Raptors NBA Draft Thread: Harrison Barnes

[Ell Curry]

To me being a pnr ballhandler comes down to

a) The speed/ballhandling to consistently get into the paint after the screen (Questionable at best for Barnes against NBA competition)
b) The passing ability and court vision to set up the roller/popper, or other players spreading the floor (Nothing about his game indicates this)

Basically to be a pnr ballhandler you have to be a dynamic enough on ball threat to have the offense ran through you. A guy like James Harden can do it because he's a fantastic ballhandler and passer, he sees the game like a point. When I look at Barnes I see a player who's BIGGEST WEAKNESS are the things that make a pick and roll ballhandler - ballhandling, ability to attack the paint and passing/court vision.

I think Barnes can be a guy who uses screens for a jumpshot or a one dribble drive... But a pnr ballhandler type... I think he's kind of the opposite of that type of player. He's off ball.

Yeah, the idea that Barnes is going to get in the lane and create for others is based on nothing so far. How many NBA teams run a lot of pick and rolls with the 3 as the ballhandler, anyways? Lebron and Iguodala do it, but they are high assist guys (as a sophomore, Iguodala had 4.9 assists a game on a 1.8 A/TO ratio, slightly better than Barnes' 1.1 assists and 0.6 A/TO Ratio).

Look at Paul Pierce's numbers:
"In pick-and-roll situations, when Pierce looks for his own offense, he shoots 24.1 percent and commits turnovers 24.5 percent of the time. " http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-trian ... -time-play

If our plan going forward is to run a bunch of pick and rolls for a guy with no passing ability we're stupider than I thought. Barnes needs to be either be setting the pick or more likely, playing off the ball and looking to cut to the hoop or hit a 3 if his man tries to help on the ball handler, who should really be an efficient guard we get in free agency, like Dragic.

[Dr Positivity]

Dion Waiters is the wing in this draft with PNR ballhandler ability

[fredericklove]

I'm on my phone so I can't retrieve back the old posts I had because the former UNC players comparison and pnr plays discussion were brought up before and I countered these issues with stats and multiple clips from different fame sample. Not just one game. I just know bunch of you guys argue the same thing and me and undefeated countered back the same way. I can't wait to see Barnes in the NBA. If he does better than I expected out of him oh man I'm so gonna ride a bunch of your asses all season long about the things u guys said. Vice versa I ate crow when bismack did well first yr. But for Barnes I am so gonna hunt u guys down for sure. Lol

[God Squad]

^^ Bismack's season is debatable. But he did better than expected.

[Ell Curry]

I'm on my phone so I can't retrieve back the old posts I had because the former UNC players comparison and pnr plays discussion were brought up before and I countered these issues with stats and multiple clips from different fame sample. Not just one game. I just know bunch of you guys argue the same thing and me and undefeated countered back the same way. I can't wait to see Barnes in the NBA. If he does better than I expected out of him oh man I'm so gonna ride a bunch of your asses all season long about the things u guys said. Vice versa I ate crow when bismack did well first yr. But for Barnes I am so gonna hunt u guys down for sure. Lol

He''ll probably get drafted by a **** team, take a bunch of shots and hit them at an average level, not rebound, pass or create many turnovers and like Derozan, some people will call him an all-star because they think scoring points means you're awesome.

If he's really lucky, Nash will sign with Portland, who will let Batum go when some team like Cleveland or Toronto offers him 12 a year, draft Barnes at 6 or 7 to play SF, and he will put up decent numbers because every decent shooter does with Nash to get him looks.

[fredericklove]

^^ Bismack's season is debatable. But he did better than expected.

I was expecting garbage minutes but the time he played he really showed his defensive powress and surprising offense.

