xduckshoex:

The only thing Barbosa has on Robinson is height, and Robinson has the strength and athleticism to make up for it.

 

Well, height and the fact that Barbosa is reputed to be one of the best guys in the league and Nate's a little bit of a ***.  Of course, most people would be a *** if they are surrounded by dicks.
 

xduckshoex:

The only thing Barbosa has on Robinson is height, and Robinson has the strength and athleticism to make up for it.  Statistically they are pretty much dead even; Barbosa scores better while Robinson rebounds and passes better, with neither one having a signficant advantage in any category.

As for Barbosa being good to have because the Knicks have no real point guard...Robinson is more of a point guard than Barbosa, so I don't see how that makes sense.

 

 

Midtown, I love the D'Antoni hiring.  I would have preferred it if they had waited until they had a decent team to bring in a coach like him, but they got one of the best coaches in the League so it's really difficult to find any kind of legitimate criticism.

W O W .... Hearing you say you love something about the current KNicks is music to my ears. I agree timing is off but I suppose Donnie realized that coaches like him dont come around every day. Jumped a the opportunity. I'm excited to see what these guys are going to do...and forget bout it if we get the 1 or 2 pick in the draft....

 

You ask ever GM in the LEAGUE who do you want on your team, Leandro Barbosa or Nate Robinson. What do you think the answer would be? I choose Barbosa every day of the week and then some.

Xskball:

You ask ever GM in the LEAGUE who do you want on your team, Leandro Barbosa or Nate Robinson. What do you think the answer would be? I choose Barbosa every day of the week and then some.

 So?  I don't care who most GMs would choose, we are not talking about who is more popular.  Make a case for Barbosa being better than Robinson that goes beyond "more people like him".
 

xduckshoex:

Xskball:

You ask ever GM in the LEAGUE who do you want on your team, Leandro Barbosa or Nate Robinson. What do you think the answer would be? I choose Barbosa every day of the week and then some.

 So?  I don't care who most GMs would choose, we are not talking about who is more popular.  Make a case for Barbosa being better than Robinson that goes beyond "more people like him".
 

Well lets see:

Barbosa scores at a higer per minute rate, he shoots a higher % from the floor, 3 and FT line

Rebounding: Robinson grabs 3.7 defensive boards per 40 minutes Barbosa 3.1 per 40. 1 extar defensive rebound from your PG every second game is not much to look at. Nate does grab a few more offensive boards (about .5 per 40 more) but persoanlly see that as a negative in many cases especially with a Pg like Nate. If he's running in there trying to get a put back dunk so he can be on ESPN once a year your floor balance is way off and when you miss the board the opposing team has wide open transition.

Defnsivley I don't think its even close. By the numbers it definitley isn't. opposing OGs shoot a MUCH lower % vs Barbosa than Robinson. Barbosa actually plays a bit more SG than PG in terms of minutes. He sitll has better defensive numbers vs SGss than Robisnson does vs PGs. Robinson is simply too small to defend Sgs.

As much as I enjoy watching Nate Robinson's athletic ability I can't think of a single reason I'd take him over Barbosa. He's a n entertaining change of pace certainly not a major minute player on a good team.

xduckshoex:

 So?  I don't care who most GMs would choose, we are not talking about who is more popular.  Make a case for Barbosa being better than Robinson that goes beyond "more people like him".

GMs generall don't just choose who is more popular.  I think Barbosa is an overall better ball player, more versatile and less selfish than Nate Robinson, who I personally think is more of a circus sideshow freak than anything else.  Sure, he can put some cool highlights up, but I have never been a fan of his game or his attitude on the floor.   

Toolatecrew:

He's a n entertaining change of pace certainly not a major minute player on a good team.

 

 

yes, a circus or And1 team.  He's entertaining to watch because he's so short and can jump, but that's about it.      

Xskball:

Toolatecrew:

He's a n entertaining change of pace certainly not a major minute player on a good team.

 

 

yes, a circus or And1 team.  He's entertaining to watch because he's so short and can jump, but that's about it.      

Which is probaly why the Kincks should keep him for the near term. At least you moght get something for your $1500 seat like watching him dunk in warmups or an occasional in game highlight for the next year or 2 until the Knicks can construct an actual competative NBA team

or have him dance and jiggle in the locker room flashing gang signs after his team loses.  

Toolatecrew:

xduckshoex:

Xskball:

You ask ever GM in the LEAGUE who do you want on your team, Leandro Barbosa or Nate Robinson. What do you think the answer would be? I choose Barbosa every day of the week and then some.

 So?  I don't care who most GMs would choose, we are not talking about who is more popular.  Make a case for Barbosa being better than Robinson that goes beyond "more people like him".
 

