Welcome, HARRISON BARNES!!!!!

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:50 am
No Warriors fan can be disappointed with this draft. The team got EXACTLY what was needed.

Barnes is not quite a complete package, but he is better already than most SFs in the nba I think. MKG, as a comparison, probably has more upside, but offensively right now he is more limited than Barnes. Barnes showed in recent weeks that he is a great athlete and that is also a great trait. As long as he work defensively and works on his handles up until the season starts, he is probbaly the best option to contribute for the team immediately. No trade for a SF needed with him picked and he comes right in and can be the SF we all wanted, just on a cheap rookie contract of some 2.5 million in the first year. Try to beat that last factor.

We got the backup big in Ezeli, probably among the best five to seven Centers in the draft, some may think even higher. He rebounds and blocks shots, he does his job. Develop anywhere he needs which at his age he will. He is a backup and looks like a pretty good one.

Green might even end up SF starting material, maybe PF starting material. Footage of him, he looks awesome and he was taken much later than expected. He might well make the other SFs nonkeepers. McGuire should be kept for another year or two but that's it, as Green might be the backup SF to Barnes permanently in as little as next season, he looks that good. It actually looks great getting him, as next season both RJ and AB are expirers and who knows, maybe a run at some superstar like resigned Dwight, giving Bogut as well and Tyler, Ezeli and Green are proper backups at C, PF and SF.

This may well setup the future to be a contender without looking like it right now.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 6:03 am
Location: Thessaloniki, Greece
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:21 am
Agreed Migs i think we can all be satisfied. It is the second draft in the row i felt the FO did the best they could.
Image

Mullin is the Ultimate Warrior
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:34 am
Pick 7 - Harrison Barnes, SF
Initial grade: B+


Barnes was precisely what Warriors fans were hoping would come out of this draft: a starting caliber forward. Sure, the glitzy, immediately gratifying choice for many would have been to trade the pick for a defensive-minded 3, but Barnes is no courtesy-clapping consolation prize: the man is big, strong, and incredibly agile. And for a stacked dude with so much beef on him, he sure knows how to fill it up. Fans of Jason Richardson will love Harrison Barnes; the guy rebounds, he shoots, and he finishes. He's another gun to pair with our already dangerous starting 5 and with HB in tow, I don't know how the Warriors miss the playoffs next year.

Pick 30: Festus Ezeli, C/PF
Initial grade: C+


The main plug for our backup big situation, Ezeli is ready to contribute now with solid shot-blocking instincts and a frame already carrying 264 pounds. Not the rebounder that either Lee or Bogut are, Ezeli can spell either for small periods of time when the Warriors are looking to slow the game down and get a few stops. If nothing else, it's as if we reacquired Epke Udoh... But bigger. Andris Biedrins is officially Mark Jackson's cleaning lady now in the locker room.

Pick 35: Draymond Green, PF/SF
Initial grade: A-


A wildcard pick, but a DAMN good one if his strength can hold up at an NBA level. Green is a mold of player that one seldom sees in the NBA anymore; a Rodney Rogers, an Anthony Mason; the big-bodied 3/4 who has so much fundamental skill, he can step in and run the point for a few possessions a game. He rebounds, he has a midrange jumper best suited for catch-and-shoot pops, and he has a tremendous basketball brain. The biggest reach in the Warriors draft, but if all goes well, Green is an NBA role player waiting to happen who should enjoy a solid 10 year career.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:32 am
You know, I don't watch a lot of college basketball. To be honest I don't watch ANY college basketball so I try not to comment too much, but someone who does can correct me if I'm wrong. I saw that Barnes measured off the charts at the combine, but from what I see in some of the videos I've watched, he's not athletic. He doesn't dunk the ball with authority. He doesn't drive much, and if he does it isn't very athletic. I don't see any reverses, euro steps, hang time, left hand, not much of anything. Given the FO is saying that he's more athletic than what he's given credit for, but that's because they got to watch them in a private workout that none of us got to see, so I don't see where people are getting some of their opinions. Anyone kind enough to link me because I'm not impressed with his agility, speed, or finishing ability. Or like I said before, our definition of athleticism may not be the same.