[Undefeated]

To me being a pnr ballhandler comes down to

a) The speed/ballhandling to consistently get into the paint after the screen (Questionable at best for Barnes against NBA competition)
b) The passing ability and court vision to set up the roller/popper, or other players spreading the floor (Nothing about his game indicates this)

Basically to be a pnr ballhandler you have to be a dynamic enough on ball threat to have the offense ran through you. A guy like James Harden can do it because he's a fantastic ballhandler and passer, he sees the game like a point. When I look at Barnes I see a player who's BIGGEST WEAKNESS are the things that make a pick and roll ballhandler - ballhandling, ability to attack the paint and passing/court vision. I see players who are overall more gifted than Barnes like Danny Granger, Rudy Gay, Luol Deng and even extending it to Carmelo and Durant - and I wouldn't even call any of them "pick and roll ballhandler"s, at least in the definition I use. Are you using a different one? Those guys can use screens but it's in a quick strike score type of way, which I suppose I could justify for Barnes. He can be the guy who comes off screens for a J or one dribble drive... I've said it before, Barnes reminds me of a SF Bargnani in offensive skillset. However much Bargnani utilizes the pnr is about what I'd say for Barnes as well.

What I've learned from playing basketball and going to camps is that, it's not all about speed and quickness. More so, it's about selling the direction you want to go to and quickly changing directions in your favor on the screen-and-roll. You've got the upper hand of where you want to lead your defender because all the defender can do is react to your moves. What does this have to do with Barnes? Firstly, he's very good at baiting his defenders into certain angles through uses of the jab-step, body fakes and ball fakes with the ball in his hands and a screen. That alone will make the defender on their heels as they're guessing which way they should shadow your move. Secondly, a large part of it also reliant on footwork. I've got friends playing pro-ball overseas in Peru who taught me this. If you get your inside and outside feet mixed up as you're trying to split the defender on the ball screens, most likely you're not going to get in the paint. Say you're dribbling the ball on your right, you want your outside feet or the feet on the opposite side with the hand you're dribbling to go forward as you lead your dribble in front of your body. In the clips I showed, you can see almost every time Barnes splits his defender on the screen because he timed his footwork perfectly. All I'm saying with Barnes is that, he's good enough to be a 2nd option or 3rd Banana where you can run your offense through him because of his ability to call his own shots out of the screen. It'd be nice to see Barnes incorporate more behind the back dribble or a front change instead of his hesitation dribble (in-and-out) if he wants to be more creative leaving the defense second guessing.

[Dr Positivity]

The only standout talent related to Barnes is his PR agent. Mayo and Marvin held onto their reps from high school long enough for people to just assume they had great talent

To me Barnes is neither in the top 15 in either talent or production, in terms of players being talked about as potential 1st round prospects this year. I would put him near guys like Terrence Ross and Moe Harkless for level of interest. Intriguing but not dynamic physical talents who have just enough skill to have starting potential in the right situation where they're the 4th/5th most talented guy. If I had the #22 pick and he was there I might take him.

I mostly agree, but would caution some humility and respect for the wisdom of crowds. If I have him as about the 16th best pick in the draft and a ton of people have him at #6, with the average spot for him being about #8 or 9, I think about taking him once it gets to 12 or 13. You have to allow for the possibility that you might be wrong.

Not to the extreme level of ignoring your own instincts, but it makes sense to take into account the fact that some people see a star when they see him, and again, he supposedly, and the Raps can interview him and his coaches to see this better, has a great work ethic, which he will need.

I agree to an extent. I've been hard on Barnes but I'll say this. A lot of my criticisms just come down to (IMO) the quality of this draft compared to normal. I went back to look at my 2011 big board and I had Knight 6, Jimmer 8, Brooks 9, Reggie Jackson 10. Not exactly the dream team of perimeter talents. I like 2012 Barnes as much as I did 2011 Knight, and definitely more than I did Jimmer/Brooks/Reggie. After my top 5 prospects (2 of which didn't go top 10 in Burks and Motiejunas) I saw the next 15 or so prospects not counting Biyombo who was on his own planet as "all-star or out of the NBA" boom/bust, as "B" grade. So I wouldn't have complained much about Barnes at #5 instead of Valanciunas, Knight, Jimmer, BB, etc. I knew there was 0.00000000% we were taking Burks or Motiejunas and it was between those players.

