Bargnani for... Boozer?!?!

[NoPropsneeded]

Boozer can crash the boards tho. We are getting eaten up on the glass by teams

[Chr1s1anL]

I agree. I don't think Boozer is a big enough upgrade worthy of making us a luxury tax team. Is Boozer worth loosing all financial flexibility for, including loosing the option of signing free agents in the offsease using the various exceptions? I don't think so.

Your very confident of us being able to get a 15 n 10 guy in free agency. We have to build a winning resume before we can start think about free agents. That's why I'm fine with him, Rudy and Lowry till 2015

[white men can't jump]

Your very confident of us being able to get a 15 n 10 guy in free agency. We have to build a winning resume before we can start think about free agents. That's why I'm fine with him, Rudy and Lowry till 2015

Who said he wanted to sign a 15 and 10 guy??? We still have depth issues at PG, to say the least, and who knows what other holes if more moves are made. Boozer is not actually the kind of player we need the most. JV figures to be able to score from all the same spots I think by his 3rd year. We will need a true stretch 4 who can shoot and rebound, so the floor is well spaced.

Getting Boozer also just moves us more toward Memphis' style by default as we'll have two big men who can't stretch out to the perimeter very well starting, in JV and Boozer....I frankly don't think it's a good idea. If we want to keep fast and athletic, Boozer ismaybe the worst possible choice...even worse than keeping Bargs in that sense. I would be more ok with trading for Millsap and trying to convince him to re-sign, just because of how bad a fit I see Boozer as for what TO seems to be trying to do on the court.
*I'd just like to add that style, I'm sure, is the other big reason Chicago wants this trade to happen. Boozer is almost useless as a PF when the game speeds up as it tends to these days. He can't guard stretch 4s, he certainly can't keep up with a small-ball lineup, where his bruising kind of post up game becomes harder to utilize because of pace...Thus he's less than ideal on both ends of the court.

[Nilanka]

Who said he wanted to sign a 15 and 10 guy??? We still have depth issues at PG, to say the least, and who knows what other holes if more moves are made. Boozer is not actually the kind of player we need the most. JV figures to be able to score from all the same spots I think by his 3rd year. We will need a true stretch 4 who can shoot and rebound, so the floor is well spaced.

Getting Boozer also just moves us more toward Memphis' style by default as we'll have two big men who can't stretch out to the perimeter very well starting, in JV and Boozer....I frankly don't think it's a good idea. If we want to keep fast and athletic, Boozer ismaybe the worst possible choice...even worse than keeping Bargs in that sense. I would be more ok with trading for Millsap and trying to convince him to re-sign, just because of how bad a fit I see Boozer as for what TO seems to be trying to do on the court.

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to find a 3pt shooting PF at all. Gay's situation in Memphis (with Gasol and Randolph) had more to do with the offensive hierarchy...as in, the big men being option #1 and #2.

With Boozer in town, Gay would still be option #1.

But the biggest benefit of this proposed deal is getting rid of Bargnani's carcass. If this is the only offer Colangelo gets, I think it's a no-brainer.

[white men can't jump]

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to find a 3pt shooting PF at all. Gay's situation in Memphis (with Gasol and Randolph) had more to do with the offensive hierarchy...as in, the big men being option #1 and #2.

With Boozer in town, Gay would still be option #1.

But the biggest benefit of this proposed deal is getting rid of Bargnani's carcass. If this is the only offer Colangelo gets, I think it's a no-brainer.

A big part of the reason Memphis played that way: they couldn't play at a faster pace with those 2 bigs. It wasn't that Gasol and Randolph were better scoring options, it's that they were 2 of the 3 top scoring options, and playing a faster game would take them out of it...much like it would take Boozer out of it.

[Chr1s1anL]

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to find a 3pt shooting PF at all. Gay's situation in Memphis (with Gasol and Randolph) had more to do with the offensive hierarchy...as in, the big men being option #1 and #2.

With Boozer in town, Gay would still be option #1.

