NardDogNation wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

y2zipper wrote:It was and still is about getting out from this roster in 2015. Considering that nobody would take Felton's contract, which is about the same as Novak's for a much better player, I don't see how Novak could have been dumped outside of this trade.

Personally, I'd consider moving the 2018 pick (protected, of course) if I could get rid of Felton and Smith along with it without taking on future salary.

I mentioned this in a separate post but the Bucks would likely have taken Novak's contract for an expirer. They were grossly overpaying Kyle Korver at $6 million/yr,which leads me to believe that they'd have interest in Steve Novak, a Marquette grad, who has a similar skillset. The Bargnani deal we made seemed to involve no leg work whatsoever. It gives me the impression that we took the very first offer that the Raptors gave us. Remember that the Raptors were talking about amnestying Bargnani during the offseason and we gave up picks for this "talent".

As for Felton and Smith, I honestly think that Billy King would be stupid enough to trade for both (and Kenyon Martin) in a package deal. I think the odds are increased by the fact that Jason Kidd played with these guys and had success with them. All I'd need is Marcus Thorton's expiring deal.

Korver is playing retarded ball. 6 million is not grossly overpaying.

Take a look at his stats.

I dream to have him on my team!

He is the reason that we will not make the playoffs and hotlanta will

Korver hits a few efficient three's every game...that's about the extent of his ability. I admit, he looks good but that is primarily because they have an excellent coach in Mike Budenholzer who understands his talent and is very good with X's and O's. The same could not be said about Mike Woodson and to a much lesser extent Dwayne Casey. If you were to put Novak on the Hawks, I think he'd provide exactly what Korver does, as efficiently as Korver does.

His TS is freakin 67!!

And its 59 for his career which is also ridiculous.

Steve Novak's TS% during the MDA years was 68.4%. Steve Novak's peak TS% was 73.7%, granted that it was only over 30 games (all he played during the 2010-2011 season). Career wise, Novak is at 62%. Again, Korver is just a product of Budenholzer's coaching. I don't think the guy is anything special compared to Steve Novak.

so novak is as good as Korver?

He's certainly ballpark and good enough to interest a team at $4 million/yr that was interested in paying Korver $6 million/year, especially considering that Novak was a local hero as a Marquette grad.

sorry but that is beyond insane. Have you watched Korver this year?

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

y2zipper wrote:It was and still is about getting out from this roster in 2015. Considering that nobody would take Felton's contract, which is about the same as Novak's for a much better player, I don't see how Novak could have been dumped outside of this trade.

Personally, I'd consider moving the 2018 pick (protected, of course) if I could get rid of Felton and Smith along with it without taking on future salary.

I mentioned this in a separate post but the Bucks would likely have taken Novak's contract for an expirer. They were grossly overpaying Kyle Korver at $6 million/yr,which leads me to believe that they'd have interest in Steve Novak, a Marquette grad, who has a similar skillset. The Bargnani deal we made seemed to involve no leg work whatsoever. It gives me the impression that we took the very first offer that the Raptors gave us. Remember that the Raptors were talking about amnestying Bargnani during the offseason and we gave up picks for this "talent".

As for Felton and Smith, I honestly think that Billy King would be stupid enough to trade for both (and Kenyon Martin) in a package deal. I think the odds are increased by the fact that Jason Kidd played with these guys and had success with them. All I'd need is Marcus Thorton's expiring deal.

Korver is playing retarded ball. 6 million is not grossly overpaying.

Take a look at his stats.

I dream to have him on my team!

He is the reason that we will not make the playoffs and hotlanta will

Korver hits a few efficient three's every game...that's about the extent of his ability. I admit, he looks good but that is primarily because they have an excellent coach in Mike Budenholzer who understands his talent and is very good with X's and O's. The same could not be said about Mike Woodson and to a much lesser extent Dwayne Casey. If you were to put Novak on the Hawks, I think he'd provide exactly what Korver does, as efficiently as Korver does.

His TS is freakin 67!!

And its 59 for his career which is also ridiculous.

Steve Novak's TS% during the MDA years was 68.4%. Steve Novak's peak TS% was 73.7%, granted that it was only over 30 games (all he played during the 2010-2011 season). Career wise, Novak is at 62%. Again, Korver is just a product of Budenholzer's coaching. I don't think the guy is anything special compared to Steve Novak.

so novak is as good as Korver?

He's certainly ballpark and good enough to interest a team at $4 million/yr that was interested in paying Korver $6 million/year, especially considering that Novak was a local hero as a Marquette grad.

sorry but that is beyond insane. Have you watched Korver this year?

I live in Georgia, so yes. Frequently enough.

