↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Fourth-year guard Rodney Stuckey hires his fifth agent

Rodney Stuckey has hired his fifth agent in his four-year career, according to Vincent Goodwill of The Detroit News:

Stuckey, who will become a restricted free agent in six weeks if there is no NBA lockout, left Seattle-based Steve Banks in favor of Leon Rose.

Rose is the agent for LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Paul and Pistons teammate Richard Hamilton. Rose is Stuckey’s fifth agent since 2007. Banks, who declined comment, began working with Stuckey when he was drafted by the Pistons and Stuckey was represented by Goodwin Sports Management.

Stuckey left Goodwin in September 2009, and he and Banks reunited in January 2010.

Merely from a standpoint of assessing Stuckey, this is a bit disconcerting. Why has he changed agents so many times? I believe a player’s off-court decision making can correlate with his on-court decision making, so if I were the Pistons, I’d certainly explore what’s happening here. There may be nothing worrisome, but I’d at least have questions.

As far as Stuckey returning to Detroit, could this put a hitch in Joe Dumars’ plan? Because Stuckey is a restricted free agent, the Pistons appeared to be in the driver’s seat this summer. Rose has plenty of other clients, but his most high-profile jobs recently involve trying to get players under contract (Carmelo Anthony, Richard Hamilton and, perhaps, Chris Paul) to new teams. Did a hope of taking control of his free agency draw Stuckey to Rose?

Handling Stuckey this summer was already complicated, and now it appears even more so.

18 Comments

  • May 21, 20111:54 pm
    by tarsier

    Reply

    Ultimately, the Pistons are still in the driver’s seat. They can wait for a while to see if anyone offers Stuckey a contract. If not, his value comes down and they can offer him a lower priced deal. If someone else offers him a contract, then they just have to decide whether Stuckey is worth the money he was offered or not. Then they cut their losses and let him go or happily accept a reasonably priced player and hope he improves. The only way Stuckey gains control of the situation is if he takes the QO. But even then, the Pistons can probably get decent value for him because that would make him underpaid for this coming year.

  • May 21, 20113:00 pm
    by rob

    Reply

    5 agents in 4 yrs, 3 Head Coaches in 4 yrs.

    Stuckey isnt the problem, its everyone else! LOL

  • May 21, 20113:09 pm
    by rob

    Reply

    IMO, this is a big factor in Stuckey’s FA. This guy only represents stars who he expects to be paid lots of money. I’m sure he is expecting a big pay day as well for Stuckey, and I’m not sure Joe will be interested in participating.

    This is also the guy who was basically the architect of the NJ-DET-DEN trade that almost happened, in part to get his guy Rip off the mess that is the Pistons, and his other guy Carmelo other all-stars to play with.

    Which means, he could be influencing Stuckey to play with some of his other clients on other teams.

  • May 21, 20113:53 pm
    by curriergroh

    Reply

    Bundle him up with Rip and send it off express.  I like Stuckey, don’t like Hamilton’s contract, or drama.

  • May 21, 20114:26 pm
    by detroitpcb

    Reply

    as a group, agents are a sleasy bunch. Can you blame a kid from a small college making it to the NBA if he switches agents a few times before he finds the right one? Anybody tried a few different barbers in their life? Or hired a lawyer for a case that you hope never to see again?

    Personally i wonder why Feldman is always casting negative aspirations on players for what I regard as things simply within a players right.

    • May 21, 20114:48 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      It’s certainly within his right, and I hope he’s found the best agent for him. But players, regardless of which college they attend, rarely change agents this often.

      It’s funny you bring up the barber example. I recently moved, and I needed a new barber. So, I asked friends who live/lived where I moved about the place to get my hair cut. I wanted to make an informed decision, so I talked to several people. And guess what? I got a good haircut. If I got a bad haircut, that wouldn’t have necessarily meant I did something wrong. But my odds of getting a good haircut were much higher than if I just walked into a random barbershop.

      Maybe Stuckey has just had bad luck, despite making informed decisions. I don’t know. But if I were the Pistons, I’d do what I could to find out.

      • May 21, 20116:58 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        It is certainly uncommon for someone to switch agents this often. But I don’t get how it is either a positive or negative thing. Kinda like changing your number. Most players don’t unless they are traded or a number is retired or something. But would it matter if someone wanted to play with a different number every year?

        • May 21, 20119:29 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          Well, it doesn’t necessarily have to be labeled as positive or negative. Stuckey made a business decision. He’s a free agent and probably wanted to be with a high-powered agency that has a reputation for getting its clients what they want.

          It’s probably not great news for the Pistons, who probably want Stuckey back but should rightfully be leery about over-paying him since he’s yet to prove himself as a starting PG or SG in this league. I mean, if Stuckey gets the contract he wants out of this, then good for him. Nothing wrong with that. But yeah, I would be slightly worried if I were the Pistons.