Maybe I'm just overrating this draft. But I'm sold on about 10-14 players having true "top 4 on a good team" potential and talent and then about 7-10 more guys in that "B grade", can contribute to a team in some form, and that's the group I have Barnes in. Other players in that group include Lillard, T Zeller, Ross, T Jones, D Lamb, M Harkless, so it's not an insulting group to be in IMO. I can see Damian Lillard being an 18ppg Mo Williams type 3rd guard. I can see Tyler Zeller being a legit starting center who can score and rebound a bit. I can see Terrence Jones and Terrence Ross putting up 15ppg somewhere. I can see Barnes doing his 14-17ppg 6 rb .52 TS% type of thing. I would be good with Lillard, Zeller, Jones, Harkless at 5-8 last year just like I would Barnes. However at least in this draft I can imagine good things for the 15 or so players ahead of them too, and I'm a lot more sold on their talent level and upside as being worth the risk than I am Barnes. For me the goal of every draft pick in the top 10 should be to get a player who can be one of the 3 or 4 best guys on our future title team. Anything less that is accessible parts through trades, FA, etc. If a player's talent level makes him look like he'll fall short of that I'm not that interested. That's why I think taking Lillard, Barnes, or T Zeller top 10 is an Arrested Development "I've made a HUGE mistake", because IMO, they're even as risky as all the other picks are anyways to go along with giving the team very little chance of filling that "top 3-4 on a 60 W team" hole (It's possible the team sees a Lillard or Barnes as more talented than I do though)

[DG88]

I think I know who Barnes best comparison is.....Alan Anderson, and he'll play Anderson's role since that would best suit him with his skill set

[fredericklove]

He''ll probably get drafted by a **** team, take a bunch of shots and hit them at an average level, not rebound, pass or create many turnovers and like Derozan, some people will call him an all-star because they think scoring points means you're awesome.

If he's really lucky, Nash will sign with Portland, who will let Batum go when some team like Cleveland or Toronto offers him 12 a year, draft Barnes at 6 or 7 to play SF, and he will put up decent numbers because every decent shooter does with Nash to get him looks.

At least he won't be just scoring, unlike Demar who can't do anything else whereas Barnes displays his two way game. The thing is, he's doing what he's supposed to do at his SF position. Someone who knocks down shots, defend and rebound. Barnes does rebound, he's shown the assertiveness to crash the offensive glass. He's doing that while playing w/ two 7 footers that avg. 10 reb per game each. What I've project him to be is someone who has a decent floor game, play well in the half-court game, doing what he's supposed to do but not recognized as all-star level but a 2nd option at best or being a critical part of the scoring option, spreading the floor w/ his shooting game and make commitment to defense. That pick at a 6-7 range is pretty solid in my opinion.

Otherwise, I just know people will treat him like crap for the rest of his career due to how he came into the basketball world w/ such high expectation. No matter if he's drafted 3rd, or 4th or 5th or 7th or 10th, people like you or some of the posters here and the whole basketball world and fans will criticize him heavily if he doesn't turn into an all-star or be a game-changer, even if all he does is scoring and defending, its still not going to be good enough for all you people's critical eyes.

[fredericklove]

1. As discussed earlier, wings at UNC have been better scorers than Barnes under Roy Williams. Not different. Better.

-Harrison Barnes put up 17.1 a game with a TS% of .528 as a sophomore
-Wayne Ellington put up 16.6 a game with a TS% of .576 as a sophomore
-Rashad McCants put up 20.0 a game with a TS% of .590 as a sophomore

2. Looking at possession %, Barnes was around the same as Ross, Barton and Waiters (played 5-6 minute less a game, but while on the court, as much a go to guy as Barnes), but it's true that Lamb and Beal did take less shots.

3. Re: The Pick and Roll
"On the offensive end, Barnes ranked in the 73rd percentile in transition, 65th in post-ups, 64th in isolation, 64th as the ball handler in the pick-and-roll, and 60th when coming off screens."

You can't just claim he has an ability to score off of pick and rolls, unless what you mean is "he has an ability to score off of pick and rolls, but not as well as 36% of college players, the overwhelming majority of whom will not be drafted.

