jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:We draft like sheehit, look it up, it's easy to do. So the first rounder didn't bother me all that much. Unless of course I kept thinking Steve Mills was suddenly going to become a genius with IT whispering sweet nothings in his ears.

I was a little sad to see Novakaine go, but I was also almost equally tired of his one-trick pony act. Camby and QRich who?

I bought into the dreamscape of a 7 footer with the mad handle spreading the floor and making Fat Hibbert look silly. Someone for Melo to pass to without second and third thoughts! Bargs was going to be healthy, happy and reborn in the big city! And he was playing good D on some premier bigs! Bonus! Alas, it was not to be.

Oh well. I truly don't worry about Droolan's money, either.

We draft okay- under this cba you have to keep your picks because of their cheap contracts.

Novak may be a one trick pony, but alas, Bargs is a no trick pony- what the heck does he do great that makes up for his many short comings?

Define "okay", and use examples over the past 29 years.

If you're point is a comparison to Novak, I don't think Bargs needs to do anything great:

Bargs doesn't get into meaningless pissfights with Nate Robinson.
He plays D against the likes of DHoward.
He can actually dribble and get his own shot without 4 screens.
He can dunk.

Thats four.

Next: Why Bargs on the IR is worth more than Camby and QRich on the bench.

Why 29 years?! That's ridiculous- you compare one regime or one set of scouts picks, not lumping together 29 years worth of personnel!

So Bargs can play okay man on man defense against one player we play twice a year and he can dunk (when he isn't breaking his elbow for a year in the process)- slim pickings!

Why 29 years, hmmmm, does the year 1985 mean anything to you?
So, you have no examples. Check. Google is your friend. Have fun.

And Bargs played D against Hibbert too, remember? You'd prefer watching Novak get torched by...anyone?

And Novak can do...what, again, exactly?

mreinman wrote:also, even if you will say that we don't pick well, its a very valuable asset to have.

Exactly, the picks but mostly the 1st rd pick could have been used to get talent that actually deserved it. Aflalo and Lowry come to mind. However, that trade may have had lead to Phil so it all works out.

Then again in 2-5 years it may be a poll thread about: Did you support the Phil for Pres. move? Its ok to come clean.

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:We draft like sheehit, look it up, it's easy to do. So the first rounder didn't bother me all that much. Unless of course I kept thinking Steve Mills was suddenly going to become a genius with IT whispering sweet nothings in his ears.

I was a little sad to see Novakaine go, but I was also almost equally tired of his one-trick pony act. Camby and QRich who?

I bought into the dreamscape of a 7 footer with the mad handle spreading the floor and making Fat Hibbert look silly. Someone for Melo to pass to without second and third thoughts! Bargs was going to be healthy, happy and reborn in the big city! And he was playing good D on some premier bigs! Bonus! Alas, it was not to be.

Oh well. I truly don't worry about Droolan's money, either.

We draft okay- under this cba you have to keep your picks because of their cheap contracts.

Novak may be a one trick pony, but alas, Bargs is a no trick pony- what the heck does he do great that makes up for his many short comings?

Define "okay", and use examples over the past 29 years.

If you're point is a comparison to Novak, I don't think Bargs needs to do anything great:

Bargs doesn't get into meaningless pissfights with Nate Robinson.
He plays D against the likes of DHoward.
He can actually dribble and get his own shot without 4 screens.
He can dunk.

Thats four.

Next: Why Bargs on the IR is worth more than Camby and QRich on the bench.

Why 29 years?! That's ridiculous- you compare one regime or one set of scouts picks, not lumping together 29 years worth of personnel!

So Bargs can play okay man on man defense against one player we play twice a year and he can dunk (when he isn't breaking his elbow for a year in the process)- slim pickings!

Why 29 years, hmmmm, does the year 1985 mean anything to you?
So, you have no examples. Check. Google is your friend. Have fun.

And Bargs played D against Hibbert too, remember? You'd prefer watching Novak get torched by...anyone?

And Novak can do...what, again, exactly?

Yeah, the trade was a steal for us!

I thought it was a gamble at the time. A high risk...high reward move. Now it's a high risk....low reward move. So yes, I thought the Bargs trade would be good for the knicks, along with 90% of the knick fan base. Did not want to give up a 1st round, but I thought if Barbs can play like he did in his prime, then I'm ok with losing a 2nd round pick....not a 1st. I wasn't ok with losing Novak. I believe if you have a great specialty in something, you are a good asset for the team. And Novak was known around the league as a sharp shooter, so he helped spread the floor for Melo, whether he was hitting or not....He never pump faked or hesitated on his jumper....When he was open, he let it fly. Something I thought Barbs would do, plus add some better defense, but that never happened.

I think everybody was ok with the trade, minus the 1st round pick. Novak was suppose to be a poor mans Barbs, but as you can see. Barbs was more of a driver than a shooter. So basically, he created more of a log jam at the rim, which resulted in poor spacing between Chandler, Melo, Amari, Shump,etc..... I don't think management made it clear what Barbs role would be on this team. And I don't think the coach knew what his role would be. All they knew is that he used to be a 20 plus scorer that needed a change in scenery. Well, that trade didn't work out, but you can't fault them for trying.

I'm just glad we increased our management basketball IQ with Phil Jackson now, and hopefully we can start making better additions and subtractions. People think role players aren't valuable, but I think it's clear that Cope, Novak and Lin were valuable role players....Especially when you have over paid stars on the team. Barbs turned out to be 1 too many over paid stars on this team. We needed more role players that understood their role. Better coaching might have helped the Barbs trade...

AB is an inefficient scorer and aside from being born 7 feet tall, he has done nothing else worth noting.

Why would we want another chucker on this team?

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:We draft like sheehit, look it up, it's easy to do. So the first rounder didn't bother me all that much. Unless of course I kept thinking Steve Mills was suddenly going to become a genius with IT whispering sweet nothings in his ears.

I was a little sad to see Novakaine go, but I was also almost equally tired of his one-trick pony act. Camby and QRich who?

I bought into the dreamscape of a 7 footer with the mad handle spreading the floor and making Fat Hibbert look silly. Someone for Melo to pass to without second and third thoughts! Bargs was going to be healthy, happy and reborn in the big city! And he was playing good D on some premier bigs! Bonus! Alas, it was not to be.

Oh well. I truly don't worry about Droolan's money, either.

We draft okay- under this cba you have to keep your picks because of their cheap contracts.

Novak may be a one trick pony, but alas, Bargs is a no trick pony- what the heck does he do great that makes up for his many short comings?

Define "okay", and use examples over the past 29 years.

If you're point is a comparison to Novak, I don't think Bargs needs to do anything great:

Bargs doesn't get into meaningless pissfights with Nate Robinson.
He plays D against the likes of DHoward.
He can actually dribble and get his own shot without 4 screens.
He can dunk.

Thats four.

Next: Why Bargs on the IR is worth more than Camby and QRich on the bench.

Why 29 years?! That's ridiculous- you compare one regime or one set of scouts picks, not lumping together 29 years worth of personnel!

So Bargs can play okay man on man defense against one player we play twice a year and he can dunk (when he isn't breaking his elbow for a year in the process)- slim pickings!

Why 29 years, hmmmm, does the year 1985 mean anything to you?
So, you have no examples. Check. Google is your friend. Have fun.

And Bargs played D against Hibbert too, remember? You'd prefer watching Novak get torched by...anyone?

And Novak can do...what, again, exactly?

Yeah, the trade was a steal for us!

mreinman wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

jrodmc wrote:We draft like sheehit, look it up, it's easy to do. So the first rounder didn't bother me all that much. Unless of course I kept thinking Steve Mills was suddenly going to become a genius with IT whispering sweet nothings in his ears.

I was a little sad to see Novakaine go, but I was also almost equally tired of his one-trick pony act. Camby and QRich who?

I bought into the dreamscape of a 7 footer with the mad handle spreading the floor and making Fat Hibbert look silly. Someone for Melo to pass to without second and third thoughts! Bargs was going to be healthy, happy and reborn in the big city! And he was playing good D on some premier bigs! Bonus! Alas, it was not to be.

Oh well. I truly don't worry about Droolan's money, either.

We draft okay- under this cba you have to keep your picks because of their cheap contracts.

Novak may be a one trick pony, but alas, Bargs is a no trick pony- what the heck does he do great that makes up for his many short comings?

Define "okay", and use examples over the past 29 years.

If you're point is a comparison to Novak, I don't think Bargs needs to do anything great:

Bargs doesn't get into meaningless pissfights with Nate Robinson.
He plays D against the likes of DHoward.
He can actually dribble and get his own shot without 4 screens.
He can dunk.

Thats four.

Next: Why Bargs on the IR is worth more than Camby and QRich on the bench.

Why 29 years?! That's ridiculous- you compare one regime or one set of scouts picks, not lumping together 29 years worth of personnel!

So Bargs can play okay man on man defense against one player we play twice a year and he can dunk (when he isn't breaking his elbow for a year in the process)- slim pickings!

Why 29 years, hmmmm, does the year 1985 mean anything to you?
So, you have no examples. Check. Google is your friend. Have fun.

And Bargs played D against Hibbert too, remember? You'd prefer watching Novak get torched by...anyone?

And Novak can do...what, again, exactly?

Yeah, the trade was a steal for us!

No, of course, it was a goldmine for Toronto! Novak Camby and QRich and that draft pick are the keys to the division lead!

Your response make so much sense.

Is comparison really that hard of concept for you to understand?

We gave up sheehit, with the exception of a magical draft pick that we
1) given our history, would have used on the next Beasley
2) traded for someone probably even more valuable than Bargs turned out to be.

In return Toronto got pure sheehit and our draft pick.

I was still wrong about the trade. I feel clean.

fishmike wrote:it was a buy low... Dont think anyone realized how low

Hindsight- we actually bought high!