The answer to the question that EVERYBODY has been asking me!

[VINYLONE]

I believe that we are worse off as a team without Boozer.

Does the team record currently say otherwise?

 

[Fishsticks]

I'm a Jazz fan first. I believe that we are worse off as a team without Boozer. With that said, I doubt Bulls fans would give a rats *** if I started topics about how the Jazz should have kept Boozer on a Bulls forum.

Except, do we not have a better record at this point than last year? The team is better this year, Boozer in some ways is better than Jefferson and other ways not. You cannot dispute that.

 

[Fishsticks]

I'm a Jazz fan first. I believe that we are worse off as a team without Boozer. With that said, I doubt Bulls fans would give a rats *** if I started topics about how the Jazz should have kept Boozer on a Bulls forum.

Should also add that on the jazz forum we dont give a rats *** either.

 

[Jeditiger]

 

[Sloanfeld]

Here's what I just posted in another thread about the record garbage:

It bothers me that we didn't play as well as they should have for the first half of last season. After Gaines shot, we took off. Sure we had early injures to CJ and Korver, but our record should have been better. The fact is, we were one of the top teams in the NBA after that shot, and that was was more indicative of us as a team than any record prior to that. We've watched both teams. The record means jack ****. The team just didn't play well for almost half of the season. And Boozer was damn well the best player on our team until the all-star break. D-Will took command after that.

 

[Fishsticks]

Hmmm.... records mean jack....ok you are bordeing on the line of insanity.

 

[Archie Moses]

This topic is dedicated to all of the CLOWNS that kept asking me how many points Boozer was averaging earlier in the season. Every time I talked about Boozer here or in chat, one of you, namely Revolution 9, Stickler, and a few more I can't positively identify, replied with 'how many points is Boozer averaging?' Naturally the answer was zero. Let's be real, anybody sitting on the bench in a suit for the first 15 games of the season is going to average zero points per game. Was John Stockton a lesser player than Penny Hardaway in 1997 because he missed the first 18 games of the season and Penny didn't? DIDN'T THINK SO. But under some of your logic the answer is most certaintly YES.

So now here we are, 14 games into the Chicago Bullzer era. You thought you were clever with that dumb 'zero ppg' response but you weren't. But alas, now your question gets a response.

Carlos Boozer is averaging 20.4 PPG. That's over a 204,000% increase from where he was just 30 days ago. And it's still going up.

Meanwhile, Jeffersuck is averaging a decent 16.4 points per game in over two times as many games. To all the 'give him some time' people, just look what Boozer has done in such a short amount of time. Boozer has fit in with the Bulls way better than Jefferson has fit in with us. And don't argue with me, you've seen the articles yourself that Jefferson was struggling to learn the offense.

Rebounds? Try 10.1 for Boozer and 8.8 for Jefferson.

And get this, I was watching NBA TV yesterday morning, and Steve Smith pointed out that since Boozer came back, Rose and another Bull were shooting 10% better from downtown since Boozer came back (because you know, Boozer commands a double team, PERIOD).

Anyway, I hope now you clowns who kept asking that question see how silly you look. I'm not going to let you get away with that crap.

BOOZER REIGNS SUPREME.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Your response is obnoxious and does little to do anything besides further entrench the Boozer haters position. But at the core of your winding, bloviated rant is a good point.

 

[Sloanfeld]

Hmmm.... records mean jack....ok you are bordeing on the line of insanity.

In this comparison it means jack. Do I have to spell everything out for you Boozer haters?

Should also add that on the jazz forum we dont give a rats *** either.

In your ideal Jazz message board, everyone would agree with each other all the time! That would be so fun.

Your response is obnoxious

You know it's my style, cupcake.

 

[LogGrad98]

Does the team record currently say otherwise?

Tough thing with this question is that we don't know. Becaue you have to compare Boozer and Jefferson ceteris paribus, and cannot simply say that because his new team is better/worse that means Boozer on the Jazz would automatically be better/worse. What you have to ask is, if Boozer were still here instead of Jefferson, with all the other players exactly the same as they are now, would we be better than having Jefferson here now. Obviously Sloanfeld thinks we would be better with Boozer.

Personally I am not so sure. Would Boozer's better rebounding and scoring be more important than Jefferson's better defense? Also, Boozer made it clear he did not really want to be here, and what effect would that have on our chemistry, playing with someone you know doesn't want to be playing alongside you?

I think in the long run we are better with Jefferson, if nothing else than for the reason that we already knew what we had with Boozer. What we will have with Jefferson is yet to be determined. Remember when Boozer first got real PT with us, after missing so so so many games early on, he was not automatically a 20 and 10 guy. He had to learn it to. A better comparison is how does Boozer compare to Jefferson at similar points in their careers with the Jazz. That would be interesting to see.

But not interesting enough for me to look it up.

 

[chemdude1232]

Boozer is gone
Time to move on.

 

[Sloanfeld]

Also, Boozer made it clear he did not really want to be here, and

I don't know what you are talking about. From what I've read, he did want to be here. It was KOC in June 2009 who said to him that the team was looking to go in another direction.