It's official, Larry Hughes has the heart of a ?

[FUDU]

...you know I cannot come up with a legit word to describe it.

Talk about a guy that has a knack for letting you, and his teammates, down.

Don't want to hear the excuses.

He was willing to take some shots for pain in games 1 & 2 but not tonight?

Screw him.

Hate to say it but JB was right some 600 days ago, this guy is a punk.

No tolerance for pain, no heart and no courage to stand up with his teammates.

His signing is the Danny Ferry signing of this Cavaliers era.

It will hurt for a while.

[StewieG]

Yeah, we really needed Michael Redd.

If you can believe the story that SI wrote about Hughes shortly after he signed here, supposedly we stopped contact with Redd to sign Hughes. I don't recall if it was because we didn't think we could sign Redd, or if Ferry thought Hughes would have been a better fit (WRONG), but this team would be much better with Redd instead of Hughes.

[Madre Hill, Superstar]

SI doesn't jive with my memory. Redd wanted more dinero, so he was going to stay in Milwaukee. We then turned to Allen, who mulled it over but decided on remaining loyal to the Sonics. That's when we were left with Hughes.

[consigliere]

Speaking of Ray Allen.....

Wasn't he looking to get out of Seattle? I'd take him.

[Guest]

Now people are dogging Hughes for NOT playing when everyone wanted him NOT to play?
That's funny.
I actually put the blame on the coach, if he was hurt bad, why suit him up?
Tterrible handling of the entire situation.

[JoelHammond]

Now people are dogging Hughes for NOT playing when everyone wanted him NOT to play?
That's funny.

Exactly my thoughts. The Game 2 thread was full of, "BENCH HUGHES!!! PLAY BOOBIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" posts.

Well, that's what happened. Did you all like the results?

Isn't there a time when a player, when the coach won't do it for him, has to take himself out if he's hurting the team, which Hughes most certainly was?

To question his guts after playing on that foot for as long as he did is preposterous.

[JoelHammond]

From the Game 2 thread, of which I spoke:

We appear to attempt fast breaks more/better when LeBron isn't the one with the ball?

That makes so little sense, Snow pushes it more than Lebron lately.

Memo to Mike Brown: prevent Hughes from making decisions as much as possible.

Hughes has to be seriously hurt, nobody can be such a bad decision maker and be a totally different player from when signed as he is displaying.

FUCK YOU LARRY!!!!

FUCK YOU LARRY!!!!

FUCK YOU LARRY!!!!

FUCK YOU LARRY!!!!

FUCK YOU LARRY!!!!

FUCK YOU LARRY!!!!


GET OUT OF CLEVELAND NOW YOU POS!!!!!!!


PLEASE GET HIT BY A SEMI OR SOMETHING, JUST GET OUT NOW!!!

its about to be a 30 point lead



fuck you larry, get hit by an 18 wheeler and get out!

If Hughes starts next game Brown is a stubborn, freaking MORON!

[hermanfontenot]

Now people are dogging Hughes for NOT playing when everyone wanted him NOT to play?
That's funny.

Exactly my thoughts. The Game 2 thread was full of, "BENCH HUGHES!!! PLAY BOOBIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" posts.

Well, that's what happened. Did you all like the results?

Isn't there a time when a player, when the coach won't do it for him, has to take himself out if he's hurting the team, which Hughes most certainly was?

To question his guts after playing on that foot for as long as he did is preposterous.

I won't question his guts, but I have questioned his motives for playing hurt, and will again. I thought it was selfish of Hughes to play as long as he did; like he was more interested in gathering kudos for his courage than in helping the team, which he would have done by sitting.

And I didn't want to start Boobie in the first place. I wanted Eric Snow to start, and still do. I believe I've said as much on this board.

But wag your finger at our ignorance all you want. As Digital Underground says, do what you like.

[leadpipe]

I think some people are mixing a couple issues here. Look, I have no reason believe Hughes' injuries are not real. The guy is hurt. What can you do. I do believe, however, that he was essentially lost for this playoffs before the injury anyway. Really a non-issue. He wasn't helping much before he got hurt, and he's not helping much now that he's banged up. A good, solid defender, but he needs to be more.

