What's new
By:

proposed trade for Harrison Barnes.

Park Bites

Park Bites

Well-Known Member
in the draft thread there has been a lot of talk about trading the pick, based on DL's comments about trading the pick for a vet. I went through all the teams and Barnes actually makes a lot of sense.

gsw is going to be way over the tax. they have to sign green and Thompson this offseason and that will put them in the tax even after the tax goes up. gsw might lose Barnes for nothing but with a lotto pick this year they can start grooming some one else.

this would make the jazz a lot more competitive. it would move Hayward to the 2 where he is more dominate.

exum, Burke, Andrew Harrison (yes jazz will draft him in the second round)
Hayward, burks
Barnes, hood, ingles
favors, booker
Gobert, pleiss and or tomic
 
I am of the opinion that Alec Burks would be a GREAT 6th man. Trey Burke has filled that role admirably in the last month. But before that, I could see the Jazz getting deeper at the 2/3 spots by signing a defensive minded stretch 2/3 to start beside Hayward. Bring Alec off the bench a la Manu for an offensive punch. Barnes could be that guy. Not a bad proposal. Especially since we are probably going to have a #12 pick this year.

Personally, I would give them back their 2017 pick for Barnes, not a top 12.
 
Not horrible, but not good either. I wouldnt give up a lottery pick for Barnes.

Barnes has a year before he hits RFA, right? So a year rental of Barnes (with the potential to sign him long term) is worth a lottery pick? Naw.
 
GSW can trade Barnes and Speights for Booker and then buy him out. That will save them 7.5+mil in cap space if they're looking to retain Green. Although we'd probably have to sacrifice a pick or two to make GSW give up two rotation players for just cap space.

Of course the big white whale they're looking to unload is Lee. Not sure we want to go there - DLee is probably a downgrade from Kanter at this point.
 
It's a reasonable trade proposal, IMO. There are pretty obvious reasons both teams do it.

I don't love Barnes, but I'm not crazy about our options in the 10-12 range of the draft either, if that's where our pick ends up.
 
I think it would take our pick this year and giving them their 2017 pick back to make it happen.
 
spycam1 said:
It's a reasonable trade proposal, IMO. There are pretty obvious reasons both teams do it.

I don't love Barnes, but I'm not crazy about our options in the 10-12 range of the draft either, if that's where our pick ends up.
Click to expand...

Agree

The Jazz Wonderbra said:
Personally, I would give them back their 2017 pick for Barnes, not a top 12.
Click to expand...
This.
Maybe throw in some of our non core crap too. (Lilsap, that new 7 foot euro, evans, maybe trey)
 
Crocodile Dante said:
gsw is going to be way over the tax. they have to sign green and Thompson this offseason and that will put them in the tax even after the tax goes up.
Click to expand...

Thompson is already signed - his extension kicks in next year. But you're on the right track. With an 81 mil projected luxury tax next year, if they want to retain Green, no way they don't go over it without dropping some assets.
 
I'd give them our pick, top 10 protected, for Barnes in a heartbeat. No questions asked. That being said, I'd rather give Burke to Chicago for Snell.
 
I really don't see what Barnes currently does that somebody like Devin Booker couldn't replicate, for a lot less money. Barnes is strictly a spot up shooter who can rebound decently, and play average defense. ****, I'd rather trade that pick for Tony Snell.
 
Hantlers said:
Not horrible, but not good either. I wouldnt give up a lottery pick for Barnes.

Barnes has a year before he hits RFA, right? So a year rental of Barnes (with the potential to sign him long term) is worth a lottery pick? Naw.
Click to expand...

Agree. I think we can find comparable talent at #12 and have that player for a couple more years on a rookie deal. AS you said, Barnes will be a RFA but in a year when owners will be going crazy on offers. Barnes will get a much higher deal than what we'd be comfortable paying. Most I'd offer is giving them the worst of our picks in 2017.
 
I do think we're reaching the point where--unless we're adding a top shelf talent at the top of the draft--we need to add more experienced pieces, not projects. Barnes fits that criteria. He's a good mixture of being young (so still, perhaps, has some unrealized potential that a coach like Snyder could develop), but also has playoff experience.

