riley doesn't like boozers posturing

seejaydeja · Post #1 » by **seejaydeja** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 7:23 pm

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/ ... posturing/

"I wasn't really comfortable with it," Riley said.

"I really don't know what kind of agreement that he and Utah have," Riley added. "We have had conversations about a number of things, but there hasn't been anything really, at all, nothing, about a trade for Carlos Boozer."

Think he's the only one?

Post #2 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 7:31 pm

That conniving sunnuvabitch. He is going to be on the team this year, no one wants him. There is no reason to trade him for expirings, he is expiring.

seejaydeja · Post #3 » by **seejaydeja** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 7:33 pm

I'm kind of interested in seeing his dumbass having to report back on Media day. I hope he gets eaten alive.

outerspacefella · Post #4 » by **outerspacefella** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 7:37 pm

My grandpa used to tell me: "Be carefull with your deeds and even more with your mouth; in life you usually go as far as your own stupidity allows you to go".
Boozer certainly put a big red light all over himself. If he did it because of stupidity, he should get some professional help on anxiety management...

Phenom415 · Post #5 » by **Phenom415** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 8:32 pm

ROFL -- what a douchef##k Boozer is.

hoops4life · Post #6 » by **hoops4life** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 8:44 pm

What an asshat!

Haha, He is such a lying bum. Nobody wants him. We should start an over under and take bets for his starting salary next year.

stevebozell · Post #7 » by **stevebozell** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 9:31 pm

Maybe Riley is doing a little posturing himself...

The best way to drive down the Jazz asking price is to make it seem that NOBODY wants him.

carrottop12 · Post #8 » by **carrottop12** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 9:33 pm

Riley has been around for 20+ years. He has no problem dealing with players like Boozer. Honestly I am surprised he even commented on it. I honestly don't think it means anything.

GP · Post #9 » by GP » Wed Aug 5, 2009 10:45 pm

If you guys are going to take riley literally at his word, I have to question how much you watch basketball. Riley was also the one who stated he had no intention of coaching the heat, then turned around fired SVG and coached the heat. Its all just GM speak. For this deal Riley has more to lose, because if Boozer want to go to miami and the heat admit to wanting him, but don't get him, they are going to hear about it from the fans. Its much better in this situation to not acknowledge the discussions. That way if something does happen, then Riley looks good and if nothing happens, they can always claim they never had interest.

rick333 · Post #10 » by **rick333** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 11:01 pm

My question is, why would it play any affect if Riley says there is nothing going on? Obviously the Jazz brass know whether something is going on. He can't use that scenario as leverage.

drivewayball · Post #11 » by **drivewayball** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 2:27 am

Let's push the replay button on this one. The sports wire services ... realgm and hoopsyhpe ... come out with the story that the Heat are "furiously pursuing Odom and Boozer, both of them." Media in Miami naturally contacts Boozer to ask him about it, just as they did Odom. Boozer says he'd love to play there. Exactly when or how did Boozer do any posturing of any kind? And what exactly is Riley uncomfortable with?

seejaydeja · Post #12 » by **seejaydeja** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 1:49 pm

If Riley is 'posturing' its futile. Jazz brass aren't stupid, and they already stated they won't do anything unless it makes us win games. They aren't gonna do a deal to make us worse. At this point i'm sure KOC and company are more than content to make Booz suit up and fulfill his contract this year. And at this point I really don't see the Jazz with any other option.

Paper Face · Post #13 » by **Paper Face** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 4:07 pm

The Heat and Chicago are desperate to get better, especially with how much the rest of the East improved in the last two months. Boozer is exactly the kind of big man scorer they want and need, and both teams have the pieces to do the deal.

Pat Riley is absolutely bluffing. As are the Bulls. These teams face an entire season of mediocrity in an economic downturn, and 2010 offers no guarantees. Chicago in particular can become an interesting dark horse contender in the East by adding Boozer to their core. The Jazz, meanwhile can go all the way to the 2nd round or perhaps even the WCF with Boozer on the team.

And Carlos? He'll be playing for a contract, and he'll be playing in 75+ games without question.

KOC truly holds all the cards.

AirP. · Post #14 » by **AirP.** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 8:34 pm

Paper Face wrote:The Heat and Chicago are desperate to get better, especially with how much the rest of the East improved in the last two months. Boozer is exactly the kind of big man scorer they want and need, and both teams have the pieces to do the deal.

Pat Riley is absolutely bluffing. As are the Bulls. These teams face an entire season of mediocrity in an economic downturn, and 2010 offers no guarantees. Chicago in particular can become an interesting dark horse contender in the East by adding Boozer to their core. The Jazz, meanwhile can go all the way to the 2nd round or perhaps even the WCF with Boozer on the team.

And Carlos? He'll be playing for a contract, and he'll be playing in 75+ games without question.

KOC truly holds all the cards.

Both Chicago and Miami can go 1 year without Boozer and pick him up without trading any assets, just cap space. With the Celtics, Cleveland and Orlando as the top teams in the East, there's not much hope that just adding Boozer makes Chicago or Miami a real threat to come out of the East quite yet. Rose has to develop and so does Beasley and they're a couple years away from getting to the level they should be at for most of their careers.

The reality of the situation is Utah has him for 1 more year unless they make a move. Short term Utah is better, long term they're loosing an asset for nothing much like Chicago did with Ben Gordon this year. So the question for Utah is, is it worth holding onto Boozer and spending all that luxury tax cash to basically rent Boozer for 1 year when you've already put money towards your PF of the future in Milsap?

