Brent Barry: He couldn't be....could he?

[Solid D]

Brent Barry has averaged 10.04 ppg in 21.7 mpg over the first 21 games he has played for the Spurs in 2006-07. In that 21st game, Brent lit up the Clippers on 8-10 shooting, hitting 5-6 on 3-pointers and 24 total points, his high as a Spur.

Since that night (Dec. 11, 2006), Brent has dipped in his performance over his next 16 games to 5.5 ppg in 20 mpg. The new/old ball came into play on Jan. 1, well after Brent's slide had started.

What has brought on this lack of performance in roughly 20 minutes of PT per game? Are teams adjusting to where he likes to catch and shoot? Is his confidence dropping causing him to pass up open shots?

It was on Dec. 13th that the LA Times reported that Corey Maggette's agent Rob Pelinka had asked for a trade. Prior to that date, rumors had swirled regarding Maggette being considered by the Grizzlies, and then the 76ers. Only days before the 13th, Coach Mike Dunleavy had been quoted as saying the Clippers weren't interested in trading Corey.

That brings us back to Brent Barry. Are the similar dates of Brent's slide and news of Corey Maggette's public availability a matter of mere coincidence? Is Brent holding back? Have the rumors dented his attitude? He couldn't be....could he?

[timvp]

I think it's possible that the Spurs told Barry that they could trade him and that has effected his play. He was playing way over his head to begin the season, but for a while now he's regressed back to the Barry at the beginning of last year.

He's not aggressive anymore. He's not attacking as he once was. Is it because of ongoing trade talks or is it simply a matter of Barry come back down to earth?

Good question.

:smokin

[Solid D]

I think we are on Brent's trail. Snif* Snif*

[Solid D]

By the way, Brent had 0 points today against the Bulls in 17:38 minutes, going 0-2 with 1 assist and 1 TO with 5 Bulls near the paint.

[NuGGeTs-FaN]

trade him to the Nuggets, they need another white shooter :smokin

[Pablo Escobar]

i wouldn't blame him i would get tired of every time there is trade talk his name comes up he's like if you are going to trade me then trade me already

[MannyIsGod]

Almost traded Barry was rescinded when he was not traded to the Clips. It canceled out the mojo from last years near trade.

[ploto]

No matter how professional you are and no matter how hard you work, it has to effect you eventually. You get to a point where you say, "just trade me and get it over with so I can move on." Remember what that last season was like with Malik?

[SenorSpur]

Enough already. Can we just trade this guy and move on?

It's weird. Barry's a good shooter - not aggressive enough. Finley's a streaky shooter - shoots too much.

I wish the Spurs would get the stick out of their asses and improve this team - NOW!

[T Park]

wish the Spurs would get the stick out of their asses and improve this team - NOW!

Im sure the Spurs are the ones holding up trades.

Think please.

[SequSpur]

these shitty player topics are getting stupider by the day. The only Spurs that matter are Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker. The rest of them are shitty and could be waived at anytime without an effect on the win loss column.

I can't believe how shitty this team has gotten in such a short period of time.

Redickulous.

[Solid D]

Sequ, a guy does some stat research and basically graphs out Brent Barry's decline for you and it's a ****** topic?
...........and then you post topics in Spurtalk Forums entitled:

"It's Official" (which was merged with some other topics and lost it's identity)
"Tickets" ("give me some")
"Ahhhhhhh"
"I've never"
"It's going to snow *******"
"Peanut Butter" ("Jelly Peanut Butter Jelly Peanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter JellyPeanut Butter Jelly"

:donkey

[SenorSpur]

Im sure the Spurs are the ones holding up trades.

Think please.

Do you have some secret information the rest of us aren't privy to?

[Please_dont_ban_me]

I think it's possible that the Spurs told Barry that they could trade him and that has effected his play. He was playing way over his head to begin the season, but for a while now he's regressed back to the Barry at the beginning of last year.

