If Boozer isn't worth $80 mil, who is?

[SaltyDawg]

I agree on all accounts. What can we get from NJ though? If they drafted Cousins, maybe they could give him to us in some kind of trade. As of now, Nets may not offer much. If they gave us next year's pick it would be good , but it's unlikely. Something to explore though.

I don't know how much cap space the Nets have... If they have enough cap space, a future protected pick and trade exception for AK could be in order. If they don't have enough cap space, perhaps a scrub with a future pick and smaller trade exception.

I agree though- if they had Cousins then that would be a dream for the Jazz.

The Nets are desperate right now, no doubt. And I'm sure there will be lots of teams looking to unload contracts on them too. But AK is actually expiring, and he's probably someone they might actually want in their future plans too.

 

[vj_74]

But yeah, I knew Boozer would not be traded for scrubs before his contract was up. It was a no brainer that the Jazz would let that contract expire and take the savings. Anyone who has been following the Jazz for years should have known that was coming. Either Boozer would agree to a deal way under market value, or he would expire and walk for nothing.

.

You could'nt have been sure about Jazz letting Booz walk for nothing(atleast not until Feb trading deadline, 2010), because all along you were confident that the Jazz would somehow trade AK. If the Jazz had managed to trade AK, without getting players of equal value in return and getting some salary relief in the process, then they could have still had a chance to offer Booz what he wanted.
The fact that AK is still here has what caused this mess. Imagine if that Marion trade had happened 2 yrs back..things could have been different now.

 

[vj_74]

If the Jazz do not trade AK now and if he is playing well at all-star break, then they wont trade him at all. The next time the Jazz do a major mid-season trade, it would be the first in a decade or more.

 

[bat]

Salty Dawg, the problem is you are taking an absolutists approach to an ever changing market.

Trying to permanent value tags to something like an NBA player is an absurd thing to do. You are ignoring several things like team need and market availability.

In this off season, there were several big spenders looking to acquire players. New York, Miami, New Jersey, Chicago, and LAC all had large amounts of money to spend on free agents. When there is a competitive market like that (demand) the price tag for players goes up. This off season, Joe Johnson, Amare Stoudamire and even Carlos Boozer benefited from exaggerated price tags. Amare and Joe Johnson got ridiculous deals, while Boozer got a less ridiculous but still somewhat high deal.

By not taking into consideration team need, you over exaggerate Boozer's value to the Jazz. Having Millsap, AK and Memo to a degree makes Boozer far less valuable to the Jazz than he was to the Knicks, Bulls, Heat, and Nets. You notice the Clippers weren't offering Boozer a contract because they already have Griffin and Kaman. Had any of those other teams had similar talent you can bet they wouldn't have been shopping for Boozer either.

Simply put, the value of a player varies from team to team. Joe Johnson for example probably has a pretty high value for the Jazz seeing that we could really use a dynamic wing player. However Joe Johnson's value to the Rockets is probably not so high because they already have Kevin Martin.

Now if Boozer were vastly superior to Millsap the Jazz likely would have matched the offer and retained Boozer if he wanted to stay. If Dirk Nowitzki was the one leaving you can bet the Jazz would have done more to keep him, but Boozer is more easily replaced with our existing assets.

 

[memo is money]

I am not saying Boozer is or isn't worth $80 mil. I am just curious, who do Jazz fans think is worth $80 mil?

I am seeing pretty much everyone on the board say Boozer isn't worth $80 mil. It's not even being debated by anyone.

Is there a player in the NBA right now that you think will get $80 mil or less that you think is actually worth $80 mil? And I'm not talking about someone on or just coming off his rookie contract (where the max is probably less than $80 mil) so skip that. I am talking about guys like Boozer, who are not coming off the rookie contract.

It's pretty easy to name guys like Wade, Bosh, Amare, and Lebron. But none of them are getting "only" $80 mil either.

Joe Johnson agreed to a $120 contract the other day...

If you think $80 mil is too much to pay an all star caliber player and dream teamer, then you don't understand the NBA.

