Barnes frustrated with lack of offers

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32

User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:53 pm
Yeah. If I were any team looking at Matt, I'd pay for only one year. He's not worth the risk.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 5705
» Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:57 pm
xbaywarrior wrote:Yeah. If I were any team looking at Matt, I'd pay for only one year. He's not worth the risk.


If they sign him to a two-three year deal and he turns out to be a bust, you are stuck with him for three-four million a year. One year is alright because if he turns out to be a bust, you can get rid of him. I hope that is what the Warriors do. If he did the same this year as he did last year, that is the situation where they can give him a multiyear deal.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:27 am
sfsfsfgiants wrote:
xbaywarrior wrote:Yeah. If I were any team looking at Matt, I'd pay for only one year. He's not worth the risk.


If they sign him to a two-three year deal and he turns out to be a bust, you are stuck with him for three-four million a year. One year is alright because if he turns out to be a bust, you can get rid of him. I hope that is what the Warriors do. If he did the same this year as he did last year, that is the situation where they can give him a multiyear deal.


Exactly. If the Warriors are going to spend the full MLE on Barnes, it better be only for a year. If Mullin is offering him 2-3 mil, I don't mind a multiyear deal. Nothing more, anything less. :wink:
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:13 am
We're not gonna pay him the full MLE. That's too much for a player that has only one good season in his career. And as a backup, to make matters worse.

I'd say our limit is around 3 or 3.5 million, not more.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 21852
» Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:08 am
xbaywarrior wrote:
sfsfsfgiants wrote:
xbaywarrior wrote:Yeah. If I were any team looking at Matt, I'd pay for only one year. He's not worth the risk.


If they sign him to a two-three year deal and he turns out to be a bust, you are stuck with him for three-four million a year. One year is alright because if he turns out to be a bust, you can get rid of him. I hope that is what the Warriors do. If he did the same this year as he did last year, that is the situation where they can give him a multiyear deal.


Exactly. If the Warriors are going to spend the full MLE on Barnes, it better be only for a year. If Mullin is offering him 2-3 mil, I don't mind a multiyear deal. Nothing more, anything less. :wink:



Barnes at 3 million a year for three years is ideal because you don't want him leaving or demanding much more money if he repeats what he did last season in only a one year deal
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 5705
» Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:16 am
migya wrote:
xbaywarrior wrote:
sfsfsfgiants wrote:
xbaywarrior wrote:Yeah. If I were any team looking at Matt, I'd pay for only one year. He's not worth the risk.


If they sign him to a two-three year deal and he turns out to be a bust, you are stuck with him for three-four million a year. One year is alright because if he turns out to be a bust, you can get rid of him. I hope that is what the Warriors do. If he did the same this year as he did last year, that is the situation where they can give him a multiyear deal.


Exactly. If the Warriors are going to spend the full MLE on Barnes, it better be only for a year. If Mullin is offering him 2-3 mil, I don't mind a multiyear deal. Nothing more, anything less. :wink:



Barnes at 3 million a year for three years is ideal because you don't want him leaving or demanding much more money if he repeats what he did last season in only a one year deal


But what happens if we give him a full time starting job, and he busts and averages 6-3-1. He will be a bench warmer the rest of his time here.

I would say three years with a team option after the first year.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1266
» Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:09 pm
There is no way he is going to sign a 1 year contract coming off a career year. Migya had it right with 3 mil for 3 years and I would add a player and team option for year four (where they both had to agree on it). That way he gets financial security and W's don't committ too much for too long. As trite as it is, 3 mil isn't that much in the NBA, considering teams are paying players 5 times that amount to not play for them.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 21852
» Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:05 pm
Thunder wrote:There is no way he is going to sign a 1 year contract coming off a career year. Migya had it right with 3 mil for 3 years and I would add a player and team option for year four (where they both had to agree on it). That way he gets financial security and W's don't committ too much for too long. As trite as it is, 3 mil isn't that much in the NBA, considering teams are paying players 5 times that amount to not play for them.



Yea, three years isn't exactly a long time to commit to a player, especially at three milion a year only. Even if Barnes does become a pretty useless player, it is only three years and he can get stuck deep down the bench and Mullin can still sign another player for a similar amount

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests