Tip-In: The Best of the Worst; Raptors beat 76ers in "Harrison Barnes Cup"
A Bargnani and Weems led victory over the Philadelphia 76ers was a good thing for the Toronto Raptors...wasn't it?
Depending on your view of this season, the Toronto Raptors' 94 to 86 victory last night over the Philadelphia 76erswas either a good thing, or a disappointment en route to the inevitable draft lottery visit at season's end.
While neither team played well, the Raptors made fewer errors down the stretch and managed to wrestle away the road win, evening their road trip record at 2 and 2.
For me this was a win.
A good one?
Well...that's like saying the last 3 Star Wars movies were amazing.
They were made...and...let's just leave it at that.
It was definitely not a pretty win but I'll argue it was an important one.
While I'm all for grabbing that top lottery spot come May, I don't want this to turn into an 8 win season and have a deathly losing culture ingrained in the minds of these youngsters. I'd prefer to see the club play hard each and every night, and it's hard to do that when you're constantly ending up on the losing side of performances like the night before last in Washington.
So while Toronto did plenty wrong last night, and frankly would have lost to pretty much any other team in the league having played like this, the Raps did enough to come away with an important W.
Leading the charge?
How about Andrea Bargnani?!
He mixed up his shots, hit on a great percentage (12 of 18) en route to a game-high 30 points, got to the line frequently, and even hauled in 7 rebounds. And while he still got caught standing around on defence at times, this is the type of performance the Raps need each and every night if they want to consistently compete. His offence simply must offset his other liabilities and while his plus/minus mark was 0 on the night, I thought this was a good example of Andrea being a positive contributor when all was said and done.
Yes, Elton Brand pumped in 27 points but most of the night Reggie Evans was matched up with Brand, not Bargs.
Also helping Andrea out, Mr. Sonny Weems.
Yep, I've been blowing the Weems horn pretty loud for the past two seasons so I don't think I need to go too much further here.
Simply put, 10 of 18 shooting from a wing is spectacular, and 4 rebounds, 2 assists, 6 free throw attempts and a team-high plus 17 on the night is pretty solid too. Weems gave the Raptors the push they needed and hopefully has solidified his spot at the starting 3 going forward. I see no reason why he can't be a key member of the Raptors for years to come and I'm going on record right now as saying that he, along with Amir Johnson, are the only two players I'm sold on in terms of being key pieces for the future; either in starting or reserve roles.
So what about the rest of this group?
Well the team got another big rebounding and hustle night from Reggie Evans (5 points and 14 rebounds), including some lock-down D on one of the game's final possessions that sealed the TO win.
And Jose Calderon had 12 points and 8 assists in only 25 minutes, looking like a completely different person than the point guard who suited up in Washington.
This core group was enough to vanquish solid performances from the likes of Jrue Holiday and Evan Turner, and the 76ers 16 to 6 dominance on the offensive glass, but as mentioned above, that ain't gonna cut it on most nights.
Jarrett Jack and Linas Kleiza continue to struggle and were a combined 3 of freaking 20 on the night. Only you wouldn't know that because they kept jacking them up.
And while DeMar DeRozan wasn't bad necessarily, he was fairly invisible.
The argument this morning will be that DeRozan didn't get much of a chance to do anything but in reality he played the third most minutes on the team behind only Weems and Bargnani, and got his fair share of touches. Sure, Bargs can be a black hole and Jack was chucking up almost everything he could get his hands on, but it's also up to DeMar at some points to create for himself. Hopefully this will come though as the season progresses.
In a way though, this was one of the most encouraging things about the win.
The Raptors really only got great play from two players, good from another two, and that was pretty much it on the night.
Add in some bad shooting (the team was 2 of 12 from long-range) and there's lots of opportunity for improvement.
So yes, the win put Toronto slightly behind the 8 ball in terms of a shot at some of the rumoured top picks in the upcoming draft, but considering the fickle nature of the lottery, as long as the Raps are in that top 5 range, it's ok with me. This team needs to show some sort of progress on a night by night basis and while overall things weren't pretty last night, the win did have those elements.
Which ones?
Well I don't know about you, but to me, if the Raptors finish the season and establish a consistently powerful offensive weapon in Andrea Bargnani, find their 3 (or 2) of the future in Sonny Weems, have DeMar DeRozan take another big step forward, get guys like Joey Dorsey and Ed Davis some meaningful experience, AND establish some sort of trade value for players like Reggie Evans an Jose Calderon, that's a successful campaign.
Yes, even if the club only wins 20 games.
116 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
A Black hole?
I did no watch yestarday’s game (and neither the one against the Wiz) it is the first time however I hear Andrea being touted as a black hole. Just looking at the line, 12-18 does not look like the line of somebody who hijacked the offense. Is there more than meet the eye?
RE: Black hole
Don’t put too much into it. It’s just franchise being franchise. Nice post anyways. Avid reader.
Sorry, didn’t mean in terms of hogging all the shots, I meant as a distributor in Toronto’s offence.
