yellowboy90 wrote:

knickscity wrote:

callmened wrote:yikes...that was a nasty spill...

he can ball when motivated...theres no DOUBT about that

hes more of a 4 than a 5 too...reminds be of a bigger gallo

Just curious how he reminds you of Gallo.

Outside of atreaky shooting, Gallo defended usually the best wimg, rebounded and made plays.

Here is a comparison of the two through their first 5 seasons. For what it's worth.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=bargnan01&y1=2011&p2=gallida01&y2=2013

it's not worth much if you look at the wrong stats and neglect the right ones.

callmened wrote:Bargs has post skills?

Plenty of video has been posted to prove that

callmened wrote:dude has great offensive skills as a 7fter...if he ever stayed consistent, he has the ability to be like dirk..look at how he runs circles around tyson

I'm actually very happy you posted this video because they showed AB playing defense against STAT. What you see is EXACTLY what the point of this thread was at the start. AB IS A VERY EFFECTIVE MAN DEFENDER!!! Just watch the video everyone and pay attention to AB on D. I think it's an excellent example of why he's effective against PF's. He's bigger and yet still has good quickness. No one seemed to comment on this which is bothersome to me. All you read is negative crap and then you post a video showing the guy doing exactly what the Sports Analysts said he could do and no one actually pays attention.

NYKBocker wrote:The frontline will not be a problem this season. Bargs, Tyson, amare, artest and Melo will do well. He problem is at the point. Hopefully Beno can fill this hole cause I don't think Felton can do it. Ray is a very good backup point and a lousy starting point

I understand your frustration with Felton, but we've seen lousy and his name is Toney Douglas!!! Felton is a passable PG. He's better than having Duhon, but not a very good PG compared to other NBA PG's. I think he was in the mid 20's among PG's. I'm hopeful that his losing 15 pounds will allow him to be much more active and drive to the hoop more.

Did you watch the video above? Did you see Bargnani defending STAT? I think this is what the Synergy sports stats on AB were referring to when they said he was a very good man defender. With him in there along with Tyson I think we'll be just fine defensively inside. As you mention we also have MWP, KMart and down the line we'll have Tyler. I think we'll be fine on the frontline.

nixluva wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:The frontline will not be a problem this season. Bargs, Tyson, amare, artest and Melo will do well. He problem is at the point. Hopefully Beno can fill this hole cause I don't think Felton can do it. Ray is a very good backup point and a lousy starting point

I understand your frustration with Felton, but we've seen lousy and his name is Toney Douglas!!! Felton is a passable PG. He's better than having Duhon, but not a very good PG compared to other NBA PG's. I think he was in the mid 20's among PG's. I'm hopeful that his losing 15 pounds will allow him to be much more active and drive to the hoop more.

Did you watch the video above? Did you see Bargnani defending STAT? I think this is what the Synergy sports stats on AB were referring to when they said he was a very good man defender. With him in there along with Tyson I think we'll be just fine defensively inside. As you mention we also have MWP, KMart and down the line we'll have Tyler. I think we'll be fine on the frontline.

That's the thing. Ray is passable. That's it. We need a PG that is better than passable if our goal is the championship.

Yes. I saw the video. Awesome. I really like the addition. I think Bargs will play both the 4 and 5 this year. His defense is not as bad as what people claim. I think Bargs is a victim of the euro stereotype in that they can't defend.

nixluva wrote:I drink the Kool-Aid cuz in this instance cuz the team has been better and IMO isn't as far off as some around here want to paint the picture. Sure it's not an all time team, but I don't think the Mavs were either and they won a title. You have to at least allow this team to play out the next 2 years and see where it takes us. There's a good amount of talent on this roster now. More talent and youth than last year when the team was the #2 seed.

Bargnani needed a new home and this team will embrace him and support him. I think he'll bring a lot to the table despite what the naysayers point out about his flaws. He's got a lot of skills this team needs but of course he doesn't do everything well. If he did then we'd have no shot to get him. Unless you're talking about Duncan or KG most bigs have some kind of flaw. IMO it's gonna be up to Woody to get the most out of Bargnani. That's what a coaches job is. Woody has to see if he can improve his weaknesses and accentuate his strengths.

As for our PG spot, I think we'll be OK in that area. We've got Felton, Prigs and Beno who are all capable PG's. None are great but they're all capable in their own way. I think Woody likes these type of PG's. PG's that are low mistake players. This is why he would NEVER have been able to handle having Lin as his PG. Woody is real old school on that topic. He's a Knight, Holzman and Brown disciple. Woody will take safe and steady over flashy and mistake prone.

Personally I'm not really into the "positive hope it works approach"....I've been on that side of the fence and it's disappointing year in and year out.

I'd rather the team "surprise me"....rather than "disappoint me".

But opverall I think we both want the Knicks to win regardless of opinion.

Now there is a part of your post that I disagree with and it's the pg assessment and Woody.

Woody only cares about his pg's moving the ball and taking the open shot, and thats pretty much it.

They dont average alot of assists because they dont RUN the offense, the merely keep the ball moving.

I'm not going delve on Lin too much and I support the teams decision to let him go, but looking at him lat year he probably would have fit in nicely as that 2nd ball handler in the starting lineup.

His shot was coming along as the season progressed and he put up decent assist numbers while not being the primary ball handler.

Keep in mind even when Lin was here, he didnt lose his starting spot, and the team was kicking every opponents teeth to the back of their head with Lin as the starter.....he got injured and that was that.

I do think he has made a fatal mistake already though....claiming Felton as the automatic starter.

That may come to a head when he will have to reconsider, and felton has shown he doesnt take a bench role well.

http://angryknickblog.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/turns-out-chris-copeland-isnt-a-cheaper-andrea-bargnani/

I did some research. It turns out that even in Bargnani’s worst year as a pro, he’s more versatile of an offensive player that can help open the floor for Carmelo while still being able to score himself than Copeland was.

This past year was by far Andrea Bargnani’s worst year in the NBA. He was riddled by injury, he was booed out of the building, he shot poorly… he was about to be amnestied for God’s sake (source: none)! Meanwhile, Chris Copeland finally made an NBA roster, he became a fan-favorite, and wouldn’t you know it, he actually HELPED his team win some [regular season] games. To compare the two, we’ll start out with their shot charts, separated by zone:

Here’s what we can draw from this:

* For a guy who was labeled a three point specialist by experts and bloggers all over the interwebs, Bargnani sure does take a lot of mid-range jumpers. Actually, he took almost 70 more mid-range jumpers than he did three-pointers. And he only took 13 more three-pointers than he did shots in the paint.
* Chris Copeland is almost as bad from mid-range as Bargnani is from three-point range. He only took 69 mid-range shots last year actually, as opposed to 135 three-pointers. But if you’re going by the theory that all that matters are three-pointers, this is irrelevant.
* Copeland is obviously better down low. He’s a better offensive rebounder and, according to Synergy, most of his points came in the paint off offensive rebounds. Let’s get real, no one is feeding either Cope or Bargs in the post.

So right off the bat, it seems like calling Bargnani one-dimensional or labeling him a three-point shooter is inaccurate. Well at least we tried. But where it really becomes apparent that Bargnani is way more of a versatile player that can really help the offense is when you break down those zones, like so:

So what conclusions can we draw from this?

For starters, Andrea Bargnani can hit from a lot more places on the floor than Copeland can. That’s not what’s important though… HOW he hits from those spots on the floor is. When you break down Bargnani’s offense in 2012-2013, it ain’t pretty. Synergy can provide you with those stats, and none of them will blow you away. 2012-2013 was also his worst year as a pro. If you go back two, three, even four years though… his pick and pop efficiency is top of the line. Literally.

From HardwoodCanvas.com:

Sooo, that’s pretty good. And yes that was two years ago, but it should be noted that sample size is larger than this past season, and it also wasn’t Bargnani at his best (or healthiest) by the raw numbers. Tim Duncan, Kevin Love, Kevin Garnett… that’s some good company. You probably also have to be able to set some pretty decent screens if you’re THAT effective in receiving the ball after one and being wide open enough to hit shots at that high a rate.

IMPORTANT: The free throw percentage that you see in that table. That means that he is getting fouled on 12.9% of his pick and pop attempts, head and shoulders above the rest of the crew. Now, a common blogger theme has been “LOL defenders won’t have to play him tight because he’s a bad shooter.” Welp, this is gonna hurt, but the NUMBERS… they disagree with that sentiment. So either teams are going to leave him wide open and he will hit the shot 40-45% of the time or go to the line 13% of the time… or they are going to have to stick a defender on him, allowing guys like Melo and JR to have a most likely favorable one on one matchup.

Now, I digress. This past season, his stats are miserable (per Synergy). Couldn’t find one that I’d be able to use in my favor. But what we’ve looked at is the sum of all parts. Of course, Bargnani is not going to be Kevin Garnett, Kevin Love or Tim Duncan from mid-range in terms of production. Especially not on this team, where he will be a third option for most of the minutes he’s on the floor. But I also know who research tells me he won’t be: a worse Chris Copeland.

