My Recent Encounter of Matt Barnes..... - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

nashtymavsfan13 · 07-08-2007, 06:16 PM

So, yesterday I went to a celebrity softball game that was at my local minor league team's stadium and Matt Barnes, Mike Bibby, and Kevin Martin were all there. I was fortunate enough to meet all three of them and get their autographs. All three were very kind to the fans there and were very laid back just having a great time.

Matt barnes is a really nice guy in person, i have a much better impression of him now than I did just seeing him on TV. He signed very well for everyone and posed with anyone who wanted pics. The best moment of the day of him: i hand him an 8x10 pic of him dunking one handed and ask him nicely to sign it. he signs it and turns away, then turns back and asks if he could see it again. he's all like "man that's sick!" then he turns to the guy with him "you see that? you see your boy flyin' right there? hahaha" it was awesome.

Lots of Warriors fans were there to see him and they asked him about his contract status and if he was going to re-sign. He is VERY popular with Warriors fans. He said that they were currently working on it and he was hoping to sign soon, but that he didn't know what would happen. I was going to ask him if Dallas was one of the teams he was considering, but couldn't work up the nerve and didn't really get a good chance as he walked away after that. He's also very good on the baseball diamond, he was easily the best guy out there.

Overall though it was a good experience, I think he would fit well with Dallas and that fans would eventually be able to like him a lot. He was very pleasant and fan friendly, and the fact that the Warriors are having some trouble reaching a deal with him (that's the way it sounded from what he said) is encouraging.

DubOverdose · 07-08-2007, 06:26 PM

I don't want him. If we're talking about guys from the W's...I'd take SJax, JRich (he's more of a W than a bobcat), and uh....pietrus? Barnes ain't on that list.

Janett_Reno · 07-08-2007, 06:40 PM

Barnes is on my list and i welcome him. Good post.

chumdawg · 07-08-2007, 07:09 PM

I've got a hard-on for getting Barnes that is not likely to go away soon.

I'm always intrigued by the number of people who will immediately say "I don't want him." Can any of these people explain why? What is it about his game you don't like?

My guess is that it's either the tattoos, or the fact that plays for Golden State, or the fact that he bounced around the league for a little while before fully developing his game. I don't care about any of that stuff. In my estimation, the dude is a highly valuable basketball player who can do a lot of different things on the floor. I also think he's just going to be better with age.

What's not to like?

nashtymavsfan13 · 07-08-2007, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DubOverdose

I don't want him. If we're talking about guys from the W's...I'd take SJax, JRich (he's more of a W than a bobcat), and uh....pietrus? Barnes ain't on that list.

That was my initial reaction at first. I knew his game would be helpful and that he could be a good piece to add. What made me not want him here is the thuggish appearance and thinking that he might not mesh well with the team. He's a very nice guy though, and I now have no doubts he'd fit in well with the team. He is very personable and made friends with the other guys quickly. He has a laid back personality, has good size, and is a very good athlete. He's not on the top of my list, but I think he could be a could fit here if the price isn't too much and if guys like Wallace don't work out (which I expect will be the case).

nashtymavsfan13 · 07-08-2007, 07:23 PM

A pic of Barnes from the day (taken with my phone so a little blurry, he was a great signer:

Patrick Willis (49ers 07 first round pick) auto that I got:

Keith Lewis and Jason Hill autos on the same mini helmet:

BGMaverick9 · 07-08-2007, 07:23 PM

He's got a nice game, but I would call it a hard-on for how I feel about him.
haha

nashtymavsfan13 · 07-08-2007, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

He's got a nice game, but I would call it a hard-on for how I feel about him.
haha

Yeah, chum might be going too far with it haha

chumdawg · 07-08-2007, 07:45 PM

When chum has an opinion on a player, that opinion is generally not lukewarm.

GIVE. ME. MATT. BARNES!!!

Janett_Reno · 07-08-2007, 07:47 PM

I think it might be the tattoo's some do not like. Not sure.

BGMaverick9 · 07-08-2007, 07:53 PM

I like his game, and he looks to be getting better with time.

My only two concerns:
did he play well based on a free-flowing system? if he is in a more structured one will he suffer?

and the obvious contract year bump.

otherwise, i don't have any real problems with his game. I'd much rather have him or offer more to him opposed to Pietrus, IMO.

chumdawg · 07-08-2007, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

I like his game, and he looks to be getting better with time.