Xanthis · Post #15 » by **Xanthis** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 9:08 pm

AirP. wrote:The reality of the situation is Utah has him for 1 more year unless they make a move. Short term Utah is better, long term they're loosing an asset for nothing much like Chicago did with Ben Gordon this year. So the question for Utah is, is it worth holding onto Boozer and spending all that luxury tax cash to basically rent Boozer for 1 year when you've already put money towards your PF of the future in Milsap?

We have to take back 75% salary....no reason not to pay the whole thing. We don't want multiple pieces of dead weight for our expiring contract.

Paper Face · Post #16 » by **Paper Face** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 10:13 pm

AirP. wrote:Both Chicago and Miami can go 1 year without Boozer and pick him up without trading any assets, just cap space.

How many opportunities are they going to have to pair up Rose with a 20/10 guy? Next summer is much more of a crapshoot than you are suggesting. Boozer might just as likely be snatched up by any number of rising teams as end up in Chicago. And Miami's situation is even worse. If Wade doesn't sign an extension they could be knocked back to the stone age.

With the Celtics, Cleveland and Orlando as the top teams in the East, there's not much hope that just adding Boozer makes Chicago or Miami a real threat to come out of the East quite yet.

Boozer would give both teams the inside/out game that they currently lack. I agree that it would put neither over the top, but it would put either in contention on paper & give their respective rosters and fans a sense of progression. Is there anything more valuable than a competitive roster in the NBA right now? Perhaps Chicago could spin their uneventful summer (wherein they lost Gordon) as a season tossed to the young players to let them develop, but I doubt it. They have too much excitement to build on after that 7-gamer against Boston. Miami? They have no such luxury. They either surround Wade with talent, or they could potentially watch him sign with the Knicks next July.

So the question for Utah is, is it worth holding onto Boozer and spending all that luxury tax cash to basically rent Boozer for 1 year when you've already put money towards your PF of the future in Milsap?

Why wouldn't it be worth it? With Boozer & a healthy season, the Jazz are in the top 4 teams in the West. Plus, he's playing for a contract. There's no telling how things might change for some teams as the season progresses. So there is no desperation to trade him now. If the Jazz can trade him for a legitimate wing, it balances out the roster. The LT burden is then softened next year with the Jazz' other current expirings (Harpring/Korver) & the possibility of trading Kirilenko's then expiring contract. If Boozer can't be traded, then you make a playoff run and say good-bye. The Jazz still have the assets to upgrade, and they still have NY's pick.

The luxury hit isn't that bad when you consider the fact that the Jazz have made money for more than 20 straight years. One year of LT, two at the most, is worth it to keep D-Will surrounded with talent & in contention so that he signs his next contract. The long term investment of this money is that the Jazz will keep their core and continue to remain in contention through the next 5-10 years of economic downturn. That's how you keep fans in the seats. It's worth the LT money.

hoops4life · Post #17 » by **hoops4life** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 10:52 pm

What a bloody slow week... this is killing me.

drivewayball · Post #18 » by **drivewayball** » Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:52 am

Xanthis wrote:
AirP. wrote:The reality of the situation is Utah has him for 1 more year unless they make a move. Short term Utah is better, long term they're loosing an asset for nothing much like Chicago did with Ben Gordon this year. So the question for Utah is, is it worth holding onto Boozer and spending all that luxury tax cash to basically rent Boozer for 1 year when you've already put money towards your PF of the future in Milsap?

We have to take back 75% salary....no reason not to pay the whole thing. We don't want multiple pieces of dead weight for our expiring contract.

The twenty five percent savings you are talking about, amounts to over $3 million. Add a similar amount in luxury tax savings and then you are saying that $6 million dollars means absolutely nothing. The Jazz might as well keep Boozer. You are kidding, right? While $6 million might be a pittance to a high roller like yourself, I doubt that the Miller family takes it so lightly.

Xanthis · Post #19 » by **Xanthis** » Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:11 pm

drivewayball wrote:The twenty five percent savings you are talking about, amounts to over $3 million. Add a similar amount in luxury tax savings and then you are saying that $6 million dollars means absolutely nothing. The Jazz might as well keep Boozer. You are kidding, right? While $6 million might be a pittance to a high roller like yourself, I doubt that the Miller family takes it so lightly.

Yeah nothing like saving $6 million this year to have guys on the roster that are going to get paid for another few years and keep the team from having money to spend. Boozer comes off the books at the end of the year....12.7 million off of the books. Obviously if the Millers were looking to cash out they would have already. You guys are just being ridiculous now.

puppa bear · Post #20 » by **puppa bear** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:40 am

The thing I don't understand is how short-sighted some of the comments being made are.

Boozer and the Jazz have made it clear that neither intends to continue their partnership after this season, hence him having a career year playing for a contract on a team he wont resign with (& doesn't want to resign him) only effects the development of the players (& team chemistry) who will be there after he runs out of town to whoever is willing to give him more than he's worth.

Of course no team wants to get worse in any trade, but I think (& hopefully the FO does to) it needs to be looked at over more than just 1 season and make the move that netts them the best return now, for the future. 1 or 2 Sloan-type players on reasonable/expiring contracts and a pick/prospect should be enough.

I am a Miami fan, and thus think that UD/JJ/2010 1st should be enough of a return to pull the trigger, but I'm sure that Chicago could probly put together a similar offer, so maybe teams are waiting for the value to drop and/or Jazz are waiting for a better offer. Either way, I don't think Riley thinks negative of Boozer's comments, and probly actually likes them because it lowers Boozer's perceived value around the league.