Watch him in his offensive sets…he’s averaging 1.2 assists on the season and has a terrible passer rating for a reason…VERY rarely does Andrea look to facilitate, he almost always looks to score immediately upon receipt of the ball.
Not saying he needs to be KG, but I was just pointing out a fact. When the ball goes into him, he’s almost solely looking for his own offence.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 10:08 AM EST up reply actions
Was it different last year?
I mean maybe they asked him to do so this year? has it been always this way? I remember A. passing out quite well when he is doubled, but aside of that I really have no clue.
He’s always been sold as a great passer but that’s not the case in reality.
Right now he ranks 47th amongst center’s in terms of assist ratio, and last year he was 46th on the season so no change.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
People also called Araujo a great passer after he made a behind the back pass underneath the basket one time.
People also called Araujo a great passer after he made a behind the back pass underneath the basket one time.
Dying…favourite comment in ages because I REMEMBER that stupid pass!!
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
What ever the guy does, you still manage to find a fault….seriously why not take the half-full approach for a change
by Canuck Exile on Nov 19, 2010 6:25 AM EST up reply actions
With Araujo? Glass is empty.
With Andrea? He is a weak passer. I’ve always thought he should work on driving and dishing, he seems to put his head down on his drives, so when the help comes, his only option is to take that pull-up jump shot (which is a little inconsistent, especially further form the basket). He has the passing ability, but not the instinct, and unless he puts in specific work on that, he will always have low assist numbers. Which may not be a problem – if his role is a scorer, so be it, but a couple dishes here and there tend to open up the floor, for himself and everyone else.
by dhackett1565 on Nov 19, 2010 8:34 AM EST up reply actions
Here's the thing though
Most post players who rack up assist can either pass to the other post player for a finish, or pass to a reliable outside shooting threat to counter the double, preferably a 3 point shooter, which at the moment the Raptors don’t have. I see a lot of passes going to Kleiza who to this point hasn’t really been shooting well, and one would figure that when he develops more chemistry with Weems and DeMar, and DeMar in particular develops a reliable jump shot, the assist numbers should go up.
I jumped ship too early on Bargs yesterday, but last night was the sort of night where you say, if things come together..watch out.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
Normally a C gets assists while passing out of a low post setting
this would hence be the first year he could be judged on that, up till recently he would have been in the low post just because of a mismatch and looking to score.
Normally yes…but Andrea plays so much on the perimeter that he should be racking up way more assists than traditional centers.
Watch how Toronto runs a lot of plays; a bulk of them involve a very high screen-and-roll with Bargs. But 90% of the time if he doesn’t make his offensive move (head-fake and drive or shot), then the offense resets. Very rarely does Andrea look for a cutter or anything of the sort…things just sorta stop.
Again, this isn’t meant to be a “Bargs sucks” comment, just a reality of the issue and stats back it up.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 10:32 AM EST up reply actions
Again, once Weems and DeRozan develop chemistry with Bargs
The assist numbers should go up. Getting tough passes through to cutters means being on the same page, knowing your team mate’s preferences and working off your chemistry. I really view this as year 1 of something. Right now turnovers can be a problem for this team so I understand not making the riskier pass until you know your target well. But moving on
In light of recent news on Oden and Roy – one being the likely #1 overall pick in 2006 if the rules hadn’t changed and the other considered the best player from that draft the first couple of years after – did the Raptors get lucky in landing Bargnani?
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
As soon as I heard the Roy news I shuddered as I KNOW Colangelo is going to use that rationale to defend the pick until his grave…ugh.
That being said, it’s becoming more and more evident that this was a terrible draft, so the Raptors DID get at least some value although none of the best 5 players in the end.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
The best five players?
They did get one of the best 5 players from that draft.
Roy (plays with Aldridge)
Rondo (what would he look like on a different team without the vets surrounding him)
Bargnani
Milsap
Aldridge (plays with Roy – no pressure)
Gay (not a game changer, team has been bad for most of his time there)
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
I read that list
he was 5th on that list althought arguing tha gay al aldrige are better… well let’s say it is at least debateable…
Scoring skews this but Tyrus Thomas is infinitely more valuable than Bargnani. There isn’t an advanced stat in the world that doesn’t back this up, and I can’t imagine Larry Brown or any coach of that ilk wanting Bargs over Thomas.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
now you have to say that
to redeem yourself for you choice at the time….
actually, to play PF
I would not put that out laud….
RIDICULOUS!
We roast Bargs based on inconsistency and lack of basketball IQ and you’re throwing TYRUS THOMAS name out as INFINITELY more valuable on what a 4-8 Bobcats team? A team that struggles to score? Tyrus Thomas who is still on the bench for that team? You can’t be serious.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
We saw TT play against a decend C (Chandler)
we never saw Andrea in that position. I would say in that position most of Andrea’s deficiencies on D would be masked and you would be left with a very productive offensive threat who could defend his man quie well but who could seldom be defended by his opponnent….
tyrus Thomas??
Hahaha sorry francise but that’s crazy talk, I wouldn’t choose tyrus over bargs.
by sherwin316 on Nov 18, 2010 12:00 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
infinitely?
