How about Matt Barnes?
by popozow on Jun 30, 2009 12:48 PM PDT
39 comments
It seems like everyone is itching for a glue guy and in the event we can't snatch Battier away from Houston, how about going after Matt Barnes?
I see Barnes as a poor man's Battier. He can hit the open jumper and is a solid perimeter defender. He might not be as polished as Battier, but if the Clippers can pick him up in free agency I say bring him back. He only made $1.2 million in Phoenix last year and put up solid numbers, but didn't play amazing enough to earn a big pay raise so I think the Clippers can land him for around the same amount.
Plus, he has that UCLA and GSW connection with Baron Davis so I think he would actually WANT to come back to the Clippers.
What do you think?
0 recs |
39 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Solid pick-up.
I was hoping to land him when we missed out on Azabuike(!). We went for Ricky Buckets instead. Barnes only in the event we can’t land Battier or Prince.
by Gordon for President on Jun 30, 2009 12:52 PM PDT reply actions
I like it
Just need to trade Randolph/Kaman first to see exactly what our need is. But after the trade, the need still is SF, then Barnes is an great choice.
I don't think that's an issue...
They’ll happily pay up to the mid level exception for the right guy.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on Jun 30, 2009 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Just to clear up...
Not that Barnes is an MLE guy.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on Jun 30, 2009 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Nah
Matt barnes was never my type of guy when he was with the Clippers. But I dont know, maybe he’s really grown up and can actually HIT the open jumpers. ( I remember back in the Clippers day, he use to miss them.)
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
I do not like Matt Barnes what so ever...
…this would be painful for me to watch.
I would sign off on this
Its free agent time, so examinations such as this seem much more interesting right now than yet another trade proposal.
Barnes can probably be had for less than the full mid-level and would be a significant upgrade over Thornton. He can probably play some 2 in a pinch, and can certainly cross guard the 2 if matchups dictate.
I’d give him maybe the full mid-level to entice him to town, but only for one year with two more unguaranteed. If the Clippers land a better wing via trade or they want to go another way next season, they won’t be on the hook. Win/win. Barnes gets his biggest contract ever and the Clippers aren’t fully married to him, unless he makes good.
Barnes over Thornon; anybody else agree?
I dont.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
Why don't you agree?
What does Al do better than Barnes?
What does the team need from Al that Barnes can’t provide?
Why would you appeal to groupthink for your point?
I don’t agree because I don’t want to add more salary on a low-mid impact player. Barnes is a smarter player than Al right now, but I’d rather improve the 3-spot via trade or free agency in 2010. Battier and Prince are much better options than Barnes.
You ask what Al does better than Barnes…well, a quick look at the past two year’s will say that Al averaged more points and shot better. In fact, in his entire 7-year career, Matt Barnes has NEVER had a better scoring average than Al’s worst year, his rookie year (12.7 pts)!
Again, I’m not hating on Barnes, I just don’t see the team improving that much from a basketball point of view.
Fair enough
Why does adding salary matter in my example? My proposed contract doesn’t add salary in any manner that is meaningful.
Scoring average? Not impressed. Barnes is a more efficient scorer, a better rebounder, a better distributor, a better team defender.
For reference: Barnes vs Thornton last year.
More stats, John R?
Why don’t you just watch the game? Then you will know that stats don’t matter.
(Sorry, couldn’t resist)
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Well played, sir
Also I recently learned from Barry Greenstein that Math is Idiotic.
But once again, the stats do not tell the entire story
Barnes may be more efficient, but that is in part a byproduct of the offense. In Phx, he was basically a spot up shooter. Thornton was more of an offensive focus, played more minutes, and was expected to create offense. Barnes is not a postup player and doesnt’ have anywhere near the athleticism Thornton has. He’s also remarkably inconsistent (something that most stats won’t show). Thornton is a lottery pick who the team is committed to and hopefully will grow into his role. He’s not going to play behind Barnes.
So while mikey p may be joking, there’s some truth to what he said. You really cannot judge whether Matt Barnes is better than Thornton, generally or for this team, merely by looking at stats.
Well you can
I mean, with the starters you want a spot up shooter there. Same with the point of getting Battier.
Strange to write a narrative that doesn’t exist to the end of making a bizarre point without a point.
Just b/c you don't understand it doesn't mean it's "bizarre"
But I digress. Do you really think it’s realistic that MDSr is going to bench Thornton, who he loves to run isos for, in favor of journeyman Barnes who is basically a spot up shooter who isn’t that great of a shooter? Someone who is best in the open court freelancing? Just watch Barnes play and get back to us before posting.
