How To Make A Harrison Barnes Trade Work?

[Roy H.]

He might. If Barnes came, I agree he would take all or nearly all of the minutes used by Semi, Grant, and Javonte, plus maybe a couple minutes from current backcourt. But mostly I think the team would play fewer two-big sets - instead of 60-70 minutes going to Theis-RW-TT it might be closer to 50. So a lot of his minutes would come from the bigs. Theis could slide back from the 4 to the 5, e.g.

If they bring him on, it would be ideal to move one of the current bigs.

You just did a good job explaining why I am not that excited about Harrison Barnes.  He is less PF than Marcus Morris was for example but you are saying that we would need to play him mostly as a PF (or force us to play without a PF).  Marcus Morris and Horford worked pretty well as a "big" pair but that type of line up can't be used all the time, there just isn't enough size.  Barnes and Theis or Barnes and Thompson can't even equal Morris and Horford but that is what we would be faced with needing to use.

Why can’t we slide Tatum over to power forward? He seemed to excel there last season.

[Vermont Green]

He might. If Barnes came, I agree he would take all or nearly all of the minutes used by Semi, Grant, and Javonte, plus maybe a couple minutes from current backcourt. But mostly I think the team would play fewer two-big sets - instead of 60-70 minutes going to Theis-RW-TT it might be closer to 50. So a lot of his minutes would come from the bigs. Theis could slide back from the 4 to the 5, e.g.

If they bring him on, it would be ideal to move one of the current bigs.

You just did a good job explaining why I am not that excited about Harrison Barnes.  He is less PF than Marcus Morris was for example but you are saying that we would need to play him mostly as a PF (or force us to play without a PF).  Marcus Morris and Horford worked pretty well as a "big" pair but that type of line up can't be used all the time, there just isn't enough size.  Barnes and Theis or Barnes and Thompson can't even equal Morris and Horford but that is what we would be faced with needing to use.

Why can’t we slide Tatum over to power forward? He seemed to excel there last season.

I know that opinions vary on this but to me, whether you play Barnes or Tatum at "PF", it is still the same problem but worse if you force this on Tatum.  Tatum is our best player and one of the best wings in the game right now.  So you bring in Barnes to force yourself to play your best player out of position for what will be a fair percentage of his overall minutes?

Yeah, I just don't see it.  I don't like Barnes that much.  I think if the Celtics did bring in Barnes, they would play him in the Marcus Morris role, which isn't the end of the world, it is not horrible, but definitely not worth what I think we would have to give up, which includes the opportunity cost of the TPE plus likely Thompson for salary purposes and maybe Nesmith and picks to make it worthwhile to SAC.

I do that for Jerami or Collins or Siakam, all true PF players who would not force Tatum out of position, but not for a swing who leans more wing and has a history of not really living up to the stats when the chips are down.

[Celtics2021]

He might. If Barnes came, I agree he would take all or nearly all of the minutes used by Semi, Grant, and Javonte, plus maybe a couple minutes from current backcourt. But mostly I think the team would play fewer two-big sets - instead of 60-70 minutes going to Theis-RW-TT it might be closer to 50. So a lot of his minutes would come from the bigs. Theis could slide back from the 4 to the 5, e.g.

If they bring him on, it would be ideal to move one of the current bigs.

You just did a good job explaining why I am not that excited about Harrison Barnes.  He is less PF than Marcus Morris was for example but you are saying that we would need to play him mostly as a PF (or force us to play without a PF).  Marcus Morris and Horford worked pretty well as a "big" pair but that type of line up can't be used all the time, there just isn't enough size.  Barnes and Theis or Barnes and Thompson can't even equal Morris and Horford but that is what we would be faced with needing to use.

Why can’t we slide Tatum over to power forward? He seemed to excel there last season.

I know that opinions vary on this but to me, whether you play Barnes or Tatum at "PF", it is still the same problem but worse if you force this on Tatum.  Tatum is our best player and one of the best wings in the game right now.  So you bring in Barnes to force yourself to play your best player out of position for what will be a fair percentage of his overall minutes?

Yeah, I just don't see it.  I don't like Barnes that much.  I think if the Celtics did bring in Barnes, they would play him in the Marcus Morris role, which isn't the end of the world, it is not horrible, but definitely not worth what I think we would have to give up, which includes the opportunity cost of the TPE plus likely Thompson for salary purposes and maybe Nesmith and picks to make it worthwhile to SAC.

I do that for Jerami or Collins or Siakam, all true PF players who would not force Tatum out of position, but not for a swing who leans more wing and has a history of not really living up to the stats when the chips are down.

All I can say is that the Celtics don’t do well with Tatum in a 2-big lineup.  In almost 300 minutes, Tatum, Theis, and Thompson have a net rating of -1.0, roughly 4 points per 100 possessions worse than Tatum’s average net rating (and that understates the issue, because the 2-big lineup is pulling down his average).  Call Tatum or Barnes whatever you want in terms of position, but we need Tatum on the court with one traditional big instead of two.

