Crank

LOL No.

More likely....

pg- bibby=35 min a game

sg-johnson=40 min a game

sf- marv=35 min agame

pf-smith=35 min a game

c-horford-35 min a game

bench

pg- flip- (He has to be gone)

sg-crawford-25 min a game

sf-evans-15 min a game

c-zaza-20 min a game

pg-teague - 0/1 min a game

Joe and Crawford were both top ten in minutes played last year now Crawfords gonna drop all the way to 25 minutes per game ? I think both will see reduced minutes minutes but the one who will see a drastic reduction in minutes is Bibby.

Instead of the 38-39 minutes Crawford and Joe were playing last year it will be 35-36 but Bibby will go from 34 to probably around 30 .

Mcdyess would be awesome for the right price and as long as hes part of the rotation but I also like Gortat for the right price because we need the size and physicality of his game .

In searching for something from his teammates or coaches that says he was selfish or a ballhog I came across this .

http://foxsports.foxnews.com/nba/story/919...eId=20090207043

OAKLAND Wednesday, during shoot-around, Warriors coach Don Nelson pulled aside point guard Jamal Crawford. The message was one Crawford had heard from everyone.

From his teammates. From his friends around the league. From his family.

"Even the dude at Jack in the Box was telling me to be more aggressive," Crawford said after Thursday's practice. "Honestly, we're a better team when I'm aggressive."

Almost lost in the Warriors' 124-112 win over the Phoenix Suns on Wednesday thanks to swingman Stephen Jackson's first career triple-double and the sheer fluidity of Golden State's offensive attack was the return of Crawford. The old Crawford, who, during a seven-game stretch in January, averaged 28 points on 45.9 percent shooting with 5.7 assists.

He finished Wednesday's game with 27 points, six assists and one turnover. It's a far cry from his averages the previous five games: 10.2 points on 10.3 shots with 2.8 assists.

After seeing the two versions of Crawford, the explosive playmaker and the accommodating floor general, it's unanimous which one members of the organization want around.

"He hasn't really had a game like that since he hurt his knee," Nelson said. "I didn't know if it was lack of aggressiveness or his knee was bothering him. So I asked him to be more aggressive."

If the imploring of Crawford to be aggressive sounds familiar, that's because it is. When Crawford was acquired in a trade with the New York Knicks in November, he openly acknowledged taking a back seat to Jackson and forward Corey Maggette.

Crawford gave two reasons for his passive play of late: the return of guard Monta Ellis and the execution of the game plan.

Crawford said when Ellis arrived in late January, he wanted to do everything he could to make sure Ellis was involved in the game.

In other words, he deferred.

"I'm glad he's finally understanding he can't (defer) to Monta," Jackson said. "He has to go out there and be the guy that he is, the guy he's been his whole career. It makes it a lot easier for me because teams don't help as much. They have more than one guy to worry about. When we're so deep like that, it opens up the floor. "

The finger of blame goes to the point guard in Crawford. He said he felt obligated to carry out Nelson's ball movement philosophy. He said he wanted to set the example of sacrifice and be the one to suppress his scoring in favor of the game plan. As a result, he didn't look for his shot but to make the extra pass. He didn't take advantage of his mismatches but focused on exploiting others'.

The problem with that? They need him to be more than a facilitator.

"I appreciate that," Nelson said of Crawford's attention to the game plan. "But we need him to be what he is. He does enough of that. He does move the ball. But he also has the skills to shoot and do other things. So we want him to max out at whatever he does. The worst thing is to take a good player like that and make him one-dimensional when he's got two or three dimensions to his game."

One thing about shooting I was looking at 82games.com and checking out some of Crawfords stats . I havent seen the teams hes played on that much and I noticed like northcyde that 85% of his shots were jumpshots but then I also noticed that 39% were unassisted which very few players can put up good shooting numbers creating that many shots on their own . His efg% as a Warrior was 46%

But I also wanted to see his knicks stats because thats who he went to camp with last year as he joined the Warriors after the season started . With the knicks 82% was jumpshots but 52% were unassisted and his efg% was 54% .

The knicks numbers under Dantoni is only a small sample but we know that that system is based on ball movement and good decision making . Before his trade he was shooting 43% from two but 45% from 3 so he really is a enigma but I think he will be a pleasant surprise for us .

