Reply With Quote
same question I was wondering.
I distinctly remember Matt Barnes being a "player of interest" around these parts for at least the past couple of years.
Now that he's with the Warriors and having gotten a good, first-hand look at him, he looked like a decent, all-around type of player. He also seems to "get after it" on defense too.
We've known for a couple of years that the Spurs needed to get younger and more athletic on the wing. Barnes appears more active in the halfcourt than Finley, is a better one-on-one player than Bones, plays better D than both and can seemingly drain the 3 pretty well.
So, what's the reason the Spurs decided to pass on this guy?
Last edited by SenorSpur; 11-28-2006 at 09:47 AM.
same question I was wondering.
He worked out 2 summers ago with Spurs but thay haven't offered him a contract.
Maybe they were right given that he has been very average in 05-06.
I don't know if they have offered him a contract last summer. Barnes has maybe chosen GS over SA because I've always heard him saying that he wanted to paly in the west coast.
I wanted that Spurs signed him two summer ago but the past is the past. One thing is sure : Spurs still need a strong SF like Barnes. I've hoped that Eric Williams was a good solution but he is doen and out of shape. SF is the most crowded in the NBA, finding one who is just a good defender/rebounder isn't the hardest thing to do if SPurs really wnat to have a long/strong SF in their roster.
We like our bench full of old, decrepit veterans, thank you very much.
"in the west coast."
he wanted to play at SAC but they kicked him out.
Yes and when he has signed with GS, he has said that he was happy to sign a contract with a west coast team.
He has worked out with the Spurs in a couple different summers, including for four/five days in the summer of 05. They like him because he's a good defender and works hard. It just didn't come to together.
He would also much rather stay in Cali. I guess his Philly/NJ experience was a nightmare
I thought the Matt Barnes we worked out earlier was a white dude. Long range shooter.
Both the age of this roster and its continuing struggles with B2B games are well-do ented. I find it very discouraging - no, make that idiotic - that they couldn't find a way to secure the services of an up-and-coming player like this.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 11-28-2006 at 04:32 PM.
With Barry and Finley taking up vital off-guard and swingman spots on the bench, there wasn't a lot of room for a young up-and-comer. With Finley's signing last year, the sad consequence was, in exchange for another veteran shooter, we filled yet another spot with a pair of tired legs. Mostly we'll overcome it, but it will be a problem.
Why the Spurs couldn't fill a deep bench slot with Matt Barnes or the equivalent is frustrating. Beno's troubles forced a 3rd string pure point guard. The two-for-one trade of Nesterovic for Bonner and Williams (the latter of which is pure deadweight) froze out two more player slots.
And I think, in the end, the Spurs overlooked a player like Barnes because he doesn't fit the mold of their Bowen replacement. They think they need a long SF to guard the Dirks of the league. OF COURSE they need that player, but they also need pure young talent that can get things done. Perhaps a guy like Barnes needs a loose playing style to succeed (like GSW), but there have been a remarkable number of players in the Raja Bell mold who walked into the Spurs' camp and walked back out. A single one of those guys would be valuable.
Spurs have decided to have long term project with high upside (White) instead of a more ready and limited player like Barnes. In the long term, it' s the good solution.
I can see Spurs doing a move for a Barnes like player around the trade deadline to have some help for the playoffs. For the moment they have a full roster and are in the luxury tax area, so wait and see.
Understand. This is precisely why I was against the Finley signing in the first place. It's enough having one 35 year-old backup SG (Barry), but the Spurs decided they needed yet another and signed Finley during the summer '05.
My issues with Finley being a one-trick pony are now coming to light. If he's not hitting his outside shot (mainly the 3-ball), he's virtually unproductive. He doesn't bring much else to the table.
On the other hand, Barnes is a bit more well-rounded of a player even though he doesn't have Finley's skins. He plays solid D, can hit the glass, can bring the ball up against pressure and basically score the basketball in other ways than constantly flinging away from the 3-pt line. While he's producing now, he has considerably more upside than any of their current SGs not named Ginobili.
