Jamal Crawford?

[Wizenheimer]

Blazer fan here coming in peace...

I've seen Minnesota fans express some interest in Crawford. If Crawford opts-out of his 2nd season, he'll be looking for a multi-year deal and I'm not sure why the Wolves would be interested in adding Crawford long-term

However, in the rather unlikely event he opts-in to next season, I'm wondering if there could be a convergence of interests for Portland and Minnesota:

Portland appears to be trying to maximize cap-space for this summer. Crawford opting in would monkey-wrench those plans a bit. So they would likely be looking for ways to negate the impact to their cap-space.

If Crawford officially opted in early enough at the end of this season, how feasible would a simple swap of Crawford for Martell Webster be from Minnesota's perspective? Or for Brad Miller? I know in these types of situations everybody likes to 'hold out' for a pick or some other asset, but I don't see a reason to complicate the issue, especially considering the two teams are division rivals.

Portland would secure that extra cap-space while Minnesota would get a micro-wave type SG on an expiring contract. Would that trade be acceptable to Minnesota?

[Worm Guts]

Maybe. It probably wouldn't be my first choice, but there are worse options.

[Klomp]

As each game goes by, I think about what could have been. Beasley has played in just 5 games since the trade deadline. The Wolves are 3-8 since then. With Beasley in the lineup, they are 2-3.

I strongly believe that had we pulled the trigger on the trade, we would be currently sitting as the 7 or 8 seed in the playoffs.

[Worm Guts]

I think the opposite. Without Rubio and Pek, we were fried. Crawford wasn't going to make a difference.

[Wingman]

I'm glad it didn't happen. I still have high hopes for Beas.

[SO_MONEY]

What would the Wolves get for taking on the remaining year of his contract? If you were thinking nothing, then I don't see a deal. That 5.25mil (- Webster or Miller) could be better spent towards a long-term solution. Long story short, the same reasons Portland doesn't want him are the same reasons Minnesota doesn't want him.

[Calinks]

I think Crawford is too old to invest heavily in. He would be a last resort for me. Don't need to sign a player to a long term deal who can fall off any minute.

[Beas]

I think the opposite. Without Rubio and Pek, we were fried. Crawford wasn't going to make a difference.

Agreed. Pekovic has had as big of an effect on the team as Rubio did. Crawford might have helped a little but with Pekovic/Rubio injured our playoff window closed.

[Hambone93]

it's a little ridiculous. Everytime it seemed like someone on the roster started to play well they got injured. Rubio goes down, pek steps up then goes down. Barea strings together some real nice games, goes down. Beas starts to look like a real nice sixth man, goes down. It's just not fair ;(

[Grits n Gravy]

it's a little ridiculous. Everytime it seemed like someone on the roster started to play well they got injured. Rubio goes down, pek steps up then goes down. Barea strings together some real nice games, goes down. Beas starts to look like a real nice sixth man, goes down. It's just not fair ;(

the way i see it is we're getting our bad luck out of the way this year when expectations we're tempered to begin the season. next year we're gonna be healthy and competeing for home court

[post0115]

I would love that trade. I don't think it is likely given the scenarios that would have to occur for it to happen. I still see us signing Jamal Crawford as a free agent as more likely. I also don't think MN would need a pick to make it happen as Webster and Miller both have buyouts associated with them. It is small, but good enough reason for me not to demand a pick in the trade.

If this were to occur, it could give us flexibility to give QO's to Beasley and/or Randolph which would have value.

[Worm Guts]

.

If this were to occur, it could give us flexibility to give QO's to Beasley and/or Randolph which would have value.

I'm not sure what you mean, we already have that flexibility.

[Narf]

I don't have high hopes for Beasley anymore, but I think he's clearly better than Crawford as a 6th man. Crawford is a .502 TS% volume shooter who's now on the decline in his career that Portland fans are preemptively trying to dump because he sucks. Color me confused why anyone would want to give up cap space for him. Jodie Meeks is better all around and will be cheaper than Crawford next year. Why would we help a division rival and make ourselves worse at the same time?

[Krapinsky]

Enough with the Jodie Meeks talk. He averages .9 FTA and .7 ast per game.