share

Harrison Barnes BAD IDEA

ZEO
Registered User
Joined: 12/09/2009
Posts: 146
Points: 35
Offline
Harrison Barnes BAD IDEA

I've watch every UNC game the last past two years. And I dont understand why people are so high on him. I mean he has his games wer he'll throw up 40. But if you watch any of his games you can see he is as raw as Perry Jones. Every game he'll jack up ten 3's and only make 2 or 3. He never uses the shot clock and he never goes into the paint and use his Athleticism which piss me off so bad! He has a terrible Basetball IQ and he has really ever been on a bad team! Any team drafting him with a Top Ten well be taking a gamble seeing he never had a to care a team on his back. Bobcats and him well be the worse for both of them. Tell me yourwhat you think about Barnes is he really going be a good NBA player?


ChrisCross
ChrisCross's picture
Registered User
Joined: 01/04/2012
Posts: 407
Points: 681
Offline
If he plays with a good PG he

If he plays with a good PG he can be really good, without a PG to create shots, he could struggle.

Makaros
Registered User
Joined: 06/14/2011
Posts: 83
Points: 178
Offline
Seriously? As raw as PJ

Seriously? As raw as PJ III?

The only thing that stands out from his time at UNC is that the system wasn't designed for him. He managed to put up 16.5ish ppg in his two seasons while being the third option on offense.

His mid-range game, the part that translates better than anything in the NBA, is by far the best in college and should help him immediately when he moves over. His suppodesly "low" athleticism was put to rest with his results at the combine and he took way less threes this year compared to his freshman year.

So I really don't know what you watched, or if you understand anything about basketball, but there's nothing raw about him.

Scott42444
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 482
Points: 284
Offline
@Makaros

I agree with you completely Makaros. He is nowhere NEAR as raw as Perry Jones III. Barnes is compared to Deng, but has a much more polished offensive game. I think he will be an All-Star, and make the team early in his career. His combine testing made me do a double take as well. I didn't think he would test as well as he did. I just read that the Bulls had an interview with him, and that they might be trying to swing a deal with Cleveland to grab him if he is there at 4 (which I doubt, because I believe he is going to the Bobcats). Saying his basketball IQ is low is also ridiculous, since this guy is more polished than most sophomores coming into the league. He could have gone to Iowa and scored 25 a night, but instead worked on aspects of his game that were team oriented and will translate well to the NBA (as you mentioned in referencing his mid-range game). Also, he was trying to compete for an NCAA title, on a team that features all 1st round NBA picks in the NBA for its starting lineup. I don't think he understands basketball all that well either, ALTHOUGH some of the points he brought up as negatives of Barnes were legit. They just were exaggerated.

Lebron's Hairline
Lebron's Hairline's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2012
Posts: 2128
Points: 5817
Online
I'm a UNC fan also I think he

I'm a UNC fan also I think he will have a great career as this guys game is tailor made for the NBA. I knew he was going to underpreform while at UNC because he wasnt in the right system(UNC revolves around their bigmen). This guy will put up multiple 20plus seasons in his career

UNCbasketballbum
UNCbasketballbum's picture
Registered User
Joined: 10/05/2011
Posts: 948
Points: 1881
Offline
Maybe you were watching a

Maybe you were watching a Harrison Barnes playing for a team other than UNC. To Say that Barnes is as raw PJIII is absolutely preposterous. He does not have a terrible basketball IQ either. His IQ is probably one of the strengths. Barnes was overhyped coming out of hs. He was supposed to be the savior for UNC, which he wasn't. He was still a good player. just not elite. He will never be a superstar in the NBA, but I believe he will have a solid NBA career. Makaros quesitioned whether this guy knows anything about basketball, and I have to agree. This is one of the dumbest posts I have ever seen on here.

surve
surve's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/19/2010
Posts: 2887
Points: 4501
Offline
I think he posted it as a

I think he posted it as a joke.

