Jordan Crawford Thinks Celtics Now Think of Him as a Leader

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2013/09/jordan_crawford_thinks_boston.html


Jordan Crawford thinks Boston Celtics now look at him as leader, raves about 'workhorse' coach Brad Stevens

Print Jay King, MassLive.com By Jay King, MassLive.com
on September 13, 2013 at 5:57 PM, updated September 13, 2013 at 6:03 PM


BOSTON -- Celtics shooting guard Jordan Crawford doesn't have the greatest reputation.

This is largely his fault. He's been caught yawning on the end of the bench, wearing marijuana socks to practice, and screaming allegedly lewd remarks at Carmelo Anthony after a playoff game. When Crawford met his former team, the Washington Wizards, for the first time as a Celtics player, he pretended not to have any recollection of his time there.

But maybe, just maybe, Crawford wants to change how people see him. As the 24-year old prepares for his fourth NBA season, he figures he's due for a different role in the locker room.

"Just trying to build the team, we've got a lot of young guys," Crawford said Friday at Holland Elementary School in Dorchester, where he, several teammates, and coaches led a clinic for students. "I’m going into my fourth year, so I’m actually kinda getting looked upon to lead, you know, in the weight room and drills. Just trying to lead everybody, show them the right way to do it."

Further explaining his leadership skills, Crawford said, "I kind of have a strong personality, so people kind of gravitate towards me in locker rooms and on the court, so it’s my job to lead them in the right direction."

Your eyes might be rolling in their sockets. But Crawford continued to rave about new head coach Brad Stevens, who led drills for the elementary schoolers and gave a speech about the importance of integrity, humility and hard work.

"Beyond his years. He really knows the game, a workhorse, pretty much," Crawford said of Stevens. "(He's) always watching film, always trying to figure ways to get better on offense, defense, individually, what players need to work on. He's just always ahead of what's going to come."

Stevens doesn't have any NBA experience, but Crawford doesn't think that will hold him back.

"First and foremost, it's a respect factor," said the guard. "Back-to-back Final Fours, ain't too many coaches did that. He knows the game, so it's really not about transitioning to the NBA. It's about being comfortable with yourself and knowing your team."

Jordan Crawford as a wise voice. I'm sure the Celtics wouldn't mind if that trend continued.




bob
MY NOTE:  Crawford thinks he's going to be looked to for leadership.  Keith Bogans thinks his strength and asset to this team is "leadership".  Kris Humphries is being looked at, in the locker room, as a leader.  I'm getting very scared and confused.


.

If everyone starts to want to step and act like a leader, we're good.  It's the rare team that has that type of maturity, but we can always hope.  

Natural leaders will emerge through their consistent actions and focus.

Leader? Crawford? Sorry, the two thing just don't go together.

Heh... Leadership... What does he know about it anyhow?

KJ

When his head is right, Crawford can heat up and score lots of points in a short period of time like few in the NBA. I have no idea if he can do it consistently, if he has what it takes to be a leader etc etc.

But WHY not encourage the guy to be positive and come in here and work hard to fill a bigger role. The Celtics have very little to lose, and everything to gain.

when he does it once, will be the first time, never saw him do it in green....hope we can get rid of him.

I've seen very few players announce that their expectations for the upcoming season include mediocrity on the court, disruption in the locker room, and dismal failure in the leadership department.  So Jordan's statements are no more earthshaking than any of the other offseason pap that passes as news.  Still, at least the nature of his remarks could be expected to motivate a rational personally very strongly.  Whether rationality is one of his strong suits is up for debate.

To cut him a little slack, it should be remembered that he was a midseason addition to a Celtics team that was constantly trying to find itself and may possibly have set a record for most guys playing out of position.  As a shooter, he had no experienced PG to put him a position to succeed.  That situation rendered the Celtics' offense akin to playground basketball all too often; and that kind of atmosphere is exactly what was not needed if there was to be any hope of adding some discipline to his game.  And how many of his ill-advised heaves came as the result of possessions gone wrong?  I might have mentioned once or 2,000 times that here's always a context!

A free throw shooting figure of roughly 80% suggests that he really does have a shooter's touch, and hopefully Brad (and maybe Rondo as well) can work with Jordan to improve his shot selection.  In the meantime, among the players from last year's team who are still on the roster, Crawford ranked number 4 in points per 36 minutes and was a distant second to Rondo in terms of number of assists per 36 minutes.  There's little question that he represents a form of instant offense.  Perhaps, with a training camp's familiarization and role-setting processes under his belt, his obvious talent can be harnessed to create a useful role.  

With a guy like this, I'm content to see what he might have to offer under more nurturing circumstances this season, and I'm also happy for other teams to have seen the same thing as the trade deadline approaches.

