It's just been brought up so much it's made to seem like a no brainer. Interesting theory.

nixluva wrote:

EnySpree wrote:

nixluva wrote:

KNICKSBIGCATS wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Pretty close in voting.

Here's my take.

We signed Jason Smith for basically the same price. Jason Smith is NO where near as good as Bargs and we essentially gave him the same deal (1yr 3.5mm)

We have 0 ZERO signed frontcourt players. To keep flexible, we need to spend atleast 1/3 of our cap space on 1 year rentals. This ASSURES us of having material cap space going 4 ward which is CRUCIAL even with the salary cap going up. I do not see doing much better than Bargs at 1 year 4mm. We need pro players at every position. The only way to do that is to spend less and ask for more. It really is. We need to identify players who cost less and can play over their contracts. This keeps us flexible and guys on smaller contracts play harder(most of the time) and are easier to move. If somoen can think of a frontcourt player better than bargs for 4mm Id like to hear it.

I think that Jerebko is better than Bargs for equal money, Briggs.

Has Jerebko ever been a primary option or shown he an carry an offense for any period of time? As much as people trash Bargs he did have a period were he was at least able to anchor an offense. Off the bench Bargs should be a decent scorer.

Jerebko? Nixluva we can't win

You can't take these things seriously. It's like Bargnani derangement syndrome. The level of hate for Bargs is unreal. Even to the point of thinking anyone would automatically be better. It defies logic. They aren't using any kind of logic. No matter what Bargs does they refuse to accept him as an option. I actually like Jerebko and would have no problem adding him. Doesn't mean we can't keep Bargs who can actually guard Centers!!!

Per Basketball Reference, Jerebko has played 77% of his minutes at center for the Celtics....
He's averaging 8.4 points and 3.9 rebounds over a modest 17 minutes per game through seven appearances while shooting 52.5 percent from the floor and 55 percent beyond the 3-point arc.

But it's the team's advanced numbers that leap off the page with Jerebko, who has settled in as part of a energy-fueled second unit that has invigorated Boston since adding both Jerebko and Isaiah Thomas at the trade deadline. In the seven games he's appeared in since his arrival, the Celtics own a ridiculous offensive rating of 114.2 when Jerebko is on the floor (that's 13.2 points better than Boston's season average) and the team's defensive rating with Jerebko (100.4) is nothing to sneeze at either (nearly three points below Boston's season average). That net rating of plus-13.9, albeit in a small seven-game sample size, is best on the team.

So, yeah, if given the choice, I take Jonas Jerebko every day of the week and twice on Sunday for equal money over Bargnani.

markvmc wrote:Actually, I generally like nixluva. It's good to have posters with a positive outlook. But just lately nix has taken to calling posters out about their logic and how their posts make no sense. That's fair enough, we're all bul****ters here, and everyone's posted stuff from time to time that made little sense (except maybe Bonn). But given the combination of Nix's relentless optimism, and the near-two-decade-suckitude of the knicks, Nix has been wrong...like... a lot. Which makes his calling out other posters on logic and non-sensical posts a bit weird, imo.

Truedat.

Still that's not the point anyway. I have no problem with getting Jerebko in addition to having Bargs. They would serve different purposes IMO. Bargs is a legit 7ft 250. He's guarded real C's in his career.

nixluva wrote:You Freaking geniuses ever watch Jerebko play? Do you even know who he is? You don't know WTF you're talking about. He's not even close to a Center. He's 6-10 230! On the Celtics who have no bigs he may be forced to play as a C, but that doesn't make him a C. He's been with Boston for all of 7 games!!! I can't believe i'm being challenged on this from you CLOWNS!!! Basketball Reference shows that he's played his entire career as a PF.

Still that's not the point anyway. I have no problem with getting Jerebko in addition to having Bargs. They would serve different purposes IMO. Bargs is a legit 7ft 250. He's guarded real C's in his career.

Sorry to see this. We just discussed you and there was a glimmer of compassion from multiple people and you post this? You're just awful. I'm not sure you deserve any sympathy at all.

Yes Bargs isn't a great help defender, but you can play him next to a shot blocking PF like Towns and let Bargs guard the opposing center. I can make a case for that kind of arrangement easily.

