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

[Dragitoff]

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).

Not to split hairs, but Crawford went to the line as much as JJ did last year, which was more than double the amount of times Bibby went to the line. I'd say he does his fair share of attacking the basket for him to get to the line that much.

As for acquiring Crawford, I think he gives the Hawks leverage with Marvin (to an extent because he's RFA) and definitely Bibby (maybe even Flip). You could go multiple directions now and not hurt your team.

Re-sign Bibby and Marvin-Crawford most likely comes off the bench

Re-sign Bibby and Flip-Crawford starts at the 2

Re-sign Flip and Marvin-Crawford starts at PG

It's about options. Crawford gives the Hawks options now. If Bibby knows the Hawks don't really have a starting PG option, he's got leverage. I think the best thing for this team would be to re-sign Marvin (as long as the price doesn't get ridiculous) , ZaZa (or Gortat) and Flip and let Bibby walk. Draft a PG with the #19 pick and try to pick up a vet big man for the min. like Drew Gooden

Crawford/#19

Johnson/Murray

Williams/Evans

Smoove/Gooden

Horford/Pachulia

I think that's realistic and keeps the primary core in tact. A role guy like Gooden is essential I think to making this team better than last year's team.

[exodus]

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.

In the playoffs the Lakers were 2nd in defensive efficiency. What part of this do you not understand?

[Diesel]

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.

If you except what's wrong and build with it, then you will always have problems... this is foundational.

First and foremost, we need a distributing guard to make this team better. When we get a SG like Crawford, it send a signal that we should play the iso joe, iso flip, iso crawford, iso smoove game any more. The longer we do that, the more we stunt the development of Smoove and Horf and other young players who have yet to define their offense.

This is a chance for us to get right.

Boy I would love for Sund to make a move to bring in Jason Kidd or Hinrich so that we would be forced to become more classical on offense.

At best Crawford is an OG. Not a PG. Just because he can handle the ball doesn't make him a PG. Same goes for Joe. IF this is Woody's way, then Woody needs to go.

[AHF]

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?

I view him as a combo guard on a team that has an All-Star SG, no point guard, and solid RFA SF. Depending on what Marvin gets offered, he could be going elsewhere but most likely I see him returning to this team so I am assuming that we have JJ, Marvin, J. Smith and Horford as four starters.

I say this even with the Crawford acquisition in part because it is obvious that Marvin doesn't need the ball in his hands as much as Crawford and because Marvin is a substantially superior defender with a coach who focuses on defense which makes it much easier to blend him into the starting lineup with some higher usage players (notably JJ).

I see JJ getting more rest and Crawford playing a combination of PG minutes next to JJ and SG minutes when JJ and/or Marvin are on the bench.

[chillzatl]

If you except what's wrong and build with it, then you will always have problems... this is foundational.

First and foremost, we need a distributing guard to make this team better. When we get a SG like Crawford, it send a signal that we should play the iso joe, iso flip, iso crawford, iso smoove game any more. The longer we do that, the more we stunt the development of Smoove and Horf and other young players who have yet to define their offense.

This is a chance for us to get right.

Boy I would love for Sund to make a move to bring in Jason Kidd or Hinrich so that we would be forced to become more classical on offense.

At best Crawford is an OG. Not a PG. Just because he can handle the ball doesn't make him a PG. Same goes for Joe. IF this is Woody's way, then Woody needs to go.

I think the problem is the coach. They're playing his system and while we don't know exactly how Crawford will be used, it appears Sund is collecting players that fit what we've done in the past. Of course, all of this goes out the Window if we deal for a real PG and suddenly this move becomes a great one, but until then, I think we're dealing with more of the same IMO.

[Diesel]

In the playoffs the Lakers were 2nd in defensive efficiency. What part of this do you not understand?

Who are the defensive stalworths on that team?

Soft gasol?

Inconsistent Odom?

How many defensive players can you call out?

The point is that the Lakers are KNOWN for their ability to score on offense.