He's not aggressive anymore. He's not attacking as he once was. Is it because of ongoing trade talks or is it simply a matter of Barry come back down to earth?

Good question.

:smokin

That doesn't make sense.

After trade rumors last year for JR Smith his play picked up. Now after trade rumors for Maggette his play has gone down.

Does he pick and choose which trades he wants to sabatoge?

[timvp]

That doesn't make sense.

After trade rumors last year for JR Smith his play picked up. Now after trade rumors for Maggette his play has gone down.

Does he pick and choose which trades he wants to sabatoge?

Uh, he didn't "sabatoge" the JR Smith trade. The trade deadline passed and he was stuck on the Spurs for the rest of the season.

[Texas_Ranger]

He sucks. Trade him.

[Manu_The _Best]

[QUOTE=Solid D]Brent Barry has averaged 10.04 ppg in 21.7 mpg over the first 21 games he has played for the Spurs in 2006-07. In that 21st game, Brent lit up the Clippers on 8-10 shooting, hitting 5-6 on 3-pointers and 24 total points, his high as a Spur.

Since that night (Dec. 11, 2006), Brent has dipped in his performance over his next 16 games to 5.5 ppg in 20 mpg. The new/old ball came into play on Jan. 1, well after Brent's slide had started.



PER GAME statistics is NOT reliable, I said that many times - you would need to look per/48 min. (actual playing time) to see whether a player is effective on the floor for the actual time he played (NOT per game):

Scoring Statistics
Player Min Pts Tnd/48 TC EJ FF PF DQ STA PTS/48
barry,brent 747 299 23.39 0 0 0 47 0 0 19.21

Brent Barry's current Tendex is 23.39 which is the 4th of ALL Spurs - Timmy, Manu, and Tony are only before him. He is showing extremely positive spread of (+4.18), which shows you he is still very effective on the floor, helping the Spurs NOT only by scoring, but with all other things. Back to the period you are talking about when his "stat per game" was higher, his spread was only +0.75 above current level, meaning his actual contribution to the team for the actual time he played as a whole didn't go down much (he contributed other ways than scoring!)...he is still shooting .488 from 3-pt range and we look at 3 Point PCT (min 40 atts) here is the ranking:

kapono,jason Mia 0.557
nash,steve Pho 0.500
barry,brent San 0.488
bowen,bruce San 0.470

Barry is still 3rd in that category as he was 3rd before Dec 11th, Bruce is 4th now with .47 FG!

In FT pct (min 61 attempts) Barry is first now(!) during the period before Dec 11 he was 3rd:

barry,brent San 0.925
francis,steve NYK 0.925
korver,kyle Phi 0.921

Having said the above, Barry is still efficient for his time on the court - with regard to energy, Pop probably told him to save it for the Playoffs and to slow down a little bit now...Pop knows Barry CAN deliver...The scenario he would be traded and doesn't put 100% energy is BOGUS...They didn't tell him anything last year until the last sec when the trade with JR fell apart...WHY THEY SHOULD TELL HIM NOW??? Non-sense! You don't distract your player like that...My theory is Pop is trying to get rid of Finley via a trade, so he is giving him minutes to show something, so we can trade him, unfortunately Finley is NOT performing...(Look at the last game Barry didn't play almost in the 3rd and in the 4th, Finley took a lot of minutes and didn't deliver ANYTHING...Pure LOSER - we lost the game because of his poor shots...)

I will be deeply surprised if the Spurs trade Barry for Maggette - it will be a bad trade for the Spurs since Barry can pass the ball also, not only score and play "D"...Maggette is turning the ball over too many times...

GO SPURS!!!
:ihit :ihit :ihit

[Phenomanul]

I was thinking this last week....

Is Barry purposely dropping his stock so that he cannot get traded?

He's not taking the shots he was taking earlier this season. He continues to move the ball around looking for assists (although he's been commiting a few more turnovers than normal) as a way of at least gaining playing time. But he refuses to let them fly.

