Carlos Boozer

MasterRaider · by **MasterRaider** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:39 am

jsm0331 wrote:
MasterRaider wrote:
jsm0331 wrote:
MasterRaider wrote:and yes, there ARE others available

Then list them out. I am so tired of people saying that there are better options out there, but when the refuse to name any names. The league isn't what it once was, the big man crop is running dry.

I have like 500 times already. Gadzuric is available this year (and more plausible). Chandler is available in exactly 1 year. People, for whatever reason, have so blindly commited themselves to the Boozer plan, they will let no amount of reason or logic is allow them to see other options. They will just deny it's possibility. Ridiculous.

Ok, I can see waiting a year for Chandler, IF we had some type of assurance that he will leave the money and come to LA. Money talks...it's that simple. That's a big gamble, waiting a year on a player, especially when you have Mark Cuban, who keeps his wallet open at all times, will pay big men ungodly amounts of money, and has liked and wanted Chandler, since his rookie season.

Again, repeating myself for the 500th time: Grant's expiring contract. Think $16 million will be enough?

Danny Boy? There's quite a drop of in levels of talent. You have Chandler and Boozer at one level, then a few steps down, you have Dan. He'd be more of a consolation prize, if we couldn't get Boozer.

Again, for the 500th time, Gadzuric is a better REBOUNDER, SHOT BLOCKER, DEFENDER. Boozer is a better scorer, but DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS.

Edit: putting Boozer on Chandler's "level" is ludicrous.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:08 am

Bulls are working on extending Chandler's contract. Let me find the article. He said that he wants to stay there. It's not happening, MR.

Edit: You saying that you said anything 500 times in fewer than 300 posts is ludicrous.

MasterRaider · by **MasterRaider** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:21 am

k0pr0phage wrote:Bulls are working on extending Chandler's contract. Let me find the article. He said that he wants to stay there. It's not happening, MR.

As of now, he's on record saying he'll take the qualifying offer for next season. They could very well make him their priority. Until he actually signs, he's fair game. And in that case, there's Gadzuric.

Edit: You saying that you said anything 500 times in fewer than 300 posts is ludicrous.

Your inability to detect a figure of speech for the sake of making a point, is most ludicrous.

Edit: Notice the Boozer advocates making grammatical criticisms. They really have nothing left in this debate - if they ever had anything at all.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:41 pm

MasterRaider wrote:
k0pr0phage wrote:Bulls are working on extending Chandler's contract. Let me find the article. He said that he wants to stay there. It's not happening, MR.

As of now, he's on record saying he'll take the qualifying offer for next season. They could very well make him their priority. Until he actually signs, he's fair game. And in that case, there's Gadzuric.

Gadzuric. Hmm. I'll take Boozer.

GuRu · by **GuRu** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:11 pm

KingKobe wrote:I would rather keep Butler than get Boozer.

Why?

It has everything to do with defense. Why the hell would we trade are number one trade commidity for a no defense no size player like Boozer. I'm aware that no matter what trade we make we need to get a real power forward in return, but what is the sense in that if that real power forward doesn't have real power forward size or real power forward defense.

In fact not only is Boozer two inches shorter than Odom, Odom has averaged more blocks than Boozer, every single year he's been in the NBA.

Odom also averges more rebounds.

Sounds like we're upgrading from one undersized out of position forward, to another undersized in postiuon forward. The benifit of this is what, exactly? Post offense? Great. I mean

I was watching this team last year, and you know what I said:
"Hey, Chucky Atkins gets run past to the basket every single time. We're undersized inside, and there's no way in hell Mihm can do it all by himself. In fact, with addition to the fact we have the worst defensive point guard rotation in the NBA, and one of the worst shot blocking front courts in the NBA, we just might be the wrost defensive team in the NBA..........you know what we need? Another undersized non-athletic offensive player in the front court who doesn't block shots or play D." Oh.....wait, I said no such thing, in fact I'll do anything to get this team a real defensive core. Trade Butler? I hope so. Lamer Odom? If it will bring D home. Atkins? I'll trade him for anything at this point. But I'm trading for D, not for offensive luxeries like Carlos Boozer.

Here's the next reason we don't need Boozer. His contract sucks. He makes more than Odom does for five more years. If we get him we're stuck with him for a long time. I'll repeat that, five years. Kobe's prime will be done. And I doubt that there will be people lining up to take on that much money on after Boozer is getting traded again after we realize that a Mihm, Boozer front court will never show enough defensive promise to ever win a championship.

I mean if we want to be in the playoffs, then yeah, maybe with Boozer we can score enough points to win the 7th or 8th spot, but once we hit the spurs or any other team with a real defense we'll be back on vacation. And for what? So we can throw Boozer the ball and watch him work on 7' Duncan? Or have him post up Amare? I'm sure Duncan and Amare are really shaken waiting to take on a player several inches shorter, and far less atheltic, and with no defense. Look for one teams power forward to drop 45, and I have a feeling it won't be Boozer. And I didn't even mention KG.

And yeah, here we go, "Nobody can guard those guys anyway." Yeah, but there's a big difference between a player who can least keep up with them and a new poster everytime down the floor. Huge. If there's a player who can at least say, he has good size, and a decent vertical and shotblocker, I'll take him every time over Boozer.

Hey....it worked for the Utah Jazz :roll:

"But yeah. Who cares about D. As long as we have short offensive players we'll always win." Ok, so lets look at the offense. I mean I think what Kobe Bryant really wants is another player who needs the ball in the post and draw players into the paint. Sounds perfect. Who would want to draw players out of the paint so Kobe can drive and kick, slash or post up, when we can have Carlos Boozer! I'd much rather have him with the ball then Kobe. Sounds great! I mean we can tell Kobe to facilitate getting Boozer the ball. I mean, its not like we got Boozer for free. Remember the Bulls, they had an undersized no defense player like Boozer that Jordan always threw the ball to. Excellent.........oh wait, no they did not. They had shooters to spread the floor. And defnsive players, Boozer is neither. And before you compare him to Shaq, calm down and repeat to yourself..."Boozer is not SHaq. Boozer is not Shaq." Until your breathing normally again.

So basically we're spending more money, on a power forward who gets less boards, less blocks, and is two inches shorter then the one we already are doing anythng to move to a different position, so Kobe can have the ball less on offesne and move away from the post with less room for slashing.

Does that make any sense at all? Not to me it doesn't, but everyone else here seems to have a different opinion. So, please tell me what I missed.

And before I here..."thats the best we can do," I already have one sure fire way to have a better team with more tradinging potential the getting Boozer. It's called keeping Butler. Do I want to keep Butler? Hell no I don't, (and anybody that reads my posts no I've been yelling to trade him from the first couple days we got him) but anything beats spending millions on a pleyer who won't improve the defense almost at all. I'd rather just wait for a better trade, becasue once we get Boozer we're stuck with him.

I have serious doubts that a Boozer, Mihm front court will ever win a championship as long as Amare, KG, and Duncan still play on the west coast.

Laker Jam · by **Laker Jam** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:19 pm

Anthracit3 wrote:
jsm0331 wrote:
Anthracit3 wrote:Boozer cant guard Tim Duncan or KG. The road to the finals run through the Spurs.

Ok, that might be true, but then name an alternative. Who out there can guard KG and Tim, that is available in a realistic trade?

Boozer can rebound, play defense, score, and can play well in the post. Sounds good to me, better than anything else we have or could get this summer, in terms of big men.

We do not need another scorer. We need a scrappy defender that would piss the hell out of people ie. Rodman. I would like to see fortson as a laker.

Man, are you sorely mistaken. It's not necessarily just about the scoring or defense, it's about the physical presence he brings on both ends of the court. Boozer BANGS INSIDE. He wears opponents down by throwing his body around in there, on them, against them, fighting for every rebound. He's a bonafide presence, and that can't and shouldn't be taken lightly. Fortson does bring a physicality to the post, as well, but he's no Carlos Boozer. In fact, his entire career is filled with either suspensions or sitting on the pine with foul trouble. It won't help us if our PF can't or doesn't make the opponent work on defense (either because he's gotten himself in trouble or because, as with Fortson, he doesn't even think about trying to score). Boozer does get guys in foul trouble and we need that, Otherwise, the opposing PF is merely patrolling the paint on defense and looking to block shots, thus preventing us from grabbing key rebounds or making simple put backs.

Boozer is a young, physical, STRONG, power forward with solid fundamentals. He has a lunch-pail work ethic and no fear of contact. At 23, he's only getting better - and he already rebounds better than Fortson. As for improvements on defense, that will come with the coaching that stresses it. This is not a lazy guy so all he needs to do is continue to learn and grow. He does box out and he's clearly an excellent rebounder. He doesn't block shots, but that doesn't mean he's not effective.

Seriously, I don't know what some of you are smoking that you think this Laker team has any business sticking it's nose up at a physical 20/10 POWER Forward whose still a babe and only getting better. There are very few PHYSICAL power forwards in the league today, for us to treat one that may be attainable as though we can take a pass on him because there are 50 others around the corner. It's absolutely an absurd attitude to have. A physical inside presence can make a huge difference. Just look at Amare Stoudemire. He's not what anyone would call a good defender, but he brings a physical presence on offense and wears guys down - and that makes a huge difference to his team. Boozer isn't Amare, but he brings the same type of physicality to the low block. I don't know about you, but we'd have an even better chance against the Duncan's of the world, if we had a big body pushing up against him and wearing him out, and if that big body also made him have to worry about the other side of the court, too, then that's even better.
.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:21 pm

Here's a breakdown of Boozer vs. some of the PFs who are big names...these are games from the past two seasons. I may have missed some but I assure you I didn't just choose games where Boozer performed well. In bold, I put the player's average stats (over the past two years) before giving the breakdown.

Dirk: average 24 pts, 9 rebounds, 3 ast, 46% fg shooter
Dirk 27.5 pts, 14 reb, 4 ast, 50%
Boozer 23.5 pts, 17 reb, 1.5 ast, 55%
Verdict: Dirk got his but Boozer outrebounded him and was a more efficient shooter. Dirk gets the nod.

Garnett: average 23 pts, 13.5 rebounds, 5.5 ast, 50% fg shooter
Garnett 18.5 pts, 11 reb, 3 ast, 46%
Boozer 15.5 pts, 8.5 reb, 1.5 ast, 56%
Verict: While Boozer didn't shut down Garnett, he held him to signifcantly below his averages. Even.

Brand: avg 20pts, 10 rebounds, 3 ast, 50% fg shooter
Brand 21 pts, 8 reb, 4 ast, 52%
Boozer 18 pts, 5.5 reb, 4 ast, 47%
Verdict: Brand was pretty close to his averages; this actually seems to be Boozer's toughest matchup; good thing is that Boozer still had 4 assists and hit a decent % of his shots. Brand

Marion: avg 19 pts, 10 rebounds, 2.5 ast, 46% fg shooter
Marion 18.8 pts, 8.8 reb, 1.0 ast, 46%
Boozer 17.0 pts, 11.0 reb, 1.8 ast, 57%
Verdict: Held Marion in check, just under his average, more than a rebound below his average, -1.5 assists, while being very efficient himself . Boozer.

Gasol: avg 18pts, 7.5 rebounds, 2.5 ast, 50% fg shooter
Gasol 24 pts, 6.5 reb, 2.0 ast, 57%
Boozer 17.5 pts, 12.5 reb, 2.0 ast, 52%
Verdict: Gasol got the points but Boozer crushed him on the glass and put up solid numbers. Even?

Duncan: avg 21 pts, 12 reb, 3 ast, 50%
Duncan 18 pts, 13 reb, 4 ast, 44%
Boozer 9.5 pts, 3.5 reb, 4 ast, 40% (fouled out in one)
Verdict: This is the test, I suppose. Boozer held Duncan below his average in points and made him shoot a lower percentage...Boozer, however, didn't get the job done on offense. Duncan.

Do I take it that this proves that Boozer is NBA All Defense? No. It shows that he can hold some of the better PFs (and I take it that most of the best are on here). Boozer may not be the next coming of Karl Malone but he's young, can rebound, can shoot, can score, and can play some D. Remember, these are the best PFs in the league...show me a guy we can get who can play better against these guys and is as young as Boozer.

by **Guest** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:51 pm

k0pr0phage wrote:Here's a breakdown of Boozer vs. some of the PFs who are big names...these are games from the past two seasons. I may have missed some but I assure you I didn't just choose games where Boozer performed well. In bold, I put the player's average stats (over the past two years) before giving the breakdown.

Dirk: average 24 pts, 9 rebounds, 3 ast, 46% fg shooter
Dirk 27.5 pts, 14 reb, 4 ast, 50%
Boozer 23.5 pts, 17 reb, 1.5 ast, 55%
Verdict: Dirk got his but Boozer outrebounded him and was a more efficient shooter. Dirk gets the nod.

Garnett: average 23 pts, 13.5 rebounds, 5.5 ast, 50% fg shooter
Garnett 18.5 pts, 11 reb, 3 ast, 46%
Boozer 15.5 pts, 8.5 reb, 1.5 ast, 56%
Verict: While Boozer didn't shut down Garnett, he held him to signifcantly below his averages. Even.

Brand: avg 20pts, 10 rebounds, 3 ast, 50% fg shooter
Brand 21 pts, 8 reb, 4 ast, 52%
Boozer 18 pts, 5.5 reb, 4 ast, 47%
Verdict: Brand was pretty close to his averages; this actually seems to be Boozer's toughest matchup; good thing is that Boozer still had 4 assists and hit a decent % of his shots. Brand

Marion: avg 19 pts, 10 rebounds, 2.5 ast, 46% fg shooter
Marion 18.8 pts, 8.8 reb, 1.0 ast, 46%
Boozer 17.0 pts, 11.0 reb, 1.8 ast, 57%
Verdict: Held Marion in check, just under his average, more than a rebound below his average, -1.5 assists, while being very efficient himself . Boozer.

Gasol: avg 18pts, 7.5 rebounds, 2.5 ast, 50% fg shooter
Gasol 24 pts, 6.5 reb, 2.0 ast, 57%
Boozer 17.5 pts, 12.5 reb, 2.0 ast, 52%
Verdict: Gasol got the points but Boozer crushed him on the glass and put up solid numbers. Even?

Duncan: avg 21 pts, 12 reb, 3 ast, 50%
Duncan 18 pts, 13 reb, 4 ast, 44%
Boozer 9.5 pts, 3.5 reb, 4 ast, 40% (fouled out in one)
Verdict: This is the test, I suppose. Boozer held Duncan below his average in points and made him shoot a lower percentage...Boozer, however, didn't get the job done on offense. Duncan.

Do I take it that this proves that Boozer is NBA All Defense? No. It shows that he can hold some of the better PFs (and I take it that most of the best are on here). Boozer may not be the next coming of Karl Malone but he's young, can rebound, can shoot, can score, and can play some D. Remember, these are the best PFs in the league...show me a guy we can get who can play better against these guys and is as young as Boozer.

Ladies and Gentleman...Now THAT'S how you present your case.

Kudos, bro. I wasn't even feeling Boozer as a Laker and now you've at least piqued my interest.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 5:22 pm

VerbalMilk wrote:Ladies and Gentleman...Now THAT'S how you present your case.

Kudos, bro. I wasn't even feeling Boozer as a Laker and now you've at least piqued my interest.

Thank you kindly. I'm not trying to say that Boozer is the second coming of Ben Wallace on D with the offensive capabilities of Karl Malone. I'm just saying that the guy can get the job done. Odom will abuse SFs, Kobe will abuse anyone. With those three guys in the middle of your lineup, that would be a hell of a core. Toss in a lottery PG and even a decent C and we can go deep into the playoffs.

by **Guest** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 5:29 pm

k0pr0phage wrote:
VerbalMilk wrote:Ladies and Gentleman...Now THAT'S how you present your case.

Kudos, bro. I wasn't even feeling Boozer as a Laker and now you've at least piqued my interest.

Thank you kindly. I'm not trying to say that Boozer is the second coming of Ben Wallace on D with the offensive capabilities of Karl Malone. I'm just saying that the guy can get the job done. Odom will abuse SFs, Kobe will abuse anyone. With those three guys in the middle of your lineup, that would be a hell of a core. Toss in a lottery PG and even a decent C and we can go deep into the playoffs.

No problem. And you don't have to further explain anything about Boozer, ya laid it out very well in your initial post, bro. Good stuff.

MasterRaider · by **MasterRaider** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 9:08 pm

k0pr0phage wrote:Here's a breakdown of Boozer vs. some of the PFs who are big names...these are games from the past two seasons. I may have missed some but I assure you I didn't just choose games where Boozer performed well. In bold, I put the player's average stats (over the past two years) before giving the breakdown.

Dirk: average 24 pts, 9 rebounds, 3 ast, 46% fg shooter
Dirk 27.5 pts, 14 reb, 4 ast, 50%
Boozer 23.5 pts, 17 reb, 1.5 ast, 55%
Verdict: Dirk got his but Boozer outrebounded him and was a more efficient shooter. Dirk gets the nod.

Garnett: average 23 pts, 13.5 rebounds, 5.5 ast, 50% fg shooter
Garnett 18.5 pts, 11 reb, 3 ast, 46%
Boozer 15.5 pts, 8.5 reb, 1.5 ast, 56%
Verict: While Boozer didn't shut down Garnett, he held him to signifcantly below his averages. Even.

Brand: avg 20pts, 10 rebounds, 3 ast, 50% fg shooter
Brand 21 pts, 8 reb, 4 ast, 52%
Boozer 18 pts, 5.5 reb, 4 ast, 47%
Verdict: Brand was pretty close to his averages; this actually seems to be Boozer's toughest matchup; good thing is that Boozer still had 4 assists and hit a decent % of his shots. Brand

Marion: avg 19 pts, 10 rebounds, 2.5 ast, 46% fg shooter
Marion 18.8 pts, 8.8 reb, 1.0 ast, 46%
Boozer 17.0 pts, 11.0 reb, 1.8 ast, 57%
Verdict: Held Marion in check, just under his average, more than a rebound below his average, -1.5 assists, while being very efficient himself . Boozer.

Gasol: avg 18pts, 7.5 rebounds, 2.5 ast, 50% fg shooter
Gasol 24 pts, 6.5 reb, 2.0 ast, 57%
Boozer 17.5 pts, 12.5 reb, 2.0 ast, 52%
Verdict: Gasol got the points but Boozer crushed him on the glass and put up solid numbers. Even?

Duncan: avg 21 pts, 12 reb, 3 ast, 50%
Duncan 18 pts, 13 reb, 4 ast, 44%
Boozer 9.5 pts, 3.5 reb, 4 ast, 40% (fouled out in one)
Verdict: This is the test, I suppose. Boozer held Duncan below his average in points and made him shoot a lower percentage...Boozer, however, didn't get the job done on offense. Duncan.

Do I take it that this proves that Boozer is NBA All Defense? No. It shows that he can hold some of the better PFs (and I take it that most of the best are on here). Boozer may not be the next coming of Karl Malone but he's young, can rebound, can shoot, can score, and can play some D. Remember, these are the best PFs in the league...show me a guy we can get who can play better against these guys and is as young as Boozer.

Totally misleading considering:

A) He was a better player 2 years ago BEFORE he got his contract. You know this and knew it would inflate his stats which is why you included it.

B) You simply looked at his season splits without considering if they guarded each other in each game or not.

Here's a look at Boozer's matchups from THIS year:

vs. Dirk (1 game)

Boozer - 35 min. 3-9 FG, 8 pts, 2 rbds, 6 ast, 4 fouls
Dirk - 41 min., 10-19 FG, 30 pts, 7 rbds, 2 ast

vs. Garnett (1 game)

Boozer - 21 min. 5-9 FG, 10 pts, 6 rbds, 2 ast, 5 fouls
Garnett - 39 min. 8-17 FG, 25 pts, 14 rbds, 5 ast

Note: Boozer played one other game against the Wolves. Garnett played Center that game and Boozer was matched up against Wally and Spree.

vs. Brand (2 games)
game1:
Boozer - 36 min. 5-15 FG, 13 pts, 3 rbds, 3 ast, 3 fouls
Brand - 49 min. 4-12 FG, 19 pts, 6 rbds, 5 ast

game2:
Boozer - 39 min. 9-15 FG, 23 pts, 8 rbds, 5 ast, 2 fouls, 0 stl, 0 blk
Brand - 36 min. 9-15 FG, 23 pts, 10 rbds, 3 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk

vs. Marion (4 games)
game1:
Boozer - 38 min. 11-19 FG, 27 pts, 18 rbds, 2 ast, 5 fouls, 1 stl, 0 blk
Marion - 45 min. 8-18 FG, 21 pts, 9 rbds, 3 ast, 2 fouls, 1 stl, 4 blk

game2:
Boozer - 29 min. 7-11 FG, 19 pts, 11 rbds, 2 ast, 1 foul, 0 stl, 0 blk
Marion - 33 min. 7-17 FG, 16 pts, 13 rbds, 1 ast, 2 fouls, 2 stl, 2 blk

game3:
Boozer - 26 min. 4-8 FG, 8 pts, 6 rbds, 1 ast, 4 fouls, 2 stl, 0 blk
Marion - 36 min. 6-11 FG, 20 pts, 6 rbds, 0 ast, 3 fouls, 1 stl, 1 blk

game4:
Boozer - 21 min. 6-11 FG, 14 pts, 9 rbds, 2 ast, 1 foul, 0 stl, 0 blk
Marion - 41 min. 6-13 FG, 18 pts, 7 rbds, 0 ast, 4 fouls, 0 stl, 1 blk

He had some good games here, but that's to be expected against the Suns, a team that plays no defense, and against Marion, a SF playing out of position.

vs. Gasol (lol, a guy who averages 7 rpg, but ok. 2 games)
game1:
Boozer - 42 min. 8-14 FG, 20 pts, 15 rbds, 2 ast, 5 fouls, 2 stl, 2 blk
Gasol - 36 min. 9-15 FG, 25 pts, 10 rbds, 3 ast, 2 fouls, 1 stl, 1 blk

game2:
Boozer - 35 min. 4-9 FG, 17 pts, 10 rbds, 2 ast, 5 fouls, 0 stl, 0 blk
Gasol - 27 min. 7-12 FG, 23 pts, 3 rbds, 1 ast, 3 fouls, 1 stl, 0 blk

Again, he's scoring and rebounding better against a softer and lesser player, but he's hardly stopping him.

vs. Duncan (2 games)
game1:
Boozer - 29 min. 3-10 FG, 6 pts, 3 rbds, 4 ast, 6 fouls, 0 stl, 0 blk
Duncan - 27 min. 4-10 FG, 12 pts, 13 rbds, 3 ast, 1 foul, 0 stl, 4 blk

game2:
Boozer - 24 min. 5-10 FG, 13 pts, 4 rbds, 2 ast, 4 fouls, 0 stl, 2 blk
Duncan - 38 min. 8-17 FG, 24 pts, 13 rbds, 1 ast, 2 fouls, 0 stl, 1 blk

When matched up against REAL SUPERSTARS (Dirk, KG, Duncan, Brand), Boozer got schooled. So he played on par on with Gasol and Marion? Whup-D-Doo! I wouldn't want either of those guys as our PF either.

And if you want to see how Boozer REALLY plays most of the time, just check out what he does against average-nonstar bigmen like K.Thomas., Kristic, Hornets bigmen, etc. He plays alright one game, disappears the next. Sorry, but if we're going to pay someone $12 million, we need CONSISTENCY, especially on REBOUNDING, SHOT BLOCKING and DEFESE. Boozer doesn't cut it.

James083 · by **James083** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 10:48 pm

I see the track records and think Boozer can play a key role on this team and it is exactly what fits. That is a physical presence with offensive finshing ablity, solid D and pitch in on the boards.

Not a superstar because we have Kobe and Odom. People keep wanting a dominant PF but we cant be dominant in all postions cause that leads to conflict. We need a leader and role players who get the job done.

Considering that KOBE and ODOM will command so much doubles on Offense this will only allow Boozer to become a better finsher and that is something they lacked this year when Kobe and Odom got cold or trapped.

Boozer's physical presence will free up Mihm and make him a better rebounder. Look Mihm dosnt have the physical power to keep 2 guys off his back but he has the height to get boards with a banger next to him. I like the idea of Mihm, Boozer and Odom going after boards. Tall athletic and hard workers.

Its not his individual stats that Im so focused on but rather the overall role he can facilitate between Odom and Kobe doubles which should translate into finshed plays from a naturally good offenseive player.

I like the idea that adding him to this lineup makes us faster up the court from 1-5 postion. Hell when BGrant was actually running up the court and making layups this year I found myself off my seat. I think Boozer will keep help keep our transition D and fastbreaks on the move.

I know alot of people dont like mihm but I think we are strong enough at Kobe and Odom postions to make average and above average players like Mihm and Boozer play better. Dont get me wrong Mihm and Boozer are not scrubbs but they are average-above average players.

I could be reading too much into this but a young athletic team feeding off Kobe and Odom doubles needs good offensive finishers like boozer.

I would take the boozer trade and solidify our core and then make a defensive pg my priority.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 10:50 pm

James083 wrote:I see the track records and think Boozer can play a key role on this team and it is exactly what fits. That is a physical presence with offensive finshing ablity, solid D and pitch in on the boards.

Not a superstar because we have Kobe and Odom. People keep wanting a dominant PF but we cant be dominant in all postions cause that leads to conflict. We need a leader and role players who get the job done.

Considering that KOBE and ODOM will command so much doubles on Offense this will only allow Boozer to become a better finsher and that is something they lacked this year when Kobe and Odom got cold or trapped.

Boozer's physical presence will free up Mihm and make him a better rebounder. Look Mihm dosnt have the physical power to keep 2 guys off his back but he has the height to get boards with a banger next to him. I like the idea of Mihm, Boozer and Odom going after boards. Tall athletic and hard workers.

Its not his individual stats that Im so focused on but rather the overall role he can facilitate between Odom and Kobe doubles which should translate into finshed plays from a naturally good offenseive player.

I like the idea that adding him to this lineup makes us faster up the court from 1-5 postion. Hell when BGrant was actually running up the court and making layups this year I found myself off my seat. I think Boozer will keep help keep our transition D and fastbreaks on the move.

I know alot of people dont like mihm but I think we are strong enough at Kobe and Odom postions to make average and above average players like Mihm and Boozer play better. Dont get me wrong Mihm and Boozer are not scrubbs but they are average-above average players.

I could be reading too much into this but a young athletic team feeding off Kobe and Odom doubles needs good offensive finishers like boozer.

I would take the boozer trade and solidify our core and then make a defensive pg my priority.

Word. Gotta agree with you.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Mon Jun 06, 2005 10:58 pm

MasterRaider wrote:Totally misleading considering:

A) He was a better player 2 years ago BEFORE he got his contract. You know this and knew it would inflate his stats which is why you included it.

B) You simply looked at his season splits without considering if they guarded each other in each game or not.

Dude, you're really offensive. I'd like you to know it. It's not what you say or that you're speaking the truth and I can't handle it or that you're talking too much business sense. It's all in the delivery. "You know this and knew it would inflate his stats..." What are you talking about? There's a better way to say the things you'd like to get across. And you don't have to be rude, ignorant, or offensive when you do it. Boozer is still Carlos Boozer. He's the same guy he was last year. In 03/04 he averaged 15.5 pts, 11.4 reb, 2.0 ast on 52.3% shooting...this year he was at 17.8 pts, 9.0 reb, 2.8 ast on 52.1% shooting. I put up his defensive stats and they were good. You replied that he doesn't block a lot of stats and was "only" 32nd in rebounding efficiency (sic). As far as I'm concerned, that is fantastic for a PF. His offensive numbers, though you suggest I tail the stats to fit my interpretation of "good" are impressive. I showed you only two other PFs who put up similar pts/reb/fg% numbers this past season. You said that offensive stats don't tell the whole story because sucks on defense. It's evident that no stats will sway you. Choose to stick to other threads that don't deal with Boozer or please be more respectful. You're really making my clublakers experience complete crap of late.

Anthracit3 · by **Anthracit3** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:43 am

James083 wrote:I see the track records and think Boozer can play a key role on this team and it is exactly what fits. That is a physical presence with offensive finshing ablity, solid D and pitch in on the boards.

Not a superstar because we have Kobe and Odom. People keep wanting a dominant PF but we cant be dominant in all postions cause that leads to conflict. We need a leader and role players who get the job done.

Considering that KOBE and ODOM will command so much doubles on Offense this will only allow Boozer to become a better finsher and that is something they lacked this year when Kobe and Odom got cold or trapped.

Boozer's physical presence will free up Mihm and make him a better rebounder. Look Mihm dosnt have the physical power to keep 2 guys off his back but he has the height to get boards with a banger next to him. I like the idea of Mihm, Boozer and Odom going after boards. Tall athletic and hard workers.

Its not his individual stats that Im so focused on but rather the overall role he can facilitate between Odom and Kobe doubles which should translate into finshed plays from a naturally good offenseive player.

I like the idea that adding him to this lineup makes us faster up the court from 1-5 postion. Hell when BGrant was actually running up the court and making layups this year I found myself off my seat. I think Boozer will keep help keep our transition D and fastbreaks on the move.

I know alot of people dont like mihm but I think we are strong enough at Kobe and Odom postions to make average and above average players like Mihm and Boozer play better. Dont get me wrong Mihm and Boozer are not scrubbs but they are average-above average players.

I could be reading too much into this but a young athletic team feeding off Kobe and Odom doubles needs good offensive finishers like boozer.

I would take the boozer trade and solidify our core and then make a defensive pg my priority.

Why pay him that much if he is not, is all im saying. If you need toughness we can pick up cabbage patch kid Fortson for a cheaper price.

Anthracit3 · by **Anthracit3** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:45 am

Read your post. Signing a star PF (boozer makes star PF $$) = conflicts.

MasterRaider · by **MasterRaider** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:10 am

k0pr0phage wrote:
MasterRaider wrote:Totally misleading considering:

A) He was a better player 2 years ago BEFORE he got his contract. You know this and knew it would inflate his stats which is why you included it.

B) You simply looked at his season splits without considering if they guarded each other in each game or not.

Dude, you're really offensive. I'd like you to know it. It's not what you say or that you're speaking the truth and I can't handle it or that you're talking too much business sense. It's all in the delivery. "You know this and knew it would inflate his stats..." What are you talking about? There's a better way to say the things you'd like to get across. And you don't have to be rude, ignorant, or offensive when you do it.

Coming from the guy who said he will quote me in his sig just to offend me. Kinda hypocritcal don't you think? Perhaps you should evaulate your own tone before calling others out. Maybe their tone is a reflection of yours.

Boozer is still Carlos Boozer. He's the same guy he was last year. In 03/04 he averaged 15.5 pts, 11.4 reb, 2.0 ast on 52.3% shooting...this year he was at 17.8 pts, 9.0 reb, 2.8 ast on 52.1% shooting.

Most people who have seen him play have agreed in a huge dropoff since he got his big payday. It's neither uncommon nor unheard of.

I put up his defensive stats and they were good.

They were 2 years ago. They weren't last year - which common sense tells me is closer to now.

You replied that he doesn't block a lot of stats and was "only" 32nd in rebounding efficiency (sic). As far as I'm concerned, that is fantastic for a PF.

Um, maybe if you're a bench player making $5 million. He's making $12 million, and that's HORRIBLE for his price tag. I've already posted the list of other players more efficient in rebounding and shot blocking, and almost all are getting paid less than Boozer. And for the record, he was 34th in rebounding efficiency. As for shot blocking efficiency, well, I wouldn't be suprised if he was 200th at .65 per/48 min.

His offensive numbers, though you suggest I tail the stats to fit my interpretation of "good" are impressive. I showed you only two other PFs who put up similar pts/reb/fg% numbers this past season. You said that offensive stats don't tell the whole story because sucks on defense.

Exactly. I've never argued he didn't have a decent offensive game. His rebounding and defense sucks. The stats show that.

It's evident that no stats will sway you.

I can say the same about you considering I've posted plenty which you just flat out ignored. See the stats in my previous post.

Choose to stick to other threads that don't deal with Boozer or please be more respectful. You're really making my clublakers experience complete crap of late.

Maybe you should chill out and be a bit more respectful yourself. Unless you consider flat out saying you are trying to offend another poster, as repsectful behavior. If you're getting worked up that another poster disagrees with you and will back it up with numbers, I think you have more problems than this trivial debate. Chill and stop taking everything you read here so seriously, that you set out to offend those you disagree with.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:09 am

I wrote a reply point by point but there's one major theme here. Your standards are unrealistic. It's great that you want the best PF ever on the team. I would love to get such a player. I'd love the best PG and C, too. But to say that a PF who is 34th in rebounding efficiency (and like 16th in rebounds per game) sucks and is horrible at rebounding is unrealistic. It means that there's an average of one player on the floor at a time who can outrebound him...that can't be anything short of "very good".

Blocks are literally zero indication of how good a defender one is. Look at Kobe, Jordan, Pippen. There are many ways to be a good defender.

If we don't get Boozer, I'll lose no sleep...but he is at least an above average defender with a good offensive game. If you can't see paying $12m for that, relative to what's available, that's fine. But that makes zero business sense.

James083 · by **James083** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:14 am

Anthracit3 wrote:Read your post. Signing a star PF (boozer makes star PF $$) = conflicts.

He does have a fat contract but if he can provide all of the duties outlined above and solidify this team then its money well spent.

Fortson cannot do all the things I pointed out in my post.

Dont just pick one part of the post but take into consideration all of the other things he will be doing for this team. He is not your typical superstar in scoring and defense but his role is crucial and worth a starters salary.

Sometimes its not about the label of a superstar that makes a player worth the money they are getting rather its their worth to your team in an overall picture.

MasterRaider · by **MasterRaider** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:40 pm

k0pr0phage wrote:I wrote a reply point by point but there's one major theme here. Your standards are unrealistic. It's great that you want the best PF ever on the team. I would love to get such a player. I'd love the best PG and C, too. But to say that a PF who is 34th in rebounding efficiency (and like 16th in rebounds per game) sucks and is horrible at rebounding is unrealistic. It means that there's an average of one player on the floor at a time who can outrebound him...that can't be anything short of "very good".

Blocks are literally zero indication of how good a defender one is. Look at Kobe, Jordan, Pippen. There are many ways to be a good defender.

If we don't get Boozer, I'll lose no sleep...but he is at least an above average defender with a good offensive game. If you can't see paying $12m for that, relative to what's available, that's fine. But that makes zero business sense.

My standards are not. And I never said we needed the "best PF ever". You consider Boozer worth $12 million because inspite, or I guess combined with his medicore rebounding and defense, his poor shotblocking, he has a decent offensive game to go with it. I've already said that offensive proficiency in our PF is the smallest concern. More important than offense, our PF should be a big rebounder, defender, and shotblocker. I've already listed all of players who can do those things better than Boozer and for a much cheaper salary. When you consider this, instead of ignoring it, you will see why paying Boozer $12 million makes zero business sense.

Anthracit3 · by **Anthracit3** on Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:19 pm

James083 wrote:
Anthracit3 wrote:Read your post. Signing a star PF (boozer makes star PF $$) = conflicts.

He does have a fat contract but if he can provide all of the duties outlined above and solidify this team then its money well spent.

Fortson cannot do all the things I pointed out in my post.

Dont just pick one part of the post but take into consideration all of the other things he will be doing for this team. He is not your typical superstar in scoring and defense but his role is crucial and worth a starters salary.

Sometimes its not about the label of a superstar that makes a player worth the money they are getting rather its their worth to your team in an overall picture.[/quote
We need a rebounder. Kobe and Odom can take care of the scoring. We do not need to pay a someone (not only boozer) max money to rebound and play D. Boozer would be great but for a lesser price.

kobe4ever · by **kobe4ever** on Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:05 am

we should trade butler, cook, atkins, divac, #10 for boozer and #6

bleed purple n gold · by **bleed purple n gold** on Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:40 am

kobe4ever wrote:we should trade butler, cook, atkins, divac, #10 for boozer and #6

i dunno about tha 6 spot.

utah would be some morons if they did that.

MasterRaider · by **MasterRaider** on Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:37 am

KoBeXo8 wrote:
kobe4ever wrote:we should trade butler, cook, atkins, divac, #10 for boozer and #6

i dunno about tha 6 spot.

utah would be some morons if they did that.

And we'd be morons to trade for Boozer.

Okki · by **Okki** on Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:14 am

MasterRaider wrote:
KoBeXo8 wrote:
kobe4ever wrote:we should trade butler, cook, atkins, divac, #10 for boozer and #6

i dunno about tha 6 spot.

utah would be some morons if they did that.

And we'd be morons to trade for Boozer.

why???

odom will play butler's position.

cook is useless anyway.

we got a good pick like jack/felton or even paul in the draft to replace useless chucky.

Carlos Boozer

Who is online