What's new
By:

Boozer Agrees to Terms With Bulls (5 yrs/80 mil)

InGameStrategy said:
And he plays defense in less than 100 of them.
Click to expand...

....exactly right! The Boozer loss will be minuscule. We replace him with a guy that scores half as much, but gives us three times as much defense! So we win games 90 to 85 instead of 100 to 95!
.....and we save 80 million dollars!!!
 
From a marginal analysis point of view, I understand the decision to go with Millsap instead of Boozer. Millsap will probably give us 80% of the value at less than half the cost next season.
 
So long farewell. I just wish it would've been last season--give something back to the Jazz who you screwed out of 6 years and gave them 1 playoff run. Good bye-square headed Betrayer! I'll miss your luke warm personality, your fake put-on interviews and your delicate body that takes forever to heal. I'll always remeber that bruised chest against the warriors and how you opted in after declaring your intentions to leave.

I'll always remeber how you sat out an entire season trying to force a trade, those times you threw your teamates under the bus, the matador defense, that crazy "I'll get a raise no matter what", the way you slapped Dwill in the face ' I'd love to play with a good point gaurd like Rose' . And who can forget your cowardice being "injured" each time the jazz played in Cleveland--I'm so sorry you'll be rehabing this year when the bulls come to town.

You left the jazz in a pinch, but they knew what you were when they picked you up--you lied to a blind guy and left the cavs & the worlds best player, why wouldn't you screw the jazz too.
 
We can get by without Boozer, doncha think? We always have. Imma repost what I done said in another thread:

07-08: Boozer plays in 81 games, Jazz win 54
08-09: Boozer plays in 37 games; Jazz win 48

In 08-09, in games where Boozer played more than 22 minutes, the team's record was 18-15 (.545), by my count, which would mean they were 30-19 (.612) in the other games. In 07-08, the team won the only game he didn't play in, so they were 53-28 (.654) with him.

Overall: 71-43 (.623) with him, 31-19 (.620) without him.

.623 = 51 wins a year
.620 = 51 wins a year
 
Borat said:
This comes as no surprise. I already posted why in another thread. Bulls missed out on Wade, Bosh and Amare (and likely James) and after giving away so much talent for nothing just to clear CAP room, they really had no choice. Jazz really dropped the ball on that one a year ago. And extension would have cost a lot less than 80 mil too. This is a huge blow to franchise. To lose a 20 and 11 guy for nothing is not very good. Oh well, at least KOC was smart enough to keep Millsap last year by matching Blazers offer, so he will be our stating PF. What would be great now is to get a trade exception out of this from Bulls, but I doubt this will happen, since there is simply no reason for Chicago to do that.

The good news though is that there may be some interest in AK from the teams under the CAP who failed to get Lebron (if indeed LeBron does not go to one of them), Boozer, Wade, and Bosh, and still have loads of CAP available: Nets and Knicks. If let's say LeBron stays in Cleveland, NY and especially Nets, who have Russian owner now, might take on AK's salary, thus removing further salary from us, giving us big trade exception, and maybe even an asset in the process.
Click to expand...

Boozer wasn't going to sign an extension for less money than he made last year, which was around 12.8 I think. If the Jazz had extended, it would have started at about the same salary he got from the Bulls, so no, it would not have been less than 80 million, unless the Jazz went for fewer years and Boozer accepted that, which I doubt would have happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top