[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Bargs: Do you agree with Jackson when it comes to Bargnani? Do you think Bargnani can be a “surprise” for the Knicks
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum


Author Poll
babyKnicks
Posts: 2486
Joined: 10/31/2006
Member: #1191
USA
http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=new-yorkknicks&id=58101&city=newyork&src=desktop&rand=ref~%7B%22ref%22%3A%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ultimateknicks.com%2F%22%7D

Are you optimistic about Bargnani?


Jim McIsaac/Getty Images

Last season, the 'Bockers were better off with Andrea Bargnani on the bench. But Phil Jackson says he might "surprise" next season. Agree?

By most measures, Andrea Bargnani's season with the Knicks last year was a forgettable one.

New York’s offense was 6.8 points better (per 100 possessions) when Bargnani was on the bench. On defense, the Knicks allowed one fewer point per 100 possessions when Bargnani was off the court.

And then there’s this: The Knicks went 15-27 before Bargnani went down with an elbow injury and finished the season 21-18 after he got hurt.

It's unfair to put that all on Bargnani, but it doesn't reflect well on the former No. 1 overall pick.

"He just never seemed to be a good fit," one NBA scout said of Bargnani last season.

But when viewed through the prism of individual statistics, Bargnani’s 2013-14 season doesn’t seem so terrible. He averaged 13.3 points and 5.3 rebounds per game, numbers the Knicks probably would have signed up for when they acquired Bargnani last summer.

The bigger issue last season for Bargnani was that he never fit well on the floor with Carmelo Anthony. The Knicks hoped Bargnani could be a strong secondary scoring option. That didn’t happen.

New York outscored teams by 3.5 points per 100 possessions when Anthony was on the court without Bargnani. But when Anthony and Bargnani shared the floor, the Knicks were outscored by 3.9 points per 100 possessions.

Maybe that was one reason, along with his salary, that Bargnani was deemed expendable earlier this summer by the Knicks. The Knicks’ hierarchy tried to ship Bargnani out, along with one of their guards, in an effort to shed his $11.5 million salary and free up some money for then-free agent Pau Gasol, sources say.

Either New York couldn’t find an amenable trade partner or couldn't construct a deal to its liking because Bargnani is still a Knick and Gasol is with the Chicago Bulls.

It is unclear if Bargnani is still on the trading block.

Phil Jackson said last week he thinks Bargnani will “surprise” some people this season. He also called the seven-footer “overlooked.”

“We think he's going to really do well in the kind of system we have,” Jackson said in an interview on MSG Network. “We've got a couple guards he likes to play with in Jose [Calderon] and Pablo [Prigioni] because he's played with them before in situations. I think he's going to be a surprise and I think he's going to be a pleasant one for our fans.”

Some see Jackson and Derek Fisher's triangle offense as a panacea for Bargnani. If he can knock down the open shots produced by the triangle, the theory goes, maybe Bargnani can have a successful run in his second season in New York?

(That theory ignores that Bargnani isn't a strong passer and doesn't move well -- two essential skills in the triangle.)

Offense, though, hasn't been Bargnani's biggest issue over eight years in the league. Defense and rebounding have also held him back -- maybe to a larger degree than any drawbacks he has on the offensive end.

So Fisher and the Knicks will have to figure out not only how to get Bargnani open looks on offense but also how to overcome his porous perimeter defense and spotty rebounding.

And, oh yeah, they’ll also have to find a way to incorporate him on offense without hindering Carmelo.

Is that possible? Sure. Anything's possible. But, based on last season, it doesn't seem all that likely.

Question: Do you agree with Jackson when it comes to Bargnani? Do you think Bargnani can be a “surprise” for the Knicks this season? Or should they look to trade him?

You can follow Ian Begley on Twitter.


Reg

Yes. Bargs will continue his 12/6 numbers and contribute to wins
No. He's done. Not even PFhish can fix him.
View Results


Page 4 of 6 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4  5  6 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
IronWillGiroud
Posts: 25207
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/17/2012
Member: #4359
7/23/2014  7:23 PM
bargs ain't about it
The Will, check out the Official Home of Will's GameDay Art: http://tinyurl.com/thewillgameday
AUTOADVERT
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
7/23/2014  8:08 PM
nyvector16 wrote:I'm with ya nixluva..

I remember a few games last year where Bargs was a beast on defense, in particular against Dwight Howard.
I also remember the announcer stating: "I can't believe I'm gonna say this, but what are the Knicks going to do on defense when Bargnani hits the bench?"

A few of those games he had some very inspiring blocks and generally played with Passion... but then he got hurt.

