45/3 years for Boogie?
Moderators: dms269, HMFFL, Jamaaliver
45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- Junior
- Posts: 465
- And1: 420
- Joined: Jul 19, 2002
-
45/3 years for Boogie?
How would you all feel about a 3 year 45 million dollar deal for Boogie Cousins. He is really damaged goods now and he may not get an offer better than that.
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,770
- And1: 13,513
- Joined: Jun 28, 2017
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
WuriderX wrote:How would you all feel about a 3 year 45 million dollar deal for Boogie Cousins. He is really damaged goods now and he may not get an offer better than that.
You kinda answered your own question, no?
How's about a 1 year minimum deal since he'll be rehabbing. He gives us a discount after that since we allowed him to rehab on our dime?
Honestly, I'd pass altogether. I tend to think the achilles-then-quad thing isn't a great sign for his long-term health. We might have seen his best days already and, frankly, they weren't that great.
king01 

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- _s_t_u_r_t_
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,641
- And1: 723
- Joined: Jun 13, 2007
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
It's an interesting question because he is the ball movement big that I think Schlenk covets. But I don't think the timing is right. He's the kind of disruptive personality that you can bring on to a team when they're already established, and can be an asset because the culture of the team is too well-established... I think of Rodman joining the Bulls at just the right time. Two, three years from now, maybe we're in a that kind of place.
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________


_____________________________________________
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 909
- And1: 159
- Joined: Apr 19, 2002
- Location: Atlanta
- Contact:
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
All depends on the draft. I seriously think NYK gets him.
If it counts luck is worth the same as skill
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- Atlanta Hawk Fan
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 7,653
- And1: 659
- Joined: Jul 19, 2002
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:It's an interesting question because he is the ball movement big that I think Schlenk covets. But I don't think the timing is right. He's the kind of disruptive personality that you can bring on to a team when they're already established, and can be an asset because the culture of the team is too well-established... I think of Rodman joining the Bulls at just the right time. Two, three years from now, maybe we're in a that kind of place.
What are the string of issues he has had that disrupted his team in SAC, NO and GS? I know that he isn't a leader and is a bit strange but the disruptive narrative seems overblown. A lot more smoke than fire.
The big issues around him now is the injuries, imo.

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,770
- And1: 13,513
- Joined: Jun 28, 2017
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
Atlanta Hawk Fan wrote:_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:It's an interesting question because he is the ball movement big that I think Schlenk covets. But I don't think the timing is right. He's the kind of disruptive personality that you can bring on to a team when they're already established, and can be an asset because the culture of the team is too well-established... I think of Rodman joining the Bulls at just the right time. Two, three years from now, maybe we're in a that kind of place.
What are the string of issues he has had that disrupted his team in SAC, NO and GS? I know that he isn't a leader and is a bit strange but the disruptive narrative seems overblown. A lot more smoke than fire.
The big issues around him now is the injuries, imo.
I think we all can agree (yes, even the most ardent 'Cat fans among us) that he's a lot to deal with attitude-wise.
He's not had off-court incidents and whatnot, but I don't think it's unfair to characterize him as 'disruptive'. Considering he's not a leader and there is questionable impact on winning (despite his diverse skillset), it's not automatic that he's worth the trouble.
king01 

