Get to know Marcus Haislip

From my favorite Spurs blog site:

http://www.poundingtherock.com/2009/...ur-new-spurs-5

"Haislip, a raw 6-foot-10, power forward from Tennessee, got high marks for his athleticism, NBA body and a good work ethic. Rumors that he could bench press 400 pounds sent his stock soaring and some draft experts saw Haislip as the Bucks' answer to their problems at the four spot, albeit two or three years down the road. But what the Bucks have unearthed in the summer leagues is a very different player -- a slashing, small forward who plays great defense on the perimeter and sinks the NBA 3-pointer effortlessly.

On Wednesday, Haislip rained down six 3-pointers on the Hawks' DerMarr Johnson and showed surprising poise for a kid that wasn't supposed to be ready for prime time. He ended the game with 21 points, including one fabulous dunk. The thunderous dunks we expected, but the 3-point shooting?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

what the Bucks have unearthed in the summer leagues is a very different player -- a slashing, small forward who plays great defense on the perimeter and sinks the NBA 3-pointer effortlessly.

---

I hope this turns out to be true; he might solve part of our match up problem with the Lakers (Odom). I'm getting stir-crazy already, I want the season to begin. I can't wait to see how Haislip, Blair, Mahinmi, Jefferson, Hill, Hairston and Williams play.

Haislip wants to succeed as a rotation NBA player as well. Motivation should be no problem.

Interesting. Maybe he's been a SF all along, and was just mis-categorized. And a 40" vert on a 6'10" player is unearthly. JR Smith's is like 41 maybe 42, he's 6'6", and people consider HIM a high-flyer.

Holy hell that was an extensive write up about on a guy that'll probably be one of the deepest in rotation. Interesting read nonetheless

Nice, don't expect anything from him. That's why I love the pickup, doesn't hurt the Spurs financially but could be rewarding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomtom

Holy hell that was an extensive write up about on a guy that'll probably be one of the deepest in rotation. Interesting read nonetheless

---

Low risk, high reward. He costs almost nothing, salary wise, and is a monster athlete still under 30 who can shoot the long ball. If he gets into a groove, he could drop Finley or Bonner deep on the bench or even into street clothes.

Best case: A taller, more athletic Bowen-type defender who can run the floor, shoot the 3, and go up for lobs.

Worst case: Francisco Elson II, an athletic dumbass who can't learn half of your playbook.

I think a lot of it hinges on whether he was a) smart enough to adapt to Euro-ball and set plays, or b) just SO much more athletic than everyone else.

a) would trend towards best case, and b) would trend towards worst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

From my favorite Spurs blog site:

http://www.poundingtherock.com/2009/...ur-new-spurs-5

"Haislip, a raw 6-foot-10, power forward from Tennessee, got high marks for his athleticism, NBA body and a good work ethic. Rumors that he could bench press 400 pounds sent his stock soaring and some draft experts saw Haislip as the Bucks' answer to their problems at the four spot, albeit two or three years down the road. But what the Bucks have unearthed in the summer leagues is a very different player -- a slashing, small forward who plays great defense on the perimeter and sinks the NBA 3-pointer effortlessly.

On Wednesday, Haislip rained down six 3-pointers on the Hawks' DerMarr Johnson and showed surprising poise for a kid that wasn't supposed to be ready for prime time. He ended the game with 21 points, including one fabulous dunk. The thunderous dunks we expected, but the 3-point shooting?"

---

400lbs LMAO


At max I'd say his bench is around 300+ MAYBE.

His arms are far too long to be able to bench that much, and his chest isn't big enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooks

400lbs LMAO


At max I'd say his bench is around 300+ MAYBE.

His arms are far too long to be able to bench that much, and his chest isn't big enough.

---

They did say it was a rumor...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muser

Nice, don't expect anything from him. That's why I love the pickup, doesn't hurt the Spurs financially but could be rewarding.

---

This is pretty much what I had in mind, but I manage to get hyped up after watching that little in-game scuffle of his. I wouldn't let anyone get away with slapping me in the face either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phila_Chamberlain

Did anyone notice that this is about 4 years old?

---

The particular piece that the OP quoted was, but the article itself has a date of 9/4/09. In fact that quote was only a quote within the article, relating to his NBA history.