I didn't totally erase the possibility of him being an upgrade. A large one no. Overall. It's not a large upgrade if any at all. He is a worse rebounder than Bibby, gets less steals, and he is not really a better defender either. While getting to the free throw line can make up some difference on a shooting percentage, it still doesn't make JC the better player or the better PG for the team. Most of the time when you go to the ft line it's off shooting attempts that officially just don't count on the stat sheet.

My point was that you dont know how he will fit because Crawford has not played a game yet . But Ive yet to find anyone who has said Crawford wouldnt play the role that he was asked.

How is JC going to effect Josh's game? Bibby could feed Josh from time to time. Will JC do that? I doubt it. If Josh is back with JC at

PG I would expect Josh's shooting to go lower. This team will go back even further in terms of a fast break team.

Why wouldnt he feed Josh ? Again you are predicting worse case scenario .

Free attempts are mainly off shot attempts. So they're just unofficial shot attempts most of the time. What this team lacks on the fast break will get even worse.

of course they are it means you were fouled while shooting but it also means you are putting the ball on the floor and getting into the lane something Bibby does not do and Crawford does and then he also shoots a better percentage as well.

This is Crawford's 4th team. If you're on your 5th team, I think you fall into the journeyman category. Even in Shaq's case it's party

due to an insane contract.

5th team in 9 seasons ? but he was on two of those teams for 8 seasons ? yeah it screams journeyman lol

Poor old JC... He just shoots because that's what he's asked to do. Teams obviously get him because he shoots a lot... And they're quick to still get rid of him.

My point was that I think he will play a whatever role is asked of him it just so happens that on those teams he was asked to generate points.

Every team that gets JC is quick to give him the boot.

He was with the Bulls for 4 years and then the knicks for 4 years and then GS for one year and now us .

.

Size doesn't mean anything if you don't use it. If you don't put forth the effort to play defense then your size on the defensive end is of little use.

Size means alot when a team is attacking you with the smallest backourt in the league like the cavs were . Now we have someone that can make them rethink those matchups

He'll also throw up 3's and cause you to lose some good games. All he has done is score points on bad teams. He does nothing else.

Do you have any proof of this ? I dont know how you could argue that adding him doesnt improve our teams ft percentage considering hes the 14th best ft shooter in the league

If he's so great at taking over games how come his teams always lose? I mean, we basically got 2001 AI here the way some are acting. How come his teams lose and teams want rid of him if he is so effective? This team already plays junk ball and Crawford is a junk ball player. The mess up margin for this team gets even lower for this team now.

Because he cannot carry a team by himself . Hes not Kobe,Lebron or Dwight . Correct me if Im wrong but didnt he get SIGNED and then traded to the knicks ? and then the knicks traded him because they were dumping salary for 2010 ? The Warriors traded for him as insurance for Monta and now that Monta is said to be healthy and they invested near max dollars in him they decided to move Crawford as they are guard heavy ?

No matter if we keep Bibby or not, I don't want to see Jamal a the starting PG. He's never been able to help a team as a PG before. Honestly, most people are just defending because he is a Hawk anyway. I think most thought Reef was going to do good things for the team even though he was a career loser before.

Besides, how is a junk ball team supposed to get better by adding more junk ball players? This past season was as far as this team could go until they make some REAL upgrades. This team would still get swept by Cleveland or a really good defensive team. Miami wasn't even a good defensive team and the Hawks still struggled to move the ball around and score in half the games. Kenny Smith was right about this team in the playoffs last season and subbing Bibby for JC makes it even more so. This becomes even more of a one on one team. I don't believe the team would fall apart with the roster listed above, but I'm not seeing a large or even decent scale overall upgrade.

I am aware that JC get's to the FT line when Bibby doesn't. I still think you're talking about a slightly worse team or a marginal upgraded team. ESP if ZaZa leaves and the only thing they counter that with is bringing over a player that they didn't figure could help them the last 8 years. Why now? Because Spirit is cheap. That's why.

Why do you keep mentioning Reef ? You are living in the past because the two situations are nothing alike .

Reef was a maxed out #3 pick being traded for a #3 pick . Crawford is no where near max and he was traded for scrubs in a salary dump.

Reef was considered a franchise player and I dont think Crawford was ever considered a franchise player .

This team plays one on one by coaches design thats the offense .I was one of the main proponents of trading for Amare .I never for once believed that we should drop Bibby because we have Crawford but I do believe there are things that Crawford does that would improve the team especially if our goal is to get further in the playoffs .

