Jordan Crawford

[pancakes3]

Hands, now you're attacking a strawman and strawmen within strawmen.

- His efficiency got better but it still wasn't anywhere near what you would qualify as "good". Crawford is 25 years old this season. How many seasons at the rate of improvement he previous demonstrated would we have to wait for it to improve to what it is now with Boston? 3-4 seasons?
- I'm not sure what to say about him being a better 3 point shooter from the spot where everyone else is a better 3 point shooter. Duh? So what? Inefficient shooter is inefficient?
- efg takes the 3 ball into consideration and by hook or by crook he's a much better shooter with Boston than he was with the Wizards and there's really no way of knowing that would happen last season when we traded him.
- So Crawford needs to be a point guard? And what were we to do with Wall/Beal? Scrap it all and let Crawford develop? We needed (and still need) a guard to come off the bench. He isn't talented enough to be afforded the luxury to "warm up to the game." We need him to go do a job and he didn't do it. He's doing a different job for someone else. That doesn't mean that we made a mistake in getting rid of him.
- So your last sentence regarding our guard situation is: IF we had kept Crawford, and IF he completely bucked the trend that he showed with us over the course of 133 games, and IF he gets to play the position he excels at the expense of John Wall... we would be better and that's what you've been saying all along?

Well I'm sorry but that strike me as pedantic if not outright stupid.

[TGW]

WWSD: What would the Spurs do?

It sure as hell wouldn't be to sign or play Crawford.

[hands11]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YEneh6a1oI[/youtube]

I like Brad Steven as a coach. Sully is a good player also. Actually, Boston has an interesting team. No real A list players but Hump, Sully, Crawford, Bradely, Bass, Lee, Wallace, Jeff Green, Kelly O and even Faverani. They really don't have any dead weight. Actually Marson Brooks is probably their worst player.

[hands11]

Hands, now you're attacking a strawman and strawmen within strawmen.

- His efficiency got better but it still wasn't anywhere near what you would qualify as "good". Crawford is 25 years old this season. How many seasons at the rate of improvement he previous demonstrated would we have to wait for it to improve to what it is now with Boston? 3-4 seasons?
- I'm not sure what to say about him being a better 3 point shooter from the spot where everyone else is a better 3 point shooter. Duh? So what? Inefficient shooter is inefficient?
- efg takes the 3 ball into consideration and by hook or by crook he's a much better shooter with Boston than he was with the Wizards and there's really no way of knowing that would happen last season when we traded him.
- So Crawford needs to be a point guard? And what were we to do with Wall/Beal? Scrap it all and let Crawford develop? We needed (and still need) a guard to come off the bench. He isn't talented enough to be afforded the luxury to "warm up to the game." We need him to go do a job and he didn't do it. He's doing a different job for someone else. That doesn't mean that we made a mistake in getting rid of him.
- So your last sentence regarding our guard situation is: IF we had kept Crawford, and IF he completely bucked the trend that he showed with us over the course of 133 games, and IF he gets to play the position he excels at the expense of John Wall... we would be better and that's what you've been saying all along?

Well I'm sorry but that strike me as pedantic if not outright stupid.

Talk about strawmans.

The starting PG job was open here last year. Wall was injured. Crawford should have been the PG.
After that, he could have been used as the back up PG and as a 2nd SG on the floor with Wall.
We could even use that this year.
And above all else, if traded, he would have brought more back in return.

He was totally mishandled on all front. Both while here and in trading him. And in replacing him. The trifecta

As for your projection of him getting better at constant rate. Guess it don't work like that. Look at his numbers. Besides, his TS% last year for the Wizards was .512% up from .488% the year before up from .462 the year before. So even on that trend you would expected around .538 this year. Meanwhile we have Maynor at .392

And you say he is 25. Right. He just turned 25 Oct 23.

[hands11]

WWSD: What would the Spurs do?

It sure as hell wouldn't be to sign or play Crawford.

Right, they wouldn't have signed him to start with so it kind of a mute point from there. I was talking about how to maximize an asset we had. What the Wizards did was a blue print in what not to do. What Boston is doing is a blue print in how to do it correctly.

Should be interesting to see what they do moving forward. Next phase would be either trade him and see if he can bring the same thing as a PG off the bench. Still have to see if this will translate into that. Every team need a PG off that bench that is effective who can start if the starter goes down, which is the part he is proving right now. That's what I think Crawford is. But not sure 12-14 min off the bench is enough. Need to find him another 4-6 minutes playing at SG. 18-20 pts a game would works for a player like him while he learn PG more and proves himself there. He is getting a late start at it.

Us, we don't have that player so we still have to go find him. That was kind of my point.

As for Crawford. His .571 TS% ranks him between Chris Paul and Tony Parker currently at 6th in the league for starting PGs. But in fairness, at a lesser usage rate. He needs to get his usage back up

Here are your NBA PGs.

http://bkref.com/tiny/tKiKB

[TGW]

WWSD: What would the Spurs do?

It sure as hell wouldn't be to sign or play Crawford.

Right, they wouldn't have signed him to start with so it kind of a mute point from there. I was talking about how to maximize an asset we had. What the Wizards did was a blue print in what not to do. What Boston is doing is a blue print in how to do it correctly.

Fair point Hands. I actually do agree with that...his value was tanked and they traded him for garbage. Couldn't even get a future 2nd rounder out of it.

[FAH1223]

Brad Stevens is a good coach.. Boston has a weird team and he is making it work so far.

