RealGM

Posted: **Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:47 pm**

hands11 wrote:We talked a lot about Crawford inefficiency... So how is he looking so far in a limited sample size ? From the numbers, he looks more efficient.

No question about it. Off the numbers and over a *very* small sample size Crawford is playing just slightly better than the average NBA 2 guard who's getting 15+ minutes/game. That's an enormous improvement, obviously.

hands11 wrote:...efficiency should look even better when he brings his FT% up...

I'm sure he will bring it up, but that's no indication that his efficiency will improve. Again, this is a very small sample size. Something else affecting his productivity may be higher now than it's going to turn out. For example, he's rebounding well above his career average.

One good thing: he's shooting about 10% less. And the "less" is in 2-point attempts not 3-pointers (wch have actually gone up). His 2 pt % is up from @45% last year to 52% this year. And his efg% is way up from last year's horrendous 45% to an above average 51%.

This is all very heartening -- but... again, it's a small sample. 96 minutes. Doesn't mean much. All the same, "better" is better than "worse" or "the same."

edit: I should say that, for me, the value to the Wizards in Crawford's improvement is that it might make it possible to trade him.

Posted: **Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:25 pm**

Hoping for crawford to improve is a fool's errand. He's just another player in a long line of wizards disappointments who shows just enough flash to make you question your better judgment. Do not fall under the sway of his jedi mind tricks. Yes, 5 seasons is a small sample but look at the big picture. 2 full seasons of not topping 40% from the field. All of a sudden his 43% looks stellar even though it's iverson-esque at best. Even if his percentages do improve, his shot selection hasn't. It won't be sustainable.

Posted: **Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:03 pm**

I think he ultimately pans out as a journeyman 5th guard, or if he improves a bit more, he might find a niche as a regular-rotation backup SG.

His modest improvement this season is helpful. He might move out of the "detrimental to the team" category and into the "modestly helpful backup scorer" category. He is no where near making himself an indispensable player though. He'll probably never reach a point where he can't be replaced by some other easily-attainable free agent.

Posted: **Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:13 pm**

Yeah absolute best case scenario is Crawford becomes a decent 6th-7th man, scorer off the bench when we need a spark type guy. But I don't think he'll ever be that reliable.

Posted: **Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:54 pm**

I wasn't really projecting what he would become as much as just sharing the numbers ( small sample size ) for his increased efficiency so far... which was a huge topic on the board.

Its a ray of sun shine in an otherwise challenging season so far. Just thought I would share it and ask were it ranks him since I remember posts that he was dead last in efficiency given his usage. Sounds like he is no longer there...in a small sample size.

Posted: **Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:08 pm**

I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

Posted: **Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:33 pm**

AFM wrote:I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

Posted: **Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:44 pm**

AFM wrote:I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

I see very little so far this season to indicate statistically or from just watching to suggest Crawford's decision-making has changed at all. His shooting percentages are about the same, his turnovers are up, his usage rate is about the same, his offensive rating is even worse. His rebounding is MUCH better and his assists are up, but I doubt either number will persist.

More subjectively -- during one of his better shooting games this season, I commented on Twitter that his shot selection seemed the same as it did in previous years (ridiculously long 3s, etc.), but that some of those bad shots were going in. I predicted that those bad shots would stop going in, which is what I think we're seeing.

It's still early in the season, of course, but Crawford looks to me like he's about the same as he's been in previous seasons. Only big differences are rebounds and assists (positive) and turnovers (negative).

Posted: **Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:45 pm**

Nivek wrote:
AFM wrote:I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

I see very little so far this season to indicate statistically or from just watching to suggest Crawford's decision-making has changed at all. His shooting percentages are about the same, his turnovers are up, his usage rate is about the same, his offensive rating is even worse. His rebounding is MUCH better and his assists are up, but I doubt either number will persist.

More subjectively -- during one of his better shooting games this season, I commented on Twitter that his shot selection seemed the same as it did in previous years (ridiculously long 3s, etc.), but that some of those bad shots were going in. I predicted that those bad shots would stop going in, which is what I think we're seeing.

It's still early in the season, of course, but Crawford looks to me like he's about the same as he's been in previous seasons. Only big differences are rebounds and assists (positive) and turnovers (negative).

Yes, it is still to early. but

Re: Jordan Crawford

Postby hands11 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:03 am
We talked a lot about Crawford inefficiency over the time he has been here and this last offseason.

So how is he looking so far this year. He basic stats are looking better.

His 3 ball % is up and that is helping to pull up his FG%
He efficiency should look even better when he brings his FT% up to something more normal. He is at .600 when he is a career .808 so I expect he will return to something higher then where he is.

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/i ... n-crawford

His SCEFF is up from 1.076 to 1.159
His SHEFF is up from .446 to .511
His AST/TO up from 1.35 to 2.0

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... fjo02.html
Per 36
Rebounding is up from 3.5 to 5.2
AST% is way up from 19.3 to 28.5
PTS are steady at 19
PER up from 14.5 to 17.4

TS% from .448 to .527

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:36 am**

Nivek wrote:
AFM wrote:I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

I see very little so far this season to indicate statistically or from just watching to suggest Crawford's decision-making has changed at all. His shooting percentages are about the same, his turnovers are up, his usage rate is about the same, his offensive rating is even worse. His rebounding is MUCH better and his assists are up, but I doubt either number will persist.

