What's new
By:
Filters

CARLOS Boozer

Sloanfeld said:
So now that Boozer has put together a very productive string of games with Chicago, I just have to ask?




WHERE ARE ALL THE BOOZER HATERS AT??????????????????????



Taste of your own medicine, ****ing losers.

BOW DOWN, BEND OVER, AND SUBMIT TO SLOANFELD.
Click to expand...

Boozer puts up good numbers, but he is a terrible teammate and the Jazz have better chemistry/better team and thus a better record. Also no worries he will be injured in no time. The Jazz players clearly didnt like him. Especially Dwill.
 
Beantown said:
Boozer puts up good numbers, but he is a terrible teammate and the Jazz have better chemistry/better team and thus a better record. Also no worries he will be injured in no time. The Jazz players clearly didnt like him. Especially Dwill.
Click to expand...

You guys and your 'team chemistry' and 'locker room issues' are just pulling this **** right out of your ***. It's quite pathetic.

It's fine if you believe we are better off with Jeffersuck than Boozer, but it's just RE-DICK making stuff up all the time support your opinion.
 
Sloanfeld said:
You guys and your 'team chemistry' and 'locker room issues' are just pulling this **** right out of your ***. It's quite pathetic.

It's fine if you believe we are better off with Jeffersuck than Boozer, but it's just RE-DICK making stuff up all the time support your opinion.
Click to expand...

Then why is our record better this year than last?...also its THE JAZZ that keep talking about how they are playing better because of their chemistry...on AND off the court. I also know that Dwill did not like Boozer.
 
The record issue is pure garbage. Jazz played WAY better the second half of last season than the first half. To suggest that the record would mean anything, in THIS comparison due to that reason is pure ********.

And you earn no credibility if you don't have any sources. You know jack ****. SLTrib and DesNews back me up.

I didn't type the word anything twice, but it's appearing that way.
 
Sloanfeld said:
The record issue is pure garbage. Jazz played WAY better the second half of last season than the first half. To suggest that the record would mean anything, in THIS comparison due to that reason is pure ********.

And you earn no credibility if you don't have any sources. You know jack ****. SLTrib and DesNews back me up.

I didn't type the word anything twice, but it's appearing that way.
Click to expand...

Why do the Jazz players keep talking about how much the chemistry is better? Also Locke talked about how you would NEVER see Boozer hanging out with the team. My source is the golf club I worked at where Dwill is a member. About every Jazz player has been up there with him either golfing or at dinner/parties. Boozer was never up once or has ever been. Members that know Dwill very well told us they did not get along and had no real relationship off the court.
 
Sloanfeld said:
You guys and your 'team chemistry' and 'locker room issues' are just pulling this **** right out of your ***. It's quite pathetic.

It's fine if you believe we are better off with Jeffersuck than Boozer, but it's just RE-DICK making stuff up all the time support your opinion.
Click to expand...

chicago road record seem pretty nice for a team with boozie
 
Sloanfeld said:
The record issue is pure garbage. Jazz played WAY better the second half of last season than the first half. To suggest that the record would mean anything, in THIS comparison due to that reason is pure ********.
Click to expand...

lol. We had Bozzer for six years and you want to talk about half of an NBA season.
 
Beantown said:
Why do the Jazz players keep talking about how much the chemistry is better? Also Locke talked about how you would NEVER see Boozer hanging out with the team. My source is the golf club I worked at where Dwill is a member. About every Jazz player has been up there with him either golfing or at dinner/parties. Boozer was never up once or has ever been. Members that know Dwill very well told us they did not get along and had no real relationship off the court.
Click to expand...

Of course they will say team chemistry it better, nobody is going to say it's worse unless they are losing.

A guy in the media talking bad about Carlos Boozer? Really? Some of these clowns, namely Sir Hacks A Lot GORDON MONSON, owe their career to Carlos Boozer.

As far as the rest of your post, not everybody in the NBA is required to be a golfer. My goodness. I hear people talk about stuff all the time and they have no clue what the hell they are talking about. The grapevine is almost always ********.
 
FWIW, during Utah's 17-2 stretch last season you heard the same talk about how great the chemistry on the team was. It was also a big topic during the 12-1 start to the 06-07 season (although it quickly faded by season's end when Deron and Boozer called out other teammates for making vacation plans before being eliminated by the Spurs). When you have a good group of guys (which the Jazz generally have) chemistry rarely becomes an issue when you're winning.