Interesting read. And ya I def snickered at the 400 lb bench rumor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exstatic

Low risk, high reward. He costs almost nothing, salary wise, and is a monster athlete still under 30 who can shoot the long ball. If he gets into a groove, he could drop Finley or Bonner deep on the bench or even into street clothes.

Best case: A taller, more athletic Bowen-type defender who can run the floor, shoot the 3, and go up for lobs.

Worst case: Francisco Elson II, an athletic dumbass who can't learn half of your playbook.

I think a lot of it hinges on whether he was a) smart enough to adapt to Euro-ball and set plays, or b) just SO much more athletic than everyone else.

a) would trend towards best case, and b) would trend towards worst.

---

As much as I'm hoping this guy pans out, I see him more as Francisco Elson the sequel. I think its a bit unfair to this guy to compare him to Bruce. Bruce had the smarts and lateral quickness to make him a lock down defender. I'm sure we'll see soon enough what MH can contribute to the Spurs this year.

It's been my theory that he was brought in to play SF. If he can provide all that the article is spouting and from what I've seen in clips from his Euro play...his more natural postion in the NBA is at the SF slot.

I look at it this way...if Haislip winds up being a legitiment b/u at the SF and being able to do what the article says...the Spurs will have a combined payroll of only 15mil for 2 players that will provide consistent play at that position. That's only 7.5 mil per player though one will be receiving considerably more than the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpurNation

It's been my theory that he was brought in to play SF. If he can provide all that the article is spouting and from what I've seen in clips from his Euro play...his more natural postion in the NBA is at the SF slot.

I look at it this way...if Haislip winds up being a legitiment b/u at the SF and being able to do what the article says...the Spurs will have a combined payroll of only 15mil for 2 players that will provide consistent play at that position. That's only 7.5 mil per player though one will be receiving considerably more than the other.

---

Agreed!

That's what I've been telling this board for the longest time. He's is with the Spurs because he's going to play SF.

We got a problem with guys like Odom, Dirk and David West. You got to have someone long enough to come up with a credible defense.

- McDyess at 6'9" is not long enough
- Ratliff is only useful against postup players.
- RJ at 6'7" though quick, is too small
- Blair at 6'6" lacks the perimeter quickness and is too small.
- Mahinmi at 6'11" also lacks the perimeter quickness. He could be effective against West but not for Odom or Dirk.

In the end, your best defensive lineup for a team like the lakers would be:

Ginobli vs Fisher
RJ vs Kobe
Haislip vs Odom
Duncan vs Gasol
Ratliff/Mahinmi vs Bynum

Any combination reveals a gaping hole!

The closest best may be:

Hill vs Fisher
Ginobli vs Kobe
RJ vs Odom
Duncan vs Gasol
Ratliff/Mahinmi vs Bynum

But that just tires out Ginobli and puts RJ at a defensive dilema.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

That's what I've been telling this board for the longest time. He's is with the Spurs because he's going to play SF.

We got a problem with guys like Odom, Dirk and David West. You got to have someone long enough to come up with a credible defense.

---

Odom, Dirk and West are PFs. If Haislip guards any of those players, it will be as a PF.

Not to mention, McDyess seems well suited to do at least an admirable job on those players. He is not a great low block defender, but a pretty good perimeter defender.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

In the end, your best defensive lineup for a team like the lakers would be:

Ginobli vs Fisher
RJ vs Kobe
Haislip vs Odom
Duncan vs Gasol
Ratliff/Mahinmi vs Bynum

---

Artest is the Laker SF, not Odom. A Bynum/Gasol/Odom combo was used rarely, if at all. Gasol, Odom, and Bynum made up the 4/5 rotation, with two of them on the court in nearly all game situations. Haislip may very well get a chance to guard Odom as he plays PF next to Gasol OR Bynum. In those situations Haislip will be the PF next Duncan or another Spur big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

- Mahinmi at 6'11" also lacks the perimeter quickness.

---

I don't know what you base this on since we haven't seen Ian play in the NBA, but let's assume that you are absolutely correct.

What evidence exists anywhere that Haislip has the requisite perimeter quickness to play SF in the NBA?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phila_Chamberlain

I wouldn't doubt that Haislip could bench 400. I remember I had a high school coach who could do reps of 350 like it was nothing and he was around 6'7". In that video of Haislip is amazing he shows off a bit and has some good tone.

---

Yeah...it's not like 400lbs is an otherworldly amount. I haven't maxed out in forever but I could probably get 350 up and he is quite a bit bigger than me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mel_13

Gasol, Odom, and Bynum made up the 4/5 rotation, with two of them on the court in nearly all game situations.

---

When Odom plays at the SF position, then we got a mismatch. Otherwise we are fine. The game however is won by exploiting mismatches, and until we plug that hole, we are vulnerable.

So if the Lakers play the Odom SF card, then we should be able to plug it with Haislip at SF. If they play it for less than 20 minutes a game, then that's about how long Haislip should ever be in the court.

Playing a big SF has been what teams have been doing to us lately or a quick PF. See we had no guy with the length and quickness to keep up with them. Duncan may do a good job, but we always risk him going into foul trouble.

I agree that McDyess would hold his own against the likes of David West who plays in the block. But against guys like Dirk who play in the perimeter, we have always had trouble. We never had a guy like Posey who had enough length to be a nuisance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

So if the Lakers play the Odom SF card, then we should be able to plug it with Haislip at SF. If they play it for less than 20 minutes a game, then that's about how long Haislip should ever be in the court.

---

So, basically you agree with everyone here that Haislip is not likely to see anything but garbage time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

When Odom plays at the SF position, then we got a mismatch. Otherwise we are fine. The game however is won by exploiting mismatches, and until we plug that hole, we are vulnerable.

So if the Lakers play the Odom SF card, then we should be able to plug it with Haislip at SF. If they play it for less than 20 minutes a game, then that's about how long Haislip should ever be in the court.

Playing a big SF has been what teams have been doing to us lately or a quick PF. See we had no guy with the length and quickness to keep up with them. Duncan may do a good job, but we always risk him going into foul trouble.

I agree that McDyess would hold his own against the likes of David West who plays in the block. But against guys like Dirk who play in the perimeter, we have always had trouble. We never had a guy like Posey who had enough length to be a nuisance.

---

At least do some research, any research. Lamar Odom played SF in about 1% of all his minutes last season. He played over 98% of his minutes at PF. Look it up before you post.

And as I pointed earlier, if he defends Dirk it will be as a PF not as a SF. Dallas does not play Dirk with two other bigs. You can look that up as well.

Haislip may very well be used to defend mobile PFs like Dirk, Odom, and Lewis. When he does, he will be playing PF not SF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mel_13

And as I pointed earlier, if he defends Dirk it will be as a PF not as a SF. Dallas does not play Dirk with two other bigs. You can look that up as well.

Haislip may very well be used to defend mobile PFs like Dirk, Odom, and Lewis. When he does, he will be playing PF not SF.

---

True.

But it is going to nice that he might be able to use his size along with quickness to help defend SF's as well.

That would be the ultimate. Much in the same way that Kevin Garnett has been used to defend opposing team's SF's at times.

As been said before...you can't teach height. And if that height comes with quickness it's all the better for the team that player is on.

I'm hoping Haislip can provide that luxury for the Spurs. We'll see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BG_Spurs_Fan

So, basically you agree with everyone here that Haislip is not likely to see anything but garbage time?

---

Does Odom play SF only during garbage time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benefactor

Yeah...it's not like 400lbs is an otherworldly amount. I haven't maxed out in forever but I could probably get 350 up and he is quite a bit bigger than me.

---

id consider it otherworldly if a non-juicing 6-10 man with 4-foot long skinny arms with small joints and a lanky frame and nowhere the muscular development typically necessary could bench anywhere near 400lbs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

Does Odom play SF only during garbage time?

---

Well if you had done your research or watched the Lakers at least a couple of times you would know when and how much he plays at SF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mel_13

At least do some research, any research. Lamar Odom played SF in about 1% of all his minutes last season. He played over 98% of his minutes at PF. Look it up before you post.

And as I pointed earlier, if he defends Dirk it will be as a PF not as a SF. Dallas does not play Dirk with two other bigs. You can look that up as well.

Haislip may very well be used to defend mobile PFs like Dirk, Odom, and Lewis. When he does, he will be playing PF not SF.

---

Then by your logic, Dirk and Odom shouldn't create match up problems because their size 7'0" and 6'10" are not out of the ordinary for a PF position. You got to realize, they play a SF role in their offense and that causes match up problems because a SF is too small and a PF typically is too slow.

Now speaking about Lewis, this guy hangs around the 3 point lane and rarely ever has a post-up game. Is that a PF? Maybe only in position, but not in function.

These guys play SF in offense and have the luxury of playing the PF in defense simply because of their height (not effectively, but adequate enough).

Duncan on the other hand, is a real PF, but don't expect him to guard the likes of Dirk/Lewis/Odom because he isn't quick enough.

Now look at our main competitor the Lakers. Bynum is a true center, Gasol is a true PF, Bryant is a SG, Fisher an SG and Odom well he can play PF but creates match up problems when he plays his natural position, that is a SF. Odom starts his offense from the 3pt, he can take a shot from there or dribble penetrate if he needs to. Do PFs do that?

Now look at Haislip, same thing, he can start his offense from beyond the 3pt line, take his shot from there or dribble penetrate. His low post game, just like Odom's isn't that great. So in situations with true PFs, McDyess or Blair should do much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

Then by your logic, Dirk and Odom shouldn't create match up problems because their size 7'0" and 6'10" are not out of the ordinary for a PF position. You got to realize, they play a SF role in their offense and that causes match up problems because a SF is too small and a PF typically is too slow.

Now speaking about Lewis, this guy hangs around the 3 point lane and rarely ever has a post-up game. Is that a PF? Maybe only in position, but not in function.

These guys play SF in offense and have the luxury of playing the PF in defense simply because of their height (not effectively, but adequate enough).

Duncan on the other hand, is a real PF, but don't expect him to guard the likes of Dirk/Lewis/Odom because he isn't quick enough.

Now look at our main competitor the Lakers. Bynum is a true center, Gasol is a true PF, Bryant is a SG, Fisher an SG and Odom well he can play PF but creates match up problems when he plays his natural position, that is a SF. Odom starts his offense from the 3pt, he can take a shot from there or dribble penetrate if he needs to. Do PFs do that?

Now look at Haislip, same thing, he can start his offense from beyond the 3pt line, take his shot from there or dribble penetrate. His low post game, just like Odom's isn't that great. So in situations with true PFs, McDyess or Blair should do much better.

---

Thanks for making my point. When Haislip plays against the players in the examples you cite he will be on the floor with one other Spur big. The man he is guarding will be on the floor with one other big from the other team. Each team will have 3 other players on the court, two guards and a SF. Haislip and the man he guards will be PFs in those configurations.

I have said several times that Haislip would seem likely to get a chance to guard mobile PFs like Dirk and Odom. That will make him a mobile PF, not a SF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mel_13

I have said several times that Haislip would seem likely to get a chance to guard mobile PFs like Dirk and Odom. That will make him a mobile PF, not a SF.

---

Well if "mobile PF" is the term that fits you fancy, then so be it.

SF in my book.

But agree, it all depends on configuration. I however like this second team configuration:

Hill - PG
Ginobli - SG
Haislip - SF
Blair - PF
Mahinmi - C

Go to cause a lot of matchup problems for sure!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceperez

Well if "mobile PF" is the term that fits you fancy, then so be it.

SF in my book.

But agree, it all depends on configuration. I however like this second team configuration:

Hill - PG
Ginobli - SG
Haislip - SF
Blair - PF
Mahinmi - C

Go to cause a lot of matchup problems for sure!

---

:lol

Just tell me. Let's fantasize that the Spurs send that line up out against Dirk, Dampier, Marion, Terry and Kidd. While our SF Haislip guards their PF Dirk, who guards Marion?

Or they use it against Gasol, Odom, Artest, Kobe, and Fisher. While our SF Haislip guards their PF Odom, who guards Artest?

Or against Howard, Lewis, Pietrus, Carter and Nelson. While our SF Haislip guards their PF Lewis, who guards Pietrus?

Do you really think the Spurs are going to counter line-ups like these with Haislip and two other bigs?:lol