# Larry must go.



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

We should not in any way offer him 10 mill or more a season. He's not worth it, He's injury prone and selfish. 

He'd be our new Allan Houston in a year or two. He also helps perpetuate the notion of the big 3. He must go. 

Big 3 concept needs to die, we need more balanced with capaable inside scorers and a more shared ball mentality. We need better defense on the permeter as well. 

Next season is gonna be a disaster wth the Big 3 concept. 

1 of the big 3 MUST go and a defender added in its place.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

If he gets a medium ranged contract, I wouldn't be opposed to keeping him but a bigger one would be questionable. I first have to see who is going to offer Larry Hughes an outrageous deal to begin with. 

Personally, Jamison will eventually have to go, not Hughes for now. If Hughes is not overpaid, he will be a good player to keep. I don't know if the WIzards will get any viable low post options though this offseason. I would consider Kwame but really, what else is there?


----------



## PartisanRanger (Oct 24, 2004)

I would love to keep Hughes, but not for that stellar of a contract, since he doesn't deserve it. His play really broke down in the playoffs, I was kinda surprised. He kept taking ill-advised jumpers and shot a pretty low % while making Gilbert and Antawn do all the work. He'll probably go somewhere else, but I hope he stays so we can develop him further.


----------



## Shanghai Kid (Mar 7, 2003)

Where ya been at Jazzy? This board has been pretty dead lately, nice to see some activity again.

I agree, I would like to see Hughes get 8-9 mill a year, 10 is pushing it. However, if we let Hughes go and don't get a suitable replacement we'll be back in the lottery next season. And not just because of that, I'm hearing Juan Dixon is a goner, and losing both Dixon/Hughes takes us from having one of the stronger SG spots in the league to the weakest. I don't trust Jarvis Hayes to be a good starter any time soon.


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

My take on Hughes is that at $10 million a year, he is not quite at Alan Houston max level. 

My concern is that if you let him walk, and don't replace him with a lockdown perimeter player, what are you left with? 

Lockdown defenders are rare it seems, and lacking a better option, the Wizards can not afford to take a step backward.


----------



## Moto (Jan 11, 2003)

MJG has mentioned before, Larry should not get more than Arenas is getting.

Larry deserves that much though I wish had is not as easy to get hurt.

what I don't like Larry is sometimes he does not say the right things. For example he was pushing the big 3 thing and not wanting to feed the bigs.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Did he play SG or point last year? Or a mixture?


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

TheATLien said:


> Did he play SG or point last year? Or a mixture?


 Mostly shooting guard.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I don't know how to feel about guys have career years in contract seasons.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

BCH said:


> My take on Hughes is that at $10 million a year, he is not quite at Alan Houston max level.
> 
> My concern is that if you let him walk, and don't replace him with a lockdown perimeter player, what are you left with?
> 
> Lockdown defenders are rare it seems, and lacking a better option, the Wizards can not afford to take a step backward.


Larry Hughes is a lockdown defender? Have I missed something?


----------



## BCH (Jun 25, 2002)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Larry Hughes is a lockdown defender? Have I missed something?


Yeah the part about getting rid of Larry to obtain a lockdown defender necessitates a lockdown defender being obtainable. In the event a lockdown defender is unavailable, which is the case, the Wizards might as well keep Hughes, who at the very least was a 1st team All NBA defender.


----------



## Ramos32 (Jun 27, 2005)

all i know is that Larry is our best defender and he contained Ray Allen..not many people can say they stopped ray allen from doing what he wants to do...he even stopped him from making the game winning shot...thats called skills on the defensive side!

in other words, LARRY NEEDS TO STAY


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Hughes is definitely not a lockdown defender in the normal sense -- we can't just throw him on the other team's top player and expect that player to have a worse game than usual. What he does lock down, so to speak, is passing lanes. A really unique trait he showed last year was the ability to gamble for steals, especially on weak passes, and still be able to get back to his man if he didn't nab the ball. Granted, not all the time; we still got burned plenty of times when he gambled too hard. However, compared to guys like Arenas and Dixon and most other gamblers in the league, I thought he did an amazing job covering himself when he didn't get the steal.

In a more traditional sense, Hughes occasionally locks someone down, more often then not in one or two short six minute bursts. Really, the whole team was like that though -- we showed all the time that we are capable of some great defense, but it seemed as though we could never sustain it for more than a few minutes at best.

