Crawford

[macdaddy]

When did 6th man of the year start meaning best expiring contract?

This is the difference between us and teams that continue to win. Teams that continue a winning tradition don't look at good players as trade bait. How many times have you seen the Lakers talking about Derek Fisher as a good expiring contract? Last year, Fish was an expiring worth 5 Million dollars. Do you think that they looked at one trade?

How about the Celtics and Ray Allen?

Allen was making 19.8 Million dollars and not playing like 19.8 Million dollars.. Do you think that they look at one trade?

However, when it comes to us, we're quick to push an expiring out the door for nothing.

I can't think of the last time we traded an expiring contract other than tlue and aj? I think that's why Crawford is seen this way. The last couple years there has been great talent moving at the trade deadline for expiring deals that we didn't have. Finally we may be able to make a deal for that type of player that may help us in the playoffs. I don't discount Crawford's impact on the team but if there is even a remote possibility of guys like cp3 or Jefferson moving at the deadline it would be irresponsible of Sund not to have us ready to try to make a deal. Unfortunately for Crawford, his contract is our best piece. I guess that's the downside to getting a long term, $10/million per contract.

[MaceCase]

I agree with your three reasons why Sund picked him up.

However, I think at some point, we do need to recognize that he did bring something to the team and point 3 should be revisited and maybe revised.

Bottom line, I would rather move any combo of Marvin, Bibby, Zaza... in order to keep Jamal.

HE was our 4th best player and this was off the bench and like it or not, his contribution to the team is big. The money argument is a meaningless argument. What I mean by that is that it should not be used to determine if a player has value to our team.... It's a scarecrow.. a strawman. For instance, the same people who say that we don't have the money to resign Jamal are the same people who would give up 2 times as much to bring in Melo. When it comes to Melo, we say.. We'll do whatever it takes to get it done. My point is that we should have a similar attitude about Craw. The number 1 reason is because we know what kind of chemistry he would have with our team. Number 2 is because this guy genuinely wants to be here.

I think that's a poor argument on your part comparing Melo and Jamal to begin with. For one thing, Melo is better and for another, similar to how you and others were vehemently arguing to sign Shaq, his celebrity would increase revenue for the ASG making his larger salary irrelevant. It is not a strawman argument to basically be stating the ASGs philosophy, it's a fact. They will overpay for a contending team that gets them decent revenue but they will not severely overpay for the same team and receive less revenue for it. No straws in that argument.

Point #3 still stands, having Jamal's expiring contract make way for Al's new contract could occur either by him being let go entirely or extending for a contract that is either lower initially or annually than his previous one. It's been my observation that it's the lowering part that is irking Jamal far more than anything else.

[AHF]

Don't forget that Crawford is being treated the same way as all our other players in recent years as well other than JJ (i.e., Josh Smith offered a new contract only when his old deal expired; Mike Bibby offered a contract only when his old deal expired; Zaza offered a new contract only when his old deal expired; Marvin offered a new deal only when his old deal expired; etc.) and that we drafted a player with the exact same profile as him in the first round this season.

The risks of resigning Crawford:

* His performance is likely to regress to his career mean rather than stay at his career high scoring efficiency of last year;

* He is getting older;

* He has the potential for an injury this year;

* He has the potential to be a very attractive trade piece this season and would have to be part of any deal for a superstar if we had a shot at acquiring one (as some believe we won't be contenders without that upgrade);

* His leverage is at its peak both based on his career season and the more favorable current CBA expected to go into place;

* If Jordan Crawford emerges we will be heavily invested in Jamaal while a much cheaper option (with the same skill set) is stuck on the bench

* His salary could make it difficult to resign Horford

The risks of not resigning Crawford:

* He unprofessionally tanks his performance or the team's chemistry this year in retaliation;

* He is able to command a higher contract next offseason than the one we could have signed with him now

Easy decision to pass on the extension, IMO.

