BREAKING **** NEWS: Deal #done Knicks acquire Bargnani

[Capn'O]

My take is there are some here who think he has negative value and would not have taken him for free. They may be correct.

I don't think it's a Curry sitch. First off, the contract it short. But he doesn't have the metabolism issues Curry had. His issues are all on him. This guy is an athlete and looks the part. I think this guy had some bad years and wanted to get out of Toronto. When in shape, he's a bit like a souped up Cope, who also didn't rebound, to me.

If he doesn't get in shape, then none of the rest falls into place and it's a waste of assets with some flexibility gained. He is a risk player.

[True_Shooting]

Raptors board: 2502138 posts
Knicks board: 2297916 posts

Pretty close

[Context]

Raptors board: 2502138 posts
Knicks board: 2297916 posts

Pretty close

Who cares? I mean really...why do we always find ways to separate each other even further...

[JustaKnickFan]

Young - signed as FA
Gasol - acquired in Pau trade
Chalmers - acquired in a trade for future picks
Birdman - undrafted
Haslem - undrafted
Green - signed as FA
Neal - undrafted

The only guys there that were actually playing for the teams that drafted them in the 2nd round were Manu, Stephenson, and Cole (sort of).

It seems to me that the Knicks could get by alright by signing undrafted rookies or young guys cut by the teams that drafted them.

All these guys were undrafted/2nd rounders, so my point is that there IS talent in that 2nd round, and that giving up 2nd rounders just makes it harder to find said talent. It's tougher to get those valuable undrafted guys because there are plenty of other teams after them.

There are (30) 2nd round draft picks in any given year. Of the thirty that are chosen every year, a small portion seldom make it past the 2nd/3rd year. Of that group, an even smaller group make an impact. The Manus, Gilbert Arenas, Marc Gasol and such are the exception and not the rule. While 2nd rounders shouldn't be frivolously discarded as nothing, they aren't something to cry over if they are used as trade fodder to 1) possibly improve the team, and 2) to reduce cap for a goal.

IMO the hope anyone can have for a second rounder to come in and produce is trumped by the hope that Bargnani can provide, based on what he showed in during the first portion of his career. The injuries he had aren't as debilitating as Amare's nor Shumpert's and he is still relatively young. Add onto that the motivation he lacked while playing in T-Dot, and we may have someone of a decent caliber.

I can understand the precautionary hate he is getting based on his production the last couple of years, and what he does not do... but I at least have optimism on what can provide.

The thing is, it's easier to find this talent in the 2nd round than as undrafted. Yeah Knicks can still find undrafted talent, but it's much better to have second rounders so you have priority over the remaining talent, and can sign these guys without competing with 29 other teams.

I personally feel like the amount of picks given up is not worth the player in return.

Bargs is 27, has an awful work ethic, and is lazy. Idk about you, but I don't feel like this is the guy the Knicks should be going after. He's one of the worst 1st round picks in league history, and is the worst rebounding 7fter in league history.

I'd take what the Raptors got over what we got 10 times out of 10. I've watched quite a few Raptors games, and have seen how bad he was last year. Maybe I'm wrong (I hope), but I seriously doubt it. I'd rather have 3 motivated young guys on this team, than 1 lazy, 7fter who can't even rebound.

[Capn'O]

Raptors board: 2502138 posts
Knicks board: 2297916 posts

Pretty close

Well, we'll, well. Look who's full of facts now.

Foe'd!

[GONYK]

All these guys were undrafted/2nd rounders, so my point is that there IS talent in that 2nd round, and that giving up 2nd rounders just makes it harder to find said talent. It's tougher to get those valuable undrafted guys because there are plenty of other teams after them.

There are (30) 2nd round draft picks in any given year. Of the thirty that are chosen every year, a small portion seldom make it past the 2nd/3rd year. Of that group, an even smaller group make an impact. The Manus, Gilbert Arenas, Marc Gasol and such are the exception and not the rule. While 2nd rounders shouldn't be frivolously discarded as nothing, they aren't something to cry over if they are used as trade fodder to 1) possibly improve the team, and 2) to reduce cap for a goal.