I will say though, that there's a video where draft express breaks down his game and it showed that he plays really good on-ball defense. If all else fails I think he has what it takes to be a good defender.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:43 pm
Again, 8th, it depends on the kind of athleticism you're talking about.

(A) He's not 6'5" and (B) he's not Kevin Durant, so all those guard-like qualities you listed aren't his game. He's strong and quick and athletic like a Carmelo Anthony, not a LeBron James. He's not there to wow anybody with any coast-to-coast shake-and-bakes en route to a throwdown; creating off the dribble is a very specific problem for him. But he can rebound against bigger opponents, he can bully his way to the cup, he's a solid wall on defense, and he's explosive in short spurts. I feel like you're looking for the wrong kind of athleticism; or, to be fair, a different kind of athleticism. Harrison Barnes is football athletic; not track-and-field athletic.

I'm basing this on my view of his play at NC, which consists of less than 10 games. I'm not a combine guy; a guy's vert, his 40 time, his dribbling-through-cones... Those things don't really phase me. I'm much more of a hands on type of scout and, if I can assure you of one simple thing it is this: Barnes can play.
Last edited by 32 on Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:07 pm
Just to clarify, I am NOT saying Barnes is an athletic stud. I'm just saying his athleticism is more based around things like balance, upward strength, and length. Obviously, yes, his true value is as a shooter, but some of guys are saying that like its a bad thing. How are Klay Thompson and Steph Curry working out? A jumper defenders are forced to respect makes all other parts of one's game more dangerous.

Barnes can fill it up. That's the bottom line.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 1129
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 4:53 pm
Poster Credit: 26
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:01 pm
Also, I don't think he has to be a huge scorer on this team. He just has to be a threat at the 3point line to space the floor for Lee and Bogut, be able to move without the ball, rebound, and defend. He isn't a lock down defender, but he has the size and athletism to be a good defender. Much better then Wright in my opinion.
"Hard Work Beats Talent, When Talent Doesn't Work Hard"
Image

Image : 2010 - 2011
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:16 am
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:04 pm
Good analysis 32. Out of curiosity, who could we have picked at #7 and #30 that would have been worth an "A" in your book? From where I'm standing, anyone else would've been either less valuable as a prospect, or less valuable as a team need (or perhaps even both). I honestly can't imagine being happier with those first three picks based on who we had available at the time.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 3:36 pm
D4rk 0ne wrote:Good analysis 32. Out of curiosity, who could we have picked at #7 and #30 that would have been worth an "A" in your book? From where I'm standing, anyone else would've been either less valuable as a prospect, or less valuable as a team need (or perhaps even both). I honestly can't imagine being happier with those first three picks based on who we had available at the time.

Perhaps I'm being a bit unfair to Barnes, as I do in fact believe he was the best player available and heavily addresses a need. I guess I mean a "B+" as a #7 pick, because as talented and NBA-ready as Barnes is, you're looking at a solid starter-quality guy who, to my mind, lacks that superstar potential. To compare, I'd give Lillard at #6 an A for a top 10 pick because he might explode onto the scene and turn into LeMarcus Alderige's Russell Westbrook, but Barnes, Waiters, Rivers, and Myers are all B's to me, as they seem like they'll end up being solid starters, but probably not anybody's rock. Actually, Rivers is probably closer to a C (like Terrence Ross) because there are a couple question marks they need to address before they can be deemed starter-quality.

Ezeli's C+ is for a similar reason. Simple grade for a simple player. Love the pick, think he addresses a need that would have cost us Kwame money in free agency, but he's a shot-blocker and likely to be not much else throughout his time in the league. For us, it's another home run. We add size, defense, and toughness, which we needed. But Ezeli won't unseat Bogut anytime soon and I doubt he'd even overtake Udoh if EU13 were still here.

Draymond Green gets an A because he's a rotation guy that can rebound, handle, play some D, and contribute in a variety of ways that'll make him an excellent addition worthy of at least 10 minutes of run per game. He won't excell at any one area, like Barnes or Ezeli, but he'll do a little bit of everything and plucking a poor man's Anthony Mason in the 2nd round really intrigues me.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 1129
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 4:53 pm
Poster Credit: 26
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 3:45 pm
Wow! just watched Rooks on NBA TV and you guys are going to love Barnes athletism. I didn't watch much college ball, but this guy has jumps. I wouldn't be considerned sinc he is also a worker.
"Hard Work Beats Talent, When Talent Doesn't Work Hard"
Image

Image : 2010 - 2011
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:49 pm
32 wrote:Again, 8th, it depends on the kind of athleticism you're talking about.

