Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Would you put all the blame on his shoulders though. I would think making the playoffs as a young player is a pretty good accomplishment. We didn't make the playoffs for 10yrs with veterans

All? No. That's a silly question. The point is that the only thing Bargs has shown in his 7 year career is that even when he's actually healthy, he's a big net negative on the court.

It's in the past. Let's see what this guy does on a real team. It's a lot to ask of a guy who is obviously not a franchise player to be a franchise player. At least here we all know who the alpha dog is and it will be interesting to see what he can do with little pressure. Personally I'm excited to see what he can do. Regardless it's an upgrade over Novak and Camby.

The past is all there ever is when evaluating players. Of course it's in the past!
At best it's ambiguous whether this is a roster upgrade. Almost all the numbers indicate Bargs was the third best player in this trade, although obviously Camby's health is uncertain.

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

I wish I were. None of the numbers indicate Camby or Novak was even close to the net negative on the court that Bargs was.

C'mon we're talking a net negative of 5 points on defense! He's been +3 on offense for his entire career in Toronto which is why I stated the past is the past. I'm not a rocket scientist but I think that is a total negative of 2 points as in 1 hoop/2 free throws.

Chris Bosh was net negative for his first 4 seasons in Toronto. Think that had anything to due with the team he was on?

Can you cite your numbers? With Dean Oliver's formula, he was -15 last year and -8 for his career.
Are you talking about on/off +/-?

Dean Oliver? We talking bout Dean Olver? Who in the blue hell is Dean Olover? C'mon man I get it....your a stats guy.

The problem I have with all the advanced stats, +/- nonsense is that we're talking about the game of basketball...BASKETBALL. The ultimate in team sports.

Steph Curry had the game of his life against our very own Knicks. One of the best performances I've watched as a fan of this sport for over 25 years. At the end of the day his stat line stated -4! So what are we to conclude from this -4? That while he was on the floor his team was 4 points worse than the opponent? That if he was a better defender and locked his man down he could have been +4? That being -4 is straight crap?

All I know is that Steph went 18-28, 11-13 from 3 land and 7-7 from the line. The kid dropped 54 points with 7 assists, 6 boards and 3 steals but was -4 while his teammate Richard Jefferson played 15 minutes had 5 points 3 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 steal but was +11. +11 > -4?!!!!

So according some guy named Dean Oliver I should conclude that AB sucks because he's -8 for his career? WOW! Considering that he played with the Raptors and played with studs like Jamario Moon, Rasho Nesterovic, Sunny Weems, Marcus Banks, Reggie Evans and Amir Johnson. No crap....he's probably negative since the Raptors were outscored more often than not and wound up losing as a result.Again I get it your a stat/advanced stat guy.

Where you aware that Mark Pulombo's advanced statistics showed that AB is +23 on days where he plays 40 minutes in front of 15,000 fans on taco night where the outside temperature is 85 degrees and he has a hot date?

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens. Like I said before....the past is the past and logic > advanced stats.

gunsnewing wrote:Curry is an exaggeration. No one is as unmovivated as him. Curry was all based on potential. Bargnani is proven

Bargs so far has only proven that he will underachieve... consistently...

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Would you put all the blame on his shoulders though. I would think making the playoffs as a young player is a pretty good accomplishment. We didn't make the playoffs for 10yrs with veterans

All? No. That's a silly question. The point is that the only thing Bargs has shown in his 7 year career is that even when he's actually healthy, he's a big net negative on the court.

It's in the past. Let's see what this guy does on a real team. It's a lot to ask of a guy who is obviously not a franchise player to be a franchise player. At least here we all know who the alpha dog is and it will be interesting to see what he can do with little pressure. Personally I'm excited to see what he can do. Regardless it's an upgrade over Novak and Camby.

The past is all there ever is when evaluating players. Of course it's in the past!
At best it's ambiguous whether this is a roster upgrade. Almost all the numbers indicate Bargs was the third best player in this trade, although obviously Camby's health is uncertain.

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

I wish I were. None of the numbers indicate Camby or Novak was even close to the net negative on the court that Bargs was.

