Bagnani's Contract an Albatross?

[Raps in 4]

On this team: Yes. He doesn't fit in here, however, I don't think trading him would be a problem, in fact I can imagine a lot of teams actually wanting his services (I can see Nelson jizz his pants over the prospect of coaching Bargs).

[oncl0ud9]

On this team: Yes. He doesn't fit in here, however, I don't think trading him would be a problem, in fact I can imagine a lot of teams actually wanting his services (I can see Nelson jizz his pants over the prospect of coaching Bargs).

Don't worry he will fit here once we trade Jose and Bosh to Houston for Brooks and Yao. Book it.

[Harry Palmer]

It's not so much that it's an albatross contract. It's how much the degree to which he's overpaid, however much or little that might be, further cuts into the value of the return we could net for a first overall pick.

An alatross is generally one where the contract makes it a negative value, and you either have to eat it or send some value in return for getting rid of it, and I don't see that being the case with Bargs at this point.

[Indeed]

On this team: Yes. He doesn't fit in here, however, I don't think trading him would be a problem, in fact I can imagine a lot of teams actually wanting his services (I can see Nelson jizz his pants over the prospect of coaching Bargs).

I agree, even Spurs can upgrade Bonner to Bargs easily.
Bargs plays better man to man D than Bonner, and his offense and ball handling are better than Bonner.

Bargs > Okur as well.
Denver could use him to free up Camelo Anthony in the low post iso.
Bucks is using Ilyasova with a similar role as Bargs.
Orlando needs a 3pt PF to create better spacing.
And etc...

[D-Wins-RingsIMO]

not an albatross at all. it is however big enough that he's going to have to play significant minutes at least for the first few years of that contract .... so now that we know that, it's going to impact on what he does with Bosh b/c the bosh/bargs combo isn't going to work (imo)

[Indeed]

not an albatross at all. it is however big enough that he's going to have to play significant minutes at least for the first few years of that contract .... so now that we know that, it's going to impact on what he does with Bosh b/c the bosh/bargs combo isn't going to work (imo)

Feel more like BC is buying some time from Bosh to develop Bargs.
If Bosh cannot cooperate with Bargs and other guys, he is likely to be gone.
And by that time, Bargs should be an average starter, at least.

The Hedo signing is more benefit to Bargs than Bosh, as Bargs cannot create his own shot, while Hedo does not work well with Bosh isolation (too static, no off ball movements and screens).

[Habibi]

Bargnani is the worst possible fit for this team.

-He is not a true 'C', his natural position is PF and like T. Baker said he needs a defensive bruiser playing along side him

-Calderon cannot stay in front of his man, he's constantly being beat. Bargnani is a horrible help defender and he doesn't have that intimidation factor to alter shots consistently and is often too late to help.

-Not a good fit along side Bosh offensively and defensively. Not enough touches for him for us to see what he can really do.

If Bosh leaves, I have no real problem shipping Calderon away and building around Bargs. If we trade Bargs and Calderon, and Bosh leaves, this team is **** for a long, long time. I, for one, would like to take a stab at putting someone like Samuel Dalembert (overpaid, but only 2 years left on his deal, and being shopped - so we could try it out without handcuffing ourselves) beside Bargnani and letting Jack start.

Dalembert
Bargnani
Hedo
Belinelli
Jack

Jose/Amir/Reggie/Demar off the bench.

I'm really sick of the current core. I like Bargnani's contract and potential upside if the coaches would make a concerted effort to make him our primary scorer.

Wait. Did you just trade Bosh straight up for Dalembert in your scenario? Because I don't see any other pieces added.

I'm just speculating how the team would look if we let Bosh walk. Or if all we can get is a piece from a third party in a sign-and-trade, after he's already made it clear he wants to leave.

I'm not saying Bargnani is a franchise player. I'm saying Bargnani is a better piece for the Toronto Raptors at 10m/year than Bosh is at 20m/year.

[Harry Palmer]

This whole Bargs at 10> Bosh at 20 stuff is pretty silly. I mean, extend that reasoning. ____ at 5> Bargs at 10. Wait! ____ at 2.5, etc.

Obviously a premium is placed upon star players for a reason. Not arguing that Bosh is that guy, but the whole ratio argument that's popped up and proliferated in the past few days to rationalize one side in this antagonistic Bosh fans vs. Bargs fans thing is flawed reasoning.

[MacDaddy]

On this team: Yes. He doesn't fit in here, however, I don't think trading him would be a problem, in fact I can imagine a lot of teams actually wanting his services (I can see Nelson jizz his pants over the prospect of coaching Bargs).

I agree, even Spurs can upgrade Bonner to Bargs easily.
Bargs plays better man to man D than Bonner, and his offense and ball handling are better than Bonner.

Bargs > Okur as well.
Denver could use him to free up Camelo Anthony in the low post iso.
Bucks is using Ilyasova with a similar role as Bargs.
Orlando needs a 3pt PF to create better spacing.
And etc...

What?!

[Schad]

This whole Bargs at 10> Bosh at 20 stuff is pretty silly. I mean, extend that reasoning. ____ at 5> Bargs at 10. Wait! ____ at 2.5, etc.

Obviously a premium is placed upon star players for a reason. Not arguing that Bosh is that guy, but the whole ratio argument that's popped up and proliferated in the past few days to rationalize one side in this antagonistic Bosh fans vs. Bargs fans thing is flawed reasoning.

I'm not a fan of Win Scores (they tend to overrate certain types of players, IMO, usually high-percentage shooters), but that metric has credited Bosh with roughly 10 wins a year for the last four years. Bargs had a career high 3.9, last year. So by that metric, Bosh is worth 2.5x as much as Bargs, which means that either Bargs is overpaid relative to Bosh's max...or Bosh is underpaid.

[toyguc]

On this team: Yes. He doesn't fit in here, however, I don't think trading him would be a problem, in fact I can imagine a lot of teams actually wanting his services (I can see Nelson jizz his pants over the prospect of coaching Bargs).

I agree, even Spurs can upgrade Bonner to Bargs easily.
Bargs plays better man to man D than Bonner, and his offense and ball handling are better than Bonner.

Bargs > Okur as well.
Denver could use him to free up Camelo Anthony in the low post iso.
Bucks is using Ilyasova with a similar role as Bargs.
Orlando needs a 3pt PF to create better spacing.
And etc...

Bargs>Okur ??!!??

[FTW]

This whole Bargs at 10> Bosh at 20 stuff is pretty silly. I mean, extend that reasoning. ____ at 5> Bargs at 10. Wait! ____ at 2.5, etc.

Obviously a premium is placed upon star players for a reason. Not arguing that Bosh is that guy, but the whole ratio argument that's popped up and proliferated in the past few days to rationalize one side in this antagonistic Bosh fans vs. Bargs fans thing is flawed reasoning.

How is it flawed reasoning? You're saying it is, but I'm not seeing why.

It seems perfectly logical to me to do the following math:

"Bosh at PF for $20 million plus a bruising center like X for $10 million"

is better than

"Bosh at PF for $20 million plus Bargs at center for $10 million"

but neither of those give the same performance/price point as:

"Bargs at PF for $10 mil plus a bruising center like X for $10 million"



Schafe alluded to the fact that "the cap doesn't work this way." I asked him why, but haven't heard back on that yet. Why not? Why is this "flawed reasoning?" Every team can only spend so much, and the MLSE clearly aren't prepared to pull a Lakers/Celtics and obliterate the cap. To me, it seems like it would be a better idea to invest less in the PF/Forward spots and more in the SG/SF spots.

FTW

[Tom Baker]

This whole Bargs at 10> Bosh at 20 stuff is pretty silly. I mean, extend that reasoning. ____ at 5> Bargs at 10. Wait! ____ at 2.5, etc.

Obviously a premium is placed upon star players for a reason. Not arguing that Bosh is that guy, but the whole ratio argument that's popped up and proliferated in the past few days to rationalize one side in this antagonistic Bosh fans vs. Bargs fans thing is flawed reasoning.

