Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford

[billysan]

I noticed something interesting today while researching Celtic player stats. Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford are nearly identical statistically this year in all the base categries of rebounding, FG%, 3pt%, PPG, TO and steals. Crawford has a slight edge in FT% and Assists. I know most of the people on this board will now say, 'yeah but Bradley is the better defender'.

I suddenly realized, both these guys are coming up for contracts this off season. If we give Bradley a contract for 7 million per, Crawford could make the argument that statistically, he deserves comparable money.

I realize that this is a really small sample size and may not stay close till the end of the season, but I will be watching to see how big of a difference they end up with. I know many here have said no way Bradley gets 7-8 million per, and I believe most would say the same about Crawford. Some even think we should offer Crawford a lot less if we even offer him a contract.

If it comes down to it, do we keep Jordan Crawford for less money (assuming he accepts a smaller contract?) or pay Avery Bradley more because of his 'defense'?

[kozlodoev]

I noticed something interesting today while researching Celtic player stats. Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford are nearly identical statistically this year in all the base categries of rebounding, FG%, 3pt%, PPG, TO and steals. Crawford has a slight edge in FT% and Assists. I know most of the people on this board will now say, 'yeah but Bradley is the better defender'.

I suddenly realized, both these guys are coming up for contracts this off season. If we give Bradley a contract for 7 million per, Crawford could make the argument that statistically, he deserves comparable money.

I realize that this is a really small sample size and may not stay close till the end of the season, but I will be watching to see how big of a difference they end up with. I know many here have said no way Bradley gets 7-8 million per, and I believe most would say the same about Crawford. Some even think we should offer Crawford a lot less if we even offer him a contract.

If it comes down to it, do we keep Jordan Crawford for less money (assuming he accepts a smaller contract?) or pay Avery Bradley more because of his 'defense'?

He can make whatever arguments he wants. The market for a player is dictated by what other teams are willing to pay him -- even more so with RFAs such as Bradley and Crawford.

[vjcsmoke]

I believe that both will be trade bait.

The Heat are reportedly interested in Crawford, but I doubt we give him up unless we get a decent package, or it's a 3-way trade.  Cos I honestly don't like their roster outside of their top 3 players.

As for Bradley, if he insists on getting Jeff Green type money, I think we have to trade him and try to package him for a lotto pick.  It looks for sure like we won't even crack top 10 in the draft this year.

[beklog]

Ok so they have identical stats
Crawford vs AB
less $ vs more $
can shoot, pass and hold the ball) vs can shoot, can't pass and hold the ball
defense?? vs AB elite defender

I'm gonna pick Crawford, to bad AB I really like him and his chemistry with Rondo

[billysan]

i know this is not going to be a popular sentiment, but Courtney Lee is going to be cheaper than both of them going forward. How bad would it be if we draft a decent SG and keep him as our number three guard off the bench? Use Pressey as our 4th guard and back up PG?

If we want to sign top tier talent, why do we pay either of these top dollar?

[Celtics4ever]

Ainge made an offer.   Bradley refused it and he has shown better offense and will want more money.   I do not think he is worth 8 Million a year.   I think he will be traded.  The market for him will never be higher, hopefully, we do it before he get's injured.

I think Lee has played lights out.   I see us moving both these guys possibly.  Maybe AB for McLemore and a pick?

[obnoxiousmime]

I noticed something interesting today while researching Celtic player stats. Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford are nearly identical statistically this year in all the base categries of rebounding, FG%, 3pt%, PPG, TO and steals. Crawford has a slight edge in FT% and Assists. I know most of the people on this board will now say, 'yeah but Bradley is the better defender'.

I suddenly realized, both these guys are coming up for contracts this off season. If we give Bradley a contract for 7 million per, Crawford could make the argument that statistically, he deserves comparable money.

I realize that this is a really small sample size and may not stay close till the end of the season, but I will be watching to see how big of a difference they end up with. I know many here have said no way Bradley gets 7-8 million per, and I believe most would say the same about Crawford. Some even think we should offer Crawford a lot less if we even offer him a contract.

If it comes down to it, do we keep Jordan Crawford for less money (assuming he accepts a smaller contract?) or pay Avery Bradley more because of his 'defense'?

He can make whatever arguments he wants. The market for a player is dictated by what other teams are willing to pay him -- even more so with RFAs such as Bradley and Crawford.

Crawford will be an unrestricted free agent. There's a lot of confusion about this on the board and even in news outlets, but his fifth year option was not picked up by the Celts before the season. Right now it's looking like a mistake by Ainge. Even if you want to "motivate" the guy, he would have still been properly motivated to play for restricted free agency. On the plus side, we do hold his Bird Rights.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/2013/11/12/jordan-crawford-earning-kudos-for-his-unselfish-play-with-the-celtics/obl6THuhbrkKCnLcb8q6dL/story.html

[jc3celticsphan]

I noticed something interesting today while researching Celtic player stats. Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford are nearly identical statistically this year in all the base categries of rebounding, FG%, 3pt%, PPG, TO and steals. Crawford has a slight edge in FT% and Assists. I know most of the people on this board will now say, 'yeah but Bradley is the better defender'.

I suddenly realized, both these guys are coming up for contracts this off season. If we give Bradley a contract for 7 million per, Crawford could make the argument that statistically, he deserves comparable money.

I realize that this is a really small sample size and may not stay close till the end of the season, but I will be watching to see how big of a difference they end up with. I know many here have said no way Bradley gets 7-8 million per, and I believe most would say the same about Crawford. Some even think we should offer Crawford a lot less if we even offer him a contract.

If it comes down to it, do we keep Jordan Crawford for less money (assuming he accepts a smaller contract?) or pay Avery Bradley more because of his 'defense'?

He can make whatever arguments he wants. The market for a player is dictated by what other teams are willing to pay him -- even more so with RFAs such as Bradley and Crawford.

Crawford will be an unrestricted free agent. There's a lot of confusion about this on the board and even in news outlets, but his fifth year option was not picked up by the Celts before the season. Right now it's looking like a mistake by Ainge. Even if you want to "motivate" the guy, he would have still been properly motivated to play for restricted free agency. On the plus side, we do hold his Bird Rights.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/2013/11/12/jordan-crawford-earning-kudos-for-his-unselfish-play-with-the-celtics/obl6THuhbrkKCnLcb8q6dL/story.html

TRADE HIM ASAP!

[oldtype]

I noticed something interesting today while researching Celtic player stats. Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford are nearly identical statistically this year in all the base categries of rebounding, FG%, 3pt%, PPG, TO and steals. Crawford has a slight edge in FT% and Assists. I know most of the people on this board will now say, 'yeah but Bradley is the better defender'.

I suddenly realized, both these guys are coming up for contracts this off season. If we give Bradley a contract for 7 million per, Crawford could make the argument that statistically, he deserves comparable money.

I realize that this is a really small sample size and may not stay close till the end of the season, but I will be watching to see how big of a difference they end up with. I know many here have said no way Bradley gets 7-8 million per, and I believe most would say the same about Crawford. Some even think we should offer Crawford a lot less if we even offer him a contract.

If it comes down to it, do we keep Jordan Crawford for less money (assuming he accepts a smaller contract?) or pay Avery Bradley more because of his 'defense'?

He can make whatever arguments he wants. The market for a player is dictated by what other teams are willing to pay him -- even more so with RFAs such as Bradley and Crawford.

Crawford will be an unrestricted free agent. There's a lot of confusion about this on the board and even in news outlets, but his fifth year option was not picked up by the Celts before the season. Right now it's looking like a mistake by Ainge. Even if you want to "motivate" the guy, he would have still been properly motivated to play for restricted free agency. On the plus side, we do hold his Bird Rights.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/2013/11/12/jordan-crawford-earning-kudos-for-his-unselfish-play-with-the-celtics/obl6THuhbrkKCnLcb8q6dL/story.html

In hindsight yes it was a mistake but I don't think you could reasonably expect any GM to have predicted this level of performance from Crawford. If he maintains this for a whole season not only could he demand similar money to Bradley (say 4 years, 30 million), he'd probably deserve it too.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I noticed something interesting today while researching Celtic player stats. Avery Bradley and Jordan Crawford are nearly identical statistically this year in all the base categries of rebounding, FG%, 3pt%, PPG, TO and steals. Crawford has a slight edge in FT% and Assists. I know most of the people on this board will now say, 'yeah but Bradley is the better defender'.

I suddenly realized, both these guys are coming up for contracts this off season. If we give Bradley a contract for 7 million per, Crawford could make the argument that statistically, he deserves comparable money.

I realize that this is a really small sample size and may not stay close till the end of the season, but I will be watching to see how big of a difference they end up with. I know many here have said no way Bradley gets 7-8 million per, and I believe most would say the same about Crawford. Some even think we should offer Crawford a lot less if we even offer him a contract.

If it comes down to it, do we keep Jordan Crawford for less money (assuming he accepts a smaller contract?) or pay Avery Bradley more because of his 'defense'?

He can make whatever arguments he wants. The market for a player is dictated by what other teams are willing to pay him -- even more so with RFAs such as Bradley and Crawford.

Crawford will be an unrestricted free agent. There's a lot of confusion about this on the board and even in news outlets, but his fifth year option was not picked up by the Celts before the season. Right now it's looking like a mistake by Ainge. Even if you want to "motivate" the guy, he would have still been properly motivated to play for restricted free agency. On the plus side, we do hold his Bird Rights.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/2013/11/12/jordan-crawford-earning-kudos-for-his-unselfish-play-with-the-celtics/obl6THuhbrkKCnLcb8q6dL/story.html

Don't think that's how that works. What the Celtics didn't was pick up his team option, that doesn't mean he doesn't become a restricted free-agent. Whether he becomes a restricted free-agent or not has to do with whether the Celtics offer a qualifying offer this offseason or not, it has nothing to do with them picking up his team option.

[obnoxiousmime]

[quote author=BudweiserCeltic

Don't think that's how that works. What the Celtics didn't was pick up his team option, that doesn't mean he doesn't become a restricted free-agent. Whether he becomes a restricted free-agent or not has to do with whether the Celtics offer a qualifying offer this offseason or not, it has nothing to do with them picking up his team option.
[/quote]

Yeah, you're right. It was confusing because I never heard of rookie deals having fifth year options. I thought all first round rookie deals were two years, then two options, then a 5th year qualifying offer. The language in the Washburn article specifically said an option was declined. Should it have just said he wasn't offered an extension instead? Or did Crawford have a weird, special deal?

[BballTim]

[quote author=BudweiserCeltic

Don't think that's how that works. What the Celtics didn't was pick up his team option, that doesn't mean he doesn't become a restricted free-agent. Whether he becomes a restricted free-agent or not has to do with whether the Celtics offer a qualifying offer this offseason or not, it has nothing to do with them picking up his team option.

Yeah, you're right. It was confusing because I never heard of rookie deals having fifth year options. I thought all first round rookie deals were two years, then two options, then a 5th year qualifying offer. The language in the Washburn article specifically said an option was declined. Should it have just said he wasn't offered an extension instead? Or did Crawford have a weird, special deal?
[/quote]

  I think they have a team option at a certain price. If they pick up the option he's under contract for that season, if they don't pick up the option he's an rfa.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Don't think that's how that works. What the Celtics didn't was pick up his team option, that doesn't mean he doesn't become a restricted free-agent. Whether he becomes a restricted free-agent or not has to do with whether the Celtics offer a qualifying offer this offseason or not, it has nothing to do with them picking up his team option.

Yeah, you're right. It was confusing because I never heard of rookie deals having fifth year options. I thought all first round rookie deals were two years, then two options, then a 5th year qualifying offer. The language in the Washburn article specifically said an option was declined. Should it have just said he wasn't offered an extension instead? Or did Crawford have a weird, special deal?

I'm assuming it's a team option that was declined, I don't have the details. Regardless, there's time still to make the qualifying offer next off-season.

[pokeKingCurtis]

J-Craw is indeed on his rookie contract.
Marshon Brooks and J-Craw's options were declined, while Sully's option was picked up.

Don't kill me if I'm wrong but I believe rookie contracts are negotiable? Might explain the 4+1 years on his contract.

[LooseCannon]

Bradley and Crawford are from the same draft class and should have the same contract status with regards to options and restricted free agency.