ImageImageImageImageImage

Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 52,610
And1: 8,968
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
       

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#301 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Fri Feb 22, 2013 6:57 pm

nate33 wrote:
McGully Culkin wrote:I just came across this...I still dont think we got good value for JC, but now I understand WHY the trade was made. There was obviously more going on behind the scenes that we knew about.

http://www.wusa9.com/sports/article/244 ... d-Riddance

Thanks for posting this. It explains a lot.

It's about time somebody in the media start telling us what's going on in the locker room. If Crawford was going out of his way to undermine Beal, then I can understand why they would view dumping Crawford as addition by subtraction.


Crawford was a veteran and Beal a rookie. The Wizards were dumb enough to keep Crawford after they drafted Beal. The first rule in nature is survival. Crawford's survival as a Wizard stemmed on his proving to be better than Beal, a 19-year old who Crawford was better than to start the season. Crawford was a veteran who Beal said he looked up to.

Stuff about Crawford undermining Beal is bullshyt IMO. As far as I am concerned the writer of that article linked above put his agenda out there with this line:

Jordan Crawford was the last piece of shrapnel left over from the knucklehead Wizards era. Crawford was never as big of a cancer as Andray Blatche or JaVale McGee, but his irrational persona had become a misfit puzzle piece. Certain players don't value winning. Crawford was that way in D.C. Maybe he will change in Boston while surrounded by savvy veterans. Maybe not.


The Steez personna was what he labels irrational. This is character assassination at its finest. Calling something the knucklehead era blasts young players and never looks at Grunfeld or Leonsis as an owner. What are they? This writer like many others don't understand the uproar over getting rid of Crawford, a player I and many others have wanted to get rid of for a while.

Crawford got better. Crawford won my respect THIS SEASON. He is what he is, but the guy is a good soldier from a standpoint that he gives his best. The shots were not selfish shots. They were unwise often terrible shots. His defense was not good. However, at times the guy was sensational. Even his biggest critics saw the game winner. Crawford was mobbed with affection from his teammates after that show. Watch the video of that play.

That Crawford had some trade value.

The uproar I feel is that once again dunderhead Grunfeld, at Ted's behest, got rid of an asset for nothing in return. Why not start throwing the labels both ways?
Bye bye Beal.
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,365
And1: 3,825
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#302 » by tontoz » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:06 pm

This is definitely the knucklehead era. Unfortunately it won't be over until EG is gone.
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 52,610
And1: 8,968
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
       

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#303 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:08 pm

Trevor Jackson, of Blog So Hard Sports, wrote an article that illustrates just when the Wizards ran into problems with Crawford and when they should have traded Jordan.

THE BRADLEY BEAL AND JORDAN CRAWFORD DILEMMA

…. the large increase Beal’s stats corresponds with the increase in court time he saw in Crawford’s absence. Clearly Crawford doesn’t impact Beal’s shooting stroke when he is on the court, but in the four game Jordan sat out, Bradley played an average of 38.4 minutes per game. In the 4 game since Crawford has returned, that playing time has dropped to 28.7 minutes per game.

Beal averaged 20.3 points, 3.5 rebounds, and 3.5 assists per game while Crawford sat out. During that stretch, he shot 50.1% from the floor (29/57) on 14.3 shots per game. Those numbers drop pretty dramatically when Crawford returned, as Brad averaged 12.5 points, 2.8 rebounds, and .8 assists per game. His shooting percentage dropped to 45.2% (19/42) and shots per game drop almost 4 to 10.5 per game.

Clearly I am in the pro-Beal category as most Wizards fans are, but where does this leave Crawford? What are the options for the Wizards?


Crawford didn't make Beal worse. Crawford has value as a back up at PG. That value should have returned the Wizards at least a 2nd round pick.
Bye bye Beal.
Doctor Bombay
Ballboy
Posts: 11
And1: 0
Joined: May 17, 2012

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#304 » by Doctor Bombay » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:11 pm

Dat2U wrote:...When I saw this deal, I openly laughed. I laughed at the thought of the reactions on here. This organization makes me laugh. Not in a funny haha type of way, but in laughing away the pain type of way.

