Boozer does not compete

[GetBuLLish]

I completely disagree w/ people complaining about Boozer being disinterested, lazy, or unfocused.

That's not the problem. He doesn't come fully out on Hansborough b/c he has ZERO lateral quickness. So he knows he will get blown by if he comes right at him. It's a complete mismatch, so Thibs has to adjust by putting Gibson in.

And on the offensive side, Boozer played terribly not because he was disinterested but b/c of foul trouble and inability to play against taller/longer players. He has lost a substantial amount of explosiveness, so he can't get over the defenders' long arms. Instead, he tries to bulldoze them over or use his off hand to shove them away -- hence the offensive fouls.

Boozer was brought in to be the elite, post presence that Chicago has been dying for. But we have to realize sooner or later that Boozer is just not going to be that guy.

[JOHN]

I have nothing to truly say here. People just complain and complain when the reality is Tyler was hitting everything today. It happens, deal with it.

+1

[Beith Kogans]

Relax..We all know Boozer's D is bad, but come on chill out. He'll make adjustments and he'll be ready for game 2. How can you hate on Boozer, he wasn't the only reason we were losing, and besides we got the W...the only thing that matters.

[Indomitable]

Noah when he dogs it I complain.

So why are you not complaining? His defense was just as poor as Boozer's.

Noah made a mistake but he gave a good effort. when Boozer was posted up and never body him or really contested his shot that is my pet peeve.

There is difference in the two because Noah actually was helping off the ball and could not recover. Boozer does not give proper help and he does not body people in the post.

I am not Boozer because of one game he has been booty for most of the year. Look at my sig. Boozer has to play defense like he cares. Indy knows he gives a half hearted effort and are trying to take advantage of it.

[chadrucf]

Because people use the term to marginalize players they just don't like. See the thousands of anti-Deng posts from the past few years. Did Deng not play defense? Did Deng not give maximum effort? Or did the definition of soft conveniently evolve to the exact deficiencies of a player people like to scapegoat?

The point is there is no "basketball definition" of soft, and the term is used as a substitute for substantive analysis.

[Indomitable]

Because people use the term to marginalize players they just don't like. See the thousands of anti-Deng posts from the past few years. Did Deng not play defense? Did Deng not give maximum effort? Or did the definition of soft conveniently evolve to the exact deficiencies of a player people like to scapegoat?

The point is there is no "basketball definition" of soft, and the term is used as a substitute for substantive analysis.

I think he lazy. He does not give a good effort. Your argument is weak because I have nothing personal against Boozer. Still sometimes a crap effort is a crap effort.

We need Boozer to big and he is paid to play big. That is my point.

[bullsnewdynasty]

For a 'post presence' his offense sure has sucked for the past two months. No finishing ability and turnovers a plenty. If you're going to sacrifice his defense he better be putting up 16-20 points a game on good efficiency. Because sub 40% shooting and 4 turnovers isn't going to cut it as soon as next series, if we advance.

[chadrucf]

Noah when he dogs it I complain.

So why are you not complaining? His defense was just as poor as Boozer's.

Noah made a mistake but he gave a good effort. when Boozer was posted up and never body him or really contested his shot that is my pet peeve.

There is difference in the two because Noah actually was helping off the ball and could not recover. Boozer does not give proper help and he does not body people in the post.

I am not Boozer because of one game he has been booty for most of the year. Look at my sig. Boozer has to play defense like he cares. Indy knows he gives a half hearted effort and are trying to take advantage of it.

Noah missed a ton of rotations today. I thought both of them played very poorly. If your analysis of Boozer's defense was so profound, why did Hansborough's scoring not slow when other defenders were on him? Boozer only played 26 minutes tonight.

[HomoSapien]

You seem to be implying that the criticism is unmerited. It's not, because he nearly cost us the game. This is forgivable at times during the season, but this is the time where he simply has to put it together. He's supposed to be our second best player. We need him to pick it up, otherwise we're not going anywhere that matters.

[gumshoe]

I expected Boozer to play poor defense...but I also expected Boozer to outscore and outplay psycho T

[KEGster]

We must hope Boozer is ''saving himself''. He does have by far of any significant player the most playoff experience and knows it's a marathon and not a race yadda yadda yadda.

Bulls are still young and I think emotionally they get too high and logic must argue that get too low at times as well. Boozer is always steady

[chadrucf]

You seem to be implying that the criticism is unmerited. It's not, because he nearly cost us the game. This is forgivable at times during the season, but this is the time where he simply has to put it together. He's supposed to be our second best player. We need him to pick it up, otherwise we're not going anywhere that matters.

His criticism is warranted. But he is too often singled out when it is not a Boozer issue. Today was a Hansborough issue, but yet Boozer is supposed to shoulder the entire blame for that? Why was it solely Boozer that nearly cost us the game?

I think one of the biggest issues is one of the things you pointed out; he was supposed to be our second best player and a force on the low block. He's never really been a low block player, and his defense has always been poor. I think a lot of the criticism is due to people not really knowing who we were getting when we signed him. He took another hit with criticism when he got injured, and then finally when he actually played and people saw what kind of player he is there was another wave. It is natural to have a scapegoat for all of the team's troubles, and it is most certainly Boozer (with a dramatic come-from-behind victory over Boagns).

