In addition, if Barry really is going to the Spurs, where he knows he'll probably be a backup, what does that say about his assessment of his own physical condition? If Barry thinks he's too worn down to play a starter's minutes, do we want him?
What makes you say this? Barry started his career as a two guard and probably reads the news; he knows the Spurs have Ginobili, Bowen, and Hedo threatening to leave via free agency. Further, Barry said his first choice would be Seattle, where he'd either start at the 1 or the 2. Frankly, I think the arguments are pretty dumb. Fact is, if you like a player, you'll see his virtues. If you dislike the player, or like a different player more, you'll see his flaws. The fact of the matter is, there is no young player out on the market that fits our needs perfectly... Kirk Hinrich is, unfortunately, not a FA or on the block, and we have nothing that would entice the Bulls into giving him up. Ditto for Mike Bibby and Bobby Jackson. Here are the facts: Pros - 1. Barry's the best shooter available. We need shooters. 2. Barry is not a mistake prone player. His assist to turnover ratio is very low for a player that handles the ball as much as he does. 3. Barry is tall, and has long arms that he uses well to get deflections and steals. 4. Barry knows how to run the break. With a low possession offense, we need to get as many easy points as possible. 5. Barry is a good passer, and makes up for his average ball handling with smart passes out of traps. 6. Though he isn't a pure PG, he's very unselfish and relishes the role of third option who preys on double teams. Cons - 1. Barry isn't a great dribble-penetrator... Which doesn't really matter in our system anyway. 2. Barry's 32-years-old and doesn't look like he can play big minutes at the point for 82 games a year, for four more years. (He has only missed an average of 9 games per season the last five years) 3. Barry's a slowfooted defender. Against quick, dribble-penentration PGs like Parker, Marbury, and Nash, this will be a problem. Which is why Lue would be that much more effectively. 4. 4yrs/$24mil is a big contract to swallow for an aging roleplayer. It's important to understand that ANYONE we bring in now that we have Yao and T-Mac will (or should) be a roleplayer. Do the pros outweigh the cons? I don't think so. I think this is the best PG available, and further, the best PG that will be available in the next three or four years, unless you honestly think Bobby Jackson (who will be 32) will want to leave Sacramento to sign with us next year. Barry's the best fit for us right now, and I think we have to go with that.
I don't know if anyone's posted this yet: SportsRadio610.com . The Rockets have offered free agent G Brent Barry a four year, $24 million contract. I know its pretty much saying the same thing as in the Denver newspaper, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
How are is this amount supposed to be (4 mil year up?). I don't see the Spurs going for Barry unless they lose Manu, which I don't think they will. I think they will fork over a long term deal (or match Denver) starting at least at 7 mil and up to just under 10 million per year. After resigning Manu and Bowen, signing a guy like Barry or SJ would kill any remaining cap space for them long term--I don't see them doing that with other line up weaknesses. By the way, the Spurs do have a bad contract, that is why they left Malik Rose unprotected. I don't really like Rasha's (Cato's equivalent) either. Those two contracts together will eat a lot of lot of space through 08.
Let's try that again... Good point, Barry playing out his 4th year at 37 doesn't sound so great. I'm not sure about the whole Turkoglu thing, but Barry sounds like another bad contract waiting to happen. He could give us a couple of good years, but I don't think we should get him long-term. Go with Fisher (who always plays his hardest) and hope that he finds his range consistently. He knows how to play with a great scoring guard and a dominant big man, and we could use the experience.
