Kings Bidding On Jamal Crawford??????

Dime Dropper

Dime Dropper

All-Star
#2
#2
Not really the minutes for him here, unless they're willing to cut back some of Jimmer's. Crawford would be good off the bench, but he needs shots too, and I'm no sure how it would work.
 
RookieOfTheDay

RookieOfTheDay

Starter
#3
#3
I'm not sure I understand what role he'd play but I really am enjoying hearing the Kings name pop again and again in FA. It's a refreshing change from that passive crap they pulled the last few years.
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#4
#4
Its another talent to be sure, but you do that its a direct slap in Jimmer's face, and it just makes our already questioned offense/defense ratio and too many guys needing shots problems critical. Its a tone deaf look at the pretty name move.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#6
#6
This dude is the biggest blackhole not named Kobe. Kobe wins. Jamal doesn't. He'd take shot from everyone. This guy has no place on this team. Unless we trade either Jimmer or Thorton, what the hell sense does this make?

This would be a nightmare. Westy would completely f it up with this many options.
 
Last edited:
Hallama

Hallama

Starter
#7
#7
rainmaker said:
This dude is the biggest blackhole not named Kobe. Kobe wins. Jamal doesn't. He'd take shot from everyone. This guy has no place on this team. Unless we trade either Jimmer or Thorton, what the hell sense does this make?

This would be a nightmare. Westy would completely f it up with this many options.
Click to expand...
Acquiring Crawford makes much more sense for a title contending team that needs instant offense off the bench. Think he'd be a good fit in OKC, NYK, CHI+1. Not for the Kings, no way. Agreed.

Maybe Petrie is having visions of Vernon Maxwell circa 1999?
 
RookieOfTheDay

RookieOfTheDay

Starter
#8
#8
rainmaker said:
This dude is the biggest blackhole not named Kobe. Kobe wins. Jamal doesn't. He'd take shot from everyone. This guy has no place on this team. Unless we trade either Jimmer or Thorton, what the hell sense does this make?

This would be a nightmare. Westy would completely f it up with this many options.
Click to expand...
I heard the Pacers offered him two years ten million. I don't think we need to worry about the kings topping that.
 
SacKings7

SacKings7

Starter
#10
#10
This makes no sense for us if we're planning on playing Jimmer at all this year. I would like it though as I've been a fan of his since his Chicago days before he became a known commodity.
 
NoBonus

NoBonus

Starter
#13
#13
If I were Geoff (and I am not, regardless of what the rumors are) and I saw this whole Howard/C3p-O thing going on, slowing the Free Agent market to a near standstill as many free agents are seen as plan B or plan C once the trades are completed, I would be making offers all over the place. Low offers, bad offers, but offers. These Free Agents want to play some ball and get settled ASAP and these trades may never materialize and if they do, it will be awhile... so I, I mean I would, prey on the impatience of these free agents with all kinds of bargain offers. Sure, Crawford is not the ideal fit, but if he can be had on the cheap while the competition for him is limited... why not?
 
ParniValjak

ParniValjak

All-Star
#18
#18
How many balls are we planning to play with this year?!

We need a vet who is not expecting to play much but can come in and do the job when needed. What is wrong with signing Earl Watson and sitting him behind Jimmer and if there is an injury, he is ready to play greater role.

Much cheaper and much better option for us than Jamal Crawford.

It was refreshing to see our front office change their focus and target defensive minded players with toughness. In one off-season we have managed to walk away from that belief.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#19
#19
Let me start by saying that I like Crawford, so my opinion is biased. So, I'll start by saying that I don't think it would be Jimmer whose minutes would suffer. Aside from Thomas, Jimmer probably comes closer to being a pure pt guard, than anyone else on the team. If I had to pick someone, it would be Greene and or, Cisco, whomever is penciled in as Salmons backup. Why? Because I think the Kings like going to a three guard lineup, and so you could switch Evans to the SF position, bring in Crawford off the bench at the SG position, and bring in Jimmer at PG. So you could have some combination of Evans, Salmons, Crawford, Fredette, and Thornton on the floor in a three guard combo.

