-
Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.
Matt Barnes agrees to 2 yr/$3.2 mil w/ Orlando (pg. 34)
- Thread starter Creamy
- Start date
kovanovich
Sixth Man
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,192
- Reaction score
- 2,101
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
It does seem Afflalo is going (coming, in my case) to Denver, but he will essentially be replacing Dahntay Jones on the roster...Like the Cavs, the Nuggets lost out on C. Frye, so unless they make other moves, I think they'd like to keep Kleiza. Made a QO of 2.7m and presumably the Cavs could only beat that by a couple thousand bucks with what's left of their MLE, and surely Denver would pay him 2.9 if they were willing to pay 2.7, now that they lost the Frye hedge.
Boston is talking about pursuing Jamario Moon from MIA as a RFA...Don't think his name has come up yet in connection with the Cavs. Like Barnes, made only the vets min last year. Based on his play the last couple of years, is worth a bit more than that. Brings some of same qualities as Barnes to the table, but is a better athlete.
Barnes is worth the chance. Something like 2 yrs using the BAE? Last couple of years he has certainly been a more siginificant contributor than Frye. Also, back in 07-08 he played a lot of time for GS at PF, so at least against certain teams in the small ball lineup he could play PF. Especially with Parker at SG, that lineup is actually not overly small. Barnes is a pretty good rebounder too (at least has been in the wild west). Like many second rounders, it took him about 4 years to get established in the NBA. Since then, he has been a solid bench player. Cavs need more depth and Mike Brown may actually play him.
Have also seen reports that Orlando is interested in him...May be a smokescreen, but last thing I want to see is another wing player on their roster knocking down threes.
It does seem Afflalo is going (coming, in my case) to Denver, but he will essentially be replacing Dahntay Jones on the roster...Like the Cavs, the Nuggets lost out on C. Frye, so unless they make other moves, I think they'd like to keep Kleiza. Made a QO of 2.7m and presumably the Cavs could only beat that by a couple thousand bucks with what's left of their MLE, and surely Denver would pay him 2.9 if they were willing to pay 2.7, now that they lost the Frye hedge.
Boston is talking about pursuing Jamario Moon from MIA as a RFA...Don't think his name has come up yet in connection with the Cavs. Like Barnes, made only the vets min last year. Based on his play the last couple of years, is worth a bit more than that. Brings some of same qualities as Barnes to the table, but is a better athlete.
Barnes is worth the chance. Something like 2 yrs using the BAE? Last couple of years he has certainly been a more siginificant contributor than Frye. Also, back in 07-08 he played a lot of time for GS at PF, so at least against certain teams in the small ball lineup he could play PF. Especially with Parker at SG, that lineup is actually not overly small. Barnes is a pretty good rebounder too (at least has been in the wild west). Like many second rounders, it took him about 4 years to get established in the NBA. Since then, he has been a solid bench player. Cavs need more depth and Mike Brown may actually play him.
Have also seen reports that Orlando is interested in him...May be a smokescreen, but last thing I want to see is another wing player on their roster knocking down threes.
Beanie4Heisman
"Cosmo Kramer... You are the Osman!"
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2008
- Messages
- 1,913
- Reaction score
- 2,646
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
Yeah cause 32 is so much worse than 35. And Matt Barnes is 29, not young in my book. Kleiza at least has a shot to guard the PF posistion due to his size while Barnes would have no shot. :shakehead
Yeah cause 32 is so much worse than 35. And Matt Barnes is 29, not young in my book. Kleiza at least has a shot to guard the PF posistion due to his size while Barnes would have no shot. :shakehead
AWhistleAndWhat
From Betrayed to Inspired
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2007
- Messages
- 79
- Reaction score
- 73
- Points
- 18
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
If that's how matt barnes defends the wing, i can't see mike brown even getting him in the game. Klieza is clearly a better player and a better fit IMO, but the Cavs just don't have the $$$ to make it happen.
If that's how matt barnes defends the wing, i can't see mike brown even getting him in the game. Klieza is clearly a better player and a better fit IMO, but the Cavs just don't have the $$$ to make it happen.
Lee
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2005
- Messages
- 41,222
- Reaction score
- 62,177
- Points
- 148
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
I think Klieza is the best option, but not obtainable, so stop with wanting him people. He has a QO at 2.7 and is restricted...if we offer him our 2.9 left on our mle Denver just matches and we did them a favor...like charlotte did for us with Andy a couple of years ago.
