GONYK wrote:JustaKnickFan wrote:GONYK wrote:
This has literally nothing to do with a player's longevity
I meant compared to the members of the other draft. I thought you were making a point of how compared to the rest of the class, Bargs fared well which knows he's useful.
PER is not productivity. Of course Novak will be more efficient. He only shot like 5 times a game and only when he was wide open.
Well what stat would you like to use?
Bargs is a better rebounder, defender, ballhandler, passer than Novak. If you are disputing that, you have lost objectivity.
Sh*t, if Novak was an inch taller, he'd be the worst rebounding 7ftr in history
Actually, you'd be surprised at how Novak's bad defense can occasionally help the team because it causes players to iso against him and end up taking bad, contested long 2s. He may be bad laterally, but Novak has length and is focused enough to contest, AND HE FOLLOWS THE SCHEME. Bargs has shown to be hopeless on D. At least Novak follows the scheme of what Woodson says (he sometimes trails his man intentionally), which leads to forcing offensive players into a tough situation. Attack Chandler at the rim(tough floater/layup) or pause and have Novak back in position. He also slowly goes through picks , but tries to get back to his man quickly to contest if they're pulling up, which leads to a semi-contested jumper thanks to his length.
Tl;DR version: Novak is slow, but always in position and follows the scheme. Bargs has good post D, but is lost on help D. Since the Knicks always switch, the good post D attribute isn't as helpful. As for rebounding, Bargs is better, but he's 7ft tall. Bargs shouldn't be handling the ball much, and they both rarely get assists. so it's not much to be a better ballhandler/passer than Novak.
No, he wasn't.
He shot around 43% from 3, that's reliable in the grand scheme of things. . Yeah he goes through stretches of being less affective, but then again, all shooters do that.
Answers in
bold
Bargs is capable of providing every single "benefit" Novak does on that end, as well as some actual defense. Bargs' issues are with focus. He is not as limited physically as Novak is, and he has even more length.
There really is no disputing that Bargs is a better ballhandler and passer than Novak.
As far as Novak's shooting, he was useless against any team that was capable of making the playoffs. He simply was too easy to defend and a complete liability on the other end.
Bargs has been capable of a lot for awhile now.
However, he's yet to show he can actually focus to do said things. Yeah he has the length to contest better, and he has the quickness to actually stay in front of players, but he's lazy so it doesn't happen.
Bargs was useless against other playoffs teams, too. In fact, I think he had a 0 rebound game in the playoffs
. At least Novak managed to come through in a few regular season games where he went against some playoff teams.
Right now, I'd rather take Novak than Bargs because Novak actually focuses, and is a much better shooter. He also isn't a team cancer like Bargs was for Toronto.
