Allen Crabbe

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

I'd agree that Nash indisputably made the Blazers worse. I don't have any reason to defend him, but I do think there's probably more backstory than we fans are aware of. Taking over after the Whitsitt era was a no-win situation and I suspect Paul Allen and the Vulcans played a big part in giving Nash his marching orders. Ancient history at this point.
I always felt like PatterNash was hired to get rid of the bad publicity players and tear down the team for a rebuild. That they did. Add to it their lousy drafting and the difficulty getting any free agent to come here, and yeah, their sucktitude was pretty epic. Even their coaching hires were bad. Now our rebuild is approaching two decades in the making. Yay.

:cheers:
 
folowed your and Stomp's interesting exchanges. Just wanted to say that I don't think the whole "trading to a team in the same conference" thing is that big of a deal in this case. Looking at Excremento's roster, most of them are on the wrong side of 30 - they're not competing for a playoff spot after a Boogie trade, regardless. IMHO, they need...

1) Young allstar who is signed for a long time (like CJ, Booker, ....)
or
2) Multiple good young players on good contracts who will develop.

They're not gonna get the first, PDX can, and is willing, to supply the second. That's why I think we're good trade partners.

Since this thread is actually about Crabbe, I'll say that I don't think he's tradeable, even if he didn't have the kicker. If I'm the Kings I don't want him. Philly most certainly doesn't want him. (they've avoided bad contracts like the plague, even to the extent of starting DLeaguers before taking on salary).

Wow. I think I hit your long-standing Rasheed Wallace nerve.

Yes, on reflection I remember that you were always against trading Wallace and that you thought that Nash got fleeced. I don't want to dive into that quagmire again except to say that I've always been of the opinion that Nash had little choice but to move Rasheed. The same dynamic that you talk about as Atlanta's reason for moving him immediately, his desire to play on a championship contender and not being willing to re-sign with a non-contender, were in play in Portland as well. IMO, the Sheed defenders always underplayed the "Jail Blazers" dynamic and just passed it off as a vendetta by the Oregonian. To this day, any talk around the country about the Blazers' history brings up that era and that nickname. I suspect that the directive to move Wallace came from PA. You've seen how he went all-in on character guys this summer. I think the opposite was true at the end of the Wallace-era. Could Nash have gotten more for Wallace? Maybe, but it was definitely a buyer's market on the guy. I've always been of the opinion that had Wallace not been such a jackass, the Blazers either would have retained him or they would have been able to move him for better players. Sheed shafted us fans and we ended up with several years of crappy basketball as a result. You, obviously won't agree with, but I guess at this point it doesn't really matter.

I didn't intend to say that Cousins and Wallace are the same situations. I was just pointing out that there are sometimes situations beyond basketball talent that cause teams to make moves and sometimes the return the team nets is less than what you'd otherwise expect. Cousins actions on and off the court have probably tainted his reputation a bit, but probably not to the degree that Wallace had hit by the end of his tenure in Portland. He does have the ending contract issue and that will be a concern for the Kings, if they think he won't re-sign, and for any team that might make an offer for him. Given the right situation, I wouldn't mind seeing the Blazers take a gamble on him. Better teammates around him and a winning situation could make him happier and more successful. I doubt that the Kings would be interested in a deal with a Western Conference team and I doubt that an offer of CJ and, say Plumlee would get their attention, but stranger things have happened in the NBA.
 
Philly is done tanking. They wouldn't spend money in the past but Philly IS looking to spend money this year. They met with Crabbe and wanted to sign him but he signed with the Nets. They threw a big contract at Manu and at JR Smith when both of their teams dragged their feet in signing them. None of the players wanted to go there even though they were willing to overpay was the problem. It wasn't them not willing to spend money.
 
