If you had to choose, who would you take: Bibby v. Crawford

[Packfill]

Which player would you rather have starting at point guard for the Haks for the 2009-10 season:

[i can't get the poll function to work, sorry]

Edited June 25, 2009 by Dolfan23
Added the poll for you

[bumpyphish1]

if this is even a question to anyone, wear it as a badge of stupidity.

BIBBY is the answer.

[/END OF THREAD]

[HawkNJersey]

My New Jersey education must have failed me, cause I do not want Bibby back on this team. Easily Crawford in my book. Nothing Bibby did overall, was Point Guardish...

[coachx]

I would NEVER want Crawford starting at PG.

However, if their was an option of

Bibby - PG / Flip - 6th man

or

Lawson - PG / Crawford - 6th man

I'd go Lawson / Crawford in that scenerio.

Edited June 25, 2009 by coachx

[HAWKSFAN89]

Hmmmm, well, Crawford isn't a true PG. BUT, i'll take Crawford over Bibby. Bibby isn't worth 10 mill a year IMO, he's getting older. With Crawford we have a lot more options, whether it be him playing point, SG (JJ playing SF), or just him coming off the bench as our 6th man. We'll see how the draft goes.

[JoshB9]

My New Jersey education must have failed me, cause I do not want Bibby back on this team. Easily Crawford in my book. Nothing Bibby did overall, was Point Guardish...

What on earth does Crawford do that is "point guardish." It is beyond me how people can knock Bibby for not being a distributor and then turn around and sing the praises of a player in Crawford who is far worse in that category.

[Packfill]

Which player would you rather have starting at point guard for the Haks for the 2009-10 season:

[i can't get the poll function to work, sorry]

Thanks for fixing the poll Dolfan.

[BusBoyIsBack]

As the STARTING Point Guard? Bibby and it's not even close.

But neither should be considered PG of the future. That's who we need to get at #19, and if we don't it's an epic failure.