kamazilla wrote:^^^
Bottom line- Boozer's offense is irreplaceable for the Jazz. As far as being undersized- he dwarfs Millsap and plays plenty big for a 4. The problem is, and always has been with this core, a complete lack of length, tenaciousness and athleticism at the five. Were Boozer playing next to any sort of real center, he would come off as being all-world nearly every night. Good teams capitalize on their strengths and address their weaknesses; they do not watch their most productive players walk while pretending no weakness exists. No Boozer means the Jazz take a serious step backward.
First, Boozers offense is very replaceable versus the Lakers, which is something the Jazz have to gear their team towards since they (and the thunder) will be the team to beat over the next 5 years. Millsap outplayed Boozer in every facet of the game (scored more / more efficiently at a way higher percentage, got the line, attacked the basket, got offensive boards etc).
This is true any team that has a really big 4 to throw at boozer, he shrinks from contact and relies on his jumper which worked against bad defensive teams like the nuggets, but not against contenders.
Vs. Lakers ----
Boozer: 15.5 pts @ 44%, 13 rbs, 2.5 turnovers, .2 blks, .2 stls 38 min.
Millsap: 19 pts @ 53%, 7 rebounds (he was playing a center), 1.2 turnovers, 1.4 blks, 1.2 stls, 32 min.
And don't say they were double teaming Boozer, they weren't. Boozer was one-on-one vs. Pau (mostly jumpers), and Bynum is as tough a matchup for Paul.
Second, Millsap is at least 90% of Boozers offensive output. He scores 20 pts on the regular, he averaged at least 18 in his third year as a starter, he shoots as good if not better than Boozer.
Sure, he doesn't often play with his back to the basket, but that is not a requirement to generate interior offense anymore in the NBA. Millsap has an excellent face up game, a quality step back jumper, good post moves (e.g. burning artest with the up and under) and is in general very effective going toward the basket. He literally has not had a chance to prove himself as a starter yet and get the minutes Boozer got (which definitely hurts his output, see
http://ballhype.com/story/the_paul_millsap_doctrine/), he can definitely be you're third best player on a championship team. Boozer can't be your second best player (empirically proven), so why keep him anyways.
Third, defense wins championships. Boozer's defense is all-NBA terrible. Yes Paul is as short. But paul has a monstrous wingspan, quick feet, and solid athleticism / vertical leap to contest shots. Boozer does none of the above, and consistently screws up defensive rotations because he is defensively (Please Use More Appropriate Word). Paul is really a quiet good defender actually. Boozer is awful. Even if paul is only 80% of Boozers offense, its a small price to pay for a huge upgrade at defense.
Yes Boozer would look good with a defensive center who hides some of his weakness, Paul would look better. Not to mention, we're unlikely to get a truly elite defensive 5, so we will probably have to settle with a quality (but not elite) defensive 4 and 5 and play team defense.
