What's new
By:
Filters

Trevor Booker

Catchall said:
Meh. There are dozens of players who are as good or better than Booker. Another forward who can't shoot isn't going to help us.
Click to expand...
Which other forwards meet that description on the team for you? And a career 30% from 3 is better than what Favors did or Bradley will ever do. We don't have a player like Booker on the roster.
 
Catchall said:
Meh. There are dozens of players who are as good or better than Booker. Another forward who can't shoot isn't going to help us.
Click to expand...

But Booker is a Badass Mamba Jahamba and is ready to contribute when needed. Great locker room guy... here is the test...

You hear that we are going to have to start Tony Bradley for a month while player X is out... how much did your face wince?

You hear that we are going to have to start Trevor Booker for a month while player X is out... how much did your face wince?
 
NUMBERICA said:
Which other forwards meet that description on the team for you? And a career 30% from 3 is better than what Favors did or Bradley will ever do. We don't have a player like Booker on the roster.
Click to expand...

He's a mobile 4 that can rebound at a high rate... he'd get beat by the better post up players like Aldridge, but how many guys are even like Aldridge anymore.
 
NUMBERICA said:
We didn't get rid of Crowder to get rid of him, he was necessary for the trade to get Conley.

And you bet your *** I would've kept Crowder and shipped Exum's busted *** out of here instead. Better a forward that leaves something to be desired as a shooter than a guard that is worse at shooting and cannot stay healthy that costs more money somehow.
Click to expand...

It's a valid point but I'd say if we really wanted to keep Crowder we'd have found a way to keep him -- like maybe giving up Exum instead. Booker has been available in the past and has made comments or hints that he'd like to be back but the Jazz don't seem to have interest. I think Booker is what he is at this point. We've had too many people who can't shoot in the past and we're going a different direction now. I'd rather see if Niang can keep improving, see how Jeff Green pans out, see if we can develop Brantley, or whatever.
 
NUMBERICA said:
I'm here to be the echo chamber for @Handlogten's Heros and @infection yet again. There is a list of players of significant length that the Jazz could still sign outright that would be more useful than Bradley, and Booker is near the top of that list. And I'm not even suggesting he be in the regular rotation. But I'd be much more comfortable throwing Booker out there on special teams or in an emergency than a kid that doesn't look like an NBA player in the G-League and has played like 69 total NBA minutes or some ****.
Click to expand...


I almost started a new thread last night but didn't want to start a Dante thread that goes places it shouldn't... but was listening to Zach Lowe's podcast with David Epstein... they talked about sunk cost fallacy and that is when it got interesting... around the 25 minute mark. Zach said there is a team that he had some front office contact with that drafted a player in the last 5 years that has some trade value because he is still intriguing... because he hasn't been on the court much... he paused and said for a couple reasons. Zach was really trying to make sure no one knew who he was talking about. I thought he was going to say because of injury. He said there is outside interest in the player because of intrigue and some in the front office think they should move on and collect the value (said it wasn't a lot of value)… then he said that some of the mainstays in the front office are so bought in that it is a complete non-starter because they drafted him.

I'm 90% sure he was talking about Dante because there aren't many guys that fit the description... honestly I couldn't think of any. Anyway... I think some in our front office may be too emotionally attached to guys we pick and make decisions based on sunk costs... Dante is one example... Bradley imo is another. I think we stick with things a little too long sometimes when the data points suggest it ain't working.

Here is the way to think about it... if Tony Bradley was a free agent and we have an open roster spot... would you give him a two-year $5.5m (in total) deal? Would you give him a 1 year 2M deal? Or would you rather go for someone with more upside on a minimum (multi-year) deal or a vet on a minimum deal?

If DL was in full control there is no way we cut Bradley and open up a roster spot... Zanik doe... maybe? He just makes no sense on this roster and we have a few roster spots committed to development type players already.
 