    • May 21, 20119:26 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      “Personally i wonder why Feldman is always casting negative aspirations on players for what I regard as things simply within a players right.”

      Is your point that this is not newsworthy? Because if that’s your point, then you’re wrong.

      • May 22, 20117:27 am
        by detroitpcb

        Reply

        No Patrick, it certainly is newsworthy and it may influence what the Pistons pay to retain Stuckey or if they choose to move him.

        But like the cloumns that appeared after the “players revolt” it seems there is a definite bias against the players for exercising the same rights that any employee (no matter how much they get paid) should enjoy.

        My opinion is that Stuckey has a right to change agents without having negative asperations cast on him. My point has been that players have the right to question the ‘authority’ of their coach when the coach’s clear incompetence is costing them a year of their relatively short working careers. To me, and i may be wrong, there seems to be a bias towards an anti-labor, pro-management position that goes beyond analyizing the game itself and reflects certain tendencies becoming more and more prevelent in our society.

        • May 22, 201110:28 am
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Wait, you’re saying it is within a player’s rights to not show up for work when they’ve signed a contract just because of coaching incompetence? I would agree with you if it were equally within the employer’s rights to fire the player with nothing more than a moderate severance package. But sports don’t work the same as most jobs. e.g. to the best of my knowledge, Yahoo and ESPN can’t trade John Hollinger for Mark Spears.
          The players would have a right to strike if they were being forced to practice in unsafe conditions or something of that nature. But even normal employees don’t strike because they have a lousy supervisor. And, as has been pointed out on this site, Kuester is a bad coach, but a run-of-the-mill bad coach, not an epicly bad coach.
          But yes, it is natural that “anti-labor, pro-management” biases are becoming more prevalent. That is because of a power shift in society. Unions were first instituted because employers had way too much power and abused employees. But now, with all the legislation that limits employers power and virtually none doing the same to employees, unions have become much too powerful and now they are the ones abusing the system. There are countless examples of this. Personally, I am most familiar with those in the construction business because I have spent time working in that field. But there are countless jobs in which you have to join the union to be hired regardless of whether you support the union’s positions. But the best example readily available is probably in the video “Waiting for Superman” which really fleshes out a number of the issues with the teachers’ unions.

        • May 22, 20118:27 pm
          by Patrick Hayes

          Reply

          That’s a fantastically ignorant leap you make based on, in this post, Dan saying basically that it’s weird that a marginal NBA player to this point in his career has had five agents in four years. I mean, he’s anti-labor because of that?

          Explain to me how, if you were the Pistons, heading into the negotiations with Stuckey, how would you feel about things if he just hired an agent who has a reputation of getting players above market contracts and/or getting them to new teams. I would say that would probably make the Pistons pretty uncomfortable, or at least more uncomfortable than they were heading into what was already going to be a tough decision as to what to do with Stuckey.

          As far as the mutiny, I won’t get back into that. You’ve already embarrassed yourself enough on that topic in those old threads. No reason to reopen old go-nowhere discussions.

          I’ll just say this: to read this site and believe you can draw any kind of definitive conclusions about non-basketball belief systems of the writers is, to quote Laser, objectively wrong.

  • [...] Fourth-year guard Rodney Stuckey hires fifth agent « PistonPowered [...]

  • May 22, 20116:57 am
    by gmehl1977

    Reply

    Stuckey’s decision making off the court seems to be just as good as it is on the court. He is definitely not worth over paying for and i would hope that Joe knows this too.

  • May 22, 201110:01 am
    by brgulker

    Reply

    I don’t blame Stuckey for looking out for his own best interests.
     
    Hopefully, what this means is that he won’t agree to the small deal Joe wants to offer, it will scare away other teams, and Stuckey will sign a qualifying offer — which means we can keep him cheaply for one more year and then be rid of him (via UFA or via some type of extend-and-trade next season).

  • May 22, 201111:49 pm
    by Jason

    Reply

    I think Stuck would be a great fit for NY, maybe Rose thinks the same, and is attempting to get Stuck and Melo together.. Even with picking up Chauncey’s final year, Stuck could easily play SG, and would seemingly be a good fit for the uptempo style.. Just a thought, but it makes you wonder if there might just be a hidden agenda here..

    • May 23, 20118:26 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      But if he were offered a long-term deal at the MLE (assuming CBA stays similar), you can bet that Dumars would match. I think it’s a bit too much money for him, but not absurd.

  • May 23, 201110:57 am
    by BIG MARV

    Reply

    hes got one of the best agents in the biz now? yeah I got a feeling he will be gone and winning teams like New York, Boston and chicago are desperate for a SG too they might pay him top dollar def more than detroit. Oh well let him go or at least sign and trade him get something out the deal.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here