I think you're funny, but not the funny like a joke
I think you're funny like the funny as in Little Richard -
You're even more of a sucka than I pictured

- Cassanova

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9Dwkra2xtA

The last line in that verse is what immediately came to mind when I heard of this trade.
:lol: -> :roll: -> :x -> :evil:
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#305 » by Nivek » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:12 pm

GhostsOfGil wrote:
Nivek wrote:TGW: Love the sig.

I made that. Saw that quote and had to make a sig of it. :lol:


Just terrific. Well done.

I sorta agree with CCJ. The ONLY reason to trade Crawford was because the relationship between him and his co-workers was broken in some way. Whether Crawford's bad attitude was the cause or the effect of his treatment by the team, it's just the latest example of the team not maximizing its assets.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
McGully Culkin
Sophomore
Posts: 184
And1: 19
Joined: Oct 09, 2008

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#306 » by McGully Culkin » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:13 pm

CCJ - what about the notion that Crawford was the player Nene was alluding to in his early-season rant about players on the squad not respecting the game?

Personally, I fell as though Crawford THOUGHT the starting SG job was his by default coming out of camp. From the time Beal was drafted, it was made known that there would be an open competition between him and Crawford. Whether we agree with that or not, that was how the Wizards decided to handle this situation.

I believe Crawford's jimmies were rustled the second Beal was drafted. He'd probably have a much easier time coming off the bench behind James Harden. However, he's now having to fight for his starting job with a 19 year old kid. There is a 4 1/2 year age difference between the two and in a league where ego is king, this HAD to have hurt Crawford.

This is just me speculating, but coupled with what I read in the article, I think there is a lot of truth to what was written and we also got a glimpse of what was going on behind closed doors.

I think we can all agree that we got pennies on the dollar for Crawford. I personally felt that we should have gotten more and I think the trade itself was awful and paints a picture of the ineptitude of our blundering front office. However, Crawford NEEDED to be moved because it seems like he was hindering Beal's growth and was just not a good fit for the direction of the roster that the team is trying to go towards. You look at who we have now, and it's nothing but guys who work hard and are selfless. The page is completely turned from the days of Blatche, McGee, Young, and now, Crawford. It doesn't absolve the front office from not doing their due diligence or the way they failed at developing JC. This team is a mess, but this move was absolutely necessary.
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,365
And1: 3,825
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#307 » by tontoz » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:14 pm

Beal averaged 20.3 points, 3.5 rebounds, and 3.5 assists per game while Crawford sat out. During that stretch, he shot 50.1% from the floor (29/57) on 14.3 shots per game. Those numbers drop pretty dramatically when Crawford returned, as Brad averaged 12.5 points, 2.8 rebounds, and .8 assists per game. His shooting percentage dropped to 45.2% (19/42) and shots per game drop almost 4 to 10.5 per game.



Does this clown really not realize that Beal injured his shooting hand right after Jordan came back from his ankle injury?

:roll:
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 52,610
And1: 8,968
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
       

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#308 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:18 pm

Nivek wrote:
GhostsOfGil wrote:
Nivek wrote:TGW: Love the sig.

I made that. Saw that quote and had to make a sig of it. :lol:


Just terrific. Well done.

I sorta agree with CCJ. The ONLY reason to trade Crawford was because the relationship between him and his co-workers was broken in some way. Whether Crawford's bad attitude was the cause or the effect of his treatment by the team, it's just the latest example of the team not maximizing its assets.


Cause and effect say dude didn't have any problems at all when he was playing. I would have a problem, too, with going from 28-32 minutes to DNP CD. I might get a little pissy, too, if I had been carrying the team when Nene and others were bandaged up. I'm just trying to empathize with what might have been Jordan Crawford's perspective. I don't know the man's thoughts prior to the trade or whether his teammates didn't like him, or vice versa.

