The Official Allen Crabbe Thread

[steady]

honestly if crabbe made 7 mil less this wouldn't be an issue lol

They did conveniently dump a $7M dead weight for the next 3 years as part of the deal to get Crabbe. So if you believe we got the pick from WAS more because of our willingness to take back Nicholson than acquire Bogdonovic, in return for taking on Crabbe Portland helped absorb a good chunk of the cost we paid to get Jarrett Allen.

This is spot on. They had no plans to keep Bogdanovic and didn’t even try. Exactly the way we should be thinking about Crabbe. He was the equivalent of a 36 mill/3 year FA signing. Only difference is that he can’t be traded as easily as someone actually on that deal.

Anyone who refuses to admit that those two are basically equivalent has an agenda.

I agree -- I never understood the narrative that...

Nets magically got a 1st for Bogdonavic
And took a cap hit of $18 m/year for Crabbe for three years

... completely ignoring the important role that Nicholson's $7 mill/yr for 3 years contract , played in both of those trades.

A salary dump of $20 mill is about what the market usually demands for a 1st round pick. Taking on Nicholson's $21 m over 3 years was how we got the 1st round pick that became Jarrett Allen. ... it wasn't Bogs

And sending Nicholson to Portland was the reason Marks agreed to take on Crabbe's $18 m/year for 3 years contract, because the reverse salary dump of Nicholson, made the net cap hit from the Crabbe trade only $12m/year

So the way I see it is the Nets' cap hit from the Crabbe trade , is a net $12/m per year.

[TheBrooklynKidd]

They did conveniently dump a $7M dead weight for the next 3 years as part of the deal to get Crabbe. So if you believe we got the pick from WAS more because of our willingness to take back Nicholson than acquire Bogdonovic, in return for taking on Crabbe Portland helped absorb a good chunk of the cost we paid to get Jarrett Allen.

This is spot on. They had no plans to keep Bogdanovic and didn’t even try. Exactly the way we should be thinking about Crabbe. He was the equivalent of a 36 mill/3 year FA signing. Only difference is that he can’t be traded as easily as someone actually on that deal.

Anyone who refuses to admit that those two are basically equivalent has an agenda.

It's nice to think about it as only about $7mil of dead money still on the roster, but it still limits flexibility more than Nicholson & no Crabbe would have. $7mil can be squeezed into a larger deal. $7mil can be stretched & not be a cap killer. You have little choice but to ride out $19mil.

It absolutely limits flexibility. But I assume there weren’t anymore teams willing to dump players and give up picks that summer. Otherwise Marks would’ve done those deals.

I think the way the justifies it was along the lines of: we have to show progress on the court out of respect to ownership

[TheBrooklynKidd]

They did conveniently dump a $7M dead weight for the next 3 years as part of the deal to get Crabbe. So if you believe we got the pick from WAS more because of our willingness to take back Nicholson than acquire Bogdonovic, in return for taking on Crabbe Portland helped absorb a good chunk of the cost we paid to get Jarrett Allen.

This is spot on. They had no plans to keep Bogdanovic and didn’t even try. Exactly the way we should be thinking about Crabbe. He was the equivalent of a 36 mill/3 year FA signing. Only difference is that he can’t be traded as easily as someone actually on that deal.

Anyone who refuses to admit that those two are basically equivalent has an agenda.

I agree -- I never understood the narrative that...

Nets magically got a 1st for Bogdonavic
And took a cap hit of $18 m/year for Crabbe for three years

... completely ignoring the important role that Nicholson's $7 mill/yr for 3 years contract , played in both of those trades.

A salary dump of $20 mill is about what the market usually demands for a 1st round pick. Taking on Nicholson's $21 m over 3 years was how we got the 1st round pick that became Jarrett Allen. ... it wasn't Bogs

And sending Nicholson to Portland was the reason Marks agreed to take on Crabbe's $18 m/year for 3 years contract, because the reverse salary dump of Nicholson, made the net cap hit from the Crabbe trade only $12m/year

So the way I see it is the Nets' cap hit from the Crabbe trade , is a net $12/m per year.

Agreed Bogs was worthless and that trade really showed it. We got a 1st and a second for 27 mill left on Demarre, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that 24 from Nicholson was the real reason for that 1st.

Imagine how different this team would’ve been if Billy King hadn’t refused to include Bogdanovic in that deal for Kyle Lowry? Eh idk if I would change where we are right now if I could. Billy King’s **** ups made us low key better off in the long run because it lead to a change of faith from ownership and Sean Marks.

[vincecarter4pres]

I feel the plan for Crabbe this year is give him a ton of unnecessary and unrealistic freedom.
Let him make tons of mistakes. Let him be somewhat inefficient. Turn it over. Just get way out of his comfort zone.
But... but... he must play good defense, give effort and think about his mistakes and start understanding things that work as well. This way, once they reel him in next year and going forward, they're hoping he can be mainly 3 and D, but still have the ability to mix it up when necessary and do some basic but needed things with the ball.
A guy you can at least trust to dribble more then twice.

Just like a Wes Matthews in his prime. Or Kerry Kittles.

I think they're just hoping to avoid $19 million a season Anthony Morrow lol.

Kittles? kittles was a super athlete who got end to end as fast/faster then anyone, had point gaurd like handles (even played point for us before the injuries/kidd/marbury additions) and dunked like it was going out of style.

Kittles handle was efficient and sufficient, but he never had point guard like handles. His handle was basic as they come, but it was under control.

Kittles was ridiculously fast though, especially end to end and got to the rack when opportunity was there.

I'm just saying, I think they'll consider Crabbe a success if he turns into a long term efficient player, with some abilities you can rely on when needed other than catch and shoot, who can defend and run, putting up maybe 12 to 16ppg, 4 or 5 rebounds, over a steal a game and a couple assists, year in and year out, with above average decision making on both sides of the ball, with low usage.

My belief is Markinson saw him as a can't miss player of the above ilk, but with the outside shot to be a Klay Thompson type, so they figured he was worth the risk, because worst case he is an overpaid, but above average 28+ minute per game player.

[vincecarter4pres]

This is spot on. They had no plans to keep Bogdanovic and didn’t even try. Exactly the way we should be thinking about Crabbe. He was the equivalent of a 36 mill/3 year FA signing. Only difference is that he can’t be traded as easily as someone actually on that deal.

Anyone who refuses to admit that those two are basically equivalent has an agenda.

It's nice to think about it as only about $7mil of dead money still on the roster, but it still limits flexibility more than Nicholson & no Crabbe would have. $7mil can be squeezed into a larger deal. $7mil can be stretched & not be a cap killer. You have little choice but to ride out $19mil.

It absolutely limits flexibility. But I assume there weren’t anymore teams willing to dump players and give up picks that summer. Otherwise Marks would’ve done those deals.

I think the way the justifies it was along the lines of: we have to show progress on the court out of respect to ownership

Don't necessarily buy this angle.
To beat a dead horse, I just think Markinson have a huge soft spot for Crabbe and all the truth of flexibility aside, really wanted Crabbe the player and as you guys have mentioned, understood they'd dump Nicholson in the process.
I'm sure Marks tried like hell to grab a 1st attached to Crabbe, but Portland wanted to move up to 10 and had no intentions of giving up any of those 1st's in the process of dumping Crabbe.
You, me, Prok, most posters here probably would have told Portland to screw in that case, but again, I think Marks and co. really like Crabbe that much, for better or worse. Imo, they have this vision of this deadly 3rd option 17 to 20ppg efficient, low usage scorer with slightly expanded game and really good defense, who breaks games open with his 3 bombs, all in the flow of things.

[Netaman]

It's nice to think about it as only about $7mil of dead money still on the roster, but it still limits flexibility more than Nicholson & no Crabbe would have. $7mil can be squeezed into a larger deal. $7mil can be stretched & not be a cap killer. You have little choice but to ride out $19mil.

It absolutely limits flexibility. But I assume there weren’t anymore teams willing to dump players and give up picks that summer. Otherwise Marks would’ve done those deals.

I think the way the justifies it was along the lines of: we have to show progress on the court out of respect to ownership

Don't necessarily buy this angle.
To beat a dead horse, I just think Markinson have a huge soft spot for Crabbe and all the truth of flexibility aside, really wanted Crabbe the player and as you guys have mentioned, understood they'd dump Nicholson in the process.
I'm sure Marks tried like hell to grab a 1st attached to Crabbe, but Portland wanted to move up to 10 and had no intentions of giving up any of those 1st's in the process of dumping Crabbe.
You, me, Prok, most posters here probably would have told Portland to screw in that case, but again, I think Marks and co. really like Crabbe that much, for better or worse. Imo, they have this vision of this deadly 3rd option 17 to 20ppg efficient, low usage scorer with slightly expanded game and really good defense, who breaks games open with his 3 bombs, all in the flow of things.

I think this is spot on. The only thing I'd add in for context is that they didn't move on Crabbe until after FA. After they struck out on Porter. After they took on 2 dump trades to their liking (Moz, Carroll). After KCP became a UFA and went to LA. Presumably after they evaluated every "salary dump" that was out there. I think at that point they determined Crabbe's talent was worth the gamble.

Btw, when KCP was a FA we would have done cartwheels if he'd signed here for 3 years 52M - and that's without also losing Nicholson's dead weight. Anyone can argue back and forth in terms of who they'd prefer between Crabbe/KCP as players, but they are comparable and losing Nicholson to me would have easily been the tie breaker.

[vincecarter4pres]

It absolutely limits flexibility. But I assume there weren’t anymore teams willing to dump players and give up picks that summer. Otherwise Marks would’ve done those deals.

I think the way the justifies it was along the lines of: we have to show progress on the court out of respect to ownership

Don't necessarily buy this angle.
To beat a dead horse, I just think Markinson have a huge soft spot for Crabbe and all the truth of flexibility aside, really wanted Crabbe the player and as you guys have mentioned, understood they'd dump Nicholson in the process.
I'm sure Marks tried like hell to grab a 1st attached to Crabbe, but Portland wanted to move up to 10 and had no intentions of giving up any of those 1st's in the process of dumping Crabbe.
You, me, Prok, most posters here probably would have told Portland to screw in that case, but again, I think Marks and co. really like Crabbe that much, for better or worse. Imo, they have this vision of this deadly 3rd option 17 to 20ppg efficient, low usage scorer with slightly expanded game and really good defense, who breaks games open with his 3 bombs, all in the flow of things.

