Sources: Cavaliers Expected to Take Barnes at No. 4

Makes sense with the Irving connection. Those two were close in HS, and yea so were Irving and Gilchrist (played for same New Jersey team) but MKG will be taken #2 so that opportunity went out the window.

 

Good news for us if we trade up.

Barnes at 4 is a major reach IMO.

 

This only happens if both MKG and Beal are gone 2 and 3.

 

Ummm, he's a top 5 pick in most mock drafts.

 

I think Cleveland takes Barnes over Beal. People forget how quickly these draft rankings can switch. Their entire careers up until 4 months ago Barnes was a more highly coveted and touted prospect. What did Beal show anyone in the tournament to all of a sudden make himself a snub if he isn't picked at #4? He shot better in March, yes, but he's still a 6'4 SG. Austin Rivers can tell you what the ceiling of those types of players are. Btw Rivers was also a higher ranked prospect than Beal for most of their careers.

I'm not saying that Barnes and Rivers are necessarily better; I'm just asking everyone to take with a grain of salt those rankings. Beal certainly did not dominate college bball as a freshman the way Durant (25.8ppg), Beasley (26.2), or even Eric Gordon (20.8). His scoring average (14.8) is closer to that of Eric Bledsoe (11.6) or Avery Bradley (11.8) as a freshman, so expect something in between Gordon and those guys.

 

I was thinking Eric Gordon was who Beal resembles the most. He may be falling back down a bit. I used to think Barnes was the class of this draft. But he really didn't show anything at NC besides being a jumpshooter and sometimes finisher. He didn't show a handle. If he really doesn't have the ability to dribble and create, that limits him at the next level. My gut right now says Beal is the better NBAer.

 

Ya. I shouldn't have said major reach. A major reach was Tristan Thompson last year.

It may not even be a reach. I'm just not sold on Barnes myself and I think you can do better at #4.

Say the draft goes 1. Davis, 2. Robinson, 3. Beal, there's no way I take Barnes over MKG. If it goes 1. Davis 2.MKG 3.Beal, there's no way I take Barnes over Robinson.

I'm not totally sold on Beal, but If I had to pick Beal or Barnes, I'd probably go with Beal, though I'd be hesitant to give up #4 value for either guy.
I like Lamb at #8 better than Beal or Barnes at #4.
I'd rather stay away from Drummond, but if I had to choose between Drummond and Barnes, I just might go with Drummond, though again I wouldn't give up #4 value for either guy.

Totally objective, obviously.

 

Harrison Barnes = Marvin Williams.

 

I think Barnes can dominate, but he needs someone to set him up. A lot of the bad taste in scouts' mouths at the end of the year was due to Marshall being out. If he's on the same team as Irving, watch out. He may not be an elite talent at driving the ball, but he sure has enough athleticism to put up 20ppg on the right team. Rich Harden wasn't a major speed threat coming out of USC, and he still isn't, but he had a great midrange game and some outside shooting skill. Barnes is a worse midrange player, but he does have one, in particular I bet his posting up is better than Harden's. I also think Barnes is a better shooter than Harden. If the Rockets moved up to 6-8 to select Barnes I'd be happy.

I know Gordon's 6'3, and other combo guys have shown you can be successful at the 2 guard while not being over 6'5, but I still think there's an inherent limitation to those types of guards. On a championship team, the best short non-point guard you'll find is the Jason Terry type. A Monta Ellis (and maybe even Gordon too) that scores bunches but requires a high usage rate to do so does not appeal to me at all.

In short, Beal might put up superior stats in the NBA, but I feel like Barnes will contribute more towards winning.

 

You're probably right. It's just that....did the Cavs learn how to NOT screw up the #4 pick in the draft (remembering last year)?

Barnes is good when his PG is healthy.

Maybe Cleveland thinks they can snag a good SG with their cap space, or maybe (not to derail the thread with my BS) we can send them Kevin Martin for their #20-whatever pick.

 

He'll probably benefit from being the number two guy and having Irving setting him up.

Still don't get why they picked Thompson. Valanciuas-Barnes-Irving would have made for a very good core.

 

Gilchrist-Kidd might go 2nd or 3rd. I doubt Barnes will be ahead of him, regardless.

 

Granted, I have never followed MKG. However, he is only 6-6 (puny for a SF), doesn't shoot from the outside very well and is, according to draftnet, is a "jack of all trades and master of none." I doubt he will transition at more than a journeyman level in the NBA -- sort of smaller Shane Battier.

 

wtf? hes 6-7 220 and yams on people..if he develops a jumper look out..wayyyyyyyyy more athletic than shane

 

I would take Barnes over Beal if I was Cleveland as well.

They have a young big man, a young wing full of potential to pair with a young star point guard.

Irving/Barnes/Thompson -- Good young base to build from. Very solid.


That being said I think Washington should take Beal, I really believe his shooting will complement John Wall very well.

I can see Robinson and Drummond falling to 5 and 6.

 

This . . .along with #24 pick, #33, #34, and they've got money to spend in FA.

 

This is the best formula for a team, I prefer Barnes for Cleveland than MKG. The scoring can't all come from Irving for the Cavs to be a legit championship team. It's got to come from everywhere.

 

Still don't get why they didn't get Valanciunas last year. So what you have to wait for him? The Cavs had to think long term anyway.

 

My guess is it's to surround Irving with real buddies. To have a Thunder-like relationship within the team.