Javaris Crittenton

Post #61 » by **Ruzious** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:29 pm

Of course it makes sense to play Critt... when he's ready. It does nobody any good to play him when he has no clue what to do out there - especially him. Nate's post was absolutely right. Remember, he's never played in an offense like the Wiz'. James was playing in an offense that was virtually identical to the Wiz'. Critt will get his chance. Hopefully, he'll learn fast, but remember - he was raw for a college player when he played at GaTech, and he's rawer as an NBA player - playing for his 3rd team.

mohammed10 · Post #62 » by **mohammed10** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 5:49 pm

nate33 wrote:Crittenton should take a chill pill. He has been with the team for 3 weeks and barely knows the plays. In 19 minutes of play, he has 0 points, 1 assist, 4 missed shots and 5 turnovers. He clearly isn't ready to contribute yet. Tankscott will get him some garbage time minutes whenever he can. If Crittenton produces during garbage time, then he'll earn a chance to get some burn when it's meaningful.

Respectfully disagree, nate. Didn't seem to take as long for Mike James to get a little burn, and he has adjusted just fine.

This ain't the NFL for Black Qbs here. This is the worst team in the East...gimme a break

Post #63 » by **nate33** » Sun Dec 28, 2008 6:17 pm

mohammed10 wrote:
nate33 wrote:Crittenton should take a chill pill. He has been with the team for 3 weeks and barely knows the plays. In 19 minutes of play, he has 0 points, 1 assist, 4 missed shots and 5 turnovers. He clearly isn't ready to contribute yet. Tankscott will get him some garbage time minutes whenever he can. If Crittenton produces during garbage time, then he'll earn a chance to get some burn when it's meaningful.

Respectfully disagree, nate. Didn't seem to take as long for Mike James to get a little burn, and he has adjusted just fine.

This ain't the NFL for Black Qbs here. This is the worst team in the East...gimme a break

Mike James produced when given the opportunity. He demonstrated that he could function in the offense and in the defense. Crittenton did nothing but brick shots and turn the ball over. He should continue to be given opportunities in garbage time, and if he shows that he knows what he is doing, he should be given more minutes.

And I'm sure the coaches are watching him in practice too. My guess is that Crittenton hasn't yet produced in practice so there's no reason to put him in games. I'm not at all worried. We've had him for what, 8 games? We've got 56 more games to go. He'll get some time.

hands11 · Post #64 » by **hands11** » Mon Jan 5, 2009 1:32 am

Just wanted to give this thread a little bump since Critt has been getting some burn lately.

4 games in a row now.

Minutes 4, 5, 21 and 12

Now that DS is sidelined he will see minutes most if not every game until GA comes back.

closg00 · Post #65 » by **closg00** » Mon Jan 5, 2009 2:22 pm

One thing that concerned me about Crit and it reminded me of AD & Dee Brown, is that he freezes when he has an open-look - he won't shoot it. Guys are going to clamp-down on players that Crit is trying to pass to if he doesn't keep defenses honest.

Donkey McDonkerton · Post #66 » by **Donkey McDonkerton** » Mon Jan 5, 2009 2:33 pm

closg00 wrote:One thing that concerned me about Crit and it reminded me of AD & Dee Brown, is that he freezes when he has an open-look - he won't shoot it. Guys are going to clamp-down on players that Crit is trying to pass to if he doesn't keep defenses honest.

I hear ya, but im not too worried about it. Right now, Javaris is probably scared to shoot because he thinks he will get pulled. He was probably told to go in, run the offense and set peopel up....as he get's that, he'll relax more and hopefully start to shoot.

What he needs to learn is how to crab dribble.

BadWolf · Post #67 » by **BadWolf** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:22 am

So how's he doing?

JWizmentality · Post #68 » by **JWizmentality** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:59 am

BadWolf wrote:So how's he doing?

So so. Not terrible, not great. He's lightning quick, but needs work on his finishing. He is however, a very good passer and decent defender. His jumpshot is terrible, but that could be a side effect of the bench in Memphis. I want to see him and Arenas on the court together. Arenas has this odd talent of making borderline scrubs look like allstars. It's become somewhat of a double-edged sword.

See DeBrick Stevenson, Benedict Hughes, Tanktwan Aimlesson, and Prune Juice.

mhd · Post #69 » by **mhd** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:46 pm

I LOVE Critt's rebounding ability. He skies high and grabs board like no other guard on this team.