I think this is spot on. The only thing I'd add in for context is that they didn't move on Crabbe until after FA. After they struck out on Porter. After they took on 2 dump trades to their liking (Moz, Carroll). After KCP became a UFA and went to LA. Presumably after they evaluated every "salary dump" that was out there. I think at that point they determined Crabbe's talent was worth the gamble.

Honestly, this a really good point/add-on to the convo.

Btw, when KCP was a FA we would have done cartwheels if he'd signed here for 3 years 52M - and that's without also losing Nicholson's dead weight. Anyone can argue back and forth in terms of who they'd prefer between Crabbe/KCP as players, but they are comparable and losing Nicholson to me would have easily been the tie breaker.

Another good point. Me personally, I wasn't so high on KCP. Not at all really. KCP is putting up similar stats and impact to Crabbe right now, but KCP is doing what he always does, numbers and style of play. Crabbe is in a serious shooting slump and being asked to learn and expand all types of things about the game on the fly, in game.

KCP is a low IQ chucker with a sweet shooting stroke, who plays solid D because of his great athleticism, but sounds dumber than a rock wearing a torn t-shirt as a headband, drinking whiskey in a wife beater.

I'll take Crabbe and the hope he turns the corner overall and the likelihood he regains his shooting touch, on his wack ass contract, over KCP at the more likely 4/65 he would have got minimum on a long term deal, combined with Nicholson's dead weight, any day. It's the lesser of two evils though, that isn't to make Crabbe's contract look good or anything lol. But if you had to move KCP in a year or two, it would probably take the same protected 1st it would to move Crabbe and you'd still be stuck with Nicholson on the books, whether full or stretched. And I think KCP has zero upside. He's just that basketball and real life stupid. Just a dumb ass dude.

[Netaman]

Don't necessarily buy this angle.
To beat a dead horse, I just think Markinson have a huge soft spot for Crabbe and all the truth of flexibility aside, really wanted Crabbe the player and as you guys have mentioned, understood they'd dump Nicholson in the process.
I'm sure Marks tried like hell to grab a 1st attached to Crabbe, but Portland wanted to move up to 10 and had no intentions of giving up any of those 1st's in the process of dumping Crabbe.
You, me, Prok, most posters here probably would have told Portland to screw in that case, but again, I think Marks and co. really like Crabbe that much, for better or worse. Imo, they have this vision of this deadly 3rd option 17 to 20ppg efficient, low usage scorer with slightly expanded game and really good defense, who breaks games open with his 3 bombs, all in the flow of things.

I think this is spot on. The only thing I'd add in for context is that they didn't move on Crabbe until after FA. After they struck out on Porter. After they took on 2 dump trades to their liking (Moz, Carroll). After KCP became a UFA and went to LA. Presumably after they evaluated every "salary dump" that was out there. I think at that point they determined Crabbe's talent was worth the gamble.

Honestly, this a really good point/add-on to the convo.

Btw, when KCP was a FA we would have done cartwheels if he'd signed here for 3 years 52M - and that's without also losing Nicholson's dead weight. Anyone can argue back and forth in terms of who they'd prefer between Crabbe/KCP as players, but they are comparable and losing Nicholson to me would have easily been the tie breaker.

Another good point. Me personally, I wasn't so high on KCP. Not at all really. KCP is putting up similar stats and impact to Crabbe right now, but KCP is doing what he always does, numbers and style of play. Crabbe is in a serious shooting slump and being asked to learn and expand all types of things about the game on the fly, in game.

KCP is a low IQ chucker with a sweet shooting stroke, who plays solid D because of his great athleticism, but sounds dumber than a rock wearing a torn t-short as a headband drinking whiskey in a wife beater.

I'll take Crabbe and the hope he turns the corner overall and the likelihood he regains his shooting touch, on his wack ass contract, over KCP at the more likely 4/65 he would have got minimum on a long term deal, combined with Nicholson's dead weight, any day. It's the lesser of two evils though, that isn't to make Crabbe's contract look good or anything lol. But if you had to move KCP in a year or two, it would probably take the same protected 1st it would to move Crabbe and you'd still be stuck with Nicholson on the books, whether full or stretched. And I think KCP has zero upside. He's just that basketball and real life stupid. Just a dumb ass dude.

I totally agree. Considering we needed talent and had nothing to use our cap room on in the immediate future, I would have been thrilled with Porter. Less so with Reddick, but happy depending on the contract. KCP would have been a gamble, but I liked his defensive tenacity and trust Atkinson/Marks. I have similar feelings for Crabbe. I love what he brings as a shooter. I'm glad to see his defense is solid. I see flashes of more talent. And I trust Atkinson/Marks. I don't think the contract is crippling and I think they exhausted many other uses of the cap room before taking him on.

