Haslem for SWILL/Swift

aussienet · Post #1 » by **aussienet** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:20 pm

Just really spitballing here guy's but i was thinking we need a big body PF.
Haslem. Does he provide that for us?

Losing Swill. I know it seems like i am giving up on him but does he need a change of enviroment?

Not saying we should do this or that we have to do this. But am interested tour thoughts.

Would MIAMI do this?

Cheers

BTW it works on the trade checker

jeff1624 · Post #2 » by **jeff1624** » Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:27 pm

Not that they're about to finalize a deal with TOR for JO I don't see this happening. They'd already have their ideal starting 5 and rotations without having to do our trade:

O'Neal
Haslem
Beasley
Wade
Chalmers

Cook
Jones
ZO (if he comes back)

aussienet · Post #3 » by **aussienet** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:48 am

Just curious Jeff, do you see Beasley as more 3 than 4 or more 4 than 3? Or is he a combo

jzmagik · Post #4 » by **jzmagik** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:03 am

Miami would never do this

jeff1624 · Post #5 » by **jeff1624** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 5:10 am

aussienet wrote:Just curious Jeff, do you see Beasley as more 3 than 4 or more 4 than 3? Or is he a combo

I think he'd be overpowered by 80% of starting PF's in this league. He's not strong enough or tall enough to be consistently good at the 4. He'd be better off at the 3..

vincecarter4pres · Post #6 » by **vincecarter4pres** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:05 pm

I see Beasley's ceiling as Antawn Jamison and that style of play regardless of what level of it he reaches. Not too hot for the 2nd overall pick.

BTW, all Rod hear's is a dial tone after he offers this to Riley.

Pro · Post #7 » by **Pro** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:29 pm

I don't see the benefits of that trade from our (Miami's) standpoint.
We pick a guy who's known to have a really bad attitude that will definately not work in a Pat Riley organisation and a guy in Swift who is pretty much past it.
While we give up arguably our 3rd best player...

S.I.C. GM · Post #8 » by **S.I.C. GM** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:53 pm

^I dont see the benefit of that trade from our (Nets) standpoint either.

We dont need to pay a guy that much money when we can draft a second rounder that can Rebound, play decent Defense and Shot an open jumper. We already have Najera that does most of those things.

No Thanks!

Pro · Post #9 » by **Pro** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:14 pm

S.I.C. GM wrote:^I dont see the benefit of that trade from our (Nets) standpoint either.

We dont need to pay a guy that much money when we can draft a second rounder that can Rebound, play decent Defense and Shot an open jumper. We already have Najera that does most of those things.

No Thanks!

Lol then it's settled
no good for either side.

vincecarter4pres · Post #10 » by **vincecarter4pres** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:30 pm

This trade is great for the Nets, let's not get it twisted.
Haslem is a severely underrated glue guy.
Miami scoffs at this.

aussienet · Post #11 » by **aussienet** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:21 pm

Thanks for your thoughts guy's.

1) what would it take (from miami's pov) to get it done.

2) SIC, that's why i was keen on takin Dorsey or Jawai, but when CDR fell into our hands well you gotta take him.

3)Remember I didn't say we had to do it. Was just a thought is all.

Cheers

vincecarter4pres · Post #12 » by **vincecarter4pres** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:31 pm

We don't have the pieces to get Haslem without dramtically overpaying.

aussienet · Post #13 » by **aussienet** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:09 am

vincecarter4pres wrote:We don't have the pieces to get Haslem without dramtically overpaying.

Fair call.
Is there anyone else out there with Haslem's 'glue qualities'. Who do you think would be a 'glue player' to go after? without breaking the bank.

rag-time4 · Post #14 » by **rag-time4** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:05 am

What exactly is a glue guy? What are glue qualities?

Is a glue guy a guy who has zero ambition to be a great player, and who is comfortable with being mediocre and collecting his paycheck without giving his coaches any hassle?

Haslem has a blocks + steals to turnover ratio that's negative.... his career blocks + steals = 1.0 while his turnovers are 1.2. He doesn't get to the foul line often. From what I've seen of him he's a boring player who usually doesn't have much impact on the game by himself. Now that the Heat aren't loaded, Haslem isn't able to step up and take his game to the next level and help his team win. I don't think that's what he's about.

Has Haslem improved at all since he came into the league? I really don't see him as any kind of 'glue guy', if that term has any meaning at all.... To me he's been nothing but the weakest link on some very strong teams and is now being exposed for what he is.

He seems to have little drive to excel or improve.

All that said, he might be a good fit for the Nets and Coach Frank's devious offensive scheme.... Haslem is a pretty good shooter, and Frank loves big men who can shoot.

If the Heat continue to hold on to Haslem they'll continue to struggle unless they surround him with talented players (no more Shaq, Zo, J-Will, Payton, Posey to carry the load now)

The Heat would be fools not to try to move him while he still has a decent reputation in the league (if he does)

S.I.C. GM · Post #15 » by **S.I.C. GM** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:53 pm

It was only a matter of time before Ragtime chimed in.

WoW!!! I am impressed he didnt mention himself once in the post.

aussienet · Post #16 » by **aussienet** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:59 pm

rag-time4 wrote:What exactly is a glue guy? What are glue qualities?

Is a glue guy a guy who has zero ambition to be a great player, and who is comfortable with being mediocre and collecting his paycheck without giving his coaches any hassle?

Haslem has a blocks + steals to turnover ratio that's negative.... his career blocks + steals = 1.0 while his turnovers are 1.2. He doesn't get to the foul line often. From what I've seen of him he's a boring player who usually doesn't have much impact on the game by himself. Now that the Heat aren't loaded, Haslem isn't able to step up and take his game to the next level and help his team win. I don't think that's what he's about.

Has Haslem improved at all since he came into the league? I really don't see him as any kind of 'glue guy', if that term has any meaning at all.... To me he's been nothing but the weakest link on some very strong teams and is now being exposed for what he is.

He seems to have little drive to excel or improve.

All that said, he might be a good fit for the Nets and Coach Frank's devious offensive scheme.... Haslem is a pretty good shooter, and Frank loves big men who can shoot.

Hey, hey what's all this hostility?
I was just throwin an idea around. My Idea of a 'glue guy' is some one that plays hard defence, takes advantage of small offensive opportunities,knows his role on the team and brings his hard hat and lunch box to work EVERY SINGLE DAY!!! My glue guy won't pout over playing time, won't blame his coaches for his own mistakes and most definately won't find himself in the coach's dog house so many times that they gotta trade his ass.
HE WILL BE A TEAM GUY, and help make the team stick!

If the Heat continue to hold on to Haslem they'll continue to struggle unless they surround him with talented players (no more Shaq, Zo, J-Will, Payton, Posey to carry the load now)

The Heat would be fools not to try to move him while he still has a decent reputation in the league (if he does)

vincecarter4pres · Post #17 » by **vincecarter4pres** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:23 pm

That statement by ragtime is pure moronacy and is obviously the opinion of someone who doesn't really know much of anything about basketball and makes his evaluations off of stats only and doesn't actually watch the game.

Haslem is a very good defender.

He is a very solid rebounder and a good work ethic.

The complete irony of your statement is that most of your displeaasure with Haslem describes Stromile Swift to a tee.

aussienet · Post #18 » by **aussienet** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:47 am

vincecarter4pres wrote:That statement by ragtime is pure moronacy and is obviously the opinion of someone who doesn't really know much of anything about basketball and makes his evaluations off of stats only and doesn't actually watch the game.

Haslem is a very good defender.

He is a very solid rebounder and a good work ethic.

The complete irony of your statement is that most of your displeaasure with Haslem describes Stromile Swift to a tee.

For some reason my original response to rag time didn't show up.(i'm gonna assume it was my (Please Use More Appropriate Word) computer skills or lack there of) anyways my post pretty much agrees with everything you said.

vincecarter4pres · Post #19 » by **vincecarter4pres** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:12 am

I noticed your response after I submited mine, it is camoflaged in your quote of ragtime.

rag-time4 · Post #20 » by **rag-time4** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 4:13 am

aussienet wrote:
vincecarter4pres wrote:That statement by ragtime is pure moronacy and is obviously the opinion of someone who doesn't really know much of anything about basketball and makes his evaluations off of stats only and doesn't actually watch the game.

Haslem is a very good defender.

He is a very solid rebounder and a good work ethic.

The complete irony of your statement is that most of your displeaasure with Haslem describes Stromile Swift to a tee.

For some reason my original response to rag time didn't show up.(i'm gonna assume it was my (Please Use More Appropriate Word) computer skills or lack there of) anyways my post pretty much agrees with everything you said.

Aussie I see your response but it's buried in my quote. If you want to sandwich your own comments in different pieces of another poster's quote, you have to break the quote up with the proper html tags.

What you said only verifies what I said. To you, a 'glue guy' is someone who shuts up and does what he's told. He whole heartedly accepts the role he's assigned by his superior, no matter how demeaning that role may be.

To me, these are characteristics of someone who accepts mediocrity, which Haslem has done, because when you are applying these characteristics to someone who aspires to greatness or dominance in his or her field, they will only prove true when that person's superior gives them an opportunity to achieve greatness. When someone who aspires to greatness is denied the opportunity to achieve their dreams, they have every right to fight back. In the context of the NBA, players are nothing but the working class. The amount of money they are paid doesn't negate the fact that they are all human beings with dreams and hopes, just like anyone else.

As you argue, Haslem is happy just to be a clock puncher and collect his paycheck, and do what's asked of him, nothing more, nothing less.

I think he's somewhat comparable to Charles Oakley. Since he's mediocre and has no ambition to be a great player, you can use him as filler and have some success as long as you have great players around him.

vincecarter4pres wrote:That statement by ragtime is pure moronacy and is obviously the opinion of someone who doesn't really know much of anything about basketball and makes his evaluations off of stats only and doesn't actually watch the game.

Haslem is a very good defender.

He is a very solid rebounder and a good work ethic.

The complete irony of your statement is that most of your displeaasure with Haslem describes Stromile Swift to a tee.

Here's what very good defense really looks like: Zo vs Mavs Haslem's impact on team defense is minimal at best, and he's a liability at worst. Incidentally, you can see him giving up an offensive board in the above clip.

Offensively he's limited and boring. He averages 2.6 free throw attempts per game, with a career high of 2.9 for a season. In his second season, Swift got 26 minutes per game and averaged 4.5 FT attempts. He has a career average of 3.1 FT attempts in only 20 minutes per game, because he's much more versatile offensively than Haslem.

He might be a good fit for the Nets since he's the type of guy that will listen to Coach Frank and do what he says no matter how dumb his ideas are. He'll accept a more limited role and won't look to create offensively, so he might complement Carter and Harris pretty well and he might be a good fit for Coach Frank's offense.