I am not saying the Jazz should have or should not have matched that offer when they were given the chance. But I am saying it is not a no brainer to let him walk at that price like the board members seem to be saying.

I will also say this- if the Jazz don't get a very good player to replace Boozer within the next year or so, then letting him walk will prove to be a big time mistake. And if/when they do replace Boozer, it will likely cost them the $80 mil Boozer is getting.

Heck, didn't the Jazz originally sign a much younger and unproven Boozer for something like $70 mil? And now we're saying it's such a no brainer to let him walk at $80 mil- now that he's a proven all star caliber player?

- You cannot make CArlos worth 80 mil just because stupid Hawks gave Johnson a 120 mil contract. Two falses do not make a right.
- This year, unexpectedly, a lot of teams offer extremely high value contracts to players. That's the main reason why Carlos signed a 5 year, 80 mil$ contract, IMO. Not because he is that good.
- Carlos should be glad that somebody gave him a contract with length of 5 years.
- I also cannot make such a comparison like the contract of a YOUNGER and UNPROVEN Booz & of an OLDER and PROVEN INJURY PRONE Booz. That makes no sense to me at all.

 

[vj_74]

If Dirk Nowitzki was the one leaving you can bet the Jazz would have done more to keep him, but Boozer is more easily replaced with our existing assets.

I would'nt say that he is "easily replaced" with our assets. The Jazz FO just think that the $$ that they ultimately save>any drop in production resulting from Boozer's departure. That's it. Sheer business decision.

 

[SaltyDawg]

So I am still not seeing any names...

I see a bunch of "Boozer isn't worth it" posts, but I don't see a single post naming a player the Jazz could/should/might get for the $80 mil they saved by letting Boozer walk.

The lack of names in this 4 page thread should tell you, it wasn't such a no brainer to let Boozer walk.

It seems like Jazz fans have a nice plan to save as much money as possible while competing for the 8th seed. I can tell you right now D-Will is going to throw a monkey wrench into that plan when he bolts if the Jazz actually try to do things that way.

Jazz fans like to say "we had no shot at a championship" and "we weren't contenders anyway" and other such nonsense. The truth is, maybe we weren't better than the Lakers (thanks to the worst trade in NBA history giving them Gasol for nothing) but we were sure as heck better than everyone else in the west.

I think just about every time the D-Will and Boozer lead Jazz lost in the playoffs, the team that beat them played in the NBA Finals. We beat Denver while we were missing 2 starters for crying out loud. Yet most people on this board are all about blowing it up to put some extra cash in Miller's pocket.

All I can say is, the Jazz better have a pretty good plan for that $80 mil they saved yesterday because D-Will is not going to go along with competing for the 8th seed on a good year. Remember the Jazz before D-Will and Boozer? That is where we are headed if we don't do something pretty fast.

So, I ask again, if Boozer isn't worth $80 mil then who is? Who could/should/will the Jazz spend that $80 mil on that they refused to spend on Boozer?

 

[billyshelby]

If Booze gets a 6th year via S&T, is he still worth signing in your book?

 

[Scat]

Is Boozer worth 80mil to the Jazz? Nope. I think there are a number of much less expensive players that the Jazz could plug into the 4 spot and they would do as well as Boozer. Everyone keeps saying that we need more length to contend with the Lakers/Gasol. No we don't. We need a 4 that doesn't wilt under pressure and will take it down Gasol's throat. Gasol intimidated Boozer. Boozer would start to play timid so that his shot wouldn't get blocked becoming highly ineffectual. What Boozer should have done is take it at Gasol every play. Booz is not the player that the Jazz needed at any price.

Looking at a list of UFA here are players that I would consider that should come at a much cheaper price than Booz.

Haywood
Gooden
J. O'Neal
Haslem

This thread makes me chuckle watching everyone argue over Boozer's value and then seeing other names thrown in the mix as to who is worth what.

Gasol was a better than average player before life as a Laker but was nowhere near worth the max. It wasn't until he was paired up with Kobe that eveyone started saying that he was a max player. You take Gasol off the Lakers and put him on the Timberwolves and guess what? He goes right back to his prior status as a better than average player.