Hmmmmmm.... I wonder.....

[Solid D]

PER GAME statistics is NOT reliable, I said that many times - you would need to look per/48 min. (actual playing time) to see whether a player is effective on the floor for the actual time he played (NOT per game):

Scoring Statistics
Player Min Pts Tnd/48 TC EJ FF PF DQ STA PTS/48
barry,brent 747 299 23.39 0 0 0 47 0 0 19.21

Brent Barry's current Tendex is 23.39 which is the 4th of ALL Spurs - Timmy, Manu, and Tony are only before him. He is showing extremely positive spread of (+4.18), which shows you he is still very effective on the floor, helping the Spurs NOT only by scoring, but with all other things. Back to the period you are talking about when his "stat per game" was higher, his spread was only +0.75 above current level, meaning his actual contribution to the team for the actual time he played as a whole didn't go down much (he contributed other ways than scoring!)...he is still shooting .488 from 3-pt range and we look at 3 Point PCT (min 40 atts) here is the ranking:



I totally disagree with you. Per game stats ARE reliable. The NBA doesn't hand out accolades for scoring per 48 minutes, or rebounds per 48 minutes. Brent's point production has dropped 45% since December 11th.

The same site you referenced in your other thread http://www.dougstats.com/06-07Players.html
uses per game stats. Why use that source if it's "not reliable"?

[Manu_The _Best]

The same site you referenced in your other thread http://www.dougstats.com/06-07Players.html
uses per game stats. Why use that source if it's "not reliable"?

They site provides both stat, per GAME and per 48 min., BUT as Doug says himself, per 48 min. is more reliable than per game becuase it shows you the effectivenss of a player on the court during the actual time he plays - I was thinking like you 10 years ago - you don't evaluate a player JUST BY SCORING PER GAME (EH?!!!) - this is BOGUS - the Tendex Index provides you how effective a player as a whole is during his time on the floor, playing "D", passing the ball, shooting FTs, shooting, rebounding, blocks, stls, etc. The reason why Barry's pts per game decreased is because he didn't take that many shots as he did before, so he scored less points, this doesn't mean he was playing bad (???), and Pop probably asked him to do other things (passing the ball) which show ONLY when you look at the stat per 48 min. NOT in per game - as I said above - Barry's stat per 48 just Tednex Index slightly decreased (but his spread is still very positive over +4.0), but he is still 4th overall after Timmy, Manu, and Tony - he is now No.1 shooter from the FT line in the league...and still 3rd from the 3-pt range...so, the effectiveness is still there...Tony Parker's contributions according to per minutes Tnedex Index is ONLY by scoring points, which actually hurts the Spurs in a long run since his spread is FLAT (-0.01) - meaning Tony didn't contribute mainly with other things, but JUST SCORING, he didn't play excellent defense, and didn't pass the ball enough to help his colleagues - look at Tony's stat for asts and stls and you will find he is NOT even close to Nash, Wade, Kidd, TJ Ford, Billups, etc. - this is what is hurting the Spurs - the lack of pure PG who CAN distribute the ball and get you over 10 asts/48 min....You cannot see and find those details when using stat per GAME - it just doesn't you show how effective player can be...Period!

GO SPURS!!!

[Solid D]

I look at per-minute stats, also, as part of player analysis....but stick to the original point you made. Your point was per-game stats are not reliable. You are incorrect...and will be 10 years from now on that point.

[spurschick]

these shitty player topics are getting stupider by the day.

Can we talk about the word stupider for a moment? :lol

[Solid D]

Uh, he didn't "sabatoge" the JR Smith trade. The trade deadline passed and he was stuck on the Spurs for the rest of the season.

I'll just add here that had Hawks general manager Billy Knight not been at a funeral and unable to answer his cell phone at trade deadline, Barry would have been traded. He was told not to get on the team plane and then a few hours later told he was travelling with the team.