If healthy, Bargnani will have a great 14/15 season... and of course it will help that it is a contract year.


Yeah it looks like he's in great shape from the pictures i've seen. He looks more toned and bigger across the shoulders. His arms look more cut than I remember last year. As I've said Phil let everyone know they had to come to camp in great shape. I doubt Bargnani, in a contract year, wouldn't come in to the season in great shape. Phil is gonna look to raise his value as well. You can't trade guys who look like they can't play. He'll put Bargs in prime position to shine this year.
RonRon
Posts: 25531
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/22/2002
Member: #246
7/23/2014  10:02 PM
He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/24/2014  7:59 AM    LAST EDITED: 7/24/2014  8:00 AM
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
7/24/2014  8:27 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
Nalod
Posts: 71359
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
7/24/2014  8:41 AM

Past Metrics: Bargs will be awful. Extrapolate the past into the future is the safe assumption.

Forward thinking: Forget the draft position, look at age and skill set. The kid can play at the NBA level but has yet to be consistent and healthy in two seasons.

Fan: hopeful he can put it together, new coaching and a system that if he can fit in would give us production.

Hater: Once bad, always bad. I hope he sucks because otherwise Im wrong and its not about cheering team on, its about this fan being correct!

Nalod: Looking forward to seeing if the kid can turn his career around with Zen, health, and be Pau in the triangle. Pau is HOF player, Bargs is not but that don't mean he can't give us 15 and 6 this season!!
fishmike
Posts: 53864
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
7/24/2014  9:10 AM
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/24/2014  9:15 AM
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.

What do you mean "the only stat that's accurate"? You think the author made calculation errors with the others? You tend to dismiss them as if you think he did.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/24/2014  9:21 AM
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
7/24/2014  9:25 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.

What do you mean "the only stat that's accurate"? You think the author made calculation errors with the others? You tend to dismiss them as if you think he did.

It's not accurate in the sense that he should have taking everything into consideration.

It's like saying, this guy had a accident, he's a bad driver, but doesn't take into consideration the Icy roads, bad breaks, and zero visability.

ES
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
7/24/2014  9:31 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.

What do you mean "the only stat that's accurate"? You think the author made calculation errors with the others? You tend to dismiss them as if you think he did.
I am not sure about these stats. Is the author referencing time on the bench during games that Bargs played or is he including when Bargs was off the court for injury.

I am not sure about these stats. Is the author referencing time on the bench during games that Bargs played or is he including when Bargs was off the court for injury. If it is the later then I don't think it is an accurate stat.
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/24/2014  9:33 AM
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.

What do you mean "the only stat that's accurate"? You think the author made calculation errors with the others? You tend to dismiss them as if you think he did.
I am not sure about these stats. Is the author referencing time on the bench during games that Bargs played or is he including when Bargs was off the court for injury.

I am not sure about these stats. Is the author referencing time on the bench during games that Bargs played or is he including when Bargs was off the court for injury. If it is the later then I don't think it is an accurate stat.

Both look bad for Bargs. You can get the stats at 82games.com.
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
7/24/2014  9:35 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.

What do you mean "the only stat that's accurate"? You think the author made calculation errors with the others? You tend to dismiss them as if you think he did.
I am not sure about these stats. Is the author referencing time on the bench during games that Bargs played or is he including when Bargs was off the court for injury.

I am not sure about these stats. Is the author referencing time on the bench during games that Bargs played or is he including when Bargs was off the court for injury. If it is the later then I don't think it is an accurate stat.

Both look bad for Bargs. You can get the stats at 82games.com.
Their two different things. He was out when the team played well down the stretch. That is going to sway things.
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
fishmike
Posts: 53864
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
7/24/2014  9:37 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/24/2014  10:15 AM
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?

Last year isn't all that matters. BUT this is mostly last year's team returning.
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
7/24/2014  11:28 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?

Last year isn't all that matters. BUT this is mostly last year's team returning.

Well then last year's 37 win team was a random fluctuation.

50+ wins, here we come!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/24/2014  11:30 AM
franco12 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?

Last year isn't all that matters. BUT this is mostly last year's team returning.

Well then last year's 37 win team was a random fluctuation.

50+ wins, here we come!


Actually, it was the predictable and predicted result of several roster downgrades.
F500ONE
Posts: 23899
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/28/2014
Member: #5844
7/24/2014  11:41 AM    LAST EDITED: 7/24/2014  11:42 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
franco12 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?

Last year isn't all that matters. BUT this is mostly last year's team returning.

Well then last year's 37 win team was a random fluctuation.

50+ wins, here we come!