I didn't see the Lakers stop or hinder Mello... did you?

In fact....

Denver 103 Final

Los Angeles 105

Denver 106 Final

Los Angeles 103

Los Angeles 103 Final

Denver 97

Los Angeles 101 Final

Denver 120

Denver 94 Final

Los Angeles 103

Los Angeles 119 Final

Denver 92

Hmm? Was that the offense or defense that led the way here? The Lakers scored over 100 in every game? Your argument is RAGGEDY. Do I need to pull out the Atlanta Playoff scores to show you a contrast? Do you want to see how many times we got over 100?

BTW, LAL didn't score under 99 against the Magic in the finals.

[Diesel]

I view him as a combo guard on a team that has an All-Star SG, no point guard, and solid RFA SF.

Let's make this easy for you and others.

His position shouldn't change based on our personnel. That's the same BS that has us messed up now. He doesn't have a real PG's skillset. He was given this label that never fit his game because he came out when it was fashionable to have a Penny Hardaway. Hell Joe too for that matter. However, neither of them are PGs. At best an OG. Even Hardaway dropped the label of PG after a while.

[Lascar78]

His position shouldn't change based on our personnel.

You are trying to change Joe's. And Joe is WAY better. That's the point. Joe starts at SG, that is maybe the one certainty in all of this.

[macdaddy]

If you except what's wrong and build with it, then you will always have problems... this is foundational.

First and foremost, we need a distributing guard to make this team better. When we get a SG like Crawford, it send a signal that we should play the iso joe, iso flip, iso crawford, iso smoove game any more. The longer we do that, the more we stunt the development of Smoove and Horf and other young players who have yet to define their offense.

This is a chance for us to get right.

Boy I would love for Sund to make a move to bring in Jason Kidd or Hinrich so that we would be forced to become more classical on offense.

At best Crawford is an OG. Not a PG. Just because he can handle the ball doesn't make him a PG. Same goes for Joe. IF this is Woody's way, then Woody needs to go.

Most on here would agree with you but Woody doesn't and I don't think Sund does either. They are still going with the 'versatile' player concept. Down the stretch of a lot of important games we were running Flip at the point instead of Bibby. Is Flip more of a PG that Crawford? I don't think so. I think they are satisfied with Crawford's ability to do what Bibby did plus a little more and be less of a liability on defense. Plus we can run Crawford and Flip out there to rest JJ or move him to SF whereas Woody wasn't that comfortable with playing Bibby and Flip at the same time I don't think. It happenned some i guess.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Crawford is a 2/1 tweener. I think he's a bigger, better version of Flip which is huge considering all we did was give up Acie Law to get him.

And if we are smart enough to pick a PG in this draft, we could replace Law (although I do wish Law the best)

[Diesel]

You are trying to change Joe's. And Joe is WAY better. That's the point. Joe starts at SG, that is maybe the one certainty in all of this.

Unfortunately for your point, we've seen Joe play Sf. He did very well. Much better than Mo. When Bibby, Joe, and Flip were on the floor at the same time, Joe was aggressive and good.

BTW.

Joe is 6'7 235...

I think he's heavier than Smoove.

[exodus]

Who are the defensive stalworths on that team?

Soft gasol?

Inconsistent Odom?

How many defensive players can you call out?

The point is that the Lakers are KNOWN for their ability to score on offense.

I didn't see the Lakers stop or hinder Mello... did you?

In fact....

Denver 103 Final

Los Angeles 105

Denver 106 Final

Los Angeles 103

Los Angeles 103 Final

Denver 97

Los Angeles 101 Final

Denver 120

Denver 94 Final

Los Angeles 103

Los Angeles 119 Final

Denver 92

Hmm? Was that the offense or defense that led the way here? The Lakers scored over 100 in every game? Your argument is RAGGEDY. Do I need to pull out the Atlanta Playoff scores to show you a contrast? Do you want to see how many times we got over 100?

