foremost.
Having a knee brace doesn't explain the numbers that he put in December.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:20 pm
by dagger
I give Sam props for his evolution as a coach. Not in terms of on-court strategy - I still think we could do a lot more to get easy baskets, I loved the deliberate motion Nate McMillan has instilled into the Blazers' offence - they use diagonal penetration to set up corner three balls and will pass up a likely two for a chance at a wide open three.
However as a judge of character, I believe Sam has learned a great deal about how to handle people as individuals, rather than subjecting them to a single template. Each coach has his own way. George Karl loves to use the media to bully his players, always has. Sam tends to keep it in house until he gets some results. We only found out about the Kris Humphries two dribble rule and all of what Sam has had to do to get Hump to stop being The Man like he wanted to be in Utah after Sam felt that he had Kris buying in. Sam's not going to do a George Karl and wait for public criticism to change a player, he's going to get the change first, then use it to make both him and the player look good.
I just wouldn't expect overnight miracles. It's good that everybody's on the same wavelength now, but it will take a lot of trial and error to teach an outside player to play the centre position. There's an awful lot to learn, a lot of it fairly subtle stuff that centres begin learning in AAU and high school. I'd be looking for small but sustainable progress at doing those things rather than dramatic change.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:27 pm
by vulture
SomewhatDamaged wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Well some of it has already been mentioned, as far as bargnani being "arrogant" and such, which plays a big part, I imagine, as to why smitch and him don't get along. I had a feeling this would happen pretty much since last year, since we all know how smitch is, and some of us can sense that Andrea doesn't exactly go out of his way to be nice to people. Something/someone had to give in, and it looks like smitch had to give in, mainly because of BC stepping in last season, to get bargs more playing time (I strongly believe if it was up to smitch, he wouldn't have averaged more than 8-10mpg last season)
Sam was probably given a little more leeway this season due how well the team did last season, as well as the fact thatwe haven't been all that bad this season. I'm still confident in saying that it was BC that ordered bargs to be put back into the starting lineup, as opposed to what had been said in the media. If sam and bargs aren't getting along at all (mostly bargnani's fault for being stubborn and having the ego) , why would smitch throw him back into the lineup after lacklustre play? By the same token, if BC did order him to start bargs, why would smitch continue to play him few minutes? I'm not quite sure why that's the case...there could be something else.
But yeah, two things need to happen, bargs needs to smarten up, and smitch needs to remember he's dealing with a number 1 draft pick, not some castaway. I mentioned in the past that there's most likely some sort of language/cultural barrier between the two and that its probably a catalyst in all of this. At the same time, bargs needs to realize he's not 'the man' over here and he should be taking criticism a little more constructively...but again, the culture/language thing comes into play.
I don't think that was an issue with Jose/Garbo because they seem like the nice guy types, as well as the both of them not being high lottery picks, so smitch doesn't see them in a certain light.
Whatever the case may be, smitch and bargs need to work it out.
I think you just a created a wack of excuses here, IMO.
It's as simple as:
Bargs being told to defend and rebound and deciding to dog it in practice.
I'm glad he is turning his attitude around but, it's not as if it's going to change the way he plays.
Andrea is what he is.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:31 pm
by splayed
from24ft wrote:How often does Joey get to hang with MG, Bryan and chat their ears off? How often does Andrea? Is this healthy in a hierarchical environment?
Most business/management/leadership thought on the issue is that hierarchical environments discourage success factors. "Flatten the matrix" and all that. The fewer barriers for employees to any manager/executive/superior leads to increased performance.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:32 pm
by Shaazzam
vulture wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I think you just a created a wack of excuses here, IMO.
It's as simple as:
Bargs being told to defend and rebound and deciding to dog it in practice.
I'm glad he is turning his attitude around but, it's not as if it's going to change the way he plays.
Andrea is what he is.
I assume you are not a big fan of self improvement tools.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:38 pm
by hoop_head
vulture wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I think you just a created a wack of excuses here, IMO.
It's as simple as:
Bargs being told to defend and rebound and deciding to dog it in practice.
I'm glad he is turning his attitude around but, it's not as if it's going to change the way he plays.Andrea is what he is.
You seriously believe that? Andrea's attitiude will have no bearing on his play? So, in your own life, your attitude doesn't affect how well you do things?
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:40 pm
by reck0n3r
vulture wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I think you just a created a wack of excuses here, IMO.
It's as simple as:
Bargs being told to defend and rebound and deciding to dog it in practice.
I'm glad he is turning his attitude around but, it's not as if it's going to change the way he plays.
Andrea is what he is.
So you're trying to say he peaked in his rookie season?
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:53 pm
by vulture
Shaazzam wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I assume you are not a big fan of self improvement tools.
You can improve but at the of the day, you are what you are.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:55 pm
by vulture
hoop_head wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
You seriously believe that? Andrea's attitiude will have no bearing on his play? So, in your own life, your attitude doesn't affect how well you do things?
Of course it does. but we're talking about his play here. In his rookie season, he averaged 11 and 3 and shot 41%, so it's not he had a great rookie season.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:58 pm
by Shaazzam
vulture wrote:
You can improve but at the of the day, you are what you are.
Yes, but if you have a thorough understanding of what you are, then you can internalize that and use techniques that will cause you to respond to situations in a more positive manner.
Sometimes people need to eat a little humble pie before they are willing to take the actions required to achieve the results that they want.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:01 pm
by vulture
SomewhatDamaged wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
So you're trying to say he peaked in his rookie season?
I'm saying that he's a scorer who doesn't even do that efficiently. He will get better at that, but his rebounding and defense will always be a liability.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:02 pm
by vulture
Shaazzam wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Yes, but if you have a thorough understanding of what you are, then you can internalize that and use techniques that will cause you to respond to situations in a more positive manner.
Sometimes people need to eat a little humble pie before they are willing to take the actions required to achieve the results that they want.
I agree. Let's hope this is the case for Bargs.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:05 pm
by Shaazzam
vulture wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I agree. Let's hope this is the case for Bargs.
Here's to hopin'
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:40 pm
by from24ft
splayed wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Most business/management/leadership thought on the issue is that hierarchical environments discourage success factors. "Flatten the matrix" and all that. The fewer barriers for employees to any manager/executive/superior leads to increased performance.
I think coaching is a little different. Decisions are made by the coach durring the game and not by committee. Sam should not have to ask the team as whole to come up with a strategy for developing Joey and Andrea. The team will not be blamed for failing to develop Andrea, Sam will.
The coach is the top of the hierarchy on a sports team. This relationship is crucial to success in sports. Players need to respect the coach, just like a soldier needs to respect higher rank.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:24 pm
by Darrick Martin
El Presidente wrote:Bargnani's drive an dunk to start off the game was indication that he was ready to play this game. Unfortunately for him, he has trouble understanding NBA rules and picks up silly fouls which are hampering him more than anything. Let's see how he fares tonight and whether he can stay out of foul trouble.
Sounds a lot like Arujo don't ya think?
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:57 pm
by The_Hater
Darrick Martin wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Sounds a lot like Arujo don't ya think?
It's just one game. It happens but Bargs hasn't been in a ton of foul trouble this season. Hoffa was a fouling machine.
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:51 pm
by brownbobcat
YogiStewart wrote:keep in mind what the Blue Jays did to Roy Halliday - they demoted him to the most minor of minor leagues and basically started his pitching technique from scratch. is that the way you treat a 1st round pick? you would initially say no, but it clearly had its results.
Don't forget that one reason Halladay's story is amazing is because of its rarity. The minors are littered with 1st rounders that got sent back and were never heard from again.