Crawford is not a PG. Crawford is not a 6th man.

[Diesel]

I understand that moving Joe to SF is your latest way to bash Marvin, but no thank you.

There's no need for me to bash Marvin. Sund has already taken care of that. I think what is easily seen is your an other insistence to hold on to Marvin despite the writing being on the wall.

We bring in a 20 ppg guy who plays SG... and your first instinct is to say...

Let him play off the bench.

OK?

Thanks Agendaman...

Really? Put a 20 ppg guy on the bench?? Really? Why? You want to try to sell more of this "he's better off the bench crap?" That may have flown with Chillz, but we're talking about a legit scorer...

Please continue... This is entertaining.

[NJHAWK]

Well if we do resign Bibby then there will be few shots left for Marvin. Joe and Crawford both put up a ton of shots. Bibby loves to shoot, Smoove will most certainly want his. That leaves about 10 shots a game to be divided up between Al, Marvin and the rest of the bench. lol

[Diesel]

IN my mind...

I wonder. Had it been Dwayne Wade instead of Crawford that we got. What would this crowd be saying?

Play him off the bench or play him at PG??

My guess is that this crowd would make Wade a PG so that Marvin can be resigned and started?

:sad:

[mrhonline]

Well if we do resign Bibby then there will be few shots left for Marvin. Joe and Crawford both put up a ton of shots. Bibby loves to shoot, Smoove will most certainly want his. That leaves about 10 shots a game to be divided up between Al, Marvin and the rest of the bench. lol

Crawford's FGA/36 is basically the same as Flip's. So there's no difference.

(Besides, most of us think the FGA for Marvin and Al also need to come from Smith and Joe).

[mrhonline]

IN my mind...

I wonder. Had it been Dwayne Wade instead of Crawford that we got. What would this crowd be saying?

Play him off the bench or play him at PG??

My guess is that this crowd would make Wade a PG so that Marvin can be resigned and started?

:sad:

Yes, because Dwayne Wade = Jamal Crawford.

[BossTweed]

How did I not realize that this trade would be a way for Diesel to get Marvin out of the starting lineup.

[Diesel]

Yes, because Dwayne Wade = Jamal Crawford.

offensively similar players H. Offensively similar.

The point is that you guys have already placed a 20 ppg player on the bench in order to pay Marvin 7.355 Million and start him? Keep Joe at the 2 guard and watch teams tire him down. And watch Woody turn this 20 ppg player into Flip Murry.

Very good.

For your next trick, could you make that Penguin into a Center so that we can get some rebounds?

[Lascar78]

There's no need for me to bash Marvin. Sund has already taken care of that. I think what is easily seen is your an other insistence to hold on to Marvin despite the writing being on the wall.

We bring in a 20 ppg guy who plays SG... and your first instinct is to say...

Let him play off the bench.

OK?

Thanks Agendaman...

Really? Put a 20 ppg guy on the bench?? Really? Why? You want to try to sell more of this "he's better off the bench crap?" That may have flown with Chillz, but we're talking about a legit scorer...

Please continue... This is entertaining.

I don't have any agenda, and I wouldn't be against a Marvin trade if we got true value.

I didn't say Crawford is better off the bench. Joe Johnson is our best player and I'm not playing him out of position for Jamal Crawford. Therefore, ON OUR TEAM, Crawford starts at PG or comes off the bench. You don't play better players out of position to accommodate lesser players.

It's clear that Crawford is a starting-caliber player, which is why I think they'll start him at PG. I think it's a mistake, and I think that on a JJ led-team he should come off the bench and we should get a real PG.

For the record, Terry was averaging 17/5 on a championship caliber team when the started bringing him off the bench. Ginobili was getting 15/4 on a championship caliber team. I find both of those at least as impressive as 20/4 on the high-pace Warriors. Not all starting-caliber players have to start on good teams. Many of them get 30+ minutes off the bench.

But that's because smart teams make smart decisions and ... well ... we're the hawks. If the Spurs signed a starting-caliber PF they wouldn't think about moving Duncan to SF.

