Will, as usual, you are right on with this post. You always seem to come up with what I want to say with more precision and clarity. I'm not banked on getting Barry, though he would be nice. I'd be perfectly happy having Fisher for much cheaper. Barry on the Spurs is a bit scary though.
well apparently manu's been offered a large contract by the nugs, so that may incline the spurs to bid a little harder for barry's services. which does indeed suck.
I doubt that Barry is capable of being an 82 game point guard. After 5 years of b****ing about how we need a real point guard and not a "combo" guard, are the masses willing to be sated by bringing in another "combo" guy (I hate those labels and don't know what they mean, but I would suppose that he fits it, no?) who only played it out of necessity last year, for part of the year? If he's just going to be a shooter, than go for Cardinal, or Hoiberg, etc, for cheaper, rather than driving up the brinks truck for Barry.
What Barry brings is a rare combination of skills and size that just happens to fit the Rockets really well. Not only can he handle the ball like a point guard with terrific passing skills and a knack for running the break, but he is a deadly outside shooter. The fact that he can play both the one and the two essentially means the Rockets kill two birds with one stone. With Fisher, you get better defense, but he only plays one position leaving the team a little thin at the 2/3 spots. With Barry, you can rotate him to the two when Lue comes off the bench and move McGrady to the 3. Then, Jackson gets an early rest before Boki spells either McGrady or Barry. You still have Gaines and Piatkowski on the bench for further help if you need it. If Fisher is the PG, he comes out and Lue replaces him, but you have to go one deeper at the two spot meaning Boki, Piatkowski or Gaines get more minutes. While they COULD produce, I'd rather have them as bench depth than counted on contributors, at least for a while. I like Fisher's big-game experience. I like his defense. He certainly knows how to take and make clutch shots. He's got good size and is conservative at the point. But, Barry just has that extra gear that would give the Rockets the running game they haven't had in YEARS. He is also just DEADLY from the perimeter. And, given his size, he should be able to D up adequately against most guards. The Rockets are such a good scheming defensive team, it will hide most of his weaknesses anyway. I wouldn't be overly disappointed if we didn't get him, but I think we'd be better off with him than with Fisher.
I was arguing about Barry in another thread about his age, he wants a long term contract, and that he only played 59 games last season. Then someone pointed out his assist to turnover ratio wasn't all that it was made out to be, and now I really don't understand the facisnation with this guy. Not just with the Rockets. The guy has a been a perinnial bench player his whole career, never made a difference, and now people want to pay him 6 million a year. I just don't get it. There are better options out there for less money.
I like Berry's versatility, but his age does really bother me. We have two stars in their mid 20's, we should try to build a team to be together, grow together, and win MULTIPLE championships together for years to come. Besides, if I were Berry, I would probably choose the Spurs. They have the cap room to spend and are closer to winning a title. He would be an major part of whatever succes they will have. The Rockets have two great stars, but it will be a couple of years before they are an NBA elite and Berry would be just a real nice filler on the roster.
Nice post. People can disagree, but they need to stop asking why we want this guy. It is obvious. Also, with the zone you want more shooters on your team. Barry is the best shooter available.
Interesting post overall, but I'm not sure I agree with this part...simply put, our defensive scheme didn't seem to hide Moochie's lackluster defense...in fact, it exploited it.
This to me is a mistake. You don't overpay Barry just because there's no one else better now. We are not an aging team with a one, two-year window to contend for a championship. If the supply of role-player guards that fit our team is low and therefore relatively expensive, then save your money, make do with a stop-gap, and try to find the right fit for the right price next year. I'm not saying we should be completely inflexible. But Barry's really asking for a lot, and I think it's a mistake to get into a bidding war over him. Especially since we are now a fairly attractive free agent destination and not some cellar dweller with little alternative but to overpay for talent. Jeff has a nice post, and I'm not challenging the argument that Barry may be a really good fit. But if you're not convinced that Barry is the perfect fit/third option/critical piece of the puzzle, then why the heck offer him more than what is reasonable?
Real "combo guards" are fine. As long as they can shoot with good percentage, and good passing efficency. Payton was like this. And so was Isiah. They were great scoring/passing guards (combo). Today's "combo guard" standard has been lowered. Sign Barry if we can. Of course he's not as good as GP or IT. But, he's a solid choice.
I am unconvinced -- that BBarry is being offered more than the MLE X 4 years. I am unconvinced of his intents. I would like BB 1st, tho DFish is an acceptable 2nd choice -- at 3mil X 3-4 years. Hudson is an OK 3rd choice, again for the right contract. I am concerned about Rox painting (overpaying) themselves into a corner and not being able to get additional help from Bigs now, or making a move after the season begins and a need arises. (I also wonder if Dre is available int he right deal, for the right team -- as he fits Rox better than the running team Kiki envisions for the Nugs ... Dre for Arenas? I imagine both teams would benefit.)
We're not going to get into another T-Mac/Steve Francis type fiasco of agents leaking info for better deals by Brent Barry. If he doesn't want to play here we need to move on.
Maybe because the standard is lowered because the label is manufactured, made up, and doesn't mean anything. Actually, not maybe, it is made up. It's a point guard who isn't good enough to score so tactfully chooses not to. For the past few years it was used as an insult, now I guess it is a compliment.
Anthony Peeler --- could be had for one or two years at 1.5/per. He led the NBA in 3% last year, tough nosed defender( I remember that punch he through at KG), can give you a solid 20-25 minutes. With #1 on the team, he'll also be bringing up the ball alot and creating/distributing. We also have Lue and Gaines that will need minutes. As long as he's still able to hit the open 3 with some consistancy, I'd go along. Only knock on Peeler would be his age, 34. That's not too bad, considering Mark Jackson played well last season at 40! Then we could use some cap/MLE on a 4/5. Charlie Ward could be worth a look, too, considering his knowledge of JVG's system.
I agree with this. Barry is a pretty slick passer and is very fluid on the court. He's also fairly athlethic. He definitely has a lot of Rick Barry to him. Brent is a very good basketball player. My biggest concern still is that if he's already a defensive liability at 32, he'll be a tremendous liability in 2 or 3 years. Nate McMillan probably hated his guts. Im not too thrilled about paying someone $14 million over the last 2 years just to come off the bench and score a few points.
Absolutely. Rockets play alot of help defense...which tends to get out bigs in foul trouble...No bueno. This is my main reason for signing a guy like Arroyo.