At times, I think the FO places waaaay too much value on veteran experience. Young guys that have talent can make just as much of a valuable contribution given the opportunity. Frankly, I'm tired of seeing the Spurs repeatedly "peter out" on B2B games because they can't keep pace with younger, fresher legs that are continuously running by them as the league transforms into the "small ball" era.
Personally, I believe Barnes would have thrived in the Spurs system. It's funny how these types of guys (Barnes, Mo Evans, Raja Bell) don't seem to fit into the Spurs mold, yet they go elsewhere and flourish. Let's hope James White gets a fair shot to develop with this club and not somewhere else.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 11-28-2006 at 05:34 PM.
When you think about it the Spurs have a number of "long term projects" in the works right now. In addition to White, they have Sandkize (sp) still out there hopefully developing. Butler and Ian are also what I would call "long term projects" as well. Hopefully, at least a couple of these guys will develop into good NBA players.
As for Williams, I thought he would be an excellent piece of trade bait for the trade deadline for a team looking for someone who's salary would come off the books this summer. I don't think that is going to happen now because:
1. The Spurs want his salary coming off their books.
2. They would have to take a salary back in exchange and that interferes with the 2008 plan.
Williams should be shopped until February and if he doesn't get into shape enough to contribute after that, waive him and bring back Jamar Smith, who will have had three months of playing long small forward under his belt.
Pop would only deactivate him. He only trusts players over 30.
Yeah, that's why Tony Parker has been starting for five years.
That was a joke
I know. It seems the luxury tax kept Pop and RC from signing anyone else last season. This season we have a full roster with two young projects. That's pretty good for this team.
My thing is your club can't expect to change it's philosophy (going smaller) and keep trotting out the oldest team in the league year after year, while the rest of the league keeps getting younger.
Watching the GSW game last night, it was again evident as some "no-name" younger, more athletic players ran the Spurs out of the gym in the 4th qtr and the Spurs had no answer.
It hurts that the league is undergoing a transformation at the same moment we have most of our roster boxed in. Though it's a blessing, really, to have Ginobilis and Parkers boxed in, we lack the flexibility to retool the roster.
We could have hoped for more from Butler - I know I did, but he looked terrible the other night, totally lost - but James White was a gift from the sky, as was the unexpected production of Oberto. I had him completely written off this summer, to my eternal shame.
Why?we lack the flexibility to retool the roster.
We have two sizeable expiring contracts that can be traded or waived to get other players.
I, too, was shocked at how bad Butler looked the other night. The only saving grace is that he's young and so is the season. If it's true that he beat out Jerome James and Eddy Curry by the end of last season, that doesn't say much for the ability of those two guys.
As for Oberto, his emergence has truly been the surprise of the season thus far. I also wrote him off last year.
So we're writing off Butler now after making the mistake of writing off Oberto last season?
Butler is a fat kid of college junior age with little pro experience, I doubt he'll be kept around for very long if he doesn't grab his Spurs' chance real fast. Spurs will find somebody better able to contribute sooner. Beating out JJ and Curry, on the Knicks?, is some kind of recommendation? "I doan giv'im no respek, none"
OTOH, Oberto is 30 with 10+ years of mostly starting for mostly top teams. He could have failed to be an NBA player, but it turns out seasoned BB IQ is worth more than athleticism. FO continues to amaze.
Beating out JJ/Curry with the Knicks isn't what encouraged the Spurs to sign him.
He shot 54.4% from the floor and had good 40-minute scoring and rebound rates (15.5 and 9.9) last season.
But probably the main reason he's here is because in 3 games against the Spurs last season, he put up solid numbers each game.
Preseason - 12 pt, 8 rb, 4 blk in 23 min
December - 11 pt in 12 min
February - 11 pt, 9 rb (7 off) in 17 min
Sure some of it was garbage time, blahblah. But a then-20-year-old kid putting up good numbers against San Antonio is what made them take a hard look at them.
They expect absolute nothing of him this year except to get in basketball shape (which he's making terrific progress) and to learn how to be a San Antonio Spurs basketball player. When they got him, it was strictly as a project with what they think is good potential.
All that being said, I think he'll eventually be a starter here.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