I'm not even sure what baring his performance this year has on the conversation. Remember that the topic involves the events of the 2013 offseason and whether Steve Novak would have been an adequate consolation prize to the Bucks, after losing out on Korver. So even if Korver morphed into the Dirk Nowitzki of yore this season, it would be irrelevant to the conversation we're having. And even if it was tangent, it doesn't change my belief that Korver is merely a product of his system, just as Jeremy Lin was a product of our system in 2012.

I am sure the Heat would kill for Korver instead of Ray Allen right now.

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

freeskier wrote:I was always under the impression we traded Novak because his contract extended in to next season. Getting Bargnani back wasn't the main point of the trade, and not why we gave up the pick.

That's a terrible way of using a 1st rd pick jeez

Yeah, that's just absurd. You don't need to give up 3 picks to get out of a $3 mil contract in 3 years from now.

funny but they could have given up five first rounders and some on here would find a way to justify it.

Makes me further by into my conspiracy theory that some of the posters on here are msg plants/moles. Maybe I am reading too many playa2 posts

yellowboy90 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Korver is a flame thrower this year and has always moved well without the ball which seperates him from Novak. Chicago was dumb to dump him because they were so cheap. He's like a high volume steve kerr with length to semi guard his position.

But Novak has posted superior shooting numbers to Korver. I admit, Korver is more mobile but Novak doesn't need to be at 6"11'. That shot is difficult to contest when a guy is that big.

He has better numbers partly due to the lack of time he got earlier in his career. Also, the mobility allows Korver to actually be a presence outside of just shooting threes. His movement really opens up opportunities for his teammates because of over helping and gets him easy dump down ast. Then you have the defensive discrepancy that is a huge reason why Korver can stay on the floor for long periods of time and not be a total liability.

I think we all like Novak and wouldn't mind him back. I could see him getting cut by Toronto or traded then waived in the offseason.

Shooting is very much a rhythmed thing, so I think that Novak getting less time and still being more efficient at shooting the ball should be a credit to him, instead of a demerit. Let's be honest, guys were not really running plays for Novak, like what has been happening for Korver, which adds an even greater degree of difficulty for Novak since he doesn't know where and how his shots are going to come.

For the record though, I'm not saying that one is better than the other. What I am saying is that if a team is interested in Kyle Korver at $6 million/yr (which is grossly inflated IMO), they should be interested in Steve Novak at $4 million/yr (who is also grossly overpaid).

Novak doesn't have the ability to be that type of player. Their is a reason why he doesn't get much minutes on the several teams he has played. He is a slightly better shooting Matt Bonner but Bonner grabbed boards and played passable D.

What I am getting at is skillset. Korver and Novak has different skill sets as shooters which makes Korver more coveted than a player like Novak.

You are putting a greater emphasis on "mobile" jump shooters than "stretch" shooters. It's like synonymous to saying that a Steve Kerr type is more valuable than a Robert Horry type because they hit the 3 through different means and circumstances. The reality is that the value is determined by the type of coach, system and players that are in place. An argument could be made for either Korver or Novak being a better fit for what the Bucks intended to do but not about their being a premium on one shooters style versus another. The beauty about this game is that you can be anything (fat or skinny, short or tall, American or European, fast or short, etc.) and still have an impact. The extent of that impact is determined by the factors I already mentioned.

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Korver is a flame thrower this year and has always moved well without the ball which seperates him from Novak. Chicago was dumb to dump him because they were so cheap. He's like a high volume steve kerr with length to semi guard his position.

But Novak has posted superior shooting numbers to Korver. I admit, Korver is more mobile but Novak doesn't need to be at 6"11'. That shot is difficult to contest when a guy is that big.

He has better numbers partly due to the lack of time he got earlier in his career. Also, the mobility allows Korver to actually be a presence outside of just shooting threes. His movement really opens up opportunities for his teammates because of over helping and gets him easy dump down ast. Then you have the defensive discrepancy that is a huge reason why Korver can stay on the floor for long periods of time and not be a total liability.

I think we all like Novak and wouldn't mind him back. I could see him getting cut by Toronto or traded then waived in the offseason.

Shooting is very much a rhythmed thing, so I think that Novak getting less time and still being more efficient at shooting the ball should be a credit to him, instead of a demerit. Let's be honest, guys were not really running plays for Novak, like what has been happening for Korver, which adds an even greater degree of difficulty for Novak since he doesn't know where and how his shots are going to come.

For the record though, I'm not saying that one is better than the other. What I am saying is that if a team is interested in Kyle Korver at $6 million/yr (which is grossly inflated IMO), they should be interested in Steve Novak at $4 million/yr (who is also grossly overpaid).