[JoelHammond]

Now people are dogging Hughes for NOT playing when everyone wanted him NOT to play?
That's funny.

Exactly my thoughts. The Game 2 thread was full of, "BENCH HUGHES!!! PLAY BOOBIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" posts.

Well, that's what happened. Did you all like the results?

Isn't there a time when a player, when the coach won't do it for him, has to take himself out if he's hurting the team, which Hughes most certainly was?

To question his guts after playing on that foot for as long as he did is preposterous.

I won't question his guts, but I have questioned his motives for playing hurt, and will again. I thought it was selfish of Hughes to play as long as he did; like he was more interested in gathering kudos for his courage than in helping the team, which he would have done by sitting.

And I didn't want to start Boobie in the first place. I wanted Eric Snow to start, and still do. I believe I've said as much on this board.

But wag your finger at our ignorance all you want. As Digital Underground says, do what you like.

Who's wagging fingers? If anything, I'm simply shaking my head in disbelief that this topic surfaces after all of the criticism of Hughes' play and Brown's decision to let him play.

Y'all are, as established on the Game 2 thread, allowed to type/say/complain about whatever you want, and I certainly agree with that.

But I hope I'm also allowed to sit idly by and point out the hilarious hypocrisy in some of the things you (not you specifically, obviously) type/say/complain about.

[pup]

But I hope I'm also allowed to sit idly by and point out the hilarious hypocrisy in some of the things you (not you specifically, obviously) type/say/complain about.

Just be careful, sometimes it is a long fall from the top of a high horse.

Taking peoples heat of the moment words and applying them to rational discussions of another (even though very similar) topic is a recipe for disaster.

I don't remember seeing a job posting for a hypocrisy police job anywhere, but if it makes you feel better, so be it.

The posts from game 2 called for Mike Brown to sit Hughes and let Boobie start, but leaving Hughes available for some minutes if needed. What happened is Hughes decided he wasn't going to take another needle, so he didn't even dress. What really happened is Mike Brown finally got some balls, told Hughes he was coming off the bench, and instead decided he would rather not play at all than come off the bench.

[JoelHammond]

But I hope I'm also allowed to sit idly by and point out the hilarious hypocrisy in some of the things you (not you specifically, obviously) type/say/complain about.

The posts from game 2 called for Mike Brown to sit Hughes and let Boobie start, but leaving Hughes available for some minutes if needed. What happened is Hughes decided he wasn't going to take another needle, so he didn't even dress. What really happened is Mike Brown finally got some balls, told Hughes he was coming off the bench, and instead decided he would rather not play at all than come off the bench.

Has the part about him not playing at all rather than coming off the bench been published? I'm asking sincerely, because I hadn't heard this. I know he said he didn't want to take another needle.

If that first part hasn't been published, perhaps we can take a ride together on our high horses, since you're tuned into the locker room.

And I'm sorry, heat of the moment or not, questioning Hughes in this instance is laughable. Period. Triple period. ESPECIALLY after calling for his head for his poor play in Game 2.

But I get it, I'm in the minority. I'm the enemy, along with Larry Hughes and Eric Snow. Darn them for taking contracts offered them by this team!

[JoelHammond]

This is what I found from our guy Windhorst re: Hughes and the situation.


Here's how I can break it down from my viewpoint, having talked to some people close to Larry. After not taking the injection for Game 1, Hughes went ahead and did it for Game 2 hoping it would help even though he thought it was against his best interests. He has a fear that he could completely tear the muscle or break his foot and he wouldn't know it with it numb. It doesn't matter what the doctors told him, he hated doing it. Anyway, he got the needle and he got just 20 minutes of playing time in Game 2, which upset him. So he pretty much had enough and the Cavs weren't getting much from him. He met with the coaches and they came to a mutual decision rather than his foot actually hurting more, which was the story. It is unfortunate that him doing something he should get credit for (playing through the injury) may not be remembered as much as his poor play.



I guess I'm missing the part where Hughes' ego was hurt because Brown decided to go in a different direction. Or perhaps you are appropriately cynical (not a bad thing in this instance) and I'm being too naive.

[pup]

Anyway, he got the needle and he got just 20 minutes of playing time in Game 2, which upset him. So he pretty much had enough

So he took the injection, didn't get the minutes he expected, and decided to not take another needle.

