The Official Allen Crabbe Thread

[Prokorov]

If Marks offers the contract that you say he is worth then no way is he a net right now. Even if marks offered Crabbe $10mill a year Portland would still match and not need to trade. The truth is he had to do what he did

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars

. If the salary cap went up to $120mill as many expected gm's thought/assumed it would then Crabbe would still not be a Net. We still have players on Rookie deals that when they are up for re-signing Crabbe, Mozgov and Carrol will be just about off our books. So I don't buy into wasting/hogging up cap room. Because even though I love our preseason form so far. I don't think we are a attracting quality free agents for a while yet.

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

[vincecarter4pres]

If Marks offers the contract that you say he is worth then no way is he a net right now. Even if marks offered Crabbe $10mill a year Portland would still match and not need to trade. The truth is he had to do what he did

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars

. If the salary cap went up to $120mill as many expected gm's thought/assumed it would then Crabbe would still not be a Net. We still have players on Rookie deals that when they are up for re-signing Crabbe, Mozgov and Carrol will be just about off our books. So I don't buy into wasting/hogging up cap room. Because even though I love our preseason form so far. I don't think we are a attracting quality free agents for a while yet.

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

You never know, he could become Kyle Korver meets Wes Mathews.

[Aussienet3]

If Marks offers the contract that you say he is worth then no way is he a net right now. Even if marks offered Crabbe $10mill a year Portland would still match and not need to trade. The truth is he had to do what he did

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars

. If the salary cap went up to $120mill as many expected gm's thought/assumed it would then Crabbe would still not be a Net. We still have players on Rookie deals that when they are up for re-signing Crabbe, Mozgov and Carrol will be just about off our books. So I don't buy into wasting/hogging up cap room. Because even though I love our preseason form so far. I don't think we are a attracting quality free agents for a while yet.

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

The only down side I see In Crabbes contract is that in Kenny's system No-one is going to average 25+ points per game. Sure players are going to get hot during games and our unselfish players will spoon feed them like babies. But kenny's system calls for 20-30 mins max per starter and an even contribution from the rest of the squad. Crabbe probably isn't going to get the minutes to put up the numbers that justifies his contract numbers. Having said that wizards, heat and to a lesser extent the blazers have salary cap pressure because of what marks did. I have no problem with us paying Crabbes salary as he is a true 'system' fit for us. BTW if we didn't have Crabbe or his salary on our roster who do you think (outside of Harris) would/should be on our roster? That's a legit question with no sarcasm or smart ass involved.

[Aussienet3]

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

A quick look at our future Cap holdings show that Caris,RHJ, Allen and D'lo will still be on their rookie scale contracts. Carroll will be gone, Lin will be gone (if not re-signed) when Crabbe and Mozgov become expiring contracts. We will have Raptors first round pick on a rookie scale and our pick back. With salary cap also set to still be rising all be it not as massively as first thought. And quality free agents hardly banging down our door to sign with us. I still fail to see how Crabbe's contract will hinder our cap space going forward. It may hinder Harris getting a decent contract but that's not the debate here. I will agree that it's not the best contract going around but it certainly ain't the worst. I give Marks full credit for putting his balls on the line and having a second crack at crabbe.

[Prokorov]

If Marks offers the contract that you say he is worth then no way is he a net right now. Even if marks offered Crabbe $10mill a year Portland would still match and not need to trade. The truth is he had to do what he did

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars

. If the salary cap went up to $120mill as many expected gm's thought/assumed it would then Crabbe would still not be a Net. We still have players on Rookie deals that when they are up for re-signing Crabbe, Mozgov and Carrol will be just about off our books. So I don't buy into wasting/hogging up cap room. Because even though I love our preseason form so far. I don't think we are a attracting quality free agents for a while yet.

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

You never know, he could become Kyle Korver meets Wes Mathews.

which still wouldnt be worth 19M a year IMO.

hopefully he can maximize what he is now that we are locked in. but you dont pay roll 1 way shooters allstar money. especially ones who were not high prospects and havent shown much in 4 years.