Harrison Barnes is such a good shooter that if he doesnt do anything else, he will at the least be a 25-30mpg rotation guy for his career. I get sick of hearing he needs a great PG to be effective, he does not....he only needed on at UNC because the half court system was terrible.

Barnes will be able to create enough space in the NBA to get his jumper off, which will be money most of the time. His biggest issue as far as creating is, he is not a break you down off the dribble guy and I dont think he ever will be. His handle doesnt provide him easy accessibility to get to the hole. Thats his biggest weakness is driving. He is like Glen Rice, a catch and shoot or 2-3 dribble pull up guy or post up midrange guy.

he is going to be fine in the NBA. UNC was just not a true litmus test of what he can do....or any of the other players in this draft.

GTS 23
Registered User
Joined: 02/24/2012
Posts: 31
Points: 29
Offline
you can say whatever you

you can say whatever you want, barnes is going to be from day one, a 14 PPG player, and at full potential a 20-4-3 guy. im pretty sure the bobcats would love his scoring but you cant ignore drummond's size and defensive potential.if i was the bobcats gm i would be between those two.

Wejustwin504
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2012
Posts: 55
Points: 56
Offline
What people dont understand

What people dont understand is UNC is system ball. Strict system at that. I personally think he was held back. He did show some struggle without Marshall, but who on that team didnt?

PulseGlazer
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2011
Posts: 1281
Points: 1906
Offline
Right Wejustwin, and Barnes

Right Wejustwin, and Barnes is an excellent system player. In the top 5, who runs that structured of a system? Surely not the Bobcats.

Wejustwin504
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2012
Posts: 55
Points: 56
Offline
PulseGlazer, I think

PulseGlazer,

I think Cleveland would be the perfect fit for Barnes' services. Also the rumors of the Bulls and Celtics wanting to trade up for Barnes should put people on notice of what type of player he is. Those are playoff contenders we're talking about!

lilballa141
Registered User
Joined: 06/03/2012
Posts: 168
Points: 96
Offline
umm

UNC fan here and I get what you're saying and i agree with it to a degree... to call him the third option is terrible.. its arguable that some nights he was the first option other nights it was zeller. but third? cmon

Raw as PJ3? (my fav player in this draft?) naww

Jacking terrible shots? check

NBA star everyone projects? no but a starter on a championship team..second or third option

mj23mj23bestever
Registered User
Joined: 09/29/2010
Posts: 1081
Points: 361
Offline
hes gonna b a solid pro

if the bobcats dont trade the pick imo they should take barnes they need as much help on o as possible and barnes can score i agree that hes gonna be a better pro than college guy i got him being a solid 17 too 20 point a night guy id love too c him in cleveland if the bobcats dont take him him and kyrie would be a great 1 2 punch for the rebuilding cavs

surve
surve's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/19/2010
Posts: 2887
Points: 4501
Offline
lilballa

he wasnt really a true 1st option at UNC. he was the guy the ball was supposed to go to for the last shot. the offense was not designed around him nor did it revolve around him. the offense was really not designed around anyone. they get the ball in sometimes, sometimes they shoot the jumper, whatever they could get. what they relied on was the offensive rebound. Barnes had a very specific job, that was to provide perimeter scoring...even if they were in transition and let the big guys get the boards.

the offense was horrible. there was no pick and roll, there were no screens being set really, it was just designed for Barnes and Bullock to shoot and let the big guys do the damage and to get into transition.

lilballa141
Registered User
Joined: 06/03/2012
Posts: 168
Points: 96
Offline
surve

I agree that its an inside out attack. But when asked to create his own shot he rarely attacked and normally settled for long jumpers, even when he was cold. His defense at times was sub-par and overall he could disappear if not scoring and it happened to often.A great player could prosper under any circumstance while a good could prosper under the right circumstance, hes good but not great.

JoeJo
Registered User
Joined: 08/02/2011
Posts: 175
Points: 83
Offline
A mid-range game is the best

A mid-range game is the best thing that translates to the NBA? No it's not. Not even close. It's rebounding and shotblocking in that order. It is incredibly hard to shoot a good percentage from the mid-range off the dribble in the NBA because defenders are too good. If you don't have a dribble drive game to go along with the mid-range game, it's going to be tough sledding.

Basically, even if a mid-range game does translate, that doesn't mean too much in the grand scheme of one's game.

D7H7N
Registered User
Joined: 03/23/2009
Posts: 153
Points: 102
Offline
UNC's system has always been

UNC's system has always been run and gun since Roy came in. Get the ball into transition as fast as you can and let the PG handle his options on the break (Marshall, Felton, Lawson). With their halfcourt sets, they always pounded inside (May, Zeller, Hansbrough) with an occassional screen for their shooters (Ellington, Green, McCants, Barnes). You will never see any sort of dribble drive if you watch UNC play with the exception of when Ty Lawson would take over games by himself.

I'm sure Barnes would've looked better if he went to Duke. All those staggers and curls they run, would've fit him perfectly.

mattmancalcagno
mattmancalcagno's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/06/2011
Posts: 60
Points: 52
Offline
Agree with that ^^^^

Totally agree with that last comment. Barnes would have been perfect at Duke, he had that unstoppable 1 dribble pull up shot and was the versatile scorer that Duke has always needed besides Rivers.

TheArtistPaysth...
TheArtistPaysthePrice's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/23/2012
Posts: 965
Points: 2793
Offline
^^^^^

I agree but Duke didnt have a pure point guard which he may have thought would helped his game. For a year and a half he had Kendall Marshall and at Duke he would have had 2 guards as primary ball handlers in Nolan Smith and Rivers.

r377
r377's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/28/2010
Posts: 1467
Points: 3906
Offline
He is somewhere between

He is somewhere between marvin williams and sean elliott. He has a slow first step and needs a good PG to perform well.

I sitll think he will be a second or third option on a good playoff team 13-17ppg. He may put up better stats on a worse younger team

JoeJo
Registered User
Joined: 08/02/2011
Posts: 175
Points: 83
Offline
Yeah, UNC's system is not set

Yeah, UNC's system is not set up to feature small forwards. I like postups and especially in college, where there's not enough of them, UNC can be refreshing but they go overboard. Both bigs just set up shop on either side of the lane and call for the ball all the time. How about vacating the basketball area and opening up a driving lane once in a while?

The times there was an driving lane or Barnes just decided he had enough with feeding the post and wanted a possession for himself, he didn't look quick and his ball handling was often sloppy. I'm really confused why that was the case. In high school, in AAU games, in the all-star high school games, he looked like a very good dribble driver, sleek almost. In college he looked nothing like that. Better defenders and better defense being played must have been part of it but I wonder if the paint being crowded nearly all the time made Barnes too reliant on his mid-range game, made him reluctant to probe too deep. There were many instances in which he could have kept forcing his way to the basket and he pulled up instead. He wouldn't have done that before getting to UNC.

surve
surve's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/19/2010
Posts: 2887
Points: 4501
Offline
"A mid-range game is the best

"A mid-range game is the best thing that translates to the NBA? No it's not. Not even close. It's rebounding and shotblocking in that order"

Tell Mike Beasley that.....to his face.

TallmanNYC
TallmanNYC's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/04/2010
Posts: 1967
Points: 1110
Offline
Well the mid-range game is

Well the mid-range game is kind of pointless in today's NBA. Basically, everyone in the league shoots about 40% or less from deep mid-range (like 15 feet to inside the 3 point line). So basically they are bad shots. Only a few guys like Melo can actually operate effectively and win games shooting deep twos. So you better do something else than shoot long twos if you want to win games in the NBA. Because while you are shooting long twos, the real players will be getting to the rim, knocking down threes, or getting to the line. AND they will be dominating you.

JoeJo
Registered User
Joined: 08/02/2011
Posts: 175
Points: 83
Offline
I don't think mid-range games

I don't think mid-range games are pointless but they can't be the calling card of your game if you want to maintain good efficiency and/or consistent scoring. It's important to have a well-rounded arsenal so if one element of your game is off, you have others to go to. Barnes isn't just a spot up shooter like many say. He can pull up and post up as well as spot up from deep but he's missing the dribble drive game great perimeter players need to have unless you can shoot like Reggie Miller or Ray Allen.

On the basis of his mid-range game, among other things, he's compared to Pierce but that completely misses how great Pierce was at getting to the line and driving to the basket in his prime. That's a huge difference.

If Barnes didn't have deep range, he'd be frighteningly similar to Derozan.

akhan786
akhan786's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/02/2010
Posts: 1653
Points: 6293
Offline
Mattman

If Barnes would have gone to Duke I doubt he wouldn't have met expectations and thus would have been a one and done. So he never would have played with Rivers.

1. One because he'd be going to a team with Kyrie Irving, Nolan Smith, and (maybe) Kyle Singler so it wouldn't have been expected of him to dominate every game.

2. And secondly he would've just looked better playing at Duke and I think Coach K would've made him into a better overall player because K doesn't like hiding weaknesses and would've forced Barnes to develop his handle. He wouldn't have Kendall Marshall spoon feeding him the ball so he would have to adapt.

I think people have been a little too hard on Barnes. It was a bad decision to go to UNC, but I think he'll be a much better NBA player.

JoeJo
Registered User
Joined: 08/02/2011
Posts: 175
Points: 83
Offline
Barnes definitely would have

Barnes definitely would have fit in better at Duke. I'm not sure how much better he would've been but having driving lanes and more open space couldn't have hurt.

billyk
Registered User
Joined: 12/05/2008
Posts: 1017
Points: 546
Offline
Tell Jordan or Kobe that you

Tell Jordan or Kobe that you can't win shooting mid range jumpers...

surve
surve's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/19/2010
Posts: 2887
Points: 4501
Offline
lilballa

"But when asked to create his own shot he rarely attacked and normally settled for long jumpers, even when he was cold."

I agree, this was a flaw in his game. He was part to blame for that because his handle is not like Joe Johnson...he cant get anywhere he wants to get on the floor. He is a 2-3 bounce type of guy when he is at his best. The other part was not his fault, he couldve gotten to the basket better but a lot of times when he did get inside the key the defenses collapsed on him quickly because the lane was clogged (anticipating offensive boards) and the floor spacing was terrible. What you have to realize is, in college its hard as hell to play inside of a system where you dont have the greenlight to go crazy because you have 2 or 3 other double figure guys on your team. Barnes has NBA range and he couldve just stood back off the college line and fired away, and they may have been better for it. He is not that type of player, he played within the confines. In his freshman year he was the #1 option from the perimeter (the loss of Will Graves was big)....and as stupid as Roy is, he refused to play Barnes and Bullock together....do you know that the backup PF was Justin Watts???? McDonald could hit some shots, but Roy didnt play him like he shouldve either. This year, Barnes was still option #1 from the outside....but there is so much more to his game. Only when Strickland went down did he insert Bullock in the lineup....which he shouldve been in there from the damn get go! Barnes and Bullock should be on the wings, no doubt about it...but Roy has some sense of loyalty and thats why he kept Strickland in the starting lineup...which gave them a smaller backcourt with less shooting ability!

Lemme tell you why Roy is really bad. Did you notice that everytime they made adjustments out of necessity they actually got better??? Drew was terrible, but when he finally left and Marshall got the minutes he was supposed to be getting, what happened? When Strickland went down and Bullock got in the starting spot what happened??? When Henson went out, did McAdoo not step his game up? Roy does not mesh talent well, the reason why he won the 2 titles is because he had some of the most NBA prospects assembled on two teams. Those teams basically could win without a coach. The 1st team was just talented as hell with McCants (a 20ppg scorer as a soph who toned his scoring down for the sake of the team) an inside force like May, the deadly Felton, and Marvin Williams who came off the bench and provided instant offense and rebounding. The 2nd team....you had one of the most fiercest competitors in Hansbrough ever in college, the incomparable Lawson, the lethal Ellington, and the all-around game of Danny Green.