My only two concerns:
did he play well based on a free-flowing system? if he is in a more structured one will he suffer?

and the obvious contract year bump.

otherwise, i don't have any real problems with his game. I'd much rather have him or offer more to him opposed to Pietrus, IMO.

Good point about the contract year bump, and I also agree with you about the comparison to Pietrus. I'm not too worried about the contract year thing, though. I think it's simply a case of the guy finally honing his game.

On the system thing...I actually think that this works in the other direction. Barnes was really not all that good for the Dubs when the game went helter-skelter. He is flat-out terrible on the break. About the only thing he can do well in an up-and-down pace is rebound the ball and occasionally hit the spot-up three. The reason he was so valauble to the Dubs is that he was one of the few guys on their team who could anchor them when they played a half-court style. He defended anywhere from the one to the four, he rebounded well, and hit clutch shots with a hand in his face.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Matt Barnes will flourish the most in this league when he gets into a system where his length and athleticism will allow him to give his team great flexibility on defense, and his versatile offensive game will allow him to fill the holes, so to speak, in his team's offensive game.

Plus, I think he has well above average basketball IQ. He'll stick in the league for a long time.

Stranger · 07-08-2007, 08:27 PM

Chumdawg has changed my mind about Barnes. I'd be pretty happy to pick him up at this point.

Male30Dan · 07-08-2007, 09:21 PM

Maybe a semi, but not a full helmet!

Definitely could use him.

DubOverdose · 07-08-2007, 09:28 PM

I just think he's overrated. I don't see how he'd contribute to our team. I don't think he's good enough to be a regular rotation guy. He got overrated by a lot of Mavs fans in the playoffs. Stuff like this happens every year, then players most of the time don't pan out.

MavsX · 07-08-2007, 09:37 PM

nice thread bro. Thats awesome, good work.

Male30Dan · 07-08-2007, 09:45 PM

I am happy for you Nashty - you got some good autographs!

spreedom · 07-08-2007, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DubOverdose

I don't want him. If we're talking about guys from the W's...I'd take SJax, JRich (he's more of a W than a bobcat), and uh....pietrus? Barnes ain't on that list.

Jackson? The guy is a felon who can only play in an uptempo system (which we don't really play) and is only somewhat happy (I say "somewhat" because he bitches at referees and team mates NONSTOP) when he is given a greenlight to jack up contested threes all night long. He is a turd and I'd take Matt Barnes over him any day of the week, twice on Sunday.

BGMaverick9 · 07-08-2007, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Good point about the contract year bump, and I also agree with you about the comparison to Pietrus. I'm not too worried about the contract year thing, though. I think it's simply a case of the guy finally honing his game.

On the system thing...I actually think that this works in the other direction. Barnes was really not all that good for the Dubs when the game went helter-skelter. He is flat-out terrible on the break. About the only thing he can do well in an up-and-down pace is rebound the ball and occasionally hit the spot-up three. The reason he was so valauble to the Dubs is that he was one of the few guys on their team who could anchor them when they played a half-court style. He defended anywhere from the one to the four, he rebounded well, and hit clutch shots with a hand in his face.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Matt Barnes will flourish the most in this league when he gets into a system where his length and athleticism will allow him to give his team great flexibility on defense, and his versatile offensive game will allow him to fill the holes, so to speak, in his team's offensive game.

Plus, I think he has well above average basketball IQ. He'll stick in the league for a long time.

Would you see him as a supped-up George then? I'll take you at your word for your description of him. I see similarities to George with Barnes, with more of a versatile offensive game. He doesn't seem like that bad of an idea or a stretch really. How much of the MLE do we have to give him? Is it all of it to overpay?

chumdawg · 07-08-2007, 10:30 PM

He's more versatile on defense than George is. George is primarily a 2/3 cover guy, while Barnes can extend out to the 1 and the 4 sometimes. On offense Barnes has more range than George does, and he's also a whole lot slinkier. The comparison with George is a good one, but Barnes brings a little more to the table. He's a more active player than George is. With his length he will get hands in passing lanes a lot more often.