Nivek, the point about not maximizing assets is the bottom line.

All the relationship with teammates angles are conjecture, moot points as far as I am concerned. Crawford the player is far from a 12th man. Jordan Crawford is quite possibly somewhere between a 6th or 7th man on a decent team. Sort of the same way Andray Blatche is helping Brooklyn, a team that is better than the Wizards, another team received a player for nothing.

The Wizards, a sorry team, traded Jordan Crawford for nothing.
Bye bye Beal.
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 52,610
And1: 8,968
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
       

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#309 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:26 pm

McGully Culkin wrote:CCJ - what about the notion that Crawford was the player Nene was alluding to in his early-season rant about players on the squad not respecting the game?


McGully Culkin, every since then Nene has not missed games like he routinely did. Nene seems to respect the game enough NOW to play through. I can't say. Maybe Nene is right that Crawford did not respect the game. Or, perhaps that was a perception of Nene's. Nene is a good player. Much better than Crawford. I respect that Nene has a lot of insight into the character and heart of a player in his locker room. Nene probably had a good reason. However, just because one player can't stand another, you don't jettison that player for nothing in return if you are GM or ownership. Nene's or any other teammate's opinions should not force a trade.

Personally, I fell as though Crawford THOUGHT the starting SG job was his by default coming out of camp. From the time Beal was drafted, it was made known that there would be an open competition between him and Crawford. Whether we agree with that or not, that was how the Wizards decided to handle this situation.

I believe Crawford's jimmies were rustled the second Beal was drafted. He'd probably have a much easier time coming off the bench behind James Harden. However, he's now having to fight for his starting job with a 19 year old kid. There is a 4 1/2 year age difference between the two and in a league where ego is king, this HAD to have hurt Crawford.

This is just me speculating, but coupled with what I read in the article, I think there is a lot of truth to what was written and we also got a glimpse of what was going on behind closed doors.

I think we can all agree that we got pennies on the dollar for Crawford.
I personally felt that we should have gotten more and I think the trade itself was awful and paints a picture of the ineptitude of our blundering front office. However, Crawford NEEDED to be moved because it seems like he was hindering Beal's growth and was just not a good fit for the direction of the roster that the team is trying to go towards. You look at who we have now, and it's nothing but guys who work hard and are selfless. The page is completely turned from the days of Blatche, McGee, Young, and now, Crawford. It doesn't absolve the front office from not doing their due diligence or the way they failed at developing JC. This team is a mess, but this move was absolutely necessary.


You and I both feel we should have gotten something, regardless of the truth behind closed doors, McGully Culkin.
Bye bye Beal.
McGully Culkin
Sophomore
Posts: 184
And1: 19
Joined: Oct 09, 2008

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#310 » by McGully Culkin » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:35 pm

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:
McGully Culkin wrote:CCJ - what about the notion that Crawford was the player Nene was alluding to in his early-season rant about players on the squad not respecting the game?


McGully Culkin, every since then Nene has not missed games like he routinely did. Nene seems to respect the game enough NOW to play through. I can't say. Maybe Nene is right that Crawford did not respect the game. Or, perhaps that was a perception of Nene's. Nene is a good player. Much better than Crawford. I respect that Nene has a lot of insight into the character and heart of a player in his locker room. Nene probably had a good reason. However, just because one player can't stand another, you don't jettison that player for nothing in return if you are GM or ownership. Nene's or any other teammate's opinions should not force a trade.

Personally, I fell as though Crawford THOUGHT the starting SG job was his by default coming out of camp. From the time Beal was drafted, it was made known that there would be an open competition between him and Crawford. Whether we agree with that or not, that was how the Wizards decided to handle this situation.