[Diesel]

I can't think of the last time we traded an expiring contract other than tlue and aj? I think that's why Crawford is seen this way. The last couple years there has been great talent moving at the trade deadline for expiring deals that we didn't have. Finally we may be able to make a deal for that type of player that may help us in the playoffs. I don't discount Crawford's impact on the team but if there is even a remote possibility of guys like cp3 or Jefferson moving at the deadline it would be irresponsible of Sund not to have us ready to try to make a deal. Unfortunately for Crawford, his contract is our best piece. I guess that's the downside to getting a long term, $10/million per contract.

My friend, your memory is short. AJ, Acie, Speedy, Shelden, Rasheed, Harrington... etc. We normally trade our ending contracts for picks or other players. This worked out a few times, but now, things are different. We're not rebuilding. We're in the mode where we are trying to be competitive among the best teams.

Don't forget that Crawford is being treated the same way as all our other players in recent years as well other than JJ (i.e., Josh Smith offered a new contract only when his old deal expired; Mike Bibby offered a contract only when his old deal expired; Zaza offered a new contract only when his old deal expired; Marvin offered a new deal only when his old deal expired; etc.) and that we drafted a player with the exact same profile as him in the first round this season.

The risks of resigning Crawford:

* His performance is likely to regress to his career mean rather than stay at his career high scoring efficiency of last year;

* He is getting older;

* He has the potential for an injury this year;

* He has the potential to be a very attractive trade piece this season and would have to be part of any deal for a superstar if we had a shot at acquiring one (as some believe we won't be contenders without that upgrade);

* His leverage is at its peak both based on his career season and the more favorable current CBA expected to go into place;

* If Jordan Crawford emerges we will be heavily invested in Jamaal while a much cheaper option (with the same skill set) is stuck on the bench

* His salary could make it difficult to resign Horford

The risks of not resigning Crawford:

* He unprofessionally tanks his performance or the team's chemistry this year in retaliation;

* He is able to command a higher contract next offseason than the one we could have signed with him now

Easy decision to pass on the extension, IMO.

Nobody is saying that we should rush to sign Craw to an extension, my point is that we should consider Craw as more than just trade bait. What does a guy have to do to be a part of our core...

Let's see.... according to the talking heads here:

1. Make less than 10 Million.
   
2. Do better than 18, 2.5, 3.0 on 45% shooting.
   
3. Be better than 6th man of the year.
   
4. Be under 30...
   
   

This is what we are saying. To crack our core, a player has to do all that... or maybe it's just be drafted by the Hawks... because I'm sure if Marvin were doing all that, we'd be praising him from here to Timbuktu!!

[DJlaysitup]

Michael Gearon Jr would be insane to give an extension to Crawford. His value is his expiring contract.

Well of course Sothron...anybody with half a strategic brain understands that having a real sparkplug that could put a team (with bigs to burn) over the top in a playoff series is FAR better than having the same guy signed to a longer contract. Craw will be a very valuable trading piece midseason as things stand right now. Realistically he could get us the big we need to better compete in the playoffs. Plus, we have him totally over a barrel. He's not young enough to quit on us or sit out a year...and we can win games without him if we have to...he HAS to play for his next contract.

That said...I don't blame him and his agent for making a play at an extension or a new contract. They are just trying to do what's best for them. More than likely, we will trade our only valuable/tradeable gem to a WC team that is doing good before the trade deadline for a solid big. This means Craw will be there for their playoff run with no guarrantee of anything in the future. Of course (barring poor play or injury) he will get interest from somebody the following year.

As far as the Hawks go - we have few options - and giving up one would be stupid.

Edited September 30, 2010 by DJlaysitup

[DJlaysitup]

Don't forget that Crawford is being treated the same way as all our other players in recent years as well other than JJ (i.e., Josh Smith offered a new contract only when his old deal expired; Mike Bibby offered a contract only when his old deal expired; Zaza offered a new contract only when his old deal expired; Marvin offered a new deal only when his old deal expired; etc.) and that we drafted a player with the exact same profile as him in the first round this season.