C'mon we're talking a net negative of 5 points on defense! He's been +3 on offense for his entire career in Toronto which is why I stated the past is the past. I'm not a rocket scientist but I think that is a total negative of 2 points as in 1 hoop/2 free throws.

Chris Bosh was net negative for his first 4 seasons in Toronto. Think that had anything to due with the team he was on?

Can you cite your numbers? With Dean Oliver's formula, he was -15 last year and -8 for his career.
Are you talking about on/off +/-?

Dean Oliver? We talking bout Dean Olver? Who in the blue hell is Dean Olover? C'mon man I get it....your a stats guy.

The problem I have with all the advanced stats, +/- nonsense is that we're talking about the game of basketball...BASKETBALL. The ultimate in team sports.

Steph Curry had the game of his life against our very own Knicks. One of the best performances I've watched as a fan of this sport for over 25 years. At the end of the day his stat line stated -4! So what are we to conclude from this -4? That while he was on the floor his team was 4 points worse than the opponent? That if he was a better defender and locked his man down he could have been +4? That being -4 is straight crap?

All I know is that Steph went 18-28, 11-13 from 3 land and 7-7 from the line. The kid dropped 54 points with 7 assists, 6 boards and 3 steals but was -4 while his teammate Richard Jefferson played 15 minutes had 5 points 3 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 steal but was +11. +11 > -4?!!!!

So according some guy named Dean Oliver I should conclude that AB sucks because he's -8 for his career? WOW! Considering that he played with the Raptors and played with studs like Jamario Moon, Rasho Nesterovic, Sunny Weems, Marcus Banks, Reggie Evans and Amir Johnson. No crap....he's probably negative since the Raptors were outscored more often than not and wound up losing as a result.Again I get it your a stat/advanced stat guy.

Where you aware that Mark Pulombo's advanced statistics showed that AB is +23 on days where he plays 40 minutes in front of 15,000 fans on taco night where the outside temperature is 85 degrees and he has a hot date?

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens. Like I said before....the past is the past and logic > advanced stats.

which is why I guess you never use one game, over career stats...

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens.

you act like you are adding him to kobe, Gaol and Artest of a few years ago.... this core is not that good, and bargs doesn't help fill a weakness which is rebounding and points in the paint..

tkf wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Would you put all the blame on his shoulders though. I would think making the playoffs as a young player is a pretty good accomplishment. We didn't make the playoffs for 10yrs with veterans

All? No. That's a silly question. The point is that the only thing Bargs has shown in his 7 year career is that even when he's actually healthy, he's a big net negative on the court.

It's in the past. Let's see what this guy does on a real team. It's a lot to ask of a guy who is obviously not a franchise player to be a franchise player. At least here we all know who the alpha dog is and it will be interesting to see what he can do with little pressure. Personally I'm excited to see what he can do. Regardless it's an upgrade over Novak and Camby.

The past is all there ever is when evaluating players. Of course it's in the past!
At best it's ambiguous whether this is a roster upgrade. Almost all the numbers indicate Bargs was the third best player in this trade, although obviously Camby's health is uncertain.

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

I wish I were. None of the numbers indicate Camby or Novak was even close to the net negative on the court that Bargs was.

C'mon we're talking a net negative of 5 points on defense! He's been +3 on offense for his entire career in Toronto which is why I stated the past is the past. I'm not a rocket scientist but I think that is a total negative of 2 points as in 1 hoop/2 free throws.

Chris Bosh was net negative for his first 4 seasons in Toronto. Think that had anything to due with the team he was on?

Can you cite your numbers? With Dean Oliver's formula, he was -15 last year and -8 for his career.
Are you talking about on/off +/-?

Dean Oliver? We talking bout Dean Olver? Who in the blue hell is Dean Olover? C'mon man I get it....your a stats guy.

The problem I have with all the advanced stats, +/- nonsense is that we're talking about the game of basketball...BASKETBALL. The ultimate in team sports.

Steph Curry had the game of his life against our very own Knicks. One of the best performances I've watched as a fan of this sport for over 25 years. At the end of the day his stat line stated -4! So what are we to conclude from this -4? That while he was on the floor his team was 4 points worse than the opponent? That if he was a better defender and locked his man down he could have been +4? That being -4 is straight crap?

All I know is that Steph went 18-28, 11-13 from 3 land and 7-7 from the line. The kid dropped 54 points with 7 assists, 6 boards and 3 steals but was -4 while his teammate Richard Jefferson played 15 minutes had 5 points 3 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 steal but was +11. +11 > -4?!!!!

So according some guy named Dean Oliver I should conclude that AB sucks because he's -8 for his career? WOW! Considering that he played with the Raptors and played with studs like Jamario Moon, Rasho Nesterovic, Sunny Weems, Marcus Banks, Reggie Evans and Amir Johnson. No crap....he's probably negative since the Raptors were outscored more often than not and wound up losing as a result.Again I get it your a stat/advanced stat guy.

Where you aware that Mark Pulombo's advanced statistics showed that AB is +23 on days where he plays 40 minutes in front of 15,000 fans on taco night where the outside temperature is 85 degrees and he has a hot date?

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens. Like I said before....the past is the past and logic > advanced stats.

which is why I guess you never use one game, over career stats...

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens.

you act like you are adding him to kobe, Gaol and Artest of a few years ago.... this core is not that good, and bargs doesn't help fill a weakness which is rebounding and points in the paint..

A good player on a losing team is going to be net negative...what is so hard to understand? Without even looking it up I'm almost 100% sure that John Paxson was a net positive during his time in Chicago. Probably hadn't nothing to do with starting with Jordan and Pippen either. He was just that great.

Rebounding and points in the paint? Amazing that the Heat were able to win yet another championship while getting outrebounded. Our actual weakness is not having a reliable second scoring option. Hopefully AB helps solve the problem.

You want rebounding and points in the paint? Hopefully that's addressed with Brand.

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Would you put all the blame on his shoulders though. I would think making the playoffs as a young player is a pretty good accomplishment. We didn't make the playoffs for 10yrs with veterans

All? No. That's a silly question. The point is that the only thing Bargs has shown in his 7 year career is that even when he's actually healthy, he's a big net negative on the court.

It's in the past. Let's see what this guy does on a real team. It's a lot to ask of a guy who is obviously not a franchise player to be a franchise player. At least here we all know who the alpha dog is and it will be interesting to see what he can do with little pressure. Personally I'm excited to see what he can do. Regardless it's an upgrade over Novak and Camby.

The past is all there ever is when evaluating players. Of course it's in the past!
At best it's ambiguous whether this is a roster upgrade. Almost all the numbers indicate Bargs was the third best player in this trade, although obviously Camby's health is uncertain.

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

I wish I were. None of the numbers indicate Camby or Novak was even close to the net negative on the court that Bargs was.

C'mon we're talking a net negative of 5 points on defense! He's been +3 on offense for his entire career in Toronto which is why I stated the past is the past. I'm not a rocket scientist but I think that is a total negative of 2 points as in 1 hoop/2 free throws.

Chris Bosh was net negative for his first 4 seasons in Toronto. Think that had anything to due with the team he was on?

Can you cite your numbers? With Dean Oliver's formula, he was -15 last year and -8 for his career.
Are you talking about on/off +/-?

Dean Oliver? We talking bout Dean Olver? Who in the blue hell is Dean Olover? C'mon man I get it....your a stats guy.

The problem I have with all the advanced stats, +/- nonsense is that we're talking about the game of basketball...BASKETBALL. The ultimate in team sports.

Steph Curry had the game of his life against our very own Knicks. One of the best performances I've watched as a fan of this sport for over 25 years. At the end of the day his stat line stated -4! So what are we to conclude from this -4? That while he was on the floor his team was 4 points worse than the opponent? That if he was a better defender and locked his man down he could have been +4? That being -4 is straight crap?

All I know is that Steph went 18-28, 11-13 from 3 land and 7-7 from the line. The kid dropped 54 points with 7 assists, 6 boards and 3 steals but was -4 while his teammate Richard Jefferson played 15 minutes had 5 points 3 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 steal but was +11. +11 > -4?!!!!

