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

[Plainview1981]

The fact is that Joe can play and it is probably better for him to play Sf. Joe is getting older. He doesn't have to chase those fast SGs around. Put him at Sf, let him hang in the midcourt. Take some of the ball handling responsibility off him. Crawford was a starter, put up 20 points as a starter for the Knicks. Can be a starter for us.

How many games has Chicago, NY ,and Golden State won with him as a starter?

[mrhonline]

Lol that you think we actually run an offense.

You're right.

(JJ would probably be better at running the offense).

[Plainview1981]

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:

How many rings and winning has Crawford brought to his teams as a starter? Wade doesn't shoot 40% either.

[falc82]

My thoughts on the Crawford trade are these:

Does he make us better? In a Vacuum? Absolutely he does. We added a 20 points per game scorer for essentially nothing. Am I the only one who remembers the long streteches in the playoffs (specifically against the Cavs) where we could not score at all? We need a guy like Crawford for times like these.

Does he make us better though...? Well only if the team brings back the majority of the free agents we still have. We still need ZaZa back and I'd love Bibby back AT THE RIGHT PRICE (7mil per?). I think we have to resign Marvin, ZaZa and one of Flip/Bibby to say that the Crawford trade really made us a better team, otherwise our depth is taking a hit and our overall talent level is at best even. Relegating Crawford to the super 6th man role would be ideal and with the addition of our 19 pick would make our team legitimately 10 deep.

Bibby/Flip

JJ/Crawford

Marvin/Moe

Josh Smith/pick?

Horford/ZaZa

Though I'm more inclined to pick a point guard at #19 and let one of Bibby/Flip walk.

What this trade does tell us is NO TEAGUE at #19. I just can't see us taking him with his liability on the defensive side and his need for the ball in his hand since he is a shooter meshing well with the addition of Crawford.

If Lawson is gone and maybe Maynor as well by the time the 19th pick rolls around then I may wish to trade with say the Kings for the #23 and #31 they have been rumored to be shopping. With 23 we take someone like Blair or Psyco T and with #31 we take a Collinson or Tony Douglas type.

[mrhonline]

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

True Scoring %:

True Shooting Percentage; the formula is PTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA)). True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws (From B-R.com).

It differs from FG% in that it takes into consideration how much each shot was worth, which is why Crawford looks better in this than he does in FG% (he shoots a lot of threes and free throws relative to other players).

Also, OPS+ is better than OPS ;)

Baby steps. (Plus, the difference between BA & OPS is SO much greater than the difference between OPS and OPS+).

Edited June 25, 2009 by mrhonline

[thesheedera]

Diesel - I understand your point about Crawford being a starting level 2G and I don't disagree. My question is: do you like this move for us?

Not the transaction (obviously a huge win for our front office), but the direction(s) it leads (or could lead) us in?

I'm on the fence. Love the deal itself, not sure about what it means for us.

Bibby (or a newly acquired or drafted PG)

Crawford

Johnson

Smith (sometimes Marv perhaps)

Horford

...with Marvin (or Childress), Zaza, Flip coming off the bench??? there's a TON of versatility there and it actually looks like a lineup where pieces fit.

I want to like it.

[mrhonline]

With Crawford's offensive repertoire and defensive liabilities, it makes sense to have him be the first guard off the bench.

[falc82]

With Crawford's offensive repertoire and defensive liabilities, it makes sense to have him be the first guard off the bench.

It also makes sense to NEVER have him and Bibby be our guard combo on the court at the same time. That accompanied by the fact Bibby is asking for way too much money is why I think the Hawks will look to not resign him.

[Blunt91]

Lol that you think we actually run an offense.

Maybe a better choice of words would be, setting up his teammates.

[Plainview1981]

Yes, because Dwayne Wade = Jamal Crawford.

HA!

[Diesel]

If offense wins titles then where are the Suns rings?

I never said Offense wins titles... There you go making up stuff.

I said PPG differential wins titles.

You can get there by offense or defense. Most people choose defense, but offense can do it as well. These Lakers and Showtime Lakers did it with offense.

BTW... these Lakers were #1 in offensive efficiency...

AND their players were more offensive than defensive.

but.. you go ahead. Back to your agenda...

[Diesel]

Diesel - I understand your point about Crawford being a starting level 2G and I don't disagree. My question is: do you like this move for us?

I don't think you can separate the transaction so easily.

In the basics...

We traded a player that never played and a player that rarely played for a player that can score 19-20 ppg and be an offensive threat on the floor.

I love that.

Secondly, you can't look at this move as a new direction. Without supporting moves, it's just a good deal.

What I would like to see from our front office is a revolution of sorts for our office. Namely bringing in a PG who can run the offense. With all my heart, I believe that things won't change from us until we get a distributor who can play some defense.

Hinrich is high on my list.

Kidd and Miller just found a spot on my list.