I want Wally back as an insurance policy and as a future trade asset. We missed out the first time using him as trade bait....but that might be because his contract was to big...taking back too much junk. If we give him 3 this year and a team option of 4 next year....he is a huge trade chip next year. He is a good locker room guy. Plus, he can play 3 positions....just none of them well.
I want to bring joe smith back. I hear we have a non birds excpetion on him....meaning we can bring him back not using the mle or bae as long as he is willing to accept this. I am not sure how true this is, but if it is true...he return seems like a no brainer.
Finally I like Matt Barnes for 2 year bae. He can be our sasha type player, except he actually has the ability to play without his head stuck up is ass. He can play some pf, butreally will be mostly used as our back up sf..his natural position. (he is not a natural starting sf, he is a natural back up sf,lol)
Our line up would look like this.
Mo........boobie
Parker....west.........Kinsey
Lebron...Barnes.......Wally.........green
AV........Smith.........Jackson......Hickson
Shaq......Z
That is a pretty deep team. That would mean no Jawad, but as much as I like him, no big loss. That gives us a 10 man rotation, although Smith Barnes and boobie could find themselves not playing depending on match ups. Also, being that deep, we would be able to rest shaq and z plenty during the season and get them ready for minutes during the play offs.
That too me is a championship roster. 11 of those players could start for alot of teams in the league. 2 future hall of famers, 2 mvp's, and 1 euro multi mvp...and 5 players who have been all stars at one time in their careers. Balanced, young and vets both. Multiple players who cand play 2 or 3 or even 4 positions.
I think Klieza is the best option, but not obtainable, so stop with wanting him people. He has a QO at 2.7 and is restricted...if we offer him our 2.9 left on our mle Denver just matches and we did them a favor...like charlotte did for us with Andy a couple of years ago.
I want Wally back as an insurance policy and as a future trade asset. We missed out the first time using him as trade bait....but that might be because his contract was to big...taking back too much junk. If we give him 3 this year and a team option of 4 next year....he is a huge trade chip next year. He is a good locker room guy. Plus, he can play 3 positions....just none of them well.
I want to bring joe smith back. I hear we have a non birds excpetion on him....meaning we can bring him back not using the mle or bae as long as he is willing to accept this. I am not sure how true this is, but if it is true...he return seems like a no brainer.
Finally I like Matt Barnes for 2 year bae. He can be our sasha type player, except he actually has the ability to play without his head stuck up is ass. He can play some pf, butreally will be mostly used as our back up sf..his natural position. (he is not a natural starting sf, he is a natural back up sf,lol)
Our line up would look like this.
Mo........boobie
Parker....west.........Kinsey
Lebron...Barnes.......Wally.........green
AV........Smith.........Jackson......Hickson
Shaq......Z
That is a pretty deep team. That would mean no Jawad, but as much as I like him, no big loss. That gives us a 10 man rotation, although Smith Barnes and boobie could find themselves not playing depending on match ups. Also, being that deep, we would be able to rest shaq and z plenty during the season and get them ready for minutes during the play offs.
That too me is a championship roster. 11 of those players could start for alot of teams in the league. 2 future hall of famers, 2 mvp's, and 1 euro multi mvp...and 5 players who have been all stars at one time in their careers. Balanced, young and vets both. Multiple players who cand play 2 or 3 or even 4 positions.
ClevelandOwnz
NBA Starter
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2008
- Messages
- 2,976
- Reaction score
- 3,117
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
Kleiza is 6-8 and about 250 ... he loves to play the PF spot because he loves contact.
Only way we get him is with a sign and trade --- I think Denver would be interested in possibly Joe Smith. Veteran offensive player off the bench. I mean they went after Channing Frye.
Maybe work out a sign and trade involving those two -- ofcourse we'd probably have to give a draft pick up and cash. Pick would probably be 2nd rounder.
But as far as Barnes... i dont know. I still think we need guys with muscle down lown. we need more bigs. Guys who can hold their own down load.. Matt Barnes is not that type of player. Wally is even more of that type of player then Barnes!
Barnes too me is more of a wing defender, not a combo forward.
Kleiza is 6-8 and about 250 ... he loves to play the PF spot because he loves contact.