<a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/basketball/181047_locke07.html">Locked on Sports: Sonics in need of Barry's intangibles</a> <i>today's article in Seattle which talks about Barry, and why SEA shouldn't let him go...</i> ----------------- By DAVID LOCKE SPECIAL TO THE POST-INTELLIGENCER I hope Sonics management has heard of Darrell Armstrong. No, I am not looking at the 36-year-old Armstrong as the answer to the Sonics' free-agency questions. I am just worried that last year's Armstrong may be this year's Brent Barry. The Sonics have said they want Barry, 32, back. They just don't want to give him the fourth year on his contract. Barry has said he would return provided he receives a fourth year. However, the deeper you dig into Barry's free agency, the more you realize this is a more complex issue than just one year. Sonics management and coach Nate McMillan have stated a two-pronged goal for the off-season. The Sonics think, correctly, they must add a perimeter defensive presence and get rebounding help in order to build a playoff team. The dilemma is this: One, Barry does not make the Sonics a better perimeter defensive team. Two, though he is a good rebounder for a guard, he is not what the Sonics mean by rebounding help. McMillan has made it abundantly clear he wants to coach a team that can pressure the ball and disrupt the opponent's offensive flow. If Barry were to return, he would be keeping the point guard position warm until Luke Ridnour becomes a prime-time player, if that happens. Barring a trade, the Sonics are again left with a backcourt of Barry and Ray Allen, with Rashard Lewis at small forward. This group is to defensive presence as Froot Loops is to nutritional value. Adding to the quandary is the money game. The Sonics' financial situation does not allow them to sign Barry and add another midlevel free agent to satisfy their needs. This is the cost of having Calvin Booth, Jerome James and Vitaly Potapenko eating nearly $20 million of the budget. Therefore, the Sonics have to ask themselves: If we re-sign Barry, where will we get the defensive presence to play the game the way McMillan wants it played? This is where so many teams fail in the off-season. They analyze all their decisions based on what will take place on the floor and how their rotations will be affected. Barry is all about locker room, all about chemistry and all about the being the glue to the franchise. At some point since last season, people have forgotten how lost the Sonics were when Barry was not on the floor. Barry is not perfect. He could have dealt with Flip Murray's selfishness better, and his uncertain status last season affected his demeanor. That notwithstanding, Barry is one of the best in the NBA at communicating with teammates, at reading moods, at assisting young players and at sacrificing his numbers for the game. This is a league where players are in the CBA one day and complaining the next that they aren't getting enough shots in the NBA. Barry is the antithesis of this model. He might be the only player criticized for not being selfish. He thrives off his teammates' success. The happiest I saw him all year after a game was in the final week when Ridnour finally showed Sonics fans the play of which he is capable. Teams must have players like Barry. Last year, after an exhibition game, when an injured Ridnour showed up wearing sweats, it was Barry who took him shopping. Four years ago, Barry was looking over a quiet Lewis; three years ago, he tended to Desmond Mason. Most impressively and contrary to how it usually works in the league, once Lewis matured, Barry stepped back and has allowed Lewis to start leading. Which leads us back to Darrell Armstrong. The Orlando Magic ended 2003 by pushing the Pistons to seven games in the first round of the playoffs. Everyone thought the Magic were on the verge of taking the next step. They had an either/or financial decision similar to the one the Sonics are facing with Barry. In a move that seemed reasonable, the Magic decided to let go an aging and oft-injured Armstrong, although he had been the unquestioned leader of the Magic for the previous nine seasons. The goal was to allow their superstar, Tracy McGrady, to lead, and sign a player who better fit their needs. It was a colossal disaster. The Magic went through a rudderless training camp and were totally unprepared for the season. They began the season 1-19, which led to popular coach Doc Rivers' firing. The Magic finished with the NBA's worst record, prompting McGrady to force a trade to the Houston Rockets. The Sonics are presenting Barry's free agency as an issue of whether he can get a four-year contract on the open market. The real issue is this: Can the Sonics accomplish their stated off-season goals and bring leadership back to the roster? Otherwise, be scared of the example of the 2003-04 Orlando Magic and Darrell Armstrong. David Locke hosts "Locked on Sports" from 7-10 p.m. weeknights on Sports Radio 950 KJR-AM. His column appears Wednesdays in the P-I. You can e-mail him at Davidlocke@clearchannel.com.
Ginobili couild sign with denver or utah, but SA can match. If they sign Barry, they may not match, though. I think Ginobili is a better long term investment. SA would be stupid to do that. Very similar players, I think. Barry has the better shot, Manu is more athletic. Leave Barry to the Rox pls.