[Prokorov]

Don't necessarily buy this angle.
To beat a dead horse, I just think Markinson have a huge soft spot for Crabbe and all the truth of flexibility aside, really wanted Crabbe the player and as you guys have mentioned, understood they'd dump Nicholson in the process.
I'm sure Marks tried like hell to grab a 1st attached to Crabbe, but Portland wanted to move up to 10 and had no intentions of giving up any of those 1st's in the process of dumping Crabbe.
You, me, Prok, most posters here probably would have told Portland to screw in that case, but again, I think Marks and co. really like Crabbe that much, for better or worse. Imo, they have this vision of this deadly 3rd option 17 to 20ppg efficient, low usage scorer with slightly expanded game and really good defense, who breaks games open with his 3 bombs, all in the flow of things.

I think this is spot on. The only thing I'd add in for context is that they didn't move on Crabbe until after FA. After they struck out on Porter. After they took on 2 dump trades to their liking (Moz, Carroll). After KCP became a UFA and went to LA. Presumably after they evaluated every "salary dump" that was out there. I think at that point they determined Crabbe's talent was worth the gamble.

Honestly, this a really good point/add-on to the convo.

Btw, when KCP was a FA we would have done cartwheels if he'd signed here for 3 years 52M - and that's without also losing Nicholson's dead weight. Anyone can argue back and forth in terms of who they'd prefer between Crabbe/KCP as players, but they are comparable and losing Nicholson to me would have easily been the tie breaker.

Another good point. Me personally, I wasn't so high on KCP. Not at all really. KCP is putting up similar stats and impact to Crabbe right now, but KCP is doing what he always does, numbers and style of play. Crabbe is in a serious shooting slump and being asked to learn and expand all types of things about the game on the fly, in game.

KCP is a low IQ chucker with a sweet shooting stroke, who plays solid D because of his great athleticism, but sounds dumber than a rock wearing a torn t-shirt as a headband, drinking whiskey in a wife beater.

I'll take Crabbe and the hope he turns the corner overall and the likelihood he regains his shooting touch, on his wack ass contract, over KCP at the more likely 4/65 he would have got minimum on a long term deal, combined with Nicholson's dead weight, any day. It's the lesser of two evils though, that isn't to make Crabbe's contract look good or anything lol. But if you had to move KCP in a year or two, it would probably take the same protected 1st it would to move Crabbe and you'd still be stuck with Nicholson on the books, whether full or stretched. And I think KCP has zero upside. He's just that basketball and real life stupid. Just a dumb ass dude.

i dont think crabbe is in a shooting slump at all... i just think its unrealistic to expect someone to double the amount of 3 point attemps (not to mention take more difficult attempts) and not see your percentage plummet. i mean:

1) it was unlikely he'd match last years 3point percentage as it was his peak and an outlier for his career (his only full season over 40%)

2) he is taking less catch and shoot threes this year and less stand still threes. (more off of screens)

3) he is taking less corner threes and more straight away threes

4) he is taking 6.6 threes this year as opposed to 3.8 last year

only the elite of the elite can do that AND keep their percentage where it was (the currys,r eggie millers, and jesus shuttlesworths of the world)

Crabbe is shooting 36% from three. i think 36-38% is what you can reasonably expect on that volume and style

[vincecarter4pres]

I think this is spot on. The only thing I'd add in for context is that they didn't move on Crabbe until after FA. After they struck out on Porter. After they took on 2 dump trades to their liking (Moz, Carroll). After KCP became a UFA and went to LA. Presumably after they evaluated every "salary dump" that was out there. I think at that point they determined Crabbe's talent was worth the gamble.

Honestly, this a really good point/add-on to the convo.

Btw, when KCP was a FA we would have done cartwheels if he'd signed here for 3 years 52M - and that's without also losing Nicholson's dead weight. Anyone can argue back and forth in terms of who they'd prefer between Crabbe/KCP as players, but they are comparable and losing Nicholson to me would have easily been the tie breaker.

Another good point. Me personally, I wasn't so high on KCP. Not at all really. KCP is putting up similar stats and impact to Crabbe right now, but KCP is doing what he always does, numbers and style of play. Crabbe is in a serious shooting slump and being asked to learn and expand all types of things about the game on the fly, in game.

KCP is a low IQ chucker with a sweet shooting stroke, who plays solid D because of his great athleticism, but sounds dumber than a rock wearing a torn t-shirt as a headband, drinking whiskey in a wife beater.

