Resigning Boozer Jazz's top priority

[InGameStrategy]

You have information that says the Jazz could have traded for Cousins but opted not too? I'm interessted in that data.

It was mentioned in another thread that Simmons said it. So it's a secondary source of a secondary source, but I'm assuming it was accurate. What I don't know are the exact negotiations. I can understand Utah not wanting to take on Devin Harris's contract. But if Humphries, Jianlian and the NJ pick were offered for Millsap and the #9 (plus whatever necessary filler), I don't understand. Smells like excess loyalty to Millsap to me. Maybe Utah would feel more comfortable after they re-signed Boozer. Or perhaps they would do a S&T for Booze. Maybe it's why Utah opted for a wing instead of a big: the prospect of trading for one with CB or PM.

 

[Chad Feldheimer]

It was mentioned in another thread that Simmons said it. So it's a secondary source of a secondary source, but I'm assuming it was accurate. What I don't know are the exact negotiations. I can understand Utah not wanting to take on Devin Harris's contract. But if Humphries, Jianlian and the NJ pick were offered for Millsap and the #9 (plus whatever necessary filler), I don't understand. Smells like excess loyalty to Millsap to me.

Or they didn't want to lose Boozer & Millsap in the same off seasons and have Cousins & Harris to show for it.

 

[Harcher]

It was mentioned in another thread that Simmons said it. So it's a secondary source of a secondary source, but I'm assuming it was accurate. What I don't know are the exact negotiations. I can understand Utah not wanting to take on Devin Harris's contract. But if Humphries, Jianlian and the NJ pick were offered for Millsap and the #9 (plus whatever necessary filler), I don't understand. Smells like excess loyalty to Millsap to me. Maybe Utah would feel more comfortable after they re-signed Boozer. Or perhaps they would do a S&T for Booze. Maybe it's why Utah opted for a wing instead of a big: the prospect of trading for one with CB or PM.

Hmmm. I'll go look up Simmons. He is a hater, btw.

But i was very doubtful that the Jazz COULD trade up. What do the Jazz have that would be of trade value for that sort of pick? (Only Wall, Turner Cousins are trade up material in my oopinion.) The only value we have that could entice is DWill and Millsap. DWill is above the value of the trade up and I would guess that Millsap is below the value of the trade up.

The only options that ever seemed viable to me were contract-issue trades and even those were minimally attractive in my view of the NON-JAZZ team.

 

[Harcher]

Hmmm. I'll go look up Simmons. He is a hater, btw.

But i was very doubtful that the Jazz COULD trade up. What do the Jazz have that would be of trade value for that sort of pick? (Only Wall, Turner Cousins are trade up material in my oopinion.) The only value we have that could entice is DWill and Millsap. DWill is above the value of the trade up and I would guess that Millsap is below the value of the trade up.

The only options that ever seemed viable to me were contract-issue trades and even those were minimally attractive in my view of the NON-JAZZ team.

And the other note was very polar conflicting opinions of Cousins maturity. I think one coach who is NOT good at dealing with that is Jerry Sloan. I think Calipari is a great coach for that type of guy, but sloan not so much. So even if there was an offer for cousins, it was probably steep and the Jazz would be risking a lot on Jerry getting along with a maturity challenged individual... Prolly not gonna happen.

 

[billyshelby]

I don't buy for one second that the Jazz will enter meaningful negotiations with Boozer. I can see bargain hunting. I can't see trying to compete with his other offers. I also don't see Boozer being interested in signing back in Utah. This will all sort itself out, and we should be able to get something interesting in a Booze S&T.

 

[Shaggy]

There's a huge difference between the team and the front office. You can support the team and not support the front office.

WARNING WARNING WARNING ------------------DO NOT READ THIS POST IF YOU GET OFFENDED EASILY!----------------------WARNING WARNING WARNING

I believe Jesus died for our sins and God stood there and watched. Does that make God a coconspirator? Should I hate God for not helping Jesus? Or should I have faith in God and his plan? Can I support Jesus without supporting God?

 

[Borat]

Hmmm. I'll go look up Simmons. He is a hater, btw.

But i was very doubtful that the Jazz COULD trade up. What do the Jazz have that would be of trade value for that sort of pick? (Only Wall, Turner Cousins are trade up material in my oopinion.) The only value we have that could entice is DWill and Millsap. DWill is above the value of the trade up and I would guess that Millsap is below the value of the trade up.

The only options that ever seemed viable to me were contract-issue trades and even those were minimally attractive in my view of the NON-JAZZ team.

This is a well thought out post. First, I fully agree, only Wall, Turner, and Cousins are elite type of talents in this draft and were worth trading up for. It would have been amazing to get into top 4 to get these guys (well, it looks like the only realistic trade up would be to #3 or #4 to get Cousins), but is it worth giving up Millsap for? And even Millsap nay not have been enough. So, instead we picked a guy, who is as good a prospect as anyone aside from the aforementioned 3.