You could also be referring to him as the screener, but I haven't seen any proof he's any better at that than any 3, though it could be out there. Is that what you meant?

http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba2-harrison ... um=twitter

You should take notice of the minutes of playing time, amount of shots attempt and 3 point attempts that both Ellington and McCants in that comparison, those are a jump which explains the points scoring difference, the more 3pt shots taken, more 3pts made that makes the % difference much better than what Barnes had, thats simply because Mccants and Ellington are being told to be spot up shooters, heck never really create for themselves under UNC system where they are used as wing shooters catching the ball, spot up and fire, they have the bigs that garner attention in the paint, leaving them freedom to shoot when they get the ball. But Barnes limits these styles of plays, rather he's developing his ability off-ball this year, removing himself from being just the guy who runs thru screens to get his 3 points, his floor game expands this year. Look at what Ellington and Mccant have done in NBA, are there any shots creating off-the-dribble, or using any offensive pivot moves or using pnr? No. That's cos they can't, all they have is firing 3s, which is all UNC system ever needed from their wing players.

2. Barnes leads in points average but he's not treated as go to guy in this year especially how coach william designs plays, rarely the plays are designed for Barnes. 3. Those numbers are factual evidences, its true that he's ranked low in the pnr, that's because he doesn't use it as much heavily, but the times he's shown pnr are generally leading to good things happening.

3. If you miss out on his 1st year in UNC, then you should know he's a pretty good screeners, he's one that knows how to run thru screens, behind screen, off screen (evidently seen this year), cuts using screens. He can't iso using handles, but he can definitely use screens to his advantage really well.

[Undefeated]

Yeah, the idea that Barnes is going to get in the lane and create for others is based on nothing so far. How many NBA teams run a lot of pick and rolls with the 3 as the ballhandler, anyways? Lebron and Iguodala do it, but they are high assist guys (as a sophomore, Iguodala had 4.9 assists a game on a 1.8 A/TO ratio, slightly better than Barnes' 1.1 assists and 0.6 A/TO Ratio).

Who said anything about Barnes creating off the dribble for others? What's being said here is that Barnes has shown he can look for his own offense out of the screen-and-roll and put the ball in the basket, but UNC doesn't run a lot of Barnes screen-and-roll where he's the ball-handler because it isn't their primary offensive set hence why why he ranks low. It would helped if you watched the game instead of continuously throwing stats my way. Those stats are used to help support what you see, and I've explained why the numbers are low. He's not limited to a spot-up and catch-and-shoot type guy as most are saying, but that doesn't surprise me since they rarely watch Barnes played this year until the NCAA tournament.

[Ell Curry]

Yeah, the idea that Barnes is going to get in the lane and create for others is based on nothing so far. How many NBA teams run a lot of pick and rolls with the 3 as the ballhandler, anyways? Lebron and Iguodala do it, but they are high assist guys (as a sophomore, Iguodala had 4.9 assists a game on a 1.8 A/TO ratio, slightly better than Barnes' 1.1 assists and 0.6 A/TO Ratio).

Who said anything about Barnes creating off the dribble for others? What's being said here is that Barnes has shown he can look for his own offense out of the screen-and-roll and put the ball in the basket, but UNC doesn't run a lot of Barnes screen-and-roll where he's the ball-handler because it isn't their primary offensive set hence why why he ranks low. It would helped if you watched the game instead of continuously throwing stats my way. Those stats are used to help support what you see, and I've explained why the numbers are low. He's not limited to a spot-up and catch-and-shoot type guy as most are saying, but that doesn't surprise me since they rarely watch Barnes played this year until the NCAA tournament.

If you can't create for others with the pick and roll, you're probably not going to be that efficient running it, unless you're a lights out scorer, and Barnes hasn't shot the ball consistently well enough like, say a Durant or Kevin Martin (both of whom had way higher TS%) did in college. That's why Derozan running the pick and roll wouldn't/doesn't win the Raptors games.

Also, you're confused about the stats. 64% percentile in shooting on pick and rolls doesn't refer to volume, but the rate. He's not scoring at an elite level but not getting chances. He's scoring at an okay rate (64th percentile isn't terrible, it's just not worth a single digits pick).

