Javaris Crittenton

[Kingster]

Instead of whiffing on the home run, I prefer a solid single. Take Javaris Crittenton. But first, take a look at what the Lakers did when they traded for Trevor Ariza in 2007.

Trevor Ariza was sitting in Orlando getting little playing time and averaging 3.3 points and 2.2 rebs per game in 2007. Ariza, like Crittendon, is by NBA standards a very good athlete. Ariza is now getting the sixth most minutes on the Lakers and is a key defensive stopper for them. His offense is improving by leaps and bounds. (I wanted the Kings to get him for the past couple of years). He recently was the key player in a Lakers win over the Hornets. The Lakers traded Brian Cook and Maurice Evans to Orlando to get him. The headline was: "Little Played Ariza" traded to the Lakers.

So now we have Crittendon, who was drafted by the Lakers two years ago (a team that knows talent when they see it) for Gasol, wasting away in Memphis, not playing because they have too many point guards. He's only played in 6 games this year. Jerry Reynolds recently said he liked him. Right now, Crittendon is above average on defense. He could be a very good defensive point guard in the future. Just like Ariza, he's pretty raw on offense, but the potential is definitely there. I say we need to find a player or two like a Brian Cook or a Maurice Evans on our bench to trade for him. Sometimes you can really get these athletic late bloomers on the cheap.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I've seen a lot of Javaris and I like him a lot. He's like a Steven Francis-lite, but with bb IQ and heart. He's a good kid, he would've been a great PG for the triangle, it's too bad for him he got traded to such a guard heavy team. He's got the makings of a solid J and he has pretty good court vision and passing.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

Wait, so you're saying we follow the Lakers' blueprint?

Just kidding, I know what you're getting into. I do think Crittenton can be a solid player for any rebuilding team that doesn't have too much depth at PG, because as you said he certainly has the talent to justify the playing time. Again, makes a great athletic complement to Beno Udrih as well, and has legitimate star potential provided all the pieces fall into place for him. But to do that trade signifies that we have less hopes for Bobby Brown, which I'm not sure we want to do at this stage, especially since Brown, however streaky he may be, still provides some scoring punch off the bench from the perimeter. Again, the type of player a person like me would covet (the athletic/skilled types), but for this team--it's not a direct fit, it's more like an acute fit.

By the way, that's exactly the way I wish Geoff would pursue players in the near future, in terms of free agency and/or trades--getting those players wallowing in little playing time due to position gluts, team needs, or whatnot--and having teams "develop" them slowly for us while they come to recognize their potential with us. We obviously have many pieces (obviously mostly veterans, but probably after expirings Douby and Shelden), but with Memphis's cash-cutting ways, we'd probably need to give up young players, cash, a future pick, etc. I love Crittenton's game, but as noted, an acute fit, but it could definitely be worth the investment.

 

[creative one]

He's not a PG. If he was (and if he was halfway decent), don't you think he'd be playing ahead of the likes of Conley and Lowry? Those two aren't exactly lighting it up in Memphis...

 

[=LarryLegend=]

I am a fan of his.

I like a Mills/Martin/Cisco/Crittenton combo......with a lil Beno

 

[Kingster]

Wait, so you're saying we follow the Lakers' blueprint?

Just kidding, I know what you're getting into. I do think Crittenton can be a solid player for any rebuilding team that doesn't have too much depth at PG, because as you said he certainly has the talent to justify the playing time. Again, makes a great athletic complement to Beno Udrih as well, and has legitimate star potential provided all the pieces fall into place for him. But to do that trade signifies that we have less hopes for Bobby Brown, which I'm not sure we want to do at this stage, especially since Brown, however streaky he may be, still provides some scoring punch off the bench from the perimeter. but as noted, an acute fit, but it could definitely be worth the investment.

Maybe we have less hope for Beno Udrich. Personally, given Beno's history, I think there's better than a 50-50 chance that he misses many games this season with injury. Then you're left with only Brown and Garcia for a backup. I'd rather be proactive rather than reactive and get Crittenton now rather than after Beno gets injured and you have less leverage in a trade. Crittendon is a combo guard, and much better defensive player than Brown, so I don't think they totally overlap each other in skills. Think of it this way - Crittendon replaces Douby, who will be gone after this season. By the way, I'm not down on Brown - he's too young to make a judgement on. But I do have doubts about the longer term future of Beno.

 

[Kingster]

He's not a PG. If he was (and if he was halfway decent), don't you think he'd be playing ahead of the likes of Conley and Lowry? Those two aren't exactly lighting it up in Memphis...

Sure, and Ariza didn't light it up before he got to the Lakers. But he is blossoming now. He could be a real difference maker in the playoffs. On this kind of trade you have to use your imagination a bit to get a glimmer of what this player could be in the future.

 

[creative one]

Sure, and Ariza didn't light it up before he got to the Lakers. But he is blossoming now. He could be a real difference maker in the playoffs. On this kind of trade you have to use your imagination a bit to get a glimmer of what this player could be in the future.

Why are we using Ariza as an example? He's a wing! Wing players come dime-a-dozen in the NBA, and some do get overlooked before finding their niche. Good PGs (by NBA standards) are hard to come by, and those with any kind of potential (who are American-born and educated) aren't rotting away on the bench of one of the league's worst teams. Crittenton has size and athleticism that would make him an attractive candidate at PG, but he obviously doesn't have the PG game or mentality. Otherwise, he wouldn't be stuck behind two small guys (Conley and Lowry) who couldn't shoot their way out of a gun fight if they had uzis!!!!!

Please also keep in mind that this guy was selected 19th in a draft that was very light on PGs. The PGs taken ahead of him were Acie Law IV (who wasn't a true PG) and the aforementioned Conley. A guy Javaris' size wouldn't have been drafted that low if there wasn't any doubt of his NBA PG capabilities. And the "look towards the future" argument works better with players who are closer to 18/19 than they are to 21.

 

[fnordius]

Sure, and Ariza didn't light it up before he got to the Lakers.

He did defensively, he was getting almost 3 steals per 48 back when he was a rookie/soph with the Knicks. I was very interested in him then.

Not sure whether that extends to Crittenton, though.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Jerry Reynolds recently said he liked him.

Ok, I do like Critterton. As noted in another thread, I would like to get him cheap. He could step right in and immeditley take Douby's minute away from him. However, I am not sure invoking Jerry Reynolds as a judge of talent is going to be a major selling point for any player.

 

[Kingster]

Why are we using Ariza as an example? He's a wing! Wing players come dime-a-dozen in the NBA, and some do get overlooked before finding their niche. Good PGs (by NBA standards) are hard to come by, and those with any kind of potential (who are American-born and educated) aren't rotting away on the bench of one of the league's worst teams. Crittenton has size and athleticism that would make him an attractive candidate at PG, but he obviously doesn't have the PG game or mentality. Otherwise, he wouldn't be stuck behind two small guys (Conley and Lowry) who couldn't shoot their way out of a gun fight if they had uzis!!!!!

Please also keep in mind that this guy was selected 19th in a draft that was very light on PGs. The PGs taken ahead of him were Acie Law IV (who wasn't a true PG) and the aforementioned Conley. A guy Javaris' size wouldn't have been drafted that low if there wasn't any doubt of his NBA PG capabilities. And the "look towards the future" argument works better with players who are closer to 18/19 than they are to 21.

Ariza is used as an example because: 1) he was a very athletic raw player when drafted out of UCLA, 2) because he was raw he got limited playing time on the teams he played for, and 3) because he got limited playing time and was raw was gotten for a song by the Lakers, and 4) his skills are now catching up to his athleticism, making for a very good player regardless of his position, thus making for a steal. Guys like Javaris are drafted low not because they don't have the talent to play the position, but primarily because the other teams are discounting his value because of the extra time they believe it will take for him to develop the skills for the position. So, the longer they anticipate the development period, the lower his draft position, all other things being equal. But what happens many times is that coaches, fans, and/or management lose patience with a project like Crittendon, hence making it a potentially enticing deal for a team like the Kings, who get a player that has been in the league for a while, but don't have to pay as much for his potential. As an example, look at Chauncy Billups. He was a combo guard. Athletic, but in need of seasoning. Traded from one team to another for little value in return. Patience, talent, and perserverance on his part won out.

 

[Smills91]

Grizz want a shooter...

Douby for Critt straight up.

 

[Vlade4GM]

He's not a PG. If he was (and if he was halfway decent), don't you think he'd be playing ahead of the likes of Conley and Lowry? Those two aren't exactly lighting it up in Memphis...

Hmm...Either you can base his PG abilities off of Memphis' depth chart or you can watch his game and judge it that way. Lowry has been on the team longer and has more experience; Conley was taken fourth overall. Of course they're going to get preference.

 

[creative one]

Ariza is used as an example because: 1) he was a very athletic raw player when drafted out of UCLA, 2) because he was raw he got limited playing time on the teams he played for, and 3) because he got limited playing time and was raw was gotten for a song by the Lakers, and 4) his skills are now catching up to his athleticism, making for a very good player regardless of his position, thus making for a steal. Guys like Javaris are drafted low not because they don't have the talent to play the position, but primarily because the other teams are discounting his value because of the extra time they believe it will take for him to develop the skills for the position. So, the longer they anticipate the development period, the lower his draft position, all other things being equal. But what happens many times is that coaches, fans, and/or management lose patience with a project like Crittendon, hence making it a potentially enticing deal for a team like the Kings, who get a player that has been in the league for a while, but don't have to pay as much for his potential. As an example, look at Chauncy Billups. He was a combo guard. Athletic, but in need of seasoning. Traded from one team to another for little value in return. Patience, talent, and perserverance on his part won out.

You just said it. Crittenton is a PROJECT. That's why, despite his 6-5 height and mindboggling athleticism, he is wasting away on the bench behind two small guys who are running an NBA team at an NCAA level. The coach can't afford to play him at the point because he'd do a worse job than they're doing! That's saying something!

Since you like using Ariza/Phil Jackson as an example, answer this for me. Since Phil likes big guards running his offense, why is Crittenton rotting in Memphis while two 6-1 PGs are running the triangle for the Lakers? Why did Smush Parker (a couple years back) log more minutes at PG than Crittenton if Crittenton's got all this "potential" and "talent"? Perhaps "potential" and "talent" is nothing but buzzwords for "crazy athletic, but not an NBA rotation-worthy guard".

He does not have PG skills. This was evident when he played his audition season at Georgia Tech for a team that had legit Final Four talent. He did nothing to make those guys and that team better (and two of those guys are also on NBA rosters--one went undrafted--but did not seem NBA-ready playing alongside JC). He was/is essentially a shooting guard who plays on the ball and has the ability to drive and dish at his discretion. He cannot run a college offense, much less a pro offense. He does not have the professionalism it takes to lead a pro basketball team. He lacks the skills to play more than spot minutes at the point in the NBA. This is why he was available at pick #19 in the 2007 draft and was selected several notches lower than a 6-1 guy who couldn't hit a three-pointer if you lowered the rim and made it bigger.

As for the Chauncey Billups comparison, squash that. Billups was a very high lottery pick coming out of college who ran into an unfortunate rash of injuries that forced him to change his game. Once he did that and found his niche, he thrived. But there were high hopes for him as a player and as a future PG coming out of Colorado. The same can't really be said of Crittenton. Most NBA GMs knew he'd be a project, and that's why--despite being relatively healthy--he's already been on two NBA benches in less than two seasons.

 

[Packt]

I like Crittenton too, but you have to wonder if the talent is really there these days. He hasn't shown anything.

Ariza had shown flashes of being an athletic defensive wing when in NY, but Larry Brown pushed him out of the rotation. When asked why, Brown said Ariza knows, and if he didn't he wasn't smart—also called him delusional. The story goes Brown didn't even have the class to tell Ariza himself and a PR person had to do the dirty work. They traded him in the debacle that was the Steve Francis trade. Isiah and Dolan said Brown wanted Francis, Brown pretty much feigned ignorance. Until then Ariza was considered a part of the Knicks future.

He had a decent year with Orlando, but was injury prone and Van Gundy wanted shooters on the wings.

 

[creative one]

Hmm...Either you can base his PG abilities off of Memphis' depth chart or you can watch his game and judge it that way.

Or maybe some of us have followed this kid since HS and know what so many are trying hard not to see. He's not a PG and his best attributes (athleticism, slashing) would make him an average at best SG--and even then he'd struggle without the ball in his hands.

Lowry has been on the team longer and has more experience; Conley was taken fourth overall. Of course they're going to get preference.

That is crap. Lowry is an undersized, less than mediocre talent who can't shoot. He is a career back-up or emergency 3rd PG on any other team. Conley is Lowry with slightly better defense and a bigger "name". If Critt can't beat out these two guys, then that should tell you something about his chances at being an NBA caliber PG.

Oh, and Lowry, at 22, has a grand total of ONE YEAR more experience than Crittenton (21 at the end of this month). He and Conley (21) are "classmates". They're all peers.

 

[est.1999]

like I stated in another thread javaris is a really good kid. He came to my house last year just after he got drafted. Really mellow and humble. He was also very respectable.

As far as his game goes he's a very quick point guard who likes to attack the basket. Not sure if he's more of a shoot first mentality type guy but I'd take a risk on him for sure.

I guess I reached the point where I just wanna see any trade go down. Sick of this team the way it's assembled.

 

[Gary]

He's not a true PG which worries me.. How many teams actually win w/o a true PG?

 

[LPKingsFan]

Actually, a lot of them. The Lakers and the Bulls never had a "true" PG when they ran the triangle. And some could argue that Billups and Parker are "shoot first" and not "true" points as well.

 

[creative one]

Actually, a lot of them. The Lakers and the Bulls never had a "true" PG when they ran the triangle. And some could argue that Billups and Parker are "shoot first" and not "true" points as well.

When you have HOF players like Jordan, Pippen, Shaq, and Kobe, you don't need a true PG though it would be nice to have one. Ginobili is enough of a playmaker to make up for Parker's me-first scoring mentality (which is why he, not "Mr. Longoria", usually has the ball in his hands at the end of games in May/June). Plus, San Antonio has this big guy named Duncan who's supposed to be pretty good.

While teams can certainly get away with not having a true PG, they can't get away with not having a standout playmaker on the court. Cleveland has LeBron. Houston has T-Mac (although they still get clobbered in the first round by a team with an outstanding point). San Antonio has Ginobili. In this era of Kings basketball, do we have such a standout playmaker? I don't think so. Thus, it would do us little good in acquiring Crittenton to be the PG.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

That's actually part of the reason I don't want Crittenton--because, despite our plethora of passing bigs, we still need a point guard that can really initiate and playmake for others (Beno's quite creative and daring in his passes, but his playmaking abilities seem to fluctuate from game to game). Crittenton definitely doesn't fit this mold--in fact he fits the mold of a volume player, a Jamal Crawford type clone who, if he's getting touches and shooting shots, will get an amount of assists proportional to the number of shots he takes; that's not necessarily a black hole, but it does make for a very talented combo guard prototype. Again, not sure that's what we need, but in terms of athletic/scoring/a little bit of passing sort of upside you normally see with combo guards, it's not hard to note that he's an intriguing player we can develop in our system

 

[Vlade4GM]

Just because we trade for him means we have to pronounce him PG of the future or something?

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Just because we trade for him means we have to pronounce him PG of the future or something?

Agreed. A lot of good teams have a scoring guard off the bench. Critterton is young, has already had some good games and has the physical tools. Roll the dice. I assume we are talking about acquiring him for relatively little. If he works out at all he could be a starter, spark off the bench, trade bait. I wouldn't want to hold off on a good trade, because we are already evaluating what we wants out starting PG to be for our future championship team.