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- Jamaaliver
- Forum Mod - Hawks
- Posts: 45,145
- And1: 17,176
- Joined: Sep 22, 2005
- Location: Officially a citizen of the World...
- Contact:
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
Atlanta Hawk Fan wrote:What are the string of issues he has had that disrupted his team in SAC, NO and GS?
I know it's been a while, but this one was always my favorite:
2011Kings Fine Cousins For Fight With Teammate
Cousins got into an altercation in the locker room with Donte Greene after a 99-97 home loss to Oklahoma City on Saturday. Cousins reportedly was upset that Greene had not passed him the ball for the final shot in the game. Greene passed the ball to Tyreke Evans, who missed a 3-point attempt.
President of Basketball Operations Geoff Petrie said there is no place for violence on or off the court in the NBA and that’s why Cousins needed to be punished.Spoiler:
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- Atlanta Hawk Fan
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 7,653
- And1: 659
- Joined: Jul 19, 2002
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
kg01 wrote:Atlanta Hawk Fan wrote:_s_t_u_r_t_ wrote:It's an interesting question because he is the ball movement big that I think Schlenk covets. But I don't think the timing is right. He's the kind of disruptive personality that you can bring on to a team when they're already established, and can be an asset because the culture of the team is too well-established... I think of Rodman joining the Bulls at just the right time. Two, three years from now, maybe we're in a that kind of place.
What are the string of issues he has had that disrupted his team in SAC, NO and GS? I know that he isn't a leader and is a bit strange but the disruptive narrative seems overblown. A lot more smoke than fire.
The big issues around him now is the injuries, imo.
I think we all can agree (yes, even the most ardent 'Cat fans among us) that he's a lot to deal with attitude-wise.
He's not had off-court incidents and whatnot, but I don't think it's unfair to characterize him as 'disruptive'. Considering he's not a leader and there is questionable impact on winning (despite his diverse skillset), it's not automatic that he's worth the trouble.
I'm a Cats fan so that is why I asked the question. Because he had the reputation as a wildcard personality at UK but caused basically zero issues with the team.
I don't think he is likely worth the money it will take given his health and am 100% open to discussion around whether his stats outstrip his contribution to winning but I just think the "he is a troublemaker" narrative is overblown. He has a few incidents in his past but most of the time is just playing and putting up huge numbers.
For example, Chris Paul gets 100000% less flack for repeatedly hitting people in the nuts than Cousins gets for glaring at an opponent. Kobe butted heads and had conflicts with teammates constantly -- waay more than Cousins has had -- but never had that kind of reputation. Bobby Portis and Nikola Mirotic fight but nobody seems to be writing them off as 'disruptive personalities' that need to be avoided. I don't think he is perfect by any means -- just saying I think the reaction to anything he done is out of proportion to what he does. The comparison to Rodman illustrates this. If you named the top 10 craziest things done by Rodman, Cousin's single craziest thing wouldn't make that list.
Bigger picture, I'm definitely not all-in on us going for Cousins but that has more to do with health than personality for me.

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,770
- And1: 13,513
- Joined: Jun 28, 2017
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
Atlanta Hawk Fan wrote:kg01 wrote:Atlanta Hawk Fan wrote:
What are the string of issues he has had that disrupted his team in SAC, NO and GS? I know that he isn't a leader and is a bit strange but the disruptive narrative seems overblown. A lot more smoke than fire.
The big issues around him now is the injuries, imo.
I think we all can agree (yes, even the most ardent 'Cat fans among us) that he's a lot to deal with attitude-wise.
He's not had off-court incidents and whatnot, but I don't think it's unfair to characterize him as 'disruptive'. Considering he's not a leader and there is questionable impact on winning (despite his diverse skillset), it's not automatic that he's worth the trouble.
I'm a Cats fan so that is why I asked the question. Because he had the reputation as a wildcard personality at UK but caused basically zero issues with the team.
I don't think he is likely worth the money it will take given his health and am 100% open to discussion around whether his stats outstrip his contribution to winning but I just think the "he is a troublemaker" narrative is overblown. He has a few incidents in his past but most of the time is just playing and putting up huge numbers.
For example, Chris Paul gets 100000% less flack for repeatedly hitting people in the nuts than Cousins gets for glaring at an opponent. Kobe butted heads and had conflicts with teammates constantly -- waay more than Cousins has had -- but never had that kind of reputation. Bobby Portis and Nikola Mirotic fight but nobody seems to be writing them off as 'disruptive personalities' that need to be avoided. I don't think he is perfect by any means -- just saying I think the reaction to anything he done is out of proportion to what he does. The comparison to Rodman illustrates this. If you named the top 10 craziest things done by Rodman, Cousin's single craziest thing wouldn't make that list.
Bigger picture, I'm definitely not all-in on us going for Cousins but that has more to do with health than personality for me.
Wait ... you're a 'Cats fan? Who knew?