It comes down to Woodson, basically. The gameplan couldn’t be more clear for the people that take the time to look at it. Bargnani is a very potent mid-range jumpshooter that does his best work when he doesn’t have the ball. I don’t know, but to me, that seems like a perfect fit next to a guy like, oh, let’s go with Carmelo Anthony? A player who isolates more than anyone? Not only could it take some of the workload away from him, but it can help him be more effective.

That does create a problem however: the team might actually be better, and then what’s a blogger to do?

nixluva wrote:
This is a great article. Yes it does back up pretty much what I and others have been saying about Bargnani.

http://angryknickblog.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/turns-out-chris-copeland-isnt-a-cheaper-andrea-bargnani/

I did some research. It turns out that even in Bargnani’s worst year as a pro, he’s more versatile of an offensive player that can help open the floor for Carmelo while still being able to score himself than Copeland was.

This past year was by far Andrea Bargnani’s worst year in the NBA. He was riddled by injury, he was booed out of the building, he shot poorly… he was about to be amnestied for God’s sake (source: none)! Meanwhile, Chris Copeland finally made an NBA roster, he became a fan-favorite, and wouldn’t you know it, he actually HELPED his team win some [regular season] games. To compare the two, we’ll start out with their shot charts, separated by zone:

Here’s what we can draw from this:

* For a guy who was labeled a three point specialist by experts and bloggers all over the interwebs, Bargnani sure does take a lot of mid-range jumpers. Actually, he took almost 70 more mid-range jumpers than he did three-pointers. And he only took 13 more three-pointers than he did shots in the paint.
* Chris Copeland is almost as bad from mid-range as Bargnani is from three-point range. He only took 69 mid-range shots last year actually, as opposed to 135 three-pointers. But if you’re going by the theory that all that matters are three-pointers, this is irrelevant.
* Copeland is obviously better down low. He’s a better offensive rebounder and, according to Synergy, most of his points came in the paint off offensive rebounds. Let’s get real, no one is feeding either Cope or Bargs in the post.

So right off the bat, it seems like calling Bargnani one-dimensional or labeling him a three-point shooter is inaccurate. Well at least we tried. But where it really becomes apparent that Bargnani is way more of a versatile player that can really help the offense is when you break down those zones, like so:

So what conclusions can we draw from this?

For starters, Andrea Bargnani can hit from a lot more places on the floor than Copeland can. That’s not what’s important though… HOW he hits from those spots on the floor is. When you break down Bargnani’s offense in 2012-2013, it ain’t pretty. Synergy can provide you with those stats, and none of them will blow you away. 2012-2013 was also his worst year as a pro. If you go back two, three, even four years though… his pick and pop efficiency is top of the line. Literally.

From HardwoodCanvas.com:

Sooo, that’s pretty good. And yes that was two years ago, but it should be noted that sample size is larger than this past season, and it also wasn’t Bargnani at his best (or healthiest) by the raw numbers. Tim Duncan, Kevin Love, Kevin Garnett… that’s some good company. You probably also have to be able to set some pretty decent screens if you’re THAT effective in receiving the ball after one and being wide open enough to hit shots at that high a rate.

IMPORTANT: The free throw percentage that you see in that table. That means that he is getting fouled on 12.9% of his pick and pop attempts, head and shoulders above the rest of the crew. Now, a common blogger theme has been “LOL defenders won’t have to play him tight because he’s a bad shooter.” Welp, this is gonna hurt, but the NUMBERS… they disagree with that sentiment. So either teams are going to leave him wide open and he will hit the shot 40-45% of the time or go to the line 13% of the time… or they are going to have to stick a defender on him, allowing guys like Melo and JR to have a most likely favorable one on one matchup.

Now, I digress. This past season, his stats are miserable (per Synergy). Couldn’t find one that I’d be able to use in my favor. But what we’ve looked at is the sum of all parts. Of course, Bargnani is not going to be Kevin Garnett, Kevin Love or Tim Duncan from mid-range in terms of production. Especially not on this team, where he will be a third option for most of the minutes he’s on the floor. But I also know who research tells me he won’t be: a worse Chris Copeland.

It comes down to Woodson, basically. The gameplan couldn’t be more clear for the people that take the time to look at it. Bargnani is a very potent mid-range jumpshooter that does his best work when he doesn’t have the ball. I don’t know, but to me, that seems like a perfect fit next to a guy like, oh, let’s go with Carmelo Anthony? A player who isolates more than anyone? Not only could it take some of the workload away from him, but it can help him be more effective.

That does create a problem however: the team might actually be better, and then what’s a blogger to do?