Will Danny offer Harrison Barnes a max contract as a restricted free agent?

[Fan from VT]

Here is how i think of it:

Golden State is a well run organization in the middle of an elite championship contending window. If a team offered Harrison Barnes a max contract as an RFA, would they match it? I dont think so. So if a well run contending team wouldnt keep him for the max, why would a team that wants to be a contender take him for the max?

[chilidawg]

If you're throwing a max contract at Barnes it's because of who you think he'll become, rather than who he is.  He certainly hasn't shown max contract performance yet, but he is still only 23, the same age as some of the college seniors in the draft.

Personally, I don't see it.

[Vermont Green]

I am not convinced that Harrison Barnes is any better than a younger Jeff Green.  He will have to work a lot harder to get his shots on any team other than GSW, including the Celtics.

I don't know what Danny will do but I know what i hope he doesn't do; don't go max with Barnes.

[TheSundanceKid]

Here is how i think of it:

Golden State is a well run organization in the middle of an elite championship contending window. If a team offered Harrison Barnes a max contract as an RFA, would they match it? I dont think so. So if a well run contending team wouldnt keep him for the max, why would a team that wants to be a contender take him for the max?

I actually think they would match. Same with Ezeli. In a year they will see another jump in the cap and Bogut come off the books which should alleviate their cap concerns.

Next year they will have $73,046,784 committed to 7 players. They then have Ezeli and Barnes as restricted FAs, let's say at $23m for Barnes and $15m for Ezeli. That's $111m in salary to 9 players. Plus the 30th draft pick which is about $1m.

So $112m for 10 players. They'd get some min salary guys to fill out the roster, maybe buy into the 2nd round for a project big man. That's just into the tax, probably about $10m in once they've rounded out the roster.

But in 2017 the cap jumps to $107m, $127m luxury tax. Bogut's $12,681,081 comes off the books (one presumes he either takes less to re-sign or Ezeli takes his position) and Iggy and Curry are up for renewal. Curry gets the max, I think he'll be eligible for around $30m. That would bring their total into the region of $118m before re-signing Iggy which I assume they do.

Long story short, it doesn't hurt them to match this summer. If in a year they feel they want to reduce the tax bill they can look at trades in summer 2017.

Edit: The bolded $118m is correct if they re-signed Iggy to the same amount. He'd probably get a raise. Let's say he gets $20m, their total in 2017 would be around $127m, right on the tax line.

By re-signing their own FAs they are completely out of the race for Durant etc but does that really matter? Why break up a team that might be 2x champions by that point?

[chambers]

Re-hashing this Barnes thread made me think of guys we can target to replace Sullinger at PF.
Barnes is one of those guys, but the guy who's really impressed me is Deng.

Luol Deng  has had an amazing 2nd half of the season. He's transformed into an amazing small ball PF on both ends of the floor.

He's killing the Raptors in switches on defense because of his defensive versatility.

Honestly he could be an extremely effective weapon at power forward for us if we can't get Durant and keep Crowder at SF.

Not sure how much he'll get paid, but it will be reasonable considering how well he's been playing.

[TheSundanceKid]

Re-hashing this Barnes thread made me think of guys we can target to replace Sullinger at PF.
Barnes is one of those guys, but the guy who's really impressed me is Deng.

Luol Deng  has had an amazing 2nd half of the season. He's transformed into an amazing small ball PF on both ends of the floor.

He's killing the Raptors in switches on defense because of his defensive versatility.

Honestly he could be an extremely effective weapon at power forward for us if we can't get Durant and keep Crowder at SF.

Not sure how much he'll get paid, but it will be reasonable considering how well he's been playing.

I love Deng, he's always been underrated. I imagine with his age he'd cost around the same as he is now. He could be a good option for an Amir type contract if we want to preserve cap space for 2017.

Marvin Williams is another, he's been playing well for Charlotte. Jared Dudley to. I seem to remember Jason Smith being quite good whenever Orlando played us as well, he'd be a cheap option

[jpotter33]

Re-hashing this Barnes thread made me think of guys we can target to replace Sullinger at PF.
Barnes is one of those guys, but the guy who's really impressed me is Deng.

Luol Deng  has had an amazing 2nd half of the season. He's transformed into an amazing small ball PF on both ends of the floor.

He's killing the Raptors in switches on defense because of his defensive versatility.