More subjectively -- during one of his better shooting games this season, I commented on Twitter that his shot selection seemed the same as it did in previous years (ridiculously long 3s, etc.), but that some of those bad shots were going in. I predicted that those bad shots would stop going in, which is what I think we're seeing.

It's still early in the season, of course, but Crawford looks to me like he's about the same as he's been in previous seasons. Only big differences are rebounds and assists (positive) and turnovers (negative).

It's probably pointless to discuss changes in Crawford's game based on so few minutes -- what he does tonight might change his numbers significantly.

That said, I think you are demonstrably wrong so far -- his ball control hasn't really changed. I.e. rebounds + steals minus turnovers is almost exactly as it was last season. But he's shooting more 3s at a slightly higher %, and his 2pt % is up as well. His WS40 is at 5.3 -- vs. 2.1 last year. You may prefer your system, but per position ws40 correlates extremely closely w/ wins and losses (i.e. effects on same).

After tonight he may be back to 2.1 of course. Or back up at 6.3 where he was before last night's game. I don't see any hope for Crawford ever to be a good player, but if he could just be below average rather than hideous, that'd be something.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:02 am**

payitforward wrote:
Nivek wrote:
AFM wrote:I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

I see very little so far this season to indicate statistically or from just watching to suggest Crawford's decision-making has changed at all. His shooting percentages are about the same, his turnovers are up, his usage rate is about the same, his offensive rating is even worse. His rebounding is MUCH better and his assists are up, but I doubt either number will persist.

More subjectively -- during one of his better shooting games this season, I commented on Twitter that his shot selection seemed the same as it did in previous years (ridiculously long 3s, etc.), but that some of those bad shots were going in. I predicted that those bad shots would stop going in, which is what I think we're seeing.

It's still early in the season, of course, but Crawford looks to me like he's about the same as he's been in previous seasons. Only big differences are rebounds and assists (positive) and turnovers (negative).

It's probably pointless to discuss changes in Crawford's game based on so few minutes -- what he does tonight might change his numbers significantly.

That said, I think you are demonstrably wrong so far -- his ball control hasn't really changed. I.e. rebounds + steals minus turnovers is almost exactly as it was last season. But he's shooting more 3s at a slightly higher %, and his 2pt % is up as well. His WS40 is at 5.3 -- vs. 2.1 last year. You may prefer your system, but per position ws40 correlates extremely closely w/ wins and losses (i.e. effects on same).

After tonight he may be back to 2.1 of course. Or back up at 6.3 where he was before last night's game. I don't see any hope for Crawford ever to be a good player, but if he could just be below average rather than hideous, that'd be something.

You have blind hate. That's no good for the team. That only run talent out the city to other teams where they will get support rather than hate, and develop into star talent or better at least. Look at all the recent trades over the years. They playing better than they did when they were hated on here in Washington.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:08 am**

Knighthonor wrote:Look at all the recent trades over the years. They playing better than they did when they were hated on here in Washington.

Where's this all-star team of former Wizards that's tearing up the league? I thought we already thoroughly dashed that implinsinnuendocation of future greatness.

I wouldn't discount fan support (or good coaching, training, management, teammates, etc.) enhancing the development of a young player, but the problem has not been the stunted development of decent players. No sir!

Former Wizards' relative lack of subsequent success reveals that EG and his successive puppet masters have brought in too many subpar players. But I will give credit where credit is due. The Wizards are sometimes able to get equal value when trading such players.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:16 am**

montestewart wrote:
Knighthonor wrote:Look at all the recent trades over the years. They playing better than they did when they were hated on here in Washington.

Where's this all-star team of former Wizards that's tearing up the league? I thought we already thoroughly dashed that implinsinnuendocation of future greatness.

I wouldn't discount fan support (or good coaching, training, management, teammates, etc.) enhancing the development of a young player, but the problem has not been the stunted development of decent players. No sir!

Former Wizards' relative lack of subsequent success reveals that EG and his successive puppet masters have brought in too many subpar players. But I will give credit where credit is due. The Wizards are sometimes able to get equal value when trading such players.

Just about 90% of former wizards in the last few years have done better on other teams than on the Wizards, expect maybe Gil and Jamerson. Caron got a ring,,, lol. Rip got a ring. Lol. Hey even Stackhouse got a,,, well you get the picture... They go off to do good things. Even Blatche is better else were. Even Kwame did better off the Wizards.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:46 am**

Knighthonor wrote:
montestewart wrote:
Knighthonor wrote:Look at all the recent trades over the years. They playing better than they did when they were hated on here in Washington.

Where's this all-star team of former Wizards that's tearing up the league? I thought we already thoroughly dashed that implinsinnuendocation of future greatness.

I wouldn't discount fan support (or good coaching, training, management, teammates, etc.) enhancing the development of a young player, but the problem has not been the stunted development of decent players. No sir!