I'll take Crabbe and the hope he turns the corner overall and the likelihood he regains his shooting touch, on his wack ass contract, over KCP at the more likely 4/65 he would have got minimum on a long term deal, combined with Nicholson's dead weight, any day. It's the lesser of two evils though, that isn't to make Crabbe's contract look good or anything lol. But if you had to move KCP in a year or two, it would probably take the same protected 1st it would to move Crabbe and you'd still be stuck with Nicholson on the books, whether full or stretched. And I think KCP has zero upside. He's just that basketball and real life stupid. Just a dumb ass dude.

i dont think crabbe is in a shooting slump at all... i just think its unrealistic to expect someone to double the amount of 3 point attemps (not to mention take more difficult attempts) and not see your percentage plummet. i mean:

1) it was unlikely he'd match last years 3point percentage as it was his peak and an outlier for his career (his only full season over 40%)

2) he is taking less catch and shoot threes this year and less stand still threes. (more off of screens)

3) he is taking less corner threes and more straight away threes

4) he is taking 6.6 threes this year as opposed to 3.8 last year

only the elite of the elite can do that AND keep their percentage where it was (the currys,r eggie millers, and jesus shuttlesworths of the world)

Crabbe is shooting 36% from three. i think 36-38% is what you can reasonably expect on that volume and style

IDK, I'm not trying to put him in the conversation of a Reggie, Ray Allen, etc., as a player, or even shooter, but looking at a guy like Wesley Matthews, he shot 38 to 41% over the course of 5 seasons of his true prime, on 4.5 to 7.5 attempts per game that entire time. And he came down from about 41% on 4.5, to 38-39% sustained for 4 seasons on 6 to 7.5 attempts.

That's the type of shooting from deep I'm looking for from Crabbe.38% in his worst years, above that in others. In fact again, Wes Matthews is pretty much exactly the player I'm hoping for from Crabbe, hopefully for a longer time, we have to remember Matthews had a pretty catastrophic injury a few years back before he got that ridiculous overpay, after which he was a totally different, completely less useful and obviously slower player.

We probably can never expect Crabbe to live up to his contract, but he can and should be much more useful then right now. We shouldn't expect his game to expand in leaps and bounds. Not even just leaps or just bounds lol. But we should expect some progression, he shouldn't be a finished product.

He's being asked to do a lot more than usual right now and it isn't pretty, but it's part of the process. You're the one who professes patience and how this season is all about player development, not wins. That is what they are doing with Crabbe right now. Taking him out of his comfort zone, pushing him beyond his current limits. All in the name of, just slight permanent improvements.

I'm not trying to come across as some homer. I was with you, didn't like this trade. Don't like Crabbe on his contract at all. In fact, the extent of my homerism was denying your opinion that Joe Buckets was almost on the level of Crabbe and could surpass him. He basically is, or has, except on D, where Harris isn't bad either. But if you can just accept that Crabbe is here, that his play is out of our control as fans and that he's wildly overpaid, the sooner you can at least keep optimism he'll be useful aside from his cap clogging contract lol.

And again, just to reiterate, if he does become prime Wes Matthews by next season, then fantastic and he's just about worth that contract.

[Prokorov]

IDK, I'm not trying to put him in the conversation of a Reggie, Ray Allen, etc., as a player, or even shooter, but looking at a guy like Wesley Matthews, he shot 38 to 41% over the course of 5 seasons of his true prime, on 4.5 to 7.5 attempts per game that entire time. And he came down from about 41% on 4.5, to 38-39% sustained for 4 seasons on 6 to 7.5 attempts.

Once Wes Matthews attemps when over 5 per game he NEVER shot over 40% from three again. i think crabbe can probably hit 38-40% in any given season, but its really unrealistic to think he will be in the 43-45% range taking twice as many attemps in addition to that 44% year probably being an outlier season anyhow.

That's the type of shooting from deep I'm looking for from Crabbe.38% in his worst years, above that in others. In fact again, Wes Matthews is pretty much exactly the player I'm hoping for from Crabbe, hopefully for a longer time, we have to remember Matthews had a pretty catastrophic injury a few years back before he got that ridiculous overpay, after which he was a totally different, completely less useful and obviously slower player.

MAtthews worst years are 36-37 and best 38-39%. i think thats what we will get from crabbe on this kind of volume. i dont think we can ever expect the same level of scoring/driving as wes.

We probably can never expect Crabbe to live up to his contract, but he can and should be much more useful then right now. We shouldn't expect his game to expand in leaps and bounds. Not even just leaps or just bounds lol. But we should expect some progression, he shouldn't be a finished product.

yea, i mean its not crabbes fault marks pulled a billy king on him with that contract/trade. he is what he is. a longer joe harris. if he can even get to harris off-ball ability it would help. i dont think he will really ever be much different then he is now. i think he will improve, but i dont know that he ever becomes much more then a shooter

He's being asked to do a lot more than usual right now and it isn't pretty, but it's part of the process. You're the one who professes patience and how this season is all about player development, not wins. That is what they are doing with Crabbe right now. Taking him out of his comfort zone, pushing him beyond his current limits. All in the name of, just slight permanent improvements.

i have no issues with crabbe, love his attitude and am fine with stuggles. my whole thing was it was always unrealistic to think he was going to add scoring and not see his shooting drop. and thats not on him. like i said, thats a marks thing not a crabbe thing

[quote[
I'm not trying to come across as some homer. I was with you, didn't like this trade. Don't like Crabbe on his contract at all. In fact, the extent of my homerism was denying your opinion that Joe Buckets was almost on the level of Crabbe and could surpass him. He basically is, or has, except on D, where Harris isn't bad either. But if you can just accept that Crabbe is here, that his play is out of our control as fans and that he's wildly overpaid, the sooner you can at least keep optimism he'll be useful aside from his cap clogging contract lol.