Post #70 » by **LyricalRico** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:56 pm

Critt is basically the anti Nick Young. Nick is the scorer/shooter/finisher while Critt is the passer/rebounder/defender. That actually could bode well for them being an effective bench combo once the team is at full strength.

long suffrin' boulez fan · Post #71 » by **long suffrin' boulez fan** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 9:24 pm

LyricalRico wrote:Critt is basically the anti Nick Young. Nick is the scorer/shooter/finisher while Critt is the passer/rebounder/defender. That actually could bode well for them being an effective bench combo once the team is at full strength.

I just don't really see Crittenton's passing ability. I agree that he is lightning quick, a good rebounder and, potentially a decent on-the-ball defender. But, to me, everything he does with the ball is lateral. He passes and dribbles around the perimeter, but doesn't attack the paint or throw a decent entry pass. I still see him as all activity and no achievement.

hands11 · Post #72 » by **hands11** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 12:52 am

And in all this miss is anyone noticing that Dixon isn't a bad little PG

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/sta ... 09&split=0

To bad we are trying to showcase James so much. I wish Dixon was our starting PG instead.

hands11 · Post #73 » by **hands11** » Sun Feb 8, 2009 6:22 am

Post somewhere else but it really belongs here.

We really do have several options. That's why I'm not really worried. But for now, we have to play it out. We currently have Crit. 6-5 200 21 year old PG. We have to see what the kid can do. He is our best prospect at PG since Blake left and honestly, I think he is better then Blake was. He has come a long way this year already. He is quickly moving into my - I think this kid could be something this year camp. He has some key things I like. One is, he doesn't seem like a goof. He isn't a NY. He seems like someone that is tough minded and focused. He was very unsure when he got here. A lot of that has already left him. He also tries hard on defense.

He has the potential to be a starting PG. He seems to have good court vision and I have already seen him do some of those things that you see PGs do that makes you know they are a true PG. Stuff I used to see Blake do back in the day that made me believe he would start one day in this league.

He has been driving and dishing very well lately and then last game, I saw him pull up from 18 ft with confidence and nail it.

The kid has very smartly and maturely brought his game along over the last 20 games. You can see him growing before your eyes. He is getting more comfortable out there.

Doing a little reading on the kid. I think he is made of good stuff and can be a leader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javaris_Crittenton

So sure, we can go PG. God knows I have been waiting for us to work that out for over 10 years. But we could go SG or SF or PF also. Really, anything but center at this point.

There is still to much up in the air to narrow in on what we are going to do. We need to play this out. I want to see if Crit keeps getting better. The better he gets, the more options we have.

CrankyTodd · Post #74 » by **CrankyTodd** » Sun Feb 8, 2009 2:05 pm

hands11 wrote:Post somewhere else but it really belongs here.

We really do have several options. That's why I'm not really worried. But for now, we have to play it out. We currently have Crit. 6-5 200 21 year old PG. We have to see what the kid can do. He is our best prospect at PG since Blake left and honestly, I think he is better then Blake was. He has come a long way this year already. He is quickly moving into my - I think this kid could be something this year camp. He has some key things I like. One is, he doesn't seem like a goof. He isn't a NY. He seems like someone that is tough minded and focused. He was very unsure when he got here. A lot of that has already left him. He also tries hard on defense.

He has the potential to be a starting PG. He seems to have good court vision and I have already seen him do some of those things that you see PGs do that makes you know they are a true PG. Stuff I used to see Blake do back in the day that made me believe he would start one day in this league.

He has been driving and dishing very well lately and then last game, I saw him pull up from 18 ft with confidence and nail it.

The kid has very smartly and maturely brought his game along over the last 20 games. You can see him growing before your eyes. He is getting more comfortable out there.

Doing a little reading on the kid. I think he is made of good stuff and can be a leader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javaris_Crittenton

So sure, we can go PG. God knows I have been waiting for us to work that out for over 10 years. But we could go SG or SF or PF also. Really, anything but center at this point.

There is still to much up in the air to narrow in on what we are going to do. We need to play this out. I want to see if Crit keeps getting better. The better he gets, the more options we have.

I don't disagree. I wouldn't turn down the chance at a franchise player-level talent at PG given the doubt around Gilbert, but I'm intrigued by Crit. He's solidly built, physically tough, and as you said, is just about the only player on our roster who isn't a turnstile on defense. He needs to improve his shooting, but he's young and will likely continue to improve as he gets playing time.