[Prokorov]

If Marks offers the contract that you say he is worth then no way is he a net right now. Even if marks offered Crabbe $10mill a year Portland would still match and not need to trade. The truth is he had to do what he did

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars

. If the salary cap went up to $120mill as many expected gm's thought/assumed it would then Crabbe would still not be a Net. We still have players on Rookie deals that when they are up for re-signing Crabbe, Mozgov and Carrol will be just about off our books. So I don't buy into wasting/hogging up cap room. Because even though I love our preseason form so far. I don't think we are a attracting quality free agents for a while yet.

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

The only down side I see In Crabbes contract is that in Kenny's system No-one is going to average 25+ points per game. Sure players are going to get hot during games and our unselfish players will spoon feed them like babies. But kenny's system calls for 20-30 mins max per starter and an even contribution from the rest of the squad. Crabbe probably isn't going to get the minutes to put up the numbers that justifies his contract numbers. Having said that wizards, heat and to a lesser extent the blazers have salary cap pressure because of what marks did. I have no problem with us paying Crabbes salary as he is a true 'system' fit for us. BTW if we didn't have Crabbe or his salary on our roster who do you think (outside of Harris) would/should be on our roster? That's a legit question with no sarcasm or smart ass involved.

without crabbe id be happy with who we have besides him. i see nothing harris cant do that crabbe gives us and then we have 20 million to work with to aquire more assets or put towards a russell extension

[Prokorov]

A quick look at our future Cap holdings show that Caris,RHJ, Allen and D'lo will still be on their rookie scale contracts. Carroll will be gone, Lin will be gone (if not re-signed) when Crabbe and Mozgov become expiring contracts. We will have Raptors first round pick on a rookie scale and our pick back. With salary cap also set to still be rising all be it not as massively as first thought. And quality free agents hardly banging down our door to sign with us. I still fail to see how Crabbe's contract will hinder our cap space going forward. It may hinder Harris getting a decent contract but that's not the debate here. I will agree that it's not the best contract going around but it certainly ain't the worst. I give Marks full credit for putting his balls on the line and having a second crack at crabbe.

russell wont be on his rookie deal. he is due a huge extension this offseason. same with RHJ. unless you want them both playing on the qualifying offer so they become UFA whose rights we dont control. the next season Caris is eligible for a big extension. We arent in cap hell but paying bench guys 19 million isnt a great look when you have 3 young guys due big money and need to make a decision on Lin as well

[ChokeFasncists]

If Marks offers the contract that you say he is worth then no way is he a net right now. Even if marks offered Crabbe $10mill a year Portland would still match and not need to trade. The truth is he had to do what he did

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars

. If the salary cap went up to $120mill as many expected gm's thought/assumed it would then Crabbe would still not be a Net. We still have players on Rookie deals that when they are up for re-signing Crabbe, Mozgov and Carrol will be just about off our books. So I don't buy into wasting/hogging up cap room. Because even though I love our preseason form so far. I don't think we are a attracting quality free agents for a while yet.

again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

You never know, he could become Kyle Korver meets Wes Mathews.

Nice one. It could very well be. He does have a lot of potential. Or maybe a Klay-lite?

From those few minutes, he surely looks like he'll be better than JHar, quicker, longer, more athletic, more flexible, better shooter, better passer, better defender.

[Netaman]

Wes Matthews is a good comparison from the standpoint of having been a similar RFA gamble. In 2010 the salary cap was $58M and he got a 5 year $35M contract at age 24 after 1 season where he averaged 10 ppg. I know that amount of money seems insignificant now, but you need to remember how different things were then. It's basically the same contract we gave Outlaw - which at the time seemed like a big albatross.

In some ways Crabbe is less of a risk because he's more proven and his contract only runs 3 years, on the flip side some might argue his potential isn't as high. At age 25 I think it's a good risk because I don't see where they'd be able to get someone with higher potential. Would I rather have Otto Porter? Probably, even at the twice the price. But his team matched. As will almost all the teams who have players who are clearly better than Crabbe.