I think it is pretty easy to interpret from that, if he wasn't going to get starter minutes, it was not worth his time/effort. I am cool with that, and gained a lot of repsect for him for sucking it up and playing when he did. It wasn't like he played worse than he has since arriving here, so I didn't see it as a big deal.

But I get it, I'm in the minority. I'm the enemy, along with Larry Hughes and Eric Snow. Darn them for taking contracts offered them by this team!

That has nothing to do with this conversation. They both fill roles that this team needed when they were brought in.

You are not the enemy, but when you start jumping on other posters, and mention the possibility of writing an article about "

Is everyone on this thread a heavy drinker, or has all of this been 100% serious? Do you ever go back and read what you write? It's actually quite embarrassing.

", then you shold expect those people to defend.

Now go get your shinebox, newbie.

[JoelHammond]

Anyway, he got the needle and he got just 20 minutes of playing time in Game 2, which upset him. So he pretty much had enough

So he took the injection, didn't get the minutes he expected, and decided to not take another needle.

I think it is pretty easy to interpret from that, if he wasn't going to get starter minutes, it was not worth his time/effort. I am cool with that, and gained a lot of repsect for him for sucking it up and playing when he did. It wasn't like he played worse than he has since arriving here, so I didn't see it as a big deal.

But I get it, I'm in the minority. I'm the enemy, along with Larry Hughes and Eric Snow. Darn them for taking contracts offered them by this team!

That has nothing to do with this conversation. They both fill roles that this team needed when they were brought in.

You are not the enemy, but when you start jumping on other posters, and mention the possibility of writing an article about "

Is everyone on this thread a heavy drinker, or has all of this been 100% serious? Do you ever go back and read what you write? It's actually quite embarrassing.

", then you shold expect those people to defend.

Now go get your shinebox, newbie.

That's classy.

My point on this thread: Posters call for Hughes to find the bench, for the good of the team. He did. That wasn't good enough. Can you not see the irony in that?

If Hughes' motivations were to protect his foot, can you begrudge him that? With this group of fans, I'd certainly be looking out for No. 1, as well. I can see Hughes playing through that injury now, getting lambasted for being too slow and unable to stop Parker, then not being ready in time for opening night in 2007-08 because his foot is still bum after playing while it wasn't ready. Since he's not ready, you all bash him for being brittle.

I'm a newbie, you got me. But I seem to be one of the few not talking out of both sides of my mouth.

[pup]

That's classy.

Thank you.

My point on this thread: Posters call for Hughes to find the bench, for the good of the team. He did. That wasn't good enough. Can you not see the irony in that?

Yes, I can.

I also see the irony in someone making 2 posts in over a year, then jumping onto the board to call the people that have made this board thrive with solid takes emberassing. You come in and rip people during one of the lowest moments of the season, and expect us to PM some ideas for an article that will essentially make fun of us. These game threads are some of the funnest threads I have seen on any boards. For someone, who does not know the posters to step in and call them anything is assanine, and I will defend all of those posters with the same zeal that I would defend the fans of this city to any outsider who considers us crybabies.

The Cavs did not lose Games 1 & 2 because of Laura Hughes foot injury. They lost because SA is a better basketball team. That does not change the fact that people are pissed their team is losing in the conference finals and will post here that they are. Who cares? I mean besides you.

With this group of fans, I'd certainly be looking out for No. 1, as well.

Pretty much tells me all I need to know about you.

not being ready in time for opening night in 2007-08 because his foot is still bum after playing while it wasn't ready.

I thought the docs told him he could not do any more damage by playing on it. I don't want the guy to end his career over this. I didn't think he should have suited up for the Spurs series at all. He got us through Detroit, but this matchup did not suit him, especially injured. If he decided to be a hero and play this series, well it was a bad choice, because he was garbage.

But I seem to be one of the few not talking out of both sides of my mouth

Hard to do with your foot in one side.

[consigliere]

Okay, not to be a party pooper or anything....but I believe all parties have said their peace and this thread from here on out probably has nowhere to go but down. Fans are disappointed, emotions are riding high, and people will be on the defensive and offensive right now. I think it goes without saying a lot of fans are very disappointed right now, so some venting is to be expected. In fact, a lot of bitching about everything and anything. And, nothing wrong with that.