(A) He's not 6'5" and (B) he's not Kevin Durant, so all those guard-like qualities you listed aren't his game. He's strong and quick and athletic like a Carmelo Anthony, not a LeBron James. He's not there to wow anybody with any coast-to-coast shake-and-bakes en route to a throwdown; creating off the dribble is a very specific problem for him. But he can rebound against bigger opponents, he can bully his way to the cup, he's a solid wall on defense, and he's explosive in short spurts. I feel like you're looking for the wrong kind of athleticism; or, to be fair, a different kind of athleticism. Harrison Barnes is football athletic; not track-and-field athletic.

I'm basing this on my view of his play at NC, which consists of less than 10 games. I'm not a combine guy; a guy's vert, his 40 time, his dribbling-through-cones... Those things don't really phase me. I'm much more of a hands on type of scout and, if I can assure you of one simple thing it is this: Barnes can play.


I'm sorry, did I say something about him being 6'5"? I said he measured really good at the combine. He's 6'8", has a good vertical leap, long wingspan, etc. etc.

How is rebounding against bigger opponents make you athletic? Unless you're talking about those Garnett-esque one handed rebounds, but even then I haven't seen/heard about him doing any of that. And by bullying you mean posting up or using strength to get to the basket I haven't seen/heard that either.

And if having a "wrong athletic" player means having someone who is fast, can dribble, finish, then I don't wanna be right.

Look. I hope he works out for us. Maybe the coaching staff can mold him into something we need, but right now I'm not optimistic about our pick. If it means anything I don't think I liked the Klay Thompson pick but now I'm a Thompson homer. Hopefully everything will turn out the same way with Barnes.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:33 pm
Location: Los Anyeles, CA
Poster Credit: 13
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:09 pm
Solid pick. Only guy I would have taken over him is Drummond and I would be very nervous about him panning out. I would have picked him though regardless because of the potential and size and how lack of bigs has cursed our franchise for over 30 years. But I can live with this pick because we also drafted a guy with a ton of potential and didn't grab someone with a super low ceiling like Zeller.

People all act like Drummond is going to fulfill his potential but then act as if a 20 year old who is proven has no potential to improve himself. This is actually more likely given Barnes hard work ethic. The spacing in the NBA should be much more conducive to his slashing, although I still don't think he'll need to be relied on that a ton. Barnes has a decent post game already and could be one of the best post playing SFs in a few years. His size will be nice on defense as long as he gives effort, which has did in college. Henson doesn't block as many shots without guys funneling their men towards him and if you watched UNC, it was not a lot of Marshall doing that.

Plus it's not like Ezeli's measurables are all that different from Drummond's. Drummond is a bit quicker laterally and has a little more bulk, but Festus has great instincts, is more ready and has a high ceiling himself given that he's only been playing for 4 years. There's a good chance in 4 years Drummond would only be able to contribute what Festus should be able to right away.

I really wanted Crowder at 35 but Dallas swooped him and after the Barnes selection think Green is a better fit and I like them both as prospects for their versatility, although Crowder the much better defender.
Get Money. Get Paid.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13525
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:18 pm
8th ave wrote:
32 wrote:Again, 8th, it depends on the kind of athleticism you're talking about.

(A) He's not 6'5" and (B) he's not Kevin Durant, so all those guard-like qualities you listed aren't his game. He's strong and quick and athletic like a Carmelo Anthony, not a LeBron James. He's not there to wow anybody with any coast-to-coast shake-and-bakes en route to a throwdown; creating off the dribble is a very specific problem for him. But he can rebound against bigger opponents, he can bully his way to the cup, he's a solid wall on defense, and he's explosive in short spurts. I feel like you're looking for the wrong kind of athleticism; or, to be fair, a different kind of athleticism. Harrison Barnes is football athletic; not track-and-field athletic.

I'm basing this on my view of his play at NC, which consists of less than 10 games. I'm not a combine guy; a guy's vert, his 40 time, his dribbling-through-cones... Those things don't really phase me. I'm much more of a hands on type of scout and, if I can assure you of one simple thing it is this: Barnes can play.