IMO the hope anyone can have for a second rounder to come in and produce is trumped by the hope that Bargnani can provide, based on what he showed in during the first portion of his career. The injuries he had aren't as debilitating as Amare's nor Shumpert's and he is still relatively young. Add onto that the motivation he lacked while playing in T-Dot, and we may have someone of a decent caliber.

I can understand the precautionary hate he is getting based on his production the last couple of years, and what he does not do... but I at least have optimism on what can provide.

The thing is, it's easier to find this talent in the 2nd round than as undrafted. Yeah Knicks can still find undrafted talent, but it's much better to have second rounders so you have priority over the remaining talent, and can sign these guys without competing with 29 other teams.

I personally feel like the amount of picks given up is not worth the player in return.

Bargs is 27, has an awful work ethic, and is lazy. Idk about you, but I don't feel like this is the guy the Knicks should be going after. He's one of the worst 1st round picks in league history, and is the worst rebounding 7fter in league history.

I'd take what the Raptors got over what we got 10 times out of 10. I've watched quite a few Raptors games, and have seen how bad he was last year. Maybe I'm wrong (I hope), but I seriously doubt it. I'd rather have 3 motivated young guys on this team, than 1 lazy, 7fter who can't even rebound.

He's still more productive than 90% of all picks taken after the 25 pick, and he has had a longer career than most picks taken after that range. He is also way more productive than Novak and Camby could ever hope to be for us.

Your hyperbole is not allowing for objectivity

[johnnywishbone]

The problem is those draft picks, Camby and Novak were our last little bit of flexibility to make deals and we didn't save it for something good. We took the first **** deal that came along.

A high risk, medium to low reward forward who has never played consistent defense or rebounded in his seven year career. The best part of his game is shooting 3s and he isn't even as good as Novak at that.

You're right Johnny, but Novak's inability to do anything else pretty much made him a liability on the team when he was on. All the other team had to do was stick someone on him (not even their best defender) and he was shut down. When he can't shoot (only when open) all he did was take up space.

At least with Bargz, there's a possibility of a drive or a mid ranger. Also, just off his height, if he gets his ish together, the opposing team is going to have to either stick a great perimeter defender (a stealing wizard) or a tall player to stick it to him, or he will be able to shoot over them.

The weight of this trade pretty much sits on his motivation and the effort he brings. If he brings none, then he is no better than Novak. If he brings even a little, the possibility of him doing the above things makes him more of a threat.

Before the trade I was against bringing JR back. Now with AB on board, I'd gladly take him. Melo, JR and AB on court... who do you defend? Do you double any of them? I like the offensive threat we now have. Defense?? Yeah, it still leaves a lot to be desired, but the offseason just started...

Let me frame this in a way that shows the big picture:

It's not about upgrading Steve Novak. We didn't make it to the ECF which was by the team's own admission a failure. So the task of the FO is to figure out how we are going to get over that hump. We should have been knocking on every door, turning over every stone to figure out who we could get that was going to make us significantly better. Especially considering that we already lost a key rotation player in Jason Kidd and it's only even money (at best) that we retain Copeland, Smith, Prigioni and Martin.

And if the best answer was Andrea Bargnani then I would have said let's just wait for the trade deadline and see what unfolds. And if nothing came along then we wait for the draft. Sometimes the best move is no move.

As Howard Beck put in his column this just reeks of desperation.

[johnnywishbone]

He's still more productive than 90% of all picks taken after the 25 pick, and he has had a longer career than most picks taken after that range. He is also way more productive than Novak and Camby could ever hope to be for us.

Your hyperbole is not allowing for objectivity

He's played less games over the past two seasons than Stat and Camby. Think about that.

[johnnywishbone]

Wow, I thought you guys were joking.

As of right now, the Pelicans board has a total of 7,442 post

In this thread? We have 4,142

I feel like Realgm was made for knicks fans and just added other teams lol. Look at the Realgm logo, its knicks colors.

That or the METS. Shudder.

[bigfnjoe96]

He's still more productive than 90% of all picks taken after the 25 pick, and he has had a longer career than most picks taken after that range. He is also way more productive than Novak and Camby could ever hope to be for us.

Your hyperbole is not allowing for objectivity

He's played less games over the past two seasons than Stat and Camby. Think about that.