I like Brent and I know that Pop likes to use him when he goes small because the ball moves well when Brent is in there. Brent isn't normally hesitant to shoot, either. At least that has been the case up until recently.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

PER GAME statistics is NOT reliable, I said that many times - you would need to look per/48 min. (actual playing time) to see whether a player is effective on the floor for the actual time he played (NOT per game)



How many times could you have possibly said it???


You made that comment with your 26th post, and the first 25 were to complain about how old the Spurs are!







Per 48 minute stats made Jackie Butler look like Wilt Chamberlain last year.

[Solid D]

:lol @ Edgar

Even if you use "per-48-min." stats, Brent's scoring is clearly down in similar fashion to his ppg stats:
In Brent's first 21 games, Brent averaged 21.73 pp48min and shot 56.4% from the field
In Brent's last 16 games, Brent averaged 13.67 pp48min. and shot 35.4% from the field

[VaSpursFan]

the spurs are the best team he's been on and i can understand his reluctance to leave, but if he want's to stay, he needs to make himself indispensable. he's been making bad decisions, he's been passive and hesitant on letting the 3 fly. i don't know if he's consciously doing this, but it's certainly not helping us to win games.

[Solid D]

I recall Brent nailing that buzzer-beating 3, in Game 2 vs. SAC, that bounced off the rim twice, hit high off the glass and then dropped through to send that game to an OT win. I also remember Pop saying he called the play for Brent as 1st option because of his quick release and willingness to shoot. At the time, he was playing much more aggressively and had no reservations about letting it fly.

Something IS different.

[Bruno]

There is no doubt that Barry isn't playing as well for one month but i do'nt think it's related with trade rumors.

[remingtonbo2001]

Why isn't there more interest in Scola at the moment. I think this would be one of the Spurs' pieces many teams around the league might be interested in, especially those in playoff contention looking for a strong foward. I would much rather trade Scola and Beans than Brent and Beans. Are we waiting for that elusive mid-1st round draft pick?

[Kori Ellis]

Why isn't there more interest in Scola at the moment. I think this would be one of the Spurs' pieces many teams around the league might be interested in, especially those in playoff contention looking for a strong foward. I would much rather trade Scola and Beans than Brent and Beans. Are we waiting for that elusive mid-1st round draft pick?

Probably because Scola still has a buyout.

[BeerIsGood!]

Didn't Scola offer to pay the buyout himself if the contract was right?

[ploto]

Probably because Scola still has a buyout.
And I still believe that the team with the most interest in Scola is a team the Spurs would not trade him to.

[Please_dont_ban_me]

Uh, he didn't "sabatoge" the JR Smith trade. The trade deadline passed and he was stuck on the Spurs for the rest of the season.

Uh, but people at the time talked about how much his game improved because he was being used as traid bait. Now people are claiming his game has fallen off because he's being used as traid bait.


My point is simply I don't think his being used as traid bait in itself has affected his play . Unless he picks and chooses when he wants to step up is game after being mentioned in trade rumors.

[Kori Ellis]

Didn't Scola offer to pay the buyout himself if the contract was right?

Sure. But a team has to be willing to pay him enough that he can pay the buyout. And I'm not sure any team would do that.

Does anyone know how much the buyout still is? $5M?

[Phenomanul]

Sure. But a team has to be willing to pay him enough that he can pay the buyout. And I'm not sure any team would do that.

Does anyone know how much the buyout still is? $5M?


Only for this year correct? As in, is the contract over next year (no buyout clause needed)????

[Kori Ellis]

Only for this year correct? As in, is the contract over next year (no buyout clause needed)????

I think Scola's contract is through 2008.

[Phenomanul]

I think Scola's contract is through 2008.

:depressed

Not that I know if he would help our woes or not....

[BeerIsGood!]

I didn't realize the buyout was that high. I was thinking 2, 2.5 mil tops

[BeerIsGood!]

:depressed

Not that I know if he would help our woes or not....

