yellowboy90 wrote:

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-
??????

As far as your experiment goes, it'd be interesting. I'll see what I can come up with at a later point. Are you looking at this from a historical perspective or more modern?

NardDogNation wrote:

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.

There are in fact drills that improve reaction time and reflexes. Just as there are trainers out there that work on just about everything an athlete is called on to do. It can't change what your potential is based on your genetics but it can maximize what natural ability a player does have. That's why they create all these drills to improve a QB's footwork or a PG's handle. I get the idea Bargs NEVER works on the needed BB skills. Anyone can get better. Heck I'm still working on my game and I'm pushing 50!!! Improved my jumper too, with work.

nixluva wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

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.

There are in fact drills that improve reaction time and reflexes. Just as there are trainers out there that work on just about everything an athlete is called on to do. It can't change what your potential is based on your genetics but it can maximize what natural ability a player does have. That's why they create all these drills to improve a QB's footwork or a PG's handle. I get the idea Bargs NEVER works on the needed BB skills. Anyone can get better. Heck I'm still working on my game and I'm pushing 50!!! Improved my jumper too, with work.

DAMN!!!!!! you old LMFAO. Just kidding. If that is the case, there geniunely seems to be no hope in correcting Bargnani's ills.

mreinman wrote:

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

Giving up 3 picks for Bargnani is also an absurd idea

But I wasn't the only one thinking along these lines:
http://knicksfan.net/?p=5507

We have to make the playoffs so Bargs can play again this season. That is something I doubt anyone finds as means to stoke the competitive fires.

mreinman wrote:

jrodmc wrote:Barg's is running on a basketball court again, Stat didn't get a double double. Connection? - (Stat sees his starting role disappearing because Woody believes firmly that you can't coach height, and the taller you are, the less coaching you need?)

We have to make the playoffs so Bargs can play again this season. That is something I doubt anyone finds as means to stoke the competitive fires. (Does anyone on this team actually miss Bargs, outside of maybe Prigs?)

This is a head scratcher? What do you mean?

Updated with subtitles.