I heard a scout say that there are two things that every pro offense must have:

1. A pick and roll

2. Isolations.

We have tons of Isolations but no pick and rolls. The reason being is because we're so caught up in the Billy Knight montra of versatility that we have lost perspective of how to win.

Winning will always start and end with diversity of skillsets. Right now, distributor and floor general is the missing set on this team. Along with Interior scorer.

[Diesel]

With Crawford's offensive repertoire and defensive liabilities, it makes sense to have him be the first guard off the bench.

You're talking about a 20 ppg player.

Let me tell you.. We haven't had 2 of those on the same team in a while. We finally get the capacity and you want to bench one? Why?

I think what's necessary is for everybody to wipe the slate and look at the pieces again.

[BossTweed]

It also makes sense to NEVER have him and Bibby be our guard combo on the court at the same time. That accompanied by the fact Bibby is asking for way too much money is why I think the Hawks will look to not resign him.

Exactly, that's why I mentioned that you don't pick your starters based only on offense. You want a balance, you can't just play your best offensive players, otherwise our starting lineup would be Bibby, Crawford, Joe, Marvin and Zaza.

[Diesel]

Exactly, that's why I mentioned that you don't pick your starters based only on offense. You want a balance, you can't just play your best offensive players, otherwise our starting lineup would be Bibby, Crawford, Joe, Marvin and Zaza.

Actually, I agree with you. You don't pick based on offense. You pick based on Skillset.

When you do that, Crawford starts at 2 and Joe at 3. Everything else is up for interpretation.

[Plainview1981]

You're talking about a 20 ppg player.

Let me tell you.. We haven't had 2 of those on the same team in a while. We finally get the capacity and you want to bench one? Why?

I think what's necessary is for everybody to wipe the slate and look at the pieces again.

Last team it happened the team win.... 35 games. Because the teams didn't fit.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[Diesel]

Last team it happened the team win.... 35 games. Because the teams didn't fit.

With any move, that's a possibility. The hope is that we get some chemistry. I hope we get a strong starting PG who can manage this team's offense and change it from being something that is a bunch of isomess to being a team game. I don't want to watch Kenny Smith outlining:

dribble, dribble, dribble.... dribble, dribble, dribble... dribble dribble shoot..

Not in the playoffs. It's embarrassing that other teams are running real plays with options and we're running ISO JOE LEFT, ISO JOE RIGHT, and J-BATTLE!!

[Plainview1981]

With any move, that's a possibility. The hope is that we get some chemistry. I hope we get a strong starting PG who can manage this team's offense and change it from being something that is a bunch of isomess to being a team game. I don't want to watch Kenny Smith outlining:

dribble, dribble, dribble.... dribble, dribble, dribble... dribble dribble shoot..

Not in the playoffs. It's embarrassing that other teams are running real plays with options and we're running ISO JOE LEFT, ISO JOE RIGHT, and J-BATTLE!!

The other teams have tough big men like Perkins and Dwight Howard matching up with Al is embarrassing also. It just sucks because that hole has been empty 10+ years now. I hate beating this horse to death, but hopefully it gets addressed.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[Lascar78]

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.

Oh come on. Clearly Crawford is a combo guard who is much closer to being a PG than Joe. He played 2/3 of his minutes at PG last year, and 50% of his minutes at PG the year before. Joe is 0% PG. Crawford is part PG.

Crawford will not create for others, just like no PG has created for others in Woodson's non-existent offense. But as far as bringing the ball up, protecting the ball, guarding PG's etc... he would do just fine. He's no defensive anchor but will still play significantly better D than Bibby. His handles will get him into the lane a lot, hopefully he can draw a 2nd defender and dish it off, even though you know he'll be looking to finish it himself.

Of course I would much, much, MUCH rather bring in a real PG and have Jamal be our big-minute combo guard off the bench who spells our PG and SG (and maybe even bring Joe's minutes per game down to 38!) but I expect Woody to start him. And Joe is not playing out of position for him.

Hell I'm praying that we draft Lawson or Teague tonight but even then I know they won't be used properly. They'll be asked to bring the ball up and hand it to Joe anyhow.

[Dragitoff]

The other teams have tough big men like Perkins and Dwight Howard matching up with Al is embarrassing also. It just sucks because that hole has been empty 10+ years now. I hate beating this horse to death, but hopefully it gets addressed.

I think we're all frustrated with the lack of a true, back-to-the-basket big man, but those are probably the hardest players to come by. Here's a list of other NBA teams that don't have a dominating post player......

Charlotte (don't even say Okafor)

Chicago

Cleveland (pre-Shaq)

Golden State

Indiana

Memphis

Miami (because O'Neal is injury prone)

Milwaukee

New Jersey (unless they are playing us, then Lopez is like Kareem Pt. 2)

New York

Oklahoma City

Sacramento

Washington

That leaves just a handful of teams that have legit post scorers and some of those are extremely borderline