Blakely: Keep an eye out for a potential Barnes for Crowder swap

[fubar089]

Barnes is soft. do not want.

[KeepRondo]

i believe its a possible deal that can happen

Why? It doesn't make sense for either team. GS probably more than us. Crowder is an almost elite defending wing who can reliably hit the 3. That's all GS needs Barnes to do, and Crowder is much better at it than him. Now, Barnes probably has a higher ceiling overall, but it's not like he's showed a ton of glimpses of a potential all-star wing so far. I'm not sure his offensive ceiling is much higher than Crowders and his defensive ceiling is certainly lower.

Add in the fact that Crowder is signed at a huge discount for the next 4 seasons, while Barnes is up for a HUGE contract this summer, and it just doesn't make sense. GS would need to add assets to make that trade, and they don't really have them

crowder is not an almost elite defender. You kidding??  He is a very very good team defender and good 1 on 1 defender.  Top effort

But he can't stop any of the top 10 sfs one on one.   He is a 6'5 sf , not explosive, overly quick.  Just sheer work ethic.

I didn't fully appreciate Crowder's defensive abilities until I went to a few games this year.

The dude is an intense, in your face, physical presense that won't give up an inch. If there are better perimeter defenders than him, it's not by much.

Anyone who says he's not a top defender in the league either hasn't seen him play live or doesn't understand that side of the ball.

He is good , nobody said he was not

But can he stop Lebron, George, Leonard, even Demar carrol's of the world?

The answer is no. Can he assault back on the offensive end? No

Barnes can at least return it on the offensive end. So athletic/explosive. He can become a better defender under CBS too

He absolutely can put a body and disrupt those guys about as good as anyone can. You can't stop those guys mentioned but you can disrupt them and there aren't too many guys who can disrupt those guys like Crowder can.

Also Crowder has some offensive game. His get and go move is one of the best in the league. He also has a nice midrange jumper off the bounce.

You are definitely selling Crowder short.

No offense but just like with rondo , your talking from your heart

I understanf how much of a fav/underdog feel good player crowder is

But he has pretty much a non existant 1 on 1 game. No dribble stop and pop. Crowders offensive game is mechanical and needs the passes to score

Barnes is different. He can take you 1 on 1 and torch you in so many ways.  Think of Derozan

How does Rondo have anything to do with this?

You just sound like someone scratching for things to say to back up your silly comments about Crowder.

I never once said I would or wouldn't want Barnes over Crowder. I just pointed out your silly and wrong observations about Crowder.

[Who]

Crowder would get even more credit for his defense if he had a shot-blocker behind him.

A lot of perimeter defenders don't get the credit they deserve when they play on teams without a strong shot-blocker / interior defense. That is why Bruce Bowen slipped through the cracks for so long. It wasn't until he got to play alongside Alonzo Mourning (and then Tim Duncan) that everyone began to realize just how gifted Bowen was defensively.

[Dino Pitino]

I don't understand where people are seeing all this promise and high ceiling for Barnes. When has he shown it? Where is the substantive case for Barnes as a potential star? His situation is being compared to Harden's in OKC, but Harden actually proved his star potential. I know it's a deeply flawed metric, but Harden's PER was 21+, whereas Barnes's PER is below average. You'd expect a future star with a high ceiling to have a better PER, right? To have a huge game every now and then? On that Warriors team, in his auxiliary role, with such greatness surrounding him, with all that ball movement, you'd expect him to have some games with lots of assists, no? His assists per game is curiously low, and he never has games like that. What evidence is there that he has the kind of potential that pro-Barnes people think he has? Because I don't see it. And nothing of the sort has been posted in this thread yet. All the substance points to Crowder being much more valuable. And yet people want to not only trade Crowder for him, but then pay him three times as much as Crowder makes? Good lord, why? Because of the residual swag of being a lottery pick?

