[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Deal is done Q was added
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
7/1/2013  11:39 AM
Al Iannazzone ‏@Al_Iannazzone 4m
I have heard the Knicks-Raptors deal is agreed upon with Quentin Richardson being signed-and-traded to make the deal work. Official July 10.
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
AUTOADVERT
NYY1NYK2
Posts: 21013
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/16/2010
Member: #3067
7/1/2013  11:59 AM
does this mean less picks?
Knixkik
Posts: 35475
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
7/1/2013  12:01 PM
LOL @ Q Rich getting another contract just to be part of the trade. Worst player in the NBA just lucked himself into good money.
martin
Posts: 76389
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
7/1/2013  12:03 PM
NYY1NYK2 wrote:does this mean less picks?

no. Not sure of exact details but looks like it's 2016 first, 2014 OKC second rounder and future second rounder.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
MSG3
Posts: 22788
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/2/2009
Member: #2476
USA
7/1/2013  1:04 PM
Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/1/2013  1:11 PM
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.
MSG3
Posts: 22788
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/2/2009
Member: #2476
USA
7/1/2013  1:15 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

Novak's efficiency numbers (along with Tyson's) are the flaw of using efficiency numbers as the biggest way to evaluate a player. Novak was **** last year no matter what his numbers look like.
Jmpasq
Posts: 25243
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/10/2012
Member: #4182
7/1/2013  1:15 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

Bargs is much better then Novak if he is on the court. U can put the words volume or efficent in front of it he is far more talented then Novak
The thing that amazes me is 3 Picks not 1 got sent , 3 picks they got out of Grunwald. how do u get hosed that bad.
Check out My NFL Draft Prospect Videos at Youtube User Pages Jmpasq,JPdraftjedi,Jmpasqdraftjedi. www.Draftbreakdown.com
Knixkik
Posts: 35475
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
7/1/2013  1:17 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?
MSG3
Posts: 22788
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/2/2009
Member: #2476
USA
7/1/2013  1:18 PM
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?

Exactly. The price we paid for flexibility was a late 1st round pick and 2 2nd rounders. Could Grunwald have gotten away with not including the 1st rounder? I don't know. Tor turned down David Lee for Bargs so I guess a 1st was their asking price.
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
7/1/2013  1:25 PM
Bargnani will be an excellent small 6'11 forward in the Knicks frontcourt rotation. We desperately needed a second scorer and acquired one. Chandler focuses on rebounding. Carmelo does what he does. Sign Kenyon Martin and test drive the other big men (CJ Leslie, Jerome Jordan, AJ Matthews) in Summer League in 2 weeks.
once a knick always a knick
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/1/2013  1:59 PM
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.
MaTT4281
Posts: 34909
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
7/1/2013  2:01 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.

Eye test - no numbers allowed - do you believe Novak was helping this team?
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34064
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
7/1/2013  2:02 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.

so Novak was a positive roleplayer? And Bargs was a negative starter? There is a flaw in this methodology, especially when there's a good chance Bargs will be apart of the second unit

DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
MSG3
Posts: 22788
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/2/2009
Member: #2476
USA
7/1/2013  2:04 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.

Pick a completely random 10-15 games from this past Knicks season, watch them from start to finish, and then with a straight face tell me Novak was a positive contributor.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
7/1/2013  2:09 PM
misterearl wrote:Bargnani will be an excellent small 6'11 forward in the Knicks frontcourt rotation. We desperately needed a second scorer and acquired one. Chandler focuses on rebounding. Carmelo does what he does. Sign Kenyon Martin and test drive the other big men (CJ Leslie, Jerome Jordan, AJ Matthews) in Summer League in 2 weeks.

Actually Bargs is a legit 7' without shoes and 7-1.25 in shoes. It's actually amazing that he can drive from the 3pt line all the way to the basket at that size. This is a kid that really needs a coach like Woodson to get in his head, cuz he's got a ton of talent that hasn't been fully tapped.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/1/2013  2:10 PM
MSG3 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.

Pick a completely random 10-15 games from this past Knicks season, watch them from start to finish, and then with a straight face tell me Novak was a positive contributor.


How do you want me to assess "positive contribution"? Is the team consistently going on good runs with him on the court sufficient? What about highly efficient scoring? You gotta be more specific first. Then I (might) look for a 10 to 15 game stretch.
Note that it's rare that Bargs even stays healthy let alone contributes a net positive impact for 10 to 15 consecutive games anyway though.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/1/2013  2:13 PM
nixluva wrote:
misterearl wrote:Bargnani will be an excellent small 6'11 forward in the Knicks frontcourt rotation. We desperately needed a second scorer and acquired one. Chandler focuses on rebounding. Carmelo does what he does. Sign Kenyon Martin and test drive the other big men (CJ Leslie, Jerome Jordan, AJ Matthews) in Summer League in 2 weeks.

Actually Bargs is a legit 7' without shoes and 7-1.25 in shoes. It's actually amazing that he can drive from the 3pt line all the way to the basket at that size. This is a kid that really needs a coach like Woodson to get in his head, cuz he's got a ton of talent that hasn't been fully tapped.


Did he grow a lot? His pre-draft measured height was 6'10 1/4"
Knixkik
Posts: 35475
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
7/1/2013  2:16 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.

This is the problem with judging purely on advanced metrics. You can actually find evidence to support Novak being a better player than Bargnani and actually believe it not taking into account team, role, etc. But no one in their right mind who knows anything about basketball could actually suggest Novak is a better player. In the right role Bargnani is a significant upgrade no matter what stat you look at.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/1/2013  2:18 PM
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MSG3 wrote:Q gets a 3 yr contract, 1 yr guaranteed to complete the deal.

Now Imagine if we took back 3 stiffs, gave one of them a 3 yr deal, added to our salary cap situation for an extra year and got a late 1st rd pick and 2 2nd round picks in return. Toronto got a good deal FOR THEM. We got a good deal FOR OUR SITUATION.


It's questionable whether an unhealthy, 7' volume scorer is even better than a 6'10", healthy, efficient scorer anyway. There's no way we should be giving up any picks in this deal.

So you expect Toronto to take back longer contracts, for worst players, without receiving anything of value?


No, they're getting the healthier and probably better player. Almost every advanced stat I see on Bargs indicates that he's a net negative for his team while Novak is a positive role player.

This is the problem with judging purely on advanced metrics. You can actually find evidence to support Novak being a better player than Bargnani and actually believe it not taking into account team, role, etc. But no one in their right mind who knows anything about basketball could actually suggest Novak is a better player. In the right role Bargnani is a significant upgrade no matter what stat you look at.


The problem is entirely ignoring the advanced metrics. I didn't say I judge the player entirely on them but when every advanced metric favors player A over B, that's enough for me to say we shouldn't throw in a bunch of draft picks to get player B.
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Deal is done Q was added
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy