Barnes To The Clippers

I'm going to agree with Rooscooter on this one. There is really nothing Ebanks does better than Barnes. People want him because he has potential and upside. There are thousands of players who have potential and upside, and I couldn't care less about any of them. Actually, Ebanks' ceiling is probably Matt Barnes. Lol.

Like others have said give Devin Ebanks a shot, Andre Gouledlock too, barnes is terrible he's gettin like luie walton seriously Lakers don't waste money on him

I would have loved, in a perfect world for the Lakers to have had a great blue chip prospect at small forward like a Harrison Barnes, as he would have been a godsend in the second unit on both ends of the floor... but sadly, that is just not reality!

I still can't believe how the Lakers couldn't have seen Gerald Green's potential when he was with the D-fenders and bring him up? He would have been great at the backup 2 or 3 position, and he's young, and would have come cheap. The Lakers don't make many stupid moves often, but letting this guy go, when he was in their backyard was one of them.

If we had Gerald Green(which we should have, if the scout was doing his job), and Ramon Sessions had taken that PO, signed Kenyon Martin for the veterans minimum to solidify the front court, and we had still been able to acquire Dwight Howard, Steve Nash, Jodie Meeks, Antwan Jamison, and resigned Jordan Hill and Devin Ebanks, then I can't see any major weaknesses at any position for the Lakers. Sadly, that's all completely doable, and not outlandish

Nash/Sessions/Blake
Bryant/Meeks/
Artest/Green/Ebanks
Gasol/Jamison/Martin
Howard/Hill

Our second unit of Sessions/Meeks/Green/Jamison/Hill, would have been better than some teams starting units!!! Oh well....must move on from the Sessions and Green debacles

^^^^

LAKEROC wrote:I would have loved, in a perfect world for the Lakers to have had a great blue chip prospect at small forward like a Harrison Barnes, as he would have been a godsend in the second unit on both ends of the floor... but sadly, that is just not reality!

I still can't believe how the Lakers couldn't have seen Gerald Green's potential when he was with the D-fenders and bring him up? He would have been great at the backup 2 or 3 position, and he's young, and would have come cheap. The Lakers don't make many stupid moves often, but letting this guy go, when he was in their backyard was one of them.

If we had Gerald Green(which we should have, if the scout was doing his job), and Ramon Sessions had taken that PO, signed Kenyon Martin for the veterans minimum to solidify the front court, and we had still been able to acquire Dwight Howard, Steve Nash, Jodie Meeks, Antwan Jamison, and resigned Jordan Hill and Devin Ebanks, then I can't see any major weaknesses at any position for the Lakers. Sadly, that's all completely doable, and not outlandish

Nash/Sessions/Blake
Bryant/Meeks/
Artest/Green/Ebanks
Gasol/Jamison/Martin
Howard/Hill

Our second unit of Sessions/Meeks/Green/Jamison/Hill, would have been better than some teams starting units!!! Oh well....must move on from the Sessions and Green debacles

Gerald Green looked terrible in the summer league games he played for us. No one wanted him, so I don't see how you can call it a stupid move.

Doc Brown wrote:^^^^

LOL

LAKEROC wrote:must move on from the Sessions and Green debacles

I forgot about Sessions this past July 4th and I forgot about Green sometime in 2008. Probably 2007.

Doc Brown wrote:^^^^

Each team has flaws ... Ebanks isn't the answer to back up the SF spot neither Barnes is ..

Barnes is the better player but has choked during the 3 latest playoffs runs ... PASS

LAKEROC wrote:I would have loved, in a perfect world for the Lakers to have had a great blue chip prospect at small forward like a Harrison Barnes, as he would have been a godsend in the second unit on both ends of the floor... but sadly, that is just not reality!

I still can't believe how the Lakers couldn't have seen Gerald Green's potential when he was with the D-fenders and bring him up? He would have been great at the backup 2 or 3 position, and he's young, and would have come cheap. The Lakers don't make many stupid moves often, but letting this guy go, when he was in their backyard was one of them.

If we had Gerald Green(which we should have, if the scout was doing his job), and Ramon Sessions had taken that PO, signed Kenyon Martin for the veterans minimum to solidify the front court, and we had still been able to acquire Dwight Howard, Steve Nash, Jodie Meeks, Antwan Jamison, and resigned Jordan Hill and Devin Ebanks, then I can't see any major weaknesses at any position for the Lakers. Sadly, that's all completely doable, and not outlandish

Nash/Sessions/Blake
Bryant/Meeks/
Artest/Green/Ebanks
Gasol/Jamison/Martin
Howard/Hill

Our second unit of Sessions/Meeks/Green/Jamison/Hill, would have been better than some teams starting units!!! Oh well....must move on from the Sessions and Green debacles

The Gerald Green thing was a crapshoot.. He's been in & out of the league.. Noone knew he would play like that fot the Nets, & noone knows if he'll continue it on a new team or if that was just a good fit. I also wish we would have kept him but at the time he didn't look to have any more upside than Ebanks..