Nobody is saying Barnes has only tried to be catch and shoot guy. He's tried to create his own offense. It just hasn't gone that well for him through his first 80 games of high level basketball, by any reasonable statistical measure.

It just seems like Barnes is going to have to radically tailor his inside the arc offensive game and/or go from being an average 3 point shooter to an elite shooter in the NBA to be an all-star, whereas a guy like Lamb just has to keep doing what he's doing.

As a freshman, Waiters shot 47% (same as Barnes) from inside the arc and 33% from 3 (one percent worse than Barnes). He improved his shot selection as a sophomore, he went up to 53% inside the arc and 36% from 3. His true shooting went from .523 to .565. Waiters also learned how to cut down on his turnovers and set up his teammates more, putting together a good for a 2-guard 1.9 A/TO ratio. Waiters became a menace on D, recording 1.8 steals (up from 1.1) in 24 minutes a game.

Barnes' 2pt shooting stayed at 47%, but he managed to shoot 35.8% from 3, up from 34.4%, to bring his true shooting up a scintilla, from .520 to .528, his A/TO dropped to a disgusting 0.6, indicating that he did not learn how to better create for others while not turning over the ball. Barnes also got more steals, going from 0.8 to 1.1 in 29 minutes.

So, whereas Waiters (Will Barton, a top recruit like Barnes is an even better example, since he struggled as a freshman and was great as a sophomore) made adjustments after struggling as freshman and became very, very good players, Barnes showed only slight improvement. If you have to bet on what player can make the changes he needs to make to become a more efficient player, why bet on Barnes? Barton and Waiters had disappointing seasons, worked on their games and had great sophomore seasons. Barnes had a disappointing freshman season, worked on his game and had, what, a slightly better sophomore year. You can see why that sort of stagnation is terrifying to some of us.

[Ell Curry]

I mean, if you're happy taking a guy who didn't really improve from year 1 to year 2, why take a good athlete with pretty good size like Barnes when you could take PJIII, a freakishly athletic, higher upside guy?

[Undefeated]

Also, you're confused about the stats. 64% percentile in shooting on pick and rolls doesn't refer to volume, but the rate. He's not scoring at an elite level but not getting chances. He's scoring at an okay rate (64th percentile isn't terrible, it's just not worth a single digits pick).

I know exactly well what those numbers represent. All I'm saying here is that you're using stats to measure how efficiently Barnes was able to shoot in the pick-and-roll when those plays for Barnes happened very far and between which is why it isn't conducive to make a claim that Barnes hasn't shown anything so far. That's why I watched the game unlike you here and see what Barnes can or cannot do.

[Ell Curry]

Also, you're confused about the stats. 64% percentile in shooting on pick and rolls doesn't refer to volume, but the rate. He's not scoring at an elite level but not getting chances. He's scoring at an okay rate (64th percentile isn't terrible, it's just not worth a single digits pick).

I know exactly well what those numbers represent. All I'm saying here is that you're using stats to measure how efficiently Barnes was able to shoot in the pick-and-roll when those plays for Barnes happened very far and between which is why it isn't conducive to make a claim that Barnes hasn't shown anything so far. That's why I watched the game unlike you here and see what Barnes can or cannot do.

If he had such a lack of opportunities as to make the sample size meaningless*, then aren't you relying on that same small sample size to claim that the numbers are wrong and you've seen something that indicates that in fact he will be more efficient in the pick and roll against better defenders in the NBA than he was against college defenders, with the picks mostly being set by Zeller and Henson, two lottery pick big men?

*It is worth noting the 64th percentile stat is perfectly in line with his other percentile rankings on offense: "Barnes ranked in the 73rd percentile in transition, 65th in post-ups, 64th in isolation, 64th as the ball handler in the pick-and-roll, and 60th when coming off screens.")