Honestly he could be an extremely effective weapon at power forward for us if we can't get Durant and keep Crowder at SF.

Not sure how much he'll get paid, but it will be reasonable considering how well he's been playing.

The recent article posted that wanted Bradley for Barnes wanted to slate Barnes at PF next to Crowder. But I'm unsure of going FULL-TIME small-ball at the 4 with either Deng or Barnes. I think our already questionable rebounding takes an even further hit that way and it weakens us defensively against certain teams, though it would definitely make us better offensively and harder to match up with.

[saltlover]

Here's an article written from the Golden State point of view. And yes, it mentions a possible trade to the Celtics.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2016/4/14/11419004/nba-playoff-preview-2016-golden-state-warriors-harrison-barnes-x-factor

That guy is crazy wanting Bradley over Crowder. Crowder would be the absolute perfect replacement for Barnes - best long-term, cost-controlled deal in the NBA, versatile defender, reliable shooter, excellent work ethic.

That being said, I wouldn't trade him for him. I'd like to have Barnes on our team, but I don't think he'll justify the crazy money he'll get this summer.

I like Barnes and would trade for him, but I would only trade a later first (like our 2018 pick lottery-protected, for example), and throw in Jerebko if they wanted JJ.  Any more and I sign Barnes to the offer sheet and dare Golden State to match.  My gut says they won't.  He's not worth $20 million to that team as a fourth or fifth option.

Is he worth $20 million to us as a second option behind IT? Man, I just don't know. I see him peaking at around 18 points a game, albeit with great outside shooting.

Next year, questionable.  When the cap goes up another 20%, yes.  A number 2 option (and I think he's capable of being a #2 option), getting less than 20% of the payroll won't hamstring this team.

[DarkAzcura]

Here's an article written from the Golden State point of view. And yes, it mentions a possible trade to the Celtics.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2016/4/14/11419004/nba-playoff-preview-2016-golden-state-warriors-harrison-barnes-x-factor

That guy is crazy wanting Bradley over Crowder. Crowder would be the absolute perfect replacement for Barnes - best long-term, cost-controlled deal in the NBA, versatile defender, reliable shooter, excellent work ethic.

That being said, I wouldn't trade him for him. I'd like to have Barnes on our team, but I don't think he'll justify the crazy money he'll get this summer.

I like Barnes and would trade for him, but I would only trade a later first (like our 2018 pick lottery-protected, for example), and throw in Jerebko if they wanted JJ.  Any more and I sign Barnes to the offer sheet and dare Golden State to match.  My gut says they won't.  He's not worth $20 million to that team as a fourth or fifth option.

Is he worth $20 million to us as a second option behind IT? Man, I just don't know. I see him peaking at around 18 points a game, albeit with great outside shooting.

Next year, questionable.  When the cap goes up another 20%, yes.  A number 2 option (and I think he's capable of being a #2 option), getting less than 20% of the payroll won't hamstring this team.

Just wondering, what exactly have you seen in Barnes' game that makes you believe he could be a good second option? This isn't really a Harden situation. Barnes averages 13.6 PPG per 36 and 18 PPG per 100 possessions while being assisted on 99% of his 3s and 63% of his 2s all on really low usage, and he still can barely muster above 56% TS. A guy with second option potential should be doing much better than that regardless of GSW's system. He may very well turn into a second option, but IMO, he has shown no ability to be that type of player in the NBA. He's a 3 and D player who doesn't draw very many fouls and doesn't have that great of a handle. I'm not really sure how he is going to increase his per 36 numbers by 8-10 PPG on similar efficiency, which would be the mark of a second option (like IT).

There have been some articles and statistics run to show how ridiculously open every player on GSW is because of how much Curry and Klay spread the offense. Guys like Green and Barnes would not be anywhere close to the 38-40% 3PT shooters they are right now if they didn't get to shoot the crazy amount of wide open shots they get to shoot as a result of Curry and Klay.

I'd just be weary of trying to extrapolate anything he does in GSW to any other team. I say this as someone who really wanted Barnes a few years ago also. I think he has 15-17 PPG potential, and that would have been great to have on a rookie scale contract and at a price a few million short of the max (which is his real value, imo). GSW's success has over-inflated his value a lot. I like him, but Crowder would be shooting 40% from 3 pretty easily in GSW also. There's just not a lot to take out of his game in GSW when he is simply a spot up shooter who essentially gets to shoot open-gym practice jump shots in game because of Curry.

