Knicks · Andrea "Il Mago" (The Magician) Bargnani Appreciation (page 3)

A poster broke it down like this.

ruruland
July 1, 2013 at 12:28 am

AB’s Synergy numbers on offense prior to the last two seasons are excellent, if he can just bounce back to those two years, with a change of role and shot distribution, his efficiency will look excellent, with his low turnovers he’d certainly be better than Copeland last year.

In 2010-11 he was 48th in isolations, 48th in post-ups, 46th off screens (great for a big man), and 38th as a roll man (great in pick and pop, 37 % from 3). He shot a respectable 40 % in spot-up situations, but is a guy who likely gets his shooting rhythm while on the move.

Ok, so why was his efficiency middling?
39 percent of his shots came in isolations and post-ups, so even thought he was proficient in both, they pulled his numbers down quite a bit. His usage was 28.

As as point of reference, 48 % of Melo’s shots come in isolation or post-ups, which is about the only way any player who isn’t in a fastbreak system can sustain 35 % usage.

In 2009-10 when he had a 8.8 tov rating and 55 TS, he ranked 56th in post-ups, 64th as a roll man (40 % from 3), 58th in spot-ups (42 % from 3pt for a 7-footer!!) 58th in cuts and 20th in offensive rebound efficiency.

That’s outstanding. With a dramatically reduced burden, the knicks can employ Bargnani in optimal situations — if he doesn’t have an advantage against a slow big man or small wing man, he can play pick and pop or spot-up and space the court.

Clearly he is one of the mast versatile offensive bigs in the game, how he is utilized and how his shots are apportioned will largely determine how his numbers look.

If he’s healthy he can surely return to the form he had for four years, and he won’t be in a situation where he’ll have to force anything (hopefully).

Players that leave Toronto plays better V.Carter Tracy McGrady etc.. , Toronto doesn't want to win just sell tickets.

Hard to stay motivated when you know franchise motto is their fans get to see great players on other teams live.
Toronto has a way of making good players give up, remember Vince Carter ?

V. Carter plays harder in Dallas as an older vet than he did in Toronto when he realized they were just using him to draw fans , never really wanting to continue to win in his seasons playing there.

Why can't people see this as a good trade for the Knicks.
With Barganni, the Knicks don't have to rely on Amare. They can look to buy him out or trade him, probably buy him out.
Barganni's game is a better fit with Melo and Chandler on the floor, and we seldom play our draft picks,knicks never build through the draft.

Vince Carter or any other Raptors player who bailed played poorly to request a trade.

nixluva wrote:We're not bringing him in to rebound. I forgot to mention his high BB IQ. This guy can do a lot more than some are willing to admit. He's not a terrible defender either. People just like to say he is, but he's not. He's got pretty good lateral quickness for a guy that big. The only real knock is rebounding. I can live with that if he at least gives a great effort from now on. If he can get it up to 7 rebs a game I can live with it.

Bet a lot you forgot how good he was.

Once again Knicks fans NEED to accept a guys limitations. He is an upgrade over Novak because he can create his own shot and Camby...he was likely going to give us NOTHING so, I like.

There pick was not a difference maker and Dolan has shown that he can an will buy 2nd round draft picks so, they are no loss either.

yellowboy90 wrote:fans applauded when zach Randolph left ny. This trade is not that big of a deal. if it works it works. Camby and Novak didn't work.

and he went to a team that appreciated what he could do instead of harping on his deficiencies and guess what, he became an allstar.

nixluva wrote:

sidsanders wrote:to be fair, he hasnt avg more than 5 defensive rbs. he has gone over 5 total 4 times... not by much though.

his best scoring avg occurred once bosh was gone, so i dont expect the guy to avg high teens or more playing here. if he does, thats nice. i think what you see is what you get with this guy. he wont be a main force grabbing rbs, or elite on d. lots of ifs around this guy like most other underachieving lotto picks.

