Merged: Crabbe Traded to Brk

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Boob-No-More said:
Yep, Crabbe was assisted on 97% of his 3-pointers last season. Good luck getting those kind of open looks in BRK.

BNM
Click to expand...
Actually they will be getting SO blown out every game, it'll just resemble summer league by the second half.
 
HCP said:
Actually they will be getting SO blown out every game, it'll just resemble summer league by the second half.
Click to expand...

So, basically 24 minutes of garbage time a night. And I'm still not sure if Crabbe will be able to create his own looks in that situation.

BNM
 
Denny Crane said:
Except 30 minutes a game last year is "something of value."

Hindsight is 20-20. Crabbe was a key contributor the season before, especially the playoffs. Enough that BKN wanted him. They still wanted him, even after this so-called horrible season he had. Consider if Crabbe actually wanted to be here and took the next step in his development - I think NO would have found cap space by using other players.

Again, we wouldn't have the TPE if we let him walk last year so we did get something for him ending up in BKN. I'd add that we were a 2nd round team the year before and without a draft pick. The only way to improve was internal (i.e. Crabbe included). The expectations (without hindsight) were improvement over the 2nd round team, results. Letting a key member walk for nothing would have been a downgrade.

As it is, we lost a 30 MPG player who was 2nd in the league in 3pt shooting. Shooting is a most wanted commodity in this league these days.
Click to expand...
Except it's not hindsight. Several of us were very adamant that matching Crabbe was a bad move from the beginning.

I'd call it more vindication....
 
Boob-No-More said:
My point is, given the same opportunity as Crabbe (lots of wide open catch and shoot 3-pointers when playing with Dame, C.J., Nurk, etc.) one of those guys might actually produce at a comparable rate.
Click to expand...
Now that I agree with. I'm not a huge fan of Pat or Jake, but I don't think it's too far fetched that one of them could be better this year than Aminu, Turner, Davis and maybe even Crabbe were last year. In fact, I think it's fairly likely that Pat or Jake (maybe both!) will be better than at least one of the 16/17 version of A/T/D/C. It's a pretty low bar, but I'd certainly rather pay Pat/Jake $1M than the others $7-17M for the same results.
 
blue9 said:
Looking at B-Ref Crabbe was better than everyone except those who you'd suspect at BPM, VORP, WS. When 2/3rds of the team has a negative net rating, and you get rid of the best of those with a negative rating, then I think it still qualifies as a loss.

View attachment 15903 View attachment 15904 View attachment 15905
Click to expand...
By your own analysis Patty C has a better PER and WS/48, and costs 1/10th the price. Looks like his replacement was already playing for us.

EDIT I see you're on a similar page now.
 
tester551 said:
Except it's not hindsight. Several of us were very adamant that matching Crabbe was a bad move from the beginning.

I'd call it more vindication....
Click to expand...

I'd call it a lucky (educated) guess. That a fan can somehow predict a player's future better than a GM.
 
BlazerCaravan said:
By your own analysis Patty C has a better PER and WS/48, and costs 1/10th the price. Looks like his replacement was already playing for us.

EDIT I see you're on a similar page now.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've never understood the hate for Pat C. He's fine for his role and contract. I have zero complaints about him. And from what little I've seen of him, he looks like he could easily be better than a lot of our regular rotation players. And if he's not, I don't care because he's not making enough to have an impact on our ability to make roster moves.
Pat C is a-okay in my book.
 
BlazerCaravan said:
By your own analysis Patty C has a better PER and WS/48, and costs 1/10th the price. Looks like his replacement was already playing for us.

EDIT I see you're on a similar page now.
Click to expand...

Of course, there are huge differences in sample size between their 2016-17 numbers, but go back and look at Crabbe's career trajectory and compare it to Pat's. Year 3 was the breakout year for Crabbe when he jumped from 3.3 ppg to 10.3 ppg. I'm not predicting the same jump in scoring average for Connaughton, but it's not unreasonable to see him playing a larger role now that Crabbe is gone and we need some shooting at that position.

Unless, of course, we use the TPE on a veteran 3 & D shooting guard, then it's back to the end of the bench for Pat.

BNM
 
blue9 said:
Yeah, I've never understood the hate for Pat C. He's fine for his role and contract. I have zero complaints about him. And from what little I've seen of him, he looks like he could easily be better than a lot of our regular rotation players. And if he's not, I don't care because he's not making enough to have an impact on our ability to make roster moves.
Pat C is a-okay in my book.
Click to expand...

He also seems well liked and seems to genuinely like his teammates and openly cheers for their success. I'd much rather have that than someone who sulks, complains about PT and is a regular pain in the ass.

BNM
 
Denny Crane said:
If we had let him walk last year:
1) We wouldn't have had him for ~30 minutes a game last year
2) We wouldn't have had the chance to see if his growth continued
3) We wouldn't have the TPE (unless the deal turned into a S&T)
4) We wouldn't have anything at all in return for him

I'm not sure how this was somehow a bad move. We didn't have to pay the LT last year, either.

If we had received a TPE last year, and used it, we'd be much further over the LT at this point.
Click to expand...
Goodie goodie gumdrops! We had him for 30 minutes a game last year. And the Blazers were a below mediocre team till we got Nurkic.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I can't recall precisely my posts at the time, but I'm thinking that I was in favor of something in the neighborhood of 55M/4, but not down with 75M/4.

Yes, I understand that there was a measure of uncertainty in the signing, but people's job performance isn't measured on their intentions or their reasoning, but on their results. As defensible as the Oden pick, or the Miller/Felton deal, or the Afflalo trade were at the time, all of them hurt the franchise and are generally viewed as such.

I guess I'm just not in favor of expensive lottery tickets. I'm OK with draft picks and rookie deal acquisitions as vehicles for acquiring players because they might become what we hope for them to be. Big dollar signings, in my mind, are for players who have already demonstrated the ability to fill the role intended for them, and are signed based on that expectation. Therefore, if the high-dollar player fails to fulfill that expectation, then it's a scouting/evaluation failure, not simply a risk that didn't pan out.
Click to expand...


The GOAT was on Oprah said it best. 'Young NBA players are paid off potential instead of production.'

No one has to like it, but it's a general fact.
 
honkicracker said:
The GOAT was on Oprah said it best. 'Young NBA players are paid off potential instead of production.'

No one has to like it, but it's a general fact.
Click to expand...
And in the same vein, GM's are evaluated off of results, not intentions. And at present, the results of his matching a $75M offer for Crabbe's potential are $20M flushed and a TPE. Yes, I'm hoping he is able to use the TPE to improve the team, but if he doesn't, I don't think it's unreasonable to call it a failure.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
And in the same vein, GM's are evaluated off of results, not intentions. And at present, the results of his matching a $75M offer for Crabbe's potential are $20M flushed and a TPE. Yes, I'm hoping he is able to use the TPE to improve the team, but if he doesn't, I don't think it's unreasonable to call it a failure.
Click to expand...
It's actually closer to $30M flushed down the toilet. $18M on Nicholson & the $12M over-payment for Crabbe's production last year.
 
tester551 said:
It's actually closer to $30M flushed down the toilet. $18M on Nicholson & the $12M over-payment for Crabbe's production last year.
Click to expand...
I was trying to ignore last year and just pretend that last year's Crabbe performance was simply the cost of doing business, simply because the money spent on him for last season has no lasting impact going forward, whereas the Nicholson stretch and the TPE still exist.
 
Knowing that no GM can be perfect, what is the expected hit rate for talent acquisition and retention? If aGM offers Indiana a better deal than Pritchard took, but didn't get Paul George, is that a failure of the offering GM, of Pritchard, of both, or of neither?
 
PtldPlatypus said:
And in the same vein, GM's are evaluated off of results, not intentions. And at present, the results of his matching a $75M offer for Crabbe's potential are $20M flushed and a TPE. Yes, I'm hoping he is able to use the TPE to improve the team, but if he doesn't, I don't think it's unreasonable to call it a failure.
Click to expand...

Were you on board or not with matching Crabbe? I'm still trying to figure that out. You said for lower but what were your thoughts at the actual time of signing?
 
dviss1 said:
Were you on board or not with matching Crabbe? I'm still trying to figure that out. You said for lower but what were your thoughts at the actual time of signing?
Click to expand...
I'm honestly not sure if I was OK with the match. That was a long time ago. I saw one post where I was trying to justify it, but I'm not sure if in the moment I actually believed what I was saying or if I was trying to talk myself into being OK with it.

Aha!! Found the thread with the poll, and I voted no at the time.

upload_2017-9-1_12-14-14.png
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I'm honestly not sure if I was OK with the match. That was a long time ago. I saw one post where I was trying to justify it, but I'm not sure if in the moment I actually believed what I was saying or if I was trying to talk myself into being OK with it.

Aha!! Found the thread with the poll, and I voted no at the time.

View attachment 15919
Click to expand...

Well then I have no problem with you chastising NO for the move then.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I'm honestly not sure if I was OK with the match. That was a long time ago. I saw one post where I was trying to justify it, but I'm not sure if in the moment I actually believed what I was saying or if I was trying to talk myself into being OK with it.

Aha!! Found the thread with the poll, and I voted no at the time.

View attachment 15919
Click to expand...

Why can't I find that thread?
 
dviss1 said:
Well then I have no problem with you chastising NO for the move then.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that, but I don't necessarily agree with your logic. I don't think people should only be limited to criticizing moves with which they disagreed at the time. I'm not a GM. I don't have the information available to me that he has. I don't have the experience he has. So his decision making is naturally going to be held to a higher standard than mine. For example, Neil and I were comparably in favor of the Afflalo deal, which we all know didn't really turn out all that well for us. IMO, I can acknowledge how wrong I was about it while simultaneously calling it a failure on Olshey's part.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I appreciate that, but I don't necessarily agree with your logic. I don't think people should only be limited to criticizing moves with which they disagreed at the time. I'm not a GM. I don't have the information available to me that he has. I don't have the experience he has. So his decision making is naturally going to be held to a higher standard than mine. For example, Neil and I were comparably in favor of the Afflalo deal, which we all know didn't really turn out all that well for us. IMO, I can acknowledge how wrong I was about it while simultaneously calling it a failure on Olshey's part.
Click to expand...

Sure but you don't chastise him for it do you? Acknowledging a mistake and chastising someone for one are 2 different things.

You can chastise someone for a decision you disagreed with at the time but chastising him after you agree is hypocritical.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I'm honestly not sure if I was OK with the match. That was a long time ago. I saw one post where I was trying to justify it, but I'm not sure if in the moment I actually believed what I was saying or if I was trying to talk myself into being OK with it.

Aha!! Found the thread with the poll, and I voted no at the time.

View attachment 15919
Click to expand...

PtldPlatypus said:
http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/allen-crabbe-signs-offer-sheet-with-nets.302566/
Click to expand...

Wait, who the hell changed his vote ? There's one more no and one less yes than in your screenshot lol
 
I was begrudgingly a yes for matching Crabbe. I didn't like the amount, and repeatedly referred to him as over payed over the year, but I saw matching as the lesser of two evils. I still don't think it was a bad gamble, and I'm not sure over paying him for a year really hurt the Blazers in any tangible way. If we don't get anything for the ACTE however, then matching will have really been shown to be a failed strategy. And if the goal is to simply save the money to use to pay Nurk, the Blazers may let the ACTE go the way of the RLEC.

:cheers:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wizard Mentor
Zombie Crabbe Traded
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
jlprk
jlprk
Mediocre Man
Zombie Atomic Bump
Replies
17
Views
971
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
magnifier661
I've got Crabbe!
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
BlazerCaravan
BlazerCaravan
Boob-No-More
OT: Ray Allen to GSW?
Replies
7
Views
957
riverman
riverman
Natebishop3
Allen Crabbe
2 3 4
Replies
109
Views
4K
Further
Further

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top