Crawford may be the missing piece

general · Post #1 » by **general** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:22 am

I'm from seattle and have been watching Brandon roy and Jamal crawford last week workout and they both look real good..Crawford runs the point pretty good for a 6'5 offensive weapon his passing is incredible and Brandon roy just plays like he's been in the NBA for 9 years..doin there workouts it looks like Crawford is better.I think with a good supporting cast in ATL he can be the rashard lewis or Mo williams of this team..you guys will like him and he's very Humble.

tbhawksfan · Post #2 » by **tbhawksfan** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:19 am

Thanks! Seems most hawksfans are happy witht he trade. It's nice to have someone from Seattle come on and talk it up.

D21 · Post #3 » by **D21** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:41 pm

Except that we already have someone like Roy in Joe, so why add the same kind of player, while we have other position to improve ?

tbhawksfan · Post #4 » by **tbhawksfan** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 2:47 pm

I don't get your argument. I take Crawford over Bibby, especially since JC only has a two year contract. Bibby will command less per year, but I think he'll look for at least three years.

When you add in the fact that the trade is actually:

Speedy and Law's wasted salary, plus a bad investment in Bibby's next deal, I think it is an amazing trade. Seems most of the nation agrees with this perception.

I also love that we can keep MW, and still add a couple mid-level FA's once we let Bibs go.

JoshB914 · Post #5 » by **JoshB914** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:59 pm

^^ Why would you take Crawford over Bibby? He costs more and is a much worse fit for the team.

I was listening to the talking heads on the radio today and I was shocked to hear how many people said "Bibby doesn't make us a better team." They should stop looking at his pedestrian assist numbers and look at how the team performed on the floor after we got him. He turned us into a .500 team before even know the teammates or his offense two seasons ago. Then we win 47 games last year with virtually the same squad except we were a bit deeper. Surely Bibby gets some of the credit for that, right?

Benjammin · Post #6 » by **Benjammin** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:08 pm

If Crawford is the missing piece, you might need a new puzzle.

I think the Hawks will miss Bibby's contributions if he does not come back, but I can understand that they don't want to invest big bucks in a 31 year old PG.

JoshB914 · Post #7 » by **JoshB914** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:17 pm

Benjammin wrote:If Crawford is the missing piece, you might need a new puzzle.

I think the Hawks will miss Bibby's contributions if he does not come back, but I can understand that they don't want to invest big bucks in a 31 year old PG.

I like that. Very well said.

gswhoop · Post #8 » by **gswhoop** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:17 pm

Crawford is by no means a traditional pg but playing alongside joe johnson I think they both equate to the assist production that 1 solid pg provides.

People at the warriors forum has always bashed crawford for his poor defense and I don't think that's true. A team has to play defense well in order to make 1 a stand out defender and the warriors as a unit does not emphasize defense. So personally I think he is a mediocre defender and with support from johnson and smith I think this will show that he is an even better defender than what we've seen.

I wish you the best of luck next season. Just too bad that shaq was traded to the CAVS another headache for you guys in the playoffs.

NDaATL · Post #9 » by **NDaATL** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:19 pm

general wrote:Crawford runs the point pretty good for a 6'5 offensive weapon his passing is incredible and Brandon roy just plays like he's been in the NBA for 9 years..doin there workouts it looks like Crawford is better..

Crawford may have more natural talent than Roy, but in no way is he a better player. It's not even close.

Crawford has unlimited talent but the guy has been a chucker his entire career. He can handle the ball, but he can't play point except for spot minutes. If anyone thinks this guy is going to come in and start at point they are sadly mistaken. Either that or we're going to find ourselves in the lottery next season.

JoshB914 · Post #10 » by **JoshB914** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:26 pm

^^^ Exactly how I feel. If we are going to run with Craw/JJ in the backcourt then we will be hard pressed to make the playoffs altogether.

parson · Post #11 » by **parson** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:29 pm

Bibby deserves a lot of credit for our good play, but we shouldn't go overboard. We also showed really good play whenever Anthony Johnson's health allowed him to play well. I think that demonstrates we need a good player at the point, but that we don't need a superstar, in order to remain a playoff team.