Donny, feel free to start another Laura Hughes thread up on this subject if ya want, but I am closing this because my spidey senses tell me this thread is about to go down a road we don't want it to go.

[consigliere]

Unlocked.

Not trying to be List Cop or anything...and we are all Big Boys here....but this thread was starting to get a little personal. Like I said, emotions are heightended right now. Some of us don't have dogs to kick to take out the frustrations, so I guess this is where message boards come in.

[StewieG]

My dog's already all bruised up from game 2, so I thought I'd let him rest a little before whichever game we end up getting eliminated in.

[comish]

Joel,

Boobie had a TERRIBLE game offensively, but it seems he did a fairly adequate job defensively. I'm glad Brown started him. Hughes sux, PERIOD! No hypocracy here

Thank you for re-posting for me. Feel free to go read what I said about you earlier as it still hasn't seemed to sink in.

Sincerely,
Cleveland's #1 Bridge Jumper (I'm pretty sure I've earned it)

Sorry, Mr. Lastoria, he started it

[FUDU]

Part of my point of this thread was to question whether Hughes even wants to play basketball at all.

He seems to go through phases in which he is doing something totally different than the rest of the offense even when LeBron is on the floor. Almost as if to say to Brown "hey look you guys brought me here t obe a "part" of the offensive scheme but you're not letting me so I'll show you"

It appears he is selfish.

Like somebody mentioned above, if Hughes felt he would gets the starter minutes or felt like he was more a focus of the O then I guarantee he takes another shot to relieve his "pain".

IMO he just might be the most overrated player in the NBA.

He is the most heartless that is for sure. I've played sports with worse injuries than he has had as a pro and I didn't even get paid, grow a sac Laura.

[jb]

SI doesn't jive with my memory. Redd wanted more dinero, so he was going to stay in Milwaukee. We then turned to Allen, who mulled it over but decided on remaining loyal to the Sonics. That's when we were left with Hughes.

To be fair, I remember it this way, too.
Hughes was option 3.

The issue I had was we didn't NEED a slasher who couldn't shoot. What we desperately needed was a PG and an outside shooter(s).

So Ferry got Hughes anyway, and then to compensate went out AND got marshall who he thought he could spot up to shoot outside AND he conned himself into thinking Damon Jones could play the 1 with Snow in rotation. That and re-upping Z blew the once-in-a-half-decade wad of cap room he had.

We ended up not getting the fit we needed and having insufficient resources to finbish the job.

Larry Hughes was the wrong player at the wrong time for this team coming off a career year IIRC after being a great fit playing w/ Arenas.

I always turn to Mac when I need cap 411, and IIRC he said last week we had about 1 to 2 more years before we could bust a move again.

The key is keeping Bron, of course, while Ferry makes up for his disaterous 2005 off-season.

All that said, why hate on larry for sittingout? It was clear he shouldn't have been playing, right? He knew his gig was up. We were all bithcing about it here. At least stay consistent.

[jb]

Now people are dogging Hughes for NOT playing when everyone wanted him NOT to play?
That's funny.

Exactly my thoughts. The Game 2 thread was full of, "BENCH HUGHES!!! PLAY BOOBIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" posts.

Well, that's what happened. Did you all like the results?

Isn't there a time when a player, when the coach won't do it for him, has to take himself out if he's hurting the team, which Hughes most certainly was?

To question his guts after playing on that foot for as long as he did is preposterous.

I have to agree.

[StewieG]

It was clear from game 1 that he shouldn't have been getting major minutes. I don't think anyone will disagree on that. He just didn't have anything. But personally I'm not upset that he didn't play. It was best for the team.

Regarding the SI article, I found this:

There was the Milwaukee Bucks' All-Star shooting guard, who threatened to beat Hughes in a sprint to join Cleveland.

While Milwaukee's offer to Redd was $20 million more than Ferry could pay him under the salary cap, Redd remained interested in the Cavs. He was a Columbus native who had starred at Ohio State, and he had scheduled a July 6 recruiting visit to Cleveland. Realizing that Redd's signing with the Cavs would leave Washington as Hughes's only viable option, Wechsler had to work fast. On the afternoon of Redd's arrival the agent reached a preliminary understanding with Ferry on a deal. "We had a very nice dinner with Michael," Ferry says. "But at the end of it I told him, 'We're moving forward in a different direction. We have a guy [Hughes] who really wants to be here and we're excited about that.'" Redd returned to Milwaukee and accepted the Bucks' offer.