I believe Crawford's jimmies were rustled the second Beal was drafted. He'd probably have a much easier time coming off the bench behind James Harden. However, he's now having to fight for his starting job with a 19 year old kid. There is a 4 1/2 year age difference between the two and in a league where ego is king, this HAD to have hurt Crawford.

This is just me speculating, but coupled with what I read in the article, I think there is a lot of truth to what was written and we also got a glimpse of what was going on behind closed doors.

I think we can all agree that we got pennies on the dollar for Crawford.
I personally felt that we should have gotten more and I think the trade itself was awful and paints a picture of the ineptitude of our blundering front office. However, Crawford NEEDED to be moved because it seems like he was hindering Beal's growth and was just not a good fit for the direction of the roster that the team is trying to go towards. You look at who we have now, and it's nothing but guys who work hard and are selfless. The page is completely turned from the days of Blatche, McGee, Young, and now, Crawford. It doesn't absolve the front office from not doing their due diligence or the way they failed at developing JC. This team is a mess, but this move was absolutely necessary.


You and I both feel we should have gotten something, regardless of the truth behind closed doors, McGully Culkin.


Crawford was also a player who was never lacking confidence. I thinking about the team drafting Beal, some players might accept the challenge and try to elevate their games to show they're deserving of a starting gig, and others might show resentment.

It's just sad to see things go down like this. However, this is the "culture" created here in DC, and it's my hope that this is the last of it. I'm a diehard fan of the team and will never jump ship, but it's frustrating beyond belief at some of the ineptitude displayed by those in the front office in how they make decisions regarding this team on a daily basis.
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 52,610
And1: 8,968
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
       

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#311 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:47 pm

RustyMagoo wrote:So its a good trade because Craw knows the organization is garbage and doesn't mind saying so?

Just another scapegoat for Ernie.


:nod:

Welcome aboard, RustyMagoo.

It didn't take you many posts to get to the heart of the matter!

In fairness, the Wizards are a great launching pad for players to be placed on teams that succeed. After they do their time as Wizards they end up with much better teams and therefore, more enjoyment the rest of their careers.

(Jamison might be the only exception I can come up with.)
Bye bye Beal.
jivelikenice
Analyst
Posts: 3,074
And1: 145
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#312 » by jivelikenice » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:57 pm

Knighthonor wrote:
RustyMagoo wrote:So its a good trade because Craw knows the organization is garbage and doesn't mind saying so?

Just another scapegoat for Ernie.

Pret much this. That article is bull ****. Blatche is telling the same story as Crawford. There has to be some truth. The Wizard's staff throws anybody under the buss to save their sorry asses.


Blatche?....LOL. Please don't reference him as a source of credibility

CCJ, I don't understand the logic behind calling the article BS and doubting the author....it actually is the only logical reason to explain why they did what they did yesterday. It was also alluded to by Néne, and Ernie and Ted in commenting on the deal. How often do you hear a FO say "he's not part of our current plans"...you hear future a lot, but rarely anything more...I'm glad he's gone, just wish we moved him over the summer instead of allowing this nonsense to occur. I don't think Steez will be any more than a deep bench player in the near future and could quickly find his way out of the league....
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,785
And1: 19,073
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#313 » by nate33 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:10 pm

CCJ, here's the key quote, as far as I'm concerned:

Now Beal won't feel like he's stepping on anybody's toes. Using one of Crawford's old quotes, "people gravitate towards me," is actually true in a good way about Beal. Without Crawford snorting laughter in the background and undermining any type of serious approach to basketball, Wizards fans are about to meet the real Bradley Beal.

It sounds to me that when Beal tried to get serious and take a leadership role like he did in Florida, Crawford would laugh or make a snide comment in an attempt to undermine him. Management absolutely did not want that kind of attitude poisoning the team's perception of Beal. They (rightfully) want the team to emulate Beal's natural unselfishness and professionalism, not Crawford's me-first attitude and showy flamboyance.

