Now, remind me...what tells us Barnes is really a top tier shooter?
Is it his 44% FG accuracy this season?
Or is it his 35.8% accuracy from 3-pt distance?
Or maybe that he likes to shoot and has a high release point on his jumpshot?
Printable View
Can we please, please start this meme?
I've started thinking of him as basically a Wayne Ellington clone, but with excellent size/strength. Maybe Barnes dunks a bit more often and adds maybe one more rebound per game, but otherwise, I can't really think of what exactly differentiates the two players.
... except for a championship, that is. :D
Finding myself in the odd position of defending Barnes. It is not a comfortable place to be. I think I'm getting a rash.
Shot selection and frequency can skew shooting percentages. Keep in mind that JJ shot just over 40% from 3 and 43% overall for his career. I don't think anyone doubted he was a great shooter.
With Barnes, my (admittedly unscientific) sense is that his % was a lot higher on straight catch and shoot opportunities, and on step back jumpers and pullups after 1 or 2 dribbles. It was when he tried to force the action beyond these types of opportunities that his percentage plummeted. And his stroke on those specific types of shots was often sweet and deadly accurate, and many scouts seem to think that will translate fairly well to the NBA, at least in the right situation (e.g. good PG, post players who require doubling/constant attention).
Considering our nickname for him, would it have been more accurate if you had referred to "the POULTRY improvement made..."
(Yes, it would be a stretch, but I looked it up and the definition of poultry could apply here. I know someone might cry fowl but see "squab".)
Missing shots also skews your shooting percentages. Redick was considered a better shooter than Barnes because he shot better than Barnes, both in their respective sophomore seasons and in the years in which they were considered worthy of lottery picks. Even if you look at eFG%, Barnes just isn't that great.
Interesting stuff. And shame on me if I implied that Barnes was as good a shooter as JJ. My intention in pointing to JJ was to illustrate some of the limitations in looking purely at percentages in evaluating shooting ability.
I personally think Barnes is still overrated as Top 10 pick (most mock drafts seem to have him at #6 or #7 now), and lean more toward Steve Kerr's perspective (which I summarized in a post a few weeks back), which is more like Top 15 and even then dependent on fit. I would not be at all surprised to Henson and perhaps Zeller and/or Marshall to be picked ahead of him. I am not a big fan of Henson, and his draft position is also seems somewhat fit dependent, but his ceiling is far higher than that of HB, and he has improved notably each year.
JJ developed into much more than a spot up shooter over his career. JJ was a much better shooter than Barnes if for no other reason than how hard JJ worked to get his shot off. Go back and watch some film of JJ running around the court being held and bumped by his defenders. Then watch some film of Barnes and you will basically see a guy that stands on the perimeter and waits for Marshall to lure a defender away from him and then hit him with a great pass, OR you see Barnes take a dribble or two and then step back to hit a jump shot. Much easier shots to hit than curling off screens with guys hanging on you.
Why are we even having this discussion comparing JJ and Barnes as shooters?? What are we going to compare next, Rembrant and refridgerator art?
Since we're all agreed that UNC's system cannot develop wing players, it raises an interesting question. Had Barnes not skyped Roy, but instead chosen Duke, could he have developed into a Singler, Dunleavy type player or perhaps had an even better career?
To be fair (and I can't believe I'm defending Roy and Carolina, couldn't one make the argument that Danny Green developed as a wing over 4 years in Carolina's system and has become a decent NBA pro with the Spurs?
As far as Barnes is concerned, I'm not so sure now that he would've developed better at Duke because it appears he needs a quality PG to really excell; and without a healthy Kyrie or Quinn Cook feeding him the ball in the right spots, he might not look that much different in a Duke uhiform as he did in a UNC form with no KM.
I'd say that's almost a certainty. Think about it, how many wing players has Roy put in the NBA? I bet you couldn't find more than five. Clearly UNC just isn't the place to go if you play on the wing. Who is (and how tall is) their Swingman Coach? They don't even have one!? Just solidifies what we already knew (and what people have been saying for years): UNC just doesn't develop wings.
Clearly, HB made a mistake by not accepting K's tutelage.
Eventhough he's not a UNC player, I would also say Paul Pierce comes to mind since Roy did coach him and I believe Kansas played the same system when Roy was the HC there as Carolina plays now.
That said. you're right in that 1 or 2 wing players at best (and I can't think of any more recent examples) tends to support the idea that UNC's system does not develop and produce wing players. That said, it will be interesting to watch the development (or lack thereof) of PJ and Reggie Bullock as well as possibl;y McAdoo (who I remember saying as a High School player that Roy and his parents envisioned him being a 3 in the NBA and that Roy would develop him with that mind. Of course Roy made similar promises to Henson and his family and the tryout at the 3 didn't work out). Bullock and Hairston could end up being more in the mold of Wayne Ellington than a Paul Pierce; but we'll see.
LOL!!! All very good points about Danny Green; and thanks for pointin them out. Again, I'm no Carolina or Roy Williams fan by any stretch of the imagination; but I just wanted to be fair since there are many who perceive Duke as having similar problems developing big men (although there are way more examples to the contrary in regards to Duke than there are for Roy's UNC/Kansas programs). But in all honesty, I can't think of that many wing players that have developed in his system and gone on to becoming decent to good (at least) NBA players.
Again, I just wanted to be fair to Roy and UNC. ;) You're right in that if Danny Green is used to support Roy, Lance is a good example to support K although I don't view Lance as a "big"; but rather more of a wing player who guarded 4s and 3s in college. But I get your point.
Roy has hired Hubert Davis to replace the departing Jerrod Haase. Does this mean Jay replaces him on gameday?