He brings perimeter defense, outside shooting (43% from 3), and a perimeter player who can play with his back to the basket--something we don't currently have. That could translate into time at the 4 with a lineup like:

Exum
Burks
Hayward
Barnes
Gobert

I think a Barnes trade is an interesting idea and not unrealistic (like signing Butler or Leonard).

I can see why GS does it, but they might prefer to do it at next year's trade deadline unless there's someone they particularly like with our pick on draft night.
 
spycam1 said:
I do think we're reaching the point where--unless we're adding a top shelf talent at the top of the draft--we need to add more experienced pieces, not projects. Barnes fits that criteria. He's a good mixture of being young (so still, perhaps, has some unrealized potential that a coach like Snyder could develop), but also has playoff experience.

He brings perimeter defense, outside shooting (43% from 3), and a perimeter player who can play with his back to the basket--something we don't currently have. That could translate into time at the 4 with a lineup like:

Exum
Burks
Hayward
Barnes
Gobert

I think a Barnes trade is an interesting idea and not unrealistic (like signing Butler or Leonard).

I can see why GS does it, but they might prefer to do it at next year's trade deadline unless there's someone they particularly like with our pick on draft night.
Click to expand...

I agree with you and Stifle.

I want Snell over Barnes because Snell's rookie deal lasts longer.
 
candrew said:
GSW can trade Barnes and Speights for Booker and then buy him out. That will save them 7.5+mil in cap space if they're looking to retain Green. Although we'd probably have to sacrifice a pick or two to make GSW give up two rotation players for just cap space.

Of course the big white whale they're looking to unload is Lee. Not sure we want to go there - DLee is probably a downgrade from Kanter at this point.
Click to expand...
Undervaluing Booker, IMO. Weakening a pretty good 3-man rotation to get another wing. Who do we then have to back up the 4 and 5? We'd have 2 starters and no one else. Oh, that's right...we're bringing over Tomic. :rolleyes:

Booker is a keeper, IMO. He's worth the MLE to re-sign in 2016 if he'd come back for that price. He brings the attitude and toughness we need. And he just might develop a 3PT shot. Been very consistent, but he's only had since training camp to start working on it.

That said, the OP made a decent proposal. One of the more reasonable ones I've heard. It does make sense in terms of cap relief for GS, especially if the teams go one step further and do as candrew suggested. That might be the pivotal part of the deal. Otherwise, they're not really saving much. Our 2015 pick is still adding back $2M or so to their roster. I'd want Utah to get a very good player to be our 3rd big before sacrificing Booker. Then GSW probably do the trade for our #12 AND Booker. But is it worth it to get Barnes by giving up those two assets? I just don't think so. I don't see us keeping Barnes after next season. He's going to get a fairly significant offer.
 
Last edited:
Hantlers said:
I really don't see what Barnes currently does that somebody like Devin Booker couldn't replicate, for a lot less money. Barnes is strictly a spot up shooter who can rebound decently, and play average defense. ****, I'd rather trade that pick for Tony Snell.
Click to expand...

Barnes has much better size than Booker and a back to the basket game. I actually think he's an ideal fit as a stretch 4 in the modern NBA.

And having the best defender in the game down low gives us more opportunity to play a guy like Barnes at the 4 at times. I actually think he's the sort of player we should be looking for.
 
green said:
I'd give them our pick, top 10 protected, for Barnes in a heartbeat. No questions asked. That being said, I'd rather give Burke to Chicago for Snell.
Click to expand...

are you going to spam every thread with this idea?

As for Barnes, I'm not giving up a lottery pick (and all those years of rookie-scale money) for him. Give me DBooker, 10 out of 10 times, instead.
 
Stifle Tower said:
Undervaluing Booker, IMO. Weakening a pretty good 3-man rotation to get another wing. Who do we then have to backup the 4 and 5? We'd have 2 starters and no one else. Oh, that's right...we're bringing over Tomic. :rolleyes:

Booker is a keeper, IMO. He's worth the MLE to re-sign in 2016 if he'd come back for that price. He brings the attitude and toughness we need. And he just might develop a 3PT shot. Been very consistent, but he's only had since training camp to start working on it.
Click to expand...

I want to see Booker start at the 3 tonight against the lakers.

Exum
Hayward
Booker
Favors
Gobert

^That's a nasty line up.

We can let Jarrett back up the four against the lakers. See what we've got.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top