And still was more productive offensively than STAT & Camby. Think about that

[johnnywishbone]

He's still more productive than 90% of all picks taken after the 25 pick, and he has had a longer career than most picks taken after that range. He is also way more productive than Novak and Camby could ever hope to be for us.

Your hyperbole is not allowing for objectivity

He's played less games over the past two seasons than Stat and Camby. Think about that.

And still was more productive offensively than STAT & Camby. Think about that

huh?

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/1727 ... stoudemire
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2987/andrea-bargnani

[Anotha Knicks fan]

All these guys were undrafted/2nd rounders, so my point is that there IS talent in that 2nd round, and that giving up 2nd rounders just makes it harder to find said talent. It's tougher to get those valuable undrafted guys because there are plenty of other teams after them.

There are (30) 2nd round draft picks in any given year. Of the thirty that are chosen every year, a small portion seldom make it past the 2nd/3rd year. Of that group, an even smaller group make an impact. The Manus, Gilbert Arenas, Marc Gasol and such are the exception and not the rule. While 2nd rounders shouldn't be frivolously discarded as nothing, they aren't something to cry over if they are used as trade fodder to 1) possibly improve the team, and 2) to reduce cap for a goal.

IMO the hope anyone can have for a second rounder to come in and produce is trumped by the hope that Bargnani can provide, based on what he showed in during the first portion of his career. The injuries he had aren't as debilitating as Amare's nor Shumpert's and he is still relatively young. Add onto that the motivation he lacked while playing in T-Dot, and we may have someone of a decent caliber.

I can understand the precautionary hate he is getting based on his production the last couple of years, and what he does not do... but I at least have optimism on what can provide.

The thing is, it's easier to find this talent in the 2nd round than as undrafted.

I tried proving a different thing with the first rounder we gave up. Drafting is such a crapshoot. I'm not saying it's not worth it, but I mean go back 5 years, and look at all the 2nd round picks that were chosen, and tell me how many of the 150 players (5 years X 30 2nd rounders) are still around. Then tell me how many are actually contributing. I don't discount the youth, the promise, the upside... etc, etc, but it's not like we are giving up a top ten pick.

Yeah Knicks can still find undrafted talent, but it's much better to have second rounders so you have priority over the remaining talent, and can sign these guys without competing with 29 other teams.

This particular instance would only happen if we had the 31st pick.

I personally feel like the amount of picks given up is not worth the player in return.

I can't debate this. Everyone is going to feel a certain way about it, and in reality no one will be wrong, per say, until after the last pick that was given up is chosen. Even then... after they have played a bit.

Bargs is 27, has an awful work ethic, and is lazy.

Motivation is the key. Maybe he changes? What motivated him to do decently when he came into the league?

Idk about you, but I don't feel like this is the guy the Knicks should be going after.

You are right. He was probably the last person I would've wanted on the team, but given the package, I don't mind it too much. At worst he plays as often as Camby and Novak played combined, and expires a year sooner.

He's one of the worst 1st round picks in league history, and is the worst rebounding 7fter in league history.

I would reserve that to Greg Oden who produced much less in his career than Bargs has.

I'd take what the Raptors got over what we got 10 times out of 10. I've watched quite a few Raptors games, and have seen how bad he was last year. Maybe I'm wrong (I hope), but I seriously doubt it. I'd rather have 3 motivated young guys on this team, than 1 lazy, 7fter who can't even rebound.

Yeah, again. cool man. I'm not trying to change your stance, but I just wanted to state a couple of things in a different light.

[makeitstop]

Let me frame this in a way that shows the big picture:

It's not about upgrading Steve Novak. We didn't make it to the ECF which was by the team's own admission a failure. So the task of the FO is to figure out how we are going to get over that hump. We should have been knocking on every door, turning over every stone to figure out who we could get that was going to make us significantly better. Especially considering that we already lost a key rotation player in Jason Kidd and it's only even money (at best) that we retain Copeland, Smith, Prigioni and Martin.

And if the best answer was Andrea Bargnani then I would have said let's just wait for the trade deadline and see what unfolds. And if nothing came along then we wait for the draft. Sometimes the best move is no move.

As Howard Beck put in his column this just reeks of desperation.

But we honestly have no way to land players who would make us significantly better. Look around the league, at the money being thrown at some of these FAs. Even if we'd hung on to Camby and Vak (and those magical picks), none of that would have helped land a big FA.

