Can't post the link on my phone.
Yeah I can't put my head around this one. Why for the Nets and why did Bargs pass up good money to hang around the NBA? Brook and Bargs are very similar guys in terms of being offense bigs that don't rebound. It doesn't really help offset what they get from Brook as much as just duplicate it. The best look for Bargs is next to a defensive big that can't score. Still he's a big that can bring offense so it's better than a lot of big who don't do much of anything well. Just gonna be weird to have him still in NY but not on the Knicks.
July 12th at 5:08pm CST by Will Joseph The Nets have agreed to sign Andrea Bargnani, Brooklyn GM Billy King announced (Twitter link). The big man will receive the veteran’s minimum with a player option in the second year of the deal, tweets Robert Windrem of NetsDaily.com, who cites a league source.
Bargnani has been linked to the Kings, but instead decided to take less money and join the Nets, ESPN.com’s Marc Stein reports (Twitter link). Sacramento pitched a two-year deal, Stein adds.
http://www.hoopsrumors.com/2015/07/nets-...
nixluva wrote:Yeah I can't put my head around this one. Why for the Nets and why did Bargs pass up good money to hang around the NBA? Brook and Bargs are very similar guys in terms of being offense bigs that don't rebound. It doesn't really help offset what they get from Brook as much as just duplicate it. The best look for Bargs is next to a defensive big that can't score. Still he's a big that can bring offense so it's better than a lot of big who don't do much of anything well. Just gonna be weird to have him still in NY but not on the Knicks.
He passed up money?
I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
CrushAlot wrote:I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
definitely a lot better than Derrick Williams @ 5 million per.
mreinman wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
definitely a lot better than Derrick Williams @ 5 million per.
This. The Knicks will rue the day that they didn't bring Bargs back for the vet's minimum. His game was coming around during the latter part of last season. Let's see if their smart enough to sign Shved before the Russian does.
Oh man, the Nets are such a joke. This is too funny.
Sangfroid wrote:mreinman wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
definitely a lot better than Derrick Williams @ 5 million per.
This. The Knicks will rue the day that they didn't bring Bargs back for the vet's minimum. His game was coming around during the latter part of last season. Let's see if their smart enough to sign Shved before the Russian does.
That may be a bit strong. I like Bargs but I don't know if they felt it made as much sense to bring him back with KP in the fold. I think they probably wanted to let KP do his thing without the duplication of a more seasoned vet who does a lot of what he does. Plus was it clear that Bargs would accept only the Minimum? This seems like a sudden change on his part. I thought Bargs was looking for a bigger contract than that.
Billy King ... can you imagine...
Sangfroid wrote:mreinman wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
definitely a lot better than Derrick Williams @ 5 million per.
This. The Knicks will rue the day that they didn't bring Bargs back for the vet's minimum. His game was coming around during the latter part of last season. Let's see if their smart enough to sign Shved before the Russian does.
It may have been best for him to move on. There will be a lot less pressure in BK. I agree about him coming around. I was surprised he signed somewhere else for the minimum. Phil seems to really value character/work ethic. I always gave Bargs a pass because of injuries but maybe this was an issue.
Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:Yeah I can't put my head around this one. Why for the Nets and why did Bargs pass up good money to hang around the NBA? Brook and Bargs are very similar guys in terms of being offense bigs that don't rebound. It doesn't really help offset what they get from Brook as much as just duplicate it. The best look for Bargs is next to a defensive big that can't score. Still he's a big that can bring offense so it's better than a lot of big who don't do much of anything well. Just gonna be weird to have him still in NY but not on the Knicks.
He passed up money?
I think he feels he still owes the Knicks, so he's going to bring his "talents" to Brooklyn.
markvmc wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:Yeah I can't put my head around this one. Why for the Nets and why did Bargs pass up good money to hang around the NBA? Brook and Bargs are very similar guys in terms of being offense bigs that don't rebound. It doesn't really help offset what they get from Brook as much as just duplicate it. The best look for Bargs is next to a defensive big that can't score. Still he's a big that can bring offense so it's better than a lot of big who don't do much of anything well. Just gonna be weird to have him still in NY but not on the Knicks.
He passed up money?
I think he feels he still owes the Knicks, so he's going to bring his "talents" to Brooklyn.
lol
He's doing his part to make sure the Nets are not the #1 team in NY.
We should be ahead of the Nets this year in the standings or we haven't done the job, barring some bad injury or internal problem with the team.
CrushAlot wrote:I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
Not sure you want Bargs putting up 3s though...and wasn't that what Teletovic did?
mreinman wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I think the idea is he will fill Teletovics role for less. Not a bad signing for the minimum.
definitely a lot better than Derrick Williams @ 5 million per.
When was the last time barg played a full season???? That dude is simply garbage. Who gives a darn about where he is now? Certainly not me. I am glad he is no longer a Knicks
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
ha.
crzymdups wrote:hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.ha.
It's the single 'ha', all alone on the second line, that makes this post so great.
WaltLongmire wrote:
Not sure we can do better at the minimum?
Not a great defender bit he did use his length well.
Zen man is a good liar. ;-)
Just think..2 years ago they traded a #1 and #2 for him and his contract and now he signs for vet's min….smh
