How bad is Harrison Barnes?

Sulla · Post #1 » by **Sulla** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:10 pm

Weems · Post #2 » by **Weems** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

There are simpler/meaningful/better/not awful ways to come to this conclusion. Then again, this is the acclaimed truck driver who mocked Lin as a 2nd rounder AKA a superstar.

Dr Positivity · Post #3 » by **Dr Positivity** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:44 pm

Last year this guy had Tristan Thompson 2nd btw... So are people still believing that the Cavaliers could go from having TT as a top 5 prospect and springing absolutely no leaks about wanting him, to taking a guy who the same metrics rates as a 2nd rounder and telling everyone they love him? IMO Gilbert is strategically trying to increase the chance Barnes goes 2nd or 3rd

tidho · Post #4 » by **tidho** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:52 pm

Dr Mufasa wrote:...IMO Gilbert is strategically trying to increase the chance Barnes goes 2nd or 3rd

You need to think through all aspects of your smear campaign before revealing any of it.

Here's the flaw. If Barnes were anywhere close to as bad as you proclaim him to be then it wouldn't make any sense for Gilbert to use him as bait to push his real target down. Gilbert is sitting at 4, he should be hyping who he believes to be the 5th best player, not the 15th (rounded, I believe I've seen you saying the Cavaliers should pass on him at #23, lol) best.

Now, of course I don't know if they'll take him or not, but I do think they are correct to consider him.

Dr Positivity · Post #5 » by **Dr Positivity** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:04 pm

How does Barnes going 2/3 not help the Cavs?

Eg. If Cleveland's target was Beal, Charlotte or Washington being sold on Barnes over Beal being fair and not a reach, greatly increases Cleveland's chance of Beal being there at 4. Something like Davis/Robinson/Barnes or Davis/Barnes/MKG = Beal falls to 4. Or do the same exercise if CLE's guy was mKG>

tidho · Post #6 » by **tidho** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm

You're missing my point.

Assuming they don't want Barnes, of course its great for them if he's chosen #2 or #3.
All I'm saying is that your too negative aproaches on Barnes are disconnected. You're saying Barnes isn't even top 10 (passing him at #23, metrics or a 3nd rounder, etc.). Then you're saying Gilbert is trying to trick people into taking him at #2 or #3....

....ok, if he were trying to trick teams, why wouldn't he use a better player?
...or, if Barnes is so bad why would he believe anyone would fall for it?

Back to Barnes, as I've said plenty of times already, he's a top 5 prospect in this draft. I hope the Cavaliers are interested and that he makes it to #4. I think it would be a great fit for both team and player.

Golabki · Post #7 » by **Golabki** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:23 pm

The point of the article is pretty simple.

Barnes was a decent scorer in college, but not a great one... and he didn't really do anything else particularly well.

The other point here is that NONE of the top wing's in this draft were particularly great college players. Beal, Barnes, MKG all need a pretty hefty dose of excuses to justify being good top-5 picks. Because there isn't really any great wing prospects in this draft, there's a bit of a collective amnesia going on, everyones forgetting what a high-lotto player is supposed to look like.

tidho · Post #8 » by **tidho** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:10 pm

Golabki wrote:...
The other point here is that NONE of the top wing's in this draft were particularly great college players. Beal, Barnes, MKG all need a pretty hefty dose of excuses to justify being good top-5 picks. Because there isn't really any great wing prospects in this draft, there's a bit of a collective amnesia going on, everyones forgetting what a high-lotto player is supposed to look like.

Doesn't matter what they are supposed to look like, only what they look like in comparison to each other - and after Davis they're all pretty comparable. The wings and everybody else, a bunch of guys that project to be very good but not great players. Barnes is right with them as legitimate top 5 candidates this year.