The risks of resigning Crawford:

* His performance is likely to regress to his career mean rather than stay at his career high scoring efficiency of last year;

* He is getting older;

* He has the potential for an injury this year;

* He has the potential to be a very attractive trade piece this season and would have to be part of any deal for a superstar if we had a shot at acquiring one (as some believe we won't be contenders without that upgrade);

* His leverage is at its peak both based on his career season and the more favorable current CBA expected to go into place;

* If Jordan Crawford emerges we will be heavily invested in Jamaal while a much cheaper option (with the same skill set) is stuck on the bench

* His salary could make it difficult to resign Horford

The risks of not resigning Crawford:

* He unprofessionally tanks his performance or the team's chemistry this year in retaliation;

* He is able to command a higher contract next offseason than the one we could have signed with him now

Easy decision to pass on the extension, IMO.

Well there you go. Teaches me a lesson for responding to Sothron before reading AHF's post.

You got it exactly right AHF....I could have saved some typing.

[Brokentree]

Waiting on an extension for Jamal isn't just about seeing if we can trade him for something at the trade deadline. It's also about seeing if we can trade other players on the team. If we can trade for an expiring then we'd have room to extend both Crawford and Horford.

If I am reading this right. Horford is playing on his rookie contract so if he gets an extension it has to be by Oct. 31 of this year (it falls on a Sunday so Nov. 1st is probably the actual date for this year). We can not extend him after that date. We can extend Jamal's contract up to the day it expires (June 30th). You can see why Horford takes priority.

It would probably be more beneficial to start thinking about some expiring contracts we can trade for at the trade deadline that would clear us another 5-10m per year than to argue over whether we should extend Crawford now (gee Marvin's contract might work! hours and hours of fun for Diesel). The arguement that he "deserves it" does no good because we all basically agree that he deserves something. The fact is we can't do it now. Something else has to happen first.

We have a few months of play to see who really wants to be on the Hawks.

[Swatguy]

Well of course Sothron...anybody with half a strategic brain understands that having a real sparkplug that could put a team (with bigs to burn) over the top in a playoff series is FAR better than having the same guy signed to a longer contract. Craw will be a very valuable trading piece midseason as things stand right now. Realistically he could get us the big we need to better compete in the playoffs. Plus, we have him totally over a barrel. He's not young enough to quit on us or sit out a year...and we can win games without him if we have to...he HAS to play for his next contract.

That said...I don't blame him and his agent for making a play at an extension or a new contract. They are just trying to do what's best for them. More than likely, we will trade our only valuable/tradeable gem to a WC team that is doing good before the trade deadline for a solid big. This means Craw will be there for their playoff run with no guarrantee of anything in the future. Of course (barring poor play or injury) he will get interest from somebody the following year.

As far as the Hawks go - we have few options - and giving up one would be stupid.

So, we are to trade our expiring gem (Jamal and his productivity) to a WC team to better that team and in return we get, what? The said team is to give us, Biedrins or Kamen or Bynam or I know Tim Duncan that's it. So we are to deal Jamal for Timmy.

I continue to ask this question, who is to be expected and/or available to trade Jamal at the deadline? So next season when the spurned Jamal signs with Orlando or the Celtics or Chicago, we will still have Marvin.

Real contenders keep their ballers.

[coachx]

Real contenders keep their ballers.

Real contenders spend more money then the Hawks and have no problem paying luxury tax.

Maybe the ASG shocks us all but I'm not counting on it.

[AHF]

Nobody is saying that we should rush to sign Craw to an extension, my point is that we should consider Craw as more than just trade bait. What does a guy have to do to be a part of our core...

(1) That is precisely what a lot of people are saying -- that we should sign Crawford to an extension now or that we should have already signed him to an extension. We are best to let this year play out.