The question, then, becomes, "Is Crawford better than Bibby?"

johnny878 · Post #12 » by **johnny878** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:33 pm

JoshB914 wrote:^^^ Exactly how I feel. If we are going to run with Craw/JJ in the backcourt then we will be hard pressed to make the playoffs altogether.

why is everyone acting like Bibby was such a playmaking pointguard?

bibby was pretty much just a shooter for the hawks. crawford is pretty much just a scorer. i dont see how this swap affects the hawks that much.

killbuckner · Post #13 » by **killbuckner** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:37 pm

Bibby was a legtimate NBA PG that could knock down an open shot. Crawford would be the most selfish starting PG in the league.

johnny878 · Post #14 » by **johnny878** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:45 pm

lets be realistic here,

bibby averaged 5 assist a game, half of which came from alley oops to one of the super atheletic bigs, so its not like he actually ever created shots for his teammates either.

and crawford ballhogging doesnt bother me at all. considering we have just watched years of joe johnson hold onto the ball for 18 seconds of every possession. its not like the hawks ever ran plays or passed to the open man to begin with.

D21 · Post #15 » by **D21** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:32 pm

johnny878 wrote:bibby averaged 5 assist a game, half of which came from alley oops to one of the super atheletic bigs, so its not like he actually ever created shots for his teammates either.

And we already discuss that, and know that Woodson coaching is big part of the problem.
I also don't think that Crawford can help creating shots for his teammates better than Bibby.

JoshB914 · Post #16 » by **JoshB914** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:45 pm

johnny878 wrote:lets be realistic here,

bibby averaged 5 assist a game, half of which came from alley oops to one of the super atheletic bigs, so its not like he actually ever created shots for his teammates either.

and crawford ballhogging doesnt bother me at all. considering we have just watched years of joe johnson hold onto the ball for 18 seconds of every possession. its not like the hawks ever ran plays or passed to the open man to begin with.

Again, I think just looking at his assist numbers is very short-sighted. We were a much better team with Bibby and the stat that matters the most (wins and losses) indicates that, so I have to dispute the point that Mike didn't make his teammates better because he clearly did. He's a savvy vet who got us into our offensive sets very quickly, didn't turn the ball over, and could carry us offensively for important stretches of time.

Obviously we could do better than Bibby who is nothing special at this time. But to write him off and act like he wasn't absolutely essential to our progress over the past 1.5 years makes no sense whatsoever.

deeps6x · Post #17 » by **deeps6x** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:58 pm

JoshB914 wrote:^^ Why would you take Crawford over Bibby? He costs more and is a much worse fit for the team.

I was listening to the talking heads on the radio today and I was shocked to hear how many people said "Bibby doesn't make us a better team." They should stop looking at his pedestrian assist numbers and look at how the team performed on the floor after we got him. He turned us into a .500 team before even know the teammates or his offense two seasons ago. Then we win 47 games last year with virtually the same squad except we were a bit deeper. Surely Bibby gets some of the credit for that, right?

Hell yeah! Bibby was a perfect fit for the players we had these last two years. Craw has been referred to as a cancer on the GS forum. I think you are nuts if you think he is a good replacement for Bibby. The team will slide if we make this switch. The move was probably made because management decided not to match the 9 mil/yr deal that Marvin will get offered. We will need a new fourth scoring option.

johnny878 · Post #18 » by **johnny878** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 7:59 pm

how am i writing him off? i just dont think there is a significant difference between having bibby play the point and crawford.

neither really create for their teammates. and its not like crawford could possibly play worse defense than bibby.

atleast crawford might actually be able to take a guy off the dribble from time to time instead of just sitting by the 3 point line and chucking up 3's.

JoshB914 · Post #19 » by **JoshB914** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:10 pm

^^^ I just strongly disagree that Crawford is any kind of upgrade from Bibby as a starting PG. If you think Bibby's lack of distribution skills were a problem then wait til you see Craw dribble a hole through the floor every time he gets the ball.

general · Post #20 » by **general** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:05 pm

Bibby's job was to pass first and knock down open shots and through all that he avg what?13ppg and 5apg?Crawford is a scorer and he still managed to avg nearly 5 assists per game That's pretty darn good..considering he avg 20ppg also The kid can play And I think the ones that doubt him will be surprised.New Team he has some real talent on his team for once in his career..