Knicks · don't be seduced by bargs pretty moves... (page 4)

Bonn1997 wrote:It's 45% without Bargs and in the 30s (don't know the exact #) without Bargs. You're right it's not ground breaking but it certainly doesn't support your claim that Bargs is *helping* Melo by spreading the floor.

If you saw the Inidana/Knick game, can u describe what was happening in the post with Melo against Stevenson/George while Hibbert was guarding Bargs on the perimeter??..I'll answer..Melo was abusing both players in the low post...In last years' playoffs, I remember Hibbert body-ing up Melo time and time again when Melo beat his man to the rim...

It's one game but we are only 11 games into the season...

Bonn1997 wrote:OK, 1 out of every 11 games Bargs effectively spreads the offense.

It's a process, teams don't figure it out game 1, takes time...

yellowboy90 wrote:hibbert was not guarfing Bargs west was

True...I looked at the 1st qt again...

Bonn1997 wrote:Watch the video Ramtour.

You guys know that just by chance the opposing player will sometimes have bad nights. Citing 2 bad performances by the opposing C in 11 games doesn't reveal anything.

Yes, and of course it would not have been pointed out if Bargs had gotten eaten alive by DHoward and HOF Hibbert, either, right?

The Sample size argument is quite convenient, isn't it?

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Watch the video Ramtour.

You guys know that just by chance the opposing player will sometimes have bad nights. Citing 2 bad performances by the opposing C in 11 games doesn't reveal anything.

Yes, and of course it would not have been pointed out if Bargs had gotten eaten alive by DHoward and HOF Hibbert, either, right?

The Sample size argument is quite convenient, isn't it?

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Bargs actually did a better job of getting back in the last game, have to admit I was a bit surprised. Its just one game but it looks like its starting to sink in. We'll see.

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

GustavBahler wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Bargs actually did a better job of getting back in the last game, have to admit I was a bit surprised. Its just one game but it looks like its starting to sink in. We'll see.

Yeah he did, imo. If he could learn to just sprint back to above the restricted area every possession and not lull around at the top of the key he would be better. He also needs to recognize that most bigs he is guarding at the center position can't shoot or drive so there is no reason to stay with him so tightly unless he is going to trap the PnR.

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Oh, yeah I saw those. I thought you were referring to this season though. Is the 39.1 this year?

Yeah that's this season. That's inline with his career " sample size".

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Oh, yeah I saw those. I thought you were referring to this season though. Is the 39.1 this year?

Yeah that's this season.

Well that's very good. I'm still concerned about how badly the team plays when Bargs is on the court though

They played badly with Tyson on the floor

ISO Carmelo Anthony

It doesn't matter who is on the floor

That's the name of the game for the knicks

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Oh, yeah I saw those. I thought you were referring to this season though. Is the 39.1 this year?

Yeah that's this season.

Well that's very good. I'm still concerned about how badly the team plays when Bargs is on the court though

I can't speak for what happened in Toronto, but I blame the +/- more on his teammates. Bargs is improving in almost every area, at some point its on them to raise their game as well, those who need to.

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Oh, yeah I saw those. I thought you were referring to this season though. Is the 39.1 this year?

Yeah that's this season.

Well that's very good. I'm still concerned about how badly the team plays when Bargs is on the court though

I can't speak for what happened in Toronto, but I blame the +/- more on his teammates. Bargs is improving in almost every area, at some point its on them to raise their game as well, those who need to.

He has the worst +/- of the team's regular players, though. It's not like he has the misfortune of being on the court with other players who are bigger liabilities. He's the liability.

Bonn1997 wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Oh, yeah I saw those. I thought you were referring to this season though. Is the 39.1 this year?

Yeah that's this season.

Well that's very good. I'm still concerned about how badly the team plays when Bargs is on the court though

I can't speak for what happened in Toronto, but I blame the +/- more on his teammates. Bargs is improving in almost every area, at some point its on them to raise their game as well, those who need to.

He has the worst +/- of the team's regular players, though, and by a wide margin. It's not like he has the misfortune of being on the court with other players who are bigger liabilities. He's the liability.

Shumpert has been invisible in the offense, in part because of all the trade talk. Felton has been underwhelming and hurt. Metta is also mediocre at times and hurt as well. Tyson is out, JR is still trying to get his game back, and Kmart isn't a scorer. You add all those things together and it doesn't add up to Bargs being the problem. That's a real stretch.

Bonn1997 wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:The sample size pretty much proves his scouting report is accurate: poor help/team defender and rim protector but great low post/iso defender. I am suprise that he does trap the pnr pretty well but he often gets lost trying to get back to his man.

Do you have the stats on the "great defender" issue? His opponent PER and points per 100 possessions are about average. I know you have those synergy stats though.

You saw them a while ago. Look at the sloan report and other articles. I just do not feel like looking it up again. I did look at his OppFG% aat the rim and saw it was at 39.1%

Oh, yeah I saw those. I thought you were referring to this season though. Is the 39.1 this year?

Yeah that's this season.

Well that's very good. I'm still concerned about how badly the team plays when Bargs is on the court though

I can't speak for what happened in Toronto, but I blame the +/- more on his teammates. Bargs is improving in almost every area, at some point its on them to raise their game as well, those who need to.

He has the worst +/- of the team's regular players, though. It's not like he has the misfortune of being on the court with other players who are bigger liabilities. He's the liability.

Someone posted about this on Knickerblogger:

Zanzibar November 24, 2013 at 1:07 am

REPOST
Before Felton went out, Bargnani had been plus in these 2 lineups as the center.

(1) Bargs-Melo-Shumpert-Felton-JR (+24 overall for 70 minutes total) This unit had the highest number of minutes and second highest plus value of all lineups (+6.3/game, only slightly below +6.5 of a Chandler lineup without Bargnani).

(2) Bargs-Melo-Shumpert-Felton-MWP (+3 overall for 24 minutes)

So Felton goes out with injury, pretty logical to maybe insert your backup PG into at least that 1st lineup. So let’s check # of minutes that modified first lineup was played against Wiz and Pacers:

Bargs-Melo-Shumpert-JR-Prigs: Wizards ZERO Minutes; Indy ZERO Minutes

Well how about Beno Udrih instead of Prigs: Wizards ZERO; Pacers: 8 minutes going +3

OK well what about that second lineup using Pablo? Wizards ZERO; Pacers ZERO

And finally, Beno in that second lineup? Wizards ZERO; Pacers ZERO

—————————————————————————–

Does this make any sense to you in a supposedly stats-driven organization? A major effort has been to determine in what type of lineup Bargs fits best. There’s some logic and stats which suggest the type of lineup. And seventy minutes is a fairly large sample size. How do you not play that lineup at all against the Wizards? And how do you play Shump only 27 minutes – why not have him guard Wall the for 40 minutes? What am I missing here?