[hands11]

WWSD: What would the Spurs do?

It sure as hell wouldn't be to sign or play Crawford.

Right, they wouldn't have signed him to start with so it kind of a mute point from there. I was talking about how to maximize an asset we had. What the Wizards did was a blue print in what not to do. What Boston is doing is a blue print in how to do it correctly.

Fair point Hands. I actually do agree with that...his value was tanked and they traded him for garbage. Couldn't even get a future 2nd rounder out of it.

Yeah. Just pisses me off. I actually watch some Boston games now just to catch Crawford. I like watching his succeed. And in doing so I have gotten to learn that team a little. Actually, they aren't that bad. And they don't even have Kelly O right now.

Hopefully Crawford keep it up. Best for him if Rondo takes his time coming back. Hell, if they are winning, why rush him. With another 10-15 games under his belt, we should be able to start to rank him against other PG to slot him. Sample size is still a little small to do that just yet.

Playing similar to Manu Ginobili. He has a nice WS at 2.0 Wall is at 2.1

Boston seems like a good situation for him. Good coach. Rondo to help him learn. Team not expected to win anything but not dysfunctional. Nice place. Not a Miami, NY or an LA but not backwood either. No real nuts on the team. Its a good place for him to grow as a player and as a PG. And the fans like him.

[melosmith]

http://bkref.com/tiny/UkvD3

Wall's production is still better, but Crawford isn't too shabby either when we look at per36 stats.

[nate33]

Crawford has played incredibly well for much longer than I thought he would. I still get a "good player on a bad team" kind of vibe out of him though. I think he can score with crappy teammates, which is certainly a useful NBA skill, but I don't think he's the type of guy who can make mediocre teammates play really well. Trevor Ariza and Martell Webster wouldn't post a TS% north of .600 if they played alongside Crawford.

For this reason, I'm pretty confident in saying that Wall could be a key component in a championship caliber team, whereas I think Crawford's only potential role on a championship team would be that of a bench scorer.

The decision to dump Crawford is looking worse and worse every game he plays though. As I've said before, I can live with the decision to dump him if they really felt he was such a negative locker room influence that it was harming the development of Beal; but it was inexcusable the way that they benched him and tanked his value before trading him.

[hands11]

Crawfords updated TS% to include yesterdays game..... .583%

Granted, that spiked because he went 6-12 from 3 but for a player to even have that as a spiked number after 20 games is good. Specially playing as a starting PG for the first time in his career.

In case people didn't realize it, this fella is also tearing it up..

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/i ... iah-thomas

Isaiah's TS% is .592 Curry is at .593

Compared to the players we had to to pick from Nate and Crawford lead the pack.
Maynor and Price are at the bottom.

[Dat2U]

As I've said before, I can live with the decision to dump him if they really felt he was such a negative locker room influence that it was harming the development of Beal; but it was inexcusable the way that they benched him and tanked his value before trading him.

Buy high, sell low. Ernie's mantra.

Yep, trading Craw wasn't the problem. Trading him just to get rid of him after sabotaging his value was the issue.

[Ruzious]

Crawford is having a real nice year - far better than he's ever played before - but this is water under the bridge. It's hard to crush EG on trading him for nothing since he also traded practically nothing to get him in the first place - and he was a questionable character when on the Wizards.

[Ruzious]

How many Crawford threads do we need? We traded the guy last season; not this season.

[nate33]

How many Crawford threads do we need? We traded the guy last season; not this season.

Yeah. Good point. I'll merge.

[verbal8]

Crawford is having a real nice year - far better than he's ever played before - but this is water under the bridge. It's hard to crush EG on trading him for nothing since he also traded practically nothing to get him in the first place - and he was a questionable character when on the Wizards.

It is still early, but it looks like Stevens maybe one of the elite coaches. He really seems to be getting a lot out of a roster without a ton of talent.

A quick look at Crawford's number would suggest he is basically replacing long 2s with assists and shooting 3s a little better. His usage rate is just above 20 which seems more reasonable than what it has been in the past.

[dckingsfan]

Crawford is having a real nice year - far better than he's ever played before - but this is water under the bridge. It's hard to crush EG on trading him for nothing since he also traded practically nothing to get him in the first place - and he was a questionable character when on the Wizards.

It is still early, but it looks like Stevens maybe one of the elite coaches. He really seems to be getting a lot out of a roster without a ton of talent.

A quick look at Crawford's number would suggest he is basically replacing long 2s with assists and shooting 3s a little better. His usage rate is just above 20 which seems more reasonable than what it has been in the past.

Yep, perfect example of a player that needed to move environments. Fresh start, fresh coach, little bit older, etc.

I don't think Crawford would ever have been happy hear playing 10 min/game behind Wall. He needed to move on...

[verbal8]

I don't think Crawford would ever have been happy hear playing 10 min/game behind Wall. He needed to move on...

With the right attitude he could play with Wall and get 24-30 mpg(not too far off from what he is getting now). However I agree he was an example where a change of scenery was needed.

[dckingsfan]

I don't think Crawford would ever have been happy hear playing 10 min/game behind Wall. He needed to move on...

With the right attitude he could play with Wall and get 24-30 mpg(not too far off from what he is getting now). However I agree he was an example where a change of scenery was needed.

I don't think Randy was going to let him play that many minutes. Agreed, it was time for him to move on.

[deneem4]

Was just name player of the week 23 and 6