http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3513/career;_ylt=AwrGFqFwxPlRQhkAFQOOPKB4

BRIGGS wrote:

No I'm not--he jumped up nearly 10% in FG% Y-Y after the trade--that is quite a jump. There is a factor why he jumped so high---my take his he went from cog 1 to cog 2 and was afforded better shots. Thats what should happen to AB here if used correctly.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3513/career;_ylt=AwrGFqFwxPlRQhkAFQOOPKB4

Even if you do feel he had a meaningful improvement, you can never predict which player will be the 1 in a 100 who significantly exceeds his track record.

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

No I'm not--he jumped up nearly 10% in FG% Y-Y after the trade--that is quite a jump. There is a factor why he jumped so high---my take his he went from cog 1 to cog 2 and was afforded better shots. Thats what should happen to AB here if used correctly.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3513/career;_ylt=AwrGFqFwxPlRQhkAFQOOPKB4

yeah, that's a 27 game sample

No thats well over 150 games and a championship over two years as a sample where he shot over 58% on avg.

It looks like his FG% is around 55 or 56% for that span.
It's kind of ridiculous to give this much attention to one case anyway though. There's no meaningful pattern in terms of which players exceed their track records. You're certainly not going to figure out in advance who is that 1 in 100 player who will significantly exceed his track record.

Bonn1997 wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

martin wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

martin wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Destruction! Leave 'em in the doghouse Woody!

Lin. Camby. Novak. Copeland. That's just how Woodson rolls.

I think there is general consensus that Cope prob should have played a little more against Indy... but the others? You have a good case why they should have played more?

Camby and Novak were under utilized by Woodson, is what it is.

Camby never got burn even though we got outboarded and manhandled inside. Could've easily trotted out Camby and Chandler out there against Indy. Just to stem the red carpet treatment West and Hibbert were shown in the paint.

Don't think Novak got one screen set up for him in the postseason. Sucky defense withstanding, could have used a few discount triple checks to energize the team and spark the offense.

Hopefully Woody learns from his past mistakes of favoring "his guys" instead of waiting for game 5 of a do or die playoff series to play guys deserving and utilizing his bench.

Popovich does it all the time.

Basically, making adjustments. Either you match up to the opponent size wise, or you make the opponent match up to your strengths.

When did Novak play D? And he was also shut down by slow guards. You don't play guys like that. Pop cut Novak.

Any comment on KMart getting Camby minutes? Did Camby ever recover from Plantar?

What is the point of having the best 3 point shooter in the league, if you're not going to use him. We all know Novak sucks on D, but why have a 3 pt specialist in the game then, if you won't run screens for him. What good is a decoy or floor spacer, if you won't run plays for him?

Obviously, the Houston Rockets thought Camby recovered from plantar fasciitis. 'Nuff said on that.

Look, I like Woodson as a coach. I like him alot.

Don't like his doghouse tendencies though.

Not sure if your point on Camby makes sense, ie... how Houston picking him up for the 13/14 season has anything to do with his plantar fasciitis limiting his play during 12/13.

You brought Lin up earlier. How was Lin in Woodson's doghouse?

Novak proved two years in a row that as a specialist 3 point shooter on offense.....he is nullified in the playoffs by more agressive perimeter D.

Lin didn't put up the same numbers or have the free rein that he had under D'Antoni before getting injured.

Without a D'Antoni style offense centered around drive and kick guard play, Novak needed plays designed for him. Instead he was relegated to a $4million decoy/floor spacer.

Defense wasn't the issue so much, as it was predictable, stagnant ISO after ISO sets. No motion, no backcuts, backdoors, curls....nothing.

It's either High Pick and Roll or ISO...that's the whole playbook.

I like Woody, but he needs an Offensive Coordinator, as much as, D'Antoni needs a Defensive Coordinator.

Fair enough points.....and I believe part of the reason for fan malaise is that the Knicks offense is just not as fun to watch now as it was under MDA. However the bigger picture was that the D'Antoni system was not producing enough wins and he had lost the team by mid-season two years ago. Some will argue that it was the MDA lack of focus on D, others will place the blame on Melo. Almost anyone can understand that Woody is not the offensive guru that MDA is.....so I'm not sure why anyone would expect a D'Antoni style offense under Woody. I agree that he needs offensive assistant support.

I do not agree with the Woodson "Doghouse" theory. Seems to me that Coaches go with who they trust the most. Lin might have been reigned in a bit....but having lesser numbers does not mean Lin was in the Doghouse. Camby was injured much of the season......KMart came in later in the year and played effectively enough to take his minutes.