(2) You are right that he is more than just trade bait. I'd have no problem seeing where we are with him after this season and resigning him if the circumstances fit. As Brokentree points out, if we trade other players it would make it much easier to fit his long-term salary into the team. He is a good player and if he can play like he did last year and avoid falling apart again this post-season (where his shooting dropped from .573 TS% to .499 TS% and his WS/48 dropped from .143 to .040 - behind Marin and Bibby) there may be even more reason to sign him after this year than there is right now. However, I stand by my statement that we shouldn't be thinking extension right now.

Edited September 30, 2010 by AHF

[DJlaysitup]

So, we are to trade our expiring gem (Jamal and his productivity) to a WC team to better that team and in return we get, what?...

A big...a solid big...we really, really need a solid big to contend with the top teams.

Now don't get me wrong, I appreciate Craw Sr.s skills...but we drafted Craw Jr as his replacement. A big key to this whole strategy is whether Jr can man up as a rookie. Another key is that LD wants to install a ball movement offense. If he can do that (and the guys buy into that) a guy like Craw Sr is less valuable to us (since he's generally a one man show and likely thinks "pass" is a word only used on the freeway).

If we can use our trade gem to get a quality big around midseason we can start using a front line of...new quality big at center, Al Horford at PF, and Smoove at SF.

OK, OK, OK, - I know Smoove isn't a prototypical SF - he is more of a Dennis Rodman type SF. Still, you have to have at least one aspect of the game you can rely on..in this case it would be defense around the hoop. Having a solid center flanked by AH and JS would be pretty F'n intimidating. We then still have our all-star (with Craw Jr. backing him up) and our point guard situation (which is another topic).

P.S. - If Jamal Crawford beats us in the NBA finals - well poop - I guess I could live with that.

Edited September 30, 2010 by DJlaysitup

[AHF]

OK, OK, OK, - I know Smoove isn't a prototypical SF - he is more of a Dennis Rodman type SF. Still, you have to have at least one aspect of the game you can rely on..in this case it would be defense around the hoop. Having a solid center flanked by AH and JS would be pretty F'n intimidating. We then still have our all-star (with Craw Jr. backing him up) and our point guard situation (which is another topic).

If Smoove is playing SF, how is he going to be hanging around the basket when his man is shooting Js from the perimeter? The Paul Pierces and Caron Butlers of the world are not going to hang around the hoop. They are going to try to exploit him on the perimeter. By putting him at SF, you would be taking him away from the one aspect of the game that you can rely on.

Look who he would match up with a lot of the time at SF within our division:

Miami: Lebron James - 64% jumpers / Mike Miller - 70% jumpers

Washington: Josh Howard - 81% jumpers

Orlando: Rashard Lewis 83% jumpers - Mickael Pietrus - 81% jumpers

Charlotte:Gerald Wallace - 42% jumpers / Stephen Jackson - 65% jumpers

Gerald Wallace would be the only one not living on perimeter the entire time and even he takes nearly half of his shots from the perimeter against quicker SFs. You can be sure that any SF matched up against Smoove would shoot a higher % of shots from the perimeter in order to make sure he was nowhere near the paint on defense.

On offense, there won't be room in the paint for a Brandon Heyward-type along with Horford and Smith either.

I don't see it.

Edited September 30, 2010 by AHF

[Crank]

My friend, your memory is short. AJ, Acie, Speedy, Shelden, Rasheed, Harrington... etc. We normally trade our ending contracts for picks or other players. This worked out a few times, but now, things are different. We're not rebuilding. We're in the mode where we are trying to be competitive among the best teams.

Nobody is saying that we should rush to sign Craw to an extension, my point is that we should consider Craw as more than just trade bait. What does a guy have to do to be a part of our core...