[Vae Victus]

Taking on Allen Crabbe's deal is a calculated risk by the FO. I honestly think they figure they can transform him into a more complete Otto Porter Jr type player AND even if they fail to develop more than he already is (12-13 pt per game elite sniper and not much else), they figure an expiring Crabbe is worth something especially if they attach a sweetener. Whether its part of a package for a star or for a position of future need on a "bad" contract with more years left, especially if the FO doesnt feel like they can get a good FA to sign. Worse comes to worse, one can stretch Crabbe for a 3.8 mil a year cap hit, or trade him to some team with excess cap and desperate for a shooter + pick ala DMC trade.

These are reasonable gambles and if Crabbe does develop more fully it makes Levert into an expendable player who can be considered a NICE sweetener in event a disgruntled star wants out and thinks the Nets are a fine franchise to join and boost to glory. Something like DMC (or Mozgov if its a big) + Levert + pick for Disgruntled Star. Allen if he develops quickly can also be in the same boat, as promising youngsters on rookie deals are valued immensely. Crabbe, Moz, and DMC can all be used salary cap filler for future deals, or kept (Crabbe, Moz) if they do their jobs well.

[MrDollarBills]

There is no way in hell LeVert gets traded. Marks would have to be insane.

[Curns13]

Taking on Allen Crabbe's deal is a calculated risk by the FO. I honestly think they figure they can transform him into a more complete Otto Porter Jr type player AND even if they fail to develop more than he already is (12-13 pt per game elite sniper and not much else), they figure an expiring Crabbe is worth something especially if they attach a sweetener. Whether its part of a package for a star or for a position of future need on a "bad" contract with more years left, especially if the FO doesnt feel like they can get a good FA to sign. Worse comes to worse, one can stretch Crabbe for a 3.8 mil a year cap hit, or trade him to some team with excess cap and desperate for a shooter + pick ala DMC trade.

These are reasonable gambles and if Crabbe does develop more fully it makes Levert into an expendable player who can be considered a NICE sweetener in event a disgruntled star wants out and thinks the Nets are a fine franchise to join and boost to glory. Something like DMC (or Mozgov if its a big) + Levert + pick for Disgruntled Star. Allen if he develops quickly can also be in the same boat, as promising youngsters on rookie deals are valued immensely. Crabbe, Moz, and DMC can all be used salary cap filler for future deals, or kept (Crabbe, Moz) if they do their jobs well.

Nothing makes LeVert expendable. He is gonna be here a very long time.

[Paradise]

Caris will be here for a very long time.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[Vae Victus]

Dont be ridiculous guys on keeping Levert no matter what. A smart GM has all his pieces available for trade, for the right price. Just dont be stupid like the Lakers and trade their best young player for cap savings nickels on the dollar, but if a disgruntled superstar is on the block, with the type deals that it took to nab them, a Crabbe/Mozgov/DMC + Levert + lotto protected 1st is enough to get em, you do that deal and run.

Just like the Spurs you continue to rely on smart scouting and drafting to refill your cupboard of youth talent. You dont want big salalry tied up for the likes of Crabbe/Mozgov/DMC, when instead for 10 mil more you can get a major upgrade. I dont bother including Lin, cuz he's either gone in FA or resigned to a long term deal to stick around by the end of next offseason. BUT in a coupla years later if a Lin + Allen (who's looking quite nice like Levert is) + protected 1st package, can net u a disgruntled superstar, you go do the same merry go round again.

Keep accumulating value over the assets the team personally built up. You dont make trades willy nilly, but to make concrete stratgic upgrades for the long haul.

Getting attached to young players wrongly cuz you drafted them is one of the worst things a franchise can do. It can lead to trades being missed or worst yet resigned to big money cuz of myopia. This is EXACTLY what happened to the LALs with worthless ass Jordan Clarkson and Julius Randle. The team stupidly overpaid Clarkson cuz they "invested" so much into him becoming an up and coming star and Julius Randle is still around on his final year when he shoulda been moved last year when his shine was higher. Ive a feeling that Magic wanted to hold onto these two instead of trading them for PG13...

