ImageImageImageImageImage

Jordan Crawford

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,723
And1: 18,999
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#81 » by nate33 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:20 pm

agree with tontoz. I'm not at all disappointed that we ended up with Young instead of Afflalo. I'd pay Young more than Afflalo going forward. All I'm saying is that I want one of them on the team next year.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#82 » by hands11 » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:37 am

NbdyBeatsTheWiz wrote:
nate33 wrote:I want a young starting shooting guard with deadeye 3-point range. That's not Crawford. I'd like to either resign Nick Young or sign Aaron Afflalo, which ever turns out to be the better value. Crawford looks like a 3rd guard to me.


Yeah I've had my eye on Afflalo ever since I heard he's a free agent this summer. I'd take Afflalo over Young or Crawford starting at the two, with Young or Crawford backing him up. Crawford strikes me as the ideal guy to come off your bench and get large minutes backing up both Wall and whoever we have at the 2. And in my mind Afflalo > Young. He shoots a much better percentage from 3 and almost 50% from the floor overall. Plus he does the little things better, including defense. And he does all this effectively for a winning team.

I'm not knocking Young, but if he and Afflalo came at the same price tag, I'd go Afflalo.


Hmm. Interesting.
Dat2U
RealGM
Posts: 23,492
And1: 7,062
Joined: Jun 23, 2001
Location: Columbus, OH
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#83 » by Dat2U » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:58 pm

Severn Hoos wrote:Sad part is, Young & Afflalo were available for the same price: the 16th pick in the 2007 Draft. But then Afflalo was another of those "low-ceiling role players" that we should shy away from in the first round. ;-)


No, I never said that. I said we should shy away from low-ceiling role-players if were talking about a mid-to-high lottery pick. I'd have no problem with drafting an Afflalo type in the 1st round if he was the best player on the board.

That being said, I'm totally against signing Afflalo as a free agent. Even more so than paying Nick Young. Why in heck do we want to throw away money on a role player when we've got a team that's no where close to competing? I'd say no to Afflalo and no pretty much every single solitary free agent available this year. Signing free agents, especially considering our current standing, to state it in the simplest terms is just plain STUPID.

And unless you think Nick Young is going to be your 20 ppg, playoff caliber starting SG for the next half decade, paying him would be stupid as well.

If Jordan Crawford has to be our starting SG next year so be it. Sometimes you have to take a step back to take two steps forward.
LyricalRico
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 30,451
And1: 780
Joined: May 23, 2002
Location: Back into the fray!
Contact:
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#84 » by LyricalRico » Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:05 pm

Dat2U wrote:And unless you think Nick Young is going to be your 20 ppg, playoff caliber starting SG for the next half decade, paying him would be stupid as well.

If Jordan Crawford has to be our starting SG next year so be it. Sometimes you have to take a step back to take two steps forward.


Valid logic. Too bad it apparently doesn't apply to others on the team.

:wink:
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,345
And1: 3,811
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#85 » by tontoz » Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:26 pm

LyricalRico wrote:
Dat2U wrote:And unless you think Nick Young is going to be your 20 ppg, playoff caliber starting SG for the next half decade, paying him would be stupid as well.

If Jordan Crawford has to be our starting SG next year so be it. Sometimes you have to take a step back to take two steps forward.


Valid logic. Too bad it apparently doesn't apply to others on the team.

:wink:


No it isn't valid. This team was 2nd to last in scoring even with Nick. Without him it would be the worst scoring team in the NBA by far. What quality free agent would want to come to a team like that?

You can't just clear cap space indefinitely and hope someone comes to save the day. You have to have some guys there to make a free agent feel like he can win. You also need some quality players in case you need a trade to land a big fish.

Just look at the NJ and NY deals. They had to give up some quality players to get Melo and Deron.

Letting your leading scorer walk because you don't want to pay him over $5 million a year is something I don't think even Donald Sterling would do.
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
User avatar
DaRealHibachi
Veteran
Posts: 2,864
And1: 173
Joined: Apr 11, 2008
Location: Rebuild..?? What Rebuild..??

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#86 » by DaRealHibachi » Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:37 pm

Saying Nick Young can be a starter on a good team is nonsense... Chicago may or may not reach the finals b/c they lack a consistent outside shooter... Deng is not enough...

And ofcourse we are no where close to being even a blueprint of Chicago, but we need to get our pieces is order, so when/if that last big time free agent signing happens, we don't have to deal with having a gaping hole at one of our positions...

And like some have said, 5mil per isn't gonna kill us... That Dray contract may hurt us b/c we gave a 2nd round pick a bigger than expected deal for a 2-3 month stretch while having a bigger sample size (5 1/2 years of play) to evaluate...