To me, talk of players hanging out off-the-court is overrated. Yes, it's good that they don't despise one another but the '97 and '98 Jazz teams that went to the Finals had dozens of more "chemistry issues" and they still won. In the NBA chemistry will hurt you more than it helps.
 
With Boozer this is easily a 3-2 road trip. We are now staring 1-4 and possibly 0-5 in the face. Sure Boozer isn't great agaisnt Gasol, but Millsap is getting owned on a nightly basis anymore. Length was only a problem for ONE player for Carlos. We are seeing it frequently against our current front line. Just admit I was right already. I won't make fun of you. Plenty of vacancy at Hotel Sloanfeld.
 
Sloanfeld said:
With Boozer this is easily a 3-2 road trip. We are now staring 1-4 and possibly 0-5 in the face. Sure Boozer isn't great agaisnt Gasol, but Millsap is getting owned on a nightly basis anymore. Length was only a problem for ONE player for Carlos. We are seeing it frequently against our current front line. Just admit I was right already. I won't make fun of you. Plenty of vacancy at Hotel Sloanfeld.
Click to expand...

With Boozer, he probably strains his vag and spends the next month nursing the injury, thus proving fairly ineffective as a sideline cheerleader on this current road swing.
 
Ric Bucher of ESPN had a thought on Boozer in a recent chat:

Dave (Walnut Creek)

I earlier mentioned to you the Jazz's nice road record, and you said to wait and see. After losses to the Wiz and Nets, I am less sanguine. Why these flops?
Ric Bucher (1:52 PM)

I just don't think they're that great defensively and, as I've said since the start of the season, I don't like the combo of MIllsap and Jefferson. Doesn't give you much shotblocking and they're both undersized for their positions. Neither has the hands of a Boozer, either, which makes it that much tougher on Deron.


I'm not sure if we would be in any better of a position this year with Boozer than we are with Jefferson, but I have come to the realization that you can't run your offense through Big Al like we did Boozer. I'm sure he'll get more familiar with Jerry's offense, but he just looks lost sometimes. Does he even know how to run a pick-and-roll with Deron? Seriously, didn't we run like 15 pick-and-rolls a game with Deron and Booz? How often does Jefferson try one with Deron? NEVER! Well, at least it never seems to work.

That said, I'm a Boozer homer and I'm still glad we have Jefferson moving forward. Younger, longer, etc. We still need a real C to play alongside him though, and bring Sap off the bench again.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
Chicago fans really shouldn't expect 22-10 from Boozer. He'll be better than his Cleveland days, but 16-10 seems much more likely in that offense. Good numbers, but not great, and not enough to make the Bulls elite.
Click to expand...

Darkwing Duck said:
'Twas Boozer's first game back. The stat line will improve.

What will be entertaining is reading Bulls fans and their observations of Boozer's defense. Reading RealGM tonight. Lack of rotation. Flat-footedness. Musing about his man getting an easy drive from him. With him not in a system that really accentuates his talent offensively, he may become public enemy #1 in Chicago by the end of the year.
Click to expand...

Bump
 
Darkwing Duck said:
Chicago fans really shouldn't expect 22-10 from Boozer. He'll be better than his Cleveland days, but 16-10 seems much more likely in that offense. Good numbers, but not great, and not enough to make the Bulls elite.
Click to expand...

Revolution 9 said:
and here it comes. Bulls fans voice their fustration with all that is Carlos No Defense Boozer. Get used to it Bulls fans.

"his defensive rotations were extremely slow"

"Boozer - Did he play?"

"The thing that really worries me is Boozer's defense. You saw first hand tonight how bad it is. A broken hand is no excuse for losing your man"

"At least 3 or 4 times when someone went at the rim, Taj would have been able to contest with help defense, whereas Boozer just stands there flat footed."

"I'm just a little weary of Boozer's character."

"Boozer being a premadonna can be a serious concern"

"Utah Jazz > Chicago Jazz"
Click to expand...


Weird. When you look into the past the Boozer love just wasn't there. And his defense is just as bad as I remember it.

Maybe freakazoid is really sloanfail
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top