One of his problems is that he's on the perimeter so much that he's not getting a lot of offensive rebound opportunities. He's gonna have to be used closer to the basket more often in order to increase those numbers. It's hard to be out at the 3pt line and still get offensive rebounds. To get a couple more defensive boards is gonna take hard work, boxing out and hitting the gym. The thing is he's not here to be at big time rebounder. He's here to stretch the floor and open things up for Melo and our guards. People wanna act like they don't know that.

which can be effective because he will draw a big away from the basket

JayNYC wrote:

nixluva wrote:

JayNYC wrote:

nixluva wrote:

JayNYC wrote:Cute! Does his athleticism and height, allow for him to box out and compete for a rebound? Never averaged more than 5 per. 7ft 260 I can't hate Knicks fans for wanted success.. I dig it. Clips are nice.. but don't tell the full story. He isn't an efficient scorer at all.. 43 % FG and like 30% from 3pt range.. We gave a pick up for this? But hey, I appreciate your enthusiasm.. hopefully, he comes here and actualizes his said potential.

Nice try with the low shooting % you quoted. When he was healthy he shot much better than that.

08-09 45% 41% 3pt 83% FT
09-10 47% 37% 3pt 77% FT
10-11 45% 35% 3pt 82% FT

Then he missed a ton of games in 11-12 and 12-13 and shot poorly. Let's not troll here.

hahaha did you just nice try me.. ALL JOKES ASIDE, I ain't gotta make this up .. MEN LIE, WOMAN LIE.. NUMBERS DONT. Looking at his numbers 43 % Career FG 36% 3PT RANGE. NEVER AVG'D MORE THAN 5 BOARDS.. NO DIMES. I didn't even look at his stats til you called me out, But I'm on point.. #FACTS

Career Season Averages
Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
06-07 TOR 65 2 25.1 0.427 0.373 0.824 0.8 3.1 3.9 0.8 0.5 0.8 1.65 2.77 11.6
07-08 TOR 78 53 23.9 0.386 0.345 0.840 0.6 3.1 3.7 1.1 0.3 0.5 1.13 2.71 10.2
08-09 TOR 78 59 31.4 0.450 0.409 0.831 0.9 4.4 5.3 1.2 0.4 1.2 1.73 3.10 15.4
09-10 TOR 80 80 35.0 0.470 0.372 0.774 1.3 4.8 6.2 1.2 0.3 1.4 1.50 2.69 17.2
10-11 TOR 66 66 35.7 0.448 0.345 0.820 1.1 4.1 5.2 1.8 0.5 0.7 2.30 2.42 21.4
11-12 TOR 31 31 33.3 0.432 0.296 0.873 0.8 4.8 5.5 2.0 0.6 0.5 2.23 1.68 19.5
12-13 TOR 35 25 28.7 0.399 0.309 0.844 0.7 2.9 3.7 1.1 0.6 0.7 1.54 1.83 12.7
Career -433 316 30.3 0.437 0.361 0.825 0.9 3.9 4.8 1.3 0.4 0.9 1.67 2.60 15.2
Career Season Totals

PLEASE!!! Dude was just fine before the last 2 years filled with injury. I mean you can just ignore the rookie and sophomore seasons as years of growth, but once he got going he was much better than you're trying to portray. I hate BS like this. You know damn well he's being killed for the last 2 years more than anything else.

Ohhhhhhhh I get it, he was on a learning curve.. Riiiiiiiiiiight! Dealing in fact, cause I wouldn't dare wanna be accused of misrepresenting his numbers for the sake of validating my argument. BY THE NUMBERS.. TWO SEASONS HE AVERAGED 20PPG.. BOTH TIMES HE DIDN'T PLAY A FULL NBA SEASON.. But I'll hold off on that for the moment. HOW DO YOU COUNTER THIS LINE OF THOUGHT.. 7FT 260 and Not grabbing rebounds, ISN'T THAT WORTHY OF BEING KILLED.. BY definition his position requires POWER.. Seems like to me he's ummmm "SOFT".. Matter of fact, we already know what the numbers say... Let's not debate that anymore, I ain't tryna get you super tight.. "cussing on the site LOL".. hahahahaha

Being injured and as a result having your stats suffer is NOT a learning curve, its called "Being Injured." Your sarcasn toward Knickluva doesn't alter the fact that his first 2years he shot well and his shooting only suffered after the injury. If he is healthy, I like this move.