Nick doesn't need to be our 20ppg player, we will suck next season to and can get our 1st option in that draft... I don't think anyone here expects Nick to be our #1 option, and at 5mil per for 4 years isn't a bad deal...
:beer: Magnumt
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#87 » by hands11 » Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:49 pm

DaRealHibachi wrote:Saying Nick Young can be a starter on a good team is nonsense... Chicago may or may not reach the finals b/c they lack a consistent outside shooter... Deng is not enough...

And ofcourse we are no where close to being even a blueprint of Chicago, but we need to get our pieces is order, so when/if that last big time free agent signing happens, we don't have to deal with having a gaping hole at one of our positions...

And like some have said, 5mil per isn't gonna kill us... That Dray contract may hurt us b/c we gave a 2nd round pick a bigger than expected deal for a 2-3 month stretch while having a bigger sample size (5 1/2 years of play) to evaluate...

Nick doesn't need to be our 20ppg player, we will suck next season to and can get our 1st option in that draft... I don't think anyone here expects Nick to be our #1 option, and at 5mil per for 4 years isn't a bad deal...


Dray cost 5.9M this year and 6.4 next. That isn't really a problem since he is starting at either PF or C the remainder of the way and next year and he is off his rookie contract. I guess the worry is, will he be worth 7M in three years if he is still here and he isn't starting. If he continues to develop, that deal won't suck if they are winning more and Lewis is off the books. And it isn't so large that they couldn't move him if needed.

The Dray deal is good for now and a wait and see for later. In the future when we look back it will with be a (1) wow, I wish he was only signed to 5M since he isn't starting, (2) he is worth the 7M, (3) wow, he could be making 8M or more. Look at what Haywood is signed to. In 2014/15 Haywood will be making 9,798,000 age 35. Dray will be making $7,794,921 and he will only be 27. Dray is no Yi.

The Dray deal is a good one. Some risk but minimal. There is more of a chance good deal than not. This summer is a huge summer for Dray. It may likely define his career. After age 25, people stop giving you as much wiggle room. He will determine if he can be a starter for a while or just a veritable quality two position back up. The chance of him being neither is pretty low.

I think he can develop into a quality starter in this league at center but his chances to be a quality PF are a lot less. But with either, he needs to develop his upper body.
User avatar
DaRealHibachi
Veteran
Posts: 2,864
And1: 173
Joined: Apr 11, 2008
Location: Rebuild..?? What Rebuild..??

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#88 » by DaRealHibachi » Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:11 pm

^^^ And that's why I said; His contract may hurt us, since we don't know if he will continue to play hurt, inefficient, lazy or Caron Butler-like (taking waaaay too long to make a move on offense)...

He also needs be more mature about things...











So yeah, Jordan Crawford...
:beer: Magnumt
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,345
And1: 3,811
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#89 » by tontoz » Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:25 pm

I think it is a little early to pencil in Jordan as a replacement for Nick. His TS% before last nights game was 45% and it is obviously lower now. His J has been pretty bad.

Nick's worst TS% in 4 years is 51.9%.
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
Halcyon
Veteran
Posts: 2,826
And1: 479
Joined: Jun 16, 2008
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#90 » by Halcyon » Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:49 am

The biggest thing with Nick is...if he's not scoring, he's not much of a factor. In his entire CAREER Nick has 4 games with 5 assists. He has never had any game with over 6 assists.
User avatar
FAH1223
RealGM
Posts: 15,858
And1: 6,954
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#91 » by FAH1223 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:34 am

Halcyon wrote:The biggest thing with Nick is...if he's not scoring, he's not much of a factor. In his entire CAREER Nick has 4 games with 5 assists. He has never had any game with over 6 assists.


Yeah, Jordan is a playmaker
Image
User avatar
ErikChowbay023
Junior
Posts: 489
And1: 3
Joined: Nov 01, 2009

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#92 » by ErikChowbay023 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:39 am

I like Crawford game a lot. The way he can create and attack the basket is great, but he is not the shooter Nick is..
User avatar
DaRealHibachi
Veteran
Posts: 2,864
And1: 173
Joined: Apr 11, 2008
Location: Rebuild..?? What Rebuild..??

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#93 » by DaRealHibachi » Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:29 am

Just keep both...

Both can score, one is just more of a playmaker, the other a finisher... We need all the talent we can get right now...
:beer: Magnumt
User avatar
Rafael122
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,012
And1: 2,756
Joined: Oct 11, 2004
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#94 » by Rafael122 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:26 pm

I still stand by my statement that I think Jordan can fill the void and we can let Nick walk. If Nick is demanding a starting salary of $6 mil a year, let him walk. Crawford needs to work on his shot selection, obviously, and he's a bit turnover prone but the guy has barely played so that will come with time, hopefully.