[treiz]

^But why would we go after a disgruntled star? We're ONLY in year 2 of the rebuilding phase and have ZERO reason to trade for one considering the timeline of our current roster. Adding a George/Butler for example will just pin us to a similar position as these 2 were at their previous teams in Indiana and Chicago respectively. Just because we're optimistic about the Nets doesn't mean the rest of the league is, at the end of the day the Nets' reputation around the league right now is a team on the up in 2-3 years and some of these disgruntled stars want to win now.

I don't even know who could potentially fall in that category as most of the (I suppose) "disgruntled" stars of last year just recently moved (George/Paul/Cousins/Irving/Thomas/Butler). Even so, let's say George or somebody else becomes disgruntled, they'll just be stuck in the same position they were in before, and as these stars tend to have a year or two left in their contract, they have no reason to sign an extension especially for a team that's maybe another 2-3 years away.

So in effect, we're trading a bunch of our blue-chip assets for a disgruntled star that might not sign an extension with us. This sounds familiar....

[Prokorov]

GOOD! if i could undo the crabbe move i do it 101 times out of 100. Crabbe is one of the leagues worst contracts and not a needle mover and we have a similar player in harris at near minimum dollars




again... GOOD! if he wasnt a net on that contract we would be better off. look at all the best moves we made. what did they have in common? using cap room to aquire young stars or picks. got a first with carroll and got dlo for taking on mozgov. if we didnt have crabbe we could do more of that. we could also put pressure on all the RFAs next offseason.

if you want to argue crabbe can help thats one thing. to argue his contract isnt a horrible one that will hidner us cap wise thats just flat out crazy talk

You never know, he could become Kyle Korver meets Wes Mathews.

Nice one. It could very well be. He does have a lot of potential. Or maybe a Klay-lite?

From those few minutes, he surely looks like he'll be better than JHar, quicker, longer, more athletic, more flexible, better shooter, better passer, better defender.

he isnt a better passer and not close to a better defender then harris. im not sure he is quicker either and while its outdated based on their combine he isnt much more athletic

[Prokorov]

Wes Matthews is a good comparison from the standpoint of having been a similar RFA gamble. In 2010 the salary cap was $58M and he got a 5 year $35M contract at age 24 after 1 season where he averaged 10 ppg. I know that amount of money seems insignificant now, but you need to remember how different things were then. It's basically the same contract we gave Outlaw - which at the time seemed like a big albatross.

In some ways Crabbe is less of a risk because he's more proven and his contract only runs 3 years, on the flip side some might argue his potential isn't as high. At age 25 I think it's a good risk because I don't see where they'd be able to get someone with higher potential. Would I rather have Otto Porter? Probably, even at the twice the price. But his team matched. As will almost all the teams who have players who are clearly better than Crabbe.

Outlaw WAS an albatross contract. so much so we amnestied him just a couple years in. It was an enormous failure.

Crabbe is not more proven either. Has has 1 year shooting over 40% from three and 3 straight years of being one of the leagues worst defenders. im not sure what he proved last year other then he wasnt worth what he was paid

[Prokorov]

Taking on Allen Crabbe's deal is a calculated risk by the FO. I honestly think they figure they can transform him into a more complete Otto Porter Jr type player AND even if they fail to develop more than he already is (12-13 pt per game elite sniper and not much else), they figure an expiring Crabbe is worth something especially if they attach a sweetener. Whether its part of a package for a star or for a position of future need on a "bad" contract with more years left, especially if the FO doesnt feel like they can get a good FA to sign. Worse comes to worse, one can stretch Crabbe for a 3.8 mil a year cap hit, or trade him to some team with excess cap and desperate for a shooter + pick ala DMC trade.

I dont view it as calculated risk. I think marks thinks he has allstar potential. You dont pay someone that kind of money based on nothing (when marks offered him that deal he put up joe harris numbers) or a risk. I dont know how much value crabbe has considering outside of us teams wanted at least 1 first to take him on (people on this board wanted TWO firsts to take him on - check the trade thread)

I'm not going to comment on the otto porter thing other then to say he was better in every facet of the game, younger, higher draft stock and not an awful defender. i was like 90-100% against otto porter, but he is significantly better then crabbe and younger

These are reasonable gambles and if Crabbe does develop more fully it makes Levert into an expendable player who can be considered a NICE sweetener in event a disgruntled star wants out and thinks the Nets are a fine franchise to join and boost to glory. Something like DMC (or Mozgov if its a big) + Levert + pick for Disgruntled Star. Allen if he develops quickly can also be in the same boat, as promising youngsters on rookie deals are valued immensely. Crabbe, Moz, and DMC can all be used salary cap filler for future deals, or kept (Crabbe, Moz) if they do their jobs well.

