Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 103
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lewisville, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by luvdahops View Post
    I don't think anyone views Barnes as having unlimited upside and potential anymore. General view is that he is a good but not great athlete who lacks the quickness and explosiveness to be dominant, even at the college level, but is a top tier shooter, especially for his size. From an NBA standpoint, he is seen as someone with a fairly low ceiling, but also limited downside - you know what you are getting, and it is a skill set that is immediately useful for many teams, which is not the case with a lot of other top prospects.

    In hindsight, it seems very odd to me that HB was ever viewed as having such a high ceiling. The fact that he is not a great athlete, especially in terms of quickness, was obvious to me from the first time I saw him play, yet the ESPN, etc. party line remained "potential next Kobe" well past the time it was obvious that would never be the case.
    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?

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    Or could it be that UNC just cannot develope wing players???
    Can we please, please start this meme?

    Quote Originally Posted by luvdahops View Post
    In hindsight, it seems very odd to me that HB was ever viewed as having such a high ceiling. The fact that he is not a great athlete, especially in terms of quickness, was obvious to me from the first time I saw him play, yet the ESPN, etc. party line remained "potential next Kobe" well past the time it was obvious that would never be the case.
    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.
    Last edited by Jderf; 05-02-2012 at 11:21 AM.
    "With seven national titles and 20 Final Fours in the 64-team NCAA Tournament era, Duke and UNC have had more playoff success than any other CONFERENCE." - Al Featherston

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Quote Originally Posted by roywhite View Post
    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?
    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).

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    I apologise for the multiple typo's in the previous post (had a long day and my back was killing me). Bottomline of what I was trying to say was that spending hours in a gym is not the same as "working on your game". I have know lots of gym rats that just play pick up games and 21, etc... for hours and hours every day that never really improve. I would not say that they are working on their games, I would say they are killing time in the gym....

    I do not know this, but given the paultry improvement made by Barnes over his two years, he may have just been killing time in the gym... I may be wrong, but if he put the work in (and by work I mean specific dedicated drills on ball handling, low post moves, rebounding) that Ol Roy lead us to believe when he said that HB was the hardest working kid he had seen (paraphrase), then he must have pegged his talent meter in high school. Or could it be that UNC just cannot develope wing players???
    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".)
    I certify that I personally composed this post entirely on its own merit (or lack thereof) without assistance of tutors, advisers, counselors or other outside sources or references. No credit is requested or received and no eligibility has been questioned (yet) with its submission.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    Quote Originally Posted by devildeac View Post
    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".)
    I wouldn't squab-ble over such nominclature, but it does seem you are trying to pigeon-hole the poor chap.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by luvdahops View Post
    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.
    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.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    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.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham, within a couple of miles of Cameron
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    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.
    But, but, if he just made one more shot per game! Then, he would be as good as everyone wanted him to be. Just ask Jay B.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    On the couch
    Quote Originally Posted by luvdahops View Post
    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?

  10. #70
    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?
    "Something in my vicinity is Carolina blue and this offends me." - HPR

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by HaveFunExpectToWin View Post
    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.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy View Post
    ... What are we going to compare next, Rembrant and refridgerator art?
    "Black Pigeons Playing Poker" (on velvet)

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by HaveFunExpectToWin View Post
    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?
    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.
    "With seven national titles and 20 Final Fours in the 64-team NCAA Tournament era, Duke and UNC have had more playoff success than any other CONFERENCE." - Al Featherston

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Class of '94 View Post
    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?
    But if you only have one decent example, doesn't that just prove the point? Plus, that was just sooooo long ago. Can you show me anybody more recent?
    "With seven national titles and 20 Final Fours in the 64-team NCAA Tournament era, Duke and UNC have had more playoff success than any other CONFERENCE." - Al Featherston

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    Quote Originally Posted by Class of '94 View Post
    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? ...
    Danny was so well coached in college that he exploded for 81 points in his first two NBA seasons
    - total.
    ol roy must have spent some time with danny on his dance moves, that coaching shined through.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Jderf View Post
    But if you only have one decent example, doesn't that just prove the point? Plus, that was just sooooo long ago. Can you show me anybody more recent?
    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.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by BD80 View Post
    Danny was so well coached in college that he exploded for 81 points in his first two NBA seasons
    - total.
    ol roy must have spent some time with danny on his dance moves, that coaching shined through.
    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.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denver
    Quote Originally Posted by Class of '94 View Post
    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.
    If anybody can, with a straight face, use Danny Green to support an argument that Roy develops wings, then the same person has to admit that Lance Thomas is a good recent example of Coach K developing bigs.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Dev11 View Post
    If anybody can, with a straight face, use Danny Green to support an argument that Roy develops wings, then the same person has to admit that Lance Thomas is a good recent example of Coach K developing bigs.
    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.

  20. #80
    Roy has hired Hubert Davis to replace the departing Jerrod Haase. Does this mean Jay replaces him on gameday?

Similar Threads

  1. And the hits just keep on coming.
    By ncexnyc in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 11:32 AM
  2. Jason's son hits game-winning PK
    By BD80 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-20-2009, 01:52 PM
  3. Ty Lawson Hits The Casino
    By Newton_14 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 04-04-2009, 01:00 PM
  4. Barry Hits #756!
    By blazindw in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 08-12-2007, 06:41 AM
  5. Lost "Greatest Hits"
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 05-21-2007, 11:24 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •