But according to two sources with knowledge of the Wizards' thinking, the team is considering...

But according to two sources with knowledge of the Wizards' thinking, the team is considering re-signing Howard, albeit a price less than his option when he becomes an unrestricted free agent. The sources were encouraged with Howard, who averaged 14.5 points and 3.3 rebounds and brought a positive attitude and enthusiasm to a locker room in desperate need of a jolt.

Michael Lee on Josh Howard.

almost 2 years ago Mike Prada 7 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Howard for mid-level if his knee looks sound...

You bet… he sounds like a guy who wants to contribute here, and he certainly showed some good stuff in the four games before he went down.

It amazes me to see the positive press that Caron is getting in Dallas. Not that he is not a good player, but they are making him sound like the second coming.

As Mike James (remember him?) once notably said, “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.”

by khrabb on Mar 11, 2010 4:32 PM EST reply actions

- banging head against wall -

Only the Wizards would sign a guy with a bad knee based on this decent performance in 4 games.

New GM by the draft and free agency, please.

by disgrunted on Mar 11, 2010 4:49 PM EST reply actions

ig we can sign him on a reasonable price,he is a good player being used to winning playoff team a dallas,and is not like this is career ending injury or he has history of injuries ,w need veteran with experience for the future young team

Go Wizards

by ag3ntzero on Mar 11, 2010 5:30 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

Smells like a contingency to me

Whether we like it or not, the franchise doesn’t know what direction it will go in until the Gil situation has been concluded. If he comes back, the wiz have a few pieces in place (and a bunch of cap space) to make this team out into a good team. I’d gladly take a middle of the pack playoff team now over a rebuild that may (or may not) result in a middle of the pack playoff team 4-5 years down the road.

If he’s gone, let the expiring contracts walk, use the cap space to land more picks and prospects, and start over.

by jones-y on Mar 11, 2010 5:48 PM EST reply actions

Thank you!

I’d gladly take a middle of the pack playoff team now over a rebuild that may (or may not) result in a middle of the pack playoff team 4-5 years down the road.

People forget to realize that playoff basketball is few and far between for this franchise, that 4 year stretch we had with the Gilbert/AJ led Wizards was the best stretch of basketball we had seen in nearly 30 years! Also, to what you said, there are no guarantee that rebuilds will work and if they do work somewhat there is no guarantee that they’ll get you a championship contender. Look at Atlanta who we’re playing tonight, very good team, they “rebuilt”(i guess u can call it that), but they are looking at a 3 or 4th seed, and very little chance to win a title, and this is probably as good as they are gonna get. Championship teams get lucky with superstars, does it take a rebuild to get it? maybe (look at OKC) or maybe not (Lakers got Kobe w/ no “rebuild”) I would love to see a competitive team with Gil next year, if Gil won’t be here, then we have no choice but to do the rebuild.

by SkinsWizStangs on Mar 11, 2010 6:20 PM EST up reply actions

And another factor that most ignore is that

winning begets winning. If you want a winner, a perennial contender, then the worst way to get there is by essentially intentionally losing (e.g. having a weak roster to essentially bolster your lottery position). If for nothing more than the fact that losing begets losing. the Lakers don’t get Shaq as a FA (and consequently don’t get those three rings) if they don’t have a history of winning. If they don’t get those rings then they probably don’t keep Kobe, don’t keep Odom, don’t win a 4th ring last yr., don’t get artest as a FA this yr., etc.

The fallacy keeps being reinforced by the fact that certain players are good enough to lift a franchise from the pits to mediocrity or better all by themselves. But as soon as those players jump ship, get traded, retire, miss a year due to injury, etc. the team is right back in the lottery within a year or two.

Also I’m a believer that playing in a losing situation can be more detrimental to developing players (especially after about the 3rd season of it) than the guaranteed PT is beneficial. If the game is mental (as so many say), then how can losing be a good thing? I feel like one of the reasons that Blatche is as good as he is now is because he played his first three years on playoff caliber teams. I don’t think he blossoms playing for Memphis or the Clippers.

by jones-y on Mar 11, 2010 6:47 PM EST up reply actions

I'm Concerned

Howard tore his ACL, so there is a chance he will never be 100% of what he was, and even if he can get back to 100%, he won’t get there until at least this time next season. So any salary paid significantly above the league minimum for his number of years in the league seems excessive to me, unless it is laden with perfomances bonuses. I like Howard a lot, and I agree he brought great play and a great attitude to this team for the short time he was here, but I don’t want to overpay for someone who might not be able to contribute that much ever again.

"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier

by cuppettcj on Mar 12, 2010 9:37 AM EST reply actions