I understand both points. I would rather not tempt fate and just shutdown Bargs. The Lakers and Byron Scott are in full tank mode. He plays all his youngins and scrubs at the start. Then try to put in his capable players at the end to show a semblance of trying making the outcome somewhat respectable.
If we don't shutdown Bargs then just start the youngins. Galloway, Shved, Early, Admunson, Jason Smith. This should put as in hole in the 1st quarter most of the times. In the rotation Larkin, Lance Thomas, THJr, Acy, Wear, Bargs, Aldrich....Go 12 deep everytime. Make sure everybody gets time to develop but kinda sabotaging so that noone gets consistent minutes. 
NYKBocker wrote:I understand both points. I would rather not tempt fate and just shutdown Bargs. The Lakers and Byron Scott are in full tank mode. He plays all his youngins and scrubs at the start. Then try to put in his capable players at the end to show a semblance of trying making the outcome somewhat respectable. If we don't shutdown Bargs then just start the youngins. Galloway, Shved, Early, Admunson, Jason Smith. This should put as in hole in the 1st quarter most of the times. In the rotation Larkin, Lance Thomas, THJr, Acy, Wear, Bargs, Aldrich....Go 12 deep everytime. Make sure everybody gets time to develop but kinda sabotaging so that noone gets consistent minutes.
It's just not a very realistic approach IMO. We forget that not only do the players need to be developed but so does Fisher as a coach. These games have meaning for Fish and the players who will be moving forward with us. I'm not really that worried anymore about the draft pick. We will likely still lose enough to be in the running for a top pick. I don't think it's as helpful for us to tank as it is for Philly who has no intentions on doing anything but keep drafting. We're not in that boat next draft in 2016. We need to develop on a faster pace than Philly.
Phil wants a massive improvement next year and we can't go from wretched to a strong playoff team if we don't actually start the process of improvement now. IMO that's how the Knicks are viewing the end of this season. They're looking at this as the beginning of next year already. That's the reason for playing Bargs and bringing in Shved. They want to see what it looks like with these players in the mix. So far it looks like a good fit and that is good for the Knicks future. We can see how the ball moves and how it looks with players with the right skills actually running it. It's a proof of concept and then they can be more sure as they move forward of what they already have and what the need to bring in.
BRIGGS wrote:fishmike wrote:Briggs your a bit bi-polar with this one. Like two weeks ago you were pining to sign Bargs cheap. Now your tilting because he's playing and playing well (2 games?) in the triangle. You have been all about keeping $$$ flexibility. If Bargs plays well why wouldnt they resign him? Who is going to offer him morethan $6mm next year on a 1 year deal? Name one team... and if you hot for a chance to sign Durant after next year than Bargs is a very reasonable 1-year stop gap. Lets say Bargs plays 55 games next year and puts up 20ppg and 6 rebs and shoots 48% in the triangle. Isnt someone like Durant, who has the best mid range game since Jordan going to look at that and think hmmm????
After thinking about it--I don't see this organization resigning him. If we stop and think Bargnani hasnt been able to stay healthy and that has been a plague with some of our vets. I agree with you fishmike--if Bargs plays the right way plays within a system plays within 14 feet--he could be useful--thats why i said lets atleast look at resigning him for a short stint. But lets look at the Knicks--theyve been absolutely burned by this Bargs trade and theyve won 12 games this year + their entire draft is gone in 2016 because of Bargs. The LAST thing Dolan will want to hear is why are we still talking about Bargnani? Bargs is a PR nightmare right now for the Knicks and this organization is obsessed with PR. If we signed Bargs back even for 1 year and 4mm and he was hurt within 8 games--its a nightmare and they already know it. I shouldve reasoned with that.
A 100% fair point. There are two sides of that coin of course... the other being that Bargs shows a little spunk here, some team gives him a Jason Smith type contract and he plays 65 games scores 20ppg, looks like he did a couple years ago and the stupid Knicks wasted a draft on a player they let go for nothing who is playing very well elsewhere.
My take would be this:
Look around. Im sure Phil has his set of players he's targeting from high to low. You start high. You have to at least try to be in the calling for the Butlers and Leanards, etc
If and when we whiff on the big cats as most assume we will you start looking at cost effective stop gap players, or cheaper guys with upside etc.
I dont see the PR nightmare if the KNicks whiff on the higher tier guys and bring back one for a reasonable deal who showed something at the end of the year. I mean if we are talking 3-$18mm Phil should be drawn and quartered and Splat and finally have his moment. I dont see that... 1 year $5mm shouldnt be a PR nightmare.
I have no desire to see Bargs continue his Knick career, but check emotion and ask can he help? You yourself said he can... you just need to stay within the parameters of sane. To me thats 1 year (or non guarn 2nd) at $4-$5mm like Jason Smith. I think he set the market appropriatly
18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
wow how is that even possible. I think I would accidentally pull down 1 rebound
gunsnewing wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
wow how is that even possible. I think I would accidentally pull down 1 rebound
He is allergic to rebounds.
