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

[shmeakone]

This JR & Bargnani bench is gonna be something to behold.

Can't wait

[Thugger HBC]

we try to involve tyson in the offense and he fumbles easy catch and finish dunks, he has horrible hands.

can everyone please stop acting like the pacers series wasn't close. both teams scored the exact same amount of points in the series. the difference was they won the 2 close games, while the other 4 games were blowouts 1 way or the other. imagine if melo was healthy and shot closer to his season average? or tyson and JR didn't crap the bed. a few more made shots and the knicks win that series.

How can you imagine something that has never happened?

Melo hasn't shot anywhere near his regular season average since being a Knick, Tyson has yet to be an impact in a playoff as well as JR.

This deal compounds that...not make it better.

Imo, if you have HCA and dont force a game 7...it wasnt close....close is losing 4-3.

they stole game 1 in a close game. game 2 we blew them out. next 2 games they blew us out. then we blew them out. game 6 was close but they closed it out. 2 close games they won which won them the series, to me that indicates a close series. despite the injuries, poor performances and bad strategy, it was close. make some more shots in game 6 to win it, no way they lose game 7 at home. knicks pull out the 2 close games and they win in 6. that's how it goes in sports sometimes. the spurs win game 6 and people don't remember it as a close series. a few more made shots was all it would take to turn those 2 close losses into wins, unfortunately it didn't work out in our favor. if bargs can be a guy that can make some shots why wouldn't it help?

Once again, if a team with HCA doesnt force a game seven, the series wasn't close.

The scores are irrelevant, the Pacers won every home game they had and won one on the road.

Even with the game one comment they stole nothing, the players admitted being "outworked".

But this isn't really just about one team, it's basically the majority of teams the Knicks will meet.

The majority play defense, the Knicks do not.

Most also rebound the basketball, push the tempo, and get second chance points...the Knicks do not.

What the team does not do outwiegh what they "might" do.

It's hard for me to justify a move that addresses little of what caused the team to come up short.

Good defense will always cause a team to miss shots....barganani does nothing to change that simple fact.

[ibraheim718]

Here ya go since you asked...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQSIVEBVq0A[/youtube]

You know we're in the year 2013 right?

And your point is????

I'm sure if you squeeze real hard you can figure it out.

[johnnywishbone]

You know when you have to show highlights from against the worst team in nba history you are in trouble.

[Thugger HBC]

Hell get his bone if he stops whining, play his role, and stop showing his legs when he dresses... TEAM - if Wade can do it so can Tyson...

I assume you dont have a pet.

I had two before but don't have any now Honestly, Tyson is not a dog he is a human. I hope Tyson is in the weight room right now or maybe taking up mixed marial arts as Hibbert did prior to last season. Because that's what I would do if I got pushed around by Hibbert. Bargs nullifies West to me and allows Melo to be stronger and more effective. As far as Hib is concern that's on Tyson to get stronger. Bargs or no Bargs only Tyson can keep up with Hibbert.

He can do all of that and the results will not change without a TEAM commitment.

Rebounding and defense is not an individual task....Tyson can easily be pout in foul trouble, more so now since the team is imploring even less defenders as they had.....then what?

[moocow007]

It's still the same old song..

When someone proposed trading that poo package for someone good...the same group that is caboshing the Bargnani trade would chime in with "lol no one is going to trade anyone good for that poo poo platter".

But if they trade that poo package for someone like Bargnani...the same group chimes in with the "they should have traded that package for something good".

I asked you this yesterday.. didn't get an answer.. reposted it again.. didn't get an answer... you probably didn't see it.

How do you know what we could've or couldn't have traded this package for? This package has been around all last season leading up to the trade deadline. It's not like it's a new package.

You guys constantly remind everyone that the Knicks have no real assets to trade so I thought that was obvious. But ok...tell me...what REALISITIC options did they have?

Do you know for a fact that we shopped this type of a package to other teams?