Novak doesn't have the ability to be that type of player. Their is a reason why he doesn't get much minutes on the several teams he has played. He is a slightly better shooting Matt Bonner but Bonner grabbed boards and played passable D.

What I am getting at is skillset. Korver and Novak has different skill sets as shooters which makes Korver more coveted than a player like Novak.

You are putting a greater emphasis on "mobile" jump shooters than "stretch" shooters. It's like synonymous to saying that a Steve Kerr type is more valuable than a Robert Horry type because they hit the 3 through different means and circumstances. The reality is that the value is determined by the type of coach, system and players that are in place. An argument could be made for either Korver or Novak being a better fit for what the Bucks intended to do but not about their being a premium on one shooters style versus another. The beauty about this game is that you can be anything (fat or skinny, short or tall, American or European, fast or short, etc.) and still have an impact. The extent of that impact is determined by the factors I already mentioned.

I bring up mobility because that increases their chance to get the ball not only behind the three but off curls instead of flares which keeps the defense guessing and open up opportunities for other teammates. Then you have to include what else they can do on the court like defend, rebound, and pass. Those are things nOvak doesn't do and Korver can get by doing. Therefore Korver types can get on the floor more.

An interesting experiment would be to make a list of comparable players to the two and see there minutes played, salary, and etc.

Korver Types-
?????

Novak Types-
??????

mreinman wrote:the problem was once teams found out that Novak could shoot. He no longer could get open. In the Miami series, they just did not leave him. And, being that he could not/can't move, he was useless.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:the problem was once teams found out that Novak could shoot. He no longer could get open. In the Miami series, they just did not leave him. And, being that he could not/can't move, he was useless.

He still frees a lot of space and his teams always play better with him on the floor. Unlike Bargs, at least he does something well.

thats true. makes it harder for teams to clog the lane.

But Korver drives defenses far crazier. I watched about 10 atlanta games recently and that guy playing and a crazy level.

he is too slow-footed and his defensive instincts are poor, and he is out of shape. his game does not translate to playoff success.

his usage to assist rate ratio is awful which undermines cohesion and teamwork-- the very opposite quality that kidd and sheed brought to the team.

his only value lies in hitting midrange jumpers, which he is excellent at. too bad he had so few opportunities to take those shots. that's on the coaching staff.

dk7th wrote:i hated this trade.

he is too slow-footed and his defensive instincts are poor, and he is out of shape. his game does not translate to playoff success.

his usage to assist rate ratio is awful which undermines cohesion and teamwork-- the very opposite quality that kidd and sheed brought to the team.

his only value lies in hitting midrange jumpers, which he is excellent at. too bad he had so few opportunities to take those shots. that's on the coaching staff.

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but Bargs is not slow footed. He's actually very agile and quick for a guy as big as he is. What he is, is lazy and has a low motor. Bargs has shown over and over that he can move his feet when he wants to. Bargs is one of the top mid range shooters and PnP scorers in the league, but he's not used properly most of the time. He's also one of the best man defenders in the league too. He just doesn't get any credit for that. I think he really needs someone to get in his head and work on his weaknesses. Don't think any of his coaches really got thru to him.

I'd love to see him made to have a serious off season workout program to gain strength and to work on his post moves and finishing around the basket. There's no reason for him to be as poor at the basket as he's been. If we can't trade him, then we better make sure to get something out of him. The talent is there, it's all mental.

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:i hated this trade.

he is too slow-footed and his defensive instincts are poor, and he is out of shape. his game does not translate to playoff success.

his usage to assist rate ratio is awful which undermines cohesion and teamwork-- the very opposite quality that kidd and sheed brought to the team.

his only value lies in hitting midrange jumpers, which he is excellent at. too bad he had so few opportunities to take those shots. that's on the coaching staff.

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but Bargs is not slow footed. He's actually very agile and quick for a guy as big as he is. What he is, is lazy and has a low motor. Bargs has shown over and over that he can move his feet when he wants to. Bargs is one of the top mid range shooters and PnP scorers in the league, but he's not used properly most of the time. He's also one of the best man defenders in the league too. He just doesn't get any credit for that. I think he really needs someone to get in his head and work on his weaknesses. Don't think any of his coaches really got thru to him.

I'd love to see him made to have a serious off season workout program to gain strength and to work on his post moves and finishing around the basket. There's no reason for him to be as poor at the basket as he's been. If we can't trade him, then we better make sure to get something out of him. The talent is there, it's all mental.

I don't think either are real issues. When I look at Bargnani, I see a guy with some of the worst reflexes and reaction time in the league. It helps to lend itself to his piss poor hand eye coordination, his inability to adjust quickly on switches or drives, and the gross amount of awkward motions he makes on the court. I'm not sure how you'd improve on something like that, which is a shame because the talent is there.