On the plus side, I'm hoping that Crawford and Smith will collude and lead a rebellion against woodson. One can only hope.

[BossTweed]

offensively similar players H. Offensively similar.

Offense is only half the game Diesel. You don't decide your starting lineup based only on how good people are on offense, do you?

[mrhonline]

Plus, they're not offensive similar. Crawford is perimeter-oriented, while Wade is an 'attack the basket' player. (Not to mention they're not even remotely comparable in terms of effectiveness).

[exodus]

If you really think that Crawford should come off the bench, then we should have traded Speedy for an exemption and a late first rounder and signed Flip.

Crawford is more than Flip. This guy is a possible 19-20 ppg scorer. He's not a bench player.

He's not coming here to make up for the loss of Flip. If we wanted Flip, we could have and we can still sign flip for much cheaper than we're paying Crawford. Crawford is starting material.

In fact, he has been a starter since 2003. It's mighty arrogant of us to get this great deal and start to think that just because we got him for bench players that he's a bench player. This guy is a starter.

Crawford is not our answer at PG. We will get somebody else. Weather it's Hinrich or Ridnour... We're not through dealing and we will get a PG in the draft (more than likely).

Crawford played 79 games in the 05/06 season and started only 27 games. In the 06/07 season he played 59 games but started only 36. Those Knick teams sucked so it isn't like they had to put him on the bench.

Ginobili comes off the bench behind Finley. Terry comes off the bench. Gordon played off the bench for years.

All three of those guys are better than Crawford. Acting like Crawford can't come off the bench while those guys do is ridiculous.

Edited June 25, 2009 by exodus

[Diesel]

Offense is only half the game Diesel. You don't decide your starting lineup based only on how good people are on offense, do you?

When you have as many defensive holes as we do, you have to go with the best offensive choice and play as good a brand of team defense as you can.

Dikembe Mutombo is not walking through that door!

When you look at the World Champion Los Angeles Lakers... they were not a good defensive team.

The Lakers were ranked 13th in Team Defense and 3rd in team offense this past season.

Whereas we were 10th in Team Defense and 19th in team offense.

And Orlando was 7th in Team Defense and 10th in team offense.

If nothing else, you should have learned the truth about winning in the NBA..

It's not about defense alone...

It's about the PPG differential. However you can get the best separation is what matters the most. The success of the Bulls and the Pistons has made everybody believe that defense wins championships... when the truth is you win the game by outscoring your opponents. These Lakers proved that and the Showtime Lakers proved that too.

We took a step to improve our team offense. Say what you want to say, it has been improvements in offense that has gotten our team into the playoffs and into the second round.

Bibby, Flip, and Mo are not defensive players!!! However, with them, we got into the playoffs.

It's as simple as taking players and giving them a team defense and giving enough offensive guys in order to make the team a strong team.

[Lascar78]

When you look at the World Champion Los Angeles Lakers... they were not a good defensive team.

The Lakers were ranked 13th in Team Defense and 3rd in team offense this past season.

In the playoffs, when you look at points per 100 posessions, LA was 14th out of 16 on offense, 2nd out of 16 on defense.

And they were 5th in the league in the regular season on Defense (per 100). Of course the #1 defensive team ended up with the best record.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Lascar78

[exodus]

When you have as many defensive holes as we do, you have to go with the best offensive choice and play as good a brand of team defense as you can.

Dikembe Mutombo is not walking through that door!

When you look at the World Champion Los Angeles Lakers... they were not a good defensive team.

The Lakers were ranked 13th in Team Defense and 3rd in team offense this past season.

Whereas we were 10th in Team Defense and 19th in team offense.

And Orlando was 7th in Team Defense and 10th in team offense.

If nothing else, you should have learned the truth about winning in the NBA..

It's not about defense alone...

It's about the PPG differential. However you can get the best separation is what matters the most. The success of the Bulls and the Pistons has made everybody believe that defense wins championships... when the truth is you win the game by outscoring your opponents. These Lakers proved that and the Showtime Lakers proved that too.