Only way we get him is with a sign and trade --- I think Denver would be interested in possibly Joe Smith. Veteran offensive player off the bench. I mean they went after Channing Frye.
Maybe work out a sign and trade involving those two -- ofcourse we'd probably have to give a draft pick up and cash. Pick would probably be 2nd rounder.
But as far as Barnes... i dont know. I still think we need guys with muscle down lown. we need more bigs. Guys who can hold their own down load.. Matt Barnes is not that type of player. Wally is even more of that type of player then Barnes!
Barnes too me is more of a wing defender, not a combo forward.
staycoolbruh
Stycool
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 2,841
- Reaction score
- 2,028
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
I think that happened because Lopez rotated a tad late.
I think that happened because Lopez rotated a tad late.
Triplethreat
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 12,897
- Reaction score
- 12,758
- Points
- 123
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
Oh wow, Barnes got completely blown away on that play, dedn't even bother guarding him. Kind of makes me think twice about him.
Oh wow, Barnes got completely blown away on that play, dedn't even bother guarding him. Kind of makes me think twice about him.
Frank Stallone
You guessed it...
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2009
- Messages
- 9,065
- Reaction score
- 5,489
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
I don't know, if wasn't possible to get Kleiza...then why would we be going after him?
I don't know, if wasn't possible to get Kleiza...then why would we be going after him?
sam_slam911
In the Rotation
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,921
- Reaction score
- 676
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
Don't think we can sign Kleiza withbwhat we got left. But maybe a sign and trade could work. He could be a very good or at least decent fit at PF.
Don't think we can sign Kleiza withbwhat we got left. But maybe a sign and trade could work. He could be a very good or at least decent fit at PF.
kovanovich
Sixth Man
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,192
- Reaction score
- 2,101
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
It's one play, people. The question isn't Barnes or Kleiza, it's who we can realistically get. To get Kleiza, we'd have to do some complex sign and trade deal, giving up bargaining chips in the process, and I just question whether it is worth it. In the case of Barnes, it's just a matter of saying we want you and can give you more than you are making now with a good chance of playing some decent minutes. He is insurance, while we try to work something out up to the trade deadline for a better player at the "stretch"/combo forward position. I've never read anything to suggest Ferry is overly enamored with Kleiza. He does have an upside but has been very inconsistent (granted, maybe in part because of his situation in Denver), but instead of seeing him as a combo forward, he may be more of a tweener, not really either a PF or a SF.
It's one play, people. The question isn't Barnes or Kleiza, it's who we can realistically get. To get Kleiza, we'd have to do some complex sign and trade deal, giving up bargaining chips in the process, and I just question whether it is worth it. In the case of Barnes, it's just a matter of saying we want you and can give you more than you are making now with a good chance of playing some decent minutes. He is insurance, while we try to work something out up to the trade deadline for a better player at the "stretch"/combo forward position. I've never read anything to suggest Ferry is overly enamored with Kleiza. He does have an upside but has been very inconsistent (granted, maybe in part because of his situation in Denver), but instead of seeing him as a combo forward, he may be more of a tweener, not really either a PF or a SF.
twizbuck
Pirate Ninja
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2008
- Messages
- 539
- Reaction score
- 152
- Points
- 43
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
If we got Barnes, I'm happy. If Parker starts, that gives us:
Mo/West/Gibson/Parker
Parker/West/Gibson/Barnes
James/Barnes/Parker
Varejao/???/James/Parker
O'Neal/Ilgauskus/Varejao
Just leaves us with a question mark at PF.
If we got Barnes, I'm happy. If Parker starts, that gives us:
Mo/West/Gibson/Parker
Parker/West/Gibson/Barnes
James/Barnes/Parker
Varejao/???/James/Parker
O'Neal/Ilgauskus/Varejao
Just leaves us with a question mark at PF.
-Akronite-
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 11,079
- Reaction score
- 14,609
- Points
- 123
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
Ugh.....
Ugh.....
Rimage
Sixth Man
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 5,490
- Reaction score
- 2,495
- Points
- 113
Re: Matt Barnes Watch 2009
Jackson and Hickson are capable. I am still excited about Hickson, but most people seem to want to ignore his existence.
Jackson and Hickson are capable. I am still excited about Hickson, but most people seem to want to ignore his existence.