I'm not saying I'm in love with the idea, but apparently Westphal is, so thats the reality of it. That would give the Kings a 9 man rotation, and unfortunately I think Greene is the odd man out, along with Cisco. There's also the possiblilty that one of them could be traded if they were to sign Crawford. Now if they were to sign Kirilenko, then that changes the scenario. Then Salmons becomes a more important part of the 3 guard rotation because Kirilenko would get most of the minutes at SF. If that were to happen, then I suspect they would withdraw their offer to Crawford.

As far as Crawford, he's a very good basketball player. It always amazes me how folks will bash a player that was good enough to play on a contender and win 6th man of the year, but he's not good enough to play for us. He's a very good ballhandler and passer, and he can play good defense at times. I say at times because there are times he rises to the occasion and there are other times he just doesn't put out the same effort. To me thats he biggest flaw. So its not that he's a bad defender, its just that he's inconsistent at it.

I've watched Crawford play quite a bit, and I've never gotten the impression that he was a black hole. There were times when he played lead guard at Atlanta and did just fine. So in an emergency, he could play some PG. Its probably not going to happen anyway, so its all moot.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#21
#21
Crap.

Crawford just turned down Indiana's 2/10 deal, according to Stein. I really hope he's not considering us.

Don't see it working unless there is a rule change I'm unaware of. Are we playing with 3 balls and 2 hoops on each end?
 
Padrino

Padrino

All-Star
#22
#22
Čarolija said:
How many balls are we planning to play with this year?!

We need a vet who is not expecting to play much but can come in and do the job when needed. What is wrong with signing Earl Watson and sitting him behind Jimmer and if there is an injury, he is ready to play greater role.

Much cheaper and much better option for us than Jamal Crawford.

It was refreshing to see our front office change their focus and target defensive minded players with toughness. In one off-season we have managed to walk away from that belief.
Click to expand...
i disagree. the signing of chuck hayes and the pursuit of andrei kirilenko suggests an absolute focus on tough, defensive-minded players. tyson chandler and marc gasol were always going to out-price the kings. samuel dalembert has not yet signed anywhere, but its clear he doesn't want to play here, otherwise he would have re-signed already. the kings certainly put an offer on the table, but dalembert chose free agency. the only other team who can pay him at "market value," at this point, is the rockets. he's holding out for a team on a downward trajectory. good luck to him. i'd love to see dalembert in a kings uni next season, because his length and shot blocking are tremendous assets, but if its not in the cards, the kings needed to be proactive elsewhere in free agency. the signing of chuck hayes does not recoup the loss of dalembert's shot intimidation factor, but hayes is a useful, tough-minded front court player who maintains a focus on the defensive side of the ball. and kirilenko, should he come over to sacramento, represents a long, defensive, shot blocking presence that could go a long way towards making up the difference left by dalembert's departure...

if anything, the front office has proved that defense is still a priority when considering future acquisitions. but, truth be told, the kings did not need to fill every need in this hectic, abbreviated official offseason, and they certainly weren't going to be able to. that said, i agree that jamal crawford is not an ideal fit for the kings, and vice versa. i don't understand the logic behind adding another scoring guard to a rotation full of scoring guards. he's duplicate talent, although he is an asset that could be bought on the cheap and flipped later. still, its not ideal. likewise, i'd rather the kings pursue watson and stash him at the end of the bench, or keep the rotation in-house and see what isaiah thomas will bring to the table...
 
SacKings7

SacKings7

Starter
#23
#23
Čarolija said:
How many balls are we planning to play with this year?!

We need a vet who is not expecting to play much but can come in and do the job when needed. What is wrong with signing Earl Watson and sitting him behind Jimmer and if there is an injury, he is ready to play greater role.

Much cheaper and much better option for us than Jamal Crawford.

It was refreshing to see our front office change their focus and target defensive minded players with toughness. In one off-season we have managed to walk away from that belief.
Click to expand...
He's on the Jazz, for starters :p
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#25
#25
Circa_1985_Fan said:
Guess he just turnes down the Pacers. So now between us, Portland and NY. I can't see him turning the Knicks down.
Click to expand...

Did you see what the Knicks wanted to pay him?

Dude is selfish, dumb, and doesn't play defense. While the lack of interest surprises me given the idiot contracts handed out to players thus far, Jamal might be finding out just what a chucker is worth on the free agent market.

As an aside if he showed up we would have sort of the consensus two best scoring handles in the NBA. One guy using quickess to clear space for his jumper, the other (and far superior in my mind) using power jukes to barrel through the lane.

We need AK to accept already to make this impossible and force us to play big. This seems almost like a precipice offseason where we are teetering on the edge of giving up all that size we just finally had going and replacing it with a smallball/junkball system full of undersized twerps and shameless gunners. Are we a serious franchise? Or are we just a circus trying to dazzle local yokels with pretty lights on the scoreboard, no matter which team is putting them up?
 
J

joemama

Starter
#26
#26
$10 million OVERstated

According to Marc Berman via Twitter. "Jamal Crawford got a two-year offer for 10 mill from Indy is overstated!



NY 2.5 MMLE
Blazers could be to fill void left by ROY leaving
Sac 4-5?

*Were we lied to that it was five so we offer more dinero????????

No to Indy <5 (apparently)
what happened to Minn(d)y?

If we can give Garcia Mr. Big (missed) shot 6+ you GOT to be happy with Crawford geting 4-5 on a Shorter reasonable contract that could have some type of out second year
 
Last edited:
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#27
#27
Seems to me, a large portion of that 4/31 contract we gave Marcus will be a waste if this ends up happening.

Why don't we just try to entice Dal to send over Terry while we're at it? And follow that up by signing Nick Young to an offer sheet. It would be great. Phenomenal. I can see it now. We won't even get the ball past half court because guys will be in fist fights with each other because they haven't seen the ball in three straight trips up the floor.
 
P

pshn80

Starter
#28
#28
Bricklayer said:
Did you see what the Knicks wanted to pay him?

Dude is selfish, dumb, and doesn't play defense. While the lack of interest surprises me given the idiot contracts handed out to players thus far, Jamal might be finding out just what a chucker is worth on the free agent market.

As an aside if he showed up we would have sort of the consensus two best scoring handles in the NBA. One guy using quickess to clear space for his jumper, the other (and far superior in my mind) using power jukes to barrel through the lane.

We need AK to accept already to make this impossible and force us to play big. This seems almost like a precipice offseason where we are teetering on the edge of giving up all that size we just finally had going and replacing it with a smallball/junkball system full of undersized twerps and shameless gunners. Are we a serious franchise? Or are we just a circus trying to dazzle local yokels with pretty lights on the scoreboard, no matter which team is putting them up?
Click to expand...
I don't know the answer to your question but I slant it another way. Petrie is building a winner the best way he can. Making an offer doesn't guarantee a player. In the many ways we have and we can go, I'll go Petrie's way. Let's keep our fingers crossed.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#29
#29
pshn80 said:
I don't know the answer to your question but I slant it another way. Petrie is building a winner the best way he can. Making an offer doesn't guarantee a player. In the many ways we have and we can go, I'll go Petrie's way. Let's keep our fingers crossed.
Click to expand...
I'm curious, have you ever disagreed with anything this club has done?

The question is, why make an offer in the first place, for a player which duplicates the skillset of a guy we just signed to a 31M contract, and adds another shoot first player to a team with plenty of them.
 
Tetsujin

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#30
#30
Interesting tweet from J Jones on situation:
mr_jasonjones Jason Jones
Why are the Kings pursuing likes of Kirilenko and Jamal Crawford? Ownership determined to improve team this season.
Click to expand...
and later:
mr_jasonjones Jason Jones
I don't think the Maloofs like the perception that they are just sitting on their cap space. Not the case at all.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.