Why Losing Barnes Hurts the Lakers

[Sħãlïq™]

Why Losing Matt Barnes Hurts the Lakers

 

http://wagesofwins.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/72612753.jpeg

Alright so the Lakers, who won 50 games (adjusted for 82 games) last season have pushed themselves over 55 games. So they’re contenders again! Except losing Barnes is going to hurt, a lot. In fact, I’d argue had the Lakers amnestied Kobe, kept Barnes, signed Meeks and not signed Jamison, they’d actually be in great shape. However, as Barnes walked, they are not. Let’s show why. And for fun I’ll be using one of my favorite players: Kobe Bryant.

 

Matt Barnes was really good with the Lakers. In fact, despite significantly fewer minutes than Kobe, he put up much better stats. Treating both Kobe and Barnes as Guard-Forwards, here’s a comparison of how many wins above average they got per category.

 

http://i.imgur.com/KE2cM.png

Kobe is good at exactly three things: getting to the line, not fouling and pulling down defensive boards. While useful skills, it turns out Kobe’s chucking habits and turnovers pull him down into the “bad range”. Matt Barnes puts up more than 4 wins than an average player would with his minutes. Kobe costs his team 2 wins compared to an average player with the same minutes. Let’s not forget that the Lakers signed Jodie Meeks, who happens to play the same position as Kobe.

 

Based on the box score and the Synergy stats, it’s hard to argue Kobe was that amazing at defense. At the very least, it’s hard to believe he’s better than Matt Barnes. The Lakers have some bona fide stars — albeit with concerns on health and age. However, beyond the top of their roster, the Lakers are lacking. Additionally, replacing Matt Barnes with Antawn Jamison will certainly hurt. As long as the Lakers keep believing Kobe is a major player, they’ll be in trouble. Of course, they can believe he’ll rebound and play like the Kobe of old. I’d much rather have bet on a cheap Matt Barnes though.

Full Story

[The Regime]

I didn't feel the need to read anything you posted. Fact is that Barnes was a piece of shit last season, he wont be missed.

 

Edit: Cool Kobe-Barnes comparison btw.

Edited October 6, 2012 by Simba

[Sħãlïq™]

I didn't feel the need to read anything you posted. Barnes was a piece of shit last season, he wont be missed.

 

Edit: Cool Kobe-Barnes comparison btw.

It's not like I wrote it.

[The Regime]

It's not like I wrote it.

 

When did I say you wrote it?

Edited October 6, 2012 by Simba

[Sħãlïq™]

When did I say you wrote it?

When did I say you said I wrote it?

[The Regime]

Holy shit, I feel like I'm talking to a five year old. Just leave it man, if you can't figure it out then so be it.

[Real Deal]

Barnes was horrible for us last year. I'm not too fond of some guy saying Barnes was anywhere near Kobe's game last year, either. Whatever statistics he found, it's not going to help his argument because Barnes' role on the team was to spot up and shoot the ball. He rarely defended the best player on the court, and when he was in there with Bryant (Ron on the bench), Bryant would do that most of the time, anyway.

 

For him to even think that the Lakers would be more productive with Barnes, instead of Bryant...well, he should probably just shut his blog down.