Obviously, I'm reading a lot into one quote, but we don't have much else to go on at this point.
jivelikenice
Analyst
Posts: 3,074
And1: 145
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#314 » by jivelikenice » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:25 pm

Got a question/comment I want to toss out there that I posted in the quasi-game thread. If a GM had real interest when Steez was "lighting it up" in December, wouldn't they at least have tried to buy low when he was basically being given away at the deadline? Doesn't the fact that nobody else joined the fray lead you to believe his value was crap to begin with?
User avatar
Higga
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,877
And1: 831
Joined: Jan 29, 2007
Location: Tyson's Corner, VA

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#315 » by Higga » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:33 pm

I get that Crawford was being a dick, but that doesn't mean you give him away. He has some talent, and this team needs talent more than it needs boy scouts.
Eric Maynor is the worst basketball player I've ever seen.
User avatar
pancakes3
General Manager
Posts: 9,123
And1: 2,605
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#316 » by pancakes3 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:58 pm

That's why I maintain this discipline issue is more on Randy than Crawford. This kind of personnel management is exactly what the NBA head coach is supposed to handle. Phil Jackson this mess. That's why Pitino and other college coaches don't hack it in the NBA. They don't know how to manage players - only control them.
Bullets -> Wizards
jivelikenice
Analyst
Posts: 3,074
And1: 145
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#317 » by jivelikenice » Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:05 pm

Higga wrote:I get that Crawford was being a dick, but that doesn't mean you give him away. He has some talent, and this team needs talent more than it needs boy scouts.


You're right that we need talent. But you're wrong if you think players like him help build a winning team and culture. Javale, Dray, Nick, and Jordan all had talent, but none of that talent helped this team. Not a surprise that all three of them have failed to break out
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#318 » by Nivek » Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:30 pm

jivelikenice wrote:Got a question/comment I want to toss out there that I posted in the quasi-game thread. If a GM had real interest when Steez was "lighting it up" in December, wouldn't they at least have tried to buy low when he was basically being given away at the deadline? Doesn't the fact that nobody else joined the fray lead you to believe his value was crap to begin with?


This is an interesting point, and may have validity. It could be that GMs around the league more or less shared the assessment some of us had of Crawford -- that he was an inefficient player merely being permitted to play lots of minutes and take lots of shots because the team was awful. Coaches and GMs are generally unimpressed with players on bad teams. I've heard some say Crawford "kept the team afloat" early in the season. This is something that strikes me as nonsense -- the team was historically bad when he was posting his numbers.

The one thing that keeps from agreeing with you is that in December there was no hint of an attitude issue or a rift between Crawford and the team. Teams that may have had interest could have grown leery as they saw Crawford's increasing dissatisfaction with a smaller role. Especially since that's the role he's going to get wherever he goes.

By waiting, by letting Crawford's discontent become common knowledge around the league, the Wizards diminished his value and weakened their bargaining position. In effect, the Wizards told the rest of the league they didn't want Crawford and that Crawford was unhappy with a role "less than" being a high-minute starter. It's no shock that other teams weren't willing to give value for a guy the Wizards wanted to dump -- a guy NO ONE (except Crawford) thinks can be a starter for a good team.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,365
And1: 3,825
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#319 » by tontoz » Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:43 pm

Keep in mind that the Wizards turned down one prospect because he wasn't an expirer. There may have been others that we don't know about.
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
DCZards
General Manager
Posts: 9,946
And1: 3,917
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Location: The Streets of DC
     

Re: Big Balls traded to Boston for (almost) NOTHING 

Post#320 » by DCZards » Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:48 pm

I don't think Crawford's attitude problems were something new or something unknown to other GMs prior to his recent benching. Wasn't there a game last season where Craw said he shot the ball every time he touched it because he was pissed that he had been taken out of the starting lineup?

My guess is that both JC's game and attitude have long been well-known to GMs throughout the NBA.

Return to Washington Wizards