IF Crawford is more productive than Bibby it's not all that much. Having him at PG will mean more turnovers. He shoots a lower percentage. Did you know that he is a worse rebounder than Bibby despite being 4 inches taller? He averages half a steal a game less also. JC hasn't been a value to anybody yet... He is about one trade away from being a journeyman.

About the 50 point games... The guy can score a lot of points while jacking up tons of shooting attempts. What more is there to say? That doesn't mean he makes this team better as a starting PG. I've seen no evidence here that shows he can improve this team as the starting PG. He is just as likely to shoot you out of a game as he is to help you win with a high scoring game. It's not like he does ANYTHING else on the court. he is even a mediocre rebounder by guard standards.

But it's just not about JC.... If the Hawks go into next season even thinner upfront it will be an even bigger mess. If David Andersen could help this team they probably would have brought him over before now.

I had to go look this stuff up so my replies may be a bit slow .

Crawford was 14-26 from the field and 17-18 from the line the last time he went for 50 points last year against the Bobcats. Bibby and Crawford are different types of players but with similar overall skillsets . But make no mistakes Crawfords scoring ability at this point is much deadlier than Bibbs shooting ability. Bibby is on the decline and if we choose to ignore that we are doomed .

Why would having Crawford at pg mean more turnovers when we mainly run the iso joe offense . I dont think Crawford will have much problem getting the ball up the floor and getting it to Joe .

He shoots a lower percentage but he also shot 20o0 more free throws in fewer games . Make no mistake Bibby shot a higher percentage than Joe last year but then again Joe is creating hjis own offense as was Crawford . At some point when quoting these stats you have to acknowledge the responsibilities of the player within the team they are playing on.

Bibby is on his 3rd team

Joe is on his 3rd team

Crawford is on his 3rd team

Shaq is on his 5th team

seriously ..journeyman ? :)

as for jacking up a bunch of shots thats what his team asked him to do . As Ive tried to read some of the articles on the net about Crawford Ive yet to run across anything that says his teammates thought he shot too much or that his coaches didnt want him shooting. he may shoot too much for the fans but it seems the circumstances on the teams he played on the coaches wanted him to be agressive offensively.

For some reason people equate shot attempts with points but lets be real here if we gave Zaza 20 shot attempts a game do you think he would lead all centers in scoring ? Of course not because at some point the talent has to be there for you in the highest level of play in the world to be scoring that much.

I said earlier I though he could do all of the basic things we asked Bibby to do like spot up shooting ,defense ,bringing up the ball and giving it to Joe and leading the occasional break .

Where I thought he could help us is

Hes a legit,respected scorer in this league and teams cant try and hide weak defenders on him the way they tried too with Bibby

He gets to the ft line as evidenced by him shooting almost 200 more ft attempts than Bibby in fewer games .

He allows us to use mismatches against certain teams.

defensively makes us a bigger and much quicker team allowing us in certain situations to employ switches and traps

Very good off the pick and roll like Bibby but actually has the ability to still turn the corner

The flat out ability to close out a basketball as evidenced by him being one of the best 4th quarter scorers in the league as well as one of the best ft shooters .I think him being on the squad immediately lifts our overall ft percentage which is horrible for us not to have a Shaq or Dwight Howard .

He has the ability to flat out take over a game and when you are winning team and you can add that it makes you even better . To have somsone that can come out and get you twenty in a quarter at anytime and be able to in a close game go 10-10 in the last 3 minutes to hold a lead is is huge .

But I want to keep both because good teams dont swap out talent they stack and I we shouldnt be paying Bibby 10+ million or a deal longer than 3 years . Crawford in this situation is ideal because he is a 2 year rental who is younger than Bibby but I prefer to keep them both if we can. But starting Crawford at point guard wouldnt be a disaster because unlike every other team hes played for hes not here to save us .

Jamal has never helped a team win. Reef scored 50. I think Jamison has done it twice. So what? What about all those games he will have this year where he shoots 4-15? They'll far outweigh his 50 point games. It's just funny that some try to justify him starting because he has a couple of high scoring games in his career. Tony Delk had a 50 point game. Oh yeah, jamal is up there with the great HOF players. lol Get outta here.

Why no just make Jamal the number one option? After all, he has had a couple of 50 point games on stat padding teams in his career.

When I read stuff like this i have to ask questions

How many 40 pt games did Delk have ? 30 pt games ?

Jamison and Reef were both good players but like Sund said in the interview they cannot turnaround a losing team.

I dont think anyone said start him because he scored fifty but because he is a younger overall much more productive player .Who is capable of doing the same things as Bibby but also capable of doing things Bibby is no longer capable of doing.

