A 1st for Crit, not such a bad idea?

Dwightmare · Post #1 » by **Dwightmare** » Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:22 am

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/s ... tch-080922

After reading this article, maybe it wasn't such a bad idea to send a first for Crittenton.

Force9024 · Post #2 » by **Force9024** » Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:45 am

I thought they said the same thing about this years draft last year saying it wasn't as deep as in years past. We won't really know til we see what this year has to bring for the NCAA.. But I agree it won't be as great as years past, but you'll find some good talent.

BassMaster · Post #3 » by **BassMaster** » Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:05 am

The title for this thread is very mis-leading since there is no mention at all about J. Crittenton in fact a more fitting title would be 2009 Draft Who is Hot and Who is Not.

The only people who kept on bringing up JC as a deal in the works was HoopsWorld IMO that is not a source that can be considered reliable.

fendilim · Post #4 » by **fendilim** » Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:04 am

Cougar, considering that the rumor may be true, I think it would be better if we give up Bogans + 1st for Crittenton rather than dealing JJ along with the 1st.

IMO, Lee can bring more than what Bogans offer. By keeping Redick, we keep a player who brings a totally different dimension compared to our other SGs.

Financially, it also helps us. With the team keeping not wanting to go over the allotted cap space, dealing Bogans would give us at least 200k more salary to use. Instead of signing unproven players, the additional 200k would allow us to sign NBA veterans. Which, IMO, is a better move than fielding in unproven players

trebone · Post #5 » by **trebone** » Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:14 pm

we do not really need critt at this point in time and having the hopefully very late 1st is better for keeping down payroll anyways is it not?