Roy did the same thing at KU when he had LaFrenz and Pierce. Remember, that team had Kenny Gregory and Eric Chenowith too!

I cant tell you what your eyes see, but I will say you will be surprised in a few years at how good Barnes is.

"A great player could prosper under any circumstance while a good could prosper under the right circumstance"

Do you know how badly maligned Vince Carter was his first two years at UNC???? He was the best SG in his class and a top 5 player and people were saying after his 1st year he shouldnt have went to UNC....and that was under Dean Smith! I remember when Tim Thomas said he was glad he didnt go to UNC because Dean tries to change your game instead of letting you be who you are. What Dean did was break Vince's game down and made him NBA ready. Who had the better career? Vince or Tim? Vince had a better career than Jamison, who hit the ground running at UNC. Jamison wasnt nearly as touted as Vince. Vince struggled...it was only in his junior season when his true potential was realized...and he still only avg 15ppg and they had less talent than this UNC team did.

Once again, you are paying too much attention to pre-college hype and college success. Use Carter as an example. Highly touted HS player, potential as a superstar on the next level dismissed because he didnt avg 20ppg in college, had similar career and accolades as Barnes at UNC....just didnt have the saviour hype, basically because the team before him had Stack and Sheed on it....the team before Barnes didnt make the tourney. There are other players that didnt live up to lofty expectations in college that became stars in the pros....incidentally, Paul Pierce was one....and Barnes will still get drafted a lot higher than Pierce did.

lilballa141
Registered User
Joined: 06/03/2012
Posts: 168
Points: 96
Offline
surve

I can't say i disagree with anything you said as you had valid points.. some of Roys lineups were awfully painful to watch.. not only was Justin Watts our backup PF... he was also our backup PG until he was forced to use stillman white. As far as the strickland in the starting lineup i wouldve kept it that way, he's better defensively and is better at attacking the rim. The only thing bullock has on him is floor spacing it was absolutely terible when he went down. But with that said that shouldve created an even bigger opportunity for Harrison to step up. As far as him staying two years personally I think its cuz he didn't want to go to any of the teams that could possibly pick him in small markets such as minnesota cleveland etc.. so he used the extra year to try and get better, and I don't really think he did

As for those two championship teams... man i absolutely loved that lawson / ellington / green/ tyler ..they dominated college and RAN through the NCAA tourney blowing out michigan state in virtually a home game for them.. as far as that Paul Pierce Lafrenz i have no clue... i was 5 when pierce/carter were drafted so i cant tell you anything about that

theballerway
theballerway's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/09/2012
Posts: 448
Points: 279
Offline
dont know about all that Duke stuff

Duke had enough problems with Irving and Nolan deciding who was gonna be the man. Yet alone Curry and Dawkins and the 'golden Child' Singler

But saying that as UNC is becoming an McDs AA burial ground too where guards disappear- come in with big accolades n then become role players at best.

I swear Pierce slipped because of some rumour or the other cant remember what it was tho. Alot of teams regret listening to that 1, Hit on on the head with Carter tho Surve. Space is so key to a swingmans game. If Mike knows what good for him hell pick Barnes up. but I think the Sean May memories are stiull lingering. The althletic testing just adds to his potential. Guys forget these are prospects were talking about .Davis isnt expected to dominate right away ( and probably wont) but hes the #1 pick. Surely there should be some room for the #2 pickk togrow also. And hes got soem great skills to work with and blossom

cyclo
Registered User
Joined: 01/10/2009
Posts: 455
Points: -144
Offline
Barnes is a 6'8" version of

Barnes is a 6'8" version of Nick Young.

RSS: Syndicate content