Sam

....instant bad offense

mrkleen09 wrote:When his head is right, Crawford can heat up and score lots of points in a short period of time like few in the NBA.  I have no idea if he can do it consistently, if he has what it takes to be a leader etc etc.

But WHY not encourage the guy to be positive and come in here and work hard to fill a bigger role.  The Celtics have very little to lose, and everything to gain.

+1

I'll believe it when I see it... because he current body of work says otherwise. Leaders come out and produce. Crawford is a turnover machine and doesn't play with any semblance of discipline. His best value to this team is as a trade asset, and I hope Danny feels the same way.

Rondo (as the one running the offense) and Green (as the #1 scoring threat) are going to be the leaders of this team. I'd rather not pretend that Crawford will magically elevate to that level.

KJ

Where does it say that a team can only have 1 or 2 leaders?

Leaders come in many different forms. If Jeff Green becomes a leader, it will be with his play - as he is too quiet to be a vocal leader on this team.

If Crawford makes this team and wants to be a leader of the second unit - and can prove to fill that roll, why is that a bad thing?

Guess I am not seeing why people are being so negative.

mrkleen,

I think you may have misunderstood what I was getting at.

I never said that Crawford was incapable of leadership, or that a team can only have 1 or 2 leaders. I also didn't say that it's a bad thing for him to want to be a leader. I did, however, say that judging by what I have seen from him, I don't see him as being a leader on this team.

Rondo has championship experience and is a top-class point guard. Green is a very talented player that will ultimately have a more prominent role by taking Pierce's minutes. Green actually won some games for the Celtics last year. What did Crawford do? Can you point to any time during the season you thought to yourself "Wow, this guy is a great pickup for the Celtics"? I honestly can't, and I'm a huge fan of support players. Don't get me wrong, it is a good thing if a player wants to be a leader on a team, but wanting to do it and actually doing it are two entirely different things.

If someone can prove me wrong on his actual results as opposed to hopeful conjecture, I am more than willing to concede.

KJ

Being a star and being a leader are two different things KJ.

The leader of the Red Sox this year is Johnny Gomes. He is a 230 hitter...but what he brings in toughness and hard work - has helped to turn around that team.

The leader of the Memphis Grizzlies is Tony Allen. The leader of the Nets this year will be KG. The leader of the Warriors is probably David Lee. None of those guys are the best player on their team....so pointing to stats as a means to anoint who the leader is on a team is a problematic exercise.

As for being happy to have Crawford on the court last year - yes, there were many games when he came in and lit it up. He didnt get enough consistent minutes for me to know what he can and cannot do here...but he is a 13 point scorer in this league, so clearly he has skills.

I dont see any stars at the 2 on this team - so I see no reason to cast the guy out already. Open camp, let him learn the new system and see what happens.

mrkleen,

I'm not sure where I said that being a star or having great stats is a prerequisite for leadership. D. Fisher was a leader on those Lakers championship teams but he wasn't their best player. Aside from turnovers, which stats did I point to?

Crawford did some things okay but for the most part, I wasn't impressed with him. Most of the time I watched him play, he was out of control. He's quite expendable in my opinion and I think Boston should package him in a trade for some better players.


KJ

I never saw him light up anything, guy constantly made bad plays and bricked tons of shots. If he has to be in your rotation, that must be a bad desperate team.

Yeah, guess I was the only one that watched him score 21 points in 27 minutes and 12 points in 16 minutes.

He is not a star player, hell I dont even know if he will make this team. My point all along was, the Celtics are in NO POSITION to decide who is and is not going to be a contributor at this point. If the guy comes into camp in good shape, plays hard, makes the team, and then works into the rotation and chips in 10 to 12 points per game - WHY wouldnt you want him around?

When you have a good team - you might be able to dismiss players out of hand. When you have a very mediocre, rebuilding team - you need to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks.

....the place he was at before us was a bad team, Washington Wizards, enough said. Anyone can avg 13 points a game on a bad team, a very bad team that had to play somebody and he chucked up his shots. This clown is not worthy of being associated with this franchise IMHO.

kleen every player needs at least one skill he can build on to last in the league, Crawford is a career 40% FG and 30% from 3, shooting doesn't seem to be a skill that he's too good at, hes always offbalance naturally, he can't defend either....I see no upside for keeping him around, unless were tanking, okay lets start him.

mrkleen09 wrote:Yeah, guess I was the only one that watched him score 21 points in 27 minutes and 12 points in 16 minutes.