Ironically, it was Gasol's contract that dictated what AK would be paid. Even Memphis knew Gasol wasn't worth hanging onto and jettisoned his butt when they could. The Jazz had the chance to kick AK to the curb but Larry saw something special in AK that he felt made him worth hanging onto. This right here is what is killing the Jazz now.

 

[SaltyDawg]

If Booze gets a 6th year via S&T, is he still worth signing in your book?

To be clear, I am not saying the Jazz should or shouldn't have signed Boozer for $80 mil. All I am saying is it wasn't a no brainer to let him leave at that price, and the Jazz will have to spend that money on someone else if they want to be a contender and keep D-Will.

If Boozer gets more money than was reported, then obviously that would change the pool of players the Jazz could/should/will get for the same amount.

Also, the reports say Boozer gave the Jazz a chance to match the Bulls offer. So the Jazz could have had him without that extra year if they wanted.

 

[InGameStrategy]

So I am still not seeing any names...

I see a bunch of "Boozer isn't worth it" posts, but I don't see a single post naming a player the Jazz could/should/might get for the $80 mil they saved by letting Boozer walk.

The lack of names in this 4 page thread should tell you, it wasn't such a no brainer to let Boozer walk.

It's silly to ask for names whom the Jazz should get for $80 million because Utah didn't have the cap room to sign an $80 million player where they didn't have "rights" (unlike with Boozer), and S&Ts are tough. There are a few $100 million players (Amare, LBJ), and I would have been elated to land Durant ($85M for 5 years), but OKC had his "rights". Utah probably could have Luol Deng, who is a $70 million player already a year into his contract, but I'd rather keep AK than gain Deng's albatross eight-figure contract for longer time.

It was a no-brainer to let Boozer walk because it would've put the Jazz well into the LT when they already have a PF who is making less than half as much, scored at a higher rate than Boozer in the playoffs, has had less injury problems, has more upside, plays better defense, hustles more on offense, actually has a positive +/- (unlike Boozer for the past two years) and is still improving. Millsap, AK, and Evans at PF is within 5 wins--possibly worse, maybe even better--of what they would be with Booze. I expect Utah to be a borderline playoff team this year, but I think that they would be a borderline playoff team with Boozer, too. If Fes and CJ and Matthews keep coming along, and if Millsap does better at the pick-and-roll, and if Hayward is anywhere near what KK is in skill, then Utah as a team could be as good or better than last year. The challenge is that teams around Utah continue to get better also.

 

[vj_74]

Salty it should be obvious to you that the reason you dont see any names in this thread is because most here think there is no one out there worth 80 mil over 5 yrs as well as who would want to play for the Jazz-Boozer included. I think it is as simple as that.

On the team beating us in the playoffs being the eventual NBA finalists, that's the kind of PR BS I am tired of hearing from the FO. So what if the team that beat us made the Finals? The fact is they beat us 3 yrs in a row and every year the gap seems to be wider. It is not getting closer. And so far they have'nt even needed a healthy Bynum to beat us in 3 years. You might say we were injured as well, but then we always stay injured, so maybe we will never all be healthy at the same time. Our team is just fragile, which is actually one of the reasons why many fans dont seem to miss Boozer. AK as well, when he leaves. And unfortunately Okur too, in the future. We just are'nt the 90s Jazz anymore in terms of durability and that is often an overlooked problem in addition to the basketball limitations of our core.

You know I could care less about saving money for the Millers but for once I actually don't mind letting go of Booz. I think we just don't have a shot with Booz as the first or second option and him playing 35 mins. Also if the Jazz did sign Booz, they wont be able to do anything else and we would return with more or less the same team and duplicate the results. The rich teams like the Lakers will keep getting richer(they have already added Steve Blake as backup PG) and the gap will only widen.
I think it is time to call quits to this core and try a fresh start.
Iam actually more mad about not trading AK earlier and extending Okur than I am about letting Boozer go. I think those were the bigger mistakes that lead to this, especially AK's contract.