We took a step to improve our team offense. Say what you want to say, it has been improvements in offense that has gotten our team into the playoffs and into the second round.

Bibby, Flip, and Mo are not defensive players!!! However, with them, we got into the playoffs.

It's as simple as taking players and giving them a team defense and giving enough offensive guys in order to make the team a strong team.

Umm... Gord. You are taking your stats from NBA.com which doesn't take into account pace of play.

Orlando's opponents shot 43.3% from the field during the regular season. Only Cleveland and Boston were better holding opponents to 43.1%. The Lakers were 6th in opponents fg%.

Edited June 25, 2009 by exodus

[AHF]

Crawford played 79 games in the 05/06 season and started only 27 games. In the 06/07 season he played 59 games but started only 36. Those Knick teams sucked so it isn't like they had to put him on the bench.

Ginobili comes off the bench behind Finley. Terry comes off the bench. Gordon played off the bench for years.

All three of those guys are better than Crawford. Acting like Crawford can't come off the bench while those guys do is ridiculous.

Not to mention HOF John Havlicek. IMO, it is obvious that Crawford can't run an offense. For that reason, I see him as optimal for the off-the-bench scoring role that Gordon has done for years.

[drzachary]

Not to mention HOF John Havlicek. IMO, it is obvious that Crawford can't run an offense. For that reason, I see him as optimal for the off-the-bench scoring role that Gordon has done for years.

That's certainly optimal. Less optimal, but still TOLERABLE (imo) is for him to play as the smallest guard on a team where the offense is run through a different position. (Know any teams like that?) Think of it as the worst-case scenario.

[Diesel]

Orlando's opponents shot 43.3% from the field during the regular season. Only Cleveland and Boston were better holding opponents to 43.1%. The Lakers were 6th in opponents fg%.

Uhm, Gord,

You make my point for me. Thanks. The Lakers were not the best defensive team. The Lakers do not have great defensive players. How many times did people call Gasol Soft? How many times did they call Odom Inconsistent? The only defensive piece the Lakers have is Ariza. So for the Lakers to make it out of the West and to win it all against a very good defensive team.. means that they did it with OFFENSE.

Now in the playoffs... FG% Differential, we were 14th out of 16th... Whereas the Lakers were 1st!

Our Team FG% was ranked 14th out of 16th.. whereas the Lakers were 3rd in FG%.

If you haven't gotten the picture yet... let me straighten it again. You can win with offense. You don't have to pick every player and say.. this guy has to play great defense. Because all the teams with great defenders ended up with the same thing we got... a trip to the couch.

[Diesel]

Not to mention HOF John Havlicek. IMO, it is obvious that Crawford can't run an offense. For that reason, I see him as optimal for the off-the-bench scoring role that Gordon has done for years.

If you pigeon hole a 6'6" SG to the PG position, I guess bringing him off the becnh would be "ideal".

However, when you recognize that Crawford is a SG... What then?

[chillzatl]

On this team, he IS a point guard. We don't run plays and we only move the enough to get a favorable isolation or matchup. He'll be 10x more effective in that scenario than Bibby because he will score regularly, where Bibby had off weeks. Everyone needs to accept that he will most likely be playing the 1 for this team next year. Will be better? sure, again because he's better than Bibby, but will we be better-enough? eh.. we'll see.

[buckeye242424]

I take solace in the fact that Flip became a more efficient offensive player and a better defensive player under Woodson.

I agree Flip became more efficient, but it was on his own talents. One on one, create for himself. Is it possible Sund is realizing that Woody has no offensive system, so he needs to bring players in that can score by themselves....hence, Jamal Crawford. He's a streeballin', one on one, crossover type of guy. We keep Flip, Jamal, and still run iso's for Joe...do we even need post players that can score? We complained about touches for Al...and Josh floating around the perimeter. Guys, it's only going to get worse. The positive is that Crawford can put up 15-20 a game by creating himself. But as far as getting more motion, screens, ball movement, ie. an offense. No way. Woody will preach his D, but as far as offense....just roll the ball out there and hope for the best.