RealGM

Not as big a name as other rumored to be on the block as it were which is why I think it's more reasonable of a target versus someone like Melo who's more "pie in the sky"

He's a scorer that can shoot from range which is something that I know most have said they'd like to pair with Tyreke.

Crawford's significantly older than the rest of Sacramento's core of young players, so I don't think the Kings should give up anyone they view as long term for him, but I think a package based around Cisco could make alot of sense if Atlanta would go for that

Cisco, a 2nd & a TPE, if it's enough to land him would save the Hawks something like $5 million this year and give Sacramento more long term flexibility whether or not Petrie decides to extend him.

Don't know how much Atlanta would be looking for in return though.

Is Jamal Crawford someone that makes sense for the Kings to target if he is indeed available for trade?

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=27n7nxo

just a lil joke. i would pass on Jamal since his role would be small anyway and i dont see them getting Horford or Duncan in the offseason

I think they (the Hawks) can do better than that. Crawford has proven ability and is expiring as well.

Me personally I wouldn't mind having crawford on this team. We are in a dire need for a shooting guard, more so a starting SG and he would be an offensive upgrade to cisco. Bad thing about Crawford, following him throughout his career, he is a chucker. Maybe he can become acclimated into our system like he did in ATL. who knows.

Pass. Crawford just doesn't excite me much and I would rather just stick with the young core we already have.

Not to big on Crawford but depending on what we would have to give up for him then I wouldn't mind taking him. If it's like you suggested "Cisco, a 2nd & a TPE" then I wouldn't mind taking Crawford but wouldn't go anywhere near trading one of our bigs to get Crawford. Either way it doesn't matter to me?

I'd pass. He's too close to a chucker in my opinion.

I'm meh on this, I don't like his age and I don't like his excess chucking. I'd be OKAY with it, but nothing I'd cum over.

I think he carries some bad juju.

cl24 wrote:I'm meh on this, I don't like his age and I don't like his excess chucking. I'd be OKAY with it, but nothing I'd cum over.

I'm pretty sure he's an expiring so his age won't be a huge factor considering he's only 30 will be 31 by the end of the year.

I'm still not convinced that he can continue his relatively good, efficient season last year next season and onwards. From history, Crawford is an inefficient player that happen to be a streaky shooter until last year. Why all of the sudden he can be a good player with good efficiency? I think it is fair to be skeptical here, I call it a fluke. Reminds me of the Mike James situation in Toronto years ago.

I don't want to take the risk in Crawford. He may pan out here but I don't know.

KF10 wrote:I'm still not convinced that he can continue his relatively good, efficient season last year next season and onwards. From history, Crawford is an inefficient player that happen to be a streaky shooter until last year. Why all of the sudden he can be a good player with good efficiency? I think it is fair to be skeptical here, I call it a fluke. Reminds me of the Mike James situation in Toronto years ago.

I don't want to take the risk in Crawford. He may pan out here but I don't know.

Well said. People often focus on the statistical anomaly of a typically good player having a particular bad season, their point being "Sure so and so had a bad season but it was because of X,Y, and Z." Well the fact is this is a two way street, If a player can have one bad year in a sea of good ones then surely the opposite can hold true as well.

I just posted this trade
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=1049624&p=24838810#p24838810

How does it sound to everyone..

stock01234 wrote:I just posted this trade
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=1049624&p=24838810#p24838810

How does it sound to everyone..

You have the Kings giving up a first for that? As well as taking Bibby because he's a happy memory of our glory days? I'm sorry but this is a poor effort.

There is a reason that Crawford succeeded as a sixth man/volume scorer on a good team but could never hold down a starting SG spot on crappy teams.

stock01234 wrote:I just posted this trade
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=1049624&p=24838810#p24838810

How does it sound to everyone..

Yeah um.. no. Like I said in the other thread Kings easily pass. This deal is absolutely TERRIBLE for the Kings. An expiring who is worth more than what your offering by itself but to add in a lottery pick as well just seems stupid. Dally probably will get traded but not until near the trading deadline.

Not to derail the thread, but what are your thoughts on Ben Gordon as the solution at SG for you guys? If Tyreke is going to keep playing the point, it only makes sense to get a combo-guard (like Crawford), but better. I don't get to see a lot of Sacto ball on the east coast, but I liked what I saw and really like Cousins' game.

I'm not sure what it would take, maybe Dalembert, Greene, a 2nd and a pick swap or something... but I think a lineup of Reke, BG, Casspi, Landry, Cousins is pretty dope.

I wouldn't want to make that deal until December/January though, until Cousins learns the ropes and doesn't get frustrated with the rookie foul treatment.

Cassius wrote:Not to derail the thread, but what are your thoughts on Ben Gordon as the solution at SG for you guys? If Tyreke is going to keep playing the point, it only makes sense to get a combo-guard (like Crawford), but better. I don't get to see a lot of Sacto ball on the east coast, but I liked what I saw and really like Cousins' game.

I'm not sure what it would take, maybe Dalembert, Greene, a 2nd and a pick swap or something... but I think a lineup of Reke, BG, Casspi, Landry, Cousins is pretty dope.

I wouldn't want to make that deal until December/January though, until Cousins learns the ropes and doesn't get frustrated with the rookie foul treatment.

Ben Gordon would be more than welcome on the team if I'm in charge. He's a great 3pt and FT shooter with a big body, and he's clutch. Although I'd ideally like Mo Williams or a Mo Williams-clone next to Tyreke, Ben Gordon will more than do.

Dalembert, Greene, a 2nd AND a pick swap is way too steep though considering the horrendous year Ben Gordon had last year. He didn't earn a starting position, his three point percentage dropped 9% from the previous year, FG% dropped, and he just looked plain bad out there...How does a 20 ppg scorer go to a weaker team and have his production fall off the radar? Detroit isn't in a position to ask for a lot for him.

There is absolutely no need for Jamal Crawford. This team does not need a chucker, what we need is a solid defender who can hit the open 3, he is better suited to either stay or go to a contender.

Check me if I'm wrong, but we might have enough cap space to absorb Gordon for a TPE and a first round pick in 2012 (unprotected)?