I like to judge player on everything , production,attitude,team performance . I dont think Crawford is on the same level as a Lebron or Kobe and I would be 100 percent certain that I dont think anyone else does either but that is the only caliber of player that wouldve given any of the franchises Crawford has played for a chance to win . Granger made the all star team but if you took him and placed him on the Clippers would that turn that team around ? I doubt it because as Sund says a good player cannot turn around a losing team by himself but they can help a winning team .

And Ive never seen anyone try and diminish someone scoring fifty in a nba game like that. Thats a heckuva achievment no different than lets say if next season Sessions gets 25 assists . That doesnt make his a better player than Stockton but it does mean that on that day he played as good of a game as some of the best to ever play . Crawford has done that on 3 different occasions and came close to that on several others

You offer him a 4 yr deal with a opt out clause after 3 allowing him to get full bird rights and a chance at max money if he does well.

Crawford may be a better "scorer" but Bibby is the better shooter, the better passer and the better leader. Intangibles are more important than people think. There is a reason why the Big Dog trade was such a disaster for the Hawks despite the fact that they "won" the talent end of the trade (at least in the short term given the pick they gave up).

Bibby, as we know, is far from perfect and has some significant deficiencies to his game but he brings far more to the table then Crawford. I am shocked more people don't feel this way.

Well for one you claiming this before Crawford even has a chance to play with the team .

Secondly you are giving Bibby waay too much credit here . He solidified a position that we had journeymen playing for years but his play was average and he is aging.

I think everyone wants Bibby back but his play has in no way be indicative of what his asking price will be .

At the end of the day this team is nearing a point where for us to take the next step Smoove,Marvin,JJ, and AL will have to start carrying that leadership burden as the wins and losses fall on their shoulders so we will only go as far as they take us . Some of you make it sound that if we dont have Bibby we wont run a play or even show up and that everyone wont know what to do . This even after the two playoff appearances and 48 wins this past season .

As for Crawford I look at his contribution like this . He has the ability to be the best player on the floor in any game hes in and Bibby just doesnt have that anymore . You want your point guard to be able to run your team but you also need him to be able to sometimes just take over the game and make his presence felt . In the playoffs even against role playing guards Mo Williams and West Bibby looked woefully over matched even in games where he shot the ball well and would end up 17-18 points . The opponent never looked as though they were worried about Bibby beating them .

Another thing I would like to touch on is that Bibby is a system point guard . He wasnt asked to do much and in the playoffs if you look his assists totals were 9,4,3,3,3,3,6,8,1,5,1 in that order . He shot 22 fts in 11 playoff games and while yes his intangibles are important I dont think this team can afford to have him on the floor for 35 mpg anymore because hes on the decline .

Well as long as it improves our swagger...

lol :) By that I meant that since its a superstar league you need someone who can get us those calls that superstars gets . The respect level around the league and with the refs would go up bigtime if we got Amare.

I think people are underestimating what Amare brings to the table here.

We are not talking about just an all star bigman who can score . This is a bigman that was FIRST TEAM ALL NBA and the moment he becomes a Hawk would be the best offensive bigman in the East. Amare can pass and has seen every double team imaginable and gets to the line .

The nba is a superstars league and Amare instantly ups our swagger rating ten fold .

Lets go down last years all star roster at the C-f spot shall we :smile:

Lebron

Kg

Howard

Granger

Pierce

Bosh

lewis

Getting Amare pushes us into a top two seed with the right follow up moves .

It counters the Magic getting VC

It counters Clevland getting Shaq

and it forces the Celts to rethink seriously about making a move

Can we actually trade him if we wanted to or are there rules in place that prevent that from happening?

because he was recently traded I dont think he can be traded again for 2 months or until August 25th

We were the youngest team in the NBA to make the 2nd round of the playoffs last year. We were the 5th youngest team in the NBA.

Adding Teague we are even younger. It makes no sense to break up this young nucleus of talent with worlds of potential to land Amare.

Championship window? Defense wins championships, and Amare would make our defense worse. People need to stop thinking in terms of fantasy sports and video games. Amare is a more productive offensive player than Smoove but it would severely damage our defense with how the team is currently constructed.

How many young teams can you name that kept 4-5 young players together for years ? That pretty much is a fantasy video game way of thinking . That they all will grow at the same rate and that they all will reach their potential.

It would be pretty naive of Sund to think that all our team needs is seasoning.

