Allen Crabbe

[BlazerWookee]

How could any of us answer this question? We don't know how good he is. Stotts does.

Well, technically, the question is "Would you like to see...?" so each and every one of us can answer it and nobody would be wrong.

Neener.

 

[TBpup]

Here's the problem, our second unit IS hurting us. They lose leads in virtually every game, and/or allow the other team to build on a lead. Last night we saw it twice against Houston. When we go with Mo, Dame, Wright, Robinson, Freeland, we get hammered.

Something has to change in that equation. Either Stotts needs to switch it up and play a different combination of starters and bench players, OR someone new needs to come into the equation. Hopefully CJ can be that someone.

I think you do try to give some of those players like Crabbe a little run. Some unheard of coach in San Antonio frequently has developed talent off the scrap heap that pays huge dividends later on in the season. It seems to have payed off pretty well for him and only makes sense not to rely on the starters so heavily. Putting all of your eggs in one basic has rarely been a sound strategy.

 

[Natebishop3]

I think you do try to give some of those players like Crabbe a little run. Some unheard of coach in San Antonio frequently has developed talent off the scrap heap that pays huge dividends later on in the season. It seems to have payed off pretty well for him and only makes sense not to rely on the starters so heavily. Putting all of your eggs in one basic has rarely been a sound strategy.

But 19-4!

(That seems to be the answer to any question)

 

[TBpup]

But 19-4!

(That seems to be the answer to any question)

That is a common response and I understand the sentiment behind it. At the same time, it would seem somewhat naive to not at least explore options instead of leaveing the bench as it is and just 'hope' that it gets better (it can't get much worse from a ranking standpoint). The Blazers need a better bench if for no other reason than they need some wiggle room come playoff time. This roster isn't exactly replete with playoff experience so you need as many good options as possible.

Right now it is the starters....and hope it's not too bad by the time they get back in. It's worked great so far but I'm not sure that is what you want to build a long playoff run with. Even the Heat had big contributions off the bench from guys like Mike Miller and friends to win the last two titles. He was HUGE in getting them both of their titles.

 

[Further]

love what Ive seen from crabbe so far and fully believe he will end up a good player (hence my avatar). But wright has been playing pretty well even if his numbers have taken a dip in december. The december sample size is pretty small to get concerned, and his D is getting better, not worse. And there will most likely be a sprained ankle or some other injury (hopefully minor) at some point during the season, at that time crabbe will have a chance to show off. But I actually think it's good to bring rookies off a little bit slowly. I wonder if Meyers had been unable to earn any court time last season if he would have spent more time during the offseason working on his defense instead of shooting more threes. Bottom line, Wright has not done anything to warrant a demotion yet, and since we have no need to shake things up, lets stick with what brought us here.

 

[tlongII]

Here's the problem, our second unit IS hurting us. They lose leads in virtually every game, and/or allow the other team to build on a lead. Last night we saw it twice against Houston. When we go with Mo, Dame, Wright, Robinson, Freeland, we get hammered.

Something has to change in that equation. Either Stotts needs to switch it up and play a different combination of starters and bench players, OR someone new needs to come into the equation. Hopefully CJ can be that someone.

19-4 is NOT a problem dude.

 

[tlongII]

But 19-4!

(That seems to be the answer to any question)

It's a great response when responding to imaginary problems.

 

[Natebishop3]

It's a great response when responding to imaginary problems.

Imaginary? Statistically our bench is playing horribly. That's a FACT. You can see it plain as day during virtually every game. We lose leads when our bench is in the game, OR the other team builds a lead. How is that imaginary?

But hey, we can just keep skipping along singing, "tra-la-la 19-4, tral-la-la, 19-4" while our bench continues to put our starters in a tougher spot than they need to be.

 

[PapaG]

Imaginary? Statistically our bench is playing horribly. That's a FACT. You can see it plain as day during virtually every game. We lose leads when our bench is in the game, OR the other team builds a lead. How is that imaginary?

But hey, we can just keep skipping along singing, "tra-la-la 19-4, tral-la-la, 19-4" while our bench continues to put our starters in a tougher spot than they need to be.

Stotts should bench a veteran player who is in a bit of a slump in favor of a 2nd-round pick. All of this while the team is 19-4, and even the players are raving about the chemistry.

