Bradley: Hawks to pursue David Anderson if ZazA bolts

[Bahamut]

I also hope we get both Anderson and Zaza, if possible :newspaper:

[Plainview1981]

My point was that you dont know how he will fit because Crawford has not played a game yet . But Ive yet to find anyone who has said Crawford wouldnt play the role that he was asked.

His production has shown him to do 1 thing. Score. Somebody don't just become a PG because they want to or because they're asked to. Either you're a PG or you're not.

Why wouldnt he feed Josh ? Again you are predicting worse case scenario .

He is not a PG. While Bibby isn't the best PG I will say that he has better court vision than Crawford.

of course they are it means you were fouled while shooting but it also means you are putting the ball on the floor and getting into the lane something Bibby does not do and Crawford does and then he also shoots a better percentage as well.

He doesn't have a better FG percentage. Between all the outside shots that JC jacks up and the ones he gets going to the basket he will take a lot of shots. Who is going to pass the ball on this team again? Nevermind, nobody has to. The team will just wait until the playoffs and get embarassed against because of poor ball movement. Which will happen. Even more than last year.

5th team in 9 seasons ? but he was on two of those teams for 8 seasons ? yeah it screams journeyman lol

Teams often hold onto a player hoping. Like JT here. The Hawks spent too many seasons trying to fit in a tweener combo guard and after a while they gave up.

My point was that I think he will play a whatever role is asked of him it just so happens that on those teams he was asked to generate points.

Why, because he says? You can't just become a PG if you want to. He might try. Remember, JJ was going to be the PG here also. Where has that lead to? He may think he can play the PG role, but that doesn't mean he can.

He was with the Bulls for 4 years and then the knicks for 4 years and then GS for one year and now us .

If Zeke wasn't there he probably would have been gone from NY sooner.

.

Size means alot when a team is attacking you with the smallest backourt in the league like the cavs were . Now we have someone that can make them rethink those matchups

If JC doesn't defend, the backcourt will still not be good on defense. I think he can be a good defender. When I've seen him play I've had the impression that he can. But will he? He hasn't showed it much yet. And I'm always a doubt first person. Show me first.

Do you have any proof of this ? I dont know how you could argue that adding him doesnt improve our teams ft percentage considering hes the 14th best ft shooter in the league.

Because he cannot carry a team by himself . Hes not Kobe,Lebron or Dwight . Correct me if Im wrong but didnt he get SIGNED and then traded to the knicks ? and then the knicks traded him because they were dumping salary for 2010 ? The Warriors traded for him as insurance for Monta and now that Monta is said to be healthy and they invested near max dollars in him they decided to move Crawford as they are guard heavy ?

It's common sense. If a guy shoots low percentages and shoots a lot of 3's he will shoot you out of some games. People here are acting like he is some sort of dominate player and he's not. You guys have tried to turn a player that isn't even an all star into prime time AI.

If he was taking over these games and killing everybody his teams wouldn't be as bad as they've been. GS dumped Crawford for 2 (what looks to be) scrubs. It appears they couldn't' get any value for Crawford. Wonder why.... I don't remember if Chicago signed and traded him. Either way, they wanted rid of him.

Why do you keep mentioning Reef ? You are living in the past because the two situations are nothing alike .

Reef was a maxed out #3 pick being traded for a #3 pick . Crawford is no where near max and he was traded for scrubs in a salary dump.

Reef was considered a franchise player and I dont think Crawford was ever considered a franchise player .

You look at a stat and see a 20PPG scorer and you automatically think the player is going to improve your team a lot. You think he can do this and he can do that. He can just become a PG if he wants to and so on.

My point is that trading Crawford for Bibby doesn't make this team a lot better if other players aren't picked up. IF Bibby is kept and Crawford plays a level headed game off the bench it could help the team some. That means less shot attempts. But I don't believe that letting Bibby go and just replacing him with Crawford will help this team as much as people think it will. He could slightly help either way because Crawford does get to the line. But I also suspect Bibby has a tad better court vision. I've seen him more than Crawford though.

This team plays one on one by coaches design thats the offense .I was one of the main proponents of trading for Amare .I never for once believed that we should drop Bibby because we have Crawford but I do belieouve there are things that Crawford does that would improve the team especially if our goal is to get further in the playoffs .

If all the Hawks do is replace Bibby with Crawford and bring over David Andersen and let ZaZa go I don't believe this team will improve. Even less likely with the improvements surrounding teams are making. This team is NOT getting further into the playoffs with the team I listed. NO WAY.

We can sit here and do this over and over. But if you believe that somehow that team I listed gets further into the playoffs, were not going to come to an agreement. Like I said, it's not just about Jamal. This team can't afford to just settle on bring over David Andersen and expect to keep progressing. If that's what you expect or think, you will be let down by this time year.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[Final_quest]

Got to be honest, I haven't seen very much of Jamal Crawford at all. I mean who watched any of those teams he was on. I'll give him a fair chance.

This thread seems to be about if this team can improve by replacing Zaza with Andersen and Bibby with Crawford. No way! I highly doubt that is our offseason plans, though. If it is, we have no chance of doing anything worthwhile next year.

[Plainview1981]

Got to be honest, I haven't seen very much of Jamal Crawford at all. I mean who watched any of those teams he was on. I'll give him a fair chance.

This thread seems to be about if this team can improve by replacing Zaza with Andersen and Bibby with Crawford. No way! I highly doubt that is our offseason plans, though. If it is, we have no chance of doing anything worthwhile next year.

I'm basically saying the same thing.

[BusBoyIsBack]

2008-09

Crawford .545 TS%

Bibby .544 TS%

2007-08

Crawford .528 TS%

Bibby .515 TS%

2006-07

Crawford .517 TS%

Bibby .532 TS%

They have been essentially the same in terms of shooting % over the last 3 years.

I was going to post something similar. Crawford's career FG% is pretty terrible with 40.4% but his career TS% is 51.7%

That's a stark contrast. And it's made because the guy simply gets to the FT line. Not a bad 3 point shooter either although he's no Bibby in that regard. But he will defend better than an aging Bibby and he will certainly give us more dribble penetration.

ANd I know he's never led a winning team but he's never really had the chance either. He wasn't in any winning situations in Golden State and NY.

Im actually kind of excited about the move especially when I remember the fact that all we gave up to get him was a PG that Woodson didn't even play