Knicks thinking unthinkable with excelling Bargnani: a return?

[Indeed]

I think they're simply building his value so he can get another contract _anywhere_. Maybe if nobody whatsoever comes and he's all that's left they resign him. Bargnani is, after all, the free agent haul we deserve.

great point. it makes no sense for him not to be the best he can be if he's all that we get. he might be the best available option at some point in free agency. might as well have developed him some and gotten him comfortable before we bring him back out of necessity.

imagine if that happened and we DIDN'T let him shake off the rust. then there would be complaints about THAT. kinda can't win.

It's that but I mostly think he's gotten time out of respect for the agency. You don't want CAA playing de facto GM but you also need them as one of your talent pools. The Knicks are clearly moving on from some of those relationships but if they just sit Bargs for his contract year and he could have played... that's really gonna piss some heads off.

Who knows. Maybe he will be brought back. I wouldn't like it but it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I think the Triangle experience is much better with Bargnani, which is the reason why they played him. No matter Bargnani is with the team next season or not, they need to know what other pieces can be developed into the system, and Bargnani is there to help for this moment. Clearly, Early and Larkin is far from being capable of initiate the Triangle, lack of entry pass to initiate the play and the HERO mode mentality (Early jacking up 3s instead of creating efficient shots, while Larkin is better, but still rely on PnR on the 2nd option of the Triangle).

I don't think playing Bargnani is for Bargnani himself. I think there are a lot of decisions can be made after inserting Bargnani into the lineup. How this impact the recent play of THJr and Galla, and how they understand what are the better option/efficient plays.

[Capn'O]

great point. it makes no sense for him not to be the best he can be if he's all that we get. he might be the best available option at some point in free agency. might as well have developed him some and gotten him comfortable before we bring him back out of necessity.

imagine if that happened and we DIDN'T let him shake off the rust. then there would be complaints about THAT. kinda can't win.

It's that but I mostly think he's gotten time out of respect for the agency. You don't want CAA playing de facto GM but you also need them as one of your talent pools. The Knicks are clearly moving on from some of those relationships but if they just sit Bargs for his contract year and he could have played... that's really gonna piss some heads off.

Who knows. Maybe he will be brought back. I wouldn't like it but it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I think the Triangle experience is much better with Bargnani, which is the reason why they played him. No matter Bargnani is with the team next season or not, they need to know what other pieces can be developed into the system, and Bargnani is there to help for this moment. Clearly, Early and Larkin is far from being capable of initiate the Triangle, lack of entry pass to initiate the play and the HERO mode mentality (Early jacking up 3s instead of creating efficient shots, while Larkin is better, but still rely on PnR on the 2nd option of the Triangle).

I don't think playing Bargnani is for Bargnani himself. I think there are a lot of decisions can be made after inserting Bargnani into the lineup. How this impact the recent play of THJr and Galla, and how they understand what are the better option/efficient plays.

That's also true. You don't want to embarrass the kids.

[moocow007]

I wouldn't mind giving Bargnani a 4 year deal for about $ 36 million dollars. If the Knicks trade their first round pick for Brook Lopez and Deron Williams and sign Bargnani, their lineup would have four all-star level players.

Lets not get carried away now. If he can get anywhere near that, good luck and good bye.

[god shammgod]

31
35
42
12

what's that ?

[ibraheim718]

31
35
42
12

what's that ?

The number of games played in each of the last 4 years.

[Capn'O]

31
35
42
12

what's that ?

Carl???

[aq_ua]

But it'll be different next time... I promise...

[Indeed]

Amundsen is fine. But that is 1 backup big. Assuming we draft one of the bigs (okafor/towns) and sign a FA to play the other position. We still need to fill out the roster with 3-4 additional bigs.

So Amundsen is one. What additional 2 to 3 bigs are you looking at signing for the minimum to round out the bench?

I'll take anyone that can at least play more then 40 games a season without getting hurt and will play hard on both ends. If we are really talking about a culture change, then I don't see how we bring him back. Dude is just way too soft and his game has too many negatives. Even if he manages to put together a good stretch, he’ll end up getting hurt. I really just don't see how he's cut out for any role.

I'd make a lot of calls before even thinking about Bargs...I know we wouldnt get some of these guys for the min, but i would pay a little more

Cole, Ed Davis, Kosta, Amir Johnson, Brandon Bass, Brendan Wright, Thomas Robinson, Jonas Jerbko, Marreese Speights, Glen Davis, Ekpe Udoh, Lavoy Allen, Luis Scola, David West, Carlos Boozer, Jordan Hill, Alexis Ajinca, kendrick perkins, Kyle O'quinn, Omri Casspo, Ryan Hollins, Reggie Evans, Joel Freeland, Jeff Ayes, Matt Bonner, Chuck Hayes, Tyler Hansborough, Drew Gooden, Kevin Serapin....every free agent rookie big

90% or more of those guys will be getting more than the minimum

And I thought the most important question is, how many of those can play the Triangle.
If you need a truck, would you pay cheap for a compact car? Or the other way around, if you want to save gas, would you buy a big truck?

I think it is more important to spend the money based on the strategy. I think even Acy is better than a lot of the players above, who has some range on his shot. However, he is not very understanding on the Triangle system, which seems to suggest Bargnani should play ahead of Acy based on the Triangle system beside Amundson (who is another hustle player).

[god shammgod]

31
35
42
12

what's that ?

The number of games played in each of the last 4 years.

give this man a prize

[Jeff Van Gully]

great point. it makes no sense for him not to be the best he can be if he's all that we get. he might be the best available option at some point in free agency. might as well have developed him some and gotten him comfortable before we bring him back out of necessity.

imagine if that happened and we DIDN'T let him shake off the rust. then there would be complaints about THAT. kinda can't win.