He is not a star player, hell I dont even know if he will make this team.  My point all along was, the Celtics are in NO POSITION to decide who is and is not going to be a contributor at this point.  If the guy comes into camp in good shape, plays hard, makes the team, and then works into the rotation and chips in 10 to 12 points per game - WHY wouldnt you want him around?

When you have a good team - you might be able to dismiss players out of hand.  When you have a very mediocre, rebuilding team -  you need to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks.

mrkleen,

Eddie House was better at lighting things up, in my opinion.

Why wouldn't I want him around? He doesn't play under control, plain and simple. They can do better than him. I guarantee you that he has more value in a future trade than having him on the roster.

Being a contributor and being a leader are not the same thing. I was under the impression that this thread was about leadership, not contribution. And if it were to become about contribution, pretty much everyone on the team that had significant minutes contributed something more than Crawford did.

Boston does have a mediocre team. And how does a mediocre team get better? By adding players that can improve the team. Crawford is as much a liability as anyone I've ever seen play.

KJ

KJ

Unless your name is Brad Stevens - dont go "guaranteeing" me anything.

Crawford has career averages that are nearly double that of Eddie House, so consistently - Crawford is a better scorer.

I dont really care one way or another about Jordan Crawford. But this whole conversation strikes me as falling under the "beggers can't be choosers" category. If Crawford can play here for 1 or 2 years, chip in 10 to 12 ppg, at a fairly low cost - while the team is being rebuilt - I dont see the problem.

I'm not a fan of Jordan Crawford.  In my usual pitbull-like fashion I think I've made it clear that Mr. Herky-Jerky isn't my cup of tea.  Having said that, my inclination at this time is to agree with MrKleen.  This is much ado about nothing.

If Crawford surprises the hell out of me (and, I guess Cowens and KJ too) and has a good year then either he's a relatively cheap keeper or somebody might be more willing to include him in a trade.  Either way, we don't lose. So why not showcase him?

If Crawford doesn't play because he sucks, then he's not worth talking about because we're not going to be in the hunt for a championship this year anyway. No minutes, no lasting damage to my optic nerve.

If Crawford plays and sucks, then we'll lose more games and get a better seeding in the Andrew Wiggins Sweepstakes. Bonus!

This is Crawford's last guaranteed year.  Next year we can make him a qualifying offer of $3.2M.   Or not.  So, should we really get worked up over a player that's here for cheap, for one year, on a year where our expectations are so low?

I'm going to have to unhinge my jaw, like a snake, to swallow the concept of Jordan Crawford as a mature, steadying veteran voice in the locker room.  I am, however, rooting for him.  He's in green (like it or not), we need veteran voices on this young team and if he can shed his skin, also snake-like, and become a different person, we win.  So, what's the harm in wishing him well?  There is upside for the team, even if it doesn't turn out to be in his game.


bob


.

mrkleen09 wrote:KJ

Unless your name is Brad Stevens - dont go "guaranteeing" me anything.

Crawford has career averages that are nearly double that of Eddie House, so consistently - Crawford is a better scorer.

I dont really care one way or another about Jordan Crawford.  But this whole conversation strikes me as falling under the "beggers can't be choosers" category.  If Crawford can play here for 1 or 2 years, chip in 10 to 12 ppg, at a fairly low cost - while the team is being rebuilt - I dont see the problem.  

Even Stevens can't "guarantee" anything. So, moot point.

I think you still are missing my overall point. I never said it's impossible for him to lead. Just that I have my doubts about it. Let's not turn my statement into something that it never was.

BobH,

I know he isn't a long-term player in Boston. I was basically just going off the "leadership statement" and that I fundamentally disagreed with it for very specific reasons. But do I hope he does well if he isn't traded? Yes.


KJ

Stick with it Mrkleen. This conversation is like a seesaw debating first whether Crawford can be a good, consistent player and then whether he could be a leader. While my instinct says the first will be more of a possibility (and perhaps a long shot at that) than the second, I hope I'm not short-sighted to base any judgments on a short-term Celtics tenure, sometimes playing out of position, for a team that was close to being dysfunctional under what turned out to be a lame duck coach.

The man can shoot. The man can take it to the hole. Those are talents. Whether or not they're strong enough talents, and whether he can become disciplined enough to take full advantage of them consistently, I have no idea. But he is (currently at least) on the team, and I believe he (unless he's traded) deserves a shot at capitalizing on his expressed desire.

Sam

The man can't shoot Sam!! look at his career percentages.

Sam,

I am all for him showing what he can do. But then again, I am also not a GM  

In my personal opinion, I don't always equate contribution to leadership. Bradley, Sullinger, Bass, and Lee have contributed to this team, but I wouldn't necessarily say they're a focal point of leadership.

KJ