Your Golden State Warriors. - Some Hope for the Future!

Harrison Barnes as a star. I just don't see it.

What elite quality does Barnes have that separates him from the current crop of superstar small forwards in the NBA?

It's not athleticism, explosiveness, or an unnatural ability to get to the rim. It's not rebounding. It's not defense. It's certainly not his mediocre ball handling ability.

Originally posted by crzy:
Harrison Barnes as a star. I just don't see it.

What elite quality does Barnes have that separates him from the current crop of superstar small forwards in the NBA?

It's not athleticism, explosiveness, or an unnatural ability to get to the rim. It's not rebounding. It's not defense. It's certainly not his mediocre ball handling ability.

By all accounts, it would have to be his shot making and work ethic. Quite similar to Paul Pierce, no?

Originally posted by crzy:
Harrison Barnes as a star. I just don't see it.

What elite quality does Barnes have that separates him from the current crop of superstar small forwards in the NBA?

It's not athleticism, explosiveness, or an unnatural ability to get to the rim. It's not rebounding. It's not defense. It's certainly not his mediocre ball handling ability.

Sounds like what they probably were saying about Chris Mullin back in 85. Mullin didnt do any of that well. However, he was a competitor, a very hard worker, and could shoot the ball. Now, before people get upset I am not saying that Barnes will be as good as Mullin. Only that he has similarities in his attitiude and to be able to put the ball in the hoop.

I dont think he will a superstar. However, I think he was the best pick at #7 this team could have made.

Originally posted by IdentityCrisis:

Originally posted by crzy:
Harrison Barnes as a star. I just don't see it.

What elite quality does Barnes have that separates him from the current crop of superstar small forwards in the NBA?

It's not athleticism, explosiveness, or an unnatural ability to get to the rim. It's not rebounding. It's not defense. It's certainly not his mediocre ball handling ability.

By all accounts, it would have to be his shot making and work ethic. Quite similar to Paul Pierce, no?

Shot-making? That's the #1 reason he fell to #7 in the first place. His below-average ball handling ability makes his ability to create his own shot questionable.

"Without Kendall Marshall, he showed he's not an isolation, one-on-one, create his shot guy. He's more of a spot-up shooter, piece of his puzzle

Barnes playing with an elite passing point guard would have much greater success. I'm not entirely 100% sold on Stephen Curry's ability as a distributor and playmaker.


There's no doubt he comes from the Grant Hill school of well-spoken athletes. But work ethic isn't a tangible skill.

Originally posted by susweel:

Originally posted by ImaMod:
Lets look at the Monta trade now..

The trade was really Monta Ellis, Ekpe Udoh
for Andrew Bogut, Stephen Jackson

We wouldnt have gotten the #7 pick if we didn't make that trade, so I'd add Barnes to what we got
We traded Jackson for Jefferson and pick 30, with that pick we got Festes Ezeli

Monte Ellis, Ekpe Udoh for Andrew Bogut, Richard Jefferson, Harrison barnes, Festes Ezeli

Looks like a great trade to me
There was many people in here that didnt like the trade, I liked it since the first time I heard of it

wont looks so good when you guys win 30 game next year, lol

That could happen if there are injuries. However, with Ellis on the team the Warriors would not have a legit center, a top prospect in Barnes, and would still have an undersized backcourt that couldnt defend. That was an excellent trade.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by crzy:
Harrison Barnes as a star. I just don't see it.

What elite quality does Barnes have that separates him from the current crop of superstar small forwards in the NBA?

It's not athleticism, explosiveness, or an unnatural ability to get to the rim. It's not rebounding. It's not defense. It's certainly not his mediocre ball handling ability.

Sounds like what they probably were saying about Chris Mullin back in 85. Mullin didnt do any of that well. However, he was a competitor, a very hard worker, and could shoot the ball. Now, before people get upset I am not saying that Barnes will be as good as Mullin. Only that he has similarities in his attitiude and to be able to put the ball in the hoop.

I dont think he will a superstar. However, I think he was the best pick at #7 this team could have made.

I hope you're right.

Originally posted by crzy:
Shot-making? That's the #1 reason he fell to #7 in the first place. His below-average ball handling ability makes his ability to create his own shot questionable.

"Without Kendall Marshall, he showed he's not an isolation, one-on-one, create his shot guy. He's more of a spot-up shooter, piece of his puzzle

Barnes playing with an elite passing point guard would have much greater success. I'm not entirely 100% sold on Stephen Curry's ability as a distributor and playmaker.


There's no doubt he comes from the Grant Hill school of well-spoken athletes. But work ethic isn't a tangible skill.

I can't find the article (you read things and they all get jumbled in your head and then you can't find the source) but I read that he was shooting at a very good percentage before Marshall went down, and then his season percentages dropped in the tournament.