So according some guy named Dean Oliver I should conclude that AB sucks because he's -8 for his career? WOW! Considering that he played with the Raptors and played with studs like Jamario Moon, Rasho Nesterovic, Sunny Weems, Marcus Banks, Reggie Evans and Amir Johnson. No crap....he's probably negative since the Raptors were outscored more often than not and wound up losing as a result.Again I get it your a stat/advanced stat guy.

Where you aware that Mark Pulombo's advanced statistics showed that AB is +23 on days where he plays 40 minutes in front of 15,000 fans on taco night where the outside temperature is 85 degrees and he has a hot date?

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens. Like I said before....the past is the past and logic > advanced stats.

Dean is a stat guy that had worked with nbs teams I believe he worked in Denver. He is now working with nfl teams. I believe what Bonn is referring to is off and def. ratings which shows Bargs so far has been a net negative. what is interesting is that how some players suddenly get better at D once they go to a better or become better players when their roles are reduce.

Zach Randolph goes from sieve to defensive dynamo when he gets to Memphis.

Jason Terry goes from poor TS guy to exploding in Dallas.

Lamar Odom goes from fledgling on being a bust but then goes to the Lakers and has an uptick in rebounds,TS, and defensive rating.

Blatche and Kenyon martin are two others. There was no way Martin should have posted numbers like he did. granted it was a small sample.

tkf wrote:

Our actual weakness is not having a reliable second scoring option. Hopefully AB helps solve the problem.

no our weakness is getting extremely flawed players and has been to fill roles they re not capable of.. JR smith was supposed be our second scorer, he flamed out no surprised.. Kenyon martin and camby were supposed to be our inside presence.. didn't work.. no surprise there, those guys are toast..

now we are to believe a guy who has been pretty much a bust is going to solve our need for a secondary scorer? please... another flawed concept..

what this team needs is an enema... a primary scorer who is efficient and defends.. a PG, a center, a bench, and a coach... all who have their best years in front of them....

no more fixes with broken down players and has beens.. this has been a recipe for disaster... why keep repeating it?

this does bother me as well at times, having to hide flaws across multiple players. i think its done on many teams cuz there are many flawed players out there. takes time/effort to find the not so obvious guys who can play and most FO/coaches feel the grip of death clutching at them -- they must act. just part of the probs...

Bonn1997 wrote:The worrisome thing is that in every metric (PER, win shares, wins produced, on of +/-, PER), Bargs looks like a really bad player.
If you make trades by ignoring the past and hoping for another Terry-like trajectory, you will be wrong 99% of the time and have the worst team in the league.

I think this is not a case where the Knicks are just taking a player who mysteriously underperformed. They know that a lot of his issues were due to physical issues and likely made worse by the mental part of the game. All the pressure of a #1 pick and a bad team on top of the injuries probably combined to cause such a massive drop in production. I think they feel that they can rehabilitate AB and get him to realize his potential in a much better environment and with more support around him. This is not about judging a player in a vacuum.

The assessment is likely that they know AB has the talent to be much better and they believe they have to staff to help him excel. When you don't have many good options this is what you have to do sometimes. Reclamation projects. I think it's well worth a shot.

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Would you put all the blame on his shoulders though. I would think making the playoffs as a young player is a pretty good accomplishment. We didn't make the playoffs for 10yrs with veterans

All? No. That's a silly question. The point is that the only thing Bargs has shown in his 7 year career is that even when he's actually healthy, he's a big net negative on the court.

It's in the past. Let's see what this guy does on a real team. It's a lot to ask of a guy who is obviously not a franchise player to be a franchise player. At least here we all know who the alpha dog is and it will be interesting to see what he can do with little pressure. Personally I'm excited to see what he can do. Regardless it's an upgrade over Novak and Camby.

The past is all there ever is when evaluating players. Of course it's in the past!
At best it's ambiguous whether this is a roster upgrade. Almost all the numbers indicate Bargs was the third best player in this trade, although obviously Camby's health is uncertain.

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

I wish I were. None of the numbers indicate Camby or Novak was even close to the net negative on the court that Bargs was.

