Boozer who?
- Thread starter doubledribble
- Start date
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
Yeah that's true on the "left hand" for Carlos Whoo-zer.
I think anybody would take Big Al over Boozer.
How about the fact that he's had more blocks in one game, then Boozer had with us in an entire month.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
I'd ask if you're simply looking at aggregate production -- either box scores, or cheering when Millsap makes a play -- rather than looking at the specifics of how that production is manufactured.
I love Millsap. But I fail to see how one can make an argument as to his ability to anchor an offense.
Boozer can do that. Jefferson can as well (better post presence low, though questionable on consistent facilitation abilities).
The cause matters at least as much as the effect, particularly when you have a team, coach and system that are looking for contending results through peak personnel.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
You can make this analytical move -- I applaud it. But you can't do it without following it to the end of the line. You make no mention of defense in this post or in the other thread. When you do, the tidy little lines you've drawn and placed Boozer on one side and Millsap on the other start to look a bit more arbitrary.
I also get the sense that you might be hanging on to an old story. Millsap's offensive game is improving. There were several times in the OKC game where he created his own shot from about 15-17 feet out. He was doing this in the LAL series, too.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
Dennis Rodman was a better man-defender than Shaq.
What that has to do with Rodman as a marquee player, with a championshipl-level offense designed around him, I fail to understand in any type of long or short form analysis.
Is Millsap now Bill Russell? Because the idea that he's a defensive anchor, on par with Boozer's offensive role, is one of the more nonsensical asseverations -- at the least, implications -- I've seen on here.
If that isn't the point, then I fail to see what your point is. That a sturdy, respectable defender is better than a mediocre to poor defender?
And...what? Millsap's overall game is not elevated to Boozer's level because he plays decent defense in a man to man and occasional help context.
It's rather like pointing out that a compact car gets better mileage than a Hummer.
That's a pretty poor example of self-shot creation. 15-17 foot jumpers from bigs tend to be created off spacing and guard initiation; Millsap is no different.
He is decent at driving the lane, a faceup context, but his back to the basket game is rudimentary, with little more than a decent jumper to work with in low-post situations.
He can drive, yes. But that doesn't mean you can set him up on the block, let him go to work either man to man or with a crowd, and expect an optimal shot for him or a teammate.
That's shot creation. That's facilitation.
Boozer had that -- amazing footwork -- and so does Jefferson. Guys you can design an offense around, in other words.
Millsap is -- though I'm not making a one to one talent comparison with anyone here -- more like Thurl Bailey to Karl Malone. The latter was setting up the offense, and someone like Bailey as a second or third option, just by being on the floor. The ability to dump the ball in, either in isolation or motion contexts, inherent to the star's skillsets creating not only for himself but for teammates.
LifeOnaPlate
Well-Known Member
What do you mean out of the woodwork? I was a Boozer apologist for quite a while, saw the writing on the wall, and have been vocal about not missing him ever since.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
What writing was this, that was on the wall? For a guy that has defended Kirilenko, right down to his choice in tampons, to say that you're a realist as to roster needs and production is hard to swallow.
The Jazz are fine.
Because they have Jefferson.
Allowing Boozer to walk without a suitable post replacement would have meant rebuilding, and likely the end of Deron in Utah.
But hey, that is how Kirilenko liked it. The halcyon days of 20-something wins.
AK was primarily injured for the 20 win season. That's why the team dropped from 40 to 20 wins. Get your facts straight.
You do realize the Jazz's record has been the same with or without Boozer over the last few years? You do realize the Jazz running a 'post-centric offense' is a load of crap?
You do realize the Jazz's record has been the same with or without Boozer over the last few years? You do realize the Jazz running a 'post-centric offense' is a load of crap?
NAOS
Well-Known Member
There is so much wordsmithian nonsense in this post that I don't know where to start.
First off, you take my points and throw them into the logical extremes: Shaq vs. Rodman, Bill Russell, etc. Not only did I not say that he was a defensive anchor, but I didn't even make the claim that he was "on par" with Boozer in any way whatsoever. I am comfortable with the more realistic implication of my post: that I'd rather have Millsap wearing my team's jersey than Boozer. My point is that if Boozer "anchors" the offense of a second-tier Western conference team and that is going to cost me a maximum salary as well as a near erasure of offensive output do to defensive ineffectiveness (particularly against the Lakers), then, yes, I'd rather have Millsap. I love your synopsis of my point: "That a sturdy, respectable defender is better than a mediocre to poor defender?" Thanks for extending a little reading generosity, assbag.
Millsap's has shown the ability to take 15-17 foot jumpers after a dribble, drive, cross-over, etc. That is creating your own shot. He doesn't do it as much as he could because he plays within the offense. If you are going to deny this simple point you can keep it to yourself. If Millsap doesn't have the size to play with his back to the basket then he can develop ball handling and passing skills as a counter-offensive within a team system. He's already better at Boozer in both of these categories. End of story.
So, let's make an dirtbag reduction of your point. Is it that Millsap isn't what he isn't?
"asseverations"
You know I've been called at trollish bitch or a bitchy troll on this site. But you, sir, take the ****ing cake. Go play on some "word of the day" message board.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
When has Kirilenko ever led a team to the playoffs? When has he ever been reliably healthy, both mentally and physically, while doing this?
Oh, never. Yeah. Never.
I'm aware of the fact that the Jazz had multiple 50+ win seasons with Boozer as their main post presence, winning a multitude of playoff series without homecourt advantage.
Parallel, they did a great deal of this with Kirilenko either mentally or physically providing little to nothing. Or nothing at all.
I realize that you're a basketball illiterate, with statements like the above.
No understanding of offensive schemes, basic plays, or playbooks. Floor spacing or philosophy.
And how a 5x5 not only refers to Kirilenko's old statlines, but likely your IQ as well.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
Extremes as base example of philosophy, not a literal basis.
Don't get confused. And don't attempt such transparent sophistry.
Then what was your point, considering you directly implied that his defensive ability made the choice "arbitrary" between the two?
If you don't like my reply, you should first like at your own ridiculous assertion. You know think in-tandem with what you type out.
Just a thought.
Sorry, I felt the need to take Occam's razor to your rambling emotionalism.
In other words, you have no logical argument for Millsap in this context. What you have is hatred for Boozer.
Did you have to open a book? I'm so sorry, I hope it wasn't as physically painful for you as, I'm certain, it was mentally.
Just as a sendoff, it's clear that you're a vituperative halfwit, unable to defend the lacking and moronic assertions that you throw up like a dog choking on a bone.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
2007.
There's little doubt as to how important Boozer was in that context.
And how unimportant Kirilenko was.
Be sure to explain the difference in Utah's post schemes, centralized on a power forward, that Sloan has radically implemented.
Or just shut up.
Your choice.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
astonishingly convincing
sportsnut1232
Member
I agree that Millsap is not a first option on a team or player you can run your offense through. But are you saying you would rather have Boozer than Millsap? That's what it sounds like to me. Millsap brings toughness, defense, heart. Those are things you can't teach and Boozer will never develop these intangibles.
Millsap is the type of player a championship team has to have. The things he brings to the table are rare. You can find plenty of players like Boozer- Good offensive game, not enough toughness or heart to commit himself on the defensive end, etc. We were NEVER going to win a title running our offense through Boozer.
When people look at Boozer, all they look at is the box score, not the chemistry issues he brings by not giving full effort on both ends. Our offense will score regardless if we have Boozer to run the offense through. Give me Millsap over Boozer anyday.
If you think the Jazz ran the same offense through Boozer that they did through Malone, you clearly are delusional. The post-up is the 3rd or 4th option in today's Jazz offense. This is because none of the Jazz big men are facilitators. They can score, but asking on them to be anything like Malone is crazy.
In the 90's, the Jazz would run an offense focused around the high post. Malone would get the ball almost every posession with time left on the shot clock to hit cutters and make plays.
Today the Jazz run a flex offense which has many options before the post up. The post up is usually the 3rd or 4th option after a variety of curls off screens, and is often the last option in the offense. The offense does a good job of spacing the floor for these post-ups, but they are by no means the primary focus of the offense, but rather just a facet of it. If the offense breaks down, the post-up becomes more important, which is why we see it more in the playoffs. The current offense is more balanced, and the 1 and the 3 are the primary playmakers. This is because none of the Jazz big men are great passers...their job is to score when they get the ball, which is why they get the ball less often and later in the shot clock.
If you want proof, simply take a look at the usage rates of recent teams versus the Malone teams. The recent teams are far more balanced.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/UTA/2010.html vs https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/UTA/1997.html