Do you know for a fact that we didn't shop this type of package to other teams? This package has been around all last season leading up to the trade deadline. It's not something new.

I mean let's be realistic. A near 40 year old gimpy C who showed up out of shape in training camp, got injured and is owed almost $9 millionfor 2 more years. A one dimensional shooter who wasn't able to do the one thing he's good at with any sort of impact signed to a 3 year deal paying him more than he's worth, 2 bottom of the barrel 2nd round picks and a swap protected 1st round pick 3 years from now. What type of "good value" were you planning them to get?

Do you think this move was a move in haste in rebuttal to the Nets move?

No, but apparently you do. But tell me, without giving up Shumpert, you really believe that that package would have gotten someone better? If so, lol, ok...like what? I'll remember that the next time you rag on guys for proposing outlandish trades for other teams players.

And aren't trades made all the time that are unexpected? So why assume this was all we could've traded for when none of us have any real direct knowledge of what is actually happening at MSG behind closed doors?

And obviously trades for packages like this for good/great players happen all the time? I'm not sure what part of actually needing to give up talent/assets to get assets you are missing here.

I see you and guys like GONYK speaking definitively about what type of players were actually available to us because of what we were presumably offering.

? Wait so you don't agree with us speaking definitely (we've said that it's unlikely to get anything better with a crap package...but ok...that's definitive) and yet you are saying that definitively the Knicks could have gotten something better? That's what you're saying here.

Did anyone see the Garnett+Pierce trade coming... did anyone see the Bledsoe to Phoenix trade coming... if I would've posted that Bledsoe deal on our trade thoughts trade I would've been shot down saying well Phoenix has Dragic why would they trade for Bledsoe who isn't a better PG, no?

Did anyone notice that in both those trades the team getting them actually had to give up better assets to get? If you would have proposed that we could have gotten Bledsoe for any part of what we traded to get Bargnani you should have absolutely gotten shot down. I'm really not sure what you're missing here. You want a guy like Bledsoe, you need to give up a guy like Shumpert AT LEAST. So unless you are in the camp that would have (I was) then I'm really not sure what you're point here is about bringing up those names.

My point is it's not smart to say "geez this was all we could get for our scrubs" when you definitely don't know that... it's just a way of settling which is what a front office does that lacks creativity and patience.

So what you're saying is that we could have traded our scrubs for something good? Based on what? OBVIOUSLY everyone is guessing here, but at some point common sense has to come into play no? How often do you give up crap and get back quality talent? A Bargnani type player is realistically what you could get for crap...a player that has talent but that has disappointed and whose team is looking to dump. So if not Bargnani, what other player on what other team that is still under contract do you think the Knicks could have gotten that would have been better than Bargnani? Name them.

According to reports we tried to trade for Bargnani last year... and presto.. we traded for him this year... that tells me we WANTED Bargnani however bad or good our package was. <No pun intended...

And you just answered your earlier question about this being a reactionary trade doesn't it. If the Knicks were rumored to have been interested in Bargnani last year then it's not likely that they just went out and traded for the heck of it now to react to the Nets trade. The talk last year was that Colangelo needed whomever to take Bargnani to also take Landry Fields. That stipulation CLEARLY (to me at least) would have killed any potential discussion about trading anything similar to what they traded for Bargnani by himself last season. Sans Fields this trade would be a whole lot more palatable.

This post was made in all seriousness to prove a point and I tried to lay it out as respectful as possible because what I think I've read from you is residual disappointment at first that has now turned into anger from the Hardaway draft pick.

[/quote]

The Hardaway draft pick has nothing to do with anything. I've already said that as much as I didn't want him, now that he's a Knick I'm rooting for him. I've said that I absolutely hope that I'm wrong about Hardaway. So whether I wanted Hardaway or not has what to do with not thinking that this trade was as bad as some of you guys are saying it is or saying that the package we gave up for Bargnani was not good enough to get anyone better?

Is this trade great? NO. Is this crap? NO. Is Bargnani useless? NO. Does that mean I think he'll be great? NO. Does he have the potential of contributing more than the players dealt for him? ABOSLUTELY. Do I think that that package was good enough to get someone better? NO. Would I include Shumpert in a bigger deal to land a great player? ABSOLUTELY.

[bigfnjoe96]

You know we're in the year 2013 right?

And your point is????

I'm sure if you squeeze real hard you can figure it out.

No need to figure anything out. Your stuck in the 80's with your vision of what a PF/C should be. All I can say is "Good Luck with that"

[method]

Yeah it will be like the sweet music that was Jose Calderon and Andrea. To the tune of a 22 win season.

now just add in Melo Stat Tyson etc....

The only thing you can add Stat to right now is the X-ray table.

just remember Feltons last 2 years he bounced back pretty good.Bargs will not have these crazy expections on him for being the former # 1 pick.We will not expect him to be a franchise player.

[K_ick_God]

Imagine them killing us on the boards and winning because they get to have 10 more possesions per game than we. Because that's what's going to happen.

He's a weak rebounder. Individual rebounding stats are not as significant as your team rebounding and if that's solid, you can hide a bad rebounder some. Similar to D but even more so with rebounding.

On the other hand, you can't hide a lack of secondary scoring. It catches up to you eventually.

Individual rebounding can be very overrated and even team rebounding might be misunderstood. You love numbers so I'll throw out that the Spurs were 21st in rebounding and Miami dead last at 30th. 21 versus 30 for the championship ... and 30 won. (Hey Riley, no rebounds, no rings? )

He's not a perfect player or close to one. He's not replacing perfect players (Novak is not a good rebounder and Camby didn't play at all), nor is the package we gave up good enough to get a perfect player.

Those stats are completely misleading.

We were 18th in total rebounding rate. Spurs were 19th, Miami was 21st.

However, Spurs were 4th in shots made at the rim and Miami was 8th, both on above average FG%. We were 23rd. Those teams get to the basket and they do it effectively. We're a jumpshooting team with the highest 3pt rate in the league and we just made a move that pulls a good rebounder away from the basket and puts there one of the worst rebounding bigs ever.

This is the definition of D'Antoni ball. Live and die by the 3.

I wouldn't call Bargs a jumpshooter though. He sets up in the post quite a bit and often draws doubles.

[JSmooth93]

Two starting caliber players coming off our bench, and you guys wanna complain.

[Thugger HBC]

It's pretty common sense this deal was made and discussed only on that day.

They waived the player who was to be used the day before for situations like this.

I'm almost positive the Raptors called the Knicks.

[kNicksGmen]

How can you imagine something that has never happened?

Melo hasn't shot anywhere near his regular season average since being a Knick, Tyson has yet to be an impact in a playoff as well as JR.

This deal compounds that...not make it better.

Imo, if you have HCA and dont force a game 7...it wasnt close....close is losing 4-3.

they stole game 1 in a close game. game 2 we blew them out. next 2 games they blew us out. then we blew them out. game 6 was close but they closed it out. 2 close games they won which won them the series, to me that indicates a close series. despite the injuries, poor performances and bad strategy, it was close. make some more shots in game 6 to win it, no way they lose game 7 at home. knicks pull out the 2 close games and they win in 6. that's how it goes in sports sometimes. the spurs win game 6 and people don't remember it as a close series. a few more made shots was all it would take to turn those 2 close losses into wins, unfortunately it didn't work out in our favor. if bargs can be a guy that can make some shots why wouldn't it help?

Once again, if a team with HCA doesnt force a game seven, the series wasn't close.

The scores are irrelevant, the Pacers won every home game they had and won one on the road.

Even with the game one comment they stole nothing, the players admitted being "outworked".

But this isn't really just about one team, it's basically the majority of teams the Knicks will meet.

The majority play defense, the Knicks do not.

Most also rebound the basketball, push the tempo, and get second chance points...the Knicks do not.