Synergy Sports ranked Bargnani in the 88th percentile in post defense on a per-possession basis, and the 56th percentile in isolation defense last season (with a gaudy 95th percentile overall). It wasn’t all Dwane Casey’s wizardry last season (though his work with Bargnani’s defense should not be ignored, but we’ll get there. In 2011, he was 47th percentile in post and 83rd percentile in isolation. 2010? 72nd percentile in the post, 28th in isolation. Bear in mind these numbers are regardless of the number of possessions, so someone that defended in the post once successfully logs in at the top of the chart. So basically, he’s even better than these numbers indicate, relative to his position.

But as so many people that don’t understand nuance, statistics, or empirical information suggest, “numbers don’t tell the whole story.” It’s easy to say that, but what about who he was guarding, etc. Unfortunately, if you have too much time on your hands, as I have over the past four years, you can actually watch the game video and discover that, whoops, often Bargnani was actually defending the better offensive threat due to his raw height. Surprise! Andrea Bargnani is a pretty good man defender. Let your world shake into a new comfort. Even with the problems afforded Synergy and the metrics used in that glorious environment, it’s impossible to deny that Bargnani at least does a decent job of distracting the guy he’s matched up with into missing his shot a lot of the time.

Splat wrote:Actually, I lost my appetite for destruction tonight Nix. It finally dawned on me it is not really something to joke about. If you were eccentric I could see past certain things, but you're obviously not well. That is something for a professional to deal with. Therefore, I really should not be messing with the handicapped. That's not a parting insult. I actually mean that. You need some kind of assistance you aren't going to get on a message board. At the very least, maybe you should stop tell people to GTFOH, but that's it for me. I can't relate to you on any level.

KNICKSBIGCATS brought up Jerebko playing 77% of his minutes at Center for the Celtics, but totally didn't realize that Jerebko has been a PF and only in the 7 games with the C's has he been playing any meaningful minutes as a C, which doesn't make him necessarily a legit option at C.

Bargs has his flaws but he can in fact guard opposing centers and I provided statistical proof that he can do that. Bargs can be paired with a shot blocking PF like Towns and it would work just fine. You didn't address that but that's fine.

I wasn't really knocking the idea of Jerebko as a player. I'd have no problem bringing him in here. I was just defending the premise that bringing back Bargs on a lower contract could be a good idea. Aside from the same old cliches and knee jerk hatred for Bargs, I have yet to see any reasonable argument against bringing Bargs back from anyone here. Attacking me doesn't help support your position. I think it would be good for you to not address me anymore unless you bring something of value to the table.

OasisBU wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Not that big of a deal to argue over. Seems like the pulse is 50-50 on bargs which sounds about right. I don't think a 1 year nominal deal is much to get upset about or really argue against. Let's take it for what it is a small commitment to a player who has been injured has come back to perform well.

I would only do it for the minimum or a very small deal. He has a terrible track record and while it's nice to think he fits in the triangle and has found some mojo, you can't discount that he is playing for a contract too - and we have seen this happen before with other players.

Absolutely--that is what a 1 year deal worth 4mm is-- a contract that says ok were paying you 1/3 because you havent been able to stay healthy and giving you the full opportunity to play the year well and give you the opportunity to get 1 more big contract. NO one is giving him more than a 2 year commitment at BEST. Hes played himself out of that. Im a BIG believer in trying to COMPETE now while rebuilding. Believe me I want to be aggressive into this draft AND if all else fails--I want to use any unused cap space on potentially acquiring assets. But I want to try and win now as well. We DO NOT have a pick next year--we have no incentive to play poorly. So Lets go get a Mo Williams in a 2 yr contract to be our PRO QB lets get lucky and grab Towns lets find a couple of bigs who can play who wont cost more than 3-4mm with small yr commitment. The ONLY thing I have changed my mind on for FA is Khris Middelton even though I believe that even a max contract extension will be matched. NO other player is worth the money NOT Monroe Not JKackson only a few top names not coming here. Middleton and Williams would give us a true pro backcourt and it would be up to Phil and the gang to fill it in from there. But you start saying Bargs at C Towns at PF Melo at SF Middleton at SG Willaims at PG with 5 quality back ups--then we can compete all year well. Weere NOT going to the championship next year. Then we DO have a draft pick in 2016 so we can reevaluate at the end of next year.

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Not that big of a deal to argue over. Seems like the pulse is 50-50 on bargs which sounds about right. I don't think a 1 year nominal deal is much to get upset about or really argue against. Let's take it for what it is a small commitment to a player who has been injured has come back to perform well.

Where are you getting 50-50 from? Are you combining options 2 and 3 and putting them against #1?

if it were 50/50, I don't think it would be 9 pages long.