Jordan Crawford vs. Kirk Hinrich

Post #1 » by **Jamaaliver** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:34 pm

Since the trade:

Crawford Hinrich
Games 15 15
Points 14.1 9.3
Rebs 2.5 2.6
Assists 3.1 4.1
FG% 0.395 0.47

And Jordan Crawford is averaging 20 ppg in his last 5 games. As anemic as our offense is, how was this kid not getting more PT? Or at least on the ATL untouchables list.

Geaux_Hawks · Post #2 » by **Geaux_Hawks** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:46 pm

I do think Crawford had alot of potential, but his numbers with the Wiz are high becuz the Wiz aren't a winning team. His efficiency is not all that good, so its basically saying he is chucking up shots.

He is a scorer and I do think we gave up to much with the first + an expiring being the only needed incentive for taking Bibs. If we kept Jordan then the possibility that Jamal could walk wouldn't hurt, which is the reason I thought we obtained him.

Hinrich has done well enough for me to justify it was a needed trade, but throwing in Jordan was dumb to do. Blame Sund as usual for giving up to much.

geeman · Post #3 » by **geeman** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:26 pm

I've always like Capain Kirk, he may not be the long term solotion at the point but hes a good combo PG that always plays great def and can shoot. I think I'd keep Kirk.

draycon530 · Post #4 » by **draycon530** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:56 pm

I would definitely rather have Kirk Hinrich than Jordan Crawford. Hinrich's defensive presence and experience in the league is good for our team. I would, however, much rather have Jordan over Jamal and I was really hoping we were going to trade Jamal this year, since we won't resign him anyways. Jordan and Jamal are essentially the same player, with both scoring by shooting in high volumes, but while Jamal is aging and his skills are deteriorating, Jordan will only get better.

Harry10 · Post #5 » by **Harry10** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 11:17 pm

Jamaaliver wrote:Since the trade:

Crawford Hinrich
Games 15 15
Points 14.1 9.3
Rebs 2.5 2.6
Assists 3.1 4.1
FG% 0.395 0.47

And Jordan Crawford is averaging 20 ppg in his last 5 games. As anemic as our offense is, how was this kid not getting more PT? Or at least on the ATL untouchables list.

...... that says it all

HoopsGuru25 · Post #6 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:24 am

No need to compare the two. The Hawks probably deemed Crawford unworthy for a 3rd year option and included him in the trade. They probably could have had both of them which is why the trade was so stupid.

Post #7 » by **Jamaaliver** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:44 am

And this isn't intended as a slight against Hinrich; it's just that acquiring Kirk wasn't (realistically) gonna make us a legitimate contender in the east. And as a rule, you don't give away multiple draft picks for a guy that isn't expected to push you over the top.

And while we're struggling to score basketsfor long stretches, he's competing for Rookie of the Month honors and outscoring the #1 overall pick from the 2010 draft. The kid has talent and fills a need we currently have. IMO, he and Horford should have been the two untouchable players on our roster. because of their youth and actual potential to develop into contributing players in the future.

He definitely has more of pulse than Teague. And he provided insurance should JJ get hurt again or Jamal Crawford leave in the off-season.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #8 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:21 pm

This is where people jump the shark with Jordan Crawford. He's a potential asset...but "untouchable"? He's a volume scorer who shoots 37 percent from the field and 23 percent from 3. I'm not sure what he does that would lead you to conclude he was better than Teague besides play more minutes on a terrible team.

God Squad · Post #9 » by **God Squad** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:31 pm

Jordan Crawford is gonna be a good player. Atlanta shouldn't have given up on him.

evildallas · Post #10 » by **evildallas** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:32 am

It's an apples and oranges comparison. Roles and pressure completely different. As far as the trade goes, no one out here can say what Washington would have taken as a minimum to get it done. For all I know we wanted Hilton Armstrong and had to give back someone to keep us under the luxury tax threshold.

Did they give up on Crawford early? Sure, that's obvious, but don't misread strong scoring on a bad team for a guarantee of future success.