That's where I got the idea that Redd was still interested in coming here, but we had decided to go with Hughes instead of Redd.

It's probably more complicated than that, and a lot of it is probably Ferry putting a spin on it. Plus, other sources may have said something different that I simply don't know about. But I had to go back and find it, and see if I was crazy, lol.

http://robots.cnnsi.com/pr/subs/siexclu ... ughes0815/

[jb]

It was clear from game 1 that he shouldn't have been getting major minutes. I don't think anyone will disagree on that. He just didn't have anything. But personally I'm not upset that he didn't play. It was best for the team.

Regarding the SI article, I found this:

There was the Milwaukee Bucks' All-Star shooting guard, who threatened to beat Hughes in a sprint to join Cleveland.

While Milwaukee's offer to Redd was $20 million more than Ferry could pay him under the salary cap, Redd remained interested in the Cavs. He was a Columbus native who had starred at Ohio State, and he had scheduled a July 6 recruiting visit to Cleveland. Realizing that Redd's signing with the Cavs would leave Washington as Hughes's only viable option, Wechsler had to work fast. On the afternoon of Redd's arrival the agent reached a preliminary understanding with Ferry on a deal. "We had a very nice dinner with Michael," Ferry says. "But at the end of it I told him, 'We're moving forward in a different direction. We have a guy [Hughes] who really wants to be here and we're excited about that.'" Redd returned to Milwaukee and accepted the Bucks' offer.

That's where I got the idea that Redd was still interested in coming here, but we had decided to go with Hughes instead of Redd.

It's probably more complicated than that, and a lot of it is probably Ferry putting a spin on it. Plus, other sources may have said something different that I simply don't know about. But I had to go back and find it, and see if I was crazy, lol.

http://robots.cnnsi.com/pr/subs/siexclu ... ughes0815/

Ugh.

Stewie, now THAT pisses me off to no end. I'd alwsya thought since Hughes signed after Redd that it was this scenario: Redd first choice, but CBA rules allowed us to offer less and we lost out. Allen 2nd choice, but he chose not to uproot. ONly then did we go for Hughes becsue Ferry felt pressure to surround LeBron with SOMEBODY so he wouldn't bolt.

Redd was the guy we HAD TO HAVE in that FA class, the guy who fit what this team needed like a glove. He would have allowed you to sign a true, playmaking PG and this team would have been all set.

Had Paxson not gotten suckered and played by CiCi , you would have had LeBron, Redd, Boozer and point guard guy along with Z and any effort player(s) who'd be there istead of Side Show Bob (hopefully knowing not to try the game winning shot in the Finals).

Would have been a much, much better team.

Instead, you are informing me that Dan acyually chose Hughes over Redd. Just kick me in the jimmy.

Ferry will never stop hurting this team, will he? He will haunt us forever.

[consigliere]

I hear ya JB.

And man, imagine this team with Boozer instead of Gooden. Boozer is a legit premium all-star PF. The core was there in Lebron, Boozer, and Z....we let it slip. All we needed to do, as you mentioned, was get that backcourt scorer who could fill it up and a quality PG.

[StewieG]

Yeah. Kill me now.

At the time, my list was:

Joe Johnson, Redd, Allen, Hughes, Bobby Simmons, in that order. However, knowing we wouldn't have gotten Johnson (I think Ferry pretty much wrote him off before free agency began), Redd was my first real choice. I had Allen behind him simply because of age.


I remember the C-Town sports boards being fairly split between Hughes (because we really needed defense), and Redd (because we also really needed shooting). My personal feeling was that Redd would open up the offense for our slasher (Bron) and our inside presence (Z), while I thought Hughes would clog the lanes and teams would be able to bog down on our 3 weapons (which they now do).

However, once we signed Marshall and Jones, I convinced myself this was a really good move getting Hughes, because of his defense. Jones and Marshall were going to be the ones to open up the offense for Bron and Hughes. Sadly, Jones and Marshall turned out to be busts, and we're still looking for a shooter (Gibson notwithstanding).