I just wish Woody put more trust in other players like he did with Melo and JR. And I love Melo. JR...I like, when he's good JR.

If he had unleashed Copeland earlier...oh well.

I think for the Knicks to be successful this upcoming season, Woodson cannot give Bargnani the Novak treatment.

He must run him off screens, run pick and pop, run pick and roll, post him up against smaller opponents, ISO him on the perimeter against bigger ones, etc...

If Melo's going for the scoring title again, and JR has free rein to shoot 16 times a game, then we'll probably be 1 and done or 2 rounds and done.

Woodson has to "share the wealth" with the players. Can't be predictable like last year. Melo has to average like 24 or 25, Bargnani 15 or 16, JR 14 or 15, and then distributed with the rest.

If we can balance out the offense, while playing solid D, we have as good a chance as any to advance to the ECF.

If not, you know the drill.

Just one add to this. Bargs has the ability to create his own shot........Novak really has not shown that ability.

How valuable is shot creation from a PF/C shooting .437 (or .399 last year)? All he's creating are his own misses.

I thought you don't put a lot of stock in Shooting Pct? We will see how a change in scenery and difference in role and teammates as well as a come back from injury will effect his %. My theory is that his percentage will be significantly better than .399.

You seem to establish a theory first and then go and find stats to back up the theory. Citing wanton facts means little unless you dig deeper to understand why the stats are what they are.

Bargs shooting pct will be lower than many C/PF because he shoots more from the outside and three pt range. His stats will be lower due to elbow injury. His stats will be lower due to being the main guy and therefore focus of more defensive intensity. As I have said before, basketball statistics are not static in a vacuum, there are actually other players and teams on the floor. The Knicks are banking that a change in teammates, coaches, fans and role will create more offensive efficiency. You seem to be of the mindset that everything always stays the same based on the way you are evaluating Bargs here.

OK, 53% TS% (48% last year).. Like I said, sometimes I list FG% for simplicity although you're right that I should have at least included the TS% with it.

yeah and by the way guys 53%TS is lousy and 48%TS is an abomination

CrushAlot wrote:A guy compared Pau/Kobe to Melo/Bargs on realgm. I thought he made some good points.

Will Bargnani be to Melo what Gasol is to Kobe?

Unread postby Thorn on Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:58 am

There is no question that there is a unique dynamic that exists between Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol, this is a dynamic that has been explored and talked about at length. For this to work, Pau who was the man on his lesser team got a chance to go to a better team and play with a ball dominant star. Pau had to accept a lesser role and in a sense the back seat to the larger than life alpha male that is Kobe Bryant.

Melo has often been compared to Kobe, he is not "as good as Kobe" but they each are ball dominant, each require a lot of touches, each isolate a lot chewing up lot's of clock.

When we made the move to get Bargnani some sniggered, and wondered why. Called him soft, questioned if he could fit in. I see this as the perfect match for him. He is a guy who will know have a problem accepting a second fiddle assignment to Melo, but he is someone who will impact the game positively, and in a steadfast manner. He will earn Carmelo's trust.

Is he the kind of guy that will go out for drinks with Melo? No but he will have his back in games, Melo will come to rely on his constant and efficient numbers. He will be able to pass him the ball without fear of him screwing up.

He will have moments where he chews him out at times, and they will have growing pains.

But consider the other option another Alpha male, who will fight for touches, control, and leadership. Someone to steal the spot light or at least share it. Someone like Dwight Howard. It won't work, and it didn't work because Howard could not accept that role.

Now, I do not think Andrea is as good a player as Pau, but let's look at their numbers from their teams prior to being traded into the above situations...

They are not so far off and beyond that I would argue the Knicks have more weapons than the Lakers did in their championship runs with Pau and Kobe so the point and rebounding difference can easily be made up from other sources. STATS in limited minutes, JR Smith... Chandler.

Who did the Lakers have to support their one two punch?

lastly let's not forget Barg's actually had solid numbers before his unhappiness in Toronto, and the quality of the team around him began to take that downward slide. In 2010-2011 he averaged 21.4 PPG (Pau never averaged over 20.8 for any team in the NBA, incidentally), and 5.2 RPG. In 2011-2012 he averaged 19.5PPG while pulling down 5.5RPG. The guy can play, and I have no doubt Melo can motivate him, and that he himself will ensure he fits in well, accepts his role as second fiddle and we all benefit from it.