Maybe this is a type of trade where we actually "Buy low"?

Its a low risk proposal type trade that could be really good for us. This is a big 7 footer who won't rebound much and won't be a candidate for defensive player of the year but brings some firepower to the court.

I was unsure about how I felt about it but knowing how wrong most fans are about these things and after reading the comments on the UK I am more encouraged about the trade now.

JayNYC wrote:hahaha did you just nice try me.. ALL JOKES ASIDE, I ain't gotta make this up .. MEN LIE, WOMAN LIE.. NUMBERS DONT. Looking at his numbers 43 % Career FG 36% 3PT RANGE. NEVER AVG'D MORE THAN 5 BOARDS.. NO DIMES. I didn't even look at his stats til you called me out, But I'm on point.. #FACTS

Apparently men who can't read stats do lie though.

Bargs has averaged more than 5 boards 4 different seasons. But really that's not the point. He's being brought in for a backup role, and for insurance for Amare. Camby and Novak were providing nothing in the playoffs, so why not take a chance. The move is a gamble, and after 2 years his contract comes off the books.

It's a fine gamble if we aren't giving up 3 picks. But we are.

Bonn1997 wrote:It's a fine gamble if we aren't giving up 3 picks. But we are.

U think we could have gotten a first overall pick for Novak and Camby??

What I would like for the knicks to emphasize more w Andrea is to use that big body to rebound and use the post to score more than he has in the past

So the picks are a swap pick(likely in the late 1st and two second round picks, one from OKC which will likely be a a late second rounder and the other top 55 protected. What's the uproar about?

nixluva wrote:

azamatbagatov wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:also 43% is approaching elite around here to some.

What they don't mention is that Bargs shot better than that in the 3 yrs before the last 2 when he was injured. He's much more efficient than people are trying to promote in order to bash him. He played 31 and 35 games in the last 2 seasons and wasn't healthy obviously. People can promote those shooting numbers if they want but it's really just being cute with the stats.

You are accusing people of being cute with the stats to promote their own agenda while you are being cute with the stats to promote your agenda. The irony is delicious

No i'm being realistic. We all know that most players improve over their rookie and sophomore seasons and Bargs clearly did improve. Only the last 2 years where only played 31 and 35 games did his number drop, which is understandable. You wanna pretend that he's really that player then go ahead but I know you wouldn't place any money on him being that bad when he's healthy. Like any player it always comes down to health. Bargs can produce the scoring we need when healthy. From what i've heard he's healthy now. He's not coming off any surgery so I would expect him to have a bounce back year.

I think these guys are right though. You are choosing to ignore the stats that don't fit your theory (rookie and sophomore year, overall career numbers) and only focusing on the three slightly above average years the guy had. This is the most dangerous way to misuse statistics IMO.

yellowboy90 wrote:So the picks are a swap pick(likely in the late 1st and two second round picks, one from OKC which will likely be a a late second rounder and the other top 55 protected. What's the uproar about?

it's a Knicks messageboard - I have no idea

Bargnani has a really impressive offensive repetoire. He will be more efficient here with fewer and better looks at the basket as he's playing with better scorers than he had in Toronto. I think the guy is a good get for the price we paid. I would've rather not tossed them a first rounder because his value was down, but we also were bidding against others.

To me we got back our Gallinari. Gallinari is a better all-around player, but Bargnani has proven more as a scorer, is a little more efficient scorer, and bigger.