What the team does not do outwiegh what they "might" do.

It's hard for me to justify a move that addresses little of what caused the team to come up short.

Good defense will always cause a team to miss shots....barganani does nothing to change that simple fact.

your first line is an opinion, one that i disagree with. the scores absolutely matter to me. if a team for example wins a series in 6 games, with all of their wins being blowouts and their 2 losses being close, then yea it's not close. that wasn't the case in our series.

i also disagree on why the knicks lost. defense and rebounding is NEVER going to be the strength of the team therefore teams like the pacers/bulls will always have that advantage over us. we're built to be a team that has the offensive advantage over them though.

like i said, make a few more shots and the knicks win the series. it's really that simple and all it comes down to. if melo yams it on hibbert inatead of getting blocked perhaps the knicks win the series. sometimes all it takes is one play to make a difference.

the pacers didn't beat us just because they outrebounded us. they beat up because they outrebounded us and we couldn't make shots. make a few more shots and it makes all the difference in the game, and the series.

[ibraheim718]

And your point is????

I'm sure if you squeeze real hard you can figure it out.

No need to figure anything out. Your stuck in the 80's with your vision of what a PF/C should be. All I can say is "Good Luck with that"

Really? how many of the remaining 4 teams played a traditional line up and how many of them had the best player in the world? now if we can get the best player in the world.. I'm all for throwing out whatever garbage we can find.. but we can't.. so let's do what the other 3 teams did to at least get the chance we failed on getting.

[johnnywishbone]

Kicks 2013-2014



I can't wait for the Melo, Stat and Bargnani rotation.

[bigfnjoe96]

Bring the **** Pacers on.... Il Mago babee.... Get use to it Haters...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzbAJRwjvrc[/youtube]

[ibraheim718]

It's pretty common sense this deal was made and discussed only on that day.

They waived the player who was to be used the day before for situations like this.

I'm almost positive the Raptors called the Knicks.

How this is not obvious to others baffles me.

[K_ick_God]

Imagine them killing us on the boards and winning because they get to have 10 more possesions per game than we. Because that's what's going to happen.

He's a weak rebounder. Individual rebounding stats are not as significant as your team rebounding and if that's solid, you can hide a bad rebounder some. Similar to D but even more so with rebounding.

On the other hand, you can't hide a lack of secondary scoring. It catches up to you eventually.

Individual rebounding can be very overrated and even team rebounding might be misunderstood. You love numbers so I'll throw out that the Spurs were 21st in rebounding and Miami dead last at 30th. 21 versus 30 for the championship ... and 30 won. (Hey Riley, no rebounds, no rings? )

He's not a perfect player or close to one. He's not replacing perfect players (Novak is not a good rebounder and Camby didn't play at all), nor is the package we gave up good enough to get a perfect player.

We didn't lose to Miami or San Antonio.. we lost to Indiana.

But Miami beat Indiana and won a title with scoring. Bargnani has more raw offensive talent than anybody available at the price we paid.

I mean, I would hope most of the detractors here would at least admit that much. If not, I'd like to hear some names of people who could be gotten with the package we got Bargs with.

[kNicksGmen]

It's pretty common sense this deal was made and discussed only on that day.

They waived the player who was to be used the day before for situations like this.

I'm almost positive the Raptors called the Knicks.

disagree here too. white wasn't necessary to make the deal originally and he declined to push back his option, which is why he was waived.

[moocow007]

Kicks 2013-2014



I can't wait for the Melo, Stat and Bargnani rotation.

Yes, it would have been better to have the Melo, Stat, Novak rotation.

[Thugger HBC]

And your point is????

I'm sure if you squeeze real hard you can figure it out.

No need to figure anything out. Your stuck in the 80's with your vision of what a PF/C should be. All I can say is "Good Luck with that"

Would you agree that a 5 rebound PF/C makes it harder for a team to win in the playoffs especially if they aren't scoring efficiently?

My example...Chris Bosh.