It will take the full MLE to get him.

Dirkadirkastan · 07-08-2007, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nashtymavsfan13

Yeah, chum might be going too far with it haha

No, I don't think anything has changed, I just think he's finally being honest.

alby · 07-08-2007, 10:59 PM

Matt Barnes has a very low basketball IQ. Watch him more closely throughout the whole year, then tell me if you still like him or not.

chumdawg · 07-08-2007, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

Matt Barnes has a very low basketball IQ. Watch him more closely throughout the whole year, then tell me if you still like him or not.

You're crazy! We watched him throughout the playoffs, what more do you want?

The guy knows how to win. He does NOT make stupid mistakes. He DOES put himself in good position to affect the game positively.

What, exactly, makes you say he has low BB IQ?

antoinewalker · 07-09-2007, 12:00 AM

the playoffs this past year really put matt barnes on the map.

alby · 07-09-2007, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

You're crazy! We watched him throughout the playoffs, what more do you want?

The guy knows how to win. He does NOT make stupid mistakes. He DOES put himself in good position to affect the game positively.

What, exactly, makes you say he has low BB IQ?

One good playoff series does not define you as a basketball player. See Calvin Booth. See Marquis Daniels. See Bonzi Wells.

He commits terrible turnovers and makes bad decisions on both offense and defense (especially on the break). Don't confuse his individual effectivess in the Dallas series with the great defensive schemes that Nellie implemented on Dirk and the rest of the team. We all know Dirk was literally playing 1 on 3 everytime he touched the ball. As far as what he brings to the table offensively, don't confuse someone who is a product of the system to someone who can excel no matter what type of offense he is put in.

There is a reason why he wasn't on the NBA map before playing for Don Nelson's free wheeling offense. He didn't get any quicker. He didn't get any stronger. He didn't get any faster. He was allowed to jack up more three's while not really worrying about running back on defense. So of course his numbers have improved, couple that with the injury to Jason Richardson during the regular season--you have a guy who is in his contract year trying to make a name for himself by attempting more shots.

Matt Barnes is nothing more than a spare. I don't dislike the guy because of his tattoos or his thug-ish exterior. I dislike him because he is a player that is severely overrated on this board. Go to a Warriors board where the fans had the chance to watch him for the entire year and see what they think of him. Personally, since I live in the Bay Area, I was fortunate to go to 30-35 of the possible 42 home games this year, and I saw him up close and personal. Trust me, you do not want him on this team--ESPECIALLY for the full MLE.

ty · 07-09-2007, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

As far as what he brings to the table offensively, don't confuse someone who is a product of the system to someone who can excel no matter what type of offense he is put in.

Amen to that.

chumdawg · 07-09-2007, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

One good playoff series does not define you as a basketball player. See Calvin Booth. See Marquis Daniels. See Bonzi Wells.

He commits terrible turnovers and makes bad decisions on both offense and defense (especially on the break). Don't confuse his individual effectivess in the Dallas series with the great defensive schemes that Nellie implemented on Dirk and the rest of the team. We all know Dirk was literally playing 1 on 3 everytime he touched the ball. As far as what he brings to the table offensively, don't confuse someone who is a product of the system to someone who can excel no matter what type of offense he is put in.

There is a reason why he wasn't on the NBA map before playing for Don Nelson's free wheeling offense. He didn't get any quicker. He didn't get any stronger. He didn't get any faster. He was allowed to jack up more three's while not really worrying about running back on defense. So of course his numbers have improved, couple that with the injury to Jason Richardson during the regular season--you have a guy who is in his contract year trying to make a name for himself by attempting more shots.

Matt Barnes is nothing more than a spare. I don't dislike the guy because of his tattoos or his thug-ish exterior. I dislike him because he is a player that is severely overrated on this board. Go to a Warriors board where the fans had the chance to watch him for the entire year and see what they think of him. Personally, since I live in the Bay Area, I was fortunate to go to 30-35 of the possible 42 home games this year, and I saw him up close and personal. Trust me, you do not want him on this team--ESPECIALLY for the full MLE.

Calvin Booth didn't have a strong playoff series, as a whole. Neither did Marquis Daniels. Bonzi Wells? We should be so lucky.

Matt Barnes has done something that most of the other free agents have not, and that is to prove his worth at the most critical time against the most critical opponents. I guess you dismiss the 19-foot jumper he made to bury the Mavericks in Game Five. I guess you go further and dismiss his entire playoff series against them.

You can have a hard-on against Barnes all you want, but you cannot deny his productivity. You can scream to the air all you want that Barnes is not a productive player, and you have seen it in person, but that won't change the fact that his productivity is highly valued league-wide.

I can't be held responsible for your poor player evaluation skills. I'm sorry that you can't understand what's going on here.

alby · 07-09-2007, 12:57 AM

If you want to overpay the guy in his contract year, go right ahead. Then, blame it on Cuban when it doesn't work out.

chumdawg · 07-09-2007, 12:59 AM

I'd give him the full MLE, and be happy about it. Despite the fact that you watched him play 30 times and don't think he deserves it.

alby · 07-09-2007, 01:06 AM

In the Sacramento series, Marquis Daniels averaged 16 points per game.
In the Dallas series, Matt Barnes averaged 10 points per game.

Marquis had the better playoff series compared to Matt Barnes.
As for Bonzi Wells, the series he had against the Spurs was better than both Barnes and Daniels, look what happened to him this year.

I would throw 1-2 million at Barnes for a max of 2 years--nothing more, so he can be a 9-12 guy for us.

chumdawg · 07-09-2007, 01:09 AM

Hey, I'd love the Bonzi Wells who had his head right with ball. That would be awesome.

Failing that, I'd love to have Matt Barnes. I'd go along with your idea of two to three for two years, if he would accept that. But if he costs more, I'm willing to pay it. The dude is versatile and would fit very well with what we are trying to do here in Dallas. If I have to go up to the full MLE, I bite the bullet and do it.

Male30Dan · 07-09-2007, 01:10 AM

We just gave above the MLE for a 9-12 guy. This is the market Alby.

alby · 07-09-2007, 01:11 AM

Stackhouse is and has been our 6th man and could easily start on this team.

Male30Dan · 07-09-2007, 01:13 AM

Couldn't the same be said by GS though? He is their 6th man and could start on their team. You are saying everyone is highly overvaluing him but I believe you are undervaluing him. I don't think he is quite as good as Chum makes him out to be but he would be very useful on our team and would have helped a ton against GS in this past playoffs.

23 minutes per game = 10 points for Barnes
33 minutes per game = 15 points for Jackson

These guys could easily swap spots and GS would be just as productive. Feel free to look at the shooting percentages too. They also support Barnes!

alby · 07-09-2007, 01:14 AM

Do you think he is worth the full MLE, that is what the debate is ultimately about IMO.

alby · 07-09-2007, 01:15 AM

If an elite team can get a Grant Hill-type player for the minimum--I really dislike the idea of signing a Matt Barnes-type for the full MLE.

Male30Dan · 07-09-2007, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

Do you think he is worth the full MLE, that is what the debate is ultimately about IMO.

No, but neither does Chum... Chum just said he would overpay to sign him.

Me, I would prefer not to give him the full MLE, but if we can't get a sharpshooter like Kapono, maybe I would. He is definitely very versatile and he can hit a 3.

ty · 07-09-2007, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

If an elite team can get a Grant Hill-type player for the minimum--I really dislike the idea of signing a Matt Barnes-type for the full MLE.

Or when the reigning champions can resign a back-up center who averaged 10 points a game in the conference finals for only $10 million for 3 years--I really dislike the idea of signing a Matt Barnes-type for the full MLE.

Male30Dan · 07-09-2007, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

If an elite team can get a Grant Hill-type player for the minimum--I really dislike the idea of signing a Matt Barnes-type for the full MLE.

Couldn't we still? Barnes isn't a Grant Hill-type player. He hasn't made his money yet and only looking for a ring. There are other Hill-types out there so signing Barnes for the MLE wouldn't hurt our chances of getting one of them with minimum money.

Male30Dan · 07-09-2007, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ty

Or when the reigning champions can resign a back-up center who averaged 10 points a game in the conference finals for only $10 million for 3 years--I really dislike the idea of signing a Matt Barnes-type for the full MLE.

Yeah that was crazy. I would have thought he would have got the full MLE also. Talk about a home-team discount.