Levert is probably already better then crabbe on both ends of the floor and younger. I dont see how crabbe makes him expendable. probably the other way around. typically you keep the younger/better/cheaper player. I dont see anything to suggest crabbe can be an allstar.

I dont really want to make this a bitchfest about crabbe because i have no issue with him. he isnt some dog or bad guy off the floor and his skills fit what we do on offense and he deserves a chane to show he can be better then a liability on defense.

my issue has never been with crabbe here, its with marks. if we had crabbe for MLE type money this is a non issue. I mean forget the harris comparisons is he really worth 3 times jaymichael green?

[Prokorov]

^But why would we go after a disgruntled star? We're ONLY in year 2 of the rebuilding phase and have ZERO reason to trade for one considering the timeline of our current roster. Adding a George/Butler for example will just pin us to a similar position as these 2 were at their previous teams in Indiana and Chicago respectively. Just because we're optimistic about the Nets doesn't mean the rest of the league is, at the end of the day the Nets' reputation around the league right now is a team on the up in 2-3 years and some of these disgruntled stars want to win now.

I don't even know who could potentially fall in that category as most of the (I suppose) "disgruntled" stars of last year just recently moved (George/Paul/Cousins/Irving/Thomas/Butler). Even so, let's say George or somebody else becomes disgruntled, they'll just be stuck in the same position they were in before, and as these stars tend to have a year or two left in their contract, they have no reason to sign an extension especially for a team that's maybe another 2-3 years away.

So in effect, we're trading a bunch of our blue-chip assets for a disgruntled star that might not sign an extension with us. This sounds familiar....

I agree with this. the move should be building from within these next 3 or 4 years. develop what we have then add first round lotto talent 2019 and beyond to that. in 2020-2021 maybe we look to add an allstar type. otherwise we should be looking for more guys like russell or more pick packages

[MrDollarBills]

Dont be ridiculous guys on keeping Levert no matter what. A smart GM has all his pieces available for trade, for the right price. Just dont be stupid like the Lakers and trade their best young player for cap savings nickels on the dollar, but if a disgruntled superstar is on the block, with the type deals that it took to nab them, a Crabbe/Mozgov/DMC + Levert + lotto protected 1st is enough to get em, you do that deal and run.

Just like the Spurs you continue to rely on smart scouting and drafting to refill your cupboard of youth talent. You dont want big salalry tied up for the likes of Crabbe/Mozgov/DMC, when instead for 10 mil more you can get a major upgrade. I dont bother including Lin, cuz he's either gone in FA or resigned to a long term deal to stick around by the end of next offseason. BUT in a coupla years later if a Lin + Allen (who's looking quite nice like Levert is) + protected 1st package, can net u a disgruntled superstar, you go do the same merry go round again.

Keep accumulating value over the assets the team personally built up. You dont make trades willy nilly, but to make concrete stratgic upgrades for the long haul.

Getting attached to young players wrongly cuz you drafted them is one of the worst things a franchise can do. It can lead to trades being missed or worst yet resigned to big money cuz of myopia. This is EXACTLY what happened to the LALs with worthless ass Jordan Clarkson and Julius Randle. The team stupidly overpaid Clarkson cuz they "invested" so much into him becoming an up and coming star and Julius Randle is still around on his final year when he shoulda been moved last year when his shine was higher. Ive a feeling that Magic wanted to hold onto these two instead of trading them for PG13...

the last time we traded for a disgruntled star we got burned, big time. no thank you.

and this is also under the assumption that LeVert won't develop into a star himself. the way he looks right now, I am not writing off the chance that this kid could become one of the better players at his position over the next few years.