I'd rather trade the one who can't shoot threes. I think we would be better off getting a good shooting, good defending point guard to take Turner's place. I really wish that Olshey had signed Turner for a couple million less per season, so maybe he would be tradeable.
Package Turner + Cle 1st. Has to be done. Keep Crabbe. Difference between the two: Crabbe had a team (Nets) who actually gave him his contract Turner was *shocked* at how much the Blazers were offering *facepalm*
It's hard to get FAs to come to Portland. If you trade UFAs, then future ones are even less likely to come. This effect wears off as time goes on, but I don't think NO will trade Turner yet - too soon.
Lot of good points made on Crabbe vs Turner. I agree one has to go. So it comes down to two things. 1) Who is the easiest to move 2) Who is the easiest to replace. Both have skills we need. We just can't afford both. Good point above that finding a defensive PG who can shoot is an option. But haven't we tried to find one without success? I tend to lean toward the theory that it is easier to find a three point shooter. Hell we might even have one on the bench. Layman could step up. Laugh all you want but Crabbe only average 3 points a game his first 2 seasons due to playing time. Layman could get better with more time too. Either way I think replacing AC is a little bit easier then replacing ET. And at the same time easier to move as well.
In another thread I suggested that it's not too far-fetched of an idea that next season Layman could provide us with what Turner has provided us this season. My reasoning is that, aside from a few good weeks, Turner has been a huge disappointment so it can't be that hard to live up to such low expectations. But the cost savings would be HUGE! Given Jake's appearance of knowing how to play, his ability to dribble with his head up, fundamentally sound shot mechanics, and just a general decent feel for the game as a whole, I think he fits the Turner mold better than the Crabbe mold. His overall FG% is atrocious, but his 3FG% isn't much worse than Turner's...and given that he takes twice as many 3s as 2s, that's having a huge effect on his FG%. I think his FG% is something that would improve with increased playing time. Basically, what it comes down to for me, is that Crabbe is elite in one area of the game and Turner isn't elite at anything. Therefore it should be much easier for Layman to be a mediocre jack-of-all-trades, than it is for him to becomes an elite shooter.
another article about Butler being "good as gone" this summer. CJ and ? for Butler? http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/245459/Exec-Jimmy-Butler-As-Good-As-Gone
I wish we had the guy who was 3rd in the league from 3. That would be Otto Porter. He literally does EVERYTHING better than Allen Crabbe, and I mean EVERYTHING and it's not close (other than 3-point shooting, where Porter holds the edge both this season and for his career). And he makes $5.9 million compared to Crabbe's $18.5 million. And that's the problem with Crabbe. He's a one-dimensional specialist who is the most overpaid healthy player in the league. He makes WAY more money that similar specialists. He is currently 4th in the league in 3FG%. That sounds good, but then compare him to the other guys in the top 5: Kyle Korver: 3FG% = .447 PER = 11.9 Salary = $5,239,437 Joe Ingles: 3FG% = .444 PER = 12.9 Salary = $2,250,000 Otto Porter: 3FG% = .440 PER = 17.3 Salary = $5,893,981 Allen Crabbe: 3FG% = .435 PER = 11.1 Salary = $18,500,000 Gary Harris: 3FG% = .427 PER = 15.3 Salary = $1,655,880 Crabbe isn't just paid more than all those other 3-point shooters, he has an extra digit in his salary. In fact, he makes more than the other top 5 3-point shooters combined ($18,500,000 vs. $15,039,298). Honestly, we need to move either Crabbe or Turner to realistically get under the luxury tax threshold. While Turner is overpaid, too, he's not as overpaid as Crabbe. Where Crabbe is an overpaid specialist, Turner is an overpaid generalist. Turner is a better rebounder, better passer and better defender than Crabbe. Teams like BRK, that gave Crabbe this ridiculous contract, see him as a potential starter. To a team like that, he has more value than Turner, who is seen as a career back-up. Based on our current roster, we currently have over $142 million in salary for the 2017-18 season. With the luxury tax threshold expected to be $122 million, we need to shave over $20 million to get under the threshold. If we don't pick up the team options for Ezeli, Connaughton and Quarterman, that gets us down to about $133 million. But, we'd need to add three more players to replace them. Trading Crabbe, and his $18.5 million contract is the best way to get under the tax threshold without gutting the rest of the roster. Turner would get us close, but Crabbe makes about $1.5 million more, and as mentioned one of the teams under the cap would be more likely to take the younger Crabbe if they view him as a potential starter. BNM
Ok now how many of those guys signed their contracts this past summer, post cap hike? And Porter is going to get maxed out this summer, so it's a bit misleading to use his rookie contract in any debate. Same with Harris. Harris is probably going to get something very similar to Crabbe as well. Korver won't, but that's because he's old.
