Clippers shopping Crawford, could he fit as a 6th man?

MalagaBulls · Post #1 » by **MalagaBulls** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:06 am

OK this might go in the Trade deadline thread but it does have some interesting merit. I am interested to ask how the board would feel about Crawford as an alternative for the bench playing heavy minutes to spell Jimmy and even DRose? He has been a PG for 3-4 seasons and he can create/score. He has a team option for 5.6 million which is very modest for his production (16 PPG). He will be 35 this year but hey it would only be a 1.3 year rental if that and the Clippers want a first. Does he offset the value we could get from Afflalo? Thoughts?? Mods move it if necessary please. Am I :crazy:

?

Link: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2368 ... pers-guard

Report: Clippers Shopping Crawford

Tuesday, Feb. 17

Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports released a wide-ranging report on Tuesday regarding the top NBA trade rumors. Crawford was among the marquee names involved, as the Clippers seek to upgrade their roster down the stretch of the 2014-15 season:

“
[...] The Clippers have probed the market with Jamal Crawford to see if there's a way to acquire a first-round pick that could help them make a competitive offer to Denver for Wilson Chandler or Arron Afflalo, league sources said. The Clippers have also had a continuing interest with Phoenix's Gerald Green, sources said.

IcemanGervin · Post #2 » by **IcemanGervin** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:15 am

[tweet]https://twitter.com/KCJHoop/status/567354267678539776[/tweet]

We have nothing to trade.

MalagaBulls · Post #3 » by **MalagaBulls** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:21 am

IcemanGervin wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/KCJHoop/status/567354267678539776[/tweet]

We have nothing to trade.

We have our 1st, plus possible 1st's from Cleveland and Sacramento. The thing is I get KC's got the inside connections most of the time but it has been proven the Bulls could be sending out smoke screens. I guess we wait and see. Just 38 hours to go.

t-time · Post #4 » by **t-time** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:29 am

Still makes me sick that JC wanted to come here but we signed a 55 year old Rip Hamilton instead.

musiqsoulchild · Post #5 » by **musiqsoulchild** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:56 am

MalagaBulls wrote:
IcemanGervin wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/KCJHoop/status/567354267678539776[/tweet]

We have nothing to trade.

We have our 1st, plus possible 1st's from Cleveland and Sacramento. The thing is I get KC's got the inside connections most of the time but it has been proven the Bulls could be sending out smoke screens. I guess we wait and see. Just 38 hours to go.

We dont have a 1st from Cleveland.

We get to swap picks with them if they finish worse than us.

musiqsoulchild · Post #6 » by **musiqsoulchild** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:57 am

No feasible way to get him.

Clippers arent looking to off-load him...they want good pieces back.

MGB8 · Post #7 » by **MGB8** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:10 pm

Report is that the Clippers are really only looking for a first to swing to Denver for Afflalo and Chandler.

So my dream scenario would be this: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=okjvbrz

Chicago gets Hinrich to agree to a trade to Denver, and is joined by Etwan Moore and the Bulls first. The Clippers send Udoh to Denver for salary purposes (he gets cut, Moore probably, too), and Chandler goes back to the Clipps. Then Crawford comes to Chicago.

Because Crawford only makes 5.5 million, the Bulls can get him back while only sending out Kirk and Moore. And Crawford can play both of their roles - not so much on the defensive end for Hinrich, but certainly a huge upgrade off the bench for the Bulls.

ATRAIN53 · Post #8 » by **ATRAIN53** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:29 pm

Intriguing, no question-

But KMart is a little bigger, younger and more adept at getting to the FT stripe.

Happy to add either for the stretch run and take McDermotts roster spot....

Ralphb07 · Post #9 » by **Ralphb07** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:44 pm

Bulls have nothing to trade for him. The Bulls seem good with seeing the buyout market. I see us going after Prince

Jeffster81 · Post #10 » by **Jeffster81** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:54 pm

Ralphb07 wrote:Bulls have nothing to trade for him. The Bulls seem good with seeing the buyout market. I see us going after Prince

I was thinking the same.

RyanJamari · Post #11 » by **RyanJamari** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:18 pm

I take Crawford for a 2nd. But, I think the Clipper want a 1st.

musiqsoulchild · Post #12 » by **musiqsoulchild** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:53 pm

MGB8 wrote:Report is that the Clippers are really only looking for a first to swing to Denver for Afflalo and Chandler.

So my dream scenario would be this: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=okjvbrz

Chicago gets Hinrich to agree to a trade to Denver, and is joined by Etwan Moore and the Bulls first. The Clippers send Udoh to Denver for salary purposes (he gets cut, Moore probably, too), and Chandler goes back to the Clipps. Then Crawford comes to Chicago.

Because Crawford only makes 5.5 million, the Bulls can get him back while only sending out Kirk and Moore. And Crawford can play both of their roles - not so much on the defensive end for Hinrich, but certainly a huge upgrade off the bench for the Bulls.

If Kirk could be moved, I would just as easily move him + other crap for Afflalo.

red222 · Post #13 » by **red222** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:56 pm

musiqsoulchild wrote:
MGB8 wrote:Report is that the Clippers are really only looking for a first to swing to Denver for Afflalo and Chandler.

So my dream scenario would be this: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=okjvbrz

Chicago gets Hinrich to agree to a trade to Denver, and is joined by Etwan Moore and the Bulls first. The Clippers send Udoh to Denver for salary purposes (he gets cut, Moore probably, too), and Chandler goes back to the Clipps. Then Crawford comes to Chicago.

Because Crawford only makes 5.5 million, the Bulls can get him back while only sending out Kirk and Moore. And Crawford can play both of their roles - not so much on the defensive end for Hinrich, but certainly a huge upgrade off the bench for the Bulls.

If Kirk could be moved, I would just as easily move him + other crap for Afflalo.

correct just let moore play kirk's role

Pnjguy · Post #14 » by **Pnjguy** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:57 pm

Crawford's not really a fit here this year.

musiqsoulchild · Post #15 » by **musiqsoulchild** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:12 pm

Pnjguy wrote:Crawford's not really a fit here this year.

I would have ZERO problem replacing Brooks + Kirk's minutes with Crawford.

Pnjguy · Post #16 » by **Pnjguy** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:15 pm

musiqsoulchild wrote:
Pnjguy wrote:Crawford's not really a fit here this year.

I would have ZERO problem replacing Brooks + Kirk's minutes with Crawford.

you're trading defense for offense, and offense isn't our problem.

red222 · Post #17 » by **red222** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:19 pm

Pnjguy wrote:
musiqsoulchild wrote:
Pnjguy wrote:Crawford's not really a fit here this year.

I would have ZERO problem replacing Brooks + Kirk's minutes with Crawford.

you're trading defense for offense, and offense isn't our problem.

whose defense I know you aren't saying kirk :lol:

BeatDaCavs420 · Post #18 » by **BeatDaCavs420** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:22 pm

t-time wrote:Still makes me sick that JC wanted to come here but we signed a 55 year old Rip Hamilton instead.

samwana · Post #19 » by **samwana** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:22 pm

Pnjguy wrote:
musiqsoulchild wrote:
Pnjguy wrote:Crawford's not really a fit here this year.

I would have ZERO problem replacing Brooks + Kirk's minutes with Crawford.

you're trading defense for offense, and offense isn't our problem.

Kirk really isn't defense anymore, Kirk isn't really any use anymore, the only really bad thing is that he has a no-trade
clause in his contract, he has to agree to be traded. And even worse, I don't think he wants to leave Chicago again.

Pnjguy · Post #20 » by **Pnjguy** » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:26 pm

red222 wrote:
Pnjguy wrote:
musiqsoulchild wrote:
I would have ZERO problem replacing Brooks + Kirk's minutes with Crawford.

you're trading defense for offense, and offense isn't our problem.

whose defense I know you aren't saying kirk

In Kirk's defense (a place i rarely go to) he's had turf toe and he's still a better defender than Crawford.