Kings need to move on from Barnes.

#31
I have a hard time believing Barnes and Buddy are the problem when as recently as 8 months ago they looked like guys we wanted to build the team around. It's quite likely Bogi and Giles are gone next year too and Bagley is either injured or playing limited minutes off the bench so that's roughly half the rotation which suddenly looks like garbage? I suppose we could dump everybody but Fox and Holmes and rebuild this team now to fit Luke Walton's system but holy cow is that a massive disappointment. These players are good, they're not the problem. Barnes couldn't cut it as a number 1 option but he's a solid contributer on a team that knows how to use him. There has to be a better way.
whoa Barnes hasn’t never looked like a core pice in his career, maybe one year in GSW but that’s it
 
#32
I'm inclined to believe Grant and Christie: Barnes is burned out from his summer play and his rigorous preparation regiment. Same situation we've seen from Bogs for three years. Let's see how he does after the All Star break.
Giannis seems fine and he played in last year playoffs (as well as FIBA). same as Tatum/Brown/Jokic (not known for his cardio) and others but i guess it only effects Kings players.

Maybe its better we don't make the playoffs our guys would be struggling to stay alive from fatigue.
 
Last edited:
#34
Barnes contract is a disaster. No team would be that stupid to take on that contract. He’s not worth more than 10-12mil on the open market.
Kings will be stuck with the albatross for at least another 2 years. Add it to the list of dim witted decisions by Divac.
 
#38
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.
 
#40
I think what should be said instead is that Barnes should of never been re-signed in the first place. He just doesn't fit with this group of players, he doesn't wow you but when you watch them, it's as if he isn't even on the court.
They didn't learn there lesson from 20-30 games he played with the Kings last year and they doubled down and dug the hole even deeper
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#41
They didn't learn there lesson from 20-30 games he played with the Kings last year and they doubled down and dug the hole even deeper
I was going to bring up that they just looked all out of sorts when he was acquired but that it was only a short amount of games and it takes some adjustment. Nearly 40 games in now, he still looks the same as when they acquired him.
 
#42
I was going to bring up that they just looked all out of sorts when he was acquired but that it was only a short amount of games and it takes some adjustment. Nearly 40 games in now, he still looks the same as when they acquired him.
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.
 
#45
If you think Barnes is the problem, you are kidding yourself.
It's not just Barnes but he's the biggest (player) due to his contract and lack of being able to do anything productive (Buddy despite his contact is still a elite shooter) to help us win, I said specifically that before we trade anyone else (which we should) he should be first.
 
#47
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.
 

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#48
Fox: wants to drive, can't shoot/stretch floor
Bagley: wants to play in post, can't stretch floor (yet)
Barnes: being used in post or driving, shooting has been awful

Any surprise it's not working?
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.
 
#50
Giannis seems fine and he played in last year playoffs (as well as FIBA). same as Tatum/Brown/Jokic (not known for his cardio) and others but i guess it only effects Kings players.

Maybe its better we don't make the playoffs our guys would be struggling to stay alive from fatigue.
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.
 
#51
Barnes is ok, they just overpaid for him by 30% or so......he should be making around $12-14MM per season. He has great games interspersed with poor ones. He's ranked 14th in the league ppg at this position - he's a B- player on the whole., paid like an A- player.
 
#53
Barnes is ok, they just overpaid for him by 30% or so......he should be making around $12-14MM per season. He has great games interspersed with poor ones. He's ranked 14th in the league ppg at this position - he's a B- player on the whole., paid like an A- player.
This is a fair assessment. Unfortunately that extra 30% is pretty much a given to get anyone to choose Sacramento, at least until we're a top 5 team in the West again.
 
#56
I've always said that I don't have an issue with Barnes the player, I have an issue with Barnes' contract. He's a fairly versatile player, useful to a certain degree. But the $ aspect is a burden.

He's not playing anywhere near what he's getting paid. I knew this would happen, and I think a lot of others did too.

I'm not specifically pointing the finger at HB and saying he's a problem and needs to go. This team has a myriad of other more serious problems that take precedence.

Still, the Barnes contract sucks and if the Kings even consider trading him, there's no value. He'd have to be sent out with a pick or something
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.
 
#57
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.
Well, Barnes is guaranteed $85m for the rest of his contract so whomever we want to talk about trading him to, will have to be willing to take on that contract, which probably means a team that is in contention. I don't think he'll be beneficial to teams in limbo like us.
 
#58
Injuries have definitely been a huge issue, guys. Not sure where the sarcasm is coming from

Fox missed damn near 20 games. If we win even 7 or 8 of those, this is a totally different season
Don't believe this means anything, but I'm fairly certain our record has been better without Fox this season. Dispels that notion that injuries mattered pretty quick.
 
#60
One player does not a win or loss make.
You must have missed the DMC years where the majority were saying he by himself won games and we were 1-16 (something like that without him) but I guess that now does not apply to Fox/Bagley it only applies when it's in favour of the Kings player in question.