RealGM

hawks should resign crawford now and not wait for him to be a free agent i think somehting like 3 years 27 mill is fair.....also i dont think joe johnson should be resigned bring back flip murry or a low cost 6th man.......and add SIZE.......so all can be moved to the PF........make max offers to bosh,amare if not successful then go for boozer,david lee...another idea is replace joe with rudy gay will be cheaper...and move marvin to 6th man along with bibby

And you expect us to offer max contracts how?

A) Can you reformat your posts so they're not just a mash of uncapitalized words interspersed with ellipses? It's REALLY hard to read your posts right now.
B) Lulz at the idea of paying Crawford 3/27. He's worth maybe a 3/20; 3/27 is just crazy.

azuresou1 wrote:B) Lulz at the idea of paying Crawford 3/27. He's worth maybe a 3/20; 3/27 is just crazy.

Am I reading you wrong or are you saying Crawford would take a pay cut? I think he's earning $9.3 million right now.

I'm saying that Crawford is currently overpaid, and as a FA he would be getting paid $6-7 annually. With the upcoming CBA, I think that an extra $11 mil over 2 years is fair.

hawks can get a big via sign and trade for joe johnson. crawford number say he should be paid between 10-12 mill so 8 to 9 mill per season is more then fair

Jcrawford11 wrote:hawks can get a big via sign and trade for joe johnson. crawford number say he should be paid between 10-12 mill so 8 to 9 mill per season is more then fair

What kind of numbers ?
The points/game numbers ?

Are you looking at all the other numbers to say he deserves 10-12.
Like I said, he's better than Murray, was not used correctly by Woodson, but in the end, AT THIS MOMENT, he has not shown more impact than Murray.

Do you want some other numbers: http://www.82games.com/0910/0910ATL.HTM
On/Off court : only +0.9
even Bibby, who is killed by his direct opponent (17 with only 14.3 for him) generates more impact than him, with a +7.3

And if you want to say that Crawford share some playing time with bench players:
- he plays a lot with the starters
- Murray, in same case last year, was at +6.7

Crawford did not help ATL to get better, just open your eyes:
last year 47W with lots of injuries
this year, 53W without or nearly any injury
the same team from 2008-09 without injury would have go from 47 to 53, easily.

His best sixth man award is only a mirage, or you have to admit than if Murray had been playing same time than Crawford last season, he should also have deserve the award this year.
Why should we pay 10-12M for the best sixth man if he has no more impact than a guy at 2M ?

You want a sixth man, playing starter minutes like Crawford did, at 12M that has impact : Ginobili.
I would trade 2 Crawford for 1 Ginobili

Actually, to get more reality of the game, I would have prefer to see Crawford starting.
We would have seen that it was once Bibby was coming on the court that the team was better, even if opponent PG was killing, more due to switching than only Bibby's poor defense.
Or we should have start Bibby-Crawford-Joe, which seemed to work.
But in both cases, Crawford would not have got the award. He seems to be a nice guy, but the player has not convinced me.

D21 wrote:
What kind of numbers ?
The points/game numbers ?

Are you looking at all the other numbers to say he deserves 10-12.
Like I said, he's better than Murray, was not used correctly by Woodson, but in the end, AT THIS MOMENT, he has not shown more impact than Murray.

Do you want some other numbers: http://www.82games.com/0910/0910ATL.HTM
On/Off court : only +0.9
even Bibby, who is killed by his direct opponent (17 with only 14.3 for him) generates more impact than him, with a +7.3

And if you want to say that Crawford share some playing time with bench players:
- he plays a lot with the starters
- Murray, in same case last year, was at +6.7

Crawford did not help ATL to get better, just open your eyes:
last year 47W with lots of injuries
this year, 53W without or nearly any injury
the same team from 2008-09 without injury would have go from 47 to 53, easily.

His best sixth man award is only a mirage, or you have to admit than if Murray had been playing same time than Crawford last season, he should also have deserve the award this year.
Why should we pay 10-12M for the best sixth man if he has no more impact than a guy at 2M ?