In short, the more I look at this trade the more it makes sense, and the more I see it being successful. Also we gave up less than the Lakers did to get "our Pau"... so there is always that.

my heavens but this is one of the more breathtakingly awful arguments i have ever read

yellowboy90 wrote:I think there are more examples than people realize. It's like the opposite of the number 2 receiver moving on to another team to become the number 1 receiver, aka the Alvin Harper syndrome.

Also, like I said before, for all the talk about woody coaching he got Amar'e and Melo to change their shot distribution while shooting it efficiently. So maybe he can do the same for Bargs. I have no idea but there are numbers that point to it working.

However, I don't think he needs to be in the post more but I would need to look at more synergy numbers.

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think there are more examples than people realize. It's like the opposite of the number 2 receiver moving on to another team to become the number 1 receiver, aka the Alvin Harper syndrome.

Also, like I said before, for all the talk about woody coaching he got Amar'e and Melo to change their shot distribution while shooting it efficiently. So maybe he can do the same for Bargs. I have no idea but there are numbers that point to it working.

However, I don't think he needs to be in the post more but I would need to look at more synergy numbers.

I think there are more examples than you realize of players not meaningfully improving after changing teams. The examples just go unnoticed. Out of the hundreds of transactions each season, you can count on one hand the number of players who substantially exceeded expectations.

Are you talking about 1s(option) going to 2s, 2s going to 3s, starters going to bench players, or just every transaction?

Valid Question and good luck sifting through the Data let me know how it turns out would like to know .

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think there are more examples than people realize. It's like the opposite of the number 2 receiver moving on to another team to become the number 1 receiver, aka the Alvin Harper syndrome.

Also, like I said before, for all the talk about woody coaching he got Amar'e and Melo to change their shot distribution while shooting it efficiently. So maybe he can do the same for Bargs. I have no idea but there are numbers that point to it working.

However, I don't think he needs to be in the post more but I would need to look at more synergy numbers.

I think there are more examples than you realize of players not meaningfully improving after changing teams. The examples just go unnoticed. Out of the hundreds of transactions each season, you can count on one hand the number of players who substantially exceeded expectations.

Are you talking about 1s(option) going to 2s, 2s going to 3s, starters going to bench players, or just every transaction?

Oh, if you're asking whether efficiency goes up as players take fewer shots, then the answer is that on average there is a tiny increase.

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think there are more examples than people realize. It's like the opposite of the number 2 receiver moving on to another team to become the number 1 receiver, aka the Alvin Harper syndrome.

Also, like I said before, for all the talk about woody coaching he got Amar'e and Melo to change their shot distribution while shooting it efficiently. So maybe he can do the same for Bargs. I have no idea but there are numbers that point to it working.

However, I don't think he needs to be in the post more but I would need to look at more synergy numbers.

I think there are more examples than you realize of players not meaningfully improving after changing teams. The examples just go unnoticed. Out of the hundreds of transactions each season, you can count on one hand the number of players who substantially exceeded expectations.

Are you talking about 1s(option) going to 2s, 2s going to 3s, starters going to bench players, or just every transaction?

Oh, if you're asking whether efficiency goes up as players take fewer shots, then the answer is that on average there is a tiny increase.

No, I was asking were you referring to every off season transaction that involved a player moving to a new team or to rotational layers changing roles on their new team. I guess in most cases they do take less shots because they are not the focal points.

Sidenote: just looking at Ray Allen numbers before Boston and I never realize how many 3s he actually avg. Amazing!

Yeah, I was referring to every transaction until I realized that what you were really asking is, what happens to a player's efficiency when his role is reduced (in this instance by changing teams)?

Bonn1997 wrote:For the record, though, I think all the non-scoring aspects of the game are much more worrisome than scoring is for Bargnani.

This P&T piece kind of touches on that, in terms of what he can possibly bring to the team offense:

http://www.postingandtoasting.com/2013/7/30/4563446/andrea-bargnani-best-year-and-how-it-might-help-knicks

Please, before you throw any more bricks, at least hear me out. Judging from this summer's P&T comments sections, it would appear that Bargnani and Tyson Chandler have become the two most polarizing players on the New York Knicks. I suppose it makes sense, since the two men are polar opposites, both as players and as beard-growers (Bargnani never lets his stubble grow past the "swarthy Mediterranean" setting, whereas Chandler allows his beard to reach Lincoln-esque lengths).