Knixkik wrote:To me we got back our Gallinari. Gallinari is a better all-around player, but Bargnani has proven more as a scorer, is a little more efficient scorer, and bigger.

Exactly

Bargnani is a bargain.

Clyde will have fun with pronunciation.

We just got younger. Glen Grunwald knows what he is doing.

Andrew wrote:

JayNYC wrote:hahaha did you just nice try me.. ALL JOKES ASIDE, I ain't gotta make this up .. MEN LIE, WOMAN LIE.. NUMBERS DONT. Looking at his numbers 43 % Career FG 36% 3PT RANGE. NEVER AVG'D MORE THAN 5 BOARDS.. NO DIMES. I didn't even look at his stats til you called me out, But I'm on point.. #FACTS

Apparently men who can't read stats do lie though.

Bargs has averaged more than 5 boards 4 different seasons. But really that's not the point. He's being brought in for a backup role, and for insurance for Amare. Camby and Novak were providing nothing in the playoffs, so why not take a chance. The move is a gamble, and after 2 years his contract comes off the books.

Hahaha. Let me be clear.. for his career he averages less than 5 boards per game.. As a 7ft 260 man that is horrendous! I keep telling folks ... you've just prove'n my argument. I don't hate the move when considering his role, and ability to give NYK a more conventional lineup. The reason i continue this debate is simply based on the idea of it being a lateral move. He is Amare .. trading picks away are reminiscent of years past. Mortgaging the future, for players with problem as a stop gag solution. I never once said i am opposed to acquiring him for Camby or Novak. They weren't factors here.. but i'm not gonna go over hype him like some other people on your UK boards either. The numbers are what they are.. you read em' why skew the argument. Accept it! 2015-2016 free agency cap space only matter if this organization makes a move that produces a winner.

He sure does. Misuing the amnesty and then signing guys like Novak and Camby to long term deals. Why do we have to overpay every role player we bring in. It's not that hard.

I have no faith in a guy that thinks it's smart to buy out a point guard to sign a limited player and allow a team to start toney douglas at the point guard spot. that's what we are dealing with.

This is the same guy that gave massive deals to aaron williams, jerome williams and maxed out antonio davis. The NBA is amazing.

JayNYC wrote:

Andrew wrote:

JayNYC wrote:hahaha did you just nice try me.. ALL JOKES ASIDE, I ain't gotta make this up .. MEN LIE, WOMAN LIE.. NUMBERS DONT. Looking at his numbers 43 % Career FG 36% 3PT RANGE. NEVER AVG'D MORE THAN 5 BOARDS.. NO DIMES. I didn't even look at his stats til you called me out, But I'm on point.. #FACTS

Apparently men who can't read stats do lie though.

Bargs has averaged more than 5 boards 4 different seasons. But really that's not the point. He's being brought in for a backup role, and for insurance for Amare. Camby and Novak were providing nothing in the playoffs, so why not take a chance. The move is a gamble, and after 2 years his contract comes off the books.

Hahaha. Let me be clear.. for his career he averages less than 5 boards per game.. As a 7ft 260 man that is horrendous! I keep telling folks ... you've just prove'n my argument. I don't hate the move when considering his role, and ability to give NYK a more conventional lineup. The reason i continue this debate is simply based on the idea of it being a lateral move. He is Amare .. trading picks away are reminiscent of years past. Mortgaging the future, for players with problem as a stop gag solution. I never once said i am opposed to acquiring him for Camby or Novak. They weren't factors here.. but i'm not gonna go over hype him like some other people on your UK boards either. The numbers are what they are.. you read em' why skew the argument. Accept it! 2015-2016 free agency cap space only matter if this organization makes a move that produces a winner.

I kind of like the trade because, in your words, 'He is Amare'. I don't want to rely on Amar'e for a full season. Do you? Not really a Bargs fan but I can see him fitting in here