RealGM

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwgwefavRVo[/youtube]

i find it interesting that boozer preferred to stay and seems to be fond of the team

Laker_Kid wrote:i find it interesting that boozer preferred to stay and seems to be fond of the team

His agent basically got us to bid for him, no wonder. I guess he loves LA.

think he's worth bringing back if we're to be competitive next yr, if anything he would serve to be a great player to practice against for Randle, Boozer post moves are pretty advanced even in his old age. Given Randle height, Boozer is a great model to copy offensively as Boozer has lots of little quirks in his post game to get around bigger players.

LApwnd wrote:think he's worth bringing back if we're to be competitive next yr, if anything he would serve to be a great player to practice against for Randle, Boozer post moves are pretty advanced even in his old age. Given Randle height, Boozer is a great model to copy offensively as Boozer has lots of little quirks in his post game to get around bigger players.

If we bring him back we keep stalling Kelly's development, especially after he's done a total 180 since moving back to PF.

Slava wrote:

LApwnd wrote:think he's worth bringing back if we're to be competitive next yr, if anything he would serve to be a great player to practice against for Randle, Boozer post moves are pretty advanced even in his old age. Given Randle height, Boozer is a great model to copy offensively as Boozer has lots of little quirks in his post game to get around bigger players.

If we bring him back we keep stalling Kelly's development, especially after he's done a total 180 since moving back to PF.

Kellys a career backup, I'm not worried about a player of his caliber. If he's ever a starter on our team then I'd expect us to be in this same situation as we are now going forward, SUCKING. Not asking for Boozer to resign and play a lot, more of a mentoring role.

They would make a solid PF rotation, I just hate to cheat Boozer out of more minutes though because I think he still is a 24-30 mpg type. I'm ready to give Randle 36 mpg, which leaves only 12 for Boozer, I would look into it though.

I would definitely be interested in bringing back Boozer. But, given he'd be on a vet minimum salary, and a backup role, I doubt he'd want to stay.

They seem to get along very well.

I think it's definitely worth bringing back Boozer.

He showed up every day for work, wants to be here, is a positive veteran/locker room influence, didn't act like a bitch when coach benched him, was very consistent offensively.

Granted he has issues on defense and is getting up there in age, but that's why you give him an reasonable contract.

My opinion of him has jumped like 1500% of him since I was able to watch him play this year.

Double post

I'd love our big man rotation to be Randle and Boozer, with Black as the 3rd big. I'm not too keen on developing Kelly. I suppose our big rotation could be:

Randle/Boozer/Kelly
*Towns or Okafor/Black/*Dakari

This was a nice watch.Thanks for posting it.

Randle with all left-handed hooks, jabs, and punches.

he loves it in la...with all those #holdat hashes.

Slava wrote:

LApwnd wrote:think he's worth bringing back if we're to be competitive next yr, if anything he would serve to be a great player to practice against for Randle, Boozer post moves are pretty advanced even in his old age. Given Randle height, Boozer is a great model to copy offensively as Boozer has lots of little quirks in his post game to get around bigger players.

If we bring him back we keep stalling Kelly's development, especially after he's done a total 180 since moving back to PF.

Kelly's development? Who cares about that when Randle would be playing PF.

Michael Lucky wrote:

Slava wrote:

LApwnd wrote:think he's worth bringing back if we're to be competitive next yr, if anything he would serve to be a great player to practice against for Randle, Boozer post moves are pretty advanced even in his old age. Given Randle height, Boozer is a great model to copy offensively as Boozer has lots of little quirks in his post game to get around bigger players.

If we bring him back we keep stalling Kelly's development, especially after he's done a total 180 since moving back to PF.

Kelly's development? Who cares about that when Randle would be playing PF.

Why pay Boozer when we can get that production out of Kelly? Especially when he created a fan club with how well he played the stretch 4 under D'Antoni? That's a guy that can develop a good trade value given the proper minutes.

Slava wrote:

Michael Lucky wrote:

Slava wrote:
If we bring him back we keep stalling Kelly's development, especially after he's done a total 180 since moving back to PF.

Kelly's development? Who cares about that when Randle would be playing PF.

Why pay Boozer when we can get that production out of Kelly? Especially when he created a fan club with how well he played the stretch 4 under D'Antoni? That's a guy that can develop a good trade value given the proper minutes.

No i know what you're saying, it's just that you're not really developing a player that you're using as a back up generally. Not to mention his minutes would start to dwindle the more games Randle would get under his belt. I'm not sure there would be enough minutes given for his trade value to elevate itself. Now as for getting rid of Boozer and keeping Kelly, i'm all for it.

even though Boozer is like what 10yrs older than Kelly, I'd still prefer Boozer O to Kelly. Both are severely terrible at D anyways but at least Boozer is still a beast on the block and going in against backups would be even more ideal for him. Kelly on the other hand is pretty much non existent if he can't get his shot going.