But looking back, that offseason couldn't have turned out much worse than it did. Redd, Z, and Tyronne Lue (I can't believe I just typed that) would have been much better.

[StewieG]

I think the LeBron factor played into this as well. Also in the article, LeBron was pretty much all over Hughes begging him to play here. So it may have been a case of LeBron say, Ferry do.

[FUDU]

To question his guts after playing on that foot for as long as he did is preposterous.

I question his sincerity to play within the goals of the team and his dedication to the team in terms of doing what is best for the team.

Larry and only Larry knows how hurt he is or has ever been with us, therefor he should know whether or not he is good to go and if he is good enough to help the team in a positive way.

If he cannot do that then he needs to say "hey Mike I cannot contribute in the ways that would benefit this team right now" from the start instead of going about it as he did.

Christ a 7 year old could tell two minutes into the game in Detroit that he was nowhere near capable of playing at even 75% of Larry's level.

He's just here to go along for the ride and get his, his meaning money and second hand attention.

[consigliere]

You know....did the Boozer Fiasco set us back more than we want to admit?

Yeah, we still made the NBA FInals and all that....but you lost a legit All-Star and possibly Batman's Boy Wonder.

I'm curious as hell to see what Ferry has up his sleeve this offseason to make the necessary improvements needed.

BTW, that dude that drew the Mo Carthon Playbook joke needs to come up with the Mike Brown Playbook.

[FUDU]

You know....did the Boozer Fiasco set us back more than we want to admit?

Don't watch much Utah ball, so is Boozer the main focus of the O?

It looks by his numbers that he is.

If so than IMO if we still had him I don't think it makes that big a difference in terms of winning it all.

He seems to be the type that needs/wants first look attention. Here he would still be the 2nd fiddle, albeit a better one than anybody we have now but not sure that translates into anything more than what we accomplished this year, especially considering who we are matched up against right ow.

Bottom line is we would still need a PG and with Boozer we would still be a some what methodical half court offense type team.

My two cents.

[consigliere]

But, looking long term, I'd feel much better with a front court of Boozer, Z and Lebron. Even before Boozer bolted, he was playing well with Lebron and in this offense. I think he'd have been fine as the "second fiddle" to a great player like Lebron. Boozer would still get 18/10 a night at least.

Not saying this is the difference in this series....just the long term effect of that Boozer loss is starting to be felt, and will be felt more and more each season.

[StewieG]

You know....did the Boozer Fiasco set us back more than we want to admit?

Yeah, we still made the NBA FInals and all that....but you lost a legit All-Star and possibly Batman's Boy Wonder.

I'm curious as hell to see what Ferry has up his sleeve this offseason to make the necessary improvements needed.

BTW, that dude that drew the Mo Carthon Playbook joke needs to come up with the Mike Brown Playbook.

Yeah, Boozer did set us back way too far. Which, I think that's part of the reason we were all so upset when it happened. We could see him developing into a very good player, and then, in true TCE fashion, we let him become a free agent a year early, and he up and bolts on us. Technically we made our own bed with this, but you know Paxson wouldn't have done that if he wasn't sure Boozer was going to resign with us.

And that Mo Carthon playbook was a thing of beauty.

[FUDU]

Tony don't forget about the job Gooden did his first year with us.

He made it fairly easy to forget we even had Boozer. Not b/c Boozer got hurt that year with Utah but b/c he put up very similar numbers to what Boozer did the year before.

Seems to me as a team the Cavaliers lost sight of some of the things Gooden can do. Probably due to coaching changes a little.

With Z aging more everyday and Laura being nothing what he should be IMO Gooden is not a bad option on offense. Some nights he might be a decent 2nd option others better fit for a 3rd option.

He is more athletic than Carlos was here.

But that doesn't mean much considering we are a very athletic team yet don't use it as a weapon.

[consigliere]

Gooden is a decent player, and Paxson did a great job of finding a comparable replacement for Boozer by getting Gooden and Varejao. He couldn't have fixed that problem any better. That said, I'd take Boozer over Gooden AND Varejao anyday.

[StewieG]

Gooden's a good player. He's more talented than Boozer. And I think that's what's so maddening about him. He has all this potential, but when's he going to realize it? And he visits Drewland way too often for my taste.

Boozer was a double-double EVERY night. And he was getting virtually no plays run for him. Everything was for Bron, Z, or McInnis. Boozer was the 4th option at the time. But he was very consistent. Gooden is much more inconsistent, although he's been pretty good in the postseason.

[leadpipe]

Drew Gooden is not a good player. He has ability. There is a difference. It took him two years of balls off the nose to realize Lebron might hit him with a quick pass. It took him three to avoid stupid 3 second calls in the 4TH quarter of games. The guy is wildly inconsistent. He could have 16 and 12 one night and 2 and 1 the next and nobody that has ever seen him play would be the least bit suprised. Who needs that. He gets lost on defense, has a hard time with the pick and roll.

Last year, when the stakes were the highest, he was a complete cipher. This year he's played a little better but has still been MIA too many times. I'm not sure you can expect anything from the guy tomorrow. That shouldn't be.

Word around the campfire when he came here was that he was dumb as a stump. Considering the number of teams he was on in a young career, absent of drugs, posse's and attitude problems, I tended to think those assumptions probably had some merit. After witnessing the guys basketball IQ for three years, I'm convinced it's absolutely true.

Good points here Stewie and Consig, and they did their best to cover the Boozer error. But make no mistake about it, that was a COLOSSAL blunder. The Cavs gave away a top ten MVP vote getter. TOP TEN.

[Madre Hill, Superstar]

Are we talking about the same Carlos Boozer? I seem to recall a guy who found major jack a better allure than playing with the Global Icon, then spent most of his time in SLC doing his best Ced Henderson impersonation. Now that Deron Williams stepped his game up and Utah's winning again - oh wow, Carlos is back! Oi.

Dude's a punk. Yeah, his head's more screwed on than Drew's, but he's also a Scottie Pippen Excedrin moment waiting to happen. Jason Todd's Robin.

[leadpipe]

He is a punk. He's got a bag with him always with that wife of his. He is a potential headache. But he can PLAY.

[Hoover]

Speaking of Ray Allen.....

Wasn't he looking to get out of Seattle? I'd take him.

I'd love to have him too. But the cap won't allow it, unless we find a way to dump Hughes, which is difficult. Who would take the Man of Glass? Maybe Seattle, if they took some stupid pills.

[Dozen]

Go get Hibachi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He said he's leaving the Wizards after this year.

[VultureHxC]

i think boozer has become so good and played so well is because he felt slighted in cleveland (don't flame me, i'll explain) and feels he has something to prove. first he comes out of duke and gets picked in the second round. to him that's already insulting. then he comes to cleveland, gets to start and paul silas tells him to go out and rebound and he's not going to get a play called for him. yet he still goes out and puts up a double double nearly every night. i think we all saw we had a pretty good rebounder and a guy with a potential to become a monster low post player and that's why we got so mad when he left.

gooden on the other hand has felt he has to prove nothing. he gets drafted high and puts up solid numbers. but to everyone watching, those numbers didn't seem to have any meaning. it's like when LBJ drops 40 on someone but we lose, we say "that's great but those numbers don't mean anything cause we lost." that's gooden's play to me. he puts up solid numbers but you don't consider him a key part in winning.

i also think andy is one offseason of working on his offensive game to replacing gooden or at the very least really cutting into his minutes. he rebounds just as well, if not better than gooden (and tries harder too). he averaged just under 7 points a game this year while playing about 4 minutes less than gooden (i know not the biggest but gooden is supposed to be a legitimate low post threat and andy is supposed to be the energy/defense/rebound guy off the bench and still hasn't developed a full offensive game). plus andy plays better defense, overall and far and beyond gooden at the pick and roll. andy also sets good screens, knifes quickly to the basket on pick and rolls, seems more comfortable with lebron than gooden does, and frustrates opponents. i'd like to see gooden off the bench playing more of the antonio mcdyess role

[jb]

Gooden is a decent player, and Paxson did a great job of finding a comparable replacement for Boozer by getting Gooden and Varejao. He couldn't have fixed that problem any better. That said, I'd take Boozer over Gooden AND Varejao anyday.

Rack it.

Said perfectly.