Watcher said:
It's a valid point but I'd say if we really wanted to keep Crowder we'd have found a way to keep him -- like maybe giving up Exum instead. Booker has been available in the past and has made comments or hints that he'd like to be back but the Jazz don't seem to have interest. I think Booker is what he is at this point. We've had too many people who can't shoot in the past and we're going a different direction now. I'd rather see if Niang can keep improving, see how Jeff Green pans out, see if we can develop Brantley, or whatever.
Click to expand...
Having Booker on the roster isn’t mutually exclusive of those other outcomes, he’d just be another option and as or more importantly, he’d have worth off the floor which can’t be said of Bradley.
 
Watcher said:
It's a valid point but I'd say if we really wanted to keep Crowder we'd have found a way to keep him -- like maybe giving up Exum instead. Booker has been available in the past and has made comments or hints that he'd like to be back but the Jazz don't seem to have interest. I think Booker is what he is at this point. We've had too many people who can't shoot in the past and we're going a different direction now. I'd rather see if Niang can keep improving, see how Jeff Green pans out, see if we can develop Brantley, or whatever.
Click to expand...

Book would be Ed Davis and Rudy insurance... in some matchups he could play the mobile small ball 5 and if we have issues matching up with supersize teams he could step in and play the 4.

I think Green and Niang would be ahead of him for time at the 4... but Book gives us some variance we don't have.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Book would be Ed Davis and Rudy insurance... in some matchups he could play the mobile small ball 5 and if we have issues matching up with supersize teams he could step in and play the 4.

I think Green and Niang would be ahead of him for time at the 4... but Book gives us some variance we don't have.
Click to expand...
Booker at the 4, ok. Booker at the 5? Give me Bradley

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
I really despise the Bradley-hate. Wtf is your evidence? Lack of evidence isn’t evidence, btw.

Booker is cool. But finding him and Ed Davis minutes would be a question not worth asking (and they shouldn’t be on the floor at the same time).
 
NAOS said:
I really despise the Bradley-hate. Wtf is your evidence? Lack of evidence isn’t evidence, btw.

Booker is cool. But finding him and Ed Davis minutes would be a question not worth asking (and they shouldn’t be on the floor at the same time).
Click to expand...
Personally I think Bradley could be an NBA player eventually. He has grown a lot since he was drafted

Sent from my SM-G965U using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Eh, I like Booker, but if the time came when we needed him, he would still be available. He's not going anywhere. And if no one else is signing him right now, we don't need to either.
 
framer said:
Eh, I like Booker, but if the time came when we needed him, he would still be available. He's not going anywhere. And if no one else is signing him right now, we don't need to either.
Click to expand...
I wish that the Jazz could have kept him when he left. Honestly though, a 31 year old player that relies on athleticism and doesn't provide shooting isnt what the Jazz need right now.

Sent from my SM-G965U using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
Booker at the 4, ok. Booker at the 5? Give me Bradley

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Besides that he’s bigger
NAOS said:
I really despise the Bradley-hate. Wtf is your evidence? Lack of evidence isn’t evidence, btw.

Booker is cool. But finding him and Ed Davis minutes would be a question not worth asking (and they shouldn’t be on the floor at the same time).
Click to expand...
He doesn’t look like an NBA player and the Jazz have went out of their way to not have to ever rely on him. It’s entirely on purpose that we don’t see him play NBA minutes. That’s plenty of evidence.

Furthermore, he looks and plays like a dinosaur in a league and on a team that doesn’t lack them.
 
I think Kevin Love would be the best fit, but his contract is not possible for us to trade for. I'm worried he will end up on the Blazers, and cause further insane competition in the Western Conference.

Booker would be a great locker-room fit, and he'd bring energy and leadership, but as others have mentioned his game doesn't necessarily bring anything to the floor that we necessarily need.

Joe Johnson just signed with the Pistons, and there are some intriguing names out there still.

Joakim Noah
Kenneth Faried
Thabo Sefolosha
Jamal Crawford
Dante Cunningham
Luc Mbah a Moute
Marcin Gortat

I have to imagine at this point the Jazz are running numbers on all these guys and talking to 2 or 3 of their agents. It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out. I can't rule out Tony Bradley having a better season than any of us expect though - that certainly was the case with Georges Niang. I didn't think he'd be half of the player that Jerebko was - I was surprised, but Dennis Lindsey saw it before anyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top