At least you conceded the rest of my post. Of course, how could you not.
And I’m sure by now you’ve recognized that Kevin Durant is a great SF. ;-)
Heres the things I hate about John R.
All he seems to do is read statistics over and over again. He doesn’t seem to take in consideration of what teams the player is playing in, who the player is playing with, who the player is playing under, what kind of system the coach is playing with, etc..etc. I don’t understand why you think your point is always right because your showing your statistic. In reality, if Thornton was playing under Don Nelson, who knows how far Thornton could thrive? Or how about a Thornton Nash combination? Who knows right? Will Dunleavy really get a better player in Matt Barnes under Dunleavy’s system? Statistic wise, Matt Barnes shot 42% from the field and 34%.. under Steve Nash??? Wasn’t Steve Nash the player everybody thinks that makes his team better? Adding on to Al Thornton, we didn’t really take into consideration what kind of team Thornton was really playing under. Maybe Dunleavy is the bigger “Black Hole” than Al Thornton.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
My basic feeling is that he’s NOT the long term option. I’d like to get a long term option now, not next year. If you’re just arguing for the short term, then maybe I’d go along with this one-year deal, but only if we can’t get Prince/Battier.
No problem there
Getting Barnes now doesn’t preclude you from going after those guys via trade.
My plan would be to overpay Barnes (or whoever) for a single year so he would agree to make the other years team options.
Even if it went “wrong” and the Clippers ended up with Prince or Battier as well, Barnes would become an expiring contract to trade as soon as 12/15/09.
Nothing about securing Barnes (or any other MLE for 1 year) prevents them from still pursuing the home-run trade.
watching barnes play for the warriors from 2006-2008 , i think the only reason people really discuss him as “good” is that nellie made him look good.
He’d probably be an ok pickup, but i’m not sure w’ed get anything over say al , other than he’s probably a slightly better defender. if anything he’s scrappier.
But I think you lose a lot of offense on the clips with barnes. In the suns or warriors offense he’s fine, but lots of players can look like offensives stars in those systems.
Exactly my point
Great post. You really need to look at the situation he was in, not just at naked stats.
Do the Warriors have any pieces we'd need?
Tim Kawakami mentions that GSW are looking for a big man…we got them!
Roger Sterling: I bet there were people in the Bible walking around, complaining about "kids today."
Don Draper: Kids today, they have no one to look up to. Cuz they're looking up to us.
yeah I would love to see
buike play here but somehow I don’t think the Warriors would be in to trading with us after Baron bolted.
In Gordon we trust
jack has a ridiculous contract for 4 more years that the warriors stupidly gave him.
He also is a chucker. I dont think the warriors would beinterested in our bigs, because don nelson is a crackhead and has to have an offensive minded player who can run and shoot 3s.
I suppose maybe zach randolph. They cant play bidrins and another non scorer (like camby) at the same time.
Maggs played PF for them for parts of this year (he had PF eligibility in yahoo fantasy leagues too. haha). That is how insane don nelson is.
Wouldn't have a big effect
Barnes would be used for rebounding, defense, running the floor, moving the ball, and getting it to Gordon, Griffin, Randolph, Kaman, BDavis, others. He’s the SF, perhaps starting to allow AThornton to come in for instant offense off the bench.
When Novak would be in (at the 4, guarding a non-threat like Ben Wallace), coming off the bench, he’d be playing inside-out with Randolph or Kaman (or Griffin in a year or two), spreading the floor and shooting 3s better than anyone in the league. Novak can play in the second unit at the same time as Thornton or Barnes, but you probably would never see Thornton and Barnes playing together.
by citizen zhiv on Jun 30, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Stick To The Plan
All of this talk about nothing. I cant believe all of these analysts that are on this site. Some of you guys stats and references are amazing, u should do it for a living if u dont already. But seriously its funny that everyday there are a million blogs about what? Nothing bull trades and might or might not happen, corny what if’s wishful thinking and some haters among your fellow Clips fans. Lets chill back talk about what Dunleavy needs to do the guys he for sure gonna have come 2010. The season is jus around corner people. The question I want to ask is, can Dunleavy put it all together. Answer me that
How the hell are we supposed to know?
If we spend our unfufilled lives sitting at our computers writing posts that are completely irrelevant and there are thousands like us across the web? How could we answer a real question when we are, as you said in the other posts, idiots?
http://lucasnbablog.blogspot.com/
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Clips Nation
Related FanShots on Clips Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