I don't get all the bitching about our FO. Would it really be better to get Paul George, a 6-9 Forward who shot just 42% against crappy competition and did not take his team anywhere? That's awfully similar to Kirk Snyder. Cole Aldrich is a decent prospect, but he is 2 years older than Hayward, and is just a role player. Hayward is way younger and was actually a leader, top dog, of #2 ranked team nationally. The more I analyze the facts, the more I realize we picked up the best prospect outside of Wall, Turner, and Cousins. Yes, the one that's a whole level below these 3, but nevertheless a great talent.

 

[vslice02]

I saw the KOC interview where he mentions this, and it was more of a situation where a reporter asked: Is resigning Boozer your top priority? and O'Connor answered in his usual monotonous voice Oh absolutely it is or something of the sort. Not to nitpick, but my initial impression was that this was merely more of the company line of We definitely would like to have Carlos back more than We really want Carlos back and will try like crazy to make it happen.

Coming from someone who really wants the Jazz to resign Boozer, I highly doubt they will. Just my 2 cents.

 

[TheMulletMutilator]

I like that Boozer is a 20/10 man but let's face it. With or without him we aren't getting past the Lakers. It seems foolish to throw the refrigerator and kitchen sink at him unless you are just hoping to have another 50 win season and 2nd round exit at best.

 

[Borat]

I saw the KOC interview where he mentions this, and it was more of a situation where a reporter asked: Is resigning Boozer your top priority? and O'Connor answered in his usual monotonous voice Oh absolutely it is or something of the sort. Not to nitpick, but my initial impression was that this was merely more of the company line of We definitely would like to have Carlos back more than We really want Carlos back and will try like crazy to make it happen.

Coming from someone who really wants the Jazz to resign Boozer, I highly doubt they will. Just my 2 cents.

I think you missed the key point of KOC's answer. He said he wanted to resign Boozer, and they reason he gave was that he is a 20 and 10 guy, and these are hard to find. I think that makes perfect sense. KOC gave honest answer. We have a good chance to get 20 and 10 guy (well 20/11 reg season and 20/13 in play-offs). It better be our top priority this summer. That is actually consistent with our draft selection of a SF as well. KOC is trying to focus on bringing Booz back this summer, and we simply don't have midlevel money for a guy like Korver and will definitely lose him. Much easier to replace 7 and 2 guy than 20 and 11 one. KOC was dead serious. We need Booz back. Otherwise we lose 20/11 guy for nothing (baring sign and trade for another good player).

 

[Harcher]

This is a well thought out post. First, I fully agree, only Wall, Turner, and Cousins are elite type of talents in this draft and were worth trading up for. It would have been amazing to get into top 4 to get these guys (well, it looks like the only realistic trade up would be to #3 or #4 to get Cousins), but is it worth giving up Millsap for? And even Millsap nay not have been enough. So, instead we picked a guy, who is as good a prospect as anyone aside from the aforementioned 3.

I don't get all the bitching about our FO. Would it really be better to get Paul George, a 6-9 Forward who shot just 42% against crappy competition and did not take his team anywhere? That's awfully similar to Kirk Snyder. Cole Aldrich is a decent prospect, but he is 2 years older than Hayward, and is just a role player. Hayward is way younger and was actually a leader, top dog, of #2 ranked team nationally. The more I analyze the facts, the more I realize we picked up the best prospect outside of Wall, Turner, and Cousins. Yes, the one that's a whole level below these 3, but nevertheless a great talent.

Thanks.

Snyder was the best phyical talent measuread at the pre draft camp. he did take Nevada to Sweet16. He popped a rivet in his brain when he met up with Jerry Sloan who didn't worship him and his skills. At the time, I thought Kirk was the steal of the draft. However, i had no clue about his mental situation.

Paul George is exactly & only a prospect - he did nothing in college to give impression of real NBA talent. In this case I predict bust.

I'm thinking there are three things needed at NBA physical skills, bb iq, competive nature (MJ was tops in all three.) I think Hayward has a chance becuase he reportedly has loads of the last two and *hopfully* enough of the first. We'll see.

 

[Borat]

Thanks.

Snyder was the best phyical talent measuread at the pre draft camp. he did take Nevada to Sweet16. He popped a rivet in his brain when he met up with Jerry Sloan who didn't worship him and his skills. At the time, I thought Kirk was the steal of the draft. However, i had no clue about his mental situation.

Paul George is exactly & only a prospect - he did nothing in college to give impression of real NBA talent. In this case I predict bust.

I'm thinking there are three things needed at NBA physical skills, bb iq, competive nature (MJ was tops in all three.) I think Hayward has a chance becuase he reportedly has loads of the last two and *hopfully* enough of the first. We'll see.