I will say his performance in the playoffs his rookie year always impressed me, but he hasn't really done anything in the last few years to show he has expanded his game to the point of being worth the max. It's a massive risk. We'd be signing him with the assumption that he did improve his game but hasn't been able to show it in GSW, which imo, is doubtful considering how freelance their offense is. It's possible but doubtful. Do we really want to use a max on a guy where we are making assumptions?  I'd prefer using the max on more of a sure thing (and Harden, imo, was a sure thing even though he was just a 6th man in OKC).

[wdleehi]

Has he had a big up tick in offensive production with Curry out in the playoffs?




He is just not a max player, especially if he is asked to be a small PF.


And he is not as needed for the Celtics at that value with Crowder. 

[DarkAzcura]

Has he had a big up tick in offensive production with Curry out in the playoffs?




He is just not a max player, especially if he is asked to be a small PF.


And he is not as needed for the Celtics at that value with Crowder.

He's been terrible. He's averaging 10 PPG per 36 in these playoffs while shooting 25% from 3 and taking 68% of them in the corner. He's essentially putting up the same numbers in the playoffs as a hobbled Crowder.

God I hope not.

We already have Jae Crowder, who's on a much, much friendlier contract. Why would we need Harrison Barnes.

I've seen ALL his NBA games. I know I don't have the credentials but trust me, he's not that good.

You don't think Barnes has a higher upside than Crowder? He's younger, bigger, more athletic and a better shooter.

There is a bit less than a 2 year age difference between the two and Barnes has been handed minutes from day one. Last season and this season were essentially Crowder's first years in a consistent rotation.

Also, I'd be weary saying Barnes is a better shooter. 63% of Barnes' 3s are attempted with the closest defender being 6 or more feet away. He shoots ~42% on those 3s. Crowder on the other hand, shoots 26% of his 3s with a defender 6 or more feet away and shoots them at a clip of ~39%. 16% of Crowder's 3s are taken with a defender within 2-4 feet of him. Only 3% of Barnes' 3s are taken with a defender within 2-4 feet of him. Barnes isn't asked to take difficult shots out there. He gets to shoot practice shots basically. It's the Curry/Klay effect. Guys like Green and Barnes get to attempt a ridiculous amount of wide open shots because they are playing with the greatest shooting duo of all time. If Crowder had the leisure to only attempt shots when a defender is more than 6 feet away, he'd probably be a 40% 3PT shooter also. There just isn't a lot to take away from Barnes' shooting numbers because for all we know, he could become a better shooter when the attention is on him...we just don't have evidence of it. He's just as likely (maybe even more likely) to fall off as a shooter if he leaves GSW.

[Evantime34]

I've kind of moved off the stance that I think we should pursue him at the max this summer. I still like him a lot, just not at the max.

I was a huge advocate of targeting him before the season began, but with how well Crowder played this past year (post injury play non withstanding) I don't think we really have the same need for a starting 3. I think a lineup with Crowder and Barnes at the 3/4 would be good but I'm not sure we could start both. Crowder deserves to start and Barnes isn't coming off the bench.

If we deal Crowder as part of a larger package for a star, I'd love to offer Barnes a huge contract to replace him at the 3.

[DarkAzcura]

I've kind of moved off the stance that I think we should pursue him at the max this summer. I still like him a lot, just not at the max.

I was a huge advocate of targeting him before the season began, but with how well Crowder played this past year (post injury play non withstanding) I don't think we really have the same need for a starting 3. I think a lineup with Crowder and Barnes at the 3/4 would be good but I'm not sure we could start both. Crowder deserves to start and Barnes isn't coming off the bench.

If we deal Crowder as part of a larger package for a star, I'd love to offer Barnes a huge contract to replace him at the 3.

Crap. I didn't realize this was a bumped thread haha.

[Evantime34]

I've kind of moved off the stance that I think we should pursue him at the max this summer. I still like him a lot, just not at the max.

I was a huge advocate of targeting him before the season began, but with how well Crowder played this past year (post injury play non withstanding) I don't think we really have the same need for a starting 3. I think a lineup with Crowder and Barnes at the 3/4 would be good but I'm not sure we could start both. Crowder deserves to start and Barnes isn't coming off the bench.