C'mon we're talking a net negative of 5 points on defense! He's been +3 on offense for his entire career in Toronto which is why I stated the past is the past. I'm not a rocket scientist but I think that is a total negative of 2 points as in 1 hoop/2 free throws.

Chris Bosh was net negative for his first 4 seasons in Toronto. Think that had anything to due with the team he was on?

Can you cite your numbers? With Dean Oliver's formula, he was -15 last year and -8 for his career.
Are you talking about on/off +/-?

Dean Oliver? We talking bout Dean Olver? Who in the blue hell is Dean Olover? C'mon man I get it....your a stats guy.

The problem I have with all the advanced stats, +/- nonsense is that we're talking about the game of basketball...BASKETBALL. The ultimate in team sports.

Steph Curry had the game of his life against our very own Knicks. One of the best performances I've watched as a fan of this sport for over 25 years. At the end of the day his stat line stated -4! So what are we to conclude from this -4? That while he was on the floor his team was 4 points worse than the opponent? That if he was a better defender and locked his man down he could have been +4? That being -4 is straight crap?

All I know is that Steph went 18-28, 11-13 from 3 land and 7-7 from the line. The kid dropped 54 points with 7 assists, 6 boards and 3 steals but was -4 while his teammate Richard Jefferson played 15 minutes had 5 points 3 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 steal but was +11. +11 > -4?!!!!

So according some guy named Dean Oliver I should conclude that AB sucks because he's -8 for his career? WOW! Considering that he played with the Raptors and played with studs like Jamario Moon, Rasho Nesterovic, Sunny Weems, Marcus Banks, Reggie Evans and Amir Johnson. No crap....he's probably negative since the Raptors were outscored more often than not and wound up losing as a result.Again I get it your a stat/advanced stat guy.

Where you aware that Mark Pulombo's advanced statistics showed that AB is +23 on days where he plays 40 minutes in front of 15,000 fans on taco night where the outside temperature is 85 degrees and he has a hot date?

All I'm saying is put the man on our team of Chandler, Felton, Melo and Shump as lets see what happens. Like I said before....the past is the past and logic > advanced stats.

Dean is a stat guy that had worked with nbs teams I believe he worked in Denver. He is now working with nfl teams. I believe what Bonn is referring to is off and def. ratings which shows Bargs so far has been a net negative. what is interesting is that how some players suddenly get better at D once they go to a better or become better players when their roles are reduce.

Zach Randolph goes from sieve to defensive dynamo when he gets to Memphis.

Jason Terry goes from poor TS guy to exploding in Dallas.

Lamar Odom goes from fledgling on being a bust but then goes to the Lakers and has an uptick in rebounds,TS, and defensive rating.

Blatche and Kenyon martin are two others. There was no way Martin should have posted numbers like he did. granted it was a small sample.

Yeah, that is the stat I'm referring to but it's just one stat. The worrisome thing is that in every metric (PER, win shares, wins produced, on of +/-, PER), Bargs looks like a really bad player.
If you make trades by ignoring the past and hoping for another Terry-like trajectory, you will be wrong 99% of the time and have the worst team in the league.

it's about team construction that contributes to a player. I believe Oliver said something like that in a interview I read. if you dive into his synergy profiles you can see he is an efficient player in so many areas offensively and does a great job in many areas defensively. A poster on another board made a comment how this switch heavy D maybe a perfect fit because he is a good on ball defender who gets lost helping, Idk. There are also articles saying he needs a big next to him to take away rim protection duties.

I am just saying it is not set in stone based on numbers. There have been countless of times talented players changed teams/roles and suddenly became a better player. It's about resricting roles to what they do best. Knicks have synergy data, sportsvu, data, and all the other in house models nba team's uses. They have tracked him for a reason. in Toronto he had a nice TS on a lower usage with Bosh but didn't have the defensive big to cover him because of Bosh. Carmelo and Tyson can protect him offensively and defensively. Is it a gamble, yes, but I think it's a calculated one.

Speaking of Bosh, he also became a more consistent defender stat wise surrounded by better defenders.