Sessions, I agree completely here.. Out of all of our starters, Nash's health worries me the most. Not just the potential for serious injury but his ongoing back issues that can at times really limit his minutes.. Both sides look like fools.. Ramon from leaving a championship team & us for not matching the extra 500k the Lolcats offered.. If we had a capable backup like Sesh, Blake would be dumped for a future 2nd & there would be no questions about our bench.

I don't think we'll be hurt much by Ebanks as the primary backup.. If he struggles too badly, we just slide Kobe to SF some & give Meeks more minutes. This strategy has paid off big in the past with shooters like Sasha & would be great for spacing.

During a recent interview Los Angeles Lakers free agent small forward Matt Barnes let the world know that he is a free agent

Is there such thing as a Los Angeles Lakers free agent (that isn't restricted of course)? Who wrote this? If the guy is a free agent, HE ISN'T ON AN NBA TEAM.

The evil empire? Really?

Well they are known for bringing in the misfits of the NBA so who knows maybe he'll fit in there, but really? The evil empire?

Take him. Seriously, he fits into their crappy city. He's a good teammate and seems like a good guy but trouble seems to follow him and those are the kinds of people you should try to stay away from. I think we'll see better chemistry without him honestly.

Guy's gotta feed his family...so if the Lakers aren't interested, he'll go wherever the work is.

Personally, I would still prefer him over Ebanks. Barnes is a player who gives high energy and high effort...he has a motor...that's really hard to find. I know Devin doesn't have it.

Is Barnes flawed...yes, but if healthy, he's an asset.

Like Kray said, Barnes > Ebanks until Ebanks proves otherwise.

Let Barnes go to Boston and let's sign Pietrus. Seems like a fair swap to me

From Pietrus to Barnes, this is a downgrade from Boston Celtics !

noobiew wrote:From Pietrus to Barnes, this is a downgrade from Boston Celtics !

but they've drastically improved everywhere else...

Garnett/Sullinger/Melo
Bass/Green
Pierce/Barnes
Lee/Terry
Rondo/Bradley

if the Barnes signing goes down, that's a really good bench.

I wish him the best, he gets more crap around here than he deserves. I always thought he was a bargain, and loved his effort, and movement off the ball. it's unfortunate that our bench was so bad that he was our best bench player by default. I think he will excel in a role where he's at the end of a rotation.

Crazy to think that guys like Luke Walton and Adam Morrison, were making 5 million more a year than this guy....for absolutely NOTHING!!!!

Uggghh! I would hate that.....him on same roster with the psycho Garnett mentality when we face them. I agree he was great for us at the price although unfortunately common injuries....ankles....anything else?.....took him out of regular season form 2 years in a row, just in time for playoffs. They seemed to take his shooting skills as well as hampering the great mobility and effectiveness he had for us around the rim when healthy.

After being on the fence about Barnes, I'm fine with this if it goes down. As much as I hate Those Guys, it seems like a good fit for Matt actually. And if he helps them to beat the CHEAT then more power to them both.

While I agree with Kray that at this moment Barnes is better than Ebanks, the time has really come for us to either fish or cut bait with Devin. If we kept Barnes then Brown would play him over Ebanks and we'd never develop him or see what he is capable of. Ebanks is on a one year contract so it's the right time to see what he's got.

In Ebanks' favor - he's got youth and athleticism, two things that we are in short supply of on our team. We could definitely use his length on a guy like Durant in our rotation behind Artest. Ebanks has shown that he has some promise in that department.

Barnes can't guard Durant. We've seen that. Barnes can't guard Lebronze either. Those are the two premiere SF's that we're going to have to deal with if we want to win it all. Ebanks can't stop Lebronze either, but he can bother Durant at least, which is where we'll need the help the most. Ron Ron used to be able to handle Durant pretty well, but last year he got kind of torched. While Ebanks will take some developing, he could be our kind of Sefalosha type defensive guy to throw at Durant just as they throw Sef at Kobe. Of course Sef is a much better and more developed player at this point in time. But over the next couple years I could see Ebanks getting to that level, and maybe surpassing Sef . . . at least on the offensive end.

I think Devin is worth it. Obviously the FO does, too, or he wouldn't have gotten the QO. I'm glad he's got this year to see what he's capable of. Hopefully it pays off for both him and us.

if he improves boston so they can have a better chance against the heat i dont care. he aint coming back to the lakers so anywhere but the heat is fine with me. he was good for us just had VERY bad luck with injuries at the worst time.

nameant wrote:

During a recent interview Los Angeles Lakers free agent small forward Matt Barnes let the world know that he is a free agent

Is there such thing as a Los Angeles Lakers free agent (that isn't restricted of course)? Who wrote this? If the guy is a free agent, HE ISN'T ON AN NBA TEAM.

lakersStan24 wrote:Like others have said give Devin Ebanks a shot, Andre Gouledlock too, barnes is terrible he's gettin like luie walton seriously Lakers don't waste money on him

luke walton?