While I have been a vocal critic of the Bargnani trade, my utter lack of a time machine has forced me to accept the man and look for ways he might help the Knicks in 2013-14. Yes, I am standing up right here and now and declaring that I, a Knicks fan, am rooting for New York Knick Andrea Bargnani to succeed while playing for the New York Knicks!

The book on Bargnani seems to be that he was a quality player (on offense) a few years ago, but that his play fell off the past few years due to a wide range of factors (injuries, the loss of front-court partner Chris Bosh, repeatedly blowing off practice to nosh on bear claws at the local Tim Hortons).

Since his 2012-13 season was an unmitigated disaster, let us focus on the four previous seasons - from 2008 to 2012. Check out is numbers and see if you can spot his most effective season with the Raptors:

Season G MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% TRB AST TOV PTS
2008-09 78 31.4 5.5 12.3 .450 1.5 3.7 .409 2.8 3.4 .831 5.3 1.2 1.7 15.4
2009-10 80 35.0 6.7 14.3 .470 1.5 4.1 .372 2.3 2.9 .774 6.2 1.2 1.5 17.2
2010-11 66 35.7 8.0 17.8 .448 1.2 3.4 .345 4.3 5.3 .820 5.2 1.8 2.3 21.4
2011-12 31 33.3 6.7 15.6 .432 1.1 3.7 .296 4.9 5.6 .873 5.5 2.0 2.2 19.5

Provided by Basketball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 7/27/2013.

Now the point-fetishists among us will surely choose 2010-11, year of the 20-PLUS POINTS PER GAME, as Bargnani's finest campaign. Those of you more partial to shooting percentages might choose either his 2008-09 or his 2009-10 season. But which season do the advanced stats rate as Bargnani's best? Let me warn you: it's about to get weird up in here:

Season G MP PER TS% eFG% TRB% AST% TOV% USG% WS/48
2008-09 78 2453 14.6 .559 .512 10.0 6.4 11.2 22.7 .076
2009-10 80 2799 15.5 .552 .523 10.4 5.4 8.8 22.3 .072
2010-11 66 2353 16.4 .533 .480 8.6 8.8 10.3 28.2 .052
2011-12 31 1032 17.9 .538 .467 9.8 11.6 11.0 28.7 .104

Provided by Basketball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 7/29/2013.

-spits out brandy- GASP! You mean to tell me, my dear numbers, that Bargnani's best season came in what was clearly his worst shooting season? Surely you jest, statistics!

Well the numbers don't lie, people. Despite shooting less than 30% from beyond the arc, Bargnani was a transcendent presence for the Raptor's offense in 2011-12. Overall, Toronto had the second-worst offensive efficiency rating that season, but when Bargnani took the court the Raptors offense jumped from a ghastly 99.4 points-per-100-possessions to a league-average 104.3 points-per-100-possessions. That +4.9 offensive rating on/off number was by far the best of Bargnani's career:

- 2011-12: +4.9

- 2010-11: +3.1

- 2009-10: +2.1

- 2008-09: +0.1

Call it the Bargnani paradox: a reputed shooter performing at his highest level of offensive efficiency while shooting at his lowest level of efficiency. How did he pull it off? First, you should check his assists rate: in 2011-12 he assisted on 11.6% of his teammates' field goals while he was on the floor, a rate nearly three percent higher than his next-best season. Second, he excelled at getting points from the free-throw line - 4.9 made free throws per game.

Both of these qualities could prove extremely valuable to the Knicks next season. Last season's Knicks team didn't get many free throw opportunities as a group - they finished 21st in the NBA in free throws per field goal attempt. The 6.0 free throw attempts Bargnani averaged per 36 minutes in 2011-2012 would have ranked third on last year's Knicks squad, behind only Carmelo Anthony (7.4) and Amar'e Stoudemire (6.9). Among Knick forwards, Bargnani's 11.3 AST% would have ranked second behind Melo (14.1%).

This version of Bargnani could provide real offensive value to the Knicks second unit that suffered at times from severe bouts of "sit around and watch JR"-itis last season. Running things through a foul-drawing, pass-happy Bargnani could keep the offense from getting bogged down along the perimeter, while simultaneously opening up J.R. Smith as a spot-up shooter (where he still excels).

Maybe this is all a pipe dream; maybe Bargnani will not bounce back at all. But it helps to remember that guy was a viable offensive weapon a mere two seasons ago, even without his three-point stroke. Andrea Bargnani can help the Knicks' offense with more than just shooting; and if he somehow bring his shooting numbers in line with his early-career averages, well then that's just a bonus.