I actually agree that the discussion is a health one, not wholly an attitude one. However, I do think his attitude is something that needs to be considered.
The reality is, if you're constantly having to cater to a guy. Constantly having to calm him down. Constantly having to make sure he's ok mentally. All that adds up. No, he hasn't been Rodman-level crazy. But that roller coaster of emotion Cousins always seems to be on can be just as disruptive.
Add on top of that he hasn't shown that he truly contributes to winning ...
king01 

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,715
- And1: 5,139
- Joined: Jul 01, 2017
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
It’s over for Boogie. Never wanted him here to begin with so...it’s all good I guess.. 

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- ATL Boy
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 10,959
- And1: 4,005
- Joined: May 15, 2011
- Location: Atlanta GA
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
I'd throw a 1-year deal at him depending on what we do with our cap space this offseason but I'm not comfortable with anything more than that. I think the "he's a bad leader" narrative is overblown but him sustaining two major injuries in back to back years is a legitimate concern. I'd look to mitigate the risk as much as possible.
SichtingLives wrote:life hack:
When a man heaves a live chainsaw towards you from distance, stand still. No one has good accuracy throwing a chainsaw.
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,236
- And1: 12,902
- Joined: Mar 11, 2014
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
I'd pass, for a mumber of reasons.
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 769
- And1: 176
- Joined: Oct 08, 2002
- Location: Columbus, GA
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
I don't follow him, so someone will have to give me proper insight for the on court negatives... I've heard he's kinda slow in transition and his defense isn't anything to write home about. As far as the attitude stuff, some stories say teammates love him and others say he's a distraction. Not sure what to make of all the rumors/reports, but I'm a firm believer in where there's smoke there's fire.
I'd just as soon not take the risk just for the sake of expediting the process. I'm less interested in his productivity if it comes at the cost of the great team chemistry that we currently have. I mean, from what Bob says these guys very much love playing together.
I think a one year deal would be fine to evaluate him, but he'll get a better offer that I'd not be inclined to match on years or salary.
I'd just as soon not take the risk just for the sake of expediting the process. I'm less interested in his productivity if it comes at the cost of the great team chemistry that we currently have. I mean, from what Bob says these guys very much love playing together.
I think a one year deal would be fine to evaluate him, but he'll get a better offer that I'd not be inclined to match on years or salary.
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 869
- And1: 1,127
- Joined: Nov 30, 2017
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
No thanks, doesn’t seem to fit what this team’s about and where it’s headed.
Hazerbeamidge 

Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- D21
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,574
- And1: 689
- Joined: Sep 09, 2005
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
Hazer wrote:No thanks, doesn’t seem to fit what this team’s about and where it’s headed.
On his potential and what he already show on the court, I would say it could be a great fit, but him adapting what he has to do to get the team at his best is too much of a gamble for me.
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- KevinMcreynolds
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,171
- And1: 3,494
- Joined: Feb 07, 2010
- Location: Sacramento
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
Too much. Just to give you an idea, we're debating whether we should bring him back at 1/7m.
Save your money/flexibility. You have an awesome young team and coach + assets, might as well be patient.
Save your money/flexibility. You have an awesome young team and coach + assets, might as well be patient.
floppymoose wrote:Too much Vlad. Sixers can't handle it. Solid gold.
"I'm a big proponent of footwork. Believe me." ~Jim Barnett
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
- HMFFL
- Global Mod
- Posts: 53,942
- And1: 10,338
- Joined: Mar 10, 2004
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
I like Boogie but after this recent injury I'm concerned he signs anything more than a one year deal to only play "safe".
I expect him to receive more money anyway.
Sent from my SM-N920P using RealGM mobile app
I expect him to receive more money anyway.
Sent from my SM-N920P using RealGM mobile app
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,773
- And1: 5,478
- Joined: Jul 01, 2014
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
At his current status for our pace, I wouldn't even give him the min
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- Starter
- Posts: 2,486
- And1: 2,517
- Joined: Jul 02, 2017
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
I don't think the regime wants any reclamation projects. I don't really either.
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
-
- Junior
- Posts: 257
- And1: 251
- Joined: Jan 16, 2019
-
Re: 45/3 years for Boogie?
I would rather give the keys to Len then bring in Boogie. If we sign that guy we get his bad juju too. Not saying he is a bad guy but **** seems to always go against him and he is about cocky to boot