I thought the idea for a coach was not to lose your team. Benching Wright for Crabbe in the rotation at 19-4 is something that only internet coaches on a message board would do. It's a bad idea in the real world, where players need to trust their coach and know he won't give up on them for a small sample size.

If the team was 4-19, I'd be all for Crabbe playing, as well as trading LMA and firing Stotts. That's not happening in the real world right now, either.

 

[Natebishop3]

Stotts should bench a veteran player who is in a bit of a slump in favor of a 2nd-round pick. All of this while the team is 19-4, and even the players are raving about the chemistry.

I thought the idea for a coach was not to lose your team. Benching Wright for Crabbe in the rotation at 19-4 is something that only internet coaches on a message board would do. It's a bad idea in the real world, where players need to trust their coach and know he won't give up on them for a small sample size.

If the team was 4-19, I'd be all for Crabbe playing, as well as trading LMA and firing Stotts. That's not happening in the real world right now, either.

I didn't say we should bench Wright.

I asked if you would like to see some of his minutes go to Crabbe?

 

[donkiez]

All I know about Crabbe is that he is a lights out shooter, and his stroke in the one game he appeared in seem to back that up. My guess is that the rest of his game is raw and he would probably be a defensive liability, and potentially an offensive one also (outside of 3pters). So Ill leave it up to Stotts to bring Crabbe along as he see's fit. I would like to see more of Crabbe though, and he looks like an NBA player for what that is worth.

 

[PapaG]

I didn't say we should bench Wright.

I asked if you would like to see some of his minutes go to Crabbe?

Why? So they can both get 6 minutes and never get into a rhythm?

 

[Natebishop3]

Why? So they can both get 6 minutes and never get into a rhythm?

Wright currently has no rhythm to speak of. I'd like to see what the kid can do. Reports out of practice say that he can stroke it. You aren't the least bit curious? We are only playing 9 guys right now. I don't see any reason why we can't find a few minutes for Allen Crabbe.

 

[blue9]

I thought people were saying that Crabbe was a good 3-and-D guy when we drafted him? Can anybody speak to this?
Yes, given the fact that he's a rookie, there's a very good chance that his D isn't as good as Wright's. But we don't really know whether we'd be better, worse, or the same with Crabbe playing more minutes.

 

[PapaG]

Wright currently has no rhythm to speak of. I'd like to see what the kid can do. Reports out of practice say that he can stroke it. You aren't the least bit curious? We are only playing 9 guys right now. I don't see any reason why we can't find a few minutes for Allen Crabbe.

I can think of many. Others have as well.

 

[Natebishop3]

I can think of many. Others have as well.

The only two reasons that people can produce are "chemistry" and "19-4."

Got any others?

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Here's the problem, our second unit IS hurting us. They lose leads in virtually every game, and/or allow the other team to build on a lead. Last night we saw it twice against Houston. When we go with Mo, Dame, Wright, Robinson, Freeland, we get hammered.

Something has to change in that equation. Either Stotts needs to switch it up and play a different combination of starters and bench players, OR someone new needs to come into the equation. Hopefully CJ can be that someone.

Like I said in another thread, its the lack of offensive threat of our bench bigmen that hurts us more than anything. If you want to address something, address that. Change the offensive scheme.

Changing Wright to Crabbe will basically have no net positive effect whatsoever even in the best case scenario. He's not a focal point of the offense in the 2nd unit. What are we going to look for exactly? higher 3% shooting?

In the worst case it could cause internal strife with vets versus rookies.

 

[ponderguy]

I'd really like Crabbe to get some more burn. I think he is a legit deep threat and could become one of the best shooters on the team. I like Wright but maybe sitting him for a couple games would light a fire under him and get him to step up a bit

 

[PapaG]

The only two reasons that people can produce are "chemistry" and "19-4."

Got any others?

Trust and confidence in the coach, but the first two are enough for me not to fuck with things, anyhow.

 

[PapaG]

I'd really like Crabbe to get some more burn. I think he is a legit deep threat and could become one of the best shooters on the team. I like Wright but maybe sitting him for a couple games would light a fire under him and get him to step up a bit

The team loses a few games after Stotts demotes a veteran, and the fireworks begin. Again, it's easy to say on the internet, but not as easy in real life.

 

[blue9]

Changing Wright to Crabbe will basically have no net positive effect whatsoever even in the best case scenario.

Really? You say this based on what?
And what other teams focus their bench scoring around a PF (or C)? Seems to me off-the-bench scorers are nearly always guards/wings.