The team could really use a traditional lockdown defender, someone who focuses their game on that (Hughes, despite the accolades, still values the offensive side of the court), plays tough on his man the entire time he's in the game. Doesn't have to be a Bowen or Artest either, just someone who doesn't mind getting gritty on defense. Maybe we could look at the often mentioned-by-jazzy Ruben Patterson? I've read enough Kwame-Portland chatter that perhaps we could do that swap? I'm sure there are others, but that's one idea.

<hr>
As for the topic, as I've talked about elsewhere, I'm willing to bite the bullet and pay up to an Arenas contract for Hughes. I don't think he's worth kind of money in the general sense, but the team can't drop back and let him walk just like that. However, I just can't give him more than Arenas. There needs to be some semblance of a pecking order when handing out salaries, and I can't accept Hughes and Jamison both making more than our best player. If it gets to the point where he can make $65+ million somewhere else, and he expects us to match or even go higher, I just let him go.

Depending on what happens with Kwame, if Hughes leaves, we could get ourselves some $9-10 million under the projected cap. At that point, it might be too late in the summer to really do much with the money, but it shows that we do have _some_ flexability. It hurts to say, but if it gets to the point where we have to give Hughes $75 or $80 million to keep him, I'd rather just see what we can do with without him this season.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

He's not going to stop Dwayne Wade anytime soon though. Although I don't know if anyone can.


----------



## One on One (Dec 12, 2004)

You're out of your mind. We have to re-sign Hughes. I don't think he was a contract year guy. Remember he was a lottery pick and I think he's finally realizing his potential. He's not selfish at all either, not sure where you got that from.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

I don't want Ruben Patterson, he's another head case. Even if he is a good defender, he doesn't have good range. This isn't really a viable option unless Jarvis Hayes actually picks up his play. Etan for Patterson could be a possible trade but I dont think Portland wants his bad contract, which has a trade kicker. 

I'm leaning more and more towards giving Hughes a big deal because, let's face it, without Hughes and most likely Kwame, the Wizards are in the lottery again, assuming they do not make any other moves. Those expecting Ramos to be a consistent option next year when he only played meaningful minutes for a few games is unrealistic. The Wizards will be looking at either an Arenas and Hayes backcourt or a Arenas/Dixon one; take your poison.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

How do you plan on making the playoffs next season if Hughes isn't back?


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Mercury News mentions negotiations may be a tad rocky?



> With Ray Allen and now perhaps Redd out of the picture, the Cavaliers are expected to turn their attention to the Washington Wizards' Larry Hughes and the Los Angeles Clippers' Bobby Simmons.
> 
> A person close to Hughes said Wednesday that he's unhappy with the initial talks with the Wizards and might now be turning his interest to the Cavaliers. He's not the shooter Allen and Redd are, but averaged 22 points, 6.3 rebounds, 4.7 assists and a league-high 2.9 steals last season. He's also only 26.


Wouldn't surprise me if Hughes wanted the max, we didn't offer it to him, and now he's seeing if another team will offer it to him. He probably doesn't see anything that would indicate that guys like Redd and Joe Johnson really deserve more than him, so he's going to base his value against their values.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

MJG said:


> Mercury News mentions negotiations may be a tad rocky?
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't surprise me if Hughes wanted the max, we didn't offer it to him, and now he's seeing if another team will offer it to him. He probably doesn't see anything that would indicate that guys like Redd and Joe Johnson really deserve more than him, so he's going to base his value against their values.


I like Hughes at 6/7 mill at 10 no way and I think thats where th Wzards are right now. Hughes isn't worth 10 mill darn sure not the max. I truly expect Hughes to leave, its gonna cause some belly aching at 1st but in the long run maybe us turning to Simmons and adding aother defender behind him might be the better move. 

I really believe the Cavs are gonna overpay for Hughes. Lebron is gonna want some of the pressure relieved. Ernie G knows what he's doing. 

I expect Hughes to go and kwame to be re-signed.


----------



## daytripper (Feb 22, 2004)

Can the Wiz get Simmons back?

Kwame + Simmons > Hughes


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

I think Simmons' stock is much too high for his real valuse as well. Figures say he wants like 6-7 million which seems a little much. I know he's a decent defender but I'm not sure if he is really a great defender. 

As for Kwame and Simmons is greater than Hughes, Hughes and Kwame is greater than Simmons plus Kwame which the Wizards could still do if they had the patience with Kwame.

I think this shows that EG may let Hughes walk, but Jarvis will probably get the starting job first and Arenas will have an even bigger role in the offense.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Simmons isn't as good as Hughes, but honestly, I'm much happier with Simmons signed at $6-7 million a year than Hughes signed at $10+ million a year.

It's a rapid change from what I was thinking just a week ago, but I'm starting to prepare for us having to figure out what to do without Hughes. I can easily see Cleveland getting desperate now that their options are quickly shrinking, throwing a max contract (5 years, $70-75 million) at Hughes just to try to ensure they don't wind up with nothing this summer. I've always had strong faith in EG to generally make the smart decisions with the team, and that includes not paying Hughes $80+ million when he clearly isn't worth that much on the court. That's when he's on the court at all -- I don't think I'd want him for anything near the max if he were playing 80 games a year, let alone the 60 or so he's played per over the last five seasons.

I think his actual worth is close to $7 million per. I would have been able to swallow anything up to $10 million per. I would be very unhappy to the point where I'd believe we made a mistake at anything more than that.


----------



## Shanghai Kid (Mar 7, 2003)

MJG said:


> I think his actual worth is close to $7 million per. I would have been able to swallow anything up to $10 million per. I would be very unhappy to the point where I'd believe we made a mistake at anything more than that.


I disagree, Hughes is definetly worth at least 8-9 mil. 7 mil is the kind of contracts that Jamal Crawford/Etan Thomas got, and Hughes is definetly worth more than that. I don't even think I mind giving him Arenas money. Just when it gets into the 12-13 million dollar range I'm iffy on Hughes coming back for that much.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Shanghai Kid said:


> I disagree, Hughes is definetly worth at least 8-9 mil. 7 mil is the kind of contracts that Jamal Crawford/Etan Thomas got, and Hughes is definetly worth more than that. I don't even think I mind giving him Arenas money. Just when it gets into the 12-13 million dollar range I'm iffy on Hughes coming back for that much.


 If he were not an annual injury-risk, I'd be willing to set his actual value higher than the $7 I listed. Considering he misses a quarter of each year though, I think that should knock his value down accordingly.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Jamal Crawford gets like 8 million per year!! The guy may not even be starting next season. I think Simmons starting salary would be at like 6 million like Crawford and it would build up to 8 million per year. The Wizards are financially messed up mostly because of Jamison.

Either way, the Wizards are at a disadvantage to get a player at the quality of Hughes in the free agent market. Look at Cleavland, they have to probably offer close to a max contract to get Larry Hughes, which means the Wizards will have to overpay to get even another quality player. What the Wizards will have to count on is for another team that has a Gilbert Arenas or Carlos Boozer player that was drafted in the 2nd round AND the team does not have enough cap room to keep him and the Wizards can offer a big deal.

I'm not that sure that Cleavland will want Hughes that much because Hughes doesn't really help what the Cavaliers need most; a shooter. Still, I really don't see anybody else that Cleavland can offer the max besides perhaps Joe Johnson.

Can Simmons really be an effectie two guard with the Wizards; this is potential what the starting lineup could look like

PG- Arenas
SG- Hayes
SF- Simmons
PF- Jamison
C- Haywood

This lineup is not really good at defense especially since Jamison will now have to cover power forwards and Hayes last time I checked was not a good defender. This changes if Kwame signs but that is a big if.


----------



## nets1 (Sep 27, 2002)

Just reported: Larry has left: going to the cavs, and signed for 12 million.


----------



## byrondarnell66 (Jul 18, 2004)

Where's a legitimate link


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Wish granted.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

jazzy1 said:


> We should not in any way offer him 10 mill or more a season. He's not worth it, He's injury prone and selfish.
> 
> He'd be our new Allan Houston in a year or two. He also helps perpetuate the notion of the big 3. He must go.
> 
> ...


arent you a lakers fan?


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

f22egl said:


> He's not going to stop Dwayne Wade anytime soon though. Although I don't know if anyone can.


Yeah, D Wade ate him for breakfast. But even Detroit struggled in some games. Lindsey Hunter, is probably the best defender against Wade.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

SoCalfan21 said:


> arent you a lakers fan?


 And a Wizards fan, lucky for us


----------