[td450]

He might. If Barnes came, I agree he would take all or nearly all of the minutes used by Semi, Grant, and Javonte, plus maybe a couple minutes from current backcourt. But mostly I think the team would play fewer two-big sets - instead of 60-70 minutes going to Theis-RW-TT it might be closer to 50. So a lot of his minutes would come from the bigs. Theis could slide back from the 4 to the 5, e.g.

If they bring him on, it would be ideal to move one of the current bigs.

You just did a good job explaining why I am not that excited about Harrison Barnes.  He is less PF than Marcus Morris was for example but you are saying that we would need to play him mostly as a PF (or force us to play without a PF).  Marcus Morris and Horford worked pretty well as a "big" pair but that type of line up can't be used all the time, there just isn't enough size.  Barnes and Theis or Barnes and Thompson can't even equal Morris and Horford but that is what we would be faced with needing to use.

You are comparing Barnes and Theis to Morris and Horford, and saying that Barnes and Theis aren't big enough to be used as a primary lineup.

If you are playing a team that is much bigger, it isn't whether you can match up, its whether you can win the mismatches. Theis and Barnes are better suited to winning the mismatches than Morris and Horford, because they are both quicker and even more switchable.

Of course , the biggest players, especially Embiid, will push them around, but the bet is that he won't be able to handle the team quickness and that the C's will be more successful at digging down on him in the post. Barnes and Theis should be more able to run bigs off the court.

When you start from a base of Tatum and Brown, that strategy of switchable defenders is your best option, unless some monster big falls into your lap.

[Vermont Green]

He might. If Barnes came, I agree he would take all or nearly all of the minutes used by Semi, Grant, and Javonte, plus maybe a couple minutes from current backcourt. But mostly I think the team would play fewer two-big sets - instead of 60-70 minutes going to Theis-RW-TT it might be closer to 50. So a lot of his minutes would come from the bigs. Theis could slide back from the 4 to the 5, e.g.

If they bring him on, it would be ideal to move one of the current bigs.

You just did a good job explaining why I am not that excited about Harrison Barnes.  He is less PF than Marcus Morris was for example but you are saying that we would need to play him mostly as a PF (or force us to play without a PF).  Marcus Morris and Horford worked pretty well as a "big" pair but that type of line up can't be used all the time, there just isn't enough size.  Barnes and Theis or Barnes and Thompson can't even equal Morris and Horford but that is what we would be faced with needing to use.

Why can’t we slide Tatum over to power forward? He seemed to excel there last season.

I know that opinions vary on this but to me, whether you play Barnes or Tatum at "PF", it is still the same problem but worse if you force this on Tatum.  Tatum is our best player and one of the best wings in the game right now.  So you bring in Barnes to force yourself to play your best player out of position for what will be a fair percentage of his overall minutes?

Yeah, I just don't see it.  I don't like Barnes that much.  I think if the Celtics did bring in Barnes, they would play him in the Marcus Morris role, which isn't the end of the world, it is not horrible, but definitely not worth what I think we would have to give up, which includes the opportunity cost of the TPE plus likely Thompson for salary purposes and maybe Nesmith and picks to make it worthwhile to SAC.

I do that for Jerami or Collins or Siakam, all true PF players who would not force Tatum out of position, but not for a swing who leans more wing and has a history of not really living up to the stats when the chips are down.

All I can say is that the Celtics don’t do well with Tatum in a 2-big lineup.  In almost 300 minutes, Tatum, Theis, and Thompson have a net rating of -1.0, roughly 4 points per 100 possessions worse than Tatum’s average net rating (and that understates the issue, because the 2-big lineup is pulling down his average).  Call Tatum or Barnes whatever you want in terms of position, but we need Tatum on the court with one traditional big instead of two.

Again, I understand that views vary on this but to me, your logic is that based on the fact that the line up with Theis and Thompson is not doing well.  We agree on that.  But you are concluding that this proves that the one big line up is the best line up.  My take is that the Theis - Thompson based line up is mediocre due to Theis and Thompson not Tatum.  Add a real PF to that and I don't think there would ever be another discussion about playing Tatum as the PF.

There will always be times where the Celtics play "small", with one big but I prefer to have the personnel to allow that to be a choice, not something we are forced to do because we don't really have a starting level PF.  To me, this is our biggest problem or weakness and Barnes does not address this.  He adds some things in other areas that is nice or useful but we still would not have a decent PF and that would still be our biggest weakness.

Said another way, yes, a 3-man of Barnes-Tatum-Theis includes more skill than a 3-man of Tatum-Theis-Thompson but it would be an entirely different discussion if you were comparing Barnes-Tatum-Theis to Tatum-Jerami Grant-Theis. 