We were typing at the same time. We both noted that Crabbe is a specialist (3-point shooter and nothing else) and Turner is a generalist (better passer, rebounder and defender, but much worse shooter). It's funny that you suggest Layman as a potential Turner replacement, because as I was typing my response, I was wondering if the team is grooming Connaughton as a potential Crabbe replacement. His 3-point shooting is at .500, even better than Crabbe's, but that's for a very limited sample size (but still a bigger sample size than anything Layman has done). Other than 3-point shooting, Crabbe brings nothing to the table, which is why I think he would be easier to replace than a player who has multiple skills. 3 and D guys get paid big bucks because they have two valuable skills. Crabbe is paid like an elite 3 and D guy, unfortunately he lacks the D. He's the worst defender on a bad defensive team. He's basically a younger version of Anthony Morrow. The difference is that Morrow was actually a better 3-point shooter at the same age, and has never been paid more than $4 million a season in his 10-year NBA career. In fact, Crabbe is making more this season than Morrow made in his first nine seasons combined. So, groom Connaughton to be Crabbe's replacment and/or snag a couple sharp shooters in the draft and try to move Crabbe to a team under the cap to get us out of luxury tax hell. BNM
You makes some excellent points. But I still think what Jake does is more similar to what Allen provides. And I would throw Layman's shooting stats completely out of the discussion until he actually plays with the rotation players for at least 10 games. ET played very well before his injury as a starter. I kind of want to see what he can do next year when he is back to normal. However if a decent trade presents itself, by all means we should make it. Ironically the bench players who play best in those possible 4-5 playoff games against the Warriors......will probably be the ones we move.
Point is, it's easy to replace a one dimensional player like Crabbe, with either a cheap player on a rookie contract or with a proven vet like Korver. Even with last summer's spending spree, Crabbe is ridiculously overpaid for what he brings to the table. Hell, NOP just plucked Jordan Crawford from the D-League. He spent a couple seasons in the D-League improving his 3-point shot. It's only been 12 games, but he's shooting better from 3 than Crabbe and makes 50% more 3-pointers per game in fewer minutes. Like Crabbe, he's always been a weak rebounder and a poor defender, but he's a much better passer and NOP signed him for the 2017-18 season for $1.7 million. So, whether it's a cheap vet, a young guy on a rookie contract or a D-League call up (or European player), it shouldn't be too hard to to find a Crabbe replacement for a fraction of the cost. BNM
Well, he did play 9 games as a starter in the D-League and shot just as poorly there. Layman may eventually find his shot, but until he does, he's Victor Claver 2.0. BNM
If Crabbe is such a one dimensional player and it's so easy to replace a shooter, then explain why Brooklyn decided to give him that contract
I bolded the answer to your question within your question. With that said, I think BNM underrates Crabbe quite a bit. He might not be great at anything other than shooting, but he's not totally absent in all other aspects of the game as BNM seems to suggest. He often hits big shots - that's slightly different than just shooting a good percentage. He seems to have a knack for coming up with a steal in the closing minutes of tight games - not something that really stands out in stats, but probably helps to add 2-5 wins on a season. For the record, I'm fine with trading Crabbe - I would just prefer to trade Turner. Either way, one of them needs to go.
Oh, I don't know, maybe they're stupid. You realize this is BRK, right? It's not like they haven't made other stupid player personnel moves. With all the draft picks they gave to BOS, they are absolutely DESPERATE for "talent". They viewed Crabbe as a potential long term starter who was poised to breakout and were willing to overpay to find out. They were under the salary floor and will likely be about $40 million under the cap ($60 million below the luxury tax thresholds) heading in into this summer. Giving Crabbe that huge contract would not have hamstrung them the way it did POR. BNM
I just think most rookies need a year to adjust to the extra 2' feet for the NBA 3pt line. There are certainly exceptions like Dame, but most seem to shoot more confidently in their 2nd season.