[Eddie20]

I'll take Crowder and his 5 year bargain contract over Barnes and what will be a max or near max deal. Barnes doesn't have the handles to create and I've always seen him defer or not step up in big games dating back to UNC. I'd rather pay Crowder 3x less for marginally less potential production.

[j804]

I maybe missed it but where does anybody state Crowder for Barnes? I saw the video and it just says to watch out for the Celtics as one of the teams that could be interested.

[Tr1boy]

That's the thing with Barnes. He was a disappointment until last season under Kerr

you can't expect him to score 20 ppg consistently when Curry and Thompson and now D Green shoot as many shots as they do.   

In Boston it will be different. 

Its a risk you explore taking.   I doubt many if any big FA's will want to come and sign here. 

Name the last big FA that has signed with the Celtics?

Either by trade or via draft has been the way for this franchise success

[celticslove]

Not another uncle snooze. Pass

[jpotter33]

I maybe missed it but where does anybody state Crowder for Barnes? I saw the video and it just says to watch out for the Celtics as one of the teams that could be interested.

There's text below the video that suggests Crowder for Barnes.

[Smartacus]

I don't understand where people are seeing all this promise and high ceiling for Barnes. When has he shown it? Where is the substantive case for Barnes as a potential star? His situation is being compared to Harden's in OKC, but Harden actually proved his star potential. I know it's a deeply flawed metric, but Harden's PER was 21+, whereas Barnes's PER is below average. You'd expect a future star with a high ceiling to have a better PER, right? To have a huge game every now and then? On that Warriors team, in his auxiliary role, with such greatness surrounding him, with all that ball movement, you'd expect him to have some games with lots of assists, no? His assists per game is curiously low, and he never has games like that. What evidence is there that he has the kind of potential that pro-Barnes people think he has? Because I don't see it. And nothing of the sort has been posted in this thread yet. All the substance points to Crowder being much more valuable. And yet people want to not only trade Crowder for him, but then pay him three times as much as Crowder makes? Good lord, why? Because of the residual swag of being a lottery pick?

And that's my and others point about bringing up Harden. OKC has always been an ISO team. The latitude afforded to guys like Harden and Reggie Jackson when Durant and Westbrook need a breather has shown the type of production they could be capable if given the chance. Golden State on the other hand is beautiful basketball.

It's a team oriented system that allows Curry to go nuts, Thompson to fire away and everyone else to move the ball and contribute within the team concept. It's similar to our system's approach only unlike there's, our's still has room for a high usage shot creator.

Again I'm not saying that we can expect Barnes to jump his PPG  to 25.9 like Harden did, but maybe up it to about 18-20 PPG on good percentages and low turnovers. Think that's absolutely attainable. He's proven he can produce in a system, now he needs a system that asks more of him.

[Dino Pitino]

I don't understand where people are seeing all this promise and high ceiling for Barnes. When has he shown it? Where is the substantive case for Barnes as a potential star? His situation is being compared to Harden's in OKC, but Harden actually proved his star potential. I know it's a deeply flawed metric, but Harden's PER was 21+, whereas Barnes's PER is below average. You'd expect a future star with a high ceiling to have a better PER, right? To have a huge game every now and then? On that Warriors team, in his auxiliary role, with such greatness surrounding him, with all that ball movement, you'd expect him to have some games with lots of assists, no? His assists per game is curiously low, and he never has games like that. What evidence is there that he has the kind of potential that pro-Barnes people think he has? Because I don't see it. And nothing of the sort has been posted in this thread yet. All the substance points to Crowder being much more valuable. And yet people want to not only trade Crowder for him, but then pay him three times as much as Crowder makes? Good lord, why? Because of the residual swag of being a lottery pick?

And that's my point and others about bringing up Harden. OKC has always been an ISO team. The latitude afforded to guys like Harden and Reggie Jackson when Durant and Westbrook need a breather has shown the type of production they could be capable if given the chance. Golden State on the other hand is beautiful basketball.