I think we probably need to package up a couple of our young players as we make moves (either combined with high salaried deadweight on the roster as an enticement so we can dump salary), or combined with some legit talent in order to get back a quality player, but I'd actually like to hang on to Crit for now.

MJG · Post #75 » by **MJG** » Sun Feb 8, 2009 3:20 pm

I don't remember which thread I posted it in, but I mentioned a few weeks ago how disappointed I had been in Crittenton, saying he was only good at rebounding and looked like a dud otherwise. Lo and behold, since that point, he's been a vastly improved player, and I feel silly for being so harsh on him so quickly. He's still no stud or anything like that, but he has been the best point on the team the past week or two. He might come back down again, who knows, but I think I'll cut him a little more slack for the time being either way.

CrankyTodd · Post #76 » by **CrankyTodd** » Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:38 pm

Reading the following article about Battier/ NBA Moneyball statistical approaches made me think about Crit. He may be the only person on our roster who comes remotely close to fitting that mold.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magaz ... ier-t.html

Great article BTW.

Post #77 » by **nate33** » Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:44 pm

CrankyTodd wrote:He's the only person on our team whose potential contribution to the team exceeds his statistics re:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magaz ... ier-t.html

Great article BTW.

It is a very good article. I'm curious about your comment though. Was there something I missed? I didn't see any stats about Crittenton in the article. Are you just opining that Crittenton is the only guy who's contribution exceeds his stats? Or is that an actual stat tabulated by someone?

One paragraph of the article struck me:

The 3-point shot from the corner is the single most efficient shot in the N.B.A. One way the Rockets can tell if their opponents have taken to analyzing basketball in similar ways as they do is their attitude to the corner 3: the smart teams take a lot of them and seek to prevent their opponents from taking them.

Now that I think about it, the Wizards NEVER shoot 3's from the corner. And they yield them all the time.

CrankyTodd · Post #78 » by **CrankyTodd** » Sun Feb 15, 2009 4:42 pm

nate33 wrote:It is a very good article. I'm curious about your comment though. Was there something I missed? I didn't see any stats about Crittenton in the article. Are you just opining that Crittenton is the only guy who's contribution exceeds his stats? Or is that an actual stat tabulated by someone?

Just opining. Nothing Crit specific in the article. As I was reading the article, I was attempting to think of a single player on our roster whose contribution perhaps exceeds his statistical output, and Crit was the player who came to mind. Slim pickings indeed. We're packed with the opposite though (stat greedy, flashy non-winners). I edited the original post for clarity. Thanks Nate.

daSwami · Post #79 » by **daSwami** » Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:19 pm

CrankyTodd wrote:
nate33 wrote:It is a very good article. I'm curious about your comment though. Was there something I missed? I didn't see any stats about Crittenton in the article. Are you just opining that Crittenton is the only guy who's contribution exceeds his stats? Or is that an actual stat tabulated by someone?

Just opining. Nothing Crit specific in the article. As I was reading the article, I was attempting to think of a single player on our roster whose contribution perhaps exceeds his statistical output, and Crit was the player who came to mind. Slim pickings indeed. We're packed with the opposite though (stat greedy, flashy non-winners). I edited the original post for clarity. Thanks Nate.

Great article. I'd say Haywood is the Wizard who most fits the Battier mold.

I remember when one of the great debates on this board was whether we should've taken Battier or Kwame with the #1 overall pick in 2001. In hindsight its a no-brainer which side was right in that argument (thankfully that thread is lost in the ether, as I think I was a pro-Kwame guy at the time, mezmorized by his freakishness).

pancakes3 · Post #80 » by **pancakes3** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:28 am

typical michael lewis archetype. i wonder if there's just not enough stuff there to write a book like he did with moneyball and blind side or if this was just a rough sketch of what's to come.

also worth noting
-manu has no faults in his game, well other than to get better in all of them, but he's equally good and equally bad. that's... very interesting
-it is easier to take a charge/dive for loose balls on hardwood than asphalt.
-the rockets VP has an insane way to watch basketball. he'd probably go into cardiac arrest if he ran the 'zards.
-the rule of thumb of x minutes left with x point lead results in an 80% win percentage
- the aforementioned corner 3. i wonder what dictates the efficiency thereof and why.