And let's say your worst-case scenario plays out, and we end up losing Cope, JR, Prigs, KMart and Kidd. If that happens, how in the world do you hold on until the deadline with a 10-man roster? If those guys all end up gone, they're going to have to spend the MMLE, use vet minimums and yes, even trade away picks to be able to field a team.

I'm in agreement with the guys here who say that Camby and Novak were giving us nothing while they were here, and they wouldn't have gotten us much better than Bargs in any trade scenario. Not even with those picks that everybody's so worried about.

I'll give the guy a shot. Could he possibly deliver less than Camby and Novak did last season?

[Deeeez Knicks]

A lot of people are saying the Knicks have nothing to lose besides the picks and players (the value of which can be debated forever). There is much we can lose then that. We can also be wasting another season.

My fear is that Bargs will just be a huge net zero on the court. Anything positive he gives us offensively will be lost defensively and on the boards. Rather then us shopping around more urgently for an adequate starting PF or going in a different direction, this is a guy that we are depending on. If he can’t produce and flops its another season down the drain.

Our entire philosophy and direction is pretty much a waste of time if we have a championship in mind.

[GONYK]

A lot of people are saying the Knicks have nothing to lose besides the picks and players (the value of which can be debated forever). There is much we can lose then that. We can also be wasting another season.

My fear is that Bargs will just be a huge net zero on the court. Anything positive he gives us offensively will be lost defensively and on the boards. Rather then us shopping around more urgently for an adequate starting PF or going in a different direction, this is a guy that we are depending on. If he can’t produce and flops its another season down the drain.

Our entire philosophy and direction is pretty much a waste of time if we have a championship in mind.

We would have wasted the same season if we kept those players and picks.

We know what those guys provide...nothing. In Novak's case, it was worse than nothing. It was a loss.

At least now we have a chance of improvement. We definitely got more talented.

Is it enough by itself? No. Not even close. But that package wasn't going to provide significant improvement either on the court or through trade.

[Anotha Knicks fan]

The problem is those draft picks, Camby and Novak were our last little bit of flexibility to make deals and we didn't save it for something good. We took the first **** deal that came along.

A high risk, medium to low reward forward who has never played consistent defense or rebounded in his seven year career. The best part of his game is shooting 3s and he isn't even as good as Novak at that.

You're right Johnny, but Novak's inability to do anything else pretty much made him a liability on the team when he was on. All the other team had to do was stick someone on him (not even their best defender) and he was shut down. When he can't shoot (only when open) all he did was take up space.

At least with Bargz, there's a possibility of a drive or a mid ranger. Also, just off his height, if he gets his ish together, the opposing team is going to have to either stick a great perimeter defender (a stealing wizard) or a tall player to stick it to him, or he will be able to shoot over them.

The weight of this trade pretty much sits on his motivation and the effort he brings. If he brings none, then he is no better than Novak. If he brings even a little, the possibility of him doing the above things makes him more of a threat.

Before the trade I was against bringing JR back. Now with AB on board, I'd gladly take him. Melo, JR and AB on court... who do you defend? Do you double any of them? I like the offensive threat we now have. Defense?? Yeah, it still leaves a lot to be desired, but the offseason just started...

Let me frame this in a way that shows the big picture:

It's not about upgrading Steve Novak. We didn't make it to the ECF which was by the team's own admission a failure. So the task of the FO is to figure out how we are going to get over that hump. We should have been knocking on every door, turning over every stone to figure out who we could get that was going to make us significantly better. Especially considering that we already lost a key rotation player in Jason Kidd and it's only even money (at best) that we retain Copeland, Smith, Prigioni and Martin.

And if the best answer was Andrea Bargnani then I would have said let's just wait for the trade deadline and see what unfolds. And if nothing came along then we wait for the draft. Sometimes the best move is no move.

As Howard Beck put in his column this just reeks of desperation.

I can't argue with that. I don't think AB will take us over the hump, per say... but I think he will contribute more than Camby and Novak did last year. Even if its even money, that little bit of contribution makes us better. I also agree that we maybe jumped a little too soon. MAybe the pressure was to get it done before the offseason started, and acquuire him under "last season's" contract. If that was the case, then we should've pulled back and seen what else was out there. But to be honest, this move was a whole lot better than what I was expecting we could've done. I really didn't think we had any moves. I don't think too highly of the package we gave up.