Philly is done tanking. They wouldn't spend money in the past but Philly IS looking to spend money this year. They met with Crabbe and wanted to sign him but he signed with the Nets. They threw a big contract at Manu and at JR Smith when both of their teams dragged their feet in signing them. None of the players wanted to go there even though they were willing to overpay was the problem. It wasn't them not willing to spend money.
I mentioned in the trade thread, but Dallas would trade Mathews for him and Cuban loves to bleed money...Crabbe would start there and be a core player making a bit more than Mathews but a much younger player....not sure we'd do that, but it would make Crabbe tradeable
 
Philly is done tanking. They wouldn't spend money in the past but Philly IS looking to spend money this year. They met with Crabbe and wanted to sign him but he signed with the Nets. They threw a big contract at Manu and at JR Smith when both of their teams dragged their feet in signing them. None of the players wanted to go there even though they were willing to overpay was the problem. It wasn't them not willing to spend money.
Good point, but I find it extremely unlikely they're willing to blow THAT much money AND give up an asset, too.
 
I mentioned in the trade thread, but Dallas would trade Mathews for him and Cuban loves to bleed money...Crabbe would start there and be a core player making a bit more than Mathews but a much younger player....not sure we'd do that, but it would make Crabbe tradeable
Cuban is Matthews' biggest supporter. I think he would entertain the idea but I not positive it is near the slam dunk you think it is. Matthews is looking good (finally - it took a long while).
 
Cuban is Matthews' biggest supporter. I think he would entertain the idea but I not positive it is near the slam dunk you think it is. Matthews is looking good (finally - it took a long while).
I just read that he was on the trading block...probably a rumor. Wes is a bona fide 3 and D guy and he's playing well the last few games...you know he hates losing in Dallas..it would be a risky move for us
 
Sorry to be annoying, but I'm gonna FIFY:
I just read that he was on the trading block...probably a rumor. Wes was a bona fide 3 and D guy and he's playing well the last few games...you know he'd hate coming off the bench in Portland.
 
I don't see Dallas trading Wes, unless the deal is too good to pass up. I also don't see Wes wanting to call me back here, especially to be a bench player.
 
Why are we talking wes Matthews? Blazers aren't gonna pull that Steve Blake shit with past players. Even in theory I wouldn't want wes back. Sure we all loved him but we made him and he got all mad because he apparently can't see how tearing your Achilles is bad in basketball given the past. Sure he came back but he's not the same and still carries that bullshit chip on his shoulder. If I were to bring any blazer back from that team it would probably be rolo given the fact that's what we need. I would also replace turner with batum to be honest.
 
The real question is whether Philly would do Noel for Crabbe, and its very likely a no from their end - we IMO would have to add a pick at least. Keep in mind Crabbe is a 21 mil per yr contract with the trade kicker so he probably is a "negative" contract

PHI is currently over $18 million under the cap. Nerlens Noel makes $4.4 million. So, PHI could absorb Crabbe's entire salary + kicker and still be under the cap.

PHI is also $8 million under the salary floor. They will pay that $8 million in a penalty of they don't use it. That's basically an $8 million dollar discount for acquiring Crabbe.

Crabbe can waive the trade kicker if he chooses, although I can't imagine why he would.

Yes, depending on how Crabbe plays between now and the deadline, and if/how Noel plays, we may need to throw in a pick. Hopefully, Crabbe will play well, increasing his value, and PHI will continue to not let Noel see the floor, decreasing his value, and the pick required to get the deal done will drop from a late first rounder to a future second rounder.

BNM
 
The struggling Crabbe is now shooting 40% on the season from outside, but yeah, i bet he has no value lol! Btw 18m will be the standard for quality bench players, just wait on it.
 
The struggling Crabbe is now shooting 40% on the season from outside, but yeah, i bet he has no value lol! Btw 18m will be the standard for quality bench players, just wait on it.

And his PER is now into double digits - EXACTLY 10.0.

With Turner above 12 and Ed Davis at 10.1, we are now down to 3 single digit PER players in our top 10.

Yay!!!!

