# Lakers Claim Boozer off Waivers



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

> @daldridgetnt: League source says the Los Angeles Lakers have submitted the winning claim for free agent F Carlos Boozer, amnestied by Chicago.


...

**** it. Why not?


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

You guys are actually trying to be a good team. Boozer is 6'9 and 265lbs, Randle is 6'9 and 250lbs. This is mentor matching to the max. 

I think Boozer is vastly underrated in this league, I know his defense is sub par but the dude has been a perennial scoring and rebounding delight for many years.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

I think it's a great move. It doesn't hurt at all and he's not going to stunt any of Randle's growth. He'll only help him. Adequate replacement for Pau.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

How can Lakers sign Jordan Hill? cap space?


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/11229606/carlos-boozer-join-los-angeles-lakers


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

What the ****. I was just excited to see Ed Davis finally get his burn, and now this?

**** off LA. I hate this move so much. They basically have 4 power forwards right now in Boozer, Hill, Davis and Randle. I really don't know what they're trying to accomplish.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Funny!

Gasol for Boozer


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Solid pick up. Boozer can help groom Randle and we can ship him out at the deadline to a contender for assets.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

R-Star said:


> What the ****. I was just excited to see Ed Davis finally get his burn, and now this?
> 
> **** off LA. I hate this move so much. They basically have 4 power forwards right now in Boozer, Hill, Davis and Randle. I really don't know what they're trying to accomplish.



Hill will likely start at center.


----------



## MojoPin (Oct 10, 2008)

It's going to be awfully hard to cheer for Boozer. The Lakers kicked his ass so many times I can't even count. 

If they were in the Leastern Conference, this team would be playoff worthy. In the West, I think they'll compete for 9th place.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Basel said:


> Hill will likely start at center.


I would say he's the only one of those four that can play the position competently.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

MojoPin said:


> It's going to be awfully hard to cheer for Boozer. The Lakers kicked his ass so many times I can't even count.
> 
> If they were in the Leastern Conference, this team would be playoff worthy. In the West, I think they'll compete for 9th place.


No they wouldn't.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

wait until we pick up Beasley


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> wait until we pick up Beasley


Fit wise the move actually makes sense for both sides.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

MojoPin said:


> In the West, I think they'll compete for 9th place.


That's doubtful.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

King Sancho Fantastic said:


> Solid pick up. Boozer can help groom Randle and we can ship him out at the deadline to a contender for assets.



We can't trade him. He's with us for the entire year.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Fit wise the move actually makes sense for both sides.



Given how badly we need a starting small forward, it wouldn't surprise me at all.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

We didn't have much cap space. Surprised we got him.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

$3.25 million was our winning bid.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Basel said:


> $3.25 million was our winning bid.


I figured someone would go all the way up to $5, to be honest. I suppose the bidding process happening later in free agency like this reduced the number of teams with interest.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Basel said:


> $3.25 million was our winning bid.


Didn't realize we had that much.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Basel said:


> $3.25 million was our winning bid.


Boozer has $13.55 million negative trade value.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Mixed feelings about this... Can he play Center?


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

PauloCatarino said:


> Mixed feelings about this... Can he play Center?



He _could_ but it would be an awfully stupid decision.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Basel said:


> He _could_ but it would be an awfully stupid decision.


So, the Lakers have Hill, Randle, Davis and Boozer (and Kelly?) all whose natural position is PF, huh?


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Hill can play C. Kelly can play SF.


----------



## Wilmatic2 (Oct 30, 2005)

Kelly is too slow to play small forward. Lets just get this season over with.


----------



## Uncle Drew (Dec 16, 2013)

PauloCatarino said:


> So, the Lakers have Hill, Randle, Davis and Boozer (and Kelly?) all whose natural position is PF, huh?


You're right in that it's their best position, but I think in (very short) stretches, a lot of those guys can play together on the floor. 

For example; Hill (not sure about Davis) can definitely play C next to Boozer. If the other team goes small or their C is a complete non-threat , Boozer could play C for a few min. I think Kelly and Randle can play together in a 3-4 combo against most benches with them switching spots offense-defense.

The biggest thing I like about bringing in Boozer is that it takes a ton of pressure off of Randle. He's very talented and seems to have a great work ethic, but still, probably not a good idea to have that much pressure on a rook to be so productive in order to give us a chance to win. If he shows out, then there's no harm in paying Boozer $3.25 mil to sit on the bench.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Randle is 19 years old. Boozer will be a huge help in taking the load off of Randle.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

This might be to open up hill trades if we aren't pacing towards 45 wins mid season. But hill is our only real center after sacre.