Dereke has a nice ring to it.
Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
Exaggerate much? It's fun to pick at the guy for his lack of hustle but at the same time he's never as bad as some try to make him out to be either.
SEASON TEAM GP GS MIN FGM-A FG% 3PM-A 3P% FTM-A FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
'06-'07 TOR 65 2 25.1 4.1-9.6 .427 1.5-4.1 .373 1.8-2.2 .824 0.8 3.1 3.9 0.8 0.8 0.5 2.8 1.6 11.6
'07-'08 TOR 78 53 23.9 3.6-9.3 .386 1.2-3.3 .345 1.8-2.2 .840 0.6 3.1 3.7 1.1 0.5 0.3 2.7 1.1 10.2
'08-'09 TOR 78 59 31.4 5.5-12.3 .450 1.5-3.7 .409 2.8-3.4 .831 0.9 4.4 5.3 1.2 1.2 0.4 3.1 1.7 15.4
'09-'10 TOR 80 80 35.0 6.7-14.3 .470 1.5-4.1 .372 2.3-2.9 .774 1.3 4.9 6.2 1.2 1.4 0.3 2.7 1.5 17.2
'10-'11 TOR 66 66 35.7 8.0-17.8 .448 1.2-3.4 .345 4.3-5.3 .820 1.1 4.1 5.2 1.8 0.7 0.5 2.4 2.3 21.4
'11-'12 TOR 31 31 33.3 6.7-15.6 .432 1.1-3.7 .296 4.9-5.6 .873 0.8 4.8 5.5 2.0 0.5 0.6 1.7 2.2 19.5
'12-'13 TOR 35 25 28.7 4.9-12.2 .399 1.1-3.5 .309 1.9-2.2 .844 0.7 2.9 3.7 1.1 0.7 0.6 1.8 1.5 12.7
'13-'14 NY 42 39 29.9 5.3-12.0 .442 0.7-2.6 .278 2.0-2.4 .824 1.6 3.6 5.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 2.4 1.4 13.3
'14-'15 NY 10 3 21.6 3.8-9.0 .422 0.2-0.7 .286 3.2-4.2 .762 1.1 3.2 4.3 1.5 0.6 0.1 2.0 0.8 11.0
Career 485 358 30.1 5.5-12.6 .437 1.3-3.5 .355 2.6-3.2 .823 1.0 3.9 4.9 1.2 0.9 0.4 2.6 1.6 14.9
IMO Bargs biggest issue has been his health, but also his motor. What has gone on the 3 years has come to define him but he did have another part of his career where he showed some promise. It could be that he's just not a very durable player and that alone would be reason not to want him, but he also does have some talent which could be useful in a given role.
I think he needs more touches and to stay active and involved in the offense. The more he shoots the better he performs. The more FGA's he gets the more efficient he seems to play.
Of courser first he's got to stay healthy. I would offer him a 1 year contract to show and prove he can stay healthy next year.
I remember we used to call KVH "Soft" and he averaged 8 rebs a game!
Bargs, To his credit 10'-11' was the strike short year, but since he is fragile!
That sesason was his best, avg 21pts and 5.2 rebs
His rebounding is not bad for a stretch 4.
Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
if only he played 36 minutes and shot twice as much then perhaps he could have tripled his output.
we have got to sign this dude as priority one.
mreinman wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
if only he played 36 minutes and shot twice as much then perhaps he could have tripled his output.
we have got to sign this dude as priority one.
We need to retain Bargs so we can keep the Raptor connection strong with him and Calderon. We can't break up the Calf Brothers.
Are Dereke and Tyreke related?
nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
Exaggerate much? It's fun to pick at the guy for his lack of hustle but at the same time he's never as bad as some try to make him out to be either.