Dr Positivity · Post #9 » by **Dr Positivity** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:11 pm

Speaking of the Cavs and what to learn from their TT pick, Hollinger's top 10

1. Anthony Davis
2. Thomas Robinson
3. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
4. Dion Waiters
5. Andre Drummond

6. Quincy Miller
7. Jared Sullinger
8. Terrence Jones
9. John Henson
10. Royce White

Ed Weiland of Hoops analyst also had TT top 3 last year and his indicators are different, but similarly bearish on Sullinger and Waiters. I could see CLE's top wing being Waiters.

kd35sneighbor · Post #10 » by **kd35sneighbor** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:27 pm

A 6-2 guy (Waiters) to pair with Irving? No thanks.

vct33 · Post #11 » by **vct33** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:54 pm

I think Barnes is the 2nd safest pick in the draft. His ceiling may not be perennial all-star but his floor is nowhere near bust. I think his floor is a solid 28-mpg 6th or 7th man on a good team or a starter on a lesser team. (maybe on the level of J Dudley, M Dunleavy, M Williams or T Young) I think his ceiling is a fringe all-star who could make 2-3 all-star appearances in his career. (along the lines of D Granger, L Deng, G Wallace)

mcfly1204 · Post #12 » by **mcfly1204** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:57 pm

kd35sneighbor wrote:A 6-2 guy (Waiters) to pair with Irving? No thanks.

6' 4" in shoes with a 6' 7" wingspan, you are selling him a bit short. Cleveland does not strike me as a team that would make a promise to someone, especially that high.

kd35sneighbor · Post #13 » by **kd35sneighbor** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:05 am

mcfly1204 wrote:
kd35sneighbor wrote:A 6-2 guy (Waiters) to pair with Irving? No thanks.

6' 4" in shoes with a 6' 7" wingspan, you are selling him a bit short. Cleveland does not strike me as a team that would make a promise to someone, especially that high.

You should focus on what his height is without shoes. It is 6-2.5. Think about that for a sec. He is shorter than Beal by almost an inch, and Beal is already short as is. He will get owned by other shooting guards, period.

At 6-2.5 he is shorter than Sam Cassell. Just think about Cassell having to guard other shooting guards. Cleveland will not draft this guy, he simply does not fit.

Roger Murdock · Post #14 » by **Roger Murdock** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:32 am

vct33 wrote:I think Barnes is the 2nd safest pick in the draft. His ceiling may not be perennial all-star but his floor is nowhere near bust. I think his floor is a solid 28-mpg 6th or 7th man on a good team or a starter on a lesser team. (maybe on the level of J Dudley, M Dunleavy, M Williams or T Young) I think his ceiling is a fringe all-star who could make 2-3 all-star appearances in his career. (along the lines of D Granger, L Deng, G Wallace)

I think hes the riskiest perceived top 10 pick because his strength - shooting/scoring - is inefficient and largely overblown and likely won't compensate for his lack of ability to do anything else well.

Post #15 » by **jman3134** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:39 am

There's a difference between overrated and bad.

For reference, I compare Barnes to MKG head to head in the following thread on the Grizzlies board:

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=1185999&start=15

tidho · Post #16 » by **tidho** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:48 pm

Dr Mufasa wrote:Speaking of the Cavs and what to learn from their TT pick, Hollinger's top 10
...
Ed Weiland of Hoops analyst also had TT top 3 last year and his indicators are different, but similarly bearish on Sullinger and Waiters. I could see CLE's top wing being Waiters.

The Cavaliers didn't select Thompson because of his advanced statistics or anything else these guys are using for ratings. They brought Enes Kantor and Tristan Thompson in and worked them out together (similar to Barnes and Beal this year) and Thompson destroyed him. That is why they made the pick.

Rumor has Beal with a very slight edge in this year's workout.

As for Waiters, I have a hard time believing they'd draft a guy that does the exact same thing on the court as Kyrie Irving with the 4th pick in the draft. Even if they thought his talent warrents it you have to build a team.....which is why I think they'd still go Barnes over Beal (not that they'll have a choice).