----------



## ceejaynj (Oct 9, 2005)

Funny...but I was never a Carlos Boozer fan. Maybe he will turn me into one now.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Boozer's a bargain at what you're paying him. He's good at what he does. Plus, he did this:


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I totally missed how cheap we got him. Who were the other teams with cap space? Didn't Houston still have like 6 million left?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> I totally missed how cheap we got him. Who were the other teams with cap space? Didn't Houston still have like 6 million left?


I think the Rockets are over the cap unless they renounce the trade exception (which is counted as salary for cap space purposes) from the Lin deal.


----------



## arasu (Jan 18, 2013)

Uncle Drew said:


> You're right in that it's their best position, but I think in (very short) stretches, a lot of those guys can play together on the floor.
> 
> For example; Hill (not sure about Davis) can definitely play C next to Boozer. If the other team goes small or their C is a complete non-threat , Boozer could play C for a few min. I think Kelly and Randle can play together in a 3-4 combo against most benches with them switching spots offense-defense.
> 
> The biggest thing I like about bringing in Boozer is that it takes a ton of pressure off of Randle. He's very talented and seems to have a great work ethic, but still, probably not a good idea to have that much pressure on a rook to be so productive in order to give us a chance to win. If he shows out, then there's no harm in paying Boozer $3.25 mil to sit on the bench.


Davis played some solid stretches with Zach Randolph last season and has a better career blocks per minute than Hill. Both Hill and Davis had their best stats at the center position, but usually were most effective (dominant) against small-ball lineups and opposing bench units. Against the best and bigger lineups Davis is no match at C, and Hill is a mediocre defender against bigger more skilled centers. Boozer could make up for some of their weaknesses, and at least rebounding would be a strength with Boozer/Hill(Davis).

I like the idea of Randle/Kelly as a 3/4 combo. While they are both combo forwards, they have complementary skills. Randle can handle and dish well, but he lacks range on his shot. He has enough length, speed, and agility to defend smaller, slightly quicker SF's, and the size/weight to mix it up in the paint against bigger PF's. Kelly has length and is a pretty good shot-blocker for a player with his shooting ability, but he isn't much of a rebounder, sup-par for a PF. I think Hill could fit well with those 2, giving them an interchangeable frontcourt on defense.

It is a bit of a crowded mix at PF. I think with Lin, Kobe, and Randle in the lineup together, three-point shooting and shot-blocking/defense are needed at the other positions to compete well. Boozer doesn't do either. But he comes cheap, and claiming him does keep the Rockets or other conference rivals from signing Boozer to a minimum deal, which may have been part of the motivation for this signing. I suppose with the roster possibly still in flux, the extra depth can't hurt either


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

I'm wary of playing Kelly or Randle at the 3. It would have to be very matchup specific.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Kelly played the 3 a little last year. Center too. Since we were so ravaged with injuries


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

King Joseus said:


>


Those some tig ol' bitties :yesyesyes:


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Apparently the Lakers were forced to waive Kendal Marshall to be able to do this deal, or renounce his cap hold as it were. It looks like they are going to hope they can sign after the three days. 

They were probably surprised that they were the highest bidder, not sure why some other team didn't bid a little more honestly.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...ive-kendall-marshall-may-bring-him-back-after


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Diable said:


> Apparently the Lakers were forced to waive Kendal Marshall to be able to do this deal, or renounce his cap hold as it were. It looks like they are going to hope they can sign after the three days.


Is it possible that another team would put in a waiver claim on Kendall Marshall? The 76ers perhaps?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Having Boozers bird rights could come in handy next summer too.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

RollWithEm said:


> Is it possible that another team would put in a waiver claim on Kendall Marshall? The 76ers perhaps?


He might be better than Donald Sloan in Indy.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

You can do worse for your backup point guard then kendall marshall especially at his price. At the same time though he doesn't greatly improve any team and so I see teams passing to avoid ruffling feathers.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Marshall had to be waived to be able to sign Swaggy. I'm curious to see how this affects Ryan Kelly's status.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...bucks-will-claim-kendall-marshall-off-waivers

Marshall will apparently be claimed by Milwaukee


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

This just in..."Boozer's jumper is at its apex".


----------