[footey]

He might. If Barnes came, I agree he would take all or nearly all of the minutes used by Semi, Grant, and Javonte, plus maybe a couple minutes from current backcourt. But mostly I think the team would play fewer two-big sets - instead of 60-70 minutes going to Theis-RW-TT it might be closer to 50. So a lot of his minutes would come from the bigs. Theis could slide back from the 4 to the 5, e.g.

If they bring him on, it would be ideal to move one of the current bigs.

You just did a good job explaining why I am not that excited about Harrison Barnes.  He is less PF than Marcus Morris was for example but you are saying that we would need to play him mostly as a PF (or force us to play without a PF).  Marcus Morris and Horford worked pretty well as a "big" pair but that type of line up can't be used all the time, there just isn't enough size.  Barnes and Theis or Barnes and Thompson can't even equal Morris and Horford but that is what we would be faced with needing to use.

Why can’t we slide Tatum over to power forward? He seemed to excel there last season.

Or better yet, why can't we play Barnes and Tatum as 3/4, so that they can interchange while playing together.  They are both about the same height and length.

[jambr380]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

[footey]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Yes, it doesn't work money wise. Would have to include salary. They were just speculating on assets it would take. It's pretty funny how Pritchard at 26th pick probably has more trade value at the moment than our last two late lottery picks in Romeo and Aaron.

[NKY fan]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Another flaw with the idea is that the Kings have more than enough point guards at this point. It will be a waste for them unless a third team trades them a promising young big in exchange for Pritchard

[gouki88]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

Terrible trade

[Moranis]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Yes, it doesn't work money wise. Would have to include salary. They were just speculating on assets it would take. It's pretty funny how Pritchard at 26th pick probably has more trade value at the moment than our last two late lottery picks in Romeo and Aaron.

Or just pay the tax

[Roy H.]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Yes, it doesn't work money wise. Would have to include salary. They were just speculating on assets it would take. It's pretty funny how Pritchard at 26th pick probably has more trade value at the moment than our last two late lottery picks in Romeo and Aaron.

Or just pay the tax

Normally I agree, but there's no need to continue down the path to the repeater tax if it can be avoided.  This is the season to reset that.

[Celtics2021]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Yes, it doesn't work money wise. Would have to include salary. They were just speculating on assets it would take. It's pretty funny how Pritchard at 26th pick probably has more trade value at the moment than our last two late lottery picks in Romeo and Aaron.

Or just pay the tax

They're not paying the tax this year to acquire anyone short of All-Star quality.  Paying the tax this year makes the repeater tax take effect next year, costing the team an extra $10-15 million a year in tax bills going forward and/or limiting what the team is willing to spend in future seasons.  I like Harrison Barnes and think he would be a great addition, but not at that cost.

[Moranis]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Yes, it doesn't work money wise. Would have to include salary. They were just speculating on assets it would take. It's pretty funny how Pritchard at 26th pick probably has more trade value at the moment than our last two late lottery picks in Romeo and Aaron.

Or just pay the tax

Normally I agree, but there's no need to continue down the path to the repeater tax if it can be avoided.  This is the season to reset that.

If Barnes isn't good enough to pay the tax for, then he isn't good enough to acquire imo. 

[Roy H.]

Jackie Mac on Simmons podcast speculated it would take Pritchard and a 1st to get Barnes. She and Simmons would both do that trade. She said Celtics need to get bigger, that Pritchard size limits his impact.

Wonder if she feels that way about Chris Paul.

I really like Pritchard, but with Smart healthy and Teague not being a total zero, I think we can get by without him. And depending on how you feel about Yam, we may be pretty well stocked in the present and future at the PG position.

But, this trade idea has a giant flaw, and it's that it doesn't have us sending out enough salary to get under the tax. Even adding in Theis, I am not sure we quite get there, so we'd need to likely find a suitor for Thompson and his nearly $10M/yr non-expiring contract. Personally I'd prefer to keep Theis, but understand that he's probably more desirable to another team. I suppose we can just toss in Edwards with Theis to make the numbers work.

Yes, it doesn't work money wise. Would have to include salary. They were just speculating on assets it would take. It's pretty funny how Pritchard at 26th pick probably has more trade value at the moment than our last two late lottery picks in Romeo and Aaron.

Or just pay the tax

Normally I agree, but there's no need to continue down the path to the repeater tax if it can be avoided.  This is the season to reset that.

If Barnes isn't good enough to pay the tax for, then he isn't good enough to acquire imo.

It's not "the tax".  It's needlessly continuing into into the repeater tax, which handcuffs the team going forward.

Dumping a marginal amount of salary to avoid gigantic penalties down the line seems like a reasonable decision to me.  That said, I think if the team pursues Barnes it will be in the off-season.