Potential doesnt win championships and its not like Amare is 30+ hes 27 .

How would Amare make our defense worse he blocks shots at the same rate and is a pretty good help defender in his own right. We would trade away some perimeter defense versatility but add a player who we could go to when our outside shots are not falling. We are talking about someone who lives in the paint who makes over 80% fta and is top ten in the league in fta .

Amare would actually balance the way this team plays and I would rather balance it out and take my shot now with flexibility to quickly retool than to sit back in the middle of the pack and watch our window close .

QFT and welcome to the board.

thanks its a tough decision but I hear people saying how we may lose Joe anyway so how about a calculated move to try and play for the East crown next year.If it works its our first appearance and if it doesnt we get cap space (if we dont extend ) and we are right in the thick of things next summer . If we extend we have one of the best cores in the east with Amare,Joe,and Al and that will attract veteran playmakers down the line . You cant be reactionary but you certainly cant bank on solely internal growth either when everyone else around you is making moves for all stars and such either.

I think Amare would be a great to help Al work on his pick and roll game . Joe and Bibby are good in the pick and roll and Sund said Crawford was great in the pick and roll too. We have someone in which to attack Cleveland and Orlando with that their guards will actually have to help on. Orlando romped through the east forcing everyone to adjust to their style until they met the Lakers who forced Orlando to adjust to their style . I think a healthy Amare would give us that .

Trading Smith for Amare is a potential disaster considering Amare and Joe are going to be FA's at the end of the season. We would probably lose one of them.

but that would also open up major cap space for us to be players that year as well. There is so much uncertainty with there possibly being a lockout in 2011 that a move like this is basically a move to try and get to the finals and a chance to play for a ship next season and then if one or both walk we retool .One of the worst things a franchise can do is be afraid to go for it all . I look at this like the Bulls situation of 05-07 . They made the first rd one year and then the semifinals the second year. Everyone thought they would go hard after KG(who they couldve gotten) but instead decided to use cap to get Ben Wallace because that wouldnt require giving up any of there young players . Now today Hinrich on the block ,Gordon may walk for nothing ,Deng is a 71 million dollar bust ,and Ben Wallace was one of the worst signings in a long while .

At a certain point Sund has to decide how far does he think we can get with our current group. I listened to his interview on the radio and he said that we had to try and catch the teams in front of us while staying ahead of the team behind us and the gap for the teams in front of us is much larger. If we want to compete for titles then we have to consider acquiring an Amare or a Bosh.This window of opportunity wont be open forever .

I don't think hes gonna start but I wouldn't be surprised to see him getting good minutes in the rotation by February.

they would probably want teague to. and i for one do not want to move him.

To make this deal work we would have to include Smith and Teague and a resigned Marvin as well. I would much rather use those assets for Bosh . However sometimes if you wanna play in the big leagues you gotta swing for the fences .A move bringing in Bosh or Amare would say that Atlanta is playing for a title and is not happy just being in the playoffs . Now if we were to do this and then they both opt out we clear a ton of space before the league has another lockout .

Is Crawford a factor when he is not knocking down 3s? He is argueably more of a streak shooter then Bibby and less of a distributer. The Hawks were so much better with Bibby versus Tyronne Lue, another streak shooting combo guard, because of Bibby's improved playmaking skills (not that they are on the level of the true elite point guards like Kidd, Paul, Williams and Nash).

Also, Crawford is basically the same age as Bibby when the Hawks acquired Bibby (i.e., a little less then two years younger), and is an equally unwilling defender.

Crawford gets to the line more than Bibby waaay more . Crawford is just as good open court playmaker as Bibby and neither are good as halfcourt playmakers and how could they in the iso Joe offense when its not even a requirement . So when talking about the playmaking aspect of both players unless we were to change our offensive style of play then its a wash.

Ive been researching and trying to find some stuff about Crawford but Ive yet to find anything to show where he started the regular season as the point guard since he played for the Bulls. It has always been as shooting guard but then something changes and he ends up at the point guard spot. So who know really how he would respond if given the role of pg in training camp and kept in that role the entire season.

The one thing I do know when comparing these players is that if Flip and Bibby got it going 20 points would be great for them well if Crawford gets it going youre talking about 30,40, and even points as being a possibility. If you could put that next to Joe it really forces the opposing coaches to have to game plan for our point guard something they didnt have to do for Flip or Bibby .

My hope is that we keep both though because good teams dont swap out talent they stack it