Boozer is what he is. The only thing that is disappointing for me is his mediocre offense up until this point. We saw what he could do early in the season, as well as in year's past, and he has to get back to that for us to win it all this year.

[TheAdmiral]

For a 'post presence' his offense sure has sucked for the past two months. No finishing ability and turnovers a plenty. If you're going to sacrifice his defense he better be putting up 16-20 points a game on good efficiency. Because sub 40% shooting and 4 turnovers isn't going to cut it as soon as next series, if we advance.

Indeed. These excuses are getting really annoying. People keep making excuses for a guy who's just not delivering right now. He was supposed to help our offense and give us easy buckets to prevent us from going through offensive droughts. I did NOT expect Rose to have to go off, because our defense wasn't there against a friggin' Pacers team.

[jl342323]

You seem to be implying that the criticism is unmerited. It's not, because he nearly cost us the game. This is forgivable at times during the season, but this is the time where he simply has to put it together. He's supposed to be our second best player. We need him to pick it up, otherwise we're not going anywhere that matters.

His criticism is warranted. But he is too often singled out when it is not a Boozer issue. Today was a Hansborough issue, but yet Boozer is supposed to shoulder the entire blame for that? Why was it solely Boozer that nearly cost us the game?

I think one of the biggest issues is one of the things you pointed out; he was supposed to be our second best player and a force on the low block. He's never really been a low block player, and his defense has always been poor. I think a lot of the criticism is due to people not really knowing who we were getting when we signed him. He took another hit with criticism when he got injured, and then finally when he actually played and people saw what kind of player he is there was another wave. It is natural to have a scapegoat for all of the team's troubles, and it is most certainly Boozer (with a dramatic come-from-behind victory over Boagns).

Boozer is what he is. The only thing that is disappointing for me is his mediocre offense up until this point. We saw what he could do early in the season, as well as in year's past, and he has to get back to that for us to win it all this year.

+ i agree with you 100%

[jl342323]

For a 'post presence' his offense sure has sucked for the past two months. No finishing ability and turnovers a plenty. If you're going to sacrifice his defense he better be putting up 16-20 points a game on good efficiency. Because sub 40% shooting and 4 turnovers isn't going to cut it as soon as next series, if we advance.

Indeed. These excuses are getting really annoying. People keep making excuses for a guy who's just not delivering right now. He was supposed to help our offense and give us easy buckets to prevent us from going through offensive droughts. I did NOT expect Rose to have to go off, because our defense wasn't there against a friggin' Pacers team.

pick n roll is what boozer needs (drose just isnt comfortable with it) when you watch boozer in utah that pick n roll with dwill was a thing of beauty

[Indomitable]

His criticism is warranted. But he is too often singled out when it is not a Boozer issue. Today was a Hansborough issue, but yet Boozer is supposed to shoulder the entire blame for that? Why was it solely Boozer that nearly cost us the game?

I think one of the biggest issues is one of the things you pointed out; he was supposed to be our second best player and a force on the low block. He's never really been a low block player, and his defense has always been poor. I think a lot of the criticism is due to people not really knowing who we were getting when we signed him. He took another hit with criticism when he got injured, and then finally when he actually played and people saw what kind of player he is there was another wave. It is natural to have a scapegoat for all of the team's troubles, and it is most certainly Boozer (with a dramatic come-from-behind victory over Boagns).

Boozer is what he is. The only thing that is disappointing for me is his mediocre offense up until this point. We saw what he could do early in the season, as well as in year's past, and he has to get back to that for us to win it all this year.

McRoberts Hook Shot: Made (4 PTS) Boozer defending

Price Substitution replaced by Hansbrough 05:33
Hansbrough Jump Shot: Made (17 PTS) Assist: Granger (3 AST) 04:36
[IND 93-88] Boozer
Boozer Turnover : Lost Ball (4 TO) Steal:Hansbrough (1 ST)
Hansbrough Jump Shot: Made (19 PTS) Assist: Collison (9 AST) 03:54 Boozer
Hansbrough Dunk Shot: Made (21 PTS) Boozer with the and 1
Boozer then actually competed no more from tyler

Indy was running O through Tyler. Tyler is a more athletic Kurt Thomas. He is not someone who should be abusing you.
Boozer is not aware of who he is guarding. That is the reason for Mcroberts being include you do let him shot.

[gumshoe]

whenever there is a pick and roll situation with Boozer he calls "ICE"....Also Derrick does need to do a better job of staying in front of his man, and prevent the ball handler from receiving the ball (which he did in the second half) but he is already doing everything so I can't complain

[Ajosu]

Why is there not an accompanying Noah thread as well?

An accompanying "Noah does not compete" thread would be ridiculous, considering he made big plays in the end when we needed him more than ever.

Boozer might compete, but he needs to compete better. Unless this is the best he's got, which none of us here believe.

[kyrv]

Boozer does not compete

Yes he does. This is a self evident fact.

He is terrible.

No, he's not. Boozer is not a terrible basketball player.

Sig worthy stuff there.

[Indomitable]

Boozer does not compete

Yes he does. This is a self evident fact.

He is terrible.

No, he's not. Boozer is not a terrible basketball player.

Sig worthy stuff there.

sig away and he got his butt kicked. Include that to.