Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
Moderators: Kilroy, Danny Darko, TyCobb
Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 484
- And1: 8
- Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
Is he still signed with the Lakers? What's his situation? He was sadly our best bench player last year.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- NOODLESTYLE
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,827
- And1: 828
- Joined: Jun 16, 2005
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
He's currently a free agent and no word yet.
Besides the Lakers, he was arrested last month and is being sued.

Besides the Lakers, he was arrested last month and is being sued.

Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 15,350
- And1: 34
- Joined: Jun 28, 2005
- Location: USC
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
probably not
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- gotokyo
- Rookie
- Posts: 1,150
- And1: 283
- Joined: Feb 29, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
I hope not
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 484
- And1: 8
- Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
NOODLESTYLE wrote:He's currently a free agent and no word yet.
He was arrested last month for traffic violations and resisting arrest tho.
Just traffic violations. No biggie. I hope we resign him though.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,474
- And1: 1,213
- Joined: Dec 27, 2005
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
Conceivably, they could after releasing both Goudelock and Morris, but in reality his role has now been replaced by both Meeks and Ebanks.
I just hope Ebanks is somewhere shooting in an empty gymnasium as we speak.
If Ebanks lays an egg, the Lakers will regret letting Barnes go to another team for minimum money.
I just hope Ebanks is somewhere shooting in an empty gymnasium as we speak.
If Ebanks lays an egg, the Lakers will regret letting Barnes go to another team for minimum money.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 484
- And1: 8
- Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
ALL HAIL wrote:Conceivably, they could after releasing both Goudelock and Morris, but in reality his role has now been replaced by both Meeks and Ebanks.
I just hope Ebanks is somewhere shooting in an empty gymnasium as we speak.
If Ebanks lays an egg, the Lakers will regret letting Barnes go to another team for minimum money.
Barnes had a 15.5 PER last year. He's also a tough SOB. I really don't see why we don't bring him back.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 3,976
- And1: 31
- Joined: Apr 19, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
Barnes got hurt right before the playoffs twice.
Ill pass, he's not dependable
Ill pass, he's not dependable
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,474
- And1: 1,213
- Joined: Dec 27, 2005
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
nbaintel1 wrote:ALL HAIL wrote:Conceivably, they could after releasing both Goudelock and Morris, but in reality his role has now been replaced by both Meeks and Ebanks.
I just hope Ebanks is somewhere shooting in an empty gymnasium as we speak.
If Ebanks lays an egg, the Lakers will regret letting Barnes go to another team for minimum money.
Barnes had a 15.5 PER last year. He's also a tough SOB. I really don't see why we don't bring him back.
I agree.
With Goudelock and Morris gone, there would be one empty spot left at third (possibly second) string SF.
Lakers need third string bench depth in case of injury ... remember Karl Malone getting hurt and Lakers having to play Medvedenko because they were too cheap to re-up Horry the previous summer.
As far as I'm concerned, if the Lakers had resigned Horry in addition to stealing Payton and Malone, we'd be talking about Kobe surpassing Jordan's six-ring total this next season. Having Medvedenko at backup PF instead Horry cost them a ring. My two cents.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- DEEP3CL
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,899
- And1: 3,207
- Joined: Jul 23, 2005
- Location: LOS ANGELES,CA.
-
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
Agree, time to move on.TheXFactor wrote:Barnes got hurt right before the playoffs twice.
Ill pass, he's not dependable
VETERAN LAKERS FAN
SmartWentCrazy wrote:It's extremely unlikely that they end up in the top 3.They're probably better off trying to win and giving Philly the 8th pick than tanking and giving them the 4th.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 484
- And1: 8
- Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
TheXFactor wrote:Barnes got hurt right before the playoffs twice.
Ill pass, he's not dependable
And Bynum gets hurt every year before the playoffs. Who cares. Barnes was dependable and he played great last year.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- stunnar0b
- Starter
- Posts: 2,476
- And1: 121
- Joined: Feb 10, 2010
- Location: JUST OG
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
TheXFactor wrote:Barnes got hurt right before the playoffs twice.
Ill pass, he's not dependable
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- gotokyo
- Rookie
- Posts: 1,150
- And1: 283
- Joined: Feb 29, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
nbaintel1 wrote:TheXFactor wrote:Barnes got hurt right before the playoffs twice.
Ill pass, he's not dependable
And Bynum gets hurt every year before the playoffs. Who cares. Barnes was dependable and he played great last year.
If by great you mean was awful you are correct.
He had some okay moments during the regular season but couldn't shoot for sh** in the playoffs, letting teams basically defend 5 on 4 and clogging the paint
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Freshman
- Posts: 53
- And1: 4
- Joined: Jul 09, 2010
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
hopefully not
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- EArl
- RealGM
- Posts: 49,975
- And1: 13,473
- Joined: Mar 14, 2012
- Location: Columbus
-
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
no /end thread
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there wondering, fearing, Doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before;
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 484
- And1: 8
- Joined: Jun 28, 2012
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
gotokyo wrote:nbaintel1 wrote:TheXFactor wrote:Barnes got hurt right before the playoffs twice.
Ill pass, he's not dependable
And Bynum gets hurt every year before the playoffs. Who cares. Barnes was dependable and he played great last year.
If by great you mean was awful you are correct.
He had some okay moments during the regular season but couldn't shoot for sh** in the playoffs, letting teams basically defend 5 on 4 and clogging the paint
He averaged 15.5 PER in the NBA. Anything above 15 is above average with the way PER is setup. Find another player that had that kind of production and is willing to take the minimum. Lakers probably want to resign him but he's asking for too much money.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- Jajwanda
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,611
- And1: 105
- Joined: Jun 01, 2007
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
McGrady would be a better bargain. I don't know if he can get over his history with Kuester but he's wanted to be a Laker for a while now. The great thing about him is not only does he score but he can play point forward for sixteen minutes a game, enough time to take the pressure off of Nash and Kobe.
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- Wavy Q
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,317
- And1: 2,390
- Joined: Jul 10, 2010
- Location: Pull Up
-
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
god i hope not
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- ennui
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,719
- And1: 955
- Joined: Feb 10, 2011
- Location: I see jigaboos, I see styrofoam
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
Jajwanda wrote:McGrady would be a better bargain. I don't know if he can get over his history with Kuester but he's wanted to be a Laker for a while now. The great thing about him is not only does he score but he can play point forward for sixteen minutes a game, enough time to take the pressure off of Nash and Kobe.
If he can get over the Kuester thing, he would be a welcome addition. I feel he can be persuaded into a minimum type deal in exchange for the opportunity to win chips.
C'mon, you apes! You wanna live forever?
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
- tugs
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,884
- And1: 2,998
- Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Re: Are Lakers Still Keeping Matt Barnes?
damn that'll look like an All Star team from years back.
Nash/Bryant/McGrady/Gasol/Howard/Jamison/Artest

Nash/Bryant/McGrady/Gasol/Howard/Jamison/Artest
