although I have very little confidence Bargs can be a useful NBA contributor at this point. He only seems to play well at the Garden when he's not playig for the Knicks and Gallinari are guarding him
Are we going down this road again?
babyKnicks wrote:I'm willing to roll the dice with the same roster, a healthy team going into training camp, new coach and new philosophy. 50 wins.
The last thing I want is to have to see this $hit roster for another season
Well at least other uses for Bargs are coming up instead of the now-useless "spread the floor on Hibbert" playoff scenario...
I believe we've seen enough to know this situation isn't turning around here. Or do we need to see more? A 5-0 run and a great dunk attempt lowlight!
This is the second almost over-a-year-old thread bump!
jameskpolk! Have you perfected the google UK search thread function?
Does anyone expect him to last more than half a season anyway?
We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
nixluva wrote:We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
Hopefully Tyson is moved for something this offseason.
nixluva wrote:We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
Gotta give teh raptors credit. NOBODY wanted to give up anything for Bargnani until The Knicks gave up multiple picks including a 1st round pick for him. Toronto is now a playoff team and will get better. Draft picks are important
StarksEwing1 wrote:nixluva wrote:We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
Gotta give teh raptors credit. NOBODY wanted to give up anything for Bargnani until The Knicks gave up multiple picks including a 1st round pick for him. Toronto is now a playoff team and will get better. Draft picks are important
Are you suggesting the raptors are better because they subtracted Bargs from their roster? Novak doesn't play but he might be a better locker room fit.
CrushAlot wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:nixluva wrote:We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
Gotta give teh raptors credit. NOBODY wanted to give up anything for Bargnani until The Knicks gave up multiple picks including a 1st round pick for him. Toronto is now a playoff team and will get better. Draft picks are important
Are you suggesting the raptors are better because they subtracted Bargs from their roster? Novak doesn't play but he might be a better locker room fit.
I am sure that Toronto would have played better last year if they just benched Bargs just like we did better when he sat. He was/is a net negative on both teams.
I'm curious what Phil intends to do with Bargs. Does he feel he can get thru to Bargs or does he wish to find a way to get rid of him? There is talent there but can Phil and the coaches help him to fix the bad areas and enhance his talent? Do they even want to expend the energy to try?
CrushAlot wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:nixluva wrote:We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
Gotta give teh raptors credit. NOBODY wanted to give up anything for Bargnani until The Knicks gave up multiple picks including a 1st round pick for him. Toronto is now a playoff team and will get better. Draft picks are important
Are you suggesting the raptors are better because they subtracted Bargs from their roster? Novak doesn't play but he might be a better locker room fit.
No there are a lot of other factors why toronto is better. My point is that they were able take a disappointing and injury prone 1st overall pick who didnt have many suitors and get multiple picks including a first rounder
nixluva wrote:I'm curious what Phil intends to do with Bargs. Does he feel he can get thru to Bargs or does he wish to find a way to get rid of him? There is talent there but can Phil and the coaches help him to fix the bad areas and enhance his talent? Do they even want to expend the energy to try?
It will be interesting. I liked Bargs at the 5. Also, what is up with his elbow. That was a nasty injury.
Bargs/Felton for Bropez works. Bropez for Tyson works straight up.
CrushAlot wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:nixluva wrote:We've only got to worry about Bargs, Tyson and STAT one more year. I think it's been established that a coach needs to have a clear notion of how to use players or else you get a mess. Woodson was HORRID in figuring out how to use a player like Bargs. It made no sense to force it if he didn't have a clear idea of how it should work and when the team was losing games. Once Tyson went down and Bargs moved to C it became clear that Bargs is no longer a perimeter PF. He should be used as a C and in the PnP game.
Gotta give teh raptors credit. NOBODY wanted to give up anything for Bargnani until The Knicks gave up multiple picks including a 1st round pick for him. Toronto is now a playoff team and will get better. Draft picks are important
Are you suggesting the raptors are better because they subtracted Bargs from their roster? Novak doesn't play but he might be a better locker room fit.
I'm sure that's one of the many factors. Giving Bargs 30 min per night would have interfered with being a .600 team.
CrushAlot wrote:Bargs/Felton for Bropez works. Bropez for Tyson works straight up.
You can't get dimes from the bench in a suit.
What trade site did you use? NBAIslandofMisfitToys.com? Bropez may be the only center in the Least that actually plays less than FluTyson.
The Russian is not so stupid. Neither is Phil, even though Bropez passing out of the Triangle sounds really nice.