If we deal Crowder as part of a larger package for a star, I'd love to offer Barnes a huge contract to replace him at the 3.

Crap. I didn't realize this was a bumped thread haha.

Yeah, what you quoted me on in your previous post was from October.

[saltlover]

Here's an article written from the Golden State point of view. And yes, it mentions a possible trade to the Celtics.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2016/4/14/11419004/nba-playoff-preview-2016-golden-state-warriors-harrison-barnes-x-factor

That guy is crazy wanting Bradley over Crowder. Crowder would be the absolute perfect replacement for Barnes - best long-term, cost-controlled deal in the NBA, versatile defender, reliable shooter, excellent work ethic.

That being said, I wouldn't trade him for him. I'd like to have Barnes on our team, but I don't think he'll justify the crazy money he'll get this summer.

I like Barnes and would trade for him, but I would only trade a later first (like our 2018 pick lottery-protected, for example), and throw in Jerebko if they wanted JJ.  Any more and I sign Barnes to the offer sheet and dare Golden State to match.  My gut says they won't.  He's not worth $20 million to that team as a fourth or fifth option.

Is he worth $20 million to us as a second option behind IT? Man, I just don't know. I see him peaking at around 18 points a game, albeit with great outside shooting.

Next year, questionable.  When the cap goes up another 20%, yes.  A number 2 option (and I think he's capable of being a #2 option), getting less than 20% of the payroll won't hamstring this team.

Just wondering, what exactly have you seen in Barnes' game that makes you believe he could be a good second option? This isn't really a Harden situation. Barnes averages 13.6 PPG per 36 and 18 PPG per 100 possessions while being assisted on 99% of his 3s and 63% of his 2s all on really low usage, and he still can barely muster above 56% TS. A guy with second option potential should be doing much better than that regardless of GSW's system. He may very well turn into a second option, but IMO, he has shown no ability to be that type of player in the NBA. He's a 3 and D player who doesn't draw very many fouls and doesn't have that great of a handle. I'm not really sure how he is going to increase his per 36 numbers by 8-10 PPG on similar efficiency, which would be the mark of a second option (like IT).

There have been some articles and statistics run to show how ridiculously open every player on GSW is because of how much Curry and Klay spread the offense. Guys like Green and Barnes would not be anywhere close to the 38-40% 3PT shooters they are right now if they didn't get to shoot the crazy amount of wide open shots they get to shoot as a result of Curry and Klay.

I'd just be weary of trying to extrapolate anything he does in GSW to any other team. I say this as someone who really wanted Barnes a few years ago also. I think he has 15-17 PPG potential, and that would have been great to have on a rookie scale contract and at a price a few million short of the max (which is his real value, imo). GSW's success has over-inflated his value a lot. I like him, but Crowder would be shooting 40% from 3 pretty easily in GSW also. There's just not a lot to take out of his game in GSW when he is simply a spot up shooter who essentially gets to shoot open-gym practice jump shots in game because of Curry.

I will say his performance in the playoffs his rookie year always impressed me, but he hasn't really done anything in the last few years to show he has expanded his game to the point of being worth the max. It's a massive risk. We'd be signing him with the assumption that he did improve his game but hasn't been able to show it in GSW, which imo, is doubtful considering how freelance their offense is. It's possible but doubtful. Do we really want to use a max on a guy where we are making assumptions?  I'd prefer using the max on more of a sure thing (and Harden, imo, was a sure thing even though he was just a 6th man in OKC).

This is a very long post, that's well-argued.  I agree with some of the points, but I don't have time to respond in full, as I'm at work and won't be home for about 10 hours.  Yay.

I will say that Barnes creates a bit more for himself than he's given credit for -- 26% of his shots were taken off of two or more dribbles this season.  Compare that with, for example, Jae Crowder, who takes only 16% of his shots off two or more dribbles.  They had almost identical levels of effectiveness with such shots in terms of eFG% -- an okay 46%.  (That's better than IT,  Evan Turner, and Demar DeRozan, for instance, although all three took over half their shots with two or more dribbles.)

Still, on a team where it almost always makes sense for him to pass it, he's shown flashes of an ability to create for himself.  I think as he continues to improve (age 24-26 tends to be when NBA players take their biggest jumps) he will be more able to handle that role.  The playoffs have disappointed me, I can't lie.  But I think he has the skill set to take on a much larger role offensively.