RealGM

Anyone interested in pickingup Hughes perimeter defensive ability if he gets bought out in NY. certainly not a traditional PHX high-character player, but the preseason has desperately shown we need perimeter D along with a rebounding bigman who could be part of the rotation. Thoughts?

Maybe 1 year vet min?

Only if you can trade Barbs or J. Rich, you cant add him to the current mix. By the way, we aint trading Barbs, and dont nobody want J. Rich!!! so it wont work. Only interest in released or bought out players will only be if they are a C or a good able big Pf, or if they are a serious impact player, that we cant pass up, and we would start over the current guy at that spot, despite payroll, because he is that good. People, stop posting little guys who wont make a huge splash, we wont get them.

Hughes is good for 20ppg on certain nights, he plays decent defense and gets a few steals for ya which would help the transition game. He could play SF for us when we go small, but this is our rotation at any position he could play for us....

SG - Richardson / Barbosa
SF - Hill / Dudley

and frankly I'm happy with that.

SideSwipe wrote:Anyone interested in pickingup Hughes perimeter defensive ability if he gets bought out in NY. certainly not a traditional PHX high-character player, but the preseason has desperately shown we need perimeter D along with a rebounding bigman who could be part of the rotation. Thoughts?

Maybe 1 year vet min?

You been following his pre-season so far? pretty grim .... he's shooting 5% currently and has no plans to stop shooting and become a defensive ace -

He seems like he'd be nice as a Ron Harper type guard in La La Land...

His career shooting numbers are abysmal but he can handle, pass and defend. He played PG in WAS and GS I think. I am not sold on him 100% by any stretch of the imagination, but I thought he might be a good replacement for Dickau as the 5th guard. I might be mistaken but I think the vet min for Dickau would cost nearly as much as for Hughes.

Also, I think Hughes would be great in LA, which makes me want him here even more.

If we sign Scary News over a big man I'm going to be ticked.

If he does what's asked of him, which I don't think he will, then he'll be an excellent backup PG/SG. His defense would really help as well. But I just doubt he'll be the defensive PG/SG that we want him to be. I imagine he's going to come in, play a bit of D and play a bit of point for the first few games and then go into scoring mode, which is the last thing we need.

Wouldn't be surprised if SAN picks him up as insurance for Ginobili if he gets bought out.

No to Larry Hughes, for many of the reasons mentioned..like the fact that he's been asked to change his game before but just continues to be a chucker, his personality/attitude towards his teams etc

Let's look at the cost vs. benefit for Larry Hughes for a moment.

The cost( or risk in this case) is a player who's shooting percentages and inability to be consistent game to game presents a case to not pick him up regardless of his defensive abilities or his ability to handle the ball. We're also deep at that position anyways with Barbosa Richardson Hill and Dudley. It could work possibly if we let him be backup point guard over Dragic but that would probably further hinder Dragic's development and hurt his confidence. To put it lightly, Larry Hughes is what we call "a chucker". Also aren't Suns fans nervous about the inconsistencies from an offensive standpoint from Channing Frye, Jason Richardson anyways? Seems one night they're on one night they're off. We don't need another matt barnes on the team, with better handles,.

Benefit: A guy who can play multiple positions, spread the floor, be a backup point at times, defend people on the perimeter which is nice, and do other things besides score out there for us. Bring another veteran presence to the team. Biggest thing he adds is perimeter D



Cost doesn't outweight the benefit in my eyes. He would have to agree to a minimum deal and I'd be cool signing him releasing Tucker but we'd still have to sign a big man

No No No No No.

Top 5 worst ideas ever.

www.heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com/

i would love to have him here. he remembers me a bit of a guy called raja bell. not the first offensive option but a solid defender. he could get steve nash some minutes off the pg position.
that would realy leave us open to trade j-rich or barbs for a big guy. and that´s the main problem,
we need to sign someone who can defend the rim. our priority should be to sign a big man.

and let me get this straight, if we don´t sign another big body than we´ll be laughable the next year.

your spelling and grammar mirror your opinions, pidi.

got a problem with my opinion or with my spelling? if you have some with my spelling or my grammer than you can try all this **** on german and we´ll see if anybody in here understands what you are trying to say, homie.

nice pidi.

I agree sunsfever68. I too like the benefit over the cost. I look at it like this. what backup backcourt do you like more, barbs and Hughes, or Tragic and Barbs???

I just don’t see much potential or really anything special in Tragic. Hughes to me is more of an upgrade than him. He also gives us size in the backcourt (backup that is)

I do not like his attitude, his poor shot selection at times. But he would be a backup, not a starter. He can score, pass, handle and play D. I think that makes us better in a run and gun system like ours. If it happens, you have to take a look at it. We need a big too, but I don’t see the right one coming available anytime soon. Hughes has talent no matter what.

Guys, the grass isn't always greener on the other side. Just because he's good defensively could probably handle the ball be a backup point guard and even if he came for cheap Sarver won't shell out the money because every dollar is taxed twice since we're over the cap.

Plus if we get irritated at Channing Frye's inconsistencies and game to game hot and cold streaks same as J rich...Larry Hughes will be the most hated player by suns fans by the end of the season. There's a reason teams like the Bulls and Knicks don't want him. The term "other man's trash is another man's treasure" does not apply here.

larry hughes gets himself off of teams because his shot selection and his shooting is horrific. absolutely horrific. If larry committed himself to being a second option and he worked on his shot here and he committed himself to being a defensive stopper I'd maybe be for it. He'd have to know Gentry is the boss and if he's taking stupid shots he won't shoot.

Definately he would be a great pick up, it would be like last year when the Suns signed Barnes for toughness and defense. Hughes brings all that to a team and playing in the Suns system he could probably put up some great stats.

If he's not putting up good stats in D'Antoni's system...why would he do any better here? Our system relies on shooters, and that means that signing a guy who has a website dedicated to his shooting suckitude is a bad idea.

matt barnes brough inconsistent shooting and all talk no toughness. I didn't see how he changed the game with his toughness ever.

rsavaj was spot on. If he ain't putting up stats in NY, there's no reason to believe he'll put up stats here. 5% FG% is worse than horrid, I understand shooting slumps but 5% is beyond ridiculous. He's just going to come in and dominate the ball and take shots away from JRich, Barbs and Amare.