And again, just to reiterate, if he does become prime Wes Matthews by next season, then fantastic and he's just about worth that contract.[/quote]

yeah i mean i root for crabbe... you never see me bash him in game threads and im usually pumping him when he does well. the only time im really negative about him is in this thread when i have to hear how he isnt overpaid and how joe harris is some scrub and crabbeis some elite shooter

[SpeedyG]

I'm not sure it's a slump, but there's certainly more asked of him here and he's taking more shots that the defense absolutely expects (I'm looking at you, dribble hand off from the 3pt line).

As we've seen with other players, it's one thing to get the green light and another to really believe in it.

Everyone in this team has been given that, but it took Joe a full off season to really have the confidence to take it. RHJ needed a shrink. Even Caris, as well as he played last season, looked shaky and unsure early in the season (especially with his shot).

It's probably a combination of all these things for Crabbe (do more, tougher shots, confidence).

[vincecarter4pres]

IDK, I'm not trying to put him in the conversation of a Reggie, Ray Allen, etc., as a player, or even shooter, but looking at a guy like Wesley Matthews, he shot 38 to 41% over the course of 5 seasons of his true prime, on 4.5 to 7.5 attempts per game that entire time. And he came down from about 41% on 4.5, to 38-39% sustained for 4 seasons on 6 to 7.5 attempts.

Once Wes Matthews attemps when over 5 per game he NEVER shot over 40% from three again. i think crabbe can probably hit 38-40% in any given season, but its really unrealistic to think he will be in the 43-45% range taking twice as many attemps in addition to that 44% year probably being an outlier season anyhow.

That's the type of shooting from deep I'm looking for from Crabbe.38% in his worst years, above that in others. In fact again, Wes Matthews is pretty much exactly the player I'm hoping for from Crabbe, hopefully for a longer time, we have to remember Matthews had a pretty catastrophic injury a few years back before he got that ridiculous overpay, after which he was a totally different, completely less useful and obviously slower player.

MAtthews worst years are 36-37 and best 38-39%. i think thats what we will get from crabbe on this kind of volume. i dont think we can ever expect the same level of scoring/driving as wes.

We probably can never expect Crabbe to live up to his contract, but he can and should be much more useful then right now. We shouldn't expect his game to expand in leaps and bounds. Not even just leaps or just bounds lol. But we should expect some progression, he shouldn't be a finished product.

yea, i mean its not crabbes fault marks pulled a billy king on him with that contract/trade. he is what he is. a longer joe harris. if he can even get to harris off-ball ability it would help. i dont think he will really ever be much different then he is now. i think he will improve, but i dont know that he ever becomes much more then a shooter

He's being asked to do a lot more than usual right now and it isn't pretty, but it's part of the process. You're the one who professes patience and how this season is all about player development, not wins. That is what they are doing with Crabbe right now. Taking him out of his comfort zone, pushing him beyond his current limits. All in the name of, just slight permanent improvements.

i have no issues with crabbe, love his attitude and am fine with stuggles. my whole thing was it was always unrealistic to think he was going to add scoring and not see his shooting drop. and thats not on him. like i said, thats a marks thing not a crabbe thing

I'm not trying to come across as some homer. I was with you, didn't like this trade. Don't like Crabbe on his contract at all. In fact, the extent of my homerism was denying your opinion that Joe Buckets was almost on the level of Crabbe and could surpass him. He basically is, or has, except on D, where Harris isn't bad either. But if you can just accept that Crabbe is here, that his play is out of our control as fans and that he's wildly overpaid, the sooner you can at least keep optimism he'll be useful aside from his cap clogging contract lol.

And again, just to reiterate, if he does become prime Wes Matthews by next season, then fantastic and he's just about worth that contract.

yeah i mean i root for crabbe... you never see me bash him in game threads and im usually pumping him when he does well. the only time im really negative about him is in this thread when i have to hear how he isnt overpaid and how joe harris is some scrub and crabbeis some elite shooter

Nothing much to add here, I agree with you on everything. I'm just hoping for a guy who averages an efficient 12 to 16 a game in the flow of it and doesn't dribble the ball off his foot every time he pump fakes into a drive, while giving his all on defense and stays moving as much as he's asked when he's off ball.

I'd prefer Marks didn't make that trade without the 15 or the 20 and a player we could be excited about taken with that pick, so again, we agree, but like you said, we don't rail on him too often, so let's hope haha.

[steady]

It's nice to think about it as only about $7mil of dead money still on the roster, but it still limits flexibility more than Nicholson & no Crabbe would have. $7mil can be squeezed into a larger deal. $7mil can be stretched & not be a cap killer. You have little choice but to ride out $19mil.

It absolutely limits flexibility. But I assume there weren’t anymore teams willing to dump players and give up picks that summer. Otherwise Marks would’ve done those deals.