SEASON TEAM GP GS MIN FGM-A FG% 3PM-A 3P% FTM-A FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
'06-'07 TOR 65 2 25.1 4.1-9.6 .427 1.5-4.1 .373 1.8-2.2 .824 0.8 3.1 3.9 0.8 0.8 0.5 2.8 1.6 11.6
'07-'08 TOR 78 53 23.9 3.6-9.3 .386 1.2-3.3 .345 1.8-2.2 .840 0.6 3.1 3.7 1.1 0.5 0.3 2.7 1.1 10.2
'08-'09 TOR 78 59 31.4 5.5-12.3 .450 1.5-3.7 .409 2.8-3.4 .831 0.9 4.4 5.3 1.2 1.2 0.4 3.1 1.7 15.4
'09-'10 TOR 80 80 35.0 6.7-14.3 .470 1.5-4.1 .372 2.3-2.9 .774 1.3 4.9 6.2 1.2 1.4 0.3 2.7 1.5 17.2
'10-'11 TOR 66 66 35.7 8.0-17.8 .448 1.2-3.4 .345 4.3-5.3 .820 1.1 4.1 5.2 1.8 0.7 0.5 2.4 2.3 21.4
'11-'12 TOR 31 31 33.3 6.7-15.6 .432 1.1-3.7 .296 4.9-5.6 .873 0.8 4.8 5.5 2.0 0.5 0.6 1.7 2.2 19.5
'12-'13 TOR 35 25 28.7 4.9-12.2 .399 1.1-3.5 .309 1.9-2.2 .844 0.7 2.9 3.7 1.1 0.7 0.6 1.8 1.5 12.7
'13-'14 NY 42 39 29.9 5.3-12.0 .442 0.7-2.6 .278 2.0-2.4 .824 1.6 3.6 5.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 2.4 1.4 13.3
'14-'15 NY 10 3 21.6 3.8-9.0 .422 0.2-0.7 .286 3.2-4.2 .762 1.1 3.2 4.3 1.5 0.6 0.1 2.0 0.8 11.0
Career 485 358 30.1 5.5-12.6 .437 1.3-3.5 .355 2.6-3.2 .823 1.0 3.9 4.9 1.2 0.9 0.4 2.6 1.6 14.9
IMO Bargs biggest issue has been his health, but also his motor. What has gone on the 3 years has come to define him but he did have another part of his career where he showed some promise. It could be that he's just not a very durable player and that alone would be reason not to want him, but he also does have some talent which could be useful in a given role.
I think he needs more touches and to stay active and involved in the offense. The more he shoots the better he performs. The more FGA's he gets the more efficient he seems to play.
Of courser first he's got to stay healthy. I would offer him a 1 year contract to show and prove he can stay healthy next year.
I thought I was being generous. I mentioned the 3 points.
Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:18 min, 0 rbs, 0 blocks, and 3 points is closer to the Bargnani I remember.
Exaggerate much? It's fun to pick at the guy for his lack of hustle but at the same time he's never as bad as some try to make him out to be either.
SEASON TEAM GP GS MIN FGM-A FG% 3PM-A 3P% FTM-A FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
'06-'07 TOR 65 2 25.1 4.1-9.6 .427 1.5-4.1 .373 1.8-2.2 .824 0.8 3.1 3.9 0.8 0.8 0.5 2.8 1.6 11.6
'07-'08 TOR 78 53 23.9 3.6-9.3 .386 1.2-3.3 .345 1.8-2.2 .840 0.6 3.1 3.7 1.1 0.5 0.3 2.7 1.1 10.2
'08-'09 TOR 78 59 31.4 5.5-12.3 .450 1.5-3.7 .409 2.8-3.4 .831 0.9 4.4 5.3 1.2 1.2 0.4 3.1 1.7 15.4
'09-'10 TOR 80 80 35.0 6.7-14.3 .470 1.5-4.1 .372 2.3-2.9 .774 1.3 4.9 6.2 1.2 1.4 0.3 2.7 1.5 17.2
'10-'11 TOR 66 66 35.7 8.0-17.8 .448 1.2-3.4 .345 4.3-5.3 .820 1.1 4.1 5.2 1.8 0.7 0.5 2.4 2.3 21.4
'11-'12 TOR 31 31 33.3 6.7-15.6 .432 1.1-3.7 .296 4.9-5.6 .873 0.8 4.8 5.5 2.0 0.5 0.6 1.7 2.2 19.5
'12-'13 TOR 35 25 28.7 4.9-12.2 .399 1.1-3.5 .309 1.9-2.2 .844 0.7 2.9 3.7 1.1 0.7 0.6 1.8 1.5 12.7
'13-'14 NY 42 39 29.9 5.3-12.0 .442 0.7-2.6 .278 2.0-2.4 .824 1.6 3.6 5.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 2.4 1.4 13.3
'14-'15 NY 10 3 21.6 3.8-9.0 .422 0.2-0.7 .286 3.2-4.2 .762 1.1 3.2 4.3 1.5 0.6 0.1 2.0 0.8 11.0
Career 485 358 30.1 5.5-12.6 .437 1.3-3.5 .355 2.6-3.2 .823 1.0 3.9 4.9 1.2 0.9 0.4 2.6 1.6 14.9
IMO Bargs biggest issue has been his health, but also his motor. What has gone on the 3 years has come to define him but he did have another part of his career where he showed some promise. It could be that he's just not a very durable player and that alone would be reason not to want him, but he also does have some talent which could be useful in a given role.
I think he needs more touches and to stay active and involved in the offense. The more he shoots the better he performs. The more FGA's he gets the more efficient he seems to play.
Of courser first he's got to stay healthy. I would offer him a 1 year contract to show and prove he can stay healthy next year.
I thought I was being generous. I mentioned the 3 points.
As soon as Bargs inks his next contract he will dive head first into the backboard and spend the rest of the season eating Haagen Daaz through a straw.