BNM
 
I mentioned in the trade thread, but Dallas would trade Mathews for him and Cuban loves to bleed money...Crabbe would start there and be a core player making a bit more than Mathews but a much younger player....not sure we'd do that, but it would make Crabbe tradeable
I sure as hell wouldn't
 
I sure as hell wouldn't
I wouldn't either but someone said Crabbe was untradeable and I thought...no, not if you look at losing teams that overpaid somebody...you could trade and overpaid guy for an overpaid guy and it'd be a wash
 
If Philadelphia is worried about Bayless health (and his three year contract), they might require us to take him and send us their choice of Napier or Quarterman. Bayless has only played three games this year, seems as if he has had earlier health issues also.
 
I'd also taken a very lonely stance over Nash trading down to acquire Martell & Jack, & passing on the opportunity to draft Chris Paul. Nash justified that move because Telfair (who he'd drafted the year prior) was so going to be so awesome. Again the board loved that move, I hated it saying ST had no jumper to spread the D.

In the early 1950s, when few people went to college, the NBA drafted a few point guards who hadn't gone to college. Since then, only 4 Americans fit the bill:

year..pick..height..name
2004..13..6-0..Sebastian Telfair
2005..40..6-3..Monta Ellis
2005..45..6-1..Lou Williams
2009..10..6-1..Brandon Jennings

I was against the risky high schooler pick. It takes years to learn defense at that height, when you have only played against high school shorties. Also, all those guys are shooters except him. He did not belong in the first round.
 
Correction. Makes my point even more. In the early 1950s, the NBA did not draft any high school guards. For non-college players, it drafted only big men in the early 50s.

http://bkref.com/tiny/zPm2g

In 2004, the league had drafted a very few foreign PGs without college but with pro experience, but had never drafted a little American PG straight out of high school. Telfair was the first (imagine the above list with only his name on it at the time, not the other 3 players), and it seemed revolutionary and risky, especially since he wasn't a great shooter.

Also, as a bad team, we needed immediate help. A high school 6-footer should be drafted by a top team which can wait years.
 
Correction. Makes my point even more. In the early 1950s, the NBA did not draft any high school guards. For non-college players, it drafted only big men in the early 50s.

http://bkref.com/tiny/zPm2g

In 2004, the league had drafted a very few foreign PGs without college but with pro experience, but had never drafted a little American PG straight out of high school. Telfair was the first (imagine the above list with only his name on it at the time, not the other 3 players), and it seemed revolutionary and risky, especially since he wasn't a great shooter.

Also, as a bad team, we needed immediate help. A high school 6-footer should be drafted by a top team which can wait years.

I see you used the qualifier "little" America PG. I'm not sure if that was to intentionally exclude Shaun Livingston at 6'7, but he was the first American born PG to be drafted right out of high school by the NBA. He was selected 4th in the 2004, the same year as Telfair.

I was also against using a lottery pick on Telfair. My objection is he was a PG who set the high school scoring record for the state of New York. I knew he wouldn't be able to score at will against the grown men of the NBA like he did his fellow high scholl teeangers. I would have been more impressed, and in favor of the Telfair pick, if he'd set the NY state high school record for assists.

BNM
 
Yes, I used the word "little" on purpose. But even if you include tall point guards, you see how short (pun intended) the list was in 2004. Also: In that link I gave, click on the age column to sort it. You see that besides setting records for height and inexperience, Telfair was doing the same for age. Even compared to now, 12 years later. In summary, it was a radical pick. We were desperate, but desperate for immediate help, not the teenage heart-throb Mickey Rooney.

(My father, working at the Salt Lake City airport in the 1930s, helping the actor's mother find him when his connecting flight came in, and finding him out in a snowfield cheerfully horsing around by himself with the same personality he had in the movies, is another story.)
 
I don't think that's "lost" at all. It's THE reason his PER has crept up to 10.0.

BNM

What a difference a game makes. His PER is up to 10.2.

EDIT: And .406 from 3pt.
 
Last edited:
What a difference a game makes. His PER is up to 10.2.

EDIT: And .406 from 3pt.

If he can just do that in every game, he might actually be an average NBA player (PER = 15) by the trade deadline.

BNM
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top