[Undefeated]

If he had such a lack of opportunities as to make the sample size meaningless*, then aren't you relying on that same small sample size to claim that the numbers are wrong and you've seen something that indicates that in fact he will be more efficient in the pick and roll against better defenders in the NBA than he was against college defenders, with the picks mostly being set by Zeller and Henson, two lottery pick big men?

I'm looking at it from a skills perspective strategically something that you should do and you'll know understand what I'm saying. I understand a single clip isn't convincing enough, but I've seen enough games with my own eyes along with others who followed closely that positive things came out when we saw Barnes scoring from a screen-and-roll. And the NBA floor spacing is much bigger than the NCAA which means he'll have more wiggle room to probe his way into the paint.

[Ell Curry]

If he had such a lack of opportunities as to make the sample size meaningless*, then aren't you relying on that same small sample size to claim that the numbers are wrong and you've seen something that indicates that in fact he will be more efficient in the pick and roll against better defenders in the NBA than he was against college defenders, with the picks mostly being set by Zeller and Henson, two lottery pick big men?

I'm looking at it from a skills perspective strategically something that you should do and you'll know understand what I'm saying. I understand a single clip isn't convincing enough, but I've seen enough games with my own eyes along with others who followed closely that positive things came out when we saw Barnes scoring from a screen-and-roll. And the NBA floor spacing is much bigger than the NCAA which means he'll have more wiggle room to probe his way into the paint.

I guess I'm just not as convinced about Barnes' skills. I've seen him make fluid, intelligent 1 on 1 moves, and I think he'll do that a few times a game, but I see him having to take a lot of contested shots in the pros and that scares me when coupled with what seems to be a good but not brilliant defender or athlete.

I don't want more Derozans and Bargnanis. I'd much rather get someone without the skills to be a 1 on 1 scorer but better at catching and shooting and playing defense. That's how you win. Not a bunch of B- Kobe impersonators. There's a thread in which Derozan vs Danny Green was discussed. I'd take Green, right now, in a heartbeat.It was clear even in college he had good role player skills (Green was "the only player in the history of the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) with 1,000 points, 500 rebounds, 250 assists, 150 three-pointers, 150 blocks and 150 steals.") Barnes has shown no indications he knows how to get steals, rebounds, blocks or assists at an impressive rate.

It's true, though, that you have way more space in the pros. I think that's part of the argument for Sullinger, too. 1 on 1 with more space, the guys who look like more polished scorers, might be really tough to guard. But again, Sullinger mostly demolished people 1 on 1. Barnes didn't.

What kind of stats do you see Barnes putting up?

[fredericklove]

If you can't create for others with the pick and roll, you're probably not going to be that efficient running it, unless you're a lights out scorer, and Barnes hasn't shot the ball consistently well enough like, say a Durant or Kevin Martin (both of whom had way higher TS%) did in college. That's why Derozan running the pick and roll wouldn't/doesn't win the Raptors games.

how is not creating for others w/ pnr end up labeled as inefficient with it? You're talking in a point guard emphasize where they need to use pnr to create for others, but for scores, you run pnr to lead a 2nd defender in, or to lead an oncoming screen to help you create a switch in defender to either get your iso with the mismatch advantage, or to mislead the defender so that you can get your space off. So really? You use the "create for others" in a wrong emphasize, don't make the same mistake next time.

You did this again, stop using Demar as example, using him isn't going to help explain why Barnes won't work well w/ pnr in the NBA, its totally different player with different game. Demar doesn't really know how to use pnr, and rarely uses it well.

And you using TS% to dictate Barnes' game, thats a waste of valuable time, we're talking about game style, using these type of stats in a college context w/ college system/ college style isn't going to relate anything to the NBA level., and especially you're using Durant's legendary college freshman season, Kevin Martin on the other hand is a phenomenal offensive player. Bringing up Durant, Martin, or a point guard mentality w/ pnr aren't ideal comparison on Barnes' case.

[DA_SCOUT]

I mean, if you're happy taking a guy who didn't really improve from year 1 to year 2, why take a good athlete with pretty good size like Barnes when you could take PJIII, a freakishly athletic, higher upside guy?

Big PJ III fan, but if Barnes is on the board you take him and run.