Originally Posted by
gumbomoop
Although I agree that davekay1971's post is excellent, I'm goingddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd to ignore this hint that we stop trying to figure out what happened with Barnes. I do not agree ...
... that all further commentary on Barnes constitutes piling on. It depends on the commentary.
Take, for example, this interesting debate - imported from the "Roy's Greatest Hits" thread:
IMO, it's possible that both gethlives and oldnavy are onto something. But exactly what they're onto - in obviously different ways - has something to do with Newton_14's observation:
Barnes is a mystery. I do believe he worked hard to improve. In some, maybe mysterious, way, he was "driven." Although oldnavy's blunt language about "wasting his time" packs a powerful verbal punch, I don't think it's literally, as opposed to rhetorically, true. That is, I wouldn't go so far as to say Barnes didn't improve at all, and might even discourage gethlives from conceding as much ["not show improvement"].
Let's agree that it's almost certain that Barnes was, in his own [I think deliberately] mysterious way, driven. He wanted to be known as being driven, yes? He worked on several aspects of his game. By the eye test - at least mine - he was a better player at the end of his college career than at the beginning, so not all his efforts were "wasted." But the improvement didn't strike me as substantial. Barnes himself made it known that he would spend the summer of 2011 working on his handle. Yet in his sophomore year, he was only marginally better in that crucial skill. I don't know how many times I heard Jay Bilas and Jimmy Dykes [and others] say this past season that Barnes was good for only one or two dribbles before he had to shoot. That is, his handle was still a noticeable weakness.
Similarly, commentators wondered aloud why Barnes wasn't an aggressive rebounder, nor generally an aggressive player, period. At some point this past season one heard the occasional explicit, and more than occasional implicit, contrast of Michael Kidd-Gilchrist's fierceness with Barnes's passivity. Why did such a "driven" player show so little "drive"? For that matter, why didn't he drive to the basket? Something of a mystery, to be sure.
Here's my speculation, admittedly incomplete, even as speculation. Barnes was, surprisingly, overshadowed by several unanticipated developments: [1] Zeller's admirable emergence as a consistent, dependable offensive force. [2] Henson's - also surprising, to me, at least - improvement on O. Henson developed more moves than did Barnes. Think about that. Henson had a pretty varied set of moves; Barnes didn't, or at least didn't show it. [3] Marshall's brilliance both as a long-passer and half-court distributor of delicately spun, and perfectly paced and placed, entry passes.
Barnes became a good weapon, but not usually a first choice weapon. I guess there were times when he became a go-to guy, but he sure wasn't the regular go-to guy. Would we have seen more of Barnes's improvement had we seen more of Barnes? His sweet jumper was so fluid, but why depend overmuch on that when Marshall could get Zeller some pretty easy shots? Why depend on that when Marshall could find Zeller, Henson, and others for over-the-top lay-ins? Did Barnes get many of those passes? I can't remember. But I can remember Zeller and Henson loping toward the other end for a sure 2. I can't remember Barnes; I can remember Zeller, and Henson, and Marshall.
Barnes didn't disappear, but he wasn't the focal point he was expected to be, not least by himself. Is it possible that Barnes, who seems to have been so happy when Marshall replaced Drew, was negatively affected - in terms of his own development-by-in-game-repititions - by Marshall's meteoric rise as the engine that drove the Heels? A version of "hoist by his own petard"?
Marshall became the driver. The "driven" Harrison Barnes wound up, most of the time, being driven around the court by Kendall Marshall. Thus, when Marshall went down, Barnes was, ironically, less prepared to drive the team than was Stilman White.