Asking GSoM: Atlanta Hawks fans want the 411 on Jamal Crawford

1. How does Crawford help a team win?

Great handles and hesitation moves, can be a deadly shooter, takes and makes tough shots, He is capable of scoring 50+.

2. How does he help a team lose?

Inconsistent scoring, volume shooter, not a great defender.

3. What do you miss most about Jamal Crawford?

I thought he did well with young guys, and was a good influence in the locker room. I thought he handled being told he wasn’t wanted surprisingly well and never badmouthed the organization.

4. Was his defense really that bad?

It definetly wasn’t good, but I thought the bigger problem was that he wasn’t motivated often defensively.

5. Why did your team get rid of him?

We have enough scorers, he didn’t bring other things to the table.

6. Was Jamal Crawford a main reason your team did not make the playoffs?

He was part of it, although Monta being out was a bigger deal.

7. Every Warriors fan that comes onto Peachtree Hoops has made it clear that we should not be too excited about Jamal Crawford. Why is that? Are y’all just into hurting feelings?

He is what he is. You know you’re not getting defense, rebounding, or passing really. If you are looking for a volume shooter who can sometimes light it up, then you should be ecstatic!

8. What grade do you give the Warriors for this trade?

I give them a B. We didn’t really get anthing back, but kudos for getting rid of him and his ugly contract.

1. I like the guy and I like watching him play. Crawford is a very professional and classy guy. Every once in a blue moon he’ll light it up, but he usually doesn’t. He has a smooth jumper and great handles, which are useful in crunch time.

2. Zero defense, poor shot selection, zero defense, 40% volume shooting, zero defense, no rebounding… did I mention he plays zero defense?

3. Probably his pretty-looking jumper and handles. Of course, the result is either a cheer or a jeer depending on whether or not the rock goes in afterwards. Jamal’s great for pure entertainment but not much else.

4. Yes. I mentioned he plays zero defense right? Or perhaps it’s less than zero…

5. On a team full of scorers, we need a guy who can at least shoot efficiently if they cannot provide much else. On the other hand, I personally would’ve kept Crawford over Jackson because of the contract situation. On a team that isn’t winning anytime soon, I’d rather have kept the below-average player with a shorter contract than an average player with a long-term deal.

6. Not necessarily. He lost us quite a few games obviously, but won us a few (very few) as well. I think most of the blame though can rest on Monta and his trusty moped.

7. You shouldn’t be excited. In almost 600 career games, he hasn’t made the playoffs even once. Maybe the Hawks would be built well enough to put an end to the bad juju that surrounds the #11 jersey with his name on it. If not, don’t blame us.

8. Too early to tell. I can’t make a judgement until more subsequent moves (or lack thereof) are made. We got rid of a bad contract for a bunch of expirings… but we still have even uglier Jackson and Maggette contracts lying around.

9. Good luck to the Hawks. They have a pretty good team and should have no problem making the playoffs in the East if the Crawford Curse doesn’t strike.

I remember too many situations where he would turn the ball over with sloppy handling. He’s definitely a “groove” or “zone” player – when he’s in the groove/zone, his handling and shooting are great, but too often neither the handling or shooting were there, from what I could see.

Wow, how can anybody grade this trade below a B at worst? Sorry Hawks fans, Jamal Crawford does nothing to help you win games. He takes an active role in helping a team lose, though. Every time Jamal Crawford shoots (which is often), on average, he scores less than an average NBA guard – so it actively hurts the team. Any other average player taking a shot instead of him would help your team win more games (see his .517 career TS%). He is also a much worse defender than other guards. I don’t know how Atma called this an F if we don’t do anything with the expiring contracts – the Warriors became a better team the day Jamal Crawford was no longer with us. Add in additional salary flexibility (or the potential to trade the expirings for something), and this trade is an A whether we trade Law/Claxton or not.

1. He helps the team win by being a good FT shooter, so he’s good to have at the end of the game when the intentional fouls come. He does have mad dribbling skills to cross or fake out his defender. Also, when he catches a hot streak, he’s WAAAY ON FIRE.