The real area to complain about is that Jeff Teague has played well when actually given a chance without threat of pulling him right back out (games during the trade, when Hinrich was out, and at the end of blowouts). It makes me wonder if he was given consistent fair minutes all year whether we wouldn't have felt the need to trade to improve the defense or perhaps would we have mustered our few resources to acquire help elsewhere. In this area I firmly blame Larry Drew. Most of the season I blamed Teague for not stepping up, but it's been clear watching him jerk the kid around (and Zaza as well) and watching Jamal be exempt from any standards of play at PG that Drew is the problem. I still don't know if Teague is the solution, but I am fairly certain that with opportunity and encouragement he could have contributed and I doubt that the team's record would be any worse for it. I just hope that the owners (or new owners) realize the mistake of his employment (like Indiana and Charlotte did) and correct it before making any bigger trade missteps.

Jay81 · Post #11 » by **Jay81** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:37 am

what player on your bench now do you have that can score nearly 40 pts against D Wade. You guys got raped with that horrific trade

johnny878 · Post #12 » by **johnny878** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:40 am

Geaux_Hawks wrote:I do think Crawford had alot of potential, but his numbers with the Wiz are high becuz the Wiz aren't a winning team. His efficiency is not all that good, so its basically saying he is chucking up shots.

He is a scorer and I do think we gave up to much with the first + an expiring being the only needed incentive for taking Bibs. If we kept Jordan then the possibility that Jamal could walk wouldn't hurt, which is the reason I thought we obtained him.

Hinrich has done well enough for me to justify it was a needed trade, but throwing in Jordan was dumb to do. Blame Sund as usual for giving up to much.

to be fair, hinrich was on the same "not winning team". This trade was horrible for the hawks lol.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #13 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:47 am

the 9-25 and 10-28 games don't do much for me....but tonight makes me worry a little(alrthough I didn't watch their game).

parson · Post #14 » by **parson** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:50 am

Crawford's shooting about 37% for WAS. That's pitiful. Don't tell me about any man's scoring when he shoots like that. ANYbody can score when he shoots as many times as Jordan does.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #15 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:51 am

Agreed....but 39 points vs a good defensive team is a little different than shooting 10-28 in a triple overtime game vs the Clippers. That could be the most points scored against the Heat all year for all we know.

parson · Post #16 » by **parson** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:00 am

Exactly. But it was in a blowout. It's also only the 4th time he's shot 50% or better in a game for the Wiz.

parson · Post #17 » by **parson** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:04 am

The big thing is, Bibby was a negative. The Wiz weren't going to trade Hinrich to us for just Bibby. We had to send them something.

Personally, I'd have loved to have traded Jamal for someone big -- and kept Jordan. But getting rid of Bibby was a must. We would have collapsed, defensively, if he were still our starter. He was aging rapidly right before our eyes.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #18 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:17 am

Are you ignoring the fact that Bibby cost the Wizards 6 million dollars less than Hinrich?

I also disagree with you about the Hawks "having to get rid of Bibby". Offense is the Hawks biggest problem(particularly in the 4th quarter) and if they felt that Bibby was too much of a liability defensively...then they could have started Jeff Teague.

Harry10 · Post #19 » by **Harry10** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:16 am

HoopsGuru25 wrote:Are you ignoring the fact that Bibby cost the Wizards 6 million dollars less than Hinrich?

I also disagree with you about the Hawks "having to get rid of Bibby". Offense is the Hawks biggest problem(particularly in the 4th quarter) and if they felt that Bibby was too much of a liability defensively...then they could have started Jeff Teague.

Kirk is shooting better than Bibby

johnny878 · Post #20 » by **johnny878** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:21 am

what really pisses me off about the trade, is that the Wiz were essentially PAID with a first round pic to take hinrich in the first place from the bulls. then a few months later, the hawks give them essentially TWO first round picks for him right after the bulls had to bribe the Wiz to take them?

Thats just a **** GM getting ripped off. Bibby had been playing better then most expected coming into this season, so it wasnt like some sudden hole that had to be filled. just crap gm'ing.