Former Wizards' relative lack of subsequent success reveals that EG and his successive puppet masters have brought in too many subpar players. But I will give credit where credit is due. The Wizards are sometimes able to get equal value when trading such players.

Just about 90% of former wizards in the last few years have done better on other teams than on the Wizards, expect maybe Gil and Jamerson. Caron got a ring,,, lol. Rip got a ring. Lol. Hey even Stackhouse got a,,, well you get the picture... They go off to do good things. Even Blatche is better else were. Even Kwame did better off the Wizards.

Comon KH, you should know better than this. The only person you have a case for is Rip. Have you been following Blatche and Mcgee? Blatche is shooting 36% up in New York and Mcgee is averaging an on/off of -10. Caron, Larry, Jamison, Kawame, DSteve, Haywood, all played their best ball in a Wizards uniform.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:47 am**

Nivek wrote:
AFM wrote:I'll leave it to Nivek to confirm this statistically, but just from the eye test, Crawford's decision making looks much improved. No more dribbling around for a half hour and then launching a contested fadeaway. I've actually become a fan of his this year

I see very little so far this season to indicate statistically or from just watching to suggest Crawford's decision-making has changed at all. His shooting percentages are about the same, his turnovers are up, his usage rate is about the same, his offensive rating is even worse. His rebounding is MUCH better and his assists are up, but I doubt either number will persist.

More subjectively -- during one of his better shooting games this season, I commented on Twitter that his shot selection seemed the same as it did in previous years (ridiculously long 3s, etc.), but that some of those bad shots were going in. I predicted that those bad shots would stop going in, which is what I think we're seeing.

It's still early in the season, of course, but Crawford looks to me like he's about the same as he's been in previous seasons. Only big differences are rebounds and assists (positive) and turnovers (negative).

Maybe it's just the failure of my eye test then. Crawford was maddening last year. Or maybe I've just been desensitized to it.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:51 am**

payitforward wrote:
I see very little so far this season to indicate statistically or from just watching to suggest Crawford's decision-making has changed at all. His shooting percentages are about the same, his turnovers are up, his usage rate is about the same, his offensive rating is even worse. His rebounding is MUCH better and his assists are up, but I doubt either number will persist.

More subjectively -- during one of his better shooting games this season, I commented on Twitter that his shot selection seemed the same as it did in previous years (ridiculously long 3s, etc.), but that some of those bad shots were going in. I predicted that those bad shots would stop going in, which is what I think we're seeing.

It's still early in the season, of course, but Crawford looks to me like he's about the same as he's been in previous seasons. Only big differences are rebounds and assists (positive) and turnovers (negative).

It's probably pointless to discuss changes in Crawford's game based on so few minutes -- what he does tonight might change his numbers significantly.

That said, I think you are demonstrably wrong so far -- his ball control hasn't really changed. I.e. rebounds + steals minus turnovers is almost exactly as it was last season. But he's shooting more 3s at a slightly higher %, and his 2pt % is up as well. His WS40 is at 5.3 -- vs. 2.1 last year. You may prefer your system, but per position ws40 correlates extremely closely w/ wins and losses (i.e. effects on same).

After tonight he may be back to 2.1 of course. Or back up at 6.3 where he was before last night's game. I don't see any hope for Crawford ever to be a good player, but if he could just be below average rather than hideous, that'd be something.[/quote]

Well, if I'm "demonstrably wrong" about Crawford, I guess we're in the same boat considering you posted basically the same stuff I did, but with different wording.

Did I post in Russian or something?

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:52 am**

AFM wrote:Maybe it's just the failure of my eye test then. Crawford was maddening last year. Or maybe I've just been desensitized to it.

He's rebounding and assisting at a much higher rate but his usage rate and shooting %s are about the same.

Honestly, I feel the same way you do AFM but im starting to think it's just because we've seen less of him. His minutes are down significantly, this year.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:01 am**

At least he's been trying to get to the basket.... No one else plays aggressively, save maybe Martell....

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:22 am**

Crawford in at PG. Team down by 20 something and dead in the water. Heartless. Kevin S sucking for 3 games in a row.

Then something changed. Got it down to 3 or 4. Kevin was balln. Martin nailing 3 balls. They still lost. But Crawford at PG changed the way the entire team played. A team needs a PG they believe in. That wasn't Price or Pargo.

We will see if he can keep it up but I thought he should have been the starting PG from the start. He has been playing a more balanced team game all year. And given the chance to lead the team, he did the same.

6-11 3 for 5 from 3. 6-6 from the line. 7 assist. 35 minutes. 21 pts. 4 rebounds 1 steal. Not a bad line.

And Kevin sucked until Craw was at PG. Kevin finished with 16 pts. Almost all in the late part of the game.
And Martin started lighting with 3s. 4 for 4 from 3. 14pt in 10 minutes.

Hopefully Crawford gets the start at PG next game with Beal. I said I thought Crawford could help Beal get it going. I want to see him get a chance to do it. We saw what Price could do. Time to make a change.

Posted: **Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:20 pm**

Great stat line last night. Trade him NOW.