Brandon Bass Needs To Step-Up Or He Has To Go

[Fafnir]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

[kozlodoev]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

[Fafnir]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

I think he's still best as a PF, worst thing that happened to him is when he ended up in Minnesota and they tried to make him a SF.

[kozlodoev]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

I think he's still best as a PF, worst thing that happened to him is when he ended up in Minnesota and they tried to make him a SF.

His problem at PF is that he's a pathetic rebounder (and if you thought Bass was bad -- Beasley is actually worse). I don't think he'll be any more useful at PF that Bargnani is, and I want no part of Bargs either.

[Moranis]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

I think he's still best as a PF, worst thing that happened to him is when he ended up in Minnesota and they tried to make him a SF.

His problem at PF is that he's a pathetic rebounder (and if you thought Bass was bad -- Beasley is actually worse). I don't think he'll be any more useful at PF that Bargnani is, and I want no part of Bargs either.

They are pretty similar, the difficulty with Beasley is that he has played SF a lot more and thus is further away from the hoop.  As a PF, Beasley is actually a better rebounder than Bass if you look at RB% (and discount Bass' first two seasons when he barely played).

[action781]

If Phoenix offered Bass for Beasley, would you do it?  They have very similar contracts so the money is a wash, it comes down to preference on the player.  So what do you do if that deal is on the table.

I probably take the deal because for all of Beasley's flaws, he does have immense talent and maybe coming here with this team will get him to focus.  Since the dollars are the same, I say it is worth the risk. 

What say you?

And for the record that is about the only deal I can see for Bass, where he isn't just in there for dollars, and where no other assets are going out with him.

Oh my...

When people say they want to throw up when they read certain posts, I now know how they feel.

Bass is a GOOD fit for this team.  Beasley would be a bad fit.  I can't see him possibly learning our system and our team defense schemes.

[kozlodoev]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

I think he's still best as a PF, worst thing that happened to him is when he ended up in Minnesota and they tried to make him a SF.

His problem at PF is that he's a pathetic rebounder (and if you thought Bass was bad -- Beasley is actually worse). I don't think he'll be any more useful at PF that Bargnani is, and I want no part of Bargs either.

They are pretty similar, the difficulty with Beasley is that he has played SF a lot more and thus is further away from the hoop.  As a PF, Beasley is actually a better rebounder than Bass if you look at RB% (and discount Bass' first two seasons when he barely played).

Assuming that his low TRR is an artifact of a position shift after he left Miami -- sure. I'll grant you that they're somewhat comparable.

One way or the other though, I don't think it's a clever long-term plan to invest resources in a PF who rebounds at the rate of Brandon Bass.

[LooseCannon]

There's a non-negligible chance that Beasley will be a more infuriating player than Vin Baker.  He's a soft pothead with a reputation for complaining if he doesn't get enough touches on offense and playing atrocious defense.  I would try to avoid him even if he was available as a minimum salary gamble.

[Moranis]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

I think he's still best as a PF, worst thing that happened to him is when he ended up in Minnesota and they tried to make him a SF.

His problem at PF is that he's a pathetic rebounder (and if you thought Bass was bad -- Beasley is actually worse). I don't think he'll be any more useful at PF that Bargnani is, and I want no part of Bargs either.

They are pretty similar, the difficulty with Beasley is that he has played SF a lot more and thus is further away from the hoop.  As a PF, Beasley is actually a better rebounder than Bass if you look at RB% (and discount Bass' first two seasons when he barely played).

Assuming that his low TRR is an artifact of a position shift after he left Miami -- sure. I'll grant you that they're somewhat comparable.

One way or the other though, I don't think it's a clever long-term plan to invest resources in a PF who rebounds at the rate of Brandon Bass.

The investment in Beasley is actually a bit less than the investment in Bass.  So I fail to see what point you are getting at.

[krook]

I'd probably keep Bass, though Beasley would be tempting. I just don't have much faith in his potential anymore.

Not sure why he would be tempting. He's been in the doghouse on every team he's been, and his production has fallen off a cliff. He can't get ahead of Jared Dudley and PJ Tucker in Phoenix at this point -- I don't think I'm going out on a limb when by saying that Bass is a more valuable team player at this point.

This, and we don't need a third SF.

I think he's still best as a PF, worst thing that happened to him is when he ended up in Minnesota and they tried to make him a SF.

His problem at PF is that he's a pathetic rebounder (and if you thought Bass was bad -- Beasley is actually worse). I don't think he'll be any more useful at PF that Bargnani is, and I want no part of Bargs either.

They are pretty similar, the difficulty with Beasley is that he has played SF a lot more and thus is further away from the hoop.  As a PF, Beasley is actually a better rebounder than Bass if you look at RB% (and discount Bass' first two seasons when he barely played).

Assuming that his low TRR is an artifact of a position shift after he left Miami -- sure. I'll grant you that they're somewhat comparable.

One way or the other though, I don't think it's a clever long-term plan to invest resources in a PF who rebounds at the rate of Brandon Bass.

The investment in Beasley is actually a bit less than the investment in Bass.  So I fail to see what point you are getting at.

i'd better take my guy luis scola, best player in pheonix suns in a bad team

[LooseCannon]

As a player claimed on amnesty waivers, Scola can't be traded until July 1.

[kozlodoev]

The investment in Beasley is actually a bit less than the investment in Bass.  So I fail to see what point you are getting at.

I didn't mean money. I expect you the idea is to bring Beasley in order to groom him as some sort of a critical piece of the starting lineup, because he certainly isn't (and won't be) a roleplayer. That's, chiefly, a waste of time -- I'd stick with the known commodity, even if he wasn't picked second in the draft.

[BASS_THUMPER]

Bass been Thumpin

trade talks stop

[CelticConcourse]

You guys don't see when he IS stepping up. Sigh. Trades, trades, trades are all you want!

[Moranis]

The investment in Beasley is actually a bit less than the investment in Bass.  So I fail to see what point you are getting at.

I didn't mean money. I expect you the idea is to bring Beasley in order to groom him as some sort of a critical piece of the starting lineup, because he certainly isn't (and won't be) a roleplayer. That's, chiefly, a waste of time -- I'd stick with the known commodity, even if he wasn't picked second in the draft.

No I just think he has more upside and a better chance to actually contribute in an effective manner.  He is a much more gifted all around offensive player, which is what the C's could use from the 4 spot.  Bass is pretty much a spot up shooter that has been unfortunately not hitting the broad side of a barn much this year.  I also think that if Beasley was actually in a good situation with a strong presence like KG that he might actually be a bit less of a knucklehead.