I don’t think you mean “infinitely.” It may be impossible to quantify with certainty, but it can’t be infinite (unless Drea has zero or negative value).
I absolutely think that Andrea indeed has 0 value hence the comment.
Not to get into this again but I’m a firm believer in the advanced metrics and whether you like win score, wins produced, various +/- markers, they all would say the same thing; Andrea hurts his team more often then he helps it, which you can’t say about Tyrus Thomas thanks to his D and rebounding.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
Zero value?
Speechless. There are the advanced metrics, watching the games, and then there are viewing the metrics in light of watching the games. If you just looked at the metrics, Amir Johnson would be the undisputed best Raptor player night in and night out. But then you watch the games. It’s like saying the games shouldn’t be played because Team A will always win over Team B because Team A is infinitely better. In such a scenario the Lakers should win 80 games a season. Generate the spreadsheet and award the championship accordingly. It’s okay to be wrong sometimes. No need to compound it by being stubborn. Sports has gotten to the point where less and less value is placed on what’s observed vs. what’s measured based on algorithms that inherently have their own biases. The advanced metrics should be viewed as complementary to the observations not as the replacement for.
Speechless
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
Hey, love to be wrong – just absolutely believe Andrea has provided zero (if not negative) value to the Raptors so far in his career, in the same way that I believed Hedo was a terrible mistake and so was a Roko/Will Solomon back-up combo to Jose.
I’ve probably watched more Raptors’ games in the last 6 years than most and I see the same thing game after game…a player who gives up more than he provides.
We’re just going to have to agree to disagree here and remember, I defended Bargs to the death through his first nearly 3 seasons.
This isn’t some “I’ve hated Bargs from day 1” thing.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 5:08 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, let's agree to disagree
I’m viewing this as Bargani’s Raptors, Year One, afforded all of the opportunity and responsibility that one would expect from a Number 1 overall. My judgments will be based on this year going forward.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 5:42 PM EST up reply actions
You can’t simply throw out four years worth of data and watching a player simply because he’s gone from the 2nd to the 1st option. That’s a little ridiculous. Bargnani isn’t going to become a good rebounder and defender simply because he’s taking four more shots a game.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
The Miami Heat is the perfect case
According to WOW or some other metric, they were not supposed to lose a game, or something nearly as ridiculous. in fact the win total was incalculable according to one of those metrics. Well…the games are played for a reason.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
using last years metrics
which will no longer apply to this year as their usage statistics will change
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Nov 18, 2010 5:45 PM EST up reply actions
But thats the case going into each year
WOW is predictive based on historical measures, so the prediction was incalculable. The point is context changes the numbers so if we were to abide by advanced metrics use the ACTUAL games and the systems they employ as the context for those numbers.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 6:05 PM EST up reply actions
the metric
can be applicable to someone who has or is having a small usage change.
You are saying its inaccurate and using players who are destined to have significant decrease in usage changes as an example. What I’m saying is your example is very bad one.
Anyways… would love to see Bargs advanced numbers if points weren’t calculated… that would really get people going.
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Nov 18, 2010 11:10 PM EST up reply actions
I approached that wrong
Alberta is and has historically been a vastly conservative province. Now if I was to go into certain neighboorhoods in Calgary and took a poll, I could/will find the majority voted liberal. That result doesn’t mean that Alberta isn’t (or is no longer) a conservative province. It was simply an outlier
What I’m saying here is your “perfect example” is not even close to perfect. Its a rarity that would not fit most or common trends. Its an outlier that you are trying to use to discredit an argument… that is far from perfect.
Anyways… in your previous post you mentioned that “There are the advanced metrics, watching the games, and then there are viewing the metrics in light of watching the games” all three of those should be and are telling us that Bargs hurts more often than helps. Regardless of Tyrus Thomas.
Its just some can’t/refuse to see it, and then choose to ignore what the advanced metrics say even “in light of watching the games”. If he was a rookie or relatively fresh in the NBA I could still give him the benifit of the doubt… he is however on the verge of becoming considered a veteran. He no longer gets that benifit.
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Nov 18, 2010 11:45 PM EST up reply actions
Actually
I’m not refusing to see the advanced stats, what I had a problem with was their apparent use in isolation in the Tyrus Thomas over Bargs discussion. Using your polling analogy – Raptors fans with Bargs are like a pollster having had the opportunity to interview EVERY person in Alberta and then being asked to compare the results of that data with results gathered via 50 phone calls to PEI.
The fans on either side of the argument have a tendency to throw out names of other players being better or worse having seen so little of that other person.
I would argue that in a sport like basketball, the metrics that should hold the most weight are those that reflect play of groupings and combinations as opposed to individuals.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 19, 2010 12:22 AM EST up reply actions
From now on, when you make an outrageous comment
I’m just going to say Tyrus Thomas and leave it at that. Even a couple of hours after digesting that comment – wow.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
And further, I don’t even think Thomas is a great player…he’s not NEARLY in the same class as guys like Rondo, Roy, Millsap, etc, etc.
So that shows you my true opinion of Bargs.
Again, as a Raptors fan though, I’d love to be wrong and have Andrea string together 60 games of performances like last night.
I’d also like to only run this site for a living :)
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Consider
When you draft near the top of the draft, you look at a player who might contribute for 10 years. Considering injury history, and what’s still possible in years 6 through 10, in retrospect, it was a good pick. Drafts are always judged in retrospect, 5 years from the draft, which was the timeline suggested originally when the pick was made, the argument was Bargs would be the best player and that is still possible. Factor in salary, Roy paid at max for what might turn out to be an Allen Houston type outcome.
In Carter’s draft, would Raps fans not take Pierce or even Jamison in retrospect?
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
No. For all the pain that came after, I wouldn’t change that pick. VC was amazing, and he put the Raps on the map.
by dhackett1565 on Nov 18, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
Such a tough question.
Not Jamison, despite what you could argue was a more consistent career overall…but Pierce…possibly.
However dhackett makes a great point in that this franchise really needed someone to make them relevant and Carter certainly did that.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 4:24 PM EST up reply actions
Just like when Bosh would pass out of double teams
Rarely would anything good come of it, seemed like…
Same with Bargs, most times, he should just try to score.
Though I have to say, he seems to be talking to Demar and Sonny a lot these days on court, that is a great sign…
He is a black hole
It just looks good when his shot is falling and looks terrible when its not.
I’d have to agree that he has been instructed to play like this.
Probably not his fault, but when the opposition knows he’s going to shoot everytime he gets the rock, it’s easier for them to find an answer. It’s also probably why he seems to have more off nights than good ones.
And I completely disagree with the statement that Demar got his fair share of touches. Alot of the time, they had him glued to a corner in weird iso situations for Bargs or pick and pops for Calderon. You’re letting your Weems bias shield you from seeing the truth. While it’s fine that Weems is a huge chucker when he’s goign 10-18, it becomes a problem when he has his nights of 3-10.
Anyway, if Derozan’s had 3 straight VERY good games, I don’t see why Jarrett Jack kept looking him off on every freaking play to take stupid fadeaways in the paint. All I can say is there’s a reason Derozan was considered one of the top high school players in the nation just 2 years ago. I continue to see Derozan as the FAR more talented player for simply playing within himself. I don’t see one mention of his 5 assists yesterday or even the chemistry between the two. You simply want to hammer away at the point that Weems will be better Derozan. Either way, time will tell who will end up being better. Weems has played at the collegiate/pro level for years now, this is only Derozan’s 3rd year.
My answe is (and has always been)
cool off, they all play for our team….
Woah, woah, woah.
I actually defended DeRozan’s performance by noting Jack and Bargnani’s propensity to shoot without looking for others!
And this is DeRozan’s 2nd year…if it was his 3rd, I’d say stick a fork in him…
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 10:10 AM EST up reply actions
And really, that’s the big picture here as I noted in my last statement. The team needs individual wins from players in terms of development and so far so good in that capacity with both Weems and DeRozan.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 10:15 AM EST up reply actions
8 road games
So Rap’s sit at 3-9, which looks pretty bad but given they have played 3/4 of their games on the road, the most in the eastern conference, it’s not as bad as it looks.
Oden out for season
well, with this news, think its safe to say Oden has to be in the conversation for biggest #1 bust in history. With his hype, and the pppfffttt of his career so far… wow. Think his body matured too fast, and it’s taking its toll. Feel sorry for the kid actually, but hey, he got his money – let’s hope he was smart with it. It might be the last big NBA contract he will get.
Feel sorry for him but more sorry for Blazers fans. Wow. I mean, it’s possible in the next few days we hear that Roy is done too, and he might never be the same. Talk about a hard luck franchise!
That being said, if Oden decides to keep playing and rehab again, do you make even a small free-agent offer for him this off-season?
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 10:51 AM EST up reply actions
I asked this question before the news about another microfracture surgery, and the answer in my opinion is still yes.
He’s restricted, so Portland would have likely matched any reasonable offer before this, but do they do it now? If you offered 3 years at $15 million, would they match that?
He’s still young (22 I think), and while he may lose his explosiveness, he’s still a legit 7 footer who will rebound and block shots for you. That is something this team desperately needs, and at his age, he fits into the rebuild nicely.
And at 3 years – $15 million, you’re not killing the team cap-wise if it doesn’t work out.
Uhm
I do not think you loose explosivness because of a microfracture, the doubt is he could get injuried again and again and again. Moreover we are talking about a rookye C, so you could not expect immediate production out of him. So I am not sure he would go to a contender as, being an inexperienced person could not come out and produce in short burns and I am not sure a bad team would want him as they could not paly him for extended minutes. I am afraid he is in a pretty bad fix….
may be 5 / 15 with some bonuses on top if he plays more than xyz …. not sure, a lot will depend uponthe new cap situation…
In the very limited time he has played, he has been a huge contributor, stats wise. An immediate contribution would be expected.
by dhackett1565 on Nov 18, 2010 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
3 for 15? No way
Oden is not gettable at 3 for $15M. More like 3 for $30M, I’d guess.
Sorry, you did not hink this trough
his third surgery in 4 years, plaif 82 games in 4 years and you want to give him 10 M per year? (the blazers would not even pick an option on him and that was before the injury)
Just to correct myself a bit, Portland would have to offer Oden an $8+million qualifying offer to keep him a restricted free agent. At this point, I doubt that they’d make that offer, which means he’ll be unrestricted this summer.
Agree with Renato here – the talk on Twitter last night amongst most of the beat reporters was that Oden may have to retire. One micro surgery is a big deal, TWO?
Forget ball, he may never walk correctly again…
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
He would be an interesting signing for the Raps next year
Depending on how Davis does and whether they will abandon the Bargs as a PF consideration. It is a risk worth taking all things considered. Make a contract offer and stash him away in hopes that he gets better and has a Marcus Camby like career (always injured early but healthy late)
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
Totally agree. Oden has been great in the limited amount of time he’s actually seen the floor. Throw in some Phoenix Suns style rehab (see Grant Hill or the incredible play of a 37-year-old Steve Nash) and maybe you get something out of Oden on the back end of his career. It’s at least worth a minimum salary or incentive-laden deal.
I could handle a (healthy) Oden-Ed Davis-Harrison Barnes front line.
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Nov 18, 2010 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
which Oden?
the real one or the one that plaid just on some people fantasy team? and now pls pls do not take out a per 36 min stat over a guy who could never play more than 10, either for faul trouble or for being unjured….
take a look at his numbers
prior to his injury last year. He was turning into a beast (and he was staying on the floor, which is something that always takes time with young bigs)
That said you can’t ignore injuries, and with his limited playing time you can’t think of him as anything less than a bust (especially when that was a concern going into his draft)..
but to say he was only a good fantasy player is simply untrue. When he was healthy and had some experience under his belt he turned into exactly what Portland expected. Unfortunately it was only for a half season…..
…. which is, ironically enough, still more than Bargs has provided over a 5 year career…..
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Nov 18, 2010 12:24 PM EST up reply actions
I mean, I would give him a minimum contract too
but he would be a project, like the two guys we had last year….
When healthy
Oden is not a project.
The gamble is his health. If he is healthy you have a top 5 centre, even with the limited time he has played.
I have to disagree
the guy ha no experience at all he has yet to play a season. the guy is totally unproven. you are judging on potential and thinking of him when he was in high school (and healthy) …
No, it’s being based on what he’s done on an NBA court. The sample is not great — but he’s produced at a high level when he’s seen the floor. I’d roll the dice on him once he comes back from this second microfracture surgery.
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Nov 18, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry Renato
You are wrong on this one. A healthy Oden has put up great numbers. He has already showed, in the time he has played, that he is, when healthy, a top centre in this league.
What he hasn’t shown, is the ability to stay healthy.
Portland drafted another big man in the late 60’s early 70’s – couldn’t stay healthy, but dominated when he played. Went on to play for the Lakers and won a few titles.
I think dominated is a bit of a strong statement. He was a great rebounder, solid shot-blocker and decent scorer, but had major foul issues and was still a ways away.
Again, I’m arguing you roll the dice but I’d say my expectations for him from here on out are pretty low.
In fact that’s what makes Grant Hill’s story so amazing, and even Big Z. Most times guys just never recover. Look at Shaun Livingston – he was a beast along the same lines as Oden (at a different position of course) but is a complete shell of his former self now.
And even he hasn’t had the same injury trouble as Oden!
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Good comparison
My friends and I were comparing Oden to Bill Walton around the water cooler this morning. Sometimes bodies fail too soon, and it’s really sad.
That said, I still think that the highest bid for Oden is going to be 30MM/3 or higher.
Bill Walton got an MVP trophy and a Championship (before he got one as a reserve in Boston) before his body failed. Oden hasn’t been able to do anything, yet.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
I’d say Sam Bowie is a better comparison. Unfortunately also another Portland draft pick.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
Sorry you
telling me I am wrong, based upon a healthy Oden is telling me I am right….. Anyway, I am not a Oden basher, I say Portland, and they know his situation better than me and you, would not make a qualifying offer for him. Now you want to take a flyer on him ? Fine with me, but the questions is where do you set the bar? Somebody in there, after way too many beers thoguht 10M per year which is out of this world (especially given the Blazer would not risk 8) . My doubt is: he is too inexperienced to give you “instant production” and you many not keep him on the floor long enough to gain that experience….
May I remind you guys, most of you bashed the Bosh-Bynum swap. Well Bynum is way more of an accomplished (and experienced) player that Oden.
On one of our players
It’s good to see Jose playing better. Last year, some blood hounds wouldn’t get off his case but this year they have shifted their fangs to Bargani (gotta crucify somebody). Like the rest of the team, he has “off days” but seems to be doing better on defence and certainly leads his unit well. I’m glad for him because he is such a team first player.
It’s interesting to see the the hurricane winds blow people’s opinions about players from game to game. I do find the people on here aren’t quite as bi-polar as elsewhere, which is nice to see.