Let's see.... according to the talking heads here:

1. Make less than 10 Million.
   
2. Do better than 18, 2.5, 3.0 on 45% shooting.
   
3. Be better than 6th man of the year.
   
4. Be under 30...
   
   

This is what we are saying. To crack our core, a player has to do all that... or maybe it's just be drafted by the Hawks... because I'm sure if Marvin were doing all that, we'd be praising him from here to Timbuktu!!

lol spot on Diesel it doesnt make any sense and they know it but they arent willing to talk about the actual red Elephant in the room .

also all these excuses are really disturbing

Suddenly Crawford cant play in a ball movement system .

hes old

Some guy with the same last name taken at the end of the first rd will put all star caliber numbers .

hes gonna regress because he somehow did something unheard of last year like average a triple double no way he can duplicate that .

People talk about wanting to win titles but imo they are just like the ownership just happy to be in the playoffs and are content with simply saying we have a playoff team . They will wait until we fall hard and then there will be the we shouldve couldve wouldve threads . After everything that has happened especially in the playoffs look where everyone has happily focused the attention instead of the real problems . .

[DJlaysitup]

If Smoove is playing SF, how is he going to be hanging around the basket when his man is shooting Js from the perimeter? The Paul Pierces and Caron Butlers of the world are not going to hang around the hoop. They are going to try to exploit him on the perimeter....

Well I dunno AHF...how was Rodman such a prolific rebounder from the SF position? I guess it's called athleticism :kickcan:

[AHF]

Well I dunno AHF...how was Rodman such a prolific rebounder from the SF position? I guess it's called athleticism :kickcan:

(a) Rodman wasn't a shotblocker.

(b) He also was a better perimeter defender.

© He also was a PF most of his career. Rodman with the Bulls played with:

Pippen - SF

Rodman - PF

Longley, etc. - C

Rodman with the Spurs played with:

Ellis - SF

Rodman - PF

Robinson - C

Robinson with the Pistons had some unusual circumstances that I don't think others would want repeated.

Rodman started 83 games out of 246 with the Pistons at ages 26-28 with the Pistons. Are you advocating Smith come off the bench for the Hawks?

At age 30, Rodman was 2nd on the team in 3pt attempts. Are you advocating Smith play on the perimeter for the Hawks and shoot more 3pters total and per game than someone like Isiah Thomas as Rodman did while playing SF? I think that would be a bad thing.

There are a lot of reasons Rodman does not equal Smith.

Edited September 30, 2010 by AHF

[AHF]

lol spot on Diesel it doesnt make any sense and they know it but they arent willing to talk about the actual red Elephant in the room .

also all these excuses are really disturbing

Suddenly Crawford cant play in a ball movement system .

hes old

Some guy with the same last name taken at the end of the first rd will put all star caliber numbers .

hes gonna regress because he somehow did something unheard of last year like average a triple double no way he can duplicate that .

People talk about wanting to win titles but imo they are just like the ownership just happy to be in the playoffs and are content with simply saying we have a playoff team . They will wait until we fall hard and then there will be the we shouldve couldve wouldve threads . After everything that has happened especially in the playoffs look where everyone has happily focused the attention instead of the real problems . .

I am not sure I understand this post. Can you clarify what you are saying?

(1) Are you saying that Crawford is unlikely to regress? He shot a .573 TS% last year. His career average is .524 TS%. That is a HUGE difference. If you are saying he is unlikely to regress, why do you think he wouldn't regress with his shooting?

(2) Are you saying we should sign Crawford to an extension now? If so, why?

I don't understand the comments criticizing owenrship for being cheap but saying people are unduly content merely being a playoff team. Are you saying:

(3) Ownership is willing to pay the luxury tax and therefore we don't need to worry about money to resign Horford?

(4) This team is a championship contender with Crawford and therefore anyone unwilling to sign him at any cost is resigned to second round exits we won't have with Crawford?

(5) We can't address other problems on the team unless we sign Crawford to an extension?