If not for the high buyout he'd help us as trade bait

[Kori Ellis]

I didn't realize the buyout was that high. I was thinking 2, 2.5 mil tops

No one really knows what it is. :lol Two summers ago when it was reported everywhere that the buyout was down to about $5M, it ended up really being about $14M. So who knows. I honestly have no idea what it is right now, because that's a negotiation between him and his team. The Spurs can't control it.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I recall Brent nailing that buzzer-beating 3, in Game 2 vs. SAC, that bounced off the rim twice, hit high off the glass and then dropped through to send that game to an OT win. I also remember Pop saying he called the play for Brent as 1st option because of his quick release and willingness to shoot. At the time, he was playing much more aggressively and had no reservations about letting it fly.

Something IS different.


Last year, the almost trade kind of woke him up.

Maybe he felt like he proved himself and now that they're talking trade again he's like "WTF?".

His emotional state does seem to dictate his play...so Solid could be right.


Or maybe it's just the mid-season blues.

[Bruno]

Last summer, Scola's buyout was $3.5M. Maybe it will be less this summer because only one year will be left on his contract.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/basketball/nba/spurs/stories/MYSA070706.1D.BKNspurs.scola.1300a8f.html


Scola is seeking a three-year contract worth between $9 million and $10 million, about a third of which would go to paying the $3.5 million buyout he has with Tau.

[spurschick]

They were looking to trade him last year when he wasn't doing so hot, but his trade stock went up when he started off the season so well. Beno is in the same boat. They're pretty much damned if they do and damned if they don't. It definitely must suck to constantly hear your name on the trading block all the time.

[Please_dont_ban_me]

Last year, the almost trade kind of woke him up.

Maybe he felt like he proved himself and now that they're talking trade again he's like "WTF?".

His emotional state does seem to dictate his play...so Solid could be right.


Or maybe it's just the mid-season blues.

I think that's more accurate then saying he's tanking it on purpose.

[JPB]

No one really knows what it is. :lol Two summers ago when it was reported everywhere that the buyout was down to about $5M, it ended up really being about $14M. So who knows. I honestly have no idea what it is right now, because that's a negotiation between him and his team. The Spurs can't control it.

I don't think you can really trust all that numbers, they're part of the pressure/bluff his team is putting on him or on SA. One day it'll be 5M, onather one 10M.
Some europeans FO are kind of exentric sometimes, anouncing big numbers on contracts which turns out to be not that high.

there's also the emotional part. Basketball in those cities is more than just a business as it's often said about the NBA. The relations he has with his club can have an impact on the negociations.

[Fabbs]

Last summer, Scola's buyout was $3.5M. Maybe it will be less this summer because only one year will be left on his contract.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/basketball/nba/spurs/stories/MYSA070706.1D.BKNspurs.scola.1300a8f.html
3.5M total?
Now i feel like the FO is being very chincey. They made tons off the 2005 Champs. Even if he was just signed for traid bait, it strengthens the trade position. Irregardless of what other GMs claim.

[Mr. Body]

The Spurs were being very chintzy with Scola.

[Solid D]

When the Spurs saw Oberto's progress during the summer and then they pulled in Bonner, Elson and Butler...Scola and Javtokas ended up being too pricey. Scola and Robertas were both looking to draw in the $3M per year range, I believe, and the Spurs could have spread most of the buy-out for Luis over 3 years @ $1.5M per year. It just turned into a Bang for the Buck for the "Big" issue, in my opinion.

To Scola and Javtokas, it may have translated into the "Spurs didn't want them". Scola is doing very well meanwhile, and Robertas is languishing on the bench in Greece for the Euroleague's best team.

[Mr. Body]

Also, Oberto was looking like a dead contract. They set the price high with him at $2.5 and he produced nothing last year, making it look worse that Scola could contribute something. Garbajosa coming over for a relatively expensive contract was also bad, in setting a maret value.