Actually, it was the predictable and predicted result of several roster downgrades.

You know what I was thinking since we're talking about Bargs and records


The Raptors won 48gms last year and they did this after trading one of their marquee named cancerous players.

They're bringing back the same team plus a couple additions this year


They have a coach on the bench who was under Carlisle I believe when Dallas won a chip 3yrs ago.

Their fans believe they can duplicate last year, maybe win a few more games


Why do we think we can win our division and think the Raptors over achieved possibly regressing and missing the playoffs altogether?

Didn't they win 48gms much the same we won 54gms


Did we feel after winning 54gms we'd drop down to like a 7th or 8th seed last year?

My gut says Raptors do fall back to earth a tad, maybe 42-43 wins this season
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
7/24/2014  11:47 AM
F500ONE wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
franco12 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?

Last year isn't all that matters. BUT this is mostly last year's team returning.

Well then last year's 37 win team was a random fluctuation.

50+ wins, here we come!


Actually, it was the predictable and predicted result of several roster downgrades.

You know what I was thinking since we're talking about Bargs and records


The Raptors won 48gms last year and they did this after trading one of their marquee named cancerous players.

They're bringing back the same team plus a couple additions this year


They have a coach on the bench who was under Carlisle I believe when Dallas won a chip 3yrs ago.

Their fans believe they can duplicate last year, maybe win a few more games


Why do we think we can win our division and think the Raptors over achieved possibly regressing and missing the playoffs altogether?

Didn't they win 48gms much the same we won 54gms


Did we feel after winning 54gms we'd drop down to like a 7th or 8th seed last year?

My gut says Raptors do fall back to earth a tad, maybe 42-43 wins this season

I think the circumstance were much different with us and the rapts. No one else in the divison has made as significant a move as the knicks have, in terms of addition by subtraction.

ES
dk7th
Posts: 30006
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/14/2012
Member: #4228
USA
7/24/2014  11:50 AM
F500ONE wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
franco12 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
RonRon wrote:He really did look very good at times on both OFF and DEF, and when he was starting to gel with CA, Tyson Chandler instantly regains the starting position despite not playing for 2 weeks or even practicing

Then CA had to readjust again to how the DEFENSES were playing him, the rest of the team, and with the Center position, he grew frustrated though Woodson always gave him the more opportunity to put up great numbers


Did you read any of the info. in the article in the poll? The team was so bad with Bargnani on the court. Of course the second they could get him out of the starting lineup and someone serviceable in, they did. Melo and the Knicks both benefited from that (see article).
It didn't appear like that watching him play for the Knicks. When he played center he was effective. There were a lot of factors involved in the really bad start. Bargs wasn't around for the run for the playoffs when the team went 16-5. There was a long period of time when the team record was better with Bargs in and Tyson out. I used to post it when I Tyson was brought up. The only stat that I think is accurate from the article is the one applied to court time shared between Anthony and Bargs. It would be interesting to see if Tyson was on the court then as well. Bargs was most effective as a 5 last year.
http://www.82games.com/1314/13NYK14.HTM

great post... look at "Production by Position" and you see when Bargs as at the 4 it was a bloodbath, but Bargs at the 5 was a positive. Good job calling it like you see it. Nailed it.


That could just be random fluctuation. Going back a few years, the pattern doesn't hold up. In 2010-11 and 2012-13, he got killed at center.
last year is all that matters. Remember the Knicks are a 37 win team right?

Last year isn't all that matters. BUT this is mostly last year's team returning.

Well then last year's 37 win team was a random fluctuation.

50+ wins, here we come!


Actually, it was the predictable and predicted result of several roster downgrades.

You know what I was thinking since we're talking about Bargs and records


The Raptors won 48gms last year and they did this after trading one of their marquee named cancerous players.

They're bringing back the same team plus a couple additions this year


They have a coach on the bench who was under Carlisle I believe when Dallas won a chip 3yrs ago.

Their fans believe they can duplicate last year, maybe win a few more games


Why do we think we can win our division and think the Raptors over achieved possibly regressing and missing the playoffs altogether?

Didn't they win 48gms much the same we won 54gms


Did we feel after winning 54gms we'd drop down to like a 7th or 8th seed last year?

My gut says Raptors do fall back to earth a tad, maybe 42-43 wins this season

a few of us did, yes.

knicks win 38-43 games in 16-17. rose MUST shoot no more than 14 shots per game, defer to kp6 + melo, and have a usage rate of less than 25%
Page 4 of 6 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4  5  6 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Bargs: Do you agree with Jackson when it comes to Bargnani? Do you think Bargnani can be a “surprise” for the Knicks
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy