Marty Burns talks Curry and the Hawks

[chillzatl]

I agree with your assessment of Curry. He's got a ton of potential and IF we had to pay big money for big potential that might not develop, it would probably be him.

But we don't have to offer big money to Curry. That's the whole point. There's no rule that says we have to give our money away to some potential porkchop this season. If there's nothing out there that's worth it, and I don't think there is, I say we fill other holes and hold out.

[Diesel]

1st. Swift is Unrestricted..

2nd. Swift is already motivated.

Curry has a lot of potential but he has had motivation problems since he has been in the league. He just mustered up a good season because this is one of his contract years.

I say, we don't make him an offer, we get Swift and we Let Curry play one more season with the Bulls. IF you really think Curry has that much potential, we have to force the Bulls to spend some of their money NOW...

That means, we make a Big offer to Chandler. Chicago will match.

Then we make a big Offer to Duhon. Chicago will Match.

And we wait on Curry next year when Chicago is Maxed out and he is unrestricted.

It is rare that a restricted free agent moves from one team to another.

[tmac13]

They want him , they have the cash, that is home for him..We will be underdogs to get him.

[Traceman]

never averaged double figure scoring in their careers. As terrible as he was offensively, Mutombo averaged a little over 12 ppg for his career until he left Philly to go to NJ. And Mutombo was FAR better defensively than Dalembert or Chandler. Between Dalembert and Chandler, I'd take Chandler because Chandler is a MUCH better rebounder, he's more athletic and he's 2 inches taller.

[Packfill]

I don't think any of those guys deserves near max money. But, given the current make-up of the Hawks line-up, I believe they need defense and rebounding from the center position more then they need scoring. So if it is even money, I would take Dalembert or Chandler over Curry - even knowing that Curry could turn into an offensive dynamo. If the Hawks had Ben Wallace at power forward, then I would agree Curry would be a much better fit.

[Traceman]

Not so Swift

The Stro Show taking long time to return after ankle injury

By Ronald Tillery

Contact

March 22, 2005

Analysis

Here's hoping Stromile Swift never left his bed Monday.

Rest, Stro, rest.

By Thursday it should be time for Stro to run.

Run, Stro, run.

In trying to figure out which was more embarrassing -- Swift missing his 13th game last Sunday because of a moderately sprained left ankle or sitting in a uniform not prepared to play -- one had to wonder what really is on the fifth-year forward's mind.

Pau Gasol rushed back from a stress reaction in his left foot.

Shane Battier played two games with a 101-degree temperature that should have rendered him bedridden.

Jason Williams rolled his ankle and performed after two games.

Earl Watson has a busted left hand, a tender shoulder and would have missing teeth if not for cosmetic surgery. Yet the 6-1 reserve guard is, yep, playing.

So where is Stromile Swift?

He's back, all right.

He's back to being the butt of a joke heard during the Grizzlies' inaugural season in Memphis.

Whenever the team bus hit a bump in the road and players were slightly discharged from their seats, a teammate would sarcastically check on Swift.

The remarks would go something like this: Somebody check on Stro. He may have separated his shoulder.

Right now it appears Swift's view on his future is separated from reality.

Sure, he played well when Gasol first went down because of an injury. Sure, Swift can jump to Pluto if he wants, and he operates as the team's only legitimate shot-blocker.

But those credits he earned with fine performances before the Feb. 16 ankle injury at Boston have been spent on unexcused time off.

Swift has been cleared by doctors to play for more than two weeks.

He can play.

He should play.

He needs to play.

This is a guy fighting for a contract beyond this season, and he has shown no recuperative powers and little professional pride. For a team battling for a playoff berth, the Grizzlies are right to plan on excelling without Swift.

"I have never questioned a player in 14 years," Griz coach Mike Fratello said. "There's got to be a trust in all of us. If they say they can't go, then they can't go."

Something funny happened during Lorenzen Wright's exit from practice last week.

Wright, a sturdy veteran, repeatedly asked Swift if he would play the next night against New Orleans.

Swift ignored the ribbing.

Repeatedly.

When asked about needing to prove that he can play through pain, Swift downplayed the situation.

"I don't think it's a factor because the whole year I've played through injury and didn't talk about it. Everybody plays through injuries," Swift said, responding to a notion that he needs to dispel a career-long notion that he's fragile.

Swift has also talked about not getting enough "lift" to deliver the aerial assault he's accustomed to.

Still, one has to wonder if Swift's ankle is all that's weak.

Could he be receiving bad advice from representatives?

Swift never budged from a six-year, $60 million proposal to the Griz last summer. The Grizzlies' counter was to pay him an average of $8 million per season if he met incentives.

The two parties could have met at a reasonable six-year deal worth $42 million to $45 million.

Now Swift is making the Grizzlies' sticking point seem like Krazy Glue.

How can you invest so much guaranteed money in a guy who has played in no more than 67 games during three of four seasons in Memphis?

What is Swift made of?

Potential.

But who knows beyond that?

[Buzzard]

My rankings talent wise:

Chandler, Curry, Dalambert, Swift

Now comes the hard part who do you give the money to. Depends on who we draft but Chandler and Dalambert would be my first choices, Curry next and Swift at the bottom.

[jezmund]

Finally someone is on the same page as myself. Who said we much spend all of our money this summer and try to turn this into a one year rebuilding project? Out of the group, though, I do tend to favor Chandler just b/c he seems to give pretty constant effort and doesn't try to do things that aren't in his repertoire.(sp?) I also like the fact that he can be effective w/o having to score points and he won't be a liability on defense. Chandler seems like a good fit next to Andrew Bogut actually. Athletic, shot-blocker who can rebound with the best of them. Another reason I like Chandler over Curry, Swift and Dalembert is that I think he will be the cheapest of the 4. NO knows it has to overpay to get someone to come but they have plenty of money. I see Chandler having a better attitude than Dalembert and more productive over the long haul. Curry just seems like a stat padder. I can't stand players like that. From what I've seen Bogut's defense can't be all that much worse than Curry's and he'd be at least 50 million cheaper. As far as PG goes, I don't really see much in this years crop of FA's. I'd rather take a chance on one with our 1st 2nd round pick like a Daniel Ewing and take one with our 1st rounder in 2006 with guys like Daniel Gibson, Guillermo Diaz and this Sergio character.

[Diesel]

Seems like Swift suffers from Theo disease... Fragility.

That doesn't mean that he's not motivated.

Curry is a guy who is not motivated. Doesn't want to get in shape, doesn't practice, and beyond his new contract, I think he will make Dampiere look like Shaq Daddy...

The Main thing is still this:

OF:

Kwame, Curry, Dally, Swift, Chandler, Haslem...

The only ones who are unrestricted are Swift and Haslem.

That is more of a problem than Fragility or Motivation. We would be doing Chicago a favor if we made a weak offer for Curry. At the same time, we would be doing ourselves a disservice if we offer Curry the world and watch him become Oliver Miller.

[chillzatl]

I mean really, it's a double edge sword and we stand to lose more than anyone.

If we offer him a big contract, trying to bait Chicago, we stnad to lose. Because, what if they don't take the bait? That is a real possibility. I know they've said "we will match any offer". But this is business and they're going to say whatever they have to say in order to get him as cheap as they can.

So if we do that, we could be putting ourselves into a position of paying out the whazoo for Oliver Miller. I don't want that. You don't want that either.

So if given a choice between letting Chicago get him cheaper than they might otherwise, or us paying for a porkchop, I'd rather let Chicago get him cheap and make that gamble.

[DominiqueWilkins]

80 million over 6 years is a bit much, that is Big Z type money.

I would expect Curry to sign atleast for 10 million a year, but I wouldn't steep to 13-14 million a year.

[Traceman]

I read that he was out of shape and didn't work hard all last summer but I went to the first Hawks/Bulls game earlier this season and he didn't look fat to me. He's certainly no Karl Malone or Kevin Willis but he obviously did enough in the off season to be able to compete at a pretty high level. If he gets his big payday, I agree that he could slack off. However, he also could mature and become a better all around player. The bottom line for me is that taking ANY of these guys at big money is a risk and if I am going to take a risk, I wan't to take the risk that will yield the highest reward if it pans out. To ME, that's Curry.

My order of preference for the FA bigs we have been discussing FOR THE SAME MONEY would be:

1) Curry

2) Chandler

3) Brown

4) Swift

5) Dalembert

That being said, if we could get Dalembert for a lot less than the others above him, I would go with Dalembert because honestly, they ALL have question marks.