I am confused where your comments are supposed to be driving us and am sure I am reading some of the wrong things into your post or failing to understand other inferences I am supposed to be drawing. Can you spell it out a little more? Thanks.

[Swatguy]

If Smoove is playing SF, how is he going to be hanging around the basket when his man is shooting Js from the perimeter? The Paul Pierces and Caron Butlers of the world are not going to hang around the hoop. They are going to try to exploit him on the perimeter. By putting him at SF, you would be taking him away from the one aspect of the game that you can rely on.

Look who he would match up with a lot of the time at SF within our division:

Miami: Lebron James - 64% jumpers / Mike Miller - 70% jumpers

Washington: Josh Howard - 81% jumpers

Orlando: Rashard Lewis 83% jumpers - Mickael Pietrus - 81% jumpers

Charlotte:Gerald Wallace - 42% jumpers / Stephen Jackson - 65% jumpers

Gerald Wallace would be the only one not living on perimeter the entire time and even he takes nearly half of his shots from the perimeter against quicker SFs. You can be sure that any SF matched up against Smoove would shoot a higher % of shots from the perimeter in order to make sure he was nowhere near the paint on defense.

On offense, there won't be room in the paint for a Brandon Heyward-type along with Horford and Smith either.

I don't see it.

Give me a break. No he will not be hanging around and with good reason, Al and the Center will be manning the post. What is wrong with that? If Josh is in the mid-lanes and guarding a perimeter sf fine he has a role there and it will be more able to exploit defenses on fast breaks. That really is not a problem. He will still be "weak-side" help. You suppose SF's will take Josh to the hole? no likely, more likely the shot is blocked. In fact it will be a challenge to recieve an entry pass with a 6'9" athletic freak in the vacinity.

[Diesel]

Real contenders spend more money then the Hawks and have no problem paying luxury tax.

Maybe the ASG shocks us all but I'm not counting on it.

I venture to say that ASG has been shocking you all from the get go. According to you all, there was no way we resigned Joe. Especially not at the max.

I say let it play out. Maybe Sund finds trades for the dead wood and we keep the productive players.

[AHF]

Give me a break. No he will not be hanging around and with good reason, Al and the Center will be manning the post. What is wrong with that? If Josh is in the mid-lanes and guarding a perimeter sf fine he has a role there and it will be more able to exploit defenses on fast breaks. That really is not a problem. He will still be "weak-side" help. You suppose SF's will take Josh to the hole? no likely, more likely the shot is blocked. In fact it will be a challenge to recieve an entry pass with a 6'9" athletic freak in the vacinity.

So you think Josh is a success playing on the perimeter on defense and offense?

I want him in the post on both ends. I want him playing like a Shawn Kemp or an early Andrei Kirlenko (PF) more than Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony or a late Andrei Kirilenko (SF).

[Diesel]

So you think Josh is a success playing on the perimeter on defense and offense?

I want him in the post on both ends. I want him playing like a Shawn Kemp or an early Andrei Kirlenko (PF) more than Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony or a late Andrei Kirilenko (SF).

I think it all depends on personnel. If Josh doesn't improve his posting ability, then why keep him in the post. Our motion offense will get a lot of guys open looks in their spot. The real question to be answered this year is What is Josh's spot. Back to the personnel question, if we have the right personnel, Josh is the first guy to move. i.e. if we happen upon another post player (who is good in the post) then Josh will be Sf. You guys have made Sf to be something that it's not. Sf is really the most undefined position on the court (and always has been). In General, the midsized guy who was not a great shooter/Defender or rebounder was historically your Sf. It's not really a position of Specification. You don't have to be a great shooter to be a Sf. Neither do you have to be a great perimeter defender. That's why Sf is the position on the floor with the most variance.

If we were to trade Jamal and get back Mark Gasol or Brook Lopez, would you put Smoove on the bench? What about Horf? The correct answer is that obviously Horf moves to PF and Smoove to Sf and nobody complains.