I'm not a fan of Win Scores (they tend to overrate certain types of players, IMO, usually high-percentage shooters), but that metric has credited Bosh with roughly 10 wins a year for the last four years. Bargs had a career high 3.9, last year. So by that metric, Bosh is worth 2.5x as much as Bargs, which means that either Bargs is overpaid relative to Bosh's max...or Bosh is underpaid.

Okay, but by that same reasoning, if your goal is a 50 win season, you can't devote more than 1/5 of your cap to Bosh, since he only wins you 10 games. You need to pay some more players who'll net you the other 40 wins.



I'm not certain, but I think I just confused myself. I'm not a big fan of win shares and win scores.

[Eating a Book]

This whole Bargs at 10> Bosh at 20 stuff is pretty silly. I mean, extend that reasoning. ____ at 5> Bargs at 10. Wait! ____ at 2.5, etc.

Obviously a premium is placed upon star players for a reason. Not arguing that Bosh is that guy, but the whole ratio argument that's popped up and proliferated in the past few days to rationalize one side in this antagonistic Bosh fans vs. Bargs fans thing is flawed reasoning.

I'm not a fan of Win Scores (they tend to overrate certain types of players, IMO, usually high-percentage shooters), but that metric has credited Bosh with roughly 10 wins a year for the last four years. Bargs had a career high 3.9, last year. So by that metric, Bosh is worth 2.5x as much as Bargs, which means that either Bargs is overpaid relative to Bosh's max...or Bosh is underpaid.

Okay, but by that same reasoning, if your goal is a 50 win season, you can't devote more than 1/5 of your cap to Bosh, since he only wins you 10 games. You need to pay some more players who'll net you the other 40 wins.



I'm not certain, but I think I just confused myself. I'm not a big fan of win shares and win scores.

We should bring in an external consultant:

[rdtx2005]

see my sig

[orangutooth]

what's wrong with being an albatross? the albatross is one of the most majestic creatures on land or sea.

[Eating a Book]

what's wrong with being an albatross? the albatross is one of the most majestic creatures on land or sea.

In fact, I am naming my first child Albatross, after Andrea.

[Tommy Udo 6]

Hedo's contract an Albatross.

Big time

I think we're stuck with him for a few years...and that's not a good thing

Considering that Hedo has a whopping 15% Trade Kicker, it makes it very unlikely that he will ever be traded. Consider - players are usually traded toward the end of their contracts. Considering Hedo's age, it is likely that his skills will decline toward the end of his contract. Unless Isiah gets another NBA job, I can't see anyone willing to give him a 15% raise, plus take on his salary.

Calderon has a 10% Trade Kicker.

In contrast, Bargnani's is a modest 5%. Bargnani certainly can be moved and is not an albatross contract by any definition of the term

[Eating a Book]

I still think Bargnani would be a very good power forward on a team where he isn't asked to captain the defence. A team with a good wing scorer and a solid defensive centre (San Antonio, Cleveland, Portland, New Orleans, Milwaukee, etc.) would be an ideal place for him. We have one of those, and everyone on our team is bad defensively, so it's just bad all around for everyone.

[FTW]

I still think Bargnani would be a very good power forward on a team where he isn't asked to captain the defence. A team with a good wing scorer and a solid defensive centre (San Antonio, Cleveland, Portland, New Orleans, Milwaukee, etc.) would be an ideal place for him. We have one of those, and everyone on our team is bad defensively, so it's just bad all around for everyone.

Yeah, this is the rationale behind my musing(s) on turning Bosh's $20 mil salary into a defensive big + wing player.

(Realistically, at this point it certainly seems that Demar is at least a few years away from being a legitimate scoring threat from the SG position.)

But you are right; ideally, trading Bargs and putting a defensive C beside Bosh would be the way to go I think. I'm just not sure that Bargs is enough "trade bait" to warrant a team to give up a defensive C for him....

FTW