Not sure how realistic it is for the Spurs to shell out $9 million a year for someone coming off of the bench, unless of course they seriously intend on dumping Turkoglu. I have a feeling that Ginobili will go to the Nuggets and maybe that's why the Spurs are focusing on Brent Barry. I just hope the Rockets have a contingency plan if it doesn't work out with Brent Barry. In all honesty, I wouldn't mind seeing a solid veteran PG like Nick Van Exel either. After all, he lives in Houston too!
Barry certainly has the flexibility in that we can slide him over to the 2. But playing Barry more at the 2 equals more minutes for Lue at the 1. So you're essentially substituting Piatkowski/Gaines/Nachbar's minutes for Lue's, and you have to ask yourself who you think would be more productive. Frankly, I'm not 100% sold on Lue and would rather see Nachbar's minutes extended. Of course, unless we're playing against a Marbury or a Parker, then I'd want Lue on the floor more. However, if we were to acquire somebody like Eric Williams who can play 20 minutes/game at the 3, then JJ can play backup minutes at the 2, and we could have Barry strictly play the 1, which I think would be the most efficient since it is our weakest position.
I don't get the fascination with Van Exel. Another guy to fire up a lot of shots and not play defense? Doesn't make a lot of sense. And I'm guessing he's not going to tear up the last year of his contract with Golden State worth like $11 million just to play in Houston meaning we'd have to trade for him and no WAY we take on that salary.
well . .. the price is too steep but he does bring experience and competitive spirit look what Dallas looked like without him Rocket River
the trick is to sign barry BEFORE matching I think they are looking to fortify the 1/2 position like Jeff said ... Barry can do that They may like speedy but they need some size at the 1 and Manu is not overly tall either Rocket River
I did say "if": if Barry really is leaning towards the Spurs -- that's the subject of this thread, remember? -- then he's at least seriously thinking about turning himself into a backup. Do we really want somebody who doubts he can play a starter's minutes anymore? Don't forget Stevie. He's really going to light up Barry (and Lue). Of course, this rumor about the Spurs could be disinformation spread by the Sonics to discourage other teams from going after Barry. Don't you just love politics?
A San Antonio writer who covers the Spurs was on an LA sportstalk radio station yesterday saying that there is still the possibililty that the Spurs would make an offer for Kobe by releasing Turkoglu and not signing Ginobili and possibly clearing some more cap space to make Kobe a very lucrative offer with the possibilty of playing with Duncan who wouldn't mind deferring to a scorer like Kobe. The writer mentioned that Turkoglu has had two meltdowns in the playoffs for 2 years in a row against the Lakers (with Sac and the Spurs this past season) and the team and city are really down on him and think he's not a clutch scorer which could lead to his departure.
When Steve Francis is 32, someone is going to be paying him $16.3m for the final year of his contract. Offer Barry the money, tell him the offer expires midnight July 15th. If he doesn't sign, quickly move on.
Nick Van Exel would be the worst possible fit for this team at point guard. Well, after Steve Francis.
Because $16m is 2/3's of what the entire offer is to Barry. And Francis at 32 is on a steeper decline because his style is predicated entirely on athleticism.
Francis at 32 will be less productive than Barry at 37? I'll take that bet any day. Hell, I'll bet that Francis at 32 will be better than Barry at 32. The guy's a 10.8 ppg career scorer. EDIT: I just looked at their career totals, in 5 seasons, Steve already has more points, rebounds, and assists than Barry has in 10. I know what your next answer is, well, pro rated per point....etc, similar value. It doesn't work that way, star players aren't fungible in a $ for $ sense with lesser players. In the NBA, it is far more valuable to have 1 player who can score 20 points a game, than it is to have 2 guys who can score 10 points, or 3 who can score 7, etc....and it shows. We have 3 awful contracts on the books for a while (Taylor, Spoon, Howard). We don't need 4.