Agree 100% about Paul George. I would be shocked if he is not out of NBA after his rookie contract. About Snyder though, it is not just mental issue. True, he did take his team to sweet 16 once, but he only shot 43% his last year. That's better than Paul George, but still very poor for a forward. So, his shooting was a huge concern before the draft. Also, if you look at the year he took his team to sweet 16, it could have been attributed to luck to a degree. You have to win 3 more games in the tournament to get to Finals (which is what Hayward did). Also, Hayward took his team to 25 game winning streak, which dramatically decreases "luck" factor. Additionally, Hayward was the best player on US Pan Am team, which won gold medal. So, I just don't think 43% shooting Synder comparison is fair to Hayward. It is more suitable to George, if anything.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Or they didn't want to lose Boozer & Millsap in the same off seasons and have Cousins & Harris to show for it.

If they could afford it (they probably couldn't), they could've traded away Millsap and #9 for Cousins, Yi, and Humphries. Maybe the numbers didn't work, and NJ probably wanted Utah to take Harris, too. If NJ was demanding more, than maybe I can understand. But if Utah were able to get Cousins for Millsap and re-sign Boozer, then I think that they should have done it.

I think that Millsap is approaching to be an equivalent player in impact as Boozer, but at a much lower price. It's nice to have two starter-caliber (or near-starter-caliber) PFs on a team, but if the coach is tempted to play them both together against a lineup of two 7-footers (or one 7-footer and one 6'10"+ player), then it's not productive to have both of them, especially when you can end up with a legit player at another position.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Agree 100% about Paul George. I would be shocked if he is not out of NBA after his rookie contract. About Snyder though, it is not just mental issue. True, he did take his team to sweet 16 once, but he only shot 43% his last year. That's better than Paul George, but still very poor for a forward. So, his shooting was a huge concern before the draft. Also, if you look at the year he took his team to sweet 16, it could have been attributed to luck to a degree. You have to win 3 more games in the tournament to get to Finals (which is what Hayward did). Also, Hayward took his team to 25 game winning streak, which dramatically decreases "luck" factor. Additionally, Hayward was the best player on US Pan Am team, which won gold medal. So, I just don't think 43% shooting Synder comparison is fair to Hayward. It is more suitable to George, if anything.

Except that George shot better from the trey (albeit worse overall) and had similar stats in the other major categories (a bit fewer RBs, but more assists and steals). I'll give Hayward this: 8.2 RPG is a very nice number.

 

[Archie Moses]

I watch I would not call it support any longer. I watched 10 games max this year before the playoffs and have not paid for anything regarding the Jazz in 4 years. I won't financially support this team again until they show that they care in some way or other.

As far as watching? It cost me nothing extra and I have the time.

I might just stop watching the NBA though. I only watch for the Jazz. 99% of the NBA games are unwatcheable. I saw 1 finals game this year the 1st I've seen in full since the Jazz were last there.

If you really feel this way, then leave. The NBA does not need you. (I'm just kidding, bro, but the soccer dudes said stuff like this to me when I posted something similar in their grass dancer thread.)

 

[Jazzman_86]

KOC don't sing Boozer. Let Paul develop. He is an all star without Carlos.

 

[The Ghost of Blue Edwards]

WARNING WARNING WARNING ------------------DO NOT READ THIS POST IF YOU GET OFFENDED EASILY!----------------------WARNING WARNING WARNING

I believe Jesus died for our sins and God stood there and watched. Does that make God a coconspirator? Should I hate God for not helping Jesus? Or should I have faith in God and his plan? Can I support Jesus without supporting God?

Yes, you can support Jesus without supporting God. How is that even an argument?

 

[TheMulletMutilator]

KOC don't sing Boozer. Let Paul develop. He is an all star without Carlos.

We still need a big man. Sorry if I think 50 wins and ABSOLUTELY no shot at beating the Lakers in the playoffs is now considered mediocrity. I didn't think it would be possible in one single draft or one single year but we currently are still without a bearable 5. We have dumb and dumber taking up those spots.

 

[Borat]

Except that George shot better from the trey (albeit worse overall) and had similar stats in the other major categories (a bit fewer RBs, but more assists and steals). I'll give Hayward this: 8.2 RPG is a very nice number.

George's 3 point shooting is irrelevant when OVERALL (including 3 point shooting) he just can't accurately put the ball in the basket. Besides, the guy didn't play at the highest level (like Hayward did in tourney) and could not take his team to even be ranked. There is nothing to like in Gerge. It's Snyder all over again, maybe even worse.

 

[stockcillo12]

We still need a big man. Sorry if I think 50 wins and ABSOLUTELY no shot at beating the Lakers in the playoffs is now considered mediocrity. I didn't think it would be possible in one single draft or one single year but we currently are still without a bearable 5. We have dumb and dumber taking up those spots.

In the NBA WORLD not only exist LAKERS...

Dallas with 3 players of 7" like Haywood, Dampier and Nowitzki and eliminated in first round

Lakers win because they had better players and stars

Jazz with Haywood and without Boozer for example are worse team in my opinion