Also, Macijauskas had just come over for the Hornets and stunk, and Jacikevicius was playing poorly for Indiana for big bucks. I don't think the Spurs wanted to bring another European player over.

They should have. It's easy to say now, but they should have let Butler slide and gone for Scola instead.

[VaSpursFan]

3.5M total?
Now i feel like the FO is being very chincey. They made tons off the 2005 Champs. Even if he was just signed for traid bait, it strengthens the trade position. Irregardless of what other GMs claim.

i think the FO can only pay up to $500 thousand. The remainder would be factored into his salary. In essence, you'd have to pay him more than his market value to complete the deal. From a fiscal standpoint, you would only want to bring Scola over when his buyout was $500k or less.

[Solid D]

i think the FO can only pay up to $500 thousand. The remainder would be factored into his salary. In essence, you'd have to pay him more than his market value to complete the deal. From a fiscal standpoint, you would only want to bring Scola over when his buyout was $500k or less.

Yes, $500K plus a signing bonus can also be done at a rate not to exceed 20% of the contract, spread out over the guaranteed years.

The Spurs are over-the-cap-averse though.

[Mr. Body]

I don't know where to put this, but the Bulls are doing a really fascinating thing with their new contracts. They're front loading them and decreasing them as the years go on. Look at Ben Wallace's and especially Kirk Hinrich's. Kirk makes a bunch more now than he will later in the contract, giving them more room to work with each year. Pretty smart, if the players will go with it.

[Fabbs]

i think the FO can only pay up to $500 thousand. The remainder would be factored into his salary. In essence, you'd have to pay him more than his market value to complete the deal. From a fiscal standpoint, you would only want to bring Scola over when his buyout was $500k or less.
Oh i know the buyout would have to come from Scolas salary.
As for the fiscal boohoos the FO is crying, open up the books and lets see the profits for past years including Champ run. So they have to pay some lux tax, far less then Dallas. Didn't stop Cuban and look at the result.

[VaSpursFan]

I don't know where to put this, but the Bulls are doing a really fascinating thing with their new contracts. They're front loading them and decreasing them as the years go on. Look at Ben Wallace's and especially Kirk Hinrich's. Kirk makes a bunch more now than he will later in the contract, giving them more room to work with each year. Pretty smart, if the players will go with it.

that's fascinating...i didn't know that. that's a very shrewd fiscal manuever.

do you have a breakdown of the salaries by year?

[Mr. Body]

that's fascinating...i didn't know that. that's a very shrewd fiscal manuever.

do you have a breakdown of the salaries by year?

Hoopshype is the site I use...

Chicago breakdown (http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/chicago.htm)

[Kori Ellis]

Hoopshype is the site I use...

Chicago breakdown (http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/chicago.htm)
Interesting. I thought they weren't allowed to front load contracts like that.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Interesting. I thought they weren't allowed to front load contracts like that.

That's what I thought too.


If that's always been acceptable I wouldn't say the Bulls are that smart as much as other teams are stupid for not implementing similar strategies.

WTF.

[VaSpursFan]

That's what I thought too.


If that's always been acceptable I wouldn't say the Bulls are that smart as much as other teams are stupid for not implementing similar strategies.

WTF.

agreed. their FO deserves kudos for that.

[ChumpDumper]

Interesting. I thought they weren't allowed to front load contracts like that.I seem to remember the Mavericks engineering a dip in Shawn Bradley's contract one year to accomodate a run at Tim Duncan.

[Phenomanul]

Hoopshype is the site I use...

Chicago breakdown (http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/chicago.htm)


Hmmm... so a few big contracts are front loaded while the role player/veteran filler contracts (more numerous of course) increase slightly.

[ploto]

While an old issue, it was my understanding that the dollar figures put out in the SA media as to Scola's buy out that summer were never true and were part of the reason that the huge rift appeared between Scola's agent and the Spurs. That is- it was never $14M. That was the PR reason given to make people blame Scola.

