Kings need to move on from Barnes.
- Thread starter jellyfish
- Start date
Barnes is overpaid a lot. He cant produce efficent offense, he isnt a guy that can effectively defend opposing star forwards, he is an average shooter, he has very low passing iq.
That being said, 3/4 forwards are valuable if they can shoot and defend some. Barnes can do that and he is probably worth ~10-13mil/year. Especially if its for a team that is ready to compete and just need reliable depth. The contract he signed was so huge overpay that there must have been some understanding between Vlade and Barnes' agent that if we trade for him, he will sign this extension. Obviously that contract was a mistake. Its a negative value contract and no team will take him unless we give up draft assets for that. As a rebuilding team 3 years away of being a real playoff contender, we obviously shouldnt give up any future assets.
That being said, 3/4 forwards are valuable if they can shoot and defend some. Barnes can do that and he is probably worth ~10-13mil/year. Especially if its for a team that is ready to compete and just need reliable depth. The contract he signed was so huge overpay that there must have been some understanding between Vlade and Barnes' agent that if we trade for him, he will sign this extension. Obviously that contract was a mistake. Its a negative value contract and no team will take him unless we give up draft assets for that. As a rebuilding team 3 years away of being a real playoff contender, we obviously shouldnt give up any future assets.
This might be for another topic but it's sort of relevant but does it actually take much adjustment? In particular when your dealing with role players. I look at Shumpert/Bjelly/Holmes all recently and they clicked in right away I think chemistry for the most part when dealing with below superstar level (Miami big 3 where the talent is so great it's irrelevant) players is something you have or you don't it's sort of like bball IQ.
Which role player in recent times has started off not well with the Kings and gone on to help us? The only time the team looked to have chemistry was a 20 games stretch where Bagley/Fox were not there.
Which role player in recent times has started off not well with the Kings and gone on to help us? The only time the team looked to have chemistry was a 20 games stretch where Bagley/Fox were not there.
I've said before that Barnes is OK. I don't think Barnes is THE problem but he's a piece of this entire poo poo puzzle.
Has anyone noticed that the team decline started after we picked him up during the trade deadline last year? Obviously Vlade did more than just grab him; he also traded away Shump and J Jax etc...
It could just be coincidence, but Mr. Invisible isn't earning his nickname for nothing.
Has anyone noticed that the team decline started after we picked him up during the trade deadline last year? Obviously Vlade did more than just grab him; he also traded away Shump and J Jax etc...
It could just be coincidence, but Mr. Invisible isn't earning his nickname for nothing.
Barnes recent slump is a bit of an anomaly though just as it has been with the team the whole year. This team has elite 3 point shooters. Not all of them sucking is the answer. It speaks to a likely cause and that cause is obviously spacing and the best answer we've seen this year on both ends is playing small. The stats prove it out too, when the Kings put Barnes at the 4 and play small, those problems seem to be much alleviated. There in lies the problem with a coach that has too many bigs at his disposal and apparently wants to stay big as much as possible. With his preferred style of defense it's no wonder why this team is so horrible on that end. He's either using the wrong style for the players he has, or he's got the wrong players for his style. Every year it's the same story with this franchise. Either way it is what it is. He relies on paint help and run outs back to perimeter shooters. You need to hit that sweet spot with size and athletic ability with versatile wings to be able to do that effectively and especially athletic bigs if you don't want to play small ball. And by small ball I mean D'Antoni/Warriors type of ball where the middle of your lineup is in that 6'6" to 6'8" range across the board. Nothing too small, nothing too big. Athletic enough to switch down and big enough to switch up. That is exactly how Barnes made his name. Walton needs to rely on him more for the immense abilities he brings to the table. Expecting him to blow up the stat sheet should never have even factored in, in re-signing him. There simply isn't the opportunity for that. It's a good thing his best years have always come as that glue guy that can carry you for stretches if you go to him. It's ALL usage with players like him. How you use him is what you'll get out of him on average.
I don't know that Barnes is burnt out. Barnes is a solid, veteran starter with good size and a greater ability to score than your typical 3&D wing player. Core piece? Difference maker? These terms are really just arbitrary.
Its a mistake to suggest that the players who do not appear tired or injured from summer play are evidence that no players are tired or injured from summer play. It certainly seems like this is the case for at least Bogdon.
Its a mistake to suggest that the players who do not appear tired or injured from summer play are evidence that no players are tired or injured from summer play. It certainly seems like this is the case for at least Bogdon.
Yeah, this is a great point. Barnes is a good NBA player overall and a decent-ish starter. But when he's getting 22+ mil/season, he has to be the at worst the 3rd best player on your team and has to produce like it. All 30 teams would love him on the Kyle Anderson contract.
Just an overall massive issue this roster has. Paying an absolute fortune for Dedmon, Bazemore, Barnes, CoJo and getting very little out of them.
Just an overall massive issue this roster has. Paying an absolute fortune for Dedmon, Bazemore, Barnes, CoJo and getting very little out of them.