2. He helps a team lose by being a volume shooter. He’s more often on a COLD streak than a hot streak. He’s not a physical defender. Neither was Monta or CJ on our team, but at least they steal. Crawford isn’t noted for being a stealer, nor a rebounder for that matter, unlike Monta who leaps HIGH for rebounds. He can lack assertiveness when he feels he needs to defer to someone else, which of course affects his shooting further. Not much variety in his game, mostly takes a few dribbles, then the shot. Some of us have labeled him as “dribble-dribble-shoot-clang”.

3. I miss mostly his professionalism and character, despite the injury-filled, ever-changing lineups and plans during last season. I also miss his sick dribbling, his hot streaks, and his knack for being fouled while shooting a 3, thus drawing the 4-pt play.

4. He’s not physical, he’s not a stealer, he’s not a shot blocker. So yes, his defense was that bad.

5. At the time, Nellie did not want to play Monta + Crawford because of defensively disastrous reasons. Instead, Nellie wanted a bigger backcourt in Monta + Jack. Thus, there was no place for Crawford, except to fight for guard minutes coming of the bench. Ironically, Nellie now wants to play smaller with Monta + Curry. I suppose Nellie’s gambling on Curry’s steals defense (if he has any) to make up for a lack of physical defense.

6. Crawford was not the main reason we missed the playoffs. We lost Baron, Monta found a moped, ridiculous number of injuries up and down the roster. Even if all that wasn’t a problem, it was a tough Western conference again. The Suns with 46 wins missed the playoffs.

7. We’ve seen what Crawford brings on a nightly basis, see answers #1 and #2. So we know he has more downside than upside. This has nothing to do with hurting feelings. He was the player who got the most “sit down and bring someone else in” comments during an open thread.

8. I’d give it an A for the salary dump reasons. We got rid of $19m over 2 years for $7.4 for this year. We weren’t going to play Crawford, we’re probably not going to play Law or Speedy, so the basketball side of the trade doesn’t matter for us.

9. I think Crawford actually surfs online and reads various blogs occasionally. I’m sure others do too, but he openly admits it. He’s best friends with Brandan Roy, so you’ll hear a bit about how they call each other to talk to each other. Never seen him dunk in a game. Not sure if he can.

I gave it a C. It’s a push really. We gave up a player to get a couple of expiring contracts, that will HOPEFULLY be used as a bargaining chip in another trade. The Hawks get a veteran scorer, and give up a couple guys that probably wouldn’t have seen any playing time.

1. i think he can help a team win if he balances out his scoring and passing evenly.
2. he helps a team lose because he shoots waaayyy too much. he’s capable of hitting shots, but he’s inconsistent when it comes to shoting a good pct on a nightly basis.
3. i’m gonna miss his crossover. i like his swag on the court. the he moves the ball up the court is intriguing to me, idk why. oh! and i will really miss his 3-pt flops.
4. yes, his D sucked THAT badly.
5. i agree with Atma on this one. the two guard positions were just too congested for everyone to play consistent minutes. i also think his contract had something to do with it.
6. no, he wasnt. i think he was brought in to fill in for Monta. i think he was brought to possibly help the Warriors’ playoff hopes, actually. but when you go a whole season without a full healthy roster, your playoff chances are slim.
7. i believe he’ll be a good fit in Atlanta. he can play either the 1 or 2, and is able to score any way possible, along with having the gift to create for others as well.
8. for now, i give the Warriors a C. i wanna see what they do with the expiring contracts before i grade them.
9. i’ll be in the crowd to see Jamal light it up when he comes back to the Oracle.

hi GSOM! i’m currently a high school senior, and i’ve been lurking around the site daily ever since the beginning of the “We Believe” playoff season…when we still had Murphy and Dunleavy. i remember stumbling upon GSOM while looking for Warriors blogs on Google because NBA.com and goldenstatewarriors.com just werent cool. why is this my first post, i have no idea, but i plan to be posting more often in the future.

I gave this trade a D. We traded one of maybe 10-15 players in the league who can go off for 50 points in a game for two super scrub backups that probably wont catch a wiff of playing time.
I think of trades as getting on court value for your player. We got horrible value in terms of basketball skills. Crawford is twice the player either of those guys are. I couldn’t care less about the warriors saving money, i want our team to be good and entertaining. Our owners haven’t given us a winning basketball team in 15/16 years. get good players, not good contracts! A good contract can’t put the ball in the basket.
If we trade Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum for a player that can actually do something, then that will be a good trade. But until then, the Hawks got a much better player who can contribute on a nightly basis, and occasionally completely take over a game