BTW, LAL didn't score under 99 against the Magic in the finals.

You keep playing dodeball but it doesn't change the fact that the Lakers were 2nd in defensive efficiency during the playoffs.

Against the Cavs Howard averaged 25.8 ppg shooting 65%.

Against the Lakers Howard averaged 15.4 shooting 49%.

The numbers don't lie. And of course last years champs had the best defense.

If offense wins titles then where are the Suns rings?

JJ has made the All-Star game 3 straight years and you want him to change positions to accomodate a guy who was coming off the bench for garbage Knicks teams. Agendaman at work.

[GameTime]

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.

Finally someone else gets it.

Not to split hairs, but Crawford went to the line as much as JJ did last year, which was more than double the amount of times Bibby went to the line. I'd say he does his fair share of attacking the basket for him to get to the line that much.

Crawford actually went to the line more than any Hawk last year.

Edited June 25, 2009 by GameTime

[AHF]

Finally someone else gets it.

We'll see. I remain skeptical that Sund views Crawford as his starting PG.

Crawford actually went to the line more than any Hawk last year.

Yep - although Marvin was pretty close and owns a substantial career edge (4.8 FTA/36 for Marvin; 3.7 FTA/36 for Crawford). Joe posted his third consecutive season above 4 FTA/36 but given the volume of touches and shots he takes that isn't all that impressive.

[drzachary]

We'll see. I remain skeptical that Sund views Crawford as his starting PG.

Yep - although Marvin was pretty close and owns a substantial career edge (4.8 FTA/36 for Marvin; 3.7 FTA/36 for Crawford). Joe posted his third consecutive season above 4 FTA/36 but given the volume of touches and shots he takes that isn't all that impressive.

Joe is just nothing but a ballhogging jumpshooter.

[mrhonline]

You guys made my day talking about FTA/36.

In another thread, Northcyde used TS%. I'm so happy.

Now if we could only get those pesky old-school baseball fans to use OPS...

[drzachary]

You guys made my day talking about FTA/36.

In another thread, Northcyde used TS%. I'm so happy.

Now if we could only get those pesky old-school baseball fans to use OPS...

About TS%, to quote AHF:

"(2) Crawford has a poor FG% but his TS% isn't quite as bad which is a sign that his inefficiency at a scorer may be somewhat overstated. Last season, for example, he had a TS% of .545, higher than Mike Bibby, Flip Murray, Joe Johnson and Josh Smith.

He was also significantly more efficient as a scorer (as seen in TS%) than Derrick Rose and Luol Deng, for example. "

What exactly is TS%, and why does it tell us something about Crawford that flies in the face of his detractors?

You guys made my day talking about FTA/36.

In another thread, Northcyde used TS%. I'm so happy.

Now if we could only get those pesky old-school baseball fans to use OPS...

Also, OPS+ is better than OPS ;)

[Blunt91]

So I don't understand why some think that Jamal Crawford will be the starting PG when we already tried Joe as a PG and it didn't work. Heck Joe is probably better than Crawford at the point and that's not a good thing. Bibby may not be back next year but I bet money that Jamal will NOT be our starting PG come November.

[Johnnybravo4]

So I don't understand why some think that Jamal Crawford will be the starting PG when we already tried Joe as a PG and it didn't work. Heck Joe is probably better than Crawford at the point and that's not a good thing. Bibby may not be back next year but I bet money that Jamal will NOT be our starting PG come November.

Lol that you think we actually run an offense.

[Plainview1981]

Given the fact that Joe starts at SG, crawford will either play PG or come off the bench for us. This is not that complicated.

He should be a 6th man like Jason Terry and Manu Ginobili are sixth men.

However I unfortunately suspect he may start at PG for us.

If he is just replacing Bibby than he improves the team less than I expected. It seems that other teams in the division might be going to improving. Replacing Bibby with Crawford is hardly a real upgrade. If Bibby is gone, another PG is needed. As a playmaker for the rest of the team this is a dropoff.