 

[PapaG]

Really? You say this based on what?
And what other teams focus their bench scoring around a PF (or C)? Seems to me off-the-bench scorers are nearly always guards/wings.

Did you miss the rest of his post?

 

[Natebishop3]

Like I said in another thread, its the lack of offensive threat of our bench bigmen that hurts us more than anything. If you want to address something, address that. Change the offensive scheme.

Changing Wright to Crabbe will basically have no net positive effect whatsoever even in the best case scenario. He's not a focal point of the offense in the 2nd unit. What are we going to look for exactly? higher 3% shooting?

In the worst case it could cause internal strife with vets versus rookies.

Okay, these are all good points, but how do you change our lack of offensive scoring from our bigmen? I like Robinson, but he's not a guy that you run the offense through. We really only have one guy that we can throw the ball into, and that's Aldridge. Lopez has proven to be effective too, but there's nobody on the bench that can do that.

How do you get that scoring bigman without going outside the team?

 

[HailBlazers]

The only two reasons that people can produce are "chemistry" and "19-4."

Got any others?

Defense is the biggest one I see. Wright is a savy vet that knows exactly what to do even against the stars of this league. We need HCA and now is no time to experiment IMO.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

The team loses a few games after Stotts demotes a veteran, and the fireworks begin. Again, it's easy to say on the internet, but not as easy in real life.

Seriously, its as people think this is NBA 2k14. Some of the dumbest ideas I've seen floated around that will never really happen just so Nate can do his own "i told you so" when the blazers blow a big lead and lose a game.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Okay, these are all good points, but how do you change our lack of offensive scoring from our bigmen? I like Robinson, but he's not a guy that you run the offense through. We really only have one guy that we can throw the ball into, and that's Aldridge. Lopez has proven to be effective too, but there's nobody on the bench that can do that.

How do you get that scoring bigman without going outside the team?

You play them more. That's really all you can do. Like I said, this team is still a work in progress. There's very little need to make any changes until we lose 2 out of 3 games at some point. I'm not against getting Crabbe some minutes, but Stotts is really tight with his rotation right now. Its all based on minutes in the game, not on the flow right now. Any changes are likely to throw his whole substitution patterns off for the entire game, especially crunch time where the blazers have played well.

 

[ponderguy]

The team loses a few games after Stotts demotes a veteran, and the fireworks begin. Again, it's easy to say on the internet, but not as easy in real life.

Wright has been getting about 14 mpg. What would it hurt to have crabbe take 4-5 of those for a few games, get him in in the second with some of the starters and see what he can do in meaningful minutes. We have nothing to lose by doing that. I don't think that's going to destroy the chemistry of the team or start a mutiny against Stotts

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Wright has been getting about 14 mpg. What would it hurt to have crabbe take 4-5 of those for a few games, get him in in the second with some of the starters and see what he can do in meaningful minutes. We have nothing to lose by doing that. I don't think that's going to destroy the chemistry of the team or start a mutiny against Stotts

If you take 4-5 minutes out of Wright's game you might as well bench him. There is no "take away some minutes" with Wright. He plays so few minutes that its not even worth it to do anything less than completely bench him. And then that defeats the purpose of getting solid veteran guys off the bench. last year was "experiment with fringe bench guys to see what they can do". This year its win and play guys who have played in the playoffs. These minutes Wright is playing now is going to play dividends in a 7 game series. There has to be consistency, right now the focus of the 2nd unit is to get T-rob and Freeland more comfortable playing. Having them blow leads right now early in the season is a good thing because later on in the year they probably won't, or will be at least less likely to do so. Putting them out with another rookie is going to hurt them tremendously. Changing the lineup considerably will hurt them as well.

 

[Natebishop3]

Seriously, its as people think this is NBA 2k14. Some of the dumbest ideas I've seen floated around that will never really happen just so Nate can do his own "i told you so" when the blazers blow a big lead and lose a game.

Of all the people doing "I told you so" posts, I am not one of them. There are people bumping threads from years ago and you throw that at me?

 

[blue9]

Did you miss the rest of his post?

Nope. But there is absolutely no logic behind the statement that "changing Wright to Crabbe will...have no net positive effect...in the best case scenario".
We have VERY limited data points on Crabbe, yet somehow it's already been determined that there is NO possibility for him to have a positive effect - and that would actually be the BEST CASE scenario that we could hope for.