It's that but I mostly think he's gotten time out of respect for the agency. You don't want CAA playing de facto GM but you also need them as one of your talent pools. The Knicks are clearly moving on from some of those relationships but if they just sit Bargs for his contract year and he could have played... that's really gonna piss some heads off.

Who knows. Maybe he will be brought back. I wouldn't like it but it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I think the Triangle experience is much better with Bargnani, which is the reason why they played him. No matter Bargnani is with the team next season or not, they need to know what other pieces can be developed into the system, and Bargnani is there to help for this moment. Clearly, Early and Larkin is far from being capable of initiate the Triangle, lack of entry pass to initiate the play and the HERO mode mentality (Early jacking up 3s instead of creating efficient shots, while Larkin is better, but still rely on PnR on the 2nd option of the Triangle).

I don't think playing Bargnani is for Bargnani himself. I think there are a lot of decisions can be made after inserting Bargnani into the lineup. How this impact the recent play of THJr and Galla, and how they understand what are the better option/efficient plays.

excellent points as well. this is kind of my overall philosophy. a lot of posters here would make bad scientists because they don't look at the whole picture when assessing specific problems. they still are part of the whole. holistic approach, baby.

as you said, we can at least use bargnani to help our other players see what playing with a triangle big is supposed to be like. bargnani playing to the best of his ability helps those who are staying. helps fisher get practice running his sets. we can look beyong whether or not he will be signed. he's an on-court development tool as well.

[ORANGEandBLUE]

90% or more of those guys will be getting more than the minimum

And I thought the most important question is, how many of those can play the Triangle.
If you need a truck, would you pay cheap for a compact car? Or the other way around, if you want to save gas, would you buy a big truck?

I think it is more important to spend the money based on the strategy. I think even Acy is better than a lot of the players above, who has some range on his shot. However, he is not very understanding on the Triangle system, which seems to suggest Bargnani should play ahead of Acy based on the Triangle system beside Amundson (who is another hustle player).

If Bargnani is such a good fit with the triangle, we might wanna consider changing the system.

[Isiahthomass]

Do you think it is just coincidence he's staying on the court and playing great basketball with his career on the line at season's end?

This guy is a heartless bum, after what he's pulled his first year and a half here, the only way I'd keep him is if he offered to play for free. Otherwise, let some other team overpay for his lame @ss.

[ORANGEandBLUE]

The symbolic value of GETTING RID OF BARGS grossly outweighs whatever contributions he will make in the next few years.

[TheBigBoss]

Bargs should come back for the veteran minimum since the Knicks are going to need players. Before everyone gets their panties in a knot over this speculative rumor, the distaste fans have for Bargs is based more on what his salary did to New York's cap flexibility than most anything else. If the Knicks had not squandered a first round draft pick for the guy, no one would really have an issue with a 28 year old 7 footer being signed to a $1.5 million minimum one year deal.

A couple of posters have said that they don't see Bargnani taking a minimum deal. I cannot see of any other NBA team even inking Andrea to a one year minimum. Bargnani's state of mind after the past three or so seasons must have burned the guy out, and if the Knicks offered him a 2 year (2nd year would be a team option) incentive ladened contract, this would be the season to see if this dude can bounce back.

A healthy Bargnani can only help the Knicks. IMHO, he is a better player than Jason Smith who earned over $3,000,000 last season for doing little more than taking up space. Honestly, Q-Acy's enthusiasm and energy served New York in terms of early PMFJ excitement, when, in reality, Acy and Outlaw were simply positional fill ins for NY. What differentiates Bargs from these and other "veteran types" remains what he stands to gain or lose and the timing surrounding this former number 1 draft pick's place in the sports history books. This is a player who knows what can happen to his career, both in positive and in negative terms. Andrea Bargnani would essentially receive his third and final chance if New York chooses.

Just my 0.02 cents.

Exactly, this is what happens on this board, we push this unlikely scenario (Bargs getting vet min), and then when reality comes (Barg gets a 1 year 3-4 million deal) everyone gets upset claiming an overpay. I'm not saying it's impossible that he doesn't sign for the vet minimum, but I wouldn't be surprised if we have to pay more than that either. At the end of the day though, it doesn't matter as long as it's a one year deal.

[Sark]

Bargnani is not taking a 1 year vet minimum deal.

[Indeed]

90% or more of those guys will be getting more than the minimum

And I thought the most important question is, how many of those can play the Triangle.
If you need a truck, would you pay cheap for a compact car? Or the other way around, if you want to save gas, would you buy a big truck?

I think it is more important to spend the money based on the strategy. I think even Acy is better than a lot of the players above, who has some range on his shot. However, he is not very understanding on the Triangle system, which seems to suggest Bargnani should play ahead of Acy based on the Triangle system beside Amundson (who is another hustle player).

If Bargnani is such a good fit with the triangle, we might wanna consider changing the system.

Bargnani gives you a post option. Once Anthony comes back, you will have 2 options to initiate the Triangle. And most likely another one from FA. Both Bargnani and Anthony can play on the perimeter, which allows more post options going forward, so it is a good fit for the Triangle.

Meanwhile, Triangle is rather flexible, it keeps changing based on how defenders approach against it, so I am not sure if you need to change the offensive system. Instead, you may need to change the defensive system to make things more complicated.

[aq_ua]

Let's just get this straight...

We start the offseason with three big men; Chandler, Amar'e and Bargs. Of the three, Bargs is the one we want to bring back?

[K_ick_God]

Bargs at $3M per would be a really good deal.

[NYKnicksTAPE]

Bargs is slowly becoming one of my favorite players on the Knicks. Bring this boy back on a 1 year vet minimum!

[god shammgod]

Bargs at $3M per would be a really good deal.

not you too kg