You want a sixth man, playing starter minutes like Crawford did, at 12M that has impact : Ginobili.
I would trade 2 Crawford for 1 Ginobili

Actually, to get more reality of the game, I would have prefer to see Crawford starting.
We would have seen that it was once Bibby was coming on the court that the team was better, even if opponent PG was killing, more due to switching than only Bibby's poor defense.
Or we should have start Bibby-Crawford-Joe, which seemed to work.
But in both cases, Crawford would not have got the award. He seems to be a nice guy, but the player has not convinced me.

this is absolutely (Please Use More Appropriate Word). Magic got better with Carter, Cavs got better with Jamison and Shaq, Lakers got better with Artest, Celtics and Heat got better with a healthy KG and Wade, Bulls got alittle better with a developing Noah and GIbson.

Crawford kept this team's head above water from their mark of the previous year. if you take the 2009 team without Crawford and played them this year, they wouldn't have gotten 47 wins and would have gotten the 5th seed behind the Heat the Celtics.

every contending team in the east this year got better with an addition. comparing the wins without taking to account the advancement of the competition is just moronic.

Maybe it's (Please Use More Appropriate Word) and moronic because you wanted so much Crawford that you're a bit biased
We got the 3rd seed because of the willing of BOS.
ORL - Turkoglu + Carter is not enough to explain why they destroyed ATL like that, with ATL - Murray + Crawford.

You know that I am comparing it simply, and that I said that Crawford can bring more impact if Woodson is not the coach.
Woodson let him do want he wants without any system, and he mainly did what Joe was already doing. It gave him the award, but ATL did not improve.
Without Woodson, maybe he would not have got the award, but the team would have been improved.

And this award being based on offensive stats for a guy coming of the bench, and not on the guy that has the better impact, if you think that a guy should have a salary based on his impact, I don't see why Crawford deserves, AT THIS MOMENT (again) a salary of more than 10M.

If we had traded for Speedy and Law for Haywood (who now deserves more than was he was making) instead of Crawford, and use the 3M in difference to keep Murray, ATL would certainly have been better, and especially against ORL.

I tend to exaggerate on case like Crawford, because he has not show a real impact at this moment.
I know he can bring more with a different coach, but until it's done, I don't understand how you can want to give him more than 10M.

d21 whatever it is that u smoke please share....those stats mean nothing there was a simular stat in 2008-2009 about matt bonner haveing a higher +/- then kevin durant for the entire year......

Age/Market/Role. These will all be factors at the time that Jamal becomes a free agent which happens to be the summer of the lockout. New CBA will set the guidelines. It's not a question of how Jamal's played (because he's played well), but whether the sides can come to an agreement.

Jcrawford11 wrote:d21 whatever it is that u smoke please share....those stats mean nothing there was a simular stat in 2008-2009 about matt bonner haveing a higher +/- then kevin durant for the entire year......

I did not smoke, I just intentionally exaggerated to keep everybody on earth, because I was thinking that some of you were the one smoking too much.
I just take the opposite POV, you are high on Crawford, and I am not, that's all

Again, I don't say he can't show he deserves this kind of salary, it's that at this moment, even playing good basket-ball, I don't see a improvement like some guys here seems to see, and especially coming from a guy paid 2M like Murray to a 10M.
I don't see any argument with the 53W with the more healthy team in NBA while other team are supposed to be better too, if it ends up with the monster exit in second round, worst than last season with three guys being injured.

I know I push the argument deep in one direction, but it's to show that your are pushing it deep in the other. Maybe he will show next season, with a new system that he deserves this salary, but now, he's not worth 10M even with his best 6th man award.
I excepted more impact from adding a 10M roster spot on a injured team, than just +6W and worst playoffs than the previous season.
Is it not enough to say that at this moment Crawford is not worth 10M on this team, until we see him with a new coach ? It seems to be logical to me, isn't it ?