Scola will never be a Spur- I just don't see it happening. Either the Spurs will finally trade him, he will stay in Europe for good , or he will dare to sit out an entire year so that he can then play for whomever he wants in the NBA and the Spurs will get nothing for him.

[Kori Ellis]

While an old issue, it was my understanding that the dollar figures put out in the SA media as to Scola's buy out that summer were never true and were part of the reason that the huge rift appeared between Scola's agent and the Spurs. That is- it was never $14M. That was the PR reason given to make people blame Scola.

Scola will never be a Spur- I just don't see it happening. Either the Spurs will finally trade him, he will stay in Europe for good , or he will dare to sit out an entire year so that he can then play for whomever he wants in the NBA and the Spurs will get nothing for him.

I actually got the $14.5M(?) figure from a source in Argentina that summer. *shrug* Who knows. It is just between him and his team. The Spurs have nothing to do with how much it is, so I always take whatever I read here in the papers about it with a grain of salt.

[ploto]

When the Spurs saw Oberto's progress during the summer and then they pulled in Bonner, Elson and Butler...Scola and Javtokas ended up being too pricey. Scola and Robertas were both looking to draw in the $3M per year range, I believe, and the Spurs could have spread most of the buy-out for Luis over 3 years @ $1.5M per year. It just turned into a Bang for the Buck for the "Big" issue, in my opinion.

Robertas was ready to come for less than that. Spurs basically chose Butler over him.

[ShoogarBear]

They were looking to trade him last year when he wasn't doing so hot, but his trade stock went up when he started off the season so well. Beno is in the same boat. They're pretty much damned if they do and damned if they don't. It definitely must suck to constantly hear your name on the trading block all the time.It's called being a professional athlete.

[MannyIsGod]

It's called being a professional athlete.It is certain types of players, though. The ones that are just good enough to get an above average contract, but never quite good enough to become a really important piece that can't be traded. They make up a good portion of the trade rumors. Players like Barry, Drew Gooden, James Posey, Magette, etc etc.

[spurschick]

It's called being a professional athlete.

I realize that... no need to get pissy.

[Streakyshooter08]

I just found this:

"Spurs Shopping Barry?
17th January, 2007 - 10:03 am
Detroit News -
According to the Detroit News, the Spurs have been actively shopping Brent Barry.

The Pistons are interested in perimeter help, but reportedly not in the form of Barry."




Looks like the Spurs are active in making a trade. This makes me believe that it is really up to the Clippers of making a Maggette trade happen...

[ploto]

Supposedly, Spurs want McDyess from Detroit.


The Spurs have been trying to move Brent Barry, but the Pistons don't appear to have much interest there -- mostly because it would cost them McDyess.

LINK (http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070117/SPORTS08/701170302/1004)

[VaSpursFan]

McDyess...intriguing. Doesn't look like the Pistons want to do this. It appears that the Spurs are looking at multiple trades this season. Maybe they finally realize that the current construct of the team will only get them to the 2nd round. Who know? It's encouraging to see steps are being taken.

[ShoogarBear]

I realize that... no need to get pissy.I wasn't being pissy. Brent's been on what . . . 4/5 teams now? Sometimes the switch was of his own volition, sometimes it wasn't. I'm sure he's acquainted with the feelings of uncertainty by now.

[ShoogarBear]

It is certain types of players, though. The ones that are just good enough to get an above average contract, but never quite good enough to become a really important piece that can't be traded. They make up a good portion of the trade rumors. Players like Barry, Drew Gooden, James Posey, Magette, etc etc.Eh, that's still better than the ~1/4 of NBA players like Jacque Vaughn who basically don't know from year to year whether they can stick with somebody or not.

Remember it took Bruce like what, 5 years before he signed his first multi-year contract?

[TDMVPDPOY]

apparently barry is on the block again.....

[Solid D]

Bump

Fast forward to Memphis @ Spurs, Jan. 26.
Okay, so maybe Brent ANDDDD Beno were holding back.