So he needs to focus on creating his own shot.

If he doesn't shoot that well, isn't that explosive, isn't a lock down defender, doesn't grab boards at an amazing rate, why was he viewed as a top 5 spec?

Originally posted by IdentityCrisis:

Originally posted by SF69ers:
One thing that I see in common with those three teams are their well rounded defenses. They have players that can defend multiple positions. They could probably use another scorer for their respective teams. Maybe if Evan Turner starts living up to his loft expectations and start becoming a more consistent scorer. Paul George is quickly becoming a rising star in this league and he may become more of a threat on the offensive end.

I just don't view Basketball in the same way that I do Baseball or Football when it comes to building a team.

When you only have 5 players on the court, adding several good ones isn't enough. In baseball or football if you have good to very good players at pretty much every position, you will be extremely good because its hard for most teams to fill every spot with a good player.

Imo when it comes to basketball, you have to continually swing for the fences until you land a superstar. I'm not hating the Barnes pick because I think he MIGHT have the chance to be a superstar with his great shot and amazing work ethic as Pete has noted. However, Drummond is still very tempting. If he busts? So what, we suck again and go back to the top of the draft and look for a superstar again.

If you look at the NBA champions for the last decade+ every team has a superstar. Often times its the same teams, but the point still stands, you need someone who can completely dominate/take over the game.

you keep saying you want a superstar and keep talking about drummond, what makes you think he is going to be a superstar? his offensive game is so deficient that if he were to ever become a superstar, it would take him like 4 or 5 years.

Jeez, crzy. A bit pessimistic now, aren't you? I don't think I've seen you excited with our 1st round picks since Anthony Randolph lol.

I have a sense of confidence that Barnes will be a very solid pro, possibly an all star caliber player. Will he be a superstar? Probably not. I just don't think you're giving him enough credit for his skills. He's a great shooter, he's been working on handling the ball, his defense is decent, he's a team player, excellent bball IQ, and he's only 20!! He's got so much room for growth.

Glad we didnt take Sullinger and his bulging dicks

Originally posted by schmons:
you keep saying you want a superstar and keep talking about drummond, what makes you think he is going to be a superstar? his offensive game is so deficient that if he were to ever become a superstar, it would take him like 4 or 5 years.

Very true. They were making fun of his free throw shooting ability, or lack of ability. They were saying that Shaq would whoop him in a free throw shooting contest.

Originally posted by crzy:
But work ethic isn't a tangible skill.

Same thing I have been arguing in the Alex Smith threads for years.

Anyways I am not thrilled with the Barnes pick, but dont hate it at all. I think he will be solid, but I think his ceiling is fairly low. He could be a good rotational player or a low end starter. But, until we land a superstar, we will be stuck in mediocrity. There are a few players that we could have taken at 7 that have the potential to be a superstar. Some of you think we will be a playoff team and that would be great. But the ultimate goal is a championship, and at most this is a one and done playoff team. I dont see this team ever competing for a title the way its constructed and/or in the foreseeable future with this core of players.

Originally posted by schmons:
you keep saying you want a superstar and keep talking about drummond, what makes you think he is going to be a superstar? his offensive game is so deficient that if he were to ever become a superstar, it would take him like 4 or 5 years.

He just has the highest ceiling in the class. I'm not convinced he will be a superstar, he just has the possibility to be the best in the class.

Originally posted by IdentityCrisis:

Originally posted by schmons:
you keep saying you want a superstar and keep talking about drummond, what makes you think he is going to be a superstar? his offensive game is so deficient that if he were to ever become a superstar, it would take him like 4 or 5 years.

He just has the highest ceiling in the class. I'm not convinced he will be a superstar, he just has the possibility to be the best in the class.

Possibility maybe. Likelihood probably not. He is SO far away from being a real producer that a team may not get much of anything until his next contract comes up and he can leave. Just too much of a risk in my opinion when it was all said and done. Obviously 8 GM's in the league pretty much thought the same thing.

Originally posted by IdentityCrisis:

Originally posted by schmons:
you keep saying you want a superstar and keep talking about drummond, what makes you think he is going to be a superstar? his offensive game is so deficient that if he were to ever become a superstar, it would take him like 4 or 5 years.

He just has the highest ceiling in the class. I'm not convinced he will be a superstar, he just has the possibility to be the best in the class.

I also think that Austin Rivers has superstar potential as well. I think with the way our team is built, as long as we keep having lottery picks, we need to swing for the fences every time. I'm tired of our front office thinking we are a couple pieces away from being a contender, when clearly that isnt the case. We need to stop drafting players that could be "solid contributers" or "great role players" and start drafting players that have the potential to be elite players. Whether they turn out or not is irrelevant.

If you keep swinging for the fences, eventually you will connect and hit one out.