DeRozan may not have had a great game, but what I liked was that he wasn’t a liability out there when he wasn’t scoring (like some other unnamed player). He wasn’t great on defense, but not bad, either, and made some nice passes in crunch time.
It’s funny, I figured Bargnani was due for a big game and was anxious to see whether everyone would immediately forget everything bad they were saying before. He did have a nice game on offense, but he was still a liability on the defensive end. I know some people are going to jump on me for not giving him his due, but I judge a person on more than one game, and not just what they do on the offensive end. I’m crazy that way.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
Just curious
What current centre would satisfy you consistently? What is your baseline comparable as the sort of player that would make you immensely content from the 5 spot. Not looking to stir the pot, but i think it would provide me with some more context when taking in your viewpoint.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
I posted somewhere on this site a list of the 29 other starting centers, as I ranked them
Wanted to initiate a discussion of where our #7 ranks, both as a short term and long term option.
The exercise showed me that there’s a lot of teams really hurting at the center position. Of course, I made this list before JaVale McGhee went all Lew Alcindor on us the other night.
especially when someone is crying out laud to play PF
and they make him play C because there is noone else…
This is my point here
Bargs does not have the skillset of a true 5 (rebounding, help D). At the 4, his defensive deficiencies would be significantly masked if he played with a GOOD center.
I disagree. Bargnani has been playing a lot of de facto PF this year with Evans defending more of the centers. Bargnani is still a liability because teams will continually go at him. Watch the plays they run in order to get Bargnani to be the one having to help. Bargnani isn’t being caught out of position so much because he plays center. He’s being caught out of position so much because that’s the opposing team’s gameplan.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
Bargnani & Opponents' plays
.
If I’m a Coach (and I’ve been one – hockey though), I’d run all kinds of plays through the opposing Big (who’s the #1 scoring option). I’d also pressure him on both ends, hoping to create foul issues. I’d have guys like Shaq give hard fouls. I’d have players like Reggie bug the sh!t out of him.
The reason being, is to wear down that player. And for psychological reasons – in order to get Bargnani’s confidence down. Jack Armstrong suggests taking it to a particular player, when that player is in foul trouble.
In short, if I can burn out Bargs, and exploit his help-defense issues, I can neutralize my opponents #1 scorer. Then it’s much easier to deal with the #2 or #3 guys (Demar & Sonny).
.
by RapthoseLeafs on Nov 18, 2010 5:55 PM EST up reply actions
Because there’s just so much difference in the NBA between playing center and PF?
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
HQ Interloper,
For me, the two absolute minimums for any big man is to be able to play good defense and to rebound the ball well. If he can score, then that’s great, but that should be extra. That’s what should separate a good center from a great center. There are a lot of centers out there I would rather have as my starting center, and it doesn’t necessarily mean they are more talented, just a better center if you want to play winning basketball. If your center can’t do the little things and get his hands dirty, then you’re not going to win much.
My ultimate center would be Joakim Noah, because he is a game changer on the defensive end, is a great rebounder, but he’s also got a high basketball IQ. WHile he isn’t a great scorer, he’s not a liability on that end, because he’s so smart.
Of course there are guys like Brook Lopez and Andrew Bogut, who give you more scoring and aren’t liabilities on defense or on the boards.
Personally, I’d like to see if the Raptors can get a guy like Gortat. I suggested, on my blog, a Barbosa/Andersen/Dorsey for Gortat/Pietrus/1st round pick trade. Obviously the wrist problem puts a big crimp in that, but you get the idea. Gortat is a good defensive player and rebounder, but has never had a chance to play big minutes. I think you could probably pry him away from Orlando.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
But on this team, as it is presently constructed
Bargs scoring is needed. Noah is special and I argued a while back, even in his “iffy” years that the raps would be better served to try and move Bosh for him because he has those intangibles that translate to winning. I suppose the argument would be this – what kind of non-centre position player would contribute to championship level competitiveness in the case where the centre can efficiently handle the scoring burden and be an average rebounder for his position. If, best case scenario Bargs becomes an efficient high point scorer and average rebounder, what else might the Raptors look to do to move to the ranks of championship level team? Or is it impossible?
I would be very interested to see what Ed Davis brings to the table in years 2 and 3 of his career in combination with Bargs.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
The team, as presently constructed, is a lottery team that will probably end up winning around 25 games. You remember Tony Campbell? His scoring was needed at the time in Minnesota, but that didn’t mean you wanted him as a long term solution. Sure, Bargnani is better than Campbell, but the fact is that he does one thing above average, and that’s score. You can talk about him being a matchup nightmare and all that, but when it comes down to it, he’s a one dimensional player, and you simply don’t win with guys like that playing a big role on your team.
Look at every Championship team and tell me if there was ever a team that won that had a starting big man who was below average defensively and on the boards?
The fact is, that in the playoffs, weaknesses and mistakes get magnified. That’s why teams that are focused more on scoring never win. The defense always hurts them in the end. You can hide a guy like Bargnani, if surrounded by stellar defensive players, during the regular season, but come the playoffs, his weaknesses will end up killing your team. You don’t think over a 7 game series teams are going to focus on exploiting Bargnani’s inability to play team defense? They do it now in the regular season.
Obviously, my feeling is that you can never win with a guy like Bargnani starting, no matter who you surround him with.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
It was on the Ustation "Value of the C" blog
Here’s how I rank the 29 starting centers, omitting Andrea Ask yourself, in what group does Andrea belong?
All-Pros (1):
Howard
Allstars (4):
Bogut
Yao
Bynum (or Pau Gasol, take your pick)
Noah
Advanced (4):
Shaq (?)
Hibbert
Nene
Brook Lopez
Next 6 (6):
Marc Gasol
Horford
Kaman
Okafor
Camby
Al Jefferson
Not real psyched (5):
Varejao
Chandler (I know some people on here love him . . . I don’t see it)
Robin Lopez
Dejuan Blair
Dalembert
The rest (9):
Joel Anthony
Mozgov
Hawes
McGee (or Blatche, take your pick)
Ben Wallace
Nazr (or Diop, take your pick)
Biedrins
Kristic
Darko
Using your list
Here’s how I’d rank them (all subjective of course)
Gasol (when he has to play centre might be the most complete)
Howard (although limited offensively and a liability late in a close game)
Noah (just good at what he does)
Bogut (took him a while to round into form)
Horford (Florida was blessed in the front court)
Nene (if you don’t factor in his propensity to miss games)
Bargnani
and then everybody else. My criteria might be a little different than the traditional metrics. This is a league of match ups. If matched up I would expect those I list above Bargnani to consistently outplay him 8 times out of ten. The rest I could see him getting the better of consistently (as he has Lopez on the many occasions they’ve played). Not including Shaq or Yao or Duncan because of age, injury, and Duncan being more of a four than a five.
But the bigger point is the centre position isn’t so overwhelmingly strong around the league that one can’t be at least a little satisfied with what the team is getting and looks to continue to be able to get from Bargs.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
The problem with the term “match ups” is that most people use this to mean offence. You get the flashy graphics on the broadcast comparing the points, rebounds, assists, etc for players on opposing squads. And oh, Bargnani scored three more points than the other centre, so he must’ve “won” the match up.
Meanwhile, you look at the Wizards game and see guys like Blatche, McGee and Hilton Freakin’ Armstrong tearing it up inside (not to mention the parade of guards who finish at the rim vs. the Raptors), and you ask yourself “Even if our centre is dropping 30, is he REALLY winning the match up when his +/- is at zero? I mean, really?”
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Nov 18, 2010 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
And I realize I used two different games in that last paragraph. To clarify, just trying to illustrate a game Bargs clearly lost the match up vs. one in which I’m sure most people feel he won the match up despite the less than impressive +/-.
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Nov 18, 2010 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
lol
D Stance your knowledge dropping is unmatched (not sarcasm).
@ interloper – I can see what you are saying, but some of the C’s around the league that you would be comparing to are not the number 1 option on their respective teams. Just playing devil’s advocate. If we chose to compare our guards vs. the rest of the league it would be no contest, but the fact that you said that the C position isn’t strong and Bargs still finishes with less than stellar performances suggests that he is even less valuble.
Doesn't being the number one option further amplify Bargs value?
Who else on this team would any of you be comfortable handing the offensive reigns over to night in and night out. In a guard dominated league, the Raptors best option at the moment is their centre and he’s holding his own on most nights. The fact that he has assumed that role better than most would have given him credit for going into this year, suggest promise going forward when the talent around him gets better. In essence it is the Gasol effect, where the full breadth of his game might only be realized when the talent around him gets better.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
Marc Gasol, Brook Lopez and Jefferson have got to be on that list ahead of bargnani. Hibbert I would put there to.
I would also add a lot of guys that are pure hustle/defense/rebounding as the C is the most important position for defense in this leage…
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Nov 18, 2010 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
We'll Disagree
On Jefferson and Hibbert especially. Honestly haven’t seen enough of Marc Gasol and Lopez has had some tough nights and each time he plays against Bargs hasn’t outplayed him.
I will take this back to something I brought up a long while back. I imagine a lot of energy is consumed in trying to put up 20+ points a night, especially at the centre position where everyone is taking their shot at you. Some guys choose to use this energy for the hustle and rebounding (ala Reggie Evans) but you will still note a drop off in their play as the game goes along. We dismiss Bargs as not putting forth the effort but maybe we’re not recognizing just how the effort is being applied.
I’ll go with a Jim Edmunds/Devon White analogy here to better illustrate my point. You see Jim Edmunds dive and roll for catches in centre field and think him some amazing player giving full on effort. You watch Devon White make the same catch and looks like he’s not even trying.
I just don’t see how some of the other centres you mention would help the Raptors more, given how the roster is constructed, than Bargs would at present. You would see the likes of Jack and Kleiza taking it upon themselves to take even more shots if you stuck a Hibbert in there, who wasn’t regarded as a decent rebounder until late into last year and early this year.
With the +/- argument. Apparently Kevin Durant is known to land more on the – side and yet he is highly regarded. I wouldn’t mind if one of the board’s stat hounds looked into this.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
I’d rank Brook Lopez, Hibbert, Marc Gasol, Kaman and Okafor ahead of Bargnani. And obviously a healthy Yao and Bynum. I’d even put Kendrick Perkins before him.
Bargnani is one of the better offensive centers. There’s no doubt about that. But he’s such a liability in other areas, it offsets his offensive strengths. A guy like Okafor isn’t a great threat on the offensive end, but he’s not going to hurt you on that end. He’s never going to be a liability. Bargnani is.
Let’s look at it this way. If we rate centers from 1-10, based on parts on the three most important parts of a big man’s game, offense, defense, rebounding, obviously Bargnani would probably get a 9 on offense, but he’d get something like a 2 or 3 on the boards and on defense. At best, that gives you an average of 5. Some might say I’m giving too much weight to defense and rebounding, but I don’t. I give those three aspects equal weight because those are the three things you need to win.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
Interesting
I see where you’re coming from but if your primary metric was winning it’s hard to argue for the likes of Lopez, Hibbert, Gasol, and Kaman ahead of Bargnani given the winning percentages of their respective teams. Of course the advanced metrics might argue otherwise but the number of Ws is pretty cut and dry. You speak of Okafor as not a liability but I would disagree with you there. Perkins before the Big 3 was very much an offensive liability.
I think what’s clear is that we have way more data and direct observation of Bargnani in action than most of us do the other players at his position on other teams, so we are quicker to dismiss or discredit Bargs contribution in comparison to those others. What Franchise and the others at the HQ might look to do is bring in the other bloggers at the other sites and do a full discussion position by position to get a better perspective of just how good other players are in comparison to Raps players. Call it Mine vs. Yours or something like that.
We can argue till we’re blue in the face that this guy is better or that guy is better but I, and I suspect others, just don’t have enough information on hand to say definitively that, when you get beyond the truly upper echelon of each position, that a particular player is always and forever better than another player.
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
I was a huge fan of the NBA long before the Raptors were even a twinkle in Stern’s eye, and the Raptors certainly aren’t the only team I watch.
As for putting Lopez and company ahead of Bargnani, it’s not based on record, but simply which player I think is better and which player does enough good things, without doing enough bad things, to help his team.
Kaman, I think, is often overrated because he isn’t a good defensive player, but I’d still pick him over Bargnani because at least he rebounds the ball well.
Okafor isn’t a good offensive player, but there’s only been one game this year when he shot under 50% from the field. I think there a difference between a player who doesn’t help you in a certain part of the game and is a liability. Reggie Evans is a liability on offense. He not only can’t shoot or score, but shoots a low percentage.
And Kendrick Perkins was only 22 years old when Allen and Garnett came on board. You can’t really compare the 22 year old raw player with the player he has become. He’s much better now. Again, not a good offensive player, but you can’t leave him alone, either.
If you’re a liability on offense, your man can leave you to double team and not worry about you. If Perkins or Okafor’s man left him to double team someone else, they would, more often than not, make them pay.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
this year
Lopez is a worse rebounder and scorer….
Bargs vs Weems
I think bargnani has been kicked around enough in these comments, but i still have to point out that his plus minus was zero while sonny’s was +17 and the discrepancy in playing time was around five or six minutes. To me that seems pretty telling about bargnani’s value, 30 points and all, to that game at the least
Bingo.
And it’s the same old story game after game, year after year on average.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
As can be seen here...
http://www.82games.com/1011/1011TOR.HTM
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe it's because of Reggie. LOL
Isn’t Bargs in each of the best 5 man units though?
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
by HQ Interloper on Nov 18, 2010 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
It’s really an interesting point eh? I’ve noticed that and I think it’s something worth investigating. I want to see Bargs excel, so let’s find out how to make him as productive as possible.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Nov 18, 2010 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
The rebounding question
Is rebounding and winning really correlated? How does one explain the likes of David Lee and Kevin Love, great rebounders but poor defenders?
Happiness is that which gets lost in the details of its pursuit.
I don’t think you can win with David Lee, either. And at least he rebounds. I’m not sure how poor a defender Kevin Love is. But in their defense, rebounding is part of defense.
And there’s a reason that Pat Riley famously said “no rebounds, no rings.” The play against Sacramento where Cousins grabbed the offensive rebound (twice) is exactly why being able to control your own boards is so important.
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
You need to ask
the same people who would trade Andrea for Sam Bowie…. (and they are the asme people who drafter Bowie ahead of Jordan)
Acie, I hear ya
This hate for Bargani is not really about his stats, there is something they are not saying, they just hate the guy. It really doesn’t mater what he does on the court, they will find a stat to try to discredit him. It’s crazy man. Yea here I go, sucked in to the conversation again
You have to admit...
He is UNQUESTIONABLY the BEST 7’ white dude with “Something about Mary” hair active in the league today.
End of Discussion





























