CrushAlot wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

playa2 wrote:Absolutely he can be our 2nd option and JR the 3rd option if he stays. Prigionni will like playing with Barganni.

We could have used Copeland the same way we will use Barganni on the perimiter, ask Woody !

Basically Bargnani is like a better 7 foot Copeland.

Bargs is really tall. I was watching some tape of him this morning and the announcer said he was 7'2.

Height w/o Shoes

7' 0"

Height w/shoes

7' 1.25"

From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com#ixzz2Xu8AcgAc
http://www.draftexpress.com

holfresh wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

tkf wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

tkf wrote:

Knixkik wrote:We know what he can't do based on the conversations on this board, but he wasn't brought in for what he can't do. What he was brought in for in my opinion is to replace JR Smith as our 2nd option on offense. Do you believe he is better suited as our 2nd option than JR? I for one believe he is a great fit at PF next to Melo and Chandler and compliments this team perfectly. He is a true stretch 4. He is only 1 year removed from back to back 20 ppg seasons, so there is reason to believe while he isn't someone you want to build your offense around, he can thrive as a secondary scorer. What do you think?

was scoring the knicks problem? or was it the inability to get rebounds, stops, etc? I used to like bargs, I just don't think he likes the NBA.. He loves what comes with playing in the NBA, but I think the guy wants to be elsewhere. he is damaged in that aspect... His heart is not here.. bringing him to NY isn't going to change that.. not sure what happened to his shooting stroke, but it seems off.. he doesn't defend or rebound.. I am just trying to figure out, how does this address the knicks problems?

you keep talking about him complimenting melo and chandler... what good is that? complimenting a flawed structure does what? maybe if we had Dwight howard I could see where having a healthy and well playing Bargnani can help, but honestly I rather have ryan anderson who is better... Again, not saying bargs is a bad player.. not sure if he is a good player in the NBA anymore, and even so.. how does this help the knicks in their area of weakness..not having a stretch 4 was not the knicks problem... rebounding, points in the paint and an efficient scorer was.... we haven't addressed any of that yet..

Correct, scoring was the reason we lost to Indiana. We defended Indiana fine.

The 2 games we won against Indy was because our offense exploded, and wasn't stagnant.

so getting pounded on the boards and in the paint had nothing to do with it... just scoring?

As moses malone said " can't shoot the ball, if you aint got the ball".....

Exactly. Different era.

Unless you have a dominant post player and frontcourt ala a Shaq or prime Duncan, small ball or versatile teams like the Heat get outrebounded and still win games.

The 2 NBA Finalists actually finished 21st(Spurs) and dead last 30th(Heat). The Clippers finished 18th and the Knicks 26th.

Yes. I'd say rebounds is important, but doesn't really effect wins and losses to the extent it did in eras past. Of course in the Knicks case they should be better than 26th, ideally, but when it comes down to it, we didn't matchup or play to our strengths against Indiana.

I wouldn't exactly say that..Indy completely destroyed us on the glass with second chance points...It won the series for them..We still need scoring tho..One is not exclusive of the other..

I'm not downplaying rebounding, it's important. The reason we lost to Indy is because we played "Indy's game" instead of our game.

All season long, we made teams play our way. Out "3ing" teams(led league), winning the turnover battle, and playing timely defense in the 4th quarters of games.

Woodson, unfortunately, didn't make the right adjustments and "matched up" with Indy playing K-Mart and Chandler, 2 non offensive players.

We all know what happened when he finally unleashed Copeland...too little too late.

smackeddog wrote:

Finestrg wrote:

Knixkik wrote:We know what he can't do based on the conversations on this board, but he wasn't brought in for what he can't do. What he was brought in for in my opinion is to replace JR Smith as our 2nd option on offense. Do you believe he is better suited as our 2nd option than JR? I for one believe he is a great fit at PF next to Melo and Chandler and compliments this team perfectly. He is a true stretch 4. He is only 1 year removed from back to back 20 ppg seasons, so there is reason to believe while he isn't someone you want to build your offense around, he can thrive as a secondary scorer. What do you think?

I'm warming up to this very idea. We really don't have a choice -- he's here, it's a reality.

We can't possibly be done building however. There needs to be much more forthcoming -- we need another speedy PG; another wing that can shoot/score; and at least 1 more capable big man that can patrol the interior and rebound the ball. All about shoring up weaknesses, filling holes and improving depth (if and when guys break down, I want solid options to plug in at the ready). We look to be at least 3 capable players away from a complete rotation right now..

I envy your optimism, but I just can't get happy about this trade- what always happens when we trade for injury prone players with big contracts who are coming off poor seasons? Yep, they continue to stink, get injured and are out of the league when their contract expires. I liked Novak and Camby too, even if they didn't contribute too much- but then again we always seems to go on a run with Novak in the game.

I don't know- I just don't get what the vision is for this team this offseason. At least last year it seemed like we had a plan, this year it just feels like we're just making random decisions.

Hope I'm wrong, but for some reason this trade has depressed me for now...

If anything this move solidifies the vision in my opinion. It shows a commmitment to adding a 2nd scorer (he's probably the most attainable that has the potential for that role) and also retooling in summer 2015. I could be wrong, but we won't see hardly any other contracts added that go beyond 2 more seasons (maybe JR Smith only.) The goal is to improve within those contraints, and i think we have done that. As a bonus, Bargnani fits pretty well next to Melo.

you need player A being the primary option taking most of the shots. when he's not, you have to set up plays specifically for player B. that's how one becomes a secondary scorer. then everybody else supports them. okc follows that model. but if the offense is player A...and then move the ball around for the rest of the squad, you will never establish a real offensive identity and will get caught in the playoffs unless you are a team of very high iq players like the spurs.

ChuckBuck wrote:

holfresh wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

tkf wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

tkf wrote:

Knixkik wrote:We know what he can't do based on the conversations on this board, but he wasn't brought in for what he can't do. What he was brought in for in my opinion is to replace JR Smith as our 2nd option on offense. Do you believe he is better suited as our 2nd option than JR? I for one believe he is a great fit at PF next to Melo and Chandler and compliments this team perfectly. He is a true stretch 4. He is only 1 year removed from back to back 20 ppg seasons, so there is reason to believe while he isn't someone you want to build your offense around, he can thrive as a secondary scorer. What do you think?

was scoring the knicks problem? or was it the inability to get rebounds, stops, etc? I used to like bargs, I just don't think he likes the NBA.. He loves what comes with playing in the NBA, but I think the guy wants to be elsewhere. he is damaged in that aspect... His heart is not here.. bringing him to NY isn't going to change that.. not sure what happened to his shooting stroke, but it seems off.. he doesn't defend or rebound.. I am just trying to figure out, how does this address the knicks problems?

you keep talking about him complimenting melo and chandler... what good is that? complimenting a flawed structure does what? maybe if we had Dwight howard I could see where having a healthy and well playing Bargnani can help, but honestly I rather have ryan anderson who is better... Again, not saying bargs is a bad player.. not sure if he is a good player in the NBA anymore, and even so.. how does this help the knicks in their area of weakness..not having a stretch 4 was not the knicks problem... rebounding, points in the paint and an efficient scorer was.... we haven't addressed any of that yet..

Correct, scoring was the reason we lost to Indiana. We defended Indiana fine.

The 2 games we won against Indy was because our offense exploded, and wasn't stagnant.

so getting pounded on the boards and in the paint had nothing to do with it... just scoring?

As moses malone said " can't shoot the ball, if you aint got the ball".....

Exactly. Different era.

Unless you have a dominant post player and frontcourt ala a Shaq or prime Duncan, small ball or versatile teams like the Heat get outrebounded and still win games.

The 2 NBA Finalists actually finished 21st(Spurs) and dead last 30th(Heat). The Clippers finished 18th and the Knicks 26th.

Yes. I'd say rebounds is important, but doesn't really effect wins and losses to the extent it did in eras past. Of course in the Knicks case they should be better than 26th, ideally, but when it comes down to it, we didn't matchup or play to our strengths against Indiana.

I wouldn't exactly say that..Indy completely destroyed us on the glass with second chance points...It won the series for them..We still need scoring tho..One is not exclusive of the other..

I'm not downplaying rebounding, it's important. The reason we lost to Indy is because we played "Indy's game" instead of our game.

All season long, we made teams play our way. Out "3ing" teams(led league), winning the turnover battle, and playing timely defense in the 4th quarters of games.

Woodson, unfortunately, didn't make the right adjustments and "matched up" with Indy playing K-Mart and Chandler, 2 non offensive players.

We all know what happened when he finally unleashed Copeland...too little too late.

And to think, people didn't think Woody lost the Pacer series for us. I bet the Pacers were so happy after game 5 Woody didn't use Copeland exclusively.

Can Bargs get off the bench and actually play a game?

If Bargs was healthy, this question would never come up.

He's played less games than Amari over the last 2 seasons.

Stretch 4 with Chandler/Felton PNR
Stretch 5 with Amare/Prigs PNR or Amare post up
Provide Melo with space for Iso
Featured on PNP or Post up.

Does give Woodson versatility. But seems more like he will benefit regular season ball more so then playoff ball.

tkf wrote:

Knixkik wrote:We know what he can't do based on the conversations on this board, but he wasn't brought in for what he can't do. What he was brought in for in my opinion is to replace JR Smith as our 2nd option on offense. Do you believe he is better suited as our 2nd option than JR? I for one believe he is a great fit at PF next to Melo and Chandler and compliments this team perfectly. He is a true stretch 4. He is only 1 year removed from back to back 20 ppg seasons, so there is reason to believe while he isn't someone you want to build your offense around, he can thrive as a secondary scorer. What do you think?

was scoring the knicks problem? or was it the inability to get rebounds, stops, etc? I used to like bargs, I just don't think he likes the NBA.. He loves what comes with playing in the NBA, but I think the guy wants to be elsewhere. he is damaged in that regard... His heart is not here.. bringing him to NY isn't going to change that.. not sure what happened to his shooting stroke, but it seems off.. he doesn't defend or rebound.. I am just trying to figure out, how does this address the knicks problems?

you keep talking about him complimenting melo and chandler... what good is that? complimenting a flawed structure does what? maybe if we had Dwight howard I could see where having a healthy and well playing Bargnani can help, but honestly I rather have ryan anderson who is better... Again, not saying bargs is a bad player.. not sure if he is a good player in the NBA anymore, and even so.. how does this help the knicks in their area of weakness..not having a stretch 4 was not the knicks problem... rebounding, points in the paint and an efficient scorer was.... we haven't addressed any of that yet..

knickstorrents wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

I believe Woodson watches lots of game tape, so he'll see the mistakes he made.

I'm pretty sure he'd like another shot at the Pacers, using Bargnani as his new Copeland.

Woody has a long history of not making adjustments. He's as dumb as a door nail... like our roster.

If Woody is dumb, then all the other coaches before him must be retarded. Stubborn is a better word.