But the biggest benefit of this proposed deal is getting rid of Bargnani's carcass. If this is the only offer Colangelo gets, I think it's a no-brainer.

Finally someone else on this forum that's agrees a stretch 4 is not needed. How many teams in the playoffs a starting stretch 4? They are not needed for good spacing. I'll say it again. We have enough perimeter scoring! We need interior scoring. We don't have a time to wait for JV to become that force. We have a small window to convince Lowry & Gay to say.

[Nilanka]

A big part of the reason Memphis played that way: they couldn't play at a faster pace with those 2 bigs. It wasn't that Gasol and Randolph were better scoring options, it's that they were 2 of the 3 top scoring options, and playing a faster game would take them out of it...much like it would take Boozer out of it.

I'd much rather build a team capable of scoring in a half-court set (i.e. built for the playoffs), than a run & gun fastbreak team.

[white men can't jump]

I'd much rather build a team capable of scoring in a half-court set (i.e. built for the playoffs), than a run & gun fastbreak team.

I'd much rather a team that's capable of both with ALL their best players on the court...not one that needs to sub out somebody to go fast or go halfcourt...Boozer is this kind of player....

*Miami used LeBron in the post when the game slowed down. It doesn't have to be your big. We've seen Gay is good at posting up and passing out of it. With a stretch 4 you can still do that and have quality spacing.

[white men can't jump]

Finally someone else on this forum that's agrees a stretch 4 is not needed. How many teams in the playoffs a starting stretch 4? They are not needed for good spacing. I'll say it again. We have enough perimeter scoring! We need interior scoring. We don't have a time to wait for JV to become that force. We have a small window to convince Lowry & Gay to say.

Well, the 2 teams that were in the finals played their most common lineups with LeBron at the 4 and KD at the 4....Dirk won a ring as a stretch 4. LA actually played at its best usually with Gasol at the 5 and Odom at the 4 back in the day....

[ReubenJRD]

I would like a team that does both, but I would like that low-post player capable of being able to run the floor as well. Milsap is that type of guy, Boozer is not, while Jonas could grow into that role.

[Nilanka]

I'd much rather a team that's capable of both with ALL their best players on the court...not one that needs to sub out somebody to go fast or go halfcourt...Boozer is this kind of player....

*Miami used LeBron in the post when the game slowed down. It doesn't have to be your big. We've seen Gay is good at posting up and passing out of it. With a stretch 4 you can still do that and have quality spacing.

You're making it sound like Boozer is Oliver Miller

He may not be a gazelle like Amir, but he's a pretty versatile offensive player. The Jazz and Bulls won 50+ games five times with Boozer in their starting frontcourt.

[white men can't jump]

You're making it sound like Boozer is Oliver Miller

He may not be a gazelle like Amir, but he's a pretty versatile offensive player. The Jazz and Bulls won 50+ games five times with Boozer in their starting frontcourt.

Look at Boozer's playoff stats in Chicago though...that's the Boozer we'd be getting. Even if he helps us win some games, I think his postseason impact is being very overestimated. He has been almost a non-factor in Chicago's playoff series, and frankly, that's probably the biggest reason they acquired him as well: have an experienced go-to post player in the playoffs.

Also Boozer might not be Oliver Miller, but given his injury history and age, it is quite a risk to assume that he will keep being effective throughout his contract. He might even be starting his natural decline (shooting a career worst fg%...by a fair amount) already.

[Matt52]

Who said he wanted to sign a 15 and 10 guy??? We still have depth issues at PG, to say the least, and who knows what other holes if more moves are made. Boozer is not actually the kind of player we need the most. JV figures to be able to score from all the same spots I think by his 3rd year. We will need a true stretch 4 who can shoot and rebound, so the floor is well spaced.

Getting Boozer also just moves us more toward Memphis' style by default as we'll have two big men who can't stretch out to the perimeter very well starting, in JV and Boozer....I frankly don't think it's a good idea. If we want to keep fast and athletic, Boozer ismaybe the worst possible choice...even worse than keeping Bargs in that sense. I would be more ok with trading for Millsap and trying to convince him to re-sign, just because of how bad a fit I see Boozer as for what TO seems to be trying to do on the court.
*I'd just like to add that style, I'm sure, is the other big reason Chicago wants this trade to happen. Boozer is almost useless as a PF when the game speeds up as it tends to these days. He can't guard stretch 4s, he certainly can't keep up with a small-ball lineup, where his bruising kind of post up game becomes harder to utilize because of pace...Thus he's less than ideal on both ends of the court.

It is a great year to be looking for backup PG's and a mini-MLE would be available.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/2013-nba-free-agents

I don't think Boozer is ideal but it is certainly MUCH better than keeping Bargnani. Also, he becomes a huge expiring contract in 2 seasons time.

[jimmie]

I don't think Boozer is ideal but it is certainly MUCH better than keeping Bargnani. Also, he becomes a huge expiring contract in 2 seasons time.

The "trade Bargnani" narrative is threatening to ruin this team, one way or the other, if management starts to listen to fans.

Taking on Boozer's deal is not "certainly MUCH better" than keeping Bargnani. It *could* be better, if everything works out perfectly for Boozer in TO. But it could also be financial albatross, a chemistry-killer, a bane on the development of Valanciunas, and/or many other negative things before he comes off the books.

I'm on record as saying Bargnani has to go. But this "at all costs" narrative suggests that he's having some sort of soul-killing negative effect on the fortunes of the franchise. An unbiased look at the state of the team today says that's a vast over-estimation of Il Mago's relative impact.

[bobbybutler]

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bull...ted-for-boozer

[bobbybutler]

Bulls fans need to accept Carlos Boozer for what he is-
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baske...hat-he-is.html

Boozer deciding against diving for a loose ball might not be something fans in other NBA cities would even notice, for example. But it stands out on a team with a go-for-broke mentality that was illustrated by C.J. Watson dislocating his elbow diving for a loose ball during a 40-point victory over Memphis.

Has Carlos Boozer Turned the Corner for the Bulls?-
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/carlos-...0869--nba.html

As to how long this will last is anyone's guess. It is fair to wonder if Boozer's renaissance is here to stay, or simply a fluke. Time will tell. But as of right now, Boozer is finally performing like the player Bulls fans thought he would be. As much heat as he has taken for underperforming, he now deserves a little love. Better late than never, right?

It's not just gaudy numbers that mark Boozer's improvement. There are also more subtle differences, such as an increase in free throw attempts-- which is an indicator of aggressiveness. And although Boozer will never be mistaken for a defensive stopper, he even looks to at least be trying on that end as well. A vital reason the Bulls have maintained a winning record while awaiting the return of Derrick Rose, Boozer has significantly stepped his game up. He looks to have gotten his "mojo" back.

[bobbybutler]

[bobbybutler]

30 minutes of Boozer is worse than 15 minutes of Bargnani

[white men can't jump]

The "trade Bargnani" narrative is threatening to ruin this team, one way or the other, if management starts to listen to fans.

Taking on Boozer's deal is not "certainly MUCH better" than keeping Bargnani. It *could* be better, if everything works out perfectly for Boozer in TO. But it could also be financial albatross, a chemistry-killer, a bane on the development of Valanciunas, and/or many other negative things before he comes off the books.

I'm on record as saying Bargnani has to go. But this "at all costs" narrative suggests that he's having some sort of soul-killing negative effect on the fortunes of the franchise. An unbiased look at the state of the team today says that's a vast over-estimation of Il Mago's relative impact.

Thank you for some sanity....It is essential moving Bargs be done properly.

[psrs1]

It is a great year to be looking for backup PG's and a mini-MLE would be available.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/2013-nba-free-agents

I don't think Boozer is ideal but it is certainly MUCH better than keeping Bargnani. Also, he becomes a huge expiring contract in 2 seasons time.

We are not going to sign any free agent better than Boozer so if Chicago will dump we should take him.