I'm sorry, did I say something about him being 6'5"? I said he measured really good at the combine. He's 6'8", has a good vertical leap, long wingspan, etc. etc.

How is rebounding against bigger opponents make you athletic? Unless you're talking about those Garnett-esque one handed rebounds, but even then I haven't seen/heard about him doing any of that. And by bullying you mean posting up or using strength to get to the basket I haven't seen/heard that either.

And if having a "wrong athletic" player means having someone who is fast, can dribble, finish, then I don't wanna be right.

Look. I hope he works out for us. Maybe the coaching staff can mold him into something we need, but right now I'm not optimistic about our pick. If it means anything I don't think I liked the Klay Thompson pick but now I'm a Thompson homer. Hopefully everything will turn out the same way with Barnes.

Really...?

C'mon now, I know you're smart enough to be able to distinguish strong-athletic from quick-athletic. You're gonna split hairs with me about how athleticism works it's way into solid rebounding? You're gonna claim he can't post-up or bully his way into the paint because you haven't seen it? Did you happen to see him play against Clemson or Texas (cause if you had, you'd have seen those traits all through-out)?

Look, you have every right to endorse Andre Drummond and voice your belief that he would have been the better pick, but don't bag on the Harrison Barnes pick if you've never seen him play and don't attempt to clown my logic in this thread cause i'm being very civil and normal. You DIDN'T say he was 6'5", but denouncing his athleticism cause your 45 second DraftExpress video-montage doesn't show him eurostepping implies that you have the expectations that this full-bodied 6'8" small forward needs to have Kevin Durant level talent in order to be seen as an athlete. No, he doesn't do any tricky, AND1 dribbling moves. No, he's not gonna Mozgov anybody. No, he doesn't have Sullinger's post game or Lillard's penetration or Beal's explosiveness. But that doesn't mean he's not athletic.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:42 pm
Slow your roll, man. Ain't nobody here claimed a damn single thing. Period.

You know, I don't watch a lot of college basketball. To be honest I don't watch ANY college basketball so I try not to comment too much, but someone who does can correct me if I'm wrong. I saw that Barnes measured off the charts at the combine, but from what I see in some of the videos I've watched, he's not athletic.


Ain't nobody here tryna start an internet argument with you. I admittedly said I don't watch college hoops and invited someone to tell me wussup.

And just because someone is strong don't mean he's athletic. It just makes him strong. Athleticism is a combination of physical attributes. To me at least. I'm not gonna sit here and argue what athleticism is, because shiet, I didn't know there was much room for an argument.

So I watched both highlights of those games and it looks like he can take advantage of mismatches an he does uses his length and leaping ability to gather up boards. I also see that he's much more of a finesse player on the offensive side of the ball which is koo too. I'm particularly impressed by how he brought his team back from however much they were down and literally took over the game and won it in overtime. I wished I would've watched some of these highlights before I doubted any of his abilities, but ****, you ain't gotta be a douche about it.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21375
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 27
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:18 am
I think Barnes is already quite good and should only improve and pretty quickly as well. He looks good on both ends, but I haven't seen him much either. The only weak thing about him looks like his ball handling, but that he can and should improve over the next year or two as well. He really does have the athleticism to be Iguodala like to be honest, comparing him to the player I most wanted and liked. Barnes will likely come out with energy, looking to show that he was rightfully the most sought after player coming out of high school. He was the BPA and filled the team's biggest need, 10 out of 10 FO on that one.

Ezeli just needs to be a better rebounder to be close to perfect as a backup big right now. I didn't expect the #30 to have it all, but to give the team most of what it needed is somewhat a steal. He has to learn from Bogut and who knows, he might even become one of the best backup bigs in a few years.

Green looks like an absolute steal. I haven't seen that muc of him, but what I have seen, he can pretty much do it all. He is built real well and strong and is athletic. Real happy he was picked and now he has to earn the outright backup SF spot, playing some PF as well would be real good as well. That'd allow the team to let go of DWright and RJ, maybe even McGuire if Green becomes that capable.


I just hope the FO isn't thinking of making a trade with anyone but DWright, RJ and/or AB. The team is otherwise set.
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests