Jamal Crawford = The Difference.
#1
Posted 11 March 2010 - 10:35 PM
Jamal is truly the difference and I hope we run through the East in the playoffs.
The question.
If we were forced to SNT Joe to Chicago for Hinrich...
Could we be as good with Jamal's Leadership?
#2
Posted 11 March 2010 - 10:48 PM
#3
Posted 11 March 2010 - 10:49 PM
Diesel, on 11 March 2010 - 10:35 PM, said:
Jamal is truly the difference and I hope we run through the East in the playoffs.
The question.
If we were forced to SNT Joe to Chicago for Hinrich...
Could we be as good with Jamal's Leadership?
Nowhere near.
And I think people need to realize this. Jamal is great when he is called upon most of the time. But those of you who say that a team with Joe Johnson as it's leader will never win a championship... A team with Jamal Crawford as it's leader might not even get out of the first round.
#4
Posted 12 March 2010 - 12:21 AM
Diesel, on 11 March 2010 - 10:35 PM, said:
LOL....Jamal's leadership!
Then again...that's a fairly good question. If we were to SNT JJ for a top quality PG/Center? Craw has demonstrated that he can shoot as well as JJ and also is a far better driver of the basketball. I'm not sure how old Craw is but he looks to be healthy...does he have another 4 years at this level?
Maybe we should build around Smoove/Horford/Craw.
I would love to see this team for a couple years:
Billups. Craw, Marvin/Chillz, Smoove, Horford....with Zaza and Teague
Edited by DJlaysitup, 12 March 2010 - 12:26 AM.
#5
Posted 12 March 2010 - 04:48 AM
We could see it firsthand next year if Joe walks.
#6
Posted 12 March 2010 - 05:31 AM
jhay610, on 12 March 2010 - 04:48 AM, said:
We could see it firsthand next year if Joe walks.
You mean the fact that he has been on losing teams for his career?
When we had 13, 26, and 30 wins... I didn't hear much talk about Joe being a loser. I think you have to consider the players surrounding any one guy as it pertains to winning. Craw's NY teams sucked. Craw's GS team was injured. Craw's Chicago team was the same team that selected Marcus Fizer. Then traded Elton Brand for Tyson Chandler. And Had Chandler, Curry, Fizer and Jay Williams as lottery picks with Bill Cartwright coaching. That's a recipe for Losing.
In NY he had 4 coaches in 4 years and a starting PG named Marbury. That team was laced in friction.
I'm not saying that we should SNT Joe. However, if it looks like we will lose Joe, we should get back something for him. All things perfect, we resign Joe for the rest of his career.
#7
Posted 12 March 2010 - 05:33 AM
DeerPark, on 11 March 2010 - 10:48 PM, said:
With the cap room that Chicago has created, they can take JJ and give us back a Hinrich and probably go after Wade. I don't see it going down that way. They would be in need of a big.. but I think we have to be open to the possibility that Joe's agent possibly already has a deal in place. IN not to Chicago then Maybe Cleveland or LAL?
#8
#9
Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:39 AM
That being said, I don't think Hinrich thrives on the Hawks. We're not that kind of team (especially if we lose JJ).
Then again, it's totally possible that I'm viewing Hinrich wrong. I can't pretend like I watch a lot of Bulls games.
Edited by HawkRock1123, 12 March 2010 - 09:40 AM.
#10
Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:58 AM
#11
Posted 12 March 2010 - 01:06 PM
No thanks.
#13
Posted 13 March 2010 - 05:37 PM
Diesel, on 13 March 2010 - 05:04 PM, said:
Thanks D...Crawford is an amazing offensive player. He is definitely top 50 all-time if it's for offense - perimeter shooting-wise top 25. I'd love to watch the guy just shooting around before practice.
Edited by DJlaysitup, 13 March 2010 - 05:37 PM.
#14
Posted 15 March 2010 - 04:35 AM
#15
Posted 15 March 2010 - 09:21 AM
jhay610, on 15 March 2010 - 04:35 AM, said:
Crawford is the better scorer of the 2. Crawford is the guy you want with the ball in his hands at the buzzer. Crawford gets to the line way more than Joe. Yeah, I think Crawford could easily score 20 per game as the go to guy.
Reply to this topic

1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
















