Moderators: Inigo Montoya, FJS
HammerDunk wrote:I would say they are winning despite his performance, and I would be very surprised to see them beat teams like BOS or MIA with him playing that way. Beating the Pacers and Hawks isn't that big of a deal. Neither team is particularly special in any way.
Dupe someone into trading for Boozer
The Bulls are in a tough position when it comes to Boozer. On one hand, they need offense. On the other, Boozer is so porous defensively that they can't depend on him down the stretch.
The numbers are staggering. The Bulls were better off this season with Boozer on the bench, according to plus-minus data from basketballvalue.com (minus-1.8 net rating). The Utah Jazz were better off in 2009-10 with Boozer on the bench (minus-2.0 net rating). Same thing in 2008-09: The Jazz were better off with Boozer riding pine (minus-6.6 net rating). That's three years running in which Boozer's defensive liabilities outsized his offensive exploits.
So what do they do? Well, they could use him to net a legitimate shooting guard, but this is the second postseason in a row in which he's floundered underneath the bright lights of the playoffs. He can't hide anymore. The Bulls may be better off lighting $60 million on fire than playing him 30 minutes a night into his 30s.
jazzfan1971 wrote:Now if they were losing and Boozer was sucking, I think some of this sour grape stuff might be justified. But, as long as they keep advancing I doubt anyone in Chicago is regretting teh Boozer signing.
Pippen wrote: Pippen then added, "We all know Carlos did not play at the level the team needed him to and that that hurt them more than anything because they couldn't rely on him. The flagrant foul, the pushing calls, the inability to finish strong around the basket. Now you're a liability. We can't hide you and now we have to take you out of the game."
Bat wrote:I'm not sure boozer will ever give Chicago what he gave us production wise. Jerry Sloan was the perfect coach, and Deron was the perfect duo with boozer, rose isn't that kind of player, and chicagos system doesn't work like sloans.
countrybama24 wrote:I think that ECF might be enough to leave a pretty bad taste. I honestly think that teams better with taj gibson starting.
This boozer debate is far too black or white. Can we just agree he plays good vs bad teams but against good defenses becomes a shell of his normal self? Also...
"The numbers are staggering. The Bulls were better off this season with Boozer on the bench, according to plus-minus data from basketballvalue.com (minus-1.8 net rating). The Utah Jazzwere better off in 2009-10 with Boozer on the bench (minus-2.0 net rating). Same thing in 2008-09: The Jazz were better off with Boozer riding pine (minus-6.6 net rating). That's three years running in which Boozer's defensive liabilities outsized his offensive exploits."
Just for perspective...Pippen wrote: Pippen then added, "We all know Carlos did not play at the level the team needed him to and that that hurt them more than anything because they couldn't rely on him. The flagrant foul, the pushing calls, the inability to finish strong around the basket. Now you're a liability. We can't hide you and now we have to take you out of the game."
jl342323 wrote:hide did utah space the floor with dwill, brewer, korver, milsap, and boozer?
Bat wrote:Boozers contract is quickly becoming one of the 2 or 3 worst in the league.
Like I've said many times, it simply doesn't matter if boozer plays well or not, his affect in the game is minimal.
drivewayball wrote:Boozer's effect on a game is minimal or less.... Yet here is, playing in another conference final, just like he did in Utah. It's a good thing that wherever he goes there always seem to be players to pick him up. Maybe that's what the jazz needed this season, a bum like boozer for the others to carry to a conference final.
+1000