It's a team oriented system that allows Curry to go nuts, Thompson to fire away and everyone else to move the ball and contribute within the team concept. It's similar to our system's approach only unlike there's, our's still has room for a high usage shot creator.

What you say is true. But he should still have more huge games in the last two seasons. More than the virtually zero huge games he's had, depending on one's definition of huge. The ball moves so much every game that he should wind up occasionally being The Man and crushing it. In lieu of that, he should definitely have way more assists. In lieu of that, his efficiency should at least be tremendous with all the attention focused elsewhere. Instead, there's basically nothing but averageness. Nothing to suggest he would ever deserve the high usage.

Again I'm not saying that we can expect Barnes to jump his PPG  to 25.9 like Harden did, but maybe up it from to about 18-19 PPG on good percentages and low turnovers. Think that's absolutely attainable. He's proven he can produce in a system, now he needs a system that asks more of him.

Crowder is already a proven 15-16 PPG player, more efficiently. You would consider paying three times as much per year and suffering a large downgrade on defense, all for the potential of a less-efficient 3 extra points per game? Again: WHY? Why not just increase Crowder's near-identical usage?

[GreenFaith1819]

Crowder is a part of this team's Heart and Soul, now...I'd choose not to trade him.

He's developing quite well, is still young AND is on a nice contract.

Forgive me if something like this has been posted already but again I'd pass on Harrison for Crowder at this point.

[BDeCosta26]

i believe its a possible deal that can happen

Why? It doesn't make sense for either team. GS probably more than us. Crowder is an almost elite defending wing who can reliably hit the 3. That's all GS needs Barnes to do, and Crowder is much better at it than him. Now, Barnes probably has a higher ceiling overall, but it's not like he's showed a ton of glimpses of a potential all-star wing so far. I'm not sure his offensive ceiling is much higher than Crowders and his defensive ceiling is certainly lower.

Add in the fact that Crowder is signed at a huge discount for the next 4 seasons, while Barnes is up for a HUGE contract this summer, and it just doesn't make sense. GS would need to add assets to make that trade, and they don't really have them

crowder is not an almost elite defender. You kidding??  He is a very very good team defender and good 1 on 1 defender.  Top effort

But he can't stop any of the top 10 sfs one on one.   He is a 6'5 sf , not explosive, overly quick.  Just sheer work ethic.

He is almost elite. He's versatile enough to guard 2's, 3's and 4's well, and he has a MLB like command over team defense. He's the heart and soul of why this Celtics team has been this good.

No one can stop a guy like LeBron, or PG, or the guy Kawhi is becoming. But we've seen Crowder shut those guys down for long stretches. He's about as good as your gonna get it you don't have a Kawhi/LeBron/PG (All elite defenders, on top of being amazing offensive players) Barnes is likely never going to be one of those kinda of guys. So why lose Crowder to sign him for 15$Mil a year or more when you already have Crowder at $7Mil per year over the next four.

[tarheelsxxiii]

I'll take Crowder and his 5 year bargain contract over Barnes and what will be a max or near max deal. Barnes doesn't have the handles to create and I've always seen him defer or not step up in big games dating back to UNC. I'd rather pay Crowder 3x less for marginally less potential production.

I'll take a shot at something greater. I'm not sure what you're remembering from his UNC days, but I recall his 40 pt, 8 rebound explosion against Clemson in the ACC tourney, back to back game winning 3s against VT and Florida State (within the same week), and more points in the NCAA tourney than any other UNC freshman.

If there's potential to tap, we may as well take a flier on it. He will give just as much as Crowder (if not in different ways) and an actual chance at finding a gem/go-to scorer. Last I recall, Ainge was a fantastic GM that has (a) made a lot of winning, smallish moves, (b) drafted some hits and misses, and (c) made his one major move (which coincided with Ray's acquisition) with an old friend. It remains to be seen if he can do it again without that supposed (IMO) advantage.

[SHAQATTACK]

Oh no.