I think the way the justifies it was along the lines of: we have to show progress on the court out of respect to ownership

Don't necessarily buy this angle.
To beat a dead horse, I just think Markinson have a huge soft spot for Crabbe and all the truth of flexibility aside, really wanted Crabbe the player and as you guys have mentioned, understood they'd dump Nicholson in the process.
I'm sure Marks tried like hell to grab a 1st attached to Crabbe, but Portland wanted to move up to 10 and had no intentions of giving up any of those 1st's in the process of dumping Crabbe.
You, me, Prok, most posters here probably would have told Portland to screw in that case, but again, I think Marks and co. really like Crabbe that much, for better or worse. Imo, they have this vision of this deadly 3rd option 17 to 20ppg efficient, low usage scorer with slightly expanded game and really good defense, who breaks games open with his 3 bombs, all in the flow of things.

I agree that Markinson has a soft spot for Crabbe! He was supposed to be their first foundation piece. The type of shooting he tantalized with, is exactly Atkinson wants as cornerstone of his system. His defensive potential.

I think it is way too soon to call it either way...though. ...

I also have a soft spot for Crabbe. Not least because of his approach to playing for this team. It was clearly a big deal to him that Markinson continued to have faith in him, and bet on him. And for a person who has said loyalty is his single most important character trait, he has clearly bought into being a Net. That to me also has an important value.

[treiz]

They did conveniently dump a $7M dead weight for the next 3 years as part of the deal to get Crabbe. So if you believe we got the pick from WAS more because of our willingness to take back Nicholson than acquire Bogdonovic, in return for taking on Crabbe Portland helped absorb a good chunk of the cost we paid to get Jarrett Allen.

This is spot on. They had no plans to keep Bogdanovic and didn’t even try. Exactly the way we should be thinking about Crabbe. He was the equivalent of a 36 mill/3 year FA signing. Only difference is that he can’t be traded as easily as someone actually on that deal.

Anyone who refuses to admit that those two are basically equivalent has an agenda.

I'm really curious as to how both you and Netamans maths work on this, because this trade clearly added $12m in salary as opposed to saving money. If player A makes $7m and you do a player-for-player trade for player B who's getting paid $19m, that's a $12m difference.

We didn't 'dump' $7m, we paid an additional $12m to get rid of player A for B especially since they both have the same contract lengths. That's absurd.

I also don't understand why Bojan has anything to do with this considering that those two weren't done in tandem. Marks was heavily shopping Bojan from practically the start of the season and Marks was holding out for the best offer possible, it's completely unrelated to the Nicholson for Crabbe trade.

[TheBrooklynKidd]

They did conveniently dump a $7M dead weight for the next 3 years as part of the deal to get Crabbe. So if you believe we got the pick from WAS more because of our willingness to take back Nicholson than acquire Bogdonovic, in return for taking on Crabbe Portland helped absorb a good chunk of the cost we paid to get Jarrett Allen.

This is spot on. They had no plans to keep Bogdanovic and didn’t even try. Exactly the way we should be thinking about Crabbe. He was the equivalent of a 36 mill/3 year FA signing. Only difference is that he can’t be traded as easily as someone actually on that deal.

Anyone who refuses to admit that those two are basically equivalent has an agenda.

I'm really curious as to how both you and Netamans maths work on this, because this trade clearly added $12m in salary as opposed to saving money. If player A makes $7m and you do a player-for-player trade for player B who's getting paid $19m, that's a $12m difference.

We didn't 'dump' $7m, we paid an additional $12m to get rid of player A for B especially since they both have the same contract lengths. That's absurd.

I also don't understand why Bojan has anything to do with this considering that those two weren't done in tandem. Marks was heavily shopping Bojan from practically the start of the season and Marks was holding out for the best offer possible, it's completely unrelated to the Nicholson for Crabbe trade.

If he was shopping Bojan for months and the best deal involved taking on $24 mill owed to a D-Leaguer then what do you think was the real reason for getting the 1st?

And we said it was the net equivalent of signing Crabbe to a 12 mill deal in FA. A swap of equally overpaid players some might say. Only difference is Crabbe is harder to trade, but they weren’t trading him anyway.

[treiz]

If he was shopping Bojan for months and the best deal involved taking on $24 mill owed to a D-Leaguer then what do you think was the real reason for getting the 1st?

And we said it was the net equivalent of signing Crabbe to a 12 mill deal in FA. A swap of equally overpaid players some might say. Only difference is Crabbe is harder to trade, but they weren’t trading him anyway.

He was shopping Bojan for months, I don't think that was any secret and so was Lopez. Nobody in here expected to get a first rounder from Bojan but if we had to eat a contract to do it then fair enough, it's a classic salary dump trade. That was universally viewed as a really good trade for us.

That's a false equivalency to try and make the trade look nicer than it actually is, you can try and make that argument for almost every trade that's ever happened in the NBA but at the end of the day for this specific case, that isn't what we did because Crabbe still costs the team $19m a year. If he actually did sign for $12m a year, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[TheBrooklynKidd]

If he was shopping Bojan for months and the best deal involved taking on $24 mill owed to a D-Leaguer then what do you think was the real reason for getting the 1st?

And we said it was the net equivalent of signing Crabbe to a 12 mill deal in FA. A swap of equally overpaid players some might say. Only difference is Crabbe is harder to trade, but they weren’t trading him anyway.

He was shopping Bojan for months, I don't think that was any secret and so was Lopez. Nobody in here expected to get a first rounder from Bojan but if we had to eat a contract to do it then fair enough, it's a classic salary dump trade. That was universally viewed as a really good trade for us.

That's a false equivalency to try and make the trade look nicer than it actually is, you can try and make that argument for almost every trade that's ever happened in the NBA but at the end of the day for this specific case, that isn't what we did because Crabbe still costs the team $19m a year. If he actually did sign for $12m a year, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

It’s not a false equivalency, you’re just saying that because these ideas contradict your agenda against Crabbe.

We were paid a 1st round pick to take on 24 mill in Nicholson, similar to how we got a lesser 1st and 2nd for taking on 27 mill in Carroll. That money was going to be on the cap no matter what. Bojan was worthless as a half a year rental and Washington didn’t even attempt to retain him.

Then we added 12 mill each year in salary to turn a wasted roster spot which is worse than an open roster spot into a player that has started almost every game for us.

So we were paid a 1st to take on 24 mill in dead salary, then we added 12 mill a year to turn a wasted roster spot into a starter. That means the 7 mill that Crabbe is overpaid by is subsidized. End point is Crabbe and Jarrett Allen for ~21 million a year.

If you can’t see that then I don’t know what to say except that your agenda is clouding your judgement.

[treiz]

It’s not a false equivalency, you’re just saying that because these ideas contradict your agenda against Crabbe.

We were paid a 1st round pick to take on 24 mill in Nicholson, similar to how we got a lesser 1st and 2nd for taking on 27 mill in Carroll. That money was going to be on the cap no matter what. Bojan was worthless as a half a year rental and Washington didn’t even attempt to retain him.

Then we added 12 mill each year in salary to turn a wasted roster spot which is worse than an open roster spot into a player that has started almost every game for us.

So we were paid a 1st to take on 24 mill in dead salary, then we added 12 mill a year to turn a wasted roster spot into a starter. That means the 7 mill that Crabbe is overpaid by is subsidized. End point is Crabbe and Jarrett Allen for ~21 million a year.

If you can’t see that then I don’t know what to say except that your agenda is clouding your judgement.

You do realise that the criticism of this trade is on Marks and not Crabbe right? I've taken that stance since day 1, I guess you just think Marks should be immune to criticism.

How does that make sense? How is it subsidised when at the end of the day all we did was add an ADDITIONAL (key word here) $12m to salary to take on Crabbe. Using your logic, we paid an EXTRA $36m to take on Crabbe and get rid of Nicholson. We didn't pay just $36m, we paid $36m on top of the $21m already owed to Nicholson. So in essence, we paid $47m worth of salary for Crabbe and Allen.

I'm sorry I'm one of the few people here who think Marks isn't perfect and is not immune to criticism, but go ahead and keep that blue-tinted glasses on

[TheBrooklynKidd]

It’s not a false equivalency, you’re just saying that because these ideas contradict your agenda against Crabbe.

We were paid a 1st round pick to take on 24 mill in Nicholson, similar to how we got a lesser 1st and 2nd for taking on 27 mill in Carroll. That money was going to be on the cap no matter what. Bojan was worthless as a half a year rental and Washington didn’t even attempt to retain him.

Then we added 12 mill each year in salary to turn a wasted roster spot which is worse than an open roster spot into a player that has started almost every game for us.

So we were paid a 1st to take on 24 mill in dead salary, then we added 12 mill a year to turn a wasted roster spot into a starter. That means the 7 mill that Crabbe is overpaid by is subsidized. End point is Crabbe and Jarrett Allen for ~21 million a year.

If you can’t see that then I don’t know what to say except that your agenda is clouding your judgement.

You do realise that the criticism of this trade is on Marks and not Crabbe right? I've taken that stance since day 1, I guess you just think Marks should be immune to criticism.

How does that make sense? How is it subsidised when at the end of the day all we did was add an ADDITIONAL (key word here) $12m to salary to take on Crabbe. Using your logic, we paid an EXTRA $36m to take on Crabbe and get rid of Nicholson. We didn't pay just $36m, we paid $36m on top of the $21m already owed to Nicholson. So in essence, we paid $47m worth of salary for Crabbe and Allen.

I'm sorry I'm one of the few people here who think Marks isn't perfect and is not immune to criticism, but go ahead and keep that blue-tinted glasses on

Trust me I think the Crabbe trade was a minor **** up and he’s not immune to criticism. It definitely impacted our flexibility but it truly was the equivalent of signing Crabbe for a 3 year deal at 12 mill a year, if not better since Nicholson was owed more than Bojan the season before and Crabbes salary decreases while Nicholson’s increases.

But to say that 24 mill of Crabbes remaining 56 mill wasnt a cost paid to acquire Jarrett Allen is just false.

The point is that money would be there anyway, it was the cost of acquiring a 1st which Marks absolutely ****ing nailed. We added 12 mill a year for Crabbe, that’s much less than what we would have to pay in total if we had just signed KCP, JJ Redick, Porter or anyone else outright. Idk why you can’t see past your agenda and realize this.