Crawchuck officially opting out

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

HOOPSWORLD ‏@HOOPSWORLD
NBA PM: Crawford Excited for Offseason: If Jamal Crawford isn't traded on draft night, he'll become a free agent... http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-pm-ja...son&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


Jamal Crawford will either be traded on draft night or opt out and become an unrestricted free agent. The Portland Trail Blazers extended the deadline for Crawford to opt out from June 15 to June 29, which gives them the opportunity to shop him on the night of the draft.

If the Blazers find a trade partner that Crawford deems suitable, he could opt in to the final year of his contract and be dealt to that team, making $5 million next season. If Portland can’t put together a trade, Crawford will opt out and test free agency.

If Crawford becomes a free agent, he’ll have plenty of potential suitors. The Minnesota Timberwolves, Indiana Pacers, Boston Celtics, Miami Heat and Los Angeles Clippers are among the teams expected to pursue Crawford, according to league sources.

Crawford is looking forward to the next several weeks, when he’ll find out what his future holds.

“I’m really excited,” Crawford said. “It’s funny how things work out. If it happens, it’ll pretty much be my first true free agency. The first time I signed a contract was a sign-and-trade so I didn’t really go through the whole process. Then, last year was a rushed free agency because of the lockout. If I go through it this year, that’ll be the first true free agency of my career, which is pretty weird. It’s an exciting time. Everything kicks off in a couple of weeks and we’ll see what happens.”
...
 
#6 and Crawford to Sacto for #5?

A Crawford and Evans back court seems like a disaster.
 
#6, #11, 2015 1st, Wes, #40, #41, 3 million cash for Evans, #5 and Salmons


You gotta believe
I gotta believe that's an overpay. 6,11,wes for 5 and evans is pretty close. taking on the crap that is salmons, adding in 2 2nds and a future first?
 
I gotta believe that's an overpay. 6,11,wes for 5 and evans is pretty close. taking on the crap that is salmons, adding in 2 2nds and a future first?

If you look without the rose garden colored glasses on, it's pretty fair IMO.

Evans had a PER of 16.48, while Wes' was 14.12

Most "experts" seem to think the talent gap from 5 to 6 is pretty wide

So while it might be an overpay, it's pretty slight, IMO
 
If you look without the rose garden colored glasses on, it's pretty fair IMO.

Evans had a PER of 16.48, while Wes' was 14.12

Most "experts" seem to think the talent gap from 5 to 6 is pretty wide

So while it might be an overpay, it's pretty slight, IMO


I still think Matthews would blossom under a non-Nate coach. But trading him isn't the end of the world, for sure. We have so few assets to maneuver around with this offseason, and we would probably be able to give Williams more burn if Matthews isn't there.
 
I still think Matthews would blossom under a non-Nate coach. But trading him isn't the end of the world, for sure. We have so few assets to maneuver around with this offseason, and we would probably be able to give Williams more burn if Matthews isn't there.

How? He's basically a spot-up shooter at this point, and he had less success under Jerry Sloan than he had under Nate. If anything, Nate probably expected too much of Wes by continuing to start him.
 
How? He's basically a spot-up shooter at this point, and he had less success under Jerry Sloan than he had under Nate. If anything, Nate probably expected too much of Wes by continuing to start him.

It's just a hunch. I have nothing to back it up.
 
If you look without the rose garden colored glasses on, it's pretty fair IMO.

Evans had a PER of 16.48, while Wes' was 14.12

Most "experts" seem to think the talent gap from 5 to 6 is pretty wide

So while it might be an overpay, it's pretty slight, IMO

Evans is an expiring deal, likely to ask for a good deal more than what wes is being paid. So either you lose him after a year, or you're paying for him. He is better than Wes, and would be happy with the upgrade. I see the difference between him and Wes, and 5 to 6 as another lottery pick at 11. I think that that's fair. I can see an argument, I wouldn't believe it, but can maybe see an argument for the 2nds and a future first. So ok. I think taking on Salmons kills it. The majority of trades never seem to work that way where you attach a bad contract and still get a team to overpay. It's either I overpay for your good assets, or pay a fair price because I have to take on shit. Not I overpay AND get saddled with shit.
 
BlazerCaravan;2810769[B said:
]I still think Matthews would blossom under a non-Nate coach[/B]. But trading him isn't the end of the world, for sure. We have so few assets to maneuver around with this offseason, and we would probably be able to give Williams more burn if Matthews isn't there.

At some point I think it's OK to say a player has limitations that they aren't likely to overcome. I mean, Wesley went undrafted probably for some reason right? The fact that he's shown he's at least a rotation quality player is pretty remarkable.

Given his age and what I see as pretty insurmountable limits I think moving Matthews should be something the team considers, especially given how much money he makes.
 
except we can't trade any of our future firsts.

UNLESS....we make some deal with CHA either getting our pick back or removing the protections.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top