[bigfnjoe96]

He's played less games over the past two seasons than Stat and Camby. Think about that.

And still was more productive offensively than STAT & Camby. Think about that

huh?

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/1727 ... stoudemire
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2987/andrea-bargnani

If you look @ the 2 years, both players were really close offensively. The reality is even if we get what Bargnani gave last year it's still an upgrade offensively than what Camby & Novak gave us.

[johnnywishbone]

Let me frame this in a way that shows the big picture:

It's not about upgrading Steve Novak. We didn't make it to the ECF which was by the team's own admission a failure. So the task of the FO is to figure out how we are going to get over that hump. We should have been knocking on every door, turning over every stone to figure out who we could get that was going to make us significantly better. Especially considering that we already lost a key rotation player in Jason Kidd and it's only even money (at best) that we retain Copeland, Smith, Prigioni and Martin.

And if the best answer was Andrea Bargnani then I would have said let's just wait for the trade deadline and see what unfolds. And if nothing came along then we wait for the draft. Sometimes the best move is no move.

As Howard Beck put in his column this just reeks of desperation.

But we honestly have no way to land players who would make us significantly better. Look around the league, at the money being thrown at some of these FAs. Even if we'd hung on to Camby and Vak (and those magical picks), none of that would have helped land a big FA.

And let's say your worst-case scenario plays out, and we end up losing Cope, JR, Prigs, KMart and Kidd. If that happens, how in the world do you hold on until the deadline with a 10-man roster? If those guys all end up gone, they're going to have to spend the MMLE, use vet minimums and yes, even trade away picks to be able to field a team.

I'm in agreement with the guys here who say that Camby and Novak were giving us nothing while they were here, and they wouldn't have gotten us much better than Bargs in any trade scenario. Not even with those picks that everybody's so worried about.

I'll give the guy a shot. Could he possibly deliver less than Camby and Novak did last season?

You never know what's going to happen that's why you lie and wait. Some team might fall flat on it's face and look to tank and or dump salary. Or some guy becomes a total pain in the ass and wants out of a situation.

And I don't care about Steve Novak but some team out there would have been interested in a guy who could easily lead the league in 3 point shooting. On the right team he would be a valuable 2nd team option.

And as Kos pointed out: by trading the 2016 pick that means we can't trade our 2017 pick. So there is the potential that we could have bundled that with Novak and Camby and gotten something significantly better.

But the bottom line is Andrea is NOT going to get you over that hump. So why bother?

[makeitstop]

I can't argue with that. I don't think AB will take us over the hump, per say... but I think he will contribute more than Camby and Novak did last year. Even if its even money, that little bit of contribution makes us better. I also agree that we maybe jumped a little too soon. MAybe the pressure was to get it done before the offseason started, and acquuire him under "last season's" contract. If that was the case, then we should've pulled back and seen what else was out there. But to be honest, this move was a whole lot better than what I was expecting we could've done. I really didn't think we had any moves. I don't think too highly of the package we gave up.

They wanted to get it done quick for the trade to fall under last year's salary rules. It got snagged, and that's why QRich was signed and included in the deal.

That' and if they'd amnestied Bargs we never would have had a shot to pick him up.

It's been said that Grunwald has been eyeing Bargs for a long time. If you think about it, Grunnie just gave a textbook example of buying low. Hopefully, Bargs will increase his value as the season goes on.

[GONYK]

You never know what's going to happen that's why you lie and wait. Some team might fall flat on it's face and look to tank and or dump salary. Or some guy becomes a total pain in the ass and wants out of a situation.

And I don't care about Steve Novak but some team out there would have been interested in a guy who could easily lead the league in 3 point shooting. On the right team he would be a valuable 2nd team option.

And as Kos pointed out: by trading the 2016 pick that means we can't trade our 2017 pick. So there is the potential that we could have bundled that with Novak and Camby and gotten something significantly better.

But the bottom line is Andrea is NOT going to get you over that hump. So why bother?

There are 0 teams in the NBA where Novak would be a valuable 2nd option