Well lets see:

Barbosa scores at a higer per minute rate, he shoots a higher % from the floor, 3 and FT line

Rebounding: Robinson grabs 3.7 defensive boards per 40 minutes Barbosa 3.1 per 40. 1 extar defensive rebound from your PG every second game is not much to look at. Nate does grab a few more offensive boards (about .5 per 40 more) but persoanlly see that as a negative in many cases especially with a Pg like Nate. If he's running in there trying to get a put back dunk so he can be on ESPN once a year your floor balance is way off and when you miss the board the opposing team has wide open transition.

Defnsivley I don't think its even close. By the numbers it definitley isn't. opposing OGs shoot a MUCH lower % vs Barbosa than Robinson. Barbosa actually plays a bit more SG than PG in terms of minutes. He sitll has better defensive numbers vs SGss than Robisnson does vs PGs. Robinson is simply too small to defend Sgs.

As much as I enjoy watching Nate Robinson's athletic ability I can't think of a single reason I'd take him over Barbosa. He's a n entertaining change of pace certainly not a major minute player on a good team.

 

Barbosa's scoring edge isn't really that significant, especially when you factor in the simple fact that everybody's scoring efficiency increased in that Suns system.  And yes, opposing players had a higher eFG% against the 5'7" Robinson...they also turned the ball over, rebounded worse and got to the line less.  Any advantage he has defensively is small at best, and likely stems from the fact that he is average height.  As for his scoring advantage...per 36 minutes, they took an almost identical amount of shots, and Barbosa scored an extra 1.6 ppg; not exactly a significant advantage.

And that's the whole point...neither one has a significant statistical advantage in any facet of the game, so how can one be said to be better than the other? 

 

well, you can try WATCHING the game versus watching boxscores.

When did I say that I haven't seen either of them play?

 I just prefer not to say "I'm right because I say I am right".  I like to have something a little more substantial than that.  You should try it sometime.
 

 

xduckshoex:

When did I say that I haven't seen either of them play?

 I just prefer not to say "I'm right because I say I am right".  I like to have something a little more substantial than that.  You should try it sometime.
 

 

That's a shame.  

 

Its much better saying "look at the stats of two players on two different teams. They're not that much different....they must be equal!!!! Stats!"

 

     

....but that is not what I am doing.  I didn't realize that I had to explicitly state that I have watched a player play every time I talk about him.  I thought it was a given that we all watch basketball here.

 

xduckshoex:

 

Barbosa's scoring edge isn't really that significant, especially when you factor in the simple fact that everybody's scoring efficiency increased in that Suns system.  And yes, opposing players had a higher eFG% against the 5'7" Robinson...they also turned the ball over, rebounded worse and got to the line less.  Any advantage he has defensively is small at best, and likely stems from the fact that he is average height.  As for his scoring advantage...per 36 minutes, they took an almost identical amount of shots, and Barbosa scored an extra 1.6 ppg; not exactly a significant advantage.

And that's the whole point...neither one has a significant statistical advantage in any facet of the game, so how can one be said to be better than the other? 

Does a player have to have a significant statistical advantage (especially playing on 2 different teams) to be BETTER?

Brandon Roy is statistically inferior in every cat except stats to Mike Dunleavy is there anyone out there who feels Roy isn't a significantlly better player?

BTW Barbosa is significantly better statistcally than Robinson. His GF%, FT% and 3 point % are all significantly higher.

The whole Sun's system thing a a cop out. Unless you also want to acknowledge that Robinson put up his numbers on a bad team simply by juacking up shots becuase the coach had no control over his team and everyone wa out to "get his".

Robisnon likley would not play that many minutes or get that many shots on a GOOD team. Barbosa has already proven he's a big minute player on a very good team. So reverse their roles. Put Barbosa on a crappy team. He's likley going to start and score 20ppg plus. Robinson is going to play lesss and do less.

Yeast:

xduckshoex:

The only thing Barbosa has on Robinson is height, and Robinson has the strength and athleticism to make up for it.

 

Well, height and the fact that Barbosa is reputed to be one of the best guys in the league and Nate's a little bit of a ***.  Of course, most people would be a *** if they are surrounded by dicks.
 

 

 

Which league is Barbosa reputed to be one of the best guys in? 

Toolatecrew:

xduckshoex:

 

Barbosa's scoring edge isn't really that significant, especially when you factor in the simple fact that everybody's scoring efficiency increased in that Suns system.  And yes, opposing players had a higher eFG% against the 5'7" Robinson...they also turned the ball over, rebounded worse and got to the line less.  Any advantage he has defensively is small at best, and likely stems from the fact that he is average height.  As for his scoring advantage...per 36 minutes, they took an almost identical amount of shots, and Barbosa scored an extra 1.6 ppg; not exactly a significant advantage.

And that's the whole point...neither one has a significant statistical advantage in any facet of the game, so how can one be said to be better than the other? 

Does a player have to have a significant statistical advantage (especially playing on 2 different teams) to be BETTER?

Brandon Roy is statistically inferior in every cat except stats to Mike Dunleavy is there anyone out there who feels Roy isn't a significantlly better player?

