dk7th wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

Panos wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:Never was a fan of him or the trade. I understand he has played well the last 20 games of the seasn but he is too injury prone to offer anything more than a vet minimum conract. Id let him go

Agreed. Bargs is super soft. How is it that this is his first stretch of decent ball in the whole time he has been here? Coincidence? He wants to get paid. Worse than a contract year. He's having a contract month. A step above Jerome James. I pass.

This isn't his first stretch of decent ball since he's been with the Knicks. He produced in points whenever he was healthy for us. He played just as good as he's been playing recently for us last year when he was healthy. If we can get him cheap then he's definitely worth having but i wouldn't go out of the way to try and beat other teams offers. His one on one defense isn't that bad but his team defense and help defense is pretty bad.

if he has played well when he was healthy, why are his stats so friggin ugly?

Now I see the mindset with how some wanted this trade to begin with ... ignoring the obvious

Obviously you didn't watch every game last year because if you did like i did you would of seen it with your own eyes that he was scoring 15-18 points almost every game. You guys have to get over the fact that the Bargs trade was horrible and we paid his butt 11.5 million a year and that he's injured a lot because if we can get him for a cheap contract then he'd be a perfect fit for what we're looking for in the triangle. Quit looking at the past and look to the future.

the future requires defense and rebounding

You won't get an argument from me on that for sure but if you don't have a couple of shooters then you won't be contending for much.

nixluva wrote:It almost doesn't matter what happens with Bargs. Phil is gonna have so many more pressing issues to deal with, that Bargs is gonna be way down the list of priorities. Phil has to put together an NBA quality top 6 rotation and he's gonna be working hard to sign bigger free agents. Only after he's gotten the players he thinks he needs to win will he address guys like Bargs. If Bargs is gone by then I don't think Phil is gonna lose sleep over that. There are just too many Free Agents out there to be worried about one player coming off your bench.

TripleThreat wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:Obviously you didn't watch every game last year because if you did like i did you would of seen it with your own eyes that he was scoring 15-18 points almost every game. ....Quit looking at the past and look to the future.

Bargnani is not a center. Not a guy you want to play center for you if you actually want to try to consistently win basketball games.

Melo is a power forward. A combination of Bargs at the 5 and Melo at the 4, or Bargs at the 4 and Melo at the 3, pick your situation, pick your poison, both will be defensive nightmare situations. Like a girls high school bench reserve, from a all girls high school enrolling a total school population of 24 kids, dropping 35 points on the Knicks frontcourt kind of nightmare.

That means in order to actually have some kind of defense, Bargs is now a backup power forward. Being paid 3 years, 18 million under this scenario.

Whether Bargs can give you 15 points if you give him 35 minutes a game ( and his past injury history shows nothing that he can sustain that kind of usage) and make him the focal point of an offense running mostly D League talent around him is not the question. The question is can Bargs give you an efficient 8-10 points a game at 12-14 minutes a night as the Knicks 4th or maybe 5th offensive option as a reserve?

The only way he can give you 15-18 points a night. Or that occasional 25, which probably prompted this front runner type thread, is if you give him heavy burn with minutes. Which either will grind down his lack of durability. Or so severely compromise your defense than you'll give up 40-50 points on the other end with him on the floor.

"Looking to the future" means, at least to me, looking at a players likely role, not trying to force and shoehorn in a guys production when his minutes and shot opportunities won't be the same if he comes back. And since he can't hit the three ball, nor defend the rim, all he does is clog up your floor spacing when is on the floor ( the reason he can get by know is most of these fringe D League types on the roster now can actually play team basketball and work around his clear limitations )

And if the point is to see what a reserve PF can give you at 12-14 minutes a night, the clear VORP question always applies ( Value Over Replacement Player)

Can I get a younger cheaper player to give me 75-80 percent of what Bargs would give me, or even more, for 15-20 percent of the cost?

Some UDFA could play at no guaranteed money and at least be more likely to be able to suit up each night and is willing to at least give full effort of defense. That some of you want the Knicks to resign a chronically injured player who only adds to the lack of team basketball dysfunction and burn 18 million in the process, for some stiff who can't even space the floor or give you six hard fouls, who is clearly only trying now to play for his next contract/find his next sucker team, is mind boggling.

Dude, it's just me and my view on it, but if you are ok with resigning Bargs for 3/18, I wouldn't start chastising others about what they glean from their watching of NBA games.

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:Phil is auditioning him for other teams to hopefully get something back (read: draft picks) from a bad trade. For those of you smarter than most of the league's GM's, please remember we got draft picks in a trade involving Ray Felton.

We are playing Bargs because Jason Smith really, really, really sucks.

We are saving Cole Aldrich for a season that matters. By playing Bargs instead, it allows Cole to remain uninjured and relatively uninteresting to other teams.

We are playing Bargs because starting Lou Amundsen at the 5 makes other teams laugh.

Please God, make people stop telling stories about Barg's and stretching the floor...amen.

I doubt that is correct. We can't just trade him in the off-season. We could do a sign and trade but that's usually needed for large contracts that teams cannot offer on their own because they're over the cap.

I honestly dont see any scenario where a team would s&t for Bargs and actually give quality back.

IMO slightly overpaying for this guy is a small risk that I might take in Phil's Position. The Knicks will not be a contender next year and if Bargs stays healthy and plays well he can become a moveable commodity for a pick given a very reasonable contract. If it doesn't pan out, Bargs is still a serviceable backup on a Knicks team that while improving, will likely still be adding pieces/rebuilding over his 3 year contract period.

A rebuild is not only about bringing in High Priced talent or High Draft picks or giving up assets for guys with proven efficient track records. It is also about buying low and selling high to bring in more picks/assets. Sometimes you have to take chances on guys to do this.

GustavBahler wrote:IDK, what worries me about Bargs at this price is that when he gets hurt its usually for a big chunk of a season, thats been his history. Would be more comfortable offering half that.

BTW, I usually put the quote first but I keep getting hit with redirects to google app sites when I visit UK on my android phone, have to disable javascript. Its the only site I visit that does this.

foosballnick wrote:Not sure what the market is for a back-up 4/5. If you are re-signing Bargs, the reason would be that you feel the negotiated cost would be reasonable considering other options and cap space. You also have to think beyond next year. If Bargs is signed for $6 million per over three years....given the cap increase, it will likely be equivalent of an MLE or less in contract in years 2 & 3.

IMO slightly overpaying for this guy is a small risk that I might take in Phil's Position. The Knicks will not be a contender next year and if Bargs stays healthy and plays well he can become a moveable commodity for a pick given a very reasonable contract. If it doesn't pan out, Bargs is still a serviceable backup on a Knicks team that while improving, will likely still be adding pieces/rebuilding over his 3 year contract period.

A rebuild is not only about bringing in High Priced talent or High Draft picks or giving up assets for guys with proven efficient track records. It is also about buying low and selling high to bring in more picks/assets. Sometimes you have to take chances on guys to do this.

This **** is driving me insane. UK isn't the only site that does this but it happens way more often here than anywhere else I visit.

newyorker4ever wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

Panos wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:Never was a fan of him or the trade. I understand he has played well the last 20 games of the seasn but he is too injury prone to offer anything more than a vet minimum conract. Id let him go

Agreed. Bargs is super soft. How is it that this is his first stretch of decent ball in the whole time he has been here? Coincidence? He wants to get paid. Worse than a contract year. He's having a contract month. A step above Jerome James. I pass.

This isn't his first stretch of decent ball since he's been with the Knicks. He produced in points whenever he was healthy for us. He played just as good as he's been playing recently for us last year when he was healthy. If we can get him cheap then he's definitely worth having but i wouldn't go out of the way to try and beat other teams offers. His one on one defense isn't that bad but his team defense and help defense is pretty bad.

if he has played well when he was healthy, why are his stats so friggin ugly?

Now I see the mindset with how some wanted this trade to begin with ... ignoring the obvious

Obviously you didn't watch every game last year because if you did like i did you would of seen it with your own eyes that he was scoring 15-18 points almost every game. You guys have to get over the fact that the Bargs trade was horrible and we paid his butt 11.5 million a year and that he's injured a lot because if we can get him for a cheap contract then he'd be a perfect fit for what we're looking for in the triangle. Quit looking at the past and look to the future.

If a guy scores 15-18 points a game then how does he only average 13?

Also, who gives a damn about points? That is what happens when you watch with your eyes. You get enamored by the wrong things.

Bargs stinks this year and he stunk last year too (and that was when he played)

Is this really that hard for you to figure out? Yes Bargs' game when it comes to rebounding and team defense stinks and needs to get better but everyone knows that about him and that wouldn't be what we would use him for. He would be needed off the bench to be a big man that can stretch the floor and bring the other teams big man away from the basket and to score points. He's a good fit for the triangle and what Phil is looking for so no matter how much you hate him and want to argue your point the truth is he's a good fit for a bench role in the triangle.

No ... not at all. I have already figured out that Bargs is a bad player that is a better player when he is hurt and does not play.

I have also figured out that points are meaningless if they are attained stupidly and inefficiently.

Has he been a good player this year when he was on the floor? If you answer yes to this question then there is no point in arguing with you.

He is one of the worst by advanced stats.

All he is doing is scoring - and doing so terribly inefficiently.

Guy should not be in the league.