It's handing out contracts like we did last time (Etan, Daniels, Songaila) that got us into cap hell in the first place. We could use those $4 to $5 million on something else.
Bickerstaff: who's up for kickball?!!
Ed Wood: Only if it's the no-pants variety.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,723
And1: 18,999
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#95 » by nate33 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:30 pm

DaRealHibachi wrote:Just keep both...

Both can score, one is just more of a playmaker, the other a finisher... We need all the talent we can get right now...

Exactly. Having both allows us to play the hot hand. When Nick is on, it doesn't matter that he isn't a playmaker because he's a great finisher. When Nick is off, put Crawford in the game in place of him. Also, Crawford looks like he can become a capable backup PG who has a style of game similar to a poor man's Wall.

I think a 3-guard rotation of Wall, Young and Crawford will work out well, as long as they all continue to improve. Young needs to get stronger and rebound better (I can live with the lack of court vision). Wall needs to improve his jumper and his defense (already showing signs of this). Crawford needs to improve his jumper, shot selection, and decision making (all forgivable for a rookie).
User avatar
pancakes3
General Manager
Posts: 9,103
And1: 2,593
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#96 » by pancakes3 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:31 pm

i think nick is clearly better than etan, daniels, and songaila.
Bullets -> Wizards
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,723
And1: 18,999
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#97 » by nate33 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:32 pm

Rafael122 wrote:I still stand by my statement that I think Jordan can fill the void and we can let Nick walk. If Nick is demanding a starting salary of $6 mil a year, let him walk. Crawford needs to work on his shot selection, obviously, and he's a bit turnover prone but the guy has barely played so that will come with time, hopefully.


It's handing out contracts like we did last time (Etan, Daniels, Songaila) that got us into cap hell in the first place. We could use those $4 to $5 million on something else.

I don't want Young to become a cap burden either. I think the solution is to engineer a Nick Collison style front-loaded deal. Make the back end of his contract cost $3-4M per year instead of $6M by paying him $12M in his first year.

This team doesn't have the luxury of just giving away talented players. Cap room is nice, but we need to have enough players here to attract free agents. Otherwise, cap room is only good enough to land us guys like Travis Outlaw and Drew Gooden.
User avatar
Rafael122
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,012
And1: 2,756
Joined: Oct 11, 2004
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#98 » by Rafael122 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:40 pm

nate33 wrote:
Rafael122 wrote:I still stand by my statement that I think Jordan can fill the void and we can let Nick walk. If Nick is demanding a starting salary of $6 mil a year, let him walk. Crawford needs to work on his shot selection, obviously, and he's a bit turnover prone but the guy has barely played so that will come with time, hopefully.


It's handing out contracts like we did last time (Etan, Daniels, Songaila) that got us into cap hell in the first place. We could use those $4 to $5 million on something else.

I don't want a Young to become a cap burden either. I think the solution is to engineer a Nick Collison style front-loaded deal. Make the back end of his contract cost $3-4M per year instead of $6M by paying him $12M in his first year.

This team doesn't have the luxury of just giving away talented players. Cap room is nice, but we need to have enough players hear to attract free agents. Otherwise, cap room is only good enough to land us guys like Travis Outlaw and Drew Gooden.


This is true. I dunno, the uncertainty with the CBA is killing me. Nick's QO is around $4 million, close to it at least, according to Sham Sports. If we can get him for that much, for 3-4 years...maybe something like 4 yrs/$15 million, I'd be OK with that. Ernie's made the mistake of paying for a guy just for the sake of paying him.
Bickerstaff: who's up for kickball?!!
Ed Wood: Only if it's the no-pants variety.
User avatar
Rafael122
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,012
And1: 2,756
Joined: Oct 11, 2004
       

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#99 » by Rafael122 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:42 pm

pancakes3 wrote:i think nick is clearly better than etan, daniels, and songaila.


It's not that, it's handing out MLE contracts to everybody, then in 3 years, we'd be the 2005-2008 Wizards but with less talent. I'm sure Ernie and Ted have a plan, I hope that cap flexibility is part of that plan.
Bickerstaff: who's up for kickball?!!
Ed Wood: Only if it's the no-pants variety.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,723
And1: 18,999
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jordan Crawford 

Post#100 » by nate33 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:42 pm

pancakes3 wrote:i think nick is clearly better than etan, daniels, and songaila.

He's better than Etan and Songaila. Those guys were mediocre backups and/or injury prone.

Daniels might be a fair comparison. When we acquired Daniels, he was a good player, good enough to start on a lot of teams. His contract wasn't a bad one until age caught up with him. I think Young is at least as good as Daniels, plus he's younger so he might improve a bit more and there's no possibility of an age-related decline.

Return to Washington Wizards