BTW Barbosa is significantly better statistcally than Robinson. His GF%, FT% and 3 point % are all significantly higher.

The whole Sun's system thing a a cop out. Unless you also want to acknowledge that Robinson put up his numbers on a bad team simply by juacking up shots becuase the coach had no control over his team and everyone wa out to "get his".

Robisnon likley would not play that many minutes or get that many shots on a GOOD team. Barbosa has already proven he's a big minute player on a very good team. So reverse their roles. Put Barbosa on a crappy team. He's likley going to start and score 20ppg plus. Robinson is going to play lesss and do less.

 

 Mentioning 3 different scoring efficiencies is misleading, that's like saying that Robinson is better at offensive rebounding, defensive rebounding AND rebounding.  Barbosa a better scorer, I've already acknowledged that.

And I would take Roy over Dunleavy if I were building a team, but Dunleavy played just as well as he did this year.  The only reason people should be skeptical about Dunleavy is the fact that he's been in the League for a while and only done this once.  You just provided another example of a player who is perceived to be vastly superior but when all is said and done is not really. 

As for Robinson not playing minutes on a good team...proof?  Usually when a player(especially a guard) proves that he is an above average NBA player he can get minutes pretty much anywhere.  You're just speculating, and that doesn't really mean anything.  I can speculate that Barbosa is only good because Steve Nash is actually shooting for him and his success is actually a CIA conspiracy using a lot of camera tricks to keep us fooled and it holds just as much weight as your speculation that a player who has proven he can play at an NBA level would not get minutes on a good team.  We're talking about an NBA where Jannero Pargo gets significant minutes on a good team, after all.  Anthony Carter played 28 minutes per game for a 50 win team and you don't think Nate Robinson can get minutes on a good team?  That's absurd.

As for your original question...yes, a player should have a significant statistical advantage to be considered a better player.  That is why statistics are tracked: so we can have a means of measuring an individuals contribution to his team.  If we say that Kobe Bryant is better than Ronnie Brewer, we look at their statistics to prove the point, why should it be the same for any other combination of players?  Because you don't agree with what the statistics say in this case?
 

How did this turn into a Barbosa vs Robinson thread?  Oh well, not going to read through it.  Just add my 2 cents.  Barbosa may have better stats, but that is because of the "system."  He doesn't do anything better than Robinson really.  He's a undersized shooting guard, was never impressed with his playmaking whenever Nash was out.  His scoring would go way up, but he didn't distribute the ball enough.  The only justification I could see for taking him over Robinson is that he is taller and it may seem like less of a liability than Robinson defensively.  But I don't believe that either because he's weak as fvck.  Robinson may be small, but there aren't many PG's that can back that fool down.  Built like a fvcking house.

 

I agree with Duck, it's a push. 

TRy this one for size guys..... THAT TRADE AINT HAPPENING !! Walsh is not going to take on those 2 contracts ( Diaw & Barbosa ) .

Adelman:

Yeast:

xduckshoex:

The only thing Barbosa has on Robinson is height, and Robinson has the strength and athleticism to make up for it.

 

Well, height and the fact that Barbosa is reputed to be one of the best guys in the league and Nate's a little bit of a ***.  Of course, most people would be a *** if they are surrounded by dicks.

 

Which league is Barbosa reputed to be one of the best guys in? 

 

Your intramural league?  

15 seconds of googling:

"You get really privileged to coach certain [players] and this is one of the good guys in the league," D'Antoni said. "I've really had the privilege of coaching him and watching him mature into a great player. I think this is the first step of a lot that he can do."

Just as fast as Barbosa’s growth has been, his popularity has exploded as well. Henry Abbott at True Hoop has been running a great series of stories about his entry to the US and the NBA. A great read. LB is a team guy and the team loves him. Reading the book Seven Seconds or Less really provides a great perspective of how much his teammates love LB. All the stories seem to establish that LB is great guy who really enjoys this team and playing basketball in Phoenix.

 

Barbosa is good but I think it is a stretch to say "one of the best guys in the league" and use D'Antoni's quote to back it up. Isiah once said that the only players he wanted to keep were Nate Robinson and David Lee.

How hard is it to understand that Barbosa is on of the best guys in the league and nate is a bot of a ***" refers to their personailites and not playing ability. Especially when D'Antoin's quotes are about what a good berson Barbosa is.

 

Its simple.

 

Nate Robinson is a dickhead. All his coaches have had issues with him, he's flashing gang signs caring more about spectacular plays in games than his team.

Barbosa is by akll reports a nice guy, good person and great eamate.

Its just one more reason you want Barbosa over Robinson. Before anyone starts in being a nice guy doesn't make you a better player than some guy who's a ***. But its still a factor in Barbosa's favour. You have to be a wordl class talent like even an Artest before your talent outweights your antics. Robinson clearly doesn't have a level of contribution that warrents his attitude.